There's something fishy going on in the International Space Station

Go back and look at post #30. I didn't mention the footage having been sped up. Just tell us what the force is that makes it flutter.

 

I don't care whether you mentioned it or not! In the past you have mentioned it numerous times and have failed to identify by what factor. During the flag waving sections which are consistently at the same speed, the flag rotates with ZERO force impeding it. This is moronic to claim it is in water - a viscous medium with drag. Now by this very token it is irrefutable that either the WHOLE film is speeded up the same factor or it has not. When it is slowed down to 25%:-



The flag is STILL moving in ways that are impossible in water and the astronaut is now barely moving! The scientific method looks at all the evidence not the idiotic "look, the flag is fluttering" fragment!

HOW fast has it been sped up? Is it a secret? Are you saying this section hasn't been sped up but the one just prior where the flag pole is PUSHING a flat fabric is?

Scientific method? You? Meh!

 

You're tap dancing around my question. If the flag is not fluttering because it's being dragged through water, what is the force that's making it flutter? You still haven't addressed this.

 

I'm doing far less "tap dancing" than the cowardly evasion you are constantly doing. I've already answered this spammed bullshit in 2017!

YOU just quoted my post and completely ignored it. Try again:-

I don't care whether you mentioned it or not! In the past you have mentioned it numerous times and have failed to identify by what factor. During the flag waving sections which are consistently at the same speed, the flag rotates with ZERO force impeding it. This is moronic to claim it is in water - a viscous medium with drag. Now by this very token it is irrefutable that either the WHOLE film is speeded up the same factor or it has not. When it is slowed down to 25%:-



The flag is STILL moving in ways that are impossible in water and the astronaut is now barely moving! The scientific method looks at all the evidence not the idiotic "look, the flag is fluttering" fragment!

HOW fast has it been sped up? Is it a secret?
Are you saying this section hasn't been sped up but the one just prior where the flag pole is PUSHING a flat fabric is?

I'm still waiting for you to address this:-

Show your scientific methodology as to why it is an anomaly! Your opinion is less than most and not even close to scientific.

I guarantee (and this is now proven from your failure to do so!) you won't answer the stuff below because you are once again getting your butt kicked.

Stop tap dancing around the issue and address these - they definitely have you checkmated:

1. Are you saying that you have never claimed the footage has been slowed down? How much slower should the footage be running at - ie. 30% 50% - define it?

2. The other "anomalies" have gone away with simple observational evidence, your lack of response to this fundamental question is most telling. You are checkmated. The objects fly in a whole myriad of directions and you simply cannot explain why.

3. The guy who made your main film:-

Says your stupid "bubble" changes direction! (I dare you to dispute this.)
911 was not an inside job
The Moon landing was not hoaxed.

This is where you make the absurd claim that he was "got at" when there are dozens of people still making idiotic films and claims on these subjects with far more views! Your witness disagrees with you, just like Chomsky.

4. THERE is your real credibility test.



That looks NOTHING like a bubble and EVERYTHING like a flat jagged piece of rotating ice. A bubble in areas where people are breathing is almost impossible to be a singular item. It rises vertically and doesn't change size by 400% in a short span of ascent. It isn't jagged, doesn't rotate and isn't white and flat!

5. I laugh at your statement - it is ridiculous.

Your "bubble" goes "straight up" / A piece of debris would "go straight". - Explain to me how these two are different!

 

An objective truth-seeker who believed there was a force different from it's being dragged through water causing the fluttering would simple explain what he thought the force was. You're obviously not an objective truth-seeker. If you explained this in 2017, please link to the post. All the viewers are watching and judging.

 

You are neither.

There isn't and it didn't "flutter". I don't believe it, I know it.

I know what the force was and I have already told you 4 years ago.

An objective person would listen to all evidence. You avoid anything that contradicts your pathetic batshit theories. A truth seeker looks for the truth. You spam the crap out of the internet and NEVER budge one iota on anything you post. You are neither.

Find it yourself spammer. Link here.

Yes - you. They have adjudged you to be a person incapable of honest debate. The irony that this was answered 4 years ago, you don't even remember doing it so many times here, or that you are still spewing out the same horseshit - truly pathetic.


