1

Flat Earth Q&A / NASA into space

« on: October 24, 2006, 01:06:26 AM »

The theory is evolving, that's how science works.

Sure, theories evolve, but then again they evolve based on something, not just through words thrown around by TheEngineer for no reason and with no basis like "NASA went into space (despite the fact that the FAQ says differently) but they did not take pictures of earth because I say so".

They are not just words.  I've seen three shuttle launches.  I saw the shuttle go very, very high.  Therefore, I have a first hand account that rockets have been into 'space'.

We have been into space, get over it.

Douche.

2

Flat Earth Q&A / New to the board!

« on: October 23, 2006, 11:34:20 AM »

You mean people like you, Ystick?

At least I dont fancy Mary-Kate Oslen, you sick fuck.

3

Flat Earth Q&A / New to the board!

« on: October 23, 2006, 11:29:36 AM »

Hey there.

Don't worry, we have plenty of superfluous useful on the forum that I'm sure some members would be willing to supply you with some.

~D-Draw

This is why you get trolls.

4

Flat Earth Q&A / The Problem with Eclipses

« on: October 23, 2006, 10:13:14 AM »

Shut up.

5

Flat Earth Q&A / The Problem with Eclipses

« on: October 23, 2006, 02:27:49 AM »

REPLY TO THIS THREAD REPLY TO THIS THREAD REPLY TO THIS THREAD REPLY TO THIS THREAD REPLY TO THIS THREAD

6

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Attention

« on: October 23, 2006, 02:25:10 AM »

This community does not revolve around the singular idea that the FE'ers are trying to prove that the Earth is flat.  They already know the Earth is flat, so there is no use in trying to convince them otherwise.  Since FE is the huge countertheory to RE, it is most likely that they came to the conclusion themselves rather than indoctrined in this belief.

While I cannot say that they do not wish to "convert" RE'ers to FEism, I can say that it is not the purpose of this forum to do so.  It is merely a discussion forum.

FE'ers have absolutely no obligation to answer any of your challenges.  They do, however, from time to time answer questions, and it is very nice of them to do so even though they aren't required to prove anything to anyone here.  It is unfortunate that this stance is often taken as either ignorance or rudeness.

This is something posters should keep in mind while posting in this forum.

You post your theories on the internet then complain when people ask you to back them up with proof.

Fucktard.

7

Flat Earth Q&A / What proof do you need to believe the earth is a sphere?

« on: October 23, 2006, 02:19:26 AM »

Some points:

1.  TheEngineer is correct.  You can keep accelerating and never go faster than the speed of light.  Hell, you can keep accelerating and never go faster than you were going when you started.

2.  It does not take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate the Earth for a finite period of time, just like it doesn't take an infinite amount of energy to accelerate a rocket ship for a finite period of time.

For fucks sake! You cant accelarate forever and not reach lightspeed dumbass that is impossible.

8

Flat Earth Q&A / Tides due to vibrating Earth

« on: October 23, 2006, 02:16:06 AM »

Tides are caused by the gravitational pull of the moon.

Dumbass. :roll:

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Burden of Proof

« on: October 22, 2006, 11:19:59 AM »

I guess it's a good thing no one does that here then.

Only in your twisted little mind.  :lol:

10

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Tides due to vibrating Earth

« on: October 22, 2006, 11:16:53 AM »

It occurs to me that if the surface of the Earth is a slowly vibrating membrane with its boundary at the ice wall fixed, this could explain tides.  The function describing the vibration would a superposition of waves dominated by something like A/2 sin(θ + π t/(12 hrs))× J_α(r), where A is the height of the highest tide and J_α is a Bessel function of the first kind with α>0.

Basically, this would look like a saddle-shaped surface that rotates throughout the day and possibly (due to smaller-scale fluctuations) vibrates up and down as well.  Mind you it's not the surface itself that's rotating; just the crests and troughs of the "wave".  The two crests would always be on opposite sides of the Earth and would have low tides; the two troughs would be 90° out of phase with the crests and would have high tides (since the water would naturally flow downhill away from the crests.)

