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 - The Question1

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
1
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Things yet to be explained(Properly) by FET.
« on: July 14, 2011, 01:22:17 PM »

The world is round, get over it.

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

And I've seen you FE'rs map, dumbest thing I've ever seen. What's on the "dark" side of your map?
-___-
Please re-read the op.By that i mean read the second sentence.

FErs do not respond to threads this old because most of the people in the thread have left. Its like yelling to yourself.

Personally I never answer threads like this, even when they are new. I looked through and indeed I played no part in this one. But its not because it terrifies me.

These are list threads, with someone spouting off 15 different reasons. A one line answer isn't sufficient to answer any of the reasons satisfactorily.
I could spend hours constructing answers for all the objections in the thread, but it would most likely be met with tl;dr or people would take bits each and fragment the thread making it huge. In short, list threads take little time to put together, and massive amounts of time to answer. They are unrewarding, not worth the investment and hence ignored.
If someone wants a proper answer to something, they should make a thread about just that.
I understand,but i honestly tried to raise a discussion on the southern hemisphere in this thread
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=3b0f24647cc9d0f01df8d062b8bfa3ec&topic=39227.0

And nobody could give me a solid answer.Hell even Ski said:
Without a doubt the distances/geography of the southern hemi-plane are a serious cause of concern for FET.

2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Things yet to be explained(Properly) by FET.
« on: July 08, 2011, 07:44:35 PM »
We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

You lost me. Dark energy is somehow connected to the function of UA? (I honestly don't know)
I believe it is what powers UA,or the earth,or something like that.

Worthy of the list?
I am going to search the forums before i add it.

3
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 08:33:19 PM »
Good,so its NOT aliens.Still wanna know where they are from though.

4
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 08:30:47 PM »
...I suppose their is ample evidence for this claim?

5
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 08:13:54 PM »
an ancient torture method employed by the arctrians was to bind a person and leave them exposed to moonlight for several nights and placing them in under cover during the day.  It would eventuall drive the unfortunate person mad and suffer from all sorts of psychological ills.  Ancient cultures knew about the dangers of moon light.   Now the knowledge is being intentionally suppressed.  This is information the conspiracy (NASA, KFC), does not want out in the open.
Just curious(as i have never heard of them before.)What part of the world are they from?

6
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 06:09:54 PM »
just because something is harming something else doesnt mean it will kill that something off.
But if that something is causing illness,then that would probably hinder the ability of the animal to hunt.This would probably kill it off,indirectly.

7
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 04:56:31 PM »
So does that mean every nocturnal creature has developed an immunity to moonlight?

No.
Then why would they be active at night?

Dunno. Ask them. They probably wouldn't if they didn't have to.
If they hunted a night,and were harmed by moonlight,then they would
A)Stop being Nocturnal
B)Die out.
C)Adapt.
Which one is it?

8
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 04:48:29 PM »
So does that mean every nocturnal creature has developed an immunity to moonlight?

No.
Then why would they be active at night?

9
yes, then we have to create a Sphere earth society to prove again that the Earth is a sphere :)
Oh I'd love to see that  :)

Finally the minority society will be able to respond to every thread, have an answer to every question, and shut down the majority belief. And we won't be crackpots either.
Too bad everybody stopped posting on Roundearthsociety.

10
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 04, 2011, 02:47:14 PM »
So does that mean every nocturnal creature has developed an immunity to moonlight?

11
Flat Earth General / Re: NASA and NANO
« on: July 04, 2011, 02:45:10 PM »
What does a fast food restaurant have to do with the conspiracy?Besides perhaps a conspiracy to keep people fat.

12
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: I would like to know
« on: July 03, 2011, 04:42:52 PM »
TFES did not come up with this theory.  It has been reported and discussed widely for some time.  We are better served, however, by continuing the research and development of the issue.
Really?I couldn't find any information regarding the dangers of moonlight anywhere(unless we are talking about werewolves.)
Do you happen to know where i might read about it(Outside TFES i mean.
It has little to do with james and more to do with the fact that moonlight reflects no heat whatsoever,  On top of that there have been experiments proving moonlight to be harmful, to at least plants.  How can the reflection of sunlight become harmful to plantlife at night.
Besides ichi,who has done an experiment that proves moonlight to be harmful?

13
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Things yet to be explained(Properly) by FET.
« on: July 02, 2011, 01:26:48 PM »
We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

You lost me. Dark energy is somehow connected to the function of UA? (I honestly don't know)
I believe it is what powers UA,or the earth,or something like that.

14
This is not based off of nothing of substance you say, but around fact.
Let me see if i understand...
The fact that NASA is interested in Nanotechnology,is the fact you are basing your theory around?

15
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Things yet to be explained(Properly) by FET.
« on: April 10, 2011, 08:59:55 PM »
It lives!I also think this thread needs more links.

16
Flat Earth General / Re: Round Earther's
« on: April 08, 2011, 09:22:15 AM »
The thread in my sig explains the main reasons i remain unconvinced.
Though It needs more links.

17
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Things yet to be explained(Properly) by FET.
« on: September 23, 2010, 02:58:46 PM »
Good,now if i can find threads to go with it,the thread will be stronger.

