The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Q&A => Topic started by: ChrisDuhfur on March 08, 2006, 05:08:32 PM
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
-
I'm just curious, out of which of the several existing threads containing an identical post did you cut and paste this drivel?
-
I'm just curious, out of which of the several existing threads containing an identical post did you cut and paste this drivel?
All of them. I picked the best parts of each one. Like I said, I felt that it must be repeated over and over until you REers finally get it.
-
All of them. I picked the best parts of each one. Like I said, I felt that it must be repeated over and over until you REers finally get it.
Sounded that way. Look, I'll save you some time. Nobody cares about this argument anymore. Originally it was funny because of the extreme level of ignorance it indicated on the part of people like you... now it fails to perform even that simple function.
-
All of them. I picked the best parts of each one. Like I said, I felt that it must be repeated over and over until you REers finally get it.
Sounded that way. Look, I'll save you some time. Nobody cares about this argument anymore. Originally it was funny because of the extreme level of ignorance it indicated on the part of people like you... now it fails to perform even that simple function.
So basically you're resorting to insults because you have no answers to awesome proof presented by me and my fellow flat earthers? Maybe someday you will learn how to debate like an adult and quit with the childish behaviors. Oh, and you have every right to ignore my posts and continue in ignorance, but I will not forgive you for it.
-
know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
Please don't bring politics into this. And don't give us conservatives a bad name.
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
No....It's called gravity....
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
The ball doesn't have gravity....
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
Oh, does it really? Ok, I'll keep that in mind :roll:
-
Ok if you took that beach ball made it a beach ball of solid rock, and floated it totaly free and isolated in space then the sand would indeed be attracted to it and stay on its surface. Though they wouldn't be very strongly held there.
The Earth however is much bigger then a beach ball and there fore has stronger gravity. So objects are attracted to the earth rather then your beach ball.
And yes i'm aware that mass causes gravity not size but I had to dumb it down for the flat earther.
-
Ok so acording to flat earthers central gravity does not exist, and people who are not flat earthers strongly believe it does. You can not prove to either they are wrong, they are to strongly stuck on their point. So lets try something new. This is directed to an FE. How do you explain the location of the equator? And night and day? In depth please. Also in the flat earth theory is their an ozone? if so how do you explain it? PLEASE if the earth is flat thenthese questions are answerable. If you can sufficiently answer these questions I will promise to fund and support your beliefs.
-
Actually there are many experiments you can do to prove that every object ahs some degree of gravity. But i'll leave it to someone more knowledgable then myself in the area to tell you what they are.
-
The ball doesn't have gravity....
I just wanted to point this out... the ball does have gravity. Everything has gravity. But the ball's gravity is far less than that of earth. The object resting on the top of the beach ball is held there by the earth's gravity, not the ball's gravity.
-
The ball doesn't have gravity....
I just wanted to point this out... the ball does have gravity. Everything has gravity. But the ball's gravity is far less than that of earth. The object resting on the top of the beach ball is held there by the earth's gravity, not the ball's gravity.
hence particles of dust stick to big spherical things, [I guess? haha]
Sorry but I'm quite tired and my commen sense is low.
-
know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
Please don't bring politics into this. And don't give us conservatives a bad name.
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
No....It's called gravity....
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
The ball doesn't have gravity....
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
Oh, does it really? Ok, I'll keep that in mind :roll:
I agree totall with you there mbczion, most flatearthers are so intoxicated with the idea o being right that they make stupid examples from everyday things, conveniently overlooking the fact that they are speculating in a world where gravity exists
Erasmus, please think of something relevant to say as your obsession with semi-formal insults is very childish
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
Hi, Chris.
Have you ever heard of a thing called 'gravity?'
It's everywhere these days!
-
So basically you're resorting to insults because you have no answers to awesome proof presented by me and my fellow flat earthers? Maybe someday you will learn how to debate like an adult and quit with the childish behaviors. Oh, and you have every right to ignore my posts and continue in ignorance, but I will not forgive you for it.
So, first of all, I have not resorted to insults. When I describe an argument as ignorant, it means one of two things:
1) The argument is of the form, "Nobody knows how X could be possible, so X is impossible." This is the fallacy of arguing from ignorance, but it doesn't apply in this case.
2) The argument is based on a set of false premises which indicate the arguer's ignorance of a certain field of thought. Usually, this is an argument in the form of an improper analogy. It's pretty clear that when you bring up the ball-and-dust analogy, you don't know much about the round-Earth model of how gravity works. It's not something you should be ashamed of, just a lack of knowledge. That's what "ignorant" means: "without knowledge."
