kernzyp's Feed

kernzyp
09-14-2021 at 07:30 AM
38 Comments
Rate this Entry

Benjamin !

Taken from other thread, not appropriate there...


Quote Originally Posted by BenMullen

I have enjoyed this thread.

I don't really have a horse in this race. I'm pro... people enjoying a good game, But I know, sometimes people take it too far sometimes shennanigans happen, it happens in every fandom and thing out there.

Anyway, I'll just speak to something and someone mostly unrelated to all this:

Kernzy, I never explained why I unfriended and blocked you: It was actually nothing personal at all and you never really did a thing wrong. I just woke up one day and said to myself "no more Q's", and just cut the few I had out.

Anyway, the stuff I have missed about you are gems like this that I see the people here know better than to try to engage in: "rockets and boosters can not work in a vacuum. No atmosphere = no propulsion. "

Hahaha. read newtons 3rd law of motion and look at a gif of a rocket functioning. there is no physical way it would not work in a vacuum, lol.

Anyway, very enjoyable read this thread :)

Hey Ben !
It's ok, mate. Nothing happened as a consequence. Apart from you having a more boring FB experience than normal! :D So much, so, that you had to do it on here instead. Have you come to block me on here, too, then? ;)
Newton !! Lol.
The trouble with "science", is that it has also fallen prey to the corruption. Newton, Einstein, Hawkins, De Grasse, Cox, etc. All freemason shills. Most of their teachings are correct, but the mysterious stuff is nonsense. A force as common and necessary as "gravity" would not be discovered in recent times. Plato, Socrates, etc, all missed that one, eh? IDIOTS !
If anyone ever says "trust the science", they are a shill, or a pupil of the shill. If science cannot be questioned, it is not science, it is a command. A rule. Shut up, is what it means. Censorship. These are not critical thinkers in any way.
They are shills. They used your own language against you to keep you from asking questions. "Trust" the "science". Most never fathom it.

"newtons 3rd law of motion and look at a gif of a rocket functioning"
You think Newton knew about rocket engineering in the future in a non gravity environment in a vacuum using fuels and gases not discovered, yet? How can you apply a 500 year old formula to the wrong future apparatus and think it makes sense in a non Earthly space? Solid objects are not gases. Gravity is not vacuous. Formulas are not universal. "Trust the apple..."
Combustion needs three components.
Combustible material, ignition, oxygen. Thrusters/rockets/motion of all kinds need an atmosphere/mass to push against. Winch a car or boat up, see if it's propulsion still works.
Newtons third law does not cover vacuous entities or spacey stuff. Apple. Ground. Punch in face, etc. As long as someone you believe is a "scientist" says it, you'll believe anything they say. Same as Nasa fans who believe Apollo, will believe nasa found a black hole sucking up an Earth twin probably able to have life with 6 suns just out of our spectrum, and we plan to send a non binary to start life on Jupiter. WOOAAHHH !!! Every few years, they change their lies, and never do it. Donkey-carrot-nasholes.
De Grasse and NASA can't even agree on the shape of the Earth, but you trust BOTH of them? Fact: They can both be wrong, both cannot be correct. You try to belittle people who are not called scientists, who think the Earth is different again. When they can be equally as right, or more so. You have been told what to think, and you're happy with that. I'm not. If I can't question something, it is controlled censorship, not science. Which explains the difference between us.
You sit on the teachers lap, while I'm rooting through his brief case for info and secrets.
:)
It's pretty much what DKF did/does. I do it to everything.
You're still a potential agent. Not ready to be unplugged, yet. And you will do anything you can to protect the system you don't know exists, even though it is your very existence.
You have to learn you are a prisoner before you understand you need to escape.

I've got the key to your prison cell. Do you want it? Maybe not as long as you have a cell phone...? Your battery will run out, then you'll see.
When patterns emerge, it's proof of production, not random events.
Einstein was the school dunce. Then worlds smartest "scientist".
Cox the mathematician flunked maths. Now a TV "scientist".
De Grasse is a failed boxer, failed actor, now a TV "scientist".
Greta Thunderbird the climate expert, angry teenager who can't answer unscripted questions, related to cabal. Climate "expert".
All freemasons.
EXPERTS !!
Hawkins died 30 odd years earlier of motor neurons disease. People think his intellect can out think physical degradation and death? Replaced. Different teeth, different jaw. Speak and spell voice for a genius. Now spell..... FRAUD.
Disappeared for a while, came back with blonde hair, and a brand new set of non human teeth, bottom jaw of a dog.
No point having eyes if you cannot see.


