1

Flat Earth General / Re: NASA Artemis

« on: December 14, 2021, 03:12:53 AM »

I'm a new poster and interested in the topic. I am curious why there are so many who do not believe the idea of a flat earth on here when this forum should be for those who want to learn and discover more. Instead I find many posters shutting down discussion, much like paid disinfo agents on other forums, why is that?

I think that has a lot to do with what attracts people to the site in the first place.

Many people in this thread for example, just like discussion based around the idea of a Flat Earth. I myself, am still confused on the whole issue. As I don't break the illusion of society down into "levels." Like some of the FE and RE do.
I just in general enjoy reading what others have to say on some issues.

For instance, in this thread, again for example. I know Stash made some excellent points about how faking CGI could be impossible. But, I still agree with sceptimatic in a way, because sure. I can agree there are always more questions. And a lot of subjects become slippery slopes when we talk about the "ramifications" on what a Flat Earth would mean on society as a whole.

I am a neutral party, but a interested observer, on both sides! Much like yourself!

2

Flat Earth General / Re: The Music Experiment

« on: December 14, 2021, 02:48:07 AM »

Sound was found very recently to not actually travel in a straight line.

Google, my case in point: "A research team has discovered a new type of sound wave: the airborne sound wave vibrates transversely and carries both spin and orbital angular momentum like light does. The findings shattered scientists' previous beliefs about the sound wave, opening an avenue to the development of novel applications in acoustic communications, acoustic sensing and imaging."

I don't know if OPs experiment, however beautiful it sounds, would come up with much conclusive evidence. One way or another. It sounds a lot like "The Bedford Level experiment" but only instead of visible distance, OP talks about using sound as a distance measure.

Or something. 

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Suggestion For Showing Evidence Of The Ice Ring

« on: August 25, 2016, 07:13:16 AM »

One of the problems about this "ice ring" is that plenty of ships have made complete circumnavigations of the Antartic coastline.  The whole trip takes a matter of weeks and whether measured by travel time, fuel consumption, or mileage, it is roughly half the distance of the Australian coastline.  Obviously if Antarctica can be circumnavigated then it's not surrounding us.

I haven't heard of many ships doing this, that would be a prime factor in evidence for a flat earth. However, I do know of a few such recorded events of circumnavigation of Antarctica.
Would there be public records of such logs in any country in the world that could prove such things? In support of a FE model? Such as travel time, fuel consumption, or mileage as you mentioned?

4

Flat Earth General / Detecting a flat earth?

« on: August 25, 2016, 06:32:45 AM »

How would one, within scientific reason, and measurements, detect, beyond a shadow of a doubt, a flat earth?
Please, extrapolate, and entertain this thought. What methods would one use to get detailed data about the earth landscape in support of either model. Imagine if you will, a time in the future where one might say it would be possible, to completely and accurately say, within scientific reason, that a flat earth working model is correct/incorrect. How, in everyone's opinion, could the round earth model methods everyone uses and believes be proven scientifically infallible/fallible? How, in everyone's opinion, would the flat earth model be proven infallible/fallible?

I only ask that you consider how one person could, if he had the proper technology at hand, at some time in the future, or at present, be able to prove and detect a flat earth? Not just to himself, and his opinion, but representing all necessary data that would, within the scientific community, make it be considered a fact.

I hope this question isn't to vexing for some as well. Either way, if you have any ideas or comments that support or help, feel free to voice them about the nature of this subject and how its goals might be achieved one day. Use whatever method or idea you think is best, and don't be scared to say anything that you don't think technology at present could achieve. This is more a, admittedly somewhat nerdy, thought experiment rather than a cut and dry post.

I'm a round earthier, but am rather interested how advancing technology is a growing, and seemingly never ending field. I hope that with human cooperation and ingenuity, we will one day break beyond our barriers of confinement, and be free to explore and grow into whatever lies beyond our skies. Whether that be a round, or flat earth model, I'm excited for whatever lies ahead for the future of human beings. I feel like everyone here is excited to for that, and this will be a great discussion topic. Among FE's and RE's alike.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Satanism

« on: May 16, 2016, 06:43:56 AM »

I like Satan. And bacon. Also, beer.

I second this motion, but add women.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Can Black People be Racist?

« on: May 16, 2016, 06:40:42 AM »

"Having said this, there are two things I want to address: First, I have lost patience continuously explaining what it means to be privileged to a white person and why black pain is valid. Second, I understand that black people have a right to voice out their pain. Their pain does not require validation from a white person to be considered real. If your arrogance as a white person is blinding you from seeing this, then it’s time you did some introspection. Do not be quick to jump on the “victim” bandwagon and accuse blacks of being racist. Black people can never be racist – we never had the tools or power to institutionalise racial oppression. So next time you as a white person want to accuse black people of reverse racism and insufficient anger – check yourself and your privilege."

http://www.pambazuka.org/governance/black-people-can%E2%80%99t-be-racist

This entire paragraph seems to Urk me.

He sounds like an entitled guy. I've met some pure asshole blacks in my day. Best advice I've gotten from blacks as well. Seems to me there are more assholes, black and white, in the world than well tempered, well mannered people.

I do think that blacks can be Racist, because I've been in the presence of one black man, who did indeed seem to simply hate us whites, for no reason other than to hate us. The situation and the social exchange between us was however complicated and varied among a few friends of mine.

My point. Anyone can be racist. White, Asian, Black, European. Its just human instinct to disregard and shun that which we do not understand, and we as humans simply can not understand anything 100%. Much less the minds, thoughts, and feelings of our own fellow man. No matter the color of his skin.

7

Flat Earth General / Re: The ISS is a Gulfstream jet.

« on: May 16, 2016, 05:38:42 AM »

NASA releases huge amounts of verifiable public-domain data that also matches third-party observations, and its structure is set up to where a hoax is wholly unfeasible.

Are you saying that NASA has never been caught lying, cheating, or manipulating data?

Not as a whole, they haven't.  Any organization can have small-scale outlying corruption or mismanagement.  I don't think anybody will argue that.  But that is also a reason that there cannot be a huge unified top-secret conspiracy.  Among the outlying cases, there would be whistle-blowing and blackmailing.  Good luck trying to hide the earth's shape from thousands of highly-qualified professionals whose life's work is to know the orbits and functions of satellites.  And when a thruster gets stuck open and your satellite gets stuck in the wrong aether current that doesn't match a Kepler orbit, good luck getting help from the contractor responsible without setting off any alarms.  Can you imagine how hurt they would be if they found out they had been lied to from the start about something as basic as the shape of the earth?  There would definitely be quite a few whistle-blowers.  But there aren't any.  Not one employee of NASA or any of its many contractors, or any of the other space agencies or their contractors. 
So we're left with a choice:  Either
A.) NASA has the best indoctrination program in the history of mankind, so that even the disgruntled employees and the people who fail the program still carry the secret to the grave, or
B.) There is no all-encompassing conspiracy, NASA has nothing to hide, and (gasp) you still have more to learn about physics and engineering.

While not a FEr, I do have to disagree with you Blue Moon regarding to the subject of whistleblowers. I know the links I provided are still hearsay and conjecture, in context to your argument. I would still like to implore you to re-think the subject of whistleblowers. Not necessarily in context to NASA, just in general.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

http://www.activistpost.com/2016/03/watch-computer-programmer-testifies-under-oath-he-coded-computers-to-rig-elections.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_whistleblowers

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8070253/Wikileaks-10-greatest-stories.html

http://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-11/WikiLeaks/online.html

To the subject of the thread, the evidence seems to lean against the subject of the thread.

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Map

« on: May 16, 2016, 05:04:28 AM »

meanwhile, please don't do anything of what you usually do, like raping people, orgies with animals and childrens, sacrifices etc.

You are ignorant easily manipulated and a lesser human being. That's just my opinion but one we are all intitled to.

Please read the satanic bible before making wild, offensive accusations.
I've read nearly every bible, and have given them equal consideration in my belief system, I don't feel it's prudent to judge anything without doing the research first.

Apologies for what seems like ignorance from some FErs, you can't much expect there to be a well rounded knowledge base in the FES when it comes to religion. Especially since the FES isn't technically linked to any religion. Ignore the hate comments towards satanism, they seem a bit uniformed.

However, back on topic.

I think it is more important to the FES that they promote the discussion of the subject matter, rather than try and push a map on people. Based of the many theories and different views withing the FE community itself, I doubt you will find a solid answer to this thread that pleases you beyond a shadow of a doubt.

There is simply, as far as I've been able to tell, not one. At least not a reliable working model. I do think you expected as much before you started the topic though. There is still time for a FEr to surprise us both though.

9

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Newtons third law

« on: May 16, 2016, 04:39:47 AM »

15 to one says you dont.

Ahem.
17

10

Flat Earth Q&A / What is outside the dome/filament? What is under?

« on: May 16, 2016, 04:28:48 AM »

This will be my first started topic. Be kind. I'm not aware if these sort of questions have been tackled before, but if they have, please link the thread so I may read it!

(Tl;dr Just answer the subject if you're a FEr, if your a RE skip to the bottom and read the last paragraph.)

Hello FE society. I've perused the boards before I signed up. Used the site search engine. Did quite a bit of lurking and I've come to grips with the reality that most people on this site are probably just here for the lols. That aside. I'd rather much like to ask some questions, with hopes that I get serious responses, as to what most FErs think is outside the dome? Also, why was it created? To observe? To what ends? What end purpose would it serve? Who or what created it? Did the big bang happen? Is there a universe of some sort outside, similar to our own, or does it run on a completely different set of rules than we understand about our current view of the universe at large? Also, what is under the FE? If anyone has any ideas contrary to the popular Ether explanation, I'd love to hear them. Ideas as to what causes lava flow? Does that possibly have something to do with Ether, or is it that most FErs hold the belief of lava pumps that send lava to the surface? How do we track space objects that sometimes enter our atmosphere? Could that be project by a dome or complicated filament structure? Could whoever/whatever made the dome have any ulterior motive whilst outside? Ideas on what the dome/filament is made of?  (Feel free to answer one, many, or all questions to the best of your ability, or just bring something new to the table I didn't think of, I'd love to hear it!) In my search through the boards I've come across many odd theories, some that sound a bit far fetched, and others that seem very well thought out. Ideas and comments from FErs that are very well thought out and hold high merit, in my opinion at least. It is my hopes that by making this thread, I can attract more of those mind blowing, and very structural ideas I have read from some FE members I have read through my many uses of the search engine provided by this site.

For some conjectural context, these question arose mainly after watching this video through and though.

I marked it on the part where he talks about the "structure." Since that is what lead me to these questions. It is a great source of knowledge and is probably the video that got me to sign up for this site. I'm not here to debate or deny any claims made by any FEr in this thread. I'm just asking honest questions. I'd enjoy reading honest FE ideas, theories, hypotheses and thoughts on this subject matter and any questions they feel up to sharing their thoughts on. Again, I am not here to deny any claims or words said. I'm simply here to listen to what any FErs have to say, because honestly, I'm intrigued by the concept of FE altogether. However, it is important to note I do not believe in the FE theory or any model I've seen. This does not mean that I find the FE belief funny or a joke. I do understand how serious some that post on this Forum are. I hope that those that are serious in their belief and ideas will post serious replies. I'd rather enjoy reading detailed descriptions on the Ether and such, as well as anyone who has any counter model ideas to the FE theory that are related to the posted subject, such as the double sided FE I've read about, such as the "FE universe" (essentially a never ending flat plane of land which we reside on, just under our own dome?) that only seem to be talked about in hush whispers on this site for some reason. I do not find any good idea crazy or odd, I find them fascinating and hope to hear back from anyone interested in sharing their ideas related to the subject matter or any questions I posed.

Please, any RErs that enter this thread refrain from flaming or hating on any ideas presented in this thread. Let the FErs share their ideas freely without any backlash from the RE community on the site. If any REr would like to link to any interesting threads they have been in recently or in the past where ideas that involve this subject matter are discussed, feel free to do so as I would like to read them.

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The flat Earth model cannot explain lunar eclipses

« on: May 15, 2016, 10:54:15 PM »

Personally I think the lunar life forms cause everything we see on the moon. The lunas (aka moonshramps) flourish when the sun is closest, not from direct sunlight, but from the ambient heat. The moon isn't being eclipsed by a shadow object, but the lunas are completely dormant.

I think you forgot the part about where you also believe in space unicorns Space Cowgirl.

I would ask if you could even provide a modicum of evidence to prove this, but you've dived so far into fantasy land and so far off topic with this post, I'm afraid your answer would dive into a realm far beyond the imagination of even the most talented science fiction writers.
That isn't a complement. You've probably already read this and taken it as such, so I couldn't convince you otherwise, nor can anyone in this thread, it seems, convince you of your insanity.

