31

Flat Earth Debate / the 'hill' topic

« on: September 26, 2012, 10:23:25 PM »

so recently we have talked about how an observer sees the horizon on a round earth. lets forget flat earth for this thread for a change and get some answers for round earth horizons.
i do not believe this is strictly true but it is said that the horizon always meets eye level.
hoppy states that when looking out across the sea or a lake or wherever you are always standing on the top of a sphere. i disagree with this and the calculations in enag for working out the curve or drop of the earth if it is round. let me demonstrate this with some pictures;

this is how hoppy and a few others propose the way we would view an object;


this is my proposal;


now let me repeat the way we see the first picture to point out how there is a 'hill' between the observer and the object;


hoppy stated that if we lie on the floor we still do not see this 'hill' between the object. but we do! the higher we are the further we can see, we are essentially looking over this hill. this explains how the horizon always appears to meet with our eye level. if this theory is true then my idea that the horizon does not meet our eye level could be false.

i believe that thinking that we are always looking down to objects from the top of a sphere is false. i have seen others agree with me here, including flat earth protagonists.

32

Suggestions & Concerns / just wondering when tom bishop will be getting banned?

« on: September 10, 2012, 07:54:01 AM »

the upper fora is littered with his low content posts i hope he will receive the same treatment as TK.

Pretty.

Pretty small.

It's not.

So has anyone tried going to the ice wall?

Yes.

Faith is not the same is proof, and both statements "there is a god" and "there is not a god" are positive claims.

Incorrect.

the classic;

Still nobody has proved anything so far.

Read Earth Not a Globe.

33

Arts & Entertainment / minecraft 1.3

« on: August 05, 2012, 03:27:02 PM »

my server is now 1.3 and is quite popular. its been up for 2 days now if you want to join

website - www.noblox.net

ip - mc.noblox.net

34

Flat Earth General / i witnessed 1st hand something that should cast doubt

« on: July 26, 2012, 01:47:09 PM »

this morning i was awake at sunrise. flying over me was a plane. the plane was white and the underside was all lit up orange from the sun. where i was it was still in shadow. now this can mean 1 of 2 things really;

the earth is round

the earth is flat but the sun was less than 30,000ft high

clouds have a pretty good excuse for being lit up, but the under side of a plane?

35

Flat Earth General / powering 'flat earth satellites'

« on: July 24, 2012, 09:07:06 PM »

quoted from new scientist - 21 july 2012


"a reconnaissance drone has flown for 2 days strait, fuelled by a laser beam that transmits energy from the ground to the aircraft.
       lockheed martin and seattle-based laswrmotive teamed up to performt he test last week in a wind tunnel in palmdale, california, as proof that drones can be made to fly indefinitely via wireless energy transferred from the ground.
       when the team stopped the flight - because the craft had surpassed the goals of the test - the battery on the drone had more energy than it started with. lasermotive is now working on adapting the system to beam power from earths surface to orbiting satellites and even the moon."

i found this rather interesting, this is just a press release for the public. it is possible that this technology could already exist. many arguments against flat earth satellites is fueling. by using this technology it would be possible for sustained flight and geostationary flight using ground to air laser technology.

36

Suggestions & Concerns / racisism ignored by moderator

« on: July 11, 2012, 04:25:18 AM »

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,55227.0.html#.T_1h7_Vii00

in this thread thork makes a racist comment about black people (yes i rightly reported this). however the next post that was made by pongo not only ignored the comment but joined in with the banter. unacceptable. it doesnt matter where in the forum people post they should be warned about being racist not encouraged.

37

Suggestions & Concerns / good changes

« on: June 24, 2012, 08:35:00 AM »

the little changes that have happened recently are good. finally 'home' takes you to the home page! however you should put the social network links either at the bottom on the page or on the home page only. does the fes need those adverts? they scream 'like me please' and its a little off putting

38

Suggestions & Concerns / members area

« on: June 03, 2012, 06:46:48 AM »

cant we have a members area in the flat earth discussion boards? maybe it will encourage more real believers to discuss issues with non-believing members like myself? i crave more real memebrs to talk about fet, i take a genuine interest in both sides. perhaps even make it hidden unless you are a member so people can post in confidence. it may also encorage more people to sign up too!

