1

Flat Earth General / Re: Last trip to space by a civilian

« on: October 06, 2011, 02:13:41 PM »

You really believe that?? deep down inside?? I mean come on.... Do you ever listen to yourselves??

I constantly see FEers here whining that space travel is not available to civilians...It actually is, you just have to be rich enough...And then when civilians DO go to space and witness that earth is round, you call them liars?

That was your strategy?  You knew what answer you were going to get and you're rebuttal is just asking if they really believe that and if they listen to themselves?

I mean come on...

Actually, what i see is probably a lot of FEers avoiding this thread, because they know their answer would sound ridiculous...
I ask if he really believes that, because with such a brief answer (without the conspiracy talk that usually comes along with it), it almost looks like he doesn't believe himself, and that he's just answering for the sake of standing behind the initial FEer claim none of you can let go....

And that settles it for me. How do you expect me to take FEers seriously, when all they are able to do is call conspiracy on everyone and dismiss any and all evidence presented to them, while not presenting any themselves??

This website is a complete waste of time. I came here at first because I thought ready through the forum was simply hilarious, with those ridiculous avatars and childish drawings to try and support probably one of the most absurd ideas of the 21st century. Then i got sucked in because i just couldn't bare reading such ignorant posts from FEers without replying...

But really, i've had it...

2

Flat Earth General / Re: Last trip to space by a civilian

« on: October 06, 2011, 01:29:58 PM »

The last of 7 civilians to have been to space, Guy Laliberté, also founder of Cirque du Soleil, is having an exhibition of pictures taken when he was up there.
Guy Laliberté is from my city, where the exhibition also takes place (Montreal). He also got a book out, called Gaïa (same name as the exhibtion).

Surprise! He has very clear pictures of our spheric earth.

Are you FEers saying he is part of the conspiracy, that he didn't take these pictures, that he never went to space? That its all orchestrated?

Yes.

You really believe that?? deep down inside?? I mean come on.... Do you ever listen to yourselves??

I constantly see FEers here whining that space travel is not available to civilians...It actually is, you just have to be rich enough...And then when civilians DO go to space and witness that earth is round, you call them liars?

3

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What proof will you accept?

« on: October 06, 2011, 08:40:39 AM »

In all that gibberish you finally put an answer of sorts: The evidence of your eyes. It all boils down to "The Earth looks flat so its flat." Once again, we have something that is impossible to disprove.

I think the earth is flat, that night is darker than day, and that there are no gnomes in my attic. If you wish me to believe otherwise, there should be better evidence than "I was taught in elementary school of a globe."

It is impossible to disprove because it is true. There are no gnomes in my attic. I have been in my attic. I have traveled to its far corners. Your only response to the falsity of your gibberish is that the gnomes are to small to see.

Oh yeah? so you've been to the far corners of flat earth? I guess you forgot your camera on that day did you? 

4

Flat Earth General / Re: Last trip to space by a civilian

« on: October 06, 2011, 08:38:40 AM »

bump, please FEers, answer the question.

5

Flat Earth General / Last trip to space by a civilian

« on: October 06, 2011, 07:06:38 AM »

The last of 7 civilians to have been to space, Guy Laliberté, also founder of Cirque du Soleil, is having an exhibition of pictures taken when he was up there.
Guy Laliberté is from my city, where the exhibition also takes place (Montreal). He also got a book out, called Gaïa (same name as the exhibtion).

Surprise! He has very clear pictures of our spheric earth.

Are you FEers saying he is part of the conspiracy, that he didn't take these pictures, that he never went to space? That its all orchestrated?

6

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 06, 2011, 06:57:48 AM »

You don't have anything approaching measurements of the globe. You have a thrilling set of equations you found somewhere posted on the globularists' oracle of the internet -- that you doubtless believe with all your stubborn heart. Don't patronize us (or flatter yourself) by stating that you have measurements of "the globe."

