1

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Stars and Constellations - Explain?

« on: January 11, 2010, 05:37:44 PM »

Those photos don't show that the sun is close to the earth at all.  Those rays of light, especially in the first image, may appear to be travelling downwards towards the ground, but this is not the case.  Each ray is actually travelling at a surprisingly sharp angle towards the ground, and the reason you cannot see this is due to the angle of the photograph.  The photographer has positioned themselves so that they are taking a photograph towards the sun's rays, looking along their length.  This means that even though the rays of light are almost parallel, we are seeing these lines move off into the distance, allowing perspective to take effect.  It's like looking up at a tall skyscraper.  The edges of the skyscraper are parallel, but if we are standing at the base of the building looking up, the sides of the building appear to converge together towards a point at the top. 

2

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Stars and Constellations - Explain?

« on: January 11, 2010, 12:01:49 PM »

i'm not exactly sure what you're saying there, but from what i read. Have you heard of perspective? the shadow looks larger since it is closer to you, and smaller as the distance increases. Can you not comprehend this phenomena? A 2d image can not accurately represent a 3d landscape, and that is why the photo is distorted. And also, it can be seen that the sun is setting, so the cloud and the sun are almost level, that is why the shadow is cast almost parallel to the ground

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Stars and Constellations - Explain?

« on: January 11, 2010, 11:39:50 AM »

Please enlighten me, this photo undoubtedly proves light travels straight, it does no bend to such a degree as all of you FE's claim it too. Have a look at this photo, and try explaining to me that light does not travel straight. What proof, either written or photographic can you show me, to make me think otherwise...



don't say this photo proves nothing, as you have done with every other photo presented. It perfectly shows the shadow the cloud has cast, and how the light surrounding the shadow is travelling in a straight line.

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Stars and Constellations - Explain?

« on: January 10, 2010, 04:29:40 PM »

"since vertical light does not bend"

Why does vertical light not bend? And also, how come can astronomers create accurate star maps, if the light from all stars is not directly overhead from a specific observatory, this would mean their exact position would be distorted to a different degree from observatory to observatory, meaning the position of the stars from star map to star map would be not be consistent. However this is not the case, countless astronomers have all created their own star maps, and their determined positions and distances all match up with each other, meaning the stars position can be consistently calculated on earth from varying observatories, since the light given off from stars does not bend, which would prevent them from calculating accurate distances and locations.

Is every single astronomer on earth in on this conspiracy? Or does the government control the distribution of star maps?

http://www.fourmilab.ch/yoursky/ (this website can provide you a accurate star map regardless of where you are, you can look up at night and confirm it too)
http://www.skymaps.com/

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: A Comprehensive List of Evidence?

« on: January 09, 2010, 06:00:23 PM »

i recently posted a thread, stars and constellations. which provides evidence that the earth is round. however it seems no FE's are able to provi de an explanation to support that the earth is flat, or even comment on the subject. i guess it takes longer than expected to make a bullshit excuse that makes absolutely no sense, to support a theory that defies all logic and reasoning. you should be the ones giving evidence, even if there is none...

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: A Comprehensive List of Evidence?

« on: January 09, 2010, 05:36:49 PM »

don't bother, they'll just tell you to look out your window and ask what you see

7

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Horizon - explain.

« on: January 09, 2010, 05:19:56 PM »

We're arguing over definitions now, you believe that "bend" is analogous with "refract", where as I disagree.  Using the word "bend" implies that light can be curved as opposed to travelling in straight lines, changing direction whenever the light is reflected or refracted.  Stating that refraction is the bending of light is only a simple way of explaining refraction to somebody who doesn't understand its concept, however I believe this word does not describe refraction adequately. 

I will admit however that if light is passed through a gradient of refractive indicies it will refract the light constantly, giving the appearance that it is "bending" in a curved line.  This is what happens inside more advanced fibre optic cable, in order to reduce attenuation to the signal. 

In conclusion, the earth is round. 

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Stars and Constellations - Explain?

« on: January 09, 2010, 02:32:27 PM »

i've thouroughly read your FAQ and find no answer to explain, or rather fault aristotles findings of Travelers going south seeing southern constellations rise higher above the horizon. And also, why is the southern cross constellation only visible mainly in the southern hemisphere of earth?
I live in australia and see it every night, so i know it exists. And have travelled to the northern hemisphere numerous times, and have been unable to find the constellation. For a round earth, this occurs since the constellation, in relation to earth, is situated in a southerly direction, and thus is not visible in the northern vicinties of earth, as a direct line of sight is obstucted by earth. This also supports aristotles work, in relation to proving the earth is round.
For a FE, how does this occur?
How is a constellation visible near the horizon in one country, while being directly above others in a different country? If the light does bend to produce this phenomenon, then where is the constellation

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Horizon - explain.

« on: January 09, 2010, 02:27:24 PM »

You have no clue, maybe this will help, its even got colourful pictures

http://www.californiasciencecenter.org/FunLab/DoItYourself/BendAPencil/BendAPencil.php

light is refracted , i just explained it before, theres articles all over the internet explaining this.

