Comments by "snuffeldjuret" (@snuffeldjuret) on "Primal Space" channel.

  1. @25thMax 2003 "but the CIA one is not to be made public only known by ISRO and DRDO scientist it was wrong about making it public." What are you talking about? Also, why are you and (almost) everyone else here so reluctant to talk about this idea: "When you are in one of three neighboring nuclear powers like Iran, Pakistan and India, each struggling to achieve martial rivalry over the other two ..."?
    1
  2.  @EragonShadowSlasher  hehe yea, it is as if the U.S. isn't really involved ;).
    1
  3.  @EragonShadowSlasher  ergo CIA killed Indian scientists?
    1
  4.  @EragonShadowSlasher  don't be conspiratorial. The evidence presented by everyone here is pathetic. "And their intelligence agencies will do whatever it takes to fulfill their national objectives." is an exaggeration and you know it. Do better.
    1
  5.  @thepodcastpoint9653  what you believe is irrelevant really.
    1
  6.  @radhakrishna-fv6dt  "... but u can't deny the fact that there is a chance that cia did this!" Did I do that? I don't recall doing that, but please quote me if i did. Of course you can't say they didn't do it unless there is unquestionable evidence someone else did. My point is that it is ludicrous to assume or claim the U.S. did it (which so, so many do here in this thread and comment section) when there are other, more motivated, actors.
    1
  7.  @radhakrishna-fv6dt  "US doesn't have any less motivation than other countries!" and "... if they did kill the scientist they would have been caught! cause they are not that much capable as CIA !" Just looks like uninformed speculation from your part. To me, making a plane crash (if that's the one we are talking about) lacks any finesse, certainly sounds like something Iran or Pakistan would do. Or you know, it could just have been an accident ;). You see, you have to back up your argument with something substantial to be convincing, otherwise it just looks like you are taking advantage of a situation to throw shade at an arbitrary chosen direction.
    1
  8.  @iscifion7122  "So the solution was. Kill the lead scientist." Still, this is your speculation. Be honest about that.
    1
  9.  @iscifion7122  how does that question make sense?
    1
  10.  @iscifion7122  What did I write that makes you think it is even remotely possible that I think the world is a utopia?
    1
  11.  @danydash316  ergo USA killed an Indian scientist? Is that what you are trying to say?
    1
  12.  @danydash316  do you think he should have gotten a more severe punishment? Surely you can understand the desire to not send a citizen away to another country for prosecution?
    1
  13.  @samusam5853  oh, we are up to "many" now? XD. You must be furious people only talk about one!
    1
  14.  @asi2765  Do you dispute that "Misunderstanding between Geneva Airport and the pilot about the aircraft position near the mountain is the official reason of the crash."? All in all though, if you align with Russia in the cold war, I think you deserve it if CIA did it :P.
    1
  15.  @asi2765  "Nice of you to come in front of the curtain." What is that even supposed to mean? What made you think I could even possibly be pro-Russia? Call it what you want, it is what it is. Haha, next up I am expecting Germans coming in here, complaining about how the U.S. and Russia stole their scientist, setting them back I don't know how many decades. Oh how they would complain XD. Do you get my point? :D
    1
  16.  @avishekmondal4836  "Scientists" Plural s? That is a rare claim, even in this thread. Are you mad at your bretheren who only claim there was one? I have only seen evidence presented for one, and that is very weak evidence mind you. Not even remotely as comparable to today, which is Israel btw, not the U.S.
    1
  17.  @avishekmondal4836  "Yes, CIA killed 200 other innocent passengers just to kill 1 Indian Nuclear Scientist." Does the Indian government make this claim? Last I heard, the official story is accidents. They do happen, you know.
    1
  18.  @avishekmondal4836  "In comments section of other videos too" Yeah I'd like you to present evidence on that one haha. Unless you think it is hate propaganda to point out that NASA does not consist of 37% Indians :P. "... wont stop India from developing. Just watch and suffer. Wish you a long life so that you see for yourself what this country has to achieve." Quite the opposite (I was once accused for being an Indian masquerading as a Swede just because I praised ISRO), but that is not what this is about. This is about the truth and how confident we can be in us understanding it based on evidence. This whole hate thing is something you just made up in your head, which seems common in comment sections like this. A lot of patriotism over truth and rationality.
    1
  19.  @mrnobody9473  "the only evidence we have was when our scientist Homi bhaba was killed by CIA" But that is not evidence, that is a rumor. I mean, is this even the official stance of the India government?
    1
  20.  @sambin8481  "But before jumping the gun" I am not jumping any gun, the gun jumpers are those who say it as if it is a fact.
    1
  21.  @mrnobody9473  "many were saying that it was CIA" yeah but that doesn't make it evidence or true. Do you know that many people say that the democrats stole the election from Trump, do you believe that as well? I mean, many people are saying it!
    1
  22.  @mrnobody9473  "I have not said that it is CIA confirmed" Mate, you literally did when you wrote: "our scientist Homi bhaba was killed by CIA in bomb blast on his plane"
    1
  23.  @mrnobody9473  I was quoting your first comment mate. "our scientist Homi bhaba was killed by CIA in bomb blast on his plane" is from your first comment, which does indeed contradict what you later said "I have not said that it is CIA confirmed". Maybe you are commenting from multiple accounts?
