Rampage explains how outer space is a hoax

[Copper Burner]

It's just a real time simulation of the event, so people could follow along. It's not being presented as real footage.

Funny, they sent live footage back to the United States when we went to the moon over 55 years ago.

They brought real cameras to the moon right? Do you know of any footage out there that shows Indians bouncing around on the moon and maybe putting a flag up there? I would also be interested in seeing a real picture of the craft that they used to make it to the moon.

 

[Copper Burner]

Lol, that's an animation - it wasn't supposed to be real live footage.

With our advance cameras with high capabilites, surely there's footage of the actual spacecraft and Indians jumping around in their space suits right?

 

[dirtypablo]

lol. thats funny to me. I kind of knew you would have some kind of emotional reaction to him.

you never posted all the serious debunking of meldrums work you have read. I am still quite interested in it and I even did some looking but could not find anything legitimate other than cheap slander.

if that work exists I would be really grateful to read it man.

I didn't have an emotional reaction, I just responded with my thoughts on him based on seeing him continuously spout batshit conspiracy theory nonsense for years on end. He recently claimed that 17 million people have died from the covid vaccine. He's a nutjob. He found an audience and a way to make money by spouting conspiracy theories around covid, and undoubtedly caused people to die by spreading vaccine and ivermectin pseudoscience.

From wikipedia -

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Weinstein made several public appearances advocating the use of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin to prevent or treat the disease and downplaying the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.[50] David Gorski, in Science-Based Medicine, described Weinstein as a prominent "COVID-19 contrarian and spreader of disinformation", and "one of the foremost purveyors of COVID-19 disinformation", citing his appearances on Joe Rogan and Bill Maher.[5][36] Sam Harris criticized Weinstein's advocacy, stating that he "consider it dangerous".[36] Eric Topol, professor of molecular medicine, described Weinstein's position on mRNA vaccines as "totally irresponsible. It's reckless. It's sick. It's predatory. It's really sad."[36]

Weinstein has made erroneous claims that ivermectin can prevent or treat COVID-19, calling it "a near-perfect COVID prophylactic".[51][5] There is no good evidence to support such claims.[52][53][54] Weinstein hosted ivermectin advocate Pierre Kory on his DarkHorse podcast to discuss the drug,[55][6] and advocated for the use of ivermectin on other podcast and television news appearances.[56][57] Weinstein took ivermectin during a livestream video and said both he and his wife had not been vaccinated because of their fears concerning COVID-19 vaccines.[58] YouTube demonetized the couple's channels in response to their claims about ivermectin. Afterward, Weinstein and Heying moved their subsequent broadcasts to the fringe alternative video sharing platform Odysee.[55] In August 2021, Weinstein said he had misstated that a study had shown a 100% effective ivermectin protocol for the prevention of COVID.[52][59] Weinstein considers himself a supporter of vaccines in general; he believes mRNA vaccines have promise despite what he claims are "some clear design flaws".[43] Weinstein has falsely claimed that the spike protein produced by or contained within COVID-19 vaccines is "very dangerous" and "cytotoxic".[60][61][62] Weinstein has said that ivermectin alone is "good enough to end the pandemic at any point" and claimed that the drug's true effectiveness against COVID-19 was being suppressed in order to push vaccines for the financial benefit of Big Pharma.[63] He has told Fox News' Tucker Carlson that if ivermectin functioned as he thought it did, then "the debate about the vaccines would be over by definition."[64]

Bret Weinstein - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And here you go.

https://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/bigfootreview.pdf

 

[dirtypablo]

With our advance cameras with high capabilites, surely there's footage of the actual spacecraft and Indians jumping around in their space suits right?

? It was an unmanned mission, but here is some actual footage from the lander.

Footage from moon shows Indian lunar lander successfully 'hopping' – video

The Indian Space Research Organisation has released footage showing the Vikram lander completing a hop after historic landing on the moon's south pole

www.theguardian.com

 

[Copper Burner]

? It was an unmanned mission, but here is some actual footage from the lander.

