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 - RESOCR

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
1
The Lounge / Re: modern day Flat Planet hero
« on: March 12, 2007, 12:36:08 PM »
yeah heart sucked but he made up for it by having that sweet pet monkey.. what exactly did he control anyway.. like water obvious.. fire obvious.. earth he could control rocks and land .. but heart?... wtf?

he control's peoples EMOTIONS!

Actually that'd be pretty sweet....

"Get me a taco!"
"No!"
*Uses ring* "GET ME A TACO!"
"That doesn't sound like a bad idea...."
It sounds like a horrible idea. Id rather burn their house down, or cause an earthquake if they wouldnt. Fear is your friend.

Fear is your friend.... Mind Control is your faithful servant.  :D

2
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Bedford Canal Experiment
« on: March 12, 2007, 12:33:34 PM »
Quote
In fact, Rowbotham's experimental results have not only gone unduplicated, they have been repeatedly falsified.

If Robotham's experiments could be falsified over and over throughout the years, why couldn't Round Earth experiments be falsified over and over throughout the years too?

How do we know which measurements are accurate, and which measurements are falsified?


You eliminate all variables that could make your results inaccurate to what you want, then conduct the experiment.  Then repeat at different times to be sure your results are consistent.

I'm being kinda stupid pointing this out, or were you trying to prove the point about tampering or not?

3
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Another solution to gravity?
« on: March 12, 2007, 12:16:18 PM »
other that inaccurate nameing of a force its good! centrafugal force does not exsit it is merely momentum of an object holding it in place the onle foce would be pulling directly into the centre of the orbit (gravity) which is the centripetal force (my spelling is awful)

I apologize, it would be whatever they call the effect of being pushed to the exterior of a spinning object, like a centerfuge (again, spelling here).

4
The Lounge / Re: modern day Flat Planet hero
« on: March 12, 2007, 12:14:06 PM »
yeah heart sucked but he made up for it by having that sweet pet monkey.. what exactly did he control anyway.. like water obvious.. fire obvious.. earth he could control rocks and land .. but heart?... wtf?

he control's peoples EMOTIONS!

Actually that'd be pretty sweet....

"Get me a taco!"
"No!"
*Uses ring* "GET ME A TACO!"
"That doesn't sound like a bad idea...."

5
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 05:58:16 PM »
It was quite scary given that if we are ever invaded by robot aliens we won't be able to confuse them and blow up their heads by shouting paradoxical questions at them.

Reminds me of the Dark Tower series.

You just have to ask 'Why did the chicken cross the road?'


back to topic, I think I get what your trying to say, that you progress it enough to the point they difference is indistinguishable, and being no solid difference, they are the same. Maybe? So it would hold true that 0.89r=0.9, 1.09r=1.1, etc?

But I still don't believe there is no real number that would be first, we'd just have to apply a range of 'tolerance', how many decimal places are accounted for. As long as you increase but maintain that there will be a smaller number.

Although someone pointed out a number line plotted on a graph, X axis being the number and -Y axis being the number of decimal places it has, or something to that effect. I liked that.

6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 05:11:34 PM »
All of the proof you need is in the Flat Earth Literature. Open your eyes for a second and remove your head out of the gutter. Do a little thinking for once in your life and come to your own conclusions independent of the propaganda NASA has fed you since the age of three.

I have, a couple days after I joined this site. I asked many questions here, read flat earth information, and left unsatisfied. None of the explanations are as complete as those for RE. My entire with FE so far has been scientifically sub-par. My own independent conclusion are that the earth is round, but not even RE model is as complete as anyone says. Neither model is, and I doubt neither will be for awhile.

7
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:52:46 PM »
well by your logic 9r=10r, even though 9r-10r=-1 (no matter how many nines or zeros at the end, as long as it is an equal amount which it should be (infinity=infinity, duh) they would subtract to be 1, or -1) and NOT 0.
You can't do this with real numbers, because real numbers have decimal expansions with a leftmost digit, but not necessarily a rightmost so neither 9r nor 10r represent real numbers. Incidentally, p-adic numbers have base p representations with a rightmost, but no leftmost digit. So in the 10-adics, ...999 is an actual number, (although it's important to realize that there is a last 9 but no first, unlike 9r which one would think of as having a first but no last) and it is in fact true, in the 10-adics, that ...999=-1. (If you find this confusing, don't worry about it. The p-adic numbers are a very abstract algebraic concept which only professional mathematicians care about anyways.)

On the subject of the "first number after zero on the number line", as I've said before, there is no such object. The real numbers are dense, which means that between any two real numbers there is another real number. In fact, this is obvious, because if a and b are real numbers, so is their average, (a+b)/2, which lies half way in between them on the number line. As a corollary to this, there is no first number after zero on the number line, because if there were, half of it would lie between it and zero, so it wouldn't actually be the first.

9r has a leftmost digit, being 9. 10r has a leftmost digit, being 1.

