I'm a non-believer, here to debate.

  • 27 Replies
  • 4518 Views
?

Loki

I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« on: August 17, 2007, 04:05:46 PM »



Q: "Why do the all the world Governments say the Earth is round?"

A: It's a conspiracy ME: What cause do they have to have a conspiracy? What could the POSSIBLY gain from it?

Q: "What about NASA? Don't they have photos to prove that the Earth is round?"

A: NASA is part of the conspiracy too. The photos are faked. ME: What about when your in an airplane, an you see the worlds curves? FYI, NOT the mountains.



Q: "Why has no-one taken a photo of the Earth that proves it is flat?"

A: The government prevents people from getting close enough to the Ice Wall to take a picture. ME: How do you know about this "Ice Wall" and why is it so conveniently place RIGHT on the border? And if this were true, would the world not become a big 'bowl'?

Q: "How did NASA create these images with the computer technology available at the time?"

A: Since NASA did not send rockets into space, they instead spent the money on developing advanced computers and imaging software instead ME: Proof of this?

PLEASE NOTE This means that pictures confirming the roundness or flatness of the Earth DO NOT IN THEMSELVES CONSTITUTE VALID PROOF Me: Yes they do.

Q: "What is the motive behind this conspiracy?"

A: The motive is unknown although it is probably money Me: What could one gain form keeping this secret from the world?

Q: "If you're not sure about the motive, why do you say there is a conspiracy?"

A: Well it's quite simple really; if the earth is in fact flat, then the governments must be lying when they say it isn't. Me: AGAIN, why would they lie?

Q: "The government could not pull off the conspiracy successfully"

A: Actually, they could. Me: No, they couldn't.

Q: "How are the world governments organized enough to carry out this conspiracy?"

A: They only appear to be disorganized to make the conspiracy seem implausible. ME: Such ignorance needs no answer.

Q: Why hasn’t this site been shut down by the government?

A: Doing so would prove that the government is hiding something. ME: Umm...no it wouldn't. They could just have taken it down in te first minutes of it being created.

Q: No way could the government possibly guard the entire Ice Wall!  It would take too many men!  Millions of men!

A: Not really.  You could do it with a few hundred and some basic equipment. ME: Then why can't they gaurd the Mexico/USA border with just a few men?

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

A: It was specially constructed by NASA to be so. After all NASA are at the heart of the conspiracy. ME: Proof?

The Earth in space


Q: "What is the circumference and diameter of the Earth?"

A: "Circumference: 78225 miles, Diameter: 24,900 miles

Q: "What about the stars, sun and moon and other planets? Are they flat too? What are they made of?"

A: The sun and moon, each 32 miles in diameter, circle Earth at a height of 3000 miles at its equator, located midway between the North Pole and the ice wall. Each functions similar to a "spotlight," with the sun radiating "hot light," the moon "cold light." As they are spotlights, they only give light out over a certain are which explains why some parts of the Earth are dark when others are light. Their apparent rising and setting are caused by optical illusions. ME: What the fuck? This point is so flawed it'd take me an hour to point EVERYTHING out.

In the "accelerating upwards" model, the stars, sun and moon are also accelerating upwards. ME: What causes the "accelerating"?

The stars are about as far as San Francisco is from Boston. (3100 miles) ME: Then they would be easily accesible via spaceship, and show MUCH more detail.

Q: "Please explain sunrises/sunsets."

A: It's a perspective effect.  Really, the sun is just getting farther away; it looks like it disappears because everything gets smaller and eventually disappears as it gets farther away.ME: What causes it to go away? What causes it to come back?

Q: "Why are other celestial bodies round but not the Earth?"

A: The Earth is not one of the other planets.  The Earth is special and unlike the other bodies in numerous ways. ME: What makes it special?

Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"

A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites can't orbit the Earth.  The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites. ME: How do you explain satellite dishes? If Towers WERE the truth, there would be MILLIONS of towers a across the desert to get signals across it.

Q: "What's underneath the Earth?" aka "What's on the bottom?" aka "What's on the other side?"

