|
Out of 6866 people who responded, so far, to this question, in an in on line poll, 91% said yes we are.
|
Polland ?
Mind you depends what you mean by pandering ? If you mean that anyone is allowed to follow the religion of their choice (or indeed not) well that's fair enough. The French for instance are enforcing a no face covering law....should we do that ? After all Sikhs were allowed to ride around in Turbans - is that pandering...? Sounds like an emotively loaded choice of word to me.
|
|
Seems to me the question itself - meaningless as it stands (who are 'we'? What Muslims? Pandering how exactly?) - is a deliberate affront to 'Muslims'. But they are probably used to it by now.
|
|
So, where does one find such a deliberately inflammatory question designed to only attract those that will give the desired answer?
|
Maybe the question refers to the rent a mob situation when half wits of any group gather to shout and wave placards with inflamatory stupid slogans emblazoned...with an army of photographers ready to snap the less intelligent show offs of said group, fools come in all shades and believe in all or nothing at all, sheep ripe for steering by nasty twerps.
A media ready to stir the carp for various reasons, and non of it helped by an army of do gooder white mainly (undetermined religion or morals) liberal fools who have made lifelong careers of being offended for others and turning a blind eye for no good reason save career making for themselves instead of doing what was needed.
I've never had a Muslim complain to me about Christmas for instance so why did we have silly renaming situations caused by white non Muslim idiots making trouble where none existed.
For myself i've never ever had a moments problem with anyone resembling a stereotypical Muslim, indeed i recently had to work a lot with genuine Muslims, always been treated with respect and decency by them exactly as i treat them and anyone else, often had my hand shook which is more than can be said for the greeting one gets from many non Muslims.
If only some non Muslims could behave with such uncommon courtesy this country wouldn't be disappearing round the U bend quite so quickly as it is.
|
|
I've known a number of Muslims both male and female of many ethnicities, including ethnic Britons - I had a close working relationship with the local Iman and acquainted with others. Never had any negativity from them in any way. I totally agree with GB.
|
I can only speak from experience, but being born in West Yorkshire, and spending the first 45 years of my life in two industrial towns, then I think we do. I have good friends who are Muslims, Hindus & Sikhs so am not racist, but certain people get away with far more than others.
I also have several friends in the police force who just turn a blind eye to motoring offences. The paperwork is just not worth the time, which is 'better spent elsewhere'. Probably not what you want to hear, but be that as it may.
|
I've got Muslim friends and have met lots of Muslims and been in some of their countries and regions. Quite a few have given me gyp and behaved like carphounds.
Not, of course, because they are Muslims. Just because they are people and some people are a pain. There's also a tendency for believers to attribute some view or habit to their religion - Muslim, Christian or other - when in reality it's just some local bit of backwoods culture grafted on, or forced down their throats by some frightful barmy cleric. Nothing's flawless of course but mainstream Islam is pretty clean, as clean as any other mediaeval superstition.
|
|
IF the question needs asking it is a bit hard to find a way of phrasing it, don't you think?
|
The word 'pander' is one where emotive interpretations are attached. So it's a bad word for a survey as what one person takes from the word, is not what another would.
The meaning from the Cambridge Online Dictionary is:
to do or provide exactly what a person or group wants, especially when it is not acceptable, reasonable, or approved of, usually in order to get some personal advantage:
The bit I've underlined is absent from some peoples' views, whereas for others it forms a major part of the understanding of the word.
And for a giggle, look the word up on dictionary.reference.com Quite a different meaning in American English.
Actually I suspect both appear in the full Oxford English dictionary, but the American meaning is not used often in English English and may be we what we consider, archaic.
Last edited by: Slidingpillar on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 09:17
|
"The word 'pander' is one where emotive interpretations are attached"
I see them in black and white.
(or is that a a different pander?)
|
In my opinion (fwiw) most Ethnic groups, not just Muslims "seem" to get away with "more" or "seem" to get their own way more than White Christians do in this Country. I think it's the fear of the "Authorities" being branded not exactly Racist, but unfair and harsher on them, that makes them err slightly on the side of caution and allow them more leeway.
I wouldn't think Islamic Authorities would allow the building of Catholic Churches on the same scale as our Authorities have allowed Mosques, or tolerate the ringing of Church-bells on a Christian Sabbath or religious festival, let alone broadcast them on National T.V.
|
|
Muslims are not an ethnic group, they are a religious group. I know white British Muslims....
|
Not Splitting hairs R.P, but I had to Classify them as something, as Muslims "originate originally" from distant shores.
P.S
eth·nic
[eth-nik] Show IPA
adjective
1.
pertaining to or characteristic of a people, especially a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like.
2.being a member of an ethnic group, especially of a group that is a minority within a larger society:
|
|
Does that make Christians and Trekkies an ethnic group then ? :-)
|
|
Christians in other Countries, probably! Trekkies, everywhere, Certainly! Christians, "Whites" in this Country, almost Certainly eventually.
|
>> Not Splitting hairs R.P, but I had to Classify them as something, as Muslims "originate
>> originally" from distant shores.
you originate originally from distant shores.
|
|
Muslims of any colour or origin get wAAAy more acceptance and tolerance than Christians get in Sordid Arabia. For example and bearing in mind an embassy is deemed to be the territory of its country - " Christian religious services in the American Embassy were terminated at the Saudi government's request." Plural and bouncing!
|
>> Muslims of any colour or origin get wAAAy more acceptance and tolerance than Christians get
>> in Sordid Arabia.
