Simple things that prove much on this site wrong.

I have read many things on this site that I know are blatant lies. I fail to comprehend many of these "believer's" logic. I am writing this to prove that many things which have been said on this site are not true.

Also if satellites are not in space but still in the atmosphere, there is friction. So without propulsion how do they keep their speed up? We are told that they are in space so they don't need to be propelled, they just keep going in an orbit. But the atmosphere extends way above satellites. Why on earth is the world buying this story? Satellites don't exist!  

If satellites do not exist, can you please explain why I can watch satellite TV, why satellite phones work, and why I can use a GPS to get directions to a location? Also, if I open up Google Earth and zoom in on my house, I can see my house as it would look from the sky. The same is true for all of the houses I have seen. How do you think they get these pictures? They can not fly an airplane around the whole earth taking pictures of the houses below, that would be unnecessary. They used satellite imaging to get a bird's eye view of the whole world.

1. The Sun is a sphere. It is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

If the sun is a sphere, simple logic tells us that the physics required to make a spherical sun would be the same physics that would be applied to the earth, thus creating a spherical earth. This law of physics is called gravity. The problem with your constantly-accelerating-earth deal is that the sun would have to be accelerating also. The probability of such an event would be extremely low.

Another simple way to prove that the earth is flat is to look at the stars. We know from observation that the constellations in the sky are different if you go south of the equator or north of the equator. This would not be true on a flat earth, because the same stars would be visible no matter where you were on the earth.

If the Earth was flat, shouldnt there be a be a drop off point of where you just fall?

Not a single one of you "believers" were able to answer this question. As far as I know, no one has found a point where you can simply “drop off” the earth. The easiest explanation would be that you loop around the flat earth, but that almost certainly means the earth is a sphere.

Quote from: ClockTower on November 11, 2010, 05:21:48 PM

Reputation of author: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0102.html.

It says that he is an author of fiction.

Really? Of all people I think Isaac Asimov knows what he is talking about. To be honest it is a bit strange you have never heard of him.

I’m sure all of you here can see the truth in my statements. All it takes to figure out the earth is round is logic and some prior knowledge. I am sure someone will discredit my observations claiming “You have no conclusive evidence.” All I have to say is, “Do you?”

Quote from: Thork on November 27, 2010, 02:03:26 PM

Also if satellites are not in space but still in the atmosphere, there is friction. So without propulsion how do they keep their speed up? We are told that they are in space so they don't need to be propelled, they just keep going in an orbit. But the atmosphere extends way above satellites. Why on earth is the world buying this story? Satellites don't exist! 

If satellites do not exist, can you please explain why I can watch satellite TV, why satellite phones work, and why I can use a GPS to get directions to a location? Also, if I open up Google Earth and zoom in on my house, I can see my house as it would look from the sky. The same is true for all of the houses I have seen. How do you think they get these pictures? They can not fly an airplane around the whole earth taking pictures of the houses below, that would be unnecessary. They used satellite imaging to get a bird's eye view of the whole world.

Search, "Pseudolites". Google Earth actually uses high altitude airplanes to take their pictures. Google does not deny this. The rest of the Earth that has not been photographed is merely an artist's rendition.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 09, 2010, 06:56:33 PM

1. The Sun is a sphere. It is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

If the sun is a sphere, simple logic tells us that the physics required to make a spherical sun would be the same physics that would be applied to the earth, thus creating a spherical earth. This law of physics is called gravity. The problem with your constantly-accelerating-earth deal is that the sun would have to be accelerating also.

Another simple way to prove that the earth is flat is to look at the stars. We know from observation that the constellations in the sky are different if you go south of the equator or north of the equator. This would not be true on a flat earth, because the same stars would be visible no matter where you were on the earth.

How is there an issue with the Sun accelerating also? There is no reason why the Earth cannon exhibit gravity while the Sun can. Would you not expect to see different constellations as you move around the Earth? You are looking at them from completely different angles.

