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.
I have a new sig.I saw your avatar and I could only think of one thing...
Also,hum, witch brings me to wonder, dose bleaving the earth is flat affect peoples religion?Spelling is important.
The South Pole is a wall of ice that runs along the outer edge of a disk-shaped flat Earth. The entire thing has a magnetic charge opposite that of the North Pole, which is in the center of the circle.How is the magnetic field here generated?
i hope that one day you see that all sciences and theories about the universe come from the flat earth society...it includes envoys, messengers, prophets and God. I shouldn't hope this for you...you will see itI'm going to just put this in here....
Special relativity would disagree with you.(i think....)It sure is right according to Einstein.Is time constant? Yes.
See, the way it works is this: you want to know about the who, what, when, where, why, how of the conspiracy. Everyone directs to to the FAQ, claiming that all answers lie within. What you read in the FAQ is that NASA, not the government, is responsible for the conspiracy. They provide a link to another flat earth society thread where a guy speculates about how NASA could pull it off. Part of this speculation (not proof, mind you), suggests that you would be able to cover it up by paying off a grand total of 40 individuals world-wide. This includes high-ups in the NASA program, russian program, and chinese program. It also includes some (not all) astronauts and counts them only as half-people (I guess because anyone with actual evidence who is not implicit in the conspiracy would somehow be less likely to want to talk about how their years of training and lifetime dedication to becoming an astronaut were all based on lies--makes sense, I guess). It also includes a few other people.You just made my day.
They will suggest that other people in NASA don't need to be paid off because they don't have direct evidence--they just sit behind desks and see what the rest of us see. Of course, what they don't mention is that, even though they don't need to be "bought off," they still need to be paid, because, hello people, that's their job! People don't gain employment with NASA just for the love of sitting behind a desk and seeing what the rest of us see. And I imagine that these NASA control room people make a pretty good salary.
You will then go to other threads where they suggest that any university that is conducting research that verifies a round Earth is a part of the conspiracy or is conducting research using money that comes from NASA. Well, first of all, that is a lot of universities--including many, many universities that are not a part of the US, Russia, or China. It's also a lot of "fake research" that needs to be funded. The "Conspiracy Thread" never accounts for the vast sums of money that required to fund this research, nor does it consider that anyone who has ever looked through one of these huge university telescopes (more grad students than we can count) would have definitive evidence of either a round or flat earth that was every bit as compelling as an astronaut's evidence.
You will also find threads whereby it is suggested that all of the launches that NASA (and undoubtedly other space programs) conduct are staged. While these launches all have large audiences of people who come to see the liftoff, FEers will tell you that these launches are meant to dupe those people. The crafts don't actually go into space, but only pretend to do so, then land in an alternate location. The problem again is that the "Conspiracy Thread" never accounts for the cost of these faked launches in its figuring. Those fake launches still cost a lot of money in terms of building the crafts, paying employees, burning fuel, etc. There still need to be people manning both the launch site, and the alternative landing site. Since the people at the landing site know "the truth," they would then become people who needed to be paid off.
All of this operates under the absurd notion that you could pay a person off for the Dr. Evil-esque sum of $1 million. You know, "$1 million dollars isn't exactly a lot of money now-a-days. Virtucon alone makes $9 billion a year." If I were one of the 40, I'd think about...unionizing or something.
Anyway, this entire site and all the FEers on it rely on you not being able to navigate through the vast sea of convoluted arguments made here, and then actually put them together to realize how implausible their so-called "theory" is.
You just have to look at it as having fun reading some really ridiculous banter and leave it at that.
However much I hate everything you believe in regarding FET, your sig = winI move for a Flat Sun Theory(FST)
Go make your own forum then. This site is about FET.
You REALLY expect people to believe you with an answer like this?If I was to dig a hole straight down (lets not bring on another discussion of straight lines) would i eventually fall through the bottom of the earth?Unknown.
Holy hell. I just saw in another thread that robosteve had 13000 posts and thought he had to have the most on the site. How do you manage over FORTY THOUSAND posts?
You can't leave me
Antarctica exists in FET. Please lurk more.
Q: "Why doesn't water run off the Earth?"
A: There is a vast ice wall that keeps the water where it is. The ice wall is roughly 150ft high. This also explains why you can find a vast plane of ice when you travel south. Antarctica as a continent does not exist.
fixdwell thats quite a stupid topic because i think some people would realise that they have fallen of the earth wen they went to the north pole. and dont u think after 400 and something years people would descover the world is flat and that they have been lied to?English mother fucker, do you speak it?
Down syndrome isn't caused by a genetic trait...its a mutation in meiosis causing 3 chromosomes on the 21st pair.Well that didint explain anything. How is my birth a miracle? oO
Because two people with genes susceptible to down syndrome found each other and had you?
My point was that Waste of Mind was asking how the RET sun was different than the FET sun.QuoteYes, actually the RET sun is much different. If you have a star fusing hydrogen into helium only 3000 miles above the Earth, we would all have been incinerated.
Only if this sun was the unbelievably large object depicted in RET.
What would the correct equation be?QuoteThen how has the Earth not reached close to light speed yet? If the Earth/the universe have existed for 6000 years (EXTREMELY conservative estimate) and the UA has been accelerating the earth by 9.8m/s^2 for the entire 6000 years, the earth should currently be going 1.764x10^12 m/s. The speed of light is 3.0x10^8m/s. Explain.
You aren't using the correct equation to ascertain the current velocity of the earth.
I was not necessarily saying that quantity equals quality. My general idea was that because nobody here is qualified to spot a doctored photo and you do not have definitive evidence of a NASA conspiracy, you cannot automatically assume them all false. Plenty of people in the world are fully qualified to claim that ghosts are a physical impossibility. Because you cannot claim all photos to be false, the next best thing we have to go off of is the probability that they are false; even with a 99% chance that each picture of the round Earth from space is false, the probability that all of them are false is astronomically low.QuoteThis is your "average" picture of a round Earth. There are 123 million of these on Google alone.
So if there is a lot of something, it must be authentic? There are millions of people who have seen ghosts, ergo ghosts are real and scientifically valid.
QuoteThen how has the Earth not reached close to light speed yet? If the Earth/the universe have existed for 6000 years (EXTREMELY conservative estimate) and the UA has been accelerating the earth by 9.8m/s^2 for the entire 6000 years, the earth should currently be going 1.764x10^12 m/s. The speed of light is 3.0x10^8m/s. Explain.
Please educate yourself by reading the FAQ.
Q: "Doesn't this mean we'd be traveling faster than the speed of light, which is impossible?"
A: The equations of Special Relativity prevent an object from accelerating to the speed of light. Due to this restriction, these equations prove that an object can accelerate at a constant rate forever, and never reach the speed of light. For an in depth explanation: Click here.
I looked at that link and it was a joke. Its entire argument is that from our reference point on Earth, the Earth is not moving. The reference point is irrelevant. Speed is still speed; if you go from point A to point B in X time your speed does not change if you are the object moving or if a planet you are standing on is moving. The speed of an object in motion is constant regardless of reference point. My point still remains that if the Earth were accelerating at 9.8m/s^2, after 6000 years the Earth would be traveling several hundred thousand meters per second FASTER than the speed of light.
Which chemical reactions exactly, and how have the reactants lasted for so long? Even by the most conservative estimates, the Earth is at least 6000 years old. You'd be hard-pressed to find a reaction that releases light and heat and lasts for that long.Yes, actually the RET sun is much different. If you have a star fusing hydrogen into helium only 3000 miles above the Earth, we would all have been incinerated. What reactions take place in the FET sun? Is the sun solid, liquid, or gas? If it is fluid, what holds it together, if not gravity? If it is solid how does the reaction give us light if only the reactions taking place on the surface can be seen? Because the moon is "know" to be solid and according to FET, releases its own light, what reactions take place on the moon and how is it still visible if only reactions taking place on the surface are visible? Its reactants on its surface should have run out long ago.
The sun in RET is any different?
I personally believe it is "protected" by a few planes and some radar. But anyway, why would someone follow, what they presume to be, an ice shelf for 50-100 miles?Why not? What if they were a research team looking for a way into what they think is Antarctica because they can't get a ship over a 150 ft wall of ice?
-If the force acting as *gravity* is the universal acceleration then I am already moving at this speed. Assuming air resistance is negligible, if I jump I will be artificially increasing my speed such that I should be traveling faster than the UA. Should I not fly away from or above the Earth if there is no force pulling me back down?Then how has the Earth not reached close to light speed yet? If the Earth/the universe have existed for 6000 years (EXTREMELY conservative estimate) and the UA has been accelerating the earth by 9.8m/s^2 for the entire 6000 years, the earth should currently be going 1.764x10^12 m/s. The speed of light is 3.0x10^8m/s. Explain.
Do you understand how UA works? The earth is constantly increasing in speed.