Thank God for that.
|
|
Exactly. That's the difference between a tolerant, liberal democracy and a dictatorship.
|
|
Christianity originated in the middle east and is as much an imported religion as Islam. In fact Christianity is as English as Morris Dancing.
|
You are right, but in the context of this thread we weren't discussing the "origins" of Religion, but the different Groups of Races within this Country, and whether any were getting favourable/preferential treatment because of their "differences?".
Britain, being a basically Christian Country, appears to be more accepting and tolerant, on these grounds than an Islamic Country would be if the scenario was reversed.
So the answer to the original question is "YES".
|
>> Britain, being a basically Christian Country,
But its not, is it. Churches are closing, who gets christened these days? how many church marriages happen? how many marriages come to that?
This is turning into an agnostic country basically.
|
|
Yep! - I stand corrected - again ;-) - even i'm a Pagan!
|
|
Incorrect Z! - Me, Devonite, personally originate from here, my distant Ancestors certainly will have done - after all the only race that can claim otherwise are the Africans! - if you believe the hearsay that Africa was the Cradle of Mankind!
|
>> Incorrect Z! - Me, Devonite, personally originate from here, my distant Ancestors certainly will have
>> done - after all the only race that can claim otherwise are the Africans! -
>> if you believe the hearsay that Africa was the Cradle of Mankind!
I do, and thats where you came from. You were a black fella originally.
|
|
He wasn't but his great (to the power of 10ish) probably was.
|
|
he is related to Robert Mugabe!
|
|
How far do we want to go with this? His great to the power of 1000 would have been a shrew. And to the power of 3000 a jellyfish. And 5000...well it all starts to get a bit murkey.
|
|
the jellyfish is far enough back.
|
|
Ok. Well we're all brothers under the mesoglea then.
|
|
Jellyfish have rights as well...:-)
|
>>www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTl7K47pTcc
I am shocked that she has not been arrested and charged for racial hatred for pretending that those marchers are intolerant. It must have hurt their feelings!
:-)
|
Those marchers aren't Muslims really. They are noisy Islamist halfwits led by the egregious smart-aleck toerag Londoner Choudary.
Some of his followers may 'believe' in some of the noxious distorted twaddle he puts out, but if Choudary could be proved to believe in anything but Choudary I would be astonished. I wish the real believers would do something about these people.
|
|
So do they in my experience. The vast majority of Muslims are just like us - they just have anothe religion.
|
These days political correctness tends to cause ridiculous "erring on the side of caution". So if it is a subject where accusations of prejudice or discrimination are sometimes valid, then many panic that it might be valid anytime.
Where such a complaint would fail (abusing a WASP in a WASP environment for example) then nobody gives a crap and a non-WASP can be as abusive as they want. (or vice versa elswhere, of course).
In the face of an accusation or complaint of prejudice or discrimination there are times when "get a life" would be a valid response. People are too scared to call the complainer's bluff and tell them not to be so ridiculous.
So no, I wouldn't say we are pandering to Muslims particularly.
However, I would say we not only pander to *every* group, we also expect to be pandered to.
|
Speak for yourself FMR. I pander to no one and I don't expect to be pandered to.
Who is this 'we'?
|
" I pander to no one and I don't expect to be pandered to. "
Same here.
|
By "we" I mean as a society; which both of you are part of.
And what's your point? That you don't and so therefore it doesn't exist?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 16:13
|
Not really making a point, just excusing myself from being counted as part of a soft-minded, self-important PC collective. It may constitute an effective majority in this country, but I am not part of it. I might have been at one time, but I am more grown-up now.
Look, FMR, these are areas of bottomless complexity really. We could have a long timewasting discussion at the end of which our positions would turn out to be very similar. So let's not bother.
|
|
AC, it is 34 minutes before the sun is over the yard-arm, what else am I going to do?
|
|
Pour a very early, very large Gin.
|
>> Out of 6866 people who responded, so far, to this question, in an in on
>> line poll, 91% said yes we are.
Yeah, but (picking a couple of polls at random) only 43% of the British public believe that global warming is happening and is mostly caused by man, and 25% don't believe that man landed on the Moon.
So what do the British public know...(assuming that this is a British poll)...
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 17:09
|
Global warming was happening but it has slowed right down for the last 9 years. 25% of people may not have believed that man had landed on the moon in the 12 months after it happened but I think a lot more would give it credibility today and how do those who still don't, explain this and how the reflectors got to the moon if they weren't taken there?