Trust the science, still? Or the "scientist"? Teenage boxing acting dunce zombie flunkers, heh...
They are wheeled out to spew nonsense, because they are the "trusted" ones. No one will ever believe Hawkins would lie, so they can say anything they want, as long as they use the speak and spell voice. Everyone wonders at the seemingly impossible.

They give us more than enough clues. People just don't care, as long as they're trusting the science.
Everything is planned. The only thing that has been holding them up is the production rate of special effects development. Which is why ALL nasa footage is the same quality of the special effects limitations of that day, for decades. Earliest space walk footage? Stop/go motion. Today, CGI. Newton says no.


Feels like old times !! ;)
You playing anything, recently?
Comments
  1. kernzyp's Avatar

    Ha! Dude, I don't have a telescope anymore.
    I forget our convo, there have been many since, very sorry.
    Don't get silly with your questions. Of course electrons exist, etc.
    Don't get silly.
    It won't help. Can you see your nose? You must be an alien.

  2. Blackflag82's Avatar

    It's not silly, I'm asking seriously. You said if you can see it. You can't see an electron. so belief that electrons exist while not believing many of the things you spout based off of "sight" is rubbish


  3. kernzyp's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82

    It's not silly, I'm asking seriously. You said if you can see it. You can't see an electron. so belief that electrons exist while not believing many of the things you spout based off of "sight" is rubbish



    It is silly. If I had the proper same equipment that allowed who you "believed" saw it, I could see it too. Your belief in their existence is also a probable fantasy, unless you have access to aforementioned equipment.

  4. Blackflag82's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by kernzyp




    It is silly. If I had the proper same equipment that allowed who you "believed" saw it, I could see it too. Your belief in their existence is also a probable fantasy, unless you have access to aforementioned equipment.

    But you just said you believe electrons exists without having seen them. But you don't believe other scientific claims because you haven't seen them. (Your point about equipment applies to literally every scientific scenario). In other words, you just arbitrarily decide what to believe based on what's convenient to your narrative, not based off of what you can see

  5. kernzyp's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82


    But you just said you believe electrons exists without having seen them. But you don't believe other scientific claims because you haven't seen them. (Your point about equipment applies to literally every scientific scenario). In other words, you just arbitrarily decide what to believe based on what's convenient to your narrative, not based off of what you can see

    I believe in the backbones of regular science. To see the microbial parasites on the eyelid of an insect, takes more than we can decide with in this thread. To try and prove otherwise is just as silly.
    Rain makes me wet. Running makes me breathless. Microbial parasites on the eyelid of an insect may be bullshit. However, this piece of craap did not get to the moon.
    Paper. Curtain rods and foil.

  6. kernzyp's Avatar

    PAPER.
    WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF ???????????????

  7. Blackflag82's Avatar

    So rather than have an honest conversation about your hypocrisy in what you believe without seeing and what you won't believe without seeing and how silly that is, you divert the conversation...seems pretty similar to what Robbie was doing over on his thread. hmmmm

  8. kernzyp's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82

    So rather than have an honest conversation about your hypocrisy in what you believe without seeing and what you won't believe without seeing and how silly that is, you divert the conversation...seems pretty similar to what Robbie was doing over on his thread. hmmmm

    I doubt it. He is proving a score, we are proving science. He lies, I do not.
    To not know something is the same as knowing the wrong info. So educated you become stupid.
    I have no hypocrisy at all, that is nonsense.
    Not knowing and knowing too much are the same thing, sometimes. Not sure if you had a question, there, rather than an attempted put down.
  9. Blackflag82's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by kernzyp



    I doubt it. He is proving a score, we are proving science. He lies, I do not.
    To not know something is the same as knowing the wrong info. So educated you become stupid.
    I have no hypocrisy at all, that is nonsense.
    Not knowing and knowing too much are the same thing, sometimes. Not sure if you had a question, there, rather than an attempted put down.

