Re: NASA caught LYING TO YOU again!

On 8/3/2025 2:15 PM, % wrote:
> 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

In any sense, "yes".  Anyone can come on Usenet and throw-up a bunch of 
technobabble, but that does not mean that the rest of us have to sift 
through their nonsense to identify their many errors.

Dawn