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 - flyingmonkey

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 24
151
Flat Earth General / Re: Da Conspirasa!
« on: April 26, 2010, 05:59:00 PM »
Already doing it for the lulz, might aswel get paid to to do it for significantly more lulz aswel.

152
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof the Moon is not a flat disc.
« on: April 26, 2010, 05:55:13 PM »
I don't believe in the conspiracy.


So hw bot dem rockits

153
Flat Earth General / Re: Why, oh Wyoming?
« on: April 26, 2010, 07:59:04 AM »
Technically, I could make a sundial using any direction, I would just have to space out the hours retardedly like your FE maps have done with the RE world map.

154
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Antimoon?!?!?!
« on: April 26, 2010, 07:48:47 AM »
Fisheye lenses work great for taking 360 spherical panoramas

http://www.footootjes.nl/Panoramas_Ladakh_2008/Panoramas/20080805_Hotel_NightSky_flash.html

There.

inb4 "It's behind the trees"

155
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: New Ice Wall Question
« on: April 26, 2010, 07:32:58 AM »
The entire fucking ice wall bullshit is out of date.
We are talking the 1800's for Christs sake, NZ was barely even colonized then.

He made that when Antarctica was viewed as that, a wall of ice - since then it has been explored, circumnavigated and mapped, it has a set size, the ice wall theory is rubbish.


Quit holding onto straws that no longer explain what is proven to exist.

156
Flat Earth General / Re: Why, oh Wyoming?
« on: April 26, 2010, 07:29:01 AM »
Once you know where North/South is, you can make a clock based on the Sun when it finally rises.


Tard

157
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof the Moon is not a flat disc.
« on: April 26, 2010, 07:25:37 AM »
Ah yes, animals being affected by a full moon proves the Earth is flat.

158
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Stellar Parallex
« on: April 26, 2010, 02:28:16 AM »

Quite clearly, one can see that the stars are the ones doing the moving.


And when you fall, quite clearly, one can see that you are the one that's moving.


Fail more.

159
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: More reasons the Wilmore Model is crap
« on: April 26, 2010, 02:27:01 AM »
Actually, Wilmores 'model' of the Sun is actually correct about what parts of the Earth are illuminated, just, they put it onto a Flat Earth map instead.

They get all their information from RE sources and convert them to fit FE, that's it.

160
Flat Earth General / Re: Why, oh Wyoming?
« on: April 26, 2010, 02:18:10 AM »
I'm from NZ, and can work out where South is just by looking at a few stars, from that I can determine North.

161
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retrograde Motion
« on: April 22, 2010, 06:55:49 PM »
Then it's nice to know what you class as evidence, should make it easier to ignore you from now on.

162
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Explain this...
« on: April 22, 2010, 06:53:09 PM »
Antarctica is more in the region of 12000 miles in circumference.

Please provide evidence to support this claim.




Much like every other sailor that has circumnavigated the continent.

163
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flight times
« on: April 22, 2010, 06:50:51 PM »
How on Earth do you compare two different routes, at totally different speeds, to see if they're "the exact same"?


The fact that your little GPS worked perfectly the entire fucking trip when it supposedly assumed a Round Earth when you were traveling along in your car on the surface of the fucking "Flat Earth".

You will see that it makes no assumptions, it just tells you the data, you're the one making the assumptions.

164
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Airplanes?
« on: April 22, 2010, 06:48:27 PM »
That all depends on how much detail you are going into with measurements, and how the smallest details can have a great effect on such an object.

165
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retrograde Motion
« on: April 22, 2010, 06:10:23 PM »
I'd like you to bring that goal post back here.

It's also very relevant to the discussion at hand, Retrograde motion, so it is not off topic.

166
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Airplanes?
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:53:23 PM »
Keep it on topic.


There is no accurate flat earth map.  Thus we have no way to know if the distances traveled are inaccurate for a flat earth.
so why is there deserts, ice caps, jungles etc.?
wouldnt the reason these geographical features exist be because they were far away or too close to something?

> Implying that equatorial places are hotter because they are closer to the sun


So, where are these Ice Caps?

How come they are so cold?


It's called the Tropics for a reason, it's hot there.

Subtropics are where most of the jungles are.

Then you have freeze-yer-balls-off.

Hmm, wonder what's the difference in all these.

