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 - cartwheelnurd

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
Flat Earth General / Questioning the validity of photographic evidence
« on: January 18, 2015, 09:12:56 PM »
Is use of photographs as evidence acceptable here? It seems like it is often used to support both sides of the issue. For instance, an FE'er might post a photo showing that earth's curvature can't be seen from certain heights, like an airplane. A RE'er might post a photo from space showing that the earth looks like a ball. Each of them would be accepting their own provided photograph but denying the validity of the other's. Obviously photos can also be edited or doctored. So is photographic evidence used to prove a point in any way valid?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flying off the disc
« on: November 05, 2013, 11:12:25 AM »
Seems like it would be easy to experiment and it seems unlikely that no one has even flown close to the edge.

WHy would anybody ever go ear there? To the mainstream society this ice wasteland doesn't even exist. The only reason this society hasn't gone there is because of a lack of resources/funds.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: sideways rocket
« on: November 04, 2013, 11:25:08 PM »
I believe the coldest temperature ever recorded is something to the effect of -122 degrees F.

Not cold enough to freeze nitrogen.

Mighty cold though, I have been out in -55 ambient temperatures before and that is f'n cold!

you're missing the point. It's a thought experiment, to see whether sufficient resources could help determine the temperatures at the edges of the earth, where it is inconcievable to travel to. It's not about weather, it's about measuring things we've never been able to measure.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: sideways rocket
« on: November 04, 2013, 11:10:01 PM »
Yes but as you approach the end of the Earth the temperatures supposedly get much colder, so this would simply be an experiment to try to find the rate at which it gets colder.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Voyager 1 - fake?
« on: November 04, 2013, 10:52:51 PM »
Here you go, a picture that you can look at on your computer that shows the curvature of the Earth....

It is taken from a tall building, which does not even violate you do not fly rule....

Photos are not valid evidence. First of all most photos are taken with a slight lens distortion causing much of what you see when you think you see the curvature of the earth from photos. Also, unless I see the same thing with my own eyes, how can I be sure that it is unaltered?

Common sense.

Things that we can take as happening naturally because logically, they will happen.

For instance, when I let go of a ball, it falls.

These beans are not magical (unless you count their ability to induce flatulence), because magical beans do not exist.

Winter follows fall, which follows summer, which follows spring.

If I bet on a lame horse, chances are I will lose.

If I go outside in the winter without a coat I will likely get cold.

Now lets look at some more complex things.

When you have a low pressure area in the northern hemisphere the wind around it circles in a direction whereas the predominant wind flow on the Eastern side will be towards the North, and on the Western side it will be to the south, if it is in the southern hemisphere it will be opposite.

The motions of the tides correspond with the positions of the sun and the moon as the tides are caused by gravitational effects.

The sun and the moon take the same amount of time to transverse the same angular distance in the sky no matter where that angular distance is in the sky.  (They both move across the sky at roughly ~15 degrees per hour).
This corresponds to the objects ability to travel in a straight line angular distance of 360 degrees.  If you hold an orange out with your hand at arms length and turn it at the same rate around you consider the first half of a turn to be 12 hours of day, the most logical way for the sun to make the rest of its journey to end up back to where it will rise in the morning would be that it continues on its same arc going around.

Grab an orange and spin around slowly until you are either dizzy, or figure it out.

most of what you said made sense, though I still don't understand how this affects the earlier statements in this thread. YEs most things are validated by basic logic, that doesn't mean that "Common sense" is an infallible research tool. Let's pitch a question that gets most people: A woman has two children. One is a boy. What is the probability that the other is a boy?

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Voyager 1 - fake?
« on: November 04, 2013, 10:30:56 PM »
Um, well, I have a theory that these beans I bought are magical.

Common sense would dictate otherwise.

There is a thing called Occam's razor, basically it says if you have to go through tons of jumps and loops in an attempt to prove your conclusion there may be issues with your conclusion.

In my theory I can produce all kinds of tests to prove it works.

I have yet to see the same from the Flat side....

Please elaborate. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove. Is your conclusion right just because it validates the experiment which you said would work? "Common Sense" really doesn't mean anything considering the complexity of the human brain.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Voyager 1 - fake?
« on: November 04, 2013, 10:11:06 PM »
So, when you go to Florida and watch them launch something, where does it go?

Likely the launched object is sent high enough that it is out of sight, then directed to another, unknown location where it is recovered or it is taken from the air by a recovery vehicle and transported in secrecy to another location. Remember that since the space travel conspiracy is a conspiracy we have no way of knowing how or why they do what they do, we can only speculate.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Voyager 1 - fake?
« on: November 04, 2013, 10:04:49 PM »
So then, where did all of the data from the probe actually come from?

Why did the probe fail if it was never even sent into space?

