Originally posted by sonhouse
"We" have established that. In your flaccid dreams. You have no valid arguments. I am through talking about all this, go back to your fantasy world, hold your head deeply in your ass and live in darkness the rest of your days.
You have an interesting (and predictable) pattern: insult, introduce irrelevant and wholly theoretical topics, and then when the conversation turns to specific nuts and bolts which can be verified by anyone... you abandon ship!
For instance, despite your admiration for the agency, you've never once defended their reputation when challenged on the topic of their exclusive use of altered images of the earth--- never unretouched
photographs, always
images.
To defend them, you needed only provide a single unaltered photograph, and yet, nearly two years later, you've not even tried a single time.
I let this one go, but you couldn't explain how that commemorative football got on board, either.
For that one, you feigned confusion, threw in some bluster and I eventually let you off the hook, but it still stands as yet another internally contradictory instance of NASA's fakery.
And even here, the constant and verifiable visibility of distant objects, is a topic which can immediately be tested, proved, retested, verified and in all aspects of any scientific method one wishes to use, falsified, you opt to sidestep and walk away.
We both know you will be back at the topic at some point in the very near future, just as we both know you will again follow the same pattern when you do:
• insult
• introduce irrelevant and theoretical topics
ignore salient challenges
• abandon ship
• rinse
• repeat
I wouldn't presume to offer advice, but my suggestion is to address the challenges I've put before you as though you really wanted to disprove my claims, instead of making counter claims which we both know have failed as a substitute for anything resembling "victory" except in the popularity contest.