What's the single dumbest/most implausible conspiracy theory out there?
Pic related of course.
The Dalai Lama/Bruce Springsteen one gets me every time, the amount of hole in it is hilarious and yet I've had so many arguments with idiots who actually beileve he did it.
>>17688384
>flat.jpg
That's not how the theory goes, it's like the UN logo with Antarctica surrounding it.
The Moon Landing hoax one, it's completely idiotic.
>>17688405
I don't think any configuration of a Flat Earth makes sense.
>>17688405
it's just a reference to the "theory" in general, since all versions are equally dumb/implausible
>>17688384
chemtrails?
chemtrails
>>17688415
You needn't.
>>17688415
I like this one.
I like that theory where Stephen Hawkings was a veggie, and the goverment used his fame to promote scientific theories.
Or the one when japanese pilots did 9/11 as a revenge for the atomic bombing and it was covered up and redirected, to attack the Talibans and Irak.
>>17688415
>>17688421
pretty much
>>17688384
it used to be flat earth for me, but now its the people who think space isn't real.
>>17688399
What conspiracy is that?
>>17688384
When you've been lied to your whole life, the truth seems like a joke
>>17688434
Commencing dump
Dinosaurs are fake, and were used to prove evolution/discredit the bible.
It's just wrong on so many levels.
Nothing beats flat earth though.
>>17688452
People think space isnt real?
Kek
>>17688470
What proofs of dinosaurs are there other than the "fossils" that all of sudden popped out a bunch of them out of nowhere
Note: Flat Earth threads are all started by trolls that want something easy to argue against.
It's all the same shit, really.
They're all dumb, you have to be stupid to believe in any of them, that's why people who believe one most often believe all of them.
The act of being a conspiracy theorist requires stupidity and insecurity.
>>17688488
Dinosaurs are very much real and still alive
>>17688489
omg yes.
Please keep em coming.
>>17688486
>>17688482
>>17688480
>>17688473
>>17688468
This is how they make our atmosphere their atmosphere.
>>17688468
Stop
>>17688500
Nah, there's people that really believe this shit.
>>17688512
I think he got banned.
>>17688488
>all of a sudden
Name a single conspiracy theory that isn't retarded and bullshit.
>>17688512
No
>>17688510
yes what?
>>17688384
Uhhhh think again bitch
>>17688530
This is not your soapbox.
>>17688530
MOAR>
>>17688535
This is an AnonSec Leak
Expect more in two days
Chemtrails is such a boring theory.
Give us something juicier.
>>17688384
This one along with the universe shifters. I can't tell if they're just acting retarded anymore
>>17688488
Other than the fact that entire prehistoric ecosystems have been dug up as well as million of biological ancestors
>>17688384
Although nothing beats those moronic inbreds known as "flat earthers", there is another cancer called "hollow earth theory" which is wrong in so many levels of life comprehension. Either way such retarded people must seek mental help instead of spreading their schizophrenia in this place.
>>17688567
Note again, it's is not a 'flat earther' that is bringing this up, it's the troll that wants to argue against it. He is literal posting dumb ideas, then is saying, "That's dumb"
>>17688525
The second Iraq war was started on false pretenses.
>>17688532
>a gun
>in space
Are you retarded?
>>17688588
made me laugh
>>17688574
Could you go away?
>>17688588
Bro, not a gun. Party noisemaker... ( wait for it)
>>17688384
im surprised no one brings up that homonculus thread that is surprisingly not up today
I always liked Blue Beam, because it combines so many crazy implausible conspiracies into one great big ultracrazy antiplausible uberconspiracy.
Also Steven Christ and his concave earth.
>>17688602
You're the stupid troll, you go away.
>>17688588
What's wrong with a gun in space?
ITT: Fedoras that don't believe in anything, discuss things they don't believe.
>>17688615
>What's wrong with a gun in space?
It's probably rip your arm off when you fired it for one thing.
>>17688623
No. The recoil in space will be the same as it is on earth.
>>17688610
>im surprised no one brings up that homonculus thread that is surprisingly not up today
Damn you're stupid.
See: >>17681359
>>17688628
uh, no
>>17688637
are you actually retarded?
>>17688628
>thinks propellants at the bottom of a gravity well would act the same in the micro-gravity of space
>>17688384
No it's actually Darwinism.
>hurr durr we can observe evolution and the church is evil
>>17688384
I can't imagine how a single person actually gives any thought to this "theory" in the modern day.
Didn't we leave this idea behind long ago with the "earth is on a giant turtle" type myths too?
>>17688641
I have no idea what your argument is supposed to be.
>>17688618
Shhh, the grownups are talking.
>>17688640
never heard of that or thought of that.
but can you prove what you say?
>>17688480
>global warming
>global
But anon, the earth isn't a globe.
>>17688647
Not a perfect sphere but approximately that shape.
Don't get into semantics.
>>17688644
Neither does he, he's just tossing out buzzwords he thought he heard his pastor say while he was sleeping through the sermon.
>>17688642
>I can't imagine how a single person
NO ONE IS. Trolls start the stupid thread, then other trolls and morons say, "Whoa, what a dumb idea." It's pure circle-jerk.
>>17688641
Are you trying to imply we can't?
>>17688640
>>17688637
The propellants release the same amount of energy regardless of being on earth or in space. After that it's just conservation of momentum. Bullet weighs the same, user weighs the same, disregarding his 200 lb space suit.
The astronaut, in this case, would drift backwards slightly, with a small amount of spin, because he doesn't have a solid earth to brace against, but he's already got the space suit with the jet thrusters on it, so that would be pretty minor.
The idea that he would blow his arm off is just plain stupid.
>>17688653
People do legitimately believe in it, stupid as it is. Stop trying to police the posts.
>>17688645
>grown ups
>on a website for cartoons
>>17688649
The term you're looking for is "oblate spheroid".
>>17688671
As I said, semantics.
>>17688659
No Im downright saying you cant. Because: show me footage of evolution taking place, and please repeat the process with any given species under a controlled situation.
You can't. That's the meaning of no evidence.
>>17688675
You need more time than you can give in our lifetimes for "footage", genius. That's like asking for a live feed of a mountain eroding.
>>17688652
memes and buzzwords shall be countered with the same
fight fire with fire
>>17688641
>implying you need to observe to know
>>17688682
>No evidence.
>>17688674
>semantics.
No, geometry. It matters when you're trying to build ICBMs.
>>17688631
welp............ i guess i am stupid for thinking /x/ is getting better.
>>17688644
he doesn't have one, he's just being dumb
>>17688686
No obversation = no knowledge
Or are you implying someone only needs to believe in something one cannot see? You sound like a religious person.
>>17688682
>That's like asking for a live feed of a mountain eroding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iciLigLgsWc
>>17688687
>says the guy supporting "the church"
cos you know, creationism has lots of evidence
>>17688675
>needing footage of allele frequency changing in a population due to environmental contraints
is this because its summer time or has /x/ always been retarded?
>>17688675
There is more than one type of evidence than just direct observation.
You don't have to see a murder happen to be able to piece together what happened.
In this regard there's mountains of evidence, enough to call it proof.
>>17688675
The fossil record provides literally tons of evidence, but if you want an example on human time scales, then there's poison resistant rats, insecticide resistant insects, and antibiotic resistant bacteria.
>>17688694
>the ground outside is wet as far as the eye can see
>I did not see it, but evidence says it rained
Use your had
>>17688711
head*
>>17688675
>implies science is fake and has no evidence
>doesn't realize everything he uses is because of science
i fuckin hate summer
>>17688711
You never saw rain??
wew lad
>>17688615
I don't know why everyone is talking about the recoil, it has nothing to do with that.
A gun cannot fire in space because there's no oxygen, and thus the combustion required to fire the bullet can't happen.
>>17688717
I have, but it's not the only way the ground can be wet.
>>17688641
It's the only plausible explanation for humans and life across the planet out there.