And if you say there is no first number after 0 on a number line, that is saqying no numbers even exist, that 0 is as far forward as you can go.

and if 0.9r is a real number, and 1 is definately a real number, there would be numbers between them.

8
The Lounge / Re: Since educators lie
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:46:47 PM »
Actually  :D it would considering it was an English project. But it has nothing to do with spelling, or I'd have it done already. While I can spell well, I cant type fast without errors.
YO MOMMA! that one doesnt really work here... dammit. *sigh* outta tricks i am i is. *sigh*




Remember, the only response lower on the flame rating system than a NoU!!1 is a 'YER MOM!'
But i like yo MOMMA! so i win? I WIN!
recycling old jokes is (almost) just as bad. Including variations.

No flame is good unless it's original and funneh!

9
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Occam's Razor
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:45:51 PM »
100% of FE theory is assumptions.
Not true. There's still evidence towards it, let alone evidence against the round Earth theory. And still Occam's Razor does not apply for the reasons previously stated.

~D-Draw

Neither theory is even complete. People must remember in redefining the shape of the earth, you are redefining the behavior of the universe. 90% of the physics involved may be the same between the two, but that other 10% has profound impact. So we don't even know how much evidence is even there for one side or the other.

10
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:34:39 PM »
I was confused with what you were originally saying, Kasroa.  You mean 9.9r = 10.0r and not an infinite amount of nines on the left of the decimal place, right? 

well by your logic 9r=10r, even though 9r-10r=-1 (no matter how many nines or zeros at the end, as long as it is an equal amount which it should be (infinity=infinity, duh) they would subtract to be 1, or -1) and NOT 0.
I don't think that's right, Resocr. 
        9 - 10 = -1, but
   9.9 - 10.0 = -0.1,
9.99 - 10.00 = -0.01, etc. 
So 9.9r 10.0r =/= -1. 

uh, I was more referring to 9-10=-1
99-100=-1
999-1000=-1
etc.

I did not add any decimals. 9r (99999999999999999999....)-10r(100000000000000000000....)=-1.

11
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:32:00 PM »
Quote
but A CONSPIRACY must exist in order for photographical evidence to not be allowed. There needs to be a conspiracy to edit said photos, doesn't there? So if FE argued without any sort of conspiracy, the first picture from the Space Shuttle would shut this site down.

The origins of the Conspiracy have been well documented by Samuel Birley Robotham, Samuel Shenton, et all.

See this thread on the subject: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11233.0

But the conspiracy started well before 1670 (when the first accurate radius of the earth was calculated). In fact, it stretched well back into BC. With no apparent purpose, and more importantly, no proof whatsoever for the hundreds of years it's supposedly been around.

That is, excepting the fact that the proof you have is that the world is flat. Which I'm saying isn't proof at all.


Diego, what if the pictures of a round earth were just that- actual pictures of a round earth? You are saying they are fake because they are pictures of a round earth, as proof of a flat earth, when the earth must be flat to begin with for them to be fake. It's all begging the question.

"The pictures aren't of a flat earth! So they have to be fake! Since the pictures are fake, that proves a conspiracy that (...) proves the earth is round!"

Thats like saying pictures of China are fake, because China cant exist, then saying that china cant exist because there are no pictures of it. ALMOST EXACTLY what you're trying to say!

12
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:15:25 PM »
no, i didnt mean a number smaller than zero, I meant after as in next on the number line, greater than, etc.

Right.There is no smallest number after zero. You don't even need to resort to irrationals to see that, since between any two numbers there are not only infinitely many irrationals, there are infinitely many rationals as well. This is pretty obvious in the case of rationals; because if you have any number bigger than zero, you can divide that number by two and get a smaller number bigger than zero.

By this, of course, Skeptical meant no smallest number after zero on the number line.

Well whatever he meant, he is right, and it is not what I meant. Maybe it would be better explainable as the smallest non-zero number?

Anyway, ho would you display it? I've been (trying) to display it as 0.0r1, because thats how it makes sense to me.

13
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:05:17 PM »
None of this matters, RESOCR. If Earth is flat a conspiracy obviously exists. If Earth is not flat there is naturally no conspiracy. We FE's believe that Earth has been proven to be flat, this means a conspiracy exists. Why a conspiracy exists, or how said conspiracy exists is entirely irrelevant.

but A CONSPIRACY must exist in order for photographical evidence to not be allowed. There needs to be a conspiracy to edit said photos, doesn't there? So if FE argued without any sort of conspiracy, the first picture from the Space Shuttle would shut this site down.

14
The Lounge / Re: Since educators lie
« on: March 11, 2007, 02:03:42 PM »
Actually  :D it would considering it was an English project. But it has nothing to do with spelling, or I'd have it done already. While I can spell well, I cant type fast without errors.
YO MOMMA! that one doesnt really work here... dammit. *sigh* outta tricks i am i is. *sigh*




Remember, the only response lower on the flame rating system than a NoU!!1 is a 'YER MOM!'