    We haven't been talking about proving anything. I've been asking questions about why you believe some things you can't see, but not others beyond some arbitrary reasons and youtube videos. You diverted answering. There's no attempted put down, just pointing out the obvious similarity between the way you respond and the way Robbie responds since this thread had it's origins there. You're failure to see the connections between your belief or your responses says all that needs to be said...

  10. kernzyp's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackflag82


    We haven't been talking about proving anything. I've been asking questions about why you believe some things you can't see, but not others beyond some arbitrary reasons and youtube videos. You diverted answering. There's no attempted put down, just pointing out the obvious similarity between the way you respond and the way Robbie responds since this thread had it's origins there. You're failure to see the connections between your belief or your responses says all that needs to be said...

    I'm not even sure what your question is. Be more specific.
    Do not put me in the same category as someone else. I can't see most of the fleas on my cat. They still exist. Trust me !
  11. D.B. Cooper's Avatar

    This right here is a perfect example of why I wouldn't waste my energy arguing with you Kernzy. I could take you to the hospital and show you someone dying of Covid and you still wouldn't believe. I think your nuts but love your conviction. You and I both know there is zero chance that anyone can change your mind on this stuff. But the same thing holds true for me and most others. No matter how many times you post this stuff, we aren't running out to buy tin foil hats. But I actually do enjoy a good conspiracy theory argument. I just wish you'd stay away from the topics where people have died like Covid and the Sandy Hook shooting. People are morning the loss of loved ones and even though I respect your right to think whatever you want, IMO you need to keep that stuff to yourself. It's no longer fun and games when you deny that people have died. Did D.B. Cooper get away with the money? Die from the jump? Or maybe he was a made up by our government as an excuse to redesign all the current airplanes making Boeing millions of extra profit?

  12. Barthax's Avatar

    Kernzyp: great character but his opinion is full of more holes than science. :P I particularly enjoy the typical "if I can't prove it then it's wrong and here's a bunch of flawed reasoning that's worse than science to confirm it" attitude!

    Updated 09-15-2021 at 01:02 AM by Barthax
  13. kernzyp's Avatar

    Maybe you got the wrong idea, or took my statement too literally.
    Believing what I see does not get penned in with just the naked eye. I have owned telescopes and microscopes. What do you think I saw? The same things you may be trying to prove I don't believe in. Nonsense. I can't see France, Australia, a Dodo or my own bum fluff. Are you gonna question my belief in those? That's why I said it was silly.

    Coop...

    First of all, which is common in most cases, the ones seeking the truth get blamed for all kinds of nonsense. Will you blame the detective for finding out who did something bad? Or thank him for diligence? Use that formula. How can finding out the true culprits of absolutely anything, be an insult to anyone apart from the culprits? It is done on the victims behalf. The only insult here, is to some peoples' ignorance of the event in question.
    Using your model, if I help you look for your lost dog, I hate the dog and I'm insulting it and you by helping. The only people who speak like this, are dedicated TV believers, who cannot handle the fact that their news is fake, because it always has been. Since before our grandparents were born. Hard to disbelieve, isn't it?
    Secondly, anyone CAN change my mind, if they show me new evidence. How do you think I ended up like this in the first place? Do you guys think I was born like this???? :D I changed my mind. I have questions. So should you guys, but you aim them all at me for not being similar minded. I don't want you to believe me, I want you to discover it yourself. Discovery is the greatest teacher.
    Thirdly, I didn't ask you for anything, nor an argument.
    Still interesting understanding your impression. Cheers.
    And god knows about DB Cooper. Either amazing or complete shyte. I go for shyte. A Hollywood ploy, maybe. Loch ness monster was made up for tourism. Same as the Blarney Stone. People believe any old crap ! :D