No where in this article does it mention light bending on earth, the right conditions do not and can not exist on earth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_bending

The refraction of light can be thoroughly explained and accounted for, light 'bending' on earth can not.

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Explanation of southern and northern constellations

« on: January 09, 2010, 01:53:07 PM »

i've thouroughly read your FAQ and find no answer to explain, or rather fault aristotles findings of Travelers going south seeing southern constellations rise higher above the horizon. And also, why is the southern cross constellation only visible mainly in the southern hemisphere of earth?
I live in australia and see it every night, so i know it exists. And have travelled to the northern hemisphere numerous times, and have been unable to find the constellation. For a round earth, this occurs since the constellation, in relation to earth, is situated in a southerly direction, and thus is not visible in the northern vicinties of earth, as a direct line of sight is obstucted by earth. This also supports aristotles work, in relation to proving the earth is round.
For a FE, how does this occur?
How is a constellation visible near the horizon in one country, while being directly above others in a different country? If the light does bend to produce this phenomenon, then where is the constellation?

11

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Horizon - explain.

« on: January 09, 2010, 01:08:21 PM »

Except light does bend. Go ahead and verify this yourself: fill a glass of water, and stick a pencil into it.

its clear you are mistaken, the light is not 'bent' , it is merely 'refracted' throughout the water. As when the light rays pass through the medium they are altered a certain degree, judging by the mediums refractive index, which is a given value to determine how much the medium will alter the light rays, for example air has a refractive index of about 1.0003, and water has a refractive index of about 1.33. If you don't believe this, you mustn't of ever used a pair of glasses or a magnifying glass, they all obey the same principles of refraction.

this picture heavily supports the existence of refraction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GGB_reflection_in_raindrops.jpg

12

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: In FE theory, is the Earth rotating?

« on: January 03, 2009, 07:33:39 PM »

i wouldn't b the first too

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How do we know the ice wall actually exists?

« on: January 03, 2009, 05:41:11 PM »

Tom has a theory about this in which in Cook's logs he states some extraordinarily long circumference of Antarctica or something.

Well I'm sure since Tom made it up it must be right.  Why don't you go find this extraordinary theory of his?
Either way it still does not disprove the fact that cook circumnavigated Antartica and in fact the whole world.
By the way, just some figures. For Tom's theory to be true (which never been done, not even with the plethora of theories that tom has thought up) Cook would of sailed for 78225 miles, i'm from Australia so i am more familar with the metric system, but i know a mile equals approximately 1.6 kms. Either way that is still a fuking long way.
Compared to 11 165 miles (17,968 km )which is the length of Antartica's coastline.
i have a feeling Cook would of noticed that something was wrong considering he was a very expericenced sailor and he would of been documenting all of his travels constantly, like any sailor would.
Cook took 7 years to travel 11 165 miles.  If the Earth was indeed flat, he would have travelled 78 225 miles in the same amount of time.  So you're telling me for no apparent reason he was travelling 7 times the normal speed of a ship in those days?

Actually, the usually use airplanes to take pictures with some satellite (or strattelites in FET) help.  I have a quote somewhere from Google but I don't feel like finding it.  Use the search feature.

so if they use aeroplanes, why are there so many pictures of other aeroplanes in flight on google earth?
http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2005/12/planes_in_fligh_1.html
and i'd love to see the quote from google, or is it too non-existent to find?

In order to do that they're goal would have to be to walk all the way across the continent.  How many people do that?

Well people have bothered to walk all the way into the middle, something we call the south pole, and something that doesn't exist in your flat earth model of the world.  So where exactly did they go?

So your saying not one pilot in the world would of thought of being the first person on earth to fly across Antartica? you've got to be joking.
I guarantee it has been done.

Go find out.

First flight across Antarctica. (Departing November 23, 1935). Lincoln Ellsworth and Herbert Hollick-Kenyon in aircraft Polar Star from Dundee Island to near Little America II, 2300 miles in six stages over two weeks.
http://www.antarctic-circle.org/firsts.htm

14

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: In FE theory, is the Earth rotating?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:51:45 PM »

because tom is so important

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: In FE theory, is the Earth rotating?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:46:13 PM »

But Tom regards his opinion as being scientific proof.

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: In FE theory, is the Earth rotating?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:43:17 PM »

If you've ever listened to tom, this is ALL he does

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:42:36 PM »

How does it open your mind?
It creates false understandings of physics and astronomy

However, there is no definitive definite proof from where we are sitting at our computers.  Which is why there is an alternative Flat Earth Theory.  You cannot prove either, as both fit observations from Earth.  Round Earth Theory is probably correct, but you can't be sure.  Which is why I debate and defend Flat Earth Theory.  It's fun and a challenge, and it opens your mind.

You want proof?
here


now what PROOF do u have to show this supposedly photoshopped?
A conspiracy?
Well what PROOF do you have to show that a conspiracy exists?

Also, do u find it "fun" to look like an absolute idiot and absolute downer in front of thousands??

