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 - gpssjim

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 18
1
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Problems with Round Earth
« on: March 16, 2015, 07:46:02 AM »
When round-earthers couldn't explain why things were pulled down, they made up gravity.  When they looked to the stars and saw that their made-up term couldn't pull hard enough to hold the galaxies together, they made up dark matter.  When they find a flaw in that, they'll make up something else.  Looks bulletproof to me!
But none of this has to do with the shape of the earth.  Even if gravity is not fully understood, it does not mean that the earth is not round.  You seem to argue that if we don't understand everything then we must know nothing.  And yet FET understand nothing, so it some how explains everything.

2
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Questions that might destroy your funny theory
« on: March 07, 2015, 04:23:48 PM »
for 1 and 3 i refer you to my faq.
seasons change when the sun moves closer and further from the central pole.

2 is not confirmed as possible, people usually circumnavigate. if it can be confirmed, i offer one possible explanation under 'speculation' in my faq.
The FAQ should be renamed WAG.  When any one refers to problems in the FAQ you FETers respond by saying that there is no agreement on the theories in the FAQ and that it is not meant to be taken as the actual FET theory.  The FAQ is pure BS, it is meaningless to refer to it.

3
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What are the bright spots on Ceres?
« on: March 03, 2015, 04:34:15 PM »
since you just think it is fake

Of course it's fake. Look at the movement of Ceres in the video. The animation software they were using seems very choppy. Also, if you observe the video closely you will see that the reflective crater magically pops up about half-way through the rotation. That is not natural at all. This was clearly shopped.
It is about 3/4 of a revolution.  It is a simple animated gif of several images taken at a large interval.  That is what would be expected.

4
Does "It is not possible" count as a correct answer?  Do I win?

5
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What are the bright spots on Ceres?
« on: March 03, 2015, 04:03:29 PM »
According to modern REism, it is probably a subsurface ocean or water vapor. It could also be large mirrors. Of course, it could also be a photographic artifact. This is assuming the image is genuine (which it's not). But, hey, it's fun to speculate.
So why would it be fun to speculate if they are just fake?  There can be no possibility of discovering something new if they are just made up, so in that case who cares?

The same reason it's fun to speculate on the outcome of television shows, novels, games, etc.

Were you trying to prove some sort of point with this photo?
Just that there is real and exciting things going on in the world that FET is excluded from.  There is no reason to think about these issues, since you just think it is fake, you have no sense of wonder and amazement.  Just boring work trying to figure out how to draw that Map ya'll have been working on for the last few hundred years.

6
Flat Earth Debate / Re: What are the bright spots on Ceres?
« on: March 03, 2015, 03:18:07 PM »
According to modern REism, it is probably a subsurface ocean or water vapor. It could also be large mirrors. Of course, it could also be a photographic artifact. This is assuming the image is genuine (which it's not). But, hey, it's fun to speculate.
So why would it be fun to speculate if they are just fake?  There can be no possibility of discovering something new if they are just made up, so in that case who cares?

7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Did NASA invent math?
« on: March 03, 2015, 02:45:05 PM »
If Pi can change, we are in a world of hurt.  Seems like we would notice something like that, simple things like the shortest distance between two points would not work anymore.  I don't think you could invent a single think with a variable Pi.

8
Flat Earth Debate / What are the bright spots on Ceres?
« on: March 03, 2015, 02:43:12 PM »
What is the FE take on images coming back from the space probe Dawn?  It is approaching a dwarf planet Ceres and is seeing unusual bright spots on the surface:

Source: http://dawn.jpl.nasa.gov

More NASA BS, or something of interest? 

9
Flat Earth Debate / Did NASA invent math?
« on: March 03, 2015, 12:56:58 PM »
I really don't get this idea that there is a big conspiracy to fake RET.  It is all open and explained with math and can be checked by anyone.  One can estimate sun rise / sun set times, dates and times of eclipses, etc. etc. and it is not a secret as to how it is done.  Anyone can come to the same calculations using first principles.  It is all described in the math, there is no voodo magic involved.  In order for RET to be wrong, math itself would have to be wrong.  FET on the other hand would require a massive and unsupportable conspiracy, because it has absolutely nothing going for it.  No map, no predictions, no logic, no consensus even among FET and certainly no sex appeal.  What exactly is wrong with RET Math?

