1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Winds~

« on: July 12, 2014, 04:13:07 AM »

And you seem more than willing to dismiss a model that does demonstrate and observable, real world phenomenon (world wide wind patterns) created by someone who obviously did have the requisite funds, expertise and time.

And what's to assure me their data is correct?  What if every line on that globe was reversed?  Simply having the skills, time, and money to make an application like that does not mean it's correct.  For all any of us know, it's a complete fabrication.  Also, you're still breaking our unspoken mutual ignoring truce.

Did you miss the part where I mentioned that wind patterns are observable?

Yes, but not all over the plane'et simultaneously.

This is why there are weather stations scattered all over the world.

Who's to say the weather stations have the proper data? Who's to say the weather stations equipment is even properly built? Who's to say that the data you're reading is even data? On a serious note if we all thought like this we would still be in the stone age. New technology didn't just happened last night, it took years and multiple generations to accomplish. Think about it you Flat Earthers, lets say you actually had data then passed it on to your children and what not. Why would they believe you over what they can observer them self? Who is confirming your research? What kind of education do even have? Job occupation high school janitors? There is absolutely 0 evidence the earth is flat, there is 0 mathematics to flat earth, there is absolutely no science or any data what so ever to prove the earth is flat. So thousands maybe millions of books and research about round earth theory, so why would anyone on this forum have to prove himself by recreating decades of research? Round earth theorist have absolutely nothing to prove because it's flat earthed theorists who think we are wrong so they should be the ones providing evidence not us. It's also funny that they are raising money, normal people attend a University for their study's and the University has more then enough knowledge and equipment for some of these studies. If you say you can't afford school then all I'm hearing from flat earthers is more excuses to how they cannot prove us wrong. I think anyone can afford school now a days since they give out loans to just about anyone.

Another thing to take note is that not all flat earthers are on the same page. Meaning that maybe this guy believes that the wind works one way then you might get another flat earther come in and say it works like this. Then you'll have another say this and that. So for all we know there could be thousands of flat earth wind diagrams, meanwhile there is only 1 diagram for the round earth witch has been confirmed and checked by various scientists who actually have a phd. See the problem here, all of flat earth bs is accepted by all their members no matter how far fetch it sounds, as long as the earth isn't round life is good for them, but that also means any joe blow can come in here and be like heres my diagram and it's 100% dead on because I made it, it's a flat model so the community automatically accepts it without double checking it or even understanding any logic out of it, it just works like that because it makes sense in their mind.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: ISS tracker

« on: July 12, 2014, 03:44:43 AM »

Pretty ironic how he says that you can't tell whats in the sky because it's only a light. But all of FE theory is based on what you can see with the naked eye. They'll say something like go outside and tell me if the earth is flat. Like are you on powerful drugs? No one can see the entire planet unless you actually travelled away from earth then looked back. Another thing to take note is that he claims you cannot make out the ISS, but he can somehow make out other planets, stars, the sun... witch are all way farther away then the ISS. So the ISS being the closest object to earth would make it logical that we could see it and make out what it is. Lets say it was a secret aircraft ok, then why would they advertise when it would be flying over your house so you can see the secret plan? You see how dumb you sound.

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: How does FE account for Hubble Space Telescope's photographs?

« on: May 12, 2014, 05:46:22 AM »

I wonder are stars flat also? It's funny no one even takes distance in consideration. Lets say you're in a plane can you see every country, building, house... on earth? Stars are a inside our galaxy, so they're a lot closer to us resulting in us seeing them at night. Other galaxies are hundred of thousands of light years away from us. So in reality what we see in the sky is not really there but the light that was emitted from it thousands of years ago.

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: July 14, 2013, 02:26:58 AM »

Steve,

(Sigh) I hate having to reiterate things to people like you with an attitude.  I never said that you said the Earth was in perpetual motion!  I asked the question that if the Earth was really spinning, wouldn't it get faster and faster and YOU pointed out that was called PERPETUAL MOTION and it didn't exist.  I disagreed with you.  YOU are the one who apparently needs to be educated and learn to read. 

The fact is, it's NOT the Earth spinning that determines time, it's the cycle of the cosmos that turns ABOVE Earth.  It has a beginning and an ending every 364/5 days.

