How did the Earth get flat?

How did the earth get flat?
I ask you how did the earth get round? it began that way

fag

I think I have come up with a pretty good theory about how the Earth came to be flat yet everything else of similar size came to be spherical.

if FE believes the big bang, that means they must believe that explosions cause things to go in all directions

so if things go everywhere, there is no such thing as up

so how are we being "pushed up"??

also, the explosions must have come from a pressure build up or chemical inbalances (ie a natural explosion) so you cannot disprove that there arn't things "below us" and therefor in space, there is no such thing as up.

and seeing as space is pretty much empty space (yes empty space does exists, because u can make vaccum sealed things where all air was taken out) that means there is nothin to push against, therefore the gases and everything else cannot be held down

if the planet is travelling at a constant speed, we too must travel at that speed (no friction in space so it cannot be disproved). so we are travelling same rate as the planet. there are no forces holding us down because to be held down, we'd need to be pushing against something (which is wat FE says we are doing) so technically, we would just float away according to FE principles

if FE believes the big bang, that means they must believe that explosions cause things to go in all directions

For the most part, yes.

so if things go everywhere, there is no such thing as up

Sure there is.  It's that way *points up*.

so how are we being "pushed up"HuhHuh??

That's the direction we have defined as up.

you cannot disprove that there arn't things "below us" and therefor in space, there is no such thing as up.

If there is no such thing as up, how can there be a below?

if the planet is travelling at a constant speed, we too must travel at that speed (no friction in space so it cannot be disproved). so we are travelling same rate as the planet. there are no forces holding us down because to be held down, we'd need to be pushing against something (which is wat FE says we are doing) so technically, we would just float away according to FE principles

The earth is accelerating, not traveling at a constant velocity.

 

Quote from: self on March 08, 2007, 10:37:20 AM

if FE believes the big bang, that means they must believe that explosions cause things to go in all directions

For the most part, yes.

Quote

so if things go everywhere, there is no such thing as up

Sure there is.  It's that way *points up*.

Quote

so how are we being "pushed up"HuhHuh??

That's the direction we have defined as up.

Quote

you cannot disprove that there arn't things "below us" and therefor in space, there is no such thing as up.

If there is no such thing as up, how can there be a below?

Quote

if the planet is travelling at a constant speed, we too must travel at that speed (no friction in space so it cannot be disproved). so we are travelling same rate as the planet. there are no forces holding us down because to be held down, we'd need to be pushing against something (which is wat FE says we are doing) so technically, we would just float away according to FE principles

The earth is accelerating, not traveling at a constant velocity.

your logic is still flawed

as a perspective individual, we have a direction. but in the terms of space. directions are impossible because there is nothin to catalogue a direction

we could be travelling down for all you know. it cannot be proved

there is such thing as below even when a direction cannot be initiated. "below" would concern what is behind us as we travel in a certain direction

even if we are accelerating, the faster we go, the more force (if there is one) would be evident on the planet. think of an elevator, the faster u go "up", the more the pull occurs towards the ground object

if we are constantly accelerating and the this forces us to stay on the planet, we would inevitably be crush extremely quickly

Aww, but Tom is so (in a bad way)awesome.

wtf is this guy your god or something ? what about hte thousands, MILLIONS, BILLLLLIONS of ppl that believe the earth is round and dont even give it a second thought ? you kno why, because it's  well known fact that the earth is round and no one is even worried about people THINKING the earth is flat .. it's not because of a government conspiracy and whatever this tom guy has to say about it cant change the fact the earth is indeed round, that centrifical force exists, that gravity is simply because of the mass of the planet and not because of some retard theory that we're moving upwards

The earth became flat through rotational forces and sheers.

WHHATAT !?? LOL the earth became ROUND because of rotational forces and i dont evne kno what sheers are ... your theory needs extreme amounts of work

if we are constantly accelerating and the this forces us to stay on the planet, we would inevitably be crush extremely quickly

WE DON'T FEEL VELOCITY.  If the acceleration is constant, that is all the force we will feel!

Quote from: self on March 08, 2007, 10:06:44 PM

if we are constantly accelerating and the this forces us to stay on the planet, we would inevitably be crush extremely quickly

WE DON'T FEEL VELOCITY.  If the acceleration is constant, that is all the force we will feel!

wow. you don't know how to read do u???

do u actually understand english?

i just explained this to an 11 year old and he knew what i meant

That 11 year old apparently understands physics better than you.  Maybe you should stick will psychology, it seems to be more your speed.

actually

it show he understands it better than u do mate

don't quit your day job

btw. are you some fat dungeons and dragons nerd thats still a virgin???

the FE people seem that type

you know, the geeks in school who no-one likes so they think "yay, lets not conform"

sorry i get saracastic. after all, i am british 

don't quit your day job

My day job requires that I know physics.