>>17688642
My thoughts exactly.
Maybe all flat earthers were dropped on their heads as babies.
>>17688719
Well guns can be fired underwater but i really don't understand the chemistry behind that. Cause it can fire once but it can't fire the second consecutive shot. I know oxygen exists in water but i just can't seen how it can still cause combustion. But then again, there are underwater mines but i dunno how that works either....
>>17688699
That's because religions dont need evidence.
You on the other hand do rely on it, so please provide it. Or admit that science is a religion just like any other.
>>17688703
>There is more than one type of evidence than just direct observation.
>You don't have to see a murder happen to be able to piece together what happened.
A murder can be, and has been, witnessed many times.
Evolution has never been witnessed even once. There's your difference.
>>17688711
Rain has been witnessed many times as well.
Still, noone has seen evolution.
Youre comparing real things with made up things that noone ever saw.
>>17688728
So what's YOUR great explanation instead?
>>17688728
I hope no one falls for this troll.
>>17688728
>science is a religion
Fundamentally, it is not.
>>17688723
>plausible
No it isn't. It explains literally nothing. If you think life was created from molecules randomly interacting, please repeat the process. It should be pretty simple as we're talking about a one celled organism.
Still, you can't do this.
>>17688720
But it did rain last night, I heard it. A bit of thunder, too.
>>17688719
Guns make their own oxygen.
Fossil record demonstrates evolution.
Done.
>>17688728
>science is a religion
>everything he owns was possible due to science
>>17688574
>the troll is bringing dumb ideas
so trolls and flat earthers are the same?
>>17688737
>created
That is a religious concept, has no place in rational discussions.
>>17688737
please dont feed this troll.
>>17688737
we're not talking about the origin of life, that was abiogenesis, we're talking about evolution, which caused the variety and change in species across the Earth's lifetime
The flat earth has to be number one as we have proven it. I think it would be funny if NASA replyed to these comments saying its flat with a satellite taken photo of earth
>>17688754
Proven what?
>>17688730
I'm an openminded sceptic. I'm not interested in explaining these things, I accept what I can see and nothing more.
What I can see all over society is how a lot of money is going into this "science" for no other reason than belief without evidence, and how this is contrasted against older religions were they do exactly the same thing.
These lies should be exposed for what they are. The truth is that we know very little.
>>17688760
for the last time, please dont feed this troll
>>17688765
Could you shut the fuck up?
I didn't put that Trojan on /v/ board moot
>>17688760
Sounds to me like you're just a blockhead burying into the sand.
>>17688719
>A gun cannot fire in space because there's no oxygen, and thus the combustion required to fire the bullet can't happen.
You're a moron, never post on /k/, people will die from laughing at you.
Modern ammunition contains its own oxidizer, a chemical that will trigger the explosion of gunpowder, and thus the firing of a bullet, wherever you are in the universe. No atmospheric oxygen required.
http://www.livescience.com/18588-shoot-gun-space.html
>>17688769
why can't a gun shoot twice underwater? Only the first bullet can be fired.
ii seen him in pron with sabu
>>17688753
>which caused the variety and change in species
Repeating your false notions won't make them real. There is no "variety and change", where did you get this idea?
The only thing we can observe is that the number of species is decreasing over time, leading to the conclusion that there were more variety and more species BEFORE than there is now.
>>17688769
To be fair, if he's the same anon as >>17688760
his world view is stuck in the matchlock era.
>>17688776
>there is no variety of species on Earth
>>17688719
A cartridge is air-tight to maximize pressure. Also, gunpowder has an oxidizer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUdkIn7C9fA
>>17688719
Guns don't need atmospheric oxygen to fire.
Shells already contain the oxidizer in the explosives themselves.
>>17688776
why do you guys keep falling for this troll?
mpt its gonna get strang it rly is also rafssstar left winger
>>17688776
>the number of species is decreasing over time
That is because humans are causing extinction of many species. They changed the game.
>>17688787
>>17688765
>>17688735
>>17688612
You are way more annoying than any of them.
