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 - SpaceCadet

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
1
I haven't tried to defend FET at all in this thread. Are you even following along?  I answered the question posed in this reply https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=83193.msg2204515#msg2204515  Then you asked questions, and I answered them. Each question you asked was based on a strawman. Just like your last question is based on a strawman.

"Pray tell, if you are fine with one aspect of their theory, why do you oppose my mentioning another aspect of the same belief?"

When did I oppose you mentioning another aspect of the same belief? When did you even mention another aspect of the same belief?  When did I say I was fine with one aspect of their theory?  You are just making shit up. I'm beginning to wonder about your reading comprehension skills.

I don't know if this will help you at all, since you are determined to make stuff up I haven't said, but here goes-  There are FE who base their FET on the Bible. Specifically the Old Testament.

Now, I'm sure you will find a way to misinterpret that.

And I'll say it again like I said at the first. They base their belief on thier own interpretation of the Bible.

2
It is the cosmology described in the Old Testament.

You mean the cosmology derived from his own interpretation of the Old Testament.

The ancient Hebrews were flat earthers, as were most people of the region. They are thought to be the descendants of the Sumerians who were also flat earthers. http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/01-Genesis/Text/Articles-Books/Seely-Firmament-WTJ.pdf

Edit to add: Not just people of that particular region. Most people were flat earthers, no matter where they lived.

Quite right. They also believed the sun went under the flat earth. Should we accept that is the flat earth theory on how night happens?

The people of those regions believed the earth was flat due to the extent of their knowledge and observations. The talmud on the other hand doesn't teach that the earth is flat. It's teaching are on Man's relationship with God. Not science and geography.

You should accept that there are people with different FE theories, and if one of them believe the sun goes under the flat earth, then you should accept that is part of their flat earth theory.

And so everyone's "theory" should be given equal weight?

No, I don't care what weight you give to a theory. You are making up things to disagree with, aren't you?

Not at all. At least no more than your trying to defend flat earth without actually saying anything.

You say the ancient Hebrews believed the earth was flat, insinuating that is sufficient reason to accept a flat earth

I said they also thought the sun went under the earth asking if we should accept that part of their theory with the other part that said the earth was flat.

Pray tell, if you are fine with one aspect of their theory, why do you oppose my mentioning another aspect of the same belief?

3
It is the cosmology described in the Old Testament.

You mean the cosmology derived from his own interpretation of the Old Testament.

The ancient Hebrews were flat earthers, as were most people of the region. They are thought to be the descendants of the Sumerians who were also flat earthers. http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/01-Genesis/Text/Articles-Books/Seely-Firmament-WTJ.pdf

Edit to add: Not just people of that particular region. Most people were flat earthers, no matter where they lived.

Quite right. They also believed the sun went under the flat earth. Should we accept that is the flat earth theory on how night happens?

The people of those regions believed the earth was flat due to the extent of their knowledge and observations. The talmud on the other hand doesn't teach that the earth is flat. It's teaching are on Man's relationship with God. Not science and geography.

You should accept that there are people with different FE theories, and if one of them believe the sun goes under the flat earth, then you should accept that is part of their flat earth theory.

And so everyone's "theory" should be given equal weight?

4
Most people were flat earthers, no matter where they lived.
In fact, most educated and reasonable men believe the earth is flat. Of course, I'm not talking about the hand puppets that the academic community puts out, while simultaneously putting in a debt based slave class.

Speak for yourself and Americans. Where I live, I pay in full for my own education. I conduct my own experiments and do my own research to verify what I am taught. And the American givernment has no say in what is taught in our universities here. Most of the time as a matter of fact, here you guys are officially persona non grata.

And yes, we have verified that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. And Man has landed on the moon (including the semi failed ISRO mission few weeks back)

5
It is the cosmology described in the Old Testament.

You mean the cosmology derived from his own interpretation of the Old Testament.

