Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - RAmenBrother

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Flat Earth Debate / Re: 'Proof'
« on: April 08, 2007, 01:43:51 PM »
Actually, the Flat Earth Society was founded on fundamentalist interpretations of the Bible. This is further secured if you read up on FES under Voliva... scary man.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trinity of FE Proof
« on: April 05, 2007, 07:17:09 PM »
Ok, narcberry you've proven to have little grasp on the laws of nature and general happenstance before, and now you've taken the cake.

First off...

Greenhouse gases do not CAUSE global warming. They trap solar radiation, and NOT just ultraviolet radiation, but the entire spectrum that comes from the sun. The idea is that some (not all) light penetrates the atmosphere and irradiates the surface of the earth (as well as heating up the atmosphere on its way down). Only a tiny percentage of the light that hits the earth's crust is actually reflected; most of it is absorbed, which then warms the planet. However, since the air is so thick with greenhouse gases, what little light that is reflected then has to pass through that barrier again, and most of it doesn't make it, but ends up being absorbed by the atmosphere. Look at Venus, for example. It's so choked with greenhouse gases that we can barely see the surface, but the temperature on the surface is a uniform 485 degrees Celsuis, roughly.

Also, do you not fear that global warming will melt your ice wall? What will happen then? Oh yeah, btw, what is keeping the atmosphere from spilling over the perimeter of the ice wall?

Second: your spiel about sums of parts is not relevant as you simply take theories out of context, and put them in situations where they don't make sense. That is simply not proof for a flat earth, because you haven't actually done anything than show that you don't understand what that theory actually means.

Third: once again, you have shown you know nothing about force interactions, or anything else for that matter. The movement of the atmosphere is caused by the rotation of the earth, but like you pointed out, it is negligible (or is it negligable? I can't remember how you deciede to spell it today). What truly causes the motion of the atmosphere, as well as weather in general, is the sun. As you know, heat makes matter expand, therefore making it less dense. Exchanges in temperature throughout the atmosphere create an endless amount of convection currents that effectively create all weather we see.

Also, your post about how the distance between France and Romania is flat is skewed. You can't just say something and then call it fact. Where is your reference to the study that suggested these results? I don't care if YOU haven't done the study, but simply saying things doesn't make them true. And since the vast, vast, VAST majority of the world believes in a round earth, the onus is actually on you to come up with counter-proof, not the other way around. So stop asking RE'ers for proof, because we do not have to justify anything at this point.

3
To try and sort out why he acts the way he does.

4
What's your take on this, Frankis? Need your opinion here.

5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: When will you learn
« on: March 28, 2007, 11:47:53 AM »
I mentioned it in another post, but I think this site is more or less a thought experiment to point out how modern physics cannot truly differentiate between a round and flat earth.

6
I sincerely doubt that people like Frankis are capable of thought.

7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why no round Earth?
« on: March 28, 2007, 11:42:45 AM »
I sincerely doubt that more than one or two people actually believe the theory outlined in these boards. For one, it differs greatly from the "official" stance of the Flat Earth Society. I think it's mostly a thought experiment to show that modern theoretical physics doesn't care whether the earth is round or flat.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Evolution Theory
« on: March 28, 2007, 11:24:51 AM »
Uh, SPrinkz, I don't know you, but it looks like YOU'RE the only one flaming. I mean, look at your post. Everybody is a fucktard but you. I suggest you grow up and stop relying on cussing to get your point across, or simply go to another thread. We don't have to listen to you rave about how sure you are that you're correct.

9
Flat Earth Debate / Proof that franc T., Planar is just being an idiot
« on: March 28, 2007, 08:13:04 AM »
Below is a link to a copy of the Flat Earth Society's flyer that they send to people.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flatearth.html

Why, do you ask, is this proof that everything that Frankis describes is false? Well, because this letter directly contradicts essentially all of the things Frankis claims, outlined here:

1. Earth's motion

According to Frankis, the world constantly accelerating to create the force of gravitation. The letter (which was created by the most recent leader of the FES) directly states that the earth does not move AT ALL. Therefore, Frankis's model of an accelerating earth is just his own, and not related to FE theory at all. in fact, Rowbotham, the founder of FES, describes the earth as a "CIRCULAR NON-MOVING PLANE".

2. Earth's size

Frankis eschews an infinite earth, while the earth, according to official FES documents, is approximately 50 000 miles in circumference. Well, once again that directly contradicts with Frankis's own opinions, which, either way, are just wrong.

3. Sun and moon

Once again, Frankis claims that there are an infinite number of suns to light the infinite plane. Well, that's again wrong, as the letter describes only one sun and only one moon, which are equal in size and distance from the earth (32 and 3000 miles, respectively).

4. Biblical origins

The FES was brought about by the most literal translation possible of the English version of scripture. Therefore, its roots are inherently drawn from Christian dogma and ethos. Frankis seems to scorn religion in general, since he insults "round-earthers" by calling them zealots or religious idiots, etc., and by calling round earth theory a "religion". This shows he clearly doesn't care much for the Bible, let alone any religion, meaning that he is completely alienated from the actual standing of the FES.


