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 - Ellipsis

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16
31
Flat Earth General / Re: When The Conspiracy Fails...
« on: June 04, 2010, 11:15:40 PM »
There's FET logic for you.

Everything is presumed an elaborate conspiracy until shown to be real--not the other way around.

32
In Q&A people generally ask questions.  Clearly you have not read the failed hypothesis about UA.

33
He considered that it breaks the law of action and opposite reaction: If curvature of space is formed due to strong gravitational fields, then it should become straight due to opposite reaction.

So if I hang a coat on a hanger, and that coat is heavy enough to cause the hanger to bend, you're saying the concept of "opposite reaction" (do you mean the equal and opposite exchange of forces?) somehow means the hanger should straighten itself back out, even though I haven't yet removed the coat?

It is a property of mass (at least all that we've observed) to bend spacetime.  You seem to be arguing nothing more than "If spacetime bent, it would be straight.  It it nap time yet, nurse?  Can I have my tinfoil hat back now?"

34
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Global......... "Planar" Temperatures
« on: June 02, 2010, 12:03:19 PM »
Levee's into the Bendy Sun Hypothesis.  ::)  In seriousness, his map isn't the one that requires an ice wall.  At least it's got that going for it, save the countless other problems.

35
This is always worth keeping in mind, too.

36
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: June 02, 2010, 06:09:10 AM »
What it's like arguing with pongo:


"Why does my stove appear red-hot?"

"It's not actually red-hot.  There are little demons running through the coils that heat them."

"But that doesn't make any sense."

"Zetetic method.  Optical illusion.  lrn2read."

37
Flat Earth General / Re: Round Earth from a Balloon
« on: June 02, 2010, 03:04:15 AM »
What you are seeing is in fact the edge of the spotlight.

Wouldn't the edge of the spotlight be orange, what with it being sunrise/sunset there?

38
I figured the reflection of spoons would be a more readily available demonstration of different kinds of visual warping due to light reflecting off (or traveling through) bent materials.

Now that I think about it: what kind of lensing is this even supposed to be?  Unless the thickness of the window somehow seriously changes between the middle and edges, you're not going to get much of a warped image at all.

39
This causes the windows to bow and give objects in the distance a curved look.

Wouldn't that cause the horizon to slope up at the edges instead of down?  For further experimentation: look at your reflection on either side of that cereal spoon, Mr. Wizard.  The lens you're pretending it would form would only curve the edges down if the horizon were above the vanishing point when viewed straight out.  Even if I try to help you and we presume that's the case and the plane is tilted, it still doesn't account for the people looking from the other side who would view just the opposite curvature.  Good day, sir.

Now times that by the 80 or so windows and tell me how far the fuselage bows out....

Multiplying the windows affected doesn't change anything if the pressure is constant.  If we DO account for the slight change in pressure, there's actually less force acting over each area, as the total volume has increased.

40
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: A FE'er please explain curvature
« on: June 02, 2010, 12:32:30 AM »
((Headscratch))
...Edge of super-spotlight?

41
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: June 01, 2010, 01:13:19 PM »
Well, that still does not explain how it illuminates the undersides of the clouds with reddish-orange light. 

I've explained this.  How am I expected to have a meaningful dialog if you just ignore my posts?

You didn't explain it.  You made an excuse.  You said it was from the sun's light being reflected from the Earth, but did absolutely nothing to explain why it was orange or how such a scattered reflection would result in perfectly uniform light.

43
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 31, 2010, 02:50:48 AM »
Things move close to me without appearing to rise.  Things move away without appearing to fall.  What the hell optical illusion are you talking about, Pongo?  What makes the celestial bodies different than every other object in existence?  What would cause thing moving parallel to my field of vision to begin dropping down below other things?

44
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: A FE'er please explain Zetetisicm
« on: May 30, 2010, 11:09:49 PM »
In the Scientific Method we're told to hypothesize first, experiment later.

Without a hypothesis, how do you know what you're testing for?

The Scientific Method doesn't have you prove what's true. It has you attempting to prove your hypothesis true.

Stop lying.  It ISN'T attempting to prove a hypothesis true.  It accepts both evidence for and against the hypothesis.  Stop projecting your own confirmation bias onto the method that cures your illnesses.

The simple nature of choosing first a bias, then testing against that bias, and finally interpreting the data against that bias pollutes the fruits of the scientific method.  Its no wonder non-zet. studies and research are compromised due to money.

You need to stop lying too--or learn what the word "bias" means.

45
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why is earth special enough to be flat?
« on: May 30, 2010, 10:03:45 AM »
So Einstein's wrong because we've never personally reached light speed?
Sorry roundy, but you're off your rocker.

46
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 30, 2010, 06:28:53 AM »
optical illusion

Wow, WOW there Mr. Science!  Hang on a second!  You're blinding me with all this in-depth, detailed information!

Take all the time you need.

Evidently FEers don't understand sarcasm either.  Pongo, please STOP AVOIDING THE POINTS.  You gave an apparently random phrase that raised more questions than answers.  Are you going to explain yourself, or continue pushing things back with trivial rhetoric?

