I thought I'd give it a go for a couple of posts today as I'm sober and feeling generous. Results were predictable.

Yeah, but I do not think anyone really expects to get anywhere in this case, but I have watched some people try so hard to explain things in great detail to riggies only to have it thrown back in their face. One poster named spadebidder who was a stats expert spent hours analyzing one really angry riggie's (same personality as that Qanon dude that was here) hand database and did dozens of different studies on it with all the work provided. The results were as expected quite boring, but as also expected a couple results were a couple standard deviations above or below the expectation. The riggie took the worst result, ignored the rest and then declared that spadebidder proved that it was rigged. When spadebidder corrected that the riggie told him to %^&* himself and math was for losers. Welcome to the riggie culture. Lucky just does it in a different way but the results of any serious interaction with him are the same.

I think I remember the thread in question. I used to be quite fond of the riggie thread myself also, if you recall.

Nothing will ever beat this dude, IMO. I mean, he even invented his own notation, which he expected everyone else to understand!

Ostensibly, yo.

What do you think would happen if the gun were as large as a cruise ship and bullets were proportionally larger as well.

Tennis balls obviously are not as hard as human bone. What do you think would happen to your skull if it were hit with a tennis ball traveling 400 mph. Before you answer, consider that there are documented cases of bone fractures from tennis balls traveling at 1/3 that speed.

https://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/...valov-eye-shot

Sorry, I guess "moved on from" would have been better wording. I assume you're still "agnostic" on it (LOL), so abandon isn't correct.

Wow.

You have nearly as much experience with riggies as I do plus the bonus of enduring my interactions with riggies for years. How is anything this guy saying surprising you, other than his addiction to using questions to answer questions or to try to redirect a conversation. That is why years ago I told him to go to the Internet Poker riggie thread to try to teach those riggies a few lessons in how to use linguistics as none of them used these approaches anywhere close to the same level.



That guy was the pinnacle riggie in my opinion, as he actually went to the stats forum and shoved his crazy there instead of the cesspool riggie thread in the Internet Poker forum. Years later his thread (he actually had a second one that was nearly as nuts) is still there stickied at the top. That's the way to be a riggie.

Edit to add: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...tally-1706112/

What did I move from in that case? Still confused there.

Luckbox, what prominent conspiracy theories do you think are unlikely to be true?

Good luck with that type of questioning, because hard core conspiracy people have been asked that all the time. They know how to answer it within their belief structures while also not answering it.

Perhaps it is a reading comprehension issue.

It really is such a shame that all these pictures and videos are always so blurry you can barely make out the shapes of the depicted objects without the adherents of the CT having to explain the whole scene in vivid detail. Imagine the wealth of conclusive evidence we'd have for UFOs and holographic planes and whatnot if only a couple of these guys could find a way to get their hands on a 20 year-old 4 megapixel camera.

(Referring to the picture LB posted earlier to which you responded.)

You've got it all wrong. Size / speed / shape of objects don't matter. You see what the mainstream media don't want you to know is that the world actually works like rock, paper, scissors where one material always defeats another material.

He knows better than to answer this. The smarter riggies (of which he is one) know that as soon as he throws one out there, the next question is "why", and if he answers that, the next logical step is essentially to ask him why he refuses to apply the same reasoning to the stuff he actually believes in. This is why he's always "agnostic".

That's part of process. Find video from very far away. Zoom way in until the resolution is ****. Go frame by frame until you find a still that looks weird. Post it on the internet. Assert that the burden is now on the sheeple.

And the elites always know what you're going to throw before you've even made your mind up, because they've been neuro-linguistically programming you since conception through the same mainstream media.

I like this. It's sort of Marvel or DC version of physics.

I don't know what counts as prominent? Be more specific and I might answer for you since I think you're acting in better faith than some of the others.

Answering a question with a question. What a twist!

If he continues with the in good faith assertion that you of all people would know the most prominent conspiracy theories, you can then redirect him with a "why would you think that?" or a "everyone has different opinions on things, so I am not sure mine is the one that matters" non answer. Then we can see how many more times he tries asking!

All the best.

If you regard the Holocaust happening as a far out conspiracy claim and then are adamant you didn't do a typo, then by implication you're a Holocaust denier to any normal person. When you refuse to confirm or deny then normal people tend to think that the reason for this is because you're a Holocaust denier but don't want to come right out and say it.
If you're simply trolling then that's extraordinarily tasteless considering the subject matter.
Acknowledging the Holocaust isn't controversial in the least so the fact that you refuse to answer, isn't a good look for you at all.

I suppose Bubble_Balls can be a bit clever in this situation by asking about the Holocaust in reply to Lucky's request to be more specific, though I expect that would then get the good faith - o - meter switched to bad and Lucky would refuse to answer due to that. More likely he would reply with a variant of not thinking that is in his opinion a prominent theory, so back to Bubble_Balls to ask for a different theory. Chessmate.

I see what you're saying but it's getting nittly into the semantics.

No there was no typo, but I am saying that reptilians existing or the Holocaust not happening are the far out claims.

Hologram planes are a far out claim (one I never heard of until today) and you were familiar with it and did not dismiss that, so you know - the math aint hard here, though you can simply claim that corpus has a reading comprehension issue. Use the tools that work for you.

All the best.

Maybe he thinks the concentration camps were a bunch of holograms?

Isn't it just the same video that you guys are touting as so clearly showing it? Then when it's actually looked at now all of a sudden there is a problem? Doesn't that seem a bit hypocritical?

Answering a question/statement with 3 questions. What a triple twist!

All the best.

And we come full circle
https://www.wiesenthal.com/assets/pd...iracies-20.pdf
Thoughts LB?