The ancient Hebrews were flat earthers, as were most people of the region. They are thought to be the descendants of the Sumerians who were also flat earthers. http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/01-Genesis/Text/Articles-Books/Seely-Firmament-WTJ.pdf

Edit to add: Not just people of that particular region. Most people were flat earthers, no matter where they lived.

Quite right. They also believed the sun went under the flat earth. Should we accept that is the flat earth theory on how night happens?

The people of those regions believed the earth was flat due to the extent of their knowledge and observations. The talmud on the other hand doesn't teach that the earth is flat. It's teaching are on Man's relationship with God. Not science and geography.

6
Flat Earth General / Re: Lunar eclipses
« on: September 18, 2019, 09:46:31 AM »
I'll start a new theory.

The moon is a luminaire but gets shut down for maintenance every so often.

So - when you walk on the moon, you have to wear special insulated boots so you don't get burnt feet?
Look at the boots the astronauts did wear:

They look to be special insulated boots so Buzz Aldrin didn't get burnt feet.

By the way, Lunar Landing hoaxers like to claim that there are no stars in the photos on the moon, but here is part of the sky brightened considerably:

Buzz Aldrin on Moon - AS11-40-5964HR - sky brightened

Are they stars of different colours showing?

That's just CGI. It's CGI  I tell you. CGIIIIIII.

7
Wow! 45 lomg long looong pajes of Cilky refusing to answer the very question created by a topic he created himself. Gish galloping into philosophical discussions about if he is real or not. Just in a bid to refuse to answer. Dude, Sandokhan can learn a lot from you.

I'll try again.

1 simple question.

The gas exiting the rocket. It pushes against the gases in the atmosphere. How does this translate to a foward movement of the rocket?

8
It is the cosmology described in the Old Testament.

You mean the cosmology derived from his own interpretation of the Old Testament.

9
Quote

Rockets can fly in a vacuum regardless of the presence of my heart or not.

The best comment here by far.

10
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 12, 2019, 12:55:50 AM »
there's also a black sun

There must be.

Here is the Allais effect:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg760382#msg760382

Has one wondered if the Black Sun causes the Moon phases?

If you wonder, then look at this:

Moon above Kampala, Uganda, one observer in Berlin, another in Antananarivo, where is the Black Sun?

There is one for each of us. A personal black sun.

You've got a black sun! You've got a black sun! Everyone's got a black sun!!

11
Flat Earth General / Re: The RE Community Has a New Enemy
« on: September 11, 2019, 03:22:28 AM »
Like most of us, when served a heaping bowl of Sandy's copypasta, we just ignore what he posts. But something caught my eye as I scrolled past.


[q]Dr. Paul Biefeld did Einstein's homework while both were attending the same university:

http://ttbrown.com/defying_gravity/12_biefeld-brown.html

“Yes,” Biefeld told the Denison campus newspaper, “when Einstein would forget to go to a class, he would come and borrow my notes to get caught up on what he had missed." [/q]

This is what Sandy wrote up there. Please tell me where that quote shows Paul Biefield did Einstein's homework. When did going through someone's lecture notes to catch up on what you missed become having your homework done by that person?

This is a perfect example of Sandy's reasoning - take something out of context, read personal opinion into it, and pass it off as truth and fact.

Here is something you can believe in: the BIEFELD-BROWN EFFECT.



https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0507082.pdf

Weyl electrovacuum solutions and gauge invariance
Dr. B.V. Ivanov

https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0502047.pdf

On the gravitational field induced by static electromagnetic sources
Dr. B.V Ivanov

The formula was obtained for the first time in 1917 by Hermann Weyl: the electrovacuum solutions.

http://www.jp-petit.org/papers/cosmo/1917-Weyl-en.pdf

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2177463#msg2177463

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2179065#msg2179065


Here is the BIEFELD-BROWN FORCE FORMULA obtained using Weyl's affine connection theory:



Dr. Paul Biefeld did Einstein's homework while both were attending the same university:

http://ttbrown.com/defying_gravity/12_biefeld-brown.html

“Yes,” Biefeld told the Denison campus newspaper, “when Einstein would forget to go to a class, he would come and borrow my notes to get caught up on what he had missed."


