NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years

[Alpha]

You're asking for evidence you can actually observe even though you don't believe the science or sources.

If you had spent every single day for dozens and dozens of years observing an ape in a locked cage, then took a holiday and returned to find it replaced by a human in a three-piece suit, you wouldn't claim - "Blimey! They've been right all along. Evolution is kosher." You'd ask who's stole your bloody ape.

Again I'll point you the the scientific method, must be observed and repeatable, I'm just asking for 1 piece of observable evidence. Just 1. Darwin spoke of a change in kinds, can you give me an example of this change in kinds? Don't say finches, because although the beak size changed, they were still finches. Same with bacteria, still bacteria.

[Master]

The Finches adapted and evolved.

[Alpha]

The Finches adapted and evolved.

Yep they did, guess what into?

[TitoFan]

Tito, you are OBLIVIOUS to facts. You deny them because you are like a creationist and believe despite the evidence that all men are created equal. Humans are very different and traits among certain groups exist in some more than in others, so bring your grudge out all you like, the fake news is your own. It need not be a terrible but to deny evidence is false.

Miles, I don't know who pulled your chain, but you're obviously on permanent "knee-jerk mode".

FFS tell me where in my last post did you get ammunition for your tired "you're oblivious to facts" parrot-like grunts. I'll continue to believe that all men are created equal until someone much smarter than yourself proves to me otherwise.

Now..... I'm purposely avoiding falling into another "Miles-Beanz nuclear war"..... but you appear to be starting your girly stalking mode.

Knock it the fuck off. If you miss fighting with Beanz, go find him and you guys can do handbags at dawn.

[TitoFan]

I'm pretty sure they took away Louis Armstrong's seven moon landings after he admitted taking drugs to get there.

Good one.

[TitoFan]

Nobody ran away from the evolution stuff, @Alpha, it's just that you seemed to be muddling up biology with physics. But then dismissed all the evidence for evolution and like with the testimony of thousands of scientists who debunk the moon conspiracy, you claim they are either wrong or bullshitters.

It's no different to flat earthers who end up claiming - all the evidence/pictures/science is fake.

Here's an interesting theory from the flat-earthers:


THE WORLD IS ROUND - It isn't I'm afraid. It's flat. But it's not static, the land is constantly moving across it like a supermarket conveyer belt. Hence we get night and day, night is when the belt is on the underside of the Earth. This also explains why some long-haul flights take less time on the way back than the way there or vice versa. Planes are either going the opposite way to the direction of travel of the belt, or trying to accelerate in the same direction, which takes longer.





It's an excerpt from an article by Dean Burnett, who by the way hails from Wales and is a neuroscientist to boot, so he obviously has a high IQ and should be believed. All evidence points to his not being raised by a single mom, so there's that too.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ce-confessions

[Gandalf]

Tito, you are the one making sly comments based on your complete ignorance of scientific data. It is a fact, a scientific fact, that differentials exist between races. You cannot deny that unless you are a flat earther. Now are there possible different reasons for it? Sure, but that does not deny the numbers. We are not the same otherwise the data would be the same. It is not and instead of accepting this research you want to put your head in the ground like an ostritch and call me a racist, so yeah, I take issue with that as it is you refusing to prove to me that there are no IQ differentials between the races and insulting me. That's what kicked this all off and I dislike it. If I am wrong then prove me wrong. You should either prove I am wrong or never talk about bogus data ever again.

[Alpha]

Nobody ran away from the evolution stuff, @Alpha, it's just that you seemed to be muddling up biology with physics. But then dismissed all the evidence for evolution and like with the testimony of thousands of scientists who debunk the moon conspiracy, you claim they are either wrong or bullshitters.

It's no different to flat earthers who end up claiming - all the evidence/pictures/science is fake.

Here's an interesting theory from the flat-earthers:


THE WORLD IS ROUND - It isn't I'm afraid. It's flat. But it's not static, the land is constantly moving across it like a supermarket conveyer belt. Hence we get night and day, night is when the belt is on the underside of the Earth. This also explains why some long-haul flights take less time on the way back than the way there or vice versa. Planes are either going the opposite way to the direction of travel of the belt, or trying to accelerate in the same direction, which takes longer.





