1

The Lounge / Re: Microsoft to become a nuclear power?

« on: March 23, 2010, 11:08:54 PM »

Right after he gets them to pay back the money he used to save them, with interest of corse.

I wonder if the anti microsoft adds are really designed by microsoft to promote their own products. Microsoft would break monopoly laws if it was the only computer software company, thats why they bailed out apple years ago.

Maybe the two are working in cahoots to make microsoft a monopoly with out breaking the law...

2

The Lounge / Re: Werewolf Signup Topic

« on: March 23, 2010, 10:52:42 PM »

You could try really hard to convince the villagers that the sibling is a wolf but then they would have reason to suspect that why you knew was that you too are a wolf.

3

The Lounge / Re: Werewolf Signup Topic

« on: March 23, 2010, 09:59:56 PM »

so the question then becomes how do you convince the others to kill the other wolves before one of them realises what you are trying to do. All the while keeping your own nature (which ever one you are) a secret.

4

The Lounge / Re: The Mississippi Lesbian is apparently still not invited to Prom

« on: March 23, 2010, 09:57:32 PM »

My school board declaired defending ones self to be an act of antaganization. My brother was walking home from school a this kid who had been picking on him and his friends for a while was behind them throwing out comments.

Comments where exchanged back and one of the boys on the other side said "oh, it's on"

My brother turns round to see the older of the kids charging up to him. My brother has had some martial arts training, so he knows enough for how to deflect him out of the way (which is all he did) but the school report says "He took and agressive stance which provoked his attacker" he got a weeks suspension for side stepping, tripping, and pushing the boy who was attacking him onto the ground then booking it all the way home.

Well it looks like the next person who attacks me is going to get a stern talking to after he beats me to death. I certanly will never try to provent harm to my person again.

Now I must ask how does one provoke a man who is charging at you with intent to mame?

5

The Lounge / Re: Werewolf Signup Topic

« on: March 23, 2010, 09:28:47 PM »

Wow thank you for your great input. I ment on this forum, I really doubt that they would host it off this site.

It's too bad some one made a wiki warning for that site which shows up directly below it. I figured it was probably a gage site but that shit would get me fired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_site

6

The Lounge / Re: Werewolf Signup Topic

« on: March 23, 2010, 09:20:05 PM »

I will join, though I hope my avitar won't lead to me being linched right away...

Where's it hosted?

7

Flat Earth General / Re: To all RE'ers: why are we arguing?

« on: March 23, 2010, 09:13:28 PM »

I'm quite new, but I don't think I've figured it out. You can learn all there is to know about flat earth theory in a day, but the people will surprise you.

I could care less about the theory, I just want to see people on this site try to do more than just yell at eachother. I do like debating it, to an extent, what I really like is trying to come up with equations. I do that anyway but it is easyer when people give you the peramiters.

When I sugested the moon thing I took off with it because it sounded like a fun quick sort of thing to try and move on with. Not really because it would prove anything. I also wanted to see how FE'ers would react to a cheep and inexpensive experiment, well detailed and explained.

I like this forum becuase it gives me somthing to do durring the long periods of blah at work. Waiting for quality inspectors, waiting for parts, waiting of epd's, waiting for the chemical crib people to get back, waiting for the computer programs to load, and my favorite waiting for the tug boat guy to figure out how to do a 3 point turn with an airplane.

I'm rambling, i'm sorry. I'm just, guess what? Waiting!

8

Flat Earth General / Re: Occam's Razor

« on: March 23, 2010, 08:34:36 PM »

Thank you bejamin. Mind if I quote you should this arise again?

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 23, 2010, 08:22:48 PM »

I'll clear it up when I get home

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 23, 2010, 11:31:16 AM »

This equation removes the height variable from the angle.  This is then added to the distance. I am working on finding out how to compensate for bendy light, as you can see I worked it into this equation.

I worked out how to compensate for bendy light/curvature of the earth when the moon is between the two points but I am not sure how to get it to work for the others.

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 22, 2010, 06:59:52 PM »

Well I am fixing some of the equations to acomidate hieght above sea level. Will post pictures with updated equations later. Still need to work out curvature/bendy light equations, it's not a high priority as I will collect as much data as possible(height above sea level, long/lat, angle, direction facing at time of mesurment, phase of the moon, etc.)

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 22, 2010, 06:08:12 PM »

Any suggestions, parsec, as to how to over come some of the problems you have listed?

I was working on coming up with an equation to remove the problems with bendy light. You are quite good at math as I have seen. Any help on improving my equations would be appreciated highly.

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 22, 2010, 02:06:45 AM »

If trolling ever appears to be getting out of hand I will take all the information and good questions (non troll) out of this thread and put it in a new one all organized so it can at least be looked at with out having to sift through the trolls.

But seeing as you and enigmanzv are the only one whom have posted in it besides me, and as far as I know you two and lord willmore are the only ones who have read it. I am not to worried at the moment. Hell If it wasn't for the fact that I keep updating it I'm almost certain it would have vanished by know just like the moon thread.

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 20, 2010, 04:44:42 PM »

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Building the Scope Part 1
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Building the Scope Part 2

Total time to make scope (with out cross hairs) 30 min. I of course wasn't using a drill and most of that time was spent drilling through the protractor. Total cost of all materials (keep in mind I made 2) $25 US. That includes buying the drill bits, so if you have some dullish ones lying around I would use those.

I'm gonna throw this in here too. While I'm figuring out the distance of the moon I will do the equation backwards as well, only solving for x instead of h, and having h = 3000.

Since it is imposible for me to verify how far away my brother is, even if I drove it, Solving for x would show how far away he would have to be to get the angles we are getting if the moon where only 3,000 miles away.

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Comets and Meteor Showers

« on: March 19, 2010, 09:36:48 PM »

The bible is very vauge on the whole creation thing. It uses a quick story to get it out of the way but then rushes of to Abraham. I get the feeling that it wasn't that important or it would have more detail.

Many other religions have much longer and detailed accounts of how the world came into bieng, the bible says "god made space, light, water, land, the sun and stars, plants and animals, man, then took a break." then on  to adam and eve to set up sin, then off to abraham. With irelivent stories about insest in the middle.

There was one part I liked in the bible that really stuck with me. The tower of bable, "god saw how man would soon be capable of anything and fucked up with language so they would war with each other" Thats all it says, but people draw so much more out of it. Till I read it people always told me about how the people of babalon where building a tower to the heavens to reach god but thats no where in the bible.

What I'm getting at is people draw out what they want and expand it into something its not. No where in the bible does it specificaly say how long a day was before the sun was made, so honestly, it could have been whatever god considers a day.

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Does the flat earth rotate?

« on: March 19, 2010, 09:07:46 PM »

The sun moves around heating diffrent parts of the world. Thats part of how wind is made in the RE model.

Check the FAQ and the search button. I think there is more about it on here.

17

Flat Earth General / Re: According to FET, we will all die very soon.

« on: March 19, 2010, 07:20:50 PM »

I don't doubt that the earth may be getting hotter. However, I do doubt that it's due to anything caused by man.

The earth has been getting hotter and colder since times immaterial. Ice ages come and go. Eras of heat come and go. It's the nature of all things old and new.

Wow, I haven't read all of your posts but this is the first thing I have ever compleatly agreed with you on.

It doesn't mean things shouldn't change, resorces are still limited but I think its a good way to motivate people who otherwise wouldn't care.

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Earth's Shadow on the Moon

« on: March 19, 2010, 07:15:08 PM »

But if they are not on the same plane then how does the anti moon create the shadow?

If the moon is below the sun then the anti moon would need to be as large as the moon and pass infront of it to block light. Which we already astablished it doesn't do.

If it is above the sun then why does the solar eclipse work?

Side note*

Another thread talked about the moon producing its own light (i believe james promotes this). That would mean that the anti moon, moon, and sun all align durring a solar eclipse, otherwise you would still see the moon.

19

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Need a Bendy Light Specialist

« on: March 19, 2010, 07:09:24 PM »

It's the equation to determine how far the horizion is away from you. THe horizon itself actualy extends another 20% of this distance. But that is from light refraction or something or another.

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Need a Bendy Light Specialist

« on: March 19, 2010, 04:00:10 PM »

Found it, Here

21

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Need a Bendy Light Specialist

« on: March 19, 2010, 03:23:34 PM »

Bendy light was disproved and they are working on a new theory.

I froget what it is but it had something to do with how the air was kept in.

THe problem with bendy light was parallax. Two stars directly over head would get further apart the closer to the horizon they got. (because the stars are 100 miles further than the sun and moon this increases the deflection of them by the bendy variable)

d=sqr(13h) where d is the distance to the horizon in kilometers, and h is how high you are off of the ground only for the stars the distance would be increased by 160.9344 Km at the horizon. This whole equation changes as the stars move up and away from the horizon... and blah blah blah.

I can't type more right now. It was either TD or 2FST4U who talked about it they could direct you to the page about it.

22

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 19, 2010, 01:50:16 PM »

My brother coming out pertains to the experiment in the fact that he determines the date at which it will be preformed.

1)Bendy light was disproved (by this equation unsurprisingly) and a new theory is being developed to replace it. But that doesn't matter because we can still calculate the position of the moon with bendy light because it bends exactly as much as the curve of the earth. So we can use the same equations as in EnaG to determine its position.

