FET theory is pretentious.

  • 89 Replies
  • 23246 Views
?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #60 on: April 11, 2010, 04:04:56 AM »
Isn't EA or bendy light required to explain why there is a horizon in FET?

No.  EA/bendy light is required to explain why the flat earth looks round (sunken ship observations, etc.).

Actually, it isn't.

Read Earth Not a Globe.

Perspective doesn't explain why the Sun hits the horizon at such a large size.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17934
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #61 on: April 11, 2010, 08:09:22 AM »
Isn't EA or bendy light required to explain why there is a horizon in FET?

No.  EA/bendy light is required to explain why the flat earth looks round (sunken ship observations, etc.).

Actually, it isn't.

Read Earth Not a Globe.

Perspective doesn't explain why the Sun hits the horizon at such a large size.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Magnification+of+the+Sun+at+Sunset

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #62 on: April 11, 2010, 09:10:40 AM »
Isn't EA or bendy light required to explain why there is a horizon in FET?

No.  EA/bendy light is required to explain why the flat earth looks round (sunken ship observations, etc.).

Actually, it isn't.

Read Earth Not a Globe.

Perspective doesn't explain why the Sun hits the horizon at such a large size.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Magnification+of+the+Sun+at+Sunset

Tom, perhaps you missed the part where perspective doesn't explain why the sun hits the horizon in the first place.  Perspective will never allow an object above the horizon to appear to sink below the horizon, regardless of its size.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17934
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #63 on: April 11, 2010, 09:35:20 AM »
Tom, perhaps you missed the part where perspective doesn't explain why the sun hits the horizon in the first place.  Perspective will never allow an object above the horizon to appear to sink below the horizon, regardless of its size.

In Earth Not a Globe we learn that the Vanishing Point in perspective is a finite distance away from the observer, and not an infinite distance away as taught in art school.

Please read Earth Not a Globe and grasp the material rather than asking the same dull questions year after year.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Setting+of+the+Sun
« Last Edit: April 11, 2010, 09:42:33 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #64 on: April 11, 2010, 09:47:42 AM »
Tom, perhaps you missed the part where perspective doesn't explain why the sun hits the horizon in the first place.  Perspective will never allow an object above the horizon to appear to sink below the horizon, regardless of its size.

In Earth Not a Globe we learn that the Vanishing Point in perspective is a finite distance away from the observer, and not an infinite distance away as taught in art school.

Please read Earth Not a Globe and grasp the material rather than asking the same dull questions year after year.

I've read the appropriate sections of ENaG.  Rowbotham is wrong in his interpretation of the vanishing point as well.  How can the sun appear to set below the horizon due to the vanishing point when the atmosphere makes the sun appear bigger?  Seems like a contradiction to me.

When I watch the sun set below the horizon, I'm not watching the bottom part of the sun fade away as the sun recedes into the distance, I'm watching the sun move downwards.  Frankly, bendy light explains this phenomenon better than perspective does.

Oh, BTW, perspective doesn't explain why the sun rises almost exactly due east and almost exactly 12 hours later, set almost exactly due west to observers all over the world on the days of the equinox.  Perhaps you can refer me to Rowbotham's explanation for that one too while you're at it.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2010, 09:49:35 AM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #65 on: April 11, 2010, 11:13:27 AM »

Please read Earth Not a Globe

*screams and screams and screams until he's sick*
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.

*

Lorddave

  • 18170
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #66 on: April 11, 2010, 11:26:34 AM »
Tom, perhaps you missed the part where perspective doesn't explain why the sun hits the horizon in the first place.  Perspective will never allow an object above the horizon to appear to sink below the horizon, regardless of its size.

In Earth Not a Globe we learn that the Vanishing Point in perspective is a finite distance away from the observer, and not an infinite distance away as taught in art school.