NASA has a very extensive knowledge of the physics they are pretending to do. They know what type of measurements the public would expect or want to hear, so to protect their points someone created this false data.

The probe failed because no corporation is perfect, and to avoid suspicion even NASA must make mistakes.

Flat Earth Q&A / sideways rocket
« on: November 04, 2013, 10:01:17 PM »
So we know that as we approach the edge of the Earth the temperatures get colder and colder. I don't think we know exactly how cold it canget, but would there be, assuming no limits to resources, a way to figure that out? Could you create a very powerful rocket fillled with a gas that condenses into liquid at excessively low temperatures, something basic even like nitrogen, and fire it in any sideways direction, preferably close to Antarctica? With the proper measuring devices on the rocket we would be able to figure out at what point the temperatures got cold enough to freeze the nitrogen.

Disclaimer: This is a thought-experiment, I'd like to assume the creation of such an experiment is possible and the necessary recording and measurement devices exist and don't measure error.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Voyager 1 - fake?
« on: November 04, 2013, 09:55:20 PM »
I have friends who have done work for NASA, was all of the things that they put together to send a probe to orbit the moon faked as well?

Obviously, since space travel is impossible, the moon cannot be reached, so a lunar probe must be faked as well. However those who work for NASA might not be aware. As with many other conspiracies, only the very highest of authorities probably knows about the conspiracy and your friends are unaware that they are building a probe based on incorrect physics which will never be launched to the moon.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Math and predicting the future.
« on: November 04, 2013, 09:52:58 PM »
If you go here there is a slightly blurry, but still an image of Uranus...

I took it...

With a digital camera in my back yard....

It does exist!

How did you find Uranus? did you use the guide from the magazine you found? If so, how can you be sure you have the right planet without calculating its orbit and proving that it has the same irregular orbit that scientists have discovered. Unless you did all the work yourself, you're still trusting someone else's word that it is Uranus as opposed to any other celestial body that happened to be there at that time.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Voyager 1 - fake?
« on: November 04, 2013, 09:46:29 PM »
What reason is there to say that Voyager is real? All we know about it is its pictures and what NASA, a company substantiated by spreading false information, has told us about it. Unless you see it in interstellar space for yourself, which is impossible, you would simply be believing what the media says.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Firmament speculation
« on: December 13, 2012, 04:52:57 PM »
The Bible says the the dome is hung like hammed sheets. It is probably made of ice or water, the sky is blue, somewhat like the blue of the oceans.

How does one "ham" a sheet?

And since when can the bible be taken literally, or used as evidence?

Flat Earth General / Re: List of flaws in FET
« on: December 13, 2012, 01:04:11 PM »
A response to the list of flaws in RET

1: Eclipses

2: Neutrinos

3: Distances in southern hemisphere

4: Reliance on religious principles to support theories

Feel free to add more!

1.. Explained by eyewalls

2. No issue

3. An issue in RET, not FET

4. Incorrect

What are eyewalls in this context?

How do you explain the neutrino phenomenon (not breaking the speed of light, but being shot into the ground to arrive at another detination)

We can support ourselves with data, and have. YOu have not.

Only for some is religion a problem.

Flat Earth General / Re: List of flaws in FET
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:56:56 PM »
flatorange, I could go on and on. Most of those proofs are downright ridiculous.

29. If the Earth were a globe, it would, unquestionably, have the same general characteristics - no matter its size - as a small globe that may be stood upon the table. As the small globe has top, bottom, and sides, so must also the large one - no matter how large it be. But, as the Earth, which is "supposed" to be a large globe, bas no sides or bottom as the small globe has, the conclusion is irresistible that it is a proof that the Earth is not a globe.

Yes this makes sense. Globes definitely have definitive sides and had been seen from space in 1885.

67. Seven-hundred miles is said to be the length of the great Canal, in China, Certain it is that, when this canal was formed, no "allowance" was made for "curvature." Yet the canal is a fact without it. This is a Chinese proof that the Earth is not a globe.

This also makes sense. Chinese proofs are fundamentally different than western ones. Also the author seems to assume that people are perfect and that every measurement is exact, as well as the fact that there would be a noticable curvature over supershort distances.

THese are all ridiculous.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Flat earth non-believers forum?
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:25:20 PM »

This is the Flat Earth Society, in case you are confused. There is a Round Earth Society with a round earth believers section. Feel free to post your convictions there.

I did not know there was such an elaborate parody website! That is cool. Thanks, Thork.

Flat Earth General / Re: NASA want suggestions
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:19:57 PM »
I would vote for that. It would be fun to hear the NASA/FES debate. Plus, I know some higher-up people in NASA (for real) and maybe he'd be on it.

Flat Earth General / Re: NASA want suggestions
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:16:55 PM »
Some ass downvoted it  >:( where is the rest of FES?

