THE BIG QUESTION

  • 53 Replies
  • 10378 Views
?

euanlikestheequator

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #30 on: March 20, 2007, 03:50:11 PM »


This leads me to the discussion, if man installed the sun in the sky, (ignoring the fact that it is depicted in ancient drawings) where did man come from? Man eats plants, plants photosynthesize from the sun. If there was no sun, man would never have the chance to trick the rest of mankind with a conspiracy that makes no sense for no apparent benefit.

there, solid evidence thankyou L0gic

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #31 on: March 20, 2007, 05:03:54 PM »
Who is arguing that man in fact did construct the sun? 

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #32 on: March 20, 2007, 05:06:26 PM »
Back to a previous subject... carbon dioxide is acts much like a sponge allowing radiation of sorts to be absorbed in the atmosphere. The side by which it approaches it is irrelevant for the fact that it still traps the heat on Earth. However, if we redefine the properties or carbon dioxide, this can be used to show FE has an advantage of evidence.  ::) This can't be used as evidence since carbon dioxide doesn't act like a barrier!
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.

?

Vladdie

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #33 on: March 20, 2007, 11:08:42 PM »
Quote from: Vladdie on Today at 04:22:29 AM
How does a piston ‘know’ its supposed to go up and down?
Because it is connected to a connecting rod.
*Clapping hands* Ok does a able know when I put a book on top of it? A lifeless object can’t know!

Quote
Does a magnet work in vacuum? What mediating particles cause magnets to attract or repel each other?
Virtual photons. *Clapping again* Did you bother to read on? “…is it so far fetched to your mind that gravity can work by a similar field effect…”

Evil Toothpaste “There are plenty of ways to falsify the FE model.  All of them involve understanding the criteria for a belief in the flat Earth first.  Understanding this criteria takes a lot of thinking about what it is you are reading . . . and also it takes a lot of reading.  Or, it might just take a certain level of intelligence (though I haven not put together any numbers on that).”

Wow, I knew all along that fe’rs think they are just so very, very smart that they do not fall for the round earth “lies”. Oh my, you are so smart! Why is it then that this conspiracy as the mainstay of the flat earth belief. Are you oblivious to the fact that your criteria is wholly flawed. You need to create an alternate universe for flat earth to work.

Alas you did not say what would convince you of a round earth you merely said that the faults can only be seen once you have read a vast amount of (ancient) documentation. Nice but ultimately anything that your belief does not agree with is blamed on some error, illusion or ‘the conspiracy’, prove me wrong. Think about it, if you remove the conspiracy your argument falls flat on it’s face, you have isolated yourself from facts, there is a wealth of tangible evidence out there but you have to believe beyond belief that it all is faked. This way only a select few are smart enough to know what you know and see what you see, oh how special you are.

You do realize that there is no proof for your conspiracy except that you want to believe the earth is flat. Last time I checked want did not equal fact. “I want to have 6 arms!”…*crickets*… No didn’t happen, why should what you want be different, somehow actualised by your desires?

I urge each and every fe’r to re-evaluate the supporting evidence for it and realistically consider the plausibility of such a conspiracy. Above all honestly judge for yourself why you personally hold this conspiracy as fact and whether your version of this conspiracy is based on reasonable facts.

If you can honestly do this and still be of the opinion that the earth is flat, I invite you to tell me what evidence would convince you that the conspiracy does not exist. Should you find that there is no such evidence it is clear that flat earth “theory” is not a theory but rather a belief, “the cult of the flat earth conspiracy” you are allowed such beliefs, by all means go ahead. However then you unavoidably have to admit that it is unscientific and not fact based, and face the inevitable conclusion that you have isolated yourself so far form science that facts will not likely bring you back to reason. 

?

qwerty1297

  • 43
  • lol tree!
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #34 on: March 21, 2007, 02:27:25 PM »
y would the government try to keep it a secret????????? its not lke there is anything wrong with a flat eaarth...IF THERE WAS ONE!  i have no idea who started this site but whoever did is wasting a llllllooooooooootttttttttt of time with their lives.  i feel sorry for them

*

EvilToothpaste

  • 2461
  • The Reverse Engineer
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #35 on: March 21, 2007, 05:56:51 PM »
Easy on the sarcasm!  I'm not smart; I just like to read a lot. 

