1

Flat Earth Q&A / The Bedford experiment and refraction of light.

« on: December 10, 2012, 11:29:44 PM »

I have just finished reading about the Bedford experiment in "The Earth not a Globe" and out of curiosity I decided to Google it, I found that the experiment is quite legitimate and has been repeated several times, by sceptics and supporters of FET and the results have allways been favourable for FET but then I came across a Wikipedia page and it says that light can refract and 'bend' in the air close to the surface thus creating an illusion of a flat earth. I cannot find any other references or scientific information about this but it has made me a little doubtful of FET. What weight does this actually hold?

2

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Dad thinks he is right

« on: April 27, 2012, 06:56:37 AM »

So, I'm having an argument with my father. He says, that if you are moving forward at a given velocity and you launch a projectile in a backwards direction, that the projectile may still land infront of the initial point of release. Can someone please explain how this could happen (maintaining all accepted and general laws of physics)

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Industrial flat glass, needs a flat earth

« on: October 18, 2010, 04:16:15 AM »

thork is for all intents and purposes correct. you cant make flat glass with the method described on a spherical planet. thork please prove the glass manufactured this way is flat.

4

Flat Earth General / Re: now i am really confused

« on: September 22, 2010, 06:32:59 PM »

is trolling where you do stuff to annoy people like when i posted my first thread? but i dont think it annoys people, parsifal actually thrives

on this kind of stuff, but who doesnt lol, its pretty funny

dw, im trying really hard to increase readability

is english your second language parsifal?

because with all talk of flt earth and other nonsense it doent seem to me that you have really grasped it.

hello

i like trolling

on a more personal note parsifal, who is that thingy in your dp?

PARAGRAPH!!! ! ! ! ! !

5

Flat Earth General / Re: now i am really confused

« on: September 21, 2010, 05:45:22 AM »

oh, btw, your response is lacking in paragraph structure too just incase you didnt notice.

I'm sorry, I didn't realise that individual sentences were supposed to be split into paragraphs.

well then smarty pie, how many sentences constitute a means for a paragraph? just stay to what you know and answer to the best of your ability some of the questions i have asked unless oyu don't know anything at all.

6

Flat Earth General / Re: now i am really confused

« on: September 21, 2010, 04:05:26 AM »

ok, good lol. its responses like yours which make it clear beyond a doubt that this site is just for a laugh and to hone your skills as a troll. oh, btw, your response is lacking in paragraph structure too just incase you didnt notice. how come if someone asks a serious question it is picked apart by means of little imagination and thought. conventional literature does not apply to informal questions and answers on what is heavily considered to be a joke website.

7

Flat Earth General / now i am really confused

« on: September 21, 2010, 03:51:55 AM »

I came across this site almost 2years ago, and while at first i just wanted to come on, post some comments and make some threads which in hindsight were actually really really stupid, possibly quite offensive not in favor for RET at all. after much deliberation on the subject and a slight bit of maturity on my behalf i have realized that the more science progresses the more it can be used to support FET as well as RET and thus have found myself seriously questioning my own belief on what shape our earth is. to sustain a belief in god a strong faith necessary to hold your views and opinions together however to believe RET requires a strong faith in our supposed world leaders, which i think cannot be and shouldn't be in any respect compared to God. following this line of thought all i can come up with is that people are generically good and would not partake in such heinous activities to present the rest of mankind with complete and utter lies but when you look at the whole picture and see the world for what it is and see the people who inhabit it for who they are you see that people are not actually good at all and would be very capable of pulling of the biggest conspiracy we have ever seen. with all this taken into account, i still cannot fathom the information this site has put forward and in a life or death situation would have to agree that the world is a ball and gravity exists and all of the above, even tho in the back of my mind i almost know that i would be adding 2+2 and answering 5. what is it going to take to completely convince people one way or another and hopefully in support of FET? i like to look at this whole argument for and against as a big philosophical exploration into the human condition and have come to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter what shape the earth it... so why would adherents to FET be trying to tell us otherwise? just as people ask what gain is there for NASA and company. what gain is there for FEers ? there is personal selfish motivations behind every action anyone carries out, so what is there to gain from a FEers point of view? i hope this makes sense to the people who read it and to some extent analyze what i have said. if it doesnt make sense im sorry, i just really made it up as i went along.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: answer this, smart one

« on: April 14, 2010, 07:57:41 PM »

these forums are so fun, ooooh im warned from posting on a site that is complete bogus lol, oooh. go on ban me that will help people believe the world is flat, my argument is just as stupid as every other one that you flat earthers come up with, hey you know there is anotehr society called the hollow earth society, yeah no shit aye, go talk to them that would be interesting, all this site is good for is a good laugh, spelling words increctly, making up new words and telling people stupid physics stuffthat doesnt work,  you cant possibly believe that the earth is flat. hey the physisics we have doesnt work so weel make up new physics hmm that makes sense. derh derh derh i think the earth is flat. then end.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: answer this smart arse

« on: April 14, 2010, 02:49:39 AM »

They are effected by gravity as they float on motlen rock. Also, they are not flying off into outer space.  The reason they move is because of heat currents in the magma.

this reply is just for you cos i could not deal with it with the others, ok now go get a cup of water put it in a vacuum or anywhere without wind etc, drop in like a leaf or summin, leaveit alone and realise that it doesnt move. ok then when you see thie boil the water and see that it flaps everywhere, so now go get a rock, drop it in the cup, boil the water, the rock still doesnt move, magma no matter how hot wont do shit.

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: answer this, smart one

« on: April 14, 2010, 02:39:22 AM »

yes it is defying gravity, by moving in any direction besides to the centre of the earth is to resist(defy) gravity, and for a matter of fact you dont have to a superhuman to jump into the air (that is still defying gravity). "this would only indicate an imbalance of forces" gravity is obviously as old as the earth and the gravity generated by the earth works to correct this imbalnced force by holding everything equally to the centre to create a ball. this correction of imbalanced forces has been taking place over millions of years, shouldt it have worked by now? "Things can oppose gravity easily, and do so all the time. When aeroplanes fly, they seem to oppose gravity quite easily" areoplanes are built and designed to fly in the air, thesethigns which defy gravity such as an areoplane does (or a person jumping into the air) are not bound by the earth. we can jump into the air because we have legs, which can generate a large enough force upon the surface of the earth to thrust us upwards, planes a boyant in the air because they have huge engines wich power proplellers which are aided by huge wings which are built to float. what gives the 'plates' this ability to yes defy the pull of gravity. understand the concept yet. perhaps you cant because you are just a fat penguin unable to jump into the air.  

11

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: answer this, smart one

« on: April 14, 2010, 02:12:01 AM »

sowhat causes them to collide into one another when there is an overwhelming force called gravity which is meant to hold them and pull them to the earths centre of mass. by moving in a direction contradictive to the apparent downward force is defying gravity, when we walk in a line we defy gravity, tectonic plates do not have legs, your stupid little response shows a lack of thaught which i suppose i expect from peopel like you.

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The appearance of Gravity

« on: April 14, 2010, 02:08:31 AM »

um ondupe, i have the solution for you, and it wont be as painful as falling of your chair, no because i care about what you are saying i only read your first post and then only the first page of responses because i know that these things get derailed easily if there is a tricky question, the logic can still be applied easily, you just dont know how to. ok lay on your back and look into the sky (change the perspecitive) and let something fall onto you, from this you can not tell that the ball is falling, only that it hits oyu in the face (if you where always on your back you would think you are thrusted into it), although this does not favour one side or the other it is the answer to your question, the logic can be applied. now for a little bit of derailing. round earthers have a very bad problem of not being able to see things from another point of view, and are unable to chanegthere perspective, traits like this lead to misundertanding and things like war, racism, hatred etc, no wonder all these things exist on a 'round earth'. good on you, your making this world a better place.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / answer this, smart one

« on: April 14, 2010, 01:59:12 AM »

 round earthers are always asking smarmy unthaught out questions (im not saying this is unthaught out, but i would liek to be enlightened none the less), ok so here it is:
the world is apparently spherical (in your opinion) and its a ball because this thing this force name gravity just happens to pull everything togethe...r and it is generated by a mass, so there is gravity which comes form the earth and the earth pulls everything to its centre of mass, as is the nature of said gravity, this force is so powerful it stops people and animal and cars etc from falling off into space it even holds the ocean in place(a great feat) so how the fuck do these tectonic plates get the urge to go against the millions and billions of neutons of friction they are experiancing and say screw you to gravity by moving and colliding into each other?

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The appearance of Gravity

« on: December 19, 2009, 03:22:17 AM »

your logic to find gravity was found (and mimicked) from observing our logic to show the earth is flat. if you dont even believe our logic, how can you believe a conclusion you have made which is based upon logic you cant dont believe.

you started with a flat earth and ended with a flat earth, so obviously that rules out the gravity thing doesnt it.   

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Evidence of a round world (Debate)

« on: December 19, 2009, 03:12:27 AM »

since the sun is actually a spotlight. the man with no shadow was obviously standing under the spotlight at mid day, whereas the man 800 km away had a shadow because the light was hitting him side on instead of directly above, thus casting a shadow.

get a torch, a couple of chess pieces (anything which can stand and cast a shadow), set your pieces up on the dining table (prob about 30cm would be good enough) shine the torch directly over one of the pieces and you will get the same result as in your diagram which you posted. 

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 24, 2009, 11:47:47 PM »

how can my question be off topic, when my question is the topic, especially when philosophy has its own dedicated forum. if you believe that my first question was answered,  then please quote the answer, if you can. as for the other numerous times i have asked slight variations of the question, none of them have been answered yet. my questions/queries are not more important than those of others, in reality they seem a lil less important due to fat that they have not been payed attention in the same way as your philosophical telescope argument, by the way, that is not progression it is derailment off the topic. if you are worried about how important your queries etc are then go to the correct forum dedicated to your cause. if you cant answer the question then don't reply, its very simple.     

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 24, 2009, 01:55:43 AM »

Wilmore forget about telescopes, i started this whole post thingy and am yet to get a real response. all you are doing is dodging the question and being side tracked. dont worry if these other people cant understand your philosophy, just try and answer my question. ill rephrase in short for you.

why cant i see these seemingly massive radio towers from wherever i am on the planet?
if you wanna speak philosophy go to the appropriate forum and if you want to discuss the integrity of a telescope go to a store which sells them and chat to the owner. please answer my question. unless you cant answer, which would just imply that i am right.

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 23, 2009, 10:30:02 PM »

So how come when i walked to the lookout of Mt Warning which (a local mountain bushwalk) leads you up to a point whch is 1156m (3793feet) high i can not see every radio tower in my country let alone my state when i am significantly higher then any other geographical point for hundreds of kilometres? Also, if the earth was flat and the towers where and should already be placed in appropriate positions to make clear transmission, why do we need so many towers to reciver signals, they have fibre optic cabling running under the ocean thicker  that of a car, nearly all the towers would become redundant if the earth were flat? Also, if satellites do not exist and there is nothing up in the sky to bounce signals back to the towers, why are satellite dishes shaped parabolically (they will only recieve a transmission from a specific point) and face towards they sky instead of the concavity being faced towards other towers? Well if it is because these "other" towers are a lot taller (hence the direction of the face of the dish) well why cant we see these towers from just about anypoint on earth?

well seeing that wilmore re-posts the same comments over and over, i odnt see why i cant re-post this one. use your philosophy to answer this please. everyone please try and stay on track, the philosophy speak is not relevant here.

19

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 22, 2009, 02:24:21 AM »

So how come when i walked to the lookout of Mt Warning which (a local mountain bushwalk) leads you up to a point whch is 1156m (3793feet) high i can not see every radio tower in my country let alone my state when i am significantly higher then any other geographical point for hundreds of kilometres? Also, if the earth was flat and the towers where and should already be placed in appropriate positions to make clear transmission, why do we need so many towers to reciver signals, they have fibre optic cabling running under the ocean thicker with a diametre that of a car, nearly al the towers would become redundant if the earth were flat? Also, if satellites do not exist and there is nothing up in the sky to bounce signals back to the towers, why are satellite dishes shaped parabolically (they will only recieve a transmission from a specific point) and face towards they sky instead of the concavity being faced towards other towers? Well if it is because these "other" towers are a lot taller (hence the direction of the face of the dish) well why cant we see these towers from just about anypoint on earth?

