at the end of the day...

I said reasons for my beliefe...not evidence. I was moaning at you for reasons for you belief instead of refering to Bishop.

That's why I mention out towards sea. There's nothing there. So what's it facing that why for then?

I don't quite see the same affect when the moon is around the horizon though. Only works with ships does it?

I'm referring to this:

I said earlier that I can produce evidence for my own belief without the help others.

Apparently you've claimed it more than once.

The moon doesn't disappear from the bottom up at the horizon?  Are you feeling ok?

Quote from: edlloyd on December 02, 2007, 12:24:13 PM

I said reasons for my beliefe...not evidence. I was moaning at you for reasons for you belief instead of refering to Bishop.

That's why I mention out towards sea. There's nothing there. So what's it facing that why for then?

I don't quite see the same affect when the moon is around the horizon though. Only works with ships does it?

I'm referring to this:

Quote from: edlloyd on December 02, 2007, 11:11:51 AM

I said earlier that I can produce evidence for my own belief without the help others.

Apparently you've claimed it more than once.

The moon doesn't disappear from the bottom up at the horizon?  Are you feeling ok?

That is the evidence for MY belief.

Didn't say it doesn't disappear. That example is to point out that it doesn't distort like that of a ship. As u say...try reading.

That is the evidence for MY belief.

But that's not producing evidence for your own belief without the help of others.  Can't you do that like you claimed?  Or are you just going to claim that people telling you they've put satellites in the sky, and a ship mysteriously disappearing below the horizon is evidence enough (which isn't even what you claimed you would provide) for you to believe the earth is round?
 

Didn't say it doesn't disappear. That example is to point out that it doesn't distort like that of a ship. As u say...try reading.

Distort?  Are we talking about atmospheric distortion now?  Or are we talking about the ship disappearing from the bottom up?  Make up your mind.

Quote from: edlloyd on December 02, 2007, 12:36:00 PM

That is the evidence for MY belief.

But that's not producing evidence for your own belief without the help of others.  Can't you do that like you claimed?  Or are you just going to claim that people telling you they've put satellites in the sky, and a ship mysteriously disappearing below the horizon is evidence enough (which isn't even what you claimed you would provide) for you to believe the earth is round?
 

Quote from: edlloyd on December 02, 2007, 12:36:00 PM

Didn't say it doesn't disappear. That example is to point out that it doesn't distort like that of a ship. As u say...try reading.

Distort?  Are we talking about atmospheric distortion now?  Or are we talking about the ship disappearing from the bottom up?  Make up your mind.

Semantics..whatever.

Opp...don't forget the government conspiracy I mentioned as well. Seems more than you mate. Which you seem to of ignored.

If it was an optical illusion of the ship, it would be distortion would it not? Same difference.

Opp...don't forget the government conspiracy I mentioned as well. Seems more than you mate. Which you seem to of ignored.

What?

If it was an optical illusion of the ship, it would be distortion would it not? Same difference.

It doesn't need to be distorted for the optical illusion to work.  You don't see the works of magicians distorting.

"Tom bishop says it best"?

"it looks round to me"
"read robotham"
"conspiracy"

that's ALL tom has ever said. and that's the BEST FE can do?


oh, by the way, magicians take advantage of the angle from seats to the stage. someone peeking from backstage would not be fooled!

"Tom bishop says it best"?

"it looks round to me"
"read robotham"
"conspiracy"

that's ALL tom has ever said.

BS.  He's actually given very detailed explanations of his, erm, theories, over and over again, and you need to get on the ADD drugs.

oh, yes: one theory for gravity, a DIFFERENT theory for lunar phases that CONTRADICTS the first theory, a third theory for sunrise and sunset that contradicts BOTH, and so on.

some of his answers almost make sense by themselves, but if you try to put them together, it's an incoherent mess!

check my other thread, "observations and explanations"

DIFFERENT CONTRADICTS BOTH

Oh, Tom Bishop says it best   If you deny that you deny life.

i still havnt got any reply on why if this theory has "proof" it isnt accepted by the scientific community yet RET that dose have proof is accepted??

i still havnt got any reply on why if this theory has "proof" it isnt accepted by the scientific community yet RET that dose have proof is accepted??

RE does not have experimental evidence which confirms that the earth is a globe. The only thing RE has is a series of observations and interpretations; something FE easily matches.

The reason why FE isn't accepted by the Scientific Community is because most scientists follow media hype like dogs to the whistle.

Quote from: tommo on December 03, 2007, 09:49:35 AM

i still havnt got any reply on why if this theory has "proof" it isnt accepted by the scientific community yet RET that dose have proof is accepted??

Why would the Scientific Community consider accepting FE Theory when they've been conditioned against it since birth?

Unlike you, people can be open minded to legitimate evidence.

The reason why FE isn't accepted by the Scientific Community is because most scientists follow media hype like a dog to the whistle.

i was expecting that. and im really sure scientists when at a debate or university or what ever they do base there theory's on the news . i was really expecting something better after all the hype you got to having a good answer for this.

also alot of the worlds theory's were bases before "media hype" of today

RE does not have experimental evidence which confirms that the earth is a globe

to name 1 ;

"Contrary to what most people think, the Earth was known to be spherical in ancient times. The ancient Greeks even calculated its circumference with surprising accuracy"

Quote from: Tom Bishop on December 03, 2007, 09:52:08 AM

RE does not have experimental evidence which confirms that the earth is a globe

to name 1 ;

"Contrary to what most people think, the Earth was known to be spherical in ancient times. The ancient Greeks even calculated its circumference with surprising accuracy"

Like Aristotle and Ptolemy?

Like Aristotle and Ptolemy?

i don't know , never heard of em to be honest , just tried to find a quick source that RE has done experiments.