    Pete.
    That feels like a low blow, heh !
    Proof is now questionable, and selective.
    Even the biggest weirdness can be tested. Our "evidence" is on screens. Not a single TV programme is made without some kind of effects. Which is why I stated above, all NASA footage has kept in line with the special effects of the day. It had no choice ! Anyone can see that if they want to. Instead, they think it's so bunk, it's not worth checking out, and leave rude comments or insults. Natural footage of spacewalks would only change in the quality of film, if it was all natural recordings. But we see all kinds of weirdness. Different sized, and different speeds of planet Earth, shadows ON the Earth, lmao, bubbles, scuba divers, lighting rigs and gravity. No one questions when a Not in the ISS drops something, in a weightless atmosphere? When a Not on the ISS tries to put nothing on a shelf, because he thought he had hold of what the computer program screen showed him? And I'm crazy? That is a drone like existence to me. I'd rather know if I was being lied to. I'd rather figure it out than be told. If I'm told to believe something, I immediately disbelieve it.
    All the NASA screw ups above are available to view via NASA's own videos. Guess what? You can all SEE it. With your own eyes, and sh!t. Will you stay in denial? Or do you want to take a peek under the stage? Why NASA fans deny NASA footage when it exposes something is the weird thing. But they point instead. It's hilarious. Indoctrination. ISS crew constantly screw up the 11 seconds (eleven again!) delay, while the moon had zero seconds delay, from a land line used to call his mistress, to a blue tooth head set in a space mans helmet on the moon. In 1969. Magic, then, yes?
    Or lies? That's an easy one. Come on, guys?? It's lies, isn't it? :D






    Saying "tin foil hat" does not get you off from answering the next question. It's a sign of defeat.
    I will accept all questions. But remember, I'm just some dude, with a different opinion. I don't have all my own answers yet. I'm not concrete on anything, as new evidence will arise.
    If you can teach me, I accept. I'm not rigid about education. I accept all ideas.
    As should you !!! Nothing is too weird, only our sheltered (so far) beliefs are our enemy, not the one showing us they exist. If it's too fantastic for you to believe, look harder. Shock yourself. Dig.
    I had the same opinions as you guys, years ago. I'm open to persuasion. Nothing has been settled yet. If you think it has been, then you have switched off. Your book is closed.
    Time you opened a new one... ;)


    Even some Americans, will factor in, the lack of "high 5's" for the greatest achievement of mankind. Just guilty faces. Written all over their faces. Petrified to answer the next question. Looks like a murder investigation. NO pride, whatsoever. The behaviour of a caught naughty kid. Sheepish, instead of jubilant. Quiet, instead of speaking in amazement of the awesomeness of what they did. Evasive, rather than enthusiastic. Doubtful, instead of being the only ones who know the answers. Depressed rather than buzzing like a super hero. Frowns instead of smiles. Defeat rather than victory. Negative instead of positive. Refraining instead of explaining. Check watch, can I go home, now, please? Elbow nudge when someone screws up. Then go into hiding. Then refuse to swear on Bible what they did was true.
    Buzz apparently has an endless supply of quarters he took to the moon. $2,000 each. Want one? I've got about 50 of them. :D



    If you was on the Moon, wouldn't recording the Earth be the first thing you did? Never done by anyone, never. 12 guys never thought of doing it. Right. Video, not photo.
    Moon photo's have been proved to be faked, and people still don't care. Space wrestling is what it is. Space wrestling. Some still believe it.
    Pictures of the Earth from the Moon, are sometimes smaller than pictures of the Moon from the Earth, even though it's 4X larger. Would be impressively LARGE, right? NASA says no.



    I say question everything.
    Especially the evidence.
    Nice one, guys.

    LikesD.B. Cooper, datagod liked this post
  14. datagod's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by lexmark

    Hello, Paul. One topic I've been very interested in for about 40 years is the Kennedy assassination. Do you have any thoughts on that one?

    Jesse Ventura lays it all out in his book "They killed our president". All the items in the book are all items entered into court as facts during various cases throughout the years.

    https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/they-killed-our-president-3

    Well worth the read.

    Thankskernzyp thanked this post
  15. lexmark's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by datagod


    Jesse Ventura lays it all out in his book "They killed our president". All the items in the book are all items entered into court as facts during various cases throughout the years.

    https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/they-killed-our-president-3

    Well worth the read.

    Thanks, Bill. I will definitely take a look.


    john


    .

  16. Barthax's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by kernzyp

    Pete.
    That feels like a low blow, heh !

    Just difference of opinion. :) I don't follow NASA so don't care what proofs they have and you typically just scattergun-spout a bunch of speculation about "go see for yourself" rarely honing in on any single idea to rip it apart. The two (from memory) times our interests crossed I found your interpretations to be thoroughly flawed.

