The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: Sutekh on December 23, 2009, 08:58:35 PM
-
Any flat earthers think the conspiracy is reading and posting? do you ever worry if they gunna get ya some day?
-
I lol'd at your enthusiastic sarcasm. But why would it matter if the conspiaracy is posting here anyway? They would just look like noob trolls.
-
Yes, it would be in the conspiracies best interest to watch this site. I am not sure if they are posting or not though. <_< >_>
-
Right now FE'ers represent no threat to the ruling elite. We are too small a group with little to no power and little to no influence. As long as we are regarded as a bunch of lunatics by the mainstream the elite won't care. In fact, they probably are laughing their asses off at how weak we are despite how right we are.
Now, if we were to grow in size and power; if the day came when we are debating this subject on Larry King and This Week and Good Morning America -- yes, then we would really have to watch our backs. I suggest that all interviews with the mainstream press should be conducting from undisclosed, remote locations via satellite.
-
Right now FE'ers represent no threat to the ruling elite. We are too small a group with little to no power and little to no influence. As long as we are regarded as a bunch of lunatics by the mainstream the elite won't care. In fact, they probably are laughing their asses off at how weak we are despite how right we are.
Now, if we were to grow in size and power; if the day came when we are debating this subject on Larry King and This Week and Good Morning America -- yes, then we would really have to watch our backs. I suggest that all interviews with the mainstream press should be conducting from undisclosed, remote locations via satellite.
UMMMM SATELLITES DONT EXIST REMEMBER!!!
-
Right now FE'ers represent no threat to the ruling elite. We are too small a group with little to no power and little to no influence. As long as we are regarded as a bunch of lunatics by the mainstream the elite won't care. In fact, they probably are laughing their asses off at how weak we are despite how right we are.
Now, if we were to grow in size and power; if the day came when we are debating this subject on Larry King and This Week and Good Morning America -- yes, then we would really have to watch our backs. I suggest that all interviews with the mainstream press should be conducting from undisclosed, remote locations via satellite.
UMMMM SATELLITES DONT EXIST REMEMBER!!!
I'm just glad you remember.
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
Thankfully we are a strong and close-knit family of Zetetics
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
There is no evidence of this.
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
There is no evidence of this.
Um, I beg to differ. It happened to me. My first hand experience is evidence enough for me. James has also been threatened, and was actually attacked.
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
Thankfully we are a strong and close-knit family of Zetetics
Our sense of community is our strength. We must never lose sight of that.
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
There is no evidence of this.
Um, I beg to differ. It happened to me. My first hand experience is evidence enough for me. James has also been threatened, and was actually attacked.
We have only your word for that. And James's word. Since you won't accept first hand testimony from anyone who has been into space, anyone who has been on Concorde and seen the curve of the earth, and many other people, then I'm afraid the rest of us must judge you by your own tight standards and declare your first hand testimony to be utterly worthless. Sorry about that, but it's your own doing.
Of course if you could provide some sort of evidence other than "I say so" then that would be another matter.
-
We have only your word for that. And James's word. Since you won't accept first hand testimony from anyone who has been into space, anyone who has been on Concorde and seen the curve of the earth, and many other people, then I'm afraid the rest of us must judge you by your own tight standards and declare your first hand testimony to be utterly worthless. Sorry about that, but it's your own doing.
Of course if you could provide some sort of evidence other than "I say so" then that would be another matter.
My first hand experience is evidence enough for me.
-
We have only your word for that. And James's word. Since you won't accept first hand testimony from anyone who has been into space, anyone who has been on Concorde and seen the curve of the earth, and many other people, then I'm afraid the rest of us must judge you by your own tight standards and declare your first hand testimony to be utterly worthless. Sorry about that, but it's your own doing.
Of course if you could provide some sort of evidence other than "I say so" then that would be another matter.
My first hand experience is evidence enough for me.
Then don't bother telling the rest of us about it because none of us really believe you.
-
Several people believe me. Protip: you != everyone.
-
Several people believe me. Protip: you != everyone.
Protip: several people != real flat earth believers. Some of them are just pretending trolls. I'd say James is the only one who really believes you, maybe Bishop, and both of them give the appearance of people on the edge of insanity. Anyone else who says they believe you is likely making it up to dig in as FE trolls.
