Jump to content

North Korea

sweetleftpeg

By sweetleftpeg,
in General Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 880
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ewerk
ewerk

I imagine that many people traveling from Newcastle to Sunderland have noticed the same thing.

ohhh_yeah
ohhh_yeah
Howay
Howay

I genuinely think you couldn’t have come up with that bit if you were trying to take the piss. 

Posted Images

The Fish

The Fish 10855

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, wolfy said:

Nope, that's not what I'm saying at all.

That's what you're thinking.

If you question something official and then accept a further explanation, without proof and then argue for it against someone who still questions it, it does not make your stance correct.

When someone calls me a nutter for questioning and then says I do it without evidence, then fails to prove evidence for their own acceptance, then they're simply relying on authority and mass opinion to elevate their stance.

It does not prove anything and you know this.

Which expert is this and what do you know about them that makes them an expert?

 

 

I've provided many reasons in the other topic but I cannot help it if people just reject it or go into a frenzy over what I say.

The truth is that I cannot physically prove to anyone what I'm saying and nor do I pass it off as 100% legitimate.

All I pass of as legitimate, is that the Earth is absolutely 100% not a globe that we walk upon and you nor anyone else have proof that it exists, except mass opinion and ridiculous photo's and video that supposedly proves a globe.

 

Logic dictates how silly it all is but most people will not dare to venture down that route because they are weak and afraid of being called names.

Those who believe in authority and their answers to questions, unconditionally, without really taking any other interest in questioning it, have no reason to believe anything otherwise.

This goes for so called nuclear weapons and all the rest of it.

It's an acceptance and/or belief system.

 

We are all closed minded and we are all hypocrites in many aspects. It just depends on what's on offer for the time.

One thing is for sure and even you know this. We are being lied to on a daily basis and those in power are anything but as honest as they portray.

That being the case and you knowing this, means, how do you know what the truth is?

 

 

 

 

 

 

But I have recieved proof that satisfies my standard. I've seen photographs, I've heard testimony, I've understood enough of the science behind it, and it makes sense. 

 

You cannot prove a mote of what you claim. Not a speck, not a jot. Everything you suggest is the logical alternative to the consensus is the fanciest of flights. It isn't replicated anywhere in the natural world, it requires total suspension of every law of nature we understand and it relies on nothing but you insulting people who mock it.

 

I know this might toss you down a rabbit hole, but the only thing you know is that you exist. Your eyes, your ears, even your mind can lie to you. You might think you're replying to a message board, but for all you know, you're a brain in a jar on a shelf in a Pratchettian existence. You exist, everything else is up for debate. The trouble is, debate has to move forward otherwise it's pointless. 

 

There are industries, livelihoods, technologies, etc. all dovetailing perfectly with a globe earth reality. And not a single scrap of evidence for your flight of fancy. It would work as a thought experiment if it stood up to the modest scrutiny we've applied, but it doesn't.

 

Oh and the expert was Rikko, who you informed that his years of study and subsequent career was a lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alex

Alex 35063

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, wolfy said:

I think you've probably put in 500 posts that consist of a total of about 50 words and 400 smileys. 

You're a right joy. 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolfy

wolfy 12

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

Quote

But I have recieved proof that satisfies my standard. I've seen photographs, I've heard testimony, I've understood enough of the science behind it, and it makes sense. 

What proof have you seen that satisfies your standards?

What photo's do you have or have seen that proves a reality?

People testify every day in court and even swear on a bible that they're telling the truth. Do they all tell the truth?

What science do you understand that proves anything  I'm questioning?

 

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Quote

You cannot prove a mote of what you claim. Not a speck, not a jot.

Natural science is proof enough for me that we are being duped about Earth.

You have no proof other than the words of people placed on a pedestal to tell you stuff that goes against logic, yet authority wins the day, because is gains mass opinion and a misguided trust among those masses.

 

 

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Quote

Everything you suggest is the logical alternative to the consensus is the fanciest of flights. It isn't replicated anywhere in the natural world, it requires total suspension of every law of nature we understand and it relies on nothing but you insulting people who mock it.

