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.

Topics - Rama Set

Pages: [1]
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Violence against women
« on: January 23, 2017, 08:35:14 PM »
…society has normalized the abuse of women.

Can you elaborate more?  From where I am sitting it was normalized like back when it was ok to see men on TV slapping their uppity wife to silence her, but I don't see it anymore.

Flat Earth General / Cool Hard Logic - Testing Flattards - Part 1
« on: November 29, 2016, 07:30:13 AM »
Cool Hard Logic is getting ready to wreck FE:

Suggestions & Concerns / Hey look! Legba is back...
« on: September 14, 2016, 12:59:41 PM »
...and he is already flaming and making personal attacks in the upper fora!  Some people never learn, but maybe something can be done to prevent this?

Prove me wrong.

Already have, repeatedly.

Plus I know the name you post under at cluesforum, dickhead...

And it's a surprising one...


These two clowns both know the gun explains rocket propulsion

Incorrect; I ruined that shit years ago.

Plus lol at you freaks proving this true as well:

However, as I have provided solid evidence elsewhere that this forum, & the internet as a whole, is run by military-industrial criminals, expect a riot of mad bullshit disinfo-spam, plus a forum slide, to attempt to hide the crimes I have so easily exposed using simple science & logic.

How's it feel having a gay children's entertainer & total fraud of a human as an avatar btw?

Pretty shit I'd imagine...

But I'm not a shill so that's just a guess.

Toodle-pip, Retards!

Suggestions & Concerns / Some Mod loving please
« on: May 20, 2016, 01:18:09 PM »
Hey Mods,

TheBigYun is getting a little rowdy down in PR & S.  Calling Space Cowgirl a hooker and making lewd comments, etc... Could you have a look when you have time?


Suggestions & Concerns / Post editing
« on: February 12, 2016, 12:14:58 PM »
Why don't posts display when it was last edited anymore?  I think this is a good feature that allows for editorial transparency.  Any chance we can get it back?

Suggestions & Concerns / Whatever happened to Baby Jane?
« on: January 20, 2016, 11:24:19 AM »
Jane was a mod and then she wasn't.  Can anyone shed some light on that?

Suggestions & Concerns / Papa Legba-FE Champion or Troll?
« on: May 10, 2015, 01:20:45 PM »
Hey Mods, just wondering if there was a reason why Papa Legba's terrible posting is permitted to continue?  Is it because he stays in the one thread?

I have no problem with his point of view, but he is almost always insulting someone is a profane way. It does not help that he reiterates the same point again and again.

Interested in your thoughts!  Thanks!

Suggestions & Concerns / A Suggestion to make FE Q & A more effective
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:46:49 PM »
I appreciate the need for a place when questions can get answered without debate or editorializing but I think there should room for elaboration or errata to be appended on to answers so that people's ignorance or mistakes do not get in the way. As such, I propose that posters be allowed to comment on answers but in an extremely limited fashion. Matters of fact should be open to correction as long as they are accompanied by a quotation and source with the correct fact. The correction must be explicit in the quote and not a matter of deduction or inference and the correction must also be completely devoid of editorializing.

If someone has a legitimate objection to the correction, then both the correction and objection are split in to a debate thread and if the objection is specious then it goes to CN or AR. In this way answers still have the place they deserve while reducing misinformation. Hopefully that can cure some of the angst surrounding that forum and allow FEers a place to present the proper foundation for their ideas.

Thanks and don't hurt me.