39

Flat Earth General / the solar system

« on: May 25, 2012, 05:00:07 PM »

am i right in thinking that the main view point of the fes is that the sun and moon are at 3000 miles and the rest is about 3100 miles above us? on the 5-6 of june it will be possible to see venus travel past the sun. infact it does every 8 years and this was how people first started to measure the suns distance to the earth scientificly.

on a flat earth note, some say the moon is translucent and starts can be seen through it. however if venus is able to travel in fron tof the sun, surely a star can pass in front of the moon? as there is little/no evidence to suggest that the moon is transparent, wouldnt it be more logical to suggest that the star would travel in front of the moon? solar eclipses would show if the moon was translucent wouldnt they? so the zetetic answer would be that the stars sometimes travel closer than 3000 miles. and so does venus for that matter.

40

Flat Earth General / the true opinion of a flat earther? oO

« on: May 23, 2012, 10:39:56 PM »

this is just amazing to read!

just for you christians out there!




We know the Earth is flat because the Bible tells us so. But for those of you skeptical, close-minded types that flat out refuse to accept the overwhelming Biblical evidence, I have designed some experiments you can do at home that will show you, before your very eyes, that the world is indeed flat, and not spherical as some crazy scientists proclaim. It's amazing how many people blindly believe in a spherical Earth, without ever having seen it for themselves! I intend to change that.


1) Jump!
Now, scientists claim that Earth is spherical and rotating at a speed of between 700-1000 miles per hour, depending on your latitude. This is a very high rate of speed. You can disprove this nonsense by simply jumping up as high as you can. Really, it's that simple. What happens when you jump? You come straight down to where you were. But, if the Earth were indeed spinning at such a fast speed, wouldn't you land hundreds of feet away?

If you were to stand in the flat bed of a truck going 75 mph, and jump straight up, what would happen? You wouldn't fall straight down. You would fall out of the truck. That's because trucks move, the Earth doesn't. This experiment proves the Earth is fixed in space and doesn't move.


2) Blow!
Since if the Earth is supposedly a sphere, it naturally comes to assume what would happen to people below the equator, like in Australia? Since they are underneath the sphere, wouldn't they fall off? This is where scientists come up with mumbo-jumbo like "gravity" and "centrifugal force" to explain away their theories. So, the scientists want you to think that because the earth is so much more massive than people or things, that people will naturally "stick" to the bottom of the earth because of gravity.

This can be disproved very simply. Get a balloon and inflate it as big as possible. It will be a spherical shape. Now, take a piece of paper and try to rip, tear, or cut the tiniest speck of paper possible. This paper represents a human being, much smaller in mass to the balloon, which represents the Earth. Now try and place the small piece of paper to the underside of the balloon. What happens? It falls off!

That's right. Even though the balloon is so much bigger in mass, it cannot hold the tiny paper. So if the Earth was a sphere, no one could live below the equator because they would fall off.


3) Get High!
Ok, this one you really can't do at home, but you can do it out in the world. Stand on the ground and look around you. What's the farthest you can see? Maybe it's a building, tree, or mountain. Now, find some place very close to it where you can get a much higher vantage point. (This also works if you're on a jet and about to take off.) Notice how in the higher place you can see much farther? You can see more of the world the higher you get. This shows the world is flat because the higher you go, the easier it is to see over obstacles. At the same time, it shows the world cannot be spherical. Because if the world was curved, the far distance would forever remain out of view because of the Earth's curvature. It would eternally be over the horizon.

If the Earth was a sphere, it would not matter how high you went, you would still see the same thing. Since this is not the case, the Earth is flat.


These experiments are all confirmed by creation scientists as being 100% accurate. If you're skeptical of the flat Earth, why don't you do these experiments so you can see truth with your own eyes.