18
Flat Earth General / Re: Why don't you flat earthers
« on: September 03, 2010, 11:21:29 AM »
Raise the funds and go on a trip to space? Maybe live aboard the ISS for a few days and see the earth properly?
Probably won't convince them.
Their answer will either be
1.The windows are screens.
Or
2.The earth looks round from a distance.

19
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: James' Dream Visions
« on: August 11, 2010, 02:26:53 PM »
Why is his dream relevant to FE?

20
It isn't compatible. The moon isn't alive in RET.
The magic power didn't make it alive. It only allowed transport to it. Please keep up Clocktower.
Who says that the magic power didn't make it alive when it violated the FET edict that sustained space travel is impossible? Is the Moon alive in FET?

If I remember correctly the moon hurtled toward the earth and had to be caught by gods and thrown back up. Probably a commentary on the impossibility of a round earth and moon staying separate while there is a huge "attractive" force between them.
Typical of FEers, you make a conclusion on the intent of some designer who've never met. Perhaps, someday FEers will understand the need for evidence before conclusion. <sigh>

I'm not a FE'er. I'm just saying the fact that the moon fell towards the earth supports the FE side of things. You know prolonged space flight being impossible et al.
Nope. RE explains it as gravity. Again, you make conclusions prematurely.

So.... the moon fell out of a stable orbit and crashed into the earth slowly? RE does not make that prediction at all.
Who said the Moon was in a stable orbit? Is that yet another unsupported assumption? How is it that in FE the Moon fell? Did its nexus ring fail? Did its magic fail? Again, you make assumptions prematurely, just like the typical FEer.

What? The RE's moon has to be in a stable orbit. Or at least relatively stable for it to have been there for any long period of time.
IIRC,the moon is moving away from us slowly.I think thats what he meant.

21
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 05:40:15 PM »
Put 2 and 2 together.
In other words,you can't.At least not without some convoluted light bending trick.
Please explain sunsets and sunrises on a RE, but make sure it's without some convoluted Earth being spherical-ish trick.
An RE implies the earth is spherical.
Nice try though.

I think you missed his point. The explanation is there. Its just not good enough for you.
The explanation isn't good.Period.
In fact,the explanations i have read seem to be "Prove it exists."This is because people neglect to mention that it doesn't just happen in Antarctica,you can fly over to Sweden or Norway and observe it for yourself.

22
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 05:31:57 PM »
The explanation isn't good.Period.
In fact,the explanations i have read seem to be "Prove it exists."This is because people neglect to mention that it doesn't just happen in Antarctica,you can fly over to Sweden or Norway and observe it for yourself.

Subject, this post needs it.
Are you incapable of understanding the post without it.

23
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 03:41:54 PM »
The explanation isn't good.Period.
In fact,the explanations i have read seem to be "Prove it exists."This is because people neglect to mention that it doesn't just happen in Antarctica,you can fly over to Sweden or Norway and observe it for yourself.

24
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 03:26:10 PM »
In other words,you can't.At least not without some convoluted light bending trick.
Please explain sunsets and sunrises on a RE, but make sure it's without some convoluted Earth being spherical-ish trick.
An RE implies the earth is spherical.
Nice try though.

25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: FE Wiki Critique: Antarctica
« on: August 03, 2010, 03:16:58 PM »
For a theory rooted in zeteicism(Which is kind of ironic if you knew the rules for it) their is ALOT of diversity.

26
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 03:01:33 PM »
In other words,you can't.At least not without some convoluted light bending trick.

27
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 02:35:58 PM »
All I see is a list of things you haven't yet found FE's explanations for.
More like things that can't be explained(because FE'ers have tried and failed.)
And yes,i have used the search function.
Though you could tell me how it is possible for a place(like norway) to receive 24 hours of sunlight,without messing up the amount of sunlight other places receive.
Or better yet i could bump the thread later can you could tell me then.

28
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 02:24:24 PM »


FE is plenty falsifiable. However, I have yet to see anyone take it upon themselves to falsify it.
Please click on the link in my sig.

I fail to see how that falsifies FE.
Really,you read through the entire page(plus the thread in my thread in 8 minutes?
Maybe you should read it again.

29
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Quick Questions
« on: August 03, 2010, 02:14:45 PM »


FE is plenty falsifiable. However, I have yet to see anyone take it upon themselves to falsify it.
Please click on the link in my sig.

30
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Please explain Sunset dynamics
« on: August 03, 2010, 02:12:46 PM »
Yeah. It's an optical effect caused by the atmosphere, as explained in the FAQ.
Please direct me to where it says that.I checked and the same perspective effect thing is there.Which doesn't make sense because it sinks BELOW the horizon.It also maintains its shape throughout the day.

I'm pretty sure you haven't read the FAQ. Please read the FAQ.
Whether i have read the whole thing is irrelevant.

The above statement is incorrect. Please, read the FAQ.

Because you didn't bother to read the whole post obviously.

This whole thread wouldn't have to exist if you simply read the entire FAQ thoroughly.
This whole thread would still be here because i didn't make the topic.
Also no matter how many times i read the FAQ,the facts don't change.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13