The most Horrifying of all Unspoken Implications.

technology built the pyramids? Silly me,I was always under the impression it was a lot of strong backs

 

lol!!!!

a flat-Earther.

I thought they were a myth.

 

Logic says otherwise.

- - - Updated - - -

You're not grasping the entirety of the OP.

 

OK, since you won't defend your position, I guess we're done here. You forfiet.

Ah, brainstorming. So, nothing based on actual evidence, then? Surely nothing with a cited source.

Good question. The answer: because people like you are what make conspiracy theorists look bad. Every time I try to talk about the NWO, or some other REAL conspiracy, I get compared to people like you. You are the "tin-foil hat nutter" everyone keeps talking about whenever someone tries to warn them about real problems. You do such a disservice to free thinking by crying wolf about things as stupid as "the sky is fake", that it makes me wonder if you are a government shill, here only to make conspiracy minded people look retarded. I'm trying to preserve some credibility, by letting people see that CTists aren't ALL bat(*)(*)(*)(*) insane.There is a thing called evidence. Your rants and "brainstorms" do not qualify. Put up or shut up.

 

'logic' does NOT say otherwise....what an absurd statement.

 

Don't fret and angst. People have been in space, just accept it. Good lord man....so many other real things to worry about.....

 

The issues you fight about are slam dunks.

Everyone knows false flags are a weekly occurrence. Sandy hoax, Holmes, all of them.

Your theories and arguments are still only Inside the box they've set up for you to play in.

Your parameters are so limited in scope, it makes me wonder if YOU'RE the Shill!

I mean... A Fawkes mask? Seriously?

I can source every single argument I ever make.

Id just rather focus on producing my literary dissertations, assuming other intelligent folks like myself are out there reading the Larger perspectives I prophetically donate to the world, knowing my statements are fact.

If they're intelligent as I'd hope they are, then they know they can go research ANY of my claims for themselves.

I'm not scared.

Maybe you're hurting when you read my threads, because I'm connecting dots on such a grand scale that it makes you jealous you weren't able to perceive these things for yourself?

Update=

Lol. So you're a Better "conspiracy theorist" than I am?

Its a big competition now? LOL

What are YOUR motives?

 

My OP wasn't all that angry.

 

I know, I slammed them so hard you won't respond.

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Cite one source that backs up your claim that the sky is really a projection dome. Cite one source that says people can't see further than 36 miles.

If your posts hurt anyone, it is because you caused them to facepalm too hard.

It's not a competition. It is a matter of credibility, and the fact that you destroy the credibility of everyone who tries to bring up legit conspiracies when you talk a bunch of craziness. MY motives are to distance legitimate conspiracy theories from nutso ones, so that we are not smeared by association.

 

Its saddens me that you don't think too highly of yourself.

You must not, if you're so intimidated by the willingly blind's ridiculous tactics of dismissal of truth via cries of "conspiracy theorist!"

If you're out there fighting the good fight for people like you and i who know the truth behind the conspiracies, and you're confident in YOUR specific case arguments concerning legit CTs, why would you be so worried about me?

You're your own truth warrior. How can my speculations ruin any of your efforts?

Besides that, if THEY'RE going to break all the rules, why should I have to play by THEIR same stupid rules?

Screw THEM and everything about THEM!!!

Seems like what we have here is a serious case of Misdirected Hostility.

 

I'm not intimidated. I continue to espouse those theories for which I have evidence. But it makes convincing people much more difficult when there's other "conspiracy theorists" saying crazy crap. You are helping the deniers to dismiss all CTs, because they can say, "those CTists are crazy; they believe the sky isn't even real! So I won't listen to them about JFK, NWO, etc..."

It's like how Sarah Palin can drag down the whole Tea Party by saying stupid (*)(*)(*)(*).

And here it is. You finally admit that it is all just speculation (whereas before you were lying about being able to produce source citations). Speculations do not rise to a level sufficient to even be called a theory. Theories have supporting evidence. Speculation is just made-up bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

What rules? You mean the rules of evidence and logic? You should follow those rules because they are what will make you correct. So if "they" don't use those rules, then you will have an advantage.

Who are you even talking about?

Yes, you obviously do. Misdirected at "them", whoever that is.

 

I've never claimed to be a textbook definition CT. I don't need that label.

If you were to read my OP with intellectual integrity, you'd see that you cannot answer the paradoxical conundrums I propose. No one can. They're designed to prove larger points.

You're all caught up in minor details, not grasping the higher gist.

My arguments are footed in pure logic. You may need to Carefully reread the OP to see this.

Besides this, if there is someone out there intelligent enough to realize the JFK and NWO conspiracies might be true, and are already willing to explore them deeper, they're probably intelligent enough to realize my OP was a more Functionally speculative thread, as opposed to traditional CT threads which focus more on lists of detailed factoids.

They also (according to the thousands of view counts and likes my threads receive) seem to rather enjoy my thought provoking originality and capability of expressive freedom in thought.

I'm just trying to broaden the scope of conspiracy discussion, itself.

I'm always going to be looking beyond those cliche parameters you seem so unfortunately stuck within.

I think its the wisest approach to have, to be perfectly honest.

And you act like you're making great leaps in the area of convincing people who are on the fence about CTs, because you're playing by their rules.

I strongly argue that MY approach is much much more effective.

The eloquence of my prose causes new synapses to connect and thought patterns to rearrange permanently in the minds of ALL my readers, from the supporters, all the way to the most bitter of my opponents.

Thus, I contribute far more to our common cause than you do.

But I'm not even interested in playing that game.

