Re: NASA caught LYING TO YOU again!

Dawn Flood wrote:
> On 7/29/2025 1:02 PM, JTEM wrote:
>> On 7/29/25 11:30 AM, jojo wrote:
>>
>>> doesnt look like it.
>>
>> You know what it looks like?  Mental illness.
>>
>> #1.  I said that the Dimethyl sulfide in question was already
>> confirmed. It was detected and later detected again. AND I
>> said that the claim here wasn't that NASA found no evidence
>> for it but, no "Strong" evidence. Which means that their
>> findings were CONSISTENT WITH Dimethyl sulfide, rather than
>> excluding it.
>>
>> Any dispute? Any word addressing this at all?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> #2.  I said that Dimethyl sulfide was not the only biosignature
>> detected. There were others. I said that Dimethyl sulfide was
>> so important because there are no non-biological sources.
>>
>> Any dispute? Was a single word acknowledged or addressed?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> #3.  I said that NASA, besides NOT claiming that they found no
>> evidence for it, merely no "Strong" evidence," dismissed this
>> Dimethyl sulfide as something that could have come from a simple
>> chemical reaction. But, this is wrong because, as I already
>> pointed out, as far as we know the only known sources are
>> biological.
>>
>> Any dispute? Was this addressed at all? Was it acknowledged?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> #4.  I said that this was consistent. That, NASA is consistent
>> in it's denials of evidence for life outside the earth, and
>> even misinforming the public on the subject. I reiterated facts
>> raised in a previous thread regarding the Mars lander and the
>> supposed search for life there.
>>
>> Any dispute? Was there so much as a single counter example? Any
>> attempt to address this fact at all?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>
>>
>> I get that people can  /Like/  a particular answer over others,
>> but that's not even the problem here. This thread is about me
>> raising facts that should set off alarm bells in any so called
>> "Skeptic," while the collective spasms & tries to stop any
>> conversation it is unable to control.
>>
> 
> Then type all of this up and submit it as a manuscript; here's one place 
> that you can go to today:
> 
> https://arxiv.org/
> 
> You'll get fairly prompt feedback from experts.  I am not an expert; 
> few, if any others here, are experts either.  Get back to us when your 
> paper is online and any replies that you receive; please be sure to 
> include links.
> 
> Dawn
> 
are we being graded on this