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The flat Earth model cannot explain lunar eclipses

« on: May 15, 2016, 10:45:39 PM »

Sorry rabinoz, I don't know the answer. I don't like the shadow object theory! You could join the flat side and make the theory better.

Wow, and you're a recruiter?

I believe there are many areas where the round earth model shine, you're just further proving rainboz point. FET can't explain everything, and it can't even do it well.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: satellites

« on: May 15, 2016, 10:07:32 PM »

Definitely not drones, or any sort of atmospheric vehicle.  We have several databases of satellites and their orbital elements.  You can use these elements to track any satellite yourself.  These elements are not coordinates or anything that could be used for aircraft, but parameters for ellipses. 
This is one of the biggest proofs that the earth is round, and trumps any argument about horizon. 

Blue Moon, I do indeed acknowledge that these tools do exist, and that the data from them is indeed relevant, however, as a human race we seem to be pretty smart. Programming is something we have gotten rather good at, is it not also plausible that we've created a system in which this data is created and automatically sent out as to look and seem real and true to anyone reading. I've perused quite a few threads about satellite threads in search of answers, before I signed up for this Forum, where programming of the apps and the data that was sent was discussed. I'm not a FEr myself, I do however think the government lies, and with todays modern technology it wouldn't be far fetched at all to think that telemetry data is somehow faked from these satellites.

It is my belief that the governments of the world hold technology that is far beyond our comprehension even with all of our knowledge that modern humans hold. I understand your an avid believer and defender of NASA and I'm not attempting to debunk them or anything of that nature, just offering food for thought as it pertains to the thread. (I attempted to shorten quoting to to save space as to not litter the thread with tons of long quotes.)

Not attempting to start a flame war either as it pretains to NASA, again, just food for thought.
So, thoughts Blue Moon? I'm interested to hear back from you, as I'm not scientist. Just an average joe in search of answers. I've seen you post in many threads while searching before I signed up for the Forum as well, so I assume you know more about this subject than I. Partly why I brought it up.

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: mythbusters faking a curved horizon

« on: May 14, 2016, 09:46:13 PM »

How DARE you question mythbusters. Next thing you know you'll be questioning whether the earth is round.

Oh god, I lol'd. Nice sense of humor there.

Indeed OP, I do have to agree with you, the image does look distorted and there is something fishy (fish eye lense) going on in the images you provided. Nice thread.

I however, being a avid fan of the mythbusters am a bit disappointed in them, especially since I started my quest for knowledge. I always viewed them as a beacon of reason and logic, and now I view them more as "meh, cool show." Thanks for sharing.

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Give me one logical reason the earth is flat part 3

« on: May 14, 2016, 09:36:37 PM »

Until ye sail the arctic, pacific, hell all of them oceans, ye don't know that there is an edge to the earth! I however have found no edge other than the deck of my ship. Explain me how that do be possible on a placemat earth like you Cubers think.

This is the most ingenious response I think I've read in the forums as of yet.

OP, I don't think many FE's can give you a convincing answer. If you haven't been blown away by anything in the Wiki as of yet I'm not sure you'll find a convincing answer. There are however some interesting user forums that I've seen posted that attempt a much higher form of math to prove their point, I've seen them mentioned as "alternative FAQ's" you might be able to find them if you search that phrase through the sites search engine, if you quest for answers isn't met here maybe it well be met elsewhere on the internet? Just food for thought.

Best of luck in your quest for the truth OP.

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: UA & Light

« on: May 14, 2016, 09:29:53 PM »

So, reading about the FE theory, I understand how the universal acceleration of 9.8m/s/s is used to give the effect of gravity as opposed to the gravity created by a round earth. I can see how as a human, I would never be able to tell the differenece as they would feel the same.

But surely there is a simple way of differentiating, for example with light. If a beam of light (laser beam maybe) was shot parrallel to the surface of the earth, if the earth was round, this beam of light would gradually head away from the surface, whereas if the earth was flat and accelerating upwards, the beam would head down to the surface as it rose up to meet it?

Surely this is such a simple test, that if the world was flat, someone would have shown it by now?

Unfortunately, if UA was true (I personally don't hold it is), there would be no experimental means to determine the difference. This is known as Einstein's Equivalence principle. If one could show that, they could also show that Relativity was incorrect.

The EP only applies to uniform gravitational fields. The earth's gravitational field has been shown to not be uniform.

You should know by now that claiming "The earth's gravitational field has been shown to not be uniform." stops a thread in its tracks!

Indeed, it is not uniform.
Gravitational acceleration at Palo Alto, CA :
9.78933730054 m/s^2


Gravitational acceleration at Beijing, China :
9.78920541783 m/s^2

Odd yes?

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: satellites

« on: May 14, 2016, 09:26:35 PM »

First off. I don't do drugs. or even drink. Secondly who said anything about blinking lights? This is one of the reasons I know they are not airplanes because they have no blinking lights. Third you don't need a laser rangefinder to determine altitude of these objects. Its obvious that these objects are not planes. Do planes look like moving stars in the night sky? No they don't. A plane is obvious in the night sky. I'm pretty sure I respectfully asked for serious replies only so if you have nothing important to add or have any thought on my question then I would appreciate you troll some where else. I'm not interested in being insulted. Thank you

• jroa doesn't do "respectfully"!
• jroa doesn't do "serious replies"!
• jroa really does "insults" very well! Which is of course against the rules, but being the "Custodian" (floor sweeper), he "interprets" the rules.

I don't think there are any planes flying at or over 50,000 feet? That's been the whole point of my question which you have obviously missed. Particularly commercial aircraft, as cruising altitude for commercial flights is around 35,000 feet with exception to Concorde which was around 60,000 but is irrelevant because they have been grounded for years. So back to my question, your answer is just simply that these objects that I can go outside and see right now flying well above 35,000 feet with no blinking lights moving at incredible speeds in all different directions that appear and look like stars moving across the sky are planes flying around well above normal altitude all of them with there lights shut off? Is That what your suggesting? I suppose if your suggesting these were military planes which as I understand can fly at around 50,000 or higher and would I'm guessing not have to abide by FAA regulations as far as anti-collision lights go? I don't really know but even still that brings up another question. What the heck are these planes doing up there? But I am not convinced that all these objects are planes. I have know idea though what they are? I almost positive they are not satellites, I'm 100% positive they are not commercial aircraft. So what the heck are they?

OP, I grappled with the same question last night as I spent quite a few hours outside from when the sun started to go down until about 12 at night. I found it perplexing that I saw 3 different satellites heading in different directions and asked many of the same questions you are asking right now. "What the fuck are those things?" I don't think I can give an informed answer since I'm on the same page you are right now concerning Satellites.

I have however, before I signed up for the Forum, lurked quite a bit and used the search engine in full. I looked through many Satellite related topics (such as the information we receive from them not being fake because you can download apps on your phone and some such and GPS satellites, which were refuted by FE's saying all GPS is fake ect. ect.)

I think the government is highly involved in such matters as they would have to be to pull of such a monumental feat. However, the technology is around right now to pull of such feats, and since we apparently started shooting space junk into the air on a monumental level, I think the technology has come far. So if the FE's do turn out to be right, I wouldn't be surprised if what we see are akin to some sort of high altitude aircraft. Its all in the realm of possibilities.

Ignore Jroa, I haven't seen him seriously attempt to answer many question. It seems his only goal it to boost his amount of times posted. That however, is just my best guess to his actual motivation here. rainboz is very wise in his/her regard to this matter.

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Hypothesis not Theory

« on: May 14, 2016, 09:08:59 PM »

"A hypothesis is an attempt to explain phenomena. It is a proposal, a guess used to understand and/or predict something. A theory is the result of testing a hypothesis and developing an explanation that is assumed to be true about something."

And there is no proof of any kind that the Earth is flat, and all the testing that has been done has not been put under criticism from actual scientists

Even if it was put forth, it would most likely be laughed at and kept on a shelf somewhere, maybe used as a paper weight. It would be interesting enough to see the FE movement gain so much momentum that a serious study was demanded to be conducted by the population and preformed by modern and accredited scientist. I think the results would be comical at best.

This thread seems more like Troll bait however then an actual discussion. When people throw out "ITS ONLY A THEORY/HYPOTHESIS" people tend to think that takes away merit from actual scientific results and they get all angry and hot headed. This thread seems to be a decent example of such squabbling.

19

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Explain this

« on: May 14, 2016, 09:02:45 PM »

The common answer on uninformed questions like this is "Lurk moar"

Say that you are travelling on a plane leaving from the west coast of the United States and going to Japan which if you look at a map is on the far east of it. Say you are travelling due west from California to Japan. Going by flat Earth logic (judging by the layout of all paper maps), heading due west should bring you to the edge of the earth but that doesn't happen, Instead you safely reach Japan. Now after a search of google maps, the quickest route from California to Tokyo is to go west (plus it makes sense so that you're not sat on a plane for like two days). Why can you travel from California to Tokyo without meeting some sort edge to the earth? Because it's fucking round, plain and simple. It would be the same Leaving California heading west, circling the world and landing back where you left. All of this is possible because the earth is round. If you flat earth people are so sure of your belief, please explain to me why this works, how it is possible to make this journey if the earth is supposedly flat?

OP, you do indeed need to lurk more.

I would suggest you also take a look at the wiki, because if you did, you most likely wouldn't have presented this question.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Circumnavigation&highlight=circumnavigation

Try and see you you can find any north to south or visa versa navigation of the globe! You'll be surprised, most links google gives are very shady and have been put out very recently since the FE model started gaining traction.

Hope this helps OP and best of luck in your search for truth!

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Formation of the flat earth

« on: May 14, 2016, 08:49:43 PM »

Its quite likely the infinite earth always existed. Really this is a silly question - nobody knows how it form and ever could.

I second this notion, OP's question is a bit hard to answer from the context of a FE's perspective. Nay, I think impossible.

Its like asking "why does god exist?" The question itself is a bit counter-intuitive. I do however think it does have merit if one is trying to understand a flat earth.

The best answer I can give, would be that is was formed by some being, or beings, with knowledge and power far beyond our comprehension, the tools necessary to create such a place would be very difficult for a normal human to comprehend, and therefore, very hard to explain how it was all put together in the first place. However, it must have been really fucking hard. My hats off to whomever did it, if the FE's turn to be correct.

21

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why is Earth the only flat planet?

« on: May 14, 2016, 08:43:41 PM »

Why is Earth the only flat planet?  And why does it follow different physics than all the other planets?

OP
Its sad to see 4 people come to the thread and not one attempt to answer your question seriously, and instead poke fun at the words you used.

Why is Earth the only flat planet?
It is my understanding that most modern FE's believe that earth is the only world (you used the word planet and its quite fine.) That all the stars in the sky along with everything you see in the sky is simulated, moon included I believe (opinions differ on how satellites work and the ISS and stuff in space, so I can't comment much on how they wrap their head around the whole "space doesn't exist and satellites aren't real" thing.)
As to why the earth is the only flat place of existence, I've read that most FE's assume the existence of a creator(s). They akin our existence to to us being observed through the dome by some unknown force. Put an impenetrable sky above us we can't penetrate that gets colder the higher we go and less breathable, and put below our feet a crust of considerable distance and increase in temperature as you go further down to stop all those pesky humans in the dome from exploring much up or down. So maybe you answer lies in the question. Why not? A simulated world, real or unreal, can yield some interesting results when played out in full. Maybe we exist as an experiment? I don't actually think a solid answer can be presented to your question until we completely understand the nature of the world we live in. However, it is an interesting question and I hope more attempts are made at it that aren't trolling or poking fun at you.


I do believe the wiki attempts to answer you second question however. It does a decent job as well describing the physics. Hope that helps OP and best of luck in your search for the truth.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=General+Physics&highlight=physics

22

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

« on: May 04, 2016, 09:00:34 PM »

I haven't seen any results of any simulations of any kind so far. To win my Challenge you must show that your figures and descriptions are complete and realistic.
If the simulations, e.g. include a 357.5 seconds blast to produce 97 400 N thrust, burning 10 898 kg of fuel, to get backwards into orbit around the fast moving Moon (in order not to crash on it or miss it) that orbits Earth that orbits the Sun at great speed, the description must also include in what direction the thrust was applied, by whom it was done and how, etc. How was the steering jets controlled so that the rocket thrust was applied in exactly the right direction. I am also interested in how the fuel pump was driven to pump 31 kg/s fuel to the rocket engine. Electric?  From where? Batteries? And at what pressure was the fuel injected? It seems quite complicated to manually steer a spacecraft into Moon orbit and I haven't seen, as said above, any realistic simulations or descriptions of it. The 1969 NASA + Buzz descriptions are a little vague, to say the least. You have to perform better to win my Challenge.