>>17688771
I can see how water's viscosity might mess up the action on a semi- or full automatic but it shouldn't be an issue with a revolver.
>>17688796
just cause its summer doesn't mean we know you are samefagging.
>>17688801
Just stop whining.
>>17688797
I guess i should learn more about how a gun actually works.
>>17688781
>implying there are species
That's fucking speciecism. There is only one species, it should be called earthlings.
why am I still fucking here
>>17688803
lol, pretty cute response. only if you stop samefagging and trolling.
>>17688791
You realize that 99% of all animals were extinct before the existence of humans?
>>17688814
Yes, I do, except that rate has greatly increased in a smaller span of time. Before humans is billions of years. After humans is only a few hundred thousand.
>>17688822
>Before humans
>implying humans didn't exist all along
or wait we don't know either way about this, it could be any
Maybe humans came first and created all the lower lifeforms to survive in this hostile environment.
>>17688815
>>17688824
Google bot malfunctioning?
>>17688828
How do you manage to tie your own shoelaces?
>>17688805
Different guns work different ways.
>>17688831
I'm slim, I just bend forward and I can reach my own feet with no problem. If you go on a diet, maybe you can do this too one day.
All this shilling about the FACT that the earth is actually flat. Stay asleep.
>>17688822
Im not too certain on your numbers there but there are species that still exist today and existed before the presence of humans. But i really dunno what we are talking about lol. If you are implying we are pests of this earth, then i guess i can agree to an extent. But you would also have to say that for any other animal that causes environmental problems and cause other species to die out. Even plants do this.
>>17688836
lol, i think i can come to that conclusion myself. But thanks for your consideration.
>>17688841
oh boy here we go
>>17688843
The conversation is "guy thinks he's very smart by just mindlessly denying all human knowledge and going DUNNO LOL"
>>17688841
have a (You)
if I drink the gates r gonna open
>>17688850
are you the same dude i have been talking to or are you the troll that keeps denying science?
>>17688856
Yes.
>>17688841
wow that is zero effort
>>17688857
No actually that's me.
moots heaven gate good luck 4chan
>>17688869
Good luck to you too.
>>17688690
look up what semantics means you annoying ass fucking pedant
If I gave you the truth would you tell me that you're happy now?
www.dataasylum.com
>>17688384
>implying the flat earth is not with the north pole in the center and antarctica all around
>implying oceans can be 1000 mile wide humps without magic
enjoy your phony ball earth, I myself have eyes to see and a body to feel (especially movement of the 1000+ mph variety)
>>17688936
kidding?
>>17688771
Semi-automatic weapons require inertial force the bolt reward to eject the casing and load the next round. Since water is so much thicker than air this becomes an issue due to friction.
You could always manually chamber the next round.
>>17688936
Day/night, horizon, seasons, etc all disprove that idea.
>>17688948
>implying x3
no they don't
but the fact that we are supposedly moving 1000+mph and we aren't disproves your theory
>>17688961
>no they don't
wanna explain that?
oh wait you can't
>>17688965
what's there to explain? They say we are moving 1000+ mph and we aren't. Case closed
>>17688936
How would you know whether you are or aren't, if you've been doing it since you were conceived?
>>17688969
Sounds like you literally have no other talking points than that vague one.
Guessing troll.
>>17688961
>no they don't
But they do, entirely.
>>17688971
>How would you know whether you are or aren't, if you've been doing it since you were conceived?
by using simple reasoning, and your assumption that we have been traveling 1000+ mph all along is only that. an assumption
>>17688973
>Sounds like you literally have no other talking points than that vague one.
>being this foolish
oceans can't be 100 mile side humps of water, mountains/buildings/clouds don't tilt away from you as they go to the horizon, moon phases would be impossible on a ball earth, horizon always rises to eye level, government patrol ships guard antarctica so you can't go there on private expeditions, sun and the moon are the same size despite one supposedly being farther away by a factor of 400, a non-vacuum (the atmosphere) existing inside of a vacuum (space) without a barrier...etc
>>17688986
>oceans can't be 100 mile side humps of water
what does this even mean?