Dr. Takaaki Musha
Advanced Space Propulsion Investigation Committee (ASPIC)
Research Engineer on Naval Systems, Technical Research & Development Institute
Honda R&D Institute, Biefeld-Brown effect experiments

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/musha/Musha.pdf

In 1956, T.T. Brown presented a discovery known as the Biefeld-Bown effect (abbreviated B-B effect) that a sufficiently charged capacitor with dielectrics exhibited unidirectional thrust in the direction of the positive plate.

From the 1st of February until the 1st of March in 1996, the research group of the HONDA R&D Institute conducted experiments to verify the B-B effect with an improved experimental device which rejected the influence of corona discharges and electric wind around the capacitor by setting the capacitor in the insulator oil contained within a metallic vessel . . . The experimental results measured by the Honda research group are shown . . .

. . . The theoretical analysis result suggests that the impulsive electric field applied to the dielectric material may produce a sufficient artificial gravity to attain velocities comparable to chemical rockets.


https://web.archive.org/web/20120710005059/http://www.ovaltech.ca/pdfss/Theoretical_Explanation_of_the_Biefield-Brown_Effect.pdf

Experiments carried out at the HONDA R&D Institute


I could verify

The only thing everyone here has had an occasion to verify, first hand, is the vacuity of your beliefs.



12
Plat is so blind but his ego on being "woke" will not let him do other than swallow what his cult prophets preach to him. Talk about brainwash.

Dutchy  is so swallowed in personal incredulity that he cannot see what is staring him in the face. It just has to be "how can you believe....."

13
That's a lot of words to dodge the very question you quoted.

Under which of those 2 will you classify a hot air balloon?

In addition. When the rocket's exhaust leaves and hits the air around it, how do the air molecules transfer that force back to the rocket to get it to move?

2 simple questions that you say a lot to avoid answering.

14
During the August 11, 2008 flyby, Cassini’s plasma sensors found ion and electron beams propagating from Saturn’s northern hemisphere. Their variability was something of a puzzle until it was noted that time-variable emissions from Enceladus’ south polar vents could correspond with the footprint’s brightness variations in Saturn’s aurora.
So, in you're typical, long winded, roundabout manner, you're saying that rockets can fly in a vacuum?  Thanks for that (I think).

Sandy copy pastas so heavily his "proofs" always disprove his other "proofs".

15
Flat Earth General / Re: Jupiter and its moons
« on: September 03, 2019, 08:49:11 AM »
Sandokhan's love of gish gallop as a way of escaping the problems of a flat earth are well known.

This post is about Jupiter and its moons.

FE says they are simply "luminaries". Lights in the sky. So how do they obviously orbit Jupiter? How do they cast shodows and have shadows cast on them?

16
Flat Earth General / Re: Weather sattelites
« on: September 02, 2019, 01:38:02 PM »
Crickets.

FE call crickets

17
Flat Earth General / Re: “Sigma Octantis” and the Infinite Plane?
« on: August 31, 2019, 04:16:58 PM »
Are there any star constellations that resemble these 5 continents? And how would it relate to Sigma Octantis?

I fing this very interesting. What are the chances?

What's even more interesting is how you ignore verified and easily verifiable evidence for flights of fancy and fantasy because it is what you want to believe.

Only you can prove to yourself Earth is not a Sphere. I have done this for myself. Now that I have proved Earth's not a sphere but an infinite Plane, I have a new challenge, a new world to figure out. Sigma Octantis is a key to more knowledge and as you will soon see it’s really a blunder for the Globe theory.

Explain this blunder that you speak of.

18
Flat Earth General / Re: “Sigma Octantis” and the Infinite Plane?
« on: August 31, 2019, 12:31:18 PM »
Are there any star constellations that resemble these 5 continents? And how would it relate to Sigma Octantis?

I fing this very interesting. What are the chances?

What's even more interesting is how you ignore verified and easily verifiable evidence for flights of fancy and fantasy because it is what you want to believe.