I think you and those other two are the only real FE believers in the society.
-
Well, John also believes me, for what it's worth. Anyway, what's your point? ???
-
Well, John also believes me, for what it's worth. Anyway, what's your point? ???
Oh yeah, forgot about John, who also appears to border on mental instability.
My point is that of the several people you think believe you, most of them are lying and the three that might really believe are the lunatic fringe.
-
So, do you have any evidence for your slanderous claims of mental instability and dishonesty? Or are we going in for a touch of hypocrisy this evening?
Because if not, then it's just your opinion, and then I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask once more what your point is...
-
Don't worry. I believe you Wilmore.
-
So, do you have any evidence for your slanderous claims of mental instability and dishonesty? Or are we going in for a touch of hypocrisy this evening?
Their collective posts on this forum. James appears to be unable to tell reality from fantasy (opinion based on what I have read in his posts), Bishop denies things that everyone can see with their own eyes (FACT based on what I have read in his posts) and John thinks the earth is an infinite plane despite there being no data that anything exists further away than Antarctica apart from the stars and planets (thus creating the appearance of one to whom reason does not apply).
-
Their collective posts on this forum. James appears to be unable to tell reality from fantasy (opinion based on what I have read in his posts), Bishop denies things that everyone can see with their own eyes (FACT based on what I have read in his posts) and John thinks the earth is an infinite plane despite there being no data that anything exists further away than Antarctica apart from the stars and planets (thus creating the appearance of one to whom reason does not apply).
Opinion, opinion, and opinion. Fascinating stuff. Now, let's get back to my original question: what's your point? You think that people don't believe me. Gee, that was a low blow. Up until now I thought everyone believed the same things I do. ::)
Don't worry. I believe you Wilmore.
Thanks Ichi. Honestly, watch yourself. They probably have info on a lot of us.
-
What is this I don't even.
Could you please tell the story of how you were threatened? I'd love to hear this.
-
Now, let's get back to my original question: what's your point?
My point: You stated that the conspiracy had approached and threatened forum members. I was trying to make clear that this statement can not be taken as face value fact. In case anyone did. You confess you don't mind me doing this because you made it plain that you don't care if anyone else believes you because it's good enough for you.
To simplify - you don't mind that I raise the possibility you might be lying.
-
Not only do they monitor this site, they have approached and threatened more than one of us.
There is no evidence of this.
Um, I beg to differ. It happened to me. My first hand experience is evidence enough for me. James has also been threatened, and was actually attacked.
really? please give details. people emailing you pretending to be from the govt to have a little fun at your expense dosen't count.
-
The conspiracy is obviously present here. Why else would certain members come up with completely nonsensical theories? Obviously they are here to discredit fe theory.
-
Now, let's get back to my original question: what's your point?
My point: You stated that the conspiracy had approached and threatened forum members. I was trying to make clear that this statement can not be taken as face value fact. In case anyone did. You confess you don't mind me doing this because you made it plain that you don't care if anyone else believes you because it's good enough for you.
To simplify - you don't mind that I raise the possibility you might be lying.
So your point was that not all statements can "be taken as face value fact(s)". It's good to know that you're here to help just in case any characters from The Invention of Lying show up.
really? please give details. people emailing you pretending to be from the govt to have a little fun at your expense dosen't count.
Read here:
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=27043.msg631312#msg631312
-
The conspiracy is obviously present here. Why else would certain members come up with completely nonsensical theories? Obviously they are here to discredit fe theory.
If there is a conspiracy it's some of the fe's, giving arguments so crazy as to convince people who are not sure, that fe is insane. Do I need to mention the antimoon that is impossible to ever observe yet which crops up during an esclipe only?
-
The conspiracy is obviously present here. Why else would certain members come up with completely nonsensical theories? Obviously they are here to discredit fe theory.
If there is a conspiracy it's some of the fe's, giving arguments so crazy as to convince people who are not sure, that fe is insane. Do I need to mention the antimoon that is impossible to ever observe yet which crops up during an esclipe only?
