Chinese Women, Asian Women, Online Dating & Things Chinese and Asian
Imi was born and raised in Europe, Hungary. After finishing his school years, he moved to Canada to search for a better life. He lived in Toronto for 13 years and currently resides in Vancouver. He is a romantic at heart with a strong desire to always do the right thing. He would like to give hope to the Chinese and Asian ladies with his story and send a message that love eventually finds everybody.
Articles :
Views :
Comments :
Create Time :
This Blog's Articles
Index of Blogs
Index Blog Articles


By Imi
11689 Views | 200 Comments | 8/6/2018 2:25:00 PM
(Showing 31 to 40 of 200) Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 More... Last
#2018-08-09 22:06:28 by Imi5922 @Imi5922




Moon expedition. My bad, sorry, not in 2019, in the next decade. Chinese are working on it. The European Space Agency is working on it. So is NASA. I guess all are lying.


Barry, if you don't hear about it, that doesn't mean it's not happening. Check it on the internet.


Paul, taking something out of context doesn't prove that NASA admitted anything. Cherry picking, searching for sentences that prove your narrative? Leave that to MSM, you're not good at it.


Paul, I give credit to you for going the extra mile and answering two of my questions. However, sorry to say this, but logic seems to be completely skipping your mind. It clearly shows in your answers. In my opinion, your brain is tuned to escape reality. Anyway, thank you for answering two of my questions.  


Barry, speaking a second language doesn't indicate that the person who speaks it is intelligent. Do you speak another language, Barry? If not, then you must be unintelligent. That's what you're trying to say? Learning a second language takes constant repetition, dedication, and a huge amount of patience. If I may, I'd like to ask a favor of you. Could you, please, explain what Paul's answers mean? They don't make any sense to me. You're a born English speaker. You might be able to enlighten me about what he may have meant.  


As the writer of this blog, I have to admit it achieved nothing. However, it was interesting or rather sad to see how easy it is to divide people. Look at the world. Left, right. Flattards, Globtards. Blacks, whites. Browns, yellows. Moon landing, no moon landing. The world is changing at a fast pace because of tech monopolies. Unfortunately, it is changing for the worse. Social sites let unqualified people keep repeating stuff on their platforms, talking to millions, that fit their narratives and make us divide. If someone doesn't agree with them, they call them names. I don't like this. That was my main reason to write this blog.


I joined CLM in 2012. I remember how happy I was when I found Zoe's blog series. I had the opportunity to learn about Chinese women's way of thinking. That blog series has an average of almost 8000 views as of now. 29 entries are getting close to 230,000. Because of that blog, I've got a wife now.


Nowadays, members of CLM are reading the blogs for conspiracy theories and verbal fights. For example, @autumn2066 prefers reading the comments where we, men, fight about completely unrelated issues to a dating site. I could easily envision autumn2066 glue to the TV and watch Jerry Springers all day. That is her world. As she said in her comment, I should go back and write about flowers, lilies and roses. I'll take her advice. I've got a beautiful flower in my garden that needs my care.  


I miss the old days on CLM. I miss the old world. I miss my wife. So, gentlemen and autumn2066, this is my last comment. I'm just too busy. John, back to you, and I'm sorry for this blog. It was entirely useless. Nothing has changed. I can't reason with a parrot.                              


#2018-08-10 05:57:42 by kalzorch @kalzorch

@paulfox1, as an avid conspiracy theorist myself, I can agree with much of what you say, and sometimes you do not go far enough.  However, on the flat earth question you have many "facts" which are simply bollocks.  For example:

18. In training school, ALL pilots are taught the Earth is a flat, stationary plane, and that no 'spin' is allowed for.

19. No surveyor, canal-builder, railway engineer, bridge builder, etc, is ever taught to consider 'curvature' when constructing.