Quote from: BINATKO96 on December 05, 2010, 08:51:00 AM

If the Earth was flat, shouldnt there be a be a drop off point of where you just fall?

Not a single one of you "believers" were able to answer this question. As far as I know, no one has found a point where you can simply “drop off” the earth. The easiest explanation would be that you loop around the flat earth, but that almost certainly means the earth is a sphere.

What are you talking about? Saddam answered it. There is a drop off point. It is deep in Antarctica. You would have to get pass the Ice Wall but after that there is nothing stopping you from going off the edge.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 11, 2010, 05:27:16 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on November 11, 2010, 05:21:48 PM

Reputation of author: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0102.html.

It says that he is an author of fiction.

Really? Of all people I think Isaac Asimov knows what he is talking about. To be honest it is a bit strange you have never heard of him.

I’m sure all of you here can see the truth in my statements. All it takes to figure out the earth is round is logic and some prior knowledge. I am sure someone will discredit my observations claiming “You have no conclusive evidence.” All I have to say is, “Do you?”

No I cannot see any truth in your statements. Most of them were due to ignorance from not lurking, or straight up lying such as in Saddam's case.

What are you talking about? Saddam answered it. There is a drop off point. It is deep in Antarctica. You would have to get pass the Ice Wall but after that there is nothing stopping you from going off the edge.

Considering humans have a base at the south pole, I highly doubt "you can fall off the edge".

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_FaB7ozXA3Uk/SxCl_iDLmBI/AAAAAAAAABo/D0oFDOf-vvY/s1600/Antarctica_map.gif

There is a confirmed base at the south pole. (Amundsen-Scott, USA)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen%E2%80%93Scott_South_Pole_Station

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on December 08, 2010, 02:16:12 PM

What are you talking about? Saddam answered it. There is a drop off point. It is deep in Antarctica. You would have to get pass the Ice Wall but after that there is nothing stopping you from going off the edge.

Considering humans have a base at the south pole, I highly doubt "you can fall off the edge".

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_FaB7ozXA3Uk/SxCl_iDLmBI/AAAAAAAAABo/D0oFDOf-vvY/s1600/Antarctica_map.gif

There is a confirmed base at the south pole. (Amundsen-Scott, USA)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen%E2%80%93Scott_South_Pole_Station

The earth disk has a diameter of approximately 40,000 km, however this is only the internal diameter of the earth up to the ice wall. No-one knows how far the ice wall may extend beyond this distance. As far as we know, no-one has yet reached the edge. This base you speak of could easily be in the icy tundra surrounding the ice wall.

The earth disk has a diameter of approximately 40,000 km, however this is only the internal diameter of the earth up to the ice wall. No-one knows how far the ice wall may extend beyond this distance. As far as we know, no-one has yet reached the edge. This base you speak of could easily be in the icy tundra surrounding the ice wall.

We know that it is the south pole because if you walk in any direction from it you will eventually hit the ocean. The earth's magnetism also shows that they are indeed at the south pole. (And if they were not at the true south pole they would be at the magnetic south, which is close.)

The earth's magnetism also shows that they are indeed at the south pole. (And if they were not at the true south pole they would be at the magnetic south, which is close.)

Are you suggesting the Earth's magnetic field is the only thing that can affect magnets?

Besides, the rim is magnetic south, not just one point.

Quote from: TheUnseenForce on December 08, 2010, 05:15:51 PM

The earth's magnetism also shows that they are indeed at the south pole. (And if they were not at the true south pole they would be at the magnetic south, which is close.)

Are you suggesting the Earth's magnetic field is the only thing that can affect magnets?

Besides, the rim is magnetic south, not just one point.

First of all, I was referring to a compass. Just as at the magnetic north, a compass would continuously spin in circles at the south pole. Therefore the scientists were able to show that they had reached the magnetic south when this same event happened. If the magnetic south was along the rim of a "flat earth" then a compass would always point in the same direction anywhere in Antarctica, which is not true. Another way to show that the magnetic south is not along the "rim" is that a field of this shape would no longer be able to deflect asteroids from the bottom side of the earth. The earth would no longer be able to sustain life with no shields from space debris.

