Coronavirus testing

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Coronavirus testing > Page 2

Page 2 of 3

20-12-2020 03:33
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote:...how you ever verified that there actually is a pandemic, albeit invisible.. That is THE question. 1- How would I know: I see a video produced by an ER doctor, find it convincing and don't see a motive for her to lie. I also trust that the information provided by the CDC and government is accurate and to date nothing has been brought to light which calls that into question I find credible. I also had a family member, though distant, die of Covid. His immediate relations to the family are a Nurse and a Surgical tech who would without question have no reason to lie about it. In short I am provided with information from sources and I evaluate their credibility based on both expertise and motive. Ultimately my "knowing" something is based on the probability that it is true. That probability is almost never 100% but often 99+% 2- How would you know: you have said nothing on this point. IBdaMann wrote:Those are not the CDC's instructions to medical examiners. You don't know what the CDC instructions are so how would you know.
20-12-2020 03:36
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Death certificates are real, not fictitious. And they are not publicly available. Yes they are. tmiddles wrote: If you'd like to prove me wrong then YOU provide Herman Cain's death certificate. YOU are the one making the assertion. YOU provide the certificate... Do your OWN homework for a change... tmiddles wrote: You're just picking an excuse, a lame one, to bow out here. YOU are the one bowing out, not him. You have yet to provide the certificate... tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: IBD is claiming that they are falsified because covid is appearing at the end of section 1 rather than appearing in section 2 where it belongs. Actually if you'll look more closely at your example you'll see that section C1 tells you everything you need to know. See? just to the left. What are you even talking about? What "example" did I provide?
20-12-2020 03:42
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: tgoebbles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Death certificates are real, not fictitious. And they are not publicly available. I retract. There are places where death certificates are not public records. So we're left with the question of how you ever verified that there actually is a pandemic, albeit invisible. The current theory is that you are simply gullible and believe whatever your slave-masters tell you to believe without question, no matter how stupid. . I concur with that theory.
20-12-2020 04:21
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	gfm7175 wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tgoebbles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Death certificates are real, not fictitious. And they are not publicly available. I retract. There are places where death certificates are not public records. So we're left with the question of how you ever verified that there actually is a pandemic, albeit invisible. The current theory is that you are simply gullible and believe whatever your slave-masters tell you to believe without question, no matter how stupid. . I concur with that theory. And your faith in our Saviour Jesus is based on faith. I love you brother. Some say Jesus never died on the cross to redeem sinners like myself and you. While we have no proof, it is our faith that saves us. Am glad that you know that faith and science are 2 different things brother.
20-12-2020 04:45
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	James___ wrote: And your faith in our Saviour Jesus is based on faith. Yes, faith is faith. My acceptance of Christianity as a True is indeed a faith based belief. James___ wrote: I love you brother. I love you too, man! James___ wrote: Some say Jesus never died on the cross to redeem sinners like myself and you. Indeed. Some DO say that... Some say that Jesus never even existed to begin with... Others say that Jesus was simply a man (IOW, he was not God incarnate). James___ wrote: While we have no proof, it is our faith that saves us. It is (God's) grace alone that saves us, through (our) faith alone, according to the Holy Bible. (Ephesians 2:8-9) James___ wrote: Am glad that you know that faith and science are 2 different things brother. Indeed. Some theories can move beyond being circular arguments while other theories cannot. Edited on 20-12-2020 04:48

20-12-2020 05:02
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	tmiddles wrote:You don't know what the CDC instructions are so how would you know. You don't know what I know so how would you know? Yes, I watched the full CDC instruction video to medical examiners. You did not. We kind of have to go with what I say. We're done. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-12-2020 05:05
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	gfm7175 wrote:Indeed. Some theories can move beyond being circular arguments while other theories cannot. I just learned that it is a circular argument that's at the bottom of the deepest pit. Who knew? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-12-2020 17:22