41

Flat Earth General / spaceX

« on: May 20, 2012, 03:08:36 PM »

so most people who hang onto the fact that a conspiracy is withholding the true shape of the earth or are just plain lying about thier missions into space may soon have to give up on the idea that NASA is the main body withholding the information. spaceX is an independent company who are planning to dock with the ISS to send supplies. spaceX have already launched thier own rockets and are now looking at docking with the ISS and beyond.
spaceX is founded by Elon Musk (co founder of paypal). thier idea is that goverments are getting stale in the space age because they do not want to try new things because if they mess up they will have that label against them. private companies however can only loose out on thier own money and are able to try new things.
spaceX however (and this will be one arguement that pops up) is partly funded by NASA. NASA have to get contractors to make thier parts for thier rockets and it is not cheap! spaceX however make all thier own parts for thier rockets. now some say that NASA rockets and technology is nothing more than a movie prop and all the contractors do not know about a conspiracy because they all make different parts like a jigsaw to make the whole item. so the arguement is used to say that nobody involved truely knows how or if the technology works. but spaceX makes all its own equipment and tests it. it is considerably cheaper too (at a 3rd of the price) and this is why NASA are willing to help fund projects. kinda like ill scratch your back if you scratch mine!

spaceX admits itself that the first attempts to dock with the ISS may fail, if anything as out of place they will abort the mission and wont risc colliding with the space station, so they may not be able to dock soon. they were infact ment to launch last month but due to software issues they aborted and delayed it. everything has to be perfect so lives on the station are not at risk.

in the future spaceX wishes to produce 'inflatable' space stations and even start sending private investers into space. this is looking more promicing than virgins attempts.

time will only tell what will happen. the important issue is though; private companies are looking into space travel and are no longer under the goverment wing

42

Flat Earth Debate / Shining light on an old topic.

« on: April 20, 2012, 05:35:26 PM »

the perspective effect and bendy light effect is always in debate here. bendy light is very much thrown out of the window for many reasons even though many do not accept this. ENaG doesnt talk about bendy light but uses perspective and the atmosphere to explain sunsets. today while watching the clouds oposit the sunset i realised something. now this may of been posted before but i havnt seen this in the time ive been lurking here. here is my evidence that throws some ideas of fet away and may force us to think of new ideas.

fig.1.



the green lines represent the surface of the earth.
the yellow lines represent ligh rays
the grey shapes are clouds
the red lines are horizons
the black circles represent the observer
and finally the blue line represent the direct angle to the sun but the light cant be seen

the picture is showing a cloud being illuminated at sunset after the sun goes below the horizon. the most popular theory is that the atmosphere blocks the suns light getting to the observer and thats why we cant see a 24 hour sun. also the other popular theory for clouds reflecting the light off the bottom when the sun is higher is because the light reflects off the earth then off the cloud to the observer.
i added the rets answer to why the clouds are lit from bellow for comparison.

at first i didnt think it was much of an issue. i thought the suns light will be travelling through a lower density therefore it will travel further. but this will explain this picture:

fig.2.



here the suns light only has to travel high up in the atmosphere until it reaches the cloud then reflects off to the observer. but this is when the observer is between the cloud and the sun.

however in fig.1. the light has to travel a much greater distance than it would if it was taking a direct path AND the suns light is traveling through the atmosphere at a low altitude for a greater distance than any other time of the day. yet the light is still able to travel to the cloud and then reflect off the cloud to the observer.

43

Flat Earth General / possible proof of people in orbit

« on: April 08, 2012, 08:30:13 PM »

has anybody here heard of chemical gardens before? these experiments are made by growing metal salts in a solution. the experiment can take hours to form. now a chap called david jones devised experiments for people to do in space and a serious scientific paper was written on the subject.
you can read this paper, its called:

the silicate garden reaction in microgravity:
a fluid interfacial instability

it was to test the groth of these salts as the patterns they produce on earth rely solely on gravity

there are pictures of these crystals too and they show the crystals in a shape that cant be replicated on earth

44

Suggestions & Concerns / just curious how this warrents a warning?

« on: March 30, 2012, 05:01:38 PM »

Samuel Birley Rowbotham

vs Newton, Hawking, Bruno, Galilleo

You must learn some basics of astronomy......
This is real dangerous joke man.... FET is real dangerous joke, and any of FETs do not have ANY evidence nor science proof of any kind of FET....

this is kind of religion.... new one...

debilizam!

I think that English is not your first language.  I have lots of patience for people who know many languages.  This is why I am wording this post clearly.  Stay on topic.  This is a warring.  Do not keep posting like this or you will be banned for a few days.

