-
NEWS FLASH - EARTH IS FLAT
I have really been digging and the truth is truth. It is flat.
(http://)
-
Wow. I got about 5 minutes into your video and all that I can say is that there are so many things wrong with your "understanding" of RET that it's hard to know where to start.
-
NEWS FLASH - EARTH IS FLAT
I have really been digging and the truth is truth. It is flat.
(http://)
The deception of NASA is without measure.
I like the irony of your quote. There is nothing to measure.....
-
NEWS FLASH - EARTH IS FLAT
I have really been digging and the truth is truth. It is flat.
(http://)
The deception of NASA is without measure.
I like the irony of your quote. There is nothing to measure.....
The deception of NASA is, in fact, measurable. You could measure it by the number of lies told.
-
NEWS FLASH - EARTH IS FLAT
I have really been digging and the truth is truth. It is flat.
(http://)
The deception of NASA is without measure.
I like the irony of your quote. There is nothing to measure.....
The deception of NASA is, in fact, measurable. You could measure it by the number of lies told.
And just how many lies would that be?
-
NEWS FLASH - EARTH IS FLAT
I have really been digging and the truth is truth. It is flat.
(http://)
The deception of NASA is without measure.
I like the irony of your quote. There is nothing to measure.....
The deception of NASA is, in fact, measurable. You could measure it by the number of lies told.
Give a figure for the number of lies. For each one, offer testable proof that it is a lie.
-
NEWS FLASH - THE EARTH IS ROUND
The links in my forum signature prove it.
-
NEWS FLASH - THE EARTH IS ROUND
The links in my forum signature prove it.
They do.
-
NEWS FLASH - GEOMETRY IS MADE UP BY THE HUMAN MIND
That means, shapes are not real. Kant proved that somehow. But the book is really thick.
-
The truth is that all it takes are a few FACTS and the rest is semantics.
1. NASA is filled with known liars, known photo hoaxers, known photo editors and is loved by those who foolishly adore and follow blindly.
2. Water cannot have a bend. If you would like to bring gravity in to play here, well then you can disprove gravity in this way as well. Two birds with one stone. If my glass of water is "flat" and a bucket of water is "flat" and a ten foot trough of water is "flat" well you can go from there. I actually am having an photographer grab a photo of the California coast from Santa Cruz to Santa Barbara. It will have the gps and EXIF data included and he will ensure the horizon is flat behind it. That distance is 487 miles. Haha, laughable.... you want to make a bet? I'll bet you there is zero curvature of water and you must take the RET curvature of 324 feet. LOL! That is classic. The Statue of Liberty is 305 feet. You really think the statue of liberty is standing between the two cities holding up this hill of water suspended in mid air by gravity? Laughable. You can only use your made up geometry for so long. I'll admit, 400 years was a nice run, now move over intellectuals, time to go cry to Mommy about your globe and universe being a hoax.
3. Stars in the sky prove a non rotating earth. That one is simple to prove. Go out side tonight with your video camera and spin around like you are the earth and look with a comes out in the video. Hmmmm not the same is it? If I fly from the tip of South America to San Francisco and I take off at nightfall, can I watch the moon flip upside down? No? Then sorry, not a globe.
Do you really need more? Ask NASA to go to the moon again. Oh yeah they can't, I forgot.
Did you see the human outside of Apollo 11 in my movie at http://xby.me/flat? (http://xby.me/flat?) So, what is the NASA lover's excuse gonna be now?
Did you go through all the images at the site I directed you to at the end of my video?
Did you know that Erick Verlinde has already submitted a paper calling gravity a false theory?
Will you ever stop fighting for something so obviously wrong? It is okay... I promise you there is no hell okay. I understand that religion is a joke and the bible isn't divine but it is funny that those "ancient desert wanders" knew more than you.
Goodbye Globe, Goodbye Globalists, Goodbye NASA suck-ups, I wish I could say it was fun but you shills are relentless.
-
You're begging me to hate you. I normally take it easy on newbies, but forget that.
1. EVIDENCE, now. Otherwise false instantly, no argument.
2. I fail to see any proof or in fact any disproving
3. If it were that easy don't you think that we would've thought that? We aren't moving fast enough for the celestial bodies to appear to spin around. They do that at the poles, though.
4. Yes, they're going to do something they already did, spend more money that they could be investing in new things.
5. Yes, people can be in space with space suits. Magic, eh?
6. I do not care enough about your site to waste the bandwidth.
7. And? Who cares. Just because a paper is published is not magically changing reality.
8. Yes, I agree. There is no hell. But there is evidence to RE, and stupid ad hoc, idiotic, notions is all FE has.
I hope this crushed you, I'm happy to help people back to their senses.
-
You're begging me to hate you. I normally take it easy on newbies, but forget that.
1. EVIDENCE, now. Otherwise false instantly, no argument.
2. I fail to see any proof or in fact any disproving
3. If it were that easy don't you think that we would've thought that? We aren't moving fast enough for the celestial bodies to appear to spin around. They do that at the poles, though.
4. Yes, they're going to do something they already did, spend more money that they could be investing in new things.
5. Yes, people can be in space with space suits. Magic, eh?
6. I do not care enough about your site to waste the bandwidth.
7. And? Who cares. Just because a paper is published is not magically changing reality.
8. Yes, I agree. There is no hell. But there is evidence to RE, and stupid ad hoc, idiotic, notions is all FE has.
I hope this crushed you, I'm happy to help people back to their senses.
Yeah, crushed indeed. The funny thing is you said, "But there is evidence to RE, and stupid ad hoc, idiotic, notions is all FE has." So, let me see if any of your points have a crushing effect.
1. You are kidding right? My video shows a)the lie of ISS, fast forwarding clearly seen meaning not traveling near 17,000 mph b)tons of faked photos all analyzed by a professional. The shadow on the ceiling? The light bulb Sun? The altered photos? The props being moved?
VERDICT: RE CLEARLY CRUSHED BY YOUR BELIEF IN NASA - you can't win this one, too much proof. Stop trying to call clear hoaxing science please, you look silly.
2. You fail to see any proof? I have been looking into this far too long to go away that easy. I feel a bet coming. Are you going to take the side of Lady liberty standing in the middle of the two cities holding up a bulge of water? Are you going to say water can have a bulge? It can curve? Now, do you need crayons for your first day in kindergarten?
VERDICT: ONLY A FOOL WOULD CLAIM WATER CAN BEND. Picture water in the shape of the letter n... " n " Is this possible? Of course not. It would spill and become ___ which is ummm, flat. That's FE 2 RE 0
3. I don't even understand your explanation of three. Go watch a "star timelapse" see the circles the stars make? Okay great. That is because we are spinning right Mr. Hates Me? Okay so now go outside and point your camera in the sky and spin in a circle, go inside and watch your movie, now cry yourself to sleep because
VERDICT: Duhhhh, the stars cannot make circles from a spinning Earth. FE 3 RE 0
4. Oh they don't like to do things they already have done huh. These are your true responses? If they would have gone back maybe they would have discovered water on the moon instead of letting a rover find it outta India. Buzz was too busy playing masonic loincloth I guess to notice the water! But you are right, NASA spends money wisely like the ISS taking the same photos satellites take. But that 150 billion has served humanity well... have you seen them flip a microphone? It spins! I swear! And they are growing vegetables up there.
VERDICT: NASA CAN'T GO TO THE MOON, so FE 4 RE 0
5. Oh now there is a new member of Apollo 11 outside the ship running away and you explain this with "yes, people can be in space with space suits. Magic, eh?" Good one. That isn't weird at all. It'd be like you finding a video of Jesus being raised to heaven by a crane and a Christian explaining it with, well yeah, cranes can lift people, magic huh?
VERDICT: Dumbest response yet award and FE 5 RE -1
6. Cool, default win.
VERDICT: Too lazy to attempt to explain 1000 inconsistencies so FE 6 RE-2
7. So, you intellectuals can challenge me daily with this, "Where is your degree" "Where is your peer reviewed paper?" but when I do the same, now peer reviewed papers don't mean stuff is true? Ummm, ad hoc, see definition. Please
VERDICT: Still out- it is only a theory - no pints awarded FE 6 RE -2
8. Has been summed up above, no point needed
VERDICT: Land slide win for FE....
Now, you must hate me so much more because THAT is how you crush!
-
And welcome to a football game. How about instead of asking me for evidence, go get a google search. Oh, and every one of your claims needs to be proven. Otherwise it's 100% false. I'm going to push you to give evidence either until you ragequit or do it.
-
1. Evidence found at AULIS.com and here, I cued it up for you
2. Go get a glass of water, test for curve. None? Okay a bucket, a pool, a lake.... a pacific ocean. Thanks
3. Please see testable proof in post above and post above that and post above that. I have done the experiment. You don't expect me to do it for you do you? Sorry, I have enough to do. I have given you the test, if you are afraid of results I can't help you.
4. What am I proving here? Have they gone back to the moon? Okay, proven. Thanks
5. I showed video PROOF of someone running outside apollo 11. That is called PROOF. If it isn't then you have no proof we ever went. Sorry.
6. Proven again
7. Peer reviewed paper. PROOF. Talk about shill.
8. Old ancients believed Earth was flat and a disc. You do not. They are right, you are wrong. Proven.
I can't help you further. I would try and prove 9 points but only 8 are possible so I apologize that 8 is all I can do. Maybe if I was an intellectual who believed people in Australia are upside down and that boats travel up the ocean and down the ocean then I would be able to prove 9 points outta 8 but hell, I am only human so 8/8 is the best I can do. I let humanity down. It is as if I pretended things were true for 400 years just because I hate the church and now I don't have enough balls to admit my theory was stupid as believing air moves along with earth.
And the ref has declared the blowout and is allowing the knee here in the 3rd quarter. Game over folks, game over. Maybe you should hand the game over to space x. They can take the hoax from here.
-
Thanks jeranism, this thread is a clear FE victory. You efforts are appreciated.
-
2. Water cannot have a bend.
Sure it can.
(http://gdj.gdj.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/water-drop-photos-13.jpg)
(http://ekfe-a-peiraia.att.sch.gr/Titration/Titration%20module.files/47102ST.jpg)
-
Well, flat earthers, don't worry. Around 7 billion or so persons will keep the round earth going round anyway regardless of your notions to the contrary. So enjoy your little fantasy world. You're welcome to it. Meanwhile the rest of us have to make a living in such fields as the Navy and other maritime services just for one example that depend on maps made from a globe shaped earth and not from any flat earth map of the earth, which do not exist in the first place
-
I commend your search for truth and dedication to reason. It's wonderful that you have taken notice of the many truths within the Bible, and I encourage you to dig deeper into the Word of God.
You will find, that everything written in the Bible is true and no logical explanation can be given to it's authenticity other than divine inspiration. The fact is, Scripture has held up to extreme scrutiny for over 2000 years and no one can disprove its historical accuracy.
The best an atheist can offer is vague verses out of context and subject to interpretation. Let's see a non-believer disprove one of the hundreds of cities, events, dates, genealogies and other historical records. I can go on and on about the many excavations that have taken place throughout the world that prove the Bible's legitimacy, and much of what is recorded historically in the Bible is not disputed by scholars anyway. Take for instance that major world empires of ancient times like the Babylonian kingdom, Egyptians and Romans, Persians and Medes and the Hebrews. No one denies that, and where do you think the histories of these ancient empires can be found? The prophet Daniel successfully predicted the fall of all the world empires, and has astounded scholars to this day.
You can search my post history for all the evidence for the Bible like the physical remains of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Dead Sea or how the Dinosaur fossils are direct evidence of a world-wide flood.
Look a giant chicken:
(http://www.rentals-on-vacation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/bigstock-Fossil-21020713.jpg)
Is it a dinosaur footprint? Or an Emu track...
(http://praxis.wynja.com/images13/emutrackIMG_1464.jpg)
Please read this chapter and decide for yourself who Jesus really is:
John 8
1but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.
2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women.Now what do you say?” 6They were using this question as a trap,in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11“No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,”Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”
Dispute Over Jesus’ Testimony
12When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
13The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.”
14Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. 15You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one. 16But if I do judge, my decisions are true, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. 17In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. 18I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.”
19Then they asked him, “Where is your father?”
“You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” 20He spoke these words while teaching in the temple courts near the place where the offerings were put. Yet no one seized him, because his hour had not yet come.
Dispute Over Who Jesus Is
21Once more Jesus said to them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come.”
22This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?”
23But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”
25“Who are you?” they asked.
“Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,” Jesus replied. 26“I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.”
27They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father. 28So Jesus said, “When you have lifted upa the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. 29The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.” 30Even as he spoke, many believed in him.
Dispute Over Whose Children Jesus’ Opponents Are
31To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
33They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”
34Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.b ”
39“Abraham is our father,” they answered.
“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you wouldc do what Abraham did. 40As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41You are doing the works of your own father.”
“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”
42Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”
Jesus’ Claims About Himself
48The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”
49“I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. 50I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”
52At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. 53Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”
54Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” 59At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
-
Yeah, and your little beaker has sides. Good representation of Earth. And your water drop is 119,465,070,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 x lighter than the earth and is not in a pool or lake. It is sitting there before it puddles off and becomes a flat puddle. So you really don't see it? I mean you don't understand the joke. The Earth is flat and you can deny it but if you didn't see that everyday you wouldn't be here. Use your eyes, measure the Earth. Now add in Gravity and it will tell you that you are on a globe. You got told and you got told wrong and that's fine. So was I. But I was able to get out. It is made up. The Earth is not a globe with upside down people and a force field atmosphere that zooms 1000 mph around exactly even with the land 'cuz gravity' and it rotates around an axis and travels 500 million miles in an orbit around a star 93 million miles away. It just isn't. You have fallen for a story. Why does NASA not have a 24 hour hd Space Cam on Earth? Never ending feed of the spinning Earth. Huh? I can go to NASA.com and see the ISS take photos from the height of a plane while doing a perfect circle of the flat earth using a fish eye lens (provable) and still, even that has to go dark every 45 minutes: because its "on the dark side of Earth"? What? We can talk to Voyager you say at 12 billion miles but we can't keep a goddamn camera on the 150 billion dollar ISS are you dumb? You have fallen for it.
Here, mathematics for the intellectuals...
Flat Earth (as seen by every man on Earth) + gravity = Globe Earth
See how they got you. If you flew from the southern tip of South America to San Francisco at dusk, would you see the moon flip upside down or rightside up throughout your flight? How do pilots fly? By keeping the plane level on the horizon. Cause it is level. as in no matter where you turn. Like water... level. Always. Oh but soon as you say "gravity"... oh jeez, NASA Nazi Mason's yes sir. Promise to repeat the word daily sir!
And no, I do not have a crack pipe in my hand. Thanks for asking. I keep it in my pocket with my tin foil hat. I'm just thankful I don't also believe I'm on a magic ball of mystery and wonder.
-
Well, flat earthers, don't worry. Around 7 billion or so persons will keep the round earth going round anyway regardless of your notions to the contrary. So enjoy your little fantasy world. You're welcome to it. Meanwhile the rest of us have to make a living in such fields as the Navy and other maritime services just for one example that depend on maps made from a globe shaped earth and not from any flat earth map of the earth, which do no exist in the first place
http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg (http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg)
What do you mean no map? And the maps they use are flat clown. They use the flat Earth map in the military for communication and radar. Do you see globe radar? Oh pardon, do you see any globe besides what your lord and savior- NASA HEIST passes off as Earth. It is comical. You see real life everyday then they show you the blue marble and then you lose your minds. Yeah! Globe! Gravity! Upside Down People and boats going uphill or downhill. And planes flying inverted and upside down. Then they will say, "Nobody is upside down, there is no up in space, everyone is right side up."
Oh, the Earth IS flat. Hmmmmm- I rest my case.
-
I commend your search for truth and dedication to reason. It's wonderful that you have taken notice of the many truths within the Bible, and I encourage you to dig deeper into the Word of God.
You will find, that everything written in the Bible is true and no logical explanation can be given to it's authenticity other than divine inspiration. The fact is, Scripture has held up to extreme scrutiny for over 2000 years and no one can disprove its historical accuracy.
The best an atheist can offer is vague verses out of context and subject to interpretation. Let's see a non-believer disprove one of the hundreds of cities, events, dates, genealogies and other historical records. I can go on and on about the many excavations that have taken place throughout the world that prove the Bible's legitimacy, and much of what is recorded historically in the Bible is not disputed by scholars anyway. Take for instance that major world empires of ancient times like the Babylonian kingdom, Egyptians and Romans, Persians and Medes and the Hebrews. No one denies that, and where do you think the histories of these ancient empires can be found? The prophet Daniel successfully predicted the fall of all the world empires, and has astounded scholars to this day.
You can search my post history for all the evidence for the Bible like the physical remains of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Dead Sea or how the Dinosaur fossils are direct evidence of a world-wide flood.
Look a giant chicken:
(http://www.rentals-on-vacation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/bigstock-Fossil-21020713.jpg)
Is it a dinosaur footprint? Or an Emu track...
(http://praxis.wynja.com/images13/emutrackIMG_1464.jpg)
Please read this chapter and decide for yourself who Jesus really is:
John 8
1but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.
2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women.Now what do you say?” 6They were using this question as a trap,in order to have a basis for accusing him.
But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
11“No one, sir,” she said.