And yet we DO have these measurements! That were gathered by experimenting the way the OP suggested!! You asked for them, we answered.

Was it predictible that you'd dismiss them? Absolutely. When did you ever NOT dismiss proof of the round earth?

You're telling me i stubbornly believe the globularist's oracle of the internet....But then you yourself use that internet to ask us a specific info...So if you're not ready to listen to the info thats given on this evil internet, why even bother to ask the question in the first place??

7

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 08:44:43 PM »

Sorry, my reply is not timely enough for you. If you really need something, you can contact me via PM and I will see it when I log in.
I don't have any measurements for the same reason that you don't. It is exceptionally difficult, fiscally impossible for me to set about measuring the earth's entirety with any accuracy. This thread is simply the latest example of the double-standard globularists impose on the members of the movement, and the blatant hypocrisy of their answers when faced with a similar demand.

Thats precisely where you are wrong. We HAVE measurements in RE, as we've already indicated numerous times in this thread. we only ask that you produce some measurements yourself. If your theory is so plausible, why is it harder to get measurements for it, while you call RET nonsense?? Why can we measure and calculate in RET, but that you can't in FET??

It always gives me the chuckles when you try to convince people that your theory is the best of theories, and yet you don't even have a fraction of the data and numbers available in the contradicting theory, RET.

8

Flat Earth Debate / Re: INS disproves FE.

« on: October 05, 2011, 01:46:17 PM »

Thork, denial is a very strong trait of character for you isn't it?

You're getting owned on this. You make yourself sound like an imbecile everytime you try to answer intelligently, which i assure you, you aren't.
You're stubborn person who has just been proved wrong on his whole way of thinking and simply can't accept it. Thats why you try and repeat things over and over again like a bad politician.
You're wrong, and i'm pretty sure that deep down inside you know you are.

Go ahead, disagree with me and further prove i'm right about you being in denial

9

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 01:24:29 PM »

WE ALREADY DID, TWICE.

post #28 being the last one.

geeze are you guys CHOOSING not to see our answers???

Hey man please read my post and what I was replying to. you'll notice that I was not talking to you and in fact I was asking SKI for some FE measurements.

my bad on that!

10

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 01:23:28 PM »

Really? You measured that yourself? Amazing.

Actually, I'm just gonna leave this to 3-dimensional-world and Ski. They seem to be taking care of this quite well.

What difference does it make?? Would you take MY word instead of the word of experts who measured and found these numbers?

you see thats your problem, you ask for numbers, but no matter where they come from, when they are given to you, you won't accept them. So whats the point??

11

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 12:12:05 PM »

Moreover, if I presented contradictory measurements, you would, no doubt, dismiss it -- as you do any evidence that detracts from your world view.

Please by all means provide some measurements.

WE ALREADY DID, TWICE.

post #28 being the last one.

geeze are you guys CHOOSING not to see our answers???

12

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 12:08:42 PM »

To the point, I wouldn't think measurements provided by you are automatically valid. Yet, you would have that certainty. Why would you assume at face value that the measurements taken by anyone are valid? Moreover, if I presented contradictory measurements, you would, no doubt, dismiss it -- as you do any evidence that detracts from your world view.

Alright,
So it seems that both you FEers and us REers will never be convinced of the opposite proposition.
Lets agree to disagree? Good. Now you trolls have no reason to have a website, you may take it down now. Whats the point of having a discussion forum if both sides shut each other down, as we can all observe? We REers live quite well without a website of our own to defend our point of view.

13

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What proof will you accept?

« on: October 05, 2011, 10:56:28 AM »

pitdroidtech and OU812,
You're obviously in agreement with the fact that the earth is a sphere...

So how do you figure RE is only a theory, when we have clear photographic and videographic evidence that it is a sphere? Isn't that enough for it to qualify as a discovery?? If I dig out a rectangular rock out fo the sand, i just discovered that specific rock to be a rectangular one. Its not a theory, its a fact, i have it in front of my eyes...

14

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 09:12:12 AM »

Not a single round earther rose to the challenge.

It was met with

• Sarcasm sure let me just start walking outside my house and I will be back in 2 years after I have walked across this globe
• Displacement Same goes for you: measure the FE and please explain why there is no distance-accurate map of the FE.
• Immaturity LMAO COMMITMENT?!?! oh my god that made me laugh hard
• Lunacy I would have to drill a hole all the way through the earth
• Cop out hasn't this been done already? You know, by Eratosthenes around 2,200 years ago?
• Apathy It's pointlessly difficult

but nobody was able to provide measurements...

It's just a shame that even though they know they can't prove their claim.. they utterly refuse to consider the possibility that it's wrong.

Actually, we DID provide measurements that were gathered by people who DID measure the earths circumference by various calculations. But i guess THOSE REers, the one who don't care enough to debate this to come on your website, are not to be trusted are they??

Also, i did indicate to you how your experiment may be conducted (and HAS been conducted) with help of an airplane. Seems it was more convenient to leave that reply out of your little list of answers? 

I'll show you once more the numbers KNOWN AND ALREADY MEASURED BY REers , in case you chose to be blind for a second :

circumference at the equator : 24,901.55 miles
circumference throught the poles : 24,859.82 miles

WE HAVE measurements of the circumference of the spheric earth. Well documented.

YOU don't have EVEN A SINGLE measurement of the diameter of YOUR flat earth.

So if someone needs to walk outside his house and measure stuff, believe me, its you, not us.

15

Flat Earth General / Re: Challenge to round earthers!

« on: October 05, 2011, 06:43:06 AM »

sure let me just start walking outside my house and I will be back in 2 years after I have walked across this globe

If round earth is untestable it's unscientific.

you do know scientists have a simpler method rather than walking on every piece of the earth
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2004-01-18/open-space/28330110_1_radius-earth-stadia


honestly this thread is as stupid as the flat earth theory

You haven't performed any measurements or calculations yourself. If it's so stupid why can't you just solve the challenge? Maybe there's some reason why you cannot measure the "radius" of the earth...

So you are suggesting that WALKING around earth with a measuring tape is practical?

What about oceans?

thers an easier way you know, and it has been done : you take a plane, and keep records of altitude, speed and time. You go around the globe, back to your starting point. Take all the numbers, calculate.

16

Flat Earth General / Re: RE is NOT a theory, it is a DISCOVERY.

« on: October 04, 2011, 01:57:01 PM »

This is partially correct. However, instead of staring at the flower not growing in my eyes, I would check if it's as hard as rock, if it looks like a rock, if it has a grassy/flowery taste to it, et cetera. Calling something a flower just because it grows slowly is moronic. It implies that trees, chiuauas, and Parsifal are, in fact, flowers.

I'll only address this part of your post, since the rest is a waste of my time, and for the most part answers without any explaination (you know, just stating that something is incorrect without any explainantion doesn't make you right. That seems to be a big problem amongst FEers).

I was not implying that everything that grows slowly is a flower, i think you're intelligent enough to know that (aren't you?? are you playing dumb??). I was vulgarizing for the sake of the argument.

So since you do recognize the fact that you need to look at a lot of evidence to come to a conclusion, how do you explain that you believe in a theory which lacks all sorts of evidences and in which there is no consensus even in your own community, as opposed to a discovery that proves this theory wrong, with tons of evidence and a consensus within the scientific community???

17

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Discovery vs theory

« on: October 04, 2011, 01:24:44 PM »

I'll post this again, since it seems like an FE mod deleted it for no apparent reason, before it even got an answer...maybe because of certain words i used, which i edited out.

RE is NOT a theory. IT IS A DISCOVERY. You should look up the difference...

