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 Round-Earther

Pages: [1]
1
Flat Earth Q&A / Reaperman's theory of infinite copies.
« on: August 02, 2005, 03:21:03 AM »
Quote from: "reaperman93010"
"common sense" is how you all have allowed yourselves to swallow 'round earth' lies.
And common sense shows that you lack it.

Please, if you are going to attempt to prove something, then provide some evidence! There's mounds of credible evidence to prove that the Earth is round, that the Space Shuttle Program is genuine. There is absolutely no credible evidence showing that the Earth is flat, that astronauts have been forced to lie, that you work for the US government and as for your version of the "infinite universe", you haven't provided us with a shred of evidence.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Bible and Flat Earth
« on: July 25, 2005, 03:46:24 AM »
Quote from: "shitonashingle"
If You Don't Believe Every Word of the Bible LITERALLY then you are a half-assed Christian. Believe it or don't. That's all there is to it.
I'm an atheist and a believer in mainstream science, but I have to say that your argument that there is no such thing as a moderate Christian is just ignorant. Biblical inerrancy is a miserable excuse created by Christian fundamentalists to slander everything they perceive as a threat, from the Theory of Evolution to moderate Christians. Doesn't it say in the Bible that you are judged when entering heaven based on your belief that God exists and is the all-powerful entity that created the Earth and heaven, rather than to attempt never to sin (therefore never break the rules that He has supposedly set out), to follow the Bible word for word? Isn't God supposed to forgive you for your mistakes?

And letís have a look at the Bible itself. As we know, there are varying degrees of interpretation among Christians. Some believe that the words are those directly spoken by God and written by prophets exactly as He has meant them to. However, this notion has been challenged throughout history by many, even the most devoted of Christians have done so (an example is St. Augustine). Rather, many believe that these words were inspired by God, and that some parts have been misrepresented somewhat by the prophets, but the general moral notions that define Christianity, such as the Ten Commandments, still have their meanings interpreted correctly. After all, according to the Bible, no man is perfect, and the Bible was written by the very men who are said not be imperfect, although it is claimed to be from the words of God. Your notion would be absolutely correct if the Bible was written by God, but it isnít. And thatís why the doubts expressed by many moderates exist as they do, as well as personal choice.

There is nothing expressed in the Bible that proves that it is inerrant. Of course, fundamentalists like to argue that the Bible is inerrant because it is unfalsifiable, but this notion itself is unfalsifiable. Anyone realise that according to fundamentalists, we canít argue otherwise because they believe that God said you canít? A rather obvious piece of circular reasoning. In any case, just because the means of how a text is presented is different, it does not necessarily mean that that text is false.

If you start looking at all the propaganda campaigns that have used Christianity as itís centerpiece, then you will definitely find doubts in the literality of the Bible. Examples include Judah and Israelís political propaganda which can clearly be seen in the Old Testament and the Roman Empireís attempts to destroy pagan religions.

So really, it is a Christian's choice to decide how literal the Bible is. Fundamentalists obviously interpret the Bible more literally than moderates. However, you must respect the opinions and beliefs of others.

3
We should create an anti-jump movement in the countries that don't lie on the timezones. When the day for the jump comes, all those people living outside the zones should jump, causing an opposite force preventing the orbit of the Earth changing.

4
Flat Earth Q&A / Education?
« on: July 23, 2005, 11:39:16 PM »
Is astrology even studied in universities? I mean real ones, not those diploma mills.

I doubt serious flat-earthers (not those people pretending) would have any educational credentials at all. Flat earthers are probably just 9 year old children who can't understand school at all.

5
Flat Earth Q&A / Prove this wrong, Flat Earth Society.
« on: June 28, 2005, 01:17:46 AM »
Quote from: "KevinHallX"
if you could, i could prove creationism to every person in the world in about 30 seconds. here's how it would go: close your eyes and imagine that Jesus came back and told you he made the world 6,000 years ago.

now did that convince you? no. because Jesus hasn't come back yet to tell you that. he will some day, but until then, asking you to imagine it won't convince you of anything.
Fortunately, Jesus hasn't come back from the dead. Fortunately, creationism is a brainless set of generalisations created by zealots who can't comprehend the world outside the Bible.

6
Flat Earth Q&A / Who here actually BELIEVES the earth is flat?
« on: June 19, 2005, 11:07:36 PM »
I think neither Daniel or Goodfriend really believes in this, I doubt whether Charles K. Johnson would even really have believed that the Earth was flat.

7
Flat Earth Q&A / I have a few questions for all the believers.
« on: June 19, 2005, 01:19:11 AM »
Quote from: "Chee"
Why would the government want to hide the fact that the earth was flat? What would they have to gain from misleading everyone into thinking the earth was round?
Exactly. That's what makes this theory completely pointless.

8
Flat Earth Q&A / Flat Earth in non-European cultures
« on: June 19, 2005, 01:18:03 AM »
Alexander the Great was taught as a child by Aristotle, one of the great Greek thinkers of the time, and because Aristotle was definitely a believer in the round Earth (he was the first person recorded to have attempted to prove scientifically that the Earth was round), it's plausible to believe that Alexander also believed in the round Earth. Because of Aristotle, Alexander was very interested in science as the Greeks knew it, which makes it almost impossible for Alexander not to have believed in the round Earth model.

Although Alexander would have encountered many different cultures during his vast campaigns, he was clearly someone who believed that the Macedonian-Greek culture was more superior to any other culture, considering his wanton razing of many cities he conquered, and the founding of many new cities with his own name.

And about the Europeans being the only people to believe that the Earth was round, the Arabs, who held Greek astronomy in high regard, believed that the Earth was round. In China and India, where science was relatively free from religious persecution, they similarly found that the Earth was in fact, round, thorugh advanced mathematical and astronomical calculations.

9
Flat Earth Q&A / I have a few questions for all the believers.
« on: June 19, 2005, 12:55:21 AM »
I'm not a believer, but I'll answer your questions, since barely anyone here is a serious believer, other than the Moderator.

Quote
I have heard that there is a huge wall of ice of some sort around the edges...what brings you to believe this and why have we not discovered this?
They believe that Antarctica, or at least where Antarctica should be, is the huge wall of ice. I'm sure that no believer has ever been to Antarctica, because all sane people know that there is no 150ft wall of ice surrounding the Earth there, and that you can travel across one side of Antarctica to the other.

Quote
And finally...you've seen the space ships launch into space. If the earth was flat, wouldnt astronauts (However you spell it.) notice that the earth had an edge and said anything about it?
They believe that the various governments of the world are keeping a conspiracy, and that  photos of the Earth looking round are fakes. An even more insane idea among some is that there is some natural phenomena that makes the Earth look round from space.

Quote
And if you were to sail across the ocean and go to the other side of this "flat earth" you speak of...wouldn't gravity completely change? I'd like to see where you all believe earth has this edge.
This can be simply explained by the fact that since no-one has gone there and come back alive, it's one of the great mysteries of the universe.

Hope I helped...

10
Flat Earth Q&A / Does Australia exist?
« on: June 12, 2005, 06:00:45 PM »
Quote from: "Round"
well as I'm sitting at my desk in Sydney...
So am I.

11
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: the bible
« on: May 29, 2005, 11:17:03 PM »
Quote from: "Daniel"
To be quite honest, I haven't seen many people here defending the Flat Earth theory by quoting religious scripture.
Quite a few of your articles in the Flat Earth Information Repository refer to scripture. For the sake of locial argument, it's better to have them removed, or at least add a mention that the facts of the articles may be disputed.

12
Flat Earth Q&A / airplanes
« on: May 29, 2005, 11:13:17 PM »
Quote from: "Daniel"
Quote from: "Commie"
Bonus points if you can tell the class why it takes about two hours longer on said trip to fly NY-S than S-NY, considering the earth can't rotate.


If the flat earth is rotating (as if on a record player), that might account for the difference in journey lengths.  If you're flying against the rotation, it would take less time to arrive at your destination.
But if the Flat-Earth is rotating, because the Earth is flat and rotating from its origin (like a record player, as you've said), then the coordinates that the pilots use to fly to one destination to another will be wrong, because the rotation of the flat Earth and the rotation of a round Earth are different.

13
Flat Earth Q&A / This is just awesome
« on: May 29, 2005, 04:15:01 AM »
Quote from: "Round."
Quote from: "acidic 909"
Are you the defender of the poor and the innocent?
What I think is that you and that other dumbass 'Round-Earth' are the one and the same crackpot.
Get a life.


Well then you'd be mistaken, we are two completely different people. And you're posting on these forums along with me, so I suggest you get a life too.

PS: I'm the defender of sanity - ie: the Spherical-Earth model.
Yep, we are two different people, no doubt about that.

Anyway, see http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=680#680 for my er... "reply" to what you've said.

14
Flat Earth Q&A / Do you think the Earth is flat?
« on: May 28, 2005, 05:33:53 PM »
Decided to make this poll to see exactly how many people support what.

15
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Explain
« on: May 28, 2005, 05:04:06 PM »
Quote from: "cry"
Quote from: "Round."
If the Earth is flat, how can you fly/sail around it? I flew from London to Prague, Prague to Cairo, Cairo to Bangkok, Bangkok to Sydney, Sydney to San Francisco, San Francisco to NYC, and NYC to London (around the world), and I didn't see any walls! And ever since the 50s there have been people to sail around Antrartica, with no wall luck either.

Explain one thing to me Where is the wall? Between Asia and America? Been there. In Antartcia? Know people who've been there. North pole? (Don't you think Canadians would have noticed a huge wall by now?)

Send me driving instructions to your wall, and I'l consider believing you.


What wall are you talking about?  Does a pond or a lake have a wall?

All you have done by flying to those far away places is to visit more of the disk.  Nothing about visiting those places prooves that you have gone around a mythical sphere.
You obviously lack information about your own Flat-Earth Hypothesis. According to the last model of the Earth given out by the Flat-Earth Society, there is a 150ft wall of ice surrounding the edge of the Earth where Antarctica should be. Obviously you lack the information about what you are believing in, so until you do, please stop talking about things you don't know about.

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Bible and Flat Earth
« on: May 27, 2005, 04:19:51 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
I'm not gonna say much more than the Bible does not prove the Earth is flat and that although Chrisitians (which I am) believe in it, we can not take the Bible literal in every way. It does not mean its wrong, its just the Bible wasn't meant to be some sort of scientific textbook as some may take it. The Bible uses a lot of metaphors/analogies/and comparisons. There's scripture that says the Earth is a circle, circle not meaning a literal flat shape, but a sphere. Thhe four corners doesn't have to be a literal four corners, it could easily be signifying the four cardinal directions of the Earth. Anyway, a Christian can easily know the Earth is not flat because of science we know. Again, people look at the Bible, look at the "flat-earth" stuff in it, call it crap and say it defies science. The Bible is not wrong, its just usually misintrepreted or taken too literal (amongst its scientific/numerical areas).
Ditto.

17
Flat Earth Q&A / This is just awesome
« on: May 25, 2005, 12:43:53 AM »
Sorry for the double posting :oops:.

18
Flat Earth Q&A / This is just awesome
« on: May 25, 2005, 12:40:55 AM »
You are the most idiotic person I've seen on this board so far. Fighting the common enemy? Who is the enemy? Please, do not Bible-bash people who want to find out the truth. Any information regarding science from the Bible cannot be trusted, since the Bible is dogma, and because of this, there is no evidence presented to support the claims. Whatever claim is made is told by the Bible to be the one truth.

As with your very mundane tips, let me comment on them from a rational point of view:

Quote
first you should try to sound more scientific to prove your point: try to come up with some mathematical equations that, if not proving the earth is flat at least spice things up a little bit. Sometimes it really does not matter if they make any sense at all, but it gives the whole speech some air of superiority and you can easily convert a couple of dumbasses with little to no sweating.
And do you know what this is? It's called lying. Trying to sound scientific? Science always requires proof, which is obtained through measurements, test results and so on, not a random babble of made up fantasy.

Quote
For instance when debating gravity use this equation from the chapter on 'special relativity and the flat - spacetime' (see! even Einstein said it is flat!):
Einstein never used his paper on the Special Theory or Relativity to claim that the Earth is flat, nor has anyone else. In fact, the paper has never stated anything about the Earth being flat, and makes no hints and references to it either.

Quote
try to mention 'quantum mechanics' and the word 'entropy', along with Deepak Chopra. It not only sounds sexy but will leave everybody perplexed.
It does leave me perplexed - at your idiocy. Without linking quantum mechanics to the Flat-Earth Hypothesis, nothing is proven, and a good argument must at least attempt to prove its opponents. your argument would fail dismally against anyone who half understands the subject. And what's with Deepak Chopra? Since when did he publish a book about the Flat-Earth Hypothesis?

Quote
Proving the negative is a very efficient way of crushing your oponent: tell them how wrong mainstream science was with so many things. Don't forget historical references, they show your knowledge in history of science and philosophy.
In the cases when mainstream science was proven wrong, most of the time the theories were wrong because there was no way of gathering evidence to the contrary at the time, and because the theory seemed to fit the criteria perfectly with the information given, it was simply accepted as fact. A perfect example is the Flat-Earth Hypothesis itself. It was mainstream science in the past, but has been disproved using science, mathematics and photography, and replaced by the known fact that the Earth is round.

Quote
Of course you should come up with something related with the fallacy of the earth being round. In fact, now they say it's not even round 'cause around the poles its supposed to be flattened, or what not. See! They can't even agree on their flawed theory!
The theory has been revised after it was found in the 1600s that the Earth was flatter at the poles. It's just that the difference is only about 20km, and this does not affect the pictures of Earth, so most people don't realise it. If you had common sense, you would hav realised this. Besides, 20km of an object with a diameter of 125000km is almost a perfect circle anyway.

Quote
If you have trouble with that, suggest that in the name of open mindness we should teach alternative versions of science in geography and astronomy classes. We don't want to discriminate anybody, do we?By the way, why stop with flat-earth? Let's also teach nazi apologism, hollow earth theories, free energy, vibrator usage in the lesbian sexuality classes lab (that one I happen to agree with), vampire anatomy, etc. Just have some patience, soon enough you will have your sticker in Kansas that says 'the round earth theory is just a theory'.
You know, we humans exist in a society, and our society has something that sets us quite afar from animals - we have morality. Open mindness? The topics you've suggested insult so many other people that it is not open minded. Take the Nazis for example, they murdered millions of people on the basis of their race. They were extremely close-minded and believed that their race, the Arians, were the most superior race on Earth.

Quote
Always remember: make your opponent angry, so he ends up looking weak
You are seriously an idiot. This forum, however it may be full of fools on both sides, was meant for logical argument, something which you definitely lack.

Quote
Come up with a list of prominent scientists, experts, etc. that are flat-earthers. If you have a hard time finding any, just make them up or invent names and append a 'Phd in applied chromodynamics from MIT' to it. After that it will hard to debate the obvious truth, I mean, how can an expert from MIT be wrong, right?
There hasn't been a prominent scientist that believed in the flat-Earth since the 19th century, so you'll have no luck finding quotes. As for so called "Flat-Earth Theory experts", they haven't had any scientific backing since the Renaisssance. And yes, people do verify sources given from other people - at least the intelligent people anyway. Science is all about proving that something is correct, and if there is ludicrous information that is a downright lie, then the argument will not be accepted by anyone, except for the most idiotic, such as yourself.

Quote
To be honest though I have to say that your society AND the scientists are all wrong: the earth is a hollow spaceship manufactured by the aliens.
I've just proven your stupidity, so no need to do it again here.

And by the way, your arguments haven't been convincing or sexy.

19
Flat Earth Q&A / Round Earth Evidence
« on: May 24, 2005, 11:21:10 PM »
Quote from: "flat_earthers_are_stupid"
Alright, it's been quite some time now and NO ONE has disproved ANY of my arguments.  Not surprising, considering they are a bunch of fucking retards.
Too true, othe than the profanity. It's good to see that even a semi-organised argument has yet to be rebutted. While the flat-Earth believers constantly ask for proof of a round Earth, when they do get it, they make no reply. This shows their lack of logical approach to their arguments.

20
Announcements / Welcome to theflatearthsociety.org!
« on: May 23, 2005, 07:32:16 PM »
Quote from: "ali mack"
thats because a compass always points to the middle of earth. Nort, South and all thaT BULLSHIT IS TO KEEP EVEREY BODY silent. All compasses are ment to lead you to the middle of the earth. To the big vulcano were it all started. The earth flowed out of that vulcano.
And can you explain in scientific terms, how compasses point to this "volcano" at the middle of the flat earth?

21
Quote from: "Cryoruggie"
Well - I have been in airplanes as high as 35,000 feet, and the earth is still a flat disk disapearing in the distance.  How much bigger do you want me to be?  The only chan ge I can see is that things are smaller and fuzzier...
I mean - let's not play mind games of "ohh, you gotta be 24,000 miles tall to see that the earth is spherical.
But seeing the curvature of the Earth from certain heights not a mind game - it's the truth. When you go up a certain height, such as on the Space Shuttle or SpaceShipOne, you can definitely see the curvature of the Earth. If you keep going higher, you will start to notice the curve more.

As flat_earthers_are_stupid has said, the diameter of the Earth of about 12,500km, in which case 35,000 feet amounts to only 10.7km. Obviously there is a great difference between the two lengths.

22
Announcements / Forums announcements, suggestions, etc..
« on: May 23, 2005, 07:19:43 PM »
How about just "Skeptic", "Believer" and "Undecided"? Nice and simple :D.

23
Flat Earth Q&A / your toilet proves the world is round
« on: May 23, 2005, 07:13:54 PM »
Quote
The twisting effect of the Coriolis force is real and does influence certain large things like the movement of air masses, but the effect is so small that it plays no role in determining the direction in which water rotates as it exits from a draining sink or toilet. The Coriolis effect produces a measurable effect over huge distances and long periods of time, neither of which applies to your bathroom.
Once again, we see the selective editing and complete ignorance of flat-earthers. According to your very own website you use to back up your preposterous claim, it states that the Corolis effect, although not powerful enough in toilets and sinks to affect the way the water flows out, still exists and can be seen in air masses, projectiles over a north-south distance etc.

Please, get some elementary school education before you try to make any sort of claim at all.

24
Announcements / Forums announcements, suggestions, etc..
« on: May 23, 2005, 12:06:12 AM »
Perhaps there should be a sign on the poster's information box that displays whether you believe in the Flat-Earth Hypothesis or not. At least we will be able to distinguish who believes in what.

25
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: A Few Questions
« on: May 22, 2005, 11:58:53 PM »
No, I am not a believer in the Flat-Earth Hypothesis, but since I am trying to disprove the flat-earthers with at least a hint of logic, I'll answer your questions.

Quote from: "A simple Skeptic"
Letís say this idea of gravity DOES work...
To the flat-earth hypothesis believers, gravity as we know it, where objects are attracted to the centre of the Earth, does not apply. Often it is a "mysterious force" which cannot be explained which attracts us to the Earth.

Quote from: "A simple Skeptic"
It is claimed that Antarctica is the ďring of ice surrounding the earthĒ. Have you met any Antarctic Explorers to verify this? We can see where a "north pole" could be on this map, but what about the south Pole, where does that fit on this map if at all?
No, they haven't, at least not out of their own will to do so. But I'm sure they have met some Antarctic explorers, who would only have tried to talk to them to talk them out of this ridiculous notion, they will say that the explorers, despite the fact that they have been to Antarctica, are wrong. Ignorance is one of the main features of flat-earthers.

Quote from: "A simple Skeptic"
And lastly... why can I see the Southern Cross from The South Hemisphere (according to sphere-earth theory) and not the Northern Hemisphere? A flat Earth would require that all people could watch the same sky at the same time and thus always see the same stars. Well, thatís how I understand it.
There are many hypthesises to this among the haphazard and contradictory flat-earthers, but the most common hypothesis is that a mysterious "invisible wall" blocks the stars, similar to the way they believe that the wall blocks sunlight in some areas to cause day and night simultaneously in different regions.

26
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Bible and Flat Earth
« on: May 22, 2005, 11:30:12 PM »
You flat-earthers are nutters. The Bible, although it contains many good stories and morals that would make the world a better place, any objective intellectual would tell you that the Bible should not be taken word for word, as it has been designed to be dogmatic, to manipulate people's minds so that they will believe in Christ, and to quash any threats that may come in the way of Christianity. It was never written as a factual reference book, but as a book of theology. Although it contains some representations of Earth as being flat, these messages are often contradictory (such as the "four corners of the earth" as opposed to the earth being disk-like) which tell the reader that these comments were never meant to be taken literally.

Clear evidence of this shown as a vast majority of Christians in both Roman and modern times, however literally they interpret the Bible, have the common sense to know that the Earth is round. There is a point where taking messages literally is completely idiotic. Even many of the most evangelical believe that the Earth is round.

Although not many people know this, the books in the Bible have been selectively edited to include books that only fit the needs of the church of the time. When Constantine converted Rome to Christianity, he published the official books with only a select number of books to fit his religious doctrine. The Bible today contains only those books that Constantine allowed.

27
Flat Earth Q&A / If the earth is flat...
« on: May 22, 2005, 04:55:38 AM »
Quote from: "Goodfriend"
All human sensibilities dictate that such a situation would be an extremely vulnerable equilibrium, and that the slightest shock would either make Earth head for the Sun or into outer space.
Flat earthers seriously need elementary school education - have you ever heard of Newton's laws of motion?

One thing that these laws state is that for an object to move, the applied force must be greater than the force already exerted on the object. In the case of the Earth, the Earth's orbit around the Sun caused by the Sun's gravity is much stronger than the "slight shock" that Goodfriend has been suggesting. Unless you are attempting to disprove Newton who built the foundation for modern Physics, you are completely wrong, as usual.

28
Flat Earth Q&A / Pi
« on: May 22, 2005, 04:32:12 AM »
Above post was by me.

29
The Bible was written not as a reference for reliable, factual information, but as a religious text containing bias and propaganda favouring Christianity and against anything that may be a threat to it.

Therefore the information contained within the Bible is not a reliable source, as it may contain half-truths, selective editing or downright lies designed to coerce at the expense of any threats.

30
Flat Earth Q&A / So, how did you end up on this site?
« on: May 22, 2005, 04:04:32 AM »
I found out about the old Flat-Earth Society from an old trivia book, and decided to find out more about it, consequently reading the Wikipedia article and following the link to this forum.

Pages: [1]