1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FET is a bad theory--so inconsistent

« on: November 14, 2010, 04:29:49 PM »

Irrelevant.  This thread is about inconsistencies in FET, not RET.

It's hypocritical to accuse FET of being inconsistent when RET is inconsistent in a number of areas.

Please explain with your hundreds of peer reviews from all over the globe, yes "globe", and explain in detail why RET is inconsistent..
I and millions of others have a hard time wondering why FET is the more accurate or consistent theory.

Even IF RET had some inconsistencies due to scientific flaws, it doesn't mean FET is the more logical theory by any means. You have the burden of proof, now get explaining.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: James's theory on dinosaurs

« on: November 14, 2010, 04:22:41 PM »

There are families of organisms and even genus that have remained almost unchanged for hundreds of millions of years.
Case in point, Limulidae, the horseshoe crabs

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that Earth is round, not flat

« on: November 14, 2010, 04:12:40 PM »

doesnt that mean that eventually, we would see stars in a line, or near a line, but as we aproach their location, they become different shapes? constellations dont do that, just look at the big dipper, then drive or fly 600 miles one way.  the big dipper does not become "smooshed"

also, dont shout in such big font, that makes you look immature, and not willing to debate

Victorious expression is probably hard to contain at times.  The bold print is useful when scanning a thread to see who has won the debate. It did work in this case.

Hilarious.......

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Model of a Nuclear Sun is false.

« on: November 14, 2010, 04:07:09 PM »

REers can't grasp anything!

James I know some trolls that sound less sarcastic than you.....
What haven't we grasped that you FErs have? What evidence have you provided that we haven't to justify our claims?

5

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Model of a Nuclear Sun is false.

« on: November 14, 2010, 04:04:43 PM »

Some stars are tiny, you could probably hold them in your hand they're so small.

care to back up this claim with evidence?......there is no evidence for this, I am confident in that!!!

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Model of a Nuclear Sun is false.

« on: November 13, 2010, 08:51:53 PM »

that's quite embarassing....really, as if there hasn't been enough of that in these forums.

7

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof: The Earth is Round

« on: November 13, 2010, 08:48:49 PM »

I've proposed a proof. I've presented how the evidence needed can be obtained. I've explained that the FEW and EnaG already have provided the needed data points. I've met my burden of proof.

And I refuted your proof as garbage in my first post.

Not even close. You just admitted that you "won't" even describe EAT, yet your refutation requires its verification. How typical of an FEer.

Why would I do the dirty work for you? You need to supply proof for your own conclusions. And you are reported.

If you flat earther's would work from the evidence instead of from a fantasized conclusion, maybe this would turn more scientific in a way..after all, science is aboutdrawing conclusions from available facts.

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that Earth is round, not flat

« on: November 13, 2010, 08:45:39 PM »

Still too far for the change to be noticed.

Epic fail, Thork.

If earth's radius is 12,000 miles and stars are between 700 and 3100 miles above us, then you would notice that change moving from North pole to equator. You are moving 4 times the distance horizontally to their altitude.
Epic failure to understand the thread, Horatio. You seem most out of your depth when you venture from RM.

The very idea of the hottest and brightest stars being that close to earth is ridiculous...we would see them in full view...enormous in the sky....affecting the heat and perhaps climate on earth.

But FE also doesn't say the sun and stars are huge. The sun's diameter is only 32 miles across and the stars are as you see them. Closer but smaller. They are very small and bright. They do not put out lots of heat like the sun. They are too small. They may well be bioluminesent like the moon anyway.

WEll consider for once that FE may be wrong.....WE have every bit of contradictory information on all points. We also know the sun is only one of many stars in the universe. The do not put off heat like the sun? that's crazy talk and a very childish view...scientists have observed the level of heat given off by them at relative distance..

Please do not put words in Thork's mouth. It is intellectually dishonest.

EG, i would take you a bit more seriously if you could provide evidence so you seem a little more intellectually honest.

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Model of a Nuclear Sun is false.

« on: November 13, 2010, 08:39:50 PM »

Is the sun just a dwarf star for short???

No, dwarf stars are much smaller.

Dwarf stars are much smaller than 32 miles?

Well, sure, in the FE model.

dwarf stars wouldn't be dwarf stars then....you're trying 2 add modern science to your "theory", how amusing...

