301

Flat Earth Q&A / michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:44:03 AM »

Congrats... you also claim to be part of the conspiracy, which would not be claimed by anyone who is actually part of it, so
Ezkerraldean Crediblity=0

crimsonking credibility=0

for denying everything which conflicts with his personal beliefs as part of a global conspiracy against him. come on now, for fucks sake. no one will buy this.

302

Flat Earth Q&A / seismic waves

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:42:42 AM »

They almost certainly do.  Waves reflect off any interface between media of differing impedance, such as rock and air.  Depending on whether the change is a decrease or an increase, the reflection is even or odd, respectively..

no they dont. they infer spherical concentric structure. if they didnt, it would be obvious.

They could be behind the liquid outer core in relation to a virtual image of the reflected wave.

what?

303

Flat Earth Q&A / Distance to stars

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:40:35 AM »

but star's are a big bigger then lightbulbs, and wouldnt the consistancy and size of the object, and that fact that its burning something completely different then anything here on earth dismay the results a bit?

look at the fucking law, for fucks sake. it involves the median emitted wavelength and temperature. not mass or size or anything else.

304

Flat Earth Q&A / michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:39:30 AM »

There is no massmedia as far as i know in Antarctica, so nothing would get reported anyway.

There are Government forces down in Antarctica to cover the icewall, you just proved it in my mind.

there are researchers and scientists, yes. i have met a few.

305

Flat Earth Q&A / Distance to stars

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:35:30 AM »

well, Wien's Law works just fine with lightbulbs.

306

Flat Earth Q&A / Proove the NASA photos are fake

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:34:45 AM »

yep. i am part of the conspiracy. seriously. and i know the reasons for it, but i'm not going to tell you.

307

Flat Earth Q&A / michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:34:04 AM »

can you prove there is a military presence in antarctica? go on, google-bomb me.

the only military exercise in antarctica was the argentinean Operacion 90 in 1958 (?)

308

Flat Earth Q&A / Proove the NASA photos are fake

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:28:51 AM »

To protect their government and way of life.  What would happen if they did tell you one night.

1) you might believe they are crazy and have them commited
2) the word would get out, and the gov't would need to silence him
3)the word might get out, and the people would be pissed off to know theyve been lied to their entire life

I think you see my point

no, i don't.

and considering my contacts, i should probably be in on this Conspiracy by now. but suprisingly, i'm not.

309

Flat Earth Q&A / michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:27:25 AM »

The ice wall is a bit thicker than that, I doubt they would let anyone near the far edge.

Wow... buildings domes, planes, tracked vehicles, it almost seems like a... military instilation

any military presence in antarctica is illegal unter the Antarctic Treaty of 1959

tracked vehicles i.e. snow buggies to carry weather balloons to their launch sites etc.
planes - pretty much just cessnas on skis. just for getting there and carrying small supplies.

310

Flat Earth Q&A / Proove the NASA photos are fake

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:23:07 AM »

I would say that "blissfully ignorant" would be what FErs would use to describe RErs.  That being said, if they were in a conspiracy, I'm sure they would not tell you.

Oh and congratulations on being accepted to ESA, I heard it was excedingly difficult

i'm sure, yeah. some of the guys i know at JPL are on the Opportunity mars rover team. they are just everyday geologists. what would their motive be to lie to me?




the guy who tries to sell you a computer at a shop will probably tell you all the computer's specifications, but you are unlikely to understand what he means. maybe he is part of a conspiracy! maybe none of that stuff inside the computer is real, maybe they are run by a cold-fusion-powered human brain? and the brain cells are arranged to look like normal circuitry?

311

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:20:21 AM »

What would be the difference?
If he was at the edge of the Ice Wall, would YOU be able to tell the difference from if it were Antarctica?

surely the edge of the ice wall is a big cliff or something with a huge void of nothingness beyond it. this didnt quite look like that.

it was a pole in the ice with flags around it, and a few domes, buildings, planes and tracked vehicles in the background. and a couple of cameramen and a presenter too.

312

Flat Earth Q&A / Mathematics of the guards

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:10:22 AM »

and which government, anyway?

313

Technology, Science & Alt Science / radiometric dating

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:09:37 AM »

we've been over this. some creationist started bashing the big bang and evolution and got smacked down over the course of like 12 pages.

haha, i bet it was the old "if we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" stuff.

314

Flat Earth Q&A / There is no ice wall security and no ice wall (proof here)

« on: July 18, 2006, 09:06:51 AM »

I don't know.  According to this triple-point phase diagram for water, at 44 MPa water is solid below -10°C.

strange. you will use a phase diagram but presumably you think gravity does not exist. how do you know that phase diagrams are not part of the Conspiracy?

315

Technology, Science & Alt Science / radiometric dating

« on: July 18, 2006, 08:55:53 AM »

some of you seem to have something against radiometric dating in general. probably because you are creationists and you do not like the idea of anything being older than ~6000 years old.

these two papers use non-radiometric methods to put a minimum age on the sun, which agrees perfectly with the radiometric ages of the oldest known meteorites. this is predicted by the solar system accretion theory.
consequently
a) we have an age for the whole solar system
b) radiometric dating (and all its assumptions) are perfectly valid over any timescale.

http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/aa/pdf/2002/30/aa2598.pdf?access=ok

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9809/9809361.pdf

316

Flat Earth Q&A / Proove the NASA photos are fake

« on: July 18, 2006, 08:47:18 AM »

which NASA photos? everything they have ever come up with? or just the ones from space?

this is fucking pathetic. I assume it goes for other space organisations like ESA (european space agency, who i am going to work for soon). i know tens of people from NASA - most from JPL. they do solid science and tech. you people are so blissfully ignorant.

317

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 08:45:07 AM »

so where is the south pole?

You didn't read the FAQ, did you?

It's at the ice wall.

i read the FAQ, and it said
"Explain magnetism, if THERE IS NO SOUTH POLE"

anyway, the south pole was a definite place, not merely the edge of the ice wall or any crap like that.

318

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: let me get this straight

« on: July 18, 2006, 08:40:54 AM »

1.  There is no gravity on the FE, therefore no orbits.

so, every form of space travel, communications and exploration IS fabricated?

319

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 08:40:01 AM »

was this series fake then?

He went from the north pole to the south pole.  That route is entirely possisble on the FE.

so where is the south pole?

320

Flat Earth Q&A / seismic waves

« on: July 18, 2006, 08:39:22 AM »

Why would the FE be any different?

because the whole structure depends on a round earth. there is no hint that the waves bounce of the bottom of the flat earth, or anything like that.

and the whole concept of shadow zones would not be possible on a flat earth, since that requires the observer to be "behind" the liquid outer core in relation to the earthquake focus. yet, shadow zones blatantly do exist.

321

Flat Earth Q&A / Mathematics of the guards

« on: July 18, 2006, 07:19:00 AM »

If you have to ask, you'll probably never know.
Evil government officials.

and how do you know that?

322

Flat Earth Q&A / Distance to stars

« on: July 18, 2006, 06:00:04 AM »

and a slightly easier way to do it at home:
http://www.exploratorium.edu/snacks/solar_brightness/index.html

"The distance to the sun is 1.5 x 10^11 m."

323

Flat Earth Q&A / Distance to stars

« on: July 18, 2006, 05:01:15 AM »

Distance to stars

Measure intensity through observation

Intensity = luminosity/4πD2

Measure λmax through observation

Wien’s Law      λmax=b/T    (b=displacement constant = 2.897 7685 × 10–3 m K)

Calculate surface temperature of star

Stefan-Boltzmann law      luminosity = σT4 (σ= Stefan-Boltzmann constant = 5.670 4×10−8 W•m-2•K-4)

Therefore (re-arrange first equation) 4πD2 = luminosity / intensity
D=distance to star


try it. i doubt it comes up with 3000 miles.

324

Flat Earth Q&A / Airplanes cannot fly on an accelerated earth

« on: July 18, 2006, 04:22:25 AM »

So why is jumping out of a plane at 3000 feet more dangerous than jumping out of a plane at 30 feet? According to you, in both circumstances you will be going at the same speed, 9.8m/s.

nope. you accelerate at 9.8m/s^2.

(at ground level anyway - it will be marginally less at aircraft altitude - gravity follows a 1/r^2 pattern))

325

Flat Earth Q&A / michael palin

« on: July 18, 2006, 03:57:18 AM »

http://www.palinstravels.co.uk/static-12
the Pole to Pole series. he went to the US Amundsen-Scott base at the south pole in west Antarctica.

was this series fake then?

326

Flat Earth Q&A / Mathematics of the guards

« on: July 18, 2006, 03:45:45 AM »

so, how do you become one of these guards? who controls them?

327

Flat Earth Debate / Rendered Picture of Flat Earth Universe

« on: July 18, 2006, 03:43:04 AM »

so the sun and moon orbit in a circle above the flat earth? what mechanism causes this? it is incompatible with gravity.

328

Flat Earth Q&A / seismic waves

« on: July 18, 2006, 03:40:29 AM »

waves produced by earthwuakes travel through the earth at speeds depending on the medium density, and they also refract when meeting a change in medium. these waves, when detected in various parts of the world, build a picture of the structure of the earth, with its differentiated layers: crust, asthenosphere (low-velocity layer), the mantle, the liquid outer core and the solid inner core (known to be solid through detection of shear waves)

so, presumably, this is all a conspiracy too?
is the global network of seismometers, several of which i have operated myself, all a lie?

329

Flat Earth Q&A / if the earth is flat

« on: July 18, 2006, 03:23:10 AM »

like a disc, what is on the other side?

330

Flat Earth Q&A / let me get this straight

« on: July 18, 2006, 03:20:11 AM »

so........
you reckon:

every form of space travel, communications and exploration is fabricated
antarctica does not exist, penguins are artificial
the day/night cycle, the seasonal cycle, the motions of the stars and planets can be explained by a flat earth and not a round earth
?