>>17688977
but not with the explanations given by "science"
>>17688993
sorry that was a typo. 1000 mile wide humps of water*.
look at any model earth globe, turn it so any ocean is facing up, and voilà ! you have a hump of water that is 1000 miles wide, even though every other water surface you've ever seen in your entire life has been flat
>>17688986
>mountains/buildings/clouds don't tilt away from you as they go to the horizon
because it's not steep enough for that
> moon phases would be impossible on a ball earth
Why?
> sun and the moon are the same size despite one supposedly being farther away by a factor of 400
Because the sun is ridiculously larger than the moon. Faraway things look smaller, genius.
>>17688999
I don't think you understand gravity very well.
>>17688539
I'll be checking in
what happens in two days?
>I'll be leaking more
>>17689001
>because it's not steep enough for that
the horizon is supposedly 60 miles away and yet every tall thing (especially clouds considering they are 15K + feet up) stays level to the horizon
>moon phases would be impossible on a ball earth
because the moon will always have the same phase as the earth, the line of demarcation (separating light and dark) on earth and the moon will always be nearly parallel to one another. Thus new moons are now impossible during night and full moons are impossible during the day
>Because the sun is ridiculously larger than the moon. Faraway things look smaller, genius.
And you don't find that "coincidence" of them being the same size in the sky strange, given that one is so farther away? Lots of "coincidences" are required for their systems and given that they rely so much on the "logical" it is surprising to me that they don't take them into account. This is because it is an inconvenience to them that something beyond their understanding is taking place
>>17689003
I understand it perfectly. It is a fraud. All its faculties can be explained by density
>>17688994
How so?
>>17689021
The "coincidence" is their orbits
>>17689003
I don't understand you gravity well very think.
>>17688936
A flat does not make any logical sense. Such a planet could never have formed.
>>17689021
Go up high enough, you can see the earth's curvature. Easy proof.
>>17689022
modern science doesn't give a perfect explanation of them, only a ad hoc one that changes with each error discovered. Gravity doesn't exist so there can be no orbit of celestial bodies and the sun and moon are not bigger than 40 miles. There explanations are proven wrong by the simplest of means, which is frightening given how much power these liars hold
>>17689028
their "orbits" don't exist
>>17689043
If gravity didn't exist then you would have drifted off into the sky instead of sitting down to write this crap
>>17689036
>Such a planet could never have formed.
and whats the basis of this assumption?
>>17689042
nope, all amateur footage going 20+ miles up shows it is flat, NASA cgi shows otherwise, but NASA is a shill organization so this is not surprising
>>17689046
Show me this "flat footage"
>>17689046
The most rudimentary knowledge of planetary formation? A big disc is not going to form. It would collapse under its own weight.
It's not an assumption, it's common sense.
>>17689031
Well very I think understand you don't gravity.
>>17689045
nope, the phenomena of falling is perfectly explained by density, so your theory is put to rest.
>>17689056
It doesn't explain geology
Example, earthquakes and volcanos, both are side effects of a round earth and its innards.
>>17689048
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=flat+earth+footage
>>17689053
>A big disc is not going to form. It would collapse under its own weight.
Assuming gravity exists which it doesn't. Base your explanations for the formation of the earth on no assumptions please
>>17689060
>Example, earthquakes and volcanos, both are side effects of a round earth and its innards.
>both are side effects of a round earth and its innards.
There it is! I found the assumption. Which is just as incorrect as your previous assumptions
>>17689061
>which it doesn't
Which you state like a fact for some reason.
>>17689064
Not an assumption you idiot. We know how they work.
>>17689066
Because it is a fact, the earth is not a sphere so any explanation of the earth being formed into the shape of a sphere is erroneous. When writing proofs, we can make deductions based on knowledge a priori, so throwing in a false conclusion automatically makes your conclusion false
>>17689046
and the variety of amateur footage showing it's round?
you can't just dismiss that with "it's fake", that's close minded as fuck
>>17689071
Now who's making assumptions?
