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.

Topics - 6strings

Pages: [1]
Arts & Entertainment / The Music Game
« on: February 19, 2006, 07:22:50 AM »
Right, so here's my idea for a game, because people here seem so unhappy with one another; also it may turn people onto new music they like.

Here's how it works, one person names a song they like, the next person who wants to post listens to that song (yay, illegal downloads!) and says whether they like it or not, and why (yes, you have to give a reason why, otherwise this will easily degenerate into "my music rocks, yours sucks").  The reason can be as simple as, "I don't really like the feeling of this song", just keep it civil.  They then post a song they like.

Anyone who wants to post has to "evaluate" either the previous two songs, or up to their last post, whichever comes first.  Hopefully, this'll help spread musical diversity to the world!  Also, you can't suggest more than 1 song per post.

So, to get the ball rolling, here's my suggestion:
The Extremist by Joe Satriani

Flat Earth Q&A / An exercise in Logic
« on: February 02, 2006, 06:49:14 PM »
So the thread is badly named.  Sue me.

I just had a thought; post-modern relativism.

Alrighty flat-earthers, listen up, because this might just be the bullshit theory that you can use as a lifeboat in these horribly unfriendly, and all-too-well charted seas of Logic, Reason, and Scientific Fact.

Essentially, post modern relativism states that (roughly paraphrased):
1) The unisvers does not physically exist
2) We only percieve things in our own "reality construct", and have no way of experiencing them from another's point of view
3) As things don't truly exist, our only understanding of them is through our experiences of them, which cannot, necessarily, be stated to relate to another's experiences.

Ergo, all views of the world are equally valid.  The earth is flat, if you believe it's flat.

Here's the catch though; it's also round if you think it's round.
Granted it's not the round-earth smashing theory you're looking for, but it's probably the closest you're gonna get.

So, opinions?

Flat Earth Q&A / Round Earth "Gravity"
« on: January 14, 2006, 07:51:42 PM »
For my next magic trick, and to prove I'm smarter than all you other "real" flat-earthers, I'll point out a chink in the round earth gravity theory, which none of you have been able to do as of yet, despite your attempts to.

Ok, so I've got a question for all you round earthers who fanatically cling to your gravity theory: why isn't the moon attracted to the sun rather than the earth?  Let's do the math (ask Mundi to check it for you).

The equation to calculate the force gravity is exerting on an object is this:
Force= (Mass 1 * Mass 2)/ distance between masses^2

Now, let's calculate the force between earth and the moon:
F=(7.347 67310^22 kg (moon's mass) x 5.973610^24 kg (earth's mass))/384,403 km ^2
F=43.8921x10^46 kg^2 / 1.477566641x10^11 km^2
F=29.7057x10^35 kg^2/km^2

Now between the moon and the sun:
F=(1.989110^30 kg (sun's mass) x 7.347 67310^22 kg)/ (149.610^6 km (sun's distance from earth)+384,403 km(moon's distance from earth))^2
F=14.6152x10^52 kg^2 /2.2495321143x10^16 km^2
F=6.4970x10^36 kg^2/km^2

Now, I think it's safe to state that 6.4970x10^36>29.7057x10^35
So...what explains this?

« on: January 07, 2006, 09:23:46 PM »
So, I've looked at all the evidence, weighed it carefully, and decided that the flat-earth model makes more sense. (/sarcasm).

In all seriousness though, flat-earthers, listen up:
In my fifty odd posts, I have systematically destroyed all your arguments, you have never successfully managed a logical rebuttle, in fact, in most cases, you've neer launched any rebuttle at all after my posts, but simply ran away.  From this, one can conclude that I must have some overwhelming advantage, either:

A) My genius towers over your collective intellects
B) I have facts on my side (ie: the earth is round)

Now, as accepting point B causes you to vanish in a puff of smoke (I can only assume this is what happens, because you always seem to disappear after I prove you wrong), one must accept that I am smarter than all of you by leaps and bounds.

My problem is that I feel bad for you and enjoy a good argument, and you guys are so defenseless, and so this is my announcement:

Until further notice, I am, for all intents and purposes (or until I get bored), all flat-earther; I will use twisted logic and my genius (comparative to your own intelligence) for your cause, retarded though I may find it, simply because I feel sorry for you.

Flat Earth Q&A / Maps and such
« on: January 05, 2006, 06:08:15 PM »
So, I note that the flat-earthers have been destroyed in basically every thread here, which is hilarious.  Everyone, give yourselves a big high five.  But I figure I'll throw them a bone and make a topic that they haven't been destroyed on yet.

Now kids, I ask you all to take out your atlases, and look at the world map.  Look at Groenland, it's that big country to the north-east of Canada.  Now see, that's actually the's not that big, however, its contours are exactly where they should be in relation to all the other countries.

Now take out your spherical globe (flat earthers, you may need to go to your neighbors houses for this one.  Explain to them how you're trying to figure out if the earth is indeed round.  Tell me what they say), look at the same country.  Looks small doesn't it?  Notice how it's still in the same place in position in relation to everything else?

Uh oh...looks like the earth is a globe...Now flat earthers, if your crying by now (which I assume you are, as a result of your entire world view being shattered), look on the bright side; you can spin the globe and watch the pretty countries go round and round!  Couldn't do that with a flat earth now could you?

Flat Earth Q&A / Round earth Gravity vs. Flat earth "Gravity"
« on: January 02, 2006, 05:11:42 PM »
Ok, so I'm sitting in this plane right? And the captain's all, "Ladies and gentlemen, if you look your windows, you'll see that the earth is flat."
So I look and my window, and I'll be damned, he was right, I even saw that crazy ice wall.  And that all got me thinking, "hey, maybe I was wrong, maybe I was a little harsh on all those guys on that forum".

But then my trip started going bad and monkeys started throwing their feces at me 'till the LSD wore off, and then, clear minded and lucid, I thought: "What are those glue-sniffing pseudo-hippies on? And how can I get some?  And hey, if there's no gravity, why are my feet hitting the ground?"

That last thought stayed with me for a while, and the more I thought about it, the more I realized it didn't make sense.  See, the way gravity works is that every mass that's smaller than earth (which is you) is pulled towards the center of earth's gravity, which means that as I walk, my foot is pulled towards the ground.

But flat-earthers don't believe that's how gravity works, they believe that the earth rushes up at a rate of 9.8m/s/s.  Ignoring the many obvious flaws with this, such as the fact that we should have, reached the speed of light, this means my foot shouldn't hit the ground.  

Try this experiment:
-Stand up
-Lift your leg
-Release all the muscles in your leg

Notice how your leg falls to the ground?  Iff the earth were rushing up, this wouldn't happen, because your other leg would act as a brace between the ground and your body.  Meaning your leg should float.  It doesn't.

QED.  Gravity is not the result of the earth rushing upwards.

Anyone care to explain to me why I'm wrong?

Flat Earth Q&A / Flat-Earth's gravity Vs Planes
« on: December 11, 2005, 07:39:51 PM »
I have a question about the flat-earth theory of gravity; it assumes that the world is flying upwards, causing the "illusion" of things falling to the ground right?

But if you think about this, and how it would affect airplanes, wouldn't an airplane that's flying at a level attitude be constantly falling towards the earth, as the earth is rising toward the plane?

If this isn't the case, the plane would have to be rising at the same rate as the ground is coming towards it, but as the plane has no propulsion on the bottom of it to keep it parallel and rising and a constant rate, this isn't possible.

So, could any flat-earther explain this phenomenon to me?

Pages: [1]