A: This is unknown. Some believe it to be just rocks, others believe the Earth rests on the back of four elephants and a turtle. ME: Are you serious? 4 elephants and a turtle? What damn school did you go to?

Q: "What about gravity?"

A: The Earth is accelerating upwards at 1g (9.8m/s^2) along with every star, sun and moon in the universe. This produces the same effect as gravity. ME: It would NOT create the same effect as gravity, it would create total instability in the planet and MASSIVE wind storms 24/7

Q: "Isn't this version of gravity flawed? Wouldn't planes/helicopters/paragliders crash into the Earth as the Earth rises up to them?"

A: No. By the same argument, we could ask why planes/helicopters/paragliders don't crash into the Earth as they accelerate down towards them.  The reason that planes do not crash is that their wings produce lift, which, when the rate of acceleration upwards equals that of gravity's pull downwards, causes them to remain at a constant altitude. ME: they dont crash into the planet because they lower the force on which they push down on the Earth, in this sense by slower down the rotors and decreasing aerodynamics.

The same thing happens if the Earth is moving up. The plane is accelerating upwards at the same rate as the Earth, which means the distance between them does not change. Therefore, the plane stays at the same height and does not crash.

Q: "Doesn't this mean we'd be traveling faster than the speed of light, which is impossible?"

A: The equations of Special Relativity prevent an object from accelerating to the speed of light.  Due to this restriction, these equations prove that an object can accelerate at a constant rate forever, and never reach the speed of light.  For an in depth explanation:  Click here. ME: Wrong....

Q: "If the world was really flat, what would happen if you jump off the disc's edge?"

A: You would enter an inertial reference frame, moving at a constant velocity in the direction the Earth was moving before you jumped. The Earth would continue accelerating upwards past you at a rate of 1g, so it would appear to you that you were falling into space. ME: Earth wold have reach maximum velocity a LONG time ago, so by this theory you would just float, ALSO meaning you could jump and never go back down because Earth would be moving at the same velocity.

Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A1: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, yes, it would eventually happen, after a billion years maybe. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field.  What we know as 'gravity' is provided by the acceleration of the earth. ME: No, thats EXACTLy what would happen.

A2: There is a counter-mass which pulls the Earth back into a disc shape. ME: What is this force? Where does it come from?

Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"

A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull. If they are only 32 miles wide they would not create a gravitational field nearly enough to effect humans from 3100 miles away.

Q:  Follow-up to previous question:  How is it that the Earth does not have a gravitational pull, but stars and the moon do?

A:  This argument is a non sequitur.  You might as well ask, "How is it that snakes do not have legs, but dogs and cats do?"  Snakes are not dogs or cats.  The Earth is not a star or the moon.  It doesn't follow that each must have exactly the properties of the others, and no more. ME: It's not a non sequitur, thats a matter or physics, not relation or classification.

Geography

Q: Do you have a map?

A: See this one, created by one of our members.  There is also this map attributed to a person named Wilbur Voliva, and another by Heinrich Scherer.
Also, there is Cosmas Indicopleustes' world picture, 6 th century in the Christian Topography.

Q: Exactly what shape is the Earth if it's flat? Square or circle?

A: Circle, like in the UN logo, however, the earth is NOT 2D, it is in the shape of a cylinder. ME: hahaha

Q: "Why doesn't water run off the Earth?"

A: There is a vast ice wall that keeps the water where it is. The ice wall is roughly 150ft high. This also explains why you can find a vast plane of ice when you travel south. ME:, yea, it's called Antarctica, where people have been, and crossed over.

Antarctica as a continent does not exist. ME: Yes it does.

Q: "How does global warming affect the ice wall?"

A1: The Ice Wall is really a mountain range.  It just happens to be covered in ice and snow. ME: What created the mountains then? Because GLOB(E)al shifting causes mountains to form, 2 plates ahve to crush against each other, since there is nothing on the other side of the mountains, nothing could have created it.

A2: Global Warming doesn't happen. It and its counter-theory (Global Cooling) are effects that cancel each other out. Remember, these "greenhouse gasses" can reflect heat back out into space as well as keep it on Earth. Yes, there are recorded rises in temperature, but the only records we have go back, at most, around 150 years. This is very likely an occurrence that happens every [x>150] years, that's happened before (perhaps many times), and that the Earth has thus survived before. ME: Proof? :)

Q: "What about tides?"

