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 - LiceFarm

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
1
The Lounge / Re: is your avatar your real picture?
« on: February 23, 2010, 09:41:23 AM »
Yes.

2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sky mirror
« on: February 23, 2010, 04:44:22 AM »
God, quit being so rude. You don't get to decide what people can or can't ask in Q&A.

But you do. Amirite?

3
The Lounge / Re: Classiness versus age
« on: February 23, 2010, 03:29:05 AM »
Boobs aren't allowed on normal tv? Damn your country is full of prudes

It's OK to shoot people in the head though.

4
The Lounge / Re: Classiness versus age
« on: February 22, 2010, 02:21:55 PM »
I'd so fuck an old whore so long as she's classy about it.

5
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Is mars flat, too?
« on: February 22, 2010, 01:40:46 PM »
i think your very slightly underestimating the mass of jupiter  ;)

although it is made of gas, it has more than 100x more mass than the earth (im not sure the exact number offhand)

Which is why it's used as a standard measurement of the mass of extrasolar planets.

True story.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: How would you feel...
« on: February 21, 2010, 05:05:09 PM »
I'd feel incredible.

I'd feel emboldened.

7
Flat Earth General / Re: Proof we landed on the moon
« on: February 21, 2010, 05:03:46 PM »
Oh, so nothing was debunked then. Got it.

Everything was debunked. I suggest you read ENaG and come back when you have got your facts straight! LOL!

8
Everybody not retarded knows that mountains are formed on the boundary of two tectonic plates, and either go down so they are gradually pushed up. There is a lot of proof to suggest this is the case... unless, wait! It's the conspiracy again!

Mountains cannot move in the literal sense but they are on a bed of molten hell as described in the good book and this can cause unobservable variations over time which may lead to the incorrect perception of a static movement in the surrounding area but not the mountain itself This is a widely accepted theory.

9
The Lounge / Re: M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL!
« on: February 21, 2010, 04:51:03 PM »

10
Flat Earth General / Re: Proof we landed on the moon
« on: February 21, 2010, 04:47:23 PM »
Sorry, what was debunked?

"You're wrong" isn't a debunking of anything.

I suggest you use the search feature. You could try searching for your own name, since you took part in many of those debunkings.

Also: The OP is not proof that we landed on the moon because we do not know what the moon is made of or even if it has a side and therefore how can scientists land on the moon when they can't even tell me what the weather will be like in a weeks time. The answer is that they lie in order to cover up their lies and they would close this website down but it is part of their plan already. I know what I can see with my own eyes and that the earth is flat. Anyone who claims otherwise has not read Earth Not a Globe. I challenge anyone to convince me.

11
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: satellites?
« on: February 21, 2010, 04:40:53 PM »
Lice Farm you are being stupid! Any fule kno that paragraph 17 of Chapter III says "The remarks just made in reference to simple forward levelling apply with equal force to what  is called by surveyors the back-and-fore-sight process".
The bit about Oranges is in Chapter VI.  ;)

I was refering to Chapter III of the King Teed Version, which omits references to the works of heretics such as surveyors for the sake female  readers daintiness and good standing.

12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: satellites?
« on: February 21, 2010, 04:15:59 PM »
It's the conspiracy.

The lights are radio towers which are in bubbles so that you cannot see that they are towers and this would have the same effect as an object travelling thousands of miles an hour because how can we really know what is real.

Now turn to Chapter III Paragraph 17 of Earth Not a Globe for "My horizon doth shineth me Like an Orange"

[/thread]

13
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Is mars flat, too?
« on: February 21, 2010, 10:12:37 AM »
No. It isnt. it freakin rotates, you can observe that with a telescope and a camera.

I have searched ENaG for "freakin rotates". 0 results found.
that book is classified as science fiction. it is not a reliable source.

It is gold plated truth. Take an orange. Paint half black. The earth is flat.

14
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Is mars flat, too?
« on: February 21, 2010, 10:06:39 AM »
No. It isnt. it freakin rotates, you can observe that with a telescope and a camera.

I have searched ENaG for "freakin rotates". 0 results found.

15
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Is mars flat, too?
« on: February 21, 2010, 10:01:28 AM »
????

what about the rest of our solar system?!

It is flat. Please read Rowbothams spectacular scientific revelation Earth Not a Globe. It is only filled with facts.

16
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Thermal Detonator's Antarctic Sun Thread
« on: February 21, 2010, 09:20:06 AM »
Like I said, I'm staying out of this thread, but perhaps you should check your logic in stating that they are incompatible.

Glad to hear you're staying out of this thread John. But perhaps you could explain how they're not incompatible, instead of making these useless passive-aggressive posts.

17
Us being stuck to the earth has always been because we weren't being accelerated by the UA. Probably because we're sheilded by the earth or something like that.

How do you know we're shielded 100% by the effects of the UA?

18
The Lounge / Re: M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL!
« on: February 03, 2010, 10:29:25 AM »
Parsifal is correct, you are the failure.

Do not feed the fuckwitted troll?

19
Is this a well known fact or a well known prediction of Newton's Theory of Gravitation?

Yes.

20
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: 'Bendy Light' Discussion
« on: February 03, 2010, 10:18:58 AM »
Light rays, although they obey analogous mathematical principles as point particles, are just a convenient pictorial representation of propagation of light in a particular domain of applicability called Geometrical Optics. They are not trajectories of some real physical particles. The concept of acceleration is only valid for the mechanical motion of real physical objects. If a light ray is represented by a curved line, it does not mean that there are some particles moving along that line. Therefore, the concept of acceleration is meaningless in the context of optics, even in geometrical optics.

Your post caused Firefox to crash with "0x004332: Fail overflow". I had to reboot. :(

21
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: The future of YouTube
« on: February 03, 2010, 10:17:09 AM »
Adobe lost their way but has a golden opportunity to embrace the future with HTML5.

22
Usually you're shielded from it due to how thick the FE is. The less earth you have between you and the source of UA, the stronger the effect of the UA has on you. So you're now slightly accelerating up due to the UA.

The effect of the UA has a decay parameter?

Meaning things above the surface will be affected even less by the UA... meaning we'll smack into them.

Congratulations on destroying FE theory.

23
The Lounge / Re: M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL!
« on: February 03, 2010, 10:04:25 AM »
solar behaviour is not observed to vary with longitude.

24
When you dig the hole, you get closer to the force of the UA.

Good.

And therefore?

25
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: 'Bendy Light' Discussion
« on: February 03, 2010, 09:54:32 AM »
It's nice to see that you completely misunderstood my statement.

Instead of stamping your feet and asking people to stop talking about things, maybe you should just help us understand your statement...

26
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I have A question
« on: February 03, 2010, 09:51:43 AM »
I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.

I don't see how you would be able to "remember" something I did years ago when you weren't here, but I agree, it wasn't very funny.  Still, at least I grew out of it, unlike you.

Newsflash for the thick: I'm not pretending to be a flat earther.

Nor is Lord Excalibur. He is a well known flat earther who holds meetings with like minded people every month. I believe he has also organised a flat earth parade to bring to attention the plight of the opressed FE community. Just because he is not active online does not mean he is not a flat earth believer.

27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Computer simulation experiment
« on: February 02, 2010, 02:05:37 PM »
No, I understand entirely. A simulation based on a model is not proof of that model. Your entire reasoning is circular, in that the conclusion is the same as the premise.

This is good news. You should go and tell Tom Bishop, because he's often caught using the argument that since the horizon is flat in Mortal Kombat 4 the earth must be flat...

For example: In the game Battle Field 1942 a bomber can be bombing you from overhead while a distant bomber appears closer and lower to the horizon, despite the two bombers flying at the same altitude.

If that distant bomber could shine a laser pointer out of his cockpit across the map, the laser would hit the bomber above you from the side, the laser being parallel with the earth.

28
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I have A question
« on: February 02, 2010, 01:55:44 PM »
Attention newbies:

Welcome to FES!  Also, there are about four, maybe five active members here who genuinely believe the Earth is flat.  "Lord Excalibur" is not one of them, and the idea of pretending to be a radical FE'er to "parody" us has been done about fifty times before.

I remember when you did it. It was really not funny. You should do it again some time. Only funny.

29
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: I got Firefox to work with JACK
« on: February 02, 2010, 01:49:52 PM »
This means, among other things, that I can record bit-perfect from Grooveshark.

Does it mean, among other things, that I should give a fuck?

30
The Lounge / Re: M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL!
« on: February 02, 2010, 01:47:35 PM »
Bendy light contradicts neither gravitation nor electromagnetism.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13