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 13, 2010, 08:28:41 PM »

EnglshGentleman, provide a single piece of evidence of how space footage is analogous to your sci-fi alien fantasies...

I realize what you are trying to say is that not everything you see should be taken at face value, but it doesn't prove the opposite either. You are on the edge of an uneven balance of evidence. To push yourself down, add weight with "EVIDENCE", not pointing out half-truths or irrelevant info.

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth

« on: November 13, 2010, 08:25:26 PM »

This is so funny, for a bunch of folks who believe in evolution fairly well, you guys can't seem to grasp the burden of evidence that's on you if you support a flat earth.

We've provided evidence to support a flat earth...  Did you just post that for the hell of it or do you really not understand what's going on in this thread?

and most of your "evidence" have not been proven by science. Nuff said
I wonder if you flat earthers understand what is going on in this world. And if so, where's the proof.

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Debunking the UA hypothesis

« on: November 12, 2010, 07:42:23 PM »

There is no such thing as the Solar System, the notion that the Earth, or anything else, orbits a giant, flaming, spherical Sun is an insane globularist fantasy.

are you willing to bet your life fortune, or even your life on this idea?

Why is there no solar system? We need evidence to say it doesn't exist. Globularist fantasy? give evidence for it.
Give evidence for an anti-moon that can't be explained by other things. Give hard evidence for the shape of the earth, we have some, pictures, geometry, visual evidence confirmed from space....etc. And countries all around the world, including bitter enemies, have acknowledged it for centuries, not agreed with it, DOWNRIGHT acknowledged it.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 12, 2010, 07:38:04 PM »

EnglishGentleman, If you could provide evidence that the alien takeover is analogous to the space mission footage, more people might take you seriously, but you just make blank comparisons that aren't relevant.

ohhhh, but it's the world against you small folks when it comes to common knowledge....oohhhhh this is the end of the world...

14

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 12, 2010, 07:35:16 PM »

If we sent you into space, would you comply given it's a free trip for you??? If not, why not.

If I knew how safe the shuttle was, sure. I would ride in the ship. Am I saying the ship would actually make it into outer space? Nope.

Why would you think I wouldn't?

How about this, next time they are set for a launch....just go to the station and tell em your situation. They might joke around and laugh about it, and it would be understandable, but if you can gather enough believers, go and they will show you something that's been available since 1969. lolz. You are so adamant it won't make it into space,...they have the footage of rockets launched, footage of satellite missions going on TODAY.

How lost you must be in today's world of technology.

Cuz that makes sense. If I get enough people and cause enough of a ruckus, they will launch us into space. 

Guess what? I have footage of another planet in which there are a blue sentient race that flies around on dragon looking things.

I also just saw footage in which an entire city was pretty much swallowed up by aliens and their brains stolen.

You must think this is real as well.

you are hilarious. Show me the computerized or staged crap for that scenerio. We have all the news covering the space missions, all the major science networks hosting the shows,....interviews from top scientists and actual astronauts telling how it is in space.
You are delusional. Anbd btw, did I say they were gonna launch you? you were non compliant the first time
I meant you would watch em pull away, then look to your screens to check the status. Why do you think they have all those folks monitoring safety and trajectory for??
omg.........lol

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: How Evolution Proves a Flat Earth

« on: November 12, 2010, 07:30:09 PM »

This is so funny, for a bunch of folks who believe in evolution fairly well, you guys can't seem to grasp the burden of evidence that's on you if you support a flat earth.

16

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Debunking the UA hypothesis

« on: November 12, 2010, 07:14:50 PM »

Please cite these zetetic meteor theories.

Meteors fall from celestial bodies, they have not been "accelerating for less time than the Earth" except in cases where the celestial bodies have been (so, Solar and Lunar meteorites have technically been accelerating for less time than the Earth, but this is not really relevant).

What are you trying to say? Meteors are falling space debris, outside, they are meteroids, and are celestial objects in and of themselves...for a long time they may revolve around the solar system,(we have proof of this), and some eventually fall in a meteor shower in the earth's atmosphere.
What exactly are solar meteorites?