 

A lot of what people believe, including yourself, requires you to abandon your logic and your own natural senses in favour of a saturated indoctrination throughout life of which is extremely hard for many people to recover from.

Most people will not dare to question stuff because they fear ridicule and persecution.

It's easier to go with the flow but going with the flow does not gain all the truth's.

 

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Quote

I know this might toss you down a rabbit hole, but the only thing you know is that you exist. Your eyes, your ears, even your mind can lie to you. You might think you're replying to a message board, but for all you know, you're a brain in a jar on a shelf in a Pratchettian existence. You exist, everything else is up for debate. The trouble is, debate has to move forward otherwise it's pointless. 

Debate can only move forward when one side gains in providing enough realism or food for thought to actually sway the opposition.

Easier said than done when the people of the world hold a belief system that does not adjust to any other form of questioning.

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Quote

There are industries, livelihoods, technologies, etc. all dovetailing perfectly with a globe earth reality. And not a single scrap of evidence for your flight of fancy. It would work as a thought experiment if it stood up to the modest scrutiny we've applied, but it doesn't.

There are no industries or anything else that rely on any global Earth reality because a global Earth in how we are told, is not a reality.

 

 

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Oh and the expert was Rikko, who you informed that his years of study and subsequent career was a lie.

Do you personally know Rikko and if so, do you 100% know he's dealt with nuclear fuel and watched it do what we are told it does?

How many people on a sub or in a so called nuclear power plant, or making so called nuclear weapons have access to the reality of what's going on?

A cleaner at a so called nuclear power plant  or a person wiping down a so called nuclear missile can go home or on a forum and tell all and sundry that they're in the know.

You can read a book about it all and profess you're an expert but you would be no more an expert on it any more than a sci-fi person reading up on the diagrams of all the star wars ships and weapons, etc.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolfy

wolfy 12

Posted
Posted
Just now, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

 

Well that makes more sense than the rest of the stupid shit you spout.

I'll try and talk about socks and sandals just for you. You have to remember that I can't just automatically get down to your level unless I know for sure how low it is.

I got you now, so, good kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolfy

wolfy 12

Posted
Posted
Just now, Meenzer said:

 

I'd hope not, it'd be a bit of a squeeze.

Not for Kevin. That's why he loses one now and again when he jumps up screaming and farting and spluttering in the playground. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Fish

The Fish 10855

Posted
Posted
Just now, wolfy said:

What proof have you seen that satisfies your standards?

What photo's do you have or have seen that proves a reality?

People testify every day in court and even swear on a bible that they're telling the truth. Do they all tell the truth?

What science do you understand that proves anything  I'm questioning?

 

Photos, videos, launch sites, testimonies, and so on and so on and so on.

They don't all tell the truth, but neither do they all lie. Also, there are often reasons for someone to lie under oath, you still haven't given a reason for a centuries old, global conspiracy.

 

Just now, wolfy said:

Natural science is proof enough for me that we are being duped about Earth.

You have no proof other than the words of people placed on a pedestal to tell you stuff that goes against logic, yet authority wins the day, because is gains mass opinion and a misguided trust among those masses.

You have no proof of anything whatsoever, and as you're making the claim (the Ice Dome and Denpressure) the burden of proof lies with you.

 

Just now, wolfy said:

A lot of what people believe, including yourself, requires you to abandon your logic and your own natural senses in favour of a saturated indoctrination throughout life of which is extremely hard for many people to recover from.

Most people will not dare to question stuff because they fear ridicule and persecution.

It's easier to go with the flow but going with the flow does not gain all the truth's.

No it doesn't, yes they actually do, you condescending bellend.

 

 

Just now, wolfy said:

Debate can only move forward when one side gains in providing enough realism or food for thought to actually sway the opposition.

Easier said than done when the people of the world hold a belief system that does not adjust to any other form of questioning.

 

Right, so you've done literally nothing to move your position forward. You state the globe is a lie, but can't prove it. Then you insult people who agree with the consensus because you can't prove anything.