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...how you ever verified that there actually is a pandemic, albeit invisible.. That is THE question. 1- How would I know: I see a video produced by an ER doctor, find it convincing and don't see a motive for her to lie. I also trust that the information provided by the CDC and government is accurate and to date nothing has been brought to light which calls that into question I find credible. I also had a family member, though distant, die of Covid. His immediate relations to the family are a Nurse and a Surgical tech who would without question have no reason to lie about it. In short I am provided with information from sources and I evaluate their credibility based on both expertise and motive. Ultimately my "knowing" something is based on the probability that it is true. That probability is almost never 100% but often 99+% 2- How would you know: you have said nothing on this point. IBdaMann wrote:Those are not the CDC's instructions to medical examiners. You don't know what the CDC instructions are so how would you know. So, basically, the ER doctor, on your morning Soap Opera, is a credible source. It never crossed your mind, that he probably has no actual medical training, just an actor, reading a script. Sort of like Joe Biden, reading the teleprompter. There is nothing wrong with putting 'Covid-19', on death certificates. After the pandemic, it will be useful, and convenient to be able to separate those cases out, for further study. It's a useful policy, since we can expect another epidemic, or pandemic, and we would want to do better. The official scoreboard, will be adjusted later, the car accidents, suicides, and overdoses, will be removed, as well as many of the other deaths, in which the virus, really had no role. Unfortunately, politics, and the fear mongering media, are having some fun with the numbers, least with those who can do math, for themselves. Like most any other respiratory infection, most everyone recovers. The fatalities, are almost always people with serious health issues, and just barely hanging on to life to begin with. Any traumatic event, would most likely be fatal. Last March, it made sense, to be hyper-cautious, since it's a new virus, and we had little knowledge. Once we learned that the fatalities, are a fairly narrow group, there was no reason to continue pretending it's any worse than a common cold.
20-12-2020 21:23
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	"fatalities a fairly narrow group". Where did you learn that Harvey?
20-12-2020 21:23
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	We're all on thin ice. Edited on 20-12-2020 21:25
20-12-2020 21:29
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	keepit wrote: oops Try CDC.gov... 65+, and medically-messed up, make up over 90% of the fatalities. Then again, I don't trust the government either... CDC also promotes masks, and hiding in your basement, as effective defenses, to this horribly fast-spreading, deadly disease.
20-12-2020 22:12
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	But that isn't a "narrow" group.
20-12-2020 22:41
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Death certificates are real, not fictitious. And they are not publicly available. They are public record. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: If you'd like to prove me wrong then YOU provide Herman Cain's death certificate. Fioxation. Irrelevant. tmiddles wrote: You're just picking an excuse, a lame one, to bow out here. Inversion fallacy. That would be you. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-12-2020 22:55
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...how you ever verified that there actually is a pandemic, albeit invisible.. That is THE question. 1- How would I know: I see a video produced by an ER doctor, find it convincing and don't see a motive for her to lie. Because you stick your head in the sand. I will call this argument 1. tmiddles wrote: I also trust that the information provided by the CDC and government is accurate We have already shown you why it isn't. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: and to date nothing has been brought to light which calls that into question I find credible. Lie. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: I also had a family member, though distant, die of Covid. I don't believe you. You are making shit up. tmiddles wrote: His immediate relations to the family are a Nurse and a Surgical tech who would without question have no reason to lie about it. I don't believe you. You are making shit up. tmiddles wrote: In short I am provided with information from sources and I evaluate their credibility based on both expertise and motive. Expert worship. Experts have also said that covid19 does not kill. What is their motive? They've also been silenced from publishing their opinion on things like Youtube. What is Youtube's motive? tmiddles wrote: Ultimately my "knowing" something is based on the probability that it is true. Denial of probability math. Math error: Failure to designate boundary. tmiddles wrote: That probability is almost never 100% but often 99+% Math error. Failure to designate boundary. Failure to designate randX. Argument from randU fallacy. Argument from randR fallacy. tmiddles wrote: 2- How would you know: you have said nothing on this point. RQAA tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:Those are not the CDC's instructions to medical examiners. You don't know what the CDC instructions are so how would you know. I will call this argument 2. You are now in paradox. Which is it, dude? I will call this Paradox X. You are running out of letters on your irrationality, dude. Care to clear any of your paradoxes? You might try to answer the questions put to you as well instead of evading them for months. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
20-12-2020 22:56
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	keepit wrote: We're all on thin ice. Get off the ice. I'm not stupid enough to stand on any ice until it's good an supported. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

20-12-2020 22:57
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	keepit wrote: But that isn't a "narrow" group. 0.002% of the population is a narrow group. Even these numbers from the CDC are fake. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 20-12-2020 22:57
21-12-2020 02:58
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	keepit wrote: But that isn't a "narrow" group. What percent of the total population, is past their expiration date, and still sitting on a shelf, in the basement? Just seems bigger to you, since you are president of the club, and look at the world, through Coke-bottle glasses.