Secondly, since you have admitted to have cut-and-pasted your "awesome proof" from existing threads, surely you must have noticed that round-Earthers posted criticisms of the ball-and-dust analogy in those same threads. So no, I do have answers, I just don't see the need to service you by reposting old arguments which you had the perfect opportunity to read in the original. If you didn't read those counterarguments, but instead simply cut-and-pasted the first post, then you have broken standard forum etiquette. Either way, the responsibility is yours, not mine, to provide you with the answers in this particular case.
If, on the other hand, you felt that the counterarguments presented in the other threads did not meet up to your high standards of logic, or were based on false premises, you might have attacked those counterarguments directly. However, you gave no indication that you had specific qualms with any such counterarguments.
Next.
Erasmus, please think of something relevant to say as your obsession with semi-formal insults is very childish
Sorry Tim, you haven't got a leg to stand on with this one. The fact is that other threads really have dealt with this question, and more than once. ChrusDuhfur is contributing nothing to the forum's body of knowledge, nor to the flat-vs-round debate. I can understand that you might not be aware of the other threads, since they've been inactive, but Chris obviously *does* know about them, since he admits to having plagiarized them.
-Erasmus
-
Ok so acording to flat earthers central gravity does not exist, and people who are not flat earthers strongly believe it does. You can not prove to either they are wrong,
On the contrary, it can certainly be demonstrated that "central gravity," better known in the relevant circles as simply "gravity", does exist. As usual, it has been posted and reposted many times in this forum, but since I have easy access to the link, here it is again. It's called the torsion balance experiment (http://www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/foobar/), it can be done with common household materials, and it was first performed centuries ago.
How do you explain the location of the equator? And night and day?
This is FAQ material, but simply put, the equator is the circle centered on the north pole whose radius is half that of the Earth's. The sun acts as a spotlight; its light doesn't shine in all directions, so only some parts of the surface are lit at a time.
As for ozone, probably they'll claim that it's a lie designed to support the sunblock industry.
-Erasmus
-
Ok so acording to flat earthers central gravity does not exist, and people who are not flat earthers strongly believe it does. You can not prove to either they are wrong,
On the contrary, it can certainly be demonstrated that "central gravity," better known in the relevant circles as simply "gravity", does exist. As usual, it has been posted and reposted many times in this forum, but since I have easy access to the link, here it is again. It's called the torsion balance experiment (http://www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/foobar/), it can be done with common household materials, and it was first performed centuries ago.
How do you explain the location of the equator? And night and day?
This is FAQ material, but simply put, the equator is the circle centered on the north pole whose radius is half that of the Earth's. The sun acts as a spotlight; its light doesn't shine in all directions, so only some parts of the surface are lit at a time.
As for ozone, probably they'll claim that it's a lie designed to support the sunblock industry.
-Erasmus
You didnt explain the location of the equator like I inteded. Why is the equator around the radius of the earth?
-
You didnt explain the location of the equator like I inteded. Why is the equator around the radius of the earth?
I'm not sure what you mean by "around the radius of the Earth". Maybe you meant, "around the circumference of the Earth."
In the RE model, the equator is around the circumference of the Earth.
In the FE model, the equator is not around the circumference of the Earth.
-Erasmus
-
You didnt explain the location of the equator like I inteded. Why is the equator around the radius of the earth?
I'm not sure what you mean by "around the radius of the Earth". Maybe you meant, "around the circumference of the Earth."
In the RE model, the equator is around the circumference of the Earth.
In the FE model, the equator is not around the circumference of the Earth.
-Erasmus
RADIUS as in the middle of the circle of the flat earth, half pay from the center point to the edge of the circle completely around the flat earth. Why is it there?
-
RADIUS as in the middle of the circle of the flat earth, half pay from the center point to the edge of the circle completely around the flat earth. Why is it there?
Your belief about the meaning of "radius" is incorrect. The thing labelled "r" is the radius of the black circle in the following picture:
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f287/PraiseOfFolly/radius.png)
The equator is where it is in the FE model so that it will match up to where it is in the RE model. Here, "match up" means that cities, roads, lakes, and other features that appear on the RE equator should also appear on the FE equator. Furthermore, FEers want the equator to be the halfway point on the straight-line path from the north pole to as-far-south-as-you-can-go, which as it turns out is the same thing that "equator" means in the RE model.
Does this answer your question?
