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 - Chaltier

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5
91
Flat Earth Q&A / the
« on: April 23, 2006, 08:45:35 PM »
Quote from: "Euclidean"
When I came across this site it reminded me of the "lesbian chatroom senerio" [Rest cut for length.]


Hm, interesting analogy, though surprisingly accurate. :shock:


--Chal

92
Flat Earth Q&A / Ice Wall what is it?
« on: April 23, 2006, 08:42:17 PM »
Quote from: "lizardogre"
Are you SERIOUSLY that stupid!!?!??


You're just mad that Erasmus is calling everything you say into question so you actually have to think about it. Someone asking a question doesn't necessarily mean they don't know the answer; they may know the answer, but want you to answer it for yourself.

As you so politely put it:

Quote from: "lizardogre"
Are you SERIOUSLY that stupid!!?!??



--Chal

93
Flat Earth Q&A / the
« on: April 23, 2006, 08:05:32 PM »
Quote from: "Marshy"
theres no need for a FE forum, the FAQ outlines the theory and all "evidence". true or not, i dont see the point of dividing th eFAQ into individual topics.


The FE forum isn't there for the purpose of dividing the FAQ into individual topics, it's there to discuss flat-Earth beliefs without RE interference, regardless of their existance in the FAQ.

As for the name of the forum, I think "Flat Earth Believers" would do fine, though it's open to suggestions, of course.

Also, with regard to who can see it/post in it, I've made an introductory post based on what appeared to be the current idea for the forum, stating therein that REers can see the forum but not post there. However, allowing the more established RE members to post wouldn't be horrible, so long as their posts are made to further the FE discussion (pro-RE arguments about the FE ideas to be made in the General area). And, as Cinlef already said, there could be technical difficulties I'm not aware of, prohibiting us from allowing viewers who cannot post. If this is the case, we'll have to think of something else, which will likely be the allowing of established members to join, but disallowing pro-RE posting.


--Chal

94
Flat Earth Believers / Flat Earth Believers - Rules & Guidelines
« on: April 23, 2006, 07:47:12 PM »
Welcome to the Flat Earth Believers forum!

As is strongly suggested by the name, this forum is meant for believers in the Flat Earth theory to have a place to discuss issues within the theory, but not to alienate FEers from the rest of the board. Thus, some Round Earthers will be allowed to post here (so long as they do not make pro-RE posts), and those who are not will still be able to read everything posted here. That said, I do encourage all believers to post the majority of their ideas in the General Discussion forum, as well.

Rules

The rules can be found here, and I will add that only flat Earth posts will be allowed. I have no problem with people playing devil's advocate for RE from time to time, so long as it serves to further the (pro-FE) discussion.

Joining

To join, simply PM me or apply for usergroup membership. The criteria are, basically, that you've shown yourself to be a reasonable debater and have argued the FE side of a debate at least once. You will be turned down if I know nothing about you, however, so be sure to at least make yourself known elsewhere on the board as one who fits the criteria first.

And with that, happy posting!


--Chal

95
Flat Earth Q&A / the
« on: April 23, 2006, 06:42:25 PM »
Quote from: "EnragedPenguin"
Alright, the section is up. Chaltier, you are the moderator so it will be up to you to decide who is admitted and who isn't.

It's going to be hidden to the public until we get all the details worked out. And you guys also need to come up with a name for it (I named it "flat earthers only" temporarily).


Alrighty, thanks! I've never been a moderator before, but I'll do my best not to dissapoint the administration.

*starts putting together first post for the FE-only board*


--Chal

96
Flat Earth Q&A / The Flat Earth Theory is not debatable.
« on: April 22, 2006, 12:39:22 PM »
Quote from: "Unimportant"
So your argument is "They can track both satellites and spy planes, so it must be satellites"?


That's what it sounds like.


--Chal

97
Flat Earth Q&A / the
« on: April 22, 2006, 03:07:09 AM »
So, any updates on this idea, or has it gone the way of the dinosaur?


--Chal

98
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Extraterristrial Life?
« on: April 22, 2006, 03:00:08 AM »
Quote from: "Condraz23"
Do any flat-Earthers here believe that there are other biological species within this universe apart from the organisms living within our planet?


Within our planet? Hm, I don't know of any there, either, but assuming you mean "on," not "within," no, I do not believe in other biological species besides those that exist on Earth.


--Chal

99
Flat Earth Q&A / The Ice Wall? What makes you think it's made of ice?
« on: April 21, 2006, 12:38:17 PM »
Quote from: "Erasmus"
On this issue -- my default assumption is that all members of this forum are male.  I usually expect women to have more sense than to waste their time arguing trivialities over the internet.


So long as you're targetting yourself with the last portion of that, too... :wink:

Though, I'm not sure I'd call the Earth's shape a 'triviality,' necessarily.


--Chal

100
Flat Earth Q&A / The Ice Wall? What makes you think it's made of ice?
« on: April 21, 2006, 12:36:09 PM »
Quote from: "Erasmus"
...explain how gravity [works] in such a way that I can apply your theory to objects anywhere in the universe, and in any orientation.


How I was suggesting it could work is just as I said: A flat, nontangible disc under the Earth that pulls the Earth (and everything on it) toward it. I never said anything else has gravity, necessarily.

Quote from: "Erasmus"
[Cut for length.]


Makes sense enough. That's the last time I buy into an RE idea (ie, the Earth forming into a sphere) without checking it out, though. :P


--Chal

101
Flat Earth Q&A / The Ice Wall? What makes you think it's made of ice?
« on: April 20, 2006, 12:22:38 AM »
Quote from: "Erasmus"
Quote from: "Chaltier"
Straight lines perpendicular to the disc, pulling us into it.


That's just the difficulty: gravity doesn't work that way.


Well, I know it doesn't, according to RE. I was challenging that, actually.

Quote
[Insert rest of post here.]

(Post cut for length.)

Interesting idea. I hate to play devil's advocate for RE, but one question: You're using a concept of gravity as something that pulls in all directions, and a model that's already resonably close to being spherical. That being the case, how does the cylinder remain thus and not end up as a sphere?


--Chal

102
Flat Earth Q&A / The Ice Wall? What makes you think it's made of ice?
« on: April 19, 2006, 03:38:16 PM »
Quote from: "Erasmus"
Emanates how?  In straight lines perpendicular to the disc, or radially out from the center of the disc?


Straight lines perpendicular to the disc, pulling us into it.

Hm, interesting theory. The diagram makes the Earth look quite a bit thicker than I imagine most FEers believe it is (though that's certainly not damning to the idea). About how thick are we talking about here?


--Chal

103
Flat Earth Q&A / The Ice Wall? What makes you think it's made of ice?
« on: April 19, 2006, 01:05:39 PM »
Fair enough. I often try to cover every possible way anyone who disagrees could reply that I can think of at the moment, rarely think of the one they actually end up coming back with, and my posts then seem excessive. Sorry.

Quote from: "Erasmus"
Could you expand on this idea? For instance 6strings has proposed an alternate gravity model involving placing the FE on top of a much larger disc that have a gravitational field, but the theory had problems; I proposed making the Earth a deep cylinder with its own gravitational field, so that field lines would be near-parallel at the surface.


As for Erasmus' question (apologies for the long reply time... I'd completely forgotten that you'd attatched a question to your last post), I imagined it as a nontangible disc directly under the Earth from which gravity emanates.

Could you expand on your cylinder idea a bit, by the way?


--Chal

104
Flat Earth Q&A / the
« on: April 18, 2006, 10:39:06 AM »
Quote from: "Dionysios"
Chaltier and Enraged Penguin,

What are your opinions with reguard to the ability to view the posts?


Well, your suggestion seems reasonable, though I can see both sides of the argument. On the one hand, if a stream of flames starts up in the general forum about something said in the FE one, that acts as yet another deterrant to FEers wishing to participate in a civilized discussion here. On the other, a stream of flame threads starting about FE forum content relies heavily on the assumption that flamers would actually read the FE forum, and they're probably not the type of people who would do so.

In other words, I'm really not partial either way as to who can or cannot read posts made there, as both of the aforementioned positions seem reasonable to me.


--Chal

105
Flat Earth Q&A / the
« on: April 18, 2006, 02:19:39 AM »
As Dionysios stated already, I'm in full favour of the idea of an FE-only section here. The way I've envisioned it personally, there could be two rule possibilities, first one being that all members must believe the Earth is flat. Second being that all posts must be made under the assumption that the Earth is flat. The first being cautious about RE interference at all, the second being a bit more inclusive, hopefully without dramatically changing the content in the forum in question. Either way, I hope and trust that the moderators will choose wisely.

As for that little part about my moderating it, I've replied, and will do so here, as well. Such a position isn't something that should be requested nor pressed for, and is a gift bestowed upon those who the administration believes can best keep order as per the rules established. As such, I'll not be requesting the position, but were it to look me in the face, I wouldn't turn it away.


--Chal

106
The Lounge / Allow Illiteracy to Flourish
« on: April 17, 2006, 03:53:44 PM »
Agreed 100%.


--Chal

107
Flat Earth Q&A / If The Earth Is Flat...
« on: April 16, 2006, 11:01:06 PM »
As Erasmus stated, that's simply an assumption that REers make; they assume that they would see curvature if they really took the time to look. No one on this board has, of yet and to the extent of my knowledge, claimed to have actually seen said curvature.

However, were there such a curvature, do recall that FE no more claims the Earth to be a perfect plane than RE claims it to be a perfect sphere.


--Chal

108
Flat Earth Q&A / THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY FORUMS EXPOSED
« on: April 16, 2006, 09:39:36 PM »
Perhaps I'm one of the few here who actually do believe that Earth is flat, but I assure you we're here.

On another note, you expressed disdain toward the disc-shaped Earth ideas, preferring the old models. I'd be very interested to hear what you've to say about it, if you truly are a believer in the old models.

Don't be surprised if I send you a PM about it at some point in the near future if my idea in the Suggestions topic for an FE-only section of the board isn't taken, otherwise I'll begin a topic there on it. The whole reason for proposing an FE-only board was, after all, to have a place to discuss such things without RE interference and flaming.


--Chal

109
Announcements / Forums announcements, suggestions, etc..
« on: April 16, 2006, 12:33:51 PM »
Quote from: "Unimportant"
That would be up to the limitations of the board code. I'm pretty sure there are methods for making "private forums" which only grant access to members who are on the "Ok" list. I've seen it plenty of time with mod-only forums, private guild forums on gaming boards, things like that.

If you wanted someone in the forum, you would simply flag their account as "ok". If you didn't, you wouldn't.


That's how I was thinking it'd work. Most forums have such a system, and there's also a Usergroup system. Usergroups can be given access to boards, admin privileges over a board (by assigning the usergroup as the board moderator as opposed to individuals), and what have you. I was thinking along the lines of a "Believers" or "Flat Earth Society" usergroup which would be given access, and perhaps acceptable nonbelievers would be flagged individually, or have their own, separate usergroup.


--Chal

110
Announcements / Suggestion: New Forum
« on: April 16, 2006, 10:51:50 AM »
Suggestion:

I'd like to suggest the creation of a new forum for Flat-Earthers, mods (of course), and perhaps those who've shown themselves to be reasonable and open-minded from the RE side, only.

For criteria for non-FEers to get in, I was thinking along the lines of:

-Has shown oneself to be a reasonable and open-minded poster.

-Has challenged an REer in an FE vs. RE debate at least once.

-Has never posted a flame.

I don't suggest a similar RE forum, as what would be the point? If they have anything they happen, for whatever reason, to discuss among themselves about RE, A: there's plenty of other forums on which to do it, and B: they can do it in the General Discussion area; none of the FEers I've seen thus far would stoop to the level of interrupting their discussion with a mindless flame.

Thanks!


--Chal

111
Flat Earth Q&A / A question
« on: April 16, 2006, 10:31:58 AM »
Quote from: "cheesejoff"
We try to cut down on flames but we can't really read every post. That said, modertors now lock any thread which re-asks questions in the FAQ, which should cut down on flames.