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 12, 2010, 07:04:19 PM »

Thork you are easily one of the most amusing peope on here, tell ya what, why don't you hire the best navigators in the world and take a trip down there, to the "ice wall", called Antarctica, find as many of these land transmitters as possible and have evidence proving they are responsible for this world-wide conspiracy that noone has evidence of.
I mean your research on this flat earth surely would give scientists enough insight to make businesses and studies on it....right? Why does every geologist and geographer depend on a spherical earth for their studies then? It's just hilarious to me..why do independent and group scientists in each field want to know things, want knowledge....and all come to the same conclusion that Earth is a sphere?

Science is about making conclusions from the facts. You people make "facts" from the conclusion, it's amusing.

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 12, 2010, 06:57:25 PM »

If we sent you into space, would you comply given it's a free trip for you??? If not, why not.

If I knew how safe the shuttle was, sure. I would ride in the ship. Am I saying the ship would actually make it into outer space? Nope.

Why would you think I wouldn't?

How about this, next time they are set for a launch....just go to the station and tell em your situation. They might joke around and laugh about it, and it would be understandable, but if you can gather enough believers, go and they will show you something that's been available since 1969. lolz. You are so adamant it won't make it into space,...they have the footage of rockets launched, footage of satellite missions going on TODAY.

How lost you must be in today's world of technology.

19

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ockham's Razor

« on: November 12, 2010, 06:44:25 PM »

Roundy, what is bendy light? had bendy light been peer reviewed by any of the millions of scientists and intellectuals around the world?

Roundy, I'm sure noone's been to the end of the earth because in a straight path, you end up where u started, it's called circumnavigation. And on a hypothetical flat earth, I'm sure the military, let alone NASA, has the technology to get us as far out as we need, as long as there's a good supply of fuel.

Collusion...that's a good one.

What about the anti-moon in the absence of an eclipse? No telescope has ever captured this so called "anti-moon" ZERO. No space craft has ever seen it. A round earth would produce an eclipse too, now what's more likely? a non identified, never seen before objects causing an eclipse, or those proposed by modern science all over the world.

Tell me you didn't read at all....my example was to show how you ppl used and misconstrued Occam's Razor. Occam's razor is used when there is no furthur evidence readily available and you predict BASED ON FACTS. The anti-moon is NOT a fact. The distance to the moon is a FACT. understand?


IF there was an offer to go to space, would you guys take the offer? If not, why not.

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that Earth is round, not flat

« on: November 12, 2010, 06:33:05 PM »

Still too far for the change to be noticed.

Epic fail, Thork.

If earth's radius is 12,000 miles and stars are between 700 and 3100 miles above us, then you would notice that change moving from North pole to equator. You are moving 4 times the distance horizontally to their altitude.
Epic failure to understand the thread, Horatio. You seem most out of your depth when you venture from RM.

The very idea of the hottest and brightest stars being that close to earth is ridiculous...we would see them in full view...enormous in the sky....affecting the heat and perhaps climate on earth.

But FE also doesn't say the sun and stars are huge. The sun's diameter is only 32 miles across and the stars are as you see them. Closer but smaller. They are very small and bright. They do not put out lots of heat like the sun. They are too small. They may well be bioluminesent like the moon anyway.

WEll consider for once that FE may be wrong.....WE have every bit of contradictory information on all points. We also know the sun is only one of many stars in the universe. The do not put off heat like the sun? that's crazy talk and a very childish view...scientists have observed the level of heat given off by them at relative distance..

21

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that Earth is round, not flat

« on: November 12, 2010, 02:30:02 PM »

All of you claiming EG's example ridiculous, are relatively new to the site, with the exception of Horatio who should know better. As EG mentions, parallax is something you would expect with the FE model. Our FAQ suggests that the stars are 3100 miles above the earth. Rowbotham suggests that they are 700-800 miles above earth. Whilst there is a discrepancy, the main point is that FE surmises the stars to be very much closer that Round Earth Theorists. Therefore the parallax errors EG uses as an example are very much relevant. One would expect the effects he describes, with the Flat Earth model.

New to the site?? I don't see the relevance. The very idea of the hottest and brightest stars being that close to earth is ridiculous...we would see them in full view...enormous in the sky....affecting the heat and perhaps climate on earth.

22

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ockham's Razor

« on: November 12, 2010, 02:26:22 PM »

THIS IS ridiculously funny.