It's an excerpt from an article by Dean Burnett, who by the way hails from Wales and is a neuroscientist to boot, so he obviously has a high IQ and should be believed. All evidence points to his not being raised by a single mom, so there's that too.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ce-confessions

Flat earthers don't tend to worry about theories, they prefer to focus on the scientific method, stuff that can be observed, measured and repeated. Water always finds it's level, horizon is always flat at any height, no curvature, a pressurized system (the atmosphere) must have some sort of containment and couldn't be beside a claimed vacuum with no separation etc.

Also a lot of the physics of a spinning earth doesn't make sense. Satellites and the space rockets for example, defy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics.

Flat earthers seem like the only skeptical thinkers these days.

[Fenster]

You're asking for evidence you can actually observe even though you don't believe the science or sources.

If you had spent every single day for dozens and dozens of years observing an ape in a locked cage, then took a holiday and returned to find it replaced by a human in a three-piece suit, you wouldn't claim - "Blimey! They've been right all along. Evolution is kosher." You'd ask who's stole your bloody ape.

Again I'll point you the the scientific method, must be observed and repeatable, I'm just asking for 1 piece of observable evidence. Just 1. Darwin spoke of a change in kinds, can you give me an example of this change in kinds? Don't say finches, because although the beak size changed, they were still finches. Same with bacteria, still bacteria.

What did Darwin mean by "Kinds?" Can you give me the actual quote?

[p4pking]

Nobody ran away from the evolution stuff, @Alpha, it's just that you seemed to be muddling up biology with physics. But then dismissed all the evidence for evolution and like with the testimony of thousands of scientists who debunk the moon conspiracy, you claim they are either wrong or bullshitters.

It's no different to flat earthers who end up claiming - all the evidence/pictures/science is fake.

Here's an interesting theory from the flat-earthers:


THE WORLD IS ROUND - It isn't I'm afraid. It's flat. But it's not static, the land is constantly moving across it like a supermarket conveyer belt. Hence we get night and day, night is when the belt is on the underside of the Earth. This also explains why some long-haul flights take less time on the way back than the way there or vice versa. Planes are either going the opposite way to the direction of travel of the belt, or trying to accelerate in the same direction, which takes longer.





It's an excerpt from an article by Dean Burnett, who by the way hails from Wales and is a neuroscientist to boot, so he obviously has a high IQ and should be believed. All evidence points to his not being raised by a single mom, so there's that too.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ce-confessions

Flat earthers don't tend to worry about theories, they prefer to focus on the scientific method, stuff that can be observed, measured and repeated. Water always finds it's level, horizon is always flat at any height, no curvature, a pressurized system (the atmosphere) must have some sort of containment and couldn't be beside a claimed vacuum with no separation etc.

Also a lot of the physics of a spinning earth doesn't make sense. Satellites and the space rockets for example, defy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics.

Flat earthers seem like the only skeptical thinkers these days.

You basically do away with any chance of being taken seriously from here on. Nobody wants to continue “debating” with you for the same reason they don’t want to with an orangutan. A flat earth... it’s unbelievable people could still think like that..

[Freedom]

Russian cosmonauts will walk on the moon in early 2030s

https://www.rt.com/russia/444381-rus...-landing-base/

[Alpha]

You're asking for evidence you can actually observe even though you don't believe the science or sources.

If you had spent every single day for dozens and dozens of years observing an ape in a locked cage, then took a holiday and returned to find it replaced by a human in a three-piece suit, you wouldn't claim - "Blimey! They've been right all along. Evolution is kosher." You'd ask who's stole your bloody ape.

Again I'll point you the the scientific method, must be observed and repeatable, I'm just asking for 1 piece of observable evidence. Just 1. Darwin spoke of a change in kinds, can you give me an example of this change in kinds? Don't say finches, because although the beak size changed, they were still finches. Same with bacteria, still bacteria.

What did Darwin mean by "Kinds?" Can you give me the actual quote?

