1
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Did you know that 30,000 people a year visit Antarctica?
« on: December 11, 2007, 04:03:26 PM »
I love how you rape people.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
2
Flat Earth Debate / Re: After 150 years...
« on: December 11, 2007, 10:35:03 AM »
C'mon guys, you are ruining it.
5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Username and Lunar Eclipses
« on: December 10, 2007, 05:33:43 PM »
I like how this thread degenerated.
6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 09, 2007, 03:15:23 PM »I believe in a flat earth.
I believe in a flat earth that is rounded on all sides, kinda like a sphere.
7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 08, 2007, 05:43:03 PM »
*tilts head*
*...I think I can walk again..*
*...I think I can walk again..*
8
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Doctored Photos
« on: December 08, 2007, 03:32:51 PM »His signature is saying active users asshole.Why are we talking about photography? His question was why aren't doctored photos filled with inconsistencies.Everything is a friggin conspiracy theory to you losers. Shouldn't you all be playing World of Warcraft instead of talking shit.
This is a great place for a laugh. I can't believe there are people like this walking round in public. FRUITS!!!!
1) 97% of all people here believe the Earth is round.
You might want to change your signature then asshole.
Aye aye, flat head.
9
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 08, 2007, 03:30:24 PM »
Flag on the play, Bushido ejected from the game for being a faggot.
10
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Doctored Photos
« on: December 08, 2007, 05:51:20 AM »The problem with that image is that image was taken from Apollo 17. The Apollo missions did not occur.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4210517535942492873&q=a+funny+thing+happened+on+the+way+to+the+moon&total=51&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
tom i gotta say that video was actually interesting
11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Doctored Photos
« on: December 08, 2007, 05:43:57 AM »Why are we talking about photography? His question was why aren't doctored photos filled with inconsistencies.Everything is a friggin conspiracy theory to you losers. Shouldn't you all be playing World of Warcraft instead of talking shit.
This is a great place for a laugh. I can't believe there are people like this walking round in public. FRUITS!!!!
1) 97% of all people here believe the Earth is round.
You might want to change your signature then asshole.
12
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 08, 2007, 05:40:28 AM »The Flat Earth Society triumphs over all adversaries again!
Prove it!
13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Discussion of that CN Tower Picture
« on: December 08, 2007, 05:38:03 AM »i suppose then it's no wonder you are the single most well-documented liar on this forum.
don't want to make unsupported claims. a short compendium of bishop lies:
toronto pic lie
- lie: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310140#msg310140
- truth: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310327#msg310327
seeing beach from 33 miles
- lie: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=16172.msg268864#msg268864
- truth: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18238.0
my model of telescope does not have a camera mount #1
- lie: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17379.msg300190#msg300190
- truth: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17379.msg300196#msg300196
my model of telescope does not have a camera mount #2
- lie: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17770.msg310140#msg310140
- truth: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17379.msg300196#msg300196
i don't consider photographs as evidence
- lie: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18238.msg329148#msg329148
- truth: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18238.msg329590#msg329590
I am glad you took the time to do that, as I have only been here a week or so and was going to.
14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 08, 2007, 05:00:29 AM »
Even though I believe in the RE lol
16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: ecliptic
« on: December 04, 2007, 04:45:39 PM »
I forget what I had originally posted, it did not show up, heh.
17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 04, 2007, 04:44:55 PM »
I could try, but it would not be very funny.
18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: ecliptic
« on: December 04, 2007, 04:18:24 PM »if the planets really do orbit the sun in fe model (which has yet to yield a description of orbital mechanics or testable predictions based on it), then why does every planet - along with the sun and moon - line up very close to the ecliptic, from our point of view anywhere on earth, according to their orbital inclinations?
in the fe model, they should be scattered all about the sky, and furthermore be in different relative geometric configurations depending on where on earth you are at a given moment in time. (e.g. two people on the phone would describe different relative arrangements.)
why is that *not* what we see?
But the planets are not scattered randomly around in the sky, and they do follow an ecliptic orbit, which can e proven since you can predict where the planets will be at any given time. You will not get a response refuting this, it cannot be done.
bump. if the fe'ers don't know what the ecliptic is, it's the line the sun traces through the sky as the earth rotates.
every planet visible by eye or telescope will fall very close to this line (depending on the inclination of it's orbit and ours).
the fe predicts that the planets will be all over the sky, "ignoring" the ecliptic...and observation.
