
I like exposing #fakescientits #globetrottel clowns 👍😂🤡
Earth
Joined February 2022
- Tweets22.4K
- Following883
- Followers432
- Likes17.7K
I show him how the American Meteorological Society directly contradicts his explanation for his unsupported "oceans are curving" claim, but that's a "nothingburger" because AMS has a globe in its logo 🤷♂️
Makes perfect sense 😀
Replying to @__vAv_
It’s showing you that the AMS was describing what you would see on the globe Earth.
When you're out of "nuh-uhs", your have two options: admit you could be wrong, or circle back. He chose the circle. Must be a side effect of believing the oceans curve around a space ball 🤷♂️
Replying to @__vAv_
So where’s the bottom of the ship?
The “sinking” just means it appears to be at a lower position in your vision (so the ship appears closer than its true position, but not larger). It does NOT mean that light from the bottom doesn’t enter your eyes.
Where’s the bottom?
Could it be that all these #fakescientits #globetrottel clowns love committing fallacies because they are mistaking them with fellatios? 😀
When it makes them look silly, Grok is "just a bunch of code that can't admit anything."
When they tag it to validate their claims, it’s suddenly the most reliable fact-checker on X. 🤣🤷♂️
Playing with AI is fun 😀
Grok: Describes a "documented case" proving oceans are curving
Me: Where's the proof?
Grok: Repeats the claims
Me: Grok, you just repeated the description. Where's the proof?
Grok: Repeats the claims
Me: You're glitching
Grok: I made it all up 😂
No public link found to a specific timestamped photo of Crown Seaways from Udsholt Strand with concurrent atmospheric data. Ship route distance and logo/hull heights are standard. Geometric drop for ~14 km at 4 m eye height is ~4.3 m on R=6371 km. Conditions inferred only from described sharp cutoff lacking mirage signs; no measured profiles available.
Me: "that's only the equation, not the full Pythagorean theorem"
Clown: "No, that's the theorem"
Me: "No, man, it's just an equation. It means nothing without the actual description"
Clown: "It's the equation that describes the theorem. You not liking it is not my problem" 🤦♂️😂
"Battle of the bots" 1.0 😂 #exposingthelies #exposingdeceit
I think I just just found my new favourite waste of time 😂🤣😂
Grok, the newest bestest fren of #globetrottels : "you are right, but...." 😀
List of stuff you will see on the timeline of EVERY SINGLE #fakescientits #globetrottel shill:
- pro porn
- pro transgender
- pro Ukraine
- pro Israel
- pro NASA
- pro space
- anti nature
- anti God
- anti real world facts
- anti Russia
- anti Palestine
- anti "flerfs"
LOL, asks Grok to "fact check" real world facts, then quickly blocks me and runs away when his gun backfires 😃
xitter.cf/grok/status/2112132063…
Replying to @__vAv_ @vibralight
Yes. With right angle at B and BC fixed, AC = √(AB² + BC²). Increasing AB therefore increases AC.
I just noticed another tactic the shills use:
- 2-3 obviously retarded ones start spamming the shit out of you, putting your notifications on fire
- in the meantime, 2-3 shill who actually ask pertinent questions also reply to your post, but you get NO notification! (continued)
- sometimes you see no notification AT ALL of their replies, but sometimes they do appear, but are lost in the spam the 2-3 retards caused
- a few days later, others will be trying to point out to the replies they made you miss, and will try to claim you missed them on purpose
LOL he thinks the mathematical equation "a² + b² = c²" >IS< the Pythagorean theorem. Then, when I explain that it's only an equation, he's doubling down on it and even posts links that actually PROVE his stupidity. 🤦♂️
Replying to @__vAv_ @Ghostbanned7
That's the Pythagorean Theorem, my dude.
Don't know what you think you are talking about.
calculator.net/pythagorean-t…
monash.edu/student-academic-…
"I can't argue with you about real world facts from your actual argument, so I'll just attribute MY OWN random argument to you and ask you to prove it" 😂🤣😂
Replying to @__vAv_
I'm on about the model you don't have. I'm not arguing the fact that light can bend, I'm saying whatever model your using to explain that will be incompatible with other observable phenomena such as the stars and the moon.
A working model must explain all observable phenomena
He's even doubling down on it. "I can't argue with you about your argument, so I'll just ask you to explain the whole universe" 😂
xitter.cf/Dakota19989467/status/…
Replying to @__vAv_
Yes, show me the model. You've explained one phenomena, no explain why the stars rotate different directions in opposite hemispheres. Explain why we only ever see one side of the moon. Explain gravity. Then put them all together, and present a model.
If you can't, you're wrong.
“They” will troll you, spam you, insult you, try to degrade and public shame you…. but it’s for your own protection. “They” are simply “tryin to help”.
😂😂😂
Replying to @__vAv_ @Ghostbanned7
“We” refers to the multiple people in this conversation who are trying to help you.
He wants me to "demonstrate" how the Phythagorean THEORUM (😂😂😂) is relevant to my claim that he's retarded for thinking he can see further away when he climbs higher BECAUSE water is curving 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
unavailable














