Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.ufo.reports    |    The latest from planet crackpot    |    8,965 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 8,884 of 8,965    |
|    Dawn Flood to JTEM    |
|    Re: NASA caught LYING TO YOU again!    |
|    03 Aug 25 20:07:31    |
      XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.paranormal, alt.atheism       XPost: alt.alien.research       From: Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com              On 8/2/2025 7:48 PM, JTEM wrote:       > On 8/2/25 1:34 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:       >> On 7/29/2025 1:02 PM, JTEM wrote:       >>> On 7/29/25 11:30 AM, jojo wrote:       >>>       >>>> doesnt look like it.       >>>       >>> You know what it looks like? Mental illness.       >>>       >>> #1. I said that the Dimethyl sulfide in question was already       >>> confirmed. It was detected and later detected again. AND I       >>> said that the claim here wasn't that NASA found no evidence       >>> for it but, no "Strong" evidence. Which means that their       >>> findings were CONSISTENT WITH Dimethyl sulfide, rather than       >>> excluding it.       >>>       >>> Any dispute? Any word addressing this at all?       >>>       >>> Nope.       >>>       >>> #2. I said that Dimethyl sulfide was not the only biosignature       >>> detected. There were others. I said that Dimethyl sulfide was       >>> so important because there are no non-biological sources.       >>>       >>> Any dispute? Was a single word acknowledged or addressed?       >>>       >>> Nope.       >>>       >>> #3. I said that NASA, besides NOT claiming that they found no       >>> evidence for it, merely no "Strong" evidence," dismissed this       >>> Dimethyl sulfide as something that could have come from a simple       >>> chemical reaction. But, this is wrong because, as I already       >>> pointed out, as far as we know the only known sources are       >>> biological.       >>>       >>> Any dispute? Was this addressed at all? Was it acknowledged?       >>>       >>> Nope.       >>>       >>> #4. I said that this was consistent. That, NASA is consistent       >>> in it's denials of evidence for life outside the earth, and       >>> even misinforming the public on the subject. I reiterated facts       >>> raised in a previous thread regarding the Mars lander and the       >>> supposed search for life there.       >>>       >>> Any dispute? Was there so much as a single counter example? Any       >>> attempt to address this fact at all?       >>>       >>> Nope.       >>>       >>>       >>>       >>> I get that people can /Like/ a particular answer over others,       >>> but that's not even the problem here. This thread is about me       >>> raising facts that should set off alarm bells in any so called       >>> "Skeptic," while the collective spasms & tries to stop any       >>> conversation it is unable to control.       >>>       >>       >> Then type all of this up in a manuscript and you can submit it here       >> today:       >>       >> https://arxiv.org/       >       > Why? You can't just Google anything I said, confirm it?       >       > You need someone else to tell you that these things are right,       > you can't figure it out on your own?       >       >> You'll get timely feedback from experts.       >       > Again, why?       >       > What is it you doubt? How did you attempt to confirm or       > falsify it?       >       > You're not saying these things as part of an exchange, you're       > trying to stop a conversation you can't control.       >       >> I am not an expert       >       > You're retarded! You're admitting that you can't deal with       > facts that are spelled out for you, and you never figure out       > how to Google things so you can't confirm anything yourself..       >       > You're mentally ill. You're a raging narcissist and you can't       > even see how you just exposed yourself!       >                     Assuming that everything that you claim about me is true & correct is       *not* proof that the claims that you are making in your OP are correct.              I am not in a position to referee your claims; such is the domain of       scientific journals. Remember the maxim in academic research, "No       matter how bad a research paper is, there is a journal out there who is       willing to publish it." And, so, get to work!!              Dawn              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca