931
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Moon Light
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:38:32 PM »I took it on a beach on the moon Frenchy!
Who are you calling Frenchy? And I didn't know there were beaches on the moon. Just more RE nonsense.
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.
Who are you calling Frenchy? And I didn't know there were beaches on the moon. Just more RE nonsense.
932
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Moon Light
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:37:02 PM »
I asked him to show me a picture of the "light detector." He showed me a picture he took at the beach. Don't be ridiculous, I want the real thing now, taken from our telescopes, not a picture you took at the beach.
933
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Radius of the Earth proves spherical
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:35:39 PM »WHAT are you TALKING about?The surface distance from the North Pole to the Equator is 10,011.720km. For this point, we're only going to use the Northern Hemisphere.
The circumference at the equator is 40,075.02km.
Your argument starts with a falsehood. There is no "circumference at the equator." Sorry, but you lose.
His argument assumes there is a "circumference at the equator." There is no such thing. The Earth is not round.
934
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Moon Light
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:34:47 PM »
That's preposterous- you took a picture of a piece of machinery on a beach. Give me a break.
935
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Moon Light
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:31:46 PM »
I went to Mars and put an invisible elephant there. Can you find it?
People can claim all sorts of things, but unless you show us pictures of this so-called "light detector," we have zero reason to believe you.
People can claim all sorts of things, but unless you show us pictures of this so-called "light detector," we have zero reason to believe you.
936
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Horizon?
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:30:12 PM »I can see a horizon out at see, explain. (I think this is an RE winner!)
You are but a flea believing you can see the world.
Four people were blindfolded and led into a room with an elephant. When they came out they were asked to report on what they found.
One said it was like the trunk of a tree, another said it was like an enormous leaf, the third said it was like a solid wall and the last one said it was more like a big snake.
When you close your eyes and think your little flea-like perception is 100% accurate, you have doomed yourself to failure.
937
The Lounge / Re: I steal from websites
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:26:25 PM »
Tom Bishop is a government agent. Just ignore him.
938
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Radius of the Earth proves spherical
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:21:41 PM »The surface distance from the North Pole to the Equator is 10,011.720km. For this point, we're only going to use the Northern Hemisphere.
The circumference at the equator is 40,075.02km.
Your argument starts with a falsehood. There is no "circumference at the equator." Sorry, but you lose.
939
Flat Earth Debate / Re: some flaws which disprove FE theory . . .
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:20:25 PM »
Once again, you assume that the correct FE theory is that which rejects gravitation. The conspiracy has succeeded in hiding the truth.
940
Flat Earth Debate / Re: the equivalence principle . . .
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:17:50 PM »
Your argument assumes that gravity is replaced by acceleration. This is a conspiracy lie.
941
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Number of People in the Conspiracy
« on: March 09, 2007, 05:12:56 PM »
Probably not a real one then.
942
The Lounge / Re: I've changed my mind
« on: March 06, 2007, 08:00:27 PM »You're either with us or against us, you cannot say it is plausable, choose your side and join the debates, there are no neutrals in war
I guess Switzerland does not exist then. It's a conspiracy!
943
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Number of People in the Conspiracy
« on: March 06, 2007, 07:59:01 PM »The US government couldn't even pull off a measely conspiracy like Watergate or 9/11 without it being blown wide open, do you really think they could pull off something as gargantuan as a Flat Earth conspiracy? HAH!
You really think the U.S. governemtn committed 9-11? Hell, I am an anarchist and think otherwise.
What kind of Anarchist are you exactly? A Black Flag, "socialist," violent bomb-throwing "Anarchist," or a real Anarchist?
944
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Additional Evidence for FE?
« on: March 06, 2007, 07:57:37 PM »
The FAQ is part of the conspiracy, so why would I refer to it?
945
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Additional Evidence for FE?
« on: March 06, 2007, 06:00:56 AM »We both agree that the ICR and PETA are very bad sources. You say it is because their existence depends on hiding opposing discoveries. I say they are bad sources because these organizations are based on irrational premises.
I trust the Center for Consumer Freedom (kindof an anti-PETA), even though their existence depends on animal research being good and letting people freely choose being the best option, just like PETA's existence depends on animal research being eeeevil, because the Center for Consumer Freedom, unlike PETA, does NOT pretend that they know what's best for me, and does not finance terrorist organizations dedicated to stopping me from doing what I think is best for myself. It's an issue of morality, not epistemology. I don't trust PETA because PETA is pure evil and advocates very very immoral things.
