sattelite anyone?

i dont care about abortion personally, its a choice

Um, not in China.  Learn to read.

doppler towers dont have the guts to transmit over such great distances

Explain.

they woould have 2 be huge

Explain.

im talking about pictures of the earth from space, the ones with, ummm, with, i dont know, clouds?

They're not.

how could it be transmitted without huge towers no one has seen

Maybe they're transmitted from huge towers that people have seen.

they would have to be kilometres high, and i beleive there is a post regarding all this so you can stop trying to fight with me

Why would they have to be kilometers high?  Are we still talking about doppler radar?

And really, fighting with you is approximately no effort at all.  It's trying to read your posts that's draining me.

even if i did take the time to anser your stupid little questions, if by some chance you couldnt ask another stupid little question, you would say its part of the goddamn conspiracy

Hmmm, it's almost as though you can't debunk the Flat Earth theory, isn't it?   And as if you've been alienating virtually everyone on this site for no particuar reason...Although I'll admit that there are some gaping holes in the thory, none that you've pointed out, but they're there.

But please, answer his questions, I'm interested in hearing your logic behind your statements, who knows, maybe you're right and we'll all realize that when you explain, in detail, what you mean.

none ive pointed out

ive pointed out pleanty, if you had bothered to read threw all of my posts, before making an accusation, and btw, look what i found

Q: Why is NASA’s space shuttle runway curved?

Q: How does the atmosphere stay on the Earth?

Q: Explain the Coriolis force?

Q: Why does the hull of a ship disappear over the horizon before the mast does?

Q: if the moon is a spotlight, why can i see a "man" in the moon (shadows cast by the sun on the hills and mountains on it) last i checked a light can't contain shadows.

Q: Explain magnetism is there is no South pole.

Q: Explain fully the optical illusion causing sunrises and sunsets.

ive pointed out pleanty, if you had bothered to read threw all of my posts,

Probably you've noticed how I've brutally harassed you in reponse to the majority of your posts.  Probably I read them, or at least, pretended they were written in a language I understood, and struggled to pick out words I recognized.

look what i found

Are you trying to change the subject?

Quote from: "Luke_smith64"

ive pointed out pleanty, if you had bothered to read threw all of my posts,

Probably you've noticed how I've brutally harassed you in reponse to the majority of your posts.  Probably I read them, or at least, pretended they were written in a language I understood, and struggled to pick out words I recognized.

not the ones that you couldnt "handle"

Quote

look what i found

Are you trying to change the subject?

i believe you are the culprate in the changing the subject case, your last posts had nothing to do with the sattelites until i changed it back over, i was using your "unanswered questions" or proof of all the wholes in your theory, knowing you cant answer them

no one is ansering this post, i win

err could i just post that if the world were truely flat, you wouldn't really need a tall tower, just a very powerful one.


anyway even if you did, they could have built one 10 km high in the middle of the north pole... ya think any of us would ever see it?

err could i just post that if the world were truely flat, you wouldn't really need a tall tower, just a very powerful one.


anyway even if you did, they could have built one 10 km high in the middle of the north pole... ya think any of us would ever see it?

yes.... http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/gallery_np.html

the mast is built ontop of the camera ;-)

anyway, they airbrush Jennifer Lopez's ass, they can white out a tower

except thats not the governmont.

are you trying to tell me EVERYONE who goes on an expidition to the northpole is part of the conspiracy?

no one can explain, I win again

If you don't belive in sattelite images, howcome weather forcasters show you the clouds and wind pressue, and predict when, how much, and if it will rain. and if you say that its all just guess, how do they predict hurracanes, thats quite a limb to go on.

So now that you can't in anyway fake these sattelite images, what about the ones showing the earth as ROUND???