45

Technology, Science & Alt Science / noblox - my minecraft server

« on: March 29, 2012, 03:17:33 PM »

http://www.noblox.net
i have just updated to 1.2.4 after a few crappy months we are back on a RB.
noblox is a survival server with an economy and we offer the chance to buy plots at the spawn to sell your wares.
i.p mc.noblox.net

46

Flat Earth General / Mars and the planets size and distance.

« on: March 25, 2012, 03:54:04 PM »

today in the early evening there was a fantastic view of venus and mars and the cresent moon above the hills where i live.
no this made me think about those planets and thier distance.
we know that large objects move through space and hit planets. commonly know as a meteor or comet. we can see on earth the size of the creaters these impacts leave behind. however it is said that the moon is only 1000 miles away and the moon also shows signs of these impacts yet it is said that the moon is only 30 miles wide.
now mars also shows signs of impacts yet we are led to believe that mars is much smaller and/or is only 3100 miles away.
now whats the fes stand point reguarding mars? how big is mars and how far away is it? the creaters on the surface of mars makes me think that it is much bigger than claimed and therefore further away. there are also photos of dust clouds too, wouldnt they need to be of a significant size to be able to be seen. one person writes that it was estimated to be 60 miles high. thats twice the size of the moon!

47

Flat Earth General / astrological scociety

« on: March 04, 2012, 09:43:20 PM »

i was watching tv today and they said the oldest astrological scociety in the uk (or world, didnt quite catch it) was the liverpool astrological society. im just wondering if the fes classed itself as an astrological society because im sure the society out dates the liverpool astrological society.

48

Suggestions & Concerns / no place to say nice things

« on: February 18, 2012, 09:05:50 AM »

i suggest you add a cheerful gossip thread too! i wanted to say thanks to wilmore for getting things sorted and thanks to dan for finally sending out the mail. the forum can be hostile it would be nice to have a place to brown nose too

49

Flat Earth Q&A / hight of atmosphere

« on: February 12, 2012, 02:52:10 PM »

bit of a basic question but i just need to get my facts right.
how high is the atmosphere acording to the fes?
i mean do you accept the scientific method and you believe its the same hight as been documented? or is it unknown?
if anybody has some numbers it will be of great help for some things im working on
cheers

50

Flat Earth Q&A / has anyone tested this?

« on: February 05, 2012, 07:02:41 PM »

http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm

it does state clearly:
This calculation should be taken as a guide only as it assumes the earth is a perfect ball 6378137 metres radius
but has anybody tried to see how acurate this works?
it will help me with my work on the relationship between hights and distance seen and the atmospheric density.

51

Flat Earth Debate / more work on spotlight sun theory

« on: February 03, 2012, 04:58:48 PM »

 i was thinking how a spotlight can light up half of the world but still, the light will shine like a spotlight. i have used one of the more popular maps  to explain what im talking about. i have used an online sun rise calculator that was acurate for the uk on the date that i used the data. using the calculator i was able to see how large the area is thats lit up and using a flat earth map i was able to draw the areas that are in daylight on the 3rd of febuary 2012.
fig.1

the yellow areas are the parts of the earth that are in daylight at the time. the sun is rising in england at 07:45 GMT and the sun is setting in new zealand at aprox the same time. time zones mean that the actual area of light maybe out by some degree but you will see how radicaly different and how much that doesnt matter when i demonstrate the FE spotlight sun.
fig.2

this is as close as it is possible to place a spotlight and get the sunset and sunrise times as close as possible. now there are issues with this picture. firstly it shows the north pole is in constant light. however at this time of year it is total darkness. this is widely accepted by the FES and in EnaG. next is the distance of the sun from earth. ok it would be low on the horizon and i have seen some theories on how the sun might not actually hover above the earth. now this may sound like a trolling effort but wouldnt the close proximity of the sun actually melt the ice wall? ok forget that!
the next issue is to do with the equator. the sun never goes too far from the equator in reality. that is why the weather at the equator is almost constant. also this can be shown with a graph showing average temperatures in the north,south and at the equator:
red = north
green = south
blue = equator
fig.3

this data is consistant with the angle that the sun is observed in all these parts of the world during the seasons. when it is summer it is high above the area and when its winter the sun appears to be low on the horizon. this is due to the angle the light hits the ground; the more direct the angle is the more energy.
fig.4