10
Flat Earth General / Re: 5 Reasons that Satellites are Stupid
« on: March 03, 2015, 07:21:24 AM »
Orbital velocities, insane!  The earth moving at the speed of light, no problem.  It is amazing how much crap you will swallow to make the earth flat.

11

And you still haven't disproved the Big Bang Theory.

Why would I want to disprove it.
It is a theory, which means " guess"
In this case educated guess.

Guess do not qualify as truths.

After all.

arguing against other people's theory is like arguing against other people's beliefs.
As i stated before, beliefs are just illusions, not truths.

The Big Bang is flawed.
You can not create something out of nothing. << period.
Well, FET certainly has created something out of nothing!

12
Once one gets too far outside of the sphere of knowledge, things get pretty loose and anything starts to become possible.  Sure, this could be some dream, but that dream would be operating outside of our available knowledge to know and experience that it is a dream.  The universe could be some mold spore growing in some gigantic turd some unimaginable animal crapped out after some bad sushi it's owner gave it.  It is just not that interesting, once you loose the connection to known knowledge, there is no way to know what is a dream and what is reality.  It is much more interesting to operate at the edge of knowledge where one is still attached at least through a logical thread to what we can know and experience.  Even if this is a dream, it is a damn important dream to me and it freaking hurts when things go wrong.  I'm not real keen on dieing, even if that really means waking up. 

And still everyone is dreaming about this stupid thread instead of sex.  Pathetic.

13
Flat Earth Debate / Next eclipse
« on: March 02, 2015, 06:16:11 PM »
According to FE principles, when will the next solar and lunar eclipses be?  Now, you can't just go look at the RET prediction, you have to show how you came to your prediction.  Otherwise you are just confirming RET, and I'm sure you would not want to do that.

14
I don't always know when I am dreaming, but I know when I'm not.  And I know that my life is not a dream, and everything was not put here just to trick me into thinking reality exists.  It would be nice if everyone could be right.  Then FET could be kind of the 'Special Olympics' of science.  Let's call it Special Science.  Everyone if FE gets a gold ribbon for every dribble they come up with.  But it doesn't mean a thing.  The earth is still round, and the real science will continue without them.  And if you are dreaming, why the heck would you dream about reading this stupid post?  Don't you have better things to dream about?  Dream about sex, that's an order!

15
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why Do They Hide The Truth From Us?
« on: February 28, 2015, 03:25:48 PM »
Maybe we should put it this way: How long do they think they can keep this FET truth hidden away from other people?


Not very long I would say.  You think you figured it out and it didn't take much effort on your part.  I'd be surprised if you got off your couch.  You certainly never took the time to test things like the how far away the sun is from the earth.  And that is why FE will never be anything more than a joke, it is not possible to hide the truth of the shape of the earth.  It is out of anyone's control.  You want to go look into it?  Look away!  No one is stopping you!  No one is sneaking into your house at night and deleting parts of the internet from your computer. 


What if the right answer to question above is this : NOT ANY MORE?

What they can do about the fact that the FET truth has already been revealed?


Nothing.  Hmm, silence.  No one seems to care about your big reveal.  The lack of attention is probably because the earth is round.  Only dumb asses like me bother to argue the obvious to you.  It was either basket weaving or this, therapy can be a bitch.  Thank God they finally give us WiFi in this place.


They can hire NASA shills to try to distract other people from getting insight into this truth.

They are doing just that indeed, they are hanging around various internet sites, and especially around Flat Earth Society.

NASA shills are hired for an full time job, but they can't do their job successfully, not any more.


I didn't know I could get paid for this, where to I submit my time card?  Why the hangup with NASA?  They are probably the least of your worries.  It's the greedy bastards you have to worry about.  It's the Ken Lay's ENRONs of the world that will do far more damage than NASA.  I would argue that there is more to worry from FEers than NASA.  FET requires a complete lack of logic and ability to connect more than one idea to another.  As humans we have a hard enough time to comprehend sizes and times that are not part of our immediate experience.  Things that are really small, really large, take a long time or take a very short time just don't register at the gut level the way other things do.  To comprehend these takes some displine and trust in logic, i.e. that if A leads to B and B leads to C then A leads to C.  All the FET logic I have seen amounts to A leads to B, C leads to D, there for A leads to D.  Disconnect.


So, now that we know the truth, what can you do about it?

Use force?

Oh please, the survivalists wet dream.  Like anyone would really give a crap about the earth being flat if it actually was flat.  Tell people they can't have any more gas for their car, then you'll see some action.  The problem with storing all those guns and supplies down in the basement is that you have to actually have a crisis to make it all worth while.  Sorry, it is not going to happen over FET.  You will have to look else where.

16
Flat Earth General / Re: Who are the REAL free thinkers?
« on: February 28, 2015, 09:34:40 AM »
And scepti, you question nothing. Your form of "Free Thinking" is simply not believing anything. Well, bad news for you, that's not what Free Thinker means.
I question everything. What you fail to understand is that I once didn't question most things.
I know what free thinking is. It's being able to think for yourself, without bias. It's one of the reasons why I now question everything and believe nothing. By taking this stance, I can look into something more deeply and see the potential discrepancies.
Do you question if the earth is flat?  Seems you left a few things of the 'question' list.  Do you question that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line?  If you are stuck with that as an open question for the rest of your life you are not going to get much further than a cave man in understanding the world.

The mere fact that I question stuff that you adhere to is the only reason you try to use the thought that I am not a free thinker.
Free thinker?  As in, free of value or worthless, then yes, you are a free thinker.
With most of you people, you would rather go into a frenzy against someone questioning stuff, proclaiming anyone that questions just one thing, is a conspiracy theorist or nut job.
Either this is a deliberate attempt to batter down the person for whatever reasons, or it's a classic sheep like reaction. Probably the latter with most.


Or maybe there are those that struggle for an intelligent and objective society that make decisions based on facts rather than the personal whims of nut jobs.


I've seen people who are clueless about what they actually live on and simply believe it to be a ball, who have looked at me with a shocked and surprised glare when I've said, " what if you lived on a flat Earth and it's not a globe."

They do this for no other reason than they are trained to do it. They accepted the small part of what they see on TV or in papers as the absolute truth for no other reason than it is their trusting authority.

Or maybe they have seen Satellites in the night sky, witnessed solar and lunar eclipses, looked for predicted iridium flares, have looked through a telescope at the night sky, have viewed the ISS with binoculars, have looked at the sun and witnessed sun spots, have calculated the distance to the sun as the Greeks did in 200BC or have used GPS.     

17
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Why Do They Hide The Truth From Us?
« on: February 28, 2015, 08:37:06 AM »
If the truth is hidden, then how can you see it?  If the UN doesn't want people to know the earth is flat, why would they use an FE map?  Ultimately it is more important to question yourself than authority.  It is funny how sometimes the cabal of conspirators are super duper smart and can fake everything from rocket launches, direct flights in the southern hemisphere, satellites, and on and on.  And at the same time they are spoon-fed flunkies without a clue and it is obvious to see that they are lying.

18
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Where are we going, and why such the hurry?
« on: February 28, 2015, 08:31:32 AM »
No FE response?  I guess UA is just too ridiculous to defend.  One cool thing about going .9999... times the speed of light is that all I have to do is jump real hard and fast and I am moving faster than the speed of light, how cool is that!

19
Tom Bishop says :

According to the Department of Transportation, the average on-time arrival rate is 75% among the 16 largest carriers.

http://www.gadling.com/2011/06/08/airline-industry-best-and-worst-of-april-2011/

    "Overall, the airline industry posted an average on-time arrival rate of 75.5 percent. This means that a quarter of the time, they miss the mark. It's almost as easy as being a weather man!"

1 in 4 world-wide flights were delayed. Weather conditions, or a slight misunderstanding of the earth's shape?
Man, you people will believe anything you read if it sounds remotely like a straw to grasp.

About 25% of all flights did not arrive at their destination on time. About 40% of these (10% of all flights) were due to the flight leaving late because the aircraft itself hadn't arrived in time for an on-time departure. Another 30% (7.5% of all flights) are because of air-carrier problems like maintenance issues, late-arriving crews, fueling delays, and the like. 5% (~1% of all flights) are due to severe weather that cause gate or ground holds, diversions, or cancellations. Now we're up to about 74% of the 25% of not-on-time arrivals due to delayed takeoffs, diversions, or outright cancellations, instead of the flight mysteriously taking longer than scheduled.

This leaves only about 6.5% of all flights not arriving on time due to other causes. Of those, the lion's share are National Aviation System delays (another 24% of the 25%; 6% of all flights). Many, but certainly not all, of these result in delayed takeoffs while a problem like traffic congestion elsewhere, often due to weather, is cleared; sometimes the aircraft is required to stay in a holding pattern, keeping it aloft longer than scheduled. If we take a WAG that fully half of the NAS delays extend time in flight, now we're down to a mere 3% of all flights "in the air much longer than expected". Of those, how many just "mysteriously take too long"? Some do, I'm sure, due to routing issues or unexpected headwinds, but some, at least, fall into the "folks, I'm sorry, but we're going to have to circle Chicago for a little while because of a problem on the ground" and, sure enough, there's Chicago, Lake Michigan, the northern midwest, etc. a few miles below you while you're fretting about making your connections.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/help/aviation/html/understanding.html#q4

I've flown enough to recognize that nearly all late arrivals are due to late takeoffs. The above rings true.

Tom Bishop apparently just tossed out the fact that "only" 75% of all flights arrive on time (which is true) and let you guys gleefully assume that 25% of all flights are in the air much longer than scheduled. You ate it up and uncritically repeated it here. The next time any of you FE proponents think of accusing the rest of us of "just parroting what you're told", please look in the mirror (or, even better, check your "facts" and what they mean, first). The world (whatever its shape) will be better for it.

Sometimes I think they are not government agents, but I can't understand then why they spend so much time here.

I would tend to agree with his points.

This flight seems to exist. Until we find a way to prove that all passengers are lying about the fact that it's not taking over 3 times as much time, or we prove there are no passengers, and that all these youtube videos and the few tripadvisor pages I found... either we prove that they are all fake, and find some mistakes like we do for the rest of the hoaxes, or we cannot just discard this flight as a lie. We need to find some evidence of tampering and fakery. If we don't, then we need to revise our map.
Think outside of the box and you will figure it out!  Just take that map you have and hold in one hand and make a fist with the other.  Now put the paper on your fist and let it droop over and you will start to get the picture.  Be bold, think for yourself, don't listen to the tricksters!

20
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.

OK, I agree. Then let us propose an alternative map. And then another question is why is the NASA whistleblower saying that the South Pole is the edge, too? Wouldn't he know? Or are you saying the map is wrong, but the South Pole is still the edge?

But then if the South Pole is the edge, how is this flight possible?

What if the plumb bob is not a valid argument because buildings are too small to worry about the curvature?

What if my only valid argument is the curvature formula not matching the videos of the horizon?

It is still good enough. I am still a flat earther.
I don't think you were ever an flat earther.  You tried to get some chops as an FEer, and are now slowly loosing all your own arguments.  It is a pretty obvious RE attempt to subvert from the inside.  Nice try, but I don't approve, it muddies the water.