The earth disk has a diameter of approximately 40,000 km, however this is only the internal diameter of the earth up to the ice wall. No-one knows how far the ice wall may extend beyond this distance. As far as we know, no-one has yet reached the edge. This base you speak of could easily be in the icy tundra surrounding the ice wall.

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

Nobody has yet come up with one.

Berny
Who's alt are you?

Quote from: Terra Plana on December 08, 2010, 05:10:16 PM

The earth disk has a diameter of approximately 40,000 km, however this is only the internal diameter of the earth up to the ice wall. No-one knows how far the ice wall may extend beyond this distance. As far as we know, no-one has yet reached the edge. This base you speak of could easily be in the icy tundra surrounding the ice wall.

We know that it is the south pole because if you walk in any direction from it you will eventually hit the ocean. The earth's magnetism also shows that they are indeed at the south pole. (And if they were not at the true south pole they would be at the magnetic south, which is close.)

Firstly, have people set out in several different directions from this base and all reached the sea? Because if not then I can just claim that an expedition recently discovered the edge of the earth, and it will have just as much validity as your claim.

Secondly, the re may very well be anomalies in the earth's magnetic field in the extreme south. It is quite possible, even likely, that there are one or more localized points in the ice wall that have higher magnetism than their surroundings. Such deviations in the earth's magnetic field are known to exist in nature, caused by localized geological features such as iron ore deposits etc. This base, if indeed it is on the ice wall and not an island, may be subject to this effect, causing compasses to read as if they were at the magnetic south pole.

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

As requested: http://i23.tinypic.com/nwkp5t.jpg

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

As requested: http://i23.tinypic.com/nwkp5t.jpg

How do you know thats just not a glacier like the one thats behind me in my avatar?
How do I even know thats not in the arctic - a more fitting place for the rim.

Berny
I have been to 4 of those eight.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

As requested: http://i23.tinypic.com/nwkp5t.jpg

So why are pictures like that accepted as proof, but pictures showing that the earth is round not because you can't observe it yourself?

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

As requested: http://i23.tinypic.com/nwkp5t.jpg

Sorry, but walls tend to be taller than deep.  A shelf, on the other hand...  Well, there's a reason that scientists call it an ice shelf and not ice wall.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

As requested: http://i23.tinypic.com/nwkp5t.jpg

Who took that picture and how did they take it? Also if all NASA pictures are regarded as fakes why should we believe this picture to be true?

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

As requested: http://i23.tinypic.com/nwkp5t.jpg

Search "icewall" on google images. This picture is on page 6. Nice try.

Quote from: TheUnseenForce on December 08, 2010, 05:15:51 PM

The earth's magnetism also shows that they are indeed at the south pole. (And if they were not at the true south pole they would be at the magnetic south, which is close.)

Are you suggesting the Earth's magnetic field is the only thing that can affect magnets?

Besides, the rim is magnetic south, not just one point.

You will explain why, if it's not just one point, one specific location has been determined as The South Pole. You will explain why it's there and not 100km away along the rim. You will explain where on the FE map that specific point is. You will explain why when you are there you don't see an ice wall and also why nobody can travel further than 90^o south. Your time starts now.
Bonus points if you can explain how the sun circles the horizon from there without setting in the summer.

Quote from: TheUnseenForce on December 08, 2010, 01:34:22 PM

Quote from: Thork on November 27, 2010, 02:03:26 PM

Also if satellites are not in space but still in the atmosphere, there is friction. So without propulsion how do they keep their speed up? We are told that they are in space so they don't need to be propelled, they just keep going in an orbit. But the atmosphere extends way above satellites. Why on earth is the world buying this story? Satellites don't exist! 

If satellites do not exist, can you please explain why I can watch satellite TV, why satellite phones work, and why I can use a GPS to get directions to a location? Also, if I open up Google Earth and zoom in on my house, I can see my house as it would look from the sky. The same is true for all of the houses I have seen. How do you think they get these pictures? They can not fly an airplane around the whole earth taking pictures of the houses below, that would be unnecessary. They used satellite imaging to get a bird's eye view of the whole world.

Search, "Pseudolites". Google Earth actually uses high altitude airplanes to take their pictures. Google does not deny this. The rest of the Earth that has not been photographed is merely an artist's rendition.

Sure satellites exist.  Take a large sphere with gravity.  Get an object up where there's no air resistance and moving fast enough so that as it's falling back to Earth, it's speed keeps it at the same altitude.  It takes a round Earth to work.

Quote

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 09, 2010, 06:56:33 PM

1. The Sun is a sphere. It is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

If the sun is a sphere, simple logic tells us that the physics required to make a spherical sun would be the same physics that would be applied to the earth, thus creating a spherical earth. This law of physics is called gravity. The problem with your constantly-accelerating-earth deal is that the sun would have to be accelerating also.

Another simple way to prove that the earth is flat is to look at the stars. We know from observation that the constellations in the sky are different if you go south of the equator or north of the equator. This would not be true on a flat earth, because the same stars would be visible no matter where you were on the earth.

How is there an issue with the Sun accelerating also? There is no reason why the Earth cannon exhibit gravity while the Sun can. Would you not expect to see different constellations as you move around the Earth? You are looking at them from completely different angles.

What keeps the sun up if the Earth is accelerating upwards toward it?  And why are the other planets and moon all spheres with gravity and accelerating up, but the earth is the only one flat with no gravity and we rely on this upward acceleration theory for our 'gravity'?

I've been to various parts of the US, Europe, Iraq, and Korea.  The constellations all look exactly the same from any of those places.  I've never been to the Southern hemisphere, but I know the constellations and stars are different down there.  If the earth was flat and the southern sky was just the northern sky viewed at a different angle, we'd all see slightly different versions of 'the big dipper' or 'Orion' or whatever as we moved around the earth.

Quote

Quote from: BINATKO96 on December 05, 2010, 08:51:00 AM

If the Earth was flat, shouldnt there be a be a drop off point of where you just fall?

Not a single one of you "believers" were able to answer this question. As far as I know, no one has found a point where you can simply “drop off” the earth. The easiest explanation would be that you loop around the flat earth, but that almost certainly means the earth is a sphere.

What are you talking about? Saddam answered it. There is a drop off point. It is deep in Antarctica. You would have to get pass the Ice Wall but after that there is nothing stopping you from going off the edge.

Sure, once you get past the security forces (which no one has seen), the 30 mile high wall of ice that holds the atmosphere in (which no one has seen), and then you come to the edge.... (which no one has seen)

Quote

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 11, 2010, 05:27:16 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on November 11, 2010, 05:21:48 PM

Reputation of author: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0102.html.

It says that he is an author of fiction.

Really? Of all people I think Isaac Asimov knows what he is talking about. To be honest it is a bit strange you have never heard of him.

I’m sure all of you here can see the truth in my statements. All it takes to figure out the earth is round is logic and some prior knowledge. I am sure someone will discredit my observations claiming “You have no conclusive evidence.” All I have to say is, “Do you?”

No I cannot see any truth in your statements. Most of them were due to ignorance from not lurking, or straight up lying such as in Saddam's case.

I've been lurking a bit, and I haven't read anything here yet, or seen anything with my own eyes, to convince me the Earth is flat.

I have read many things on this site that I know are blatant lies. I fail to comprehend many of these "believer's" logic. I am writing this to prove that many things which have been said on this site are not true.

Quote from: Thork on November 27, 2010, 02:03:26 PM

Also if satellites are not in space but still in the atmosphere, there is friction. So without propulsion how do they keep their speed up? We are told that they are in space so they don't need to be propelled, they just keep going in an orbit. But the atmosphere extends way above satellites. Why on earth is the world buying this story? Satellites don't exist!  

If satellites do not exist, can you please explain why I can watch satellite TV, why satellite phones work, and why I can use a GPS to get directions to a location? Also, if I open up Google Earth and zoom in on my house, I can see my house as it would look from the sky. The same is true for all of the houses I have seen. How do you think they get these pictures? They can not fly an airplane around the whole earth taking pictures of the houses below, that would be unnecessary. They used satellite imaging to get a bird's eye view of the whole world.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 09, 2010, 06:56:33 PM

1. The Sun is a sphere. It is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

If the sun is a sphere, simple logic tells us that the physics required to make a spherical sun would be the same physics that would be applied to the earth, thus creating a spherical earth. This law of physics is called gravity. The problem with your constantly-accelerating-earth deal is that the sun would have to be accelerating also. The probability of such an event would be extremely low.

Another simple way to prove that the earth is flat is to look at the stars. We know from observation that the constellations in the sky are different if you go south of the equator or north of the equator. This would not be true on a flat earth, because the same stars would be visible no matter where you were on the earth.
W

Quote from: BINATKO96 on December 05, 2010, 08:51:00 AM

If the Earth was flat, shouldnt there be a be a drop off point of where you just fall?

Not a single one of you "believers" were able to answer this question. As far as I know, no one has found a point where you can simply “drop off” the earth. The easiest explanation would be that you loop around the flat earth, but that almost certainly means the earth is a sphere.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on November 11, 2010, 05:27:16 PM

Quote from: ClockTower on November 11, 2010, 05:21:48 PM

Reputation of author: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/bday/0102.html.

It says that he is an author of fiction.

Really? Of all people I think Isaac Asimov knows what he is talking about. To be honest it is a bit strange you have never heard of him.

I’m sure all of you here can see the truth in my statements. All it takes to figure out the earth is round is logic and some prior knowledge. I am sure someone will discredit my observations claiming “You have no conclusive evidence.” All I have to say is, “Do you?”

hello jackson this is AV I made a new account

How is there an issue with the Sun accelerating also? There is no reason why the Earth cannon exhibit gravity while the Sun can. Would you not expect to see different constellations as you move around the Earth? You are looking at them from completely different angles.

if the earth is flat what is keeping the sun and moon from crashing into the earth? Last time I checked it cant be our atmosphere because tiny asteroids can puncture it. Also what is keeping the sun and moon from flying into space?

has anyone here ever witnessed th drop off?
I personally have been to antartica 4 time and i have never seen any ice wall or drop off.
how thick is the earth?

how thick is the earth?

[brilliant quip] Almost as thick as (insert FE'er of choice here) [/brilliant quip]

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

Nobody has yet come up with one.

Certainly if such a "greater" wall exists its location is deep in the inhospitable rim-country. No small surprise there are no pictures available.

There is some debate as to whether or not there is a "greater" ice wall. Dr. Bishop, for example suggests that there is not one and that the "ice wall" is the shelf of Antarctica. I lean towards it's existence merely because it is mentioned almost universally by ancient mythos, but that is hardly conclusive. There is similar debate to whether Dr. Rowbotham held such a belief. James and I think he did, while Tom does not.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

Nobody has yet come up with one.

Certainly if such a "greater" wall exists its location is deep in the inhospitable rim-country. No small surprise there are no pictures available.

There is some debate as to whether or not there is a "greater" ice wall. Dr. Bishop, for example suggests that there is not one and that the "ice wall" is the shelf of Antarctica. I lean towards it's existence merely because it is mentioned almost universally by ancient mythos, but that is hardly conclusive. There is similar debate to whether Dr. Rowbotham held such a belief. James and I think he did, while Tom does not.

People have been to the southernmost point on earth and seen no icewall. There's no massive physical barrier to travel in Antarctica. Bishop is not a doctor, either of medicine or philosophy - he is the self appointed director of a diploma mill. Samuel Rowbottom was also not a doctor. He was a writer and inventor, though it's possible he was awarded an honorary doctorate from the Bishop Diploma Mill^TM posthumously.
The zetetic attitude would be to reject the ice wall as there is no direct sensory evidence of it, neither are there any secondhand accounts of it, in fact there is no evidence of it at all except by inference and in myth. According to people like Wilmore, inference is inadmissable as evidence.