Attitude? All I asked for was your math to your findings. Then you keep talking about the earth spinning forever(without any proof of math, because in modern physics spinning forever is not possible), even though me and another person already tried explaining this to you that it does not spin forever. NOTHING is forever. You think space is a perfect vaccum? You ever hear of something called dark energy? Witch fills the majority of the universe. Not to mention space also contains tiny particles of cosmic dust and elements like hydrogen and helium atoms.  You clearly now nothing about physics it's pretty obvious. Let me give you a simple example of spin. First of all it's takes a force to start the spin. For example 2 objects colliding together. A good example is a pool ball spin. So you hit one ball and it collides with another one giving it a possible spin effect plus a vector. The whole universe works this way, in the early stage objects collided and where spinning, creating time, planets, stars, life...

reference to math to trajectory with ball spin http://www.golf-simulators.com/physics.htm

If you say this math is wrong please show me your newly created math or come up with something better that the earth would spin forever witch is not true. You might also want to look into angular momentum.

If you say physics is wrong you are indeed delusional. For one we use it on a daily basis. Example video games, simulators, pretty much all of modern technology including the computer you are using is all based on modern science....

See the problem with FET there is absolutely no math to it. Another thing is that RET model is dead perfect, everything matchs up, distance are right on. We use it for any modern day travel, shipping.... but yet FET doesn't even know what the earth looks like, but somehow know more then any scientist in the entire world. I hope you are doing full days research for countless of years because that's what they do everyday of their life, because it's something they are passionate about. Science is about learning we take what we already know and we try to do more with it. What you are trying to do is reinvent science, math, geography and history.

Yeah, yeah.  Dark energy and dark matter are terms used as an excuse as to why maths don't work in known physics.  "The answer should be X, but since the math works out to Y, then it must be dark energy or dark matter that altered the numbers".   

More slight of hand from the RE scientists.

Please link me to these findings? Dark Energy and Dark Matter cannot be detected so I find it odd that you somehow figured out that modern scientist use it in their math witch is false. The only thing they calculated is how much of it exists, witch is not hard to calculate really because dark energy = empty space.

5

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: July 14, 2013, 02:21:33 AM »

Steve,

(Sigh) I hate having to reiterate things to people like you with an attitude.  I never said that you said the Earth was in perpetual motion!  I asked the question that if the Earth was really spinning, wouldn't it get faster and faster and YOU pointed out that was called PERPETUAL MOTION and it didn't exist.  I disagreed with you.  YOU are the one who apparently needs to be educated and learn to read. 

The fact is, it's NOT the Earth spinning that determines time, it's the cycle of the cosmos that turns ABOVE Earth.  It has a beginning and an ending every 364/5 days.

Just for the record here was my original reply

If the Earth was really spinning, wouldn't it gradually get faster and faster?

Why would it spin faster? It's actually slowing down as time goes on. You might want to look into angular velocity. When the earth was created is was created while spinning. So it continues to spin until it loses momentum witch could take millions of years.

Funny you find it odd that the earth is spinning(witch makes complete sense, where do you think time came from? You think there would still be time if the earth did not move?) but there is nothing odd about an earth that floats for no reason?

Notice I never said anything about PERPETUAL MOTION(Except for when you showed me something off topic, the electric generator witch uses other forces to spin it not a collision! And it's definitely not what the earth is. For one if the earth was attracted to magnets we wouldn't be able to use them on earth witch is not true), but I did point out to you angular velocity, angular momentum and Rotational Kinetic Energy(All modern day math to physics witch people use on a daily basis). Plus I said it would lose momentum after millions of years(Earth will not be able to support life by then anyways increase in heat, our galaxy is colliding with Andromada and our sun will also blow up, plus many more possibility's). Like I said you have no understanding of physics and it's pretty obvious.

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: July 14, 2013, 02:07:19 AM »

Steve,

(Sigh) I hate having to reiterate things to people like you with an attitude.  I never said that you said the Earth was in perpetual motion!  I asked the question that if the Earth was really spinning, wouldn't it get faster and faster and YOU pointed out that was called PERPETUAL MOTION and it didn't exist.  I disagreed with you.  YOU are the one who apparently needs to be educated and learn to read. 

The fact is, it's NOT the Earth spinning that determines time, it's the cycle of the cosmos that turns ABOVE Earth.  It has a beginning and an ending every 364/5 days.

