1

Flat Earth Q&A / Question about the bottom for FE believers...

« on: September 07, 2006, 09:56:28 AM »

I have seen some FErs promote a 'dome' theory in addition to the ice wall. That would suggest that there is at least a pressure difference between atmosphere and FE space. (n.b. 'dome' is vaguely biblical - think the bible talks of a pre-flood canopy above the earth)

What is to stop atmosphere from diffusing into space is space is not a vacuum?

2

Flat Earth Q&A / gender and beliefs

« on: September 07, 2006, 08:20:58 AM »

it's called 'light relief', or 'intellectual masturbation'.

Whether the earth is round or flat - we all need a sense of perspective.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / gender and beliefs

« on: September 06, 2006, 02:02:03 PM »

I have been wondering if there is a connection between gender and a belief in FE or RE. If you reply to this thread can you state your gender so we can see if this is the case.

I personally feel that more FE believers will be female.

This is based on the following lines of evidence.

1: women struggle with maps. the concept of a round earth translated onto flat paper is clearly beyond them.

2: the ice wall. I feel that this is a concept many women will be comfortable with. I have personally experienced an ice wall with many women when trying to become friendly with them.

3: the movement of the earth with regard to relativity. women are interested in relatives - who's related to who fascinates them.

4: shoes. women love shoes. this is connected in some way, but its very complicated to explain here.


thanks.

curiouspenguin.


BTW i am a hermaphrodite. I live in a shell.

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Serious thoughts

« on: September 06, 2006, 12:04:03 PM »

although I have read Michael Behe, I don't necessarily accept all the things he espouses. My point was that in a universe built out of perception, every major conclusion has to be based upon assumptions. I don't disagree with the concept of geocentricity or the existence of dark matter either. My original statement was directed to the RE guy who rejected the accelerating earth model on the basis that it relies upon an assumption involving dark matter.

I am, however, just going over to the evolution thead you suggested in order to have a browse. Thanks for the tip.

Enlightenment is a wily old fox - what we need is some decent hounds, some horses, and some men in red jackets with little trumpets.

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Serious thoughts

« on: September 06, 2006, 11:27:46 AM »

attempting to know the unknowable is the ultimate pursuit of science isn't it? scientists have always uses a postulation such as electrum, geocentricity, gravitons, dark matter etc,. in order to fill blanks in their knowledge to allow equations to fit the percieved state of affairs. That convention is surely allowable in this case.

An issue arises when scientists become so blinkered, or focused on thier initial theory that it blinds them to experimental data supporting a different conclusion. For example, darwinian evolution versus modern molecular ond cellular biology.

Just a thought.

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Serious question

« on: September 06, 2006, 10:49:34 AM »

of course to apply the notion of 'time' to a God is irrelevent. and a negation of God-hood. just a thought.

7

Flat Earth Q&A / TheEngineer Is A Liar

« on: September 06, 2006, 10:32:35 AM »

with no one part able to present conclusive scientific evidence to prove their beliefs or disprove thier oponent's, the debate can only ever be hypothetical. This therefore allows a totally freeform debate where any party's evidence - being inconclusive - is not accepted by the other. In order to prevent the entire process from descending into farce, keep youself focussed on the topic i hand. See the topic, be the topic.

'I don't care what you believe; you have to admit that beliefs are odd' the late, great, Bill Hicks.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / the explanation

« on: September 06, 2006, 10:11:58 AM »

i discovered this site while searching for information on the FES, and was delighted to see that believers are alive and well, rather than - as I had assumed - defeated by a tide of 'evidence' and 'scientific fact'. The ability to maintain an open and non-dogmatic stance in the face of percieved truth is very important.

I wanted, however, to air a concept which I haven't yet seen, and given that I have neither the time, inclination, nor finances to support my own message board, I would like to raise it here.

I believe that the universe, and everything in it (myself included) is the product of a thought experiment produced by my own mind. I present this to you all knowing that you do not exist, but feel the satisfaction of interacting within the confines of my thought experiment.

Please keep up the good work everyone. Think outside the box: I am the box.

All my love,

The Most Curious of Penguins.

xxx