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: the flat earth solar system
« on: February 26, 2015, 11:15:47 AM »
the sun is closer than the other stars. i've said that. planets are as well. are you going to add anything new or just keep repeating yourself?
there are multiple whirlpools, one above the other, as the several densities of aether combine. the sun and moon and planets are what happens when star-objects form in the closest pools, the stars as you call them are further. we have both naked-eye and telescopic confirmation that planets and stars are identical, and the fact rock does not glow as bright as the moon, much less the planets which are bright stars when viewed with the named eye. how can they be brighter than what are super fusion reactions according to you?

If you don't believe that rocks can appear to glow then shine a flashlight on a rock and note how bright it is, this is because the rock reflects some (not all) of the light that hits it.  If rocks didn't do this then they would appear to be a solid black all the time, which they clearly don't.  Planets do look like stars with the naked eye, but considering the angular sizes of the objects in question the naked eye is not the best judge.  Saying that planets and stars are the same thing because they look like it with the naked eye is like saying that jelly beans and colorful beads are the same thing because they look the same from 10 feet away.  As for your claim that stars and planets are identical seen through a telescope is simply wrong, when I aim my telescope at Saturn I see rings around a sphere, when I look at Jupiter I see bands of gas and 4 of it's biggest Moons, when I look at Venus I see a full range of phases, but when I look at any star then it just looks like a bright point and even when my telescope is at maximum power I just see a really bright point.  It takes a telescope as powerful as the Hubble (which you claim doesn't exist) too magnify stars enough so they look like they have volume and are not just bright points.  Stars are clearly not the same as planets, simple as that.

rocks being visible does not mean they magically get the ability to shine in the dark. planets are rocks too, and they look exactly like stars when seen with the naked eye. rocks aren't that right. i see you've ignored that as well.
not every star is going to be unique. the closest stars let you make out more traits. i see you've ignored that too.

think for yourself. it's all obvious if you would only think.
Venus does not look like other stars to me!  And we can see that planets act differently than stars with the naked eye.  Yes, it all becomes obvious if you just think about it.  It becomes clear RET is correct.

22
the obvious answer is that the maps we're spoon fed are wrong. are there jet streams (an obvious fantasy), or is it to compensate for the fact two places are closer than the round earth map says?
don't trust the obviously wrong maps you're given. not even flat earth maps, we have yet to have a chance to measure out an accurate one, the image is only an example and possibility. the governments hide the true one from us.

in addition, pilots will want money too. we aren't told the full capabilities of their planes, and they adapt the speed they fly at accordingly. if they're so reliable, why would there be any delays or early arrivals? simply, they make human error in how much they accelerate.
Were you not breast feed enough as a child?  You sure have a hangup about being spoon feed.  What is so obviously wrong?  The RET maps are accurate to the cm level.  Seems pretty good to me, especially considering FET can't even draw a map to begin with.  So now pilots are in on the conspiracy, who isn't in on it at this point?  And if you are feed up with airline delays, why don't you start an FE airline, always on time because FE pilots 'think for themselves'.  Oh, wait, there is not a single FE pilot in the world.

23
Acenci, the problem is that we don't know what the real map looks like. Consequently, we can't estimate any distances within the FE model. This doesn't mean that the Earth is not flat though.
Actually it kind of does.  If the earth was flat then drawing a map on a flat piece of paper would be trivial.  The fact is it is impossible to draw a map on a flat piece of paper.  It simply can not be done.  The only answer is to think for your self and free yourself from the tyranny of FE and place the paper over a sphere.
The RE map is also wrong, and it is blatantly clear in its most common flat version which is based on a projection. On a globe allegedly everything matches with reality, but who exactly uses globes for navigation.
Well, anyone with a GPS in their phone these days.  All navigation uses a globe, at least at the computational level.  Sure, there is not an actually physical globe inside your phone, but all the coordinates are based on a sphere (i.e. WGS84 Latitude, Longitude and Height).  Google WGS84 and you will see that navigation very much uses a sphere -- or spheriod to be more precise.  WGS84 defines a reference ellipsoid
What I am saying is that it is all relative, and it is true that the FE'ers don't have a very solid argument as to how exactly it all works and there are many holes in the theory. However, because we don't know how exactly it works and what it looks like doesn't mean the Earth is a sphere or spins. Of course, that is debatable, and if you haven't been to space you can't personally be 100% sure, I guess.
It is not a debate, the matter has been completely solved and proved at the level of proving that the shortest distance between two points is a line. 