21-12-2020 02:59
keepit ★★★★★ (3058)	Does your overly cynical attitude serve you well? BTW, your imagination isn't very accurate. According to a study i just read, over 40% of americans over the age of 18 are at high risk of developing serious consequences if they become infected with covid. This isn't a narrow segment. Edited on 21-12-2020 03:16
21-12-2020 04:05
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	keepit wrote: Does your overly cynical attitude serve you well? Does your gullibility serve you well? Your ability to think for yourself doesn't seem to work. keepit wrote: According to a study i just read, over 40% of americans over the age of 18 are at high risk of developing serious consequences if they become infected with covid. Yep, you're a moron. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
21-12-2020 08:40
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Was Trump diagnosed with Covid a while back.How dead is he now?
21-12-2020 10:28
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	keepit wrote: Does your overly cynical attitude serve you well? BTW, your imagination isn't very accurate. According to a study i just read, over 40% of americans over the age of 18 are at high risk of developing serious consequences if they become infected with covid. This isn't a narrow segment. 40% of the people put on ventilators, aren't aren't under 65... What do you consider serious consequences, a cough? Weren't we discussing fatalities in this thread? Or is this the mutations threat. Just got out of bed, coffee still cooking.
21-12-2020 14:14
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	keepit wrote: Does your overly cynical attitude serve you well? BTW, your imagination isn't very accurate. According to a study i just read, over 40% of americans over the age of 18 are at high risk of developing serious consequences if they become infected with covid. This isn't a narrow segment. Fakery. Science isn't a study. A study isn't a proof. Making shit up isn't a study. Void authority fallacy. Expert worship. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 21-12-2020 14:15
21-12-2020 14:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote:Death certificates ... are not publicly available. Yes they are. No they are not. Easily disproven: Produce Herman Cain's. Fixation. Go pay for it yourself. It's public record. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: YOU are the one making the assertion. Yes, that they are not public domain. They are public record. tmiddles wrote: I can't prove a negative. You are making a positive statement. Denial of logic. tmiddles wrote: If you claim I'm wrong then you can prove that by producing the death certificate. Fixation. Go pay for it yourself. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:What "example" did I provide? Well I doubt youd be talking without referring to something. Or is that something you do? RQAA tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...I watched the full CDC instruction video to medical examiners... So clearly made up. You make discrediting any cause too easy IBD. Paradox X. Irrational. tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote:...I see a video produced by an ER doctor, ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE68xVXf8Kw&feature=emb_logofind it convincing ... So, basically, the ER doctor, on your morning Soap Opera, is a credible source.... Try to pay attention Harvey. One of many videos shot on location in ER's by real, verified doctors. Maybe she's meryl streep and it's all an act? How do you, team denail, determine what is real? RQAA tmiddles wrote: If I am getting information second hand then I ask myself two questions: 1- Does the source have a reason to distort or manufacture that information 2- How credible is the source RQAA tmiddles wrote: You'll notice tha missing from my list is your entire list. Team Denials fact checking sheet 1- Am I hearing what I wanted to be true repeated back to me? RQAA No argument presented. Argument by repetition. Fixation. Trolling. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
21-12-2020 14:41
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote:Death certificates ... are not publicly available. Yes they are. No they are not. Easily disproven: Produce Herman Cain's. gfm7175 wrote: YOU are the one making the assertion. Yes, that they are not public domain. I can't prove a negative. If you claim I'm wrong then you can prove that by producing the death certificate. gfm7175 wrote:What "example" did I provide? Well I doubt youd be talking without referring to something. Or is that something you do? IBdaMann wrote:...I watched the full CDC instruction video to medical examiners... So clearly made up. You make discrediting any cause too easy IBD. HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote:...I see a video produced by an ER doctor, ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bE68xVXf8Kw&feature=emb_logofind it convincing ... So, basically, the ER doctor, on your morning Soap Opera, is a credible source.... Try to pay attention Harvey. One of many videos shot on location in ER's by real, verified doctors. Maybe she's meryl streep and it's all an act? How do you, team denail, determine what is real? If I am getting information second hand then I ask myself two questions: 1- Does the source have a reason to distort or manufacture that information 2- How credible is the source You'll notice tha missing from my list is your entire list. Team Denials fact checking sheet 1- Am I hearing what I wanted to be true repeated back to me?