On three of the Apollo landings, 11, 14 & 15, Laser Light Reflectors were left behind for experiments from observatories around the world. These were placed on the moon by hand and aligned with the earth in the sky. As the moon is in a captured rotation, the earth doesn't move in the moon's sky. Lasers are fired toward the three sites on the moon and a reflection is made back to the telescope every time.
|
>> On three of the Apollo landings, 11, 14 & 15, Laser Light Reflectors were left
>> behind for experiments from observatories around the world. These were placed on the moon by
>> hand and aligned with the earth in the sky. As the moon is in a
>> captured rotation, the earth doesn't move in the moon's sky. Lasers are fired toward the
>> three sites on the moon and a reflection is made back to the telescope every
>> time.
Have you seen them? pure fiction.
|
|
The astronauts never left earth orbit, any further out and they would have been barbequed by radiation.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 19:06
|
|
Thats why all the Space-Stations have been Earth-Side of the Van Allen Belts! as is Hubble! and also 40 odd years on there is still no Moon-base, - Alpha or otherwise!
|
>> 40 odd years on there is still no Moon-base, - Alpha or otherwise!
Moon landings, even robotic ones without human astronauts, are so phenomenally costly that no one has yet wanted to pay for a moon base. The space-capable superpowers, three so far, haven't yet got it together to cooperate and share the cost. Perhaps they will eventually.
I thought you just had to wear a tinfoil hat to protect yourself from cosmic rays. Hat and, er, thong perhaps...
|
How could I have seen them - get real! They seem to be the key to a number of experiments involving studies into the moon's orbit and they have found a Russian one there.
tinyurl.com/n5377a
|
>> Have you seen them? pure fiction.
>>
Humour him Zed......he's been eating cheese at bedtime again !
Ted
|
|
What one eats at bedtime has no connection with one's ability, or otherwise, to see small objects on the surface of the Moon!
|
>Lasers are fired toward the three sites on the moon and a reflection is made back to the telescope every time.
Many years ago it was suggested that mirrors on the moon could be used as a high capacity data storage medium. The idea was that you fired a laser modulated with your data at a mirror on the moon and then captured and retransmitted the reflection creating a continuous re-writeable data loop. In effect you had a disk drive with a single track half a million miles long.
|
|
If you get the chance Roger try Kloster Andechs unless I'm preaching to the converted.
|
> Gobhoblin....
Nurse?.. Nurse?!!!
|
|
I can't cope with her now. Get me a Beer.....
|
I remember an ingenious idea for a cable hanging down from the moon to a space station well within the earth's gravity, so relatively cheap to get to from down here. Once the cable - only 93,000 miles long I seem to remember - was in place all we would have to do would be climb up and down it, preferably in pressurised lifts. No need to carry fuel to get back or anything like that.
No doubt bean counters in the treasury put the kybosh on it. No imagination these people. Think of the tourism potential.
|
Are you a relative of popeye AC ?
You'd look like him after only 20 miles of your first expedition.
If you fail could my bailiff mates and I come round to collect some kit ? ;-)
Last edited by: gmac on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 22:11
|
>> Are you a relative of popeye
What on earth do you mean? Do you think I don't know that one needs a pressurised suit or vehicle to travel above atmosphere? Of course it wouldn't make the climbing - up a ladder or spiral staircase probably - any easier. There would need to be rest and recovery bubbles with hostesses at regular intervals. And the upside, or rather the downside, is that once you were within the gravitational field of the other body you would be able to just slide, at increasing speed, down the banisters so to speak.
The cable could be hollow too, pressurised breathable air all the way. Honestly you cats... no vision.
:o}
|
You'd need Lud's kind of money for that scheme...................now who on here would have that ?
Oh yes, I remember !
Ted
|
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator
Not sure about the calcs for the cable section though - Any thoughts AC?
|
>> Not sure about the calcs for the cable section
Not my sort of thing at all. N_C would decipher those equations in seconds no doubt. I like to think of myself as more of a big picture man, an animateur as the French say.
And I must say that sort of giant strimmer whipping round at planetary rotation speed looks a bit dangerous to me. I much prefer the cable hanging down, and no doubt rippling a bit, from the moon which orbits the earth at a much more stately speed.
Let us have a wager on which system will be constructed first. Shall we say a billion credits, or do you want to get serious?
|
"And I must say that sort of giant strimmer whipping round at planetary rotation speed looks a bit dangerous to me. "
It's all relative as they say. On the ground it will be stationary like Jack's beanpole reaching up into the sky. Might be a bit of a problem to incoming spacecraft but a few large warning signs should be sufficient. Those balls that they put on electricity cables for birds should do the trick
Actually I think and hope that something like this might eventually be built. Seems that it should be technically viable
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 3 Aug 13 at 09:09
|
|
I assume everything man made in space is going the same way? no need for traffic lights?
|
|
Technically, if this was to be built, travel time could also be greatly reduced, if the cable was anchored firmly at both ends. With there being no atmosphere to provide resistance it should be possible to Winch the Moon closer!! - same principle that a small Tug can move a massive liner!
|
>> resistance it should be possible to Winch the Moon closer!! - same principle that a
>> small Tug can move a massive liner!
Wouldnt that mean the earth moved, not the moon?
|
In that case if we waited till the Moon was in-line with the Sun, we could do away with Winter as well!
(This section of thread should go in the Silly thread now!! ;-))
|
>> The cable could be hollow too, pressurised breathable air all the way. Honestly you cats...