 

Just now, wolfy said:

 

There are no industries or anything else that rely on any global Earth reality because a global Earth in how we are told, is not a reality.

Yes there are, why are you lying?

 

Just now, wolfy said:

Do you personally know Rikko and if so, do you 100% know he's dealt with nuclear fuel and watched it do what we are told it does?

How many people on a sub or in a so called nuclear power plant, or making so called nuclear weapons have access to the reality of what's going on?

A cleaner at a so called nuclear power plant  or a person wiping down a so called nuclear missile can go home or on a forum and tell all and sundry that they're in the know.

You can read a book about it all and profess you're an expert but you would be no more an expert on it any more than a sci-fi person reading up on the diagrams of all the star wars ships and weapons, etc.

I've met him once or twice and he has no reason to lie. And, unlike you , he's able to provide satisfactory explanations of his work, of some of the methods and the science behind his career.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolfy

wolfy 12

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Quote


Photos, videos, launch sites, testimonies, and so on and so on and so on.

They don't all tell the truth, but neither do they all lie. Also, there are often reasons for someone to lie under oath, you still haven't given a reason for a centuries old, global conspiracy.

 

So basically you are reliant on what you're told and accept it as the truth, because your belief in photo's and video and so called testimonies, is strong.

That makes you potentially gullible and easily acceptable of indoctrination.

I'm less easily reeled in by this stuff but I used to be.

Like I said, it's not easy gaining the strength to go against mass opinion.

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:
Quote

You have no proof of anything whatsoever, and as you're making the claim (the Ice Dome and Denpressure) the burden of proof lies with you.

I agree, the burden of proof would be with me if I said what I say is 100% true. But I don't. I tell anyone that it's my musing/thought process in figuring out what Earth is against what it certainly is not.

I do not ask you to believe anything I say. I simply give people food for thought.

Whether they  take that onboard or reject and/or ridicule, is their choice.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

 

 

 

 

I've met him once or twice and he has no reason to lie. And, unlike you , he's able to provide satisfactory explanations of his work, of some of the methods and the science behind his career.

 

He doesn't have to lie, he just has to believe he knows what's what when he doesn't. And I don't believe he knows what's what in terms of the energy process, other than what he's been told about it.

Simple as that really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Fish

The Fish 10855

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, wolfy said:

So basically you are reliant on what you're told and accept it as the truth, because your belief in photo's and video and so called testimonies, is strong.

That makes you potentially gullible and easily acceptable of indoctrination.

I'm less easily reeled in by this stuff but I used to be.

Like I said, it's not easy gaining the strength to go against mass opinion.

 

No, that's not basically what it is, it's not even what it is if you take a more rigorous look at what I mean. I question, evaluate, reject or accept based on logic, reason and so on. 

 

19 minutes ago, wolfy said:

 

I agree, the burden of proof would be with me if I said what I say is 100% true. But I don't. I tell anyone that it's my musing/thought process in figuring out what Earth is against what it certainly is not.

I do not ask you to believe anything I say. I simply give people food for thought.

Whether they  take that onboard or reject and/or ridicule, is their choice.

 

You are claiming something that has been proven by centuries of study, is 100% not true, without proof. You state categorically that the earth is not a globe and you have nothing to back that up. Nothing whatsoever. You then state anyone who does accept the consensus is gullible at best. 

 

19 minutes ago, wolfy said:

He doesn't have to lie, he just has to believe he knows what's what when he doesn't. And I don't believe he knows what's what in terms of the energy process, other than what he's been told about it.

Simple as that really.

 

So explain why. Why would there be an industry which is essentially a charade? Why would Rikko have studied for years in a sham science, been employed by a sham industry. What benefit is there to the lie? Surely if none of this existed there'd be easier, cheaper, more simplistic ways to keep him in employ? Why fabricate this complex lie when a simpler one would provide just as much use?

