Posts by goldenmason172

Gregory Gomez8 said:Nice work on the link,
It’s a textbook example of how they maintain a monopoly on what people actually think...

Most folks have already forgotten just how much hype was drummed up regarding Iraq's supposed nuclear weapons program.
I still remember how the media blew it out of proportion—I honestly thought Iraq was going to launch a few nukes at any given second. 😵

But in the end? They found some junk in a shed, and there wasn't even a trace of a massive Iraqi nuclear program to speak of...

By the way, I don't quite get how nuclear weapons in the hands of Iraqis or Iranians are somehow less dangerous than having them held by a US President who can barely string two coherent sentences together without tripping over himself.

You see, even in your case, propaganda is doing its job. You’re convinced that George W. Bush can't manage to put two sensible thoughts together, and you find it impossible to grasp how someone you view as such an idiot could lead the most powerful nation on Earth. It's all propaganda, my friend—pure propaganda! 🤣
How much time do you think Bush actually spends in front of cameras, and how many sentences does he really utter daily? It's a massive amount, certainly, but the media tends to cherry-pick his blunders, leaving you with the impression that the man is completely incompetent, which, of course, bears little relation to the actual reality. "It rated G.W. Bush second last, with an estimated IQ between 111.1 and 138.5, and an average of 124.8 (which still is well above the standardized average of 100). According to the same study, the average estimated IQ of president Bill Clinton was 149." So, while he might not be as intellectually gifted as Bill, he isn't nearly as dim-witted as you seem to believe. Besides, he happens to be the first US president to hold an MBA from Harvard Business School.🤔

Nicholas Gray5 said:Honestly, you guys don't have a clue what's going on in your own backyard, let alone what's actually happening in the USA or Iraq. Most people just swallow whatever the news media feeds them without thinking twice. Don't be one of them; start asking yourself what’s actually plausible and what’s just pure fiction. If we're supposed to believe the American narrative that Bin Laden was behind everything, then where's the proof? Where are those tapes the CIA supposedly snatched from that hotel right across from the Pentagon? I mean, come on. What kind of pilot could pull off those impossible maneuvers and hit those buildings with that kind of surgical precision? And look at the damage—which building collapses all the way down to its foundation just from fire like the WTC did? None of them. Even the Empire State Building wasn't leveled by a smaller plane hitting it. On 9/11, two planes were spotted and recorded near the Pentagon—one identified as a C-180 and another unidentified passenger jet. What were those planes doing in the air when every single flight in the entire USA was supposed to be grounded? And why isn't there a single wing fragment or any significant piece of debris left on the Pentagon's facade before it took the hit? Same thing goes for United Airlines 93—why haven't they found any substantial wreckage? Until someone actually provides some real answers to these questions, I'll pass on believing this whole Bin Laden story.

Wonderful, yet another conspiracy theory—pure paranoia! 🤣

northernheron97 said:These clowns are truly unbelievable; do they honestly think anyone here is actually buying their cheap propaganda?
Just the other day, Osama bin Laden—with his beard freshly dyed, mind you—was basically saying they were the ones who brought down the skyscrapers and how he came up with the idea, yet these people are still rambling on about CIA conspiracies, babbling away and worshipping Loose Change videos, effectively calling their own idol a liar.

I bet next you'll try to tell me it wasn't even bin Laden because his beard was dyed.

Michael Moore and those of his ilk have crawled out of their holes for one reason only: to make millions of dollars off of fools. Honestly, when have Americans ever missed an opportunity to turn something massive into a profit? 🤔 🤔 😂 😂

hiddengardener84 said:Give me a break. Don't act like US officials weren't claiming Saddam was behind September 2001. Stop lying through your teeth. It’s reckless. I personally watched on TV as Condoleezza Rice was laying out the "evidence" that Saddam ordered those attacks. Naturally, public opinion polls showed over 65 percent of Americans believed it was true. That's old news—maybe you were still in grade school back then and weren't paying any attention to the news 😬

