I don't mean any insult but those FE believers will probably make up some biased stuff like Lunas in the Moon creating light because they are luminescent, Interesting right? oh and they also believe that the planets are all made out of paper foam so NASA can continue the conspiracy.And yet weirdly people are almost bullied into accepting invisible space forces and Earth forces that cater for the nonsense spewed out, yet are impossible to ever prove, other than bullies screaming out that they are proved and you better believe they are or you're going to be ridiculed or placed in a nut house if you don't.
I'd rather not even argue with them.
You will always get conflicting answers and you will always be attacked for even thinking alternate thoughts against mainstream indoctrination. You surely know this.
The mere fact that you are going to get conflicting answers to most, if not all of what you ponder, should tell you that you have to follow your own route in terms of what appears (for the time being) as more logical and then adding mere snippets of info from the thoughts of those who also ponder logical outcomes.
You may never know all the answers to anything, but by doing it in a methodical fashion, starting with the most basic of basic and not allowing over-complication of things to cloud your thoughts, then you have a very realistic chance of at least gaining a more rational insight into what everything is and why.
It's much better than blindly following the nonsense that is told to us as a globe model, plus all the trimmings to go with it.
It appears that you at least dropped that one into the nonsense bin. That's your massive start to nibbling away at the lies, mis-info, dis-info and naivety, to get to some semblance of truth.
Dropping all things magical is a good start. By magical I mean the stuff you're told by skin and bone people like yourself, who have absolutely no physical proof as to what they put on a plate for the population of gobblers to gobble up and not question why or what was in the feeding of the food for thought.
I'm attacked by flat Earther's as well. I have been since I joined. Mind you, I'm not exactly a flat Earther in the same vein as those who run this forum.You will always get conflicting answers and you will always be attacked for even thinking alternate thoughts against mainstream indoctrination. You surely know this.
The mere fact that you are going to get conflicting answers to most, if not all of what you ponder, should tell you that you have to follow your own route in terms of what appears (for the time being) as more logical and then adding mere snippets of info from the thoughts of those who also ponder logical outcomes.
You may never know all the answers to anything, but by doing it in a methodical fashion, starting with the most basic of basic and not allowing over-complication of things to cloud your thoughts, then you have a very realistic chance of at least gaining a more rational insight into what everything is and why.
It's much better than blindly following the nonsense that is told to us as a globe model, plus all the trimmings to go with it.
It appears that you at least dropped that one into the nonsense bin. That's your massive start to nibbling away at the lies, mis-info, dis-info and naivety, to get to some semblance of truth.
Dropping all things magical is a good start. By magical I mean the stuff you're told by skin and bone people like yourself, who have absolutely no physical proof as to what they put on a plate for the population of gobblers to gobble up and not question why or what was in the feeding of the food for thought.
I'm not sure if you missed my point, I said I'm attacked and blocked by flat earthers, not globe earthers
I also would like confirmation of points 2, 3 and 4
thanks
1.: although it is mentioned in the wiki, most FE'ers here do not believe in universal acceleration. It would not cause smoke to move downwards though, as air has a higher density. To put it short: Things under UA would behave exactly like they would under gravity, this is einstein's equivalence principle.
2.: some try, but this gets debunked quite quickly
3.: sandokhan (among others, I don't know who else) claim the existence of a "shadow object" which moves in front of the sun or the moon and blocks the light out. There has not been any evidence for this object, though.
4.: Some claim they are a conspiracy. Most FE'ers seem to avoid this topic.
Hope I could help.
does anyone else have any input?
does anyone else have any input?
Questions like yours have been asked a lot, have thread about it in the first couple of pages, or covered by the wiki. I would not be surprised if some FE's are just tired of answering these questions.
1. universal acceleration(UA) is not believed by every FE. If the Earth was accelerating upwards it would be hard to tell the difference between that a gravity. Stuff would behave the same.
2. A lot of people do.
3. Shadow object is the best explanation I have seen.
Not here, but I have seen it explained that the moon is hollow with a opaque and transparent surface that rotates.
Weather patterns have also been mentioned.
Bioluminescent life is another thing I have seen mentioned.
4. They are faked
They are pieces of the dome that fell off.
Your questions have baffled many FEers, but not me. For a very long time, it has been impossible for FEers to answer these questions, due to flaws in the standard FE model. Luckily, I have created a model which I call the Celestial Ocean Theory, which perfectly explains these anomalies in a Flat Earth universe.
1. Smoke does not travel downwards on the Flat Earth because the atmosphere is also accelerating with the smoke.
If you place a candle on a rocket moving upwards, the smoke will go downwards due to air resistance - however, when the candle is still, it is accelerating at the exact same speed as the atmosphere around it.
2. Crepuscular rays are evidence that the Earth is indeed flat. As of yet, the Round Earthers have no explanation for how crepuscular rays work - I do. Crepuscular rays exist because the Sun is only a few thousand miles above the Earth, which causes a visible differences in the angle of sunlight.
3. The Shadow Object causes both Lunar and Solar eclipses. This Shadow object is translucent, but its particles are arranged in oscillate in a way which does allow light of a particular oscillation (i.e Sunlight and Moonlight) to penetrate it. The existence of this object can be proven by looking at declassified and leaked NASA documents, as the government has for a very long time attempted to hide the object's existence.
4. Meteors are simply clouds of space debris that are kept in orbit by aether currents, in oscillating orbits. The oscillation of the orbits of these meteors sometime cause them to draw nearer the Sun, and the heat from the Sun disturbs the aether currents (Heated air rises faster than cold air - the same principles apply to aether.) As a result, the meteors are flung off course. Sometimes, they are flung towards the plane of the Earth, and when the enter the atmoplane they burn up due to friction.
Your questions have baffled many FEers, but not me. For a very long time, it has been impossible for FEers to answer these questions, due to flaws in the standard FE model. Luckily, I have created a model which I call the Celestial Ocean Theory, which perfectly explains these anomalies in a Flat Earth universe.Crepuscular rays are neither evidence for round nor for flat earth. They prove nothing and have been explained several times. Round Earthers do indeed have explanation for these.
2. Crepuscular rays are evidence that the Earth is indeed flat. As of yet, the Round Earthers have no explanation for how crepuscular rays work - I do. Crepuscular rays exist because the Sun is only a few thousand miles above the Earth, which causes a visible differences in the angle of sunlight.
3. The Shadow Object causes both Lunar and Solar eclipses. This Shadow object is translucent, but its particles are arranged in oscillate in a way which does allow light of a particular oscillation (i.e Sunlight and Moonlight) to penetrate it. The existence of this object can be proven by looking at declassified and leaked NASA documents, as the government has for a very long time attempted to hide the object's existence.A link to these documents would help your cause, right now it is just thin air.
Your questions have baffled many FEers, but not me. For a very long time, it has been impossible for FEers to answer these questions, due to flaws in the standard FE model. Luckily, I have created a model which I call the Celestial Ocean Theory, which perfectly explains these anomalies in a Flat Earth universe.Crepuscular rays are neither evidence for round nor for flat earth. They prove nothing and have been explained several times. Round Earthers do indeed have explanation for these.
2. Crepuscular rays are evidence that the Earth is indeed flat. As of yet, the Round Earthers have no explanation for how crepuscular rays work - I do. Crepuscular rays exist because the Sun is only a few thousand miles above the Earth, which causes a visible differences in the angle of sunlight.Quote3. The Shadow Object causes both Lunar and Solar eclipses. This Shadow object is translucent, but its particles are arranged in oscillate in a way which does allow light of a particular oscillation (i.e Sunlight and Moonlight) to penetrate it. The existence of this object can be proven by looking at declassified and leaked NASA documents, as the government has for a very long time attempted to hide the object's existence.A link to these documents would help your cause, right now it is just thin air.
they can't be tired of answering those questions, they're irrefutably disproven
1. I don't normally discuss gravity but the travelling upwards theory doesn't work due to it having enough force to put a ball back down but not enough to move smoke, smoke is lighter than a ball, therefore WOULD be affected also
2. angular sun rays you can disprove yourself, go to a beach, see the sun shining on the sea, get on a boat, try to reach the shine
OR
get a friend on a boat, you stay on the beach, you watch him sail past the shine YOU see, then ask him to point a camera towards shore and take a picture, the shine YOU see BETWEEN you and him will NOT be visible on the photo, this is simply because from HIS perspective, it will be behind him
OR
at the beach, travel 10mins up the coast, the sun will seem to follow you, travel back the other way, it will still follow you, it's not localised, the above methods ALL prove it without question
3. the shadow object would without question dim the lights of other stars, but it doesn't, so the dark object theory simply doesn't work, again, it's also not part of the flat earth model
4. they exist, you can see them with your own eyes, if it was part of a GLASS dome, they wouldn't land as rock.. meteors disprove the dome
like I said, I've looked into this for a long time, flat earthers don't agree with each other, depending on how you present evidence, meteors are usually described as man-made, I've only ever heard 3 people use the "god made" firmament breaking off theory, it's quite a new one, demeaning the work of god, as is saying the universe doesn't exist
please note, I'm not offensive, I'm not abusive, I've researched this for around 3yrs, I'm just challenging the proofs flat earthers use as they don't stand up to testing
thanks
they can't be tired of answering those questions, they're irrefutably disproven
1. I don't normally discuss gravity but the travelling upwards theory doesn't work due to it having enough force to put a ball back down but not enough to move smoke, smoke is lighter than a ball, therefore WOULD be affected also
2. angular sun rays you can disprove yourself, go to a beach, see the sun shining on the sea, get on a boat, try to reach the shine
OR
get a friend on a boat, you stay on the beach, you watch him sail past the shine YOU see, then ask him to point a camera towards shore and take a picture, the shine YOU see BETWEEN you and him will NOT be visible on the photo, this is simply because from HIS perspective, it will be behind him
OR
at the beach, travel 10mins up the coast, the sun will seem to follow you, travel back the other way, it will still follow you, it's not localised, the above methods ALL prove it without question
3. the shadow object would without question dim the lights of other stars, but it doesn't, so the dark object theory simply doesn't work, again, it's also not part of the flat earth model
4. they exist, you can see them with your own eyes, if it was part of a GLASS dome, they wouldn't land as rock.. meteors disprove the dome
like I said, I've looked into this for a long time, flat earthers don't agree with each other, depending on how you present evidence, meteors are usually described as man-made, I've only ever heard 3 people use the "god made" firmament breaking off theory, it's quite a new one, demeaning the work of god, as is saying the universe doesn't exist
please note, I'm not offensive, I'm not abusive, I've researched this for around 3yrs, I'm just challenging the proofs flat earthers use as they don't stand up to testing
thanks
1: You are going backwards on this point. As was already explained, smoke and bowling balls would all behave exactly the same on an accelerating Earth. Your smoke example doesn't disprove UA. There are much better arguments for why UA is not a viable replacement for gravity, like the difference in gravity experienced at different points on the Earth. Smoke, though? That won't cut the mustard.
2: A few people on this forum are trying to defend using crepuscular rays as a way of showing the sun is positioned just slightly above the clouds. For a group that champions using "perspective effects" as an explanation for a great number of things (light striking the bottom of clouds near sunrise/sunset, for example), ignoring perspective effects when discussing crepuscular rays would be a pretty dishonest starting position, so I don't think it is a mainstream argument.
3: Other than shadow object and moonshramp, I'm really not sure how eclipses are to be explained. Not that either of those arguments seems to merit being taken seriously. I'm just saying, I haven't heard a good explanation and those 2 seem to be the ones that are mentioned the most.
4: I've sure I have seen someone suggest that they are literally shooting stars. I wish I could quote it here for reference but I can't remember who said it now. Maybe someone else will have a better memory than me and help out.
You seem to think that you have all the answers, though, unless I'm misreading your posts. So I'm curious why you are baiting other people to post wrong answers? Why not just share your thoughts for discussion?
Shalom and welcome to the trenches OP.
to be honest, with the information I've got, I don't expect to be allowed on here for long, cognitive dissonance is very high amongst flat earthers.. you never see globe guys blocking people or refusing to answer
as far as I can see, the flat earth model has been proven wrong without question, I'm unsure as to why the highest up have not informed their "followers" of the evidence contradicting the whole theory, I'd also like to know who decides on accepted theories and why they're not cross examining evidence
thanks
to be honest, with the information I've got, I don't expect to be allowed on here for long, cognitive dissonance is very high amongst flat earthers.. you never see globe guys blocking people or refusing to answer
as far as I can see, the flat earth model has been proven wrong without question, I'm unsure as to why the highest up have not informed their "followers" of the evidence contradicting the whole theory, I'd also like to know who decides on accepted theories and why they're not cross examining evidence
thanks
Dude, there's very little that will get you kicked off this forum for more than a day or two. Srsly, just read the fucking rules. You may think you are the first person to arrive here with all the answers, but you are sadly mistaken.
The Flat Earth Society is a society of free thinkers. Even if our fearless leader logged onto the forum and told us to give it up, we wouldn't be expected to obey. There's no central FE govt deciding which theories are accepted, this is not the way of zeteticism.
The Flat Earth Society is a society of free thinkers.Well, you're not free to think the earth is a globe. :P
The Flat Earth Society is a society of free thinkers.Well, you're not free to think the earth is a globe. :P
A variant of Godwin's Law states that as an internet discussion increases in length, the probability of someone mentioning Hitler approaches 1.
Now feels like a good time to do so.
Round Earthers like to stifle free speech like Hitler did.
I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
How did they respond to your complaints?
I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
How did they respond to your complaints?
Hitler already? Why?
I'm not a member of the Flat Earth Society. I am crabby though, that much is true.The Flat Earth Society is a society of free thinkers.Well, you're not free to think the earth is a globe. :P
You are, though! No one has kicked you off the forum for being a crabby round earther.
Hitler already? Why? Just because? I think most of the REers on this forum are happy to exercise free speech and happy with FEers exercise free speech in return. There are definitely some ass hats, but they are mostly trolls and don't really deserve much attention.I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
How did they respond to your complaints?
If what I've seen from YouTube comments in the past is any indication, I would have to assume they responded with great patience and understanding.
Hitler already? Why?
Hitler was a round earther. :P
Hitler already? Why?
Hitler was a round earther. :P
So was Ghandi. :P
Hitler already? Why?
Hitler was a round earther. :P
So was Ghandi. :P
He was penpals with Hitler!
Hitler already? Why?
Hitler was a round earther. :P
So was Ghandi. :P
He was penpals with Hitler!
Sure, just long enough to encourage him not to be a douchebag. Unfortunately, history.
Hitler already? Why?
Hitler was a round earther. :P
So was Ghandi. :P
He was penpals with Hitler!
Sure, just long enough to encourage him not to be a douchebag. Unfortunately, history.
Alright, I know we are making Johnorbital cry with our chit chat, but http://www.huffingtonpost.com/irene-monroe/the-gandhi-none-of-us-kne_b_842941.html It's best not to have any heroes :'(
can you guys please take your chit chat elsewhere
can you guys please take your chit chat elsewhere
can you guys please take your chit chat elsewhere
Shoot. Sorry, I thought I was on a public forum. Must have gotten lost somewhere... ???
Anyway, I just took the time to read the "Dear Friend" letter, which was basically asking Hitler not to be a jerkface but in a nice way. Honestly, it was new to me so I won't pretend to be an expert on the special relationship they may or may not have had. Thanks for the link, SCG!
You haven't posted any evidence. Also, you seem to be mad at the FES because you were treated badly by some flat earthers on youtube. This isn't youtube.
I've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidence
I've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidence
You have posted vague, ambiguous, rambling thoughts and ideas
poorly scripted and ending with a question mark.
Narrow it down to one question and leave out the condescension.
is this what happens when someone comes in with more than 'I've seen the curve' or 'there's photos of earth'? you try to drown the 'evidence' in a sea of comments?
its not really much better than Facebook or YouTube if you're just going to ignore questions and just use people's threads as somewhere to chat
I've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidence
You have posted vague, ambiguous, rambling thoughts and ideas
poorly scripted and ending with a question mark.
Narrow it down to one question and leave out the condescension.
I've not, I've posted thorough explanations.. but feel free to point out any 'non-vague' responses I've received
as for one question at a time, that's fine by me
why, when the flat earth explanations for a lunar eclipse don't stand up to testing, do we see a round shadow during a lunar eclipse? (see my previous explanation on this thread as to how the FE lunar eclipse model cannot work)
is this what happens when someone comes in with more than 'I've seen the curve' or 'there's photos of earth'? you try to drown the 'evidence' in a sea of comments?
its not really much better than Facebook or YouTube if you're just going to ignore questions and just use people's threads as somewhere to chat
Maybe you haven't had a lot of conversations. Sometimes they diverge from and then return to the main topic. Heck, I learned something today about the relationship between Hitler and Gandhi. Maybe you have me confused with someone who thinks the Earth is flat, though. I'm certainly not trying to drown out any intelligent discussion about why the Earth is round. To that point, I answered your questions. All four of them, and you have posed no new ones. Sorry you came here looking for a battle. If only someone could decide whose thoughts should be stifled.
And holy cow. Evidence against your cloud comment was presented, acknowledged by you, then you went right back to it it like was a valid point like two posts later. Who is drowning out evidence again? Sheesh.
I'm totally looking forward to the evidence you have to offer. I've seen allusions to things that might be evidence, but nothing really explicit. I'll get right out of your way. :-X
I've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidence
You have posted vague, ambiguous, rambling thoughts and ideas
poorly scripted and ending with a question mark.
Narrow it down to one question and leave out the condescension.
I've not, I've posted thorough explanations.. but feel free to point out any 'non-vague' responses I've received
as for one question at a time, that's fine by me
why, when the flat earth explanations for a lunar eclipse don't stand up to testing, do we see a round shadow during a lunar eclipse? (see my previous explanation on this thread as to how the FE lunar eclipse model cannot work)
So, we only see a round shadow during a lunar eclipse when
the flat earth explanations for a lunar eclipse don't stand up to testing?
Is that your question?
cloud comment? you mean me saying it doesn't prove the shape of the earth? well it doesn't, there's no possible way it could, I quite clearly stated that the flat earth explanation for where the sun is located is very wrong.. I gave 3 easy ways to test it
I'm not sure how you interpret that as hiding anything
cloud comment? you mean me saying it doesn't prove the shape of the earth? well it doesn't, there's no possible way it could, I quite clearly stated that the flat earth explanation for where the sun is located is very wrong.. I gave 3 easy ways to test it
I'm not sure how you interpret that as hiding anything
Apologies. I meant smoke. My mistake. Smoke should not travel downwards because of UA. You initially said it should (see OP), then appeared to agree that it shouldn't (Reply 7), then went right back to stating that it should and the fact that it doesn't is somehow a valid refutation of UA (Reply 11).
scepti you make it sound like only RE's attack people for their beliefs.I agree.
I can suggest a little experiment you can do.
Go to a physics,engineering and FE forums forum and tell people you want evidence the Earth is a sphere or flat. You will get some name calling and also answers. Depending on the site and moderators your topic may be locked for being deemed ridiculous.
I think what you will find is the blocking, deleting,locking, and name calling will be about the same.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=67336.0
The above is what I see typically on other forums dedicated to science. Someone asks a question relating to FE and there are a few responses with at least one response being condescending.
People are people. As a group they behave pretty much the same the world over.
No evidence is staring anyone in the face. The only evidence that is put forward is the supposed evidence that people like you seem to think is evidence and expect free thinkers to simply accept it, sim ply because you come here with a full on indoctrinated mind, yet pretend you do not.I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
How did they respond to your complaints?
who? the flat earthers? the same as always.. with cognitive dissonance
I had one guy on Facebook say that a photo of the ISS passing in front of the moon was fake, so I gave him a challenge; I gave him a photo that I took, and asked him to spot what was fake on it.. he chose some elastic bands on the photo.. I told him the photo was unedited, he said he KNEW it was fake.. It was a photo from my camera roll, I even screenshotted it IN my camera roll as proof
I told him he blatantly didn't have the skills to claim photos are fake, he said 'do the math' then blocked me
flat earthers have lost all ability to admit they've worked ANYTHING out wrong, even when the evidence is staring them in the face
No evidence is staring anyone in the face. The only evidence that is put forward is the supposed evidence that people like you seem to think is evidence and expect free thinkers to simply accept it, sim ply because you come here with a full on indoctrinated mind, yet pretend you do not.I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
How did they respond to your complaints?
who? the flat earthers? the same as always.. with cognitive dissonance
I had one guy on Facebook say that a photo of the ISS passing in front of the moon was fake, so I gave him a challenge; I gave him a photo that I took, and asked him to spot what was fake on it.. he chose some elastic bands on the photo.. I told him the photo was unedited, he said he KNEW it was fake.. It was a photo from my camera roll, I even screenshotted it IN my camera roll as proof
I told him he blatantly didn't have the skills to claim photos are fake, he said 'do the math' then blocked me
flat earthers have lost all ability to admit they've worked ANYTHING out wrong, even when the evidence is staring them in the face
10 a penny..
I think this shows that mentioning Hitler, even in a meta-discussion (whereby you specifically mention the fact that you're mentioning Hitler, and make it clear that there is no real reason to do so), can derail a thread completely, and help avert the conversation away from any difficult-to-answer points that were brought up previously.
This could be a useful tactic to employ in the future.
2. angular sun rays you can disprove yourself, go to a beach, see the sun shining on the sea, get on a boat, try to reach the shine
OR
get a friend on a boat, you stay on the beach, you watch him sail past the shine YOU see, then ask him to point a camera towards shore and take a picture, the shine YOU see BETWEEN you and him will NOT be visible on the photo, this is simply because from HIS perspective, it will be behind him
OR
at the beach, travel 10mins up the coast, the sun will seem to follow you, travel back the other way, it will still follow you, it's not localised, the above methods ALL prove it without question
3. the shadow object would without question dim the lights of other stars, but it doesn't, so the dark object theory simply doesn't work, again, it's also not part of the flat earth model
4. they exist, you can see them with your own eyes, if it was part of a GLASS dome, they wouldn't land as rock.. meteors disprove the dome
You don't need nasa, you don't need videos or photos, you can see for yourself by watching a lunar eclipse, that's OUR shadow, the fact we can predict them happening is the nail in the coffin.. or by the constellation positions above the horizon in different hemispheres, and the fact you can't see the north star from deep in the southern hemisphere
if that's not enough, almost every flat earth 'proof' fails at testing too
this isn't opinion, it's testable, visual, irrefutable evidence
I've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidence
You have posted vague, ambiguous, rambling thoughts and ideas
poorly scripted and ending with a question mark.
Narrow it down to one question and leave out the condescension.
Hitler already? Why?
Hitler was a round earther. :P
Your questions have baffled many FEers, but not me. For a very long time, it has been impossible for FEers to answer these questions, due to flaws in the standard FE model. Luckily, I have created a model which I call the Celestial Ocean Theory, which perfectly explains these anomalies in a Flat Earth universe.Actually crepuscular rays are easily explained. And in fact are more proof of a global earth.
1. Smoke does not travel downwards on the Flat Earth because the atmosphere is also accelerating with the smoke.
If you place a candle on a rocket moving upwards, the smoke will go downwards due to air resistance - however, when the candle is still, it is accelerating at the exact same speed as the atmosphere around it.
2. Crepuscular rays are evidence that the Earth is indeed flat. As of yet, the Round Earthers have no explanation for how crepuscular rays work - I do. Crepuscular rays exist because the Sun is only a few thousand miles above the Earth, which causes a visible differences in the angle of sunlight.
3. The Shadow Object causes both Lunar and Solar eclipses. This Shadow object is translucent, but its particles are arranged in oscillate in a way which does allow light of a particular oscillation (i.e Sunlight and Moonlight) to penetrate it. The existence of this object can be proven by looking at declassified and leaked NASA documents, as the government has for a very long time attempted to hide the object's existence.
4. Meteors are simply clouds of space debris that are kept in orbit by aether currents, in oscillating orbits. The oscillation of the orbits of these meteors sometime cause them to draw nearer the Sun, and the heat from the Sun disturbs the aether currents (Heated air rises faster than cold air - the same principles apply to aether.) As a result, the meteors are flung off course. Sometimes, they are flung towards the plane of the Earth, and when the enter the atmoplane they burn up due to friction.
