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 - flat_earth_really?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
31
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 20, 2011, 08:09:23 AM »
NASA is referenced pretty much constantly, and to support the arguments of both sides.
I must have missed all of the NASA photos and footage showing the flat earth in all its glory. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to provide a link.

All photos and videos from NASA that show that the earth is round are claimed to have been faked to support THE CONSPIRACY.
Still waiting for NASA proof of a flat earth.

32
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 20, 2011, 08:00:14 AM »
Don't be sexist. The mods have serious issues with discrimination.
How many sprinting world records are held by women? Do the Olympics, etc. discriminate or is it that women being, on average, slower than men is indisputable? How is this discrimination?

What part of "what if" don't you get?
"What if" you read the post that I was responding to, in bold for your convenience?


33
Flat Earth General / Re: Gosh the Conspiracy has a lot to do!
« on: October 20, 2011, 05:56:22 AM »
USA have been at war with more than one of those countries since THE CONSPIRACY allegedly began.

34
Flat Earth General / Re: Yet another alternative flat earth map
« on: October 20, 2011, 05:52:54 AM »
This is off topic but we should not harass NE any longer. He can backtrace us and consequences will never be the same.
Ya this should probably stop. Sounds like he's an icewall ninja who uses his contacts in THE CONSPIRACY to get websites shutdown for fraudulent allegations of molestation.

35
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 20, 2011, 05:25:35 AM »
Any examples from the past hundred years or so, perhaps?
Are you suggesting that the truth has an expiry date? It doesn't.
Any world record holder can tell you that it some truths can and do have expiration dates.

If Mark runs a mile in 3 minutes 45 seconds today, and if Steve runs a mile in 3 minutes 44 seconds tomorrow, Mark's score is still true.

If Tom is the fastest runner in the world today and if Sarah Simon beats Tom's fastest time tomorrow, then Tom is no longer the fastest runner in the world.
Fixed that for you.
As if a girl could run faster... ;D

Don't be sexist. The mods have serious issues with discrimination.
How many sprinting world records are held by women? Do the Olympics, etc. discriminate or is it that women being, on average, slower than men is indisputable? How is this discrimination?

Is there anything in life more annoying than the kind of rubbish you have just spouted? If mods want to get annoyed, do they need you to correct me first? Are you some kind of pre-mod correctional officer?

Or are you the type of weirdo who gets offended for other people? In which case:
Don't be sexist. The mods have serious issues with discrimination.
"Don't laugh at girls, I know a girl. Honest I do..."
Fixed.

36
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 20, 2011, 05:19:17 AM »
Quote
If Tom is the fastest runner in the world today and if Sarah Simon beats Tom's fastest time tomorrow, then Tom is no longer the fastest runner in the world.
Fixed that for you.
As if a girl could run faster... ;D

Have you ever seen Tom run?
If you mean Tom Bishop, then he runs pretty quickly when his trolling and circular reasoning comes under fire.

37
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 19, 2011, 07:19:59 PM »
Any examples from the past hundred years or so, perhaps?
Are you suggesting that the truth has an expiry date? It doesn't.
Any world record holder can tell you that it some truths can and do have expiration dates.

If Mark runs a mile in 3 minutes 45 seconds today, and if Steve runs a mile in 3 minutes 44 seconds tomorrow, Mark's score is still true.

If Tom is the fastest runner in the world today and if Sarah Simon beats Tom's fastest time tomorrow, then Tom is no longer the fastest runner in the world.
Fixed that for you.
As if a girl could run faster... ;D

38
Flat Earth General / Re: Yet another alternative flat earth map
« on: October 19, 2011, 07:17:29 PM »
Would he love us if we told him we molested his mother?
Did you molest his mother? You should probably get tested as I went there first and I like to go bareback.

I shut down few websites before because of such vicious false remarks.
Wow, how many websites have made such crazy allegations? It seems pretty random that this happens to you so often.

39
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 19, 2011, 12:16:41 PM »
Any examples from the past hundred years or so, perhaps?
Are you suggesting that the truth has an expiry date? It doesn't.
I'm simply pointing out that if this is the "truth", then this phenomenon should be noticed all the time, yet it isn't. A few sketchy accounts in a book that's over a hundred years old can hardly be considered a perfect source of "truth".
Or maybe a link to something other than the FES Wiki. If NASA, etc can't be referenced due to their obvious part in THE CONSPIRACY, then surely you can't expect the FES Wiki to be considered unbiased?
What? NASA is referenced pretty much constantly, and to support the arguments of both sides.
I must have missed all of the NASA photos and footage showing the flat earth in all its glory. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to provide a link.

All photos and videos from NASA that show that the earth is round are claimed to have been faked to support THE CONSPIRACY.

40
Flat Earth General / Re: Yet another alternative flat earth map
« on: October 19, 2011, 07:33:26 AM »
Would he love us if we told him we molested his mother?
Did you molest his mother? You should probably get tested as I went there first and I like to go bareback.

41
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: It looks that way
« on: October 19, 2011, 07:28:28 AM »
In his explanation the perspective effect can be reversed with a telescope. Half-sunken ships can be restored by looking at them through a telescope, as numerous accounts attest.
Any examples from the past hundred years or so, perhaps? Or maybe a link to something other than the FES Wiki. If NASA, etc can't be referenced due to their obvious part in THE CONSPIRACY, then surely you can't expect the FES Wiki to be considered unbiased?

42

Can you please provide a link to some experiment that has shown your bendy light in action? In order to buy in to this FE rubbish, don't you need to observe things yourself before you believe them? How did you zetetically come to the conclusion that light bends?
The moon clearly looks flat, and yet it appears circular from every angle. This conclusively proves the existence of bendy moonlight.
Well that's not worth responding to....DAMMIT I RESPONDED!!
That is one nonsensical post you made right there...

43
Flat Earth General / Re: Going to the Moon
« on: October 18, 2011, 05:52:52 AM »
Okay, Iíll go along with your line of reasoning.  So did Mythbusters address the fact that it appears to defy common sense that in the late 60ís and early 70ís we put men on the moon several times, but since then (40 years later) no country has put men on the moon?  This is not just my own common sense.  MANY people feel that this issue defies common sense.
40 or so years ago, going to the moon was a landmark achievement. Now, it would be just doing it again. What reason would they have to keep sending astronauts to the moon at such huge cost? More rock samples? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_program#Program_costs_and_cancellation
Why would common sense make you wonder why nobody is sending people to the moon all of the time?

44
Flat Earth General / Re: Theory-99.9 percent of FEs are...
« on: October 18, 2011, 05:45:47 AM »
It's known as using shock tactics. Hopefully I will be able to offend REers so much that they lapse into self-hatred and question their entire beliefs system. Then, while they are weak and malleable, I will take the opportunity to convert them to FET.
How's that working out for you? Seriously, how many people have ever been "converted"? All I see on the forums are the same trolls pretending to believe believers trying to derail threads, claiming that they've all been dealt with before.

I have a ground-breaking idea: if all of these stupid angry-noob ideas have been refuted before, why don't the FEtards update the FAQ with all of the refutations? That would go a long way to preventing the same threads over and over. As it is, the trolls pretending to believe believers impatiently direct the angry-noobs to the FAQ, where their question inevitably isn't answered in full. They are then told to lurk more. Round and round it goes.

45
Flat Earth General / Re: Yet another alternative flat earth map
« on: October 18, 2011, 05:37:15 AM »
Is the north pole in Africa now?
Not right now, but once a theory surfaces that requires the North Pole to be in Africa, I guess this could be called the New Earth Model in an attempt to make it sound official and impressive. Hopefully, by that time, this thread will be lost to history so that when the New Earth Model gets referenced, nobody will be immediately aware of the obvious flaws.

That's how these things work right?

46
Bendy light removes the requirement for the Sun to behave as a spotlight. It is entirely possible that Mars is simply reflecting sunlight.
Or, to put it another way, the sun is only is spotlight when we want it to be a spotlight. Once this is shown to be ridiculous, we'll use bendy light as the explanation. Once that has been shown to be ridiculous, we'll go back to the spotlight in the hope that everyone has forgotten about how wrong it seemed before.

Can you please provide a link to some experiment that has shown your bendy light in action? In order to buy in to this FE rubbish, don't you need to observe things yourself before you believe them? How did you zetetically come to the conclusion that light bends?

47
Do you have evidence that "Mars", which we have never visited, is not a star?
It isn't all NASA conspiracy people who identified Mars as a planet. I assume this is a joke, but just to humour you:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rpif/mitc/mitcearly.html
lol
Thank you. Anything to say that means something of relevance?

48
Do you have evidence that "Mars", which we have never visited, is not a star?
It isn't all NASA conspiracy people who identified Mars as a planet. I assume this is a joke, but just to humour you:
http://zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rpif/mitc/mitcearly.html

49
Flat Earth General / Re: Government protected wall of ice - lol wut?
« on: October 13, 2011, 05:10:40 AM »
I was asked for an example, I provided an example. Your babbling doesn't change this.
Ah, so you do want me to hold you accountable for other RE'ers' stupidity. Fair enough.
The example was provided at someone else's request. Nobody asked me what you thought. I was clearly asked for an example of someone making a serious claim for "ice ninja's". I used the most official one I could find, i.e. a stickied thread on the first page of the forums. By all means, make out that I said that all FEtards believe it. That's not putting words in my mouth at all. In this thread alone Tausami claimed not to believe this. If you people want to avoid such misunderstandings, you should probably edit the threads that have been stickied on this forum. For example, in the FAQ http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.msg650021#msg650021 a reference is made to the possibility of the "conspiracy" guarding the ice wall. If this is such a ridiculous notion that nobody believes anymore, then why is it on the first page of 2 stickied threads?

