1
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 03, 2008, 02:31:56 PM »
Which 'hemiplane' is that in.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1] 2
2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 03, 2008, 02:23:37 PM »
I 'get it' now.
3
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Ice Wall!
« on: September 02, 2008, 04:48:35 PM »
Aw come on.
You're laughing, I know you are!!
You're laughing, I know you are!!
4
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Ice Wall!
« on: September 02, 2008, 04:32:35 PM »Would this scene have been as funny with a flat earth and no doubt flat meteor?!
5
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 02, 2008, 04:19:32 PM »
I'm not trying to be argumentative and don't believe that this is an argument but a debate, so.......
Where, precisely can I find examples of an 8,000 mile or 9,000 mile difference?
Also, can you explain what happens when you cross from the 'Northern Hemiplane' to the 'Southern Hemiplane'? Do the GPS devices freak out and need re-calibrated? Because that would surely get peoples attention after the first few incidences I would've thought. I wouldn't imagine it to be a seamless transition.
And to go back to the well that is the 'cheat' scenario, who in the end would they be cheating?? You?? Me?? No, they'd only be cheating themselves, what does that achieve? Cheats/liars are almost always found out. To use this as a theory is akin to having a playground argument. Calling someone a cheat is not evidence, if it was considered so, a lot of lawyers would be out of a job.
I am truly interested in the theory of a 'Flat Earth' but, like any other reasonable person, I need a lot more than 'it is said' and 'they're in on it' to even begin to weigh up what I'm reading. So, again, I put out a plea to a fully fledged FE'r to read my question and pose an answer, if it is along the lines or indeed, identical to Wardogg's then I'll take it from there but until such time.....I think all I'm getting is smoke, mirrors and diversionary tactics from members determined to drag me and other RE'rs into a slanging match.
Where, precisely can I find examples of an 8,000 mile or 9,000 mile difference?
Also, can you explain what happens when you cross from the 'Northern Hemiplane' to the 'Southern Hemiplane'? Do the GPS devices freak out and need re-calibrated? Because that would surely get peoples attention after the first few incidences I would've thought. I wouldn't imagine it to be a seamless transition.
And to go back to the well that is the 'cheat' scenario, who in the end would they be cheating?? You?? Me?? No, they'd only be cheating themselves, what does that achieve? Cheats/liars are almost always found out. To use this as a theory is akin to having a playground argument. Calling someone a cheat is not evidence, if it was considered so, a lot of lawyers would be out of a job.
I am truly interested in the theory of a 'Flat Earth' but, like any other reasonable person, I need a lot more than 'it is said' and 'they're in on it' to even begin to weigh up what I'm reading. So, again, I put out a plea to a fully fledged FE'r to read my question and pose an answer, if it is along the lines or indeed, identical to Wardogg's then I'll take it from there but until such time.....I think all I'm getting is smoke, mirrors and diversionary tactics from members determined to drag me and other RE'rs into a slanging match.
6
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 02, 2008, 10:39:39 AM »
Wardogg, based on your link to the other thread here, I can't take what you offer as 'theories' as anything other than an attempt to rile me.
Can anyone else offer an alternative theory?!
Can anyone else offer an alternative theory?!
7
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 02, 2008, 10:17:09 AM »
I'm not buying that. We've been through the whole 'casting aspersions' and 'conspiracy theory'.
Generally, you can try and discredit anything or anyone by saying they 'cheated'. Did Usain Bolt 'cheat' his way to the 100 metres gold medal and world record?!
The whole 'cheat' thing is a total cop-out and reflects badly on the Flat Earth Society.
I'm disappointed, I really am.
Generally, you can try and discredit anything or anyone by saying they 'cheated'. Did Usain Bolt 'cheat' his way to the 100 metres gold medal and world record?!
The whole 'cheat' thing is a total cop-out and reflects badly on the Flat Earth Society.
I'm disappointed, I really am.
8
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 02, 2008, 10:05:40 AM »
We seem to be losing sight of the original question?!
Or is that the idea?!
