The War Room Bet Thread V3

Status
Not open for further replies.
@MikeMcMann
Please stop entertaining this lunatic. You are exacerbating his mental illness
I'm done with him. Sorry to give him the one thing he wants. A platform to reply to, to spew nonsense that goes nowhere but is solely about spewing nonsense.
 
@abiG @MikeMcMann

I’m thinking this isn’t a great idea for a bet here. There are far too many differences between how you each view secondhand information, reasoning, and observable reality that I don’t believe a bet in here will result in both parties feeling like this was settled. I try to make sure each bet confirmed here is stated clear enough that the participates will very likely both agree on who won before any arbitrator has to step in to call the bet. If I’m certain it will go to arbitration no matter what and the losing end of that arbitration is likely to strongly disagree with the verdict, that’s only going to hurt the credibility of this thread and the records/ rankings listed within it.
 
@abiG you also never responded to my challenge. I am not convinced that Ross Perot ever existed, I believe it to be a fake by Hollywood and the Deep State to get a Democrat elected. Prove he did exist.
 
@abiG @MikeMcMann

I’m thinking this isn’t a great idea for a bet here. There are far too many differences between how you each view secondhand information, reasoning, and observable reality that I don’t believe a bet in here will result in both parties feeling like this was settled. I try to make sure each bet confirmed here is stated clear enough that the participates will very likely both agree on who won before any arbitrator has to step in to call the bet. If I’m certain it will go to arbitration no matter what and the losing end of that arbitration is likely to strongly disagree with the verdict, that’s only going to hurt the credibility of this thread and the records/ rankings listed within it.
Ya i was wrong to even be drawn into that with him.

He has no interest in clarity or getting to any logical conclusion. he just wants sounding boards and excuses to bounce his CT stuff off of and knows he will get banned if he spams it so he looks for someone to play along so he can reply to it all spewing non stop garbage. there is no result to be gained with him and you can see that in how he is trying to ensure we have no clear question here.
 
@abiG @MikeMcMann

I’m thinking this isn’t a great idea for a bet here. There are far too many differences between how you each view secondhand information, reasoning, and observable reality that I don’t believe a bet in here will result in both parties feeling like this was settled. I try to make sure each bet confirmed here is stated clear enough that the participates will very likely both agree on who won before any arbitrator has to step in to call the bet. If I’m certain it will go to arbitration no matter what and the losing end of that arbitration is likely to strongly disagree with the verdict, that’s only going to hurt the credibility of this thread and the records/ rankings listed within it.
I am not saying this to insult, but @MikeMcMann doesn't have the best grasp on our language. This is making this far more confusing to the reader than necessary, so allow me to make this as clear as possible.

This was his initial post on the subject:
There is no debate on this topic. Just fact and nonsense.

Each and every day the experiment is done and proven. Flights will leave points heading in opposite directions and yet end up at the same end point. Example departing New York for Asia via a westerly route over Hawaii versus departing New York for Asia on an easterly route via Dubai.

it is not possible for this to be done on a flat planet without one of the planes doubling back on its route or purposely wasting time and fuel to keep up the CT.

This example always /threads this discussion as the CTer resorts to nonsense as they cannot refute that on a flat earth it would be impossible to depart from a mutual point and fly in opposite directions and yet end up the same point eventually.

These never meet again on a flat earth

12-512.png


And yet plane loads of people flying in those opposite directions do meet up at the same end point all the time on this planet.
I can prove 100% that this not only can be done on a plane, but that it can be done easily and that every honest reader, arbitrator, what have you will be forced to agree.

@MikeMcMann
If I can prove that a plane can depart New York for Asia and travel over Hawaii and that a plane can depart New York for Asia on a route via Dubai and that neither plane needs to double back on its route to keep up the CT, do I win the bet?

As you also said:
I said it was impossible to leave NYC and fly both EAST and WEST thru Dubai and thru Hawaii respectively and yet end up in the same place, Japan.
So, @MikeMcMann and @Lead
If I can prove that this is very possible, do I win the bet?

That looks like the easiest way to phrase the bet, no?
I mean you can either fly from NY to Hawaii to Tokyo and also fly from NY to Dubai to Tokyo or you can't, fair?

FTR, this was his most recent post where HE asked for the bet:
No one can still get on a plane today and fly from New York to Hawaii and on to China and at the same time have someone fly from New York to DUbai and on to China and make the math work. And that is because on a flat earth you cannot fly both east and west and end up at the same point without doubling back at some point.

So keep up the spin for the few crack pots who listen but the rest of know the facts. Hey we can take this to the bet thread any time for an account bet. I know I won't be the one who has to delete his account at the end.

@MikeMcMann
This can be a mere sig bet, where for one year the loser must use the sig given to them by the other poster, cool? Let's make it a bold and legible font as well, OK?

And I'll even throw this in for you. I will use the posts of others who are in no way, shape or form flat-earthers, yet have already taken the time to explain this to you.

Please don't back out now.
 