Flat Earth General / Is the Earth Flat?
« on: December 04, 2014, 01:11:27 PM »

Flat Earth Debate / Apollo Hoax: Rogan vs Plait
« on: November 24, 2014, 11:46:49 AM »
Below is linked a debate between Joe Rogan and Phil Plait regarding the Apollo Moon Hoax.  I have read on this site that Joe Rogan trounces Phil Plait in this debate, and so I was intrigued and watched it.  Having done that, it is easy to see how one might believe that based on Joe Rogan's aggressive arguing style, but based on the facts of the matter it does not seem so clear cut to me.  I want FEers and/or Hoax believers to point out the arguments that Rogan makes they find the most compelling:

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

I also wanted to post a link to conversation years later that Rogan had with Neil DeGrasse Tyson where he talks about how foolish he was to believe in the Apollo Hoax:

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Variable Speed of Light
« on: June 28, 2014, 11:07:12 PM »
As I was researching Tired Light Syndrome I came across an observation made by the MAGIC Telescope of extermely high energy gamma rays that did not travel at the speed of light. As of yet, I have seen no explanation or discovery of any source of error for this measurement leading me to think that there is something very important in this observation.

Anyone know anything more about this?

Flat Earth Q&A / Einstein's Thought Experiments
« on: June 06, 2014, 12:10:25 PM »
Based on this comment, I was wondering if a FEer could tell me specifically which of Einstein's thought experiments are based on a FE?


Philosophy, Religion & Society / Rob Ford, Mayor of Toronto, Degenerate
« on: November 05, 2013, 05:10:01 PM »
The mayor of the fine city of Toronto has been embroiled in scandal for the last year or so. A blogger reported that he had seen a video of Rob Ford smoking crack, and this was later corroborated by the Toronto Star. The mayor was naturally outraged and denied the existence of such a video. After a successful kickstarter to raise the $200,000 price tag the drug dealer named to sell the video, the offer was retracted for no particular reason. Fast on the heels of this was a police raid of the dealer's high rise tower; the murder of two of the drug dealers associates who also had their photo taken with Mayor Ford; the arrest of Ford's friend on extortion charges related to the video and a news story about Ford's brother's history as a hash dealer. Already enough to make this mayor of questionable character no?  But wait there's more...

Fast forward to last week. Our police chief holds a press conference where it is announced that a deleted video was recovered from the drug dealer's hard drive; a video that matches the description of the mayor smoking crack. It is impossible to say the mayor was smoking crack specifically, so no charges can be laid, but the chief says that as a citizen he is, "very disappointed". The Mayor goes in to high alert, his camp lashes out at the police for convicting him in the court of public opinion, he refuses to comment on the video until it is released, he says he will carry on business as usual. Torontonians are apoplectic. Calls for him to resign are everywhere. The Mayor , on his weekly radio talk show, makes a general apology and says perhaps he should not have come to not one but two prominent street festival "blotto" as he put it. It does not help. People are even more convinced of his incompetency.

Which brings us to today. The Mayor is scheduled for a press conference and at this press conference he admits to smoking crack cocaine. He says that he probably did it  "in one of his drunken stupors". Despite this action, and all the lies surrounding it, he still thinks he is fit to run the city.

Basically Toronto is fucked. 

The Lounge / Impressions of FE All-Stars
« on: August 28, 2013, 06:15:12 PM »
For shits and giggles.  REer impressions are next!

Thork- This impression has been done literally thousands of times.  I am furious!  >o<

Jroa- You cannot prove that this impression is not accurate.

Pizza Planet- Why are impressions being done on this website.  Do what I say is right and everything will be perfect.

Parsifal- Irrelevant

Adolf Hipster- Lurk Moar

Sceptimatic- I mean if you think about it logically this so-called bullcrap impression is nothing more than a magic trick thought up by astro-liars and unscientists.  Its only my opinion, but there is no way I am wrong.

John Davis- This impression is valid from all perspectives until a paradox is encountered.  I will add this as a new chapter in my book being released next week.

Junker- I am in love.  She will post here any day now.

Ski- I am not sure why you think this is an impression of me...  ???

Roundy-  >o<

Tausami- This impression is caused by Aetheric Eddification

Rushy- So you don't have a good impression of me.  Tell me more.

Tom Bishop- This impression is clearly falsified by this evidence.

Wilmore- ...

