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 - Xander

Pages: [1]
1
I move that any appeal to authority based on Biblical evidence is invalid based on the corruption of the collected works that contributed to the Bible's original text during the intervening translations and transliterations. Only the very broadest of messages can be relied upon, with the (lost/destroyed) original texts being required to allow any sort of reliable argument to be made.

The Bible is more like a sketch map than Google Earth - the landmarks are all there but don't expect to get the street names all right.

Amen to that!

Thanks to those who gave relevant answers to this post and did not turn it into a theological debate.

2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I have personally seen the curvature of the Earth
« on: September 09, 2008, 10:24:09 PM »
This proves that light bends.

You see how flat earth theory can prove anything without requiring a shred of evidence.

you have ne idea how much foce it takes to bend light. only a black whole can do that.

Nah, we actually use the fact the light bends around our sun to magnify images of distant objects (oh I forgot, thats only if you believe that the other stars we see are more than a 3 or 4-day drive away...)

3
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: brooklyn bridge.
« on: September 09, 2008, 10:20:37 PM »
dont forget the bridge was built a while ago so it might of sunk into the ground some or it could of been really bad engineering

I agree, any deviation could simply be tolerance in the design. 

4
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What makes the sun go around?
« on: September 09, 2008, 10:18:54 PM »
I did actually read some of that already but I disagree with some of those definition.  If you assume gravity is not a real force then attraction is the correct term, not gravitation.   However, if we can agree to disagree I will drop the point as I get what the original poster was trying to get at.

5
The Lounge / Re: discovermagazine.com thinks its soooo smart.
« on: September 09, 2008, 10:10:29 PM »
I think the article was spot on.
Me too.  ;)

While I think that they missed the point of the majority of this site (discussion and debate, learning for yourself) there are several delusional posters on this site that disagree with ~6,000,000,000 other people and actually believe the world is flat.  I don't really care what they think, but the problem with them is that the answer to every question is that it is a giant cover-up.
Try again, Mr. Wifflebottom.

Try Again? Um I could probably find 500 posts in these forums about how RE is a giant cover up... what is there to try.  I why do FE ppl think governments actually care what the general population thinks about the earth being round or flat anyway?

6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Explain this Picture
« on: September 09, 2008, 10:07:49 PM »
These images provide great evidence for the curvature of light rays.
This quote proves that stupid people make up stuff to fit their version of the world instead of trying to understand the world.
I know. RET has some nerve, doesn't it?

I wasn't referring to either RET or FET in this case actually... the pictures aren't high enough quality to provide evidence of anything at all really.

7
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What makes the sun go around?
« on: September 09, 2008, 10:05:14 PM »
Statement of the Day = Well, we don't believe in gravity, but we do believe in gravitation. (i.e. I don't believe in eating cows, but I do like a medium-rare steak once in a while!)

No, they are completely different things.  Gravitation exists, while gravity is simply a construct of our imaginations.

gravitation
Noun
1. the force of attraction that bodies exert on one another as a result of their mass
2. the process or result of this interaction

gravity is the root word of gravitation... if FEers have started coming up with new definitions of words to fit their theories then they should let everyone know or something...

8
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What makes the sun go around?
« on: September 09, 2008, 09:52:10 PM »
How does FE get a magnetic field again?  RE gets one by molten iron spinning in a molten core (of a imperfect sphere). 

On the other hand most of what has been said above about magnets isn't very correct... for example a magnetic field can move things parallel to themselves (a magnet will make iron shavings line up parallel with the magnetic flux.  As long as the sun and all of the planets were made of iron the FE theory could work I guess.

Statement of the Day = Well, we don't believe in gravity, but we do believe in gravitation. (i.e. I don't believe in eating cows, but I do like a medium-rare steak once in a while!)

Perhaps you don't really believe in gravitation either... as gravitation is the effect of gravity between objects.  You mean interaction of some kind like electromagnetic or some other undefined force.

9
The Lounge / Re: .99999 does not equal 1
« on: September 09, 2008, 09:38:55 PM »
All .9999...=1 means is that the limit, as the number of 9's increases without bound, equals 1.




LOL, we did that proof in university... I love that one...

10
The Lounge / Re: discovermagazine.com thinks its soooo smart.
« on: September 09, 2008, 09:35:08 PM »
I think the article was spot on.
Me too.  ;)

While I think that they missed the point of the majority of this site (discussion and debate, learning for yourself) there are several delusional posters on this site that disagree with ~6,000,000,000 other people and actually believe the world is flat.  I don't really care what they think, but the problem with them is that the answer to every question is that it is a giant cover-up.

11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Explain this Picture
« on: September 09, 2008, 06:21:07 PM »
These images provide great evidence for the curvature of light rays.

This quote proves that stupid people make up stuff to fit their version of the world instead of trying to understand the world.


12
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sun spots, and craters on the moon.
« on: September 09, 2008, 06:09:26 PM »
No erosion on the moon, hence no natural terrain features

13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sun spots, and craters on the moon.
« on: September 09, 2008, 08:59:15 AM »
Secondly, the visible side of the moon has impact craters. With a flat moon that would be the bottom side, and even with a round moon, it's relative bottom side is still heavily impacted. How could a body like the moon get impact craters on it's bottom side?

Could it be that it's mass influenced other masses? Our flat earth is a sheep though, and the moon is a hen. That explains 100% why our earth's mass wouldn't influence other bodies. Right?

Maybe there are objects magically endlessly accelerating at more than 1g and for some reason, they come from the bottom - and through the 'flat' earth without hitting it and then hit the moon.  Oh and craters on the surface of the earth are from objects in our way that are magically accelerating sideways instead of up or down, thats why meteor showers come down at angles.  Or maybe they were dug out as part of a huge cover-up to hide the fact the Earth is flat and there is no such thing as an impact crater. 

LOL this fun, I should start pretending the Earth is flat, that the governments of the world actually cared enough about what people thought to cover up the fact that the Earth is flat and that I am really just a battery for giant machines and this is all a simulation.

14
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flight from Sydney to Buenos Aires, III
« on: September 09, 2008, 08:45:01 AM »
So they walked around the ice wall?  In the faq it says it is - something close to 78000 miles in circ.?  I guess they only walked half way or ~40000 miles.  Thats not so bad.  I wish I could walk 1000s of miles a day. 

Oh, and saying that someone lied about their journey is not a scientific argument. 

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: How do you deny private spacecraft?
« on: September 07, 2008, 10:54:09 PM »
What IS the point of putting any sort of proof anywhere on these forums... cover-up this and government that... accepted scientific theory is that the Earth is round and all FE'ers are quacks... That being said - I have never gone into space and can't confirm 'facts' myself... Any way, standard scientific practice is that the Burden of Proof is on the proponents against the accepted theory which is the FE ppl... (i.e. cover-up is not an acceptable answer to any reasonable question). 

I have an issue that all of the moderators seem to be FE'ers as well... If the goal was truly honest clean debate the moderators would have no opinion, not FE'ers with 1000's of posts.

16
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flight from Sydney to Buenos Aires, III
« on: September 07, 2008, 10:24:32 PM »
um... I haven't found anywhere where FE ppl have explain how ppl have walked across antartica if it is just a rim of ice around the ocean... or is that all made up as well?

17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Looking for an intelligent argument.
« on: September 07, 2008, 10:19:04 PM »
Uh, no. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem

Um.. no matter what side I agree with... quoting a wiki page just discredited your entire argument... Yikes!

Pages: [1]