Now spammer - time to answer the things that have NOT been answered by you:-

This post, quoted and ignored:
YOU just quoted my post and completely ignored it. Try again:-

I don't care whether you mentioned it or not! In the past you have mentioned it numerous times and have failed to identify by what factor. During the flag waving sections which are consistently at the same speed, the flag rotates with ZERO force impeding it. This is moronic to claim it is in water - a viscous medium with drag. Now by this very token it is irrefutable that either the WHOLE film is speeded up the same factor or it has not. When it is slowed down to 25%:-



The flag is STILL moving in ways that are impossible in water and the astronaut is now barely moving! The scientific method looks at all the evidence not the idiotic "look, the flag is fluttering" fragment!

HOW fast has it been sped up?
Are you saying this section hasn't been sped up but the one just prior where the flag pole is PUSHING a flat fabric is?

I'm still waiting for you to address this:-

Show your scientific methodology as to why it is an anomaly! Your opinion is less than most and not even close to scientific.

I guarantee (and this is now proven from your failure to do so!) you won't answer the stuff below because you are once again getting your butt kicked.

Stop tap dancing around the issue and address these - they definitely have you checkmated:

1. Are you saying that you have never claimed the footage has been slowed down? How much slower should the footage be running at - ie. 30% 50% - define it?

2. The other "anomalies" have gone away with simple observational evidence, your lack of response to this fundamental question is most telling. You are checkmated. The objects fly in a whole myriad of directions and you simply cannot explain why.

3. The guy who made your main film:-

Says your stupid "bubble" changes direction! (I dare you to dispute this.)
911 was not an inside job
The Moon landing was not hoaxed.

This is where you make the absurd claim that he was "got at" when there are dozens of people still making idiotic films and claims on these subjects with far more views! Your witness disagrees with you, just like Chomsky.

4. THERE is your real credibility test.



That looks NOTHING like a bubble and EVERYTHING like a flat jagged piece of rotating ice. A bubble in areas where people are breathing is almost impossible to be a singular item. It rises vertically and doesn't change size by 400% in a short span of ascent. It isn't jagged, doesn't rotate and isn't white and flat!

5. I laugh at your statement - it is ridiculous.

Your "bubble" goes "straight up" / A piece of debris would "go straight". - Explain to me how these two are different!

 

Translation:
It's so clear that the flag is being dragged through water that I'll just end up looking silly if I try to obfuscate this anomaly so I'd better avoid addressing it.

This is the point at which you'd be considered the loser in a formal debate. If it's clear that the flag is being pulled through water, all the other points are moot. It seems to be clear that the flag is being pulled through water so this debate is essentially over and you lose. Your behavior is that of a checkmated sophist*.

I'll post the link to the video again.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...l-space-station.585456/page-2#post-1072478581

Some other points you've made are addressed in that post (#30).


*
https://www.clubconspiracy.com/counter-intellegience-tricks-and-techniques-t4702.html

 

None needed.

Addressed 4 years ago and if you were even remotely smart enough you could see that through the occasional reference in the last few posts I've addressed it here.

Oh really. You want to have a formal debate with me do you?

The flag is being pulled through vacuum. It takes the visual acuity of a blind man not to understand how water affects fabric. For anyone to suggest that anything like what we see is trailed through water with no billowing, shimmering and no resistance is evidence of profound delusion.

It is clear it is in a vacuum, your useless layman opinion is meaningless. I'm glad my response are frustrating you, it may give you an inkling of what it is like having you evade and offer ridiculous replies.

Speaking of checkmated - when can we expect anything like an honest reply to the eight points raised already?

Now: time to answer the things that have NOT been answered by you:-

This post, quoted and ignored:
I don't care whether you mentioned it or not! In the past you have mentioned it numerous times and have failed to identify by what factor. During the flag waving sections which are consistently at the same speed, the flag rotates with ZERO force impeding it. This is moronic to claim it is in water - a viscous medium with drag. Now by this very token it is irrefutable that either the WHOLE film is speeded up the same factor or it has not. When it is slowed down to 25%:-

Watch the video:



The flag is STILL moving in ways that are impossible in water and the astronaut is now barely moving! The scientific method looks at all the evidence not the idiotic "look, the flag is fluttering" fragment!

1. HOW fast has it been sped up?
2. Are you saying this section hasn't been sped up but the one just prior where the flag pole is PUSHING a flat fabric is?

I'm still waiting for you to address this:-

3. Show your scientific methodology as to why it is an anomaly! Your opinion is less than most and not even close to scientific.