Daniel- ..................... I'm on a yacht bitch.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Travelling at near-light speeds
« on: August 27, 2013, 10:31:05 AM »
I have a question I have been pondering, and please forgive me as a layman trying to think my through the problem.  If someone can point me in the right direction of how to research it, I would appreciate it.

I read that when traveling, in a starship say, at near-light speed, free hydrogen on the ship would ionize and its increased relativistic mass would pose a real danger to the passengers of the ship.  Would this threat depend on having a non-inertial reference frame to the starship's to observe from?

Flat Earth Q&A / Gravitational Waves
« on: June 22, 2013, 07:13:14 PM »
How does the FE hypothesis reconcile the existence of gravitational waves?

Flat Earth Q&A / An equivalence theory question.
« on: June 11, 2013, 08:48:58 PM »
When a plane experiences turbulence it's attitude often shifts and luggage may come out of overhead compartments. So if the nose of a plane drops towards the Earth, any luggage that has come free will fall towards the nose. What is the UA equivalence principle explanation of this phenomena?

Flat Earth General / Oh the irony...
« on: April 24, 2013, 02:51:16 PM »

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Toronto Terror Suspect
« on: April 24, 2013, 09:11:08 AM »
The first of two men to be arrested for an alleged terror plot in Canada was arraigned today. He declined a lawyer and will represent himself from now on. At the end of the hearing he was allowed to make a statement on the stand:

“First of all my comment is the following,” the 30-year-old Montreal PhD student said in his first Toronto appearance. “Because all of those conclusions was taken out based on Criminal Code and all of us we know that this Criminal Code is not holy book, it’s just written by set of creations and the creations they’re not perfect because only the Creator is perfect so if we are basing our judgment ... we cannot rely on the conclusions taken out from these judgments.”


Flat Earth General / Fradulent Claim About Wallace
« on: April 24, 2013, 07:00:59 AM »
I have asked several times for evidence that Wallace was deemed to be a fraud by a court of law and have been told that the evidence is on this website in the form of a court transcript of a suit between Hambden and Wallace.  I had seen the transcript (not really a transcript, but a summation of the decision and found here) and thought that there must be more evidence.  There is none apparent, available or forthcoming.

Indeed if you look at the document linked to below you will not find a single mention of fraud or anything remotely close to being construed as fraud.  Instead what you will find is that a court ruled that the 500 pounds were payed to Wallace after Hambden's request that money be returned to himself, that they indeed had a wager, not a contract, and that because of these two facts, Hambden was entitled to repayment of the money.  It cites the relevant statutes, and the difference between money willfully given in a wager and money unwillfully given.  So the issue of the suit was not the validity of Wallace's execution of the Bedford Level Experiment, an issue which had already been contested in court, and upon which issue Hambden was found to have made libelous comments about Wallace, but rather whether or not Hambden was entitled to his money back.

Based on this, it cannot be rightfully asserted that Wallace's execution of the Bedford Level Experiment was ruled fraudulent as has been done here and here.  I would be very interested in seeing how else fraudulence could be factually asserted, and hope very much that a propoenent of this view does so.

Hey Arctangent,

I just watched the Dawkins-Lennox debate, and I am interested to know what flaws you perceive in Dawkins objections against the existence of a Theistic God?

I am interested in your thoughts.

The Lounge / RE: Flat Earth Veterans
« on: April 17, 2013, 04:25:27 PM »
Per this thread, Saddam is right 100%!  Having Thork as a representative of the FES is about a bad idea as there is.

Flat Earth Q&A / Pivoting sun contradiction.
« on: April 12, 2013, 05:14:22 AM »
At sun set the FE spotlight sun is shining directly at me, but a few time zones away it would still be shining overhead. If the sun is a spotlight and the Earth is not round, how does it simultaneously shine horizontally and vertically?

Flat Earth Q&A / Questions about the EA Equation
« on: April 05, 2013, 09:32:49 AM »

Where b is the Bishop's Constant (I have no beta on my keyboard), y is the direction of greatest increasing DE potential and x is increasing in the direction of the component of propagation of the ray which is perpendicular to y.  I also changed the third root notation to ^1/3 because I have no button for a root symbol.