I know, I wasn't directing that toward you guys. You do a fine job.

Quote from: "cheesejoff"
A good suggestion, but it should probably be posted here:

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=40


Will do, thanks! ^^

Quote from: "Unimportant"
I'd hate to think I'd miss out on a discussion with a dedicated FE'er just because 90% of new members can't approach things with anything near an open mind.


Aye, there must be a good way to weed out the flamers so we can still allow folks such as yourself or Knight into the discussions. I'll address that in the suggestions thread.


--Chal

112
Flat Earth Q&A / A question
« on: April 16, 2006, 02:33:54 AM »
Quote from: "cheesejoff"
Ages ago it used to be a completely serious RE vs FE debate, but the FE's ended up leaving.


Can't very well blame them, can you? At least 75% of the posts on this board are anti-FE flames.

I'm probably the only one who actually posts in anyone else's threads, and I'm starting to see why the others don't.

Order of the day for FEers:

[REer starts thread by asking question]

[FEer responds to said question]

[REer flames FEer for daring to answer his "I've got them now!" question]

Honestly, I think one board reserved for FE believers (and mods) would be a good idea. Intelligent replies from people such as Erasmus (or any of the mods) are one thing, but I can think of a good number of things I'd like to discuss with other FEers without the incessant RE flaming that most certainly would invade any such discussion.

--Chal

113
Flat Earth Q&A / Whoever proof-read your FAQ deserves an award
« on: April 15, 2006, 05:48:07 PM »
Quote from: "FEer0101"
I dont read bullshit.

That is all.


Proofreading your own posts must be hell for you.

Quote from: "Unimportant"
Don't ask any more about the speed of light issue until you read this thread:

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1326


Very informative. Thanks!


--Chal

114
Flat Earth Q&A / Planets?
« on: April 15, 2006, 05:41:57 PM »
Let me rephrase: Where in FE does the assumption come from that asserts that Earth is necessarily similar to these planets?

The original poster asked for what FE's beliefs are, and "photographic evidence" is only believed by RE.

115
Flat Earth Q&A / Planets?
« on: April 15, 2006, 05:34:47 PM »
Where does the assumption come from that asserts that Earth is necessarily similar to these planets?

116
Flat Earth Q&A / Lunar Eclipse
« on: April 15, 2006, 05:16:34 PM »
Quote from: "The Pancake"
Oh sorry Chaltier, I forgot to put that I wanted people who can actually think to post here. Thanks.


I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was replying to someone so closed-minded that anyone with an idea contrary to their own is immediately met with ridicule and flaming. All I did was offer a suggestion. If all you ever want in response to your questions is complete agreement to the implied answer, go get a cult.

Quote from: "Erasmus"
Did you know that the moon has distinctive and quite visible -- to the naked eye -- surface features which are present regardless of moon phase and whether or not the moon is eclipsed?


Hm, no I didn't, which certainly refutes that idea. In an effort to save the suggestion, I'll offer that possibly it looks the same from both sides, though in full realization of how unlikely this is, I'll do a bit of research and get back to this one.


--Chal

117
Flat Earth Q&A / Lunar Eclipse
« on: April 15, 2006, 02:35:53 PM »
You assume that the moon's light comes from the sun, which is a part of RE theory.

I would argue that the moon's light is quite independant of the sun, but possibly only exists on one side of it, covering ~60% of the surface, so when the moon is facing away from us, it appears as a lunar eclipse. Same with solar eclipses.


--Chal

118
Flat Earth Q&A / Ways of knowing
« on: April 15, 2006, 02:18:20 PM »
Alright, we've heard the pro-predictive-value science arguments. Seemingly very much opposed to most on this board, I'm going to be arguing for every way of knowing besides predictive-value science, which I hold in the utmost of contempt.

Let's start with faith, shall we?

Faith: [To show] great trust or confidence in something or someone. (Quoted from the Cambridge dictionary, brackets mine.)