The mainstay of flat Earth is that of personal experience, not word of mouth.  The criteria is not flawed; it's just different from that which constitutes your beliefs.  This wealth of "facts" you speak of is a matter of perspective.  They are really a wealth of assertions with no empirical proof. 

If NASA told me the Earth was flat, then I would believe the conspiracy was not real. 

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #36 on: March 21, 2007, 06:07:49 PM »
It is heating the polar ice caps...but is also having other affecting in other places of the world...not the whole world is warming up.

All effects stem from a 'global warming'. Without the warming, all other symptoms dissappear.

GLOBAL WARMING IS LIE. JESUS CHRIST GOD IS LIE. FE IS PROOF.
[size=24]TIME IS CUBIC[/size]

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #37 on: March 21, 2007, 07:21:54 PM »
If you follow the Theory of Spacetime...
(Gravity is not a force. This is almost certain, regardless of whether or not the Theory of Spacetime is true.)

Mass warps the universe by space and time. Imagine the universe like a giant cloth, pulled taught. Throw a ball in the middle of the cloth, and it makes a dent. If you roll a smaller ball near it, that smaller ball will curve towards the larger one, if mass also corresponds to size, that is. This is an example of how gravity works. It requires no energy.

So how do you reconcile that view with quantum mechanics? If you have been able to do that, you are way ahead of all of the physicists working in that field today.

?

Vladdie

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #38 on: March 21, 2007, 09:48:38 PM »
Wonderful! “They are really a wealth of assertions with no empirical proof.” GPS, Spy satelites, space probes, Niel Armstrong? Trans and circumnavigating journeys of Antarctica. Oh wait, they don’t exist! its all part of the conspiracy and optical or magnetic illusions!

“This wealth of "facts" you speak of is a matter of perspective.” *Sarcasm alert!* Would this be the same perspective you have when you leave the earth behind and orbit around it? *snickers* Oh! Yuri you vodka drinking swine, you and Edwin Aldrin…you… you… bourbon sipping bastard. watching you jumping around on the moon really clinched the illusion. *Raucous laughter*

”If NASA told me the Earth was flat, then I would believe the conspiracy was not real.” NASA has a currency-science- Science is what is best supported by the evidence at hand. As they have satellites orbiting earth they know it is round. Why would they tell you the earth is flat? It would be lying. It is tremendously funny to me that the evidence you require to not believe in the conspiracy is to have your view supported by a official source. I say the problem with fe is it’s intertwined with conspiracy. then you respond ‘If I had no need for the conspiracy to be my *proof* I would not believe in it‘. That speaks for itself I think!

As an aside. I found the same attitude amongst creationists. I even had one complain about how he gets so much mail where different people quote different sources and evidence that prove a old earth. He then concludes the following: This is proof of how far reaching the conspiracy is. They have brainwashed all of you. Then goes on to say: When scientists finally admit God made everything we will know they are telling the truth. I’m not saying all fe’rs are literalists (of the same book at least), not at all, just using this event from my life as a demonstration that the fe and Creationist way of thinking are disturbingly similar.

?

qwerty1297

  • 43
  • lol tree!
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #39 on: March 23, 2007, 02:25:44 PM »
Wonderful! “They are really a wealth of assertions with no empirical proof.” GPS, Spy satelites, space probes, Niel Armstrong? Trans and circumnavigating journeys of Antarctica. Oh wait, they don’t exist! its all part of the conspiracy and optical or magnetic illusions!

“This wealth of "facts" you speak of is a matter of perspective.” *Sarcasm alert!* Would this be the same perspective you have when you leave the earth behind and orbit around it? *snickers* Oh! Yuri you vodka drinking swine, you and Edwin Aldrin…you… you… bourbon sipping bastard. watching you jumping around on the moon really clinched the illusion. *Raucous laughter*

”If NASA told me the Earth was flat, then I would believe the conspiracy was not real.” NASA has a currency-science- Science is what is best supported by the evidence at hand. As they have satellites orbiting earth they know it is round. Why would they tell you the earth is flat? It would be lying. It is tremendously funny to me that the evidence you require to not believe in the conspiracy is to have your view supported by a official source. I say the problem with fe is it’s intertwined with conspiracy. then you respond ‘If I had no need for the conspiracy to be my *proof* I would not believe in it‘. That speaks for itself I think!

As an aside. I found the same attitude amongst creationists. I even had one complain about how he gets so much mail where different people quote different sources and evidence that prove a old earth. He then concludes the following: This is proof of how far reaching the conspiracy is. They have brainwashed all of you. Then goes on to say: When scientists finally admit God made everything we will know they are telling the truth. I’m not saying all fe’rs are literalists (of the same book at least), not at all, just using this event from my life as a demonstration that the fe and Creationist way of thinking are disturbingly similar.

  wow, only a person that desperate would spend this much time typing this even though normal people dot read a essay which is supposed to be a post

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #40 on: March 23, 2007, 02:58:14 PM »
Wonderful! “They are really a wealth of assertions with no empirical proof.” GPS, Spy satelites, space probes, Niel Armstrong? Trans and circumnavigating journeys of Antarctica. Oh wait, they don’t exist! its all part of the conspiracy and optical or magnetic illusions!

“This wealth of "facts" you speak of is a matter of perspective.” *Sarcasm alert!* Would this be the same perspective you have when you leave the earth behind and orbit around it? *snickers* Oh! Yuri you vodka drinking swine, you and Edwin Aldrin…you… you… bourbon sipping bastard. watching you jumping around on the moon really clinched the illusion. *Raucous laughter*

”If NASA told me the Earth was flat, then I would believe the conspiracy was not real.” NASA has a currency-science- Science is what is best supported by the evidence at hand. As they have satellites orbiting earth they know it is round. Why would they tell you the earth is flat? It would be lying. It is tremendously funny to me that the evidence you require to not believe in the conspiracy is to have your view supported by a official source. I say the problem with fe is it’s intertwined with conspiracy. then you respond ‘If I had no need for the conspiracy to be my *proof* I would not believe in it‘. That speaks for itself I think!

As an aside. I found the same attitude amongst creationists. I even had one complain about how he gets so much mail where different people quote different sources and evidence that prove a old earth. He then concludes the following: This is proof of how far reaching the conspiracy is. They have brainwashed all of you. Then goes on to say: When scientists finally admit God made everything we will know they are telling the truth. I’m not saying all fe’rs are literalists (of the same book at least), not at all, just using this event from my life as a demonstration that the fe and Creationist way of thinking are disturbingly similar.


This is a long post
Long posts suck
Therefore this post sucks

QED, The world is flat

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #41 on: March 23, 2007, 07:12:02 PM »
Quote
Does a magnet work in vacuum? What mediating particles cause magnets to attract or repel each other?
Virtual photons.

Any proof of this? I thought photons were light particles. What documentation exists that states magnetism requires light?
Quote from: Raist
One thing we have learned is don't fuck around in Africa. It leads to bad.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #42 on: March 23, 2007, 07:48:50 PM »
Quote
Does a magnet work in vacuum? What mediating particles cause magnets to attract or repel each other?
Virtual photons.

Any proof of this? I thought photons were light particles. What documentation exists that states magnetism requires light?
Of course I have proof.  Simply look up the messenger particle for magnetism or just look up virtual photons.


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

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #43 on: March 23, 2007, 10:16:31 PM »
Quote
Does a magnet work in vacuum? What mediating particles cause magnets to attract or repel each other?
Virtual photons.

Any proof of this? I thought photons were light particles. What documentation exists that states magnetism requires light?
Of course I have proof.  Simply look up the messenger particle for magnetism or just look up virtual photons.

How do these virtual particles appear and disappear from existence? What medium allows them to transverse from a real particle into a pair of virtual pair of particles?  Why suggest that these particles temporary exist when they cannot be directly reserved?  Gravitons have not yet been proven to exist since they have not been observed directly, yet fits well with the standard model associated quatum field theory. However, how is anyone sure of the existence of virtual particles without empirical proof?

My argument is that there is no definitive proof of these partcicles existence.  They are merely used to describe the intermediary stages of certain particle interactions and are 'calculatory devices'.
Quote from: Raist
One thing we have learned is don't fuck around in Africa. It leads to bad.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #44 on: March 24, 2007, 02:16:30 AM »
Nice.  I like the way you changed your argument.


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

?

Vladdie

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #45 on: March 24, 2007, 10:14:18 PM »
To: Qwerty1297 and Narcberry I say: Boo hoo! If reading 4 paragraphs bothers you then maybe that explains fe. I wrote at length to make it light-hearted and clear that I’m not just blowing fe’rs off, but that their belief is not only flawed in light of evidence but fails wholly to be scientific. Now if you would like to point out any errors in my thinking please do so. If you do not wish to do it here feel free to mail it to me personally.

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #46 on: March 25, 2007, 01:40:25 PM »
To: Qwerty1297 and Narcberry I say: Boo hoo! If reading 4 paragraphs bothers you then maybe that explains fe. I wrote at length to make it light-hearted and clear that I’m not just blowing fe’rs off, but that their belief is not only flawed in light of evidence but fails wholly to be scientific. Now if you would like to point out any errors in my thinking please do so. If you do not wish to do it here feel free to mail it to me personally.

I lost you at "4 paragraphs"

?

qwerty1297

  • 43
  • lol tree!
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #47 on: March 25, 2007, 01:41:14 PM »
im probbly smarter than you...
To: Qwerty1297 and Narcberry I say: Boo hoo! If reading 4 paragraphs bothers you then maybe that explains fe. I wrote at length to make it light-hearted and clear that I’m not just blowing fe’rs off, but that their belief is not only flawed in light of evidence but fails wholly to be scientific. Now if you would like to point out any errors in my thinking please do so. If you do not wish to do it here feel free to mail it to me personally.

?

Vladdie

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #48 on: March 26, 2007, 08:50:53 PM »
Be that as it may it only means someone dumber than you exploited fe as an unscientific belief. Could it be that such a critical flaw in fe thinking has gone undetected and unaddressed by fe’rs?

*

Midnight

  • 7671
  • RE/FE Apathetic.
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #49 on: March 27, 2007, 05:55:48 AM »
Be that as it may it only means someone dumber than you exploited fe as an unscientific belief. Could it be that such a critical flaw in fe thinking has gone undetected and unaddressed by fe’rs?

Oh, I think the joke is far more known than they let on  :P
My problem with his ideas is that it is a ridiculous thing.

Genius. PURE, undiluted genius.

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #50 on: March 27, 2007, 07:43:44 AM »
Electicity and magnetism are inherently related; that's why the field is called "Electromagnetism". And virtual messenger particles is one theory of describing the way the elementary forces act on matter. Therefore, if the photon really is the messenger particle of the electromagnetic force, then photons are involved in magnetism as well.

And btw, photons exhibit the properties of particles and waves.

I wish my lawn was emo so it'd cut itself.

narcberry's token douchebag score: 4

?

qwerty1297

  • 43
  • lol tree!
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #51 on: March 27, 2007, 05:21:25 PM »
Be that as it may it only means someone dumber than you exploited fe as an unscientific belief. Could it be that such a critical flaw in fe thinking has gone undetected and unaddressed by fe’rs?
wow, big words, your so smarter than me now!

Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #52 on: March 27, 2007, 05:35:08 PM »
qwerty, you are also not a benefit to these forums.
I wish my lawn was emo so it'd cut itself.

narcberry's token douchebag score: 4

?

qwerty1297

  • 43
  • lol tree!
Re: THE BIG QUESTION
« Reply #53 on: March 27, 2007, 06:34:49 PM »
qwerty, you are also not a benefit to these forums.
there are people worsethan me. and if you think i spam, look at the guy that has 400 posts  because he says "the" on eveery thread 5 times as he been yelled at??? NO