61

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Your flat earth idea is not a THEORY...

« on: March 23, 2009, 01:05:54 AM »

Not to mention that no helicopter could make that trip.

they do have some fuels stored at the ice stations you know. we stopped for fuel several times, and when we took off again we went in exactly the same direction as before we landed. i didnt actually say "we flew across it without refueling"; i would have assumed that someone with such an OBVIOUSLY high iq would have figured out that something as basic as refueling would have been assumed?

62

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Your flat earth idea is not a THEORY...

« on: March 20, 2009, 08:13:36 PM »

fyi, ive been to your so called "ice wall" and flown over it in a helicopter. it is definately a continent, not a wall. it looks somewhat like a sting ray and not a ring. i flew from its "tail" to the ross ice shelf, right over the middle. it was my brothers 21'st birthday present and the entire family went. there was noone guarding the "wall", just a couple of ice station research centres occasionally

So you say you could see all of Antarctica from the helicopter?

not what i meant; i have flown across it, there was little to no change in direction at any time. simply flown from once side to the other

63

Flat Earth Debate / Re: New User with a New Question... Maybe?

« on: March 20, 2009, 05:20:27 PM »

Anyway,  I would enjoy any insight to the topic.

Welcome to FES! An excellent opening post, if I may say so - I hope you have many interesting and entertaining debates here.

In response to your post, it is a very seductive position of modern science (and, indeed, prior science and philosophy) to say that the Earth is 'nothing special' when the most obvious piece of evidence - ourselves - implies otherwise.  The easy answers come from the anthropic principle, which you are clearly familiar with, but which leaves a somewhat unpleasant taste in the mouth of any rigorous inquiring mind.  FET gets around this, of course, by saying that the Earth is special in that it seems to behave differently to other celestial bodies.

This causes problems with mainstream science, but is it not possible that the flat Earth is not, in fact, special, but is only one of many similarly accelerated bodies in the Universe?  We haven't been looking for them and have not seen any direct evidence to support this, but there are unexplained phenomena in the Universe which could all be symptoms of the same cause.  Could it be that bodies accelerated by the UA/DE are unable to directly observe each other?  Could these bodies be responsible for the 'dark matter' in the Universe?  These are interesting possibilities worthy of debate, but often get lost in a sea of trolling and incoherent attempts at derailment.

You seem to be the type to enjoy a rational, reasoned discussion, so I hope you may help us to get to the bottom of the mysteries still present in FET (and RET) without getting trolled too much

you say that the reason earth is different is because of the fact that we have life here, when we know of no other plantets that do

actually, there are bound to be other planets in the multiverse that support life.
do you know what allows life? 2 things. temperature and atmosphere. earth is just far enough away from the sun to gain enough heat for not everythhing to freeze, and not enough to burst into flames. pure luck that earth formed in the sweetspot of the solar system.

the second is also a result of luck. there is gas in space. albiet not much, but earth also managed to end up with a mainly oxygen based atmosphere, which life needs to survive. earth formed the same way as every other planet in space. there is nothing to say earth is "special" just "LUCKY" for the position it is in. but when you say earth is specail because of life, so it must be special in other ways, that is just stupid. life=/=flat earth. they have no effect on eachother, so do NOT use that argument. it is illogical and simpleminded

64

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Your flat earth idea is not a THEORY...

« on: March 20, 2009, 05:02:03 PM »

the reason everyone thinks FE'ers are wrong is because you havent presented a single piece of substantial evidence to support it. ys, you have the faq, but that provides NO evidence. you sayc"the earth is flat" then come up with complex explanations for simple concepts. sunsets, fight times, gravity, icewall (aka antarctica. obviously a continent, not a wall) etc

when you go up in a plane, you can SEE the curvature of the earth with your own eyes. place a camera on time lapse at night and the stars will move. stars dont move enough to be seen from earth, its the earth spinning. the earth was formed in the same way as every other planet; dust and rocks collecting and getting bigger in orbit, forming a ball

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT FE. and there are many simple ones to support RE.

fyi, ive been to your so called "ice wall" and flown over it in a helicopter. it is definately a continent, not a wall. it looks somewhat like a sting ray and not a ring. i flew from its "tail" to the ross ice shelf, right over the middle. it was my brothers 21'st birthday present and the entire family went. there was noone guarding the "wall", just a couple of ice station research centres occasionally

65

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Proof that the Earth is not flat

« on: March 19, 2009, 01:20:03 AM »

I don't see anything contradicting the notion that one is looking down at the circular spotlight of the sun at the edge of the atmosphere.

The transition to space, and not the dark side of the FE, is evident in the blue to black gradient of the first photograph. Furthermore at the end of February, the terminator in FET is not curved to that degree. (It's straight on the Equinox, circular only on the first day of Summer and Winter. Tom, do face reality with honor, please.

Still waiting for a reply Tom...

How does the blue to black gradient of the atmosphere prove that the black area isn't the dark side of the FE?

because you can see the earth below the blue, the blue gradient being the atmosphere. if it was the "dark side" you would see no clouds below the atmosphere

66

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Electromagnetic Accelerator

« on: March 18, 2009, 02:11:50 PM »

actually retard, the earth is not a few thousand kilometers from the sun. its more like a few lightdays.

Fail.

yes i failed, i read up on it again and its a few lightminutes, not days. but still alot further than a few km. not gonna argue with the rest of my post tho? or cant you think of anything

67

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Electromagnetic Accelerator

« on: March 18, 2009, 03:35:11 AM »

I'm sure your argument is supported with evidence to convince the RE'ers, right?

That's irrelevant.  Experiments have already shown that the earth is flat.

Observations of the Sun at far-off points show that it must be a few thousand kilometers above the Earth.  Perspective cannot account for the vanishing of the sun at sunset if the sun is this high.  Atmospheric refraction makes the sun appear higher, not lower.  The only conclusion is that light is bending upwards.

actually retard, the earth is not a few thousand kilometers from the sun. its more like a few lightdays. light does not bend except in the case of unimaginable gravity, aka a black hole. that is the ONLY place in the multiverse that light can bend. there is no way for light to bend on earth. it can be refracted, such as fibreoptics and mirrors. the reftaction does not make the sun appear higher or lower, its relative position to the curvature of the earth does. the earth is ROUND not FLAT. THAT is the only conclusion. its a scientifically proven and accepted fact that the earth is roughly spherical. it was formed after the big bang, when the gravity of our star attracted dust, which clumped together from all sides, creating a ball. this is the earth. they say that the earth is special in the faq's in the questions forum, but it is still affected by the same laws of physics as all other objects, big or small, in the universe. the cat/dog/snake analagy is irrelevant because they all follow the same laws of physics