-Erasmus
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
I used to think reasoning by false analogy as flat earthers habitually do was fun, it turns out reasoning by flawed analogy (as seen above is way more fun) Rather than a false analogy which get shot down by the brains automated defence system of common sense (ex clowns juggling is much like the stock market both involve keeping things up thus the stock market performance will stay good as long as all the balls are the same shape) because there moroninc (that was an extreme example, also note if you find cosmic wisdom it that you are an idiot) Instead reasoning by flawed analogy means its not rejected unless you think for more than half a second. The flaw with this analogy is the THE MASS OF THE SMALL OBJECT RELATIVE TO THE MASS OF THE BEACH BALL YOU BLITHERING SIMPLEMINDED FLAT EARTHER CRETIN. You see if the ratio of the mass of the beach ball to object was the same as the ratio of mass of Earth to mass of Aussie it would stay on. Unless you do that experiment and it doesn't work you've proved nothing except you dont understand the rudiments of high school level physics. You idiot.
An enraged
Cinlef
-
A better experiment would be to take a very strong magnet and place some iron filings on the top and bottom of it. Assuming that the magnet is strong enough to keep all the filings on it, then you have a demonstration of how gravity works.
The fillings on the bottom do not fall off, just like people in Australia.
Incidently, what makes you think the USA is on the 'top' and Australia on the 'bottom'?
-
Hate to point out the obvious but doesn't that demonstrate magnetism?
An enraged
Cinlef
-
RADIUS as in the middle of the circle of the flat earth, half pay from the center point to the edge of the circle completely around the flat earth. Why is it there?
Your belief about the meaning of "radius" is incorrect. The thing labelled "r" is the radius of the black circle in the following picture:
(http://i49.photobucket.com/albums/f287/PraiseOfFolly/radius.png)
The equator is where it is in the FE model so that it will match up to where it is in the RE model. Here, "match up" means that cities, roads, lakes, and other features that appear on the RE equator should also appear on the FE equator. Furthermore, FEers want the equator to be the halfway point on the straight-line path from the north pole to as-far-south-as-you-can-go, which as it turns out is the same thing that "equator" means in the RE model.
Does this answer your question?
-Erasmus
Sorry again, I though radious was half the diameter, which it is but i thought it wrong and thought...well anyway, how do you explain the location of the equator being halfway down the radius of the circular flat earth? I mean Climate wise, the sun would have to shoot a circle of light in an "O" shape at the earth with less sun in the middle of the "O" and less on the outside. That seems a bit farfetched to me.
-
Sorry again
That's okay.
the sun would have to shoot a circle of light in an "O" shape at the earth with less sun in the middle of the "O" and less on the outside. That seems a bit farfetched to me.
Well, the FE model describes the sun as orbiting the Earth around its central axis with an orbital radius about equal to the radius of the equator... that is, the sun is more or less directly above the equator. So, the light it shines on the equator is more direct and less attenuated, and is thus more powerful.
-Erasmus
-
Hate to point out the obvious but doesn't that demonstrate magnetism?
An enraged
Cinlef
Well it demonstrates the fact that gravity pulls towards the centre of the object, not 'down'. It doesn't prove gravity exists, of course, but it gives you an idea of how it works.
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
I used to think reasoning by false analogy as flat earthers habitually do was fun, it turns out reasoning by flawed analogy (as seen above is way more fun) Rather than a false analogy which get shot down by the brains automated defence system of common sense (ex clowns juggling is much like the stock market both involve keeping things up thus the stock market performance will stay good as long as all the balls are the same shape) because there moroninc (that was an extreme example, also note if you find cosmic wisdom it that you are an idiot) Instead reasoning by flawed analogy means its not rejected unless you think for more than half a second. The flaw with this analogy is the THE MASS OF THE SMALL OBJECT RELATIVE TO THE MASS OF THE BEACH BALL YOU BLITHERING SIMPLEMINDED FLAT EARTHER CRETIN. You see if the ratio of the mass of the beach ball to object was the same as the ratio of mass of Earth to mass of Aussie it would stay on. Unless you do that experiment and it doesn't work you've proved nothing except you dont understand the rudiments of high school level physics. You idiot.
An enraged
Cinlef
He would still have to perform the experiment somewhere where you wouldn't be affected by the earth's gravitation, like in space... Well if he were in space he wouldn't have to do that experiment to see the earth is round
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
I used to think reasoning by false analogy as flat earthers habitually do was fun, it turns out reasoning by flawed analogy (as seen above is way more fun) Rather than a false analogy which get shot down by the brains automated defence system of common sense (ex clowns juggling is much like the stock market both involve keeping things up thus the stock market performance will stay good as long as all the balls are the same shape) because there moroninc (that was an extreme example, also note if you find cosmic wisdom it that you are an idiot) Instead reasoning by flawed analogy means its not rejected unless you think for more than half a second. The flaw with this analogy is the THE MASS OF THE SMALL OBJECT RELATIVE TO THE MASS OF THE BEACH BALL YOU BLITHERING SIMPLEMINDED FLAT EARTHER CRETIN. You see if the ratio of the mass of the beach ball to object was the same as the ratio of mass of Earth to mass of Aussie it would stay on. Unless you do that experiment and it doesn't work you've proved nothing except you dont understand the rudiments of high school level physics. You idiot.