Quote from: PizzaPlanet
If gravity does not exist then what do compasses point to?
Clearly, RE'ers claim compasses point to gravity. I provided an example and your babbling doesn't change this.
I never claimed that nobody ever thought that compasses point to gravity. A link (that doesn't work for me BTW so direct observation would suggest that it's fake) to an obvious idiotic post proves nothing at all about me.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet
Regarding the irony in the nickname, do you really think that that was not obvious? Really?
To someone who thinks compasses point to gravity? Yes.
What has that got to do with me?

Quote from: PizzaPlanet
You however just called me a retard. Once again, you people get to say what you like while any personal attacks on you are met with instant warnings. Ridiculous double standards yet again.
I haven't called you a retard, I have called you an REtard. Pronounced are-ee-tard. It's a made up word. The only negative connotation that this word has is whatever one you put on it yourself. Looking like a word means nothing.

In fact, you seem to be the only person not to get this. I mean, really? Really? jroa, who has previously admitted to English not being his first language, got it;
I am an REtard.  Please do not make fun of me.  why are you so cruel?
Notice the "an" and the correct spelling, as opposed to your "a" and incorrect spelling.

Ridiculous double standards on your part for attempting to turn this around on me.
Touchť.

Quote from: PizzaPlanet
and you, the ever so arrogant know-it-all of science, did not? Really?
Arrogant? Possibly.
Know-it-all of science? Not sure where I made that out. Why don't you find a post by someone else acting like a know-it-all? That'll show me.


Just for future reference, am I supposed to put a disclaimer on all posts now in case some FEtard somewhere takes offence because he/she doesn't believe in that particular ridiculous notion? How does one go about debating with you people when a post made to one person causes such obvious offence to someone who has other baseless beliefs conflicting with them?

50
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: amazing concept!
« on: October 12, 2011, 02:18:35 PM »
I thought he was a master baiter.  He seems like a fisherman.
That's the job of a troll, and Thork is a master.

I look at Thork the way a master swordsman looks at a worthy adversary.  I'm not gonna give a damn inch to his parrys or thrusts, but I have a grudging respect for his efforts.  He's a far more rewarding opponent than the rather lame Tom Bishop.  If there were to be a troll president, it should be Thork not Bishop.

I can not argue with you about Thork's master baiting skills.

He twists words like the most cunning linguist ever.
God bless Austin Powers.

51
Flat Earth General / Re: On the Notion of Dr. Samuel Rowbotham
« on: October 12, 2011, 01:42:44 PM »
Again, carving something in stone doesn't make it true.

Are you just going to take someone's word for it in this instance, and not take the word of anyone who says they have orbited a round earth? Pseudo-skepticism at its finest.
So all we need to do is carve "The Earth is a globe" into a piece of stone and this whole website will disappear? Awesome.

52
Flat Earth General / Re: How long has The Conspiracy Existed?
« on: October 12, 2011, 06:38:35 AM »
I, personally, send blackmail letters to people in the name of the FET.  For some reason, they don't seem to get a lot of responses.  Go figure.
You know that constitutes undeniable proof that the conspiracy exists, right? I mean, if there was no conspiracy, they wouldn't be afraid to send a reply, right? Can I have some tinfoil, please?

53
Flat Earth General / Re: Government protected wall of ice - lol wut?
« on: October 12, 2011, 06:29:22 AM »
It can be difficult. Dioptimus Prime left before I joined, so I'm not sure about him.
Well the thread has been stickied so I'm thinking that, unless this website stickies troll threads, the example stands as an example of a serious FEtard who believes in ice wall ninjas.
Then you are welcome to bring this up with Dioptimus Prime the next time he's around. I wouldn't get too excited about that opportunity, though.
Trying to make others responsible for his claims, on the other hand, won't get you far around here. We've had serious REtards (Do you now see the irony of the nickname you use for us? I hope you do.) claim that compasses point towards gravity, that "magnetic West" is a direction, and that you can see the Earth's curvature from 3000 metres above sea level. If I were to hold you accountable for all these claims, I would conclude you're not very bright.
I was asked for an example, I provided an example. Your babbling doesn't change this.
Regarding the irony in the nickname, do you really think that that was not obvious? Really? By the way, though, fetard is a made up word. The only negative connotation that this word has is whatever one you put on it yourself. Sounding like a word means nothing. You however just called me a retard. Once again, you people get to say what you like while any personal attacks on you are met with instant warnings. Ridiculous double standards yet again.

54
Flat Earth Q&A / Mars looks like a star; Where does the light come from?
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:53:26 AM »
If the sun is a spotlight, shining directly at earth and nowhere else, why does mars "shine" like a star when we get to see it? Is NASA shining lights at it to get it to reflect light back at us in an attempt to keep the conspiracy going, or is it reflecting sunlight like the moon in the REal world?

55
Flat Earth General / Re: How long has The Conspiracy Existed?
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:50:50 AM »
I'm looking for some diverse answers as to how long The Round Earth Conspiracy has been around.

I've seen claims of a round Earth date back to age of the Greeks and Romans, though those may be fabrications created by the conspiracy, so I'm not sure.
The conspiracy arrived with the invention of tinfoil. It's how these guys block out the RE propaganda that's getting beamed into our heads all the time. Once they put on the homemade anti-propaganda hats, BOOM, they saw the light and a conspiracy was born.

56
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The map you base your theory on, is WRONG.
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:48:17 AM »
The Aetheric Wind model explains this phenomena.

Wasn't this the one John Davis was meant to be publishing a book about? Where can we buy this book?

No, it's my own. It postulates that the Earth is propelled by aether
1) Do we all get to make up these hilarious models?
2) How can any of this rubbish possibly be more scientifically accurate than all of the mainstream theories you have discarded due to being "based on conjecture?" Every time you post more nonsense, baby Jesus soils himself in disgust.

flat_earth_really?, I also believe that this is a troll board.  However, you seem to be a little too belligerent with the FErs.  Can we try to make this a gentleman's debate?
How can you possibly have a gentleman's debate with a troll?

57
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The map you base your theory on, is WRONG.
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:46:31 AM »
The Aetheric Wind model explains this phenomena.

Wasn't this the one John Davis was meant to be publishing a book about? Where can we buy this book?

No, it's my own. It postulates that the Earth is propelled by aether
1) Do we all get to make up these hilarious models?
2) How can any of this rubbish possibly be more scientifically accurate than all of the mainstream theories you have discarded due to being "based on conjecture?" Every time you post more nonsense, baby Jesus soils himself in disgust.

1) No
2) Because the Earth has been proven to be flat. Also, good.
1) Well that's not really fair. I was going to put dinosaurs in my model. We could have played Jurassic Park.
2) No it hasn't. If it had, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

58
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Slinky in freefall
« on: October 12, 2011, 04:42:47 AM »
The inhomogeneity of earth's gravitational field is what proves UA does not exist, as UA cannot vary from place to place. Forget slinkies, interesting though they are.
Very true. What is the typical FEtarded response to this?

1) Stop with the personal attacks or I'll be forced to take out my bamhammer*
2) Pressure changes, and gravity does exist on a small scale.
1) Who did I attack personally?
2) What pressure changes? How do these changes cause variations in the acceleration felt when falling?
Also, wtf? You blatantly say gravity doesn't exist in order to postulate your UA theory. Then you use gravity to paper over the cracks when this starts to fall apart. If you don't stop this, there will be no cherries left for anyone else. And if you eat them all, you'll probably get diarrhea.

No, other people say that gravity doesn't exist. There's a difference.
OK, so if gravity exists, then why UA? If gravity is much weaker than is widely accepted, then how did you zetetically ascertain its actual effects/strength.

59
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The map you base your theory on, is WRONG.
« on: October 12, 2011, 12:15:29 AM »
The Aetheric Wind model explains this phenomena.

Wasn't this the one John Davis was meant to be publishing a book about? Where can we buy this book?

No, it's my own. It postulates that the Earth is propelled by aether
1) Do we all get to make up these hilarious models?
2) How can any of this rubbish possibly be more scientifically accurate than all of the mainstream theories you have discarded due to being "based on conjecture?" Every time you post more nonsense, baby Jesus soils himself in disgust.

60
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Slinky in freefall
« on: October 12, 2011, 12:10:52 AM »
The inhomogeneity of earth's gravitational field is what proves UA does not exist, as UA cannot vary from place to place. Forget slinkies, interesting though they are.
Very true. What is the typical FEtarded response to this?

1) Stop with the personal attacks or I'll be forced to take out my bamhammer*
2) Pressure changes, and gravity does exist on a small scale.
1) Who did I attack personally?
2) What pressure changes? How do these changes cause variations in the acceleration felt when falling?
Also, wtf? You blatantly say gravity doesn't exist in order to postulate your UA theory. Then you use gravity to paper over the cracks when this starts to fall apart. If you don't stop this, there will be no cherries left for anyone else. And if you eat them all, you'll probably get diarrhea.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5