vincent tool said that he is exclusively working the phones for child abuse cases, but never said he is not the only one.
for now, let's assume the rate of abuse cases averages over time to the three or four cases he gets per month.
let's further assume that, since he isn't the only person working the phones and is on vacation at some point, the number is 4-5 per month, or 4.5 per month.
To me this provides a pretty clear idea of the magnitude of reported cases Watchtower has received worldwide over the past 10 years, and is also a pretty good indicator of what the problem has looked like for a long time (decades!) before that.
Well done!
so i was fooled by the witnesses.
what can i learn from that?
not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.
The "c" on the rock really has no explanation, although it could just be random and not man made.
There is an interesting Apollo 17 photo that shows a still packaged moon rover, and tracks, this is kinda odd.
also the black and white feed, would they not have recorded color film (maybe not for the live feed, but for the record?)
There are more people who get crazy over shadows and lighting, but i have no clue about this madness, so I'll leave that one alone.
Where is the color footage?
recently, several threads have had some debate about logic, evidence, critical thinking and skepticism.
i wanted to write a post discussing those things, hopefully to clarify what those things are, why they are important and how to use those tools.
first, logic, at its core, is simply a method for how to reason validly, how to draw conclusions based on a premise.
To the OP while what you said is true but I do find it tiresome when every opinion must be challenged, debated and picked over.
Thank you. Who advocates challenging every opinion?
so i was fooled by the witnesses.
what can i learn from that?
not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.
think fukitol who had the second post on here made a good point, there is probably a mix of truth and fiction. Some of the pics have some issues. They may have staged some aside from the actual moon landing.
That assumes that someone qualified to weigh the evidence has done so and assigned value. What specific evidence do you believe lends itself towards that view? What pictures have issues and what are those issues?
vincent tool said that he is exclusively working the phones for child abuse cases, but never said he is not the only one.
for now, let's assume the rate of abuse cases averages over time to the three or four cases he gets per month.
let's further assume that, since he isn't the only person working the phones and is on vacation at some point, the number is 4-5 per month, or 4.5 per month.
so i was fooled by the witnesses.
what can i learn from that?
not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.
I'll do something no one else can seem to do and agree that you are correct. It has nothing to do with rational skepticism. See people was that so hard?
I appreciate the gesture dear, but made to assertion to prove correct here :)
Still you cannot deny the importance of the moon landing.
I cannot, agreed.
So all that being said the weight and importance it carried, what would you do, sacrifice, hide, or whatever for such a world stage advantage. Thats all I am saying it held incredible value, and people often do crazy shit to insure advantage. But again thats not a rational reason for anything just a great source of motive.
And that's why understanding the science involves shows it would be impossible to actually stage. Also, wouldn't another motive be to do what you said you were going to do?
recently, several threads have had some debate about logic, evidence, critical thinking and skepticism.
i wanted to write a post discussing those things, hopefully to clarify what those things are, why they are important and how to use those tools.
first, logic, at its core, is simply a method for how to reason validly, how to draw conclusions based on a premise.
recently, several threads have had some debate about logic, evidence, critical thinking and skepticism.
i wanted to write a post discussing those things, hopefully to clarify what those things are, why they are important and how to use those tools.
first, logic, at its core, is simply a method for how to reason validly, how to draw conclusions based on a premise.
With that in mind and your recent answer to me in this thread, I am having a hard time understanding if you meant to act as a moderator of the discussion or if you actually took a stand on the subject. Could you please clarify?
Look at the evidence. Did I do either of those things?
so i was fooled by the witnesses.
what can i learn from that?
not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.
The moon landing as I said before was the technological jesus if you will, and also the political implication between Russia and the us as to who got there first cannot be understated.
What about the moon landing made it a "technological Jesus"? What does any of that have to do with rational skepticism towards that moon landings?
so i was fooled by the witnesses.
what can i learn from that?
not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.
......oh the irony, but I must say it's great to know that Viv has some fascinating information which can prove that man landed on the moon, and I must apologise for the sneaky, unprincipled way I asked her to reveal it, which was by way of a direct question.Well, we've learned you also don't know what irony it.