I guarantee (and this is now proven from your failure to do so!) you won't answer the stuff below because you are once again getting your butt kicked.

4. Are you saying that you have never claimed the footage has been slowed down?

5. The other "anomalies" have gone away with simple observational evidence, your lack of response to this fundamental question is most telling. You are checkmated. The objects fly in a whole myriad of directions. Explain this with a valid and workable reason.

6. The guy who made your main film:-

Says your stupid "bubble" changes direction! (I dare you to dispute this.)
911 was not an inside job
The Moon landing was not hoaxed.

This is where you make the absurd claim that he was "got at" when there are dozens of people still making idiotic films and claims on these subjects with far more views! Your witness disagrees with you, just like Chomsky.

7. THERE is your real credibility test.



That looks NOTHING like a bubble and EVERYTHING like a flat jagged piece of rotating ice. A bubble in areas where people are breathing is almost impossible to be a singular item. It rises vertically and doesn't change size by 400% in a short span of ascent. It isn't jagged, doesn't rotate and isn't white and flat!

8. I laugh at your statement - it is ridiculous.

Your "bubble" goes "straight up" / A piece of debris would "go straight". - Explain to me how these two are different!

 

It is very clear that the flag is in a vacuum and is not in water. everyone knows this just by looking at it and no one thinks it is in water. It is not in water.

At no point would you win in a dformal debate you would have been laughed out of it years ago.

You are the checkmated sophist and you know it.

 

This does not explain the force that makes it flutter. If you maintain that the flag being pulled through water is not what makes it flutter, please explain the force that makes it flutter. Saying what you think it isn't isn't enough.

This one anomaly shows that they were in water and the case is closed. If you disagree, explain the force that makes the flag flutter when it's pulled from right to left (see post #30).

 

It doesn't flutter. For anyone to suggest that anything like what we see is trailed through water with no billowing, shimmering and no resistance is evidence of profound delusion.

Ignoring all my 8 points over and over again is not enough. But that's what you do isn't it. Evade, divert, obfuscate, spam and ultimately run away.

It isn't an anomaly.

It doesn't flutter. For anyone to suggest that anything like what we see is trailed through water with no billowing, shimmering and no resistance is evidence of profound delusion.

Speaking of checkmated - when can we expect anything like an honest reply to the eight points raised already?

Now: time to answer the things that have NOT been answered by you:-

This post, quoted and ignored:
I don't care whether you mentioned it or not! In the past you have mentioned it numerous times and have failed to identify by what factor. During the flag waving sections which are consistently at the same speed, the flag rotates with ZERO force impeding it. This is moronic to claim it is in water - a viscous medium with drag. Now by this very token it is irrefutable that either the WHOLE film is speeded up the same factor or it has not. When it is slowed down to 25%:-

Watch the video:



The flag is STILL moving in ways that are impossible in water and the astronaut is now barely moving! The scientific method looks at all the evidence not the idiotic "look, the flag is fluttering" fragment!

1. HOW fast has it been sped up?
2. Are you saying this section hasn't been sped up but the one just prior where the flag pole is PUSHING a flat fabric is?

I'm still waiting for you to address this:-

3. Show your scientific methodology as to why it is an anomaly! Your opinion is less than most and not even close to scientific.

I guarantee (and this is now proven from your failure to do so!) you won't answer the stuff below because you are once again getting your butt kicked.

4. Are you saying that you have never claimed the footage has been slowed down?

5. The other "anomalies" have gone away with simple observational evidence, your lack of response to this fundamental question is most telling. You are checkmated. The objects fly in a whole myriad of directions. Explain this with a valid and workable reason.

6. The guy who made your main film:-

Says your stupid "bubble" changes direction! (I dare you to dispute this.)
911 was not an inside job
The Moon landing was not hoaxed.

This is where you make the absurd claim that he was "got at" when there are dozens of people still making idiotic films and claims on these subjects with far more views! Your witness disagrees with you, just like Chomsky.

7. THERE is your real credibility test.



That looks NOTHING like a bubble and EVERYTHING like a flat jagged piece of rotating ice. A bubble in areas where people are breathing is almost impossible to be a singular item. It rises vertically and doesn't change size by 400% in a short span of ascent. It isn't jagged, doesn't rotate and isn't white and flat!

8. I laugh at your statement - it is ridiculous.

Your "bubble" goes "straight up" / A piece of debris would "go straight". - Explain to me how these two are different!

 

Anyone who looks at the video will see that it flutters (post #30). You're really getting desperate if you're going to start denying the obvious.

 

You are not the spokesperson for anyone. Fabric doesn't "flutter" in water, there is too much drag - it billows slowly and with light and currents it cannot possibly NOT shimmer - the absence of which proves it is not in water.

Are you now claiming that all that motion of the flag in that short sequence is running at normal speed?

 

I referred to the movement of the flag as fluttering but we can call it whatever you want. You still haven't explained the force you think is causing the flag to move if you think it's not caused by its being dragged through water. If you're sure it's not in water, there must be another force making it move. What do you think it is?

I don't know the speed but that's not relevant here. I never mentioned speed (post #30).

 

You are tghe only one who sees it.

Like all gthe so called evidence you post you simplhy spin and lie about what it shows.

 

Flapping. In a vacuum. Unrestricted with zero drag.

Yes I have.

His hand is moving it. I am simply staggered at how brainless you are being with this. We have a man in space holding a flag with stiffened fabric, so it keeps its rectangular shape, but not so stiffened that it's able to fully fold around itself. He is waving it back and forth ridiculously fast for it being in water.

THIS is why I asked you how fast it had been speeded up! It isn't moot! It is vital to the whole claim.

I made this statement: "Flags do not rotate like that in water" and a direct quote from you:

When I pointed out that this was ridiculous at 25% with still occasional fast flicks of the flag, you responded with this:

So, that brings us back to now and you are clearly either not recalling your previous horseshit or are lying.

You most certainly DID mention speed and I just proved it!

Now, since I have supplied you with a video of it at 25% and it STILL looks odd, how in any world of batshit can you claim that obviously consistent motion has varied speed? You are cornered. You know it and have always known it.

 

It sure took you a long time to answer.
The force making it move is not coming from the rod. The end of the flag is moving. If it were coming from the hand making the rod move, the movement would start with the rod and move toward the edge of the flag. The movement starts at the edge of the flag. It's also consistent with movement in a medium.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...l-space-station.585456/page-2#post-1072481642

Your explanation is wrong.

That can be explained by changing the playback speed.

That's a different issue. If we are trying to determine whether the force making the flag flap is its being dragged through water or is coming from his hand movement, the playback speed isn't as significant a factor as you're making it out to be.

When I said that years ago, we were talking about the movement of the flag that starts at the 1:00 time mark of the video. You seem to be trying to muddy the waters to confuse the viewers. When I asked you to explain the movement of the flag at the 00:30 time mark, I didn't mention playback speed.

 

Long debunked.

The movement was caused by inertia from the astronauts hand on the rod and is not consisgtent with being in water.

 

I answered it 4 years ago!!

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-ever-happened.512081/page-17#post-1068120514

It doesn't flutter like it would in water. Fabric doesn't flutter in water, it is affected by immense drag. Any movement on the flag is from direct contact of his hand. There is not any chance whatsoever that a flag could behave like that in a liquid. You seem to have a ludicrously inflated value of your ignorant opinion.

This is insanity. The flag is connected to a pole. He is holding the pole and dragging it back and forth. There is NO drag, NO shimmering, NO billowing.

All of the damn flag is moving!

Gibberish. The whole flag moves and it is connected to the pole.

Whatever crap you are seeing and saying, nobody else is seeing this.

Utter bullshit. There is NO drag, NO shimmering, NO billowing. In water even your own video shows how slowly fabric moves. There is no rippling whatsoever and many times in the footage his hand pushes the flag side on. It is moronic in the extreme to suggest a drag inducing medium would not impede such a thing.

The footage where the camera switches from opposite views runs at the same speed! He moves the flag in exactly the same way from both views. So THIS is why you are afraid to give your answer for the playback speed. If you claim one piece is altered it ALL must be altered because it is blatantly obvious the same motion throughout.

How is it!?

"We" aren't determining anything. His hand is dragging a flag by the pole in a vacuum without any resistance whatsoever. This isn't even open for discussion, your claim is just the most bizarre head in the sand comedy.

Translation: I can't give a playback speed because it MUST be slower than 25% which already looks absurd!

The two sequences are identical in the speed and motion by which the astronaut is moving the flagpole. You are cornered and know it. Are you seriously suggesting that one piece runs differently to the other - you really are making yourself look even more absurd now. Must I make a side by side gif to prove this?