15
The Lounge / Re: Since educators lie
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:59:08 PM »
Actually  :D it would considering it was an English project. But it has nothing to do with spelling, or I'd have it done already. While I can spell well, I cant type fast without errors.

16
The Lounge / Since educators lie
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:51:59 PM »
Does this site support the fact that I've been singed on here the last three hours procrastinating from a school project due tomorrow?

17
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Serious question?
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:39:30 PM »
Also the land that is there now would not have been there at some point in the past due to shifting of the plates. Who is the real dumbshoe? Someone who believes the Earth is round and argues as such or someone who believes the same but argues the opposite?

as someone who believes one but argues for whichever side he feels like, I'm offended  >:(

18
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:37:19 PM »
well by your logic 9r=10r, even though 9r-10r=-1 (no matter how many nines or zeros at the end, as long as it is an equal amount which it should be (infinity=infinity, duh) they would subtract to be 1, or -1) and NOT 0.

19
Flat Earth Debate / equivalence of orbit.
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:33:12 PM »
Why cant NASA just put a space station above the earth, and send refueling flights under the guise of 'Maintenance Missions'? For all FE knows of their own theory, that could be what they do.Keep shipping up more fuel to keep it above the earth.


And if the earth is accelerating, and the sun and moon above it, what is stopping acceleration from catching a space station?

20
You're still an ignorant layman for coming in here thinking you can disprove hundreds of years of Flat Earth research without even taking a basic physics class or glancing at the FE literature.

And YOU'RE just an ignorant layman fro thinking that even after all you've been taught and read, you can disprove hundreds of years of Round Earth Research.


Argument works both ways tom, and I think you'll see that the majority of the world would side with my variant.

21
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:23:26 PM »
speaking of decimal points, isn't this like saying that 9r is equal to 10r?

22
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:11:08 PM »
C'mon geoguy, I just saw ya reading this thread! Not enough time to educate a dumb bastard like me?

23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:07:48 PM »
And that means NASA doesn't go into space and fabricates all the photographs. Sounds like a conspiracy to me!

And of course, for you to prove all the photographs are fake, requires the earth to be flat.

24
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:04:21 PM »
No they don't. I have yet to see the conspiracy used to prove a single thing not directly related to the governments or government funded programs.

You use it all the time to dismiss photographical evidence.

25
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: .9999... equals 1?
« on: March 11, 2007, 01:03:27 PM »
Right. There is no smallest number after zero. You don't even need to resort to irrationals to see that, since between any two numbers there are not only infinitely many irrationals, there are infinitely many rationals as well. This is pretty obvious in the case of rationals; because if you have any number bigger than zero, you can divide that number by two and get a smaller number bigger than zero.

no, i didnt mean a number smaller than zero, I meant after as in next on the number line, greater than, etc. What is the very first number larger than zero, on a line where 0.9r is a viable, defined point, one step up from however you choose to name the number one step less than it, how I define 0.9r8.

26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 12:58:47 PM »
No, Earth can be flat and there be no conspiracy.

But don't you require the conspiracy to fabricate all pictures from space?

And if a then b is not logical, because half of the rebuttals on this site require b to be true, in trying to prove a.

27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 12:55:12 PM »
Fine, let me rephrase my answer. If the Earth is flat there is a conspiracy. It is simply a prediction made by the FE model.

And for the earth to be proven flat, there must be a conspiracy. Using claim A as evidence to prove B true, while B must be true to prove A is I believe the definition of begging the question. Make A the conspiracy and B FE theory, and you have this site. So if it is not definite fact, it cannot be proof. As the status of the conspiracy relies on the earth being flat (which is the thing in question) it should not be viable evidence.

And your post(s) even say you do not have concrete reasoning for why there would be conspiracy.

28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 12:50:27 PM »
The Earth is flat, the world's governments say it isn't. Obviously they must be lying.

Begging the question. The earth being flat is the question of the site, therefore unacceptable as proof.

29
Flat Earth Debate / Another solution to gravity?
« on: March 11, 2007, 12:49:41 PM »
What if the earth occupied a similar orbit as it does in RE, with the occupied plane facing towards the sun? The centrifugal force would act as gravity, pressure downwards?

Before you say 'Orbit cant be maintained without your precious gravity!" Then how do the other (spherical) planets have moons that ORBIT around them?

Before you ask about how the sun would illuminate only half the earth at a time, and almost exactly half, at any point in time, thinking that it would illuminate all, I pose the same question back to you, thinking it would only illuminate maybe a fifth.

30
Flat Earth Debate / Stop Begging the Question
« on: March 11, 2007, 12:42:38 PM »
Simple question. How do you know the conspiracy exists? And don't say 'It must, because that's the only way the earth could possibly be flat!' I would tell you to read the topic title faster than you could link to the FAQ. And in the ever-persistent way of FE denying everything without an enormous amount of proof, if you cant prove the conspiracy, it will have less validity than how FE holds pictures from the ISS.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13