Kassen's Magical Thread of Science and Other Things

Wait. You're saying the moon landing was faked? Because it wasn't peer reviewed?
Because that's how science works. Why am I the only intelligent being who understands this? The only witness to the original moon landing was NASA themselves, and it happened during a time when landing on the moon was extremely political. If no one else repeated NASA's moon landing, then why are you solely retiring the word of a single government agency?
 
I permaban people that bring down the forums. The ones who have been permabanned were given countless warnings. I don't care who it is.
We need to balance the power in the force...both light and dark!
YOU HAVE THE POWER TO UNBAN! Do it dooo ittttttt!

On a serious note as long as we aren't going personal and posting pron(but that should be a temp ban IMO)
 
Yeah those super nice Russians wouldn't say anything if the US faked the moon landing....
 
Because that's how science works. Why am I the only intelligent being who understands this? The only witness to the original moon landing was NASA themselves, and it happened during a time when landing on the moon was extremely political. If no one else repeated NASA's moon landing, then why are you solely retiring the word of a single government agency?

Is English your first language? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm trying to understand if that's a factor in why it's so hard to have a reasonable discussion with you. You say "peer reviewed" when you mean "replicated" (published research is peer reviewed, not publically observable events like the moon landing), and you say "retiring" when you mean "relying on." I'm just wondering if your English isn't all that great?
 
Is English your first language? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm trying to understand if that's a factor in why it's so hard to have a reasonable discussion with you. You say "peer reviewed" when you mean "replicated" (published research is peer reviewed, not publically observable events like the moon landing), and you say "retiring" when you mean "relying on." I'm just wondering if your English isn't all that great?
Scientists peer review by replicating experiments. Thanks for making it clear I'm the only one here who understands science. Maybe English is your second language.
 
Scientists peer review by replicating experiments. Thanks for making it clear I'm the only one here who understands science. Maybe English is your second language.

Yeah, nice try. The moon landing wasn't an experiment. You're not even clear on the meaning of that.

So your argument is that because no one besides NASA landed on the moon, that NASA faked it? The fact that they went 6 or 7 different times and have loads of pictures and data (much of which is accessible to the public), eyewitness testimony from the 11 or 12 people who walked on the moon, etc., etc., -- all that doesn't count, because some other country didn't do it, too? Some other country or agency has to go to the moon, or else it's unscientific and fake?

Wow. That is absurd.
 
Yeah, nice try. The moon landing wasn't an experiment. You're not even clear on the meaning of that.

So your argument is that because no one besides NASA landed on the moon, that NASA faked it? The fact that they went 6 or 7 different times and have loads of pictures and data (much of which is accessible to the public), eyewitness testimony from the 11 or 12 people who walked on the moon, etc., etc., -- all that doesn't count, because some other country didn't do it, too? Some other country or agency has to go to the moon, or else it's unscientific and fake?

Wow. That is absurd.
Yeah way to put words in my mouth. You must really feel the need to to valid your argument. I said "the original moon landing." I said nothing about the ones that followed. You just need to admit English is your second language before I address anything you say.
 
Oh, ok, they just faked the first one, not all the others. Well that makes sense then.



I love Norm McDonald. :txbsmile:
 
Hey Andy why did you seriously think scientists conduct peer reviews without replicating the experiment? Is that really what you thought? Why are you trying to talk science then if you don't know the basics?
 
Yeah, nice try. The moon landing wasn't an experiment. You're not even clear on the meaning of that.

So your argument is that because no one besides NASA landed on the moon, that NASA faked it? The fact that they went 6 or 7 different times and have loads of pictures and data (much of which is accessible to the public), eyewitness testimony from the 11 or 12 people who walked on the moon, etc., etc., -- all that doesn't count, because some other country didn't do it, too? Some other country or agency has to go to the moon, or else it's unscientific and fake?

Wow. That is absurd.
Lol. Hook, line and sinker! We made the same mistake in the politics thread. You will get nowhere. The Van Buren boys prevent going to the moon.
 
Hey Andy why did you seriously think scientists conduct peer reviews without replicating the experiment? Is that really what you thought? Why are you trying to talk science then if you don't know the basics?

That's not even remotely close to what I think.

This is part of what I've noticed with you, part how you hook people into these interminable arguments that go around in circles -- you completely mischaracterize their position, as a way of baiting them into defending themselves (and continuing the argument). I don't know if it's a conscious maneuver or you just lack the ability to listen and get outside your own frame of reference.

Anyway, you're just trying to bait me into one of your endless arguments that go nowhere. Once again, no thanks. Have a nice day.
 
6900952~orig.jpg


Michael bay directed the moon landing.

7gqpkjC.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viktor
That's not even remotely close to what I think.

This is part of what I've noticed with you, part of your pattern. It's part of how you hook people into these interminable arguments that go around in circles: you mischaracterize their position, as a way of baiting them into further argument. I don't know if it's a conscious maneuver or you just don't have the ability to really listen to what the other person is saying or get outside your own frame of reference.

Anyway, you're just trying to bait me into one of your endless arguments that go nowhere. Once again, no thanks. Have a nice day.
That's what you get. You were never confident in anything you said. Don't put words my mouth next time. And next time, learn the difference between "English is your second language" and an autocorrect mistake. You aren't stupid. that was clearly bait and an ad hominem. Get burned and go home, loser.
 
Oh, man, I've been burned.
 
Oh I see, Andy's mistake. He actually thinks we can observe a lunar launch and landing from Earth. The moon is 200,000 miles away so it's completely impossible to observe. So no, I did not mean "observe." You wouldn't be so hard to follow if you weren't dense and unknowledgeable.
 
Well, it's one of the more entertaining threads we've had in a while.
 
Wait a minute... Kessan thinks the first moon landing was faked? This is a joke right.
Actually no, but I think it's a possibility given the lack of evidence outside of NASA's own word.
 
Well, it's one of the more entertaining threads we've had in a while.
Why don't you explain what you mean by "observe?" How is it possible to observe a lunar landing? If you can honestly answer that question, I won't assume you are a troll who doesn't know science with English as a second language.
 
Actually no, but I think it's a possibility given the lack of evidence outside of NASA's own word.

So you're joking right, you can't be serious. A person that claims to be intelligent and has tin foil hate wearing ideas like this. It has to be a joke.
 
A guy on last weeks episode of Fargo said it was fake so I'm with Kassen