NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years

[Fenster]

Alpha, how do you know the "science" carried out by you and your mates - which proves the earth is flat - was correct? How can you trust the methods you've learned weren't designed to fool you?

And why exactly is every other scientist in the world lying?

[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.

Do you understand "humans came from apes" doesn't mean modern apes turned into us, right? That's why you can't observe it. They mean we are related to the same family - cousins.

I understand the theory of evolution. I just don't understand why we don't have millions of these transitional creatures along the fossil record.

Alpha, how do you know the "science" carried out by you and your mates - which proves the earth is flat - was correct? How can you trust the methods you've learned weren't designed to fool you?

And why exactly is every other scientist in the world lying?

We used their math, physics and astrology and couldn't get it to work. The methods were the details they give us, size of the earth, speed it is rotating, how much curvature they tell us we should see etc.

But I haven't just done the physics, there's stuff like canals, railway lines, you can see much further using a good camera they you sould be able to, based on the supposed curvature. I've talked with pilots, I've been on planes.

Think about water in a bottle turned on its side, and you draw a line from the top of the bottle to the bottom, so that it's about 5mm below the surface of the water, straight obviously.

Now there's no way you could bend the bottle to make the surface follow the line / curve. It wouldn't matter how big a bottle was, it could be miles and miles long, it wouldn't change the fact that the surface will always be level. Your common sense tells you this, but the brain washing will make your question your own senses. They'll tell you it's gravity that pulls everything towards the centre of a molten core. But yet again we are unable to observe and repeat this.

[Alpha]

Sorry didn't reply to the last part about why.

I could speculate, 19 billion a year, more land etc, but I try to concentrate on the stuff I have experience with and can observe. Water, photograph, physics, astrology. The physics stuff was really to use their story and prove it wrong.

[Fenster]

Did it ever occur that maybe you made a mistake with your experiment?

I don't understand why everyone would be lying? You're not just claiming all the millions of pictures of the earth are faked by the government, but any Tom, Dick and Abdul can do a simple experiment which proves the earth is flat.

You claimed earlier that "Lucy" was proved to be fake, right? Yet it was a scientist who revealed a fragment of bone wasn't right which led to dozens of experts reexamining everything. Maybe you're right but I find it even harder to believe so many scientists know the earth is flat yet happily delude themselves.

[Alpha]

Did it ever occur that maybe you made a mistake with your experiment?

I don't understand why everyone would be lying? You're not just claiming all the millions of pictures of the earth are faked by the government, but any Tom, Dick and Abdul can do a simple experiment which proves the earth is flat.

You claimed earlier that "Lucy" was proved to be fake, right? Yet it was a scientist who revealed a fragment of bone wasn't right which led to dozens of experts reexamining everything. Maybe you're right but I find it even harder to believe so many scientists know the earth is flat yet happily delude themselves.

Your welcome to do experiments yourself. Try to explain how satellites are able to stay in the thermoshpere of anywhere between 1500 - 2500 degrees at roughly 560kn up. Aluminum melts at around 600 degrees. Now if you heat anything, it will expand. They tell us that because of the heat the gases and particulars are spread far apart due to expanding away from each other, this is basically what they tell us to explain how the ISS/ satellites don't get affected by the heat and melt. Ok so that's their explanation on why they don't get hot. But then how does it get cold? Should be a 2 way street. If there's no air in space for the heat to radiate into, to move through, through conduction or convection, how does heat leave? Right? Only light can transfer energy through space as we're told. On earth you have to have some sort of medium for it to travel through, this is common accepted truth. Heat has to move through something, unless it's light. So the question was, how does heat that builds up inside the space station get out? Right? There's an imaginary barrier around the space station that doesn't allow heat to get in or out, how does this work? Satellites are made of metal and dense matter and they're cool, they are going to absorb that light too, how do they not? How does it choose to heat the atmosphere but not the satellites. That defies logic. The solar panels also absorb light to make electricity, lets say they can work in 1500 degrees temperatures, shouldn't they be transferring heat into the station through the matter they're connected with? Metals conduct heat, basically all matter does, hot goes to cold. How does this work? We have to obey our laws of science. In my opinion this disobeys the 2nd law of thermaldynamics, so it's contradicting the method of analysis.