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How do we know the ice wall actually exists?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:40:14 PM »

Whats stopping google earth from taking pictures of the ice wall?

They have.  Turn the globe on it's side and you can see it.  They just compressed it into one landmass.

Google Earth use satellites to take their pictures of the earth, but from what i have found that is supposedly impossible.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=25796.40

A wild adventurer would of trekked or flown over Antarctica by now and would of found the ice wall, unless its not there of cause.

Anyone who has trekked over Antarctica has walked on the Ice Wall.

Then why wouldn't they of reached the end of the earth? did they just stop because they got tired, or couldn't be fuked?

So whats stopping the pilots on the antarctic flight from flying over the mainland of Antarctica towards the "Ice wall

Nothing.  For one, they wouldn't see an Ice Wall as the Ice Wall is Antarctica, and two, how many pilots fly all the way across Antarctica?

So your saying not one pilot in the world would of thought of being the first person on earth to fly across Antartica? you've got to be joking.
I guarantee it has been done.

Also, believe it or not, Antartica (THE ICE WALL) has been circumnavigated, but i thought it surrounds the whole earth (in the FE theory), so according to the FE theory cook actually circumnavigated the whole world, since the wall encases the whole of earth. I think Cook would of realised it was taking a touch on the long side to circumnavigate Antartica, since he would obviously be circumnavigating the whole world (in the FE theory).

Near the end of February, 1775, Cook crossed his track of 1772, completing the first circumnavigation of Antarctica and proving once and for all that the southern continent, if one existed, was neither as large nor as habitable as once thought.

http://www.antarcticaonline.com/antarctica/history/history.htm

19

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:23:47 PM »

How does it open your mind?
It creates false understandings of physics and astronomy

However, there is no definitive definite proof from where we are sitting at our computers.  Which is why there is an alternative Flat Earth Theory.  You cannot prove either, as both fit observations from Earth.  Round Earth Theory is probably correct, but you can't be sure.  Which is why I debate and defend Flat Earth Theory.  It's fun and a challenge, and it opens your mind.

You want proof?
here


now what PROOF do u have to show this supposedly photoshopped?
A conspiracy?
Well what PROOF do you have to show that a conspiracy exists?

Also, do u find it "fun" to look like an absolute idiot and absolute downer in front of thousands??

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:12:40 PM »

if it is "correct', then whats the point of trying to prove that the earth is flat when it has already been proved it is round?
A lack of a social life and proper friends?

There is no point to any of the FEers arguements, they are pointless.
you yourself said the earth is round, so it therefore CAN NOT BE FLAT

21

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Distance to horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:09:03 PM »

But RE scientists have proven that light "bends" only when approaching a black hole, since a black holes gravitational pull is so great.
FE scientists (the few of them), believe light bends pretty much because it does, there is no outstanding proof to show that light bends upwards for literally no fuken reason.

22

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 04:03:18 PM »

Point out one feature of a Round Earth that cannot be explained, or has not been accounted for.

it would be nice to recieve an answer

23

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How do we know the ice wall actually exists?

« on: January 03, 2009, 03:48:46 PM »

Another job well done at avoiding my question.

So whats stopping the pilots on the antarctic flight from flying over the mainland of Antarctica towards the "Ice wall"
Any pilot for that manner.
A wild adventurer would of trekked or flown over Antarctica by now and would of found the ice wall, unless its not there of cause.

Whats stopping google earth from taking pictures of the ice wall?
o thats right, google earth is fake since satellites do not exist in orbit, der....

24

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 03:46:32 PM »

good job at avoiding my question

25

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 03:44:02 PM »

I swear you are an idiot trekky.

Every feature of a round earth has been accounted for and has a logical explanation.
Point out one feature of a Round Earth that cannot be explained, or has not been accounted for.

i wouldn't know where to begin with a flat earth.

26

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How do we know the ice wall actually exists?

« on: January 03, 2009, 03:35:42 PM »

So whats stopping the pilots on the antarctic flight from flying over the mainland of Antarctica towards the "Ice wall"
Any pilot for that manner.
A wild adventurer would of trekked or flown over Antarctica by now and would of found the ice wall, unless its not there of cause.

Whats stopping google earth from taking pictures of the ice wall?
o thats right, google earth is fake since satellites do not exist in orbit, der....

27

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 03:32:00 PM »

What proves his laws are correct?
Experiments?

Anyone can publish a book, that doesn't mean its accurate

28

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why do things sink below the horizon?

« on: January 03, 2009, 03:06:11 PM »

Maybe tom should personally explain the phenomenon of bendy light.
Since he is the one he discovered light in fact bends upwards.

Tom, what is bendy light?

i read the FAQ, and as others, it answered no questions

29

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How do we know the ice wall actually exists?

« on: January 03, 2009, 02:30:52 PM »

Tunka, i think you're onto something.
My uncle is a pilot, you think HES in on it too??

30

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: FE believers, take a look at that picture

« on: January 03, 2009, 02:25:35 PM »

I think as tom pointed out before, its bendy light obviously...

Because light bends upwards for no reason.