21-12-2020 17:51
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote:You don't know what the CDC instructions are so how would you know. You don't know what I know so how would you know? Yes, I watched the full CDC instruction video to medical examiners. You did not. We kind of have to go with what I say. We're done. . tmiddles doesn't even know how to know anything (keeps asking people "how do you KNOW..." with regard to the most basic things), yet he loves to tell people all about "what we know" with regard to things which are unknown... He has yet to resolve this issue of his...
21-12-2020 18:02
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: gfm7175 wrote:Indeed. Some theories can move beyond being circular arguments while other theories cannot. I just learned that it is a circular argument that's at the bottom of the deepest pit. Who knew? . Now you know.
21-12-2020 18:51
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	Mostly, I just watch the local news, which includes national, and international stories, that noteworthy. Catch a little CNN (unfortunately) at work. Story of interest, I look up on the internet. Try to sort through the many sources, until I find one, that is closest to the original source. I try to avoid left run sources, because I don't care for all the opinion, and spin, they include. Rather just get the facts, and make up my own mind. Sometimes, the left version of the truth can be enlightening, by details they intentionally leave out, and the focus on less important facts. If I had read a story published, before the left story, I know they had the facts available, specially, since I usually see the story on the news. Must be some reason to lie, by omission of key details. i don't just regurgitate what I read or see, I think, and keep reading, until my questions are answered. I'm not a god, I don't see all, know all. I don't watch a lot of TV, or even have cable. I do know the are hospital drama shows, but I don't watch, or know the actors. There have been many covid public service commercials, be people that appear to be medical professionals, but no way to verify.
21-12-2020 20:32
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote:...tmiddles...keeps asking people "how do you KNOW..." with regard to the most basic things... It is the most fundamental question on this board. Now "the most basic things" would apparently be massive election fraud, though not a single judge in a single court room sees it the way you do. And gfm7175 wrote: I have no clue what the temperature of my house is. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: No one can know the temperature of Denver. He's absolutely correct.... So GFM is certain, KNOWS!!!, that massive election fraud was committed. Cannot supply any evidence to support that position. Yet has no clue what the temperature in his house is.... Or was the 8 and half hour video you gave clues to the existence of represent your evidence? So how do you KNOW that felons, disbarred attorneys, and convicted sex offenders are telling the truth while Judges are liars? Or that NASA is a liar. Or the Russian space program in the 1970s, liars! HarveyH55 wrote: Mostly, I just watch the local news, ...Try to ...find one, ...the original source. ...just get the facts, and make up my own mind... Getting to the source is something I've come to appreciate more in recent years. Social media, more than main stream media, tend to warp what you hear the story is. But how about this Harvey: How do you determine if someone is lying. When the information is second hand and someone says they measured, says they saw/heard/did. How do you figure out if you are going to trust that information? As I said I look at two things in this order: 1- Do they have a motive to lie 2- Are they credible (which means everything from not being a convicted felon to having real knowledge and competence in the area). "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN
21-12-2020 22:37
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	tmiddles wrote: ...deleted spam... No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 21-12-2020 22:39
21-12-2020 22:38
Into the Night★★★★★ (21597)	tmiddles wrote: ...deleted spam... The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

21-12-2020 23:05
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	tgoebbles wrote:It is the most fundamental question on this board. Nope. It is the most fundamental red herring. The question of why a rational adult is convinced by video evidence and first-hand witness testimony does not require any sort of philosophical proof. Why do you think that is somehow necessary? State legislatures are made up of rational adults. The overwhelming evidence of election fraud is sufficient for them to do the right thing and give Trump the State's electors. He earned them, after all. tgoebbles wrote:So GFM is certain, KNOWS!!!, that massive election fraud was committed. He is a rational adult, so yeah, I would expect him to be convinced. tgoebbles wrote: Cannot supply any evidence to support that position. All that matters is that he can review the overwhelming evidence of election fraud. It's all any rational adult needs. It does not matter that all of the evidence is retained by the people pursuing the issue; direct possession of the evidence is completely immaterial. This is perhaps your second red herring on the matter. Yet you insist that you KNOW what the temperature of Denver is without any valid dataset while decrying gfm7175 for being convinced by overwhelming evidence. You're blowing hot air just to be difficult, as most Marxists do. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
21-12-2020 23:11
