Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.

  • 28 Replies
  • 5860 Views
?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« on: March 17, 2007, 10:56:27 PM »
Note: edited so that hopefully people would stop getting off topic

I've been reading the forums a lot and of all the debate going on, there's one thing that I have yet to see addressed. So I made this topic.

I have noticed that one big argument used by the FE people is that RE'ers have RE theory so strongly implanted into their head from biased government education that they subconsciously skew information and ignore facts in order to maintain their beliefs. I suppose that makes sense, in a way.

(This following paragraph is the whole point of this thread)
However, have the FE'ers ever considered the possibility that they themselves are so hard-set on defending themselves and debunking RE theory that they will go to any length, no matter how far-fetched or ridiculous in order to maintain their views? Far too often I see many intelligent, legitimate questions being met with such responses as, "You're lying" or "You're letting yourself be brainwashed by the government". The very nature of these forums is, supposedly, to spread knowledge of the "truth" and educate ignorant RE'ers. However, far more often the behavior I'm seeing is the internet equivalent of plugging your ears and going, "LALALALALA!" You guys want so badly for your theory to be accepted in the scientific world, yet your behavior is completely unscientific. Science isn't about choosing a viewpoint and defending it to the death, science is about collecting evidence and generating a viewpoint based upon it. You seem to be going about it completely backwards! You all decided that the Earth was flat and then you went out and started looking for evidence that backs you up -- that's not how it works.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2007, 12:00:25 PM by silverhammermba »
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

Franc T., Planar

  • 1051
  • Leader of the Planar Army, Republic of Canada
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2007, 11:01:01 PM »
Show me any evidence of Round Earthism, and I would consider it.
Broadcasting live from the Republic of Canada!
 
They say death and taxes are the only two absolutes. Actually, they're only half right.


*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2007, 11:13:42 PM »
There is a south pole. Magnetism works the same way on the FE as it does on the RE.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

[][][]

  • 554
  • Man of science.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2007, 11:15:50 PM »

Oh and, by the way, I'm an ignorant RE'er if you couldn't tell.


I can tell...
The folly of mistaking a paradox for a discovery, a metaphor for a proof, a torrent of verbiage for a spring of capital truths, and oneself for an oracle, is inborn in us. -Some Frenchy

Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #4 on: March 18, 2007, 04:23:25 AM »
so far all you 3 have done is proven his point by avoiding the issue

no one cares to explain the fundamental properties of how our RE earth works, cuz there is billions of scholarly papers about this, im talking about people, who go to school, they DONT get brainwashed, but learn the proper techniques to gather data and make thier own conclusions, they then go out into the world and research. THEN they put all thier research into papers which go into articles and citations and journals. next time you look up for some little flaw in our RE earth, use google scholar, check libraries and science archives on the internet. wikipedia is not a legitimate source, because anyone (including people just like you, with extremely false outlooks on the world) can put what they want up there.

what we want, is for you to explain how your FE planet works. in fine detail, cuz to m it seems to change everytime someone brings up something. eventualy u are going to have to admit that u cant play around with how the sun moves and how the surface is shaped, something is going to give, and you will realize that you have wasted a giant portion of your life in this false theory

the earth is round, deal with it

?

narcberry

  • 5570
  • Reason > RET
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2007, 05:26:50 PM »
Why does the hull of a ship disappear over the horizon before the mast does?
Light is a wave that is not affected by the dark matter that accelerates the earth upwards. This means that while the earth continues to accelerate up, the light stays on a straight vector. Therefore the light reflected from the hull will intersect with the sea surface before the light reflected from the mast.

How does magnetism work if there is no South pole?
This was explained above.

If the moon is a spotlight, why can I see a "man" in the moon?
I dont understand your question. Do you mean the man as in the imperfection in the spotlight that appears as a man?

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2007, 06:17:01 PM »
In response to the acceleration of the planet distorting the light waves of ships on a horizon, laser pointers can be leveled to face each other miles apart. Using levels (the cool things with bubbles), the "gravity" caused by alleged uniform acceleration would bend both lasers down before reaching each other.

<````````---------_______                           _______---------````````>

However, when performing this experiment, both lasers match each other with no gravity effects. This means that the light can't be affected like you say.  ;)

PS. I am impressed by your ability to come up with such great explanations! ..even if they can be disproved.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2011, 03:49:53 PM by ﮎingulaЯiτy »
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

?

narcberry

  • 5570
  • Reason > RET
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #7 on: March 19, 2007, 06:23:25 PM »
Lasers consist of light waves that are not only parrallel but their nodes are synchronous. Due to this, the light as a whole will continue to be "in-sync" even after refraction atop the ocean surface. This allows lasers to literally skip along the top of the surface of the ocean. Normal light will not do this. Which is no surprise that they did not perform this experiment with normal light, and I'd wager they also got government funding.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #8 on: March 19, 2007, 06:53:57 PM »
why exactly does light continue "in-sync" again? Lasers are normal light too. Besides, it was not the government that did this experiment. Myself, among others applied this starting back with the time the speed of light was being measured. "Normal" light was shown onto an rotating octagonal mirror which was cast miles away and reflected back to another side of this mirror. Then. the light would bounce off. When the exact right time passed between rotations, the light would be directed at the right angle to hit a light sensor. Thus with the time and distance, speed was found. According to these conditions, it would supposedly act like the ship light. However, it was precisely used over exhaustive distance. HMMM.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