19
Flat Earth General / Satellites ARE real. Ask Trump
« on: August 31, 2019, 12:01:36 PM »
So Trump tweeted a picture of an Iranian rocket launch failure captured by secret American spy satellites. Independent amateur satellitentrackers were able to work out details of the satellite that most likely took the picture. How does this square with a flat earth and fake satellites?

I can't explain as well as Scott Manley so here is his YouTube video. (Especially for those whose research consists entirely of watching YouTube videos)


20
Flat Earth General / Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« on: August 08, 2019, 02:40:45 PM »
Plat, you are a liar and a poe.

You have asked for evidence and veen provided with it only to dismiss them with no basis.

So let me ask you poe.

Where is YOUR evidence for a flat earth? Not a debunk of the globe. Evidence FOR a flat earth?

21
Flat Earth General / Re: An IMPOSSIBLE hoax
« on: August 06, 2019, 10:13:12 PM »
It is true that the earth is flat. But NASA and other space agencies do not understand this. Because they believe in gravity. What proof do you want for the flat earth?

Any proof at all. Any one that supports a flat earth. Not one that debunks a globe earth. One that supports a flat earth and a flat earth only.


Oh, and no conspiracy! Just evidence for a flat earth.

22
You know Plat, lying and giving false information as facts doesn't help your case.

Danang, using false information from the internet doesn't help your case.

It makes you flat earthers look bad.

23
Flat Earth General / Re: Lunar eclipse on flat earth
« on: August 06, 2019, 01:45:42 AM »
....so the earth is a sphere?

24
Flat Earth General / Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« on: August 06, 2019, 01:44:30 AM »
Even flat earthers know that Plat has no defensible position. Even Wise and Danang are not on hand to help defend his point.

Young man, go learn the theory you are trying to debunk.

Go learn to stay on point and not gish gallop all over the place.

25
Flat Earth General / Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« on: August 05, 2019, 12:08:58 PM »
The 216 feet is 0.041 miles.
To see that as one pixel of a bulge, your image has to be 878 pixels wide.

It looks easy, but how big part of the middle of the line will be for that one pixel higher than the rest?
And will it really be seen as a bulge at all? :)

The distance of the 36 miles is too small part of the Earth's circumference to be seen as curved in blueprints.
(One pixel per 878.)
And construction teams already know how to measure from Mean Sea level.
Any other reference is useless.

You let us know when you have actually verified your (Claim) alleged surface curvature over the Canal. I'm not going to buy a gold mine based solely on claims.

Well, seeing as you are yet to show us YOUR personal measurements of the panama canal, we can also dismiss your argument. Let me know when you PERSONALLY  verify it. I'm not going to buy a silver mine based solely on claims. Especially claims that are chock full of personal opinions and incredulity.

26
Flat Earth General / Re: When will RE Community Accept Defeat?
« on: August 05, 2019, 07:39:47 AM »
I can't decide who is better at proving a globe earth - Ranty Flat Earth or Plat Terra

One of the things I love about our beautiful Plane Earth, I am continually reminded I am right and that NASA is a great deceiver no matter how high and far we can see. There is no curve even at 339,000. If you apply curvature math to this horizon, the Globe Earth theory fails and the hoax is exposed.

 

Thanks for showing curvature

27
Flat Earth General / Re: An IMPOSSIBLE hoax
« on: August 05, 2019, 07:36:58 AM »
Space Tech has been a secret since the Cold War, and allows them to claim to put nukes into orbit to annihilate a country at the drop of a hat. It is essential to the mostly-world peace which has been achieved since WWII. There's the motivation.

Are you sure they can't censure what they want on the internet? This article tells me that they can:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-cyber-command-operation-disrupted-internet-access-of-russian-troll-factory-on-day-of-2018-midterms/2019/02/26/1827fc9e-36d6-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html%3foutputType=amp

National Security U.S. Cyber Command operation disrupted Internet access of Russian troll factory on day of 2018 midterms
By Ellen Nakashima
February 27, 2019 at 8:22 AM EST

The U.S. military blocked Internet access to an infamous Russian entity seeking to sow discord among Americans during the 2018 midterms, several U.S. officials said, a warning that the Kremlin’s operations against the United States are not cost-free.

The strike on the Internet Research Agency in St. Petersburg, a company underwritten by an oligarch close to President Vladi­mir Putin, was part of the first offensive cyber-campaign against Russia designed to thwart attempts to interfere with a U.S. election, the officials said.

“They basically took the IRA offline,” according to one individual familiar with the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss classified information. “They shut them down.”

FErs- Space tech has been a secret since the cold war.

Same FErs- College students built a rocket, put a "dogcam" on it and filmed their rocket crashing against the dome.

Seems clear.

28
The results of Eratosthenes Shadow Experiment are inconclusive because the experiment can also be interpreted under a Flat Earth model as well.

So after all these years,  who in the Globe Earth community has verified Eratosthenes’ experiment by actually verifying that Earths’ individual landmass’s and canals conform, calculate, measure to a sphere with a 3959 mile radius?  What's his name and history?



You really have no good knowledge of history, do you?

First off, Eratosthenes never set out to prove the shape of the earth or the sphericity of the rarth with a specific radius. Based on the knowledge of his time from the observations philosophers (that's what scientists were called then),  he already accepted that the earth was a sphere. All Eratosthenes was after was to measure the circumference of that sphere. And he did a damn good job of it too.
Excellent point. He assumed the earth was round, he did not prove it or show it in any way.

Quote
At his time, his peers reviewed what he did and accepted his observations and calculations. His "followers didn't believe in him". Other philosophers reviewed what he did and confirmed his calculations and observations and so his results were accepted. At least by a good number of philosophers. There were still those who refused to accept because they couldn't look beyond their own beliefs. Afterall, "it looked flat to them"
So it failed peer review. Your opinion on their motives or that they "couldn't get beyond their own beliefs" is irrelevant and taints your conjecture. After all, any opposing view that doesn't change their view "can't get beyond their own beliefs" because their beliefs are supported.

Quote
Throughout history, since Eratosthenes,  many people have conducted the same or similar observations and calculations and have ended up with the same results. So by virtue of peer review, his conclusions have still been accepted. Better equipment for observation, and knowledge accumulated over the centuries have refined the figure but his errors are completely understandable and acceptable.
Odd. You know, because this same experiment was performed by Taoist scientists in China who came to the conclusion that the sun was close and the earth flat. If only this was repeated, and got the same results. Oh wait, it was many times, starting with Rowbotham.

Quote
Even today, with flat earth research consisting maily of YouTube videos, youtubers like Bob the Science Guy and Blue Marble Science have conducted the same experiment and have reached the same conclusions. And to show that the earth couldn't be flat, they added a third location. 2 locations can be used to prop up a flat earth with a nearby sun. 3 locations will conclusively show if the earth was flat or curved.

Wanna guess which one it shows?
It shows a null result. As you yourself said, this experiment does not prove a round earth, but assumes it. Using the experiment to say the earth is flat or round is silly as its results could be interpreted either way.

Once again you let your bias get in the way of understanding.

Eratosthenes never intended to prove the shape of the Earth. He already accepted it based on other observations and rational thinking. All he set out to do was to try measure the dimensions of said spherical Earth. So his experiment was not inconclusive. It achieved the stated aim.

Using 2 points can be interpreted to suit either a globe or flat earth. Using 3 points makes it very clear that the Earth CANNOT be flat as it will not give a single height for the sun. This has been shown by multiple people over and over again including the 2 Youtubers I mentioned in my post.

Wanna keep ignoring that bit?
It only achieved its aim if his axioms and assumptions were correct. Otherwise he was measuring the circumference of a non-existent sphere. For the purposes of showing the earth round or flat, it is a null result. As I said, this was not its original purpose, but it is the purpose it is brought up again and again and again as evidence of a round earth.

