The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: ClockTower on November 16, 2010, 05:28:44 AM
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
-
I do like the question that you have posted ClockTower, however; you know that some FEer is just going to say it's part of the conspiricy (First and last response fo FE).
I have watched many o' sunset over the coast. It is obvious that the sun sinks below the horizon. Unless there are constant waves exceeding 3000 km in hight, I strongly doubt that it is due to some perspective effect.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
According to FET we cant go to mars. So there could be no way that video is of the sunset on mars.
-
Conspiracy + The earth is special, not like the other celestial bodies = Argument fail.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
According to FET we cant go to mars. So there could be no way that video is of the sunset on mars.
Not entirely true, Username (John Davis) allows for extended space travel.
Furthermore, FET doesn't get to declare something is impossible. FET must prove something before it declares it. Of course, it's typical of an FEer to dismiss evidence without due consideration.
-
Furthermore, FET doesn't get to declare something is impossible. FET must prove something before it declares it. Of course, it's typical of an FEer to dismiss evidence without due consideration.
We're in the FET bailiwick, they get to declare what they like and we have to work around it.
Berny
Beautiful day out here!
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
According to FET we cant go to mars. So there could be no way that video is of the sunset on mars.
Not entirely true, Username (John Davis) allows for extended space travel.
Furthermore, FET doesn't get to declare something is impossible. FET must prove something before it declares it. Of course, it's typical of an FEer to dismiss evidence without due consideration.
So im not allowed to disagree with John Davis' assertion that extended space travel is possible?
It would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach mars, due to the UA and its ever accelerating nature. Not possible. Sorry.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
According to FET we cant go to mars. So there could be no way that video is of the sunset on mars.
Not entirely true, Username (John Davis) allows for extended space travel.
Furthermore, FET doesn't get to declare something is impossible. FET must prove something before it declares it. Of course, it's typical of an FEer to dismiss evidence without due consideration.
So im not allowed to disagree with John Davis' assertion that extended space travel is possible?
It would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach mars, due to the UA and its ever accelerating nature. Not possible. Sorry.
I never said that you weren't allowed to disagree with John Davis's assertion. Please pay attention.
Please explain your claim that is would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach Mars. I challenge you to show the math to prove your claim. I believe that you're just making things up, like the typical FEer.
-
Would not a rocket just have to get out of the Earth's "UA shadow" so it will then be effected by the UA Aether. It will then be at a constant acceleration equal to the earth without expending fuel (a la UA) and then it is a rather short trip to any star (3100 miles).
It would be much simpler to launch nearest the rim at an angle southwards to get out of Earth's "UA shadow"
Any FE'er know how far Earth's UA shadow extends?
Berny
Cannot believe he is even contemplating this.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
According to FET we cant go to mars. So there could be no way that video is of the sunset on mars.
Not entirely true, Username (John Davis) allows for extended space travel.
Furthermore, FET doesn't get to declare something is impossible. FET must prove something before it declares it. Of course, it's typical of an FEer to dismiss evidence without due consideration.
So im not allowed to disagree with John Davis' assertion that extended space travel is possible?
It would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach mars, due to the UA and its ever accelerating nature. Not possible. Sorry.
Your reasoning assumes that UA is correct. UA is unproven and not every fuel source has been discovered, so your logic is self supporting.
-
It would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach mars, due to the UA and its ever accelerating nature. Not possible. Sorry.
You have the unmeasurable source of energy. UA. Drill a hole and harness the power of UA. Problem solved.
-
Thats assuming the UA acts against the rocket. Metors dont seem affected by it for unkonwn reasons. Noone knows if a man made rocket would be affected by it either.
-
That's assuming the UA acts against the rocket. Meteors don't seem affected by it for unkonwn reasons. Noone knows if a man-made rocket would be affected by it either.
Again:
Please explain your claim that is would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach Mars. I challenge you to show the math to prove your claim. I believe that you're just making things up, like the typical FEer.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
-
That's assuming the UA acts against the rocket. Meteors don't seem affected by it for unkonwn reasons. Noone knows if a man-made rocket would be affected by it either.
Again:
Please explain your claim that is would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach Mars. I challenge you to show the math to prove your claim. I believe that you're just making things up, like the typical FEer.
[/quote]
The variables are too great.
w amount of weight of rocket
x amount of weight for fuel
y amount of thrust needed for acceleration pushing the weights of both w and x
z amount of fuel required to maintain that acceleration
As the earth continually accelerates you can see that you would need close to an unlimited amount of fuel to achieve said acceleration. If you want to plug numbers in be my guest. I have neither the time nor the desire to do the math on an impossible equation.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
-
Thats assuming the UA acts against the rocket. Metors dont seem affected by it for unkonwn reasons. Noone knows if a man made rocket would be affected by it either.
