[Bored chemist]

I clearly say that as we observe the UFO and we have NEVER &EVER observe any matter that falls into the Accretion disc.

And you repeatedly ignore the fact that we never see it coming out; yet you believe it does; even though the laws of physics make that impossible.

But, could you explain this?

Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 22:15:01
Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 18:40:26
Now, please explain why you called me a liar for telling the truth.
Don't try to blame some mysterious "others" who don't exist..

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 18:06:38
I clearly say that as we observe the UFO and we have NEVER &EVER observe any matter that falls into the Accretion disc.

And you repeatedly ignore the fact that we never see it coming out; yet you believe it does; even though the laws of physics make that impossible.

Please answer with only one word - YES or NO on the following questions:

1. Do you confirm that in the following article?
https://www.space.com/spaghettified-star-observed-near-black-hole
There is no clear observation/evidence for matter from outside as it falls inwards into the accretion disc.
Yes or No?

2. Do you confirm that in the article about M87, there is clear observation /evidence for matter from the M87 accretion disc as it falls outwards or ejected outwards - as UFO?
Yes or No?

Please - Only one word (Yes or No) for each question!

[Dave Lev (OP)]

even though the laws of physics make that impossible.

Any law of physics that prevents from the SMBH to create new positive mass particle pair (with negative charge between each other) by using its Ultra gravity force and its mighty Electromagnetic Power (near the event horizon - which is the exact location of the accretion disc) should be set deep in the garbage.

[Bored chemist]

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 17:36:17
Quote from: Bored chemist on 21/06/2021 17:35:53
Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 23:08:00
But, could you explain this?

Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 22:15:01
Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 18:40:26
Now, please explain why you called me a liar for telling the truth.
Don't try to blame some mysterious "others" who don't exist..

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Bored chemist on 21/06/2021 17:35:53
Now, please explain why you called me a liar for telling the truth.

Sorry - As you keep on with your nonsense and do not admit that we have no evidence for matter that falls in, then you clearly don't tell the truth.
So, next time when you raise the "Truth" flag, please try to hide somewhere.

[Bored chemist]

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 17:36:17
Quote from: Bored chemist on 21/06/2021 17:35:53
Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 23:08:00
But, could you explain this?

Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 22:15:01
Quote from: Bored chemist on 12/06/2021 18:40:26
Now, please explain why you called me a liar for telling the truth.
Don't try to blame some mysterious "others" who don't exist..

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Now, please explain why you called me a liar for telling the truth.
Don't try to blame some mysterious "others" who don't exist..

I have already answered your question.

Sorry - how do you dare to carry the name of "truth" for nothing?

You can't even answer the following simple question with No or Yes:

Please answer with only one word - YES or NO on the following questions:

1. Do you confirm that in the following article?
https://www.space.com/spaghettified-star-observed-near-black-hole
There is no clear observation/evidence for matter from outside as it falls inwards into the accretion disc.
Yes or No?
2. Do you confirm that in the article about M87, there is clear observation /evidence for matter from the M87 accretion disc as it falls outwards or ejected outwards - as UFO?
Yes or No?
Please - Only one word (Yes or No) for each question!

You can't do so because you know that based on "truth" you need to say "Yes" or lie.
However:
If you say "Yes" - then you justify my theory.
If you say "No" - then you lie, and somehow you prefer to avoid lies at this phase.

So, instead of answering the question with Yes or No, you try to bypass it by unrealistic "truth".

You have just proved that there is no real truth in your messages as your main mission is to protect the BBT and keep away any observation or evidence that contradicts this useless theory.

As you are requested to answer by Yes or No, then Real  truth means one word: Yes or No!
If you can't use real truth in your answers (in order to keep the BBT alive) then please stay away from my thread.

[Bored chemist]

I have already answered your question.

No, you did not.
You made silly noises about me being a liar.
But, in this case it is clear that I was telling the truth, yet you called me a liar.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/06/2021 17:35:40
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 13:52:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 15:38:10
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 17:52:32
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 10:00:14
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 20:35:32

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 18:36:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 11:09:16
So.
You are the man who called me a liar because I said that this text
"And they found, as predicted by general relativity, that the black hole shadow - the circle in the middle of the glowing golden ring - was persistent throughout the time period, maintaining the same diameter over years. This is yet further confirmation of the nature of M87*, the researchers said."
does not include the word "perfect".

You called me a liar for saying something which is obviously true.

So it is clear that you are not worth listening to

Why did you do that?
Is it because you can not tell lies from truth?
Is that why you keep saying things that are not true?

[Bored chemist]

keep away any observation or evidence that contradicts this useless theory.

There is no evidence  which contradicts the BBT.
There's your paranoid fantasy which breaks the rules of physics, and your misunderstanding of how the BBT works.
And there's also your lack of understanding of how science, evidence, and common sense work.

[Bored chemist]

If you say "Yes" - then you justify my theory.

That's just not true.
Sit down quietly an try to understand why not seeing a black cat in a coal cellar does not prove that the cat is not there.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 03:48:23
If you say "Yes" - then you justify my theory.

That's just not true.

If that isn't true, then why you are so afraid to answer my following questions with Yes or no?