An enraged
Cinlef
He would still have to perform the experiment somewhere where you wouldn't be affected by the earth's gravitation, like in space... Well if he were in space he wouldn't have to do that experiment to see the earth is round
He would. If he looked out of the space ship and looks at the earth, he would go like: "OMFG, not real. FAKE FAKE FAKE PHOTOSHOP PICTURE ON THE WINDOW!!!!! Conspiracy!!!"
-
The problem with the "falling off" argument is.. well, everything.
"Down" is not a set direction. "Down" is a direct line to the centre of the earth. Gravity pulls "down", whichever way this may be.
Things that are far enough away from the earth are not affected by the earth's gravity. This is why the moon doesn't crash into us.
-
Things that are far enough away from the earth are not affected by the earth's gravity. This is why the moon doesn't crash into us.
This is pretty much... wrong. The moon doesn't crash into us because it's moving. The Earth's gravity *does* effect the moon, quite significantly in fact -- it keeps it from flying off into space. Like the way the sun's gravity keeps the Earth from flying off into space.
-
This is pretty much... wrong. The moon doesn't crash into us because it's moving. The Earth's gravity *does* effect the moon, quite significantly in fact -- it keeps it from flying off into space. Like the way the sun's gravity keeps the Earth from flying off into space.
Yup, objects orbit because of gravity, not because of the lack of it.
-
Oh hey, that does make more sense. More proof that you shouldn't type after 10:00. :P :roll:
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Okay, here are a a few things.
One, all things have gravity. Anything that has mass has gravity, the more mass the more gravity.
two, if a 200 pound man and a 25 pound toddler have a arm wrestling match who would win? Man or toddler? My money is on the man.
Now, you conduct above expiriment that you suggested. Which is going to win on your mini aussie? The three pound ball's gravity or the earth your standing on's 1,000,000,000+ tonne gravity?
I know it's been said but I figure, like the original posters argument that if we repeat it enough times it might pentrate that calcium build up into the cavity within.
Also figured if we explained it in a way they used in my Grade seven text book it'd be easier to understand.
-
ChrisDurFur:
Do you even bother reading these people's replies? What are your thoughts? Or are you just trolling with this obviously outdated "question"?
-
The moon doesnt crash into earth cos its rotates around the earth just like the sun does, the earth is the centre of the galaxy and everything rotates around the earth.
Where would dust come from in space anyway, for dust to appear it means something must have been dusty so really that dust must have come from earth which means that gravity doesnt exist, its just a figment of your imagination
-
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Try that with two molocules of water. OWNED.
-
Where would dust come from in space anyway, for dust to appear it means something must have been dusty so really that dust must have come from earth which means that gravity doesnt exist, its just a figment of your imagination
Space dust comes from one or two sources that I can think of. Here's the easy one.
***NEW AND IMPROVED!!! WORKS WITHIN A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD!!!!***
Find two sizable stones, about half a pound each will do. Find a black peice of paper.Hit the two stones together above the paper, do this two or three times quite forcefully. Look closely at the paper.There should be a few pieces of grit or chips that have come off the rocks.
This is what is meant by space dust. Small bits and pieces that aren't large enough to be large.
And be aware that 'figment of your imagination' is a trump. It's the door to a whole philosphical argument over whether the rest of the universe, including you my dear Welsh, is just a figment of my deranged imagination. This one is like miracles; once you put it out, you stop any reasonable discussion.
Use with care.
Edited for those who don't carry paper in space.
-
Where the hell would u find a black piece of paper in space?
-
Where the hell would u find a black piece of paper in space?
Where would you get a beach ball in space? Same reason: you brought it with you for the experiment
-
I'm Australian, and I speak for all Australians when I say that we are glad that the Earth is flat. We fall down, we get back up, but we never fall off.
Gravity is overrated. I can't see it, therefore it doesn't exist. Like Democracy.
I wish we could all just get along.
Don't be angry with each other Roundies. As George W Bush so wisely said, "Fool me once.....shame on.......shame on....you. Fool me twice...........you can't get fooled again......."
He was right. The Earth is flat.
L.A.P.
P.S. You can get pieces of black paper and beach balls in space, you just gotta have the right connections. I know a guy.
-
You use the arguement that shouldnt people in Australia fall off the bottem of the earth? By that logic, the universe itself would have to be flat, or at least controled by some other massive object that would produce enough gravity for us to fall down to. Let me explain.
