Points where FET and RET differ?

What is something that FET theory predicts that RET doesn't predict or vice versa?

One way of bringing more confirmation to your theory is to set up some experiment to test a prediction made by your theory. 

I've read of one experiment on this website that supposedly proved that the Moon was an independent light source.  The problem is, the results were consistent with predictions from RET and FET.   

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

I believe he asked for the answers to be sent via pm to him.

Quote from: Lorddave on April 26, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

I believe he asked for the answers to be sent via pm to him.

he did but that didn't stop you and Ben Franklin. But why don't you make a thread asking for the same information posted publically?

Quote from: John Davis on April 26, 2010, 10:21:50 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 26, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

I believe he asked for the answers to be sent via pm to him.

he did but that didn't stop you and Ben Franklin. But why don't you make a thread asking for the same information posted publically?

Its not something I'm interested it.  I'm sure he will do a fine job compiling the information and releasing it when its done.

Quote from: Lorddave on April 27, 2010, 04:09:11 AM

Quote from: John Davis on April 26, 2010, 10:21:50 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 26, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

I believe he asked for the answers to be sent via pm to him.

he did but that didn't stop you and Ben Franklin. But why don't you make a thread asking for the same information posted publically?

Its not something I'm interested it.  I'm sure he will do a fine job compiling the information and releasing it when its done.

Why aren't you?
Are you saying that you're not interested in pointing out where RET has holes? 
That seems oddly suspicious to me.  It makes me think that you don't believe RET has any holes in it.  Especially considering that your contribution was "things that fall from the sky that can't be explained" which doesn't have very much to do with the shape of the planet.

Quote from: John Davis on April 27, 2010, 07:52:28 AM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 27, 2010, 04:09:11 AM

Quote from: John Davis on April 26, 2010, 10:21:50 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 26, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

I believe he asked for the answers to be sent via pm to him.

he did but that didn't stop you and Ben Franklin. But why don't you make a thread asking for the same information posted publically?

Its not something I'm interested it.  I'm sure he will do a fine job compiling the information and releasing it when its done.

Why aren't you?
Are you saying that you're not interested in pointing out where RET has holes? 
That seems oddly suspicious to me.  It makes me think that you don't believe RET has any holes in it.  Especially considering that your contribution was "things that fall from the sky that can't be explained" which doesn't have very much to do with the shape of the planet.

I'm not interested in compiling a list for just the forums.  A list, which I'm pretty sure, has already been compiled a few times in the past.  I've got other things to work on flat earth wise and work wise.

If I get some freetime maybe I'll throw something together.

Quote from: Lorddave on April 27, 2010, 12:06:20 PM

Quote from: John Davis on April 27, 2010, 07:52:28 AM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 27, 2010, 04:09:11 AM

Quote from: John Davis on April 26, 2010, 10:21:50 PM

Quote from: Lorddave on April 26, 2010, 07:51:20 PM

There was a thread started on this in the Believers section.

I believe it got two response:

Not enough Evidence and strange things that fall from the sky.

In other words: Everything in Round Earth Theory makes sense and there are no holes in it according to Flat Earthers.

I believe he asked for the answers to be sent via pm to him.

he did but that didn't stop you and Ben Franklin. But why don't you make a thread asking for the same information posted publically?

Its not something I'm interested it.  I'm sure he will do a fine job compiling the information and releasing it when its done.

Why aren't you?
Are you saying that you're not interested in pointing out where RET has holes? 
That seems oddly suspicious to me.  It makes me think that you don't believe RET has any holes in it.  Especially considering that your contribution was "things that fall from the sky that can't be explained" which doesn't have very much to do with the shape of the planet.

I'm not interested in compiling a list for just the forums.  A list, which I'm pretty sure, has already been compiled a few times in the past.  I've got other things to work on flat earth wise and work wise.

If I get some freetime maybe I'll throw something together.

Fair enough.
Then I shall.  You may copy the list once it's done.

That's not really what I meant.  I was trying to come up with some experiment that could be performed.

For example, I pointed out a few weeks ago that FET and RET have different answers to the cannon ball problem.  A person is standing on top of a tall tower.  He has a cannon leveled perfectly parallel to the ground.  He fires a ball out of the cannon and drops a ball at the same time.  Which ball will hit the ground first?  FET will tell you that both balls will hit the ground at the same time, but RET says that the dropped ball will hit first(the fired ball will fall around the Earth a little bit before hitting it, much like a satellite).  The problem is, this experiment requires a ridiculous amount of precision to do correctly.

What is some other prediction that is different in FET and RET that can be tested.