The zetetic attitude would be to reject the ice wall as there is no direct sensory evidence of it, neither are there any secondhand accounts of it, in fact there is no evidence of it at all except by inference and in myth. According to people like Wilmore, inference is inadmissable as evidence.

The phrases "if such ... exists"  "lean towards" and "hardly conclusive" should indicate my level of conviction its existence; that is to say, I hold no such conviction.

People have been to the southernmost point on earth and seen no icewall. There's no massive physical barrier to travel in Antarctica. Bishop is not a doctor, either of medicine or philosophy - he is the self appointed director of a diploma mill. Samuel Rowbottom was also not a doctor. He was a writer and inventor, though it's possible he was awarded an honorary doctorate from the Bishop Diploma Mill^TM posthumously.

Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone says otherwise. I am willing to give Tom the title he has self-styled as I have no reason to disbelieve him.

Quote from: berny_74 on December 08, 2010, 06:06:30 PM

Lets see a pic of said Icewall.

Nobody has yet come up with one.

Certainly if such a "greater" wall exists its location is deep in the inhospitable rim-country. No small surprise there are no pictures available.

There is some debate as to whether or not there is a "greater" ice wall. Dr. Bishop, for example suggests that there is not one and that the "ice wall" is the shelf of Antarctica. I lean towards it's existence merely because it is mentioned almost universally by ancient mythos, but that is hardly conclusive. There is similar debate to whether Dr. Rowbotham held such a belief. James and I think he did, while Tom does not.

I still cannot see why the Arctic would be the rim and the Antarctic the center.  If they Earth where flat that would be much more sensible.  Either way as yet there is way to prove it one way or another.

Berny
Does not like blood being taken from his hand.

Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone says otherwise.

Does Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone mention who granted him his degree?

I am willing to give Tom the title he has self-styled as I have no reason to disbelieve him. 

As near as I can tell, Tom has never claimed to have earned a doctorate of any sort (even when he had an opportunity to set the record straight).  Wilmore was the one to refer to him as Doctor without being able to being able to tell us why he deserved the title.

Quote from: Ski on December 15, 2010, 05:03:11 PM

Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone says otherwise.

Does Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone mention who granted him his degree?

It does not, though part of the tombstone is eroded to illegibility.

Quote from: Ski on December 15, 2010, 05:03:11 PM

I am willing to give Tom the title he has self-styled as I have no reason to disbelieve him. 

As near as I can tell, Tom has never claimed to have earned a doctorate of any sort (even when he had an opportunity to set the record straight).  Wilmore was the one to refer to him as Doctor without being able to being able to tell us why he deserved the title.

Perhaps Wilmore is privy to information that you are not.

Quote from: markjo on December 15, 2010, 07:44:35 PM

Quote from: Ski on December 15, 2010, 05:03:11 PM

Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone says otherwise.

Does Dr. Rowbotham's tombstone mention who granted him his degree?

It does not, though part of the tombstone is eroded to illegibility.

Quote

Quote from: Ski on December 15, 2010, 05:03:11 PM

I am willing to give Tom the title he has self-styled as I have no reason to disbelieve him. 

As near as I can tell, Tom has never claimed to have earned a doctorate of any sort (even when he had an opportunity to set the record straight).  Wilmore was the one to refer to him as Doctor without being able to being able to tell us why he deserved the title.

Perhaps Wilmore is privy to information that you are not.

So you should also have that information, or else you shouldn't be calling him Dr.

Perhaps Wilmore is privy to information that you are not.

Why is he so reluctant to share that information, even when asked directly about it several times? Why does he choose to dance around the question and resort to immature word games?

Perhaps I am. It is to be expected members of the movement prefer not to be harassed by the public. To prove one's credentials one would have to divulge names, places of study or work, etc.  I have never made any sort of public claim to title as I'd be loathe to expose myself to the harassment that would inevitably follow.