Attitude? All I asked for was your math to your findings. Then you keep talking about the earth spinning forever(without any proof of math, because in modern physics spinning forever is not possible), even though me and another person already tried explaining this to you that it does not spin forever. NOTHING is forever. You think space is a perfect vaccum? You ever hear of something called dark energy? Witch fills the majority of the universe. Not to mention space also contains tiny particles of cosmic dust and elements like hydrogen and helium atoms.  You clearly now nothing about physics it's pretty obvious. Let me give you a simple example of spin. First of all it's takes a force to start the spin. For example 2 objects colliding together. A good example is a pool ball spin. So you hit one ball and it collides with another one giving it a possible spin effect plus a vector. The whole universe works this way, in the early stage objects collided and where spinning, creating time, planets, stars, life...

reference to math to trajectory with ball spin http://www.golf-simulators.com/physics.htm

If you say this math is wrong please show me your newly created math or come up with something better that the earth would spin forever witch is not true. You might also want to look into angular momentum.

If you say physics is wrong you are indeed delusional. For one we use it on a daily basis. Example video games, simulators, pretty much all of modern technology including the computer you are using is all based on modern science....

See the problem with FET there is absolutely no math to it. Another thing is that RET model is dead perfect, everything matchs up, distance are right on. We use it for any modern day travel, shipping.... but yet FET doesn't even know what the earth looks like, but somehow know more then any scientist in the entire world. I hope you are doing full days research for countless of years because that's what they do everyday of their life, because it's something they are passionate about. Science is about learning we take what we already know and we try to do more with it. What you are trying to do is reinvent science, math, geography and history.

7

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: July 13, 2013, 01:27:53 AM »

Funny you find it odd that the earth is spinning(witch makes complete sense, where do you think time came from? You think there would still be time if the earth did not move?) but there is nothing odd about an earth that floats for no reason?

Could you show me the math to this to prove it's true? What you talk about is Perpetual motion witch is impossible to do with our current laws of physics, witch scientist have been trying to do for ages.

You might want to look into Rotational Kinetic Energy to how to calculate rotation speeds and when it would slow down. I find it odd that you guys think the earth does not move but everything else in the universe does. Why would everything else move but not the earth. How would time exist if nothing was in motion?

No, perpetual motion exists.  Look it up.  And the Earth does not have to spin or revolve around the sun in order for time to exist.  You are so brainwashed!  Time exists because of the path of the sun/seasons.

Please indicate where I said the earth is in a perpetual motion? Do you really think time is forever? Sorry to be the one to bring you back to reality, but time will end just like everything else. If you actually read some of my reply's, you would have noticed that I indicated the earth is spinning but will eventually lose its MOMENTUM(Maybe that's another word you should educate yourself with). If you actually had a clue on how the universe worked, then you would know everything is in motion from collisions. Stars, planets.... all die so will we and time as we know it.

People go to College or University to learn and educate them self's I suggest you do the same or at least try to make it through grade school.

Modern definition of time:

Time is a dimension in which events can be ordered from the past through the present into the future,[1][2][3][4][5][6] and also the measure of durations of events and the intervals between them.

Notice  and also the measure of durations of events and the intervals between them.

Events are:

Day = Earth Rotation
Year = Earth Rotation around the sun

To say I traveled to China and it took me 2 days. But I sat in a hotel room for 1 day. How much time did it take me to travel get to China? People like you would think 2 days but really it was 1 day, because you spent 1 day doing nothing. So you could pretty much compare 2 different times. Time on earth and travel time. So as you can see you FET even need a new definition of time because it just doesn't workout.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Explain This

« on: July 13, 2013, 01:10:24 AM »

Just found the answer to this question. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Properties of Light

« on: July 13, 2013, 01:05:26 AM »

The light from the sun can not travel through all of the air to reach the other side of the Earth.  Sort of like how you see far away things start to get hazy and then disappear.  Air is not perfectly transparent.

We are talking about the sun here, not a flashlight. It's light cannot be stopped by some air. You are obviously not very intelligent.

Light is light, whether it comes from a flashlight or the sun.  A brighter light will go farther, but still can not go infinitely through the air.  The Sun's light can travel roughly half way across the Earth.

I find it pretty funny that you say the sun light gets blocked from the air. So you said the stars are closer to us in FET but still behind the sun. The suns light witch is closer cannot travel through the air but the stars light witch is farther out then sun can magically make it through the air? Could I please see your math to how much did the light slow down? At witch distance from the sun it started to fade? Another thing is that earth it self emits light. So if the air was to thick for sun light to go through you would think weak earth light wouldn't make it through either?

Lets look at some light sources. First we got a light witch might be in your living room. Just a bulb sticking out the socket nothing covering it's sides. The ENTIRE room will light up, and lets say you have your door open, some light will escape the room into another room. So as you can see the light did travel farther out then my room. Second source would be a flashlight, witch acts as a spotlight(Witch is what FET describes the sun).

For proof that the earths air is not stopping the light, is simply by looking at the sky, if you see anything at all it means there is light(Night time we actually do see sun light, we see it hit the moon and we see the light from stars far away). If 0 amount of like was coming through then all you would see is pitch black. Light plays a role in what we can see and the colors we see. If the air was indeed to thick then night time would also look very foggy.

Another thing is lets compare glass and air. Light can go through glass witch is more dense then air, even the night time light form the stars make it through my windows.

Another thing that baffles me, is that FET thinks the stars and earth are closer? You even know what a star is? A star is a big burning ball of mostly hydrogen and helium. You ever been near a fire? It gets hot when you are near, as the fire burn temperature near it increase also(As long as it's still burning). So having the stars and sun closer to earth like in FET would create a major heat problem.

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Funeral for the Round Earth Indoctrinated

« on: July 12, 2013, 12:33:27 PM »

So it sounds like what you did was trace the outline of the circle of light on the cardboard for marking made by the Sun shining through the cardboard with the hole in it. That's interesting, but that doesn't measure the angular diameter of the Sun as far as I can tell.

Well, of course not. The goal was to measure the relative diameter of the Sun. I wasn't sure it would work, but it obviously did.

I'm not sure you are even getting the relative diameter from that setup. I don't see how that circle of light is proportional to the apparent size of the Sun.

I must agree with you. The sun emits light in all directions 360 degrees of light.  FET has a complete new sun, if it was the same sun all earth would be lit up. Kinda like a light in your living room, you got light everywhere. In FET the sun is like a flashlight/spot light so the sides are covered. So that would mean FET has either a magic sun, or it's a disc with sides I guess.  There's no way from what I understood, from this experiment, that it would calculate anything at all, except maybe indicate the time of day. If he's experiment was right does that mean sun clocks are in the conspiracy also?

For anyone interested in really calculating the earths distance to let say the sun. Look into Kepler's third law. With math you can calculate the distance of lets say Venus, then you can measure the distance of the sun and then use the sun to measure farther objects and so on. See that's another thing with FET modern math is part of the conspiracy also, as a programmer I could confirm the math does indeed work, if not then no one would be playing video games.

11

Flat Earth General / Re: The burden of proof lies where?

« on: June 28, 2013, 04:13:14 AM »

Through reading many of the threads I often come upon FE'ers stating that the burden of proof lies with the Round Earth arguement. Using things like their side is more intuitive or it makes more sense or some such to support this claim.

I disagree. This is using a subjective claim to attempt to choose upon which side the burden of proof lies. To the Fe side it makes more sense and is intuitive and clearly the base which the other side should be held too. However it important to note that the exact opposite is true for the Re side. Which for them puts the burden of proof on the Fe side.

The burden of proof does not lie with either side. Since it is an debate with both sides trying to convince the other it means that each side has a burden of proof in their attempt to convince the other.
It should not be used as a crutch to get out of difficult questions as it has been used before.
If either side had the burden of proof it should be the Fe side since it is challenging the popular theory which is the more clearly known and understood and investigated.
I am however curious if people disagree with my conclusion on if one of the sides or both sides should have to carry the burden of proof in arguments.

I agree with you 100% I've been asking proof for a while now. I find it funny that any average Joe can get a balloon up in the air, take a flight/boat trip to Antarctica. There are thousands of scientist around the world, you think just one little thing would leak out but not a single thing(Except for false statements). Another ironic thing is that they use modern physics/biology witch is all based on RET, and they use it to prove the earth is flat. Sorry but things can't work the same in FET then as RET. I once asked someone for their research papers and he answered me back "It's so obvious the earth is flat, so I don't need any". And I guess images are not creditable(Even though RET wouldn't mind seeing some that are not photoshop) Heck the community has a lot of people right? Been here since the early 1900's, could of done a fund raiser to get the money to travel the earth and take images. You might also get responses like well why would you believe someone you don't know? Well I don't know you(FET guy), and you got even less evidence then the RET guy, but I should believe you because you sat on the side of the beach and realized the earth is flat?

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 28, 2013, 03:03:20 AM »

In what part of the sentence "The Earth is spinning" is there an implication of accelerated spin? A top on a table will cease spinning because there is a force (a table for example) acting upon it. Space has much less force acting upon the Earth although it is said that the Earth slowly but surely is slowing down.

An object in motion tends to stay in motion.  In a RE model, what could possibly be slowing Earth down if it's in a vacuum?

Could you show me the math to this to prove it's true? What you talk about is Perpetual motion witch is impossible to do with our current laws of physics, witch scientist have been trying to do for ages.

You might want to look into Rotational Kinetic Energy to how to calculate rotation speeds and when it would slow down. I find it odd that you guys think the earth does not move but everything else in the universe does. Why would everything else move but not the earth. How would time exist if nothing was in motion?

If you read the title of the video you showed me you would know it's an electric generator, meaning it's building an electric charge. The earth is not an electric generator. As you can see in the video the force of the magnet turning the object. So the earth would need many magnets that are solid to move the earth. Like I've said everything in the universe is in motion, if not then time it self would not exist.

The entire universe is electric.

Explain a bit more in depth? In the video you showed me it was a electric generator. The only reason it moves was because of the magnets. For one the earth has 2 poles, so do magnets, hmm shouldn't that tell you something? Or are magnets in on this conspiracy theory also?

The reason I want to hear it in depth is because in RET. Earth spins around the sun, the sun spins are the black whole in the center of the galaxy. The galaxy spins in a spiral and moves around in the universe. Galaxy's could even collide and create new galaxy's. So as you can see the entire universe is in motion. So you see how the earth moves, that creates time. So if you where in a different orbit or another planet time would be different. People seem to think the earth moving is far fetch, but it's funny we fly plans and walk around inside them moving at fast speeds no problem. Physics can explain it all. What's the universe doing no clue it's gotta stop somewhere you know like whats the universe inside off, then what's that inside off, then what's that inside off, infinite amount of times, so knowing the truth to everything will probably never happen ever.

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 10:32:00 AM »

No, why would it? When have you ever seen a spinning object get faster and faster?

When it's magnetic.  Have you never seen an SEG?
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

If you read the title of the video you showed me you would know it's an electric generator, meaning it's building an electric charge. The earth is not an electric generator. As you can see in the video the force of the magnet turning the object. So the earth would need many magnets that are solid to move the earth. Like I've said everything in the universe is in motion, if not then time it self would not exist.

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 10:27:55 AM »

If the Earth was really spinning, wouldn't it gradually get faster and faster?

Why would it spin faster? It's actually slowing down as time goes on. You might want to look into angular velocity. When the earth was created is was created while spinning. So it continues to spin until it loses momentum witch could take millions of years.

Funny you find it odd that the earth is spinning(witch makes complete sense, where do you think time came from? You think there would still be time if the earth did not move?) but there is nothing odd about an earth that floats for no reason?

Nothing can spin in a vacuum.
Nothing moves in a vacuum. No light can get through a vacuum.
A vacuum is nothing and can transmit nothing.

So how is the light of the stars and sun getting to us?

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 10:26:56 AM »

It's funny you should mention that people need to understand how "big" the Earth is. That is precisely what flat earther's fail to understand when they say "use your eyes, it looks flat". The Earth is in fact so huge that relative to whatever part of the sphere you are on, you are so small that you can't instinctively observe how round it is. Your observable sample of the Earth is too small to notice how gradual (relative to you) that it's curve is.

That applies to REs as well.  The images of Earth that NASA provides are highly unlikely to achieve, considering what space is.

The thing that anyone of us right now can grab a camera. Get a helium balloon and launch. Go on youtube you see all kinds. I was all into the raspberry pi lately(I'm a programmer so I got interest in this mini computer size of a credit card) and they hooked it up to a camera and balloon to take pictures of the earth above.

How is this remotely similar? It's not like NASA is taking pictures of Earth from another Galaxy. We have pictures from the space station and from the moon. By comparison, we can see more of the Earth in the horizon by just looking out of a window than a camera can see of the Universe with a picture from the Space Station.

16

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 10:19:41 AM »

If the Earth was really spinning, wouldn't it gradually get faster and faster?

Why would it spin faster? It's actually slowing down as time goes on. You might want to look into angular velocity. When the earth was created is was created while spinning. So it continues to spin until it loses momentum witch could take millions of years.

Funny you find it odd that the earth is spinning(witch makes complete sense, where do you think time came from? You think there would still be time if the earth did not move?) but there is nothing odd about an earth that floats for no reason?

17

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 10:12:46 AM »

Well one big issue with flat earth is that many have different theory's. So there are probably thousands upon thousands of flat earth theory(And some are very different then others). Mean while there is only one round earth theory. To be honest to prove the world is flat, if it really was, it would not be hard. One could get a helium balloon and get images of the ends of the earth. Imagine launching a helium balloon in lets say Antarctica. You would see nothing on one side and you would see the complete planet on the other side.

You need to understand how big the earth is.
It's not as small as you think it is.
The part we live on and can exist on, is huge and spread out around a circle with a big ice middle and a huge outer circle of ice probably thousands of miles wide, rising as it spans out.

Yea I thought about that also, but then I came to find out they think the earth is actually bigger then what us round earthers think lol So if it was bigger that means distances we travel would actually be bigger as well right. Then I read something like well when you are on a long plan ride you tend to get drunk so time goes faster. That was someone else response. Honestly I don't think there is a single person in this society who has ever studied physics or astronomy(Well anyone who believe in flat earth at least).
It's funny you should mention that people need to understand how "big" the Earth is. That is precisely what flat earther's fail to understand when they say "use your eyes, it looks flat". The Earth is in fact so huge that relative to whatever part of the sphere you are on, you are so small that you can't instinctively observe how round it is. Your observable sample of the Earth is too small to notice how gradual (relative to you) that it's curve is.

18

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 10:08:31 AM »

Obviously I am being completely sarcastic.  The point here is that the line of thinking that led you to "dome" is that it recycles or retains stuff. So by your own logic, it doesn't have to be a dome, it just has to be able to do the job you prerequisite. By no means is the atmosphere a dome in the literal sense like an ice dome would be or like the roof of a stadium but that isn't what you require. We just need something that can accomplish this task and the atmosphere does just that.

You might never get your head around it , unless you have a critical look at the model you have been brought up to accept.
That's not a dig, because I used to just accept it, before I decided to have a critical look at it and found it to be so pathetic that I just sat back and laughed at the thought that they have suckered us all.

Saying "I am right because I looked at it critically and you are indoctrinated" is not an argument. I look at it critically bud. Please do not make implications that you are above anyone cause you most certainly are far from that.  Make a real argument for once, trying making some damn sense.

I'm above no one but I play you people how you try and play me.
The thing is..tit for tat gets boring and counter productive, so I use the sin bin mentality...basically I stick people like you in it when you start getting above yourselves. 

Nobody is trying to play you scepti. We genuinely think your balls off the wall insane. You deserve all the ridicule you feel.

Honestly I'm just trying to get their point of view. I highly doubt anything would convince me to a flat earth. Honestly though if you think about it, if the earth was flat, that would mean everything we know about science is wrong. And I mean everything. And we all have done science experiments and I've yet done one witch did not work. Also flat earth has a major lighting problem. I think a lot of them don't understand how light works or there might be extra light sources. The only reason we see anything is because of light. In flat earth all the side and the moon is getting 0 light from underneath so that causes moon and horizon issues.

Not to mention

-Volcano
-Thermal Activity
-Tornado, hurricane..
-Wind
-Time
-Days, season, year(Flat earth model would not match current data, then other people can out with all these other crazy models)
And the entire universe....

19

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 09:54:41 AM »

Obviously I am being completely sarcastic.  The point here is that the line of thinking that led you to "dome" is that it recycles or retains stuff. So by your own logic, it doesn't have to be a dome, it just has to be able to do the job you prerequisite. By no means is the atmosphere a dome in the literal sense like an ice dome would be or like the roof of a stadium but that isn't what you require. We just need something that can accomplish this task and the atmosphere does just that.