19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:53:49 PM »
Thanks, I had t redeem myself from my first topic haha.
20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:36:34 PM »(for no apparent reason)
There is allways a reason!!! Its why the conspiracy exsists. We just dont know it, because of the consiracy.
Thats what I would say if I were in the hypothical situation of the FE'ers being right.This example of the flat earth hypothesis lets you see
how difficult it is to change someone's mind when they're set on some
strange or unrealistic theory.
This belief that you are right in the face of overwhelming odds is what you call faith, cornerstone of all religon. Its alright when it sticks with religon but when it fannys around with science it should be shot down, and rightfully so! I love how this is reinforced with the thousands of people who post the same stuff over and over, and they join every day. lol Nice to see some variety at least.
You are so not British!
21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: My $0.02
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:33:26 PM »QuoteIt also lets you see that just if a theory "can't be disproven" doesn't necessarily mean that it is correct, or that it should be taken seriously for very long.
That's exactly how we feel about the Round Earth Theory.
Except, the RE theory can and has been disproven on numerous occasions.
If it has been proven, on numerous, please enlighten me.
22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: The FE Pond...
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:27:43 PM »
No, it is simply magic.
23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: If someone from the conspiracy came here...
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:26:01 PM »
fair enough!
25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: If someone from the conspiracy came here...
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:16:41 PM »
i shave my balls?
26
Flat Earth Debate / My $0.02
« on: December 04, 2007, 03:10:06 PM »
it is impossible to conclusively disprove any scientific hypothesis.
That includes such hypotheses as the earth is flat,
photography steals the soul of the object being photographed, and apples
are highly toxic to humans. To hold on to such hypotheses, it may be
necessary to put forth some rather farfetched explanations of what we can
observe, but it can always be done.
In fact, science does not work by conclusively and indisputably refuting
bad hypotheses. Instead, hypotheses stand or fail on their ability to
explain known observations, and to predict the outcome of observations that
haven't been performed yet. Let's take the flat earth versus round earth
hypotheses as an example. A round earth is the most stable shape according
to gravitational theory; a flat earth would tend to collapse toward the
center, and people standing near the edges would feel a gravitational pull
toward the center of the flat surface instead of perpendicular to the
surface. Your could counter that gravitational theory is wrong;
magic holds us to the earth. This may be true, but it doesn't explain why
gravitational theory works so well at explaining how things fall, and the
observed trajectories of the planets and their moons. You could tell someone
that photographs of the earth from space show that it is round,
just like the globe model you see everywhere. You could counter that those
photographs are government fakes. Perhaps so, but we can see that other
planets and moons are round; wouldn't it make more sense to say that the
earth is round, too? You could say that the earth is special and
different. You could ask how numerous people have sailed or flown around
the earth if the earth is flat. You would have to say that every one of
these people, separated as they are in time and space, belongs to the same
great conspiracy aimed at brainwashing us into supposing that the earth is
round. You could ask about the communications networks that are linked
by satellite - how can you have satellites orbiting a flat earth? He might
then tell you that there really aren't any satellite links - everything is
connected by wires, or a close-packed array of relay antennas.
We could go on and on, and I know you HAVE gone on
and on. As you see, there is no single fact you could tell your anyone
that they couldn't dispute in some way. If you step back and look at it,
though,what kind of world would it have to be if the FEer's were right?
Gravity doesn't function here like it does everywhere else in the solar
system, there's a huge conspiracy reaching across hundreds of years to
convince us (for no apparent reason) that the earth is round instead of
flat, the progression of the seasons, and even of day and night, are
controlled by the gods. Eventually, a reasonable person would have to
concede that it would make a lot more sense to agree that the earth is
indeed round.
There are some other theories to explain things that do not meet this test
of scientific reasonableness, yet are still put forth and defended by many
people in society. This example of the flat earth hypothesis lets you see
how difficult it is to change someone's mind when they're set on some
strange or unrealistic theory. It also lets you see that just if a theory
"can't be disproven" doesn't necessarily mean that it is correct, or that
it should be taken seriously for very long.
My $0.02
That includes such hypotheses as the earth is flat,
photography steals the soul of the object being photographed, and apples
are highly toxic to humans. To hold on to such hypotheses, it may be
necessary to put forth some rather farfetched explanations of what we can
observe, but it can always be done.