“Then neither do I condemn you,”Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”
Dispute Over Jesus’ Testimony
12When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
13The Pharisees challenged him, “Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid.”
14Jesus answered, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. 15You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one. 16But if I do judge, my decisions are true, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me. 17In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. 18I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me.”
19Then they asked him, “Where is your father?”
“You do not know me or my Father,” Jesus replied. “If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” 20He spoke these words while teaching in the temple courts near the place where the offerings were put. Yet no one seized him, because his hour had not yet come.
Dispute Over Who Jesus Is
21Once more Jesus said to them, “I am going away, and you will look for me, and you will die in your sin. Where I go, you cannot come.”
22This made the Jews ask, “Will he kill himself? Is that why he says, ‘Where I go, you cannot come’?”
23But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. 24I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.”
25“Who are you?” they asked.
“Just what I have been telling you from the beginning,” Jesus replied. 26“I have much to say in judgment of you. But he who sent me is trustworthy, and what I have heard from him I tell the world.”
27They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father. 28So Jesus said, “When you have lifted upa the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. 29The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.” 30Even as he spoke, many believed in him.
Dispute Over Whose Children Jesus’ Opponents Are
31To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
33They answered him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?”
34Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. 35Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. 36So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. 37I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.b ”
39“Abraham is our father,” they answered.
“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you wouldc do what Abraham did. 40As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. 41You are doing the works of your own father.”
“We are not illegitimate children,” they protested. “The only Father we have is God himself.”
42Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”
Jesus’ Claims About Himself
48The Jews answered him, “Aren’t we right in saying that you are a Samaritan and demon-possessed?”
49“I am not possessed by a demon,” said Jesus, “but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. 50I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. 51Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never see death.”
52At this they exclaimed, “Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that whoever obeys your word will never taste death. 53Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?”
54Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57“You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” 59At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.
I do not have a problem with you believing whatever you want. But if you try and convert me I have no problem telling you why it is so easy to say no. I don't want to worship or adore a man I never met or a God that revealed himself through fallible (remember, he even knew you say) yet still gives his word in a book through men while men preach it for any reason they see fit. See Joseph Smith and wiveS and then maybe Joel Osteen and 14 million dollar homes. That book describes a human with human traits and jealous and angry and wrathful and forgiving and loving and missing and wastes time in heaven doing heaven things. I know the bible has truths. So does the tortoise and the hare but we don't argue about what road were they on and what year and was the tortoise really talking and turning water into wine? Oh sorry got my stories mixed. That is your God?
Really? Taught to you by men. Not me- that's not a God. That's stupid. Sorry. I like the bible. It's a nice story about the SUN of God who will come in Glory. Your God sent the bible with no punctuation. So, watch what I do here....
Jesus said (this is from my head) Be ready... people will come in my name saying I am the Christ. Do not be led astray..." What if it is read as I see it... "Be ready (jeranism) people will come in my name, (Christians) saying I, (Jesus) am the Christ. Do not be led astray."
So, I don't know about you but I always heed to the words of Zombie Jesus so no, I'll pass on being led antigay... i mean astray
-
The problem with your conclusion, is Jesus Christ is not just a man....
John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Here is the Garden Tomb in Israel where Jesus was laid:
(http://www.israeltripplanner.com/images/items/171/garden_tomb.jpg)
The Burial of Jesus
Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jewish leaders. With Pilate’s permission, he came and took the body away. He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs. At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.
John 19:38:42
Inside the Garden Tomb:
(http://www.mormonheritage.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/is13-photos-set-two-2841.jpg)
Now I understand you were raised Catholic, so be very careful lest you be deceived by their false practices. Mary is not the "Mother of God" but the one who gave birth to his earthly body. Even Jesus called his mother "Woman" and Mary prayed to Jesus, not the other way around.
The Bible specifically says in Matthew 23:9 "And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven."
Yet Catholics disobey this command and call their priests "Father".
I am under the impression that you might be homosexual based on your last sentence above with the antigay/astry joke. I want you to know that even though I am a fundamentalist Christian, I do not judge you or condemn you. For ALL sin and fall short of the Glory of God. That is why salvation is based on Faith alone, and not works.
Jesus did not die for the Righteous, but so the Light may be seen to those living in darkness.
Do you think it is ironic that the Bible says the earth is flat and it really is?
Comfort for God’s People - Isaiah 40
1Comfort, comfort my people,
says your God.
2Speak tenderly to Jerusalem,
and proclaim to her
that her hard service has been completed,
that her sin has been paid for,
that she has received from the Lord’s hand
double for all her sins.
3A voice of one calling:
“In the wilderness prepare
the way for the Lorda ;
make straight in the desert
a highway for our God.b
4Every valley shall be raised up,
every mountain and hill made low;
the rough ground shall become level,
the rugged places a plain.
5And the glory of the Lord will be revealed,
and all people will see it together.
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”
6A voice says, “Cry out.”
And I said, “What shall I cry?”
“All people are like grass,
and all their faithfulness is like the flowers of the field.
7The grass withers and the flowers fall,
because the breath of the Lord blows on them.
Surely the people are grass.
8The grass withers and the flowers fall,
but the word of our God endures forever.”
9You who bring good news to Zion,
go up on a high mountain.
You who bring good news to Jerusalem,c
lift up your voice with a shout,
lift it up, do not be afraid;
say to the towns of Judah,
“Here is your God!”
10See, the Sovereign Lord comes with power,
and he rules with a mighty arm.
See, his reward is with him,
and his recompense accompanies him.
11He tends his flock like a shepherd:
He gathers the lambs in his arms
and carries them close to his heart;
he gently leads those that have young.
12Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand,
or with the breadth of his hand marked off the heavens?
Who has held the dust of the earth in a basket,
or weighed the mountains on the scales
and the hills in a balance?
13Who can fathom the Spiritd of the Lord,
or instruct the Lord as his counselor?
14Whom did the Lord consult to enlighten him,
and who taught him the right way?
Who was it that taught him knowledge,
or showed him the path of understanding?
15Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket;
they are regarded as dust on the scales;
he weighs the islands as though they were fine dust.
16Lebanon is not sufficient for altar fires,
nor its animals enough for burnt offerings.
17Before him all the nations are as nothing;
they are regarded by him as worthless
and less than nothing.
18With whom, then, will you compare God?
To what image will you liken him?
19As for an idol, a metalworker casts it,
and a goldsmith overlays it with gold
and fashions silver chains for it.
20A person too poor to present such an offering
selects wood that will not rot;
they look for a skilled worker
to set up an idol that will not topple.
21Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
Has it not been told you from the beginning?
Have you not understood since the earth was founded?
22He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth,
and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
and spreads them out like a tent to live in.
23He brings princes to naught
and reduces the rulers of this world to nothing.
24No sooner are they planted,
no sooner are they sown,
no sooner do they take root in the ground,
than he blows on them and they wither,
and a whirlwind sweeps them away like chaff.
25“To whom will you compare me?
Or who is my equal?” says the Holy One.
26Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens:
Who created all these?
He who brings out the starry host one by one
and calls forth each of them by name.
Because of his great power and mighty strength,
not one of them is missing.
27Why do you complain, Jacob?
Why do you say, Israel,
“My way is hidden from the Lord;
my cause is disregarded by my God”?
28Do you not know?
Have you not heard?
The Lord is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He will not grow tired or weary,
and his understanding no one can fathom.
29He gives strength to the weary
and increases the power of the weak.
30Even youths grow tired and weary,
and young men stumble and fall;
31but those who hope in the Lord
will renew their strength.
They will soar on wings like eagles;
they will run and not grow weary,
they will walk and not be faint.
I strongly urge you to clear your mind of all the things of this world, and pray to God for wisdom. Then when you are ready, open the Bible and read it with a childlike wonder, a true openmindedness and the secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven will be revealed to you. Not until you have the smallest speck of faith will you be able to marvel in God's Glory.
-
Yeah, crushed indeed. The funny thing is you said, "But there is evidence to RE, and stupid ad hoc, idiotic, notions is all FE has." So, let me see if any of your points have a crushing effect.
1. You are kidding right? My video shows a)the lie of ISS, fast forwarding clearly seen meaning not traveling near 17,000 mph b)tons of faked photos all analyzed by a professional. The shadow on the ceiling? The light bulb Sun? The altered photos? The props being moved?
VERDICT: RE CLEARLY CRUSHED BY YOUR BELIEF IN NASA - you can't win this one, too much proof. Stop trying to call clear hoaxing science please, you look silly.
2. You fail to see any proof? I have been looking into this far too long to go away that easy. I feel a bet coming. Are you going to take the side of Lady liberty standing in the middle of the two cities holding up a bulge of water? Are you going to say water can have a bulge? It can curve? Now, do you need crayons for your first day in kindergarten?
VERDICT: ONLY A FOOL WOULD CLAIM WATER CAN BEND. Picture water in the shape of the letter n... " n " Is this possible? Of course not. It would spill and become ___ which is ummm, flat. That's FE 2 RE 0
3. I don't even understand your explanation of three. Go watch a "star timelapse" see the circles the stars make? Okay great. That is because we are spinning right Mr. Hates Me? Okay so now go outside and point your camera in the sky and spin in a circle, go inside and watch your movie, now cry yourself to sleep because
VERDICT: Duhhhh, the stars cannot make circles from a spinning Earth. FE 3 RE 0
4. Oh they don't like to do things they already have done huh. These are your true responses? If they would have gone back maybe they would have discovered water on the moon instead of letting a rover find it outta India. Buzz was too busy playing masonic loincloth I guess to notice the water! But you are right, NASA spends money wisely like the ISS taking the same photos satellites take. But that 150 billion has served humanity well... have you seen them flip a microphone? It spins! I swear! And they are growing vegetables up there.
VERDICT: NASA CAN'T GO TO THE MOON, so FE 4 RE 0
5. Oh now there is a new member of Apollo 11 outside the ship running away and you explain this with "yes, people can be in space with space suits. Magic, eh?" Good one. That isn't weird at all. It'd be like you finding a video of Jesus being raised to heaven by a crane and a Christian explaining it with, well yeah, cranes can lift people, magic huh?
VERDICT: Dumbest response yet award and FE 5 RE -1
6. Cool, default win.
VERDICT: Too lazy to attempt to explain 1000 inconsistencies so FE 6 RE-2
7. So, you intellectuals can challenge me daily with this, "Where is your degree" "Where is your peer reviewed paper?" but when I do the same, now peer reviewed papers don't mean stuff is true? Ummm, ad hoc, see definition. Please
VERDICT: Still out- it is only a theory - no pints awarded FE 6 RE -2
8. Has been summed up above, no point needed
VERDICT: Land slide win for FE....
Now, you must hate me so much more because THAT is how you crush!
1. Bring forward a few specific examples of this hoaxing. This "lightbulb" sun, the altered photos, "props" being moved, "fast-forwarding", etc.
Lay it out on the table here so we can have a discussion, instead of this shouting match.
2. What are you talking about? Are you talking about water following the curvature of the Earth? Gravity. Yes, it is that simple.
3. Explain what you are even talking about. Clearly. No one even knows what you're talking about.
4. This is neither an argument nor a point. Just baseless rambling.
5. Watched your "video". Didn't see any astronauts "running away"?
7. Everybody needs evidence to support any claim. Stop acting like you're a victim.
If you want to have a logical, coherent, scientific discussion, then let's have one. If not, then you're wasting your breath and will be dismissed like all of the other ramblers.
-
A suggestion to iWitness
Take your "ancient maps" to the office of any steamship company, airline company or navy information office and see what they think of them compared to their modern maps. Let us know what you find.
-
Well, flat earthers, don't worry. Around 7 billion or so persons will keep the round earth going round anyway regardless of your notions to the contrary. So enjoy your little fantasy world. You're welcome to it. Meanwhile the rest of us have to make a living in such fields as the Navy and other maritime services just for one example that depend on maps made from a globe shaped earth and not from any flat earth map of the earth, which do no exist in the first place
http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg (http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg)
What do you mean no map? And the maps they use are flat clown. They use the flat Earth map in the military for communication and radar. Do you see globe radar? Oh pardon, do you see any globe besides what your lord and savior- NASA HEIST passes off as Earth. It is comical. You see real life everyday then they show you the blue marble and then you lose your minds. Yeah! Globe! Gravity! Upside Down People and boats going uphill or downhill. And planes flying inverted and upside down. Then they will say, "Nobody is upside down, there is no up in space, everyone is right side up."
Oh, the Earth IS flat. Hmmmmm- I rest my case.
Check out how "flat maps" are made from projections of the globe. The earth is "round" or an "oblate spheroid" technically speaking. Oh , the Earth IS round. Hmmmmm - I rest my case.
The usual "flat earth map" is simply the "Azimuthal Equidistant Projection" of the globe.
Do a little research. Learn something.
-
Good vid, mate. Always nice to see people doing research and thinking for themselves.
-
"Research"
-
"Research"
What?
-
So basically because the goverment can tap into GPS, and can everyone else, that makes them liars? You're a moron. Why do we take that exit into space? It's hard to go straight up with a rocket, we need to get into orbit first, all those things. You're using a square map of a round globe for that ISS idea. As for your next thing about hairs, do you think there are open holes everywhere or something? And that hairs make machines malfunction?
I lost my caring of a silent, movie maker video.
-
All of those photos are from twitter. Great source for reliable info and unmodified images.
-
So basically because the goverment can tap into GPS, and can everyone else, that makes them liars? You're a moron. Why do we take that exit into space? It's hard to go straight up with a rocket, we need to get into orbit first, all those things. You're using a square map of a round globe for that ISS idea. As for your next thing about hairs, do you think there are open holes everywhere or something? And that hairs make machines malfunction?
I lost my caring of a silent, movie maker video.
To whom is this post directed? Or, are you drunk and spluttering at the world in general?
-
The video he posted.
-
The video he posted.
I enjoyed it. Was I wrong to enjoy it?
-
You enjoy soul-rending moviemaker videos?
-
Hello jerinism, I see you are new here and besides me making it clear that I am a round earther I haven't had the chance to properly introduce myself. I am a 17 year old space enthusiast christian, so basically the exact opposite of you, and I am quite knowledgeable about astronomy and physics. I think it all makes a lot of sense and whatever you don't understand about a round Earth I could help you understand better if you want. The reason the Earth looks flat is because it's so huge and what we see is exactly what we would expect on a round Earth, and a round Earth doesn't have the holes that FET has like no explanation for sunsets that also explains time zones. I have also proven on many occasions that space travel is real, sense that is a highly controversial issue around here and I am quite knowledgeable about it. Just today in fact I posted a reply proving that videos from the ISS are actually made in space, you can find that post here (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63358.msg1678848#msg1678848). I have also on a few occasions made short animations which prove various geometric things about a round Earth and I also use a lot of math. From what I can tell you are a reasonably open minded guy and you did say in your video that you are interested in debating flat earth, and I would like to do just that.
-
Hello jerinism, I see you are new here and besides me making it clear that I am a round earther I haven't had the chance to properly introduce myself. I am a 17 year old space enthusiast christian, so basically the exact opposite of you, and I am quite knowledgeable about astronomy and physics. I think it all makes a lot of sense and whatever you don't understand about a round Earth I could help you understand better if you want. The reason the Earth looks flat is because it's so huge and what we see is exactly what we would expect on a round Earth, and a round Earth doesn't have the holes that FET has like no explanation for sunsets that also explains time zones. I have also proven on many occasions that space travel is real, sense that is a highly controversial issue around here and I am quite knowledgeable about it. Just today in fact I posted a reply proving that videos from the ISS are actually made in space, you can find that post here (http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63358.msg1678848#msg1678848). I have also on a few occasions made short animations which prove various geometric things about a round Earth and I also use a lot of math. From what I can tell you are a reasonably open minded guy and you did say in your video that you are interested in debating flat earth, and I would like to do just that.
Thanks for your introduction. Is it okay if I ask you some questions then? We can go from there.
-
Well, flat earthers, don't worry. Around 7 billion or so persons will keep the round earth going round anyway regardless of your notions to the contrary. So enjoy your little fantasy world. You're welcome to it. Meanwhile the rest of us have to make a living in such fields as the Navy and other maritime services just for one example that depend on maps made from a globe shaped earth and not from any flat earth map of the earth, which do no exist in the first place
http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg (http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg)
What do you mean no map? And the maps they use are flat clown. They use the flat Earth map in the military for communication and radar. Do you see globe radar? Oh pardon, do you see any globe besides what your lord and savior- NASA HEIST passes off as Earth. It is comical. You see real life everyday then they show you the blue marble and then you lose your minds. Yeah! Globe! Gravity! Upside Down People and boats going uphill or downhill. And planes flying inverted and upside down. Then they will say, "Nobody is upside down, there is no up in space, everyone is right side up."
Oh, the Earth IS flat. Hmmmmm- I rest my case.
Check out how "flat maps" are made from projections of the globe. The earth is "round" or an "oblate spheroid" technically speaking. Oh , the Earth IS round. Hmmmmm - I rest my case.
The usual "flat earth map" is simply the "Azimuthal Equidistant Projection" of the globe.
Do a little research. Learn something.
I love that all these guys are here. What would ever compel an ex-Navy guy, who knows the earth is round to have 2253 posts in the Flat Earth forum? It is so funny to me. You guys are hilarious
-
All of those photos are from twitter. Great source for reliable info and unmodified images.
What images did I get from twitter? Are you okay? Would you like me to ask you some questions so that I may learn logic from an intellectual?
-
Thanks for your introduction. Is it okay if I ask you some questions then? We can go from there.
Yeah, ask away.
-
Well, flat earthers, don't worry. Around 7 billion or so persons will keep the round earth going round anyway regardless of your notions to the contrary. So enjoy your little fantasy world. You're welcome to it. Meanwhile the rest of us have to make a living in such fields as the Navy and other maritime services just for one example that depend on maps made from a globe shaped earth and not from any flat earth map of the earth, which do no exist in the first place
http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg (http://www.clicknhost.com/u/080415/v4u496yyc.jpg)
What do you mean no map? And the maps they use are flat clown. They use the flat Earth map in the military for communication and radar. Do you see globe radar? Oh pardon, do you see any globe besides what your lord and savior- NASA HEIST passes off as Earth. It is comical. You see real life everyday then they show you the blue marble and then you lose your minds. Yeah! Globe! Gravity! Upside Down People and boats going uphill or downhill. And planes flying inverted and upside down. Then they will say, "Nobody is upside down, there is no up in space, everyone is right side up."
Oh, the Earth IS flat. Hmmmmm- I rest my case.
Check out how "flat maps" are made from projections of the globe. The earth is "round" or an "oblate spheroid" technically speaking. Oh , the Earth IS round. Hmmmmm - I rest my case.
The usual "flat earth map" is simply the "Azimuthal Equidistant Projection" of the globe.
Do a little research. Learn something.
I love that all these guys are here. What would ever compel an ex-Navy guy, who knows the earth is round to have 2253 posts in the Flat Earth forum? It is so funny to me. You guys are hilarious
;D
-
A suggestion to iWitness
Take your "ancient maps" to the office of any steamship company, airline company or navy information office and see what they think of them compared to their modern maps. Let us know what you find.
Lol great suggestion NOT! Like the idiots sitting at the front desk will know anything about the shape of the earth, space travel and ancient history. I got a suggestion for you Googleotomy.... get a freaking life!
EVERYONE knows that modern maps are NOT accurate... which is why they turn-off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere, and use "magnetic declination" aka bullcrap to fix the errors in map routes.
-
A suggestion to iWitness
Take your "ancient maps" to the office of any steamship company, airline company or navy information office and see what they think of them compared to their modern maps. Let us know what you find.
Lol great suggestion NOT! Like the idiots sitting at the front desk will know anything about the shape of the earth, space travel and ancient history. I got a suggestion for you Googleotomy.... get a freaking life!
I bet they would know more than you do.
EVERYONE knows that modern maps are NOT accurate... which is why they turn-off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere, and use "magnetic declination" aka bullcrap to fix the errors in map routes.
You got any support for the claim they turn off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere?
-
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 HELLO?!?
And:
(http://#)
-
I bet they would know more than you do.
O rly? I don't claim to have all the answers, but I would be willing to take your bet that I (someone who has been active on the FES for the past few years and has been studying history and space travel for even longer) would know more about the topics at hand than a random frontdesk person at a railroad and even Navy. How much would you like to wager?
A lot of people make the mistake of thinking "Surely if the earth was flat they would have figured it out by now". But even the top scientists in the world agree that Geocentricity and Heliocentricity both appear to work mathematically and from a point of perspective, and is very difficult to prove or disprove.
From Wikipedia:
The motions of the sun, moon and other solar system planets can be calculated using a geocentric model (the earth is at the center) or using a heliocentric model (the sun is at the center). Both work
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor)
Now the article goes on to claim that the Heliocentric model requires less assumptions, but that is not true. In fact, in order to believe the earth is a sphere you HAVE to believe your eyes are deceiving you. Because they claim the ground curves but water is proven to be flat and the horizon stays at eye level no matter what the altitude. They say the earth is spinning and gravity prevents you from feeling it. Even though the wind blows in multiple directions.
Most people that work for the government or space programs are compartmentalized and do not put much effort into the big picture. Do you personally know anyone that has been into space? I doubt it. And the fact that they so easily traveled 220,000 miles to the moon in the 1970s in only 72 hours, but no one can do it today with better technology should raise some red flags.
-
You can't be so stupid.
-
You can't be so stupid.
Would you put money on that?
-
EVERYONE knows that modern maps are NOT accurate... which is why they turn-off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere,
(http://i.imgur.com/ne3EGZH.png)
-
EVERYONE knows that modern maps are NOT accurate... which is why they turn-off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere,
(http://i.imgur.com/ne3EGZH.png)
t3h win sir. t3h win.
-
A suggestion to iWitness
Take your "ancient maps" to the office of any steamship company, airline company or navy information office and see what they think of them compared to their modern maps. Let us know what you find.
Lol great suggestion NOT! Like the idiots sitting at the front desk will know anything about the shape of the earth, space travel and ancient history. I got a suggestion for you Googleotomy.... get a freaking life!
EVERYONE knows that modern maps are NOT accurate... which is why they turn-off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere, and use "magnetic declination" aka bullcrap to fix the errors in map routes.
iWitness You are only embarassing yourself by making these posts. I am not an expert in the field of air traffic control - only having experience in the technical field of communications, radar and computer equipment. But air traffic control is a rather complex operation and there are experts in all fields of it. It does work on a 24/7 basis and modern maps are accurate. Your remarks are just inane and insane at the best. There is a real world, it is spheroid shaped and it does depend on accurate maps and equipment. What is the problem for your ranting and raving.....except that this is the Flat Earth Society Forum website ?
How much do you know about ASDE. ?
Long range ARSR?
ARTCC.?
RCAG ?
VSCS ?
TRACON ?
Sectional charts ?
Various projections ?
If you know so much more than workers in ATC you should know all the answers to these simple questions. You can always find the answers by googling a bit.
Are you really so afraid to take your "ancient maps" to a shipping line or airline that you would learn something ? If you wish to remain in your little fantasy world, that's your problem. Meanwhile those people in the real world will still be making it possible if you want to take a trip by air or sea.
By any chance, does your resident address happen to be at The Texas State Hospital at Terrell, Texas ?
-
EVERYONE knows that modern maps are NOT accurate... which is why they turn-off airplane tracking in the southern hemisphere,
(http://i.imgur.com/ne3EGZH.png)
t3h win sir. t3h win.
I believe Australia is in the southern hemisphere (Aha,you goofed ! Why didn't you say "the southern HEMIPLANE" if you really are a true flat earth believer ??)
Hmmm ?
I hope I'm wrong but I would be willing to bet even money that iWitness is going into his little disappearing act after my questions were asked ?
-
You can't be so stupid.
Would you put money on that?
Who are you talking about ? If you're talking about iWitness IMHO that would be hard to believe ?
I'm still incredulous . Ancient maps more accurate than modern maps ? Really !!!!! ??????
-
I do believe iWitness has once more slipped out on us . That is pretty stupid in itself ?
And it is my astute observation that IMHO it is iWitness who needs to Quote "Get a freaking life." Unquote (From iWitness himself)
-
Thanks for your introduction. Is it okay if I ask you some questions then? We can go from there.
Yeah, ask away.
Fantastic...
Okay first. Can you help me understand the magic ball better. I know what we were all taught in school but I no longer just accept things said to me by authority figures or people who have been caught lying or not performing in a way that would lead one to find them credible.
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
----Before you answer... please do not use the standard answer of asking me if I understand that there is no up or down in space. That is not a true statement. I do understand the notion that they could easily be reversed. Polaris could be the South star. I get that totally... but there is obviously an up and down in space. The North star always is above the North Pole so for this question, that must remain true. Again, I ask what is going on then in Australia if I am upright. The North star is then under the feet of an Australian?
-
Thanks for your introduction. Is it okay if I ask you some questions then? We can go from there.
Yeah, ask away.
Fantastic...
Okay first. Can you help me understand the magic ball better. I know what we were all taught in school but I no longer just accept things said to me by authority figures or people who have been caught lying or not performing in a way that would lead one to find them credible.
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
----Before you answer... please do not use the standard answer of asking me if I understand that there is no up or down in space. That is not a true statement. I do understand the notion that they could easily be reversed. Polaris could be the South star. I get that totally... but there is obviously an up and down in space. The North star always is above the North Pole so for this question, that must remain true. Again, I ask what is going on then in Australia if I am upright. The North star is then under the feet of an Australian?
Well, I am an Australian, so I'll interject if I may.
Okay.
"obviously an up and down in space" Really? How would one measure this? What would be the reference point?
"what is going on in Australia if I am upright" Normal stuff I suppose. A bit more drinking maybe. What is your point?
I haven't actually seen the north star, so yeah, maybe it is indeed under my feet.
End note- My understanding of the term "up" is that direction which runs contrary to the downwards pull of gravity. So I am upright just as much as you are.
-
Thanks for your introduction. Is it okay if I ask you some questions then? We can go from there.
Yeah, ask away.
Fantastic...
Okay first. Can you help me understand the magic ball better. I know what we were all taught in school but I no longer just accept things said to me by authority figures or people who have been caught lying or not performing in a way that would lead one to find them credible.
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
----Before you answer... please do not use the standard answer of asking me if I understand that there is no up or down in space. That is not a true statement. I do understand the notion that they could easily be reversed. Polaris could be the South star. I get that totally... but there is obviously an up and down in space. The North star always is above the North Pole so for this question, that must remain true. Again, I ask what is going on then in Australia if I am upright. The North star is then under the feet of an Australian?
Well, I am an Australian, so I'll interject if I may.
Okay.
"obviously an up and down in space" Really? How would one measure this? What would be the reference point?
"what is going on in Australia if I am upright" Normal stuff I suppose. A bit more drinking maybe. What is your point?
I haven't actually seen the north star, so yeah, maybe it is indeed under my feet.
End note- My understanding of the term "up" is that direction which runs contrary to the downwards pull of gravity. So I am upright just as much as you are.
Yeah, but surely your blood must all be rushing to your head? ;D
-
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
Up and down are relative directions. Down is defined as towards the center of the earth. Up is the opposite of down.
-
If earth would be completely transparent, you could use a strong telescope to look people on the other side of the globe under the skirt. You may not believe it, but that was an argument for Charles Johnsons slightly prudish wife that earth must be flat.
-
Fantastic...
Okay first. Can you help me understand the magic ball better. I know what we were all taught in school but I no longer just accept things said to me by authority figures or people who have been caught lying or not performing in a way that would lead one to find them credible.
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
----Before you answer... please do not use the standard answer of asking me if I understand that there is no up or down in space. That is not a true statement. I do understand the notion that they could easily be reversed. Polaris could be the South star. I get that totally... but there is obviously an up and down in space. The North star always is above the North Pole so for this question, that must remain true. Again, I ask what is going on then in Australia if I am upright. The North star is then under the feet of an Australian?
If you define up as the direction of Polaris then in North America you are standing on a steep incline and the only time when up is the direction of Polaris is when you are standing on the North Pole. Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist. Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that.
-
I do believe iWitness has once more slipped out on us . That is pretty stupid in itself ?
And it is my astute observation that IMHO it is iWitness who needs to Quote "Get a freaking life." Unquote (From iWitness himself)
Look, I know you're secretly in love with me... it's obvious. When you work long hours as a shill, it's not uncommon for your mind to play tricks on you. Sure, you've been given orders to harass me, find out everything you can, but let me tell you something... you will be defeated in the end. If not by me, then by the Word of the Lord that will burn you like straw on the day of His Coming.
Do you see me chasing Round-earthers around and harassing them with private messages and replying to all of their posts? Of course not, because I stand firm in my beliefs and know the Truth. I post my thoughts out there for those that are interested, and if they have questions I will answer them.
Don't take it personal. I have a purpose to fulfill on this earth. Half of it is on the internet debating the likes of you, and the other half is going out into the world and spreading the Gospel among the lost sheep.
I am really sorry that you are in the situation that you are in. Either by choice or by force. Because there is no way you can be here on this site for as long as you have, and still be blind to the truth. But when you realize that He who lives in you is greater than he who lives in the world, you will have nothing to fear.
God's Wrath Against Humanity
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
-
I do believe iWitness has once more slipped out on us . That is pretty stupid in itself ?
And it is my astute observation that IMHO it is iWitness who needs to Quote "Get a freaking life." Unquote (From iWitness himself)
Look, I know you're secretly in love with me... it's obvious. When you work long hours as a shill, it's not uncommon for your mind to play tricks on you. Sure, you've been given orders to harass me, find out everything you can, but let me tell you something... you will be defeated in the end. If not by me, then by the Word of the Lord that will burn you like straw on the day of His Coming.
Do you see me chasing Round-earthers around and harassing them with private messages and replying to all of their posts? Of course not, because I stand firm in my beliefs and know the Truth. I post my thoughts out there for those that are interested, and if they have questions I will answer them.
Don't take it personal. I have a purpose to fulfill on this earth. Half of it is on the internet debating the likes of you, and the other half is going out into the world and spreading the Gospel among the lost sheep.
I am really sorry that you are in the situation that you are in. Either by choice or by force. Because there is no way you can be here on this site for as long as you have, and still be blind to the truth. But when you realize that He who lives in you is greater than he who lives in the world, you will have nothing to fear.
God's Wrath Against Humanity
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
iwitness - who is the guy in your avatar pic? Because I can't help but imagine you as this person, given the content of your posts.
-
2. Water cannot have a bend. If you would like to bring gravity in to play here, well then you can disprove gravity in this way as well. Two birds with one stone. If my glass of water is "flat" and a bucket of water is "flat" and a ten foot trough of water is "flat" well you can go from there.
Can you calculate how much curvature there would be in a bucket of water? Let us know if there should be enough to see if you work it out.
Here are some pictures I took from two different elevations showing a hillside and bridge sinking behind the 'hill' of water with a layer of cooler air over the water causing a mirage effect that refracts the light downward, allowing objects that should be hidden to remain visible. 9 miles to the bridge, and 12 to the hillside.
(http://i1368.photobucket.com/albums/ag167/jeffro556/bridge2_zps38b17185.jpg)
Here are some pictures of a ship beyond that 'hill' of water.
Ship 2, 8x mag. 1m alt.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6207/6155192949_68fa85794e_o.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192949/)
Ships Below the Horizon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192949/) by max_wedge (http://www.flickr.com/people/pitdroidtech/), on Flickr
Ship 2, 8x mag. 12m alt.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6164/6155192737_9c088a5df7_o.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192737/)
Ships Below the Horizon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192737/) by max_wedge (http://www.flickr.com/people/pitdroidtech/), on Flickr
-
2. Water cannot have a bend. If you would like to bring gravity in to play here, well then you can disprove gravity in this way as well. Two birds with one stone. If my glass of water is "flat" and a bucket of water is "flat" and a ten foot trough of water is "flat" well you can go from there.
Can you calculate how much curvature there would be in a bucket of water? Let us know if there should be enough to see if you work it out.
Here are some pictures I took from two different elevations showing a hillside and bridge sinking behind the 'hill' of water with a layer of cooler air over the water causing a mirage effect that refracts the light downward, allowing objects that should be hidden to remain visible. 9 miles to the bridge, and 12 to the hillside.
(http://i1368.photobucket.com/albums/ag167/jeffro556/bridge2_zps38b17185.jpg)
Here are some pictures of a ship beyond that 'hill' of water.
Ship 2, 8x mag. 1m alt.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6207/6155192949_68fa85794e_o.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192949/)
Ships Below the Horizon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192949/) by max_wedge (http://www.flickr.com/people/pitdroidtech/), on Flickr
Ship 2, 8x mag. 12m alt.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6164/6155192737_9c088a5df7_o.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192737/)
Ships Below the Horizon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192737/) by max_wedge (http://www.flickr.com/people/pitdroidtech/), on Flickr
How much do you get paid to lie? Some people. Since you "took" these photos, please send me the original files so I can check the EXIF data.
ATTN: ALL "INTELLECTUALS" - You want to know one of the many many reasons I know, without any doubt that the Earth is flat? Because clowns like this must LIE to get me to believe your garbage. Do you see me lying? I am trying to be real, use real data and construct a model that works in real life. Look at what this guy gave me as evidence. This is your scientific method? LIES?
I just prove more and more each day that not only are you people not intellectuals, not only do you not understand the science you promote, not only do you repeat and parrot things that make no sense but you will fabricate evidence to save your precious globe.
"Oh please Mr. Jeranism, don't take our pretty little globe away. Copernicus said we could keep it. What will I do if it is flat? Does that mean I might have to be accountable for my actions? I can't lean on science on a crutch anymore? Please, please we will do anything. Fabricate evidence, pretend things exist that don't, lie like a loser but please DON'T TAKE AWAY OUR GLOBE!!!"
Too bad kids, take your ball and go home. Game over. I will be releasing a video in the next hour or so called NASA throws in the towel. They have finally cracked. Go watch their Go-Pro Space Walks they released. Gig is up.
The first set of images- HOW DID YOU CHANGE ELIVATION EXACTLY? Second, in 12 miles, the Earth curves what? 6-10 feet?
http://www.clicknhost.com/v-16fr02j92nk3q10 (http://www.clicknhost.com/v-16fr02j92nk3q10) See this image to see your fabrication. Prove me wrong by sending the actual files.
Second set of images is a joke. The boat would go down, like over a ball, not like an escalator clown. And also, Explain the mountain getting lower. Did it fall behind the horizon as well? Don't go looking for images, it makes you look so dumb.
Here, because it is so important to you sir. The globe is real. Are you happy now? Can you get back to life now instead of faking evidence so you can sleep. Way to prove the plane-t
-
Jeranism, your model which "works better in real life" fails to explain sunsets, southern constellations, objects going beneath the horizon when you get further away, the constant angular distance between stars, eclipses, why everyone always sees the same side of the Moon from everywhere in the world, why I can't see Mount Everest from here, sunsets, why I can see the International Space Station in the sky and make out it's shape with a telescope, seasons, the constant angular size of the Sun and Moon, sunsets, the results to the experiment linked in my forum signature, how GPS works, why gravity can be measured in labs, what the other planets are, and did I mention sunsets? Round Earth fact has an explenation for all of these things which flat Earth theory fails at. Now it's your turn, name one thing that makes sense on a flat Earth but not on a round Earth
-
Fantastic...
Okay first. Can you help me understand the magic ball better. I know what we were all taught in school but I no longer just accept things said to me by authority figures or people who have been caught lying or not performing in a way that would lead one to find them credible.
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
----Before you answer... please do not use the standard answer of asking me if I understand that there is no up or down in space. That is not a true statement. I do understand the notion that they could easily be reversed. Polaris could be the South star. I get that totally... but there is obviously an up and down in space. The North star always is above the North Pole so for this question, that must remain true. Again, I ask what is going on then in Australia if I am upright. The North star is then under the feet of an Australian?
If you define up as the direction of Polaris then in North America you are standing on a steep incline and the only time when up is the direction of Polaris is when you are standing on the North Pole. Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist. Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that.
"Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist.
Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that."
You people are laughable and again, I have no desire to prove the flat Earth to people who can't see the problems in their own thinking. You all think you can explain away problems with the lies science gave us to begin with. See you have to come to flat earth in steps... they go something like this...
1. Go to school, get an education
2. Realize later that lies are taught
3. Challenge those lies. Religion (easy) Wars (easy) Columbus discovers America, pilgrims and Indians give thanks (easy)
4. Realization that NASA is a masonic fraternity full of lies who won't answer questions, doctors images and continues to fake shit daily.
5. The final deep dig... could science itself be a construction of nonsense as well?
6. Realizing facts, erasing beliefs and moving forward to expose the fraud...
I am on number 6, you people stopped at 3.
So, to explain to me things I have already realized are fake, with the fake notions themselves is not too effective.
YOU SAID- up and down are human creations. Let us think shall we? Year that up and down were invented or discovered.... Day 1, human 1. Now, day that gravity was invented or found? How about it is still in process.
But science needed a way to round all their crap into a ball of trash and they did. Even Tesla knew it... (ever wonder why we didn't learn his name in school) He said, "Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies, as observed."
Gravity isn't pulling things to Earth, weight is. We aren't crushed to the ground and pulled to the center of the Earth. I can jump, can't you? Why hasn't the moon fallen into the Earth?
Gravity can not exist, period and you proved it. How can two people be in opposite positions at the same time? I know gravity right? Logical fallacy boys. Or test it. Show me a camera of someone in Australia and someone here in America at the same time from the position that shows them upside down. If we are both right side up (we will be, try facetime) then it is easy to see that the Earth is flat.
You laugh at religion for their dogma and beliefs and yet believe that gravity is ruled by chance and is chaotic. It cannot be observed or measured or filmed. How are all items (according to you) like stars, planets, and moons round? How did "blind" gravity make them?
Gravity is a great force which exists everywhere in the universe and we cannot resist it. If gravity is the attraction of two bodies of matter to each other, then explain why there is no attraction between small and large things, such as a car being pulled toward a hill? You need to decide how your damn magic works anyway. You can't keep changing it per application. Is gravity the attraction of bodies of matter, or a force that pulls matter toward the center of the Earth? Choose one please.
Despite what your handlers tell you, Gravity is not a fact, but is instead JUST A THEORY! Gravity has NEVER been proven. All we know is that things fall towards the earth, but not why. The theory taught in schools is that large amounts of mass attracts smaller amounts of mass. But it has never been proven.
TScience, fighting the church, needed a concept within their own set parameters that acted on mass. There needs to be substance, at least something measurable to account for this force of nature. And so enter, Gravitons and Gravity waves. Although widely accepted as a scientific explanation, neither of them have been found or measured in any way. You parrot this force, making fun of up and down as human inventions yet literally accept gravity as fact with no evidence for the theory. What is gravity, really? Gravity is responsible for so many things on our planet and in our solar system, right? Responsible for the formation of planets, planetary orbits, the weight of objects, and even tides of the ocean. So have we measured it in Mars? Jupiter? The sun? Then, real quick, if larger masses attracts smaller masses, then how can particles, attract particles? They are of roughly equal size, right? If it works on that scale, shouldn't then little grains of sand be attracted to one another? Remember planets were born from these small attractions, yet somehow weakens as they become larger? Such as forming sand in this simple case. But then returns again when it comes to planetary orbits?
Ready to cry globe trotters, science made up mathematics in order to make their theories fit. No scientific method. Just dogma.
You are proving the Earth is round by using an untestable theory. Bravo. I can test mine, and I hate to break it to you.... Earth is flat.
-
Jeranism, your model which "works better in real life" fails to explain sunsets, southern constellations, objects going beneath the horizon when you get further away, the constant angular distance between stars, eclipses, why everyone always sees the same side of the Moon from everywhere in the world, why I can't see Mount Everest from here, sunsets, why I can see the International Space Station in the sky and make out it's shape with a telescope, seasons, the constant angular size of the Sun and Moon, sunsets, the results to the experiment linked in my forum signature, how GPS works, why gravity can be measured in labs, what the other planets are, and did I mention sunsets? Round Earth fact has an explenation for all of these things which flat Earth theory fails at. Now it's your turn, name one thing that makes sense on a flat Earth but not on a round Earth
Your handlers have had 400 years and the smartest minds to construct bullshit theories. I have had two years. I will get back to you in 2413
-
I do believe iWitness has once more slipped out on us . That is pretty stupid in itself ?
And it is my astute observation that IMHO it is iWitness who needs to Quote "Get a freaking life." Unquote (From iWitness himself)
Look, I know you're secretly in love with me... it's obvious. When you work long hours as a shill, it's not uncommon for your mind to play tricks on you. Sure, you've been given orders to harass me, find out everything you can, but let me tell you something... you will be defeated in the end. If not by me, then by the Word of the Lord that will burn you like straw on the day of His Coming.
Do you see me chasing Round-earthers around and harassing them with private messages and replying to all of their posts? Of course not, because I stand firm in my beliefs and know the Truth. I post my thoughts out there for those that are interested, and if they have questions I will answer them.
Don't take it personal. I have a purpose to fulfill on this earth. Half of it is on the internet debating the likes of you, and the other half is going out into the world and spreading the Gospel among the lost sheep.
I am really sorry that you are in the situation that you are in. Either by choice or by force. Because there is no way you can be here on this site for as long as you have, and still be blind to the truth. But when you realize that He who lives in you is greater than he who lives in the world, you will have nothing to fear.
God's Wrath Against Humanity
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
You haven't answered any of my questions as to how you know more than the FAA in regard to aviation . Or how you know more than the Cunard company in regard to sea navigation.
I'm not- Quote- "secretly in love with you" - Unquote. iWitness. Like a few other persons on this forum I just feel sorry for you if you are really as stupid or ill informed as you are..or pretend to be. I still have a suspicion that you are a resident of that institution in Terrell, Texas.
As some one else remarked. Is your avatar a self-portrait ? It looks about as wild-eyed as your posts. LOL. Are you the only person on earth - flat or round - who is not "an agent of Satan" ?
Not getting into theology, iWitness . I don't know what kind of a church that you belong to, but do they partipate in "Habitat for Humanity", Meals for the homeless, and things like that ? Or do they just go around and rant and rave like you do ?
-
I do believe iWitness has once more slipped out on us . That is pretty stupid in itself ?
And it is my astute observation that IMHO it is iWitness who needs to Quote "Get a freaking life." Unquote (From iWitness himself)
Look, I know you're secretly in love with me... it's obvious. When you work long hours as a shill, it's not uncommon for your mind to play tricks on you. Sure, you've been given orders to harass me, find out everything you can, but let me tell you something... you will be defeated in the end. If not by me, then by the Word of the Lord that will burn you like straw on the day of His Coming.
Do you see me chasing Round-earthers around and harassing them with private messages and replying to all of their posts? Of course not, because I stand firm in my beliefs and know the Truth. I post my thoughts out there for those that are interested, and if they have questions I will answer them.
Don't take it personal. I have a purpose to fulfill on this earth. Half of it is on the internet debating the likes of you, and the other half is going out into the world and spreading the Gospel among the lost sheep.
I am really sorry that you are in the situation that you are in. Either by choice or by force. Because there is no way you can be here on this site for as long as you have, and still be blind to the truth. But when you realize that He who lives in you is greater than he who lives in the world, you will have nothing to fear.
God's Wrath Against Humanity
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.
You haven't answered any of my questions as to how you know more than the FAA in regard to aviation . Or how you know more than the Cunard company in regard to sea navigation.
https://flightaware.com/live/ (https://flightaware.com/live/)
http://www.clicknhost.com/u/130415/tx0bl3ya4.png (http://www.clicknhost.com/u/130415/tx0bl3ya4.png)
-
Your handlers have had 400 years and the smartest minds to construct bullshit theories. I have had two years. I will get back to you in 2413
Well the "bullsh**" round Earth theories happen to have a lot of math and evidence supporting them while your even more bullsh** theories can't even tell me why the Sun sets. Sunsets are among the most blindingly obvious not so subtle hints that the Earth is not flat, I don't know how you manage to convince yourself that the Earth is flat after being presented with such definitive evidence.
-
"Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist.
Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that."
You people are laughable and again, I have no desire to prove the flat Earth to people who can't see the problems in their own thinking. You all think you can explain away problems with the lies science gave us to begin with. See you have to come to flat earth in steps... they go something like this...
1. Go to school, get an education
2. Realize later that lies are taught
3. Challenge those lies. Religion (easy) Wars (easy) Columbus discovers America, pilgrims and Indians give thanks (easy)
4. Realization that NASA is a masonic fraternity full of lies who won't answer questions, doctors images and continues to fake shit daily.
5. The final deep dig... could science itself be a construction of nonsense as well?
6. Realizing facts, erasing beliefs and moving forward to expose the fraud...
I am on number 6, you people stopped at 3.
So, to explain to me things I have already realized are fake, with the fake notions themselves is not too effective.
YOU SAID- up and down are human creations. Let us think shall we? Year that up and down were invented or discovered.... Day 1, human 1. Now, day that gravity was invented or found? How about it is still in process.
But science needed a way to round all their crap into a ball of trash and they did. Even Tesla knew it... (ever wonder why we didn't learn his name in school) He said, "Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies, as observed."
Gravity isn't pulling things to Earth, weight is. We aren't crushed to the ground and pulled to the center of the Earth. I can jump, can't you? Why hasn't the moon fallen into the Earth?
Gravity can not exist, period and you proved it. How can two people be in opposite positions at the same time? I know gravity right? Logical fallacy boys. Or test it. Show me a camera of someone in Australia and someone here in America at the same time from the position that shows them upside down. If we are both right side up (we will be, try facetime) then it is easy to see that the Earth is flat.
You laugh at religion for their dogma and beliefs and yet believe that gravity is ruled by chance and is chaotic. It cannot be observed or measured or filmed. How are all items (according to you) like stars, planets, and moons round? How did "blind" gravity make them?
Gravity is a great force which exists everywhere in the universe and we cannot resist it. If gravity is the attraction of two bodies of matter to each other, then explain why there is no attraction between small and large things, such as a car being pulled toward a hill? You need to decide how your damn magic works anyway. You can't keep changing it per application. Is gravity the attraction of bodies of matter, or a force that pulls matter toward the center of the Earth? Choose one please.
Despite what your handlers tell you, Gravity is not a fact, but is instead JUST A THEORY! Gravity has NEVER been proven. All we know is that things fall towards the earth, but not why. The theory taught in schools is that large amounts of mass attracts smaller amounts of mass. But it has never been proven.
TScience, fighting the church, needed a concept within their own set parameters that acted on mass. There needs to be substance, at least something measurable to account for this force of nature. And so enter, Gravitons and Gravity waves. Although widely accepted as a scientific explanation, neither of them have been found or measured in any way. You parrot this force, making fun of up and down as human inventions yet literally accept gravity as fact with no evidence for the theory. What is gravity, really? Gravity is responsible for so many things on our planet and in our solar system, right? Responsible for the formation of planets, planetary orbits, the weight of objects, and even tides of the ocean. So have we measured it in Mars? Jupiter? The sun? Then, real quick, if larger masses attracts smaller masses, then how can particles, attract particles? They are of roughly equal size, right? If it works on that scale, shouldn't then little grains of sand be attracted to one another? Remember planets were born from these small attractions, yet somehow weakens as they become larger? Such as forming sand in this simple case. But then returns again when it comes to planetary orbits?
Ready to cry globe trotters, science made up mathematics in order to make their theories fit. No scientific method. Just dogma.
You are proving the Earth is round by using an untestable theory. Bravo. I can test mine, and I hate to break it to you.... Earth is flat.
Ignoring the incoherent babbling, it seems like almost everything you have a beef with could be solved if you simply understood gravity. But you don't. That's fine though, and teachable.
So tell us, what is it about gravity you don't understand? It's literally just an attractive force between masses. Everything else can be logically derived (by anyone).
So, where exactly is the problem? And please, refrain from going off on a tangent and ranting about pointless things. You're wasting your breath and writing yourself off as a lunatic.
-
Fantastic...
Okay first. Can you help me understand the magic ball better. I know what we were all taught in school but I no longer just accept things said to me by authority figures or people who have been caught lying or not performing in a way that would lead one to find them credible.
So, I am in North America and I am standing upright. Measurable. So, can you help me understand what is going on in Australia please? Are they standing upright? Or are they upside down?
----Before you answer... please do not use the standard answer of asking me if I understand that there is no up or down in space. That is not a true statement. I do understand the notion that they could easily be reversed. Polaris could be the South star. I get that totally... but there is obviously an up and down in space. The North star always is above the North Pole so for this question, that must remain true. Again, I ask what is going on then in Australia if I am upright. The North star is then under the feet of an Australian?
If you define up as the direction of Polaris then in North America you are standing on a steep incline and the only time when up is the direction of Polaris is when you are standing on the North Pole. Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist. Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that.
"Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist.
Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that."
You people are laughable and again, I have no desire to prove the flat Earth to people who can't see the problems in their own thinking. You all think you can explain away problems with the lies science gave us to begin with. See you have to come to flat earth in steps... they go something like this...
1. Go to school, get an education
2. Realize later that lies are taught
3. Challenge those lies. Religion (easy) Wars (easy) Columbus discovers America, pilgrims and Indians give thanks (easy)
4. Realization that NASA is a masonic fraternity full of lies who won't answer questions, doctors images and continues to fake shit daily.
5. The final deep dig... could science itself be a construction of nonsense as well?
6. Realizing facts, erasing beliefs and moving forward to expose the fraud...
I am on number 6, you people stopped at 3.
So, to explain to me things I have already realized are fake, with the fake notions themselves is not too effective.
YOU SAID- up and down are human creations. Let us think shall we? Year that up and down were invented or discovered.... Day 1, human 1. Now, day that gravity was invented or found? How about it is still in process.
But science needed a way to round all their crap into a ball of trash and they did. Even Tesla knew it... (ever wonder why we didn't learn his name in school) He said, "Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies, as observed."
Gravity isn't pulling things to Earth, weight is. We aren't crushed to the ground and pulled to the center of the Earth. I can jump, can't you? Why hasn't the moon fallen into the Earth?
Gravity can not exist, period and you proved it. How can two people be in opposite positions at the same time? I know gravity right? Logical fallacy boys. Or test it. Show me a camera of someone in Australia and someone here in America at the same time from the position that shows them upside down. If we are both right side up (we will be, try facetime) then it is easy to see that the Earth is flat.
You laugh at religion for their dogma and beliefs and yet believe that gravity is ruled by chance and is chaotic. It cannot be observed or measured or filmed. How are all items (according to you) like stars, planets, and moons round? How did "blind" gravity make them?
Gravity is a great force which exists everywhere in the universe and we cannot resist it. If gravity is the attraction of two bodies of matter to each other, then explain why there is no attraction between small and large things, such as a car being pulled toward a hill? You need to decide how your damn magic works anyway. You can't keep changing it per application. Is gravity the attraction of bodies of matter, or a force that pulls matter toward the center of the Earth? Choose one please.
Despite what your handlers tell you, Gravity is not a fact, but is instead JUST A THEORY! Gravity has NEVER been proven. All we know is that things fall towards the earth, but not why. The theory taught in schools is that large amounts of mass attracts smaller amounts of mass. But it has never been proven.
TScience, fighting the church, needed a concept within their own set parameters that acted on mass. There needs to be substance, at least something measurable to account for this force of nature. And so enter, Gravitons and Gravity waves. Although widely accepted as a scientific explanation, neither of them have been found or measured in any way. You parrot this force, making fun of up and down as human inventions yet literally accept gravity as fact with no evidence for the theory. What is gravity, really? Gravity is responsible for so many things on our planet and in our solar system, right? Responsible for the formation of planets, planetary orbits, the weight of objects, and even tides of the ocean. So have we measured it in Mars? Jupiter? The sun? Then, real quick, if larger masses attracts smaller masses, then how can particles, attract particles? They are of roughly equal size, right? If it works on that scale, shouldn't then little grains of sand be attracted to one another? Remember planets were born from these small attractions, yet somehow weakens as they become larger? Such as forming sand in this simple case. But then returns again when it comes to planetary orbits?
Ready to cry globe trotters, science made up mathematics in order to make their theories fit. No scientific method. Just dogma.
You are proving the Earth is round by using an untestable theory. Bravo. I can test mine, and I hate to break it to you.... Earth is flat.
Okay. Calm down. To paraphrase Prime Minister Paul Keating; "Give him a valium."
You make several claims, and that is fine. But the thing about claims is that you have to have evidence.
I'll make a list of your claims:
1. Science is lies. Fair enough, but what proof do you offer?
Question: If science is lies, then why would you take medicine, fly in a plane etc.?
2. Education is lies. Again, proof needed.
3. Religion, wars and the Columbus story are lies. *sigh*
Question: I see in your video that you dispute both atheism and theism. I ask, what is left?
Question: How are wars faked? Who would fake them? How long has the hoax been around?
Question: What proof do you have that the Columbus story is fake?
4. NASA is both Masonic, a fraternity and a fraud. Proof needed. Actual proof, not wild claims.
5. Science being a lie is related to NASA being a lie. Wild, unfounded hypothesis.
6. The concept that 'up' and 'down' were "invented or discovered". How could one discover 'up'?
Question: What is "Day 1, Human 1"?
7. Gravity is in the process of being "invented or found". Gravity as a concept cannot be "invented" or "found".
8. Science is an entity and "needed a way to round all their crap into a ball of crap". Where are you getting this from?
9. Tesla didn't think that gravity was real. Citation needed. How do we know that quote is authentic?
Question: Why didn't you learn his name at school? I had to do a project on him in Year 10.
10. "Gravity isn't pulling things to earth, weight is". The concept of weight is just how much the gravitational field of the planet affects our mass.
Question: If weight was indeed pulling you to earth, then jumping still wouldn't work, right?
11. Gravity cannot exist. Why?
12. Two people can't be in opposite places at the same time. Why?
13. The ol' Australian argument. Why would a FaceTime that showed two right side up people be proof? I could just flip my laptop around.
Question: Do you really believe that people on the other side of a globe would be upside down?
Question: Do you realise that my up and your up are different directions?
Question: Why do people always use Australia for their examples? (I blame Tony Abbott.)
14. We laugh at religion. Not true.(all the time) Mikeman is a mormon. Yaakov is a Jew. (and a psychopath)
15. Gravity is ruled by chance. How?
16. Gravity cannot be observed. Yes it can. We observe objects falling, don't we?
17. "blind" gravity made the planets round. Firstly, gravity isn't sentient. Secondly, all celestial objects are round (or close enough) because when matter is attracted together with no outside force, the easiest shape to form is a sphere.
18. Gravity is a great force in the universe and we cannot resist it. Yeah, sure. Next.
19. There is no attraction between a car and a hill. Untrue, especially if i'm driving.
20. We change the definition of gravity per application. Nah, soz mate. We don't.
21. The "attraction of an object to another" is different to "matter being pulled to the centre of the earth".
How are these different? The earth is an object, I am an object, we are attracted to each other. Simple.
22. We have handlers. I bit mine the other day as he went to feed me. Oh, wrong handlers.
23. Gravity is just a theory. Yes, that doesn't mean it is untrue, or unproven.
24. Gravity has never been proven. Wrong.
Question: what is your alternate proposal? Other FE'rs use UA, but what about you?
25. Blah, blah, blah, gravity is false. WHY? GIVE REASONS!
26. Science invented maths to prove the earth is round. Wow. Just, wow. YOU HAVE NO PROOF!!!
27. You have a better theory. Lets hear it.
Final Question: Can you explain sunsets?
Thats enough for now, I need a Valium.
-
"Up and down are just human inventions which don't actually exist.
Down is defined as the direction of the center of the Earth and up is the opposite of that."
You people are laughable and again, I have no desire to prove the flat Earth to people who can't see the problems in their own thinking. You all think you can explain away problems with the lies science gave us to begin with. See you have to come to flat earth in steps... they go something like this...
1. Go to school, get an education
2. Realize later that lies are taught
3. Challenge those lies. Religion (easy) Wars (easy) Columbus discovers America, pilgrims and Indians give thanks (easy)
Are you saying that wars don't exist and that America was not discovered? And to think that for a while I thought you were at least a little bit intelligent... You might as well question the color of the sky while you are at it.
4. Realization that NASA is a masonic fraternity full of lies who won't answer questions, doctors images and continues to fake shit daily.
Show me an example of NASA refusing to answer a question and the reason they "doctor" images is because many of them are composite images that need a bit of processing before they are presentable. If that's what you consider doctoring an image then that must mean that all panoramas, long exposure shots, and composite images are fake.
5. The final deep dig... could science itself be a construction of nonsense as well?
Nope.
6. Realizing facts, erasing beliefs and moving forward to expose the fraud...
Fact: the Earth is round. Fraud: the Earth is flat. Easy.
I am on number 6, you people stopped at 3.
So, to explain to me things I have already realized are fake, with the fake notions themselves is not too effective.
If you classify something as fake just because it goes against what you believe then don't expect to be learning any kind of truth any time soon.
YOU SAID- up and down are human creations. Let us think shall we? Year that up and down were invented or discovered.... Day 1, human 1. Now, day that gravity was invented or found? How about it is still in process.
Up and down are not physical things (I can't believe I have to explain this), they are ideas. It's kind of like how language doesn't exist fundamentally and yet when you think it's always using language. Same thing with up and down, they are just a human idea.
But science needed a way to round all their crap into a ball of trash and they did. Even Tesla knew it... (ever wonder why we didn't learn his name in school)
Actually I did learn his name in school.
He said, "Supposing that the bodies act upon the surrounding space causing curving of the same, it appears to my simple mind that the curved spaces must react on the bodies, and producing the opposite effects, straightening out the curves. Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies, as observed."
People are wrong some times. So what?
Gravity isn't pulling things to Earth, weight is. We aren't crushed to the ground and pulled to the center of the Earth. I can jump, can't you? Why hasn't the moon fallen into the Earth?
Weight is simply a measurement of force created by gravity, saying that is like saying that airplanes fly because they are in the air.
Gravity can not exist, period and you proved it. How can two people be in opposite positions at the same time? I know gravity right? Logical fallacy boys. Or test it. Show me a camera of someone in Australia and someone here in America at the same time from the position that shows them upside down. If we are both right side up (we will be, try facetime) then it is easy to see that the Earth is flat.
Try turning a camera upside down. Oh my, you must have just turned the world upside down because that's what it looks like in the camera.
You laugh at religion for their dogma and beliefs and yet believe that gravity is ruled by chance and is chaotic.
No, I believe that gravity can be perfectly predicted using the equation F=(MmG)/d2. It's not chaotic at all.
It cannot be observed or measured or filmed.
You also cannot observe or film magnetism, so I guess it doesn't exist. Gravity can be measured though, just drop a ball and measure what it does.
How are all items (according to you) like stars, planets, and moons round? How did "blind" gravity make them?
The same way magnetism can make 2 magnets stick together, except with gravity instead of magnetism.
Gravity is a great force which exists everywhere in the universe and we cannot resist it. If gravity is the attraction of two bodies of matter to each other, then explain why there is no attraction between small and large things, such as a car being pulled toward a hill?
There is attraction between a car and a hill, but you also have to take into account that you have the Earth there beneath them both and it's a lot bigger then cars and hills. Gravity is also a very weak force which is why it takes the entire Earth working on you to pull you down as hard as it is. The gravity between a car and a hill is very weak, especially compared to the Earth's gravity. It's like trying to pull a car with a thin thread, how about you try that and let me know how that goes.
You need to decide how your damn magic works anyway. You can't keep changing it per application. Is gravity the attraction of bodies of matter, or a force that pulls matter toward the center of the Earth? Choose one please.
Gravity doesn't just effect small things, it effects all mass in the universe and nobody has ever claimed anything different. F=(MmG)/d2, period.
Despite what your handlers tell you, Gravity is not a fact, but is instead JUST A THEORY! Gravity has NEVER been proven.
There is a difference between proof and an explanation. Space flight has proven gravity and I don't have any reason to believe it to be fake. Magnetism has no explanation either, yet there is no denying that it exists.
All we know is that things fall towards the earth, but not why. The theory taught in schools is that large amounts of mass attracts smaller amounts of mass. But it has never been proven.
No, it HAS been proven. There have been many experiments done in which the attraction between 2 masses has been measured and similar experiments are even repeated in Schools.
TScience, fighting the church, needed a concept within their own set parameters that acted on mass. There needs to be substance, at least something measurable to account for this force of nature. And so enter, Gravitons and Gravity waves. Although widely accepted as a scientific explanation, neither of them have been found or measured in any way. You parrot this force, making fun of up and down as human inventions yet literally accept gravity as fact with no evidence for the theory. What is gravity, really? Gravity is responsible for so many things on our planet and in our solar system, right? Responsible for the formation of planets, planetary orbits, the weight of objects, and even tides of the ocean. So have we measured it in Mars? Jupiter? The sun?
Yes, if the Sun didn't have gravity then the Earth wouldn't orbit it. If any of the planets didn't have gravity then they wouldn't be orbiting the Sun and they wouldn't be spheres. There have also been probes sent to Mars, Jupiter, and the Sun, all of which seem to be following the laws of physics.
Then, real quick, if larger masses attracts smaller masses, then how can particles, attract particles? They are of roughly equal size, right?
If it works on that scale, shouldn't then little grains of sand be attracted to one another? Remember planets were born from these small attractions, yet somehow weakens as they become larger? Such as forming sand in this simple case. But then returns again when it comes to planetary orbits?
That doesn't matter. In fact: if the masses are equally distributed then you will actually have more gravitational force for the same amount of total mass then if one is bigger.
Ready to cry globe trotters, science made up mathematics in order to make their theories fit. No scientific method. Just dogma.
You are proving the Earth is round by using an untestable theory. Bravo. I can test mine, and I hate to break it to you.... Earth is flat.
Nope, I can test my theory and I am yet to see proof for a flat Earth. Look at the links in my forum signature. Warning: they might put your fantasies at risk.
-
Jeranism, your model which "works better in real life" fails to explain sunsets, southern constellations, objects going beneath the horizon when you get further away, the constant angular distance between stars, eclipses, why everyone always sees the same side of the Moon from everywhere in the world, why I can't see Mount Everest from here, sunsets, why I can see the International Space Station in the sky and make out it's shape with a telescope, seasons, the constant angular size of the Sun and Moon, sunsets, the results to the experiment linked in my forum signature, how GPS works, why gravity can be measured in labs, what the other planets are, and did I mention sunsets? Round Earth fact has an explenation for all of these things which flat Earth theory fails at. Now it's your turn, name one thing that makes sense on a flat Earth but not on a round Earth
Your handlers have had 400 years and the smartest minds to construct bullshit theories. I have had two years. I will get back to you in 2413
JroweSkeptic detected
-
Your handlers have had 400 years and the smartest minds to construct bullshit theories. I have had two years. I will get back to you in 2413
Well the "bullsh**" round Earth theories happen to have a lot of math and evidence supporting them while your even more bullsh** theories can't even tell me why the Sun sets. Sunsets are among the most blindingly obvious not so subtle hints that the Earth is not flat, I don't know how you manage to convince yourself that the Earth is flat after being presented with such definitive evidence.
If it wasn't for all of those Round Earth Theories , we wouldn't have the Internet or this website. Can you name anything that has been developed from "flat earth theories." Can you name any valid "flat earth theories" ? Notice I used small letters and quotation marks when referring to "flat earth theories."
One of the great problems for most people is to even think that there are even those who believe, or at least pretend to believe, that the earth is a flat disc shape....And it is even harder for them to think that there are those that " Manage to convince yourself that the earth is flat after being presented with such definitive evidence."
-
Gravity isn't pulling things to Earth, weight is.
Oh? What gives things weight?
Gravity can not exist, period and you proved it. How can two people be in opposite positions at the same time? I know gravity right? Logical fallacy boys. Or test it. Show me a camera of someone in Australia and someone here in America at the same time from the position that shows them upside down. If we are both right side up (we will be, try facetime) then it is easy to see that the Earth is flat.
I'm sorry but what part of "down is defined as towards the center of the earth" is so confusing to you?
-
Your handlers have had 400 years and the smartest minds to construct bullshit theories. I have had two years. I will get back to you in 2413
Well the "bullsh**" round Earth theories happen to have a lot of math and evidence supporting them while your even more bullsh** theories can't even tell me why the Sun sets. Sunsets are among the most blindingly obvious not so subtle hints that the Earth is not flat, I don't know how you manage to convince yourself that the Earth is flat after being presented with such definitive evidence.
If it wasn't for all of those Round Earth Theories , we wouldn't have the Internet or this website. Can you name anything that has been developed from "flat earth theories." Can you name any valid "flat earth theories" ? Notice I used small letters and quotation marks when referring to "flat earth theories."
One of the great problems for most people is to even think that there are even those who believe, or at least pretend to believe, that the earth is a flat disc shape....And it is even harder for them to think that there are those that " Manage to convince yourself that the earth is flat after being presented with such definitive evidence."
Can you name anything thing that has to do with computers that involves round Earth theory (other than your made up satellites)? That is like saying, "with out sugar, a person can not possibly cook food." Do you see how ridiculous you make yourself sound?
-
Can you name anything thing that has to do with computers that involves round Earth theory (other than your made up satellites)? That is like saying, "with out sugar, a person can not possibly cook food." Do you see how ridiculous you make yourself sound?
Other than satellites (which you can observe, measure distance to, and use on a daily basis most likely), there are flight computers that account for a globe when planning routes. I'm sure there are more than a few others, but I can't think off the top of my head. A lot of it would be in the aerospace industry. Everyone else really doesn't care because a spinning globe isn't in our frame of reference.
-
Jeranism, your model which "works better in real life" fails to explain sunsets, southern constellations, objects going beneath the horizon when you get further away, the constant angular distance between stars, eclipses, why everyone always sees the same side of the Moon from everywhere in the world, why I can't see Mount Everest from here, sunsets, why I can see the International Space Station in the sky and make out it's shape with a telescope, seasons, the constant angular size of the Sun and Moon, sunsets, the results to the experiment linked in my forum signature, how GPS works, why gravity can be measured in labs, what the other planets are, and did I mention sunsets? Round Earth fact has an explenation for all of these things which flat Earth theory fails at. Now it's your turn, name one thing that makes sense on a flat Earth but not on a round Earth
Your handlers have had 400 years and the smartest minds to construct bullshit theories. I have had two years. I will get back to you in 2413
Oh screw you, you and your "like minded" brethren have had 8,000 years for coming up with flat earth science, the time scale difference works in your favor. If you can't find something in the 8,000 years of recorded human history that can refute a theory made in the last 400 years then... well what do you think?
-
Look-
I will just answer everyone at once because obviously you guys with 5000 posts here must do this for a living. I believe it is called being a troll or a shill. What you are trying to do is discredit the truth with absolute nonsense. Just so you know... I already KNOW the Earth is flat and there is no need for me to explain it to intellectuals. You guys are so smart! Mike said that the images are composite and if that is what I considered doctored images. Mike you want to bet me $10,000 that there is no such thing as space? There is no such thing as a vacuum? You do not know who you are messing with. I am looking for people who are looking for truth, not people who are paid to keep the lie. THE GLOBE IS A LIE and I still don't know if you 100% believe it or are really so fucking stupid that you are posting in this forum daily just so you don't cry. If you really are asking for doctored images then you have not seen my youtube where in my last two videos the following things have been proven.
First I will ask a few questions....
1. Why doesn't the moon fall to Earth? It stays neatly in its orbit. If that is the case, why can't I jump and orbit the Earth?
2. How does a vacuum work if it is connected to Earth? A vacuum must be sealed and if sealed how do we get out there?
My video shows the following https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5mR4g22L_E9t1D_ExQ (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5mR4g22L_E9t1D_ExQ)
1. Gravity is fictitious. On Earth, we have weight and it is how things work. Drop a rock, and it being more dense than air will fall. A balloon with helium is less dense than air and rises.
2. Relativity is a joke
3. Light Years is a joke
4. Globe Earth cannot exist in reality
5. Copernicus said the Sun was 3,000,000 miles away so his "belief" that we rotated the sun is false.
6. We do not spin
7. The sun and moon (easily measured with sextant) are 3000 miles away and both 32 miles in diameter
8. NASA lies
9. NASA worships the devil, you worship NASA, you worship the Devil. Hahaha pagan.
10. Space X is fake
11. ISS is fake
12 Space walk is fake
13. Composite images are fake
14. Space is fake
15 Stars are right above us
16. THIS WILL ALL BE MAINSTREAM NEWS BEFORE THE END OF 2015
-
This is coming from the man who thinks that if the earth were a globe, people would fall off.
Jeranism, I had a thread for you, to say exactly these things. Why didn't you join in?
-
Pagans don't worship the devil you halfwit.
-
*yawn*
Your style of troll is boring. Been done to death here and by far better.
-
Look-
I will just answer everyone at once because obviously you guys with 5000 posts here must do this for a living. I believe it is called being a troll or a shill. What you are trying to do is discredit the truth with absolute nonsense. Just so you know... I already KNOW the Earth is flat and there is no need for me to explain it to intellectuals. You guys are so smart! Mike said that the images are composite and if that is what I considered doctored images. Mike you want to bet me $10,000 that there is no such thing as space? There is no such thing as a vacuum? You do not know who you are messing with. I am looking for people who are looking for truth, not people who are paid to keep the lie. THE GLOBE IS A LIE and I still don't know if you 100% believe it or are really so fucking stupid that you are posting in this forum daily just so you don't cry. If you really are asking for doctored images then you have not seen my youtube where in my last two videos the following things have been proven.
First I will ask a few questions....
1. Why doesn't the moon fall to Earth? It stays neatly in its orbit. If that is the case, why can't I jump and orbit the Earth?
2. How does a vacuum work if it is connected to Earth? A vacuum must be sealed and if sealed how do we get out there?
My video shows the following https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5mR4g22L_E9t1D_ExQ (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5mR4g22L_E9t1D_ExQ)
1. Gravity is fictitious. On Earth, we have weight and it is how things work. Drop a rock, and it being more dense than air will fall. A balloon with helium is less dense than air and rises.
2. Relativity is a joke
3. Light Years is a joke
4. Globe Earth cannot exist in reality
5. Copernicus said the Sun was 3,000,000 miles away so his "belief" that we rotated the sun is false.
6. We do not spin
7. The sun and moon (easily measured with sextant) are 3000 miles away and both 32 miles in diameter
8. NASA lies
9. NASA worships the devil, you worship NASA, you worship the Devil. Hahaha pagan.
10. Space X is fake
11. ISS is fake
12 Space walk is fake
13. Composite images are fake
14. Space is fake
15 Stars are right above us
16. THIS WILL ALL BE MAINSTREAM NEWS BEFORE THE END OF 2015
I'll ignore your first paragraph and interpret it as a joke. Moving on:
1. It is. Albeit very slowly. You can orbit too. You would just need to jump high enough to exit the atmosphere, and move laterally at 8 km/s to enter orbit (free-fall).
2. It's not really "connected". If anything, our Earth needs to be sealed because it's the abnormal one in this case. Anyways, it is, it's called the atmosphere. To get "out there" we just need to move very fast (e.g. rockets) to make it through our comparatively thick atmosphere.
1. What do you think causes weight? Magic? A force is a push or a pull, and doesn't require contact (e.g. magnets). Well "weight" pulls you to the ground. What do you think causes that pull?
2. Explain why or how, and provide evidence. It makes perfect sense and I can explain it if you want.
3. Light has a speed. The distance it travels in a year is called a LightYear. Next thing you're going to start calling Kilometers a joke.....
4. Explain why or how, and provide evidence.
5. Explain why or how, and provide evidence.
6. Explain why or how, and provide evidence.
7. Explain why or how, and provide evidence.
8. Do you mean spokespeople who speak on behalf of the organization? If so, then probably, they are only human.
9. What?
10. Space X is a real company. They are a registered business. I own some of their stock....
11. Plenty of amateurs have captured it through a telescope orbiting the Earth.
12. "Spacewalk" is a term for maneuvering in little to no gravity. It is something that can happen.
13. Actually, I just made one earlier. I put an alligator head on a cat body to make a funny composite image, so yes, composite images are also real.
14. Are you talking about vacuums? Because we can create artificial vacuums pretty easily.
15. If by "right" you mean "right angle", then almost. Some of them are almost directly above us. They range from 4.5 x 1016 to 4.5 x 1026 meters away, but yes, some are "right" above us.
16. Why end of the year? Why not right now? You could be a billionaire RIGHT NOW.
I await explanation, evidence, and civil discussion.
-
2. Water cannot have a bend. If you would like to bring gravity in to play here, well then you can disprove gravity in this way as well. Two birds with one stone. If my glass of water is "flat" and a bucket of water is "flat" and a ten foot trough of water is "flat" well you can go from there.
Can you calculate how much curvature there would be in a bucket of water? Let us know if there should be enough to see if you work it out.
Here are some pictures I took from two different elevations showing a hillside and bridge sinking behind the 'hill' of water with a layer of cooler air over the water causing a mirage effect that refracts the light downward, allowing objects that should be hidden to remain visible. 9 miles to the bridge, and 12 to the hillside.
(http://i1368.photobucket.com/albums/ag167/jeffro556/bridge2_zps38b17185.jpg)
Here are some pictures of a ship beyond that 'hill' of water.
Ship 2, 8x mag. 1m alt.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6207/6155192949_68fa85794e_o.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192949/)
Ships Below the Horizon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192949/) by max_wedge (http://www.flickr.com/people/pitdroidtech/), on Flickr
Ship 2, 8x mag. 12m alt.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6164/6155192737_9c088a5df7_o.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192737/)
Ships Below the Horizon (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pitdroidtech/6155192737/) by max_wedge (http://www.flickr.com/people/pitdroidtech/), on Flickr
interesting ship photos , one question for you ,why is the ship higher against the back drop , when its supposed to of sailed "over" the horizon.?
-
The first photo was taken at 1m alt, the second at 12m. As labelled.
-
The first photo was taken at 1m alt, the second at 12m. As labelled.
11m difference in elevation is nothing, but it certainly changed the wave action between the two photo's.
-
The first photo was taken at 1m alt, the second at 12m. As labelled.
Well those photos prove the case there is no curvature .
-
The first photo was taken at 1m alt, the second at 12m. As labelled.
Well those photos prove the case there is no curvature .
Well actually it does, but alright.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away. Those photos actually prove that it's a product of round Earth. Thanks for proving that the Earth is round.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
I would gather that it is more the angle that you are looking at the waves. The difference in angle between 1 mete above the waves and 12 meters above the waves is most likely to give you different views of the waves.
Another thing you might want to ask is how far apart, time wise, the pictures were taken? If it was a good amount of time, it is possible that the winds changed and caused the waves to become smaller.
Gotta keep an open mind you know instead of just jumping to conclusions.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
-
interesting ship photos , one question for you ,why is the ship higher against the back drop , when its supposed to of sailed "over" the horizon.?
Because it should be quite obvious that the ship hasn't really 'sailed' any further (not much anyway) over the horizon, but instead the viewing elevation has changed, which changes the line of sight angle to the ship and the hillside much further beyond.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
If the horizon consists of waves, and the horizon is much further when viewed from a higher elevation, then obviously the waves along the horizon will appear smaller.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
Just like science uses the Friedwald formula to calculate LDL. More deception.
Those two pictures are great. The clarity of the waves in the first one with the 1m elevation vs the waves in the second with 12m elevation shows with your eyes what is happening.
So quick throw some maths in to correct what you see.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
Just like science uses the Friedwald formula to calculate LDL. More deception.
Those two pictures are great. The clarity of the waves in the first one with the 1m elevation vs the waves in the second with 12m elevation shows with your eyes what is happening.
So quick throw some maths in to correct what you see.
Which "old maths deception"? Is the geometry unclear to you? It's really very simple.
In what way is the apparent height of waves in a photo related to interpretation of cholesterol measurements?
Do you think waves viewed from an elevation nearly equal to the wave height would look the same as waves of equal height viewed from twelve times higher? If so, why? Does a tall mountain seen from a few km distant from base level stand out more than the same mountain seen from a jet airplane a few km above it? Not sure what your point was about the math - none is needed to recognize this; just open your eyes and look.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
Just like science uses the Friedwald formula to calculate LDL. More deception.
Those two pictures are great. The clarity of the waves in the first one with the 1m elevation vs the waves in the second with 12m elevation shows with your eyes what is happening.
So quick throw some maths in to correct what you see.
Which "old maths deception"? Is the geometry unclear to you? It's really very simple.
In what way is the apparent height of waves in a photo related to interpretation of cholesterol measurements?
Do you think waves viewed from an elevation nearly equal to the wave height would look the same as waves of equal height viewed from twelve times higher? If so, why? Does a tall mountain seen from a few km distant from base level stand out more than the same mountain seen from a jet airplane a few km above it? Not sure what your point was about the math - none is needed to recognize this; just open your eyes and look.
Cannot test it.
Both frauds.
11m vs plane= more deception.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
Just like science uses the Friedwald formula to calculate LDL. More deception.
Those two pictures are great. The clarity of the waves in the first one with the 1m elevation vs the waves in the second with 12m elevation shows with your eyes what is happening.
So quick throw some maths in to correct what you see.
Which "old maths deception"? Is the geometry unclear to you? It's really very simple.
In what way is the apparent height of waves in a photo related to interpretation of cholesterol measurements?
Do you think waves viewed from an elevation nearly equal to the wave height would look the same as waves of equal height viewed from twelve times higher? If so, why? Does a tall mountain seen from a few km distant from base level stand out more than the same mountain seen from a jet airplane a few km above it? Not sure what your point was about the math - none is needed to recognize this; just open your eyes and look.
Cannot test it.
Both frauds.
11m vs plane= more deception.
Why can't you test it?
Go to a body of water, take a picture at 1 meter high, then another at 12 meters high. Compare what the waves look like in each picture.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
Just like science uses the Friedwald formula to calculate LDL. More deception.
Those two pictures are great. The clarity of the waves in the first one with the 1m elevation vs the waves in the second with 12m elevation shows with your eyes what is happening.
So quick throw some maths in to correct what you see.
Which "old maths deception"? Is the geometry unclear to you? It's really very simple.
In what way is the apparent height of waves in a photo related to interpretation of cholesterol measurements?
Do you think waves viewed from an elevation nearly equal to the wave height would look the same as waves of equal height viewed from twelve times higher? If so, why? Does a tall mountain seen from a few km distant from base level stand out more than the same mountain seen from a jet airplane a few km above it? Not sure what your point was about the math - none is needed to recognize this; just open your eyes and look.
Cannot test it.
Both frauds.
11m vs plane= more deception.
Why can't you test it?
Go to a body of water, take a picture at 1 meter high, then another at 12 meters high. Compare what the waves look like in each picture.
Did you say Space x landed on the moon?
-
No, SpaceX hasn't landed on the Moon yet. Also, math can in fact be tested. Here is a proof of the Pythagorean theorem which is used in that horizon distance diagram:
(http://i.stack.imgur.com/POhH1.png)
-
No, SpaceX hasn't landed on the Moon yet. Also, math can in fact be tested. Here is a proof of the Pythagorean theorem which is used in that horizon distance diagram:
(http://i.stack.imgur.com/POhH1.png)
Here is the freidwald formula, LDL=TC-HDL-TG/5 the math is correct you can test this math all day long, but to use it to determine heart health is a lie.
Here is a clue, the problem is the trigs.
-
1 How much do you get paid to lie? Some people. Since you "took" these photos, please send me the original files so I can check the EXIF data.
2 ATTN: ALL "INTELLECTUALS" - You want to know one of the many many reasons I know, without any doubt that the Earth is flat? Because clowns like this must LIE to get me to believe your garbage. Do you see me lying? I am trying to be real, use real data and construct a model that works in real life. Look at what this guy gave me as evidence. This is your scientific method? LIES?
3 I just prove more and more each day that not only are you people not intellectuals, not only do you not understand the science you promote, not only do you repeat and parrot things that make no sense but you will fabricate evidence to save your precious globe.
4 "Oh please Mr. Jeranism, don't take our pretty little globe away. Copernicus said we could keep it. What will I do if it is flat? Does that mean I might have to be accountable for my actions? I can't lean on science on a crutch anymore? Please, please we will do anything. Fabricate evidence, pretend things exist that don't, lie like a loser but please DON'T TAKE AWAY OUR GLOBE!!!"
5 Too bad kids, take your ball and go home. Game over. I will be releasing a video in the next hour or so called NASA throws in the towel. They have finally cracked. Go watch their Go-Pro Space Walks they released. Gig is up.
6 The first set of images- HOW DID YOU CHANGE ELIVATION EXACTLY? Second, in 12 miles, the Earth curves what? 6-10 feet?
7 http://www.clicknhost.com/v-16fr02j92nk3q10 (http://www.clicknhost.com/v-16fr02j92nk3q10) See this image to see your fabrication. Prove me wrong by sending the actual files.
8 Second set of images is a joke. The boat would go down, like over a ball, not like an escalator clown. And also, Explain the mountain getting lower. Did it fall behind the horizon as well?
9Don't go looking for images, it makes you look so dumb.
10 Here, because it is so important to you sir. The globe is real. Are you happy now? Can you get back to life now instead of faking evidence so you can sleep. Way to prove the plane-t
1 I might get around to it. I don't get paid to lie, nor do I lie.
2 I suppose you mean "intellectual" as in a person with intelligence, so I can understand your jealousy. Good luck with your model.
3 I fabricated nothing.
4 Explain how the visual evidence I presented fits into FET then.
5 I'm sure it will be a 'game changer'.
6 I changed elevation by walking down from the higher parking area to the edge of the water. Sounds crazy doesn't it. No, there would be a drop of about 90 feet. I guess you're not familiar with Samuel Rowbotham's chart.
7 Hey, congratulations, you found where someone overlaid my two images for a comparison, which was a posted in a thread on these very forums a while back. Quite the smoking gun you have there.
8 The change in angle over that distance is not very much. Yes, the mountain is also over the horizon, and will also get lower as the viewing elevation changes. This should have been obvious. Please try harder.
9 You tell me not to go looking for images, which I didn't have to as I already knew about the ship pictures and the bridge shots are my own, yet you actually searched for, and found, someone else's copy of my images, and now think that's proof of me faking pictures? Way to make yourself look dumb. What a clown.
10 I sleep fine at night.
-
Here is the freidwald formula, LDL=TC-HDL-TG/5 the math is correct you can test this math all day long, but to use it to determine heart health is a lie.
Here is a clue, the problem is the trigs.
Where is the trig in that LDL formula? I'm only seeing simple arithmetic.
Again, what does this have to do with the appearance of the waves in those two picture?
Are you saying that trigonometry is wrong? If this were true then it would be common for just about every engineered structure to fall down at any time instead of falling down after its design limits are exceeded (IOW, it's about as strong as designed, not too much more, generally no less). Lots of other routine stuff simply wouldn't work, either, like aircraft cross-wind ground tracks. Unless you can provide something meaningful to back it up, that assertion is simply preposterous.
-
Those photos prove sinking ship is not a product of round earth.
When you are higher up the horizon is further away.
And from an elevation of a whole 11 metres the waves between you and the ship are suddenly further away and smaller.
Wipe the eye snot out of your eyes and compare the two pictures.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
As H increases, D increases as well. That's how it works on a round Earth.
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
Just like science uses the Friedwald formula to calculate LDL. More deception.
Those two pictures are great. The clarity of the waves in the first one with the 1m elevation vs the waves in the second with 12m elevation shows with your eyes what is happening.
So quick throw some maths in to correct what you see.
Which "old maths deception"? Is the geometry unclear to you? It's really very simple.
In what way is the apparent height of waves in a photo related to interpretation of cholesterol measurements?
Do you think waves viewed from an elevation nearly equal to the wave height would look the same as waves of equal height viewed from twelve times higher? If so, why? Does a tall mountain seen from a few km distant from base level stand out more than the same mountain seen from a jet airplane a few km above it? Not sure what your point was about the math - none is needed to recognize this; just open your eyes and look.
Cannot test it.
Both frauds.
11m vs plane= more deception.
Why can't you test it?
Go to a body of water, take a picture at 1 meter high, then another at 12 meters high. Compare what the waves look like in each picture.
Did you say Space x landed on the moon?
More evidence that you have difficulty following a conversation. That is in another thread where another member posted some vague question.
So why can't you test this and take some pictures to see how waves would look?
-
Here is the freidwald formula, LDL=TC-HDL-TG/5 the math is correct you can test this math all day long, but to use it to determine heart health is a lie.
Here is a clue, the problem is the trigs.
Where is the trig in that LDL formula? I'm only seeing simple arithmetic.
Again, what does this have to do with the appearance of the waves in those two picture?
Are you saying that trigonometry is wrong? If this were true then it would be common for just about every engineered structure to fall down at any time instead of falling down after its design limits are exceeded (IOW, it's about as strong as designed, not too much more, generally no less). Lots of other routine stuff simply wouldn't work, either, like aircraft cross-wind ground tracks. Unless you can provide something meaningful to back it up, that assertion is simply preposterous.
Trigs are triglycerides=TG, sorry I thought that would be obvious.
Try again.
Its got zero to do with waves. I am sick of listening to REers say math does not lie, of course it doesn't .
Just because the math is correct does not mean what it is applied to is correct.
-
Here is the freidwald formula, LDL=TC-HDL-TG/5 the math is correct you can test this math all day long, but to use it to determine heart health is a lie.
Here is a clue, the problem is the trigs.
Where is the trig in that LDL formula? I'm only seeing simple arithmetic.
Again, what does this have to do with the appearance of the waves in those two picture?
Are you saying that trigonometry is wrong? If this were true then it would be common for just about every engineered structure to fall down at any time instead of falling down after its design limits are exceeded (IOW, it's about as strong as designed, not too much more, generally no less). Lots of other routine stuff simply wouldn't work, either, like aircraft cross-wind ground tracks. Unless you can provide something meaningful to back it up, that assertion is simply preposterous.
Trigs are triglycerides=TG, sorry I thought that would be obvious.
Try again.
Its got zero to do with waves. I am sick of listening to REers say math does not lie, of course it doesn't .
Just because the math is correct does not mean what it is applied to is correct.
Not obvious. You were whining about trigs. I'm not in the medical biz and never heard that as a term for triglycerides, so that, in the context of a discussion about distance to horizon, seemed to be a complaint about trigonometry. Sorry.
Still, where is the math lying? That LDL formula may or may not be valid - I sure don't know - but what does that have to do with the distance-to-horizon calculation, which is well established and well understood? Since it has nothing to do with the topic at hand and is nothing more than a possibly meaningless medical interpretation, why did you even bring it up? Everyone knows that some formulas are wrong; big whoop! So find a problem with the formula we're actually discussing, if you think there is one, and discuss that.
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
-
First I will ask a few questions....
1. Why doesn't the moon fall to Earth? It stays neatly in its orbit.
I would like to ask you the same question. Why doesn't the moon fall to the flat earth? What keeps it conveniently above the flat earth while still letting it appear to rise and set?
If that is the case, why can't I jump and orbit the Earth?
Because that isn't how orbit works. Orbits aren't so much about getting really high, they're more about going forward really fast. Why do you think that the ISS orbits at 17,000 mph?
2. How does a vacuum work if it is connected to Earth? A vacuum must be sealed and if sealed how do we get out there?
That isn't how vacuums work either. First of all, vacuum is not an absolute term. Secondly, a vacuum is the absence of air, so it is essentially nothing. How do you "connect" nothing to something.
There is not distinct line between the earth's atmosphere and vacuum of space. Rather, the atmosphere gradually gets thinner as you get higher until it thins to practically nothing (vacuum).
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
You didn't?
Oh, yeah, here it is...
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
So, by "deception", you don't mean "lying"? This sounds like more flat-earth "logic".
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
OK. No idea if your triglyceride comment is right or not, but how does it relate? What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? Can we stick to this rather than throwing in unrelated "stuff"?
Note: "I don't want to believe it's right" isn't the same as "it's wrong". So can we avoid this, too, please. If you don't think it's right, explain why rather than just whining about it or diverting the conversation, please.
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
Does the visible horizon get further away the more a person increases their elevation? Yes or no? If 'no', can you demonstrate that in some way?
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
You didn't?
Oh, yeah, here it is...
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
So, by "deception", you don't mean "lying"? This sounds like more flat-earth "logic".
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
OK. No idea if your triglyceride comment is right or not, but how does it relate? What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? Can we stick to this rather than throwing in unrelated "stuff"?
Note: "I don't want to believe it's right" isn't the same as "it's wrong". So can we avoid this, too, please. If you don't think it's right, explain why rather than just whining about it or diverting the conversation, please.
Either you are thick or just trying to exhaust me, I suspect the latter.
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
Does the visible horizon get further away the more a person increases their elevation? Yes or no? If 'no', can you demonstrate that in some way?
Yes it does. Stand on the beach and look at the ground below your feet. Tilt your head back and up to see the horizon.
Then sit down and have a good long think.
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
You didn't?
Oh, yeah, here it is...
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
So, by "deception", you don't mean "lying"? This sounds like more flat-earth "logic".
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
OK. No idea if your triglyceride comment is right or not, but how does it relate? What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? Can we stick to this rather than throwing in unrelated "stuff"?
Note: "I don't want to believe it's right" isn't the same as "it's wrong". So can we avoid this, too, please. If you don't think it's right, explain why rather than just whining about it or diverting the conversation, please.
Either you are thick or just trying to exhaust me, I suspect the latter.
Nope. Neither is true.
Just looking for answers to questions that were begged by your earlier response. The essence of the questions boil down to:
I answered your question about "math lying". Do you agree or disagree with my response?
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation?
If you don't want a lot of assertions to be challenged, then please stop throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks.
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
You didn't?
Oh, yeah, here it is...
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
So, by "deception", you don't mean "lying"? This sounds like more flat-earth "logic".
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
OK. No idea if your triglyceride comment is right or not, but how does it relate? What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? Can we stick to this rather than throwing in unrelated "stuff"?
Note: "I don't want to believe it's right" isn't the same as "it's wrong". So can we avoid this, too, please. If you don't think it's right, explain why rather than just whining about it or diverting the conversation, please.
Either you are thick or just trying to exhaust me, I suspect the latter.
Nope. Neither is true.
Just looking for answers to questions that were begged by your earlier response. The essence of the questions boil down to:
I answered your question about "math lying". Do you agree or disagree with my response?
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation?
If you don't want a lot of assertions to be challenged, then please stop throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks.
You gotta be kidding.
I said maths does not lie. It can be used to lie.
I gave you a perfect example of how math can be deceptive you do not want to check out the example I gave, so go away.
-
Time to cut the "where is the math lying nonsense", I never said it was.
You didn't?
Oh, yeah, here it is...
Ah yeah, the old maths deception again.
So, by "deception", you don't mean "lying"? This sounds like more flat-earth "logic".
Trigs are affected by sugar consumption. More sugar, higher trigs. Higher your trigs/5 gives you better LDL result.
Therefore the more sugar you eat the better your heart is.
Maths made for a predetermined result.
That's how I see your round earth maths.
Correctly made for a predetermined result.
OK. No idea if your triglyceride comment is right or not, but how does it relate? What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? Can we stick to this rather than throwing in unrelated "stuff"?
Note: "I don't want to believe it's right" isn't the same as "it's wrong". So can we avoid this, too, please. If you don't think it's right, explain why rather than just whining about it or diverting the conversation, please.
Either you are thick or just trying to exhaust me, I suspect the latter.
Nope. Neither is true.
Just looking for answers to questions that were begged by your earlier response. The essence of the questions boil down to:
I answered your question about "math lying". Do you agree or disagree with my response?
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation?
If you don't want a lot of assertions to be challenged, then please stop throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks.
You gotta be kidding.
Nope. Not kidding.
I said maths does not lie. It can be used to lie.
You may think that's what you meant, but it's not what you said. Please try to say clearly what you mean. We're not mind readers.
I gave you a perfect example of how math can be deceptive you do not want to check out the example I gave, so go away.
You gave an example of a model you think is wrong. What does that have to do with the question at hand?
Repeating:
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? You are dodging this question. Does putting this in bold type help you focus on the question you really need to answer in this conversation?
-
Yes it does. Stand on the beach and look at the ground below your feet. Tilt your head back and up to see the horizon.
Then sit down and have a good long think.
I wasn't talking about looking at the the ground at my feet, I was talking about looking at the horizon from two different elevations. So we agree that the more elevation one gains, the further away the horizon becomes. Great.
This very simple drawing demonstrates just that. As H increases or decreases, D increases or decreases.
(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/files/2008/08/horizon_diagram.jpg)
-
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? You are dodging this question. Does putting this in bold type help you focus on the question you really need to answer in this conversation?
My quibble is your calculation is made for your round earth.
The earth is flat therefore your calculation is as relevant as the friedwald formula. It means nothing. Both made up calculations for predetermined outcomes.
How will I test your calculation, can I run a straight edge out to sea and measure the drop?
No, I have to put up with people putting bloody cartoons up all the time, and be told "this is reality now just accept it".
"Hey we have math".
-
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? You are dodging this question. Does putting this in bold type help you focus on the question you really need to answer in this conversation?
My quibble is your calculation is made for your round earth.
Well, yes. It works, too, so there's more evidence the Earth (it's yours, too) is spherical. This seems to be a problem for you. Why?
The earth is flat therefore your calculation is as relevant as the friedwald formula. It means nothing. Both made up calculations for predetermined outcomes.
We're going to need some actual evidence that suggests that your assertion is correct. So far, all of the conclusive evidence falls convincingly on the "Earth is spherical" side, like the distance to horizon stuff. About the only case made for a flat earth is "look out your window; it looks flat to me", but, when viewed from near the surface of the Earth, "looks flat" is difficult to distinguish from "looks like the surface of a really large sphere", so this is inconclusive. Sorry, this is inconclusive at best. Do you have anything else that shows the Earth is flat? An explanation of sunrises and sunsets that's simpler and more elegant than the spherical-earth model would be a good start.
So why do those distant mountains, ships, buildings, etc. disappear from the bottom up in accordance with the formula? How do they know which predetermined parts should be below the horizon when someone looks from different vantage points? What if two or more people look from different vantage points at the same time, so each one would have a different predetermined horizon? How is the distant object supposed to cope with that?
How will I test your calculation, can I run a straight edge out to sea and measure the drop?
Light is typically what is used. It can be perturbed by refraction, more in some situations than others, but in most cases it's pretty good.
No, I have to put up with people putting bloody cartoons up all the time, and be told "this is reality now just accept it".
Those drawings are designed to help you understand what's being said since you seem to have difficulty grasping it. If you don't need these, then please stop playing dumb.
"Hey we have math".
Indeed we do. Works brilliantly, too, when applied correctly!
-
Look-
I will just answer everyone at once because obviously you guys with 5000 posts here must do this for a living. I believe it is called being a troll or a shill.
I personally call it being here for longer then you.
What you are trying to do is discredit the truth with absolute nonsense.
If by "nonsense" you mean math, logic, and evidence and if by "truth" you mean the ridiculous conjecture that is flat earth theory then yes.
Just so you know... I already KNOW the Earth is flat and there is no need for me to explain it to intellectuals. You guys are so smart! Mike said that the images are composite and if that is what I considered doctored images.
Then what are you doing here? Just climb back into your hole and smugly feel superior to all the "sheeple" because you know the "truth".
Mike you want to bet me $10,000 that there is no such thing as space? There is no such thing as a vacuum?
That depends, which side do you want me to take. If you are suggesting that space and vacuums don't exist and you want me to bet that they do exist then I would totally do that bet.
You do not know who you are messing with. I am looking for people who are looking for truth,
Then what are you doing on the Flat Earth Society forum?
not people who are paid to keep the lie. THE GLOBE IS A LIE and I still don't know if you 100% believe it or are really so fucking stupid that you are posting in this forum daily just so you don't cry.
Considering that you think math, logic, and evidence is stupid I am going to go with the second option.
If you really are asking for doctored images then you have not seen my youtube where in my last two videos the following things have been proven.
First I will ask a few questions....
1. Why doesn't the moon fall to Earth? It stays neatly in its orbit. If that is the case, why can't I jump and orbit the Earth?
Because it has lateral velocity which you don't have when you jump. If the atmosphere weren't there to show you down and you were somehow able to jump with a lateral velocity of 17,000 miles per hour then you would be in orbit.
2. How does a vacuum work if it is connected to Earth? A vacuum must be sealed and if sealed how do we get out there?
My video shows the following https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5mR4g22L_E9t1D_ExQ (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCS_FY5mR4g22L_E9t1D_ExQ)
1. Gravity is fictitious. On Earth, we have weight and it is how things work. Drop a rock, and it being more dense than air will fall. A balloon with helium is less dense than air and rises.
But gravity is what gives objects weight, weight is simply a measurement of the force created by gravity.
2. Relativity is a joke
Math says otherwise.
3. Light Years is a joke
4. Globe Earth cannot exist in reality
But it can, and it does.
5. Copernicus said the Sun was 3,000,000 miles away so his "belief" that we rotated the sun is false.
I am very confused by this sentence.
6. We do not spin
Gyroscopes, pendulums, and the Coriolis effect say otherwise.
7. The sun and moon (easily measured with sextant) are 3000 miles away and both 32 miles in diameter
But when they are measured with radar the Moon is 245,000 miles away and the Sun is way too far for radar to detect, not to mention it's already emitting a lot of radio waves.
8. NASA lies
Dispite having hundreds of thousands of employees and thousands of private contractors which build rocket parts that would all have to be in on it for NASA to tell lies.
9. NASA worships the devil, you worship NASA, you worship the Devil. Hahaha pagan.
NASA doesn't worship the devil and I don't worship NASA. If NASA worshiped the devil then why would the Apollo 8 astronauts quote from the Bible in lunar orbit? I don't worship NASA, I simply believe that they don't intentionally lie to everyone about literally everything they say to support a massive conspiracy. There is a slight difference there.
10. Space X is fake
11. ISS is fake
12 Space walk is fake
13. Composite images are fake
14. Space is fake
Why do you think they are fake? Is it because they go against your beliefs? That's called confirmation bias, as long as you have it you shouldn't be expecting to arrive at any kind of truth.
15 Stars are right above us
The constant angular distance between stars says otherwise.
16. THIS WILL ALL BE MAINSTREAM NEWS BEFORE THE END OF 2015
I can see the headline now.
Flat Earthers Finally Convinced That Earth is Round
One flat earther says:
"I can't believe I was so ignorent that I managed to convince myself that the Earth was flat even though the Sun sets."
-
So why do those distant mountains, ships, buildings, etc. disappear from the bottom up in accordance with the formula? How do they know which predetermined parts should be below the horizon when someone looks from different vantage points? What if two or more people look from different vantage points at the same time, so each one would have a different predetermined horizon? How is the distant object supposed to cope with that?
Open your bloody eyes. Look at your feet, then tilt your head up and back to see the horizon come up to your eye level.
Then sit down and start thinking for yourself.
-
Open your bloody eyes. Look at your feet, then tilt your head up and back to see the horizon come up to your eye level.
Then sit down and start thinking for yourself.
And then check out the second link in my forum signature which debunks that.
-
So why do those distant mountains, ships, buildings, etc. disappear from the bottom up in accordance with the formula? How do they know which predetermined parts should be below the horizon when someone looks from different vantage points? What if two or more people look from different vantage points at the same time, so each one would have a different predetermined horizon? How is the distant object supposed to cope with that?
Open your bloody eyes. Look at your feet, then tilt your head up and back to see the horizon come up to your eye level.
Then sit down and start thinking for yourself.
Since you're obsessed with looking at your feet before looking at the horizon, go ahead and do that, and then go to a higher elevation and repeat the process. Is the horizon further away than it was from the lower vantage point? I'm pretty sure it will be, but by all means, try it for yourself.
-
So why do those distant mountains, ships, buildings, etc. disappear from the bottom up in accordance with the formula? How do they know which predetermined parts should be below the horizon when someone looks from different vantage points? What if two or more people look from different vantage points at the same time, so each one would have a different predetermined horizon? How is the distant object supposed to cope with that?
Open your bloody eyes. Look at your feet, then tilt your head up and back to see the horizon come up to your eye level.
Then sit down and start thinking for yourself.
This answer reply has nothing to do with the questions asked. How does every random object know what "predetermined outcome" it's supposed to exhibit to someone, somewhere? What if there is more than one "someone"? Which "someone's" "predetermined outcome" does it honor?
Remember, it is you that is insisting:
What is your quibble with the distance-to-horizon calculation? You are dodging this question. Does putting this in bold type help you focus on the question you really need to answer in this conversation?
My quibble is your calculation is made for your round earth.
The earth is flat therefore your calculation is as relevant as the friedwald formula. It means nothing. Both made up calculations for predetermined outcomes.
So what "predetermined outcome" is expected if there is more than one observer of the same thing at the same time from a different vantage point?
-
What is the angle from your feet up to the horizon until it intercepts your line of sight?
-
What is the angle from your feet up to the horizon until it intercepts your line of sight?
Just slightly less then 90 degrees. The second link in my forum signature proves you wrong, so stop cherry picking evidence and check it out.
-
What is the angle from your feet up to the horizon until it intercepts your line of sight?
Just slightly less then 90 degrees. The second link in my forum signature proves you wrong, so stop cherry picking evidence and check it out.
I am not going to read 20 pages of drivel.
Horizon comes up to meet the eye, anything behind that intersection gets cut. Higher you go the further you see.
Case closed.
-
What is the angle from your feet up to the horizon until it intercepts your line of sight?
Just slightly less then 90 degrees. The second link in my forum signature proves you wrong, so stop cherry picking evidence and check it out.
I am not going to read 20 pages of drivel.
Horizon comes up to meet the eye, anything behind that intersection gets cut. Higher you go the further you see.
Case closed.
Never mind, it's the first link. I got them mixed up.
The video it links to is kind of long bit one of the many things it debunks is the horizon at eye level thing.
-
What is the angle from your feet up to the horizon until it intercepts your line of sight?
Just slightly less then 90 degrees. The second link in my forum signature proves you wrong, so stop cherry picking evidence and check it out.
The angle from your feet up to the horizon would be closer to 45 degrees.
-
The angle from your feet up to the horizon would be closer to 45 degrees.
Yeah, if the Earth were about 10 feet in diameter. I don't know if you have noticed, but Earth is bigger then that. if the Earth were flat then the horizon wouldn't be a defined line, it would be more of a gradient.
-
The angle from your feet up to the horizon would be closer to 45 degrees.
Yeah, if the Earth were about 10 feet in diameter. I don't know if you have noticed, but Earth is bigger then that. if the Earth were flat then the horizon wouldn't be a defined line, it would be more of a gradient.
Yes you are correct. Thanks.
Standing vertical on the earth the horizon would come up from your feet on an angle to meet the eye closer to 2 degrees.
What do you think?
-
tappet, when you say eye level, do you mean "at the same altitude as your eyes"?
Because that is a tad retarded.
-
If retarded means I stand on the beach and the horizon comes up to meet my eye level, or get in an aeroplane look out the window and the horizon has come up to meet my eye level, I guess it is.
-
If retarded means I stand on the beach and the horizon comes up to meet my eye level, or get in an aeroplane look out the window and the horizon has come up to meet my eye level, I guess it is.
So you are saying that the horizon is approximately 1.7 metres above sea level? (If that is the altitude of your eyes, that is.)
i.e the earth is concave? I smell a truth seeker alt.
A flat horizon is perfectly logical on a round earth too BTW.
And why does the horizon even exist on a flat earth? Wouldn't it be possible to see distant things with the correct magnification?
Mikeman has a link in his signature that explains it better than I.
-
30,000ft up in aeroplane
1- concave earth, horizon comes up to eye level. Plausible.
2- flat earth, horizon comes up to eye level. Believable.
3- convex earth, horizon comes up to eye level. ???
-
30,000ft up in aeroplane
1- concave earth, horizon comes up to eye level. Plausible.
2- flat earth, horizon comes up to eye level. Believable.
3- convex earth, horizon comes up to eye level. ???
Can you prove that it is at eye level? What height might that be?
How can the horizon "come up"? Is it some kind of tectonic shift?
If the earth was flat, the horizon wouldn't be at eye level anyway. Is this hard to comprehend?
It might approach "eye level" but it will never actually get there.
Again, why would the horizon exist on a flat earth anyway? What causes the edge?
-
If retarded means I stand on the beach and the horizon comes up to meet my eye level, or get in an aeroplane look out the window and the horizon has come up to meet my eye level, I guess it is.
So you are saying that the horizon is approximately 1.7 metres above sea level? (If that is the altitude of your eyes, that is.)
i.e the earth is concave? I smell a truth seeker alt.
A flat horizon is perfectly logical on a round earth too BTW.
And why does the horizon even exist on a flat earth? Wouldn't it be possible to see distant things with the correct magnification?
Mikeman has a link in his signature that explains it better than I.
its not logical at all. How can it be , it defies logic . Define your foreshores , explane how you can have water curviture & maintain foreshore hight . This logically happens with a mountain of water. Curviture would mean continues moutains of water.
Most Unbelievable footage of Japanese Tsunami I h…: (http://)
-
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
-
Is the horizon really coming up to a person's line of sight, or do people simply think they're looking along a perfectly level line of sight toward a distant horizon?
How does it work in FET if the horizon always rises up to meet one's line of sight, and we have two people with a way to ensure they're looking at the horizon with an exact level line of sight, only one of them stays at the shore while the other climbs to the top of a tall tower at that same locale or nearby mountain, and they now both see the horizon 'coming up to their line of sight'?
Can any FE'r show a diagram or something of how that would work?
-
On a round Earth we would totally expect what we see and if the Earth were flat we would be able to see the next continent over if you were at the ocean. This is all explained in the first link in my forum signature.
-
fill a ball up with water, then punch 2 holes opposite each other ,around middle. Then tell me how you managed to keep the water from pouring out.Spin it around if you like, if you think that will change the out come. Oh & care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
-
fill a ball up with water, then punch 2 holes opposite each other ,around middle. Then tell me how you managed to keep the water from pouring out.Spin it around if you like, if you think that will change the out come. Oh & care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
I will see that video once I get home to my PC. About the water balloon thing, the water shoots out because it's under pressure because of the balloon squeezing on it. The Earth's gravity also has an effect on the water, so it falls to the Earth. However, when the water is in zero G it behaves like this:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Clayton_Anderson_zero_g_edit.jpg)
It does this because of surface tension (gravity is too small to notice at that scale), and the blob of water still keeps in tact when it's slowly spinning.
-
fill a ball up with water, then punch 2 holes opposite each other ,around middle. Then tell me how you managed to keep the water from pouring out.Spin it around if you like, if you think that will change the out come. Oh & care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
I will see that video once I get home to my PC. About the water balloon thing, the water shoots out because it's under pressure because of the balloon squeezing on it. The Earth's gravity also has an effect on the water, so it falls to the Earth. However, when the water is in zero G it behaves like this:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Clayton_Anderson_zero_g_edit.jpg)
It does this because of surface tension (gravity is too small to notice at that scale), and the blob of water still keeps in tact when it's slowly spinning.
But the oceans &seas are not at zero G . So how can you have a curvature & maintain shore line . When a simple ball filled with water & then punched,demonstrates clearly somthing is terribly wrong with your logic.
-
But the oceans &seas are not at zero G . So how can you have a curvature & maintain shore line . When a simple ball filled with water & then punched,demonstrates clearly somthing is terribly wrong with your logic.
The entire planet is in zero G and it does what that water in zero-g does. The earth is mostly liquid, with a solid core (due to pressure) and solid crust (due to cooling)
That blob of water is a super simplified model of our earth.
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
Could you try that again with more coherence please. Or take you pills and once they kick in, try it again.
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
Could you try that again with more coherence please. Or take you pills and once they kick in, try it again.
Take my pills ? Your the one that needs to take out an over draft & get a realty check. If you have a curviture ,then there has to be a high point of that curviture or you just dont have a curviture do you.
So if your standing on the foreshore , are you standing on the high point or the low point of the curviture you claim is there.
-
Let me try a simple question ,are the boat & ships over the horizon or just out view from the naked eye.?
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
Could you try that again with more coherence please. Or take you pills and once they kick in, try it again.
Take my pills ? Your the one that needs to take out an over draft & get a realty check. If you have a curviture ,then there has to be a high point of that curviture or you just dont have a curviture do you.
So if your standing on the foreshore , are you standing on the high point or the low point of the curviture you claim is there.
There is no high point. Every point on the curve would be an equal distance to the centre of the curvature.
-
Well, I was referring to you incoherent question. But why do you think no one could be 2 meters above the waterline? They were standing up the beach from the edge of the water, plus their height could possibly make 2 meters. What is this high point you speak of? I see why you think the curvature is nonsense, you don't understand it and you are one of those limited frame of reference people that think the Earth is much smaller in relation to people than it really is. I bet you also think that the Earth spinning at 1000 mph would throw you off. It is ok to not understand. No need to throw a fit.
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
Could you try that again with more coherence please. Or take you pills and once they kick in, try it again.
Take my pills ? Your the one that needs to take out an over draft & get a realty check. If you have a curviture ,then there has to be a high point of that curviture or you just dont have a curviture do you.
So if your standing on the foreshore , are you standing on the high point or the low point of the curviture you claim is there.
There is no high point. Every point on the curve would be an equal distance to the centre of the curvature.
So you can substantiate this exacting centre point in earth exsits ?or its just part of a theory, because it fits your spherical model ?.
-
Let me try a simple question ,are the boat & ships over the horizon or just out view from the naked eye.?
Over the horizon.
I have personally seen stadiums where the bottom is not visible, but the top is very clearly visible.
This one in fact, where you see the arch and roof clearly, but nothing but sea below that.
(http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/south_africa/durban_stadium_g080610_mb4.jpg)
edit cause I can not believe I added a render of the stadium first!
Further along on the coast line there is a town that can see the stadium (and city scape) except you dont see the bottom of anything.
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
Could you try that again with more coherence please. Or take you pills and once they kick in, try it again.
Take my pills ? Your the one that needs to take out an over draft & get a realty check. If you have a curviture ,then there has to be a high point of that curviture or you just dont have a curviture do you.
So if your standing on the foreshore , are you standing on the high point or the low point of the curviture you claim is there.
There is no high point. Every point on the curve would be an equal distance to the centre of the curvature.
So you can substantiate this exacting centre point in earth exsits ?or its just part of a theory, because it fits your spherical model ?.
Are you talking about anywhere on the surface of a sphere being the same distance from the center of that sphere as the next position? That's pretty much what it means to be a sphere or a ball. The centerpoint of the curve of the sphere Earth would be at the dead center of the Earth, with all points on the outer "shell" being pretty much equal to each other. Therefore the curve in any direction would be virtually the same. Being that the Earth is so much larger than your individual frame of reference from the surface of it, the curvature that you would possible be able to see from ground level would be too small to be detectable by human eyes.
Or you still think because it looks flat it must be flat?
-
Well, I was referring to you incoherent question. But why do you think no one could be 2 meters above the waterline? They were standing up the beach from the edge of the water, plus their height could possibly make 2 meters. What is this high point you speak of? I see why you think the curvature is nonsense, you don't understand it and you are one of those limited frame of reference people that think the Earth is much smaller in relation to people than it really is. I bet you also think that the Earth spinning at 1000 mph would throw you off. It is ok to not understand. No need to throw a fit.
Just trying to establish distance & line of sight. Clearly the boats & ships seem to be out of sight to the naked or are they over the horizon? Amazingly looking through the camera made them visable . So which is it ?
-
care to comment on this vid on the boat ships & camera zoom or are you just going to ignore it.
Nikon CoolPix P600 60x Zoom Test Sea: (http://)
Someone standing on land that is already almost 2 meters above the water, combined with the camera's height, filming some boats on the horizon.
What about it?
How can they be 2 meters above the water line .with the silly curvature nonsence . If it curves 8" every mile like RErs nonsence states .Then the rise would be in the middle of this BS curvature of water. Can you define what your!!! References to water line is ?.
Could you try that again with more coherence please. Or take you pills and once they kick in, try it again.
Take my pills ? Your the one that needs to take out an over draft & get a realty check. If you have a curviture ,then there has to be a high point of that curviture or you just dont have a curviture do you.
So if your standing on the foreshore , are you standing on the high point or the low point of the curviture you claim is there.
There is no high point. Every point on the curve would be an equal distance to the centre of the curvature.
So you can substantiate this exacting centre point in earth exsits ?or its just part of a theory, because it fits your spherical model ?.
Are you talking about anywhere on the surface of a sphere being the same distance from the center of that sphere as the next position? That's pretty much what it means to be a sphere or a ball. The centerpoint of the curve of the sphere Earth would be at the dead center of the Earth, with all points on the outer "shell" being pretty much equal to each other. Therefore the curve in any direction would be virtually the same. Being that the Earth is so much larger than your individual frame of reference from the surface of it, the curvature that you would possible be able to see from ground level would be too small to be detectable by human eyes.
Or you still think because it looks flat it must be flat?
I didn't ask would it be. I asked can you substantiate it ,other then theory .
-
Just trying to establish distance & line of sight. Clearly the boats & ships seem to be out of sight to the naked or are they over the horizon? Amazingly looking through the camera made them visable . So which is it ?
Well, for one we have no idea what was visible by the naked eye there. Only what we can see on the video. And because the video has limited definition we dont even know if the boats where visible by the naked eye or not.
The camera there is a coolpix camera, its designed for general purpose use. When it is zoomed in (for close up objects) it has a rather wide field of view. It should not be a surprise that zooming in will make items further away more clear. Especially in that video where the boats are smaller than a single pixel at the 00:18 sec time .
-
I didn't ask would it be. I asked can you substantiate it ,other then theory .
So what are you asking to be substantiated?
If it is that every point on the Earth would relatively be equidistant from the center of the Earth, then no, I cannot travel to the center of the Earth from several points on the surface with today's technology. But that's not theory, that's geometry and its a form of math.
You could also use geometry to prove that your frame of reference would show you virtually no curvature from the surface of such a large sphere. Once again, not a theory, but math.
-
Let me try a simple question ,are the boat & ships over the horizon or just out view from the naked eye.?
Over the horizon.
I have personally seen stadiums where the bottom is not visible, but the top is very clearly visible.
This one in fact, where you see the arch and roof clearly, but nothing but sea below that.
(http://www.e-architect.co.uk/images/jpgs/south_africa/durban_stadium_g080610_mb4.jpg)
edit cause I can not believe I added a render of the stadium first!
Further along on the coast line there is a town that can see the stadium (and city scape) except you dont see the bottom of anything.
Have you got it right this time .LOL care to post the render again for a comparison. For transparency of course , seen a s your argument contains visible aspects .
-
Have you got it right this time .LOL care to post the render again for a comparison. For transparency of course , seen a s your argument contains visible aspects .
Wait, I disclosed that I added a render of a stadium instead of its real picture and you are getting upset?
Is the existence of the stadium under dispute?
It is the Moses Mabhida Stadium in Durban South Africa. I drive past it a few times a week.
Choose your link
http://www.mmstadium.com/ (http://www.mmstadium.com/)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Mabhida_Stadium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses_Mabhida_Stadium)
http://www.durbanexperience.co.za/What_To_Do/Explore_Durban/Pages/Moses_Mabhida_Stadium.aspx (http://www.durbanexperience.co.za/What_To_Do/Explore_Durban/Pages/Moses_Mabhida_Stadium.aspx)
-
I didn't ask would it be. I asked can you substantiate it ,other then theory .
So what are you asking to be substantiated?
If it is that every point on the Earth would relatively be equidistant from the center of the Earth, then no, I cannot travel to the center of the Earth from several points on the surface with today's technology. But that's not theory, that's geometry and its a form of math.
You could also use geometry to prove that your frame of reference would show you virtually no curvature from the surface of such a large sphere. Once again, not a theory, but math.
Oh yes! I see said the blind man as he pist in to the wind ,its all coming back to me now. If 1+1=2 there must be 2 easter bunny's. ::)
-
Oh yes! I see said the blind man as he pist in to the wind ,its all coming back to me now. If 1+1=2 there must be 2 easter bunny's. ::)
Charles. I am not sure what you are asking now. Are you asking for someone to go to the center of the earth and measure its distance from there to all the surface points to prove that it has a center point?
I know you dont believe the earth is spherical, But if it was, do you not think it is possible to derive a center point from spherical earth if its external dimensions where known?
-
I didn't ask would it be. I asked can you substantiate it ,other then theory .
So what are you asking to be substantiated?
If it is that every point on the Earth would relatively be equidistant from the center of the Earth, then no, I cannot travel to the center of the Earth from several points on the surface with today's technology. But that's not theory, that's geometry and its a form of math.
You could also use geometry to prove that your frame of reference would show you virtually no curvature from the surface of such a large sphere. Once again, not a theory, but math.
Oh yes! I see said the blind man as he pist in to the wind ,its all coming back to me now. If 1+1=2 there must be 2 easter bunny's. ::)
So you are saying that if I cannot go to the center of the Earth to physically prove the curvature is the virtually the same from any point for you then you will dismiss the statement? Ok, fair enough. Dismiss away, still doesn't make you correct in any way at all.
-
Oh yes! I see said the blind man as he pist in to the wind ,its all coming back to me now. If 1+1=2 there must be 2 easter bunny's. ::)
Charles. I am not sure what you are asking now. Are you asking for someone to go to the center of the earth and measure its distance from there to all the surface points to prove that it has a center point?
I know you dont believe the earth is spherical, But if it was, do you not think it is possible to derive a center point from spherical earth if its external dimensions where known?
Actually that was exactly what he was asking for, trying to be cute, thinking he was backing someone into a corner. I guess he feels good about himself now. Oh he outsmarted ... well no one really.
-
No!!! stop telling me the earth is spherical & has a curviture , when you can't substantiate it. A hypothesis is not fact.
-
Easy there bud, just because you are a little slow doesn't mean you need to get upset. It's not a hypothesis at all. The Earth is spherical, been proven by multiple space agencies, Mathematics, thousands of experiments, etc. Like I said earlier please go take you meds.
-
Easy there bud, just because you are a little slow doesn't mean you need to get upset. It's not a hypothesis at all. The Earth is spherical, been proven by multiple space agencies, Mathematics, thousands of experiments, etc. Like I said earlier please go take you meds.
You PERSONS think if you just keep saying the earth is spherical & there is a curvature that it makes it true.With anyone who questions the validity of that dribble, being labeled as daft. Well I'm happy to be labeled daft, then believe the bullshit NASA & the corperation lackys have spoon feed to the world.
-
Easy there bud, just because you are a little slow doesn't mean you need to get upset. It's not a hypothesis at all. The Earth is spherical, been proven by multiple space agencies, Mathematics, thousands of experiments, etc. Like I said earlier please go take you meds.
You PERSONS think if you just keep saying the earth is spherical & there is a curvature that it makes it true.With anyone who questions the validity of that dribble, being labeled as daft. Well I'm happy to be labeled daft, then believe the bullshit NASA & the corperation lackys have spoon feed to the world.
Uhh, ok.
No spoon feeding here, hard earned and learned knowledge. No need for some big conspiracy. Just math that works, beautiful sunsets and sunrises, beautiful views from climbing high mountains, life experience from different parts of the world, and the ability to think. I have no problem with conceptualizing things that are bigger than me. You fail at this skill. But that's not a problem. You go on being you.
-
Charles you are getting overly upset about this.
By far the majority of the people on earth says the world is round, it should by now not come as a shock to you when someone online says what everyone else has been saying all along.
I have lots of personal experience showing it is spherical, and then I have all the other data that I do not consider as part of a massive conspiracy.
What do you have to substantiate your claims (I am asking because you asked Mikey to measure the distance from the core of the planet to its surface)