Or is that the idea?!
9
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:55:40 PM »
Right, come on then, seeing as I've got the two of you here, what are your opinions/theories on my question!?
10
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:46:09 PM »
I'm with Gobsmacked.
I've got to admit, it's not very ladylike.
I've got to admit, it's not very ladylike.
11
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic.....again
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:23:20 PM »
Good shout Professor,
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22893.0
This is what has passed previously on this subject/topic, it's a question asked in good faith but yet to receive a credible response.
I look forward to hearing from you.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22893.0
This is what has passed previously on this subject/topic, it's a question asked in good faith but yet to receive a credible response.
I look forward to hearing from you.
12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:17:19 PM »
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=22948.0
Thanks Professor G.C., hopefully we'll get somewhere now.
Thanks Professor G.C., hopefully we'll get somewhere now.
13
Flat Earth Q&A / Tripping the Light Fantastic.....again
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:15:00 PM »
I posted this in General Discussion but was 'advised' to post it here.
New to the forum, I appreciate this question I'm going to ask will have been answered previously but I don't have the time or the inclination to find it. Anyway, here goes;
Now, I'm assuming that if the earth is flat then the distance we can travel in one direction is finite. Therefore, how can one 'circumnavigate' the 'globe'? I appreciate that sending someone into space to prove or disprove one or other theory is far too expensive but surely it would be easy enough for one FE'r and one RE'r to set off in one direction and not stop until they either fell off or arrived back in the same place??
I've read other topics and questions are usually answered with a sprinkling of sarcasm, abuse and general put downs. Given that I've used none of the above, I'd be grateful if this question was answered without any either. After all, we live in a society.
Thank you.
I've been to the FAQ's on numerous occasions but can't find a specific answer to my question.
New to the forum, I appreciate this question I'm going to ask will have been answered previously but I don't have the time or the inclination to find it. Anyway, here goes;
Now, I'm assuming that if the earth is flat then the distance we can travel in one direction is finite. Therefore, how can one 'circumnavigate' the 'globe'? I appreciate that sending someone into space to prove or disprove one or other theory is far too expensive but surely it would be easy enough for one FE'r and one RE'r to set off in one direction and not stop until they either fell off or arrived back in the same place??
I've read other topics and questions are usually answered with a sprinkling of sarcasm, abuse and general put downs. Given that I've used none of the above, I'd be grateful if this question was answered without any either. After all, we live in a society.
Thank you.
I've been to the FAQ's on numerous occasions but can't find a specific answer to my question.
14
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 03:09:14 PM »
Who is Tom Bishop?
15
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 02:18:31 PM »
I'm taking the silence following Gobsmacked's last post as a tacit admission, that excluding Wardogg's stirring (kudos on that by the way!), no-one has a legitimate answer to my original question.
Backed up, of course by cold, hard facts and not by casting aspersions on people/groups/organisations for being 'in on the conspiracy theory'.
Backed up, of course by cold, hard facts and not by casting aspersions on people/groups/organisations for being 'in on the conspiracy theory'.
16
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 01:52:10 PM »
Agreed.
17
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 01:39:47 PM »
I'm beginning to think I've been taken for a prize prick.
18
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 01:28:14 PM »
Wardog, you have confused me. In this topic you seem to be advocating the flat earth model but in the linked topic you seem to be doing the opposite.
I don't know what to take from this, are you FE'r or RE'r?? Or is this site/forum simply a means to wind people and provoke debate/conversation/argument?!
I don't know what to take from this, are you FE'r or RE'r?? Or is this site/forum simply a means to wind people and provoke debate/conversation/argument?!
19
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 12:45:43 PM »
OK, fair enough. I just wondered how the latitudes and longitudes were applied.
The distance given in kilometres show a discrepancy of about 76,000 between the circumference of a flat earth and the distance covered by McArthur (I'm sticking to using her as an example as it's where this started). Any reference to her journey shows approximately the same distance covered.