Footage from moon shows Indian lunar lander successfully 'hopping' – video

The Indian Space Research Organisation has released footage showing the Vikram lander completing a hop after historic landing on the moon's south pole

www.theguardian.com

I suppose they didn't have a camera on board that captured it going into outerspace either.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

It is my only question, and you didn't answer it.

It is my only question, and you didn't answer it.

My answer is that not anyone like you say can perform that test. Not at all. I thought I made that obvious in my previous reply.
Is that seriously your best argument that we went to the moon? That some multi millions worth of equipment can bounce a laser off something on the moon?
When did you last perform this test? And do you know anyone else who has also performed this test?
No? Didn't think so.

You're basically using a test that NASA say they can do, to prove NASA have done something they say they've done.
Can you see how retarded that sounds? Or is that still your argument?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I didn't have an emotional reaction, I just responded with my thoughts on him based on seeing him continuously spout batshit conspiracy theory nonsense for years on end. He recently claimed that 17 million people have died from the covid vaccine. He's a nutjob. He found an audience and a way to make money by spouting conspiracy theories around covid, and undoubtedly caused people to die by spreading vaccine and ivermectin pseudoscience.

From wikipedia -

Bret Weinstein - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And here you go.

https://www.physics.smu.edu/~pseudo/bigfootreview.pdf

We are in luck as I've already read that article and I can take some of it apart if you're interested in learning why?

Right off the bat to pretend that you need a cognitive scientist to analyze whether or not a bear can be mistaken for Bigfoot is absolute foolishness. The most idiotic kind of foolishness in fact!!

Bigfoot by all accounts are triangular shaped. Wide at the top and narrow at the hips especially in the males.... bears are pear-shaped wide at the bottom and narrow at the top. Since many accounts, in fact, lots and lots of accounts show a genuine astonishment at how wide the shoulders are on a bigfoot we can reasonably think it wasn't a black bear or a grizzly bear.... It is also the case in many many accounts that viewing the creature in question is not done in a flash or just for a moment but there is actual behavior being witnessed movement, changes in posture etc.... It does not take a cognitive scientist to distinguish between those two shapes when one has time to witness them at length so the first hard-hitting point of this article is weak... but I could go on and on on this.

In fact, I would think a cognitive scientist would be obviously far less qualified than say a very experienced hunter and since hunter's comprise a very large number of the people who see bigfoot, we can reasonably suggest that a cognitive scientist in his office is less qualified to analyze the accounts of seeing bigfoot, than an actual expert in hunting. After all, men who hunt grizzly bears do take their own lives into their hands when they hunt and there has to be a high degree of knowledge/expertise in order not to get eaten or killed by grizzly bears.

So subtly slipping in a "cognitive scientist" as an expert in distinguishing between bear and Bigfoot is a kind of sleight of hand tactic used by debunkers but that has no real world application.

I happen to be working now but would be glad to respond later to most of the points because this kind of thing passes for debunking only when you haven't actually looked into the topic for you yourself and have already decided on the outcome.

At best, this kind of work just raises questions and alternative perspectives for some things that I think are very valuable, but to claim it as a debunking is going way too far don't you think?

 

[Andy Capp]

Black Science Guy finds it hard to argue against a creator:

Neither post is relevant to my posts ITT.

With our advance cameras with high capabilites, surely there's footage of the actual spacecraft and Indians jumping around in their space suits right?

None of this drivel relates to my posts ITT.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder why not?

 

[Andy Capp]

My answer is that not anyone like you say can perform that test. Not at all. I thought I made that obvious in my previous reply.
Is that seriously your best argument that we went to the moon? That some multi millions worth of equipment can bounce a laser off something on the moon?
When did you last perform this test? And do you know anyone else who has also performed this test?
No? Didn't think so.

You're basically using a test that NASA say they can do, to prove NASA have done something they say they've done.
Can you see how retarded that sounds? Or is that still your argument?

You really have never looked through a telescope, have you?

 

[Blayt7hh]

You asked for evidence, and you got some. As expected, you're just dismissing it all and asking for more. It's what you guys always do.

Here's video of the TR3B taking off at superluminal speed (which you'll say is fake and debunked).