I love your pathetic opening statement! "It sure took you a long time to answer." You have evaded 8 separate points raised for coming up for 10 times asked.

Now: time to answer the things that have NOT been answered by you:-

This post, quoted and ignored:
I don't care whether you mentioned it or not! In the past you have mentioned it numerous times and have failed to identify by what factor. During the flag waving sections which are consistently at the same speed, the flag rotates with ZERO force impeding it. This is moronic to claim it is in water - a viscous medium with drag. Now by this very token it is irrefutable that either the WHOLE film is speeded up the same factor or it has not. When it is slowed down to 25%:-

Watch the video:



The flag is STILL moving in ways that are impossible in water and the astronaut is now barely moving! The scientific method looks at all the evidence not the idiotic "look, the flag is fluttering" fragment!

1. HOW fast has it been sped up?
2. Are you saying this section hasn't been sped up but the one just prior where the flag pole is PUSHING a flat fabric is?

I'm still waiting for you to address this:-

3. Show your scientific methodology as to why it is an anomaly! Your opinion is less than most and not even close to scientific.

I guarantee (and this is now proven from your failure to do so!) you won't answer the stuff below because you are once again getting your butt kicked.

4. Are you saying that you have never claimed the footage has been slowed down?

5. The other "anomalies" have gone away with simple observational evidence, your lack of response to this fundamental question is most telling. You are checkmated. The objects fly in a whole myriad of directions. Explain this with a valid and workable reason.

6. The guy who made your main film:-

Says your stupid "bubble" changes direction! (I dare you to dispute this.)
911 was not an inside job
The Moon landing was not hoaxed.

This is where you make the absurd claim that he was "got at" when there are dozens of people still making idiotic films and claims on these subjects with far more views! Your witness disagrees with you, just like Chomsky.

7. THERE is your real credibility test.



That looks NOTHING like a bubble and EVERYTHING like a flat jagged piece of rotating ice. A bubble in areas where people are breathing is almost impossible to be a singular item. It rises vertically and doesn't change size by 400% in a short span of ascent. It isn't jagged, doesn't rotate and isn't white and flat!

8. I laugh at your statement - it is ridiculous.

Your "bubble" goes "straight up" / A piece of debris would "go straight". - Explain to me how these two are different!

 

THIS is how crazy Scott is behaving:

This is the sequence he claims shows "fluttering" . Now instead of going to the "nothing odd to see" 30 seconds point, go to the 24 seconds point and watch as he pushes a flat fabric with a pole and supposedly in water!



THAT is impossible in water. Totally and irrefutably impossible. The fabric would simply bend backwards from drag. It doesn't. It moves dead straight - vacuum - 100%

 

Here at the 24 seconds point - watch as he pushes a flat fabric with a pole and supposedly in water!



THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE IN WATER

 

The bubble could be a glare. The hair is fine. If you look at their dog tag it is floating. They keep you focused on the hair to distract you from everything else that would disprove their claims that this was a hoax and filmed in water.

 

That scene could be created if somebody wanted to create it. The flag material could be slightly buoyant and the flag could be raises slowly. The playback speed could be increased to make it look faster than it really is.

When I said it slowed down years ago, I was referring to what happens starting at the 00:32 time mark of the video. I wasn't referring to the fluttering.


The bubble hugs his visor and then goes up the way a bubble would. If it were a piece of debris, it would have followed its original trajectory.

Proof China Faked Their Spacewalk (Part 2)

(3:00 time mark)

 

The game is up spammer. And you know it. You can't possibly believe that total crock. It's one continuous sequence that has complete continuity of motion. Your moronic claim of variable speed doesn't work. The magic buoyant flag??? Get out of it! There are other instances where it goes sideways!

There is no fluttering. All movement is from his hand. Now you've resorted to making up ridiculous claims that you obviously do not believe.

Insane. It isn't a bubble. It is flat, white and rotating. It gains 400% in size during its visibility

Bullshit. It follows a diagonal trajectory just like pieces of paper and other random objects!

 

Those are all pretty lame explanations.

You also destroyed your credibility with your lame explanations for the buoyant safety cables.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/man-has-landed-on-the-moon-july-20-1969-sir-ques
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...issions-were-faked-in-a-studio.190138/page-22