I think we can forgive whoever wrote the article for rounding either up or down (rounding down I think) the distance covered as I'm sure the circumference of a flat Earth is not exactly 126,000km, in fact I think it says as much in the Wikipedia article.
'The modern Flat Earth Society describes the Earth as being a disc with a diameter of about 40,000 km (24,900 miles) and a circumference of 126,000 km (78,225 miles).'
To say 'she must be mistaken' is a huge slap in the face to her and her team. The instruments used in a journey of this type (the difference, sometimes between life and death) would have to be calibrated to incredibly fine margins and to suggest that they could be out by such a large distance is not worth considering.
I'm not saying the Wikipedia article should be taken as gospel but as there are no references to distances on the main site, it's all I've got to use.
The distance given in kilometres show a discrepancy of about 76,000 between the circumference of a flat earth and the distance covered by McArthur (I'm sticking to using her as an example as it's where this started). Any reference to her journey shows approximately the same distance covered.
I think we can forgive whoever wrote the article for rounding either up or down (rounding down I think) the distance covered as I'm sure the circumference of a flat Earth is not exactly 126,000km, in fact I think it says as much in the Wikipedia article.
'The modern Flat Earth Society describes the Earth as being a disc with a diameter of about 40,000 km (24,900 miles) and a circumference of 126,000 km (78,225 miles).'
To say 'she must be mistaken' is a huge slap in the face to her and her team. The instruments used in a journey of this type (the difference, sometimes between life and death) would have to be calibrated to incredibly fine margins and to suggest that they could be out by such a large distance is not worth considering.
I'm not saying the Wikipedia article should be taken as gospel but as there are no references to distances on the main site, it's all I've got to use.
20
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: September 01, 2008, 12:08:51 PM »
Wardog, can you point me in the direction of a detailed flat earth map, containing latitudes and longitudes. I'm working from the image on Wikipedia and a better example would be appreciated.
Cheers.
Cheers.
21
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: August 31, 2008, 03:49:42 PM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society
I'm applying her route to the map in the top right of the page. Correlating her route with that map she sailed near the outer between New Zealand and Cape Horn and between the Cape of Good Hope and New Zealand. That's approx 75% of the map sailed near the outer rim. Which in itself is approx. 95,000km. That's still a pretty big overshoot on the actual sailed distance.
I may be wrong but that's what I take from it.
I'm applying her route to the map in the top right of the page. Correlating her route with that map she sailed near the outer between New Zealand and Cape Horn and between the Cape of Good Hope and New Zealand. That's approx 75% of the map sailed near the outer rim. Which in itself is approx. 95,000km. That's still a pretty big overshoot on the actual sailed distance.
I may be wrong but that's what I take from it.
22
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: August 31, 2008, 03:27:21 PM »
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/other_sports/sailing/3979161.stm
Applying this route to the flat world model it basically shows her sailing close to the outer rim for most of the journey.
Which brings me back to the missing 76,000km, give or take.
Applying this route to the flat world model it basically shows her sailing close to the outer rim for most of the journey.
Which brings me back to the missing 76,000km, give or take.
23
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: August 31, 2008, 03:16:39 PM »
Because, looking at the rendered image of the flat earth model on Wikipedia it's the only clear way to sail round the world, so to speak.
Looking at it further, distance could be saved by navigating the myriad of small islands in South East Asia but the time consuming manner and expertise required to do this would doubtless render it pointless.
Even if she were to hug the coastline, I'm doubtful that it would save 76,000km.
Looking at it further, distance could be saved by navigating the myriad of small islands in South East Asia but the time consuming manner and expertise required to do this would doubtless render it pointless.
Even if she were to hug the coastline, I'm doubtful that it would save 76,000km.
24
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: August 31, 2008, 03:05:06 PM »
I know but given that she would have had to sail on the outer rim to get all the way round, the distance covered would be pretty close to the given circumference of the flat earth model.
The stated figures of the actual distance sailed is considerably less than that.
The stated figures of the actual distance sailed is considerably less than that.
25
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: And another thing......