Things fall to the ground because the force of gravity produced by the earth pulls you down. So your arguement that why dont people fall off the earth realy does not make sence. People dont fall off the earth becuase there is no "down" to speak of. The earth is the largest body of gravity to us, to we "fall down" to that.
-
The universe doesnt exist thats just scientists trying to get funding. Its only flat earth and thats all. If you look at it from a religious point of view we are always told heaven is up and hell is down, so if the world was round their would not be an up or down, unless your saying living in Australia is hell
-
No. Generally, the direction "down" can be defined as the direction a stone falls when dropped. If you can agree to that definition, then Australia is not "down." According to RE, all things fall towards the center of the Earth, not towards Australia.
-
I live in Australia and you should see the amount of c**p that falls out of our skies, the other day i was hit by a Burger King Wrapper and we dont have Burger King over here, its called Hungry Jacks for some reason, so it must have been dropped by one of you Americans
-
I live in Australia and you should see the amount of c**p that falls out of our skies, the other day i was hit by a Burger King Wrapper and we dont have Burger King over here, its called Hungry Jacks for some reason, so it must have been dropped by one of you Americans
I guess that's what you get for living on the bottom side of the world!!! ha ha!!
-
The universe doesnt exist thats just scientists trying to get funding. Its only flat earth and thats all. If you look at it from a religious point of view we are always told heaven is up and hell is down, so if the world was round their would not be an up or down, unless your saying living in Australia is hell
Austraila Is hell....Weird lookin peple funny accents, hell the whole continent/country used to be a huge prison island. And now it sinfested with kangaroos and trpical looking white people. Hence the earth is round..
Just kidding about the Australia=hell thing, my only real point was in the last sentance.
-
you know, thank you for calling me a sick liberal branwashed person. it really leaves a good impression on me.
The Reason the water and the aussies dont fall off is because gravity generated by the earth is pulling all things on the earth twards the center in all angles.
I honestly think you should get more proof before calling us idiots and doing a little experiment that isnt even accurate. The beach ball has gravity (everything in the universe has gravity) but so very little that it is unditectable, your beach ball has none of the features of the earth, except for it being round.
your findings i see to be useless.
-
Hi there, Flat Earth Socialites!
I am a new member and like every other Round Earther on this website, I have been labelled a sick, liberal brainwashed person. It's not that I am overly sensitive (frankly, I couldn't give a flying f***), it's just that......what did ChrisDuhfur have to prove by saying that???
Ok, so let's say every world government is brainwashing us into believing that the Earth is round. They roped in NASA to fabricate some pictures of our lovely planet and its surrounding atmosphere, as well as all the other widely known celestial bodies. Hypothetical situation.
What, exactly does the government have to gain by telling us this? Don't go into the "Oh, but the Bush Administration is spending billions of taxpayer dollars to perform the fake shuttle launches while they're living it up in Hawaii...." BULLSHIT. They built the shuttles and they bloody well launched them.
Since the beginning of time, man has worked long and hard to discover all of life's ultimate truths, one of the being the shape of the Earth. And we found it. Tell me, of a population of approximately 6 billion people, why are only less than 950 of those people members of this society? And, that said, at least half of them are REs!! If your theory is indeed true, why aren't there more believers? The Earth is ROUND, got that?
And just for the record, I live in Australia and I have never, ever, in my entire life, fallen off the Earth. That's all thanks to this nifty little thing called gravity. :D
Have a nice day.
-
Tell me, of a population of approximately 6 billion people, why are only less than 950 of those people members of this society? And, that said, at least half of them are REs!! If your theory is indeed true, why aren't there more believers?
This can't be used as a valid argument. Nature is not a democracy. Just bacause a majority of people believe something does not make it true.
-
Tell me, of a population of approximately 6 billion people, why are only less than 950 of those people members of this society? And, that said, at least half of them are REs!! If your theory is indeed true, why aren't there more believers?
Er...what? What has the number of believers got to do with the truth of the theory? You realise at one point everyone thought the Earth was flat?
-
THE REASON THE WATER DRIPS OFF THE BALL IS BECAUSE THE WATER IS UNDER THE EFFECTS OF GRAVITY! SOMETHING THAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A ROUND EARTH!
Did all of you losers fail elementary school science? :roll:
-
Okay, my comment about "If your theory is indeed true, why aren't there more believers?" did sound ignorant and small-minded, but what I meant was, in this day and age, we are far more educated in the field of science and we have scientific proof that the Earth is round and that gravity exists.
I don't remember being told in 8th Grade Science that the Earth was flat.