 so so far i have demonstrated what area need to be lit up during a cold febuary in the northern hemiplane. the results i got during the summer were even more extreme.
fig.5

first note that i have also significantly reduced the size of the spotlight here, if i made it to scale the results would be even more extreme.
ok so this picture shows the suns position during the summer months. the sun is observed more directly over head during the summer and is demonstrated in fig.4. it is most aparent that if the sun was at this position it would light the whole earth and the earth will be in total daylight during the northern hemiplanes summer also note that both poles are again lit up but as the whole earth is in daylight it is to be exspected.
i was trying to find a way to demonstrate how it is not possible to see the sun all the time in the north during the summer, but what i have stumbled across is something much greater. and the whole idea of a spotlight sun should be revised.
some people say my point is sometimes hard to understand, if you need further clarification on any of the issues ive raised feel free to ask me.

ref.
http://www.sunrisesunsetmap.com/
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0

52

Flat Earth Q&A / celestrial gears

« on: February 01, 2012, 07:47:22 PM »

where do these gears and how does zetetic astrology come to the conclusion that they exist? what first hand evidence has come forward to explain that there are gears in the heavens?
were these gears used to explain something that zetetic astrologers dont understand?

i have read all these 'facts' this.
the stars and planets are in fixed positions on the gears and rotate in 2 different places
stars and planets are moving away from the earth
the planets do not orbit due to gravity
the tides are made by the moons gravity

the one observation that is most baffling is how come the same moon is upsidedown (or right side up!) depending on what hemiplane you are standing on? are there 2 moons on the gears aswell? why cant people see both at the same time? is this due to refraction, well if it is can we see some diagramme on how thats possible? surely if it is wouldnt the same constilations be seen but upside down?

i know thats a lot of questions but its a complicated subject. im sure any zetetic who has tested all of this and is 100% sure of these gears will be able to provide a flawless logic answer to most if not all of these questions

53

Flat Earth Q&A / A post for Irushwithscvs

« on: January 30, 2012, 08:23:05 AM »

please tell us then what conclusions have you made yourself or is all your belief derived from the internet?


  your answer -

"I've observed the movement of the stars, the sun, the moon, I found it all very unrealistic from a RET standpoint. I watched the sun "set" below the undoubtedly flat horizon. As it shimmered and melded into the ground (an obvious symptom of refraction gone bad). This combined with extended studies of water level in extreme distances (Bedford flat-style) led me to conclude there is no reason to find the earth to be globular."


the celestrial bodies are perfectly mapped with modern day equipment. please tell me the flaws.
ok the sun MIGHT set in feb, but it has been shown with maths that this is not possible. plus there are many accounts that can prove otherwise.
lastly what were these 'extended studies of water level in extreme distances' you performed?

from clocktower -

Then please do tell us how you used your process to conclude that:
1) The cause of the Earth's two-a-day, in the middle and low latitudes, tides?
2) The normal, in the geometric sense, height of the Sun above the Earth?
3) That the Moon is 32 miles wide?

an answer by you -

you said make a new thread, here it is.

an answer by you -
"We are Zetetic and therefore do not use the scientific process. It is what has caused the world to come to a false conclusion (RET). Why would you continue using a process that obviously didn't work?"

and the biggest question. you have read ENaG, i asked you if you believe in the whole book or just the parts that suit you. so what is it?

there you go no more derailments, at the moment you seem to be happy to chat about the flat earth and you are one of the first to shoot any 'angry noob' down. so no more derailing these are questions just for you

54

Suggestions & Concerns / new member

« on: January 19, 2012, 10:54:41 PM »

i became a member over 10 days ago and yet nothing has been done. i have spoken to admin and the owner. yet nothing is done. really disapointed, why isnt this system automated?  i have given up the thought of recieving my membership if nobody can even fix my profile.