20. The Bible states, over 200 times, that the Earth is 'immovable', 'stationary', and 'flat'.

I am a trained pilot, and I was not taught that the earth is a flat, stationary plane, and that no 'spin' is accounted for.  It is true that we can treat it that way, and do so for convenience.  Accounting for spin is completely unnecessary because we start (and stop) with a velocity identical to the surface, just like all the people on the planet.  If you jump in the air, you, like the surface, are moving that same 1000 mph, which is why you land back where you started.  Try that in a moving train, and you will get the same result, for the same reason.  We treat the planet as a plane simply because it is so big that it is effectively flat at the scales we generally deal with.  Civil engineers treat it as a plane for the same reason.  On a scale of meters or kilometers, it is effectively flat.  The earth has huge mountains and canyons, yet if you were to shrink it to the size of a billiard ball, it would be smoother than the smoothest billiard ball.  it's all a matter of scale.  And BTW, you can "prove" just about anything with the Bible.

1. We're told that the Earth 'spins' at 1000mph, (1600kmh) in an Easterly direction. So, if a plane flies at 500mph eastwards, how could it ever arrive at its destination?

Because we are talking motion relative to the surface.  Sitting in your chair, you are moving at 1000mph WITH RESPECT TO THE CENTER OF THE EARTH.  With respect to the surface, you are stationary.  That 1000mph is with respect to the center of the earth, not the surface.

2. Why don't helicopters simply hover and wait for their destination to arrive?

Same as above.  The problem is you're mixing your frames of reference.  First you talk about speed with respect to the center of the earth, then you talk about speed with respect to the surface.  It is a different frame of reference, which is why you get a different result.

3. How could a pilot land a plane on a runway that's spinning at 1000mph?

As above.  Because the runway is moving at exactly 0mph WITH RESPECT TO THE GROUND.  Unless of course the runway is an aircraft carrier, in which case it is probably doing at least 20 knots with respect to the surface.

4. If you at a point in the West, and were flying to a point in the East on a 12-hour flight over the North pole, when your plane arrived at your destination, you'd be landing at the same place you took-off from.

Not so, as above.  Here's a thought experiment for frames of reference.  Let's say you're in a train moving at 30mph.  You walk down the aisle at 4mph.  An observer on the train says you're walking at 4mph.  An observer on the ground says you're walking at 34mph or 26mph (backwards!), depending on which direction you're walking in.  That's because the observer on the ground is measuring your speed with respect to the ground, whereas the one in the train is measuring with respect to the train, and doesn't give a hoot about the ground.  Or try swimming upstream in a swiftly-flowing river.  You swim normally, yet looking at the shore, you might even be moving backwards!

5. The 'Pole-Star' never moves, nor do any of the constellations.

The North Star never moves because the axis of the spinning earth is (currently) pointed right at it.  If stars weren't so darn symmetric, we'd see that the star appears to be spinning, one revolution per 24 hours.  The rest of the stars in the sky, including all the constellations, do indeed move, not only with the seasons, but also during the night.  Furthermore, the constellations (stars) that you can see will be different at other locations on the planet.  From the southern hemisphere, you can't see the North Star at all.  If you download any of the computer sky simulators (or google earth), you will notice that you have to give both location and time before they can show you what stars you will see.

6. The Sun and the Moon both appear to be the same size. We're told the Sun is 93 million miles away, and the  Moon is 237,000 miles away. Who has the tape-measure?

If you hold a nickel up at arms length, you can blot out the moon.  Does this mean the moon is only the size of a nickel?  If someone holds it a couple meters away, it is no longer big enough to blot out the moon.  Has the moon grown?

7. Cellphones don't work in rural areas, yet we're supposed to have 'satellites'

Cellphones use cell towers, not satellites.  There are mobile phones which do use satellites, but they are expensive, so typically only extreme mountain climbers or blue-water sailors use them.

8. As stated earlier, water remains flat. This is observable.

Water appears to be flat for the same reason that the ground appears to be flat.  The scale is so large, that from our ordinary perspectives, we don't see any curvature.  How can the water curve?  Because gravity is holding it on the planet.  Try this:  take a bucket of water and swing it in a circle (like a Ferris wheel).  If you go fast enough, the water will stay in the bucket.  What's holding it there?  It's not centrufigal force, since that doesn't exist.  You are accelerating it, and if the bottom were to fall out of the bucket, the water would go flying away.  By going "fast enough", the acceleration you are providing is greater than the acceleration provided by earth's gravity, keeping it (and the bucket) from falling down at the top of the circle.