As for the ICR, they openly admit that they are founded on religious dogma, not science. That's a pretty obvious case of irrational premises, wouldn't you say?
Please read the FAQ and get a better posting history. 9 posts?
If you'd shut your big yap and read the thread again, you'd realize I was defending Flat Earthers, you blithering imbecile, you red-assed baboon.
946
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Number of People in the Conspiracy
« on: March 06, 2007, 05:56:41 AM »
The US government couldn't even pull off a measely conspiracy like Watergate or 9/11 without it being blown wide open, do you really think they could pull off something as gargantuan as a Flat Earth conspiracy? HAH!
947
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Additional Evidence for FE?
« on: March 06, 2007, 05:53:39 AM »
We both agree that the ICR and PETA are very bad sources. You say it is because their existence depends on hiding opposing discoveries. I say they are bad sources because these organizations are based on irrational premises.
I trust the Center for Consumer Freedom (kindof an anti-PETA), even though their existence depends on animal research being good and letting people freely choose being the best option, just like PETA's existence depends on animal research being eeeevil, because the Center for Consumer Freedom, unlike PETA, does NOT pretend that they know what's best for me, and does not finance terrorist organizations dedicated to stopping me from doing what I think is best for myself. It's an issue of morality, not epistemology. I don't trust PETA because PETA is pure evil and advocates very very immoral things.
As for the ICR, they openly admit that they are founded on religious dogma, not science. That's a pretty obvious case of irrational premises, wouldn't you say?
I trust the Center for Consumer Freedom (kindof an anti-PETA), even though their existence depends on animal research being good and letting people freely choose being the best option, just like PETA's existence depends on animal research being eeeevil, because the Center for Consumer Freedom, unlike PETA, does NOT pretend that they know what's best for me, and does not finance terrorist organizations dedicated to stopping me from doing what I think is best for myself. It's an issue of morality, not epistemology. I don't trust PETA because PETA is pure evil and advocates very very immoral things.
As for the ICR, they openly admit that they are founded on religious dogma, not science. That's a pretty obvious case of irrational premises, wouldn't you say?
948
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Additional Evidence for FE?
« on: March 01, 2007, 09:03:13 PM »"Well Mr. Turner, your arguments against black slavery are interesting, but given that you are a well-known abolitionist and insurrectionist, I cannot trust your "proofs" because you are biased and have made it your personal goal to end black slavery. Sorry buddy, but we'll keep those whips going."
See how stupid you sound now?
Since the issue of slavery is a moral and ethical issue, and not a scientific one, it has no relevance to this topic.
I am pointing out your logical fallacy. Logical fallacies apply regardless of the domain. That is why they are called *logical*.
Quote
I stand by what I said, good science is impartial, and we should not trust any "evidence" coming from people who have invested their life in coming to a prescribed conclusion.
Then you have willfully decided to ignore evidence on the basis of the person finding it. Once again, that is a logical fallacy- the fact that you refuse to accept it is not my problem.
Anyone reasonable, and who is not blinded by the illusion of "impartiality," will admit that even someone who may be "biased" can find valid evidence.
949
The Lounge / Re: modern day Flat Planet hero
« on: March 01, 2007, 12:43:27 AM »I never understood the motivation behind the villains of this show.
"ha-ha! We're going to destroy the environment . . . because . . . WE'RE VILLAINS!!!! This machine I made has no other purpose than pumping waste into a wildlife preserve! And we would get away with it, too, if not for that cursed Captain Planet!"
This is because Captain Planet was Greenie propaganda, which by definition *must* be disconnected from basic economics, basic ecology, or anything resembling reality.
950
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Additional Evidence for FE?
« on: February 27, 2007, 09:30:14 PM »shut up
An eloquent reply, but if you want to be a bully, you're gonna need to brush up on your ad hominems.
951
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Additional Evidence for FE?
« on: February 27, 2007, 09:25:53 PM »b) The authors are members of a group whose main goal is to demonstrate the Earth to be flat; Or if they are not affiliated with an organization, they have made it their personal goal. As I have said before, good science is impartial. We should no more trust Flat-Earth proofs coming out of the Flat-Earth society then we should trust Young-Earth proofs coming out of the Discovery institute, or proofs for the existence of God coming from Pat Robertson.
Arguments from authority! Fun!
"Well Mr. Turner, your arguments against black slavery are interesting, but given that you are a well-known abolitionist and insurrectionist, I cannot trust your "proofs" because you are biased and have made it your personal goal to end black slavery. Sorry buddy, but we'll keep those whips going."
See how stupid you sound now?