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 - MadDogX

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 18
31
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Conspiritory Conspiracy
« on: October 21, 2008, 01:21:14 AM »
According to Tom, the Earth is Flat but fools everyone into thinking it is round.

32
Visit:
- Czech Republic (everything is cheap)
- Croatia (great food)
- Japan (interesting place)

Live:
- UK (home sweet home)
- Canada (seems to be a cool place)
- Switzerland (for all the stuff that's "not illegal"  ;D)

33
The Lounge / Re: Logged in Time.
« on: October 16, 2008, 10:15:03 AM »
6 days, 14 hours and 22 minutes

34
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Seeing the sun
« on: October 16, 2008, 01:03:34 AM »
But thats a different thread...a different round...another chance...to win the war....

No, it is relevant to this thread.  If they want to use bendy light as the explanation, then they have to be able to explain the flaws in the concept.

Additionally, they would have to give up on Rowbothams experiments. Bendy light would make a flat Earth appear rounded, therefore the observation of flatness must have been wrong.

That's something too big to only say and don't explain, how???

I thought my explanation was sufficient enough. If the Earth is flat and light bends upwards then Earth must appear rounded. This explanation has been used by FE'ers (including Tom Bishop) on several occasions to refute observations of the curvature of the Earth. Rowbotham, however, claimed to have proved experimentally that the Earth is flat by observing its flatness.

We are now faced with two mutually exclusive ideas: the Earth is either observably flat as Rowbotham claims, or it is flat but appears rounded due to bendy light. These two concepts are not reconcilable.

35
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Seeing the sun
« on: October 16, 2008, 12:30:48 AM »
But thats a different thread...a different round...another chance...to win the war....

No, it is relevant to this thread.  If they want to use bendy light as the explanation, then they have to be able to explain the flaws in the concept.

Additionally, they would have to give up on Rowbothams experiments. Bendy light would make a flat Earth appear rounded, therefore the observation of flatness must have been wrong.

36
The Lounge / Re: What is your middle name?
« on: October 15, 2008, 05:12:24 AM »
Michael. :(

Yay, another biblical name!

Why the sad face?

37
The Lounge / Re: What is your middle name?
« on: October 15, 2008, 04:46:55 AM »
Daniel.

38
The Lounge / Re: I'm tired of Vista's shit.
« on: October 14, 2008, 06:15:32 AM »
But also very noob unfriendly. I don't want to know how many people have run sudo rm -rf / because someone told them it would solve all their problems. Fucking up your system just shouldn't be so easy.

EDIT: Why can't I post that whole command as it is? I had to split it up with bold tags, otherwise the board gave me an error.

39
Flat Earth Debate / Re: I have a theory
« on: October 14, 2008, 01:27:31 AM »
Indeed evidence for space flight is overwhelming, while "evidence" for the conspiracy is usually based on conjecture and claims of fakery.

Space organisations launch craft regularly and provide a constant stream of images and videos. Private space companies are starting to do the same. Amateur ballonists have sent photographic equipment up to heights of around 30km, from which the curvature of the Earth is clearly visible.

41
The Lounge / Re: Post your ACTUAL Desktop 1
« on: October 13, 2008, 02:25:40 PM »

42
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Whats up with north star?
« on: October 13, 2008, 01:34:17 AM »
I'd really like to see some evidence for bendy light and the celestial gears.

43
Flat Earth Debate / Re: martian sun-set
« on: October 12, 2008, 11:45:28 PM »
if youre gonno prove them wrong, find something that can not be explained with computer generated graphics



The sun

Huh? Are you saying it is impossible to fake an image that shows the sun?

no. im saying CGI has a hard time working in the sun light. especially ON the sun to make it smaller.

Sorry but that doesn't make much sense. No offense mate, but I believe you've misunderstood what CGI is - you're confusing it with image manipulation.

44
Flat Earth Debate / Re: martian sun-set
« on: October 12, 2008, 11:16:22 PM »
if youre gonno prove them wrong, find something that can not be explained with computer generated graphics



The sun

Huh? Are you saying it is impossible to fake an image that shows the sun?

45
The Lounge / Re: The hunt for Christians has begun.
« on: October 12, 2008, 12:34:05 PM »
Don't you need a permit to hunt Christians?

A permit? As far as I'm concerned, you don't even need an excuse.

46
Flat Earth Debate / Re: FET scientifical?
« on: October 10, 2008, 05:54:08 AM »
Diversity is good in the sense of having multiple possible explanations for the same observation, because then you can test them against each other. Unfortunately that's not the case here. We're looking at the initial observations and experiments that provide the foundation of FET and the addition of bendy light in order to explain some flaws and inconsistencies in the original theory.