You might never get your head around it , unless you have a critical look at the model you have been brought up to accept.
That's not a dig, because I used to just accept it, before I decided to have a critical look at it and found it to be so pathetic that I just sat back and laughed at the thought that they have suckered us all.

Well one big issue with flat earth is that many have different theory's. So there are probably thousands upon thousands of flat earth theory(And some are very different then others). Mean while there is only one round earth theory. To be honest to prove the world is flat, if it really was, it would not be hard. One could get a helium balloon and get images of the ends of the earth. Imagine launching a helium balloon in lets say Antarctica. You would see nothing on one side and you would see the complete planet on the other side.

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 08:38:30 AM »

It's impossible for the earth to be a solid round ball. Nothing could survive on it, because it could not replenish itself.
The earth is definitely flat like half an ball with an ice dome and a diamond? bottom.

It's impossible for the earth to be round but not everything else in the universe like the moon, planets, stars...? Please explain what you mean about replenish?

Nothing on earth is destroyed...it's simply recycled back to its original mass.
Rain is a simple example.
Water molecules are expanded into the air and are pushed up by denser molecules as they are agitating through them until they can't go any higher due to equal density being achieved, so it falls back to earth because it's massing into its more densely compressed water molecules which makes it heavier than the air molecules below, so it falls back to the ground and so on.
Everything is recycled.

What makes you think your recycle argument favors a flat earth?

Because a dome needs a foundation, so a round earth with a round flowing atmosphere is not going to be very sensible , is it?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you implying that a dome is necessary for things to be recycled?

Yes..
Top and bottom.

You know that the atmosphere as science currently understands it is a sufficient dome to stop things from escaping. It doesn't need to be made out of ice or anything like that. So basically there is a dome and it's just the atmosphere.

How can it be a dome without ice?

The question should be why would we even see through ice? Put ice in your freezer do you see through it? No because there is such a change in temperature that the ice gets kinda foggy. So if the atmosphere was ice then we wouldn't see much and it would be raining a lot because of constant weather changes. Another example would be all the ice at the polls can you see through them?

21

Flat Earth General / Re: Gravity is atmosphere v mass/weight.

« on: June 27, 2013, 08:34:33 AM »

Yes kinda like how you see old church windows, where the glass looks like it is a slow moving liquid.

Why doesnt the ball fall though? It is the same as falling objects in the air isnt it? What makes that scenario different?

You are shaking the mass of sand from underneath, just like the earth would in an earth quake and pushes up stuff.
Now vibrate the ball bearing  from the top, using a discarded dil.....dild....using a discarded vibration tool...and you will see that the ball bearing will sink, because you are creating a friction force against the mass of sand, "downwards".

Sorry for jumping in this debate but could you explain why there are earthquakes? In RE the earth in a continuous motion/plus gravity so there is a large amount of thermal activity. All this activity moves our Plate Tectonic witch also causes earthquakes and volcano. According to what I've read about FET, the earth never moves so why would there be all kinds of thermal activity?

22

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 08:23:30 AM »

It's impossible for the earth to be a solid round ball. Nothing could survive on it, because it could not replenish itself.
The earth is definitely flat like half an ball with an ice dome and a diamond? bottom.

It's impossible for the earth to be round but not everything else in the universe like the moon, planets, stars...? Please explain what you mean about replenish?

Nothing on earth is destroyed...it's simply recycled back to its original mass.
Rain is a simple example.
Water molecules are expanded into the air and are pushed up by denser molecules as they are agitating through them until they can't go any higher due to equal density being achieved, so it falls back to earth because it's massing into its more densely compressed water molecules which makes it heavier than the air molecules below, so it falls back to the ground and so on.
Everything is recycled.

What makes you think your recycle argument favors a flat earth?

Because a dome needs a foundation, so a round earth with a round flowing atmosphere is not going to be very sensible , is it?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you implying that a dome is necessary for things to be recycled?

Yes..
Top and bottom.

You know that the atmosphere as science currently understands it is a sufficient dome to stop things from escaping. It doesn't need to be made out of ice or anything like that. So basically there is a dome and it's just the atmosphere.