I never said Darwin said a difference of kinds, I said he spoke of a difference of kinds. It think the kinds arguement comes from the religious side. It's been a minute since I visited Origins but simply it's the thought that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor. I do recall him mentioning something about life being breathed into a few forms or into one. Maybe mordern science f-cked him, with the theory of 1.
When I speak of kinds, I'm talking genetic kinds and animal types.
Evolution appears to define Entropy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics. It also violates biogenisis. We've never seen a cell come from nothing, or a DNA strand come from nothing.
The chances of a single cell forming from nothing are considered mathmatically absurd.
Mendel's laws of genetics puts raises flaws in the evolution theory.
All the fake missing links. I've got textbooks from elder members of my family that claimed humans were 98% identical genetically to chimps. Turns out that was a lie, modern comparison techniques puts it closer to 79-80%, the same we also share with pigs and horses.
Beyond that the biggest smoking gun disproving human evolution is the Y chromosome. The Y chromosome doesn't fully recombinate with the X chromosome in men like the two X chromosomes can in women. It stays very consistent through generations, and when comparing the Y chromosomes of any of the primate species compared to humans the difference gets even greater sharing only about 60% of the same genes. So an almost unchanging chromosome from generation to generation hasn't had enough time to account for such a huge difference from the supposed divergence of our common primate ancestors we descended from til today.

There's some much more but look into it for yourself. I'm not going to tell you what to believe, I'm just giving my thoughts and beliefs.

Nobody ran away from the evolution stuff, @Alpha, it's just that you seemed to be muddling up biology with physics. But then dismissed all the evidence for evolution and like with the testimony of thousands of scientists who debunk the moon conspiracy, you claim they are either wrong or bullshitters.

It's no different to flat earthers who end up claiming - all the evidence/pictures/science is fake.

Here's an interesting theory from the flat-earthers:


THE WORLD IS ROUND - It isn't I'm afraid. It's flat. But it's not static, the land is constantly moving across it like a supermarket conveyer belt. Hence we get night and day, night is when the belt is on the underside of the Earth. This also explains why some long-haul flights take less time on the way back than the way there or vice versa. Planes are either going the opposite way to the direction of travel of the belt, or trying to accelerate in the same direction, which takes longer.





It's an excerpt from an article by Dean Burnett, who by the way hails from Wales and is a neuroscientist to boot, so he obviously has a high IQ and should be believed. All evidence points to his not being raised by a single mom, so there's that too.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ce-confessions

Flat earthers don't tend to worry about theories, they prefer to focus on the scientific method, stuff that can be observed, measured and repeated. Water always finds it's level, horizon is always flat at any height, no curvature, a pressurized system (the atmosphere) must have some sort of containment and couldn't be beside a claimed vacuum with no separation etc.

Also a lot of the physics of a spinning earth doesn't make sense. Satellites and the space rockets for example, defy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics.

Flat earthers seem like the only skeptical thinkers these days.

You basically do away with any chance of being taken seriously from here on. Nobody wants to continue “debating” with you for the same reason they don’t want to with an orangutan. A flat earth... it’s unbelievable people could still think like that..

I don't need anyone to take me seriously, couldn't care less to tell the truth. I find it interesting that people are happy to believe fake images, stories and video rather than science that can be observed, repeated and measured in front of their own eyes.

[Spicoli]

Flat Earthers oh dear . Think I need more coffee.

[p4pking]

You're asking for evidence you can actually observe even though you don't believe the science or sources.

If you had spent every single day for dozens and dozens of years observing an ape in a locked cage, then took a holiday and returned to find it replaced by a human in a three-piece suit, you wouldn't claim - "Blimey! They've been right all along. Evolution is kosher." You'd ask who's stole your bloody ape.

Again I'll point you the the scientific method, must be observed and repeatable, I'm just asking for 1 piece of observable evidence. Just 1. Darwin spoke of a change in kinds, can you give me an example of this change in kinds? Don't say finches, because although the beak size changed, they were still finches. Same with bacteria, still bacteria.

What did Darwin mean by "Kinds?" Can you give me the actual quote?