>> no vision.
>>
Man o'man o'man where's the revenue in that ?
No good you scuddin' through at 140mph and no revenue dude !
Gatso's every 0.5miles, got to be man !
Give me and the boys something to look forward to as Bailiffs ;-)
>> :o}
>>
|
>> If you get the chance Roger try Kloster Andechs unless I'm preaching to the converted.
That was the last one of just six brought back from a BFG posting by our returning family.
Over the time of their posting they have brought back the odd case or two,of various local brews, but this time their vehicles were full of household bits and bobs.
All WE can afford to buy in the UK is Carling :-(
(Or if I'm feeling flush, the odd Black Sheep Ale - ALDI here stock it at £1.49 a bottle)
|
|
Back to the topic - sort of - it seems from a good few reports that it is certain Muslims doing the pandering.
|
Back to the topic
Let's not
I think we've done muslims & immigration issues to death.
Space access so much more interesting.
|
|
Yeah quite right, no Muslims in space.
|
>> Space access so much more interesting.
Indeed. But to ensure trouble-free access to the greatest number, I post this warning that yesterday, in a distracted moment, I grossly understated the length of the cable between the moon and the earth-gravity space station as 93,000 miles. The true figure is a still-reasonable 240,000 miles.
I would hate to be responsible for anyone setting off for the moon with insufficient supplies for the journey. Of course the difference in distance should only take a few hours or months, depending on the technologies employed, but one doesn't want to cause inconvenience, let alone discomfort.
|
"but one doesn't want to cause inconvenience, let alone discomfort. "
Indeed. Some sort of rest areas would be needed where you could use the weightless toilets and buy a sachet of spaghetti bolognese and a tube of coffee for a week's wages. Should be good little earner. Welcome Break would be a good name
|
>> Global warming was happening but it has slowed right down for the last 9 years.
>> 25% of people may not have believed that man had landed on the moon in
>> the 12 months after it happened but I think a lot more would give it
>> credibility today
It is still happening but, yes, there has been a slowdown in surface temperature increases for the past few years.
I can't claim to have any expertise, but I understood that many models predicted slowdowns in surface temperature, and then acceleration again. The net heat gain is, AFAIK, still continuing but less of the energy is warming the surface.
As for the moon landings, that poll (grabbed at random) was from 2009...oh, and it was actually 28% that believed the landings were faked...sheesh!
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sat 3 Aug 13 at 15:07
|
|
I wouldn't call it annoying, but I couldn't get very far with Malay blokes, who are automatically Muslim, before they said tentatively that things would be much nicer if I became one as well. Not that it seemed to make any difference when I declined.
|
>> As for the moon landings, that poll (grabbed at random) was from 2009...oh, and it
>> was actually 28% that believed the landings were faked...sheesh!
>>
I saw a television programme recently which gave numerous pieces of evidence as to why the moon landings were faked.
|
>> I saw a television programme recently which gave numerous pieces of evidence as to why
>> the moon landings were faked.
How would you know if the television programme was faked?
|
>> >> I saw a television programme recently which gave numerous pieces of evidence as to
>> why
>> >> the moon landings were faked.
>>
>> How would you know if the television programme was faked?
>>
The programme showed original films and photographs and explained why they couldn't have originated on the moon. I couldn't find any fault with the programme makers arguments that the films and photographs were faked, and hence I had to agree with the conclusion of the programme. It was all very well a NASA spokesman saying that you couldn't keep all the thousands of people involved in the landings quiet about it, but the photographic evidence was in my opinion indisputable.
|
If that's all it takes do not under any circumstances read Chariots of the Gods by Erich von Daniken.
Your entire belief system could fall apart.
The book is complete rubbish, but you won't find any fault with the arguments or the photographic evidence.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 12 Sep 13 at 01:28
|
|
Was it Buzz Aldrin who would punch people on the nose if they asked him if the landings were faked ? Need more people like that and there should be statutory defences in law for punching people. I have a well respected friend who believes that the WTC attacks were faked - I honestly can't believe that a person of her background believes that. I have another friend whose partner was a fire-fighter on September 11th Hopefully they might meet one day. Everything has become a conspiracy theory - otherwise sensible people who don;t accept government randomness and cock-up. She also believes that Assange is a hero....
|
>> I have a well respected friend who believes that the WTC attacks were faked - She also believes that Assange is a hero...
We'd get on well R.P. ask her if she believes in Lizards.
(*_*)
|
|
you like to wear purple Dog?
|
|
Would you like to elaborate on that one Mr Z?
|
|
You are the real David Ike, and I claim my 5 pounds.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 3 Aug 13 at 20:32
|
Ah, say n'more ... I've read all von Däniken's stuff too.
:}
|
>> Ah, say n'more ... I've read all von Däniken's stuff too.
Alas, Dog, so did I. At a tender and impressionable age too. It did lead to some interesting byways over the next decades though, so not all was lost. I imagine you followed a similar route. Indeed, I think Colin Wilson, for example, is just about still with us, unwell, and living in Mousehole, which can't be far from you.
|
>> I think Colin Wilson, for example, is just about still with us, unwell, and living in Mousehole, which can't be far from you
He used to live here: goo.gl/maps/eJPX7 just the other side of one of our previous abodes, I never met him though as we only lived in Gorran Haven for 1 year.