Sorry - how do you dare to carry the name of "truth" for nothing?
You can't even answer the following simple question with No or Yes:
Please answer with only one word - YES or NO on the following questions:
1. Do you confirm that in the following article?
https://www.space.com/spaghettified-star-observed-near-black-hole
There is no clear observation/evidence for matter from outside as it falls inwards into the accretion disc.
Yes or No?
2. Do you confirm that in the article about M87, there is clear observation /evidence for matter from the M87 accretion disc as it falls outwards or ejected outwards - as UFO?
Yes or No?
Please - Only one word (Yes or No) for each question!
You can't do so because you know that based on "truth" you need to say "Yes" or lie.
However:
If you say "Yes" - then you justify my theory.
If you say "No" - then you lie, and somehow you prefer to avoid lies at this phase.
So, instead of answering the question with Yes or No, you try to bypass it by unrealistic "truth".

How do you dare to raise the flag of true while you escape from true?
If you still have some minimal "true" then please answer my question and then I will tell you why the "yes" kills the BBT.
As you clearly can't offer real true in your messages, then please try to find a shelter when the true flag is raised..

[Bored chemist]

If that isn't true, then why you are so afraid to answer my following questions with Yes or no?

I'm not afraid. I already answered them.
And you jumped to an illogical conclusion. You think it justifies your nonsense.
That's why I suggest this.

Sit down quietly an try to understand why not seeing a black cat in a coal cellar does not prove that the cat is not there.

As you clearly can't offer real true in your messages,

I did.
You called me a liar.
And I keep asking why you did that.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 05/06/2021 11:25:18
Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/06/2021 17:35:40
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 13:52:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 15:38:10
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 17:52:32
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 10:00:14
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 20:35:32

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 18:36:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 11:09:16
So.
You are the man who called me a liar because I said that this text
"And they found, as predicted by general relativity, that the black hole shadow - the circle in the middle of the glowing golden ring - was persistent throughout the time period, maintaining the same diameter over years. This is yet further confirmation of the nature of M87*, the researchers said."
does not include the word "perfect".

You called me a liar for saying something which is obviously true.

So it is clear that you are not worth listening to

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 19:46:23
If that isn't true, then why you are so afraid to answer my following questions with Yes or no?

I'm not afraid. I already answered them.

As you already answered my questions, why can't you just say if it is yes or no?
Only one word please.
Yes or no?

[Bored chemist]

Read the last line again, carefully.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 19:46:23
As you clearly can't offer real true in your messages,
I did.
You called me a liar.
And I keep asking why you did that.
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 08:27:31
Quote from: Bored chemist on 05/06/2021 11:25:18
Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/06/2021 17:35:40
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 13:52:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 15:38:10
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 17:52:32
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 10:00:14
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 20:35:32

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 18:36:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 11:09:16
So.
You are the man who called me a liar because I said that this text
"And they found, as predicted by general relativity, that the black hole shadow - the circle in the middle of the glowing golden ring - was persistent throughout the time period, maintaining the same diameter over years. This is yet further confirmation of the nature of M87*, the researchers said."
does not include the word "perfect".

You called me a liar for saying something which is obviously true.

So it is clear that you are not worth listening to

[Bored chemist]

If I answer your question, do you promise not to lie about what the answer means?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

You are the man who called me a liar because I said that this text
"And they found, as predicted by general relativity, that the black hole shadow - the circle in the middle of the glowing golden ring - was persistent throughout the time period, maintaining the same diameter over years. This is yet further confirmation of the nature of M87*, the researchers said."
does not include the word "perfect".

Well, I do not recall that I have called you a liar because of this word.
If I did, then I'm apology.

If I answer your question, do you promise not to lie about what the answer means?

I have never lied.
In the same token I expect you to say true.
So, are you willing now to answer my following questions with Yes or No?

1. Do you confirm that in the following article?
https://www.space.com/spaghettified-star-observed-near-black-hole
There is no clear observation/evidence for matter from outside as it falls inwards into the accretion disc.
Yes or No?
2. Do you confirm that in the article about M87, there is clear observation /evidence for matter from the M87 accretion disc as it falls outwards or ejected outwards - as UFO?
Yes or No?
Please - Only one word (Yes or No) for each question!

[Kryptid]

Please - Only one word (Yes or No) for each question!

This is rather akin to that old trick question of "Have you told people you are gay yet?"

[Bored chemist]

I have never lied.

You plainly did.

Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 19:50:24

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 19:46:23
As you clearly can't offer real true in your messages,
I did.
You called me a liar.
And I keep asking why you did that.
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 08:27:31
Quote from: Bored chemist on 05/06/2021 11:25:18
Quote from: Bored chemist on 04/06/2021 17:35:40
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 13:52:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 15:38:10
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 17:52:32
Quote from: Bored chemist on 31/05/2021 10:00:14
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 20:35:32

Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 18:36:30
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 11:09:16
So.
You are the man who called me a liar because I said that this text
"And they found, as predicted by general relativity, that the black hole shadow - the circle in the middle of the glowing golden ring - was persistent throughout the time period, maintaining the same diameter over years. This is yet further confirmation of the nature of M87*, the researchers said."
does not include the word "perfect".

You called me a liar for saying something which is obviously true.

You even apologised for it

If I did, then I'm apology.

, though it took so long that the apology looks completely insincere.

[Bored chemist]

If I answer your question, do you promise not to lie about what the answer means?

Why can't you promise not to lie about this?

[Bored chemist]

As you already answered my questions, why can't you just say if it is yes or no?

If you were so rude that you didn't listen, why should I repeat myself?