24
Flat Earth Debate / Where are we going, and why such the hurry?
« on: February 25, 2015, 09:26:59 PM »
So according to UA, we are accelerating at approximately 9.8 m/s^2.  After a year we would be going 309,264,480 m/s which is faster than the speed of light which is 299,792,458 m/s (interesting that they are close to each other... coincidence?).  Forget Einstein, why should we limit ourselves, we are free thinkers, are we not?  Since JC was lighting the world on fire and turning over tables at the temple, we have added 623,167,927,200 m/s to our velocity.  Considering the age of the earth is 4.5e9 years old, we are now moving 1,391,690,160,000,000,000 m/s.  That is a fair clip.  It sure don't feel like I'm moving that fast!

So you FEers are telling me that we are are screaming along at ~4.5e9 times the speed of light, but I don't feel a thing?  Wouldn't I get a nose bleed or something?  And if I jumped up in the air, wouldn't the earth come smack into me damn fast and flatten me like a pancake?  And wouldn't we smack into the moon in a damn hurry?  At that speed, hitting any object would be pretty disastrous, just an every day old pebble would put one heck of ding in the ice dome y'all have been going on about.  Just the other day a pebble hit my windshield and I was only doing like 27 m/s (~60mph) and by golly, I got a big spider crack in my windshield now and I gots to get me a new one. 

And just where in the heck are we going?  Seems like we are in an awful hurry to get there.  What kind of rocket engine do we have our behinds strapped to?  There must be one hell of a smoke trail behind us.  Well, at least it is UA and not some ridiculous gravity thing.

25
The simple answer to the OP is, there are no satellites. They don't exist. The treaty stuff is for our benefit, as in, it keeps us nice and scared - on edge about the possibility that human beings - much like ourselves would launch nuclear missiles at each other, which are also a ruse.

There's no world military might. It's nonsense. They're all in it together. It's all run as one but segmented.
We are being sold a constant on going lie and we simply buy into it all, because - let's face it - how in the hell can we know any different. It's a need to know business with all of this stuff and we don't need to know.
All we need to know, is how to be fearful and simple plod along like we always do = head in the grass and graze away.

Thanks SCEPTAMATIC... I am truly glad to see that there still are people like you with an open mind.. simple as that. All we our saying is to QUESTION EVERYTHING... that simple human instinct .. called curiosity seems to have been overshadowed by so called better than thou attitude.. no one regardless of where they studied or how much they paid to read a textbook lol or whatever.. is above or below another human being...EVERYONE has the RIGHT to QUESTION... and BELIEVE in what THEY want. So next time your being fed lies about us going to Mars with no atmosphere for the parachute to work, or to the moon which cant be done since there is a huge layer of ice dome preventing travel....or that the Shuttle really did end up in space when it doesn't ever go straight up it immediately turns its launch into a curve......wonder why........or next time your told that the World Trade Center was brought down by imaginary planes hitting it when clearly it was a controlled demolition... or next time when you are told somehow your corrupt way of life in the West is the reason terrorists are out to get you.....or when Uncle Satan has the most notorious and evil weapons ever invented...but poor Iraq needs to be bombarded to ruins without barely anyone raising a cry in the West.....well at least for NEXT TIME.. TRY  to THINK for YOURSELF. thank you!
QUESTION EVERYTHING == KNOW NOTHING.
Wouldn't you have to question FET as well?  How can you accept FET blindly and reject everything else?  You argue that it is not A, it is B.  Why B?  Why not C?  You say we are fed lies, but you are feeding us truth?  You are no less human that they are!  Question away, but you will be lost in the wilderness if you don't listen to the answer.