A: The tides exist due to a slight see-saw effect on the earth. As it goes back and forth, the water rushes to the side that is lower. Note, this is a very slight wobble. Remember, these wobbles are created by very minor earthquakes. They keep the tides in check. Notice that large earthquakes result in large tides or "tsunami". ME: What causes the SPINNING in the tsunamis? hmm? If it just "wobbles".

Q : "Why is the North pole colder than the equator?"

A: The sun circles over the equator, thus the poles don't receive the same intensity of light. ME: HAH! How does it "spin" if Earth creates no gravitational force??

Q: "How do volcanic eruptions happen?"

A: The Earth is thick enough to have a core of molten lava. Once there's too much of it in too confined a space, it finds its way out, just like the water will come out of a full bottle if you squeeze it too hard. ME: Since the earth has no gravitational force, there is no pressure large enough being put on it, making your water bottle theory wrong.

Q: "What about time zones?"

A: The sun is a spotlight which shines light on a concentrated area, so not everywhere on Earth will be lit at once. Times zones exist so that everyone's clock will be at 12:00 around the time the sun is approximately directly overhead. ME: What directs the light? It's a BALL of light, it's not a strict BEAM of light.

Q: "What about Lunar Eclipses"

(Possible A) The moon isn't a spotlight; it glows with light from the sun, reflected off the Earth. Different parts of the Earth are more reflective than others (the seas, the polar cap, the ice wall, for example). Sometimes, the position of the sun (which is a spotlight) means that only very low-reflective or non-reflective parts of the Earth's surface are illuminated, so the moon is abnormally dark. This could potentially explain lunar phases as well. ME: No, not at all.

Q: "How come the travel time by air from South America to New Zealand, via the polar route, is SHORTER than the travel time going North first and then South again?"

A: (Presumed answer: The airline pilots are misled by their GPS, or are deliberately conspiring to make it appear that the flights take different times) ME: GPS = Global Positioning SATELLITE. Contradiction, again. And your saying EVERY pilot, co pilot stewardess EVER has been in this big conspiracy? I think not.

Q: "How can a compass work on a Flat Earth?"

A: The magnetic field is generated in the same fashion as with the RE.  Thus, the magnetic south pole is near the geographic north pole, just like on the RE.  The magnetic north pole is on the underside of the Earth.  The Ice Wall is not the south pole, but acts as it, as it is the furthest from the center of the earth that you can follow the magnetic field.  The field is vertical in this area, accounting for the aurora australis. ME: There wold be no poles, since it happens to be because of GRAVITATIONAL force that there is a concentration int hose areas of Round earth.

Q: "When traveling in a straight direction, you will always reach the same point on the globe from where you started. How can this happen if the world is flat?"

A: You need to have evidence for this to be true. Also, define "straight." Remember, the northern point on the compass is, under most circumstances (unless near the centre or deep in the ice wall), pointing toward the centre of the Earth. Therefore, if you follow your compass due east or due west, ending up at the same point you started from, you've just gone around the world in a circle. ME: Because you can fly around the world, in your own personal airplane.

Q: If you go directly south won’t you eventually fall off the edge of the Earth?

A: Yes, you will. In order to use this fact as proof you need to record a video of someone flying directly south around the world without falling off the edge. Furthermore you need to prove that your navigational equipment allows you to travel directly south without deviating. ME: Because people have FLOWN around the world south...an you said videos and pictures did not count as evidence? How would you disprove it not showing in a straight line?

Q: How come when I flush my toilet in the northern hemisphere it goes counterclockwise but I have this friend in Australia and when he flushes it goes clockwise?

You're mistaken.  On a round Earth, the Coriolis effect adds at most one (counter)clockwise rotation per day; fewer as you get closer to the equator.  The water in your toilet/sink/bathtub/funnel spins much faster than that (probably at least once per minute, or 1440 times per day) so the additional/lost rotation from the Coriolis effect wouldn't be noticed. ME: That makes NO SENSE.