We are the Flat Earth Society don't have the time to review your "youtube science" experiments. If you can't debunk the findings of said Taoists or Rowbotham, or even look at them, why should we go out of a way to research and prove your point for you?

Finally, even given what you said is true, and my sources are incorrect or flawed, there are flat earth models that exist that would account for such a discrepancy. Of course, you would have to actually know about mathematics to understand them.

A truth seeker unwilling to seek the truth? Did not see that coming.

Please describe 1 flat earth model that will account for such discrepancy. I haven't been able to find one myself.

29
Flat Earth General / Re: Did NASA really send peopel to the moon
« on: August 03, 2019, 02:25:32 AM »
Do you really believe that people think Nixon simply "dialed the moon"?

He dialed mission control, Right here on Earth, and was patched via radio transmission.

Mission control has not a magic device can arrive far distances we never can arrive. Otherwise no need to GSM operators. Give all the tasks to NASA and it arrives everywhere. It is a simple lie claiming arrive impossible distances with great radio transmitters. I don't need to believe such urban legends.

Unfortunately for you and you alone, it makes no difference what you believe. What do you think was used for communication before GSM?

30
The results of Eratosthenes Shadow Experiment are inconclusive because the experiment can also be interpreted under a Flat Earth model as well.

So after all these years,  who in the Globe Earth community has verified Eratosthenes’ experiment by actually verifying that Earths’ individual landmass’s and canals conform, calculate, measure to a sphere with a 3959 mile radius?  What's his name and history?



You really have no good knowledge of history, do you?

First off, Eratosthenes never set out to prove the shape of the earth or the sphericity of the rarth with a specific radius. Based on the knowledge of his time from the observations philosophers (that's what scientists were called then),  he already accepted that the earth was a sphere. All Eratosthenes was after was to measure the circumference of that sphere. And he did a damn good job of it too.
Excellent point. He assumed the earth was round, he did not prove it or show it in any way.

Quote
At his time, his peers reviewed what he did and accepted his observations and calculations. His "followers didn't believe in him". Other philosophers reviewed what he did and confirmed his calculations and observations and so his results were accepted. At least by a good number of philosophers. There were still those who refused to accept because they couldn't look beyond their own beliefs. Afterall, "it looked flat to them"
So it failed peer review. Your opinion on their motives or that they "couldn't get beyond their own beliefs" is irrelevant and taints your conjecture. After all, any opposing view that doesn't change their view "can't get beyond their own beliefs" because their beliefs are supported.

Quote
Throughout history, since Eratosthenes,  many people have conducted the same or similar observations and calculations and have ended up with the same results. So by virtue of peer review, his conclusions have still been accepted. Better equipment for observation, and knowledge accumulated over the centuries have refined the figure but his errors are completely understandable and acceptable.
Odd. You know, because this same experiment was performed by Taoist scientists in China who came to the conclusion that the sun was close and the earth flat. If only this was repeated, and got the same results. Oh wait, it was many times, starting with Rowbotham.

Quote
Even today, with flat earth research consisting maily of YouTube videos, youtubers like Bob the Science Guy and Blue Marble Science have conducted the same experiment and have reached the same conclusions. And to show that the earth couldn't be flat, they added a third location. 2 locations can be used to prop up a flat earth with a nearby sun. 3 locations will conclusively show if the earth was flat or curved.

Wanna guess which one it shows?
It shows a null result. As you yourself said, this experiment does not prove a round earth, but assumes it. Using the experiment to say the earth is flat or round is silly as its results could be interpreted either way.

Once again you let your bias get in the way of understanding.

Eratosthenes never intended to prove the shape of the Earth. He already accepted it based on other observations and rational thinking. All he set out to do was to try measure the dimensions of said spherical Earth. So his experiment was not inconclusive. It achieved the stated aim.

Using 2 points can be interpreted to suit either a globe or flat earth. Using 3 points makes it very clear that the Earth CANNOT be flat as it will not give a single height for the sun. This has been shown by multiple people over and over again including the 2 Youtubers I mentioned in my post.

Wanna keep ignoring that bit?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15