 

Oh, and if your answer is a variation on "I don't know" I'd suggest the reason you don't know is because the answer doesn't fall in line with your world view and as such you cannot accept it, what with you being closed minded and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolfy

wolfy 12

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

I'd be quite jealous if I realised it was possible to make a very nice and lucrative career off the back of a massive lie. Seems like easy money.

It is easy money.

Imagine duping the world that you have to make WMD and enough of them to counteract retaliation of each country to create the MAD (mutually assured destruction) effect that supposedly keeps us all safe from either country daring to unleash hell.

 

Who do you think could be pissing up the tax dollars set aside to keep building these so called WMD warheads that are shrouded in secrecy and sat in supposed underground silos just waiting to be unleashed at the drop of a hat in the event that some country (like North Korea) goes nuts and fires theirs.

The cost to build and the cost of upkeep as they sit there doing nothing and yet seem perfectly stable just  ready to go in silos.

 

Then the ruse of dismantling in a so called tit for tat peaceful lowering of threat levels which apparently cost an absolute fortune.

And in all this time no brains have managed to replicate one and detonate it in an act of badness as a rogue nation.

 

Sell us the fear and make us beg to keep it because we can't be having any country bullying ours, so race race race and then dismantle before racing again and so on.

Conventional warheads disguised as WMD?

Maybe empty shells that look like missiles like Korea parade in their square as a military so called might.

 

Just remember, you only know what you are allowed to know and most of it can be anything but the reality you come to believe/accept.

Billions upon billions of dollars for space rockets and nuclear arsenal's and star wars perfecting so called global safety nets and yet it all could be one huge party by the wolves or whatever street is on the agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alex

Alex 35063

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Meenzer said:

Like I say. Since none of it requires any actual expertise, you should get among it. Take some of that lovely money for nothing!

:lol: Not like you have to be a rocket scientist or anything

Edited by Alex
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wolfy

wolfy 12

Posted
Posted
Just now, The Fish said:
Quote


No, that's not basically what it is, it's not even what it is if you take a more rigorous look at what I mean. I question, evaluate, reject or accept based on logic, reason and so on. 

 

No you don't. You arrogantly believe you do but you certainly do not.

It's similar to how you view my stance.

 

 

Just now, The Fish said:

 

Quote

You are claiming something that has been proven by centuries of study, is 100% not true, without proof. You state categorically that the earth is not a globe and you have nothing to back that up. Nothing whatsoever. You then state anyone who does accept the consensus is gullible at best. 

Natural science backs it up. Water backs it up perfectly regardless of what you try to argue.

It requires nothing more simpler than the flatness of water. The level of water.

To believe water would stay on a huge spinning globe is to literally throw away your natural logical mind in favour of nonsense spewed out by people put on a pedestal to do just that.

 

 

Just now, The Fish said:

 

Quote

So explain why. Why would there be an industry which is essentially a charade?

Money for the people who instigate it.

Shroud the energy in secrecy and make it massively life killing and you have the massive cloak as well as the cost of disposal and security etc, plus the massive build cost of these so called nuclear powers stations and you have huge bills for what was promised as a near free energy source.

 

 

 

Just now, The Fish said:

 

Quote

Why would Rikko have studied for years in a sham science, been employed by a sham industry. What benefit is there to the lie? Surely if none of this existed there'd be easier, cheaper, more simplistic ways to keep him in employ? Why fabricate this complex lie when a simpler one would provide just as much use?

To set up a ruse and mask the reality with a dupe, you still have to employ people to run it.

How many submariners actually truly know what's powering their so called nuclear sub?

They all know it's nuclear power because they've been schooled into it as part of their training, plus the emergency drills, etc.

Why would anyone doubt any of it?

You have to look deeper into it all to actually get any inkling that all may not be what it appears to be on the surface.

That's for you to decide, or not. Your choice.

 

Just now, The Fish said:

Oh, and if your answer is a variation on "I don't know" I'd suggest the reason you don't know is because the answer doesn't fall in line with your world view and as such you cannot accept it, what with you being closed minded and all.

I have reasons for why I think on anything I think with this stuff.

I'm sure I explained it a long time ago and I'm sure you will have read up on it at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

  I accept