Your questions have baffled many FEers, but not me. For a very long time, it has been impossible for FEers to answer these questions, due to flaws in the standard FE model. Luckily, I have created a model which I call the Celestial Ocean Theory, which perfectly explains these anomalies in a Flat Earth universe.Actually crepuscular rays are easily explained. And in fact are more proof of a global earth.
1. Smoke does not travel downwards on the Flat Earth because the atmosphere is also accelerating with the smoke.
If you place a candle on a rocket moving upwards, the smoke will go downwards due to air resistance - however, when the candle is still, it is accelerating at the exact same speed as the atmosphere around it.
2. Crepuscular rays are evidence that the Earth is indeed flat. As of yet, the Round Earthers have no explanation for how crepuscular rays work - I do. Crepuscular rays exist because the Sun is only a few thousand miles above the Earth, which causes a visible differences in the angle of sunlight.
3. The Shadow Object causes both Lunar and Solar eclipses. This Shadow object is translucent, but its particles are arranged in oscillate in a way which does allow light of a particular oscillation (i.e Sunlight and Moonlight) to penetrate it. The existence of this object can be proven by looking at declassified and leaked NASA documents, as the government has for a very long time attempted to hide the object's existence.
4. Meteors are simply clouds of space debris that are kept in orbit by aether currents, in oscillating orbits. The oscillation of the orbits of these meteors sometime cause them to draw nearer the Sun, and the heat from the Sun disturbs the aether currents (Heated air rises faster than cold air - the same principles apply to aether.) As a result, the meteors are flung off course. Sometimes, they are flung towards the plane of the Earth, and when the enter the atmoplane they burn up due to friction.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/11/02/crepuscular-rays-are-parallel/#.V3FlNJBOKrU
Why doesn't this shadow object block stars? Why have millions of star gazers over thousands of years failed to see it?
So meteors get too close to the sun? Are they normally moving behind the sun? Is the sun putting out heat on all sides? Is it then a sphere?
And speaking of the sun, why does it drop below the horizon and become invisible? Shouldn't something that big and that high be see able by everyone at all times, if the earth was flat?
Actually a translucent object would be very easy to see with a telescope, or, if it's as large as the sun (your sun in your theory) with the naked eye even. Since stars, well some of them anyway, give off exactly the same kind of light as the sun (we know this because we have done spectral analysis of stars and the sun) then your shadow object would be seen as blocking out certain stars in the night sky, and basically being a big black circle in the daytime sky.Your questions have baffled many FEers, but not me. For a very long time, it has been impossible for FEers to answer these questions, due to flaws in the standard FE model. Luckily, I have created a model which I call the Celestial Ocean Theory, which perfectly explains these anomalies in a Flat Earth universe.Actually crepuscular rays are easily explained. And in fact are more proof of a global earth.
1. Smoke does not travel downwards on the Flat Earth because the atmosphere is also accelerating with the smoke.
If you place a candle on a rocket moving upwards, the smoke will go downwards due to air resistance - however, when the candle is still, it is accelerating at the exact same speed as the atmosphere around it.
2. Crepuscular rays are evidence that the Earth is indeed flat. As of yet, the Round Earthers have no explanation for how crepuscular rays work - I do. Crepuscular rays exist because the Sun is only a few thousand miles above the Earth, which causes a visible differences in the angle of sunlight.
3. The Shadow Object causes both Lunar and Solar eclipses. This Shadow object is translucent, but its particles are arranged in oscillate in a way which does allow light of a particular oscillation (i.e Sunlight and Moonlight) to penetrate it. The existence of this object can be proven by looking at declassified and leaked NASA documents, as the government has for a very long time attempted to hide the object's existence.
4. Meteors are simply clouds of space debris that are kept in orbit by aether currents, in oscillating orbits. The oscillation of the orbits of these meteors sometime cause them to draw nearer the Sun, and the heat from the Sun disturbs the aether currents (Heated air rises faster than cold air - the same principles apply to aether.) As a result, the meteors are flung off course. Sometimes, they are flung towards the plane of the Earth, and when the enter the atmoplane they burn up due to friction.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/11/02/crepuscular-rays-are-parallel/#.V3FlNJBOKrU
Why doesn't this shadow object block stars? Why have millions of star gazers over thousands of years failed to see it?