If you found a flower, would you say that what you found is only "theorically" a flower??? No. Unless you REFUSE to see its a flower : then I could very well picture you saying something along the lines of : "well wait a minute, i'm not seeing this flower grow nor move right now. Therefore I present to you the theory that it is a rock. Unless you can show me this flower is growing right now, it is a rock". You know how stupid that would sound? obviously you wouldn't say such a thing, because you understand that you can't simply glance at a flower to see it grow, you have to make greater observations then that, that are proportionnal to the time it takes for said flower to grow.

Just like for earth. You can't glance down at your feet and say "this looks flat, therefore it IS flat". you have to make greater observations then that, which are proportionnal to the size of the planet. Which have been made. and verified. And therefore, the DISCOVERY of the fact that the earth is round is NOT a theory.

What you FEers continuously do here on your forums is the equivalent of saying "I won't take the time to sit long enough and watch this flower grow, nor will I carry out any other experiments needed to gather evidence, but I will not believe any evidence presented to me that shows it grows, wether it be video or photos, because i've decided that those can only be faked by you to try and convince me. Also your word or the word of others that claim to have made the necessary observations and experiements is not trustworthy enough, even if those individuals are considered a recognized scientific authority in the field. So given those facts, you can basically NEVER EVER prove to me it is a flower. Therefore it MUST be a rock, since I cannot see it move when i look at it. And since even you have to agree it is not moving when you look at it, then my theory is valid".

You can try to flip it any other way you want, but thats exactly the logic (or lack of) you use to defend FE. Your whole society is based on a sophism.

Spheric earth is a DISCOVERED FACT. Period.

Just because your very small group of individuals refuses the evidence linked to that discovery (out of simple-minded, ignorant stubborness), doesn't mean this discovery suddenly becomes a theory that can be discussed/contradicted. Nor does it make your FET any more valid or plausible.

Your thread wasn't deleted; it was moved to FE General, because it wasn't worthy of FE Debate.

Oh really??? So you don't think its important to differentiate discovery from theory??? Fact from fiction??

18

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Discovery vs theory

« on: October 04, 2011, 01:23:43 PM »

If you found a flower, would you say that what you found is only "theorically" a flower??? No. Unless you REFUSE to see its a flower

People have more fake flowers in their homes than real ones. Why would you assume that any flower you find is real?

Look at these flowers I found:



Fake or real?

Is that the only argument you could come up with?? or are you trying to escape having to answer to the fact that your whole theory is based on sophisms??

19

Flat Earth Debate / Discovery vs theory

« on: October 04, 2011, 12:42:56 PM »

I'll post this again, since it seems like an FE mod deleted it for no apparent reason, before it even got an answer...maybe because of certain words i used, which i edited out.

RE is NOT a theory. IT IS A DISCOVERY. You should look up the difference...

If you found a flower, would you say that what you found is only "theorically" a flower??? No. Unless you REFUSE to see its a flower : then I could very well picture you saying something along the lines of : "well wait a minute, i'm not seeing this flower grow nor move right now. Therefore I present to you the theory that it is a rock. Unless you can show me this flower is growing right now, it is a rock". You know how stupid that would sound? obviously you wouldn't say such a thing, because you understand that you can't simply glance at a flower to see it grow, you have to make greater observations then that, that are proportionnal to the time it takes for said flower to grow.

Just like for earth. You can't glance down at your feet and say "this looks flat, therefore it IS flat". you have to make greater observations then that, which are proportionnal to the size of the planet. Which have been made. and verified. And therefore, the DISCOVERY of the fact that the earth is round is NOT a theory.

What you FEers continuously do here on your forums is the equivalent of saying "I won't take the time to sit long enough and watch this flower grow, nor will I carry out any other experiments needed to gather evidence, but I will not believe any evidence presented to me that shows it grows, wether it be video or photos, because i've decided that those can only be faked by you to try and convince me. Also your word or the word of others that claim to have made the necessary observations and experiements is not trustworthy enough, even if those individuals are considered a recognized scientific authority in the field. So given those facts, you can basically NEVER EVER prove to me it is a flower. Therefore it MUST be a rock, since I cannot see it move when i look at it. And since even you have to agree it is not moving when you look at it, then my theory is valid".