?

narcberry

  • 5570
  • Reason > RET
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #9 on: March 19, 2007, 06:57:56 PM »
why exactly does light continue "in-sync" again? Lasers are normal light too. Besides, it was not the government that did this experiment. Myself, among others applied this starting back with the time the speed of light was being measured. "Normal" light was shown onto an rotating octagonal mirror which was cast miles away and reflected back to another side of this mirror. Then. the light would bounce off. When the exact right time passed between rotations, the light would be directed at the right angle to hit a light sensor. Thus with the time and distance, speed was found. According to these conditions, it would supposedly act like the ship light. However, it was precisely used over exhaustive distance. HMMM.

A laser in wave form:
This cohesion between waves provides a rigidity that allows what was above described.

And as far as your personal studies, might I ask who funded them?

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #10 on: March 19, 2007, 08:02:49 PM »
In response to the acceleration of the planet distorting the light waves of ships on a horizon, laser pointers can be leveled to face each other miles apart. Using levels (the cool things with bubbles), the "gravity" caused by alleged uniform acceleration would bend both lasers down before reaching each other.

<````````---------_______                           _______---------````````>

However, when performing this experiment, both lasers match each other with no gravity effects. This means that the light can't be affected like you say. HAHAHA.  ;)

PS. I am impressed by your ability to come up with such great explanations! ..even if they can be disproved.
Wait.  Are you saying that light is not affected by 'gravity'?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #11 on: March 19, 2007, 08:51:36 PM »
Wow, way to completely ignore the whole point of my post. All of you FE'ers are just focusing on those last three unanswered questions which are, by the way, not my own. They're from the very FAQ that one of your moderators wrote for the forum. So long as you guys keep blowing off legitimate questions and failing to question your own motives for your staunch FEism, no one is going to take you seriously.

And the weak responses that you made to those last three questions have serious holes in them.

Why does the hull of a ship disappear over the horizon before the mast does?
Light is a wave that is not affected by the dark matter that accelerates the earth upwards. This means that while the earth continues to accelerate up, the light stays on a straight vector. Therefore the light reflected from the hull will intersect with the sea surface before the light reflected from the mast.

If what you say is true, then something is up. Light travels at a constant velocity in a vacuum and it's velocity is only mildly affected by changing mediums. If the Earth is accelerating upward at 9.8m/s^2 (because there's no such thing as gravity, right?) and light is unaffected by this acceleration, then I suppose it makes sense that light waves would "run into" the Earth before reaching distant objects. However, since the Earth is accelerating and light is not, this would mean that the distance to the "horizon" would be constantly decreasing! Let's suppose that the Earth was created exactly when I was born. The entire disk-shaped world was created at that very moment and immediately began accelerating from an initial velocity of 0 at 9.8m/s^2. Within the 568,024,668 seconds that the Earth has existed since then, it would have taken on a velocity of about 5,566,641,746 m/s. That means that if I were to stand up and look around, the light bouncing off an object 10cm away from my eyes would hit my feet. Unfortunately for you, the Earth was not created exactly when I was born (since I'm pretty sure some of you FE'ers are older than me). So basically, light must behave incredibly differently from how we currently think it does in order for your theory to make sense. Think up a better solution.
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #12 on: March 19, 2007, 08:59:16 PM »
The velocity of the earth makes no difference to the light.  It's only the acceleration.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #13 on: March 19, 2007, 09:03:30 PM »
According to these conditions, it would supposedly act like the ship light. However, it was precisely used over exhaustive distance. HMMM.
I don't understand your point.  And what is "the ship light"?  What is "it" in the second quoted sentence?  HMMM is right.

However, when performing this experiment, both lasers match each other with no gravity effects. This means that the light can't be affected like you say. HAHAHA.  ;)

It is clear from your claimed results that the Earth is flat and light is not appreciably effected by Earth's acceleration.  If any two tangent lines on a surface are colinear then the surface is flat. 

And back to the topic: Silverhammermba, have you read anything in the "information repository" or Earth: Not a Globe? 

Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #14 on: March 20, 2007, 02:45:32 AM »
i have a question, how is the earth accelerating? i mean for something to move at a constant speed through space makes sense, but for something to accelerate it needs an unbalanced force acting on it... so where does this force come from? plz explain in great detail as i am unaware of any unkown FE forces you guys make up to complet your fe model

?

narcberry

  • 5570
  • Reason > RET
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #15 on: March 21, 2007, 08:52:41 AM »
Dont think of it as objects accelerating up, but rather the void falling down.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #16 on: March 21, 2007, 10:46:22 AM »
i have a question, how is the earth accelerating? i mean for something to move at a constant speed through space makes sense, but for something to accelerate it needs an unbalanced force acting on it... so where does this force come from? plz explain in great detail as i am unaware of any unkown FE forces you guys make up to complet your fe model
The mechanism is unknown.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #17 on: March 21, 2007, 12:12:03 PM »
Quote
The velocity of the earth makes no difference to the light.  It's only the acceleration.