I have 2 or 3 of his books knocking about, Dreaming To Some Purpose, The Books In My Life, and of course
The Outsider :)
|
Here's one for you Cc, don't let that Lud character anywhere near it though:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsDgnHJRRFM
|
>> you like to wear purple Dog?
Remind us Zeddo, what colour was your uniform last year?
|
|
It was a temporary aberration.
|
>> Was it Buzz Aldrin who would punch people on the nose if they asked him
>> if the landings were faked ?
Resorting to violence is often the action of someone who isn't able to make his point in any other way.
|
Was it Buzz Aldrin who would punch people on the nose if they asked him
>> if the landings were faked ?
Must be right! - it was portrayed in one episode of the Simpsons!!
|
>> >> >> I saw a television programme recently which gave numerous pieces of evidence as
>> to
>> >> why
>> >> >> the moon landings were faked.
>> >>
>> >> How would you know if the television programme was faked?
>> >>
>>
>> The programme showed original films and photographs and explained why they couldn't have originated on
>> the moon. I couldn't find any fault with the programme makers arguments that the films
>> and photographs were faked, and hence I had to agree with the conclusion of the
>> programme.
The "faked" film and photographs could have been "faked"
|
As it's inconceivable that L'es can be serious, Zero, I wouldn't get too excited about his post.
|
|
The nature of the double bluff reply should suggest I didn't take his post on face value.
|
|
My clumsy riposte was intended to indicate a willingness on my part to engage in the conversation. As intimations of fakery in this department are amongst the very few things that make me grumpy. Is all.
|
|
I dont believe any sane or sensible person can honestly believe that the moon landings didn't happen, specially those of us who as youngsters sat with wide eyed awe and wonder at those grainy TV pictures. The bleep at the end of each line of speech still lives with me.
|
|
Agreed. And in fact it's pretty disrespectful to those who died too.
|
>>....specially those of us who as youngsters sat with wide eyed awe and wonder at those grainy TV pictures.
For fans of space rides some not grainy shots
io9.com/5893615/absolutely-mindblowing-video-shot-from-the-space-shuttle-during-launch
|
"I dont believe any sane or sensible person can honestly believe that the moon landings didn't happen, ................"
Yet some are willing to believe in sky-fairies on the flimsiest of evidence. Thes nowt as queer as folks....
|
>> Yet some are willing to believe in sky-fairies on the flimsiest of evidence. Thes nowt as queer as folks....
Nowt indeed. But these are two distinct modes of belief. There's no real philosophic contradiction. Odd, but observably true.
|
Sometimes I have to read posts on here a couple of times to get the drift.
Sometimes I even have to Google odd words to get the drift.
I've read and read this one but would someone please tell me what the hell you are on about please?
Bored blokes.com
Pat
|
>> Bored blokes.com
(No connection with Baffled babes.co.uk, let alone Baffled bints.org)...
:o}
|
>> As it's inconceivable that L'es can be serious, .............
I'm serious. The photographs and films shown in the programme were the same official ones that I saw shown shortly after the "moon landings". Unless you actually watched the programme you're not in a position to doubt its conclusions that the photographs and films were fake. At the time of the original official showings I didn't look closely at, or analyse, the now declared dodgy details and hence accepted them as genuine.
|
|
So how did the US and Russian laser gear get to the moon?
|
>> >> As it's inconceivable that L'es can be serious, .............
>>
>> I'm serious. The photographs and films shown in the programme were the same official ones
>> that I saw shown shortly after the "moon landings". Unless you actually watched the programme
>> you're not in a position to doubt its conclusions that the photographs and films were
>> fake.
You now need to see the bit where NASA debunk those claims of fake photos. The flag one for instance? where the disbelievers claim its fluttering despite no lunar wind? Its because its on a flexible wire to make it stand out proud (due to no lunar wind).
The shadows? much is made of the lack of or multiple shadows suggesting multiple artificial light sources by the disbelievers. The answer? there were multiple light sources, bouncing off lunar landers, (with its bright shiny protective shields) camera gear vehicles etc.
The thing is, all these "experts" haven't got the foggiest idea what shooting conditions are like on the moon because they haven't been there.
you need to read both chapters of the book, not just the one.
|
|
"Could be" - "Could not Be"
|
>> "Could be" - "Could not Be"
>>
The thing is, are we pandering to Muslims?
|
|
I don't think so - they don't have a Space Programme SFAIK
|
I'm guessing L'es is either being deliberately provocative or is new to the subject and hasn't yet done the minor legwork required to show how nonsensical that all is.
There's no point in trying to reason with someone in that state of mind. They have to work it out for themselves, or they elect not to for whatever reason and remain forever contrary to the mainstream position. Their choice.
|
>> listverse.com/2012/12/28/10-reasons-the-moon-landings-could-be-a-hoax/
As soon as they start to rely on the "hidden messages" theories its all has to be thrown straight in the bin as crap.
I have no doubt that the landings occurred, no-one can debunk the fact that someone involved would have blabbed by now if that was not the case.
I also have no doubt that someone in NASA doctored (or made up composites of) some of the photos taken at a later date when back on earth to improve them (much as too much photoshopping goes on today) and its come back to bite them in the bum.
I put the moon landing conspiracists in the same camp as the "9/11 was a CIA plot" eejits.
|
>> I have no doubt that the landings occurred,
There are rock samples that were brought back from the surface of the moon. They are formed differently to the rocks found here.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_rock
|
I vaguely remember watching that! - wasn't "the film set" discovered/disclosed to be somewhere in the North Arizona Dessert?
P.S
I must admit to being Skeptical about the actual "Man thro the Belts" part of the lunar missions, but have no doubt they've sent many un-manned missions.
|
>> I vaguely remember watching that! - wasn't "the film set" discovered/disclosed to be somewhere in
>> the North Arizona Dessert?
tinyurl.com/l9j5o9h
|
|
A-ha! - there! - proof that the landings were indeed faked!! ;-)
|
Debunking the moon landing conspiracy theories is a good lesson in how conspiracy theories are constructed, and how they can be dismantled.
Often they simply rely upon confidently stating "facts" and conclusions.
The moon flag waving in the breeze is a good one. It is confidently stated that the flag is waving in the breeze and the obvious conclusion drawn. If one delves no deeper, then the conclusion seems to make sense.
What is missing are the facts around the motion imparted by the astronaut, the lack of air resistance etc.
Likewise the shadows not falling straight. It is stated that this is obviously due to another light-source. The missing fact is that sloping ground also causes the same effect.
In other words, confidently state that the only possible cause of A is B, and fail to mention that C, D and E can also be causes. An audience that fails to look for C, D and E, may easily be convinced.
It is a good example, because the missing facts (typically being physical) can be easily demonstrated. Mythbusters did a good show on it some years back, covering the flag, shadows, footprints etc.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sun 4 Aug 13 at 14:19
|
I give up...going to sit on the patio and have a glass of wine.
More productive than reading this one!
Pat
|
|
Pat its very simple, even a girl can understand it. Some people claim that man did not land on the moon, and all the photographs, film and audio at the time was faked in a special studio built for the task in America. So they have tried to prove this theory by picking holes in the film and pictures, and even claiming its impossible for man to travel through some radiation belts that surround the earth without getting frizzled up.
|
Maybe she's wondering what all this has to do with pandering to Muslims. I must admit, I'm wondering too...
Who took the wrong turn? I've been guilty on several occasions.
Last edited by: corax on Sun 4 Aug 13 at 17:05
|
>> Maybe she's wondering what all this has to do with pandering to Muslims. I must
>> admit, I'm wondering too...
>>
>> Who took the wrong turn? I've been guilty on several occasions.
Meldrew did it, blame him. I got the thread to jellyfish, but its his fault we ended up on moon landing conspiracy theories.
|
|
We could always enhance this thread by introducing the Nibirians at this point?!
|
Are we pandering to them too?
|
|
We should be! - they are allegedly our "Overlords" that showed us how to build the Pyramids! - that's how Hieroglyphics came about, when two races cant communicate by speech, they draw pictures! - ;-)
|
, when two races cant communicate by speech they draw pictures!
>>
Are those restaurants in Spain where you get pictures of the pork chop and chips run by Niberians?
|
|
some of the food that is served up is certainly not of this earth.
|
You're getting the hang of it CG.
Never settle for a simple, rational explanation when one involving the supernatural, aliens, or ideally both will do the job:)
|
>> his fault we ended up on moon landing conspiracy theories.
Instead of the far more interesting discussion of the moon/earth cable connection and the giant strimmer recommended by the crazed CGN. A bit of futuristic vision, instead of some mollusc casting doubt on the bleeding obvious and being earnestly corrected.
|
|
I started the thread! I don't think I have been guilty of any deviation that I care to discuss in an open Forum!
|
>> I started the thread! I don't think I have been guilty of any deviation that
>> I care to discuss in an open Forum!
>>
I reckon the deviation was started on Fri 2 Aug 13 at 18:37 by someone called Meldrew.
;-)
Last edited by: L'escargot on Mon 5 Aug 13 at 07:23
|
|
Maybe - post was a reply to another deviant! Hand partly raised!
|
>> Maybe - post was a reply to another deviant!
How dare you sir?! :)
But, yes, I believe that I was indeed the first to mention moon landings (as another example of how the opinion of the GB public can be somewhat unreliable).
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Mon 5 Aug 13 at 08:20
|
|
If true (link to your most despised paper) tinyurl.com/m6krufg ,it is not on.
|
|
Glad we agree, those two blokes should have shown more respect.
|
We've surrendered this Country without ever firing a shot.
The Folk that fought and died for us would weep.
|
>> The Folk that fought and died for us would weep.
Some would perhaps. Others would heave sighs of relief. Takes all sorts to make an army.
|
>>We've surrendered this Country without ever firing a shot.
Not we but, the LibLabCon, Blair, Brown, and Cameron should be tried for treason for what they've done to this country.