You didn't "personally" watch anything; you likely saw some edited segment from Al Jazeera. Back when everything was gearing up for the invasion of Iraq, that wasn't even a point of debate among anyone with half a brain. 🤣 It seems you aren't even capable of figuring out that I'm a man and not a woman, so I'll just wish you a good day. 😂

hiddengardener84 said:What lie?😬 Did they actually find chemical weapons or prove that Saddam ordered attacks on New York and the Pentagon? Sorry, I haven't been keeping up with the news lately.😬

They never even claimed that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on the WTC, so please, let's not resort to lying. 🤮 🤮 🤮

hiddengardener84 said:How on earth do you know who blew up that mosque in the Samara Desert?👎 Couldn't that have been some third party just pretending to be in Arab uniforms? Or are you one hundred percent certain?😲 🤣

Of course he did; George W. Bush orchestrated the whole thing himself. It’s almost funny how naive we can be. I mean, really, who do we think carried out that terrorist attack in Algeria just ten days ago? I suppose we're meant to believe it was George W. Bush again! 😂 😂 🤣 🤣

hiddengardener84 said:What did the black boxes tell us? Look at the crashes—all four were so badly damaged they were basically useless. 😬 Were you actually on one of those planes? You weren't. Bush and his inner circle claimed it was terrorists, and they called it "proof." Then Bush and his crew said Saddam was behind it, so that was it. Then Bush and his guys said Iraq had chemical weapons, and guess what? They never found them. 😬 Are we really supposed to trust Bush and his clique after all this? 👎 😬 🤣

The attempt to blame Saddam Hussein for the attacks was clearly designed to appeal to voters in rural Alabama rather than to appeal to anyone with a functioning intellect. 😂 When you bring up arguments like that, it becomes pretty obvious whose side you're on. Besides, there are already dedicated threads for discussing September 2001 on this forum, so please don't clutter up this specific discussion with off-topic posts.

dustyranger4 said:I suspect we’re looking at a bit of a misstatement here—it really doesn't matter whether Jews own Coca-Cola, McDonald's, or Walt Disney. For all I care, they could be owned by Germans or Turks. What actually matters is the sheer value of the brand itself—take Coca-Cola, for example. Just to clarify the practical side of things—many homeowners swear by keeping a liter of it overnight to dissolve limescale in the toilet, then just flushing it away in the morning. Beyond that, today's Walt Disney is practically defined by violence, McDonald's is essentially junk food and a direct contributor to diabetes, Microsoft Windows seems to glitch constantly regardless of how many updates they push, Ford feels like it's built out of sponge, and then there's Marlboro... Let's try rephrasing it this way instead: "10 companies with the highest 'idiot tax.'"

Regarding The Coca-Cola Company, you should keep in mind that beyond just Coca-Cola, they have about two hundred other products, and the combined revenue of that company and Caterpillar is roughly on par with the entire GDP of a small nation. Of course, Coca-Cola isn't exactly healthy any more than milk is if you decide to drink ten liters of it a day. It seems to me you've taken everything you saw on TV at face value; instead of forming an opinion based on news segments, try doing your own research and then tell me what you think. Moderation is key in everything, including Coca-Cola. Similarly, McDonald's isn't any healthier than a greasy burger or a plate of ribs, but if you eat one Big Mac once a month, I can assure you that you won't end up with prostate cancer.😂

Richard Wilson4 said:Nah, they'll be Romanian... ☕

That was meant to be ironic! 🤔 👍

Morgan Cook10 said:So, what actually goes into calculating a brand's value?

I would assume it is calculated based on the company's overall market capitalization. 🤔

Wait a second, why does it have to be exactly eight out of ten that are American? 🤔 🤣

Jessica Kelly4 said:I think you’re getting a bit too hyped up about NASA. To me, the real strength of American technology lies in the countless small, innovative companies and research institutes—places like IBM—rather than in a massive behemoth like NASA.

Same goes for the science; no sane person would question Russian science or their space program. As for practical everyday benefits, I think you're right—the US economic system is great at quickly turning "military toys" into civilian tech.