>>17689069
>We know how they work.
Do you? What mighty knowledge you have! We've never been further than 12km in the ground yet you've seen the innards first hand. Very impressive. All your "facts" are false assumptions based on false assumptions. This lie is collapsing in on itself because it has no foundation. Literally
>>17689081
>>17689071
fuck you
>>17689064
You keep doing that same thing to whatever I post.
I don't know what it is you want me to say instead.
>>17689075
>and the variety of amateur footage showing it's round?
either a fish eyed lens warping effect or CGI, like I said early false conclusions can automatically be dismissed and being open minded is not a compliment. An open mind lets in lies
>>17689080
both of us, but my assumptions have evidence, yours do not. Thus an assumption graduates from an assumption to a fact once it's proven
>>17689075
amateur round? and the it's showing of footage variety
"it's you as just with fake", fuck that can't that's dismiss minded close
>>17689083
I wish you the best of luck
>>17689087
Say whatever you please. Who am I to stop you?
say this if you wish:
Doing that thing whatever same You to post keep I.
To it is you say I what want know me don't instead.
>>17689095
What do you hope to accomplish here?
>>17689095
Ok, how did a flat disc randomly in space form, then?
>>17689095
"False conclusions can automatically be dismissed" is a pretentious way of saying "I will dismiss any evidence that doesn't agree with my point of view specifically because they do not agree with my point of view."
>>17689071
AKA
>Wahhh I'm right and that's that I don't listen to anything that says I'm wrong and any proof I'm wrong is just fake
>>17689115
education
>>17689122
God, it wasn't random hence why there is divine proportions
>>17689124
no it's a logical dismissal, why ponder over what I know to be false at a sensory level?
>>17689043
Density does not explain anything. Why would it fall downward, if there's no gravity pulling it down?
>>17689126
Because your senses can be and are wrong all the time, because you aren't omniscient.
4chan btr be drinking somhging weird is gonna happen
>>17689125
I listen and I consider and I see that it's false. It's what you do with the flat earth, why is it wrong for me?
>>17689126
"Divine proportions"?
>>17688910
It does confirm what I already knew, just put one more piece in place.
But you know I'm not falling for it. Whoever does something to me will pay. Yes this is a warning.
>>17689130
because people are denser than the air around them
>>17689132
true optical illusions exist, but it doesn't mean that 1000+ mph movement would go unnoticed
>>17689126
I bet you claim evolution isn't real too
whats gonna happen is moots head gonna explode
>>17689140
Have you ever flown in an airplane?
>>17689134
Then you're admitting your "consdering" isn't any more valid than mine?
>>17689135
>the density of water
>the size of the sun and the moon
>the number of lunar months
>golden ratio
>fibonacci sequence
>>17689140
That doesn't explain why everything is pulled to the ground.
>>17689141
It isn't, we aren't related to everything we eat
>>17689145
yep, fish eyed lens =/= sphere earth
>>17689146
No it's not, but when my consideration is wiser than your it is. You claim that we are moving 1000+mph, we are not. My evidence is sensory, yours is literal hearsay
>>17689147
That second one is unknown though
>>17689150
why not?
wendigo
moots head grew
it grew didn't it
>>17689126
lol resorting to "it's magic!", what a cop out
>>17689153
Actually, my point was that airplanes travel roughly 550 miles per hour. When you're sitting on an airplane, you don't feel any different than when you're stationary, unless there's a direction change or acceleration. Your body doesn't sense velocity, it senses acceleration.
>>17689153
explain the fossil record showing evolution then
>>17689154
nope, ~33 miles for each
woons penis in the end
was 1.5 inches
it
I didn't even think abt it
>>17688674
>>17688690
If you both weren't total idiots you would realize "global" in "global warming" means "worldwide", with no reference being made to shape.
>>17689156
Because there is no force pulling them down, if there's no gravity
>>17689159
It's what you do for your explanation for why these supposed super distant celestial objects appear the same size in the sky and why we are supposedly in the goldilocks zone
>>17689153
You don't feel the speed when you are cushioned from it.