>>The Folk that fought and died for us would weep.
Marlborough + Nelson + Wellington + Lloyd George + Churchill etc. would also shed a tear or two if they could see what became of their legacy.
|
>>Not we but, the LibLabCon, Blair, Brown, and Cameron should be tried for treason for what they've done to this country.
Not "we" Doug? Surely those three were elected? And in one case, elected a lot.
|
>>Not "we" Doug? Surely those three were elected? And in one case, elected a lot.
Very true Martin - if they were Turkeys they would also vote for Christmas I'll wager.
None so blind etc., etc., etc..
|
You, Zero, are definitely part of the problem if you truly believe that.
|
|
So called "do-gooders" have caused half this Country's problems!
|
Since I think we can say that Roger and I are rather on different sides of the political fence, it is a little beyond me how we can *both* get a frowny face.
Surely one of us must have non-offensive opinions whatever your stance?
Whoever gave the frowny faces to either or both of us - do you have the balls to admit it and/or the intelligence to explain it?
|
>> You, Zero, are definitely part of the problem if you truly believe that.
Would you want those two more or less naked whits p ricks running past your white Anglo Saxon church in front of your 6 year old white daughter?
Would you be offended? I would
You and your ilk, With your determination to be seen as the down trodden home grown folk are the entire problem!
You are, in short, one of the worse kind of racists it's ever been my displeasure to come across.
|
>> Would you be offended? I would
I can't imagine the thick-skinned Zero being offended by anything!
|
>> >> You, Zero, are definitely part of the problem if you truly believe that.
>> Would you want those two more or less naked whits p ricks running past your
>> white Anglo Saxon church in front of your 6 year old white daughter?
>>
>> Would you be offended? I would
>>
>>
>> You and your ilk, With your determination to be seen as the down trodden home
>> grown folk are the entire problem!
>>
>> You are, in short, one of the worse kind of racists it's ever been my
>> displeasure to come across.
>>
I would not be offended in the slightest by those two running past a church (of any denomination) nor would i be the slightest bit bothered by my six year old daughter seeing them.
As for you Zero, you obviously hate your own countrymen so much I would describe YOU as a racist of the nastiest type. Are you ashamed of your heritage or are you even British?
You sound like an Internationalist Trotskyite to me!
Now give me a scowly face!
|
|
Come on Roger not good for your blood pressure getting het/up like this.
|
There's a middle way.
I see no reason why two men should be allowed to run around in mankinis and I personally would not be happy for my kids or wife to have to see it..
...however
...I see no reason why one small part of our society, one that has elements that worship a strange, introverted backward side to their religion should dictate to the rest of us what we should or should not be doing when they have great difficulty getting their own house in order.
So they are both wrong.
|
>> I see no reason why two men should be allowed to run around in mankinis and I personally would not be happy for my kids or wife to have to see it..
They must have seen far worse by now (especially the wife if you don't mind my saying so Wp)... and even if they haven't they will for sure. So it's a waste of energy worrying about mankinis. Those jolly blokes are willing to make idiots of themselves for fun... just let them. They mean to be coarse but not offensive.
Surely you don't want to be considered as having the same responses as, er, 'one small part of our society etc etc'? You are risking it.
Tsk!
|
>> Surely you don't want to be considered as having the same responses as, er, 'one
>> small part of our society etc etc'? You are risking it.
>>
>> Tsk!
>>
I do like your balance and the check you provide to one's angle...a bit like the mad, liberal old aunt...;-)
|
There's not a lot of difference between a mankini and budgie-smugglers (Speedos) worn in swimming pools.
|
>> There's not a lot of difference between a mankini and budgie-smugglers (Speedos) worn in swimming
>> pools.
I suspect there's a lot more 'upthrust' delivered by those shoulder straps than I'd be comfortable with.
'Tho it could help retain haemorrhoids.
Last edited by: bathtub tom on Thu 8 Aug 13 at 00:39
|
>> You sound like an Internationalist Trotskyite to me!
You say that as if there's something wrong with it.
|
Are we pandering to Muslims? I do not believe so despite what you might read in some newspapers...
I spend a lot of time in Muslim countries and when I am there I expect to live by their rules....
Likewise I expect Muslims in the UK to live by our rules .....
The majority of Muslims that I know are good hardworking businessmen and devout family men.....
Some that I know are radical, arrogant and lazy and believe that their beliefs take precedence over others.... but then I could say that about many UK residents......or even some particular contributors to this thread....... :0).......
|
>> As for you Zero, you obviously hate your own countrymen so much I would describe
>> YOU as a racist of the nastiest type. Are you ashamed of your heritage or
>> are you even British?
Oh right? nice one roger, because I don't agree with your terrible racist ways, that automatically makes me one of them! Fabulous, you are really showing your true colours now.
>> Now give me a scowly face!
Never given you a scowly face, being contemptible, you don't deserve one.
|
>> As for you Zero, you obviously hate your own countrymen so much I would describe
>> YOU as a racist of the nastiest type. Are you ashamed of your heritage or
>> are you even British?
Are you proud to be British, Roger? If so, why?
|
|
I know I am not proud Roger is British
|
Who knew with such a dull thread title that this would end in insults...
