5641

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat out wrong! Part 1

« on: August 29, 2016, 11:13:58 AM »

So, it is ok as long as you gave me an option?  What kind of monster are you?

This time, at least, you wrote two sentences!

I see a glorious future!

5642

Flat Earth General / Re: Insistence on an "Accurate" map is a rhetorical trick.

« on: August 29, 2016, 11:11:07 AM »

Last time I cared to check, all maps were still flat.

Last time I cared to check, planes could fly from South America to Australia in less time than it would take on any of the existing flat earth maps.

Wow, you can perform scientific calculations using only your eye balls.  You must be a super hero.  Do you also speak to fish?

No need to be aqua man, you prolific troll.

You can just look at flight times online. This isn't rocket science.

What for you might be easy, is for the less with blessed ones hard as rocket science.

" the fact we feel no acceleration"
I laughed

5643

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Dear Flat Earth believers

« on: August 29, 2016, 11:07:16 AM »

Why would anyone wonder about something that goes against imperical knowledge? Perhaps the Earth is a peach?  We would never know.

Mate! Nice one, if you keep practicing maybe your 30000 post will FINALLY be reaching two lines!

5644

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat out wrong! Part 1

« on: August 29, 2016, 11:05:25 AM »

Why are you stalking me?

Oh no, you keep doing the short, rubbish nothing-saying posts
And I even gave you an opportunity

5645

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Flat out wrong! Part 1

« on: August 29, 2016, 10:48:14 AM »

CrabbyJim is soalless

I quickly checked your last 30 post.

Every SINGLE one was as useless rubbish and as short as this one. I give you the opportunity to change this.

I hereby challenge you to answer to my flat earth disprove with reasonable argumentations

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67675.0

5646

Flat Earth General / Re: Insistence on an "Accurate" map is a rhetorical trick.

« on: August 29, 2016, 10:39:27 AM »

All those maps and images are still coherent with my work.

Hold on... what?

Wait a minute. So you are saying that the images we have of the Earth as a sphere can be incorporated into your view that the Earth is in fact flat?

Now I am seriously intrigued. I am not being sarcastic. I want to know more about this new idea.

He probably uses some sort of vector space where a spehere is defined as flat and looks at everything through his vector space

5647

Flat Earth General / Re: Star Proximity

« on: August 29, 2016, 09:47:24 AM »

There's a lot of reasons for this, one is probably that there's more money in keeping sick people alive and dependent on your antibiotics, and drugs, than on teaching people how to be healthy.

And physics doesn't work without diet, you can't do physics if you can't eat, so why isn't diet taught in school?
Just...because, that's the way we do things.
Physics doesn't work without ethics, you need to value physics, in order to be interested in it.
You can't do physics unless you can think, so why not teach cognitive Science, dialectic, or logic, or philosophy?

I'm out here. The level of stupidity is just above the amount I can endure.
I do not think it's worth my time to keep explaining you how and why you are wrong and pointing out how ridiculously retarded your statements are. Everyone that can think (even without having learnt cognitive science) will see how dumb this is. And those who don't  - well, there are people here that believe in flat earth, so...

5648

Flat Earth General / Re: Star Proximity

« on: August 29, 2016, 06:06:58 AM »

In my thinking, Scientific medicine isn't what it is, simply because it works, but because of all sorts of things, because money, because of philosophical biases, because it's easy, convenient, pop a pill, no need to change your diet or lifestyle. Experimental drugs are somehow deemed safer and superior to more natural drugs that've been around for centuries, tried and tested.
It's shaped by funds, by corporations that got started in Europe and North America, by what consumers want to consume and not necessarily what's healthy for them, and by what our governments want us to consume.

Oh dear, you're so clueless, it's pathetic.
Where should I start?
Okay, look. It's not like doctors recommend you to drink alcohol and eat in mcdonalds. No, they actually suggest you to eat healthy, drink water, do sports, not to smoke etc. But you know what? Everyone can decide for himself what he wants to do or eat, even if it damages his body and maybe even mind.
Now, when a fat man that eats a lot of hamburgers and drinks soft drinks only visits the doctor with high blood pressure. What do you think should the doctor to? Tell him to fuck off because he has to blame himself for his condition? No, of course not. He can may advice him to change his lifestyle, but will the fat guy really listen? Maybe, maybe not. To still be able to help the poor guy the doctor can give him some pills to decrease his blood pressure. Do you suggest he should not do so? Not trying to help?
Do you think the doc should prescribe him some herbs, because in some mythology it's said that those herbs lower blood pressure? Should he not use medicaments that have been tested and tested over and over, made studys about how they work, when they have to be taken, what side effect they can cause etc? Really?