Sense when did the challenge include describing every nut and bolt of the Saturn V and it's payload?  I have completed the challenge as detailed in your website and your website clearly says that completion of the challenge as detailed in your website would make you €1,000,000 richer.  I have completed the challenge alas detailed in your website and now you are not holding up your end of the deal.  How about we have a community vote as to if I won the challenge or not.  Sound fair?

Cast vote for mikeman7918

Rules were clearly stated.

Screen shots of PM for proof further?

23

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

« on: May 04, 2016, 08:56:03 PM »

Nice.  You get to buy everyone a round when you get the money.  (if you get it)

Count me in!

24

Flat Earth General / Re: please papa share your knowledge

« on: May 04, 2016, 08:52:05 PM »

^Has zero banter.

Stanton & Rabinoz are both 'in step' with each other's thoughts; look:

Papa thinks it's the rest of the marching band that is out of step.

"Look mummy everybody's out of step except our John!"[

Lulz!

Back to the Facts you are so desperately trying to astroturf:

Now; seems the only reference to the Buran being in Sydney that I can find is of the OK-GLI jet-powered testbed version being a static exhibition in the year 2000, well after it was retired...

It was bought by an Australian company called Buran Space Corporation, owned by Australian 'astronaut' Paul Scully-Power, allegedly.

Apparently this 'testbed version' could both take off & land under its own power, which came from four jet engines (two of which were rather conveniently in the same position as the 'orbital manouevering system' rocket engines), and was entirely subsonic in all its test flights...

So; a subsonic, jet-powered 'space shuttle'; exactly what I have been claiming.

Sadly, 'SkepticMike' seems to be unavailable for further explanation of exactly what he saw & did in connection with this jet-powered subsonic 'space shuttle'; perhaps he is friends with 'Paul Scully-Power' (lol made-up name!) or something?

Them darn Time Zones again, I bet!

Funny how you ask me to share my knowledge but are so reluctant to share your own, hmm?

Toodle-pip, Hoarders of Shpayze-Wisdom!

I missed two pages of this thread, why do we keep repeating the same thing over and over again? You are starting to let heiwa rub off on you. Apparently if you say the same thing over and over, it will eventually be true?? Are we still on the wing design of the space shuttle?

Just a side note, you really need to come to terms with your mental break in progress....there could still be pills to take that could help before you fall further in the Abyss. Thinking people are other people, seeing things that don't exist, extreme and debilitating paranoia, unable to process any rational thought, non existent reasoning skills, difficulty with even simple day to day activities..... Its time Legba... It's time, and we are here for you. Especially markjo

I think I love you BabyHighSpeed. XD

25

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What Does the Solar System Look Like In the FE Theory? (actual)

« on: May 04, 2016, 08:46:44 PM »

I am not a FE believer, but I do try to keep an open mind, and I was just wondering what the solar system (sun, other planets, etc) would look like in the FE theory. Would all the other planets be flat as well? Or is that just simply not part of FE theory?

(yes I know I've posted this already but someone came along and told me that this was the correct forum to post on, so I took their advice and here I am)

I hope replying with another FAQ is ok, it really attempts to get down to the little extra I think you're looking for. Some links he give don't work for me though.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120423115614/http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewforum.php?f=7


However, from reading, most people have a lot of different actual model's and opinions, even here on the fourms.

In extent, I don't have an actual opinion or concrete idea.

You might also want to check this sites FAQ as well, it a decent read as well.

I hope that helps. Maybe a FE will reply and indulge you further.

26

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Meteors

« on: May 04, 2016, 08:42:37 PM »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2620007/Asteroid-size-bus-grazes-past-Earth-coming-closer-moon-just-days-astronomers-discovered-it.html

I would just like to throw this into the blender. Another example of a asteroid spotted tracked and now with a predicted orbit.

When it gets down to the nitty gritty of the universe like this, I really think this is where a Round Model earth shines. Thanks for the post, this thread showed up in a search.

27

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The horizon is curved.

« on: May 04, 2016, 04:42:25 PM »

I was at an engineering conference last week reviewing several different proposals, one including using new optics technology that utilizes some higher-level math to accurately calculate the radius of the earth.....and it reminded me of this site. I saw all of the evidence for myself, provided by four optical engineers and two mechanical engineers. The sad thing is their months of work would be completely discounted here. Just like these perfectly verifiable pieces of evidence are being discounted. And when given this evidence, FES proponents beat around the bush with it like they went to school for it. I personally have explained refraction effects using basic calculus and nobody ever makes another comment, like it was just dismissed. Really? Its unbelievable the amount of people on this site that will intentionally ignore good evidence for their own reasons, be it ignorance, not wanting to be proved wrong, wanting to feel part of a community, etc. I am just amazed.