First of all, it's not the "Anti-Moon," it's the "Shadow Object." The Anti-Moon is a celestial body beneath the earth.
The Shadow Object is a satellite of the Sun, manifesting its shadow upon the moon when the Sun, Object, and Moon perfectly align. The Shadow Object does not pass between the observer and the Moon, but passes between the Sun and Moon. During an eclipse we see its shadow.
The Shadow Object is never seen because, as a satellite of the Sun, it is always on the "day" side of the earth. During the day the sun's light blots out all celestial bodies in the sky.
Learn More: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Lunar+Eclipse
-
The conspiracy is obviously present here. Why else would certain members come up with completely nonsensical theories? Obviously they are here to discredit fe theory.
If there is a conspiracy it's some of the fe's, giving arguments so crazy as to convince people who are not sure, that fe is insane. Do I need to mention the antimoon that is impossible to ever observe yet which crops up during an esclipe only?
First of all, it's not the "Anti-Moon," it's the "Shadow Object." The Anti-Moon is a celestial body beneath the earth.
The Shadow Object is a satellite of the Sun, manifesting its shadow upon the moon when the Sun, Object, and Moon perfectly align. The Shadow Object does not pass between the observer and the Moon, but passes between the Sun and Moon. During an eclipse we see its shadow.
The Shadow Object is never seen because, as a satellite of the Sun, it is always on the "day" side of the earth. During the day the sun's light blots out all celestial bodies in the sky.
Learn More: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Lunar+Eclipse
I can see the moon during the day sometimes ;D
-
Venus can also be observed during the day if you know where to look.
-
The conspiracy is obviously present here. Why else would certain members come up with completely nonsensical theories? Obviously they are here to discredit fe theory.
If there is a conspiracy it's some of the fe's, giving arguments so crazy as to convince people who are not sure, that fe is insane. Do I need to mention the antimoon that is impossible to ever observe yet which crops up during an esclipe only?
First of all, it's not the "Anti-Moon," it's the "Shadow Object." The Anti-Moon is a celestial body beneath the earth.
The Shadow Object is a satellite of the Sun, manifesting its shadow upon the moon when the Sun, Object, and Moon perfectly align. The Shadow Object does not pass between the observer and the Moon, but passes between the Sun and Moon. During an eclipse we see its shadow.
The Shadow Object is never seen because, as a satellite of the Sun, it is always on the "day" side of the earth. During the day the sun's light blots out all celestial bodies in the sky.
Learn More: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Lunar+Eclipse
Physics, Rowbotham Style:
"1st. A reflector is a plane or concave surface, which gives off or returns what it receives:--
If a piece of red hot metal or any other heated object is placed before a plane or concave surface, heat is reflected.
If snow or ice, or any artificial freezing mixture is similarly placed, cold will be reflected.
If light of any given colour is placed in the same way, the same colour of light will be reflected.
If a given sound is produced, the same tone or pitch will be reflected.
A reflector will not throw off cold when heat is placed before it; nor heat when cold is presented. If a red light is received, red light will be returned, not blue or yellow. If the note C is sounded upon any musical instrument, a reflector will not return the note D or G, but precisely the same note, altered only in degree or intensity."
Rowbotham has trouble with thermodynamics...
"If the moon is a reflector of the sun's light, she could not radiate or throw down upon the earth any other light than such as she first receives from the sun. No difference could exist in the quality or character of the light; and it could not possibly differ in any other respect than that of intensity or quantity"
Rowbotham doesn't realize that the atmosphere can alter the light coming from the Sun to the Moon.
"It has been asserted in opposition to the above, that the moon might absorb some of the rays of light from the sun and reflect only the remaining rays. To this it is replied that absorption means speedy saturation: a piece of blotting paper, or a lump of hard sugar, or a sponge when brought into contact with any fluid or gaseous substance, would only absorb for a short time; it would quickly become saturated, filled to repletion, and from that moment would cease to absorb, and ever afterwards could only reflect or throw back whatever was projected upon it. So the moon, if an object without light of her own, might at the beginning of her existence absorb the sun's ray's, and, fixing some, might return the others; but as already shown, she could only absorb to saturation, which would occur in a very short time; and from this point of saturation to the present moment she could not have been other than a reflector--a reflector, too, of all which she receives."