Well, to begin, we all have faith to some extent, it's simply what he have faith in that differs. For instance, a Christian may have faith in God to solve their problems, just as many atheists and agnostics put faith into science to solve theirs. So, really, faith cannot be gotten around. Even the most skeptical of scientists must take someone's word for something. To attempt to learn science without taking anyone's word for anything would take far too long, and you'd likely be dead before you could put your then-incredibly-learned mind to good use.

So, who does one put one's faith into? Well, someone one respects, or someone who's proven themself worthy of trust. This differs for everyone; some trust scientists, some trust religious leaders, some trust their friends, etc. For instance, I, for one, hold the civilized men of the classical era (Roman, Greek, pre-Christianity) in the highest of regard, but there's always a bitter taste left in my mouth when the thought of the modern man and how far he's degenerated from these great people comes to mind. So, obviously, I treat any idea presented by men after a certain date with a heavy degree of skepticism, but I'll always treat those of men in what I like to call the Golden Age of Humanity with at least great respect, if not complete agreement.

All this said, however, faith has a major downside: Faith breeds generalization. For instance, let's say someone puts faith into Professor Horfmann Dumpelmanger (example name; not a real person), a scientist, REer, evolutionist, atheist, and what have you, and another puts his into Jesus Christ. Those people will likely have negative feelings toward one another before they even know each other based solely on the person they follow and a generalization held about all such people. Christ's follower would assume that Prof. Dumpelmanger's follower is an evil, heretical man who's sole purpose in life is to destroy all that's good and holy. Prof. Dumpelmanger's follower would think of the Christian as a small-minded sheep who blindly follows a dead guy. I'm not a peace-monger by any means, but nor do I think that such polarization can be a good thing under any circumstances.


Scholasticism/Documentarianism: There's far less to say on this one, as I've already touched on it with faith, and this shares many similarities with faith, as you're putting faith into another person's account of an event. However, there are often no other accounts available, and, unless you're so skeptical that you automatically assume that because a person existed he was an idiot (in which case I feel sorry for you, frankly), these eyewitness accounts are invaluable. I, for one, attempt to take context into account, but when it's not possible to do so, I generally trust such accounts.


Science: Well, as Erasmus has stated, there's two ways to conduct science: Explanatory-value science and predictive-value science.

I subscribe to explanatory-value science, myself. I think that, as usual, Erasmus seems to have described it very well: "[Theory] A [is] better than theory B[,] case that A [explains] more than B per unit complexity." (Brackets mine, mainly changing past to present tense.)

This is the more practical because one always wants the maximum result for the minimum amount of effort, and this method allows you to achieve that. Going much further than explanatory-value science nets you a worse return on the Effort:Results ratio than you'd gotten before you passed that point, and going so far as to get an inefficient return on one's effort is simply impractical.


Lastly, this may be off-topic, but for those with whom I've a standing debate, or anyone who's expecting a reply from me on a topic, a friend of mine has kindly agreed to relieve me of my internet cables (on my request) until I've completed the ridiculous workload assigned to me over the Easter break, and I know he'll comply whether I like it or not. I'm not sure quite when, over the course of the week, this will occur, but I may not reply to anything for a few days when it does, which is why I brought it up.


--Chal

[EDIT: I assumed, in the example comprising the majority of my second paragraph, that it was implied that taking all such things in context regardless of the speaker is, when possible, of course better than blind faith in such accounts. Noting upon rereading said paragraph that the example comes near to implying blind faith, which it's not meant to do, I must add that now.]

119
Flat Earth Q&A / THIS IS A JOKE, RIGHT ? YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY BE SERIOUS
« on: April 14, 2006, 02:41:11 PM »
Talk about a superiority complex. "I can't find everything I wanna know so you have find it for me and put it where I want to read it in the way I want to hear it!"

 :roll:


--Chal

120
Quote from: "Isac_Newton"
Stop playin HALO, get a job, save up, and go traveling this summer, and when you do, just the fact that you get a jet-lag proves that the earth is a sphere and not a flat disc riding on a bull's horn.


The reason I haven't posted here yet is that this hasn't been worthy of a reply, but I must now refer you to the FAQ for this one. Look up time zones.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5