1

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: The moon landing, the exploration of planets, etc, ALL F

« on: December 08, 2006, 04:20:18 PM »

The most obvious satire ever written.

2

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Australia doesn't exist

« on: November 17, 2006, 09:10:52 PM »

we have gone over this... sometimes they take you to a highly advnced studio, sometimes they shoot you...

however, i belive they have an amazing 3d virtual reality machine that actually makes austrilia come to life...

How come you can live in Australlia?

You can't silly. It doesn't exist.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Space shuttle videos...

« on: November 16, 2006, 10:13:16 AM »

It's pretty clear that photos are not necessary in proving the shape of the Earth anyway, why don't you rely on your brain instead of photographic evidence.  The round Earth theory is thousands of years old, yet photos are only a few hundred years old...

Because any little bit of evidence flung at you, you eople deny. How do you explain a horizon, and the fact that as objects move farther away the Earth curvuture becomes apparent?

4

Flat Earth Q&A / Please explain

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:57:41 PM »

well, the majority would not say that unless there was proof

Like, say, the Earth-centered Universe?

Sorry, pal, but a majority belief doesn't mean much. It doesn't make things true.

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: what does the ice wall rest on?

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:56:31 PM »

We have sent many spies to the ice wall.  Unfortunately security is so tight that all they've managed to come back with is their observations (no physical proof).  Many Bothans died to bring us this information.

Do you have any proof at all to back up this claim?

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Please explain

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:52:42 PM »

well, so far the poll is 4-1, so... i am thinking i will keep my belifs of 16 years... but hey maby they can come up with something that actually makes sense to someone who is sober... i am guessing you would have to be high on both crack and pot, plus be drunk with beer to understand this stuff

I fail to understand how the poll results can have anything to do with the shape of the world.  Given what you currently know, if a poll was run tomorrow that showed that every single person in the world apart from you believed that butterflies are actually the most intelligent life form on the planet, would that make you believe it too?

Ingsoc...

7

Flat Earth Q&A / Please explain

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:36:18 PM »

why dont you crack heads just go around the fucking earth and see for yourself that its a fucking sphere what do you live in the 15th century to beilive that the world is flat? what are you gonna start burning witches soon. in this day and age people should not be as ignorant as you fse people it makes me ashed that people could be so stupid. think clearly why the hell would the governments do this. you have to go see a psychatrist and take some prozac or something you are too paranoid.
crack heads.

Apparently, you die if you try such a thing. I'd call BS, but I think the notion kind of disproves itself without me.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: what does the ice wall rest on?

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:34:56 PM »

The Ice Wall extends to the sky line which is infinetly far away. It is a waste land with no life on it at all. It is COLD out there. It starts at the antartica and keeps going out. It's like being in the middle of a plate and the outside rim is the antarctic and then you can keep going in any direction horizontally to the skyline. And the Sky is a big ball around us. Over and under.

Didn't you guys say the government stops anyone who gets close to the ice wall?

yes because they want you to think that the earth is round

So, how can you people even know about an ice wall? If it's so well guarded, then logically you people shouldn't even exist.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Space shuttle videos...

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:32:33 PM »

Videos can easily be faked.  We've presented photos proving the Flat Earth before and they've been dismissed as fakes.  Surely the same logic that applies to us should apply to you.

There are photos that are clearly faked, and some that are not so clearly faked. However, that does not mean you can instantly dismiss any photograph against your theories as faked.

It's annoying when photographs that someone personally takes are discounted as fake. It's annoying as hell.

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Please explain

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:29:49 PM »

1. the sun

2. nearspace projects

3. commercial space travel

4. shortwave radio

Oh, and I'll just quote them for you before they ever get here.

"Propaganda."

I wouldn't even waste your time on them...

11

Flat Earth Q&A / Government Conspiracies?? earth flat??? Ice wall??

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:28:15 PM »

lol so can you plz explain how we can exist if your version of the sun in no way possible would even exist??

I think what you're so eloquently trying to say is that it is impossible for the FE model of the sun to exist, and since that's impossible, it is also impossible for us to exist in the same model.

I concede that I didn't really understand what you wrote very well, so it's possible that I'm wrong about what you're trying to say; I'm probably dyslexic.  So if I am wrong as to the point I'm about to rebut, I sincerely apologise and will endeavour to better understand your points before commenting on them in the future.

To start with the first part of your claim - "how can we exist" - I think it's an undeniable fact that we do indeed exist, at least for our definition of existence.  To quote Descartes; "Cogito ergo sum." - "I think, therefore I am" - if we didn't exist we wouldn't be capable of thinking.

So the question of our existence is, I believe, not up for debate.  

So when you say "how can we exist if it is impossible for the Sun to exist in the proposed model" (paraphrased) - Since we know that we exist we are left with two possible theories.

1.  We exist, therefore it is impossible for the Sun to follow the FE postulate.

2.  We exist and the Sun does follow the FE postulate, therefore the statement that this is impossible is false.

Now I think that leads to the obvious question; Why is it impossible for the Sun to exist in the proposed theory?  Obviously the current theories of physics don't really seem to be able to explain how it could happen naturally so we're left with a couple of different theories.

