1

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Dude what?

« on: September 23, 2008, 02:31:15 PM »

Assuming its some sort of signal other than from a satellite, why doesn't it work without a clear view of the sky?  The explanation for how GPS functions (according to FE'ers) is just as weak as satellite TV or even radio (more so for Radio IMO).  Location needs more than 1 signal to determine location to such a precise degree.

2

Flat Earth Debate / Re: I've read the FAQ, and I still can't find "answers" to some things

« on: September 22, 2008, 08:54:04 AM »

Also, the Earth isn't a perfect circle, or sphere.  Its more of an prolate ellipsoid, being slightly fatter at the equator and slightly flatter at the poles due to rotation.

You mean oblate spheroid.

TY, that why I teach history, not geometry

3

Flat Earth Debate / Re: I've read the FAQ, and I still can't find "answers" to some things

« on: September 22, 2008, 08:47:16 AM »

It says right there in the link that the route was over 100,000 miles long. That's four times around the equator of the Round Earth model and four times across the diameter of the FE model. The red line Bin Laden made on his map certainly seems to match up, if not understate the reported distance.

How do u think they measured that distance? Did they pace it out? Of course not! They calculated it from maps and GPS data, which assume a round Earth. Also, they would have calculated the length of the route beforehand so they knew how much equipment they would need.

In short, the 100,000 mile figure is based on a RE, so can't be used as proof for FET.

It doesn't say that the 100,000 figure was "calculated" or "estimated" based on RE maps. It just says that the total journey was 100,000 miles long. That type of journey would take one four times around the RE equator and four times across the diameter of the FE.

How is it possible to travel that distance around an RE in a North-South Circumnavigation? Why does it take four times longer to travel around the world through the poles than it does around the equator?

Look at their route, it wasn't exactly a straight line.  Their goal was not leave from point a and travel all the way around the world without changing direction to end back at point a.  Their trip takes several twists and turns.  Not to mention they had to travel by foot, snowmobile, boat etc.  They battled elements and what not.  Lets also not forget this was done in 1972.  I'm pretty sure our planes, boats and other modes of transport are more reliable, and faster today.

Also, the Earth isn't a perfect circle, or sphere.  Its more of an prolate ellipsoid, being slightly fatter at the equator and slightly flatter at the poles due to rotation.

4

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Explain this Picture

« on: September 22, 2008, 08:20:33 AM »

You don't understand this? From the shadows of the cloyds we see that the light is consistently coming from the right of the picture. If we were looking at the spotlight, it would be coming from the top, with slight variation in angle.

This is not observed, so the spotlight theory is incorrect.

It's impossible to even see the shadows of the clouds. I'm not sure what you're babbling about.

hanks guys for taking up the argument in my absence.
I have little more to add, but it occurred to me that a this picture with the contrast boosted might prove useful in demonstrating the curvature of the horizon and drop off point under the atmosphere.

Looks like you're adjusting the contrast of the spotlight sun to me.

I believe he is speaking about the shadow on the clouds themselves, not the shadow the clouds are casting on the ground.  I understand that you are trying to be difficult because your theory is falling apart, but come on, playing dumb.......really?  I love it when my students do this.  Its usually the beginning of the end.

5

Flat Earth Debate / Re: I've read the FAQ, and I still can't find "answers" to some things

« on: September 22, 2008, 08:07:15 AM »

Through all this discussion, I'm still not seeing the REASON for the lie.  Whether the Earth is flat or round makes no difference to people that make money.  I don't buy the 9-11 conspiracies either, but at least they have a motive, and even "proof"

Also, how are there NO pictures of the ice wall?  No pictures of anything even remotely proving the earth is flat.  Hell, people have come up with pictures of Bigfoot and UFOs, even fake, they come up with them.  The world is full of people just looking for conspiracies,.  That WANT to believe in conspiracies.  Some are quite rich.  If FET were true, I would really think SOMEONE would be out there trying to blow the lid off this conspiracy. 

The evidence for RE is SO huge that I'm still surprised there are people that dispute it.

6

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Just after FE's take on this

« on: September 21, 2008, 10:36:25 PM »

Just after FE's take on this

"Explanation: Here is what the Earth looks like during a solar eclipse. The shadow of the Moon can be seen darkening part of Earth. This shadow moved across the Earth at nearly 2000 kilometers per hour. Only observers near the center of the dark circle see a total solar eclipse - others see a partial eclipse where only part of the Sun appears blocked by the Moon. This spectacular picture of the 1999 August 11 solar eclipse was one of the last ever taken from the Mir space station, which was deorbited in a controlled re-entry in 2001. "

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040926.html

I'd be dissapointed in a "Photo Shop" blanket dissmissal.