Another thing: We're just spoiled with modern medicine so we do not appreciate it as much as we might should. You know, there where times where an acute appendix most likely killed you. When surgeons did not use any aenesthetics. When, for every kind of sickness, you had to eat some herbs or something similair which most likely did not work too good and if it worked mostly due to placebo effect. There where no antibiotics used 100 years ago - small infected wounds could kill you or take lots of time to heal and hurt a LOT.

Seriously, you're really arrogant. You talk about things you have no idea about like you know everything better than people doing those things for a lifetime and actually having studied them. Shame on you.

5649

Flat Earth General / Re: Star Proximity

« on: August 29, 2016, 05:34:09 AM »

Does Science believe the things it believes simply because they're true, and focuses on what it focuses on simply because that's what yields the most results?
What are some other things that might be motivating Science?

Science does not belive. Science does make hypthesis, experiment, theories. Everything could be disproven. Lot's of people look over the same theories over and over again.

You have no idea about science.
If you'd publish a scientific paper or even study something scientific e.g. chemistry, you'd get totally destroyed. You do not have even the slightest idea of how studys etc. work.

Why is physics considered so important, why is that taught in school, and not psychology or ethics or ufology or home economics or medicine, at least until university?

You might not be aware of it, but neither psychology nor ethic nor medicine works without maths and physics. They are simply the basic for every remotely scientific major.
Also maths and physics promote logical thinking and could be seen as sort of "brain jogging".

Anyway, I do not know where you live, but where I live in school we could chose subjects (e.g. maths/physics, biology/chemistry, music etc) to learn what we care about the most. You'd still have the basic course of maths and physics tho.

5650

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Can someone explain to me how we can fly around the world, if Earth is flat?

« on: August 29, 2016, 05:24:16 AM »

As I have already mentioned: This really, really slight curve the airplane would have to make would not be noticeable sitting in the plane. The corrections that have to be applied anyway because of wind etc. are way larger.

5651

Flat Earth General / Re: Insistence on an "Accurate" map is a rhetorical trick.

« on: August 29, 2016, 04:47:50 AM »

Talking about Euclidean space and other bullshit trying to justify why they cannot creat a simple, more or less accurate map of their flat earth.
Meanwhile round earthers have created thousands of accurate maps, google earth; google maps etc.



Edit: I have to admit: I give credits to mr. Davis; he's really a master of illusion and confusion. Trying to drag in euclidian geometry is pretty smart since he can put attention to something completely else then what this is actually about. Also something he might know more about than the rest here. Respect, smart move!

5652

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Classic and Advanced Sattelite types on the Flat Earth ! (Topic With poll)

« on: August 29, 2016, 12:48:03 AM »

What a totally nonsense idea. I seldom saw such a pile uf bullshit.

Btw considering turkeys current political actions I despise people that go on vacation there.

5653

Flat Earth Debate / Re: is there ANYONE willing to present ANY evidence of a flat earth??

« on: August 28, 2016, 03:17:32 PM »

On the equator this force would be parallel to the gravitational force. Moving towards the northpole, the force would start to change its angel to reach a full 90 degree at the pole itself. But due to radius = 0 at the north pole, the force is no more existant there.

5654

Flat Earth General / Re: Insistence on an "Accurate" map is a rhetorical trick.

« on: August 28, 2016, 12:22:51 PM »

Show me an accurate map. Go ahead.

Google earth

5655

Flat Earth Debate / Re: is there ANYONE willing to present ANY evidence of a flat earth??

« on: August 28, 2016, 11:46:29 AM »

You don't think we'd notice 0.0332 m/s/s? Do you have any idea how large a meter is? My calculations were closer to 0.04 m/s/s, but either way...

Adding the vector with gravity gives a direction of 0.2 degrees from straight down? Where exactly are you adding this vector? What vector are you adding? You don't seem to have done any vector math at all.