These points outline two possibilities: 1.) Frankis is a troublemaker who just wants attention, or 2.) He makes up his own opinions which, in relation to the original Flat Earth Society, are way-out, wrong, and completely misunderstood.

Hmm, sounds like FE in general.

Regardless, there you have it! Frankis is an idiot and not worth wasting time on!

10
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Round Earthers have the burden of proof.
« on: March 28, 2007, 05:12:50 AM »
Now that's awfully convincing evidence. An infinite earth cannot rotate (or move at all, for that matter), ergo that experiment proves the earth's rotation. And by extension, disproves everything frankis says.

11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Round Earthers have the burden of proof.
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:54:59 PM »
Commence ignoring of ridiculous statements... now.

12
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Have you guys ever been in an airplane?
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:48:43 PM »
Aren't you supposed to capitalize letters beginning sentences and use apostrophes?

13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Have you guys ever been in an airplane?
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:37:16 PM »
Uh, yeah, that's the logical deduction to my statement.

14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Have you guys ever been in an airplane?
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:34:29 PM »
I don't like either, and Dragon ball Z (and most anime) is generally for the more basement-dwelling brand of dorks.

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: A plea for rational argument on the boards!
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:33:13 PM »
Just leave him be. He has nothing to contribute here, so nobody should have to give him the benefit of acknowledging his presence. My suggestion: just ignore him.

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Air, and how it contradicts a flat earth
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:30:25 PM »
Sorry pal, but you need to back up your statements. This is your last chance: either provide your claims with proofs and convincing details, or you will simply be ignored on this forum. And something tells me you like pissing people off. So I suggest cooperating, because if you don't, you'll have to find another forum to flame.

17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Air, and how it contradicts a flat earth
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:24:11 PM »
Uhh, because none of them rely on the shape of the eart, that's why not. Now answer my question.

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Orientation of the FE
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:22:45 PM »
What data do you have to support this?

19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: A plea for rational argument on the boards!
« on: March 27, 2007, 06:17:35 PM »
Sorry, I don't dignify your stupid posts with a response anymore. You've proven to everybody on this board that you are retarded.

I think it's pathetic that you've alienated yourself even from people on a flat earth internet forum. I can't imagine how socially challenged you must be in real life. Have fun being alone.

20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Have you guys ever been in an airplane?
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:43:24 PM »
Good for you. You can link wikipedia. Oh, and by the way, Dragon ball Z sucks.

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Round Earthers have the burden of proof.
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:39:06 PM »
I agree with all of the above, especially the part that makes me look smart :)

22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:35:08 PM »
qwerty, you are also not a benefit to these forums.

23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: When will you learn
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:32:17 PM »
Ok, well I'm not bothering to respond to your posts in this thread anymore, Frankis, on account of you being too dumb to provide counter-argument.

24
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Orientation of the FE
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:29:47 PM »
Frankis, you can't just say "wrong" and nothing else. Back it up, fool.

25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Air, and how it contradicts a flat earth
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:25:34 PM »
Ok, you listed somthing. Now, how do any of those contradict the existence of a round earth?

26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: A plea for rational argument on the boards!
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:24:22 PM »
Then why did you post? If you don't want to contribute to anything, then get lost.

27
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Round Earthers, can you explain this?
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:22:45 PM »
LOL, report someone for libel!? Who do you think you are? Wait, don't answer, I'll tell you. You are absolutely nothing, because you contribute nothing to society or anybody around you.

Not once have you described WHY the world should be flat. You just call everybody else the idiot, because you're totally delusional.

28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: A plea for rational argument on the boards!
« on: March 27, 2007, 05:19:46 PM »
OK then, Frankis, we'll pretend that both items have no "evidence". In fact, we'll ignore evidence altogether.

We have a world here. That world is full of data collected over the years.

Now, there are two independent theories: one where the earth is round, and one where the earth is flat.

At this point in time, the round earth theory is adopted by the vast majority of the populate.

Your job here is to convince them otherwise. To do that, you need to explain, using data about the world, why your theory should replace the current established theory. So far, you have not done that, and until you do, you are no challenge to anybody other than your babysitter.

29
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravity, or lack thereof
« on: March 27, 2007, 01:30:46 PM »
That would make sense, as it has been detected that the universe not only is expanding, but accelerating in its expansion. Whether or not it's a linear acceleration I don't know, but it could be one logical explanation for the flat Earth rocketing through the cosmos.

One thing that confuses me, though, is the path that the flat earth takes through the universe. Since we have mapped all six degrees of the sky around us (at least partially) that would imply that man has seen what could only be seen from the "bottom" of the flat earth. Does this mean that the earth rotates on an axis, like a pancake being tossed from a frying pan? If so, what would this mean for the direction the Earth zips through the universe? Does it always propel our side "forward", or does it follow one linear path, with the Earth rotating along it?

30
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravity, or lack thereof
« on: March 27, 2007, 01:22:39 PM »
Yeah, look up on that. I haven't heard anybody elaborate on what makes the earth do what it does, other than "it just does." I'd be interested to know what makes the earth do that, but it may be just as futile a question as "why does the sun do what it does?"

Pages: [1] 2 3 4