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:...tmiddles...keeps asking people "how do you KNOW..." with regard to the most basic things... It is the most fundamental question on this board. Now "the most basic things" would apparently be massive election fraud, There are hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of corroborating sworn affidavits (under penalty of perjury) that attest to such election fraud occurring. Are these hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of people lying about what they personally witnessed?? I find those sworn affidavits to be convincing evidence. There is video evidence of such election fraud occurring in Georgia. I find such video to be convincing evidence as well. There are numerous statistical improbabilities, inconsistencies, and even impossibilities which all serve as additional evidence of such election fraud occurring. The unwillingness for various entities to be transparent and to comply with subpoenas that would verify either an honest or fraudulent election is even MORE evidence that massive election fraud occurred. You, like any good Demokkkrat, choose to deny deny deny. tmiddles wrote: though not a single judge in a single court room sees it the way you do. LIE. tmiddles wrote: And gfm7175 wrote: I have no clue what the temperature of my house is. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: No one can know the temperature of Denver. He's absolutely correct.... So GFM is certain, KNOWS!!!, that massive election fraud was committed. Cannot supply any evidence to support that position. Yet has no clue what the temperature in his house is.... I believe the corroborating sworn affidavits from the people who witnessed the election fraud take place. I believe the video evidence from Georgia of (what appears to be) election fraud taking place. I believe that various election boards, county clerks/boards, and other election related entities ought to be more than willing to put themselves and any evidence showing that election fraud "did not occur" (such as signature verification and voting machine audits) directly into the spotlight if they had absolutely nothing to hide. Since they are vehemently unwilling to do this, I can only reasonably conclude that they are attempting to keep something in the dark (such as the election fraud that they allegedly committed and is corroborated by sworn affidavits and the like). With regard to not knowing the temperature of my house, I have already explained to you, countless times even, the mathematics behind why the temperature of my house remains an unknown value. Measuring the temperature of a single location point is different than measuring the temperature of a volume. The temperature of a single location point can be known with a properly calibrated, maintained, and functioning thermometer. The temperature of a volume, however, requires much more than that (including but NOT limited to: declaring a target margin of error at the outset, eliminating biasing factors, having enough thermometers at one's disposal, selecting data by randN, normalizing data by paired randR, declaring and justifying a variance, calculating a margin of error from said variance). tmiddles wrote: Or was the 8 and half hour video you gave clues to the existence of represent your evidence? So how do you KNOW that felons, disbarred attorneys, and convicted sex offenders are telling the truth while Judges are liars? Or that NASA is a liar. Or the Russian space program in the 1970s, liars! Violation of tmiddles ordinance... summarily dismissed. Edited on 21-12-2020 23:29
22-12-2020 01:18
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	gfm7175 wrote:There are hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of corroborating sworn affidavits ... One might even say "thousands." gfm7175 wrote: Are these hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of people lying about what they personally witnessed?? Are any of the affidavits even disputed? Which affidavits or witness testimony is tgoebbles claiming to dispute? We should start there. gfm7175 wrote: There is video evidence of such election fraud occurring in Georgia. ... but you're trying to use the word "suitcases." That negates everything forthwith testified in the affidavits and gets the video discarded from the discussion. gfm7175 wrote: You, like any good Demokkkrat, choose to deny deny deny. Right. We should start with which witness testimony he is disputing. tgoebbles wrote:though not a single judge in a single court room sees it the way you do. Well, there you have it. Since tgoebbles speaks for our entire legal system, it would seem that you have no argument that holds water. You should have conferred with tgoebbles before going off half-cocked with your baseless "conspiracy theory" for which you have "no evidence." gfm7175 wrote:Measuring the temperature of a single location point is different than measuring the temperature of a volume. Aaaahhh, tgoebbles got you. You lose. tgoebbles' objective was to yank you off the election topic so he won't have to defend his denial and explain what testimony he is disputing. You fell for it. The math has been explained to him dozens of times from multiple angles. It's his "go-to" red herring when he doesn't like how the science falsifies his WACKY religious dogma ... and now when he doesn't like how witness testimony interferes with his suspension of disbelief in the narrative that Biden won the election. You should fire back and put this train back on the rails. Trump won the election in a landslide. Leftists committed massive election fraud. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
22-12-2020 01:45