1.  Current physics is wrong.

2.  The Sun was created artificially.

Theory two would mean essentially that life on Earth was put here artificially, and indeed this theory is consistent with the theory of the grand conspiracy convincing us that the Earth is round.  Of course theory 1 could also be correct in the context of theory one.

We could speculate other reasons as to our existence could continue in respect to the sun, and I couldn't claim that this post is anything more than speculation but I think I clearly give a possible answer to how we can exist and why the Sun can also exist in FE theory.

I don't think the assumption that because we exist, the FE Sun can't exist is a logical statement at all.  I don't see anything in our existence that points to the FE Sun not existing.  Clearly this argument revolves around proving that it is impossible for the FE sun to exist.  I can think of a brilliant way of proving this (one way or the other) so I'd give that some more thought if I were you.

The Sun is artificial?

12

Flat Earth Q&A / Please explain

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:25:09 PM »

oh...

5. skynet/wildblue (satilite internet)

6. PS3

PS3?

13

Flat Earth Q&A / ...Absurd

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:24:16 PM »

So...Any picture used anywhere of evidence that there is a round Earth at any time will instantly be dismissed as propaganda? Even if I were to video tape clear evidence?

...My, you guys sure do love having an unstoppable handicap, don't you?

14

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It's been fun ...

« on: November 15, 2006, 09:18:57 PM »

You failed to understand that I did understand the explanation, but chose to ignore it.  Just because something can be explained a certain way doesn't make it right.

I understood that you said you understood it. Then you made many comments that indicated complete lack of understanding:
In regards to a proof that showed .999...=1 by multiplying by 10:

Ok, now try multiplying 0.9999... by a number that isn't base ten (like 2, for instance).

Also:

Wrong; 1/9 = 0.1111... + 1/(9 * infinity).

Justification:

"infinity" is a number.  It can be defined as "the largest possible number in a set."  Therefore, it exists.  The reciprocal of infinity (1/infinity) can be defined as "the smallest positive number."  Therefore, it exists.  Only human logic prevents you from formally giving "infinity" and its reciprocal a value.

The problem with this is if we define infinity to be a number, and define it's reciprocal to be the smallest positive number, we get something that doesn't have any properties that we think numbers should have: for example, it won't be a field.

In regards to the uncountability of the reals:

On interval (0,1), there is/are exactly 1 or 2 (depends on the definition in use for "natural numbers") natural number(s), but there are infinitely many real numbers.

Couldn't you have also turned them into functions and used L'Hospital's Rule?

On a side note, I knew what he was doing. Oh, AND I agree with it.

You can keep claiming you understand what's going on as much as you like, but as long as you keep making comments which demonstrate that you don't have a clue what's going on, I will continue to ignore your protestations of understanding.

Respectfully,
Skeptical Scientist

I noticed that; seemed very odd.

15

The Lounge / Lincoln and Kennedy Coincidences

« on: November 15, 2006, 04:47:37 PM »

it is still fascinating though.  :x

It's not, really.

16

Flat Earth Q&A / Just curious...

« on: November 15, 2006, 04:19:45 PM »

I would have to veer north to reach it, which certainly didn't happen.

That's good, since you were going west.

Obviously. I can tell which direction a ship is heading.

So, all three maps disagree with my trip. Does this not poke a hole in your argument?

No, because all FE maps show you going west.

No. No they don't. On the first it is literally impossible. You can't do it without running into the ice wall. On the second, after heading west a couple hundred miles, the boat would have had to veer north to reach it. And the third likewise would be impossible unless I went all the way around South America, the same as the first.

And may I say, you guys should choose on what your world really looks like. I'm afraid these maps don't match up at all.

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Just curious...

« on: November 14, 2006, 09:56:28 PM »

I would have to veer north to reach it, which certainly didn't happen.

That's good, since you were going west.

Obviously. I can tell which direction a ship is heading.

So, all three maps disagree with my trip. Does this not poke a hole in your argument?

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Just curious...

« on: November 14, 2006, 03:58:40 PM »

All of the flat Earth maps are completely different. In the first it would be impossible, and in the other two I would have to veer north to reach it, which certainly didn't happen.

19

Flat Earth General / The Conclusive Categorical Conspiracy Compendium

« on: November 14, 2006, 03:28:41 PM »

First off, the ice wall is on land.  I would assume the land has some good thickness to it.

I was under the impression your ice wall was what held back the oceans.

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Just curious...

« on: November 14, 2006, 03:25:17 PM »

When I went from San Diego to Japan by sea a while back, I must have crossed into the Twilight zone. I mean, Japan's on the other side of the world, right? I should have encountered the ice wall, yes?

21

Flat Earth General / The Conclusive Categorical Conspiracy Compendium

« on: November 14, 2006, 03:04:59 PM »

They guard the wall and probably don't drive on it very often, for fear of sliding off the earth.