Brett

Why should we trust anything from NASA's website?

Why shouldn't we?  I haven't seen a single piece of evidence proving that NASA has faked any photos of the Earth.

7

Flat Earth Debate / I've read the FAQ, and I still can't find "answers" to some things

« on: September 21, 2008, 10:34:37 PM »

When ever people bring up questions or evidence, the most common reply is "Go read the FAQ"  Well having read through the FAQ, I have to say it doesn't answer several questions I (and I'm sure others) still have.

1.  What exactly is the motive for this conspiracy?  The FAQ says that the motive is unknown, but probably money.  Money is a great motivator, but I can't figure this part out.  Firstly, how does a lying about the earth being round make money, when a flat one wouldn't?  Assuming that the motivator is money, where is this money coming from?  And where is it going?  Would taxes not exist if the earth was flat?  If the motivator is money, they sure are spending a lot of it on phony space programs, covering up lies, creating lies, paying people off, etc.

2. Next, how were pictures from the 60's and 70's faked sufficiently enough to stand up to today's technology?  I've seen books published in the 60's and 70's showing the Earth, moon, sun, etc.  Even photos taken today and photo shopped have very clear, tell tale signs of altering that people would find.  They always do.  Look at all the instances in which newspapers have faked insignificant pictures only to be caught.  If people are checking insignificant pictures, its safe to assume someone is checking significant ones as well.

3.  Comets are not really explained.  Comets circle the sun on very predictable time tables.  If the earth is accelerating upwards, how is it that comets return?  Are comets not only moving upwards like earth up also in an orbiting pattern?  And if it is, what is causing it to orbit like it is since gravity doesn't exist.  Another problem I have is why we see a comet for several days, but we don't seem them 24/7 while they are in view.  So if the earth was flat this would mean that comets come to Earth, fall into an orbiting pattern like the sun and moon, circles several times and then shoots off? 

4.  The circling of the sun and moon makes no sense.  According to the FAQ the Sun and Moon are both 32 miles in diameter and circle the earth at a height of 3000 feet.  What isn't explained in the least is how the Sun and Moon manage to stay in "orbit" above FE.  It defies all logic and laws of nature.

Well Ill leave it at that and see what kind of answers I get.

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Just after FE's take on this

« on: September 21, 2008, 10:06:54 PM »

Just after FE's take on this

"Explanation: Here is what the Earth looks like during a solar eclipse. The shadow of the Moon can be seen darkening part of Earth. This shadow moved across the Earth at nearly 2000 kilometers per hour. Only observers near the center of the dark circle see a total solar eclipse - others see a partial eclipse where only part of the Sun appears blocked by the Moon. This spectacular picture of the 1999 August 11 solar eclipse was one of the last ever taken from the Mir space station, which was deorbited in a controlled re-entry in 2001. "

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040926.html

I'd be dissapointed in a "Photo Shop" blanket dissmissal.

Brett

But photo shop is the only explanation they can give.  I've posted pictures and I get "You think that that picture is real?" or "Clearly a photo shop"  Its actually pretty funny at this point.  But I suppose when you really believe something, its hard to deny it even when the evidence is slapping you in the face like an abusive step-father.

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: What about the weather?

« on: September 20, 2008, 09:11:57 PM »

I don't believe that dopler radar requires any satellite assistance.

10

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 18, 2008, 12:45:53 PM »

I'm disappointed because I was really expecting you to post something.  You claim to have these pictures, yet where are they?   And then when you do post them its on some site called icewallbungee.com???

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 06:59:27 PM »

That is very disappointing.  Not surprising, just disappointing.

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 03:17:07 PM »

Am I the only one that can't see the photo?  I only see a white box with a red x

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 09:22:23 AM »

Thank you, I can't wait to see the pics.  I will also be more than happy to admit if I'm wrong.  Who knows, maybe Ill be a FE'er by the end of the night. 

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 09:05:27 AM »

For sure.  I've seen plenty of pictures of RE, but other than some renderings of FE, I've never seen a single picture of FE proof.   I'm not looking for a picture of you and your buddies in a cave, I can send you one of those.  Living in Wisconsin, I can go up to the Cave of the Mounds and take some pretty amazing pictures.  You've gotta have some pics of what is past earth, thats what I, and I'm sure others are looking for.  Show something, anything that shows that end of the earth and what lies beyond.   

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 08:53:10 AM »

There are telltale signs of a photoshoped picture.  Listen, seriously, I'm not looking to laugh at you, or call you a liar, you've really sparked my interest.  You are the only person I've been able to interact with that actually claims to have seen and/or jumped off the the end of the world.  I'd LOVE to see any pictures you have.  You can email them to me if you want.  On top of that, you don't think you're fellow FE'ers would also love the photo graphical proof of FE?

Let me turn it around on you, what do I need to do to get you to post even 1 pic?

16

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 08:39:25 AM »

LOL, are you kidding me?  Your argument against posting pics is that you don't want them to be called fake?  If they're real, theyll be proven real.  Post 1 pic for us to see.  If i told you I've been to space, wouldn't you want some pictures?  And if I had been to space, I would sure as hell post the pics here for all to see.  Some would claim they are fake, but others would see it as proof.  I implore you to post your pics for us to see.  What better way to prove FE than to have actual pics!?

17

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 08:32:54 AM »

Where are your pictures of this trip with your mates?  You've been there several time and never once thought to bring a camera? How cool would a group pictures at the edge of the world be?  Sorry man but I'm calling Bravo Sierra on your story.  Nice try.

18

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof

« on: September 17, 2008, 08:20:29 AM »

But doesn't the fact that you're claiming to have been there despite it being guarded prove the conspiracy is garbage?  If YOU can go there, why can't others?  But you claim to not only have seen the wall but actually bungee jump off of it!  So is this a big tourist thing?  If you can make it to this guarded wall, people wishing to disprove it can make it as well.  Where are the pictures?  Where are other eye witnesses?  The sheer number of people involved in this conspiracy is proof its phony.  Not only do you have to keep every country on earth quiet, you have to keep countless sailors, pilots, etc quiet as well.  You're telling me that in all these years NOBODY has talked?

The proof is in the conspiracy itself.  Its flawed at is core.  But to answer your question, there is NO proof you can provide that FE'ers will believe.  They dismiss any proof as fake, flawed, etc.

19

Flat Earth Debate / Re: I see no holes in the theory just theory.

« on: September 17, 2008, 08:10:09 AM »

The biggest problem I see with FE'ers isnt that they believe that the earth is flat, its that any good proof offered up is dismissed as someone making it, propaganda, fake or some other way.  How do I know its the shuttle?  I could SEE it.  I challenge any FE'ers to go to a local college with a telescope when they have an open night and look at the shuttle.  But then, they will just say its faked by the college, so I say get your own telescope and look.  If you can't tell its the shuttle you may truly be blind.

I fully understand that I can't win, that isn't the point of my posting.  The point is, the theory is greatly flawed. A conspiracy of this magnitude could NEVER be kept a secret.  People have been to Antarctica and traveled all around it.  If its just an ice wall, where are all those penguins laying their eggs?  In this day and age of technology do you REALLY think someone wouldn't get a picture of this wall of ice? 

Another thing, if this conspiracy is just for money, where is it coming from?  How does having a round earth somehow make money when a flat one doesn't?  Seems to me that if the earth is flat a lot of that money they're making is being wasted on phony space programs.  Something I have yet to find is WHY would governments want a to lie about a round earth?  It makes no sense. 

A conspiracy can only stay a secret if 2 people know about it, and 1 is dead.

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: I see no holes in the theory just theory.

« on: September 16, 2008, 07:03:43 PM »

First off, this is my first post, I just found this forum while looking up crazy stuff, and this is really up there. I'm not quite sure where to begin since I have so much to say.  I'm not an expert and won't try to look like one.  All I AM an expert in is my own experiences and what I've been around.

1.  My cousin is an astronaut that has actually gone into space AND the International Space Station.  I've been able to tour NASA and see the components being sent up in the shuttles.  I've witnessed 2 shuttle launches, and I assure you I've never been threatened, bribed (I wish I had been!) or anything else.  There are usually several hundred people there to watch the launch, many with telescopes and they watch the shuttle climb.    I've also used a telescope to see the shuttle while its in space.  How do I know its the shuttle?  Look through a strong telescope and tell me that isn't the shuttle.

2.  Your theory on satellite tv just doesn't add up.  My dish has to be pointed at the right area of the southern sky, or it doesn't work.  It also doesn't work if I cover it up with something.  Last winter it was covered with ice and I had to climb out on my roof and knock it off for it to work again.  If it were just a broadcast of some sort, it would no matter what direction I pointed it.  Also, what about satellite radio?  Again, it has to have a clear line of sight into the southern sky or it doesn't work.  I've lost signal when driving through tunnels, trees or even next to semi's on the highway.  If it were just a radio signal that was tricking me into believing it was satellite why would the signal be lost in those instances? 

Thats the 2 big ones I've seen so far.