I couldn't agree more, and I find everything you've stated to be entirely accurate. 👍

Jessica Kelly4 said:I think this whole debate is pretty pointless. Every single invention or breakthrough mentioned here is built on centuries of grueling work by countless scientists. It’s not like Newton was kidding when he said his greatest achievements came from standing on the shoulders of giants.

goldenmason172:
Mouse, joysticks, and LCDs weren't invented at NASA, nor were they developed because of NASA (though it's true they were quickly recognized, funded, and put to use there).

That is precisely the most critical point, and it counts for a great deal. If it hadn't been for their foresight, we might not even have these products in our daily lives today. 👍 👍 There is still so much else we enjoy modernly simply because NASA recognized its value early on!

Jessica Kelly4 said:I think this whole debate is pretty pointless. Every single invention or breakthrough mentioned here is built on centuries of grueling work by countless scientists. It’s not like Newton was kidding when he said his greatest achievements came from standing on the shoulders of giants.

goldenmason172:
Mouse, joysticks, and LCDs weren't invented at NASA, nor were they developed because of NASA (though it's true they were quickly recognized, funded, and put to use there).

Oh, really? 🤔 In that case, the least you could do is be a bit more specific! ☕

I find it quite fascinating how, for two full pages now, forum members have been recycling the exact same list of Russian achievements, yet not a single person here can actually name one specific product derived from their space technology that we use in our daily lives. There are likely some, but I suspect nobody in this thread can list them, and they certainly don't compare to the scale of what NASA has delivered. I never claimed they didn't have successes; my point was simply that the world doesn't particularly care about those successes if they aren't translated into something that genuinely benefits humanity. NASA, on the other hand, has pioneered thousands of such applications. For instance, just consider how many technologies developed for space travel have found critical roles in medicine. I doubt many of you have even heard of the CCD chip! These chips are so incredibly sensitive that they can pinpoint the exact location of a tumor and determine whether it is malignant or benign just by scanning the tissue, often bypassing the need for a surgical biopsy altogether. A tumor can then be targeted and eliminated with a simple needle rather than through invasive scalpel incisions. This drastically reduces recovery times, avoids unnecessary physical trauma, minimizes medication needs, lessens fear, and ultimately saves a significant amount of money. Even the computer mouse is a byproduct of NASA's work, patented to make managing massive data sets on their computers much more efficient. And if you happen to be a gamer, you’re likely using yet another spinoff: the joystick. That originated from devices originally engineered to control the lunar rover during the Apollo mission. If you follow current tech trends, your LCD monitor is probably another legacy of the space program, developed specifically to replace those bulky, heavy cathode-ray tube monitors that were far too cumbersome for spacecraft where every ounce of weight and inch of space is precious. So, there is an abundance of things that have made our lives easier, all thanks to NASA. While we used to see mostly hardware spin-offs, today software dominates the field. Therefore, NASA's 🙏

Chris Barrett37 said:Man, a phone born from space exploration? Seriously... 🤣 A phone is basically just a standard radio receiver, thanks to the legacy of Tesla. 😎

Here’s the reality of what Russia contributed:

The first satellite
The first living being in space first man
The first human in space
The first spacewalk
The first space station, MIR
Exploration of the Moon, Mercury, Venera, Mars, and other planets via SS
And a whole bunch of other things I can't even remember right now. 🙂

And honestly, if you're sitting there watching Fox News and letting yourself get brainwashed, that’s largely thanks to the Russians, who were the first to develop rockets capable of launching satellites. About 90 percent of any space program—whether it's the Russians or Americans—is driven by the military, ranging from ICBMs and short-range missiles to spy satellites and more.

NASA has been struggling for years because they receive such ridiculously small budgets. Flights have almost vanished, space research is incredibly weak, and every year it gets smaller and smaller. When you finally see NASA launching at least a third of what they used to back in '85, then you'll know the Cold War is officially back in full swing. 😉

Everything you just listed has absolutely nothing to do with the progress of humanity. If you consider launching warheads to be "human progress," then best of luck to you. In reality, NASA has accomplished a thousand times more than those pathetic Russians.

Imagine a chemical sensor equipped with mobile signaling for content and capacity status, paired with a digital camera for detailed analysis. You know, you could actually use a setup like that to communicate with someone else.

You’re clearly spinning misinformation again; if we look at the numbers, 2000 saw $13.6 billion while 2007 hit $16.3 billion. Between 1958 and 2007, NASA received a staggering $420 billion, which really makes me wonder how much Russia actually contributed. I’d love for you to finally clarify what Russia has actually left us in terms of space technology or any kind of broad, practical application. 😂As for why they aren't receiving more funding, you really ought to take that question up with the administration. Things were handled quite differently in the past, though. NASA always maintained that the space program serves the greater good for everyone, but history shows that hasn't always been the case. A perfect example would be the backroom dealings surrounding Teflon back in the sixties. I assume you're familiar with that whole situation and how taxpayers reacted to it! Once you lose the trust of the public here in the US, you don't get a second chance. 😂

northernbison63 said:Come on! Seriously? If that's the case, then how exactly am I not able to just build a Space Shuttle that actually flies? 🤣

So, I was digging into some research from American economists, and get this—it’s actually pretty wild when you look at the numbers. For every single dollar we sink into the space program, we’re seeing at least seven bucks crawl back into the economy through tax revenue. And where does that money come from? It's all from the tech and gadgets developed for these missions that eventually end up in our hands as side products. It’s not just about the hardware, though. Think about the jobs! Every single scientist working over at NASA basically acts as an engine for employment, opening up at least five different positions in various industries that specialize in turning those space-age spin-offs into everyday tools. It’s a massive multiplier effect that most people just don't wrap their heads around.

Look, I see exactly what's happening here, and that’s precisely why they’re just barging into NASA's business whenever they feel like it. 🤣

Look, if you want my take on where things stand with technology over in Russia, I’ll tell you straight—it’s basically a flatline. It’s sitting at zero. Honestly, anyone who actually knows their stuff about this kind of thing can see that immediately. It’s just... nothing. Zero. Flat. Anyone with a brain for tech isn't going to argue with me on that one!

So, look, you just load that Space Shuttle onto a Soyuz, which then shoots the whole thing up into orbit before bringing it back down. While they're up there, the Space Shuttle basically serves two main purposes: taking photos with digital cameras and... well, handling business in the bathroom. And I'm talking about using those specialized chemical toilets that NASA had to engineer specifically for the job.😵

Now you've drifted into pure trolling because you've run out of actual arguments. I could sit here all day listing the achievements of NASA and the USA, but since you can't provide anything comparable for Russia, I'll just wish the Russians better luck in their next life! 🤣

northernbison63 said:Since you obviously don't know much about "space technology," just a quick reality check—most of the communication satellites launched into orbit for the EU lately were sent up by Russian rockets, after it turned out the French Ariane was unreliable and way more expensive. (A few satellites actually got destroyed during launch, by the way.)

Tell me something about the benefits of USA space technology, besides movies like "The Right Stuff" and "The Right Stuff." 😵

Can you honestly imagine any massive leaps for humanity coming from Rusić? 🤣 We take so many things for granted today—things like smartphones, rechargeable batteries, live TV broadcasts, and digital cameras—without ever stopping to consider where that tech actually originated. Believe it or not, these items, along with tens of thousands of others, were born directly from research conducted by NASA for the space program. If you look at analysis from American economists, for every single dollar invested in the space program, at least seven dollars are returned through taxes on the very devices and technologies that emerged as side products of that research. Or if we look at it in terms of employment, every single scientist at NASA creates at least five jobs in the various industries manufacturing those spin-off technologies. Now, tell me, what kind of technological progress has Russia achieved? It’s practically non-existent, and anyone who actually understands this field knows that for granted! 👍