I never said Darwin said a difference of kinds, I said he spoke of a difference of kinds. It think the kinds arguement comes from the religious side. It's been a minute since I visited Origins but simply it's the thought that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor. I do recall him mentioning something about life being breathed into a few forms or into one. Maybe mordern science f-cked him, with the theory of 1.
When I speak of kinds, I'm talking genetic kinds and animal types.
Evolution appears to define Entropy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics. It also violates biogenisis. We've never seen a cell come from nothing, or a DNA strand come from nothing.
The chances of a single cell forming from nothing are considered mathmatically absurd.
Mendel's laws of genetics puts raises flaws in the evolution theory.
All the fake missing links. I've got textbooks from elder members of my family that claimed humans were 98% identical genetically to chimps. Turns out that was a lie, modern comparison techniques puts it closer to 79-80%, the same we also share with pigs and horses.
Beyond that the biggest smoking gun disproving human evolution is the Y chromosome. The Y chromosome doesn't fully recombinate with the X chromosome in men like the two X chromosomes can in women. It stays very consistent through generations, and when comparing the Y chromosomes of any of the primate species compared to humans the difference gets even greater sharing only about 60% of the same genes. So an almost unchanging chromosome from generation to generation hasn't had enough time to account for such a huge difference from the supposed divergence of our common primate ancestors we descended from til today.

There's some much more but look into it for yourself. I'm not going to tell you what to believe, I'm just giving my thoughts and beliefs.

Nobody ran away from the evolution stuff, @Alpha, it's just that you seemed to be muddling up biology with physics. But then dismissed all the evidence for evolution and like with the testimony of thousands of scientists who debunk the moon conspiracy, you claim they are either wrong or bullshitters.

It's no different to flat earthers who end up claiming - all the evidence/pictures/science is fake.

Here's an interesting theory from the flat-earthers:


THE WORLD IS ROUND - It isn't I'm afraid. It's flat. But it's not static, the land is constantly moving across it like a supermarket conveyer belt. Hence we get night and day, night is when the belt is on the underside of the Earth. This also explains why some long-haul flights take less time on the way back than the way there or vice versa. Planes are either going the opposite way to the direction of travel of the belt, or trying to accelerate in the same direction, which takes longer.





It's an excerpt from an article by Dean Burnett, who by the way hails from Wales and is a neuroscientist to boot, so he obviously has a high IQ and should be believed. All evidence points to his not being raised by a single mom, so there's that too.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ce-confessions

Flat earthers don't tend to worry about theories, they prefer to focus on the scientific method, stuff that can be observed, measured and repeated. Water always finds it's level, horizon is always flat at any height, no curvature, a pressurized system (the atmosphere) must have some sort of containment and couldn't be beside a claimed vacuum with no separation etc.

Also a lot of the physics of a spinning earth doesn't make sense. Satellites and the space rockets for example, defy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics.

Flat earthers seem like the only skeptical thinkers these days.

You basically do away with any chance of being taken seriously from here on. Nobody wants to continue “debating” with you for the same reason they don’t want to with an orangutan. A flat earth... it’s unbelievable people could still think like that..

I don't need anyone to take me seriously, couldn't care less to tell the truth. I find it interesting that people are happy to believe fake images, stories and video rather than science that can be observed, repeated and measured in front of their own eyes.

Your first sentence is self evident. There literally couldn’t be more observable evidence than the earth isn’t flat. If you’d rather just believe every conspiracy theory out there than read anything or learn something, that’s your perogative.

[Alpha]

You're asking for evidence you can actually observe even though you don't believe the science or sources.

If you had spent every single day for dozens and dozens of years observing an ape in a locked cage, then took a holiday and returned to find it replaced by a human in a three-piece suit, you wouldn't claim - "Blimey! They've been right all along. Evolution is kosher." You'd ask who's stole your bloody ape.

Again I'll point you the the scientific method, must be observed and repeatable, I'm just asking for 1 piece of observable evidence. Just 1. Darwin spoke of a change in kinds, can you give me an example of this change in kinds? Don't say finches, because although the beak size changed, they were still finches. Same with bacteria, still bacteria.