In order for Rowbothams original experiments to have worked as he claims they did, light must be travelling in a straight line. The notion that light bends upward essentially invalidates Rowbothams experiments and consequently falsifies the conclusions he drew about the shape of the Earth. Bendy light is therefore incompatible with FET.

47
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: What is the Speed of Dark?
« on: October 10, 2008, 04:02:33 AM »
new question. what is the speed of nothing?

Define 'speed'...

Define 'define'...

48
The Lounge / Re: Post an image of yourself!
« on: October 10, 2008, 02:14:22 AM »
Where are those pics of Muffz?

49
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Reasons for believing in FE?
« on: October 10, 2008, 02:12:18 AM »
The issue here is finding a value that represents an area of the sky. Sure, a diameter in itself only has one dimension, but we're talking about finding an object with three dimensions here, not looking for a point on a line. You're just being difficult to distract from the argument at hand.

A three-dimensional object doesn't have dimensions of area, either.

You're just being difficult to distract from the argument at hand.

50
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Reasons for believing in FE?
« on: October 10, 2008, 01:41:07 AM »
Even then, several hundred orders of magnitude would imply a huge area.

A diameter does not have dimensions of area.

The issue here is finding a value that represents an area of the sky. Sure, a diameter in itself only has one dimension, but we're talking about finding an object with three dimensions here, not looking for a point on a line. You're just being difficult to distract from the argument at hand.

51
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Reasons for believing in FE?
« on: October 10, 2008, 01:24:47 AM »
"Several hundred orders of magnitude" doesn't make a lot of sense as it is, but in this case it's totally ludicrous because there isn't a base value to begin with. Unless Tom is referring to the one degree of accuracy. But in that case, several hundred orders of magnitude would encompass the entire sky thousands (millions, billions...) of times, which is pretty much the most ridiculous statement imaginable.

Pure insanity, as always.

Perhaps he meant relative to Neptune's diameter?

Even then, several hundred orders of magnitude would imply a huge area*. I think we can just assume the word "hundred" slipped in there unintentionally and that he really meant "several orders of magnitude".

* EDIT: By huge I mean several light years, thus encompassing the entire solar system and once again the entire sky.

52
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Reasons for believing in FE?
« on: October 10, 2008, 01:01:23 AM »
Quote
Your approximation is way off.  Weren't you the one arguing a few weeks ago that Newtonian theory of gravitation did not help find the planet Neptune because it was calculated to be a degree off from where it really was in the sky?

No, the prediction of Neptune wasn't just a degree off. It was several hundred orders of magnitudes off.


Are you are saying it was out be a factor of ~1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000  ?

"Several hundred orders of magnitude" doesn't make a lot of sense as it is, but in this case it's totally ludicrous because there isn't a base value to begin with. Unless Tom is referring to the one degree of accuracy. But in that case, several hundred orders of magnitude would encompass the entire sky thousands (millions, billions...) of times, which is pretty much the most ridiculous statement imaginable.

Pure insanity, as always.

53
Flat Earth Debate / Re: FET scientifical?
« on: October 09, 2008, 11:47:55 AM »
"Bendy light" is an unformed hypothesis.

Bendy light would actually break FET, because light that constantly bends upward would essentially cause the flat Earth to appear rounded. While this provides a convenient answer for several issues in FET, it would also mean Rowbothams initial observations and experiments were wrong - therefore it would destroy the foundation on which FET is built.

The Earth cannot look flat and round at the same time.

54
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Stars
« on: October 09, 2008, 11:27:38 AM »
J.K., the image you posted actually highlights just how ridiculous the "gears in the sky" theory is. So I'm guessing your post was intended as a joke?

55
The Lounge / Re: Post an image of yourself!
« on: October 09, 2008, 09:50:05 AM »
I'll post them around 12:15 when I get her permission.

Time zone?

56
The Lounge / Re: Post an image of yourself!
« on: October 09, 2008, 09:42:04 AM »
Iz Muffz hawt?

57
The Lounge / Re: I am now the eighth highest poster on FES
« on: October 09, 2008, 09:38:42 AM »
I'm 27th. :(

Not to mention gay.

Way to state the obvious.   ::)

Next time I'll try to be more subtle. Satisfied?

58
The Lounge / Re: I am now the eighth highest poster on FES
« on: October 09, 2008, 09:03:22 AM »

60
Flat Earth Debate / Re: space travel
« on: October 09, 2008, 08:06:31 AM »
Punisher fails at physics. Again.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 18