Rowbotham fails to understand radiative heat transfer, heat dissipation, and entropy.
"3rd. It is a well known fact, that if the sun is allowed to shine strongly upon a common coal, coke, wood, or charcoal fire, the combustion is greatly diminished; and often the fire is extinguished. It is not an uncommon thing for cooks, housewives, and others to draw down the blinds in summer time to prevent their fires being put out by the continued stream of sun-light pouring through the windows. Many philosophers have recently attempted to deny and ridicule this fact, but they are met, not only by the common sense and every-day experience of very practical people, but by the results of specially instituted experiments.
It is not so well known perhaps, but it is an equally decided fact, that when the light of the moon is allowed to play upon a common carbonaceous fire, the action is increased, the fire burns more vividly, and the fuel is more rapidly consumed."
Rowbotham's understanding of common housewife physics is astounding, but his assumptions about light from the Sun and Moon are lacking.
"4th. In sun-light a thermometer stands higher than a similar thermometer placed in the shade. In the full moon-light, a thermometer stands lower than a similar instrument in the shade."
Because Rowbotham is the king of real scientific experiments, I am surprised that he posts no references or data for this claim. I am unable to find any experiment that backs this up.
"6th. The light of the sun reflected from the surface of a pool of water, or from the surface of ice, may be collected in a large lens, and thrown to a point or focus, when the heat will be found to be considerable; but neither from the light of the moon reflected in a similar way, nor direct from the moon itself, can a heat-giving focus be obtained."
Rowbotham states the obvious, light reflected from the Sun off the Moon to the Earth should be less intense than direct rays from the Earth.
"7th. The sun's light, when concentrated by a number of plane or concave mirrors throwing the light to the same point; or by a large burning lens, produces a black or non-luminous focus, in which the heat is so intense that metallic and alkaline substances are quickly fused; earthy and mineral compounds almost immediately vitrified; and all animal and vegetable structures in a few seconds decomposed, burned up and destroyed.
The moon's light concentrated in the above manner produces a focus so brilliant and luminous that it is difficult to look upon it; yet there is no increase of temperature. In the focus of sun-light there is great heat but no light. In that of the moon's light there is great light but no heat. That the light of the moon is without heat, is fully verified by the following quotations"
Rowbotham attributes the suns radiative heat transfer to visible light alone, and fails to recognize that the same heat transfer would not occur if the light was reflected off the Moon.
At this point I got tired and decided to stop. If you wish to continue to cite Rowbotham as your source of valid experimental evidence and solid reasoning I will continue again tomorrow.
-
this might be dangerous to say but I believe Lord Wilmore. My guess is that if the conspiracy saw flat earth beggining to have momentous growth they would probably assassinate him. This what the KGB did in Russia! And it might someday be what obama does to dissidents. yet obama is already threatening people with CHARACTER ASSASSINATION if they don't cooperate with him. Just like RE'ers like thermal detonator try charachter assassination on poeple like James and Bishop who think outside the box!
-
this might be dangerous to say but I believe Lord Wilmore. My guess is that if the conspiracy saw flat earth beggining to have momentous growth they would probably assassinate him. This what the KGB did in Russia! And it might someday be what obama does to dissidents. yet obama is already threatening people with CHARACTER ASSASSINATION if they don't cooperate with him. Just like RE'ers like thermal detonator try charachter assassination on poeple like James and Bishop who think outside the box!
For Rowbotham no character assassination is needed. His physical reasoning is flawed enough.
-
this might be dangerous to say but I believe Lord Wilmore. My guess is that if the conspiracy saw flat earth beggining to have momentous growth they would probably assassinate him. This what the KGB did in Russia! And it might someday be what obama does to dissidents. yet obama is already threatening people with CHARACTER ASSASSINATION if they don't cooperate with him. Just like RE'ers like thermal detonator try charachter assassination on poeple like James and Bishop who think outside the box!
Firstly, the T and D in Thermal Detonator should be capitals. Secondly, I don't assassinate the characters of Bishop and James, I merely point at them while they commit character suicide. They do all the work themselves.