SEriously though, Occam's Razor is used in situations where there is no further evidence to back up either side, and depends largely on logic and experience.
This is kind of like many of your examples... Ex. What is the simpler explanation, a beetle exists that can combine hydroquinones and hydrogen peroxide to mix and create a self defense mechanism that involves spraying out this foul toxic blast at potential enemies? Or that the beetle doesn't exist?

Well, the simple explanation would be that such a beetle doesn't exist, but IT DOES. It's called the bombardier beetle.
Why? we have evidence of it existing, it's been observed, analyzed, closely examined, the chemical chambers have been observed by biologist, we have seen small animals being attacked by this beetle "straight out of science fiction".

When have scientists seen the tallest structures and mountains from hundreds/thousands of miles away? When have scientists been able to discern an "edge" of the earth? How many times has air traffic control FAILED on locating and getting to the designated areas that travellers wish to reach? Why would the entire WORLD, even countries opposed to the US, acknowledge space travel and moon landings/a round earth. How many of your "FE scientists" have even suggestive concrete evidence of an "anti-moon" or upwards acceleration?
Horrible misuse of Occam's razor,...I have to say..

23

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that Earth is round, not flat

« on: November 12, 2010, 02:06:57 PM »

EPIC fail EnglshGentleman...

 

Why is it that when there is so much weight on one side of the argument, you FE'rs just brush it off and remain adamant...despite the mountain of incompatible and inconsistent claims of yours.....is it another conspiracy? are we trollin' you guyz 4 eva>??

24

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The Shadow Object/Anti-Moon Revealed?

« on: November 12, 2010, 02:02:32 PM »

Newton also believed in the occult and supernatural, but RE'ers seem to ignore that and continue to hold Newton up as a genius.

I'm not sure why you think that's relevant (or even true).  We all have our eccentricities, and crazy people often prove to be the best thinkers.

So true,.....if.....we can exclude *cough* certain ppl from that classification....*cough*

25

Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Model of a Nuclear Sun is false.

« on: November 12, 2010, 01:58:20 PM »

How many peer reviewed papers on this subject do you have in your possession James? I mean from all "corners" of the world. Pun intended, not just in your little group.

Is the sun just a dwarf star for short??? we have evidence saying it isn't. You ppl claim to know more than you're capable of.

26

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 12, 2010, 01:49:50 PM »

Oh wow. Please read the FAQ and lurk. Everything you have stated has been gone over many times before.

As if the FAQ's had remotely satisfying answers. And they are marked by scientifically inaccurate/purely speculated information.

What advances and discoveries in modern science have been attributed to the flat earth "theory"?
If we sent you into space, would you comply given it's a free trip for you??? If not, why not.

27

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 12, 2010, 01:45:51 PM »

The only problem is that any evidence that supports a RE is inadmisable. Photos and GPS are all part  of the Conspiricy. Apparently about al 6.8 billion less 3 to 4 FES members have all been fooled by world governments, scientists, status quo...

oops, there's one little problem....evidence in such a world-wide conspiracy.

Now tell me, what advances in modern geography and geology have been brought up due to the conclusion of a flat earth??

28

Flat Earth Q&A / Why The Earth is undeniably ROUND

« on: November 11, 2010, 09:14:19 PM »

    Thank for my addition to the Flat Earth Forums.

I want to start by giving weight to the Round Earth idea so much that FET will be reduced to a feather.

UNDENIABLE evidence for a round/spherical EARTH.
1. Pictures of the Moon.

a. If you don't believe them, why not?
b. Why would all nations of the world be familiar with a spherical earth if the US reached there first, assuming it's a conspiracy?
c. What motive would the world, let alone the US, have for this?

2. GPS

a. GPS DEPENDs upon satellites orbiting a clearly ROUND earth
b. What are some reasons for rejecting this widely used technology?, GLOBAL positioning system

3. Planes

a. The Godfather of all arguments against FEH. Planes DEPEND upon a round earth to chart their routes and coordinates. It's been proven how a plane get's from point A to point B.
b. If you don't believe planes use GPS or other modes of transmission control, explain what makes this possible...

 



IF we sent one of you believers into space, how much are you willing to bet on the Earth still being flat?