"A wise man, when confronted with data that his theory is wrong, does not discount the data.....he changes his theory." -B.T.

Why do FES believers refuse to consider that their theory might be wrong? It isn't good science. In fact, it is terrible science.

Scientists bash FE theory. Call that good science? Even with all the evidence brought forth by some of the very smart people behind the flat earth movement. Math is math is math is math. My brother is studying to become a Nuclear Physicist. I'm not even close to as smart as he is, and I hardly can wrap my head around the basic stuff. Probably what I get from being a drop out. People are here for answers and things they can wrap there head around. Most can't do that with math, no matter how clearly you present it. This is a forum with mostly normal people who haven't done much math after high school. There are however exceptions of course!

You post math, people might read, but it will go over there head. No matter who they are RE or FE believer.

I'm speaking generally of course, and not insulting your intellegince, if anything I'm insulting my intellegince and the intellegence of others who flock to this site. Basically, don't feel bad you make perfectly good topics that are coherently explained and evidence that is presented presently. You just can't end up expecting much from this site in terms of actual science.

FE's don't do many experiments, they cost to much  pretty sure that is someone's signature on here lol

1) Scientists who "bash" FE theory are justified in doing so, not only because it's so easily disproven by those who do know what they're talking about, but also because it doesn't even meet the criteria for a scientific theory.  Theory, yes.  Scientific theory, no.

2) By your own admission, if there are people whose intelligence you aren't even close to, how are you certain that the FE evidence you've seen is presented by "very smart people?"  How are you sure it isn't terrible evidence presented by dumb people?

Honestly. I'm here for the lolz, in my free time I read, and just enjoy the community. It reminds me of the comment section of youtube. Or as stated in another thread 4chan. Its large, varried, and fun to read and learn a little from others. On both sides.

28

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Genuine question

« on: May 04, 2016, 04:32:23 PM »

With the sound down?

Many, many times since childhood. I'm sure the sound was down once or twice, and up at a reasonably loud level other times.

I'm sure for the epic lulz you are about to present me with you'd like another simple answer though, so, yes.

Just ignore Legba.......He is on a mental break and can't help it. Logic, rational thinking, and basic day to day tasks is just a few of the impossibilities he can not perform.

Also don't be surprised if he calls you me. Apparently I am heiwa, markjo, the pope, and queen Latifa. This is just my typical Wednesday. 

Crazy stuff goes down in life :/

  I am a rational tinker. I try. I'm just a normal guy. I'm not crazy, while having heard crazy things.

I think its just a reaction people have.

I once heard of a study where people can never be 100% sure on anything. Doubt can always be presented.

Humans aptitude for great feats and things that boggle the mind and our prespective of the universe, I mean.. The implications, astounding. And I firmly believe there will always be a countious error in the systematic inspection of the human race, and subsequent races into the future. It would not be to insane to say further in the future there will be many other races say 10,000 years from now at possible current expansion. Once we reach another planet, the universe is the limit.

We have no idea what the even means. How we even got here.

Who knows. I love hearing everyone's theories and ideas. Nothing is to crazy to consider. We are all rational people. I have time enough to read the internet.

29

Flat Earth General / Re: please papa share your knowledge

« on: May 03, 2016, 09:41:51 AM »

Althugh we all know you think atoms do exist. You are just trying to start arguments by saying they don't.

No; I'm poking fun at you for the astoundingly ignorant bullshit you come out with.

Cos let's face it, none of your Midwitch Cuckoo JREF scum-hive cohorts will do it.

As for 'atoms'; meh...

The current model's absurd reductionist nonsense, so although there may be some kind of basic building blocks to existence, what you potato-heads think of as 'atoms' ain't it.

This thread sucks btw.

I'm really curious to hear exactly "what" it is you think everything is made of.

I'm sure I won't get a coherent answer though. Maybe it will blow my mind though.

30

Flat Earth General / Re: please papa share your knowledge

« on: May 03, 2016, 09:38:04 AM »

Atoms don't exist.