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.
The wiki contains a lot of trash. We allowed a number of users from here to contribute to it, many of whom were round earthers.
You really couldn't. I don't come here to complain about the flat earth theory, something I believe in. You might have a point if I was actively visiting and whining at round earth physics forums or something. I come here, and participate in the flat earth community and research at large, because I care about it. You come here to shit in someone else's punchbowl.
You really need to work on your reading Neil. At least this time we didn't get entry #345 from your paperback of insults.
Says the man that didn't know the sun was a star.
How do you get the fortitude and stamina to come here every day and complain about things you self-admittedly don't understand?
I always supply my sources,No you don't, and when you do, it's usually some semi-religious pamphlet from 1928.
The fact of the matter is that I'm such a beast these folks have made it their life goal to follow me around the forums and attack me non stop.Perhaps it's because you're pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.
I answered them. I know they were accepted by the scientific community, because I am on a first name basis with the scientific community.
Not only did I not discover luna (what you call moonshrimp for some reason),
It is said that god stopped the sun - he did not stop the earth.
Certainly if god were so foolish as to make the earth round, he could stop the earth and thus the apparent movement of the sun. He did not - he stopped the sun and moon.
Stopping the sun in a heliocentric model would be meaningless to the act of stopping the sun and moon. I don't want to get too deep into Christian apologetics, so perhaps it was silly of me to ask for evidence that the bible is literally true - a stance I don't hold. Parts of it certainly are, and I happen to believe Joshua X was a real event, alongside others like Wardlaw Scott. Obviously, if you disagree with Joshua X being a true account of what happened, you won't find much for you in this thread as you will reject the premise outright.
Any lunar creatures, if they would exist would need a food source. It stands to reason that they would eat the food source available to them - themselves.
I've explained this multiple times. Due to the evidence I presented. Dinosaurs are an untenable hypothesis and can't maintain their own weight and go against everything we already know about biology. Large beasts, such as mammoths and giants, do not and have been reported as observed since the dawn of recorded history. Dinosaurs have shown up in the last 150 years near the advent of science as profession and presumably the gullibility of the American public.
They serve different purposes. If certain users would settle down and let it be used for that purpose, it'd be useful.
The flaw isn't with the sections being separate, it's with how people treat it.
You didn't get shouted down, Dino the melodramatic. You just didn't make a good argument. Also, I have no say in what forums stay or go or get merged. AND ALSO, it's not my fault the angry globularists can't understand simple rules.
Don't you think its time to merge Flat Earth Q&A and Flat Earth General?
Your opinion means very little.
The two boards serve different purposes.
You're not even trying to make a case.
Man has predicted the phases of the moon far before they invented
They don't need to be 'in on it' to be wrong or fooled. Why is it that every globularist that comes here is obsessed with conspiracy? I get why flatists might be, but this is getting silly folks! The only conspiracy at play is a conspiracy of imagination and ignorance.Here is another great story John can ignore
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/08/nodosaur-dinosaur-fossil-study-borealopelta-coloration-science/
Looks like National Geographic are in on it.Required wear for flat-earthers when leaving their basement - in case they accidently stumble on contrary evidence.
You still haven't explained why when someone finds the remains of a gigantic animal embedded in rock where no human could have placed it, you think it's not a dinosaur, but do accept that it's some other type of gigantic animal. Neither have you explained why your gigantic animals are more plausible to you than dinosaurs. And you've been asked several times.
See all the people reading this post? They know that about you now. Maybe you'd better give an answer.
If its so ridiculous, why have so many experts observed them, as cited, Dinofaux Neil? Why do you think he had an abnormality in his pituitary gland, if not genetics?
What is global warming but just round earth theory once again failing to predict the seasons accurately and account through ad-hoc hypothesis? If a theory truly is to be falsifiable, it can't explain away these with hypothesis after hypothesis. The truth is, the round earth theory predicts stars - not the seasons. They have even went so far as to recursively define this, such that Spring starts based on the movements of the stars - not as any man would know from common sense the tell tale signs of the seasons.
Perhaps you mean Wadlow. However, I provided plenty of accounts of educated men and scholars that have observed giants. Just because far less people have looked on KIC 8462852 or on the remains of giants does not mean they do not exist. It is also known from many sources that Giants would mate with man - I cited one example above in Genesis 6:4. Wadlow is likely a resurgence of their dormant giant gene. Almost every ancient source of knowledge as well as many disparate societies have observed giants and told their tale. Short of observing them yourself, how would you suggest we should they were observed aside from the accounts of those that observed them?
I'd wager many have looked upon their remains. Unfortunately, they were Frankensteined with birds, gators, and who knows what else to create the illusion of a giant dragon.
Lu, do you have any body piercings?He told me he has a clit ring.
Greetings everybody, it is my first day in this community and I'm eager to really understand how the world works.
Basically, I was wandering how the daytime in Antartica should work: I know that the sun is far less distant than what we are usually taught and that only lights certain parts during the day.
I also know that the further you go either up to the north pole or down to the south pole the daytime increases. In fact the north pole - as the south one - has six months of light and six months of darkness.
How can we explain that?
Shouldn't the south pole have the shortest daytime of the world according to the Flat World Theory?
Here's a link to the image of what I'm talking about: http://www.ilsuperuovo.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/DQmQA58TNcAE8FB4TVHJcu7UoeuKJYbFQBtwntFTBB6cVrR.png
Thanks in advance!
There's no such place as Antartica. Perhaps you should ask about daytime in Antarctica?
Before being a grammar nazi you should check your own tag. "Founder member"?. What are you? Some kind of fish? Proper English would be "Founding member".
Greetings everybody, it is my first day in this community and I'm eager to really understand how the world works.
Basically, I was wandering how the daytime in Antartica should work: I know that the sun is far less distant than what we are usually taught and that only lights certain parts during the day.
I also know that the further you go either up to the north pole or down to the south pole the daytime increases. In fact the north pole - as the south one - has six months of light and six months of darkness.
How can we explain that?
Shouldn't the south pole have the shortest daytime of the world according to the Flat World Theory?
Here's a link to the image of what I'm talking about: http://www.ilsuperuovo.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/DQmQA58TNcAE8FB4TVHJcu7UoeuKJYbFQBtwntFTBB6cVrR.png
Thanks in advance!
I've had the same exact problem. I have to go back, copy the text from my post, go back again so I'm back in the original thread instead of the new post screen, wait a couple minutes, then finally submit my post. And I'm usually just pasting text into the Quick Reply thing at the bottom of the page at that point.
I was answered the other one and you are opening a new topic with same type of but a different question. Are you shill?
RE: The power lines phenomenon of Lake Pontchartrain were settled to be a victory for FE.
Still waiting on you to show any proof.Apollo 11 photo AS11-40-5875
You have to rely on pseudo science and a google search to explain away this single booth print in the opposite direction.
It is one of hundreds of examples i can give......
Yeah like many things it is explained away with some grazy arguments that for some reason have power over you.
It doesn't matter what i show you, no matter how clear,......you will not consider anything as proof.
My first post of the day today was greeted with the message "Your last post was less than 30 seconds ago". No it wasn't.
Waiting a bit and trying to post it later got the message "You've already submitted this post" (this always comes up in this situation) and yet going to look at the thread, the post isn't ever there.
Please fix this dumb system that doesn't detect things properly.
Are you posting from your phone? I get this message a lot when I do that. Sometimes opening a new tab and posting from there helps.
But, yeah. I've run into this and it's really annoying.
