Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Where have we been?
Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Lance, You got caught lying and fabricating evidence.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:33 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:In this case, Matthew loves the Mutually Assured Destruction system and hates anything that opposes that idea. That is the whole basis for his refusal to believe, not just the Arhipov story,
I think you are a bit senile Lance. I don't like or dislike M.A.D. I know it exists. You don't even know what it is.

How could Arkhipov mutually destroy the USA, with one nuclear torpedo designed for coastal targets, while the USA had thousands of nukes ready to launch at, or drop on the CCCP?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Stop running away Lance and answer the question

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:35 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:The reason Matthew refuses ........
No Lance. Like Gorgeous, you have an agenda. Like Gorgeous, you are prepared to lie for your agenda. Therefore, like Gorgeous, you directly lied

Lance Kennedy wrote:The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records. Duh!!!!!
So Gorgeous Lance, show all of us any USA or Russian book, magazine. official record or nursery book that says the USA Navy captured the B-59 Russian submarine. I'll even accept Wikipedia for this load of bull-shit you are making up. :lol:

"As the submarine's batteries had run very low and its air-conditioning had failed, B-59 was forced to surface and use its diesel engine, amid the US warships pursuing it. B-59 then set course for the USSR."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_B-59
B59.jpg



Why are you lying for your agenda Lance? :lol: :lol: :lol:
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10241
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:57 am

Matthew

Whether the sub was captured or not is irrelevant. The point is that it was seen and reported by the US Navy, and that supports the story. The Americans were in a position to carry out a capture, and they recorded the fact.

You are a lawyer, which means you are trained to take a position, and then find an argument to support that position. That is the reverse of the scientific process, where the scientist starts with facts, carries out work to gain more data, and test hypotheses, and finally draw aconclusion. A lawyer begins with a conclusion (my client is innocent) and then gathers (cherry picks) data to support that conclusion. This is exactly what you are doing here. You have not presented any true scientific evidence for your predetermined conclusion. Just cherry picked material to allow you to present your own version of 'logic'. Just like any lawyer.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Lance gets caught making up facts

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:09 am

Lance Kennedy lied and wrote:The USA Navy captured the sub, and that is on its records. Duh!!!!!

Lance Kennedy lied again and wrote:Whether the sub was captured or not is irrelevant. The point is that it was seen and reported by the US Navy, and that supports the story. The Americans were in a position to carry out a capture, and they recorded the fact.
No Lance that is complete crap.

"When the destroyer escort USS Cony (DDE508) challenged B59 by flashing light – the sub responded "КORABL". Shortly afterwards, a sailor from our communications center came to my duty station and said "Mr. Murphy, we have flushed a Soviet sub and it has given us his name. Can you translate it for me." I said "Sure- his name is SHIP". We laughed and agreed the Captain of B59 was pretty cool in the face of adversity. At the time I remember thinking "Impressive. To have a sense of humor at a time like this." I now see that the official U.S. Navy reports state that the B59’s response to the Cony was "KORABL X" or "SHIP X". Whatever. I also recently learned that B59 also gave two other names to our ships that night."

Memoirs of Commander John Murphy, USN, Ret who was on the destroyer, when B-59 surfaced.

Where does he say he intended to capture the Russian sub? The USA wasn't at war with Russia, you complete idiot. Stop lying and making up stories to support your agenda. We already have Gorgeous, doing that. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Stop lying Lance.

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:12 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:You are a lawyer, which means you are trained to take a position, and then find an argument to support that position.
No Lance. I have to follow the evidence. If I made up stories like you are doing now I would be disbarred.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10241
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:52 am

Matthew

I am dropping out of this discussion. Your approach has become quite distasteful. Insulting and rather unhelpful. Neither is your "logic" very convincing. We are getting nowhere, and it is time to quit.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26775
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Would the world really have ended if Vassily Arkhipov or Stanislav Petrov didn't exist?

Postby Matthew Ellard » Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:21 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Matthew I am dropping out of this discussion. Your approach has become quite distasteful.
Lance, you directly lied to support your agenda and then kept lying. This is a skeptic forum.

Lance Kennedy wrote: Neither is your "logic" very convincing.
I have supplied fact, after fact, after fact, which you kept ignoring. You don't know how to do basic research. Bad luck.

Here is B-59 leaving for Russia after surfacing. I have no idea why you would claim the US Navy captured it when Russia and the USA weren't at war.
B-59 2.jpg


Note the three Russians (one using binoculars to look at the USA destroyer) just after it surfaced and turned on its diesel engines to return to Murmansk. The bloke with the big epaulettes and no hat is probably Arkhipov or Savitsky.
B-59 3.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Return to “History”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest