The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth General => Topic started by: Milky on October 31, 2009, 08:59:28 PM
-
Give me your proof that the earth is flat... come on.... hit me.
-
Prove the Earth isn't flat.
-
No you didnt understand.... prove to ME the earth is flat. Your avoiding the subject.
-
Look out your window. Looks flat to me. Anyone agree?
-
With the size of the earth. Yes it LOOKS flat. Prove it is.
-
Please read the forum-specific rules. Moved.
EDIT: Incredible response times. As I was posting my 'moved' post, one of the other mods (Jack or John I suspect) was moved it. If only Ambulances were this fast.
-
lol. what? can nobody prove this to ME?
-
With the size of the earth. Yes it LOOKS flat. Prove it is.
It looks flat, so why should we assume otherwise? We should need to prove it is round.
-
One of the oldest proofs of the Earth's shape, however, can be seen from the ground and occurs during every lunar eclipse. The geometry of a lunar eclipse has been known since ancient Greece. When a full Moon occurs in the plane of Earth's orbit, the Moon slowly moves through Earth's shadow. Every time that shadow is seen, its edge is round. Once again, the only solid that always projects a round shadow is a sphere.
-
The Earth appears flat from our local area. The burden of proof is on you to prove it is round.
-
I believe along with 99% of the world that it(the world) is round. I have seen pictures and videos from space(yes they were government funded). I would like to know why you believe why you guys think that the world is flat. I know you don't care about going out and trying to prove to everyone that it is a FE, but still could you try to explain it to me with a little bit of real proof(this does not mean you looking out your window).
-
The book Earth Not a Globe proves the earth is flat.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za00.htm
But still, it's not a matter of proving it's flat, it's a matter of proving anything to the contrary.
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
NASA's a proven liar. Why should we trust anything they show us?
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
NASA's a proven liar. Why should we trust anything they show us?
Everybody lies, I don't see you deeming your fellow FE'ers liars and not trusting them.
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
NASA's a proven liar. Why should we trust anything they show us?
Everybody lies, I don't see you deeming your fellow FE'ers liars and not trusting them.
No FE'er has lied to me.
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
NASA's a proven liar. Why should we trust anything they show us?
Everybody lies, I don't see you deeming your fellow FE'ers liars and not trusting them.
No FE'er has lied to me.
Name one lie that NASA has told you directly. You have a problem with government and as such a problem with NASA so you choose not to trust them. That's your problem but it doesn't give you the proof that the earth is flat, if you really cared you would try to actually find a way to prove it then making crap up off the top of your heads, instead all you want to do is argue which solves not a darn thing. Am I wrong?
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
NASA's a proven liar. Why should we trust anything they show us?
Everybody lies, I don't see you deeming your fellow FE'ers liars and not trusting them.
No FE'er has lied to me.
Name one lie that NASA has told you directly.
They lied to me about going to the moon.
http://www.screencast.com/users/tbishop/folders/Jing/media/d5784ce2-2348-40a0-8f9b-0ddf37763b6e
-
I haven't seen any evidence that the earth is a globe.
No no no, you mean you haven't seen any evidence you deem trust worthy.
NASA's a proven liar. Why should we trust anything they show us?
Everybody lies, I don't see you deeming your fellow FE'ers liars and not trusting them.
No FE'er has lied to me.
Name one lie that NASA has told you directly.
They lied to me about going to the moon.
http://www.screencast.com/users/tbishop/folders/Jing/media/d5784ce2-2348-40a0-8f9b-0ddf37763b6e
That proves what? Other than you have WAY too much time on your hands?
-
That proves what? Other than you have WAY too much time on your hands?
It demonstrates that NASA did not send men to the moon.
-
That proves what? Other than you have WAY too much time on your hands?
It demonstrates that NASA did not send men to the moon.
You gonna keep repeating yourself or are you gonna explain?
-
You gonna keep repeating yourself or are you gonna explain?
Explain what? That there are no stage lights on the surface of the moon?
-
You gonna keep repeating yourself or are you gonna explain?
Explain what? That there are no stage lights on the surface of the moon?
Where are such stage lights? All I see is an image of the sun that you played with in an image editor.
-
I haven't seen accepted any evidence that the earth is a globe.
Fixed.
-
They lied to me about going to the moon.
http://www.screencast.com/users/tbishop/folders/Jing/media/d5784ce2-2348-40a0-8f9b-0ddf37763b6e
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum. Adjusting the levels on one photo is inconclusive without a proper reference to compare it to.
-
It's certainly worth a raised eyebrow, is it not?
-
It's certainly worth a raised eyebrow, is it not?
Why? Again, without a control for comparison, you have no idea what Tom's "analysis" means. It's all about context.
That seems to be the primary FE'er debate strategy. Take one bit of data, remove all context and then claim it as a win for FET while ignoring the bigger picture.
-
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum.
Why, are there stage lights in space?
-
I love the way the flat guys trot out the "it looks flat" line as their reasoning, when in fact it doesn't. If it looked flat you would not see ships sinking over the horizon. They try to explain this with the [now disproved] bendy light theory, but the very fact that they accept the phenomenon is visible means the "it looks flat" statement is rendered untrue.
Anyone who says "it looks flat" must also hold the opinion "ships don't appear to sink over the horizon". Because if you think ships do sink over the horizon, you are admitting the world does not look flat.
-
The book Earth Not a Globe proves the earth is flat.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za00.htm
Just in case any newbies believe Winston's post here, I'd like to add that when the experiments in Earth Not A Globe were repeated by people who were trained surveyors, they demonstrated there is a curvature to the earth's surface. Therefore the experiments are at best inconclusive.