« on: August 31, 2008, 02:53:12 PM »
I'm referring to my other thread.
26
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: And another thing......
« on: August 31, 2008, 02:50:24 PM »
It's seems to have generated quite a following though. I must say though I'm still 100% convinced that the Earth is round.
I'll give you your dues though Saddam, you're the most rounded (see what I did there!!) person whose replied to my posts. Unlike some others who are too quickly onto the defensive.
No resorting to sarcasm or plain rude-ness, good manners breeds good manners and they don't cost anything. I'm just trying to understand the in's and out's!!
I'll give you your dues though Saddam, you're the most rounded (see what I did there!!) person whose replied to my posts. Unlike some others who are too quickly onto the defensive.
No resorting to sarcasm or plain rude-ness, good manners breeds good manners and they don't cost anything. I'm just trying to understand the in's and out's!!
27
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: And another thing......
« on: August 31, 2008, 02:35:10 PM »
Fair enough.
However, that opens up a whole other set of questions. Why, if this has been going on so long and is such a widely held opinion has no-one in any government or in the worldwide media asked serious questions of the Space Agencies involved?
However, that opens up a whole other set of questions. Why, if this has been going on so long and is such a widely held opinion has no-one in any government or in the worldwide media asked serious questions of the Space Agencies involved?
28
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Atmosphere??
« on: August 31, 2008, 02:28:22 PM »
I've heard/read differing versions about 'The Ice Wall'.
A mountain range covered in ice mainly but having seen the post pictures of it, it's of a fairly uniform height and very flat.
In fact it reminds me a lot of coastline.
A mountain range covered in ice mainly but having seen the post pictures of it, it's of a fairly uniform height and very flat.
In fact it reminds me a lot of coastline.
29
Flat Earth Q&A / And another thing......
« on: August 31, 2008, 02:21:57 PM »
Whilst being directed to the FAQ's (again) I read that the government's of the world are holding information from us that would prove the Earth to be flat. The reason given for this is vague but is provisionally given as 'money'.
Now, as we all know, by and large, governments have no concerns over money, as even the most unscrupulous (Zimbabwe for example) can print money and inject it into their economy for various reasons.
As far as I can tell if it was to become known that the Earth was indeed flat, a lot of people would stand to make a lot of money out of it. This would obviously would include governments and various people in them.
Additionally, the amount of money that would have to be spent developing the technology to continually fool us into believing the Earth is round would simply not be worth it. It can't be cheap to try to fool the world's population and even then it would appear they've not succeeded.
So, to my mind, for the (only) reason for a cover up to be given as 'money' doesn't add up for me. It smacks a bit of 'we need a reason' and 'money' fitted best.
Again, I'm an open-minded person who is willing to listen to your views on this, however I've refrained from swearing and mocking tones and I expect to be afforded the same courtesy. We live in a society.
Now, as we all know, by and large, governments have no concerns over money, as even the most unscrupulous (Zimbabwe for example) can print money and inject it into their economy for various reasons.
As far as I can tell if it was to become known that the Earth was indeed flat, a lot of people would stand to make a lot of money out of it. This would obviously would include governments and various people in them.
Additionally, the amount of money that would have to be spent developing the technology to continually fool us into believing the Earth is round would simply not be worth it. It can't be cheap to try to fool the world's population and even then it would appear they've not succeeded.
So, to my mind, for the (only) reason for a cover up to be given as 'money' doesn't add up for me. It smacks a bit of 'we need a reason' and 'money' fitted best.
Again, I'm an open-minded person who is willing to listen to your views on this, however I've refrained from swearing and mocking tones and I expect to be afforded the same courtesy. We live in a society.
30
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic
« on: August 31, 2008, 01:47:23 PM »
The weather is fine thanks, been raining but dried up now. How's it where you are?!
Now, about this question, I've hunted high and low for an answer (or failing that a theory) for where these missing kilometres went.
Now, about this question, I've hunted high and low for an answer (or failing that a theory) for where these missing kilometres went.
Pages: [1] 2