Either way you guys can pull a victory from this.

If it passes you get respect.

If it is downvoted people fear you or are too worried to try it.

Then there is the actual debate, of course.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Godwin's law
« on: December 13, 2012, 12:14:17 PM »
I would argue that some of the most evil men in history were the most intelligent. I havnt got acces to names at the moment but their are many. But we all no your views rushy they are right hear on this thread for everyone to see.

It is a common misconception that doing evil or manipulating people requires "cunning" or "intelligence." Manipulating others to get ahead is easy and requires very little thought, while purposely conditioning yourself not to do so requires discipline and intelligence. It is instinct to step on other people, it is the way of evolution. It takes an intelligent person to conciously refrain from doing so.

I'm starting to grow off topic as nothing of this is even remotely relevant to the original argument. Do you have any other questions regarding space vehicle accidents and why they are actually necessary to a good fake program?

If you study hitler's war strategies you will see that he was in reality very smart. The atrocities he commited were horrible, but everything he did was efficient, it was well thought out, and it, to some extent, worked. That is the reason it took so long to defeat him. A foolish general wouldn;t have been able to cause WWII and execute a genocide which killed 11 million.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Firmament speculation
« on: December 13, 2012, 11:50:56 AM »
Thanks thork.

Also, is the firmament what causes the "bending" of light that you talk about?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Firmament speculation
« on: December 13, 2012, 07:39:01 AM »
It is composed of air - largely a mixture of oxygen, nitrogen and carbon dioxide.

It doesn't come to an exact end - it definitely tapers off somewhere like 800 miles above the Earth. But most of its substance is contained within 100 miles of the planet.

Yes, it does move - it rotates with the earth, and besides this is made of air currents influenced by temperature fluctuations, etc.

It is colorless, but appears blue during the day due to the refraction of sunlight.

It does not have an inherent shape - it simply adheres to the Earth's surface.

Yes but if it is made only of air, how does it protect the earth so well? What happens when it hits things like space dust and rocks?

But thanks for the speculation this is all we got from pongo:

I'd prefer not to speculate. So much is still unknown.


Suggestions & Concerns / Flat earth non-believers forum?
« on: December 13, 2012, 07:37:00 AM »
The believers get one. Can we get one too?


Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Presidential Poll
« on: December 12, 2012, 09:13:59 PM »

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: So I'm wondering...
« on: December 12, 2012, 08:21:09 PM »
Nope. You don;t get mad whilst talking to walls.

Unless you do, in which case I would suggest consulting a psychiatrist

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Curvature of the Earth
« on: December 12, 2012, 08:20:00 PM »
The whole thing was a promotional stunt. They played up the "space jump" with many mindless journalists repeating it. There was a graphic of a spinning globe spinning silently behind the shots as the backdrop. It was pure hype. The wide-angle lenses just reinforced the "space jump" idea and gave it added drama. It was a giant Red Bull advert and they got a slew of free airtime.

You're saying the jump was never made?

The Lounge / Re: Punch? TV?
« on: December 12, 2012, 07:17:47 PM »
THis is a lounge. Can we get a punch bowl or a TV in here? Sitting and talking is often worse without some snacks and a football game on.
You should ask your parents, not internet people.

But this is a public place, not a home.

Plus I don't live with my parents. What made you think that?

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why
« on: December 12, 2012, 07:16:47 PM »
many people say the motive is money, but would cost more to fake a space program than to actually have one.

And the Chinese government has no motive.  It controls the core economy - why would it need to p155 about with a fake space program ?

Yes, "the government" as a whole controls the core economy, the people in charge of their space program do not.  They would be the ones becoming rich by faking space travel, not the government.

If money was the only reason for a so called conspiracy, NASA would have switched tactics many years ago.
So many better reasons to fake something, for much more money.

Switched tactics, what does that even mean?

It means found a different way to conspire against us rather than try to get the funding that they get. I think that's what he waas trying to convey.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Gravity wells
« on: December 12, 2012, 07:12:24 PM »
Imagine the well as space-time. Not just space or time individually. The sheet of rubber is distorted by gravity wells just like a rubber sheet would in the photo. It is not taking the dimension of time into account, so It looks like actual wells. This is relativiety (I can;t remember which one)

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Round the world flights
« on: December 12, 2012, 05:55:56 PM »

This is the map of the world from the FE perspective. See that "around the world " flights would be going around n a circle the north pole in the center of the map.

By the way, I am a REer.

Also read the FAQ. It answers a lot of questions.

The Lounge / Punch? TV?
« on: December 12, 2012, 05:45:48 PM »
THis is a lounge. Can we get a punch bowl or a TV in here? Sitting and talking is often worse without some snacks and a football game on.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15