1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: altranit realitys

« on: June 22, 2009, 10:51:13 AM »

I can imagine it to be logically possible, but that doesn't tell me anything about the actual world.

Nothing but the senses can tell you about the actual world. If you were to try and perceive the actual world without the use of your sense, you would in fact create your own world and it will be just as real to you as the actual world. The entirety of the universe is simply an extension of the mind, for the mind is its own world and the senses merely help shape it. The mind is capable of bending and changing the universe just as the universe is capable of bending and changing the mind. The only true world is the one within the confines of your skull bone, everything else may as well just be an illusion whether it is really there or not, for it is up to you and your mind to judge.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: altranit realitys

« on: June 17, 2009, 12:41:30 AM »

It can be assumed by inward knowledge alone, that somewhere on Earth, it is raining outside, because it would be ludicrous to assume that it would be raining inside.

Don't change my wording. I never asked a synthetic a priori like "how do you know it's raining outside somewhere on Earth?" The answer will always be true with reason as there will always be raining outside somewhere on Earth, mainly by defining "somewhere on Earth." I asked "how do you know it's raining outside?": this implies that, in your room, how do you know it's raining outside in your frame of reference. To know if it's raining outside, I have to go out and see what's happening with my senses.

No you don't, If you are sitting in a room with no windows, hence no way of using your senses to determine whether or not it is raining outside of said room, You must turn your logic inward and not so much as assume that it is raining, but rather know that it is raining. As far as you know from within the confines of the room, the outside is doing whatever you want it to, be it raining, hailing, or raising hell on Earth. If your mind possesses any doubt of its assumptions whatsoever, you will end up being incorrect whether you are let out of the room or not. By knowing without a doubt that something is happening or may happen, you will be correct in every sense.

Lrn 2 409.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: 'falling' off the edge

« on: June 15, 2009, 07:52:43 PM »

While this theory is in fact correct in every sense, the sheer amount of force required to propel something into the spatial current would be equal to what civilization already uses to do just that; rocket based propulsion. If, however, you are referring to FET, then all of this would be completely debunked by the well known fact that the Earth is an infinite plane.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: altranit realitys

« on: June 15, 2009, 05:14:13 PM »

Why does it have to be raining at all?

To put it in layman's terms, because I said so.

Damn I'm good.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: altranit realitys

« on: June 15, 2009, 02:24:19 AM »

And how do you know it's raining outside?

To put it in layman's terms, because I said so. It can be assumed by inward knowledge alone, that somewhere on Earth, it is raining outside, because it would be ludicrous to assume that it would be raining inside.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: altranit realitys

« on: June 14, 2009, 08:48:17 PM »

Attention FES: Do not read the quoted post, it will be a waste of thirty seconds of your life.

I know it would waste more than just thirty seconds of your life, a more realistic assumption would be about 90 seconds.

To Jack: As matter of fact, it is raining outside. I believe the storm will blow over in an hour or so.

To NEEMAN:

Congrats for making an interesting point, however I cannot say you are correct, since it would be rather subjective and not very correct to think you are correct, but I can say I know your point has been well made.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: altranit realitys

« on: June 14, 2009, 02:09:34 AM »

Exactly. You willfully make a choice as to which of these actions is the "best" whilst admitting that you are probably not in full posession of the facts.

Seems a little precarious to me.

There is a difference between thinking and knowing.If one thinks something, he is in effect setting his thoughts and beliefs up in prediction that they might be disproved or corrected in some way. If one knows something, he believes with precise judgment that his thoughts and beliefs are correct and cannot be disproved or corrected. Knowing something does not require the use of the senses, it requires logic, thinking, assembling the known facts that have either been obtained or formulated by the mind, and putting them together in the right position to complete the big picture.

Facts are what we make them to be, one can believe anything, he is not shackled to a predefined logic engine like an animal, running about making decisions based on one particular input of information. If one knows that the world he sees and feels is real, then it is, in all actuality, because he knows this and does not simply think it. If one thinks it, he can only be proven right or wrong, but only proven by the one who knows.

To answer the main question, whether or not one can justify their actions and/or decisions if they cannot be sure the factors are actual, if one makes a decision based on an assumption and not a belief, if one thinks and does not know, then he cannot justify his actions because he is either one of three things: a child, an animal, or an idiot. If one knows, however, bases his decision on his own known facts that he is sure of, that is all the justification he needs, as his decision, no matter how poor or extreme, was correct, because it was based on facts, known facts, not thought facts.

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Speed of Light

« on: June 14, 2009, 01:24:14 AM »

yeah, special relativity is one of the few re physics bits that fits in the fe picture

What does not fit at all is that the energy required to keep this acceleration going, eon after eon, is beyond inconceivable. Many posts ago I calculated it would be required (assuming perfect efficiency) that the bottom of the Earth would have a Hiroshima-sized atomic bomb exploding on every square meter, every 8 hours or so, or a similar outburst of energy.

In other words, we would have to have a star-sized continuous explosion under us, without us sensing it at all. While that is, by itself, not totally impossible, it is certainly one more nail in the coffin of FE "theory".

While not entirely accurate, I believe I recall that the source of Earth's acceleration through space time was induced by Dark Energy and Dark Matter.
It's time for a DIAGRAM!

Referring to the diagram above, Dark Energy is clearly capable of accelerating any given element of existence, whether it be matter, energy, or space itself. While many speculate on what precisely Dark Matter is, and where Dark Energy comes from, Dark Matter is in fact trace amounts of Element 409 which acts as a fuel source for the acceleration by emitting Dark Energy which is the same force that causes the Earth to spin, the planets to align, and the Mayans to invent time travel. This may all seem like a joke, but I assure you, Dark Energy really is that specially relative.

My best educated guess is that if Dark Energy can propel the entire universe infinitely outward at an accelerating rate beyond the initial force of the Big Bang, it is surely what is behind Earth's acceleration, as well as Nibiru's for that matter.

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Other planets and moons

« on: June 14, 2009, 12:54:14 AM »

The earth is not a planet. And it's not part of the solar system.

On the contrary, I'm afraid the Earth is technically a planet, seeing as it lacks any special attributes. Nearly every "planet" in existence is capable of supporting life. I also assume that by "material world" you are implying that the Earth is 409 based, you would be correct in this assumption although there is no practical amount within it's celestial body to be used effectively.

Unless by "Earth" you mean "Plane of Existence" then you would be correct in your assumptions. Our celestial plane is not a planet, it's not part of the solar system, and is the only known world capable of supporting life; as you would be required to die before entering our neighboring plane that is positioned on the opposite side of this one.

However, given the quantity of element 409 within the Earth (or lack thereof) it would be safe to assume that the Earth is indeed flat, in the same way a can of cola becomes flat after it has been left open all night.

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The simplest and ultimate debunkment of FE Theory

« on: April 12, 2008, 08:30:51 AM »

In before the TB:

The effect is due to the laws of perspective, and the force, Luke.

Is Zera really a Scientologist?

Yes, yes he is.

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: The simplest and ultimate debunkment of FE Theory

« on: April 10, 2008, 11:49:31 PM »

Reported for trolling. /life

Zera is a non-existent scientologist, it would be best for your health to ignore him at all costs; arguing with Pope Zera is like trying to arm-wrestle a Pickle Pusher.

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why is NASA trying to silence scientists from speaking out?

« on: April 10, 2008, 11:44:52 PM »

If global warming were real, then we would all be talking to fish right now; the water would have nowhere else to go

13

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Tank melter

« on: April 10, 2008, 11:32:47 PM »

Obviously there is a counter to every weapon and a counter to every counter as well as a counter to every counter counter, so arguing over whether or not any given weapon is teh 1337 uber ploxxorz is completely irrelevant. However, a giant mirror at 99.9% would get the job done but would have to be replaced regularly in order to remain effective to make up for the fact that it is not at a full 100.0% quality. The cost of such an endeavor would be astronomical, that is why the entire economical system should be abolished and everything made free for the military, the government and those in power such as Bill Gates.

Another flaw is that said weapon is impractical; counters will always be developed and the weapon will be made obsolete after multiple uses on the battlefield, resulting in a lot of tax money gone to waste. This particular weapon will most definitely be useless once force fields are developed.

In conclusion I'll have to agree with Fishyninetyfour, guerrilla warfare is the most effective and is the only form that can only be countered by itself. Therefore I recommend all soldiers to fashion hand grenades from pineapples and then chuck them in the back seat of someone's wagon.

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Visible Curvature

« on: March 12, 2008, 07:06:29 PM »

I've ever seen a globe earth from space. Have you?
...
Why do you need a photo when you can just look out your window?

I'm afraid I'd have to go with Tom on this one. Truly, I've ever, ever seen a globe earth from space, I don't think I've ever been to space. Therefore, I simply look out my window, but that is never entirly effective since my window is positioned in front of a  solid white fence. The fence IS completely flat, with no curvature, so technically Tom, you are correct.

15

The Lounge / Re: Iraqi researcher discovers that Earth is flat

« on: February 18, 2008, 08:06:04 PM »

Wow, that was like finding this site all over again.

16

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Pope Zera's Existance

« on: February 16, 2008, 08:04:54 PM »

After gathering much evidence, I have concluded the possibility that Pope Zera may or may not or may have exist/existed. Much examination of these forums was done and the time required was approximately 1034 hours. Nearly everything he posts is completely overlooked by all but a few individuals who are obviously nubs in one way or another. Therefor, I move to collect the community's standings in this area, does Pope Zera really not exist? Or is he reality?

I find this a pressing concern that I may be going crazy but I'm not sure if we all know of Pope Zera. So I ask you, people of FES, what is your theory and explanation on the one who claims to be Pope Zera?

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Chain Logic and God

« on: February 16, 2008, 01:51:33 AM »

Wikipedia is nothing but lies and slanders, as I recall Pope Zera stating once. Anyone who considers wikipedia to be true in any respect should be cast into a cess pit, in my opinion at least.

On to the topic at hand, although it is possible for a god(s) to exist in coalition with both a "flat" or "round" or "no" earth theory, no one kind of science has determined the exact existence (or location for that matter) of such a being(s). All I may do is offer my personal speculation. I believe that, in accordance with the laws of time/space/gravity/universal bowl movement/court juristiction, that if a god(s) were to exist in an omnipresent/omnibenevolent/omniscient/omnipotent/omnispectrum existance, the way it could be done in thesis, is relevant to the accumulation of many many strands of chronotrons all interconnecting with every state of matter individually causing an interdimensional distortion field that could allow such a being(s) to exist in such a manner. Though this is all just mere speculation.

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religion?

« on: February 15, 2008, 11:48:17 PM »

Elmoism: Whatever shit I feel like.

Reptoidism: They are among us and are going to cause shit!

G'Novaism: He shall become one with Shit and there will be no more shit!

19

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Circular Logic

« on: February 15, 2008, 11:37:29 PM »

Circular logic is key to understanding our universe of limes and corkscrews. My hat's off to you, Khriz, for bringing such knowledge to essence. This is indeed a horrific breakthrough in quantum molecular solvation physics.

ALL MY 5 R BELONG TO THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!1one!1

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Venus/Mercury/Iss-Atlantis Sun Transit - True distance Earth - Sun

« on: February 12, 2008, 01:32:38 PM »

The Earth in itself consists of many rocks, many of which are composed of raisins. This in turn can lead to what some would call a flat earth, and what some would call a round earth. In conclusion, the Earth is basically a wad of dried grapes seasoned with sunshine sauce.

21

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The wrong argument

« on: February 12, 2008, 01:22:21 PM »

This is all going in circles. If a fetus were a parasite then wouldn't the person/place/thing carrying it eventually die? And what of the unborn cells being considered children if the fetus is not? The contradictory here is only looping over and over into fine neat appendixes. I would advise that the people responsible for the well being of these fetuses/parasites/unborn cells take better precautions against ongoing mental ring-arounds.

22

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 09:16:47 PM »

Good night, and btw KEEP TO LURK TIL YOU GET IT MORE FOR GREAT JUSTACE!
Now, with that said and done, get an appointment to be de-lobotmized dumbass.

GB2B, I win, [/thread].

23

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 09:06:25 PM »

Zera, my patience is really wearing thin now. Great Justice is the ultimate ideology around witch many brave zealots, bigots, cultists and decent people alike sit and roast marsh mellows and coconuts on a platter. You defy not a powerful ideology, but the very essence of the universe itself. Corruption is simply a byproduct of meteor meteor meteor comet ultima ultima ultima ultima mega asteroid topped off with sludgeLOL. In layman's terms, U R DUMB. You should see more often how cheese degrades into static for your own situation is dire. When in doubt, look for the Valiant Lump, save a slipper, microwave a terrier.

24

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 08:52:58 PM »

For Great Justice. Fool.

25

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 08:45:51 PM »

And now you're starting to get it!

26

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 08:34:31 PM »

Tuna scones were already inverted with an appendix by a man named Valtier Duramus in the late 3rd century. And if you were more open minded, you could go to the moon whenever you damn well want and however you damn well want. Unfortunatly, you incapacity for sponge brandy is a defect you will have to live with. In all serious sense, Zera, I KNOW what, when, how, why, who, and where you will die. The evidence is always all there in front of you, the only trick is to learn how look at it correctly. I can't see through your eyes, but I bet it looks like air.

27

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 08:19:21 PM »

I see, and your main point is to actually not make one I presume. All we can say is that you can agree on the possibility that retards do exist in other dimensional space/time within our own dimensional barrier. But if I were to create a watermelon vortex out of graph paper then I too would be on top of Mt. Sane. If only you knew the possibilities of reality, how far it can take you and how far you can go; it's not very far. In fact, it's shorter that your tongue. By applying liquid sustenance to logical karaoke physics, you could in fact go to the moon by means of shooting yourself out of a large cannon all while inside a hollow aluminum shell. Zera, you simply are not a man of logic now are you.

28

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 07:21:45 PM »

Actually, Zera, I did pull those equations out of the kitchen faucet and then sent them through the dryer. What I got seems to be absolutely irrelevant in all ways but 6. I checked and rechecked but there is no mistake, the numbers do lie and it is only a quarter past seven. All I ended up with is a bunch of einstein gibberish. Even in all seriousness do I consider this the relevant conclusion of hair molecules.

Here is my equation by the way
6m/42*16.77^8(31.26r)/12.9n+2=7.00000001¹⁹⁴⁶

29

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Dark Matter Theory

« on: February 11, 2008, 07:10:24 PM »

If I were to say I'll give you a penny, do you really expect me to? If I were to say I'll give you a dollar, would you really expect me to? But if I say I'll give you a nickel, perhaps then you would expect me to, but I just give you a grain of sand instead. The equivalent matter of the entire universe is only 1/4 the percent of an apple crumb-cake. If we were to condense that cake into a form of matter from which paper clips grew, we could have a potential hair trimming source.

30

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Slow Clocks

« on: November 22, 2007, 12:53:45 AM »