I was looking at this equation and a couple of things popped in to my head that I was curious about.  I was hoping someone could provide an answer:

1.Why does the light ray in the equation not require a z coordinate?  It seems like this only deals with a two-dimensional space.  What would happen if you included a time coordinate as well?

2.  In the wiki it states, "Where (0,0) is understood to be the point at which the light ray is horizontal (that is, the derivative of this function is zero)..  When I asked Wolfram Alpha to take the derivative of this equation it delivered this result-y'(x)=(bx^4/c^2)^3/x

How does this equation equal 0?

Thanks for your help.

Flat Earth General / Infinite Plane, Gravity and the Horizon
« on: March 21, 2013, 08:50:44 PM »

Flat Earth General / Astronomer Needed RE: Halton Arp
« on: March 13, 2013, 05:52:53 AM »
Looking for the input of an actual astronomer on this, maybe Major Twang if you still lurk?  Can you comment on Harold Arp's evidence of Quasar's being nearby companions to galaxies that are much closer to the Earth than Quasar's supposedly are?

If he is correct, all of Big Bang Theory goes back to the drawing board and to my amateur eye, it looks like he has made some compelling observations.

Per the discussion in this thread regarding the capabilities of the LROC, I emailed an astronomer at Cornell University for an answer to why the LROC could not make out objects on the moon in greater detail. The answer is below:

Every camera and telescope -- and the LRO has a telescope-like set of lenses hooked to the camera, even if it's staring 'down' at the moon -- has a limit of how much detail it can pick up.  For cameras, it is a matter of pixel size.  For telescopes, it depends on a physical limit to focus the telescope (called the diffraction limit).  Normally things are matched so these are roughly the same -- it makes no sense to build a camera with more pixels than your optics can clearly use.

Think about zooming in on a digital picture in Photoshop (or your program of choice).  Eventually you get to a point where you are seeing individual pixels.  Even if you try to expand it more, you either get squares of color (the pixels) or a blur (the computer smoothing over the pixels). 

So, basically, LRO's cameras has a limit of the amount of detail it can make out.  It's a pretty tiny limit: LRO has two cameras, one of which can see down to 0.5 m per pixel and a bigger camera that only can see 100 m per pixel.  (A lot of missions will have two cameras or camera settings -- one camera to take pictures of the whole planet or moon, another to take detailed pictures of interesting things; if we tried to take a detailed picture of the whole moon, it would take a lot more camera time than we have.)

Now 0.5 m is very good for a planetary mission, but it's still 0.5 meters.  At that size, an astronaut laying down would take up around four pixels, and -- considering that LRO is looking 'mostly down' at things -- an astronaut standing up would be about a single pixel. The flag would take up a pixel, though it's shadow might be able to seen; looking down is a terrible angle for flags (but not that bad for flag shadows depending on the time of the day).  The lunar rovers would be larger, and top-down isn't as bad an angle for a rover, but even something the size of a car would look about like one of the letters in this email; you can make out what it is, but probably not any fine detail.

LRO could see more if we put it in a closer orbit, but its orbit was chosen to do so it can do both 'large scale' things like use its wide angle camera, and use instruments that need a closer range.  It also would be moving faster in a closer orbit, which could affect operations.  While more detail is always nice, eventually you get a tradeoff of ' this isn't worth the sacrifice of the other stuff we'd have to do to get this'.  (You hear this a lot in space missions.  There is a lot of compromise to get the most out of a mission for everyone involved; in this case, looking at pictures of moon rocks to learn things about large processes like craters and lava floods versus using instruments to tell us what the rocks are made of, versus methods to look for ice buried at the pole, versus better maps of the moon.)

I hope that cleared things up,

-- Rebecca Harbison

Flat Earth Q&A / Hair and UA
« on: February 28, 2013, 12:33:18 PM »
When you are hanging upside down what causes hair to fall towards the earth? 

Pages: [1]