1
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Whats the explanation behind the ISS?
« on: September 01, 2012, 08:31:14 AM »
Turns out the moon's really the size of a dinner plate, guys. I proved it with my telescope.
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.
2
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellite TV
« on: September 01, 2012, 08:29:24 AM »I don't see how you can write it off as such when it occurs with every satellite company. It isn't just local Joe's satellite TV. This is all of those companies PLUS multinational corporations with millions at their disposal. Wouldn't at least one get it right with dish installers?
I'm not sure how your signal going out is problematic for a round earth. It would seem to suggest that your dish does indeed need to be pointed at a very specific spot in the sky so that even slight shifts in the position of your dish or interference from weather can cause the signal to go out.
3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 02:29:57 AM »I can continue slaughtering you in this debate tomorrow if you'd like.
You're right. It can never work and we should never even try.
4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 02:01:34 AM »
From the very article you quoted:
Oh my goodness, friends.
Quote
Moriko’s son will soon enter eighth grade in his Long Island public middle school. Most of his friends are girls, and he dresses just like them: skinny jeans, black eyeliner, light lipstick and off-the-shoulder shirts from the girls’ department. (Moriko makes him wear a tank top underneath.) When his teachers asked which pronoun they should use when referring to him, he said masculine. But he doesn’t want to be called a boy, or a girl.
Oh my goodness, friends.
5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:32:50 AM »
All that's obvious is that you've never studied sociology, and the idea that "common sense" is a social construct. I'm not surprised that your merriam-webster definition doesn't include criticism of the concept of common sense, and how it's not something innate or always reliable.
6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:25:36 AM »
You see that you're wrong about common sense. Good.
7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:21:26 AM »I believe you will be hard-pressed to find a source confirming this definition (because you're wrong).
Read all about it, it's talked about a lot in sociology:
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/Sociology-and-Common-Sense.topicArticleId-26957,articleId-26834.html
8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:15:48 AM »It's not. It is in fact blindingly obvious to anyone with half a brain. That's why they call it "common sense".
Actually, it's called "common" sense because it's beliefs and attitudes that many people share. There's no guarantee that it's actually right, and common sense varies across different cultures.
9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 01:07:23 AM »I see, so nothing but the typical social conservative appeals to "common sense". How lazy.
Again, you have no idea of my political leanings. I'm actually extremely liberal about most things. But... yes, I do possess common sense, which I suppose might be why I don't simply toe the party line about everything.
You misunderstand. You're advancing a socially conservative position. It doesn't matter what party you adhere to. It's merely a description of what you're doing.
And your common sense, gasp, could be wrong! Don't bother actually looking into it, though, that might take some actual work.
10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:57:38 AM »
I see, so nothing but the typical social conservative appeals to "common sense". How lazy.
11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:51:17 AM »Well, according to the article he is still being teased.
Yes, kids often get teased about many things.
I'm not sure you're as in touch with the kids as you think you are. His behavior is making him an outcast,
Really, a complete outcast? Or are certain kids just teasing him?
and it will only get worse if he continues doing it (and again, his dad is not helping by supporting it).
You assume it will get worse.
12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:38:43 AM »
The deletion of that post is clearly an omission of error.
13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:35:03 AM »Well, considering that you completely misrepresented what I was saying, and clearly have no idea of my political leanings, it's frankly all I thought your response was worth.
Lol was Rushy's response. Please do pay attention.
14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:31:05 AM »
Lol is the best response you can come up with? Kids get used to things, especially if the adults around them aren't freaking out about it and the child in question stands up for him or herself. Considering that the kid here has a supportive father I don't think he's just going to crumple up into a ball of depression when other kids make fun of him.
I can speak from experience here, actually. As a stubborn child in kindergarten, I insisted on playing the part of the mother in little games of house. The teacher didn't scold me and when kids told me I was being a girl I said that I thought girls were great so what was the big deal? They got used to it, I got to play the part of the mom, and eventually I got sick of playing house and moved onto other things.
It was no big deal.
I've also spent a great deal of time in kindergarten and first grade classes, as both my mom and grandma taught at that level. I don't think you guys really know what you're talking about, honestly.
I can speak from experience here, actually. As a stubborn child in kindergarten, I insisted on playing the part of the mother in little games of house. The teacher didn't scold me and when kids told me I was being a girl I said that I thought girls were great so what was the big deal? They got used to it, I got to play the part of the mom, and eventually I got sick of playing house and moved onto other things.
It was no big deal.
I've also spent a great deal of time in kindergarten and first grade classes, as both my mom and grandma taught at that level. I don't think you guys really know what you're talking about, honestly.
15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Little boy bullied for wearing skirts; father starts wearing them too.
« on: September 01, 2012, 12:09:37 AM »This story is an example of liberalism going too far.
Other kids will get used to it, or he'll get sick of wearing dresses. As long as teachers aren't bullying him this sort of thing goes away once kids get used to things being different.
You and others are blowing this out of proportion. Please do tell us about how rampant political correctness is destroying society, though, or whatever other wisdom you've learned from chain emails.
16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellite TV
« on: August 31, 2012, 08:13:40 PM »OP, sadly I can not add personal experience of mine concerning satellites. I have been more than satisfied using the monopolizing Comcast Cable.
Thanks for posting to say that you have nothing to add. You're a real asset.
17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Earth as seen from the moon
« on: August 31, 2012, 05:08:09 AM »Whatever, the moon is supposedly vastly closser than Mars; practically no distance in comparison. Yet it's rarely probed. The lunar surface, complete with stunning backdrops of a fabricated earth, is simply harder to reproduce in a studio than putting a few cameras on an RC car and dropping it in the desert is.