You can try to flip it any other way you want, but thats exactly the logic (or lack of) you use to defend FE. Your whole society is based on a sophism.

Spheric earth is a DISCOVERED FACT. Period.

Just because your very small group of individuals refuses the evidence linked to that discovery (out of simple-minded, ignorant stubborness), doesn't mean this discovery suddenly becomes a theory that can be discussed/contradicted. Nor does it make your FET any more valid or plausible.

20

Flat Earth General / RE is NOT a theory, it is a DISCOVERY.

« on: October 04, 2011, 10:41:53 AM »

Posted as an answer inside another thread, but well worth its own thread in the debate section.

RE is NOT a theory. IT IS A DISCOVERY. You should look up the difference...

If you found a flower, would you say that what you found is only "theorically" a flower??? No. Unless you're too blind or stupid to realize its a flower : then I could very well picture you saying something along the lines of : "well wait a minute, i'm not seeing this flower grow nor move right now. Therefore I present to you the theory that it is a rock. Unless you can show me this flower is growing right now, it is a rock". You know how stupid that would sound? obviously you wouldn't say such a thing, because you understand that you can't simply glance at a flower to see it grow, you have to make greater observations then that, that are proportionnal to the time it takes for said flower to grow.

Just like for earth. You can't glance down at your feet and say "this looks flat". you have to make greater observations then that, which are proportionnal to the size of the planet. Observations which have already been made. and verified. And therefore, the DISCOVERY of the fact that the earth is round is NOT a theory.

What you FEers continuously do here on your forums is the equivalent of saying "I won't take the time to sit long enough and watch this flower grow, nor will I carry out any other experiments needed to gather evidence, but I will not believe any evidence presented to me that shows it grows, wether it be video or photos, because i've decided that those can only be faked by you to try and convince me. Also your word or the word of others that claim to have made the necessary observations and experiements is not trustworthy enough, even if those individuals are considered a recognized scientific authority in the field. So given those facts, you can basically NEVER EVER prove to me it is a flower. Therefore it MUST be a rock, since I cannot see it move when i look at it. And since even you have to agree it is not moving when you look at it, then my theory is valid".

You can try to flip it any other way you want, but thats exactly the logic (or lack of) you use to defend FE. Your whole society is based on a sophism.

Spheric earth is a DISCOVERED FACT. Period.

Just because your very small group of individuals refuses the evidence linked to that discovery (out of simple-minded, ignorant stubborness), doesn't mean this discovery suddenly becomes a theory that can be discussed/contradicted. Nor does it make your stupid FET any more valid. It simply exposes you as a bunch of tinfoil lovers who lack common sense.

21

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What proof will you accept?

« on: October 04, 2011, 08:19:30 AM »

RET is a theory, in the scientific sense. All the things you list in favour of RET prove nothing, they merely support RET. And the things you list against FET also don't disprove FET, at most a certain interpretation of FET. In this sense, the lack of consensus works in favour of FET since you will have to disprove each interpretation/version of FET.

You formulated your question incorrectly: it is impossible to prove a scientific theory conclusively, all you can do is give supporting evidence for, or disprove (part of) a scientific theory.

What you should (have) ask(ed) is what kind of evidence an FET proponent will accept as refutation of FET. That will quickly determine if someone is an FETer based on science or if someone is a religious adherent of FET.

What you can also ask an FET proponent is to clarify the exact theory in scientific terms and boundaries, ie. claims have to be falsifiable otherwise it's not science.

For instance, the star Canopus can be seen from the island Mauritius (where I have been) and the star Polaris can be seen from northern Europe (where I live). But neither star can be seen from the other location, which I have also observed personally. RET has an explanation for this and the explanation is falsifiable. For FET's explanation for the (non-)visibility of stars to be science there have to be falsifiable predictions. Just having a description of a certain process is not science.

RE is NOT a theory. IT IS A DISCOVERY. You should look up the difference...

If you found a flower, would you say that what you found is only "theorically" a flower??? No. Unless you're too blind or stupid to realize its a flower : then I could very well picture you saying something along the lines of : "well wait a minute, i'm not seeing this flower grow nor move right now. Therefore I present to you the theory that it is a rock. Unless you can show me this flower is growing right now, it is a rock". You know how stupid that would sound? obviously you wouldn't say such a thing, because you understand that you can't simply glance at a flower to see it grow, you have to make greater observations then that, that are proportionnal to the time it takes for said flower to grow.

Just like for earth. You can't glance down at your feet and say "this looks flat". you have to make greater observations then that, which are proportionnal to the size of the planet. Which have been made. and verified. And therefore, the DISCOVERY of the fact that the earth is round is NOT a theory.

What you FEers continuously do here on your forums is the equivalent of saying "I won't take the time to sit long enough and watch this flower grow, nor will I carry out any other experiments needed to gather evidence, but I will not believe any evidence presented to me that shows it grows, wether it be video or photos, because i've decided that those can only be faked by you to try and convince me. Also your word or the word of others that claim to have made the necessary observations and experiements is not trustworthy enough, even if those individuals are considered a recognized scientific authority in the field. So given those facts, you can basically NEVER EVER prove to me it is a flower. Therefore it MUST be a rock, since I cannot see it move when i look at it. And since even you have to agree it is not moving when you look at it, then my theory is valid".

You can try to flip it any other way you want, but thats exactly the logic (or lack of) you use to defend FE. Your whole society is based on a sophism.

Spheric earth is a DISCOVERED FACT. Period.

Just because your very small group of individuals refuses the evidence linked to that discovery (out of simple-minded, ignorant stubborness), doesn't mean this discovery suddenly becomes a theory that can be discussed/contradicted. Nor does it make your stupid FET any more valid. It simply exposes you as a bunch of tinfoil lovers who lack common sense.

22

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: October 02, 2011, 07:10:42 PM »

what do you mean in theory, its not a theory it stops becoming a theory and becomes a fact when there is evidence to support it and there is evidence that the world is spherical

I'Ve tried numerous times to make them understand that, but its really useless...these people simply don't understand what the word "proof" means.

23

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: October 02, 2011, 03:36:47 PM »

Of course.  Now, how does the mere fact that people have been to space prove that the Earth is a sphere?  It's a non sequitur.

I thought you FEers said there was a conspiracy and that nasa never went? I thought you FEers thought all the photos and videos of our spheric earth were fake? I thought satellites didn't exist because there is no such thing as orbitting??

Explain this to me : There have been up to today 7 people that have been to space for "tourism", the last one being Guy Laliberté, founder of cirque du soleil : how come none of them came back with the breaking news that they could observe a flat earth??

24

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: October 02, 2011, 02:27:04 PM »

And I guess that the very fact that people have been to space is not enough?

Why would it be?

Oh my god you can't be serious....Have you EVER looked at ANY evidence that the earth is a sphere?

25

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: October 02, 2011, 01:43:57 PM »

Wrong.  Just because the Earth might, in theory, be spherical doesn't mean it is spherical.  I still observe the Earth to be flat.  It's up to you to prove that I'm wrong.

And I guess that the very fact that people have been to space is not enough?
Obviously if you believe that, i won't prove anything to you over the internet. But if you were just slightly investigative, you'd realize VERY QUICKLY what amount of evidence is available that proves you are in fact wrong.

Rest assured, the evidence exists for all to see.  Just look out your window.

are you serious?? THATS your poof??? Well I have news for you. When i look out my window, I see a hill. Is that basis for me to state that the earth is a mountain?? Is this your logic??? makes one wonder what level of education you have...

