Originally posted by h1a8
The latter is false since you attempted to defeat my argument by lying and creating strawman.The best debators don't need to result to petty tactics like that.
And where is the strawman? Point it out so everyone would see.
You are just ignoring that I am right and that you tried to paint me a liar via false logic.
To everyone:
See how dishonest he is? I have obviously debunked the logic in his accusation and the only rebuttal he has is "nuh uh".
😆
Originally posted by h1a8
The latter is false since you attempted to defeat my argument by lying and creating strawman.The best debators don't need to result to petty tactics like that.
Post the quote where Nib lied and the one where he created a strawman. If you don't post it, you're admitting it doesn't exist, which would mean you're a liar.
Also, you still haven't posted the timestamp where Kyle gave the numbers he used in his equation. makes me think you were lying about what numbers he used.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Post the quote where Nib lied and the one where he created a strawman. If you don't post it, you're admitting it doesn't exist, which would mean you're a liar.Also, you still haven't posted the timestamp where Kyle gave the numbers he used in his equation. makes me think you were lying about what numbers he used.
Here is another example
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Yes, because no one here understands what is implied by your statements when:>He obviously didn't use your numbers.
The implication is that Science guy didn't provide the numbers I used.
Therefore, I made them up out of thin air.
Originally posted by h1a8
He mostly lied. You mostly create strawman and lie.
I posed where he lied and you created a strawman.Here is another example
The implication is that Science guy didn't provide the numbers I used.
Therefore, I made them up out of thin air.
Wow. What a liar.
1) Those numbers aren't "made up", those are actual values that you can find in certain sources. Post where I said those numbers were completely made up.
2) What you DID make up is that Science guy used them exactly in his equation.
You are literally rewriting the narrative. And since you are determined to just literally smear me and the others here who don't agree with you with false evidence:
A red herring to distract us and to bury the evidence under a mountain of irrelevant debates as you try to put US on the defensive and use accusation based on flawed logic and supported by flimsy evidence.
Ok, h1. Let's resolve this:
BZ challenge:
With regards to this thread, who is more believable and who is the liar between me and h1?
Debaters will use this thread in its entirety as evidence on who has used false facts/implications in their arguments, used starwmen, inconsistent accounts, etc.
Loser leaves for 3 months.
If you wanna accuse people of lying you might wanna back it up in a judged scenario.
Put your money where your mouth is you weasely little liar.
lol you know he never will. Remember, any BZ challenge, according to him, is a set up by the rest of us (cuz apparently he considers himself so important that he thinks he warrants that much effort). Because we are all bad, bad people, and he is the poor, innocent victim, fighting against our tyranny.
Originally posted by h1a8
He mostly lied. You mostly create strawman and lie.
I posed where he lied and you created a strawman.Here is another example
The implication is that Science guy didn't provide the numbers I used.
Therefore, I made them up out of thin air.
You have once again failed to provide a timestamp where Kyle said what numbers he used in his equation.
I'll give you one more chance to prove that you're not a liar.
Originally posted by h1a8
The luminosity of a star includes, radiation, heat, etc. The luminosity determines all the energy that is being output. If if say this is wrong then you are against established physics by many PhDs.
You do realize that luminosity only applies for the visible spectrum of the electromagnetic spectrum?
In other words, the energy output of a Star isn't only luminosity ...
Furthermore, gravity is also a form of energy output. Neutron stars have way more gravity than our sun....
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Wow. What a liar.1) Those numbers aren't "made up", those are actual values that you can find in certain sources. Post where I said those numbers were completely made up.
2) What you DID make up is that Science guy used them exactly in his equation.
You are literally rewriting the narrative. And since you are determined to just literally smear me and the others here who don't agree with you with false evidence:
A red herring to distract us and to bury the evidence under a mountain of irrelevant debates as you try to put US on the defensive and use accusation based on flawed logic and supported by flimsy evidence.
Ok, h1. Let's resolve this:
[b]BZ challenge:
With regards to this thread, who is more believable and who is the liar between me and h1?
Debaters will use this thread in its entirety as evidence on who has used false facts/implications in their arguments, used starwmen, inconsistent accounts, etc.
Loser leaves for 3 months.
If you wanna accuse people of lying you might wanna back it up in a judged scenario.
Put your money where your mouth is you weasely little liar. [/B]
How can I make up the event that he used those numbers? That doesn't make sense, English wise.
He provided the numbers. Therefore a logical conclusion is that he used them. If he didn't, then give me a good logical explanation of why he is providing numbers that he didn't use.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You do realize that luminosity only applies for the visible spectrum of the electromagnetic spectrum?In other words, the energy output of a Star isn't only luminosity ...
Furthermore, gravity is also a form of energy output. Neutron stars have way more gravity than our sun....
No it isn't.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity
Luminosity depends on not only brightness, but the distance the star is away from the observer.
Originally posted by h1a8
No it isn't.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity
You are thinking of brightness.
I see 👆
Originally posted by h1a8
No it isn't.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminosity
Luminosity depends on not only brightness, but the distance the star is away from the observer.
Do you agree that the suns energy output is of 3.8 x 10^26 Joules per second?
Originally posted by h1a8
How can I make up the event that he used those numbers? That doesn't make sense, English wise.He provided the numbers. Therefore a logical conclusion is that he used them. If he didn't, then give me a good logical explanation of why he is providing numbers that he didn't use.
Lol. You don't understand what "what you DID make up is that Science guy used them exactly in his equation" means?
English might not be my primary language but it makes perfect sense to me, anyone else confused by that sentence above?
Maybe you need an english refresher then? Because my statement of what you did completely makes sense:
Originally posted by h1a8
He used 10km as the radius and 10^6k as the temperature.
There is no way in hell you can get 0.25Lo with those numbers.
It's as if you don't even remember your own words.
Problem with being a liar is that it is easy for people to catch you.
😱
Notice how h1 glossed over my BZ challenge?
The BZ challenge is the perfect avenue to test if h1 believes that what he is now saying is right or wrong. Whether he is lying or telling the tru
Because, in order for a statement to be a lie, the intention to deceive has to exist.
And one deceives others by stating something that they know is not true.
The difference between a mistake and a lie is the prior knowledge of the person making the assertion that the statement he is making is incorrect.
If he accepts, then he does believe in what he is saying and that he is willing to stand by it.
If he refuses, then he has just proven that he has no faith in what he is saying and still asserted it with what looks like absolute certainty (or at least he tries to convince people of this). Which would mean he has knowingly lied.
The beauty of my current challenge is that there is no ambiguity/difficulty here in terms of knowledge level/sophistication. One cannot feign mistake (by judges and by the debating party) due to depth of subject matter.
As we all know what a lie is.
I believe what I am saying and I am willing to defend my words and would stake 3 months of my posting time here in KMC in that regard.
Apparently, h1 doesn't believe in his own words.
Typical of liars.