It has to do with special relativity. The FAQ has a link to a better, and more detailed explanation.I looked at that link and it was a joke. Its entire argument is that from our reference point on Earth, the Earth is not moving. The reference point is irrelevant. Speed is still speed; if you go from point A to point B in X time your speed does not change if you are the object moving or if a planet you are standing on is moving. The speed of an object in motion is constant regardless of reference point. My point still remains that if the Earth were accelerating at 9.8m/s^2, after 6000 years the Earth would be traveling several hundred thousand meters per second FASTER than the speed of light.
And why do you not accept photographic evidence? Do you have a legitimate reason? Or is it, as I suspect, that the Flat Earth Society was founded in the mid to late 1800s and did not want to accept being wrong when our technology advanced?
What if you assume there is equal chance for the Earth to be round or flat? Remove bias from your answer and due to the sheer number of pictures (not all pictures come from NASA) it is highly likely (99.9+ %) that at least one picture/video of a round Earth is legitimate.
This point is moot on this website. We do not accept photographic evidence as proof.
Do you realize that thousand upon thousands of people have seen this site?Quote-If NASA indeed has the resources and willingness to deceive the entire human race and has faked thousands upon thousands of photos and videos, surely they can make one small website disappear without arousing suspicion. If they have the resources you claim they do then they are as close to god as any human being or organization will ever be. If what you say about their size and power is true this website should have been shut down long ago.Could NASA not pay you or threaten to kill you or anyone else who has seen this site if you say anything? They could easily find a way to keep your mouth shut if they wanted to. This is an extremely small website on a global scale and would be relatively easy to cover up, especially if NASA is as large and powerful as stated in other threads.
It would raise suspicion no matter how strong NASA is. Strength does not give you the ability to wipe memories. Also, the website would be put back up.
It would if you intended to cross oceans with it. You're not going to throw some p.o.s craft together with little strings and a couple of tree trunks and cross the ocean. Along with being able to store enough food for the trip, hopefully some form of steering, and blind luck that you don't go in circles, you would need a minimum of 2-300 to not have those that land successfully on a new continent die out gradually. You cannot repopulate with fewer than 200-300, and even that is stretching it.Has anyone actually verified that dinosaurs arms and/or legs have the range of motion required for boat building?
And what would be wrong with using mouth and neck? Like number4 said, it wouldn't have to be pretty.
I wasn't referring to NASA or the USSR, I was referring to the thousands of physicists and geologists who have confirmed that the rocks are from the moon or some extraterrestrial origin.QuoteMy idea of credible evidence is that it stands up to scrutiny and comes from a believably reputable source.
There are the claims of countless geologists who have studied the moon rocks. Rocks from the moon can be compared to rocks known to be asteroids to confirm that they are in fact, not from Earth.
I have a hard time agreeing that NASA and the Soviet Union are "believably reputable source(s)"? Rare or unknown minerals are not defacto extraterrestrial minerals.QuoteObscured by the Earth rather.QuoteThe definition of a lunar eclipse is that the moon has been obscured by the sun.I've never seen the sun obscure the moon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_eclipseQuoteIts position is know, it just can't be seen because it has been obscured by the Earth's "shadow".QuoteIf you saw the moon then it wasn't a total lunar eclipse.Even during a total lunar eclipse the location of the moon is known.QuoteHave you admitted yours?QuoteI'm no physicist myself so I won't claim to know exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to things like Dark Energy. I choose to believe that vast number of trained, professional physicists rather than the small number of people studying the flat Earth.At least you've admitted your bias.QuoteIf your vision range is limited by the availability of light shouldn't you see a gradual darkening of the Earth rather than a bright Earth contrasted by a pitch black surrounding?QuoteEverybody else here doesHigh altitude photos may depict the curved edge of the disc or the boundary of the lit portion of the surface.If you don't believe they are all fake then some of them must be at least partially true. How do you explain a "true" picture of a spherical Earth?
QuoteI'd say I know for certain that the Earth is round because all modern technology, engineering, and physics are based on the assumption that the Earth is a sphere. You do have a point though that I can't claim to be 100% sure...QuoteMy point is that you have not been in space and thus cannot know for certain whether or not the Earth is flat or round.Yet you persistently tell me that you know for certain it is round.
My list of parts is not final, so if you guys have any suggestions, you should tell me.What kind of budget do you have?
My idea of credible evidence is that it stands up to scrutiny and comes from a believably reputable source.QuoteI did the google search and found no credible evidence. I did however end up getting reminded that NASA brought down "moon rocks"(800lbs of them) and they have been studied for more than 30 years by geologists with no affiliation to NASA. The compounds existent in moon rocks are not present on Earth. The rocks could not have been faked.
