3
TallestSkil 3 points ago +4 / -1

[no argument whatsoever]

  • Why can everyone south of the equator see the exact same stars rotating in the same direction around the same fixed central point in the sky due south of them if they’re supposedly all looking in different directions?
  • Why are the distances between degrees of latitude uniform and don’t grow exponentially away from the equator?
  • Why does everyone on Earth get the same result for the Eratosthenes experiment, when people nearer the equator should get a much smaller circumference for the Earth than those nearer the poles?
  • Come to think of it, was Eratosthenes part of the “round Earth” conspiracy?
  • Surviving records show that the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians based their astronomical forecasts on calculations assuming the Earth is a globe. Did this conspiracy begin at the dawn of civilization, or are all ancient artifacts nothing but Victorian forgeries? If so, why has this never been detected by modern carbon-dating techniques?
  • Why do arc lengths of given angles of longitude decrease rather than increase south of the equator?
  • Why does the sun not rise in the northeast and set in the northwest, year round, for everyone on Earth?
  • Why DOES the sun set, when the law of perspective states that the angular size of the sun’s altitude, like everything else, can’t become negative?
  • Why does the sun’s angular size not change throughout the day or year, since it is “moving toward and away from us” and is “closer than we’re told”? Seriously, did you fall asleep during geometry class, or are you just completely demented?
  • If you believe in zeteticism, why do you keep relying on magical and unprovable solutions, which can’t be shown to exist with your own eyes and clearly don’t exist at all? Apparently, zeteticism is just code for “make any old bullshit up and pretend it’s true.”
  • If all photographs of a round Earth are a hoax, why not simply create photographs of a flat Earth?
  • A property of mass is that it has gravitational force regardless of size. If the Earth did not have a gravitational field, wouldn’t that imply that the Earth doesn’t physically exist?
  • Where is the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station located if the south “pole” is the whole circumference of the Earth?
  • Wouldn’t creating such elaborate fakes and conspiracies cost an equal–if not greater–amount of money than the science they are supposedly covering up?
  • The idea of the Earth as a sphere has existed at least since the time of the ancient Greeks, long before NASA. What were their financial motives?
  • What financial motives could NASA have, since their budget is still cut every year?
  • How could the sun be a spotlight if it is a sphere? On the flat Earth, the light projection would have to be a semicircle.
  • Why does the North Star goes to the horizon?
  • Why do constellations appear to be different in the Southern and Northern hemispheres?
  • Why is the Coriolis effect stronger near both poles, instead of stronger in the north and weaker in the south?
  • If the circumferential south pole is preventing the oceans from pouring over the edge of the flat Earth, why didn’t the oceans disappear during the incredible amount of time it would have taken for that ice to form?
  • If the oceans would–if they could–pour off the edge of the flat Earth, where, then, would they go? Does this mean that whatever keeps the oceans on the surface of the flat Earth only operates in a downward direction on the uppermost surface and is absent on the underneath?
  • Why are satellites visible from Earth with a pair of binoculars and even the naked eye?
  • How could a flat body maintain an atmosphere?
  • Why are other celestial bodies spheres but the Earth is not? How, and why, was the Earth created differently?

YOU WON’T ANSWER, COWARD.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +3 / -1

Interesting how they always seem to arrest the family members of people involved in their false flags so that they can't speak out against the falsehood thereof, isn’t it.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +3 / -1

[no argument whatsoever]

Burn in hell, you fucking paid shill. We will never fall for your well poisoning hoaxes.

0
TallestSkil 0 points ago +2 / -2

I didn’t say [x]

OY VEY SO YOU SAID [X] THEN

Worst paid shill I’ve ever seen.

0
TallestSkil 0 points ago +3 / -3

Traditional cameras dont work well in space

Right, at least outside the magnetosphere. We used to send film cameras up on massively heavy satellites. Spying purposes, you know. When the film was full, the vessels containing them would be conveyed to a return capsule that detached from the satellite (now worthless) and fell back to Earth to be retrieved and developed.

Transistors did a lot for spaceflight. Specifically: they destroyed human spaceflight.

3
TallestSkil 3 points ago +6 / -3

Also this video.

Toaster yourself, paid shill. I don’t support publicly admitted traitors to the United States.

0
TallestSkil 0 points ago +3 / -3

… right. Because he worships them every single fucking day and you publicly admit to supporting treason. It’s fact. You can’t refute it.

0
TallestSkil 0 points ago +5 / -5

He literally worships them every single fucking day, you brain damaged sycophant.

1
TallestSkil 1 point ago +1 / -0

From what I gather this is mostly a hoax, people in the r/ohio sub have just been ripping vance and trump over this and I have yet to see anyone say that they personally seen it happen.

So the videos and the police reports and the formal statements from the mayor; those are all fake, then.

1
TallestSkil 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh well. Doesn’t matter.

3
TallestSkil 3 points ago +3 / -0

5D

So 3D. Not 5D. Just an outright lie.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +2 / -0

It is released naturally by volcanic activity and is produced as a by-product of copper extraction and the burning of sulfur-bearing fossil fuels.

Oh, so, if this is a good thing, that means “fossil fuels” are good and you lied about everything for decades… right?

Incidental exposure to sulfur dioxide is routine, e.g. the smoke from matches, coal, and sulfur-containing fuels like bunker fuel. Relative to other chemicals, it is only mildly toxic and requires high concentrations to be actively hazardous. However, its ubiquity makes it a major air pollutant with significant impacts on human health.

Kill everyone responsible for this. It’s a chemical attack on neighboring states.

7
TallestSkil 7 points ago +7 / -0

The site never allowed truth to be spoken without being drowned in a sea of paid shills, anyway. Not sure why you’d think otherwise.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +3 / -1

Two more weeks, right? God works through us. We refuse to act. We refuse to do His works. We’ve already lost and Satan has dominion over the whole of the Earth.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +3 / -1

I know that they don’t matter in the face of total global control of all media, finance, government, and militaries.

4
TallestSkil 4 points ago +4 / -0

complains to the SEC

So nothing will happen.

gives the documents to a jew

So the real documents will never come out.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +2 / -0

[no reply, no citations, no sources, no argument]

The jew cries out in pain as it strikes you.

5
TallestSkil 5 points ago +5 / -0

If they could blow off-the-shelf electronic devices, we would have seen dozens of assassinations of this type before now (and at least one researcher would have independently written a paper on the ability to do so, voicing concerns about the safety and stability of li-ion or ni-mh batteries). It’s something so hideously useful to them that they wouldn’t wait to sue it or blow their cover on its possibility by wasting its reveal to the world on a simple attack against only a handful of one enemy group in a partial war.

That’s what doesn’t add up for me. I’m not trusting what jews say because they say it; I’m believing it because anything else is either impossible, too implausible, or out of line with how they actually behave.

2
TallestSkil 2 points ago +2 / -0

And yet you’re physically incapable of refuting anything I’ve said with any evidence in any form. Interesting.

5
TallestSkil 5 points ago +5 / -0

Link for people who don’t want to give jews ad revenue.

The United States Constitution is in trouble.

Yeah, jews destroyed it.

After Donald Trump lost the 2020 election, he called for the “termination of all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution.”

Nah.

Outraged critics denounced him for threatening a document that is supposed to be “sacrosanct.”

What critics? The ones who explicitly say the same thing themselves?

By announcing his desire to throw off constitutional constraints in order to satisfy his personal ambitions, Trump was making his authoritarian inclinations abundantly clear.

Didn’t happen, though.

It’s no surprise, then, that liberals charge Trump with being a menace to the Constitution.

The same liberals who say we need to abolish it?

Trump owes his political ascent to the Constitution

Wrong.

a document that is essentially antidemocratic

Correct, and?

and, in this day and age, increasingly dysfunctional.

Proven falsehood.

After all, Trump became president in 2016 after losing the popular vote but winning the Electoral College (Article II)

If the constitution was being followed, there would have been zero votes for democrats. Your point, whore?

He appointed three justices to the Supreme Court (Article III)

Is this bitch literally listing job requirements as an argument?

Those three justices helped overturn Roe v. Wade, a reversal with which most Americans disagreed.

Didn’t happen.

The eminent legal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky

I don’t care what a jew has to say about my documents.

worried about opinion polls

You mean the things that have been admitted to be hoaxes?

showing “a dramatic loss of faith in democracy,”

Good; it doesn’t work.

“It is important for Americans to see that these failures stem from the Constitution itself.”

Nope. There’s no democracy in the Constitution.

Asserting that the Constitution, which is famously difficult to amend, has put the country “in grave danger,”

Nah. It is the country.

he entertains the possibility of secession.

Not one fucking inch more.

Scholars are arguing that the Constitution has incentivized what Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt call a “Tyranny of the Minority.”

I don’t care what jews have to say about my documents.

The delegates were all white, and they were all men.