@abiG @MikeMcMann

I’m thinking this isn’t a great idea for a bet here. There are far too many differences between how you each view secondhand information, reasoning, and observable reality that I don’t believe a bet in here will result in both parties feeling like this was settled. I try to make sure each bet confirmed here is stated clear enough that the participates will very likely both agree on who won before any arbitrator has to step in to call the bet. If I’m certain it will go to arbitration no matter what and the losing end of that arbitration is likely to strongly disagree with the verdict, that’s only going to hurt the credibility of this thread and the records/ rankings listed within it.
There is such a thing as being too neutral at the cost of objectivity. You are doing MM a disservice by using "both sides" rhetoric. Everyone knows that if anyone is going to use bad faith tactics to disagree with a verdict, it's going to be abig.
 
I am not saying this to insult, but @MikeMcMann doesn't have the best grasp on our language. This is making this far more confusing to the reader than necessary, so allow me to make this as clear as possible.

This was his initial post on the subject:

I can prove 100% that this not only can be done on a plane, but that it can be done easily and that every honest reader, arbitrator, what have you will be forced to agree.

@MikeMcMann
If I can prove that a plane can depart New York for Asia and travel over Hawaii and that a plane can depart New York for Asia on a route via Dubai and that neither plane needs to double back on its route to keep up the CT, do I win the bet?

As you also said:

So, @MikeMcMann and @Lead
If I can prove that this is very possible, do I win the bet?

That looks like the easiest way to phrase the bet, no?
I mean you can either fly from NY to Hawaii to Tokyo and also fly from NY to Dubai to Tokyo or you can't, fair?

FTR, this was his most recent post where HE asked for the bet:


@MikeMcMann
This can be a mere sig bet, where for one year the loser must use the sig given to them by the other poster, cool? Let's make it a bold and legible font as well, OK?

And I'll even throw this in for you. I will use the posts of others who are in no way, shape or form flat-earthers, yet have already taken the time to explain this to you.

Please don't back out now.
Lead has already been clear that there is no definable bet here.

i agree and realize you are just looking for an excuse, any excuse to spew and repeat your voluminous nonsense (see above). There is no end game for you beyond that. You just want to have that excuse that does not get you banned for doing so.

you have no winnable argument. You've been destroyed on it. The entire scientific community mocks and laughs at your garbage as do i. But that doesn't stop you proclaiming victory and then spamming voluminous garbage again and again. That, again, is your entire end game. I won't be the enabler.

@Lead, I'm out, so if he tries to use me as an excuse for posting voluminous CT garbage you can officially consider it spam and do whatever you do with that, and him.
 
Lead has already been clear that there is no definable bet here.

i agree and realize you are just looking for an excuse, any excuse to spew and repeat your voluminous nonsense (see above). There is no end game for you beyond that. You just want to have that excuse that does not get you banned for doing so.

you have no winnable argument. You've been destroyed on it. The entire scientific community mocks and laughs at your garbage as do i. But that doesn't stop you proclaiming victory and then spamming voluminous garbage again and again. That, again, is your entire end game. I won't be the enabler.

@Lead, I'm out, so if he tries to use me as an excuse for posting voluminous CT garbage you can officially consider it spam and do whatever you do with that, and him.
Ok, tail between legs running off like a scared little pup, noted.
 
There is such a thing as being too neutral at the cost of objectivity. You are doing MM a disservice by using "both sides" rhetoric. Everyone knows that if anyone is going to use bad faith tactics to disagree with a verdict, it's going to be abig.

Both sides rhetoric imo would’ve been saying each of their stances is equally valuable or has some merit which wasn’t done there and isn’t my role here. All I did was determine where that bet was going to lead and how it’s in conflict with the purpose of this thread. I’ve done it before with @Cubo de Sangre and @Jack V Savage when the same case arose. There isn’t a need for me to continue on with who I believe would’ve been the one to disagree with the verdict. That’s just me interjecting on the argument when my role here is to officiate. AbiG is perfectly aware on my stances outside of this thread when not in the role this thread puts me in.
 
Alex has been right about a number of political subjects for years. I bet Trump to win the Presidency at various odds because of Alex's show. The odds that I was able to get for Trump were between +350 to +1050. You obviously don't understand that the polls fed to the bewildered herd are not accurate. Alex was the first to report about Hillary's health problems. He was correct. The man doesn't have a crystal ball. He has sources all over DC & various gov't agencies.
I definitely think you are wrong about this. Let's have an AV bet on Biden dropping out in the next two months. In?
 
1. Joseph Biden will be the 2020 Democratic nominee for president.
2. Waiguoren- against @HereticBD -for
3. At the time of the 2020 DNC.
4. Signature bet
5. 1 year

@Lead
 
1. Joseph Biden will be the 2020 Democratic nominee for president.
2. Waiguoren- against @HereticBD -for
3. At the time of the 2020 DNC.
4. Signature bet
5. 1 year

One month bet, and I'll sign off. The year thing is silly. Nobody even notices after the first five days, and neither of us will care after that point.
 
One month bet, and I'll sign off. The year thing is silly. Nobody even notices after the first five days, and neither of us will care after that point.
Oh I guarantee you he'll still care lol
 
One month bet, and I'll sign off. The year thing is silly. Nobody even notices after the first five days, and neither of us will care after that point.
compromise, three months?
 
1. Joseph Biden will be the 2020 Democratic nominee for president.
2. Waiguoren- against @HereticBD -for
3. At the time of the 2020 DNC.
4. Signature bet
5. 3 months

@Lead
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Replies
734
Views
30K
Back
Top