Q: How do seasons work?

The radius of the sun's orbit around the Earth's axis symmetry varies throughout the year, being smallest when summer is in the northern annulus and largest when it is summer in the southern annulus.




The end.

Please, do not bitch about:

-Un answered questions, I didnt feel like/they didnt need an answer.

-Theories.

-Your books.

-YOUR science work.


?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2007, 04:10:04 PM »
Welcome. Please consider breaking your most important concerns into separate topics. It's too much to ask the FEers to respond to such a litany in one post. Start small.

I do also encourage you to read the RE Primer. It's the concerted effort of the REers and contains our concerns and experimental evidence.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2007, 04:10:54 PM »
tl;dr
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Agent_0042

  • 1419
  • +0/-0
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2007, 04:29:35 PM »
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2007, 04:35:20 PM »
What cause do they have to have a conspiracy? What could the POSSIBLY gain from it?

The FAQ is long overdue for an update. The governments are not purporting the lie, but the space agencies of the world are. They gain money. For instance, NASA has earned an average of $12 billion per year over it's entire 49-year history.

What about when your in an airplane, an you see the worlds curves? FYI, NOT the mountains.

This does not equate to actuality. Reference Criss Angel, or any other illusionist.

How do you know about this "Ice Wall" and why is it so conveniently place RIGHT on the border? And if this were true, would the world not become a big 'bowl'?

It's essentially pure speculation to theoretically allow a flat Earth.

Proof of this?

Please note the flawed logic in asking for conspiracy proof.

Yes they do.

 ::)

What could one gain form keeping this secret from the world?

See first answer.

No, they couldn't.

 ::)

Such ignorance needs no answer.

Quoted for irony.

Then why can't they gaurd the Mexico/USA border with just a few men?

Advanced notice would be required to make traveling along the border in time to stop everyone. This is implausible and would require a lot more men than the Ice Wall.

Then they would be easily accesible via spaceship, and show MUCH more detail.

Don't mind the Earth measurements and this information. It's speculation and hasn't been thought out well enough. The FAQ needs to be updated.

What causes it to go away? What causes it to come back?

This hasn't been adequately explained yet.

What makes it special?

It's not.

Well, I started answering all those, but I realized how much more there is. Try lurking around the forums and using the search feature to find some other basic questions, and then come back with some more specific questions and we'll be glad to help.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

Loki

Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2007, 04:41:05 PM »
I'm not here to start, just want to know what you guys are thinking. Thank you divito for ACTUAL answers, unlike the other ones, hehe.

Getting away from facts, you can't HONESTLY believe the Earth is Flat? It's so implausible. Well, this will be my last post, so goodbye, cccccccccrazies.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2007, 04:48:39 PM »
This is our last goodbye.

I hate to feel the love between us die...
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2007, 04:59:01 PM »
It's a shame, he said he was here to debate.  Guess he didn't have much of an argument.  :(
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #8 on: August 17, 2007, 05:30:46 PM »
My personal favorites:

ME: they dont crash into the planet because they lower the force on which they push down on the Earth, in this sense by slower down the rotors and decreasing aerodynamics.

Quote
ME: Earth wold have reach maximum velocity a LONG time ago, so by this theory you would just float, ALSO meaning you could jump and never go back down because Earth would be moving at the same velocity.

Quote
ME: GPS = Global Positioning SATELLITE. Contradiction, again. And your saying EVERY pilot, co pilot stewardess EVER has been in this big conspiracy? I think not.

Quote
ME: There wold be no poles, since it happens to be because of GRAVITATIONAL force that there is a concentration int hose areas of Round earth.

Quote
ME: Because people have FLOWN around the world south...an you said videos and pictures did not count as evidence? How would you disprove it not showing in a straight line?


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

*

Jimmy Crackhorn

  • 545
  • +0/-0
  • Not the Physics Wiz everyone else seems to be here
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #9 on: August 17, 2007, 05:40:47 PM »
I find it amazing that so many people fall for the turtle thing.

Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #10 on: August 17, 2007, 06:01:25 PM »
What cause do they have to have a conspiracy? What could the POSSIBLY gain from it?

