Rampage explains how outer space is a hoax

BearGrounds said:
Multiple governments have been keeping data for decades. This website is good for perusing it:

UFO Phenomena - The Black Vault

Download a massive number of documents obtained officially from the U.S. government and military via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
www.theblackvault.com www.theblackvault.com

There's also theoretical papers out there, such as:

phys.org

What is the Alcubierre "warp" drive?

It's always a welcome thing to learn that ideas that are commonplace in science fiction have a basis in science fact. Cryogenic freezers, laser guns, robots, silicate implants… and let's not forget the warp drive! Believe it or not, this concept – alternately known as FTL (Faster-Than-Light)...
phys.org phys.org
Click to expand...

You said there was evidence of FTL aircraft. A theoretical paper on the topic isn't evidence of that - did you even read the article you linked? Even if they study had shown it was possible, there is a huge gap between possible and developed.

In 2013, Dr. White and members of Eagleworks published the results of their 19.6-second warp field test under vacuum conditions. These results, which were deemed to be inconclusive, were presented at the 2013 Icarus Interstellar Starship Congress held in Dallas, Texas.
Click to expand...

And I'm not going to sift through hundreds of random articles from CT nuts just to find what is most likely some old government paper referencing a small inconclusive study on the subject (probably the one above). You said there was evidence, show it. This is no different than me saying there's evidence for unicorns, then when you ask for it I say its in the library.
 
dirtypablo said:
You said there was evidence of FTL aircraft. A theoretical paper on the topic isn't evidence of that - did you even read the article you linked? Even if they study had shown it was possible, there is a huge gap between possible and developed.



And I'm not going to sift through hundreds of random articles from CT nuts just to find what is most likely some old government paper referencing a small inconclusive study on the subject (probably the one above). You said there was evidence, show it. This is no different than me saying there's evidence for unicorns, then when you ask for it I say its in the library.
Click to expand...

I feel I've done as asked. If you feel it doesn't suffice, oh well. Carry on living under a rock, and in the dark.
 
OneOfOne said:
dylan-what.gif
Click to expand...
what was your "wait a minute, that doesn't seem right" moment when you started to develop these beliefs about space and the dimensions of the earth?



(btw, not shitting on your thoughts, beliefs. I always found you to be one of the more interesting posters)
 
BearGrounds said:
I feel I've done as asked. If you feel it doesn't suffice, oh well. Carry on living under a rock, and in the dark.
Click to expand...

I've asked for evidence of a FTL aircraft, which you claim existed. You provided me a link to an inconclusive study on the theoretical possibility of the subject, and a conspiracy theory website. I asked for something more specific from that website, but you refuse to provide it, and we both know why - because there is nothing there other than what I already mentioned - a bunch of old government papers discussing the possibility, and if you provided something concrete you would have to acknowledge that, so you keep it vague - 'Its there, you've just gotta look!' Since you wouldn't provide anything from that site, I searched the website for the topic, and surprise surprise, I find exactly what I expected - a bunch of old government papers discussing the theoretical possibility. This is not evidence of an existing FTL aircraft. It's evidence that people like yourself jump to wild conclusions based on very limited data.

And lol at me living under a rock. Unlike you, I've actually got a technical background, do technical work, and have been in top secret military contractor labs. The top secret stuff isn't at all what you dorks think it is - its the small details around known physics and engineering that take something that works to something that works flawlessly or to a much higher degree of precision.
 
shockaholic12 said:
Explain without using..... science. Maybe you can share information from some sources but make sure they only upload raw photos our they are clearly liars.
Click to expand...
I didn't need "the science" to know that the coronavirus that came from Wuhan actually came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology where they study coronaviruses and not a pangoloid soup in the market across the river.

Turns out "the science" there was just Fauci covering his ass because he paid for that illegal gain of function research.
 
markg171 said:
I didn't need "the science" to know that the coronavirus that came from Wuhan actually came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology where they study coronaviruses and not a pangoloid soup in the market across the river.

Turns out "the science" there was just Fauci covering his ass because he paid for that illegal gain of function research.
Click to expand...

Can you show photos that this Wuhan Institute of Virology exists? Remember, like you said, RAW files straight from the cameras that aren't "fake"?
 
Shouldn’t it be fairly simple to get the distance from the moon? I feel like that’s not even a complicated experiment?
 
Chad R. Thundercock said:
I feel like there should be a law that strips away the right to use modern technology (cell phones, satellite TV/internet, airplanes, etc) from those who promote Flat Earth Theory. I know it's autocratic, but these people need a taste of their own medicine.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense
 
BearGrounds said:
And yet, evidence exists to support both of those things.

What do they call it when you ignore and deny supporting evidence? Is that science?
Click to expand...
Well you can certainly deny evidence that isn’t valid. You know, like all the staged fake photos of Bigfoot.

Science cannot prove that he does not exist. His non existence is not something that can be observed. What it can do is prove that the bullshit evidence proffered for his existence is false.

So if you want to make claims that he exists, it is incumbent on you to provide the proof he exists. And when that evidence is not enough to absolutely prove he or FTL space crafts exists, and there definitely is no such definitive proof, then from a scientific standpoint you have to accept that you merely believe these things and are unable to prove them at this time.
 
OneOfOne said:
Science is a religion for indoctrinated athiests
Click to expand...

"You better not deny it". That's definitely called a religion.

Take a look at the video of India supposedly landing on the moon. Looks like a video game from the 80's haha

The world is a stage.

 
Last edited:
Andy Capp said:
Because you can see the difference during a lunar eclipse.
5xFPSdY.jpg

I took this photo awhile back during a so-called blood moon event. The reason you can still see the whole moon, and not just the little part on the lower right that is still lit by the sun, is because of light reflected off the Earth illuminating it. The reason it is red is the same as why sunsets are red.

Notice how you can't see any stars?
Edit:

So what's happened to the moon in my photo? And what in the actual fuck is happening in this photo?
2aeaoAc.jpg

Is half the moon really far away while the other half is really close to us? And still no fucking stars? Whaaaaa?
Click to expand...

Inderdasting.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,281,117
Messages
58,341,915
Members
176,007
Latest member
MehmetAliFERAL

Share this page

Back
Top