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 21, 2009, 08:42:35 PM »

Back to what i intially said/made a notion of, asked. If there are no satellites, then to send signals caple of carrying a wireless internet transmission, the radio towers would have to be remarkabley tall to avoid interference from the mountains and what not, if these towers are so tall, how come we cant see them from wherever we are on this supossedly Flat Earth? please be as direct as oyu can when answering this question, i would like no leeway for anyone to take this back off topipc. 

21

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 14, 2009, 03:04:58 PM »

Every time a good question is initially asked, it is always turned into some debate about something irrelevant, read my very first post and try and answer it, further procrastination will just strengthen the RET.   

22

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 13, 2009, 01:54:15 AM »

Wow! The FEers argument very convincing when a simple question cant be answered. Its been two days now.

23

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Questions

« on: November 10, 2009, 02:04:16 AM »

It was the "looking around the site" that led me to believe we would fall off the earth if it were round, according to all the: Sand on Beach Ball analogies. Wouldn't certain land masses such as mountains kinda interfere a lot with a wireless internet connection? I'm not talkin' LAN, I'm talking WAN (me speaking to you for instance). Oh and for the several reasons to believe in FET, I have found none, only superstitions and conspiracies.     

24

Flat Earth Q&A / please explain

« on: November 10, 2009, 01:43:42 AM »

Please explain the following:
 - Why would we fall of the earth if it was round?
 - How does wireless internet work?
 - What claim can you make against round earth theory to weaken it?
 - When FEers say "the earth could not possible still be spinning due to all the ether it is opposing, shouldn't the FE stop moving upward also? or start crumbling at the sides?

Thanks
I expect respectable answers to at least one of these questions.

25

Flat Earth Q&A / Questions

« on: November 10, 2009, 01:37:20 AM »

Please explain:

 - Wireless Internet (I'm sure many FEers use it)
 - Why is round earth theory dismissed?
 - if the earth was round why would we fall of of it?
 
I do not expect you to respond to them in order (ie: top to bottom) , however i do expect you to respond with sensible answers to as many if not to tall the points i have made.
Thank you
 

26

The Lounge / Re: Why Troll?

« on: October 27, 2009, 10:22:36 PM »

im a troll

27

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Night and Day

« on: October 27, 2009, 10:19:31 PM »

do you have any proof of this ?

28

The Lounge / Re: Why Troll?

« on: October 27, 2009, 03:15:53 AM »

It is proper English to put "an" before a noun beginning with "h" the noun being "hole organization".
I'm surprised i had to tell you that Mr "persnickety"

So do you agree with me or what?
 

29

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Night and Day

« on: October 27, 2009, 02:03:28 AM »

I did the light rays experiment in year 10 science, light only bends when passing from one medium to another and it doesn't bend very significantly (to the point that the sun far away turns into a setting sun on the horizon) there is mathematics which explain why light (RE) does what it does, do you have a reason for why the light bends. Or for that matter, why the sun is a spot light. I think it is a safe bet that every single REer here would agree on at least the basic structure of what our belief is placed on, however on so many of these posts throughout the forum often have FEers disagreeing on some of the most crucial points which can support you "theory", you guys should get your act together if you want anybody to believe you, but maybe you possibly all disagree because you are all intellectually inept.

HEY EVERYONE GET THIS.... PARSIFAL wouldn't answer one of my questions and still hasn't answered based on the grounding of my "bad" grammar.           

30

The Lounge / Why Troll?

« on: October 27, 2009, 01:47:38 AM »

Why would an hole organization devote itself to trying to uncover an unsolvable mystery when the obvious answer is staring them in the face, there can be only one solution: For the sake of being the worlds greatest troll. Who agrees with me?