167
Wilmore, I gave you your example of distorted on the FE map.


[Wilmore]But how do we know that the FE map is the one that's distorted and not the RE one?[/Wilmore]


BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN AROUND IT /slap

168
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flight times
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:48:02 PM »
I have no idea what you're trying to say. GPS can only work the way they claim it does if the Earth is round. As such, GPS canot be used as data in an experiment designed to test whether or not the Earth is flat.


Take a car trip from Italy to Spain using a GPS.

Take the flight back.


Amazing, they both worked the exact same, both when traveling on the Flat Earth, and when in the air above it.


Why can I not do the same but from NZ to Australia or South America?

What If I took a boat first, then flew back?

Are you Hydrophobic?

169
Flat Earth General / Re: The great Pilot Conspiracy
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:44:54 PM »
I am a pilot, the Earth is flat.

I am an Astronaut, there is no conspiracy and the Earth is spherical.

170
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Explain this...
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:42:37 PM »
I don't see anything in that article which disproves the theory that Antarctica is really just a cover-up by globularist conspirators for the ice wall. I do see a lovely image of the Swiss Alps, though.


People sail around it

FE says that the border of the Earth is in the region of 78,225 miles, where Antarctica is more in the region of 12000 miles in circumference.


Not your Icewall, you should take a note from Wilmores book and look elsewhere.

171
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: How's the reviewing going for EA?
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:38:53 PM »
And there are several who actively support it.


Like who?

Gee I don't know... Parsifal, maybe?


Not a FE'er. As the saying goes, lurk moar.

Wait what?
So he's a devil's advocate who just likes screwing with people?

Yes, but FE needs him to explain certain phenomena, because they cannot.

172
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Airplanes?
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:37:02 PM »
Keep it on topic.


There is no accurate flat earth map.  Thus we have no way to know if the distances traveled are inaccurate for a flat earth.


Seems a good starting point for your society then don't it?

173
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Icewall theory is consistent with round earth
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:34:52 PM »
If the Earth was round surely the ice wall would be an ice tower  ???


150ft tall and a few hundred km across doesn't seem like a tower to me.

Sound's like a continent, oh hang on, Antarctica maybe?

174
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retrograde Motion
« on: April 22, 2010, 01:33:53 PM »
AKA, you have none.


Glad we cleared that up.

175
Different points = different maths.

Here:

1 + x = 2   x=1 in this

1 + x = 5   x=4 in this

How can x have 2 different values? Because they are 2 completely different equations.

Now hold on, because in your second equation you seem to be telling me that I + X = 5 when in fact it is more like IX. 4 is not the answer, it seems to be your margin of error. Of course the Romans reversed their calculations, so I + X = XI. We have a similar process by which 1 + 1 = 11 (XI is the Roman for the number 11). That is your first equation! So you see that in reality they are exactly the same equation.




Protip: Learn what Algebra is.

That's all I have to say, glad you could make a fool of yourself thinking you could be funny with Roman numerals.



The entire argument is ridiculous, it's is why we measure volume.

1 cup of water + 1 cup of water = 2 cups of water, yet they can be placed in one cup of water still, it's just a bigger cup though.

All you are doing is taking this down to a very small scale and measuring raindrops instead.

176
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retrograde Motion
« on: April 22, 2010, 05:38:25 AM »
That's still not evidence.

177
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flight times
« on: April 22, 2010, 05:37:53 AM »
Well then, if it works perfectly the way it does on your "Flat Earth" that means you must be able to take the GPS as accurate.


It doesn't assume anything about the shape, it simply provides information that you can use to figure it out.

178
The fact that if you are making 2 completely different observations at 2 different periods of time, that is 2 completely different models.

1 apple + 1 apple = 2 apples, but if we were to blend them together, does that make it 1 mushed apple again?

Different points = different maths.

Here:

1 + x = 2   x=1 in this

1 + x = 5   x=4 in this

How can x have 2 different values? Because they are 2 completely different equations.

179
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Retrograde Motion
« on: April 22, 2010, 04:57:11 AM »
AKA, the FAQ is not evidence, therefore:


I guess you have some evidence that they are then?

The FAQ states that they are.

Hold on, while I bold the appropriate word.

180
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Flight times
« on: April 22, 2010, 04:56:06 AM »
walking around with a GPS on the ground, it knows where you are, you can compare it to what you see.

If you believe the Earth is flat, how is it lying to you?

It doesn't magically change when you board a plane.

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 24