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 - Tim Bishop

Pages: [1] 2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tripping the Light Fantastic.....again
« on: September 02, 2008, 08:10:31 AM »
That map they used looks pretty flat to me... :'(

The Lounge / Re: Have a question about physics?
« on: September 02, 2008, 08:08:14 AM »
Discuss? All that is in the FAQ!

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: help me
« on: September 01, 2008, 08:28:37 PM »
Read the FAQ. Think about everything my brother Tom Bishop says.


All the answers are in the FAQ, check.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: How do you deny private spacecraft?
« on: August 31, 2008, 01:39:56 PM »
Terminal altitude of spaceship 1 was 382,000 feet.  Thats 72 miles, 613.3 yards

Kilometers, please.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Can you disprove the Flat Earth Theory?
« on: August 30, 2008, 09:46:26 PM »
Why don't round earther's set up a series of experiments that would prove a round earth and do them theirselves? Or is that too much to ask?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Che Tom on a T-shirt?
« on: August 30, 2008, 09:22:48 PM »
I wish people would not make fun of my brother. Che was an outstanding socialist, my brother is hardly a socialist.

Flat Earth Q&A / Correction for FAQ
« on: January 13, 2008, 06:02:58 PM »
"Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A1: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, yes, it would eventually happen, after a billion years maybe. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field.  What we know as 'gravity' is provided by the acceleration of the earth."

If the earth is accelerating, it is creating a gravitation field, which is why we are standing here right now, according to FE.
More precisely, the earth is warping space-time in a way that all of us are moving along the warps, as if going down a slide. 
source: "The use of the term acceleration in conjunction with gravity arises from Einstein's principle of equivalence, which was a cornerstone in the development of the general theory of relativity. This principle states that the force produced by a gravitational field is qualitatively the same (in terms of how it affects physical objects, time, and space) as the force produced when a reference frame accelerates.",,sid9_gci804378,00.html

So, if the Earth is 4 billion years old, then wouldn't it have become a sphere?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Speed of light...
« on: January 13, 2008, 04:21:25 PM »
Our current velocity is less than the speed of light.  The limit of our velocity is the speed of light.

I disagree - the Earth's speed is not a meaninful value because no external reference point exists. Speed is a measure of how much distance from an object another object accquires in a given amount of time - when speaking in terms of the whole universe, where is the second object?

To say, "The Earth's speed is X" is not to be right or wrong, but to make a nonsensical statement. Due to our scale and surroundings, we tend to forget that speed relies on a point of reference from or towards which a speeding object can move (since for almost all human activity, points on the Earth's surface are this reference). In cases where there is nothing else to be moving away from or towards, I suggest that speed loses all meaning.

What does not lose all meaning is acceleration. We observe the effects of the Earth's acceleration and can thus calculate it, but the Earth can not be said to have a meaningful speed. Trying to deal with "Earth's speed" begs the question, "speed in relation to what?"

Spacetime itself is a valid reference point.

Flat Earth Q&A / Satellites, and the False information they provide
« on: December 23, 2007, 02:04:04 PM »
Aura (satellite)- Since this satellite is fake, you know, since we can't send things into space, according to FEers, then we dont know anything about the ozone, since that is what this satellite studies.

Hubble Telescope- All the breakthroughs of the Hubble telescope are fake, because it actually doesnt exist. The universe might be expanded, or not, as nothing is known about the Hubble constant, you know, the value at which the universe is suppose to be expanding.  Oh, and those accounts of those really old galaxies being found at the edge of the universe? False.

WMAP- That big hole in the universe? A lie. Because this telescope doesnt exist, that hole doesnt either.

What say you, brother Tom?

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Earth's Acceleration
« on: October 17, 2007, 07:36:36 PM »
Will you FE'ers stop saying gravity isn't real? Your theory demands gravity to exist! And the force powering UA should be named the Conventional Relative Acceleration Constant Kinetic Force, or CRACK Force.

Actually, it demands only gravitation to exist.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Earth's Acceleration
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:15:43 PM »
Gravity is real. Scientists just detected gravitrons.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Religion and Charles K. Johnson
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:12:08 PM »
Where in the bible does Jesus say earth is flat. is a list of bible based flat earth references.

Your arguements are shit-water.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Perspective Software
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:10:34 PM »
C ++ limit as e approaches 3.2

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Another FE'r joining
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:09:32 PM »
It does not exist outside this forum.  In today’s day and age, no one outside of here regards us as anything but a joke.  Your post content so far is proof of this.
Read the FAQ, it proves the earth is flat

Flat Earth General / Re: im no expert but............
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:08:09 PM »
Gravity does exist, and there are experiments to prove it.


Flat Earth General / Re: im no expert but............
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:05:53 PM »
why not, its what its like is it not
If that is what it was like, how would we still have water in the oceans?

you have to think outside the box, gravity and all that jazz

Prove gravity exists. It might take thinking outside ther box, and all that jazz.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: quick question for a quick answer please
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:05:11 PM »
Its called Antartica, please read the FAQ

Flat Earth General / Re: im no expert but............
« on: October 16, 2007, 02:03:28 PM »
Paxo, please refer to the FAQ

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Redshift
« on: May 31, 2007, 06:15:22 AM »
Are there detailed images of galaxies (in the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum) made by terrestial telescopes?

I read a book about the History of the Big Bang, and all the observations were obviously taken with telescopes on earth before there were satellites.

Tom, mom wants you to call.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Your Favourite Book and Why?
« on: May 31, 2007, 06:12:26 AM »
Days of War, Nights of Love by CWC

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: To Tom Bishop
« on: May 31, 2007, 06:11:08 AM »
I gained access to his computer and looked up his internet browsing history. He has never been on that web site.
He likes 9-11 conspiracy sites now, though.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tom Bishop's FE Motivations:
« on: May 31, 2007, 06:07:53 AM »
Actually, he bought one of those FE books when he was younger at a used book store.
He went out of control from there.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What's your earliest memory?
« on: May 31, 2007, 06:06:40 AM »
Beating up my brother, Tom

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Discussion on Anarchy
« on: April 17, 2007, 11:16:39 AM »
Nice logical arguement.

Flat Earth Q&A / Discussion on Anarchy
« on: April 17, 2007, 11:08:00 AM »
This thread is for the discussion of the topic of anarchy, and if it is a logical political idea.

I'll go first. I believe anarchy can work.

Thread dedicated to Nestor Makhno

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Rules are for slaves, Freedom for all!
« on: April 17, 2007, 11:03:22 AM »
And people who don't understand politics or the nature of the world

Yes, more people who don't understand anarchy.

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Cosmic Background Radiation
« on: April 17, 2007, 10:55:34 AM »
If TOm Bishop, my brother, was actually smart, he would know that to detect the background radiation oyu need extremely sensitive equipment. This equiopment is so sensitive, that when used on earth, it is obscured by the natural radiation of the earth and its atmosphere. The device needs to be sent into orbit.

Actually, that's not quite true.  The CBR was first detected from the ground by Penzias and Willson in the 1960's.  To measure the exact structure of the CBR, you need satelites like COBE, but it can be (and has been) detected from the ground.

After further consideration, it seems you are correct.
But to measure the "dents" in the CBR, you need a satellite. You can't necessarily prove the universe was created by the Big Bang without proving the existance of the dents and bumps in the CBR.

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Rules are for slaves, Freedom for all!
« on: April 13, 2007, 06:14:26 AM »
I like supporting anarchism.
All other politics suck.
Up CrimethInc.
Long live Mahkno.
Durritti, I <3 thee.
And how can I forget Red Emma.

Pages: [1] 2