All I was trying to say is that in these modern times, we should know better. For example: I acknowledge the fact that drugs such as heroin and cocaine used to be used medicinally, but, that was in a time that people knew very little about drugs. In the past couple of hundred years, we have discovered the harmful properties of these substances and have since stopped using them as medicine and made them illegal. Now by this logic, just because heroin used to be used for easing toothache, we could still use it because at one point, people believed it had healing properties. Nobody knew any better then. We know now. And because we know now for sure, it is a widely accepted fact that heroin is a dangerous substance.
People believe things if they have no way to disprove them - in the Middle Ages, nobody had a means to prove that gravity existed or that the Earth was round. We do now. We have that technology in our hands.
I'm not trying to say that just because the majority of people believe something that it must be true, but this (the fact the the Earth is round) is something we can prove.
I don't wish offend anybody - I can accept when I'm wrong.
Have a great day!! :)
-
People believe things if they have no way to disprove them - in the Middle Ages, nobody had a means to prove that gravity existed or that the Earth was round. We do now. We have that technology in our hands.
Actually, they did have the technology, but no one had thought of the proper experiments. The technology needed to prove the Earth is round and gravity exists is quite simple. Some of the math involved can be a bit complex, and the astrological observations that put the first cracks in the geocentric universe take some more specialized equipment, but the actual proof uses very simple equipment.
All you need is some string, some weights and some patience.
-
I acknowledge the fact that drugs such as heroin and cocaine used to be used medicinally, but, that was in a time that people knew very little about drugs. In the past couple of hundred years, we have discovered the harmful properties of these substances and have since stopped using them as medicine and made them illegal.
Cocaine is still used.
When I cut my arm once, they put a mixture of cocaine and adrenaline on it.
I guess to numb the pain.
-
I've heard that cocaine is used in eye surgery as well.
-
I acknowledge the fact that drugs such as heroin and cocaine used to be used medicinally, but, that was in a time that people knew very little about drugs.
I believe they still are in one form or another as pain killers.
I leeches are making a come back not to mention fly larva are
use to treat infected open wounds... the more things change the more
they stay the same.
-
I know this has been pointed out many times, but I feel that it must be pointed again and again until the rounder earthers finally get it through their sick liberal brainwashed minds that the world is FLAT!
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Here is an experiment you can do. Find a small object and put it on a large beach ball. Pretend the small object is a person(an Australian) and the beach ball is the Earth. Turn the ball upside down. What happened? Yes, the Australian fell off the beach ball. Now, try putting water on the ball(earth), what happens? Yes, the water rolls off.
Now try this. Get a large piece of card board. Put a wall of cardboard up around your plane to simulate the icewall. Next, put your aussie object on the simulated flat Earth. Ahhhh, it doesn't fall off. Now put some water on your earth. Ahhhh wow!!! It doesn't fall off either.
So I think this proves once and for all that the Earth is flat.
I must point out the narrowmindedness of this claim. First of all, i think we can all agree that nothing in science is ever proven, it can only be disproven so that automatically disadvantages the FEs. This claim is based on the world itself, I.e. this experiment would only work when carried out in an area experiencing gravity (say, EARTH). I suggest that sir gets in a space shuttle and takes a cruise round the globe, because only in space would your experiment be viable and only in space could we have you inconspicuously bumped off so we wouldn't have such crap thrown at us again.
-
Tell me, of a population of approximately 6 billion people, why are only less than 950 of those people members of this society? And, that said, at least half of them are REs!! If your theory is indeed true, why aren't there more believers?
You realise at one point everyone thought the Earth was flat?
A bold statement. I feel some confidence that out of the 2 billion or so people alive in the middle ages, at least one believed the Earth was not flat. the earth is so immense that it cannot be perfectly spherical, but when u think about it, the highest point on earth is only 7 miles above sea level, and the lowest point 8 miles below it, in the Atlanic Trench. The world is over 10 000 miles in diameter, so on that scale the surface variations are tiny and the world appears flat to people only 5"11 high.
-
Tell me, of a population of approximately 6 billion people, why are only less than 950 of those people members of this society? And, that said, at least half of them are REs!! If your theory is indeed true, why aren't there more believers?
You realise at one point everyone thought the Earth was flat?
A bold statement. I feel some confidence that out of the 2 billion or so people alive in the middle ages, at least one believed the Earth was not flat.
Actually the vast majority of people during the middle ages believes the Earth was flat. Most people believed the Earth was flat before Christ was born. I was in fact referring to much earlier periods of history.
-
the highest point on earth is only 7 miles above sea level, and the lowest point 8 miles below it
Really?
The lowest point on the earth is 8 miles below sea level?
Then, by your 'round earth' model, most of the world doesn't exist- only the north pole (the north pole being the highest point of the sea) and 8 miles below it exist. Which would mean there is only a small segment of a sphere. Not a whole sphere.
Unless, of course, you are suggesting that the 'round earth' has a diameter of only 8 miles?
I don't think anyone is going to believe you on that point.
-
Actually the vast majority of people during the middle ages believes the Earth was flat. Most people believed the Earth was flat before Christ was born. I was in fact referring to much earlier periods of history.
It's pretty clear that the ancient Greeks believed the Earth to be round. So unless Europe *forgot* that little bit of historical knowledge, I don't see any reason for them to think that the Earth was flat. Maybe the Church taught at some point that it was flat; I'm not clear on this. My understanding is that the Church was much more keen on geocentrism than geolaminarism. But it was Greek philosophy that dominated intellectual persuits until Copernicus, Galileo, and the gang.
The common misconception that people in the Middle Ages believed the Earth is flat appears to be due to Washington Irving's The Life and Times of Christopher Columbus, according to Wikipedia's article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_earth).
-Erasmus
-
Also it is the opinionof some scholars I have read that early mariners in pre Classical Greek times also believed the Earth to be round, deducing this from the whole ships on the horizon thing. Howeever that is speculation since befrore the Greek philosophical tradition of enquery few people felt the need to share and record scientific knowledge in the way we do today.
Also Dnate the great medival Italian poet describes a spherical Earth in his Divine Commedia (granted he assumed the Western Hemisphere to be ocean) indicating even in Medival times people believed the Earth to be round
An enraged
Cinlef
-
(granted he assumed the Western Hemisphere to be ocean)
That, in fact, was one of the major geographic misconceptions of the age, along with an incorrect figure for the Earth's circumference (which is telling in and of itself). It's also what Columbus assumed when he tried to find a westward passage to Asia.
An enraged
Cinlef
You've been enraged a lot lately, Cinlef. Is everything okay?
-Erasmus
-
lol just my default state is anger at things.
An amused
Cinlef
-
If the world is round wouldn't we fall off? Wouldn't the people in Australia fall into "space"?
Idiot.
-
Things that are far enough away from the earth are not affected by the earth's gravity. This is why the moon doesn't crash into us.
This is pretty much... wrong. The moon doesn't crash into us because it's moving. The Earth's gravity *does* effect the moon, quite significantly in fact -- it keeps it from flying off into space. Like the way the sun's gravity keeps the Earth from flying off into space.
yes its called a geosincrinos orbit (sorry for the spelling i had a dyslexic moment) the orbit is degrading constantly but the speed it is traveling keeps it from slamming ino the earth, this is why we dont slam into the sun.
-grim
-
yes its called a geosincrinos orbit (sorry for the spelling i had a dyslexic moment) the orbit is degrading constantly but the speed it is traveling keeps it from slamming ino the earth, this is why we dont slam into the sun.
-grim
The moon is not in a geosynchronous orbit; its orbital period is about 28 siderial days (as opposed to 1, which is the definition of a geosynchronous orbit.)
-Erasmus
-
yes its called a geosincrinos orbit (sorry for the spelling i had a dyslexic moment) the orbit is degrading constantly but the speed it is traveling keeps it from slamming ino the earth, this is why we dont slam into the sun.
-grim
The moon is not in a geosynchronous orbit; its orbital period is about 28 siderial days (as opposed to 1, which is the definition of a geosynchronous orbit.)
-Erasmus
isnt that geostationary?
-a confuzzled grim
-
Err isn't geostationary orbit a contratiction in terms?
A puzzled
Cinlef
-
Err isn't geostationary orbit a contratiction in terms?
A puzzled
Cinlef
Not really, note the "geo" part, it just means a satellite that is in orbit over the equator and orbiting at the same speed that the earth turns, which keeps it over the same spot, or "geographic location". To an observer standing on the earth it would appear to be stationary in the sky.
At least, I'm pretty sure that's what it is.
-
GEOSTATIONARY: Of, relating to or being a satellite that travels above Earth's equator from west to east at an altitude of approximately 35,900 kilometers (22,300 miles) and at a speed matching that of Earth's rotation, thus remaining stationary in relation to Earth.
GEOSYNCHRONOUS: of or having an orbit with a fixed period of 24 hours (although the position in the orbit may not be fixed with respect to the earth)
-
The moon is not in a geosynchronous orbit; its orbital period is about 28 siderial days (as opposed to 1, which is the definition of a geosynchronous orbit.)
isnt that geostationary?
-a confuzzled grim[/quote]
No.
Err isn't geostationary orbit a contratiction in terms?
Not really, note the "geo" part, it just means a satellite that is in orbit over the equator and orbiting at the same speed that the earth turns, which keeps it over the same spot, or "geographic location". To an observer standing on the earth it would appear to be stationary in the sky.