Follow the weather closely in your own home area. While it's true that forcasters do predict the weather they are not always right. If fact, if you closely keep track of the stats all across the world, it's remarkably close to only about 65% accuracy. That can be accounted for by a simple guess which would return results close to 50-50, either it will rain or not. The other 15% is the times when they can look out the window and tell at a glance that it will rain or not. The satellite models are made up. And they have weather maps that fit the round earth model. Then they make cloud layouts consistent with real time reports that are gathered. As well as NEXRAD radar.
Oddly enough, the weather people don't even know that they are part of a conspiracy. They have no clue. They are fed weather maps from the National Weather Service. Most map bases are generated by Government agencies like the USGS. (I think that's the agency)

Quote from: "Luke_smith64"

If you don't belive in sattelite images, howcome weather forcasters show you the clouds and wind pressue, and predict when, how much, and if it will rain. and if you say that its all just guess, how do they predict hurracanes, thats quite a limb to go on.

So now that you can't in anyway fake these sattelite images, what about the ones showing the earth as ROUND???

Follow the weather closely in your own home area. While it's true that forcasters do predict the weather they are not always right. If fact, if you closely keep track of the stats all across the world, it's remarkably close to only about 65% accuracy. That can be accounted for by a simple guess which would return results close to 50-50, either it will rain or not. The other 15% is the times when they can look out the window and tell at a glance that it will rain or not. The satellite models are made up. And they have weather maps that fit the round earth model. Then they make cloud layouts consistent with real time reports that are gathered. As well as NEXRAD radar.
Oddly enough, the weather people don't even know that they are part of a conspiracy. They have no clue. They are fed weather maps from the National Weather Service. Most map bases are generated by Government agencies like the USGS. (I think that's the agency)

thats for the future weather predictions, like 5 day forecasts, im tlaking about wuts gonna happen tomorrow, they know that almost certainly, and how do you think they predict possible tornados, or without any injustice, hurricanes?

Please, don't waste your time arguing with these people.  They know the Earth is round.  They're doing this for attention.  Believe me, if there was a million dollar bet on the table and their answer had to be correct to win it, they would say the earth is round.  It's just a pathetic means for attention and to be different.  Pathetic, but true.

It's just a pathetic means for attention and to be different.  Pathetic, but true.

What's true.... that the Earth is flat?

No that the Earth is round, jackass.

Jesus are FE'ers all as dumb as you?

Please, don't waste your time arguing with these people.  They know the Earth is round.  They're doing this for attention.  Believe me, if there was a million dollar bet on the table and their answer had to be correct to win it, they would say the earth is round.  It's just a pathetic means for attention and to be different.  Pathetic, but true.

  DING!!! DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!DING!!!
WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!


It's not really a cry for attention personally. It's more of a plea for people to quit being sheople. If there was a bet on the table for any amount of money and especially a million dollars, I would say that the earth was round (spherical) I had to clarify that because technically the FE model is round. The RE model is spherical.

What this site is really doing is testing your ability to demonstrate your belief that the earth is spherical without the use of outside data... that could possibly be inaccurate.
The poorest proof, I believe, is that of flight. The argument that seems to center on an arguement that so and so was on a flight that flew directly over antarctica. How could you possibly know that. I don't think continents have huge labels stamped on them that you can see as you fly over. And if the pilot told you that's where you were you would, of course, have to take his word for it.

After I figured out what this site was really about I have taken the stance of defending the FE model. It's kinda of challenging and makes you think. You also clearly see how the other side of the arguement (the RE side) is so richly based on what someone else told you.

Try it for a day or so. It's rather enlightening. But in reality, yeah, the earth is spherical.

After I figured out what this site was really about I have taken the stance of defending the FE model. It's kinda of challenging and makes you think. You also clearly see how the other side of the arguement (the RE side) is so richly based on what someone else told you.

Try it for a day or so. It's rather enlightening. But in reality, yeah, the earth is spherical.

And where does the knowledge of the ice wall come from?

For the FE model to be true, it would mean that MILLIONS of people are in on a GLOBAL conspiracy in which they gain nothing from convincing people the Earth is round. No extra money, no extra control, no extra power, nothing.

It's suggesting that millions of scientists are in on it. That they are let in on it, and don't blow the cover off it. That the government, for no reason, selected some citizens back in the late 80s, and put them on a space shuttle they planned to blow up.

It's suggesting that during the famous Space Race, during the Cold War, the Illuminati in control of this conspiracy decided who would be the first to get what/who where. Or maybe the Cold War is part of the conspiracy, too.