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:38:52 AM

don't quit your day job

My day job requires that I know physics.

wow

how have u not been fired?

do your colleagues laugh at you when you say the earth is flat?

cus i know round most places, you'd be a very lonely person at work

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 09, 2007, 12:42:59 AM

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:38:52 AM

don't quit your day job

My day job requires that I know physics.

wow

how have u not been fired?

Perhaps because I know physics.

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:49:59 AM

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 09, 2007, 12:42:59 AM

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:38:52 AM

don't quit your day job

My day job requires that I know physics.

wow

how have u not been fired?

Perhaps because I know physics.

haha i love how you avoided the loner bit

No, but seriously, "self." You're wrong. We don't feel velocity.

~D-Draw

haha i love how you avoided the loner bit

Yea, ad hominem FTW. 

we dont feel velocity but we feel acceleration, sit in a car and start to accelerate, you will feel a force but if you stop accelerating this force wont affect you. Its a simple formula. F=m*a

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:52:16 AM

haha i love how you avoided the loner bit

Yea, ad hominem FTW. 

Thats not an Ad Hominem, it would have been if he had said "You're wrong because you're a loner," but instead he essentially said, "You're wrong, and you're a loner"

Yes, thereby trying to discredit him. It doesn't have to follow a "you suck so you're wrong" formula. Any personal attack which is unrelated to the issue being debated is an 'ad hominem' attack. Also, this argument is two years old.

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:38:52 AM

don't quit your day job

My day job requires that I know physics.

Yeah.. he *snicker*... stacks *giggle*...

oh wait. Engy's right. deldeldeldeldel

"self" close your eyes when you're in a car next. When travelling at a fixed speed, try and see if you can tell if you're mving or not. Probably not, and that's what causes travel sickness. (world moving outside, guts say not moving inside)

The big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This caused the UA to develop;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

if FE believes the big bang, that means they must believe that explosions cause things to go in all directions

How does this even follow?  The big bang is not an explosion.

The big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This caused the UA to develop;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

If you want to disregard inertia - but.. you're also disregarding, that a mass which is accelerating near to the speed of light (and i think noone of you FEers will doubt that we're almost at the speed of light after a few billion years when accelerating with 9,80665 m/s?) will need more, more and even more Force to keep that acceleration because mass increases (in square i think) to speed..

Which would mean, that the "Dark Force" or whatever is also increasing - since billions of years.. yay! i found a perpetuum mobile!

p.s.: oh: and the big bang was a rapid expansion (look up, what a rapid expansion is...)

Quote from: Mr. Davis on March 03, 2009, 09:18:03 AM

The big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This caused the UA to develop;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

If you want to disregard inertia - but.. you're also disregarding, that a mass which is accelerating near to the speed of light (and i think noone of you FEers will doubt that we're almost at the speed of light after a few billion years when accelerating with 9,80665 m/s?) will need more, more and even more Force to keep that acceleration because mass increases (in square i think) to speed..

Which would mean, that the "Dark Force" or whatever is also increasing - since billions of years.. yay! i found a perpetuum mobile!

p.s.: oh: and the big bang was a rapid expansion (look up, what a rapid expansion is...)

Much like how in the RE the acceleration caused by expansion is increasing?

Quote from: gregg on March 03, 2009, 09:49:32 AM

Quote from: Mr. Davis on March 03, 2009, 09:18:03 AM

The big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This caused the UA to develop;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

If you want to disregard inertia - but.. you're also disregarding, that a mass which is accelerating near to the speed of light (and i think noone of you FEers will doubt that we're almost at the speed of light after a few billion years when accelerating with 9,80665 m/s?) will need more, more and even more Force to keep that acceleration because mass increases (in square i think) to speed..

Which would mean, that the "Dark Force" or whatever is also increasing - since billions of years.. yay! i found a perpetuum mobile!

p.s.: oh: and the big bang was a rapid expansion (look up, what a rapid expansion is...)

Much like how in the RE the acceleration caused by expansion is increasing?

I must admit that I have no clue what you're talking about - I don't know anything of an increasing acceleration - hey, I dont even know that the speed at which the solar systems are departing is increasing - why should it?

The big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This caused the UA to develop;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

You accept evidence of the big bang (forwarded by NASA astronomers) yet chose to ignore the accompanying proposal that the big bang was omnidirectional.

This isn't pick and mix you know.

How did the Earth get flat?
How thick is the Earth then?

God made it flat, when he created Earth, animals, dinosaur fossils, the sun and the moon (which are round) and the rest of the universe 7000 years ago.

Quote from: Mr. Davis on March 03, 2009, 09:18:03 AM

The big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This caused the UA to develop;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

You accept evidence of the big bang (forwarded by NASA astronomers) yet chose to ignore the accompanying proposal that the big bang was omnidirectional.

This isn't pick and mix you know.

Really, whether it was omnidirectional or not is irrelevant since we can only see upwards.  However, it is a pick and mix;  NASA is notorious for threading their lies with truth.  One has to be careful what you believe when you listen to NASA.