That is what it is.
To expand on Bongo's definitions, a geostationary orbit is a special kind of geosynchronous orbit. A geosynchronous orbit has a period of one siderial day (the time it takes the "fixed" stars to make one full trip around the sky; also, the true rotationary period of the Earth). However, its orbital plane might be inclined to the Earth's equatorial plane, and so it wouldn't stay in the same position in the sky (most notably, it might move north and south).
A geostationary orbit, aside from having a period of one siderial day, orbits in the same plane as the Earth rotates -- the equatorial plane. So if you put a pole in the ground pointing up at the satellite, the pole's top end and the satellite are following essentially the same orbit (just at different heights). The pole will always point at the satellite, whereas in the geosynchronous case, the pole would point at the satellite only once every siderial day (but always at the same time).
-Erasmus
-
hence particles of dust stick to big spherical things, [I guess? haha]
Sorry but I'm quite tired and my commen sense is low.
Actually, I think it's electromagnetism that causes that.
-
People believe things if they have no way to disprove them - in the Middle Ages, nobody had a means to prove that gravity existed or that the Earth was round. We do now. We have that technology in our hands.
Actually, they did have the technology, but no one had thought of the proper experiments. The technology needed to prove the Earth is round and gravity exists is quite simple. Some of the math involved can be a bit complex, and the astrological observations that put the first cracks in the geocentric universe take some more specialized equipment, but the actual proof uses very simple equipment.
All you need is some string, some weights and some patience.
have you heard of Eratosthenes?
he used the angle of the sun to measure the Earth's circumference. he did it very accurately too.
http://www.k12science.org/noonday/option3a.2.html
the highest point on earth is only 7 miles above sea level, and the lowest point 8 miles below it
Really?
The lowest point on the earth is 8 miles below sea level?
Then, by your 'round earth' model, most of the world doesn't exist- only the north pole (the north pole being the highest point of the sea) and 8 miles below it exist. Which would mean there is only a small segment of a sphere. Not a whole sphere.
Unless, of course, you are suggesting that the 'round earth' has a diameter of only 8 miles?
I don't think anyone is going to believe you on that point.
that argument doesn't make sense.
the radius of the (spherical) Earth is about 6400 km. more than enough headroom to account for the point 8 miles below sea level.
-
if you get a ball as big as the earth and the australian/water falls off, maybe I'll reconsider.
-
Really?
The lowest point on the earth is 8 miles below sea level?
Then, by your 'round earth' model, most of the world doesn't exist- only the north pole (the north pole being the highest point of the sea) and 8 miles below it exist. Which would mean there is only a small segment of a sphere. Not a whole sphere.
Unless, of course, you are suggesting that the 'round earth' has a diameter of only 8 miles?
I don't think anyone is going to believe you on that point.
He meant the lowest point of the earth that can be reached without mining. Idiot.
-
That is what it is.
To expand on Bongo's definitions, a geostationary orbit is a special kind of geosynchronous orbit. A geosynchronous orbit has a period of one siderial day (the time it takes the "fixed" stars to make one full trip around the sky; also, the true rotationary period of the Earth). However, its orbital plane might be inclined to the Earth's equatorial plane, and so it wouldn't stay in the same position in the sky (most notably, it might move north and south).
A geostationary orbit, aside from having a period of one siderial day, orbits in the same plane as the Earth rotates -- the equatorial plane. So if you put a pole in the ground pointing up at the satellite, the pole's top end and the satellite are following essentially the same orbit (just at different heights). The pole will always point at the satellite, whereas in the geosynchronous case, the pole would point at the satellite only once every siderial day (but always at the same time).
-Erasmus
ye know too much! Conspiracy!
-
Erasmus wrote:
That is what it is.
To expand on Bongo's definitions, a geostationary orbit is a special kind of geosynchronous orbit. A geosynchronous orbit has a period of one siderial day (the time it takes the "fixed" stars to make one full trip around the sky; also, the true rotationary period of the Earth). However, its orbital plane might be inclined to the Earth's equatorial plane, and so it wouldn't stay in the same position in the sky (most notably, it might move north and south).
A geostationary orbit, aside from having a period of one siderial day, orbits in the same plane as the Earth rotates -- the equatorial plane. So if you put a pole in the ground pointing up at the satellite, the pole's top end and the satellite are following essentially the same orbit (just at different heights). The pole will always point at the satellite, whereas in the geosynchronous case, the pole would point at the satellite only once every siderial day (but always at the same time).
-Erasmus
ye know too much! Conspiracy!
OMG. Grab the pitchforks and torches..
no..
wait.
thats for monsters.
sry.