-
[now disproved] bendy light theory
Please stop claiming that bendy light has been disproved. It has not.
-
[now disproved] bendy light theory
Please stop claiming that bendy light has been disproved. It has not.
Your beliefs are irrelevant in this thread.
-
Your beliefs are irrelevant in this thread.
Correct, but irrelevant to what I said.
-
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum.
Why, are there stage lights in space?
I don't know. Can you provide of picture of a stage light in a vacuum so that we can compare that with the Apollo picture in question? Until then, you have no basis for claiming that it's a stage light.
-
I know a guy that I met on these forums, we became good friends.
He decided to take a trip to the Ice Wall. Lets just say that I haven't heard back from him.
This was about a few months ago. I had a different account back then but I forgot the info.
-
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum.
Why, are there stage lights in space?
I don't know. Can you provide of picture of a stage light in a vacuum so that we can compare that with the Apollo picture in question?
Actually you're the one who is supposed to be justifying the existence of stage lights in space.
-
What makes you think it is a stage light?
-
What makes you think it is a stage light?
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=33855.msg830773#msg830773
-
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum.
Why, are there stage lights in space?
I don't know. Can you provide of picture of a stage light in a vacuum so that we can compare that with the Apollo picture in question?
Actually you're the one who is supposed to be justifying the existence of stage lights in space.
Answer me this then, if you don't know what a light looks like in space, how can that photo try to justify it? Or how do you know the real sun wouldn't look the same when messed with in a photo editor?
-
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum.
Why, are there stage lights in space?
I don't know. Can you provide of picture of a stage light in a vacuum so that we can compare that with the Apollo picture in question?
Actually you're the one who is supposed to be justifying the existence of stage lights in space.
Answer me this then, if you don't know what a light looks like in space, how can that photo try to justify it? Or how do you know the real sun wouldn't look the same when messed with in a photo editor?
The real sun doesn't look like that in a photo editor. Try it yourself.
-
Actually you're the one who is supposed to be justifying the existence of stage lights in space.
Umm... No. You are the one claiming that the sun in that Apollo picture is a stage light. I'm just asking you to provide evidence that the photo in question is not consistent with the conditions claimed by NASA. You have yet to do so.
The real sun doesn't look like that in a photo editor.
Unless you have a picture of the sun taken in a vacuum for comparison, you have no evidence to support that statement.
-
What makes you think it is a stage light?
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=33855.msg830773#msg830773
All I see in that crummy video is you tooling around with Photoshop. There is no evidence at all that it isn't the sun in the picture - most of what you're looking at in the original image is lens flare. If you think the big wide circle is supposed to be the edge of the actual sun or a stage light, you are far wrong. Film and scanned images have limits to their dynamic range, and the lens flare alone on the original negative would have easily reached d-max, meaning that the smaller spot of the sun within it could not be seen as seperate from the flare. Don't forget I work for the conspiracy in the imaging field and so I know what I'm talking about. The square blocks within the image after you've tampered with it are merely jpeg compression artefacts. What about that picture makes you think it's not the sun, exactly?
-
Tom, until you can show us a photo of what you believe the sun really looks like in a vacuum, you have no basis of comparison between a genuine and a fake picture of the sun in a vacuum.
Why, are there stage lights in space?
I don't know. Can you provide of picture of a stage light in a vacuum so that we can compare that with the Apollo picture in question?
Actually you're the one who is supposed to be justifying the existence of stage lights in space.
Answer me this then, if you don't know what a light looks like in space, how can that photo try to justify it? Or how do you know the real sun wouldn't look the same when messed with in a photo editor?
The real sun doesn't look like that in a photo editor. Try it yourself.
There's no evidence to support that statement cause according to you, space flight isn't possible.
-
bump
-
Why do they always say we have the burden of proof? There is so much proof out there that proves them all wrong. They choose not to accept it (even though its kind of retarded). Once one of them actually goes to space they wont ever be able to prove themselves right. All they have done so far is make up there own non proven ideas and make a website. Im sorry FE's but the burden of proof is on you. RE's have tons of proof.
-
Why do they always say we have the burden of proof? There is so much proof out there that proves them all wrong. They choose not to accept it (even though its kind of retarded). Once one of them actually goes to space they wont ever be able to prove themselves right. All they have done so far is make up there own non proven ideas and make a website. Im sorry FE's but the burden of proof is on you. RE's have tons of proof.
We aren't the ones who came and joined your website and started demanding proof, nor did we force you to start posting here. You've come here to us, so the burden of proof is on you. Alternatively, you're free to leave at any time.
-
Why do they always say we have the burden of proof? There is so much proof out there that proves them all wrong. They choose not to accept it (even though its kind of retarded). Once one of them actually goes to space they wont ever be able to prove themselves right. All they have done so far is make up there own non proven ideas and make a website. Im sorry FE's but the burden of proof is on you. RE's have tons of proof.
We aren't the ones who came and joined your website and started demanding proof, nor did we force you to start posting here. You've come here to us, so the burden of proof is on you. Alternatively, you're free to leave at any time.
But you are the unproven theory, so quit trying to dodge it, and "try" to "convert" us to FE'ers.
-
This is not some proslytizing faith. Unlike the high priests of globularism, we encourage you to come to your own conclusions.
-
This is not some proslytizing faith. Unlike the high priests of globularism, we encourage you to come to your own conclusions.
I know, they were used as metaphors.
-
I thought this is where we debate this subject? Im trying to debate this... but first I need some LEGIT proof from you guys, jesus christ.