It actually goes a lot more in depth then that. The atmosphere contains 5 layers

-The troposphere
-stratosphere
-mesosphere
-thermosphere
-exosphere

And then it's all surrounded by the earth magnetic field with is generated by the north and south pole. The magnetic field is what saves us from stuff like space radiation and the atmosphere keeps things like air inside our planet.

23

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 08:15:05 AM »

It's impossible for the earth to be a solid round ball. Nothing could survive on it, because it could not replenish itself.
The earth is definitely flat like half an ball with an ice dome and a diamond? bottom.

It's impossible for the earth to be round but not everything else in the universe like the moon, planets, stars...? Please explain what you mean about replenish?

Nothing on earth is destroyed...it's simply recycled back to its original mass.
Rain is a simple example.
Water molecules are expanded into the air and are pushed up by denser molecules as they are agitating through them until they can't go any higher due to equal density being achieved, so it falls back to earth because it's massing into its more densely compressed water molecules which makes it heavier than the air molecules below, so it falls back to the ground and so on.
Everything is recycled.

Sounds like RE. Water evaporates into the atmosphere creating clouds. Clouds get too heavy so it starts to rain, depending on the temperature it might even snow. I don't really see how the earth recycles it self in flat earth. Round earth has a core. Actually most of the inner earth is liquid. So we pretty much sit on a crust of dirt.  In round earth everything moves so it makes sense that the core is hot because it's very active. In flat earth nothing moves so how is the planet recycling it self if nothing is moving? Mountains for example are made out of 2 piece of land colliding with each other(Look up Plate Tectonics. Mont Everast and other mountains get taller every year because of this) so when the earth moves it pushes the other piece of land up creating mountains and even making them higher.

Don't take everything you already know as gospel. Think outside the box and realize the moon may be emitting it's own light.

So where would the moon be getting this light from? Earth by it self emits no light all except for man made stuff or fires. So if the moon is made out of pure rocks and dust why would it emit light at all?

No man has been to the moon, it is just a guess that it is made of rock.

I can see it pretty clear with my telescope. Are telescopes part of this conspiracy theory?

You can see the moon because it's in our atmosphere.

Never knew the moon was in our atmosphere. Man mission to the moon just got easier? I think you missed the point. I think you don't understand how light works because someone else said maybe the moon has light witch is the most legit answer here up to date. So lets say the moon was in the atmosphere or even near it, that means the sun is above it. The sun is what gives us sunlight so if you block it guess what it gets dark out(Except maybe some star lights). So if the moon is indeed over the earth, that means sun is over top of it at all times. In flat earth the sun never touches the moon when it's dark out because it's on the other half of the flat disc. So it's impossible to see something without a light source is all I'm saying. It be like driving with no lights at night a a back road that has no street lights and barely any houses, you wouldn't be able to see much because there is no light source.

24

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 07:31:35 AM »

Don't take everything you already know as gospel. Think outside the box and realize the moon may be emitting it's own light.

So where would the moon be getting this light from? Earth by it self emits no light all except for man made stuff or fires. So if the moon is made out of pure rocks and dust why would it emit light at all?

No man has been to the moon, it is just a guess that it is made of rock.

I can see it pretty clear with my telescope. Are telescopes part of this conspiracy theory?

25

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 07:30:44 AM »

It's impossible for the earth to be a solid round ball. Nothing could survive on it, because it could not replenish itself.
The earth is definitely flat like half an ball with an ice dome and a diamond? bottom.

It's impossible for the earth to be round but not everything else in the universe like the moon, planets, stars...? Please explain what you mean about replenish?

26

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 07:18:53 AM »

Don't take everything you already know as gospel. Think outside the box and realize the moon may be emitting it's own light.

So where would the moon be getting this light from? Earth by it self emits no light all except for man made stuff or fires. So if the moon is made out of pure rocks and dust why would it emit light at all?

27

Flat Earth Debate / Why can we see the moon?

« on: June 27, 2013, 06:59:18 AM »

Correct me if I'm wrong on FT. But they seem to think everything is above earth right? If so that means the moon is above earth and the sun is above the moon and the earth? So how can we possibly see the moon without sunlight? If you understand how light works then you will indeed know that light behind the moon would result in a black dot(Like solar eclipses, when the moon hides the sun).  So for us to even see the moon in the sky it means there is a light source behind us. This is not possible with a flat earth because there would be no curvature to let light in.