Nothing will suffice for you people, so you just have to stay in your lane and under the thumb of those lying to you. You can't be helped.

So let’s ignore the really obvious frame skip at around 57 seconds. Why would the military be testing this super secret aircraft in the night over a densely populated city?

 

[Copper Burner]

Neither post is relevant to my posts ITT.

None of this drivel relates to my posts ITT.

Hmmmmmm. I wonder why not?

https://x.com/bitcoinballer23/status/1694604649888911437?s=20

Can you explain this? There's stars in there no? Maybe you should contact Nasa to let them know that it's impossible to see stars from the moon lol.

Fun fact: India's space program is a counterpart of Nasa.

 

[Andy Capp]

https://x.com/bitcoinballer23/status/1694604649888911437?s=20

Can you explain this? There's stars in there no?

Fun fact: India's space program is a counterpart of Nasa.

You are dumber than you sound if you think I'm following a link to see what "bitcoinballer" has to say about astronomy. I'm not the one that needs to explain anything. I'm not making the false claim. Read my post again with those two photos that I personally took with my own camera, and give me some explanation for how that makes sense in your "things closer/farther means brighter/less bright" paradigm.


Fun fact, I don't think you know what counterpart means.

 

[Copper Burner]

You are dumber than you sound if you think I'm following a link to see what "bitcoinballer" has to say about astronomy. I'm not the one that needs to explain anything. I'm not making the false claim. Read my post again with those two photos that I personally took with my own camera, and give me some explanation for how that makes sense in your "things closer/farther means brighter/less bright" paradigm.


Fun fact, I don't think you know what counterpart means.

Well in this case, it means they run the show.

Bitcoinballer doesn't say anything. It's a 10 second video that he had nothing to do with. Don't be scared sherbro.

You lost the argument dummy. I'm going to go back and quote one of your know it all posts and reply with the same link again. That way everyone can laugh at you.

 

[Copper Burner]

The light from the earth is drowning out background stars. Ever try looking at a dim light that is far away while someone shines a flashlight in your face? Please go back and finish high school.

https://x.com/bitcoinballer23/status/1694604649888911437?s=20

Maybe Nasa didn't get the memo. You should educate them.

 

[BearGrounds]

So let’s ignore the really obvious frame skip at around 57 seconds. Why would the military be testing this super secret aircraft in the night over a densely populated city?

What exactly does a frame skip imply other than editing? It doesn't mean it's fake, that's a nitpick.

And there could be multiple reasons.

Fact is, they could pull it off precisely because you and your ilk exist, and you'll deny, ridicule, and excuse it away for them without even being paid for it. The skeptic is their dog.

 

[dirtypablo]

We are in luck as I've already read that article and I can take some of it apart if you're interested in learning why?

Right off the bat to pretend that you need a cognitive scientist to analyze whether or not a bear can be mistaken for Bigfoot is absolute foolishness. The most idiotic kind of foolishness in fact!!

Bigfoot by all accounts are triangular shaped. Wide at the top and narrow at the hips especially in the males.... bears are pear-shaped wide at the bottom and narrow at the top. Since many accounts, in fact, lots and lots of accounts show a genuine astonishment at how wide the shoulders are on a bigfoot we can reasonably think it wasn't a black bear or a grizzly bear.... It is also the case in many many accounts that viewing the creature in question is not done in a flash or just for a moment but there is actual behavior being witnessed movement, changes in posture etc.... It does not take a cognitive scientist to distinguish between those two shapes when one has time to witness them at length so the first hard-hitting point of this article is weak... but I could go on and on on this.

In fact, I would think a cognitive scientist would be obviously far less qualified than say a very experienced hunter and since hunter's comprise a very large number of the people who see bigfoot, we can reasonably suggest that a cognitive scientist in his office is less qualified to analyze the accounts of seeing bigfoot, than an actual expert in hunting. After all, men who hunt grizzly bears do take their own lives into their hands when they hunt and there has to be a high degree of knowledge/expertise in order not to get eaten or killed by grizzly bears.

So subtly slipping in a "cognitive scientist" as an expert in distinguishing between bear and Bigfoot is a kind of sleight of hand tactic used by debunkers but that has no real world application.

I happen to be working now but would be glad to respond later to most of the points because this kind of thing passes for debunking only when you haven't actually looked into the topic for you yourself and have already decided on the outcome.

At best, this kind of work just raises questions and alternative perspectives for some things that I think are very valuable, but to claim it as a debunking is going way too far don't you think?

You completely misunderstood the point of the comments about a psychologist. A psychologist, not an expert in bears or hunting, has an understanding of how eyewitness accounts can be fabricated or mistaken. The question isn't the content of the memory, its how much weight should be given to that memory and why. A psychologist can analyze a testimony and know what things to look for - there may be certain cues that a person is lying, has changed or altered their story, is creating a narrative that aligns with other previously held beliefs and so on. Your commentary that bigfoot is shaped differently than a bear and thus the two couldn't be mixed up is exactly why you're not qualified to make that distinction - we have mountains of data that people can see one thing, and believe they saw something else. Not only that, but we have plenty of data that what people believe they saw can be altered by the way someone else described it to them, or even asked them about it! There are studies where you can show someone a video, and then ask them questions about it - by slightly changing the phrasing of the questions, the person will think they saw something different. You are fundamentally misunderstanding the type of evidence they're talking about, and how it should be analyzed.

 

[BearGrounds]

Neither post is relevant to my posts ITT.

I didn't quote you.

But simulation theory (if true), could mean, in a way, that space is an illusion of sorts.

 

[Andy Capp]

https://x.com/bitcoinballer23/status/1694604649888911437?s=20

Maybe Nasa didn't get the memo. You should educate them.

If you have something from NASA to show, get it from their fucking website and let me see it or piss off, dummy. I am not following your rando links and giving "bitcoinballer" any fucking clicks, got it?

I mean, you don't even understand how proportion works. And again, you still haven't addressed my photos. You just referred me to randos. So, it's clear you can't address them because you have no explanation other than the one I provided you. Go ask your rando why lunar eclipses look the way they do. I'll be here waiting for your dumbass.

LOL honest to fuck. Hilarious. And again you clearly don't know what a counterpart is, so perhaps you should just start with understanding the definitions of words, maybe go back and finish that grade ten, and then get back to me.

[Edit:] Oh, and have you ever looked through a telescope? Even once? I'm guessing not lmao

 

[Andy Capp]

You completely misunderstood the point of the comments about a psychologist. A psychologist, not an expert in bears or hunting, has an understanding of how eyewitness accounts can be fabricated or mistaken. The question isn't the content of the memory, its how much weight should be given to that memory and why. A psychologist can analyze a testimony and know what things to look for - there may be certain cues that a person is lying, has changed or altered their story, is creating a narrative that aligns with other previously held beliefs and so on. Your commentary that bigfoot is shaped differently than a bear and thus the two couldn't be mixed up is exactly why you're not qualified to make that distinction - we have mountains of data that people can see one thing, and believe they saw something else. Not only that, but we have plenty of data that what people believe they saw can be altered by the way someone else described it to them, or even asked them about it! There are studies where can show someone a video, and then ask them questions about it - by slightly changing the phrasing of the questions, the person will think they saw something different. You are fundamentally misunderstanding the type of evidence they're talking about, and how it should be analyzed.

Thank you for saving me the trouble.

 

[Copper Burner]

If you have something from NASA to show, get it from their fucking website and let me see it or piss off, dummy. I am not following your rando links and giving "bitcoinballer" any fucking clicks, got it?

I mean, you don't even understand how proportion works. And again, you still haven't addressed my photos. You just referred me to randos. So, it's clear you can't address them because you have no explanation other than the one I provided you. Go ask your rando why lunar eclipses look the way they do. I'll be here waiting for your dumbass.

LOL honest to fuck. Hilarious. And again you clearly don't know what a counterpart is, so perhaps you should just start with understanding the definitions of words, maybe go back and finish that grade ten, and then get back to me.

You've been exposed retard. Can it.