1

Flat Earth Debate / One of Toms posts, and the 100 proofs thing

« on: November 26, 2008, 05:20:45 AM »

In http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=20927.0 tom posted....

If the earth was a globe surveyors would make allowance for the earth's curvature

From "100 Proofs the earth is not a globe" by William Carpenter:

      3. Surveyors' operations in the construction of railroads, tunnels, or canals are conducted without the slightest "allowance" being made for "curvature," although it is taught that this so-called allowance is absolutely necessary! This is a cutting proof that Earth is not a globe.

Shame really. Perhaps Tom you would like to look at the construction of the Humber bridge then?

From Wiki...
The towers, although both vertical, are not parallel, being 36 millimetres (1.4 in) further apart at the top than the bottom as a result of the curvature of the earth.[4]

From http://www.humberbridge.co.uk/interest.php
The bridge towers are 36mm (1.4 inches) further apart at the top than the bottom to take account of the curvature of the earth.

So, this would then be 'cutting proof' that the Earth IS a globe. Thanks Tom.

Pwned.

2

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Global warming

« on: November 17, 2008, 07:42:33 AM »

The ice wall was never mountainous on photos that have appeared here before. Also, isn't it so cool and fortuitous that there is a ring of mountains at the edge of the entire 'disc' of the earth that is high enough to keep the seas in!

Fail!

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: I have a few questions chaps...

« on: October 24, 2008, 05:02:49 AM »

Aarron,

I think their ideas are nutty too. However, I do have one big sympathy with them... read the FAQs, and read through a few threads. I think that they are bunkum, but it doesn't do anyone any good, them or us to keep covering the same thing again and again.  I read masses here before posting, and I am still sure most I post has been covered.

As they said, "Lurk Moar" LOL

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: GPS again.

« on: October 24, 2008, 12:28:40 AM »

So Tom the US Air force is in on it as well. It would appear that you are the only person who isn't part of the conspiracy!

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: ships disappearing over horizon

« on: October 23, 2008, 02:28:48 AM »

So Osama, are you suggesting that actual stars fly across the sky in a few minutes? He was just pointing out that they look like stars, i.e. points of light although they don't twinkle.

If you want to see the ISS, have a look at http://www.heavens-above.com/ You can put in your location and see when it next passes over and is extremely accurate.

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise / sunsets

« on: October 22, 2008, 11:12:11 AM »

Thanks bweezo, that makes a lot more sense than most of the BS on this site!

7

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof of Conspiracy

« on: October 22, 2008, 01:30:07 AM »

First of all, thanks! For replying and addressing each point. At least by doing that we are having a proper discussion.

I had thought all FErs believed in the ice wall, but I have had a look at your link. I understand where you are coming from even though I disagree. Pressure tries to equalise, therefore out atmosphere would rush away.

Ditto sky mirror. I thought all FErs believed in that. You don't, good call as it would appear highly suspect and 'convenient'!!

Bendy light. You assume that earth is flat and therefore come up with BL as a solution. OK, that is a theory, but in science you need to be able to test and retest to validate a theory. Right now you appear to be saying here is a theory of bendy light which proves flat earth can work. We can prove the theory because the Earth is flat! Running round in circles there mate.

The moons phases. Stand in a dark room with a torch shining towards you and hold out a tennis ball at arms length. Rotate slowly and you can see the ball lit in phases in exactly the same way as the moon is. This can be demonstrated, is simple, and matches visible behaviour of the moon. You propose an unknown mechanism of altitude changes (leaving aside laser distancing of the moon) and even accepting an unknown mechanism for the changes,  fail to see how you can produce the phases we see. I therefore posit that the conventional moon orbits the earth theory the much simpler explanation.

Ice guards... OK

Maps. Why is the true layout unknown? We have GPS (forget sats vs strats for a moment!), we have lots of technology that enables us to map the world. We need to be able to find our way from place to place and seem to be able to fly say London to Sydney without getting lost. So why cant we make a simple map?