Horizon

d = sqrt(13h) where d is the distance to the horizon in Km and h is the hight above sea level

2) What? Please elaborate I am unfamiliar with this one.

3) Yes I know all about that. You see while I was making it two of the Antarctic guard and their robot penguins along with a dinosaur embasitor from the other side of the ice wall came and stole my mustache. They told me to sabotage my device and said they would return my mustache once my results came back inconclusive.

4) I am using the 2*pi*d model. As long as the people are all located above the equator then the results will match that of a flat earth.



Distortion of the map only begins once you pass the 0^o mark.

23

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Lunar Parallax Experiment

« on: March 19, 2010, 12:28:26 PM »

Here is what I managed to put together. I will make a video of how to make one when I build the second one.


Here's it wound up so you can see the weight



My brother comes out next week, I think he is staying for a week. When he gets here we will work out when to do the test. Based on weather reports and moon rise and set times.

With experimentation I will determined what it should be about, I'm guessing about  +/- 2 degrees in accuracy at the moment. I will test it in full as soon as I perfect the cross hairs. The string I'm using was meant for kites so it doesn't like to knot very well.

What this means

Let us use the triangle above. Lets say c measures 30 degrees and b measures 150 degrees, with x being 1000 meters.

C = 30^o
B = 150^o
x = 1Km

A = B - C = 150 - 30 = 120^o
R_c = Sine(C)X = Sine(30^o)1000 = 577.35 meters
       Sine(A)       Sine(120^o)

h = Sine(180^o-B)R_c = Sine(180^o-150^o)577.35 = (1/2) 577.35 = 288.665 meters

These would be the perfect answers. Now we modify for +/- 2^o

C = 28^o
B = 152^o
x = 1Km

A = B - C = 152 - 28 = 124^o
R_c = Sine(C)X = Sine(28^o)1000 = 566.285 meters
       Sine(A)       Sine(124^o)

h = Sine(180^o-B)R_c = Sine(180^o-152^o)566.285 = 265.855 meters

This is the low end. Below is the high end.

C = 32^o
B = 148^o
x = 1Km

A = B - C = 148 - 32 = 116^o
R_c = Sine(C)X = Sine(32^o)1000 = 589.589 meters
       Sine(A)       Sine(116^o)

h = Sine(180^o-B)R_c = Sine(180^o-148^o)589.589 = 312.435 meters

This gives us the range of 265.855 - 312.435. That's a difference of 46.58 meters or +/-16%

As I said the 2^o was a guess at the possible error margin. I will test it with objects that I can measure the distance of.

24

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religious or non-religious

« on: March 18, 2010, 10:10:39 PM »

1) Yes, for a while I contemplated going atheist, then I got turned around and it all made sense to me.

2) I am not a fan of the Snake handlers or the devil worshipers. Just to weird for me.

3) Round and round and round we go where we stop, who cares!

4) My parents are ex Catholics who have become protestant I call myself the latter because it's considered the bastard child anyway so inputting my own view points isn't really that weird.

25

Flat Earth General / Re: Back to basics

« on: March 18, 2010, 08:59:12 PM »

The bendy light comment was ment to be used as a comparison, he argues that it simply cannot be tested over that short of a distance and that is my argument for water as well. Just because the water in my cup/pool doesn't bend doesn't mean water doesn't bend.

I supose you could make an underground pool that streaches past the "curve point" of that debth and see if the surface drops at all. But I'm guessing that no one has that kind of budget and no one would want to any way.

There are smaller scale tests that you could do but the curve would be as minute as the curve of the earth itself.

26

Flat Earth General / Re: Back to basics

« on: March 18, 2010, 08:48:35 PM »

Question: If one is unable to detect notable curvature of a standing body of water, then what is one to assume about the shape of the Earth?

That the entire earth is no bigger than the your test chamber, I don't see your point.

If i am unable to detect light bending from across a room what am I suposed to think of parcie's bendy light theory?

27

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tides

« on: March 18, 2010, 08:38:40 PM »

I got to see it go down on a diffrent trip.
If it verys day to day i wouldn't know, except for the fact that i live a stones through from the water. I could hang out there for a day i supose.

28

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tides

« on: March 18, 2010, 08:34:03 PM »

I haven't been for 12 hours either but I still got to see the tide come up.

29

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flat Earth Theory Discrepancies

« on: March 18, 2010, 08:32:01 PM »

are you kidding tom bishop could become president. Just be as vauge as posible and steer the topic back to the fact that he's for america and families.

30

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tides

« on: March 18, 2010, 08:19:10 PM »

in between what?

The high tides obviously, have you ever been to the beach?