Throwing insults about on an anonymous forum isnt something to be proud of either, regardless of which side you are on in the debate.
|
|
Are we pandering to Muslims? - by falling out amongst ourselves we are! - thats the cunning plan...divide and conquer!!
|
Tee hee... nice one devonian...
I'm trying to picture Zero and the Rastaman in all-in wrestlers' superhero costumes, expressing their incompatible worldviews...
|
>>I'm trying to picture Zero and the Rastaman in all-in wrestlers' superhero costumes <<
There is only so much drugs and therapy can do for a bloke, I would rather not!
|
>> only so much drugs and therapy can do for a bloke,
They both worked fine on me, generally speaking. Nice....
:o}
|
>>They both worked fine on me <<
I think the jury is still out ;-)
|
>> Throwing insults about on an anonymous forum isnt something to be proud of either,
Probably better than doing it on facebook though.
|
>> I know I am not proud Roger is British
>>
Your contempt is heartily reciprocated.
End of.
|
But its not "the end of" is it. You will be back on here, very soon, bringing up more perceived examples, pointing out how you, as the rightful white person living here, is having your heritage and rights are being snatched away from you by nasty non white peoples. In effect spreading nasty pernicious exaggerated examples, designed to spread fear and hatred.
|
>>In effect spreading nasty pernicious exaggerated examples, designed to spread fear and hatred <<
Says the author of the hate filled response.
|
What hate filled response was that? Contempt is not hate. Completely different things, contempt can be justified.
Or are you going to accuse me of being "one of those non british types" as well?
|
|
Contempt is defined as "beneath consideration" - if that was how you felt about him you would bother considering anything he says worthy of response, so no, it isnt contempt, you just dont like him.
|
|
No I don't like him, but most of all I don't like what he stands for, and his nasty divisive outpourings need to be countered.
|
No, they dont need to be countered, nothing he says here will have much effect on the wider public. You counter them because you like having a rant at him and he gives you enough material for your soap box, nothing more.
You wont change his mind and so it becomes about having an argument rather than changing anything. If you were honest with yourself you would recognise that.
|
|
Are muslims who wear burkas panda-ing?
|
Didn't take you long to have a pop at me now did it. How long you back for? three days, and you are into having a crack at me already. I haven't said a word to you or about you and there you are wading in.
I really don't need any life lessons or honesty from you, of all people.
|
>>Didn't take you long to have a pop at me now did it. How long you back for? three days, and you are into having a crack at me already. I haven't said a word to you or about you and there you are wading in.<<
I think you would be better off playing the ball rather than the man if indeed your views are the right ones. Why make it about Roger? Do you know what did for Nick Griffin - going on TV and looking like a total fool by his strange arguments - not people attacking him as a man, online or in the media.
I never went away... what gave you that impression?
>>I really don't need any life lessons or honesty from you, of all people. <<
Perhaps but you get your say and I get mine, live with it dear.
|
>> >>Didn't take you long to have a pop at me now did it. How long
>> you back for? three days, and you are into having a crack at me already.
>> I haven't said a word to you or about you and there you are wading
>> in.<<
>>
>> I think you would be better off playing the ball rather than the man if
>> indeed your views are the right ones. Why make it about Roger?
Because a racist is a human.
>> Do you know
>> what did for Nick Griffin - going on TV and looking like a total fool
>> by his strange arguments
Read the media. He was attacked. As each individual who spouts such tripe needs to be. As indeed he did me if you read the thread.
As indeed you did. Practise what you preach at least.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 9 Aug 13 at 14:02
|
>>Because a racist is a human <<
If he is racist, what does calling him names change? Would it not be better to drill down into why someone with issues over the colour of a persons skin thinks as they do - that would be constructive?
>>Read the media. He was attacked. As each individual who spouts such tripe needs to be. As indeed he did me if you read the thread.<<
The media had been gunning for Griffin for years to little effect, infact the BNP were climbing in the polls so a lot of good the abuse did. I actually laughed when Nick Griffin was on QT, he couldnt string a cohesive argument together on any one point - and millions got to see it, that is what did for him.
|
No, Zero will never change Roger's mind, or vice versa for that matter.
However, what happens if a third party comes along and reads only Roger's comments? Surely it would then be better to have opposing comments that would balance the view?
At one time or another we have ended up with some dumb laws in this country because one party thought the ridiculous arguments were better ignored.
I do think views need to be challenged, even if only for the benefit of the spectators.
|
>>However, what happens if a third party comes along and reads only Roger's comments? Surely it would then be better to have opposing comments that would balance the view?<<
I think there are a few people on here who when they fear they are not being listen to they resort to personal attacks - I dont think that helps any serious debate and a 3rd party will just see two individuals yelling at eachother - not really constructive.
>>I do think views need to be challenged, even if only for the benefit of the spectators <<
I could have written the script for this thread, it was only going one way, there is little benefit really. Far more balanced debate on these political subjects can be found in the kind of places people will go to find it. Whenever you put Left against Right you end up with the same squabble, it has to get boring at some point.
|
Are we pandering to Muslims? - Westpig