Do you feel the speed when sitting in a train?
fluttershy d0xd all of 4chans theeth
it wasn't me it was
des
Show me a compelling piece of evidence for a flat earth.
Not baiting here, I'm open to many ideas provided they have a real foundation.
>>17689163
either they are forgeries or the conclusions are based on false premises. Same as any other lie. No dinosaur bones were discovered prior to 1750, and all a sudden darwin comes up with the theory of evolution and voila! they just magically fall out of the sky what a coincidence
>>17689164
How can you know that?
>>17689177
>>either they are forgeries or the conclusions are based on false premises
Assumption.
>>17688384
Reptilians.
Wtf, lizards running the world?
>>17689175
sure, just head yourself on the head with a mallet first, to get into the proper mindset for a flat earther
wonder what this single night will provide
>>17689169
>>17689164
The sun would not produce enough energy to heat the world at that size, and the lack of a hot core of the round earth would mean earth would be a frozen wasteland
>>17689168
density is pulling them down, they are denser than the air and thus they sink in air
>>17689170
The difference between being outside and being on a train is that I am shielded from the wind in the train by a physical barrier, such is not the case outside. Also because their is no air resistance and friction allows me to go the same speed as the train I can jump on the train and remain in the same spot. However if we were really going 1000+ mph, then the only way this would be possible is if the air molecules (regardless of distance to the ground mind you) were going the same speed as the ground (given that planes don't have to factor in lateral deviation due to height in their flight plans). The only way the air molecules could go the same speed as the ground is if they were physically connected to the ground (each and every one) and their connection had perfect rigidity. Obviously this is impossible so the only refuge is "gravity", but such a strong gravity would crush everything on the planet so it is also false.
>>17689167
"global" implies the world is a globe, it should be called "discwide"
>>17689175
Sure, the sun and the moon are the same size in the sky. They will say that this is due to one being very far away and big and the other being close and small, but the coincidence itself is too much to be happenstance. Also, we are not moving 1000+ mph like they claim or we would feel it
>>17689179
sextants
>>17689182
how is that an assumption?
>>17689190
the sun is not what keeps the world alive
>>17688437
>Stephen Hawkings was a veggie, and the goverment used his fame to promote scientific theories
Good crap that could actually be true
I get buttterflys when ehs around moot
>>17688470
I have heard some priests argue that dinossaur bones were put there as a red herring by the devil so people would think that the Earth is older than stated by the Bible (6000 years, if im not mistaken).
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Ege,+754.+Sk.,+06270+Mamak%2FAnkara,+Turkey/@39.8955893,32.9091361,3a,60y,3.54h,88.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scPUlDuhvlpkw1_nGtf6PKw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x14d3502fe5c82095:0xfbc06d3dc6cb0869!8m2!3d39.8959924!4d32.9085755
>>17689236
A lot of dinosaur bones are found on government property and all museum skeletons are admitted plaster creations based on assumptions based on a few discovered bones. No complete skeleton of a dinosaur has ever been found
>>17689248
Yeah, you're right, we only have >90% of some skeletons, hardly anything to go on at all.
>>17689262
I agree especially when private investigators aren't allowed to examine the bones of the more exotic dinosaurs, given famous hoaxes of the past
>>17688901
Dismissing something as semantics is implying the distinction doesn't matter, I'm saying it does.
>pedant
That's just a word stupid people invented so they don't have to admit they're always wrong.
>>17689271
Your reasoning makes no sense. Why do you imagine that the ground would just be rotating/moving without the atmosphere? That's ridiculous and ignores basic physics. But I guess that's kind of par for the course.
>>17688675
Salamanders in California, dingus.
Darwin was wrong about evolution being a process so long that it would be impossible to observe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDIQFQOCGaI
>>17688576
Or any of the conspiracy theories that were proven, and elevated from theory status, to actually conspiracy status.
Like the start of the Vietnam war