In fact, science does not work by conclusively and indisputably refuting
bad hypotheses. Instead, hypotheses stand or fail on their ability to
explain known observations, and to predict the outcome of observations that
haven't been performed yet. Let's take the flat earth versus round earth
hypotheses as an example. A round earth is the most stable shape according
to gravitational theory; a flat earth would tend to collapse toward the
center, and people standing near the edges would feel a gravitational pull
toward the center of the flat surface instead of perpendicular to the
surface. Your could counter that gravitational theory is wrong;
magic holds us to the earth. This may be true, but it doesn't explain why
gravitational theory works so well at explaining how things fall, and the
observed trajectories of the planets and their moons. You could tell someone
that photographs of the earth from space show that it is round,
just like the globe model you see everywhere. You could counter that those
photographs are government fakes. Perhaps so, but we can see that other
planets and moons are round; wouldn't it make more sense to say that the
earth is round, too? You could say that the earth is special and
different. You could ask how numerous people have sailed or flown around
the earth if the earth is flat. You would have to say that every one of
these people, separated as they are in time and space, belongs to the same
great conspiracy aimed at brainwashing us into supposing that the earth is
round. You could ask about the communications networks that are linked
by satellite - how can you have satellites orbiting a flat earth? He might
then tell you that there really aren't any satellite links - everything is
connected by wires, or a close-packed array of relay antennas.
We could go on and on, and I know you HAVE gone on
and on. As you see, there is no single fact you could tell your anyone
that they couldn't dispute in some way. If you step back and look at it,
though,what kind of world would it have to be if the FEer's were right?
Gravity doesn't function here like it does everywhere else in the solar
system, there's a huge conspiracy reaching across hundreds of years to
convince us (for no apparent reason) that the earth is round instead of
flat, the progression of the seasons, and even of day and night, are
controlled by the gods. Eventually, a reasonable person would have to
concede that it would make a lot more sense to agree that the earth is
indeed round.
There are some other theories to explain things that do not meet this test
of scientific reasonableness, yet are still put forth and defended by many
people in society. This example of the flat earth hypothesis lets you see
how difficult it is to change someone's mind when they're set on some
strange or unrealistic theory. It also lets you see that just if a theory
"can't be disproven" doesn't necessarily mean that it is correct, or that
it should be taken seriously for very long.
My $0.02
27
The Lounge / Re: OK I'll bite..simple question?
« on: December 04, 2007, 11:23:36 AM »you're still talking to me as if i'm the united states of america or it's policy-makers. you just don't get it, do you.
and by the way, yes i was assuming you were american, which is why i spelled that assumption out explicitly in my first post you flipped out over. however, you did not correct that explicitly stated assumption, and furthermore several of your responses hinted strongly that you are american, and somehow it's my fault that you are british? (in fact it's so suspicious, i think it's a last-minute convenient lie. perhaps theengineer can geolocate your ip for verification of your story.)
if you are so upset about it, whining to me about it on a flat-earth internet forum isn't going to change a damn thing. either *do something* about it, or shut the fuck up. period. if you can't or won't do anything about it (yes there are things brits can do, even make-believe ones), then you know your remaining option.
until then, do not make a single assumption about my personal political views, or the actions i take regarding them. you've told me your views; i haven't told you mine nor am i going to.
You got served, I would say
28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: The burden of proof lies with the REers
« on: December 03, 2007, 05:32:48 PM »
I think Lorcan summed it up very well, you have all of the proof you need, but readily dismiss it as false or conspiracy.
29
The Lounge / Re: OK I'll bite..simple question?
« on: December 03, 2007, 05:23:07 PM »If the Earth is indeed flat, why must we use multiple satellites to send and receive signals. for example, you need at least 3 satellites to make a cell call from say new york to tokyo, because the signal cannot travel in a straight line, due to the earths roundness, the signal would just get beamed into space, you need a second satellite to catch the signal and transmit it to the next and then down to you.
explain please, if the earth is flat we have wasted countless dollars and resources for nothing.
bite me instead.
How insightful.
30
Flat Earth Debate / Re: To genuine Newbies
« on: December 03, 2007, 02:34:46 PM »
Thank you, I am a believer now!
Pages: [1] 2