#2018-08-10 06:06:04 by kalzorch @kalzorch

I think that Imi has also been very rude and condescending when speaking about people who happen to disagree with his view of the world.  The fact that someone disagrees with you, or with society at large, does not necessarily make that person wrong.  For millennia everyone knew that the sun goes around the earth, until Gallileo came along and nearly got himself crucified for daring to say that the earth is not the center of the universe.  Which side would you have been on, Imi?

#2018-08-10 22:47:29 by Imi5922 @Imi5922




(Private) TeamIndus, landing and roving. Proposed launch date: 2019


Russia, Luna-Glob, crewed lunar orbit. Proposed launch date: 2028


Russia, Luna-Glob, crewed lunar landing. Proposed launch date: 2030


Japan, JAXA, crewed lunar landing. Proposed launch date: 2030


China, CLEP, crewed lunar landing. Proposed launch date: 2036


Russia, Luna-Glob, completion of robotic lunar base. Proposed date: 2037


Why don't you, Barry and Paul, tell these idiots who plan these missions that NASA's moon landing has never happened, and the moon is just a hologram 5k above a flat landscape, under a dome, and the greatest threat that they could face on these missions is to avoid the Himalaya's peaks when they orbit this holographic moon?

Or, you should just tell them to fake their missions in a film studio in front of a green screen. It's much safer, and they could save an immense amount of money and trouble for themselves. But above all, if they go ahead with your suggestion and choose to fake it, you should warn them about putting some "moon" dust under the thrusters to make it much more realistic than NASA did.


Stupid NASA. They had all that superminds and forgot about the dust. We are lucky to have you guys, truly, you should be nominated for some kind of Nobel prize for debunking the moon landing with a small detail nobody had thought of back then.


Now, this was really my last comment.  


#2018-08-11 14:58:23 by JohnAbbot @JohnAbbot

@kalzorch - regarding your 1st comment above, the lenghty one that rebuts almost every "proof" that @PaulFox1 has provided, I can only say I love you man. I have been refraining from commenting these many days because I knew it would take me days of research and more days of trying to put it into writing, to rebut Paul's arguments about 15% as effectively as you have done, in about 10 times more words. Thank you for this.

Do me a big favor, please. Rebut the argument Paul raises about the laser light traveling 30 some kilometers ( or more, I can't remember) and being picked up by his friend in spite of the fact that he should have been unable to see it because of the earth's curvature blocking his line of sight. I am guessing that it has to do with gravity (or mass) having an effect on light, such that it bends around the earth's curvature. But I am hopeful you have the answer at hand and can finish off that line of thought as you have so many others.

In response to your comment to Imi, I think we must forgive him for any brashness or rudeness, because, while I consider Paul to be my friend, I have found his approach to teaching us about the world being flat, to have been about as condescending and rude as one could possibly be. I will grant Paul that he has recently improved his approach, but I think Imi started penning his article back when it was pretty easy to feel much affronted by Paul. He was, therefore, simply responding in kind, and I think it was his right to do so.

Having said that, for that brilliant first comment that clearly and concisely puts the boots to so many of Paul's crazy claims, thanks again. That really was a job well done. 

#2018-08-11 15:08:11 by melcyan @melcyan


"I think that Imi has also been very rude and condescending when speaking about people who happen to disagree with his view of the world."   Wow!!! Can't wait to hear your assessment of Paul Fox.

#2018-08-11 16:02:16 by melcyan @melcyan

“A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.”


These words seem to be describing many people in 2018 but in actual fact, these words were written in the 1950's by   Stanford University psychologist Leon Festinger. Whether you are confronting flat-earthers, climate change deniers or anti-vaxers, their common ground is their inability to handle the relevant scientific data within its proper scientific context. Confronting them with relevant facts has no impact. If there is an impact then it is a reinforcing one as they cherry pick the information in front of them.


How is it possible to change this situation? Maybe the study of the History and Philosophy of Science needs to be made part of every high school program and part of every science degree. Maybe all science articles produced in different forms of media need to be written by a qualified science journalist (someone dedicated to bridging the gap between Joe Public and the world of science).