Damn... I just thought about that and it works.  The light is started going up at the velocity the earth was at when the light was produced.  Then the light is unaffected by the acceleration upwards, and so it goes down, but light travels so fast that this is hardly noticable.

But what's funny is that the speed of light is so great, and the effect of gravity so unnoticable, that this would mean we never see a hull disappear beneath the horizon, and would see the "shadow of air" or whatever engulf the ship before we saw it's hull disappear.  Either the whole idea of the hull disappearing first is a government lie, or there's something else affecting it.

Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #18 on: March 21, 2007, 06:06:00 PM »
i have a question, how is the earth accelerating? i mean for something to move at a constant speed through space makes sense, but for something to accelerate it needs an unbalanced force acting on it... so where does this force come from? plz explain in great detail as i am unaware of any unkown FE forces you guys make up to complet your fe model

It's not.
[size=24]TIME IS CUBIC[/size]

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2007, 11:23:30 PM »
The velocity of the earth makes no difference to the light.  It's only the acceleration.

But...

Light is a wave that is not affected by the dark matter that accelerates the earth upwards.

So light is not affected by the acceleration nor the velocity of the Earth? Doesn't that mean we should not be seeing any horizon effect?

Narcberry's explanation made perfect sense up until you consider that light does not accelerate like matter does. Your explanation, TheEngineer, puts us back at square 1.
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #20 on: March 22, 2007, 11:36:25 PM »
Explanation of what?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2007, 10:06:48 AM »
In response to the acceleration of the planet distorting the light waves of ships on a horizon, laser pointers can be leveled to face each other miles apart. Using levels (the cool things with bubbles), the "gravity" caused by alleged uniform acceleration would bend both lasers down before reaching each other.

<````````---------_______                           _______---------````````>

However, when performing this experiment, both lasers match each other with no gravity effects. This means that the light can't be affected like you say. HAHAHA.  ;)

PS. I am impressed by your ability to come up with such great explanations! ..even if they can be disproved.
Wait.  Are you saying that light is not affected by 'gravity'?

Perhaps I should clarify. It would be silly to say that gravity doesn't affect light. Black holes for instance would be a nice example. When I say the light matches up perfectly, I mean so close that  the naked eye can't tell. Gravity does in fact affect light but this goes to show that it can't do it on a scale that warps the appearance of the ocean making it look curved.
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #22 on: April 02, 2007, 11:06:06 AM »
There is a south pole. Magnetism works the same way on the FE as it does on the RE.
OOHH, I missed this. So you are saying that the FE also has a rotating molten iron core creating the magnetic field?

?

silverhammermba

  • 172
  • Anger makes me debate. Debating makes me angry.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2007, 11:28:43 AM »
Of course there's no molten core in the FE model. They just don't know what causes the magnetic field yet, so it's a perfectly legitimate theory!
Quote from: Kasroa
Tom usually says at this point that people have seen the ice-wall. It is the Ross Ice Shelf. That usually kills the conversation by the power of sheer bull-shit alone.

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2007, 11:40:43 AM »
Of course there's no molten core in the FE model.

I don't remember ever hearing this.  A proponent of this theory would be hard pressed to explain away Hawaii. 

*

wgzero

  • 78
  • slayer of Bright Theist
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #25 on: April 02, 2007, 05:04:39 PM »
i just saw this thread and i'd like to say light is affected by the theoretical force of gravity. An accelerating object should have any effect on it. Third of all, if it did, then for light to be passed by the earth at the so-called line of horizon, the earth would have to be accelerating at hundreds of g's, not one. if you want to discuss advanced (or even any) theories about light, you should at least read up about what you are talking about (i.e. general relativity, quantum electrodynamics; theories which have been shown to work).
I'm thinking about signing my first name as lexluther instead of alex...


Political Compass: (-2.25, -4.92)

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #26 on: April 02, 2007, 05:20:44 PM »
Us actual FE'ers never claimed what you claim we do.  That was a theory put forth by someone who is not a FE'er, or at least someone who is a poor FE'er.


BTW, gravity does not exist.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

wgzero

  • 78
  • slayer of Bright Theist
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #27 on: April 02, 2007, 05:27:33 PM »
Ah. Unrelated, but what is the FE explanation for the force (or at least observable acceleration) between two objects.
I'm thinking about signing my first name as lexluther instead of alex...


Political Compass: (-2.25, -4.92)

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Something that I don't think has been discussed yet.
« Reply #28 on: April 02, 2007, 06:10:32 PM »
Ah. Unrelated, but what is the FE explanation for the force (or at least observable acceleration) between two objects.
Either actual acceleration or the deformation of space.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson