1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 02:22:59 PM »

1. Okay then, you have no personal experience or data, just blind faith. Thanks for finally admitting that.

I have plenty of personal experience, how does the fact that I am a long way away from the coast equate to I have never seen the sea? You asked a specific question to which I gave you a specific answer. You asked me what I could see out of my window - I told you, you have yet to show me how this relates to a flat earth.

2. measurements.

And these measurements were taken by whom?

3. Wikipedia and my high school history text book tend to be very balanced.

So once again we return to the fact that you are happy to rely on someone elses opinion with regard to Hitler, but not the globe.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 02:08:46 PM »

1. Look out at the ocean so you don't get local data.

I have a problem, I can't see the ocean, being that it is over 100 miles away!

2. An entity as small as Saturn could never support life.

And you know the size and conditions incumbent on Saturn how?

3.Well The summary I read was not biased in the least, and had no personal interpretation of the text.

And you know it was not biased how? You cannot know that there was no personal interpretation since you have already stated you have not read the book, thus your entire knowledge comes from someone else.

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:56:36 PM »

Note the shape of the horizon.

Very curved - again, this proves what (perhaps you should first have asked if I could see a large hill from my window).

There are no organism on Saturn.

Even though my comment was flippant, I can't resist this - And you know that there are no organisms on Saturn how?

Although I have not read the book I have read a summary of it, and therefor am pretty familiar with it's contents.

So you are happy to rely on someone elses opinion with regard to Hitler, but not the globe - interesting!

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:47:37 PM »

Look out you're window already!

OK done that - it is dark, but quite a clear night. The neighbours across the street are having a party. What does this prove?

And BTW Mien Kampf has lots of anti-Jewish propaganda.

Well der! It's written by Hitler, so I suspect that there are amoeba on Saturn who could have guessed that. I was hoping that you'd know a little more than that.

5

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:41:17 PM »

I get information about this flat earth through scientific trial and error. Not whats published, though most of it is accurate.

Then please - cite your source, so that I may also be party to this scientific revelation. I would love to see evidence that shows that the earth is flat.

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:37:20 PM »

No I won't read information about the earth published by NASA. That's like getting everything you know about Jews from Hitlers Mein kampf .

Or indeed like getting everything you need to know about the earth from the Flat Earth Society.

PS. perhaps you should read Mein Kampf, you clearly have no knowledge of its contents.

7

Flat Earth Debate / Re: DIY Experement: The Distance Between the Earth and the Moon

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:32:07 PM »

He won't read anything, if it doesn't support him, then he'll claim it is NASA conspiracy - kinda sad really.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Appeal of FET?

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:12:18 PM »

Again with the ad homenem attacks.

Perhaps you ought to look up the definition of ad hominem - it is an attack against the person. I attacked the garbage he lists, that is quite different.

I am not attacking Tom for quoting garbage, he is obviously free to do that, my point was that listing Pratchett would have more scientific merit than anything else that he lists. That is not Ad Hominem.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Appeal of FET?

« on: February 22, 2009, 12:53:45 PM »

I'm sorry, I must break the terrible news to you. Those books in the link you posted... They're Novels.

I'm sorry, I know your life is now ruined. Please seek help.

I have to confess, I am surprised that Tom doesn't list any of the Terry Patchett Discworld novels as reference material. They contain much more real science in them than any of the garbage Tom lists.

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 22, 2009, 06:54:43 AM »

Show me the data.

He just did, but you clearly refused to look at it. Now answer the question without saying show me the data, because as you very well know, you already have it. Your constant asking "Show me the data" is simply a diversionary tactic because you are unable to answer why flight times are the way they are.

11

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Appeal of FET?

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:41:14 AM »

Peer review is a basic requirement of scientific work. Scientific work is typically not valid as evidence unless it has been peer reviewed.

Well done, I didn't think you had grasped that fact. However, a peer review must be carried out by a competent and UNCONNECTED third party. This is not the case for FET, it has only ever been peer reviewed by FE supporters. Any other review of FE that shows the gaping flaws in the theory is conveniently labelled as fake and part of the conspiracy by the FE society. I have yet to be shown any impartial peer review of FE, and that includes all the garbage in the link in your sig Tom. All of it is compiled by FE supporters, none is impartial.

Perhaps it is you, and not me who needs the education?

12

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Appeal of FET?

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:16:07 AM »

It's proof because it's been peer reviewed.quote]
Yes but a peer review by Mad Jack MacMad the winner of last years Mr. Madman competition hardly constitutes proof!

Who peer reviewed NASA's space missions?[/

Last night I took my wife out to our favourite Indian restaurant, and had a lovely meal. Sadly I neglected to have this trip peer reviewed, so now I don't know if I had a good time or not!

The FE arguments get weaker every time I visit this site.

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: How do you explain ships sinking over the horizon?

« on: February 22, 2009, 01:04:19 AM »

Read Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

Yes it is a good reference source for circular reasoning and non-scientific twaddle.

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: GPS

« on: February 10, 2009, 07:06:36 AM »

In the past I've already looked for gps satellites with one of those satellite finder pages. None could be found.

So using your own logic, by the same token these balloons don't exist either? Since we must be able to see them - we can't so they don't exist.

So since you have shown that GPS does not use satellites or balloons, we return to the original question how does GPS work? Are you suggesting magic?

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: GPS

« on: February 10, 2009, 06:57:13 AM »

I was just going to post something similar.

The FE point of view seems to be that the GPS satellites don't exist because we can't see them. But then their counter argument is the use of invisible balloons and towers - well that proves it for me! 

By my reckoning, there should be clouds of these balloons floating across the sky, but looking out of my window all I see is a bunch of pigeon frantically flying away - probably due to the Sparrow Hawk sat on the garage.

16

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 10, 2009, 01:47:00 AM »

Still no defence for a flat earth - not entirely surprising when one considers your childish racist outburst.

Anyway, back on topic, I found this brilliant tool:
http://www273.pair.com/med/distance/

Interesting that the shortest route between 2 points on the globe is a curve, I wonder why that would be?

17

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 10, 2009, 01:40:32 AM »

Ok. then show the actual research. Prove me wrong.

Nice try, how about your defence for a flat earth - oh that's right you don't have one, hence this futile display!

18

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 10, 2009, 01:23:17 AM »

Why would a research how much of someone's brain they use? I know how much is used.

Clearly you don't, your comments show otherwise.

Still no defence for a flat earth I see. Still trying to get away from the subject by arguing semantics?

19

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 10, 2009, 12:53:49 AM »

No. You made an incorrect statement. I called bullshit. Now you are changing the subject.

My god reading isn't your strong point is it - neither is joined up thinking. I made no statement, I suggested that you research how much of the brain the average human uses. You then made a 100% inaccurate statement showing you had done no research.

This was all raised due to your racist and innacurate statement, which you used to divert the conversation away from the fact that you are unable to defend a flat earth. The only one changing the subject is you - nice try.

I guess that you must be declaring a RE win since you are using such futile tactics?

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 09, 2009, 08:10:27 AM »

If you are going to go into the whole the human only uses 10% of their brain thing, you need to stop watching television so much.

No I am not, always best not to make wild assumptions, they usually turn out to be 100% wrong - as you are on this, and obviously the flat earth thing. Which I notice you tried to steer the conversation away from.

21

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 09, 2009, 05:21:45 AM »

Well I'm glad we knew that in year 1,000. Except we "knew" that before then.

That is why I said over 1,000 years ago. Since it was shown that the earth was not flat over a millenium ago, why would anyone suggest otherwise?

And so you admit no one will even consider the possibility that it is flat?

Of course not, it would require deleting all scientific research, cartographical data common sense etc. One has to ask the question, which is more likely, the earth is spherical which neatly fits all observable phenomena in the world. Or that everyone is involved in a conspiracy, and that what we observe is part of the conspiracy.

As for your last remark, I think it sums you up quite neatly, but perhaps you ought to do some research yourself into how much of the brain any human being actually uses before you make such bizarre and offensive statements.

22

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retroreflectors on the Moon

« on: February 09, 2009, 02:45:58 AM »

I think what he's saying is we do not fully understand the FE model, because frankly the research being allocated to it is next to zero thanks to scientific biases.

No I think you don't fully understand the FE model because it is little more than a fairy story. There is no research being done on it because the earth isn't flat, a fact that was discovered over 1000 years ago. The only scientific bias is that FE doesn't hold up to any sort of empirical research.

23

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 03:14:13 PM »

You know one of these days I'll pop onto this forum and I'll find real evidence of a flat earth, Tom Bishop will answer a question......

And my lottery numbers will come up. All equally unlikely I think you'll find.

Goodnight all!. Tom remember to hang on to the earth - you might fall off!

24

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 03:06:30 PM »

Like a broken record - he asks for data, whilst all can see he uses this argument as a safety blanket for his lack of knowledge.

Tom we're on to you!

Answer the request for data from you, and you will receive your data. Since no data exists to prove a flat earth - this may take some time.

25

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 03:01:10 PM »

And once again he disappears - what a worthy adversary he is! 

26

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Prove there is a conspiricy.

« on: February 08, 2009, 02:54:34 PM »

The wonderful thing about the round earth conspiracy is that as far as I can tell, according to the flat earth society, only about 15-20 on the entire planet earth aren't in on it!!

27

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 02:51:25 PM »

Well when you guys have some data demonstrating that the earth takes the shape of a globe and no other please get a hold of me so we can continue this thread.

Pretty much as predicted - he slithers and slides but not a single fact exists in his tiny mind!

28

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 02:46:04 PM »

I stand corrected - he is going to duck out of the argument all together - thus proving that he has no rebuttal to any of the facts presented in this thread.

Chalk one up for round earth fact.

29

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 02:39:52 PM »

Tom doesn't do data, only arguing the minutae in grammar of arguments - he doesn't have a single fact in his head. In fact I predict his next post will prove that!

30

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Something doesnt add up

« on: February 08, 2009, 02:35:54 PM »

There he goes again - keep it up Tom