This may not be the answer but something desperately needs to change. If the world of ignorance triumphs over the world of science we are in deep trouble.



#2018-08-11 20:04:24 by paulfox1 @paulfox1


According to your 'explanation', a plane flying in a westerly direction is moving both BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS at the same time, right?

Backwards due to the Earth's 'spin', and forwards towards its destination?

Are you SERIOUS ?


You also said - I think that Imi has also been very rude and condescending when speaking about people who happen to disagree with his view of the world.  The fact that someone disagrees with you, or with society at large, does not necessarily make that person wrong. 


Well please allow me to direct my response to not only yourself, but also @Barry1, @Imi5922, @Melcyan, @JohnAbbot, in particular, but also to readers in general -


Imi referred to me as a 'flattard'. That is rude. Once you come to the opinion that the Earth is NOT a spinning ball, you become known as a 'flat-Earther'. Conversely, people who generally believe the Earth IS a spinning ball are known as 'Globers'.

Those people who understand that the world is 'far from right', and that 9/11 was an 'inside-job', that Monsanto are killing us, and that the Moon landing never happened, yet still REFUSE to look at the POSSIBILITY that the Earth is not a spinning ball, are known as 'Globetards'.

#2018-08-11 20:18:28 by paulfox1 @paulfox1






and others......


I sent the following e-mail to both Barry and John today. So far I have had no response....(but that means nothing because they're probably busy)

"We contacted Bart Sibrel, the man who made the film 'A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon'

Wikipedia says he received this footage 'by accident', however Bart said it was given to him by a 'whistleblower'.

We've uploaded it, and the link is below.


Of course, it doesn't prove the Earth is 'flat', but it certainly proves that the whole world was lied to."

(I'll put the link at the bottom of this reply)


The footage you can see here is a 'joke!'. Back in 1969, we ALL believed it, because we saw it on TV.

Where's the 'spin'? Where are the stars? Where are the satellites?


NASA, by their own admission, have 'lost' the technology to go to the Moon. (If you watch the crap they put out in 1969, it's no wonder they destroyed it.

If you were on a movie-making course and turned this in as your assignment, you'd get a big fat ZERO !


(Oh, for those in China who can't get Google, I'm uploading it to a Chinese platform that you should have access to)


You can see NASA's admission here -


I WILL be writing a blog as a response to Imi's, but I will NOT be writing it in a way that appears to seem like I'm trying to convince anyone the Earth is 'flat'.


Here is the link to our up-load of Bart Sibrels raw footage of the Apollo 11, 1969 Moon landing, as given to him by a NASA employee.


#2018-08-11 21:36:30 by kalzorch @kalzorch

The key to long laser and microwave links is to situate the endpoints high up.  The 193km microwave link, for example, has both endpoints on hills, one of them quite big.  BTW, although light and microwave signals are bent by gravity, the earth's gravity is nowhere near strong enough to have a significant impact.  Thus, for all intents and purposes, microwave and light beams are strictly Line-Of-Sight.  Lower frequency radio waves propagate differently, and can, for some frequencies and conditions, go for thousands of miles.

Note that it does little good to say: "my friend and I did this experiment."  Without recourse to the details of the experiment, nobody can say anything intelligent about it, one way or the other.

MrThriveAndSurvive with his theodolite app proves only that he has no clue what he is talking about.  He talks about "degrees of curvature" and other such meaningless drivel.  He expects that since has has traveled 2000km, the horizon will look different, and the theodolite will show that what was level in Phoenix will be 29 degrees different in Baltimore.  What he forgets is that the accelerometer in his smartphone is measuring gravity, which is always directed to the center of the earth.  BTW, the same experiment could just as easily, and more obviously, be performed with a simple bubble level, or even just a glass of water.  I would love to hear his explanation of why the North Star cannot be seen from anywhere south of the equator.

It is easy to observe, but not always so easy to understand what you're seeing.  Like I said Paul, I agree with much of what you say, but cannot agree on flat earth.  It is CIA disinformation designed to make conspiracy theorists look like nutters.

(Showing 31 to 40 of 200) Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 More... Last
To respond to another member's comment type @ followed by their name before your comment, like this: @username Then leave a space. Ask Imi a Question : Click here...