No one gives a shit, kike bitch. What’s your point.

There’s a glaring discrepancy between the soaring words in the Constitution’s preamble — a call to “we the people” that is “a seemingly ringing endorsement for popular governance,” as Chemerinsky puts it — and the distrust of democracy embedded in the rest of the document

No, there isn’t. You’re just too retarded to comprehend what it actually says.

reflecting the framers’ inability to conceive of a future when women and Black people would have a right to vote.

Correct, and? Learn what a nation is.

The legacy of this history is a stubborn ambivalence: Is the Constitution supposed to be a guarantor of human equality?

Yes.

Or, for a society with a profoundly inegalitarian origin story, is the lofty principle just hypocritical cover?

Egalitarianism has fuck all to do with equality.

You might think that such disputes would have been laid to rest by a bloody Civil War and the Reconstruction amendments, which outlawed slavery and granted all men the right to vote, regardless of race.

Why would causing a dispute in the first place end a dispute?

Senators were to be directly elected

This is unconstitutional and never legally passed.

women were granted the right to vote.

Setting the ticking time-bomb for the end of the country.

(The last major amendment, in 1971, lowered the voting age to 18.)

Shouldn’t have happened.

In reaction to landmark decisions prohibiting segregation

Unconstitutional.

bans on interracial marriage

Constitutional.

Originalists, as these scholars call themselves, say they are simply reacting to decades of “overreach” by “activist” judges. Liberal critics counter that interpreting the law according to what the founders (supposedly) wanted amounts to an end run around protecting and promoting a multiracial democracy.

Where are your farcical quotes around the words liberals said, filthy yid?

The attorney and columnist Madiba K. Dennie

I don’t care what an African has to say about my documents.

argues that originalists’ canny use of apolitical language ensnares liberals into treating originalism as coherent jurisprudence

Oh no, how dare they. I thought “liberals” were supposed to be “more intelligent,” though…

even when it functions more like an “ideology.”

Always accuse your enemy of what you are doing.

originalism is much more effective in “restraining judges from doing good things.”

“MUH FEE FEE HURT BY PAPER! MAKE PAPER STOOOOOOOP!”

It may be a measure of the current crisis that even the conservative scholar Yuval Levin

I don’t care what a jew has to say about my documents.

Originalism is by definition preoccupied with what judges do, when the more urgent problem lies with a legislature that is, as he puts it in “American Covenant,” “underactive.”

“Oy vey the government has to keep controlling your lives it has to do even mooooooooooore”

Members of Congress behave “like performers or mere seekers of celebrity,” neglecting to do the hard work of wielding the legislative power entrusted in them by the Constitution.

No one will ever believe you.

The Electoral College, of course, is one of the bargains the framers made in order to reassure the slave states that they could keep their own “peculiar institution.”

Utterly incorrect. It was created to balance the evil of populism with the representation of each state to a minimum degree.

Abolishing the Electoral College has become a popular refrain among liberals — something that the legal scholar Aziz Rana

I don’t care what a Muslim has to say about my documents.

“These defenses implicitly suggest that Americans can only effectively protect their bedrock liberties from demagogues by redoubling their commitment to the text.”

No shit, that’s literally how human psychology works, you fucking dune coon.

tolerated racial terror in the Jim Crow South

Didn’t happen.

, the Constitution was offered as proof that the country was profoundly committed to liberty and equality — that “its interests are coterminous with the world’s interests.”

Nah, the Founders never said that.

originalism has allowed conservatives to undermine progressive policies while using the soothing language of constitutionalism.

Good. Eat shit, commies.

This disempowerment of majorities, combined with political gridlock and institutional paralysis

Objectively good things.

fuels popular disaffection

Not really. Never had any trouble with it until the commies took over.

The document that’s supposed to be a bulwark against authoritarianism can end up fostering the widespread cynicism that helps authoritarianism grow.

Nope.

Americans tend to overlook the possibilities of mass democratic politics precisely for this reason

Because they’re bullshit and illegal for a reason.

The historian Linda Colley,

I don’t care what a British woman has to say about my documents.

who has written critically about the connection between constitutions across the world and imperial expansion

Except the UK doesnt have one and had the largest empire in history.

The police officers “recognized the text from where she was reading — and they did not move in and attack.”

Which they weren’t going to do anyway, you stupid fucking whore.

the undeniable power of a constitution — alongside the undeniable power of undemocratic forces determined to have the last word.

Agreed, exterminate all jews and reclaim the United States’ true laws.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›