26

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: October 02, 2011, 08:39:26 AM »

The beautiful thing about FET is that we don't need to provide evidence, as it's something anyone can confirm for himself by simply looking down.  As FET reflects what we all can observe for ourselves the impetus is indeed on the REers to prove it wrong.

You have yet to do so.

If you really believe that, you're either very very dumb, or you completely lack basic understanding of geometry and proportions.

Rest assured, you DO need evidence for ANY theory. As long as you don't understand that, you'll remain ignorant.

27

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: October 02, 2011, 06:18:17 AM »

This is NOT an argument. Because i can simply reply "well how can you say for certain that it is NOT the shape of antarctica?".

I do not say for certain that it is not the shape of Antarctica. Please, tell me how you know that it is.

YOU are the one who is trying to disprove it all. YOU are the one who needs to do the goddam verification, since nobody else's word or proof is trustworthy enough for you to believe. Just like when you take someone to court : the burden of proof is on you.

Actually, you are the one who created this thread, presumably to prove a point. It would be nice if you provided some evidence for your outlandish claims if you want people to take the time to respond to them.

How comfortable is your seat? It must be pretty decent for you to sit there all day long, doubting people and calling them liars, while not doing anything to support your "theory".

The irony, it stings.

I created a thread....in YOUR website, that YOU FEers created...presumably to prove a point. It would be nice if you provided some evidence for your outlandish claims.

See? we can do this all day. There are TONS of evidences out there that the earth is a sphere. You can choose to ignore them if you want, but that doesn't mean i have to show it to you again, and again, and again...

Funny how you also edit out the parts of my post that are convenient.

Again...give me the same amount of reasonnable and convincing evidence as the one REers are able to provide, and we can talk. Until then, nice avatars.

28

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Detailed flat earth map

« on: October 01, 2011, 03:30:47 PM »

So Australia is twice the size of china? 

Looks about the same in the line map. And if you notice the political map does show a scale as you specified in your earlier post. In reference to your map: Greenland is the size of Europe  It looks almost the size of the Continental US!

Thas because of the distortion when you try to "unwrap" a continent that is on a sphere to be on flat surface. Look at it on a globe, the scale is right.

29

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Detailed flat earth map

« on: September 29, 2011, 09:48:46 PM »

More maps and I will keep posting more until you are all sick of seeing them 



Line map small (sorry I couldn't make it bigger)

So Australia is twice the size of china? 

30

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Map of Antarctica

« on: September 29, 2011, 07:19:11 PM »

We eagerly await your verification.

Oh really?? you do???

Lets examine how you FEers respond to such verification : you either say the verifier is lying or part of your non-sense conspiracy.
You've never accepted a single successful verification as proof. No matter how many have been done, No matter how many pictures and videos, no matter how many trips to space, no matter how many flights, no matter how many boats, no matter how many goddamn national geographic expeditions...

So how would you react exactly if I told you I went around the world from north to south and from east to west?? Let me take a wild guess....

I've actually made a thread about this, to try and understand exactly WHAT PROOF YOU FEers WOULD ACCEPT. And guess what again?? not a single one of you can answer it. Why? BECAUSE YOU WON'T ACCEPT ANY. Stating the earth is flat has for you become more important than being an objective thinker. You're stubborn : even if you're wrong, you won't ever accept you're wrong. plain and simple.

So let me tell you, i'm not the one who needs to do the verification, because obviously you've already ignored the thousands of verifications that have already been made.

YOU are the one who is trying to disprove it all. YOU are the one who needs to do the goddam verification, since nobody else's word or proof is trustworthy enough for you to believe. Just like when you take someone to court : the burden of proof is on you.

How comfortable is your seat? It must be pretty decent for you to sit there all day long, doubting people and calling them liars, while not doing anything to support your "theory".

You know what I eagerly await? ONE single FEer that can provide evidence that is as reasonnable and convincing as the one presented by REers. Because right now, between your distorted avatars and your out-of-date FAQ section that most of you don't even agree with, you don't have much to offer...