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote:...a rational adult is convinced by video evidence and first-hand witness testimony does not require any sort of philosophical proof... I was asking what your process is. I've given you my rough process: 1- Do they have incentive/motive to lie 2- Who are they? Are they trustworthy and competent on what they are dealing with. When a felon who has a history of trying to get attention (like Daryl Brooks, Melissa Carone, ...) says they saw things, sound like an idiot as they make the claims, it's is hard to believe anyone finds their testimony credible. But you do. Because they are saying things you want to be true. IBdaMann wrote:...the overwhelming evidence of election fraud. You don't bother to share here. Still waiting for anytjhing at all. An 8 1/2 hour video is just sad. gfm7175 wrote: There are hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of corroborating sworn affidavits Now you are describing, in legal terms, something which would be persuasive in a court of law right? So why haven't they been? There are hundreds and hundreds of people who insist the Earth is flat. Every one of them risks social humiliation, job laws and dateless nights. I don't believe them either. gfm7175 wrote:There are numerous statistical improbabilities, inconsistencies, and even impossibilities Why not put one up for debate? It really only takes one. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: though not a single judge in a single court room sees it the way you do. LIE. OK who? What court? What case? gfm7175 wrote:showing that election fraud "did not occur" (such as signature verification and voting machine audits) directly into the spotlight if they had absolutely nothing to hide. A judge can compel discovery you know. Are you talking about things a Judge can and would do? gfm7175 wrote: I have already explained to you, countless times even, the mathematics behind why the temperature of my house remains an unknown value. Measuring the temperature of a single location point is different than measuring the temperature of a volume. No you've actually never been willing to discuss it. Do you believe that a thermometer measures the precise temperature of a single molecule? Is it more than one molecule? If so guess what? That's a volume. Anything can be determined to be within a rage at some probability. It is beyond a 99% confidence level that the air inside your house is between 0 and 100 degrees for example. It's your desire and commitment to run from this discussion that is a the heart of the NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN mantra Team Denial has here. If you're will to get into it great let's start a thread. IBdaMann wrote:Are any of the affidavits even disputed? Which affidavits or witness testimony... Yes. Melissa Carone claimed (not sure what it could have been based on) that the voting books were off by a 100,000 votes and she was directly contradicted by the Republican legislator. Because she's full of it. Can we maybe find someone that doesn't produce a mug shot on the first google search? "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN
22-12-2020 02:45
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote:...tmiddles...keeps asking people "how do you KNOW..." with regard to the most basic things... It is the most fundamental question on this board. Now "the most basic things" would apparently be massive election fraud, though not a single judge in a single court room sees it the way you do. And gfm7175 wrote: I have no clue what the temperature of my house is. IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote: No one can know the temperature of Denver. He's absolutely correct.... So GFM is certain, KNOWS!!!, that massive election fraud was committed. Cannot supply any evidence to support that position. Yet has no clue what the temperature in his house is.... Or was the 8 and half hour video you gave clues to the existence of represent your evidence? So how do you KNOW that felons, disbarred attorneys, and convicted sex offenders are telling the truth while Judges are liars? Or that NASA is a liar. Or the Russian space program in the 1970s, liars! HarveyH55 wrote: Mostly, I just watch the local news, ...Try to ...find one, ...the original source. ...just get the facts, and make up my own mind... Getting to the source is something I've come to appreciate more in recent years. Social media, more than main stream media, tend to warp what you hear the story is. But how about this Harvey: How do you determine if someone is lying. When the information is second hand and someone says they measured, says they saw/heard/did. How do you figure out if you are going to trust that information? As I said I look at two things in this order: 1- Do they have a motive to lie 2- Are they credible (which means everything from not being a convicted felon to having real knowledge and competence in the area). "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN Motive, credibility? No way of knowing these things, with people you've never met, or associated with. You only get to go, with what they show. Most convicted felons, didn't get caught on their first offense, nor charged with a fraction of the crimes they committed. Getting caught, and convicted, are two very different things... Many avoid justice, for a very long time. Sex offenders, aren't usually random stranger, snatching kids or women off the streets. The victims, almost always knew their attacker, someone they trusted... A scam, involves faith and trust, into the people ripping you off. You believe they are honest, and have no motive to deceive you. Their motive, is to get rich, off your stupidity. Scams don't always have to involve money.