So meteors get too close to the sun? Are they normally moving behind the sun? Is the sun putting out heat on all sides? Is it then a sphere?
And speaking of the sun, why does it drop below the horizon and become invisible? Shouldn't something that big and that high be see able by everyone at all times, if the earth was flat?
1. The shadow object is translucent, and therefore impossible to see using telescopes. However, it blocks a certain type of light - light which oscillates at the same frequency as sunlight and moonlight.
2. Meteors float on the Aether winds below the Sun, which is spherical, but only shines in one direction, like a spotlight. As the meteors approach the Sun, the temperature difference distorts the Aether winds, in the same way that temperature distorts regular wind, and some meteors are flung towards the Earth.
3. Refraction.
still waiting for your replyYou haven't posted any evidence....also, I've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidence..
again, I'm awaiting responses to all the evidence I've provided, I have replied to you previously, you ignored meis this what happens when someone comes in with more than 'I've seen the curve' or 'there's photos of earth'? you try to drown the 'evidence' in a sea of comments? ..I'm totally looking forward to the evidence you have to offer. I've seen allusions to things that might be evidence, but nothing really explicit. I'll get right out of your way. :-X
I did, again, I got no reply, I even narrowed it down to one question, you repeated my question (even though you changed it slightly so that it no longer made sense) but you did not replyI've given absolute evidence, testable, visual, irrefutable evidenceYou have posted vague, ambiguous, rambling thoughts and ideas
poorly scripted and ending with a question mark.
Narrow it down to one question and leave out the condescension.
again, no reply, i'm still waitingNo evidence is staring anyone in the face. The only evidence that is put forward is the supposed evidence that people like you seem to think is evidence and expect free thinkers to simply accept it, sim ply because you come here with a full on indoctrinated mind, yet pretend you do not.I'm sick of getting conflicting information from places like Facebook and YouTube
How did they respond to your complaints?
who? the flat earthers? the same as always.. with cognitive dissonance
I had one guy on Facebook say that a photo of the ISS passing in front of the moon was fake, so I gave him a challenge; I gave him a photo that I took, and asked him to spot what was fake on it.. he chose some elastic bands on the photo.. I told him the photo was unedited, he said he KNEW it was fake.. It was a photo from my camera roll, I even screenshotted it IN my camera roll as proof
I told him he blatantly didn't have the skills to claim photos are fake, he said 'do the math' then blocked me
flat earthers have lost all ability to admit they've worked ANYTHING out wrong, even when the evidence is staring them in the face
10 a penny..
so talk to me, discuss my points with me, tell me which ones you think I'm wrong about
that's why I'm here
Refraction does not even remotely answer the questions asked. Why doesn't the sun look like an oval and why does it visibly drop below the horizon?in actual fact refraction could be a viable explanation, refraction has been known to cause both the sun and the moon to be visible on opposite horizons during a lunar eclipse, so the refraction explanation can be used for both arguments, the rest you said was pretty much in agreement with what I've covered in this thread :)
Dude. I'm not going to be bossed around into defending flat earth. That's crazy. For more reasons than one. Good luck though.
Um, my eyes are up here, thank you.
In my research, I have discovered that everything is flat https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcMDMoNu66_1Hwi5-MeiQgwYes that the only you'll get a flat earth! Look ma the earth is flat(enned)!
..Look ma..
Ha, there is your noob mistake. There is no point to this forum. Well, maybe a bit of light relief when you're having a coffee perhaps, but I'm not sure that makes a point.
that's the whole point of this forum
Nope, not a silly question. Fair dinkum, how'd ya guess? Not that RABinOZ might not be a slight clue!..Look ma..Rab.. probably a silly question, but are you from Australia?
Nope, not a silly question. Fair dinkum, how'd ya guess? Not that RABinOZ might not be a slight clue!..Look ma..Rab.. probably a silly question, but are you from Australia?
Guess you'd have to be a few 'roos short in the top paddock not to pick that up.
:) Look ma, no hands! :)
:( Look ma, no teeth! :(