The wave itself would of course lose energy over time, but it is possible that tidal gravitational forces from the moon, or some other attractive force between the Earth and Moon, might drive the oscillation, keeping the tides going.  This would of course explain the observed synchrony between the tides and the position of the Moon.

If I can find or produce a video or diagram, I will be sure to post it.

Tides are caused by the moons gravitational pull.

Next.

11

Flat Earth Q&A / What proof do you need to believe the earth is a sphere?

« on: October 22, 2006, 11:14:57 AM »

Have you ever taken an algebra class?  Ever heard of an asymptote?

Isnt that the cartoon show with the fat guy that eats the donuts?

12

Flat Earth Q&A / The Problem with Eclipses

« on: October 22, 2006, 11:01:38 AM »

So far, no FE has given a satisfactory explaination of eclipses.

We are still waiting, FEers.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / What proof do you need to believe the earth is a sphere?

« on: October 22, 2006, 10:58:24 AM »

Uh, we were talking about Relativity, not thermodynamics.  But, whatever, which part are you refering to?

You cant accelerate indefinatly and not exeed the speed of light.

Yes, you can.

No, you cant. Indefinatly means forever, that means that you are getting faster and faster and faster untill you hit lightspeed.

So there.

14

Flat Earth Q&A / The Problem with Eclipses

« on: October 22, 2006, 01:21:48 AM »

This topic is "yet to be answered."

Bump'd.

x2

 bumpity bumpski  :wink:

15

Flat Earth Q&A / What proof do you need to believe the earth is a sphere?

« on: October 22, 2006, 01:18:42 AM »

Uh, we were talking about Relativity, not thermodynamics.  But, whatever, which part are you refering to?

You cant accelerate indefinatly and not exeed the speed of light.

16

Flat Earth Q&A / The Problem with Eclipses

« on: October 21, 2006, 12:31:00 PM »

Unbuntu wrote:


Indeed it does. 8-)

Right on.  8-)

Right on indeed.

Further FE pwnage:

http://www.phy6.org/stargaze/Scolumb.htm

17

Flat Earth Q&A / The Problem with Eclipses

« on: October 21, 2006, 12:27:35 PM »

Unbuntu wrote:

I think this qualifies as definitive proof that the Earth is round.




Indeed it does. 8-)

18

Flat Earth Q&A / Atmospheric Diffusion/Drainage and the Tides

« on: October 21, 2006, 12:01:28 PM »

I wish you wouldnt keep changing your theory everytime an aspect of it gets proven wrong.

19

Flat Earth Q&A / You want proof?

« on: October 21, 2006, 11:58:45 AM »

http://www.phy6.org/stargaze/Scolumb.htm


Theres your proof!

20

Flat Earth Q&A / Flawed at the very core

« on: October 21, 2006, 11:49:32 AM »

The 'g' word is graviton.

Did it no occur to you that if there was a conspiracy then scientists would say that gravitons definatly exist?

21

Flat Earth Q&A / What proof do you need to believe the earth is a sphere?

« on: October 21, 2006, 11:47:02 AM »

Are you just gonna be a b.itch or are you going to explain it in laymans terms why the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to your theory?

22

Flat Earth Q&A / Burden of Proof

« on: October 21, 2006, 11:44:42 AM »

Yes, but it was stupid, you cant just set up a website saying that the earth is flat and then whine when people ask you to back it up.

23

Flat Earth Q&A / Burden of Proof

« on: October 21, 2006, 09:02:36 AM »

No, no. It's not that we aren't expecting people to come in and attempt to refute it. The point was simply that you ARE coming in here trying to prove it. This is such a SIMPLE concept, why do you guys not get it? If this was "The Round Earth Society" and a bunch of guys who believed the Earth was flat, THEN we would need to prove our case, but it's the FLAT Earth society, hence you, who disagree with the ideas of the people here, YOU have to prove US wrong.
Is it that hard to understand? Honestly...


~D-Draw

When you make a website, or anything else for that matter (cult, religion political party, clan, discussion group ect.)