55

Flat Earth Debate / Revised: concave and convex spotlight

« on: January 17, 2012, 09:41:02 PM »

when high altitude photographs are taken and people point out that they can see the curve of the planet the general response is that what the observer sees is the area where the suns light reaches and we are infact looking at the illuminated area of the earth. beyond the light are just parts of the earth that are not visible because that is where it is night.

figure 1. high altitude photo taken in the day



as we can see here the illuminated area has an edge that is convex in shape as expected. this is because the light from the sun works like it does in figure 2.

figure 2. artists impression of the light shining on a flat earth



that is where the term spotlight sun comes from. it is not to be taken litterally but its just the term used to explain that the sun illuminates a round area just like a spotlight does.

figure 3. dawn photo taken from a high altitude



however in figure 3 we now see the light from another angle and now it looks as if the shadow is convex and the 'spotlight' is concave in shape.
as sunrises and sunsets happen simultaneously we must concluse that the spotlight effect is both concave and convex at the same time depending where the observer is.
 we also observer the same thing on the moon and possibly other celestial bodies, but i have not witnessed these myself.
 the experiment can be repeated using a sphere of any size using a direct light source pointing and one half of the sphere. when the observer walks arround the sphere they can observe that the light observed from directly behind it casts a convex shape, but if the observer walks round and observes the area where the sphere is mostly in shadow and only a thin area of light is allowed to be seen they will observe that the shadow is now convex and the light has become concave on its outer edge. this is roughly drawn in figure 3.

figure 3. artists impression of simulated day and sunrise as observed from a high altitude.



the real life images used are from a satellite or as some will say a NASA high altitude plane disguised as a satellite. either was the same pictures can be seen from weather balloons. these pictures are chosen as they show what im trying to discribe quite clearly and high altitude aircraft or weather balloons tend to still have haze distorting the far edge of the visible earth because of the atmosphere.
i have yet to come up with any conclusions as of yet but so far the only time i have been able to reproduce the phenomenon is when i have used a sphere are a test model.
another way to check the results would be to launch my own balloon and not the area that is furthest from view. then check the times beyond that and calculate where the light terminator actually is. but i do not have the means unfortunately.

56

Arts & Entertainment / my minecraft server still going strong

« on: January 16, 2012, 08:16:15 PM »

i posted details a while back about my minecraft server. its hard to ignore the game these days. after trawling youtube for more than 10 links usually results in a minecraft video. me and my friend host our own server thats up 24/7 on a fast reliable dedicated server. for some reason our uptime went from 98% to 67% but i can assure the downtime is minimal and it only goes down for updates or server work. i have the same username and ofcourse im admin so if you quite FES to me i will give out a diamond took kit if you catch me. here is our website:
http://www.noblox.net/

and our ip is:
mc.noblox.net

hope to see you there, i imagine many of you are americans and most of our players are too so us times are our busy times.
punch some trees and get crafting!

57

Flat Earth Debate / why is my post being avoided?

« on: January 15, 2012, 10:49:16 PM »

Here is a very rough picture of what happens at sunrise and sunset. from many eye witness accounts and photographic evidence. i will get better shots or leave it to others to find some if this post gets any interest. basicly, people are calling the sun a spotlight for whatever reason, well even if it is or not i highly doubt a round object like the sun can create concave and convex shadows at the same time.

the first picture that i spent many hours making is of daylight. the light looks like a circle and this is what most people claim we are seeing when we see pictures from high up. however at sunrise the light is now convex and the darkness is now in a circle and as we know sun rises and sunsets happen simultaniously, constantly, we can now conclude that the suns spotlight is both concave and convex.
please discuss, i would love to see what others think

58

The Lounge / flat earth lurker b-day

« on: January 08, 2012, 10:11:03 PM »

just like to say thanks for the entertainment over the last year, not only on here but also talking about the fes to my friends.
most enjoyable and hopefully will visit the mecca that is bedford this year to see an experiment take place first hand

59

Flat Earth Q&A / How do people see further in FET?

« on: November 08, 2011, 08:48:39 AM »

My question is:
How is it possible to see further when you are higher up when stood on a flat earth.
for instance; Im at a hight of 100m, I have a great view arround me and nothing is higher than that to block my view but the atmosphere isnt perfectly clear, so I cant see more than 30 miles (thats a guess of the actual distance). But if im at an altitude of 500m I can now see for 100 miles. The weather conditions are the same, infact the only change is the hight, but i can now see 3 times further.

60

Suggestions & Concerns / faq

« on: November 02, 2011, 07:55:48 PM »

will this ever get an update? its been nearly a year since i first read it and its worse now i know more about fet than it did when i first found this site. this: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=6308.0 is really bad at best. 90%  of it is the same standard. most fets dont follow it so why is it there?