Now you're suggesting pilots are lying about taking people to/over Antarctica? And the people who have been to Antarctica are lying about it? The people who lived in my house before me travelled a lot. They had a big map with pushpins marking all of the places they had been to, and we talked about some of their travels (they'd been to dozens of countries and all 7 continents). Now, if the pilot was lying (or, giving some benefit of the doubt, lost), and they never actually visited Antarctica, I'd think they would have noticed since they were flying from Chile to Antarctica. Or maybe you could explain some route from Chile to the North Pole  that's as short as the route to Antarctica.

Or are they in on it, too?

I understand the challenge in trying to scientifically defend something that has been scientifically proven to be false, I understand the exercise in trying to explain things differently, and for the most part you all do a very good job, but when you start saying "Conspiracy!" for most of your answers to people's questions, or "How do you know that? That's right, someone told you.", it doesn't seem very scientific, or logical or realistic, at all... especially when you refer to a 10 foot thick ice wall holding back ALL of Earth's water, that nobody has ever seen, so the only way you could say it exists is if "someone told you."

I understand the challenge in trying to scientifically defend something that has been scientifically proven to be false, I understand the exercise in trying to explain things differently, and for the most part you all do a very good job, but when you start saying "Conspiracy!" for most of your answers to people's questions, or "How do you know that? That's right, someone told you.", it doesn't seem very scientific, or logical or realistic, at all... especially when you refer to a 10 foot thick ice wall holding back ALL of Earth's water, that nobody has ever seen, so the only way you could say it exists is if "someone told you."

To me it's the challenge of trying to defend something that is known to be false. It's kind of like when you were in high school debate class and you were given a topic to defend even though you really didn't believe in the topic you were given.

I'll agree with you. I don't really like the posts that just say "It's part of the conspiracy" I usually try to explain how it fits into the conspiracy if I am going to use that angle.
As far as "someone told you that's the way it is". Well, that's the whole point to this excersise. 700 years ago you would have been told that the earth was flat, you would have been expected to believe it and if you didn't you quite possibly could have been burned at the stake. Today, you are told that the earth is flat and we are expected to believe it.

Touché on the "someone told you about the ice wall".  :wink:   But I don't think that most FE'rs would tell you that it's only 10 feet thick. I have heard 10 miles thick but I think that even that would be pretty thin for there to be expeditions to antarctica. On the picture of the FE model in one of the threads the ice wall looks pretty thick. As compared to known distances of other continents it appears that the ice wall could be hundreds of miles thick.

I tried to use doppler shift in radio theory to A) prove satellites and B) if satellites the earth is round. It actually went pretty well. No one could refute it except to say "Satellites don't exist" which pretty much tells me "You win".

As far as flying over the south pole. Since, in the FE model there is really no "south pole" the flight path could skim along part of the ice wall. That would of course suggest an incompotent pilot but none the less possible.

Think of it this way. What would happen if you were suddenly 700 years back in time and the people there wouldn't believe a photograph (because they had never seen one before) How would you expain to them the world was round? It's really an excersize in creative thinking. Unless you take the conspiracy route with out explaining how it fits in.

Think of it this way. What would happen if you were suddenly 700 years back in time and the people there wouldn't believe a photograph (because they had never seen one before) How would you expain to them the world was round? It's really an excersize in creative thinking. Unless you take the conspiracy route with out explaining how it fits in.

But even 700 years back people knew the Earth was round.

Someone a while back posted Bible passages that were interpreted to say that the Earth was round, but the thread devolved into several pages of flaming and so the passages were never (of what I read) addressed.

Actually, the way the original circumference of the Earth was estimated (which turned out to be very close) would be easy to duplicate for anyone here, and would prove that the Earth was round. I have to run errands, but I'll try to find that when I get back... or someone may find it before I return...

People, as a whole, did not know the earth was round 700 years ago. That's why explorers like Magellan, Christopher Columbus and others had such a hard time. While it's true that the Bible contains scriptures that say the earth is round you have to remember that 700 years ago the Bible was not a common book. It was written in Latin at that point and only church leaders knew how to read it. They told people what to believe. In fact, around that time the church repressed the people so much that you could be burned at the stake for even owning a Bible. It wasn't really until later around the time of King James that the Bible was translated so the common person could read it.