However, lets ignore all this and accept your value - would we notice 0.0332 m/s/s or to put it another way, 33.2 mm/s/s? This source seems to state we would, putting the threshold over 16mm moved to ~10 mm/s/s ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1402298/ ) Given the north pole of axis would feel this at a line tangent to the surface and thus normal to the gravity vector, we'd there feel the entire 33.2 mm/s/s pulling at us in every horizontal direction - which is simply not the case.

Hello mr Davis

First: Yes, I do have an idea how large a meter is. But feel free to elaborate me with your advanced knowledge.

0.033 m/s^2 are about 0.34% of the gravitational acceleration. I personally do not think, that you would notice this slight sidewards accleration since its not even momentary but continuous. A lot of people do not even notice small earthquakes except if you're not perfectly still, and when you do notice them you just notice it due to the inconsistant acceleration.

Additionally, the 0.033 m/s^2 are at the equator. This force decreases when moving away from the equator. At the northpole, where the force would be most noticable since the angle of attack is 90°, the force unfortunately has already decreased to 0!

Funny thing is: This "strong" sideway force wouldn't be noticeable like there was a string pulling it sideways. It would simply result in the force pulling you down beeing not actually directed to the earth's center but 0.23 degrees sideways. 0.23 only with the sideforce at the equator, but standing at the northpole; so in fact way lower in real life.

Tell me again: Will you notice an about 0.1 Degree tilted gravitational force? You might want to rethink your statement about "how much a meter is!" since you totally missed the point.

If you have any studies that proof you might notice such a slight sideway acceleration, feel free to show me.

By the way, I would really appreciate if you could answer to my really simple flat earth disprove
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67675.0


P.s. If you are not able to draw a triangle and use the tan^-1 to calculate the 0.23 angle, then i'm feeling sorry for you. You might also want to rethink your statement of who can and cannot do simple maths.

5656

Flat Earth General / Re: What are stars?

« on: August 28, 2016, 10:52:38 AM »

You roundies think you are so smart because you can regurgitate this kind of bull. The peddlers of this "science" have convinced you that you are brilliant and a non believer is is a total moron. It is successful brainwashing campaign that has been hoisted upon mankind.

Hello mr Flatty

I'd appreciate it if you could respond to my flat-earth disprove here
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67675.0

Since no flat earther has yet responded, I have to assume flat earth is wrong.

5657

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that the Sun cannot set on a flat Earth

« on: August 28, 2016, 06:32:53 AM »

Your limited experiment can not take into accout refration.

Refraction typically makes lower things appear higher, so that doesn't actually help you.

So says the satanists at NASA.

Yeah, fuck those satanists, right?

Feel free to comment on my 100% flat earth disprove, since you seem to be a honest flat earther
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67675.0

5658

Flat Earth General / Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

« on: August 28, 2016, 05:52:53 AM »

The north pole that people assume does not exist and is in fact what they believe is the south pole. It's just an inner ring of ice.
The so called outer ring cannot be reached.

Ah, interesting mr flat.
How do you know an outer ring exists when it cannot be reached?

5659

Flat Earth Debate / Re: What logical reasons are there to believe Newtonian gravity is wrong?

« on: August 28, 2016, 05:41:20 AM »

Is "gravity"  a force transmitted instantaneously across vast distances?  No. It is not. It is neither a force nor does it propagate instantaneously. Nor does it differentiate between mass, stress, energy or momentum.   Therefore,  the results are always wrong

My understanding is the action of gravity travels at the speed of light. if the sun were to disappear magically  we would know at the time everything went dark, from that point we would travel a straight line, Instead of fallowing the curvature of Earth's orbit.

According to roundy scientists, if the the sun disappeared this instant, we would not know it for eight minutes.

Hey mr. Smart!

Please answer to my 100% flat earth disprove. Should be easy with your artificial intelligence. Thank you!
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=67675.0

5660

Flat Earth General / Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

« on: August 28, 2016, 04:48:40 AM »

You're too nasty and frenzied to bother with. I'll explain it to someone who is genuine.

I think you just find it annoying that I keep finding fault with each and every one of your ideas.

I think you really foamed at the mouth when you found out you yourself proved two objects of different mass fall at the same speed.

I think you are so worked up about the fact that you can't beat me, you are now curled up in a fetal position under your desk until you've shaken that 'bad feeling' (AKA doubt).

I think you are out of ammo and can't prove a damn thing.

I think you are really feeling terrible about this and you can't see a way out of it.

That's what I think.

Wise words.

@Jane. Heat is just energy that causes vibration when applied to matter.

5661

Flat Earth General / Re: moon hoax information index.

« on: August 28, 2016, 04:32:15 AM »

The moonlanding is generally accepted as truth. Evidence can be found online.

If you say it's a hoax, it's up to you to prove so.

5662

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that the Sun cannot set on a flat Earth

« on: August 28, 2016, 03:19:02 AM »

It's so wrong, in every imaginable way.
1. The flat earthers say the sun is about 3000miles high. Your camera perspective would be about 2000 miles high.
2. Your "sun" moves straight away from the observer (not as the flat earth sun which does a circle)
3. To get the perspective "disappearing" look you'd have to put the camera VERY low or the coin much higher and let it go much futher away.
4. To get the sun "disappearing" you'd have to replicate mountains, clouds etc on your table.
etc. pp.

Overall, the flat earth is so easy to disprove and there are much ways. But this one isn't serving the purpose.

5663

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Special spot for Sandokhan's copy-pasta related to the Sagnac Effect

« on: August 28, 2016, 02:40:18 AM »

For all the non-physicists and others that do not know the sagnac effect: Would you mind to briefly explain this effect and its importance (as well as generally as how it concerns the flat vs globe debate).

Ty.

5664

Flat Earth General / Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

« on: August 28, 2016, 02:38:36 AM »

May anyone explain me what you discussed for 40 pages now?
I do not see a need to discuss a totally crazy idea for this long.

5665

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof that the Sun cannot set on a flat Earth

« on: August 28, 2016, 02:34:42 AM »

This "experiment" is nearly as retarded as the flat earth itself.

5666

Flat Earth General / Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

« on: August 28, 2016, 12:24:55 AM »

What is the sun reflecting?
@scepti: wrong.

5667

Flat Earth General / Re: New & Curious

« on: August 27, 2016, 12:58:39 PM »

If you follow the discussions on this forum you will notice that flat earthers reject any and all evidence that disproves their hypothosis. Including their own eyes.

They operate from the assumption that they are right about the earth beying flat, and that therefor 'logically'  everything that does not support their view is inacutate.

This makes any and all debate futile if you want to convince anyone with reason.

But the upside is that by arguing against their increasingly lunatic views ('innertia does not exist', 'gravity is caused by air', 'pinguins are man-made') you do learn more about thr actual real science of it all.

I'd add that being here gives you a good laugh every now and then.
Plus, it's an intellectual challenge to prove round earth and disprove flat earth. If you hear about flat earth for the first time, you might think "wow those guys do have some points". But thinking about it a little bit further makes it easy to disprove it.

Additionally, I find it psychologically interesting why and what people do believe in a flat earth.
Also its kind of a "strech of your boundarys" to try to imagine completely different views of our world and try to understand those.

Last but not least: You can satisfy your need of trolling


If you try to seriously argue with flat earther, you'll quickly see: It doesn't work.

5668

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Is it true that water "always seek its own level" and if so is it always "Flat"?

« on: August 27, 2016, 09:19:37 AM »

I just realized that being Charming Anarchist is quite hard when all fluids in your body slosh from side to side continuously. I guess it can have some side effects in brain and eyes case.

Most likely his brain is "vibrating" really hard so it gets constantly smashed against the inside of his skull leading to a tremendous loss of brain cells.

5669

Flat Earth General / Re: New & Curious

« on: August 27, 2016, 06:26:05 AM »

90% here dont believe in flat earth.

The few that do are either trolls or retarded, you cannot discuss with them.

5670

Flat Earth General / Re: Den Pressure - A Definable Hypothesis & Experiments (Scepti, iWitness)

« on: August 27, 2016, 04:37:17 AM »

We can see the sun rotate.

Of course, this is the utter basics and may or may not sink in. It's easy for it to be ridiculed but those that do will understand nothing. I have faith in you understanding most of what I say, regardless of whether any of it makes a reality of sense.

Amazing how you can hear the sun while you watch that!

Are you fucking retarded? It even says TIMELAPSE.
I timelaps consists of PICTURES taken in an intervall of e.g. 1minute. There is NO SOUND recorded since it is not a video.
Obviously, to make the timelaps more impressive, one can add any sound that seems to fit.