Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/23/2020 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    In any case, due to serious health issues, I have to take a leave of absence from this forum. Focusing on healing and also my family has to take priority right now. Not only that, but as usual, the threads (at least the ones I am involved in) spiral down into the world of immaturity and name-calling (and I am not saying I am not guilty of that). I don't think this forum is for me, in any case. I like open discussion and idea-sharing rather than arguing. Call me crazy for it. (Oh wait, several of you already have called me crazy, haha). I don't really appreciate being called stupid, but I won't ask for an apology or go on a tirade. As a last thought, to Mike—Nice picture. It definitely trumps all the evidence they've put forth I see the relationship of creation vs evolution regarding the subject matter of this thread, however I think it is unfair to say I make anyone look stupid based on the fact that I am a conspiracy theorist. I should have put a disclaimer. Disclaimer: The beliefs and skepticism presented by myself are my own and do not reflect the beliefs of other creationists. The intelligence of other creationists should not be put into question based on my alleged ignorance and stupidity. Best to all of you....even you, What If. You guys have felt like family in a way, for all the years I've lurked and posted. I may post now and again, but not on anything this controversial, and only when I feel well enough. To Piasan—you have been the most worthy opponent. You have a gentle and exacting way of putting things, and you aren't rude. You get two thumbs up from me. If anyone wants to stay in touch, PM me.
  2. 2 points
    You've never been around when funding dries up, have you? There were a number more Apollo missions planned that were scrubbed as the nation's priorities changed. Employment was slashed .... IIRC, over 2/3 of the jobs at "The Cape" disappeared. NASA was trying to find enough money to keep OPERATIONAL programs going. Storing ARCHIVAL of data from terminated programs was not a priority in that situation. Survival was the top priority as there were a lot of complaints about the cost of the space program. Congress did not provide funding to preserve those records. (I don't know if NASA asked for it or not.) Much of the (surviving) original documentation would probably be at the Smithsonian or the National Archives. I was able to find checklists used on the Apollo 11 mission when researching their navigation at the Smithsonian at: https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/apollo-to-the-moon/online/apollo-11/getting-to-the-moon.cfm I doubt anyone ever considered there'd be a need to "prove" they had accomplished their mission objectives.
  3. 2 points
    " You can't even explain why dinosaur bones are never mixed up in layers with modern animals, but you don't want to think about that either." That is because you have GUARANTEED that doesn't happen!... You allow for SOME animals to remain unchanged for 500 million years!!! PROBLEM SOLVED!! You have Scientists and Evolutionary Biologists claiming that over the course of "500 million years" while SOME comb jellyfish were evolving into humans OTHER comb jellyfish were evolving into .... Yes... Comb Jellyfish.... (Living fossils) Who on Earth can argue with THAT kind of logic?? "because to accept the facts of the real world would wreck the ingrained worldview you hold so dearly. " Again... Save that statement for each an every time you look in the MIRROR.... HERE are the "Facts of the real world" Dogs produce Dogs Bananas produce Bananas Cockroaches produce Cockroaches Snakes produce snakes Salmon produce Salmon Etc etc etc etc... Everything brings forth AFTER THEIR OWN KIND. That is the REAL WORLD And that is exactly what the Bible declared from the beginning MANY TIMES.... But YOU cling to a PSUEDO scientific Fairytale that claims that Baboons, Barricuda, Badgers, Blueberries, Blue Wales, Bugambilia, Bristlecone, Bobcats, Bears, Bats, Beetles, Barley, Buffalo, Butterflies, ALL came from the SAME microbial common ancestor.... INSANE!!!
  4. 2 points
    "The name of this website has absolutely nothing to do with anyone's knowledge or understanding of basic scientific principles." Does the Fairytale of Evolutionism get smuggled into that group of "basic scientific principles" just because its IMPLICATIONS happen to align with many people's philosophical worldview? Does the ability for red blood cells and measurable c14 to last FOREVER and a day happen to align with those "basic scientific principles"? There are many "Basic Scientific Principles" that are based on the SCIENTIFIC METHOD but many of the things that you believe in aren't part of them... But brainwashed and indoctrinated people almost never realize that they have been brainwashed and indoctrinated. .
  5. 1 point
    The fact we can detect and measure brain activity certainly suggests telepathy is possible .... at least with some kind of technical device. Direct telepathy is unlikely though there is considerable anecdotal evidence of people "sensing" something had happened to a loved one thousands of miles away at the exact moment it happened.
  6. 1 point
    i think we need to define what we are talking about. telepathy is the transference of one persons thoughts directly into the brain of another person without any kind of written, oral, or sign language. if we make the assumption that brainwaves are indeed the manifestations of a persons thoughts then telepathy is indeed a very real possibility. the major problem is determining how thoughts are encoded onto brainwaves. once this has been solved then telepathy will become a reality.
  7. 1 point
    Did I miss something? Is there a creation vs evolution argument in this thread, or are you sincerely that incapable of separating (and judging the quality of) religious worldviews from a thread dealing with NASA fakery? So, if you can't "fix stupid" (you're such a sweetheart!) then at least try and fix your incapability of posting something worthy enough to read. So far you cannot: Show the earth spinning despite satellites Show someone upside down on ball earth Use any method whatsoever of your own devices to prove outer space Be civil Use anything other than simulations and hear-say. Russian probes? Get real....like I keep saying. Feel free to duck out because I "make creationists look stupid" (A grand failure on your part to recognize individuality. What's next, you see a toddler fall and tell him to stop making all toddlers look clumsy?) You fit the bill for many things, "What If." Logic is not your strong suit. Your name should be "What Is" for all your pre-determined notions.
  8. 1 point
    Since when is a simulation "real?" 99% of moon rocks have mysteriously vanished, and they are strikingly similar (read: totally the same) as a certain rock found in Antarctica, of which NASA made a trip to right before the first Apollo mission. And need I say that you are relying on Russian probes here. Using your own tools, mechanical apparatus, or whatever, prove to me that outer space is real.
  9. 1 point
    randi still has his money. however, i believe the potential for telepathy exists. as a matter of fact i feel it's just a matter of time to when the technology is perfected to do so. anyone that doubts such a thing must realize that we can record brainwaves and biofeedback devices are already a reality.
  10. 1 point
    Did they go E to W or N to S? You wanna question my sanity, by all means. Just answer the questions I asked. In the end we will see who is blind and who is woke. You got personal proof of outer space? Good. Stop being a pahtzer and show it. To KB: merely a flesh wound. Me body is failing "me" (I do not exist, only God exists) so if headaches and nerve pain isn't too bad (I will not go on opoids. If there is pain it is given by God and so there must be good in it) I will fight the good fight. Why do people die in the wilderness? Million dollar question.
  11. 1 point
    Yes, there certainly is. With all our satellites, how about you give me a video of earth spinning without any gaps? Or show me a picture of people up-side down. Don't know. Afaik, up for grabs. What do you think you see and ask yourself; is it true? Can you know for an absolute fact that it's true? How do you feel when you believe that thought? Have you? I lost my Celestron Binocs some years ago, and again you are unequivically attaching your truth-hope to the word "galaxy." Send me a pic through your own telescope and or binocs, and we will discuss. Dunno. Aether? Shoot-offs of the sun? God's Masterpiece? You have NO proof how distant the luminaries are, or what they are...that is bare assertion or appeal to authority (C wut I did thar, Mike?) To you. Not to someone who questions. When did "outer space" become a thing, and what was it based on? Remember, no proof from the National Academy of Space Actornauts. What proof do you have personally that "outer space" exists? Tell me true.
  12. 1 point
    added to that, your list of material is what is often called press kits. this doesn't include such things as flight manuals, flight plans, post flight debriefs, summarry reports, quartly reports or tech memos. it doesn't include anything about the various NASA centers, the development and launches of the various "sounding" rockets, monographs, translations, the various NASA journals, material associated with "anniversarys", nor astronaut stats. the list goes on and on. ALL of this information is stored on NASA servers and is available to the public. and KB is correct in that these servers also have available material from the NACA years, NACA being the "father" of NASA.
  13. 1 point
    curious. when i made a similar statement about the ISS crew being able to see stars i was accused of "bare assertions" and trolling. like i said, i really have no inclination to pursue this matter.
  14. 1 point
    actually latitude lines are circles, longitude lines are straight lines running from pole to pole. a latitude of 30 degrees north or south is 30 degrees everywhere on the globe. a longitude of 85 west is only true at 85 degrees west.
  15. 1 point
    i was going to respond to this but i no longer have the desire to participate in this thread.
  16. 1 point
    But this is where we get the tried and true... "But the people who did this study CANT be "REAL scientists" because after all, they are CREATIONISTS!! I find in debating evolutionists that either reality is bent to conform to the myth. Or the myth is bent to conform to reality. With the ideas that says: There are no absolutes. Makes way for reality bending. With never ending work-arounds for every problem, the Fairytale bends what ever way it needs to, to conform to what ever reality is thought up. Evidence even falls into this bending. A bone is dug up, the interpretated idea of where that bone came from is made to conform to the reality that currently exists (believing that Evolutionism is fact), or the next one that is thought up. Evolutionism is like a tree of ideas that bends according to which way thewind happens to be blowing that day. And bends another way if needed then nextday. The idea is so flexible to work with that what ever comes it's way is NOT falsifiable. 1) If you have evidence that the interpretation can change to suit reality needs. 2) Ideas-theories change also to work with the evidence, reality, or just constantly changing ideas. How can you ever prove it wrong? Truth everyday can change and it won't affect Evolutionism. Which means not only can a truth prove it, but lies also. So what ever you want, when you want it, is possible with a theory that is always right because it can bend to what ever is required of it. THEREFORE How can you prove it WRONG when the insane "theory" can "change" to correct itself on a daily bases? How cannot the evidence always support the "theory" when it can be "re-interpreted" to conform to a ever changing "theory"? So if the "theory" can change to conform to the evidence, and the evidence be re-interpreted to conform to the "theory", HOW can anyone EVER prove it wrong? Also if any evidence absolutely proves it wrong. It's always put into a category where the credibility of the finder is put into question. As if THAT makes evidence good or bad.!! LOL And this nonsense is taught to every single public school biology student as a "Scientific Fact"!!
  17. 1 point
    here is ramos performing with 2 other "got talent" winners, brian crum and deadly game. that's crum on the left, ramos on the right, while deadly game performs their act on stage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgoL9vR6et4&list=RDKQBc3S7nneM&index=5
  18. 1 point
    i haven't changed anything. the stars ARE REQUIRED TO BE SEEN FOR NAVIGATION PURPOSES, but yet these astronauts "didn't remember seeing any". the sun isn't an excuse either because stars can easily be seen during an eclipse and DEFINITELY when the astronauts are on the far side of the moon. so no, you haven't adequately answered the issue. also, i seriously doubt if the cabin lights would be anywhere close to being bright enough to blind the astronauts to the stars.
  19. 1 point
    your daily dose of "got talent". take note of the reaction of the second judge from the right. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv6jiqVmmSI here is another. this guys voice is simply awesome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsNlcr4frs4
  20. 1 point
    mike, tell me, and the rest of the groupies how the astronauts navigated their craft if they "don't remember seeing any stars"? these are the EXACT WORDS of collins and armstrong on their first press debriefing. about light pollution, the stars can easily be seen during a total eclipse of the sun. there is something 100% wrong when these astronauts said they didn't see ANY.
  21. 1 point
    futile is so true, and i take great offense at you labeling me as some kind of conspiracy theorist. a conspiracy theorist only presents one side of the story and one of my first posts in this thread was the simulation programs that seems to prove the capabilities of the rocket yes indeed, these astronauts were uneducated morons that didn't know anything about the mission they were about to fly. actually these 7 men were the cream of the test pilot crop. 1000's of men volunteered but only 7 had what it takes, in other words they were the highest educated and the best in physical and mental ability. they were test pilots which required them to be keen observers. they were intimately involved with every aspect of the mission from the design and construction of the spacecraft to the actual flight plan. to label these men as "not knowing" is over the top ludicrous. you speak of "lame excuses" and the above is probably about as lame as it gets. there is no "light pollution" in space mike because space lacks the particles that causes it. the brightness of the cabin is also lame because sighting stars is how apollo navigated, that's how the astronauts knew the attitude of the spacecraft, BY SIGHTING STARS. compare this with cernan not knowing the flight plan. now, who exactly is lacking "critical analysis" here mike? except neither of the answers you gave makes any sense. except like i mentioned above, i have presented both sides of the coin. the explanations you gave solves nothing that i have presented, and i consider you labeling these men as morons offensive. i HAVE thought about it mike, and these issues make no sense to me.
  22. 1 point
    The fact of the matter is that we do not know the composition of the earth. We have not dug down far enough, and certainly no one has dug far beneath the ocean bed. Something as widely accepted as the tectonic plates, taken as fact, is actually only theory. Friction is merely a guess. It's like assuming how high (and why) a ball bounces without knowing the composition of the ball, or where it was bounced off of, or the force of which it was thrown. The tides not lining up with the moon does not prove a rotating earth unless you base it off predetermined notions. There are a million possibilities.
  23. 1 point
    The longest range artillery I can think of in regular usage was the 16 and 18 inch guns on battleships. Curvature of the Earth is insignificant compared to other factors.... like ship's motion at sea and terrain on land. The islands and Chicago are a mirage .... a reflection caused by an inversion layer.
  24. 1 point
    While it's been said before that Trump shouldn't advocated hydroxychloroquine before the science is in, I don't think anyone has pointed out that another reason why a President shouldn't advocate drugs before the science is in, especially an extremely polarizing President like Trump, is that it can make the drug political. When Trump first talked about it as a near miracle cure, even the most ardent medical advocates for it said that we need better/larger tests to confirm early results of HQC's beneficial results. Doctors and scientists were already looking into the drug for Covid. All Trump did was put it in the forefront of the public eye before scientists could confirm one way or the other about HQC, and politicized a topic that should not be politicized. You talk about anti-Trump people committing crimes against humanity for getting people to doubt HQC when it is a miracle drug. Let's say HQC is this miracle drug for Covid. How many lives would have been saved if Trump simply kept his mouth shut about HQC while scientists and doctors did their thing looking into it, and were able to say this is the miracle drug without being political?
  25. 1 point
    Just looking at the moon with my cheap 4.5 inch telescope. The arc diameter of the moon is about 30 arc minutes. At higher levels of magnification, a lot of craters are larger than my field of view, so it should be an easy matter for me to discriminate angles as small as a few arcseconds. For a conservative number, lets say 9 arcseconds. That's 0.0025 degrees Now, if we take two such telescopes 3,000 miles apart and assume the moon is directly overhead exactly halfway between them (for simplicity of calculation) at a distance of 240,000 miles, each telescope would have the moon at an elevation of 89.6419 degrees. If I were off by 0.0025 degrees (let's say 89.6444 degrees), I would get a distance of 241,683 miles. So a reasonably accurate measurement of the distance to the moon can be done with cheap backyard telescopes. Using the previous example and substituting a distance of 35,000,000 miles (Mars), the angle from both stations would be 89.9975 degrees so my cheap scope at 9 arcseconds wouldn't be good enough. But, if we get a bit better scope capable of 0.9 arcseconds (0.00025 degree) everything changes. The error would change the value from 89.9975 degrees to 89.99775 degrees and the new distance calculation is 38,200,000 miles. Not too bad. So, we can easily measure the distance to the Moon and Mars fairly accurately with reasonably inexpensive telescopes 3,000 miles apart. Without checking, I bet we could use the same process with a real observatory to at least a billion miles.

Important Information

Our Terms