'Dark Energy'. Why propose this? If you use gravitational equations, you can calculate how far a ball will go and its trajectory when thrown. Aha you say, but this is true for eart upwards theory. Yes, granted, but using those same equations, you can predict when sattelites will pass over head, the movement of the moons of other planets, the path of comets etc. All down to gravitational theory. So, one set of equations can show how everything in the heavens move like clockwork, predictably time after time, or we can accept that 'something' unseen, untested and possibly unknowable pushes the whole planet for no readily apparent reason!

So you can't 'see' gravity and therefore you think it must be the earth rushing up keeping you pinned to it...ok, so what keeps the atmosphere on venus, mars etc? Love? Nope, the same gravity that keeps us down.

What about comet shoemaker-levy that struck jupiter? The entire path of the comet was calculated and a date and time for impact into Jupiter was calculated using orbital mechanics - gravity. Wow, lo and behold it hit. Perhaps a lucky guess?

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof of Conspiracy

« on: October 22, 2008, 12:14:10 AM »

Blind Faith is ignorance. An appeal to an authority is ignorance. I don't care if the belief is in magical sky fairies, Santa Clause, or a Round Earth. Any time one puts his blind faith into something he has not tested and observed for his own self, he is exercising a despicable form of ignorance which has corrupted civilization again and again since the dawn of time.

So you have been to the Ice wall Bish? You have photos or film of it I presume. I want to know about the 'sky mirror', how you know light is bendy. Who builds all these stratolites? How can a spotlight moon have phases, or the rising/setting sun light the underneath of clouds. Why hasn't a single guard of the ice wall ever,ever blown the whistle on this conspiracy? Why has nobody ever been able to produce a proper map of the flat earth? What is pushing the Earth ever upwards?

I can't wait to see the answers and proof of all this, because after all, someone who "puts his blind faith into something he has not tested and observed for his own self, [he] is exercising a despicable form of ignorance which has corrupted civilization again and again since the dawn of time.]"

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Conspiritory Conspiracy

« on: October 21, 2008, 01:50:21 PM »

I can't remember who peer reviewed "Earth Not a Globe". Maybe Tom can tell us?

After Rowbotham published ENAG there was a monthly journal published called "Earth Not a Globe Review" which peer reviewed Rowbotham's claims.

What unconnected third-party peer reviewed NASA's claims?

Hmmm, hardly looks as though it was independent peer review does it Bish?

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise / sunsets

« on: October 21, 2008, 01:37:51 PM »

But is the sun like Apple Crumble as well? If so, where does the double cream come into it? Also, do you still see the Sun if you have eaten too much roast dinner, or is it perhaps better to let the meal go down and then take Apple Crumble/Sunset photos?

Yours Earnestly waiting for answers,

Winky

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: mars, earth, and their orbits.

« on: October 21, 2008, 02:15:12 AM »

Rowbotham may have been wrong about his figure.

Surely not??? 

Was his work not peer reviewed by the scientific community then?

 

12

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise / sunsets

« on: October 21, 2008, 02:09:17 AM »

Nice image Rasta. Also, at sunrise and sunset, any clouds are often lit by the sun... from underneath! In a FE universe, the sun would be getting further and further away, but the angle could never change enough so the sunlight lights the bottom of clouds at all. A win for RE! QED

eg...

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: GPS again.

« on: October 20, 2008, 02:09:50 AM »

You guys really are funny. Stratollites instead of satellites? You do realise that Stratollites themselves require GPS in order to keep themselves in a known position?  From your own wiki link...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratellite (Performance section)
Navigation: 6 onboard GPS units connected to the ship's engines

So, your argument that GPS works using stratollites is a bit daft as stratollites use GPS (from satellites!)

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Doppler shift and the distance to the moon

« on: October 20, 2008, 01:39:11 AM »

Never mind Doppler shifts, why doesn't the light bend, after all the light from the stars etc 'apparently' bend all over the place
 

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: atmosphere

« on: October 19, 2008, 07:44:06 AM »

Hi all,

another atmosphere related problems with FE...

Assuming the atmosphere is more than 150ft thick (which it must be or people would asphyxiate on hills let alone mountains!), then what stops the atmosphere 'spilling' over the ice wall and bleeding away into space behind us.