I find it unlikely you looked at the information contained in those links in toto. Nor do I think your idea of "credible evidence" is less biased than mine. The discovery of new and rare minerals is not a spartan occurrence. There is no evidence beyond the claims of the Soviets and NASA these rocks are from the moon.
The definition of a lunar eclipse is that the moon has been obscured by the sun. If you saw the moon then it wasn't a total lunar eclipse. If the Sun and moon are above the Earth at the same height, how does the moon get obscured?QuoteExplain eclipses. I thought that explanation was the whole reason for the shadow object in FET.
A solar eclipse occurs when the moon interposes itself between the sun and the observer on earth. A lunar eclipse is the result of destructive interference. We know the lunar eclipse is not caused by the earth's shadow as the sun and moon have been observed in the sky at the same time during a lunar eclipse.
I'm no physicist myself so I won't claim to know exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to things like Dark Energy. I choose to believe that vast number of trained, professional physicists rather than the small number of people studying the flat Earth.QuoteHow does DE work?QuoteHow does Dark Energy work in RE dynamics?Dark Energy is theorized to be energy left over from the big bang.
Everybody else here doesQuoteTextbook example of dodging a question. Photographic and video evidence is accepted in court because it IS possible to analyze pictures and videos to see if they were faked. More often than not, pictures and videos are legitimate and were not faked. Unless the FES has someone who is qualified to review pictures and videos to determine legitimacy you are really in no position to say that ALL pictures and videos can be (and therefore are) fake.But I never claimed all pictures and videos are fake.
If you don't believe they are all fake then some of them must be at least partially true. How do you explain a "true" picture of a spherical Earth?Somebody's hair color is quite a bit different than the shape of the Earth. Both the FET and RET predict the Earth should look flat to us on the ground. My point is that you have not been in space and thus cannot know for certain whether or not the Earth is flat or round. You know with absolutely no doubt what color your friend's hair is. You do not know the true shape of the Earth. Unless you know with undying certainty that the Earth is flat you cannot simply throw away every picture of a round Earth as garbage as I would if you showed me pictures of my friend with medusa's coif.QuoteThis is the exact logic you have applied to all photographs(I present you with a picture of a spherical Earth, you claim it has the possibility of being fake and therefore, it is fake).I claimed that observation shows the earth is flat. Therefore, photos showing a sphere are fake. This is a far cry from your claim. If your friend has brown hair, and I show you a convincing picture showing him with a medusa's coif, you will dismiss the picture no matter how convincingly I have crafted the snakes.
What was impossible?QuoteImplying that possibility equals truth (ie. It is possible a picture of the round Earth has been faked, therefore it is a fake picture) is a logical fallacy.And again, that was never my argument. I claimed it was fake because it was impossible.
One hardly has to be a flat earth believer to notice the conspiracy that is NASA. A simple Google search of "NASA conspiracy" will yield over a million results.I did the google search and found no credible evidence. I did however end up getting reminded that NASA brought down "moon rocks"(800lbs of them) and they have been studied for more than 30 years by geologists with no affiliation to NASA. The compounds existent in moon rocks are not present on Earth. The rocks could not have been faked.
I don't believe in a "shadow object" though I don't mock those who do.Explain eclipses. I thought that explanation was the whole reason for the shadow object in FET.
How does Dark Energy work in RE dynamics?Dark Energy is theorized to be energy left over from the big bang.
Textbook example of dodging a question. Photographic and video evidence is accepted in court because it IS possible to analyze pictures and videos to see if they were faked. More often than not, pictures and videos are legitimate and were not faked. Unless the FES has someone who is qualified to review pictures and videos to determine legitimacy you are really in no position to say that ALL pictures and videos can be (and therefore are) fake.QuoteWhy are photos and videos accepted as court evidence?Splendid question. I'd ask a lawyer.
-How does the sun generate light? How does the moon generate light?Which chemical reactions exactly, and how have the reactants lasted for so long? Even by the most conservative estimates, the Earth is at least 6000 years old. You'd be hard-pressed to find a reaction that releases light and heat and lasts for that long.
Chemical reactions.
-How can you be sure the "shadow object" exists(because even to the naked human eye, you can clearly see what is blocking the sun in eclipses)? What is it made of, how big is it, why is it not detectable? Why does it block out only light from the sun when other stars emit light of similar frequencies and wavelengths?They have not. As I said at the beginning of this topic, my questions were not answered in the FAQ or anywhere else on these forums.
Basic observations and the search function will answer these.