22-12-2020 02:49
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	tgoebbles wrote: I was asking what your process is. Stupid question. What is your "process" for distinguishing between two people? tgoebbles wrote: 1- Do they have incentive/motive to lie ... and have signed legal documents that will send them to jail if they are lying? You don't cite a single person who has signed a legal affidavit ... just as you don't dispute any witness testimony. tgoebbles wrote: 2- Who are they? Are they trustworthy and competent on what they are dealing with. Every one of the thousands of affidavits was signed by an eye witness. None of the people you cite have signed affidavits because they either aren't eye witnesses or they don't want to go to jail for lying. It seems that this discussion has reached its conclusion since you still don't dispute any evidence or testimony of the massive election fraud. Your denial does not constitute any sort of refutation of anything. We're done. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
22-12-2020 03:13
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	HarveyH55 wrote: Motive, credibility? No way of knowing these things, with people you've never met, or associated with. Ok the commitment to NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN already was out of hand but yes Harvey, you can. When someone is a convicted felon or an attorney who has been disbarred for unethical conduct you can know something about their credibility. Also motive is actually useful when someone's testimony is counter to their motives. Like a Democrat saying they saw election fraud or a Republican saying they didn't. People just saying they saw stuff, without having corroborating evidence, isn't worth much. Especially in the era of cameras everywhere. But again... don't you trust a Trump appointed Judge to get this right? IBdaMann wrote: What is your "process" for distinguishing between two people? I realize you have a hard rule on this board: never answer a question only ask them. It's pathetic. If the testimony of two people is in conflict I would distinguish them based on motive and credibility. You do it based on what Trump tweets you should. IBdaMann wrote:...and have signed legal documents that will send them to jail if they are lying? Do the math on convicted felons taking that gamble when no one can prove they didn't see something. but again random ex-cons claiming they saw stuff isn't worth spit. IBdaMann wrote:...you still don't dispute any evidence You haven't presented any. I went and found some and it's well disputed. I went with Giuliani's first choices.
22-12-2020 03:22
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: gfm7175 wrote:There are hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of corroborating sworn affidavits ... One might even say "thousands." gfm7175 wrote: Are these hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of people lying about what they personally witnessed?? Are any of the affidavits even disputed? Which affidavits or witness testimony is tgoebbles claiming to dispute? We should start there. gfm7175 wrote: There is video evidence of such election fraud occurring in Georgia. ... but you're trying to use the word "suitcases." That negates everything forthwith testified in the affidavits and gets the video discarded from the discussion. gfm7175 wrote: You, like any good Demokkkrat, choose to deny deny deny. Right. We should start with which witness testimony he is disputing. tgoebbles wrote:though not a single judge in a single court room sees it the way you do. Well, there you have it. Since tgoebbles speaks for our entire legal system, it would seem that you have no argument that holds water. You should have conferred with tgoebbles before going off half-cocked with your baseless "conspiracy theory" for which you have "no evidence." gfm7175 wrote:Measuring the temperature of a single location point is different than measuring the temperature of a volume. Aaaahhh, tgoebbles got you. You lose. tgoebbles' objective was to yank you off the election topic so he won't have to defend his denial and explain what testimony he is disputing. You fell for it. The math has been explained to him dozens of times from multiple angles. It's his "go-to" red herring when he doesn't like how the science falsifies his WACKY religious dogma ... and now when he doesn't like how witness testimony interferes with his suspension of disbelief in the narrative that Biden won the election. You should fire back and put this train back on the rails. Trump won the election in a landslide. Leftists committed massive election fraud. .