You have any reason to believe that it won't act against the solid matter?
-
That's assuming the UA acts against the rocket. Meteors don't seem affected by it for unkonwn reasons. Noone knows if a man-made rocket would be affected by it either.
Again:
Please explain your claim that is would take a rocket with an unmeasurable amount of fuel to reach Mars. I challenge you to show the math to prove your claim. I believe that you're just making things up, like the typical FEer.
The variables are too great.
w amount of weight of rocket
x amount of weight for fuel
y amount of thrust needed for acceleration pushing the weights of both w and x
z amount of fuel required to maintain that acceleration
As the earth continually accelerates you can see that you would need close to an unlimited amount of fuel to achieve said acceleration. If you want to plug numbers in be my guest. I have neither the time nor the desire to do the math on an impossible equation.
[/quote]So once again, an FEer makes a claim that he or she can't back up. Noted and expected.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
Discovery Magazine can be just as duped by the conspiracy as you are. You're really thick aren't you?
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
Discovery Magazine can be just as duped by the conspiracy as you are. You're really thick aren't you?
No problem. By invoking the Conspiracy, you lose the debate, bringing in a non-falsifiable point. See you next topic. Victory for RE!
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
Discovery Magazine can be just as duped by the conspiracy as you are. You're really thick aren't you?
No problem. By invoking the Conspiracy, you lose the debate, bringing in a non-falsifiable point. See you next topic. Victory for RE!
Incorrect. If people are claiming to have feed from mars which is impossible to have, then they are clearly lying.
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
-
Prove that feed from Mars is impossible to have.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
Discovery Magazine can be just as duped by the conspiracy as you are. You're really thick aren't you?
No problem. By invoking the Conspiracy, you lose the debate, bringing in a non-falsifiable point. See you next topic. Victory for RE!
Incorrect. If people are claiming to have feed from mars which is impossible to have, then they are clearly lying.
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
Show that your claim is true without any implication of the Conspiracy. If you can't, then you're right back to bringing in a non-falsifiable point.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
Discovery Magazine can be just as duped by the conspiracy as you are. You're really thick aren't you?
No problem. By invoking the Conspiracy, you lose the debate, bringing in a non-falsifiable point. See you next topic. Victory for RE!
Incorrect. If people are claiming to have feed from mars which is impossible to have, then they are clearly lying.
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
It is possible according to Username's(John Davis) model of the flat earth. Which model are you using and why is the video fake?
-
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
-
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
If that was all you presented, yes. If that footage came with proper documentation, and had been verified to be what you said it was by at least one impartial and sufficiently prestigious third party, no.
Also:
Prove that feed from Mars is impossible to have.
-
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
I don't know. I'd have to see the attribution of the footage.
-
Please reference: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/11/15/sunset-on-mars/).
Here we see from another planet how its sunset appears. Note that the disc of the Sun disappears below the horizon. So on a round planet, this is how a sunset looks, just like it does on Earth.
That is probably the least convincing video I have seen so far. Prove that it is not faked.
Phil Plait fully attributed the video. Do learn to read.
Irrelevant. Where did the video come from?
Can you read? "attributed" means the author tells you where he got the video. Read the article. Follow its links and their links.
It claims to be feed from a robot on mars. Prove that it is so.
What proof would you accept? You have a chain of attributions. Is there one you know to be false? Have you contacted the various authors?
It seems that Discover Magazine accepts the authenticity. Perhaps, you might take the concern up with them. If only FEers could get their scientific results published in such a magazine. If only ...
Discovery Magazine can be just as duped by the conspiracy as you are. You're really thick aren't you?
No problem. By invoking the Conspiracy, you lose the debate, bringing in a non-falsifiable point. See you next topic. Victory for RE!
Incorrect. If people are claiming to have feed from mars which is impossible to have, then they are clearly lying.
Would you doubt me if I claimed to have raw footage from a space shuttle in Andromeda?
Yes, I would.
According to RET physics (I'm just going to call this 'physics' from this point because of how certain I am that this is real physics), and the current technology of humans, it is not possible to achieve relative velocities fast enough to reach that kind of a distance in a human lifetime. Current physics restricts us to a velocity of 3x10^8 m/s (I can prove this mathematically if you really want me to, this would work for your absurd flat earth as well), so it's not really possible.
I can reject every single claim you make based on physics. I'd actually like to see some of you flat earth people get a physics degree or try to debate a physicist on your idiotic claims. Without any proof or mathematics to back up your claims, they are absolutely worthless. Before you try to present your proof, you should make sure that your proof isn't actually just another claim made to try to support an absurd idea. That's all that you've done here. You've made a claim that the Earth is flat, and in order for it to work, you established more claims to support the idea, and none of these claims can be observed or proven. Essentially, your claim can be rendered worthless by science.
-
I told you this was going to be a discussion about conspiricy, didn't I!