People will expect you to be able to prove that your point of view is not bullshit.

Ex:. People go into a cardgame forum and ask, "Hey guys, show me why you think Vampiric dragon is not a tournament worthy card" and people will explain with playtests results and game theory why it isn't.

You go into a fighting game forum and ask, "hey guys, show me why you think that SNK games are better than Capcom ones" People will show, through movies, game theory, per characte option and character balancing what their point of view is based on, and why it is valid.

Same thing with anything else. They won't go "no sir, you came to our site, we're not showing anything to you, YOU show us that Card X, or game X is not what we say it is. That would be seen as snobish to most people and would just alienate newcomers.

It's not realistic to think that people will come to your forum and NOT expect you to prove that your point of view is valid.

FES, you just got pwned.

24

Flat Earth Q&A / What proof do you need to believe the earth is a sphere?

« on: October 21, 2006, 09:01:23 AM »

If it approached it asymptotically would that still fulfill special reletivity? Asymptotically under my under my understanding could be that given some arbitrarily amount of time (as I would say the earth is reaching at this point) the speed of the earth would get so close to C that the two would be almost indistinguisable.

Now, I don't claim to even have a vague understanding of special reletivity, but at that point, wouldnt the mass be so large as to use incredible amounts of energy, like getting up to an almost infinite amount?

That's the thing about infinity.  The earth can accelerate indefinately and never reach c.  The mass of the earth would get very large and hence the earth from a nonacceleated frame of reference would seem to be slowing in its acceleration.  Luckily for us on the earth, we would see the acceleration stay constant.

That makes no sence.

25

Flat Earth Q&A / Burden of Proof

« on: October 20, 2006, 09:51:52 AM »

Well, this is a forum on the internet, and anyone can join. So you pretty muc hexpose yourself to this kind of thing. It was to be expected.

No, no. It's not that we aren't expecting people to come in and attempt to refute it. The point was simply that you ARE coming in here trying to prove it. This is such a SIMPLE concept, why do you guys not get it? If this was "The Round Earth Society" and a bunch of guys who believed the Earth was flat, THEN we would need to prove our case, but it's the FLAT Earth society, hence you, who disagree with the ideas of the people here, YOU have to prove US wrong.
Is it that hard to understand? Honestly...


~D-Draw

No penguinface, if you say the earth is flat YOU have to back it up with proof and not heresay dbaced on what some Bible thumping retard thinks.

26

Flat Earth Q&A / I know you guys must get this all the time but...

« on: October 19, 2006, 10:35:26 AM »

They make a ton of money from the fake space program, that's why.

Dogplatter wrote:

Penguins were actually created in the 1960's by Russian scientists who combined the DNA of otters and birds.

27

Flat Earth Q&A / Why do you believe?

« on: October 19, 2006, 10:33:04 AM »

Why does Dogplatter continue to say this when the line he drew himself over a still from WA's video clearly denoted curvature?

The hell did it. I drew a completely straight line over the horizon and it fit perfectly.

Dogplatter wrote:

Penguins were actually created in the 1960's by Russian scientists who combined the DNA of otters and birds.

28

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Gravity Does not Exist!

« on: October 19, 2006, 10:30:27 AM »

I never said it was.

29

Flat Earth Q&A / Burden of Proof

« on: October 19, 2006, 10:28:30 AM »

Because the earth is round.

30

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New Believer on Board

« on: October 19, 2006, 01:56:54 AM »

Hello!

It appears that posting "Hello!" threads isn't commonplace here, but since I'll never feel right being active on on a forum until I post one, here it is. So... Hi! I suppose a long introduction isn't necessary, but I suppose I should point out that I'm a believer in the Flat Earth theory (though for far different reasons than most FEers) and will be defending it. I used to be an REer and believed the propaganda, but then I heard that people still believed in a flat Earth, decided to find out why (after the customary "What a bunch of looneys!" wore off), heard the facts, and converted shortly thereafter. Anywho, see you all on the boards.


Cheers!

--Chal

You poor deluded little man.