Its NOT about competition between you and me. Its about getting the job done.

"They" want us Divided and Conquered.

 

You expect a rational thinking person to believe that man can fly??

No man can fly; to state that you can is an obvious fabrication, designed to spread disinformation. The myth of flight is perpetuated by 'Big Sky' to keep the sheeple in line, hoping for a brighter future.

 

If the details themselves are incorrect, then they can't prove any "larger points".

The very first thing I posted about this thread shows that I know exactly what you are trying to do. You are trying to take "question everything" to an absurd level. Through making a reductio ad absurdum from this advice, you have taken what was true and made it false.

Actually, your view counts are better explained by a well known tactic used by the media all the time (hence, hardly original). That tactic is sensationalism. I mean, just take for example the title of this thread. It doesn't provide any information, it's just blatant sensationalism.

Yeah, broadened into pure fantasy. And you don't even care that you're being counterproductive to the cause.

Yeah, evidence is so cliche.

And stuff like this is why I get told by people like Fangbeer that I'm only promoting certain CTs because of "my ego". I never present them with an ego, but they are mistaking my reasoned arguments for your self-absorbed tripe. Thanks again for undermining the cause by association with your insanity, this time megalomania.

 

NASA is not the only organisation that can send people into space.

Seriously? Why not question gravity or air or even if this thread exists at all?

Yes

You can't go to the sun can you?

Sun Light allegedly travels through outer space to the earth, leaving all the empty space between our planet and the Sun in total darkness. Yet when that same magically invisible light hits our atmosphere, it suddenly "appears" visible to us. Interesting B.S., huh?

It's not in total darkness because there are stars.

Climb up the mast of a ship and then you'll see it. Also 82,000 feet is only about 15 miles.

You can see Calais from Dover on a clear day which is about 40 miles.
Also you can see just about any object that is bright enough hence we see stars at night.

We do travel around the sun.

I've done two 30 hour flights from one end of the Earth to the other.
Also if the the Earth were flat then we would not have gravity.
If the billionaires are rich enough to do that then why would they need governmental sponsorship?

Yes. Go to a museum and there hundreds of these satellites orbiting the earth and alot of them have been launched from other countries.

I'll tell you. It stops things from floating off there you go.

It wasn't formed by them it was assisted by them. And no the NAZIS were not masters of perception because not everyone in Germany joined the NAZI party and many were pretty reluctant.

You're doing this for fun aren't you?

 

See, I'm OK with letting people like you drudge through the old battle trenches of the information war. You're doing a great thing.

I'm personally over the frustration it causes me. Most people are going to Deny all CTs because it ruins their lives when they find out they've been a total Chump since birth.

Instead of fighting in that arena, I move my battle to a neutral place, where they're not as Immediately defensive and apprehensive when they hear the trigger words they're used to running from.

Without me, our cause would stagnate.

You can thank me, or Judas me. Your choice.

 

You're about 400 years too late. Descartes was talking about stuff like this in his Meditations on the First Philosophy.

http://www.earlymoderntexts.com/pdf/descmedi.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meditations_on_First_Philosophy

What, you actually thought you had come up with an original idea?

Of course Descartes was an intelligent man who was trying to defeat Philosophical Skepticism. You are just a twit who wants to believe in the Illuminati and that FEMA is sitting outside your door waiting to jump you.

<-- actually has a degree in philosophy. You should try it.

 

I never once said the earth is flat in my OP.

I asked a question about whether or not earth can be proven to be a sphere.

Its a logic conundrum, not a theory or any kind of distinct claim.

This OP was speculative in nature.

And if I'm a "twit", then you're a "moron" who lacks basic reading comprehension skills.

 

Since I'm on the subject, can it really be proven that the Earth is even spherical?




it's as simple as watching the moon. which is actually made out of cream cheese.

sorry, couldn't resist...

 

Who mentioned the earth being flat? You? You think that is what Descartes was talking about? And you are trying to accuse me of not having basic comprehension skills when I have studied and actually understood the Medications on the first philosophy? Here let me give you a summation in one paragraph...

Descartes was pushing Philosophical Skepticism or rational doubt to its ultimate extreme. Essentially if you push it, you can doubt everything. You can doubt whether you are even sitting in your mothers basement, as there could be an evil demon projecting the sights, smells and feelings of being in your parents basement or even your own lard filled body into your mind. In fact the only thing you can actually not completely doubt is the simple fact of your own existence, as there has to be something that the evil demon has to be lying to. His solution is that he can completely and perfectly conceive the existence of a perfect and loving God, and since God would not lie to him then everything around him must be true. Descartes succeeded in exposing the flaw of rational doubt in that it leads to someplace the skeptics did not want to go and the only reason they did not go there is that even they hypocritically clinged to some scrap of non rational knowledge, but his solution to it was very imperfect.

As for the earth being flat, people have known it was a sphere and tilted since around 200 BC when Eratosthenes of Cyrene calculated the circumstance of the Earth pretty accurately. But then he was a member of the Illuminati, right? And people have had 2200 years to pick apart his calculations and expose the fraud. Hell I'm sure a clever guy like you can get a hold of a book on his calculations and bring the whole lie down with your brilliant destruction of them. I'll be here holding my breath. Really.

 

Why do I open these threads? You can't reason a person out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

 

True. I'm mostly just here when I'm bored (and my gaming computer is away fro repairs so I'm REALLY bored today). And sometimes it's good to flex my philosophical muscles a bit.

 

You probably opened it cause of the catchy headline, and cause Validation Boy wrote it.

You knew it would be worth the read.

I appreciate all your input. You've said many wise things on my threads.