Please read Earth Not a Globe and graspAccept  the material as Fact rather than asking the same dull questions year after year.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Setting+of+the+Sun

Fixed.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

?

flyingmonkey

  • 728
  • Troll trolling Trolls

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #68 on: April 12, 2010, 03:31:33 AM »
What's Flat Earth Theory Theory?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #69 on: April 12, 2010, 05:08:40 AM »
What's Flat Earth Theory Theory?
Redundant.  What's your point?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #70 on: April 12, 2010, 05:21:03 AM »
What's Flat Earth Theory Theory?
Redundant.  What's your point?
Redundant. How was your weekend?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #71 on: April 12, 2010, 06:15:13 AM »
What's Flat Earth Theory Theory?
Redundant.  What's your point?
Redundant. How was your weekend?
Not too bad.  Went to see Trans-Siberian Orchestra's long over due Beethoven's Last Night show. 
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Lord Xenu

  • 1029
  • ALL HAIL XENU!
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #72 on: April 12, 2010, 07:41:00 AM »
What's Flat Earth Theory Theory?
Redundant.  What's your point?
Redundant. How was your weekend?
Not too bad.  Went to see Trans-Siberian Orchestra's long over due Beethoven's Last Night show. 
Really? How was it.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #73 on: April 12, 2010, 02:42:57 PM »
There's a great kind of lounging area down below if you two feel like chatting.

 >:(
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

ERTW

  • 611
  • Always fall back to common sense
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #74 on: April 13, 2010, 09:17:34 AM »
Tom, perhaps you missed the part where perspective doesn't explain why the sun hits the horizon in the first place.  Perspective will never allow an object above the horizon to appear to sink below the horizon, regardless of its size.

In Earth Not a Globe we learn that the Vanishing Point in perspective is a finite distance away from the observer, and not an infinite distance away as taught in art school.

Please read Earth Not a Globe and grasp the material rather than asking the same dull questions year after year.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Setting+of+the+Sun

Rowbotham never proved his understanding of perspective. He gave a simplistic reason designed to confuse people, but which supported his later arguments. Nowhere does he prove that his use of perspective is correct.
Don't diss physics until you try it!

?

2fst4u

  • 2498
  • High and Tighty
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #75 on: April 13, 2010, 01:49:24 PM »
I don't know why the sun is still being discussed. Nobody has explained how it is able to shine light in only specific directions yet.

*

Lorddave

  • 18170
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #76 on: April 13, 2010, 01:55:36 PM »
I don't know why the sun is still being discussed. Nobody has explained how it is able to shine light in only specific directions yet.

Pfft.
No one worries about little details like that.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.

*

James

  • Flat Earther
  • The Elder Ones
  • 5613
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #77 on: April 14, 2010, 04:17:39 AM »
I find the idea that the entire universe is centered around the Earth to be just incredibly pretentious.  And it gets worse when you consider that in FET, no other planet is like the Earth and things on Earth must be treated differently then things in the Universe(heavenly bodies accelerate upwards while things on Earth are pushed up by the Earth). 

The Earth is not a planet.
"For your own sake, as well as for that of our beloved country, be bold and firm against error and evil of every kind." - David Wardlaw Scott, Terra Firma 1901

?

Anonymous

Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #78 on: April 14, 2010, 05:23:41 AM »
Yea yea yea. Are you flat earthers idiots?
Your beliefs are all outwardly pretentious.
Oh yes, of COURSE the Earth must be the center of the universe. Because you totally have proof to support that.
What stupidly PRETENTIOUS you all are.
Pics or it didn't happen bitches ;]

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #79 on: April 14, 2010, 05:44:59 AM »
Yeah, that makes perfect sense. One should always consider hoity-toitiness when determining the earth's place in the cosmos. 

*

WardoggKC130FE

  • 11857
  • What website is that? MadeUpMonkeyShit.com?
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #80 on: April 14, 2010, 07:26:19 AM »
Yea yea yea. Are you flat earthers idiots?
Your beliefs are all outwardly pretentious.
Oh yes, of COURSE the Earth must be the center of the universe. Because you totally have proof to support that.
What stupidly PRETENTIOUS you all are.
Pics or it didn't happen bitches ;]

I miss AR.  :(

Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #81 on: April 14, 2010, 07:47:23 AM »
Tom, you so sleep with that book under your pillow :P

Dang it FE'rs I want someone to get up there and prove it !!!

One other question - What is the purpose/how and or why is our place in ze known 'Universe' so different from everywhere else ? Does this mean all FE'rs believe a God created our space differently ? Or do some believe its a random anomally ?

I saw vague comments about this in the FAQ, but I don't think it was answered directly.

I'm just not sure how a flat earth is possible given the nature of the REST of space, unless it was designed specifically that way ( being that apparantly the FE has different laws of physics active).

?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3135
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #82 on: April 14, 2010, 10:19:19 AM »
I find the idea that the entire universe is centered around the Earth to be just incredibly pretentious.  And it gets worse when you consider that in FET, no other planet is like the Earth and things on Earth must be treated differently then things in the Universe(heavenly bodies accelerate upwards while things on Earth are pushed up by the Earth). 

The Earth is not a planet.

What is your definition of a planet and can you prove the Earth does not fit that definition?
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17693
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #83 on: April 14, 2010, 10:42:44 AM »
Yea yea yea. Are you flat earthers idiots?
Your beliefs are all outwardly pretentious.
Oh yes, of COURSE the Earth must be the center of the universe. Because you totally have proof to support that.
What stupidly PRETENTIOUS you all are.
Pics or it didn't happen bitches ;]
Because an idea is pretentious says nothing of its validity.

RE is even more pretentious.  They claim that the universe is uniform based on what they can see from a very small area (themselves.)   Imagine stating that since you have brown hair every person must have brown hair.

Silliness!
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

*

Catchpa

  • 1018
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #84 on: April 14, 2010, 10:48:36 AM »
Imagine stating that since your area of vision shows you a flat ground, the rest of the earth must be too!

Zing!
The conspiracy do train attack-birds

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17693
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #85 on: April 14, 2010, 10:51:07 AM »
Imagine stating that since your area of vision shows you a flat ground, the rest of the earth must be too!

Zing!
I agree, thats a ridiculous argument.
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #86 on: April 14, 2010, 11:17:10 AM »
RE is even more pretentious.  They claim that the universe is uniform based on what they can see from a very small area (themselves.) 

Actually, they don't.  Conspiracy astronomers have mapped the cosmic background radiation and found slight variations in the temperature of the universe.  It doesn't look very uniform to me.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17693
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #87 on: April 14, 2010, 11:20:35 AM »
RE is even more pretentious.  They claim that the universe is uniform based on what they can see from a very small area (themselves.) 

Actually, they don't.  Conspiracy astronomers have mapped the cosmic background radiation and found slight variations in the temperature of the universe.  It doesn't look very uniform to me.

I think the key word there is slight.
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42535
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #88 on: April 14, 2010, 11:37:46 AM »
RE is even more pretentious.  They claim that the universe is uniform based on what they can see from a very small area (themselves.) 

Actually, they don't.  Conspiracy astronomers have mapped the cosmic background radiation and found slight variations in the temperature of the universe.  It doesn't look very uniform to me.

I think the key word there is slight.
Slight variations can make a significant difference at cosmic scales.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Lorddave

  • 18170
Re: FET theory is pretentious.
« Reply #89 on: April 14, 2010, 12:16:48 PM »
Yea yea yea. Are you flat earthers idiots?
Your beliefs are all outwardly pretentious.
Oh yes, of COURSE the Earth must be the center of the universe. Because you totally have proof to support that.
What stupidly PRETENTIOUS you all are.
Pics or it didn't happen bitches ;]
Because an idea is pretentious says nothing of its validity.

RE is even more pretentious.  They claim that the universe is uniform based on what they can see from a very small area (themselves.)   Imagine stating that since you have brown hair every person must have brown hair.

Silliness!

No.
That would be if we assumed Every planet had the same properties of the Earth.

A better analogy would be:
That's like assuming that almost everyone has the same basic shape as you (ie. humanoid).

This is why I hate that "Snakes are not dogs and Cats" argument.  It doesn't work for the context because the context is basic properties and not specific function.
You have been ignored for common interest of mankind.

I am a terrible person and I am a typical Blowhard Liberal for being wrong about Bom.