-How do you know there is an ice wall if you have never been there and NASA kills you if you get too close?Plenty of people have said more than enough times that NASA kills you if you get close enough. I thought that was the general consensus here. What happens if they have a helicopter on their boat, are in a plane, or try and travel alongside the icewall? Would it not become obvious that it is a massive wall rather than an ice shelf after 50-100miles (not an unreasonable viewing/travelling distance from a plane)?
Who said NASA kills touse who get too close. I think that many people have seen the ice wall,and thought it was just an ice shelf.
-If the force acting as *gravity* is the universal acceleration then I am already moving at this speed. Assuming air resistance is negligible, if I jump I will be artificially increasing my speed such that I should be traveling faster than the UA. Should I not fly away from or above the Earth if there is no force pulling me back down?Then how has the Earth not reached close to light speed yet? If the Earth/the universe have existed for 6000 years (EXTREMELY conservative estimate) and the UA has been accelerating the earth by 9.8m/s^2 for the entire 6000 years, the earth should currently be going 1.764x10^12 m/s. The speed of light is 3.0x10^8m/s. Explain.
Do you understand how UA works? The earth is constantly increasing in speed.
-How does the dark energy field work? You cannot simply assume the existence of some force and provide no physical explanation for it.I believe it was explained in the FAQ as what holds the Earths atmosphere in. I could be wrong though...
What is the dark energy field?
What if you assume there is equal chance for the Earth to be round or flat? Remove bias from your answer and due to the sheer number of pictures (not all pictures come from NASA) it is highly likely (99.9+ %) that at least one picture/video of a round Earth is legitimate.QuotePLEASE NOTE: This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF.Indeed it is possible that pictures can be faked. But in reality, what is the probability that every single one is a fake?
Rather high,assuming the earth is flat.[/b]
-If NASA indeed has the resources and willingness to deceive the entire human race and has faked thousands upon thousands of photos and videos, surely they can make one small website disappear without arousing suspicion. If they have the resources you claim they do then they are as close to god as any human being or organization will ever be. If what you say about their size and power is true this website should have been shut down long ago.Could NASA not pay you or threaten to kill you or anyone else who has seen this site if you say anything? They could easily find a way to keep your mouth shut if they wanted to. This is an extremely small website on a global scale and would be relatively easy to cover up, especially if NASA is as large and powerful as stated in other threads.
It would raise suspicion no matter how strong NASA is. Strength does not give you the ability to wipe memories. Also, the website would be put back up.
You're resorting to a childish interpretation of what I said, which is even more stupid than the original question. Obviously there are lots of things dinosaurs can do which birds can't, if you're going to take the statement literally. It was clearly an expression, and the point was equally obvious: at the very least, dinosaurs had mental faculties equal to that of modern birds. I would argue that they probably had greater mental faculties, and a better natural advantage in tool making.Then why have we not found any archeological evidence to support that dinosaurs had tools? Also keep in mind that the human brain size to body size ratio is close to 10 times that of any other animal, including dinosaurs, thus the reason we made tools in 150,000 years and they likely didn't in 160 million. You're also greatly underestimating the complexity of a craft required to cross an ocean. Without and form of power other than a sail it could take several months to cross an ocean and for a creature the size of a dinosaur, it would take several tons of food to survive for that length of time.
However, unlike birds, dinosaurs faced limitations on their movement which birds did not. Birds can fly, whereas most dinosaurs were land-based creatures. The stupid, lumbering, monstrous dinosaur is a hollywood creation. If birds can fashion hooks to reach food on the first attempt in a set scenario, then isn't it possible that over time, dinosaurs could have used felled logs to cross rivers? Over time, could they not have developed an ability to craft proper rafts, perhaps even simple boats?
Modern humans are only about 200,000 years old. Dinosaurs ruled the earth for about 160 million years. Over that kind of timeline, any behaviour pattern is possible.
I thought that whole thing about dinosaurs using boats was just a joke...please tell me I'm right.Then BACK to the original point fossils of dinosaurs and plants and animals, they have been found in places meaning tectonic plates and continental drift is the only probable cause.
Like I said, we believe that dinosaurs had a maritime society, and that they were far more intelligent than is typically believed. Here's a topic where it was discussed at length, which, incidentally, I found using the search function:
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=21863.0
The evidence for a spherical Earth is even larger than the evidence for continental drift.KillaBee, do not post low-content replies with large, irrelevant images in FEQ&C or FEQ&D, please. Consider this a warning.
The evidence for continental drift is astounding and large. The evidence for Dinosaurs in boats is nonexistent (outside your head).
Po-faced troll is still a troll.
This topic is good. It deserves some replies from FET's, but they are just too scared to face realitySadly, this is true