And where in the desert would this be? Having lived in the southwest I can assure you that finding somewhere with no plants is still quite difficult.
18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellite TV
« on: August 31, 2012, 05:01:13 AM »Perhaps the sky acts as a giant wall. As if there was some sort of network of gears or something up there creating the illusion of vastness.
Pathetic reply. You're not even trying.
19
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Earth as seen from the moon
« on: August 31, 2012, 04:49:59 AM »Also, don't you find it strange that NASA keeps sending probes to Mars, hands down the most easily faked environment, when there is an entire "solar system" of places to probe? Curious.
Yes, how curious that they'd send rovers to the closest planet that isn't hot enough to melt them minutes after landing. It really makes you think.
20
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Earth as seen from the moon
« on: August 31, 2012, 04:48:30 AM »Mars looks exactly like the Southwest United States.
Not really, no. There are few places in the southwest where there are literally no plants, not to mention all the geography due to water erosion. The only similarity is that they're rocky and sandy.
21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Satellite TV
« on: August 31, 2012, 04:43:21 AM »Back in Kentucky, I would frequent a bar that would bounce its satellite signal off the face of an adjacent building. The direction a dish points needs not be accurate nor even pointing anywhere near the supposed location of the "satellite".
The dish needs to be pointed at wherever the signal is coming from, whether that's bounced off a wall or not. Unless there's a giant wall in the sky, though, this is hugely irrelevant.
22
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Stars in the southern hemisphere
« on: August 31, 2012, 04:40:05 AM »How do you explain that the stars seen from Australia revolve around a different point than the stars seen from England?
You have answered your own question. The stars do in fact move around different points. They are called celestial gears. This explains why they move differently depending on where you are on the disc.
And these gears meet at the equator? I'd love to see a diagram of how this is supposed to work because I can't see a solution that won't create more problems than it solves.
23
Flat Earth General / Re: Evidence for a Flat Earth
« on: August 31, 2012, 04:36:56 AM »It doesn't matter if Von Braun was director of NASA or not. What matter is that he was a Nazi scientist allowed to work on American space program. When me and several other members here showed you that Nazi scientists were involved in developing post WWII American technology you guys jumped on us and told us it aint so. After we proved you it is so, you guys just became wordy and began to argue semantics. Just admit your loss and move the fuck on. America had Nazi scientists working on projects, case closed.
Did you forget to make a point about all this nazi stuff?
24
Flat Earth General / Re: Evidence for a Flat Earth
« on: August 30, 2012, 06:26:21 PM »
So he wasn't in charge of NASA. In other words you're talking out your ass again, hoppy
25
Flat Earth General / Re: Evidence for a Flat Earth
« on: August 30, 2012, 04:29:05 PM »Nazis should not be in charge of any US programs or installations.
He wasn't in charge, so....
26
Flat Earth General / Re: Conspiracy Theor yquestions
« on: August 28, 2012, 05:32:55 PM »
If he had actual evidence to back up his claims, yes.
27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: So what do you FE'ers think about this?
« on: August 28, 2012, 04:59:10 PM »I am quite confident that if you selected 100 random Americans and asked them to point to Wales on an unmarked map of the world, no more than about 25% would get it right. There's a very funny video on Youtube of Americans being asked where places in the world are and getting it frighteningly wrong. Even more probably think Wales is part of England. I've personally had Americans identify the location of the UK as "near Hawaii" to me. Americans are notorious in the rest of the English speaking world for not knowing anything about the world beyond the borders with Canada and Mexico.
If you want to say I'm wrong about this, you can, but my experiences in America bear out the stereotype the rest of the world has of it being ignorant of world geography. I know for a fact that virtually nothing is taught about the rest of the world in American schools.
I'm no great patriot or anything, but posts like this bother me. Yes, we have ingorant people in the US. There are ignorant people in the UK and Europe, too. In fact, I'd say you'd have to be pretty ignorant to believe that a country as large and diverse as the U.S. can be summed up in idiotic little "they sure are dumb" factoids like the ones you bring up.
I'm not sure why people feel the need to shit on entire countries that they know so little about.
28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: So what do you FE'ers think about this?
« on: August 28, 2012, 01:28:07 AM »
I think you don't understand, Pongo. The lit area should be centered on wherever the sun happens to be, not 360 degrees surrounding the observer, unless they're right beneath the sun (which wouldn't be the case in Wales).
And perhaps address the issues brought up rather than being condescending. That might take some effort, though.
And perhaps address the issues brought up rather than being condescending. That might take some effort, though.
29
Flat Earth General / Re: Little Man, Big Door
« on: August 27, 2012, 04:52:30 PM »
Right outside the interior doorway, perhaps. I think it should be obvious to anyone with functional eyes that he's not outside of the lunar module like he is in the second picture.
30
Flat Earth General / Re: How are there timezones
« on: August 26, 2012, 05:11:19 PM »
2. Trigonometry. Take this right angle triangle for example:
Lets us suppose the sun is at point B. Line AC represents the disc of the Earth. An observer at C would see the Sun, while an observer at A would not. Why is this? The Sun's light has to penetrate a great deal more matter to get to point A than Point C. This is because the length of line AB is longer than line BC.
If the sun is 3000 miles up, that means the sun should be 34,290 miles away when the sun is 5 degrees above the horizon.
That's an awfully large area the sun should be visible in.