    1
  24.  swapnil katkar  lol, you are that person who is proud over beating up a guy even though you were in a group of 8 against him. Pathetic.
    1
  25.  @wrwhiteal  "... most viewers don’t bother to downvote because they don’t show anyway. " Is this your feeling or do you have any actual solid empirical evidence? Something is still better than nothing, you can consider the new dislike landscape and act accordingly, but only if you have a plugin showing the number of dislikes.
    1
  26.  @tomwatts703  "a prototype has flown to 10km" 5 prototypes flew that high. "only a tenth of the distance to actual space, with no crew or cargo" But they flew, and as I said "just not that high." "that is nowhere near enough to qualify it as a success." Not sure what "it" is that you are referring to here. "At least the Orion capsule has actually made it above the Karman Line." That was an odd tangent. So has Crew Dragon, so I wonder what point you are trying to make here.
    1
  27.  @oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368  you can say that about absolutely everything. It hasn't happened until it has happened, what a brilliant comment...
    1
  28.  @oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368  but you are here attacking SpaceX, not SpaceX fanbois.
    1
  29.  @oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368  you are erratic, so it is difficult to take you seriously.
    1
  30. do you believe in the second, and third etc.?
    1
  31.  @akinemainunangugel9650  but first was live, and you don't believe that one either? So you are dishonest in your standards mate.
    1
  32.  @akinemainunangugel9650  "for me they didn't make it live again because it will be noticed coz the viewing technology is evolving" But you realize the second landing was in the same year, 1969, right? How much had the viewing technology advanced at that point? Why didn't they fake the footage again, to convince even more people? If they faked it once, it'd be a piece of cake to fake it again, right? If you think it was fake back then, why would you change your opinion if they landed now? Why wouldn't you just call the footage fake, like all other flat earthers etc?
    1
  33.  @akinemainunangugel9650  that does not answer my questions.
    1
  34.  @akinemainunangugel9650  how did the technology evolve in 5 months? From mid 69 to late 69? "but the critics on the same year voice it out" Who did? All this nonsense started much later. Not even Russia disputed this, who were in the same race.
    1
  35.  @akinemainunangugel9650  "you didn't know there is a critics??? oh ok" Name one. If you say there are, without naming one single person, why should I believe you? If you don't believe in the moon landing, despite massive amounts of evidence, why should I believe you, with zero evidence? "there is always a critics and supporters everytime there is a record or show " But if there is always critics, you can't use the existence of critics as evidence against it actually happening, lol. Your logic is way out of whack dude.
    1
  36.  @akinemainunangugel9650  "whatever... naming people I don't know personally is not my thing" but claiming things without evidence is, I see. Which is so, so ironic, isn't it? "there is no evidence that the first human on the moon is real" do you confuse evidence with proof? There is tons of evidence. This is all evidence: https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/12/12/heres-your-proof-that-we-landed-on-the-moon-steph-curry/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings and for you to say it doesn't exist only shows your ignorance of the situation.
    1
  37.  @akinemainunangugel9650  "they believe it's true so they imagine it is" Have you ever thought that you refuse to see the evidence for what it is because you believe it is not true to begin with? The arguments you present are so inconsistent that it does not hold up to scrutiny, and you even claimed there were no evidence yet you disputed none of the evidence I just showed you. In the greater context, do you believe in everything about space flight, except the human moon landings? "forbes is made by the same country, so ¯\_(⊙_ʖ⊙)_/¯" Again, this is not an argument as you dismiss evidence from other countries as well.
    1
  38.  @akinemainunangugel9650  you are in denial mate, what you want and what you think you want doesn't always align. You have made zero effort in understanding the evidence for the manned moon landing, but you take any so called evidence against it at face value, without any critical thinking. Actions speak louder than words, and your actions are quite loud and your words are meaningless.
    1
  39.  @akinemainunangugel9650  yes, the relevant actions, like dismissing evidence on baseless grounds, and accepting evidence on baseless grounds. You are inconsistent in how you treat evidence, and you are very obvious about it.
    1
  40.  @akinemainunangugel9650  no you dismiss on baseless grounds as you do not treat all evidence the same. I don't believe, I assess evidence in the fairest manner I can and make a judgement call on the likelihood of the different possibilities. My problem is not with your outcome, but how you arrive to it. So regarding the evidence of the footage of Neil stepping down on the Moon, what did you think of my answer to your question " if the first human step on the moon is armstrong who put the camera before he do the step?"?
    1
  41.  @akinemainunangugel9650  hm, I have no idea what you are trying to say about the Apollo 11 cam. I think you have to be more elaborate in your description of your issue with it.
    1
  42. I'm confused, I thought Team Cocoa won over Team Boca Chica, but they chose Boca Chica's location for obvious reasons.
    1
  43.    do you know which team won? Don't use this video as a source.
    1
  44. why?
    1
  45.  @thebookofwisdom2147  because neutrality is sometimes immoral.
    1
  46. from what I have been able to find, it seems closer to 500k than 250k for Bezos. Branson seems closer to 250k.
    1
  47.  @iamarokotmanson  *most fans suck
    1
  48. 84km could be though :)
    1
  49.  @tartiflett5248  according to Karman, it is.
    1
  50.  @ManicMovesDrowsyDreams  100 km is arbitrary, you might as well choose 101 km. 100 km is not based on anything "real", it is based on us having 10 fingers :P.
    1