awesome thanks OP
I live just outside of Boston and was paying close attention throughout all of this nonsense. I remember the hilarious watery orange muck they were dripping as blood, the actors laying in the streets, the shredded clothing, the firecrackers being set off, etc. The videos of that day clearly show the scene of the event was distressed intentionally after the event failed to cause enough widespread damage to be credibly called a "bombing"
Can't wait to dig into this into too, thanks again
If that's case closed for you, then so be it, however, the issue is much much larger. I'll attempt to explain.
This argument of the Sun rise attempts to ignore our ability to directly measure the earth. And instead of measuring the shape of the earth directly, you'd like to assume that because of the nature of the lights in the sky, of which there is no way to verify their precise distance or properties, you have created a model which you believe better explains your observations.
Model making is not science - you are introducing far too many variables into your argument. Shape of the earth does not need to be so complicated - by introducing variables such as the distance and size of the Sun, by measuring shadows instead of the earth directly, and by assuming qualities about the Sun, this whole argument does not pose any serious of threat of success in "proving" the earth is round, or "debunking" flat earth.
There is plenty of direct, natural science which indicates the earth is flat and motionless. Direct measurements as well as properly designed and executed scientific experiments.
So if you want to claim that anything about the path of the Sun proves the shape or size of the earth, go ahead - but that's not science. And it's not proof - at best, it would be "some evidence" - but if you study the epistemology and logic of all of this you'll soon realize you've been fooled.
one of the points discussed - data of votes being subtracted. As the presenter says, counting votes is an incremental process - there should never be decrementing. Yet the data shows this in many places - even in some cases subtracting exact totals from one candidate and giving it to another
I asked in several threads why people thought you were banned - each time I got things like
"he was as fascist" "he was censoring people who disagreed with him" "he was banning everyone who opposed him"
etc
never any links or evidence of wrongdoing
looking forward to it