22-12-2020 03:40
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14407)	tgoebbles wrote:Ok the commitment to NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN already was out of hand As far as I can tell, you are the only one who has made that claim ... after claiming omniscience. tmiddles wrote: When someone is a convicted felon ... you can know something about their credibility. Explain. 1. Are you a convicted felon? 2. I know convicted felons who are far more credible than you are. I'm eager to read your logical proof as to why you are less credible than convicted felons. tgoebbles wrote: Also motive is actually useful when someone's testimony is counter to their motives. Which eyewitness testimony runs counter to his motives? What sworn testimony are you disputing and with what? tgoebbles wrote:But again... don't you trust a Trump appointed Judge to get this right? Judge? Are you back to the courts again? Yes, you are incorrigibly dishonest. The correct question is whether we trust the State legislatures to get it right. tgoebbles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: What is your "process" for distinguishing between two people? I realize you have a hard rule on this board: never answer a question only ask them. It's pathetic. I realize you have a hard rule on this board: never answer a question only ask them. It's pathetic. I'm trying to answer your very stupid question. Help me answer your very stupid question or at least help me help you understand why your question is very stupid. Answer my question so I can answer yours: What is your "process" for distinguishing between two people? If you would rather not belabor just how stupid you really are, just admit that you don't fully grasp this whole "thinking" thing. Otherwise, answer my question. However, I am elated that you decided to "go there" about your hard rule of not answering those questions you beg when you back yourself into a corner. Perhaps you want to rethink your hard rule and answer those questions: 1) What are the unambiguous definitions of Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhouse Effect that neither violate nor deny physics? [Status: Unanswered] 2) Why should any rational adult believe in either Global Warming, Climate Change or Greenhouse Effect? [Status: Unanswered] 3) How can I unambiguously demonstrate to my children thermal energy flowing from cooler to warmer? [Status: Unanswered] 4) How can I know the temperature of a large, unspecified volume, e.g. Denver, to within, say, 10degF with only one temperature measurement, e.g. the Denver airport? [Status: Unanswered] 5) What are the unambiguous definitions of "race," "negro," "black people," "white people," "brown people," "white supremacy," "white nationalsim," "white nationalist," "white supremacist," "black supremacist" and "racist"? [Status: Unanswered] 6) Is there an official list of races? [Status: Unanswered] - 6a) How do I determine my own race or that of my children? [Status: Unanswered] 7) Why should any rational adult believe that there is a problem of racism in the United States? [Status: Unanswered] 8) Why should law abiding citizens be rendered defenseless before rampant violent crime? [Status: Unanswered] 9) Where in the 1st Amendment is "hate" prohibited such that, if shown, a prosecutor can throw someone in jail for having had that emotion/thought? [Status: Unanswered] 10) Why do you claim that an atmosphere only makes a planet's or moon's solid surface hotter since you are fully aware that no place at the bottom of earth's atmosphere ever reaches anywhere close to the daytime temperatures of the moon's atmosphereless solid surface? [Status: Unanswered] 11) If we were to discover that Lisa Gherardini was actually a shitty person, would that justify Black Lives Matter storming the Louvre to destroy the Mona Lisa? [Status: Unanswered] 12) Why should we destroy artifacts and relics pertaining to history that we never want to forget or repeat? [Status: Unanswered] 13) The Aztecs committed genocide of many other tribes and practiced human sacrifice; should their artwork and artifacts be destroyed? [Status: Unanswered] 14) Why would you or anyone pretend to be a judge of what history is to be revised or destroyed? [Status: Unanswered] 15) In what substantive/meaningful way do the platforms of Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, The National Organization of Women, the DNC, Communist Party USA and Socialist Party USA ... differ? [Status: Unanswered] 16) Which type of wood are you claiming melts (assuming the proper temperature and pressure) ... and what is that specific temperature and pressure? [Status: Unanswered] tgoebbles wrote:If the testimony of two people is in conflict I would distinguish them based on motive and credibility. ... whereas honest adults refer to overwhelming evidence when it is available and DON'T deny its existence. tgoebbles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...and have signed legal documents that will send them to jail if they are lying? Do the math on convicted felons taking that gamble when no one can prove they didn't see something. OK, I'll do the math. Two out of the several thousand+ sworn affidavits were signed by convicted felons as far as I can tell. So, focusing only on their testimony, what do you dispute? You continue to reinforce your refusal to dispute any aspect of the election fraud. Let me know when something changes. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
22-12-2020 04:22
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: tgoebbles wrote:But again... don't you trust a Trump appointed Judge to get this right? Judge? Are you back to the courts again? Yes, you are incorrigibly dishonest....answer... Aztecs committed genocide ... your refusal to dispute any aspect of the election fraud. .... that about sums it up. You are consistent IBD.

Page 2 of 3

Join the debate Coronavirus testing:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Back-testing the climate model(s)	11	07-08-2023 05:09
Coronavirus & China	0	24-03-2020 14:37
Can UV light affect Coronavirus?	2	16-03-2020 12:43