47
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 30, 2010, 05:42:31 AM »
optical illusion

Wow, WOW there Mr. Science!  Hang on a second!  You're blinding me with all this in-depth, detailed information!

48
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 30, 2010, 01:50:53 AM »
So, about that stuff about the sun appearing to rise and set...

49
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why is earth special enough to be flat?
« on: May 29, 2010, 10:22:10 PM »
The same conditions that allowed for our own flat body to exist, I would imagine.

I really don't see how you could make such an observation anyway (I mean, about the conditions for life being "very likely" on all those other planets), as the origin of life is still a complete mystery, and any theories about the odds of its developing are guesses at best.

WHAT CONDITIONS!?

"Complete mystery?"  Stop lying.  We know all it takes to create life.  We can walk through it step-by-step, and calling them mere "guesses" or implying they're just uneducated pipe dreams is a slap in the face to the entire field of abiogenesis.  And we know it's "very likely" to have happened in other places because of the sheer number of other terrestrial bodies orbiting the countless other stars.  Certainly there's more than just ONE with liquid water and the ingredients for life in the entire universe.

50
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Why is earth special enough to be flat?
« on: May 29, 2010, 06:38:06 PM »
In FET the Earth is not a planet.  It's simply a different kind of body.

It's not "special", it's just different.  Like how it's also the only body in the RE solar system that supports life; that doesn't make it special, does it?

The conditions for life and very likely are on numerous other planets in the countless other solar systems contained within the hundreds of thousands of galaxies out there...

What conditions allow for another flat celestial body to be out floating there somewhere?

51
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 29, 2010, 06:07:53 PM »
The inverse square law is not an exponential relationship.

 :-\

52
The Lounge / Re: The Scale of The Flat Universe
« on: May 29, 2010, 06:02:08 PM »
The interesting part about this is the bubble car. It's 4 metres long, and apparently that's equal to 100*3 metres.

You think this is closer to 4 meters than 3?



I lol'd.

53
The Lounge / Re: M-M-M-MONSTER FAIL!
« on: May 29, 2010, 04:27:47 AM »
Sunlight has long range; it doesn't apply over short distances.

Oh, hey.  Funny meeting you here.  Small world, huh?  You trying to argue that energy per square unit perpendicular to the source does NOT exponentially weaken with distance?  If so, I'll get a hearty laugh over it.

54
So, no real FE response here...still?

55
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 29, 2010, 04:13:07 AM »
(Deep breath)
Gravity is a property of mass that has been observed to distort spacetime (1), acts in a mathematically predictable manner (2) and is most easily seen acting throughout all macroscopic scales.  It is a fundamental attractive force that has been observed to act in a predictable manner between all objects of mass (3), weakening exponentially with distance.  The gravitational pull of the moon, for example, is what drives the Earth's high and low ocean tides (4).  It has also been found to be what causes celestial bodies to orbit, and orbiting bodies to sweep out equal areas in equal lengths of time around one of the ellipse's foci (5), matching perfectly with mathematical prediction.

1: Curvature of light around objects of mass.
2: Gravitational equations, which are continually reaffirmed.
3: Cavendish Experiment.
4: Unless the ocean's in on the conspiracy too.
5: Come on.  Even Kepler knew this one.

But that's just off the top of my head...  These are all witnessed by independent observers across the globe, time and time again, to this very day, yet you somehow delude yourself into thinking it's all a sham.  That is exactly why you sicken and sadden me.

56
Flat Earth General / Re: How many GENUINE Flat Earthers are there?
« on: May 29, 2010, 03:55:38 AM »
Flat earth theory is based on facts and real observations...

Whew, I haven't had a laugh that good in quite some time!  Thanks, pal.

57
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 29, 2010, 03:53:22 AM »
Sue me.  I had your sentence quoted exactly and anyone who doesn't believe can click the link and verify for themselves.  The "herp derp" part is to better signify the tone of the statement if heard spoken--a kind of punctuation, if you will.  "Herp derp, my tin foil hat itches and the world is secretly flat!"

I am addressing your post at face value.  You made no real point other than sliding in that the sun is a "spotlight" and expecting us to disbelieve our own eyes by your word alone.  What are you, a hypnotist?  Explain the sunset/sunrise phenomena, in detail, with a manner that doesn't conflict with observed evidence and accounts for all forces.

58
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 29, 2010, 03:34:32 AM »
Answer the question.  It's the effing subject of the thread.

59
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 29, 2010, 03:28:59 AM »
There is no sunrise or sunset. Herp derp.

You've never witnessed these phenomena?  Neither of them?  Do you live in a bomb shelter?

Edit:
Sunlight has long range; it doesn't apply over short distances.

The sun's radiant energy decreases exponentially with distance.  Run along, parsitroll.

60
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Sunrise and Sunset (WITHOUT Bendy Light)
« on: May 29, 2010, 02:13:11 AM »
Clouds are illuminated from underneath because light bounces off the face of the earth and onto the cloud bottoms.

...oh yeah, that stuff about sunrise/sunset?  I'm ignoring that.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 16