    Most science begins by stating a bunch of stuff we're never going to examine ourselves and then states "based on this thing you'll never see, **** happens" or "based on a bunch of stuff someone else saw and claimed **** happened I found that other **** happens if you pick your nose and drop some into the test tube". Science gives the premise of how to get to the conclusion the scientist did... and if you get something different you write a new paper and publish it highlighting your different conclusion. It becomes a flawed body of knowledge because of the number of premises it is based on & wouldn't be the first time an entire set of research is de-bunked because of a new examination of old material uncovers a flaw. That's science: flawed and acknowledges it.

    Let's take one of your "proofs" above: [paraphrase] NASA is so **** they put shadows on the Earth! Yeah, no **** there are shadows on the Earth - we can all prove that happens and therefore would expect them to occur. You're not mansplaining enough to be taken seriously.

    It's about quality. Many reporters from war-torn zones are just captures with little more than a phone these days and you can see the how broken the footage gets. Whether they're in the backroom of the studio making it up or actually where at the scene being reported: the broadcast fits the scenario. If that kind of terrible quality was from a local broadcast, I'd question it.

    The first pic is a portable version of one of these:

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/NHK_Saga_Broadcast_Station_20171112.jpg

    The second pic is a camcorder in a toughened box. Just apples & oranges so you're going find differences.

    Updated 09-15-2021 at 11:51 PM by Barthax
  17. Blackflag82's Avatar

    "Believing what I see does not get penned in with just the naked eye. I have owned telescopes and microscopes. What do you think I saw? The same things you may be trying to prove I don't believe in. Nonsense. I can't see France, Australia, a Dodo or my own bum fluff. Are you gonna question my belief in those? That's why I said it was silly."

    Let me try and make my point clearer:

    You believe that electrons exists, despite having never seen one. You believe that based on the available (and still growing) mountains of science that document and explain the existence of electrons despite not fully understanding all of that science (that's not a dig, I doubt anyone here, including myself, fully understands the science that theorized, discovered, and allows for the continued study of the particle). As you admitted above, part of that belief is based on your own belief that given the right equipment, you could see an electron. In other words, you believe electrons exist because you can fathom a scenario in which you could observe one.

    ***What I am saying next has ABSOLUTLY NOTHING TO DO WITH NASA, Bringing up NASA or any of NASA's projects past, present, or future will just be an indication of either not reading or diversion.***

    Rocket flight in a vacuum is possible. This has been proven time and again and is supported by hundreds of years of scientific growth and exploration. The reasons it is possible have been covered by many in these threads with you over the years, so I will not revisit now. (Interestingly enough, we cannot fully explain what gives planes lift, though they clearly fly - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/no-one-can-explain-why-planes-stay-in-the-air/, but we can fully explain how rocket flight in a vacuum works).

    Now, here is this actualization (rockets in space) that exists, can be explained by mountains of scientific evidence (and still growing), has been demonstrated in and out of the lab, and is also something that none of us here have a full grasp of the science behind. BUT you claim this cannot exist and then use inaccurate science (the rocket can't fly if there is no air to push on as one example) to make this claim as well as the basis of you having never seen it.

    From my vantage point, there exists a lack of fully understanding the science (again, with all parties here) of both the existence of an electron and the existence of rockets in space, so that can't ultimately be the cause. The difference seems to be that in one case, you believe you could one day see an electron, and you don't believe you could see a rocket in space. Perhaps I'm wrong on this, but if so, I would appreciate you explaining why you accept one set of scientific data without pushback, while refusing to use the scientific method (not youtube videos) to investigate your claims that others have repeatedly provided evidence against and shown to be false?

    Back on the seeing is believing line - The interesting thing is that it would be significantly easier for you to see the ISS (a satellite powered by thrust in a vacuum) in real time and calculate its distance from Earth (showing it is in the vacuum of space, beyond the Karman line, and would have to be using thrust in said vacuum for a number of reasons) then to see an electron...


  18. BenMullen's Avatar

    Oh wow a whole thread got made based on this!


    The 3rd law of motion bit is really funny. So in kernzys world if a law is 500 y/o, no longer valid, and laws of physics dont matter in space.

    It aint hard: Fuel (in any state of matter) has mass... make mass go one way whilst in contact with another thing, other thing goes other way. There is kind of no way around that.

    You don't even have to believe a scientist on it. stand on something that balances you and throw a thing, fire a gun, throw a bucket of water. 3rd law of motion aint gunna get beat by troll posts bro.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Join us