1

Flat Earth Q&A / MT EVEREST

« on: July 17, 2006, 02:08:34 PM »

Wow, thanks for the science lesson, but I know how gravity works.

Some people here maybe don't, or they just ignore it. Anyway, better to explain too much than too little, right?

The maximum variation in the Earth's grav. field due to density variations is about .01%. That is very small compared to the inverse square law of gravitation.

If you say so, I don't really know the exact numbers myself. But still, there is a variation in gravity both on mountains and at the equator, and FE hasn't properly explained this.

2

Flat Earth Q&A / MT EVEREST

« on: July 17, 2006, 04:19:03 AM »

Something which is sort of explained here.
http://www.geology.wisc.edu/courses/g112/mtn_roots.html

About the equator, the g-acceleration is slightly less than on the poles. This is because the earth is spherical and spinning, which has two consequences: First of all, on the equator the spinning-speed is greatest, which results in a lower centripetal force, and because of this there is a lower gravity-acceleration. Secondly, the earth isn't a perfect sphere, because of all the spinning the distance to the center is larger at the equator. This results in a lower gravitational acceleration at the equator and a higher one at the poles, because of the distance to the center. And no, I haven't been to the poles and equator myself, but other people did. Now please, for once, try to believe other people and science (especially physics). O, and try to give a nice reason for these effects on an accelerating flat earth.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / SOLVED! Exclusive pics from discovery prove earth is flat!

« on: July 16, 2006, 03:19:46 PM »

I can't see the picture, but I assume this is about Terry Pratchett's Discworld-series, some of the best books ever written. Heh, in one of them the church upholds the idea the world is round and people get tortured because of saying it is flat and carried on the backs of 4 elephants and a turtle. Needless to say it is all satire and quite an interesting reversal of history. Everybody should read them  FEers are probably the best market for books that take place on a flat world.

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: MT EVEREST

« on: July 16, 2006, 02:51:18 PM »

but since you belive the whole earth is moving upwards at 9.8ms

  I do not believe the earth is moving upwards at all, and I do not know where you got that idea.

- Dionysios

it's in the FAQ.
And if you really want to know, the lower g-force at mountains is also caused by the mountain roots, which are less dense. Still doesn't take away the problem of reduced gravity at the equator. However, my 2-minute search yielded only pages (in very large amounts though) which calculated it while following scientific principles most FEers don't believe in. Experiments probably have been conducted, now we only have to find them. In the meantime, why don't you show me an experiment which proves gravity at the equator (or mountains, whatever) is the same as at the poles?

5

Flat Earth Q&A / There is no ice wall security and no ice wall (proof here)

« on: July 16, 2006, 02:30:44 PM »

you, indirectly. If the ice wall is 150 ft deep (which you said, and it isn't about the height above the surface because it was a reaction to Ubuntu's

'The ice could not withstand the water pressure thousands of feet down.'

the oceans must be 150 ft deep at the ice wall.

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Continental Drift

« on: July 16, 2006, 01:27:14 PM »

Now you are really ignoring enormous amounts of evidence. I mean, just look at the world map and see how wonderfully africa and south-america fit together. Not the best proof in the universe, but possible without getting out of your chair. If you would just look at the ages of the ocean floor on both sides of mid-oceanic ridges or cracks or whatever you call them in English (anyway, the thing in the middle of the ocean), the incredible similarity between some kinds of stone and mountain shapes on sides of continents that once had been together, fossile records that correspond with different climate zones in the past, and a whole lot more, anyone would come to the conclusion continental drift (and yes, thousands of miles) is a fact. Either that, or the conspiracy spent a whole lot of time shaping the continents, building mountains and putting fossils deep in the ground.

7

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: There is no ice wall security and no ice wall (proof her

« on: July 16, 2006, 01:04:55 PM »

The ice wall is only 150 ft in height.

I thought that was above the surface. Anyway, if the depth of the ocean is only 150 feet at the edge, then why all the worries about global warming being fatal on a flat earth? The sea level would drop by 150 feet, but this would actually be better compared to global warming on RE because there would be more land to live upon, and of course everybody would notice that the earth is actually flat (which everybody already does because it would take insane amounts of people in the conspiracy to make it work) and you will be proven right, so actually you should be happy with global warming, because the wall melting would be the only way people are going to believe you FEers. Ever.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / MT EVEREST

« on: July 16, 2006, 05:12:18 AM »

Since they are probably all part of the conspiracy, I'd like to know what kind of journal FEers would find reputable.

And you have no right to claim that it is a genuine fact, on the basis that

If we go on like that nothing is a fact, and therefore I propose the earth is banana-shaped, just like they said in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. And the scene in which they come the conclusion that a witch must weigh the same as a duck (go watch that movie. now) is actually based on more logic thought than the FE theory, and thus I am inclined to think of those ideas as more probable than a flat earth.

9

Technology, Science & Alt Science / The Bible and Science

« on: July 15, 2006, 06:24:06 AM »

.....But what's the function of the polar areas of ice in the true model of the Earth? One of them literally holds in the oceans and atmosphere. If these melt, we'll all suffocate, and the oceans will bleed into space. ....

Erhm, how could a 150 ft high wall possibly hold in the atmosphere? If this would mean the atmosphere is 150 ft thick (otherwise it would spill over the edge), quite a lot of people would suffocate while standing atop some skyscraper or the Eiffeltower (or are these also fake?). Even better, the tops would explode because of the lack of air pressure outside. I think some people would notice that. Unless, of course, they are (like pretty much every man, animal, plant, bacteria, guinea pig and plant) part of the conspiracy.