Speaking of mad ravings, how thick is this wall? Must be a kicker if it holds back the ocean.

22

Flat Earth General / The Conclusive Categorical Conspiracy Compendium

« on: November 14, 2006, 02:57:45 PM »

No, I read it. It's simply absurd. There's still hundreds and hundreds of miles of land for each man. And snowmobiles? You don't drive snowmobiles on a wall of ice!

You can't drive a snowmobile on land covered in snow?

If there were an ice wall, it wouldn't be flat. It would be jagged.

23

Flat Earth General / The Conclusive Categorical Conspiracy Compendium

« on: November 14, 2006, 02:46:07 PM »

obviously you havent found Erasmus's thread about guarding the ice wall either.  he based it on gaurds patrolling on snowmobiles from spaced out stations.  it made sense.  i'll have a browse for it in a tick and see if can link you guys.

No, I read it. It's simply absurd. There's still hundreds and hundreds of miles of land for each man. And snowmobiles? You don't drive snowmobiles on a wall of ice!

24

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: My Problems With FE.

« on: November 14, 2006, 11:17:42 AM »

Now, I read the FAQ, but there are still holes in the theory.

1. The Conspiracy. The idea of a spherical Earth dates back to earlier than ancient Greece. In fact, most people have believed that the earth is round for millennia now. To propose a conspiracy that would hold for millennia without any faults is unfathomable.

2. The seasons. Although the FAQ explains that the seasons are caused by the change in the radius of the sun's motion. Okay, but why does the radius change? What force causes this motion and how is it approximately periodic?

3. The stars. How does the FE model explain the motion of the stars? In particular, the circular movement of the stars and why different constellations can be seen at different latitudes? Also, what is the explanation for supernovas?

4. The planets. How does FE explain the movement of planets through the sky? Importantly, explain the retrogression of planets (as the year goes on, the planets move through the sky, but periodically, they move in the other direction, forming a small loop) and the precession of the perihelion for Mercury. Furthermore, explain eclipses of planets, like the recent movement of Mercury in front of the Sun. Finally, what about the moons of the planets - like Io of Jupiter?

5. The sun. Where does its energy come from to produce light?

6. The horizons. In, for example, the Great Plains, one should be able to see effectively forever on a clear day. However, this isn't true. One can only see to the horizon.

7. Earthquakes. What causes earthquakes in this flat earth?

8. Magnetism. In the Round Earth theory, the center of the earth is a flow of plasma which creates a circular current which causes the magnetism of the Earth. How does FE account for this? Also, how does it account for the occasional flip of the poles?

9. Gravity. Please explain variable gravity - the acceleration due to gravity is different depending on one's location on earth and altitude.

There are surely others, but these are just what I have right now.

Prepare for exceedingly vague answers. It's what they do.

25

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Australia doesn't exist

« on: November 14, 2006, 10:36:26 AM »

I thought that would have been obvious. The fact that the government puts so much effort into covering it up is just more proof that the Australia Conspiracy is much bigger than the Flat Earth Conspiracy.

I can assure you that anyone who doesn`t really feel a passion for flatland bmx, can do what Simon or Mike S. does, if they were agent from the government, they wouldn`t be spending so much time practicing bmx, also there are thousands of bmxers in austrailia, you ar egoign to tell me all of them are agents?

then most of the world`s population is an agent..........because the guys who filmed the videos were also agents, the editors too, and everyone else involved.[/quote]

It's pretty obvious, really. All of them were hired by the government. Anything anyone else tells you must be propaganda.

26

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Australia doesn't exist

« on: November 13, 2006, 11:53:41 PM »

kid...  :?

Would you prefer 'sport?'

27

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Australia doesn't exist

« on: November 13, 2006, 11:37:02 PM »

Your feelings towards what I say or who I am have no bearing whatsoever

I really cared about your opinion too

I hate to break it to you kid, but the truth is not dependant on my feelings.

It actually makes me very sad really...

28

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Silly rabbit!

« on: November 13, 2006, 11:24:56 PM »

Hahahahaha maybe if you'd been here more than a day, or had read any of the topics, you would know. Burn on you mcTroll!

You wound me. I really cared about your opinion too. Drat...

Yeah, but no one cares about anything you have to say at all.  :?[/quote]

Your feelings towards what I say or who I am have no bearing whatsoever on what is true.

29

Flat Earth Q&A / Okay. I want pictures of this ice wall.

« on: November 13, 2006, 11:13:19 PM »

are you suggesting because eyes are round the earht is round?  thats the strangest proposal i've heard here since penguins being genetically engineered by russian scientists in the 1960's.

No, I was implying that if you have eyes and half a brain you should be able to tell the Earth is spherical in nature.

30

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Silly rabbit!

« on: November 13, 2006, 10:53:35 PM »

Hahahahaha maybe if you'd been here more than a day, or had read any of the topics, you would know. Burn on you mcTroll![/quote]

You wound me. I really cared about your opinion too. Drat...