Like I said, do the science for yourself. Check it for yourself. Prove it to yourself.

Again just because you feel the secret is to big, isn't proof that it's not happening.

I don't really care about being right, I know what I know, and what I have been able to see and do. And you can do some easy stuff yourself. All I ask is that people do their own research. If you watched that vid about faking space, and still choose to believe that you're not being lied to, that's fine, but that's why they can get away with it.

[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?

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.

Do you understand "humans came from apes" doesn't mean modern apes turned into us, right? That's why you can't observe it. They mean we are related to the same family - cousins.

I understand the theory of evolution. I just don't understand why we don't have millions of these transitional creatures along the fossil record.

While Darwin predicted that the fossil record would show species with intermediate or transitional features, it was virtually unexplored at the time. Knowing what he knew about rarity of fossilization and incomplete nature the geologic record, Darwin actually imagined the record was so poor, it was likely paleontologists would never find the transitional fossils.

In 1859, when On the Origin of Species was published, very few fossils had been discovered and described. It was only in the early 19th century that fossils of ancient beasts like dinosaurs were formally identified. These days, with millions of specimens resting in museum drawers, no one would say paleontologists don’t have enough material to work with for many, many lifetimes - with more and more to be discovered.


Famous Transitional Fossils That Support Evolution
Archaeopteryx
Pakicetus and other amphibious whales
Pezosiren portelli
Tiktaalik

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaenam...ort-evolution/

[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.

Do you understand "humans came from apes" doesn't mean modern apes turned into us, right? That's why you can't observe it. They mean we are related to the same family - cousins.

I understand the theory of evolution. I just don't understand why we don't have millions of these transitional creatures along the fossil record.

While Darwin predicted that the fossil record would show species with intermediate or transitional features, it was virtually unexplored at the time. Knowing what he knew about rarity of fossilization and incomplete nature the geologic record, Darwin actually imagined the record was so poor, it was likely paleontologists would never find the transitional fossils.

In 1859, when On the Origin of Species was published, very few fossils had been discovered and described. It was only in the early 19th century that fossils of ancient beasts like dinosaurs were formally identified. These days, with millions of specimens resting in museum drawers, no one would say paleontologists don’t have enough material to work with for many, many lifetimes - with more and more to be discovered.


Famous Transitional Fossils That Support Evolution
Archaeopteryx
Pakicetus and other amphibious whales
Pezosiren portelli
Tiktaalik

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaenam...ort-evolution/

I like that you said support, not prove. There's so much to go into here. DNA wasn't around then yet either. Again carbon dating is only accurate to roughly 60,000 years. Anything beyond that is speculation. But I would challenge you to visit any dinosaur exhibition, and while there ask what displays have real dinosaur fossil's. I can guarantee it will be none. They'll give you some story about keeping the real ones locked away safely.

[Master]

I have seen many programmes where children/adults have sent cameras on balloons into the atmosphere and the world looks round. They explode and come back down to earth. The cost now is relatively cheap.

[Alpha]

I have seen many programmes where children/adults have sent cameras on balloons into the atmosphere and the world looks round. They explode and come back down to earth. The cost now is relatively cheap.

It will be a fish eyed lense, like a go pro.

And just back to the claim that I am saying the images are fake, NASA freely admits that the images of earth have been photo shopped. Other images you can download from NASAs official gallery, download some free photo forensic software and find evidence for yourself that images have been altered or shadowed areas display no sign of noise.

[Master]

I have seen many programmes where children/adults have sent cameras on balloons into the atmosphere and the world looks round. They explode and come back down to earth. The cost now is relatively cheap.

It will be a fish eyed lense, like a go pro.

And just back to the claim that I am saying the images are fake, NASA freely admits that the images of earth have been photo shopped. Other images you can download from NASAs official gallery, download some free photo forensic software and find evidence for yourself that images have been altered or shadowed areas display no sign of noise.

I would love to take you in a rocket and show you the world is round.