What did Darwin mean by "Kinds?" Can you give me the actual quote?

I never said Darwin said a difference of kinds, I said he spoke of a difference of kinds. It think the kinds arguement comes from the religious side. It's been a minute since I visited Origins but simply it's the thought that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor. I do recall him mentioning something about life being breathed into a few forms or into one. Maybe mordern science f-cked him, with the theory of 1.
When I speak of kinds, I'm talking genetic kinds and animal types.
Evolution appears to define Entropy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics. It also violates biogenisis. We've never seen a cell come from nothing, or a DNA strand come from nothing.
The chances of a single cell forming from nothing are considered mathmatically absurd.
Mendel's laws of genetics puts raises flaws in the evolution theory.
All the fake missing links. I've got textbooks from elder members of my family that claimed humans were 98% identical genetically to chimps. Turns out that was a lie, modern comparison techniques puts it closer to 79-80%, the same we also share with pigs and horses.
Beyond that the biggest smoking gun disproving human evolution is the Y chromosome. The Y chromosome doesn't fully recombinate with the X chromosome in men like the two X chromosomes can in women. It stays very consistent through generations, and when comparing the Y chromosomes of any of the primate species compared to humans the difference gets even greater sharing only about 60% of the same genes. So an almost unchanging chromosome from generation to generation hasn't had enough time to account for such a huge difference from the supposed divergence of our common primate ancestors we descended from til today.

There's some much more but look into it for yourself. I'm not going to tell you what to believe, I'm just giving my thoughts and beliefs.

Nobody ran away from the evolution stuff, @Alpha, it's just that you seemed to be muddling up biology with physics. But then dismissed all the evidence for evolution and like with the testimony of thousands of scientists who debunk the moon conspiracy, you claim they are either wrong or bullshitters.

It's no different to flat earthers who end up claiming - all the evidence/pictures/science is fake.

Here's an interesting theory from the flat-earthers:


THE WORLD IS ROUND - It isn't I'm afraid. It's flat. But it's not static, the land is constantly moving across it like a supermarket conveyer belt. Hence we get night and day, night is when the belt is on the underside of the Earth. This also explains why some long-haul flights take less time on the way back than the way there or vice versa. Planes are either going the opposite way to the direction of travel of the belt, or trying to accelerate in the same direction, which takes longer.





It's an excerpt from an article by Dean Burnett, who by the way hails from Wales and is a neuroscientist to boot, so he obviously has a high IQ and should be believed. All evidence points to his not being raised by a single mom, so there's that too.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ce-confessions

Flat earthers don't tend to worry about theories, they prefer to focus on the scientific method, stuff that can be observed, measured and repeated. Water always finds it's level, horizon is always flat at any height, no curvature, a pressurized system (the atmosphere) must have some sort of containment and couldn't be beside a claimed vacuum with no separation etc.

Also a lot of the physics of a spinning earth doesn't make sense. Satellites and the space rockets for example, defy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics.

Flat earthers seem like the only skeptical thinkers these days.

You basically do away with any chance of being taken seriously from here on. Nobody wants to continue “debating” with you for the same reason they don’t want to with an orangutan. A flat earth... it’s unbelievable people could still think like that..

I don't need anyone to take me seriously, couldn't care less to tell the truth. I find it interesting that people are happy to believe fake images, stories and video rather than science that can be observed, repeated and measured in front of their own eyes.

Your first sentence is self evident. There literally couldn’t be more observable evidence than the earth isn’t flat. If you’d rather just believe every conspiracy theory out there than read anything or learn something, that’s your perogative.

It does sound crazy, trust me, I've been into it from around early 2016. When brought up to me at the time, I thought Flat Earth, those people are stupid. Then I tried to debunk it, a group of friends and myself got together to do some actual physics on it and found stuff that didn't make sense. I'm not trying to convince you or anybody, but I can only tell you that if you actually look into the physics, breakdown the problems of a spinning earth, a spinning atmosphere etc you come to the conclusion that you either follow logic and laws or something that doesn't add up. You don't have to believe me, and that's fine, but make sure you prove it to yourself.