26
So gravity is unthinkable, the speed satellites go is ridiculous, RET is limited and not free thinking.  Yet you are willing to believe the earth is accelerating at 9.8m/s^2, which means after a year the speed increases by roughly the speed of light.  That is cool, no breakup of the earth or the dome or whatever holds it all together.  Can't get off the ground in FET, can't solve a single freaking problem and yet you say FET is unlimited and free thinking.  I prefer to limit myself by the physical limits of nature, not by the ramblings of a lunatic that says I can't believe in satellites and science.  You can't tell me where to point my radio beam to bounce it off the metallic dome to simulate a satellite.

27
The simple answer to the OP is, there are no satellites. They don't exist. The treaty stuff is for our benefit, as in, it keeps us nice and scared - on edge about the possibility that human beings - much like ourselves would launch nuclear missiles at each other, which are also a ruse.

There's no world military might. It's nonsense. They're all in it together. It's all run as one but segmented.
We are being sold a constant on going lie and we simply buy into it all, because - let's face it - how in the hell can we know any different. It's a need to know business with all of this stuff and we don't need to know.
All we need to know, is how to be fearful and simple plod along like we always do = head in the grass and graze away.
The world does not have to be flat for the second paragraph to be true.
Maybe not but the crux of it all leads to one simple answer. We are told so many lies on every level, including what our Earth is.
Most of the lies are coming right out of forums like this.  It is the denial of science and objective reality that creates fertile ground for lies.  You are creating the problem you despise, one can only surmise that you despise yourself.
Well, I wouldn't worry about it. You just stick to your thoughts and I'll stick to mine.
Then you should stay clear of the debate forum.  Stick to the 'Flat Earth Believers' forum.
I decide what I type and I decide where. I'm sure you understand this. Now let's not get into a tit for tat, it's something none of us can win and it does become tedious. Let's leave it at that.
As long as I get the last word.

28
The simple answer to the OP is, there are no satellites. They don't exist. The treaty stuff is for our benefit, as in, it keeps us nice and scared - on edge about the possibility that human beings - much like ourselves would launch nuclear missiles at each other, which are also a ruse.

There's no world military might. It's nonsense. They're all in it together. It's all run as one but segmented.
We are being sold a constant on going lie and we simply buy into it all, because - let's face it - how in the hell can we know any different. It's a need to know business with all of this stuff and we don't need to know.
All we need to know, is how to be fearful and simple plod along like we always do = head in the grass and graze away.
The world does not have to be flat for the second paragraph to be true.
Maybe not but the crux of it all leads to one simple answer. We are told so many lies on every level, including what our Earth is.
Most of the lies are coming right out of forums like this.  It is the denial of science and objective reality that creates fertile ground for lies.  You are creating the problem you despise, one can only surmise that you despise yourself.
Well, I wouldn't worry about it. You just stick to your thoughts and I'll stick to mine.
Then you should stay clear of the debate forum.  Stick to the 'Flat Earth Believers' forum.

29
Flat Earth Debate / Re: star coordinate system in fet?
« on: February 24, 2015, 09:42:53 AM »
so... is it so that there is no working fe model?
It's settled.
There is no working fe model for ANYTHING!

30
The simple answer to the OP is, there are no satellites. They don't exist. The treaty stuff is for our benefit, as in, it keeps us nice and scared - on edge about the possibility that human beings - much like ourselves would launch nuclear missiles at each other, which are also a ruse.

There's no world military might. It's nonsense. They're all in it together. It's all run as one but segmented.
We are being sold a constant on going lie and we simply buy into it all, because - let's face it - how in the hell can we know any different. It's a need to know business with all of this stuff and we don't need to know.
All we need to know, is how to be fearful and simple plod along like we always do = head in the grass and graze away.
The world does not have to be flat for the second paragraph to be true.
Maybe not but the crux of it all leads to one simple answer. We are told so many lies on every level, including what our Earth is.
Most of the lies are coming right out of forums like this.  It is the denial of science and objective reality that creates fertile ground for lies.  You are creating the problem you despise, one can only surmise that you despise yourself.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 18