The FAQ is long overdue for an update. The governments are not purporting the lie, but the space agencies of the world are. They gain money. For instance, NASA has earned an average of $12 billion per year over it's entire 49-year history.

What about when your in an airplane, an you see the worlds curves? FYI, NOT the mountains.

This does not equate to actuality. Reference Criss Angel, or any other illusionist.

How do you know about this "Ice Wall" and why is it so conveniently place RIGHT on the border? And if this were true, would the world not become a big 'bowl'?

It's essentially pure speculation to theoretically allow a flat Earth.

Proof of this?

Please note the flawed logic in asking for conspiracy proof.

Yes they do.

 ::)

What could one gain form keeping this secret from the world?

See first answer.

No, they couldn't.

 ::)

Such ignorance needs no answer.

Quoted for irony.

Then why can't they gaurd the Mexico/USA border with just a few men?

Advanced notice would be required to make traveling along the border in time to stop everyone. This is implausible and would require a lot more men than the Ice Wall.

Then they would be easily accesible via spaceship, and show MUCH more detail.

Don't mind the Earth measurements and this information. It's speculation and hasn't been thought out well enough. The FAQ needs to be updated.

What causes it to go away? What causes it to come back?

This hasn't been adequately explained yet.

What makes it special?

It's not.

Well, I started answering all those, but I realized how much more there is. Try lurking around the forums and using the search feature to find some other basic questions, and then come back with some more specific questions and we'll be glad to help.

YOU SIR ARE A FUCKING IDIOT GOODBYE

*

Jimmy Crackhorn

  • 545
  • +0/-0
  • Not the Physics Wiz everyone else seems to be here
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #11 on: August 17, 2007, 06:02:44 PM »


YOU SIR ARE A FUCKING IDIOT
All this irony is getting old.

*

skeptical scientist

  • 1285
  • +1/-0
  • -2 Flamebait
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #12 on: August 17, 2007, 10:43:07 PM »
Thanks TheEngineer. I didn't want to read it because it was too long, but that first quote you mentioned was really priceless.
-David
E pur si muove!

*

Mr. Ireland

  • 14986
  • +0/-0
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #13 on: August 18, 2007, 06:21:42 AM »
Quote
ME: GPS = Global Positioning SATELLITE. Contradiction, again. And your saying EVERY pilot, co pilot stewardess EVER has been in this big conspiracy? I think not.

Quote
ME: There wold be no poles, since it happens to be because of GRAVITATIONAL force that there is a concentration int hose areas of Round earth.

Your personal favourites broken down into my personal favourites, I'm tempted to sig.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2007, 06:35:23 AM »
I personally love the apparent fact that helicopters fly because they 'decrease aerodynamics'.


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

*

Mr. Ireland

  • 14986
  • +0/-0
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #15 on: August 18, 2007, 06:52:19 AM »
No, they can land when they 'decrease aerodynamics' (I think).  Either way, I lol'd.

*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-42
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #16 on: August 18, 2007, 08:10:28 AM »
I was almost hoping that this was the Loki from my forum...but doesn't look like it :(
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

*

Jimmy Crackhorn

  • 545
  • +0/-0
  • Not the Physics Wiz everyone else seems to be here
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2007, 02:47:02 PM »
tl;dr

*

Midnight

  • 7669
  • +0/-0
  • RE/FE Apathetic.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #18 on: August 18, 2007, 05:33:29 PM »
Fail.
My problem with his ideas is that it is a ridiculous thing.

Genius. PURE, undiluted genius.

*

CommonCents

  • 1779
  • +0/-0
  • ^_^
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #19 on: August 18, 2007, 08:09:55 PM »
I personally love the apparent fact that helicopters fly because they 'decrease aerodynamics'.

This might possibly be the most appropriate place to put:

OMG!

?

5474n5 73rr0r157

Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #20 on: August 18, 2007, 10:15:18 PM »
It's a shame, he said he was here to debate.  Guess he didn't have much of an argument.  :(

uh...WTF? cant you pieces of shit read! jesus fucking christ! grow a fucking brain! or if you have 1 then use it, honestly i hope you all die a painfull death and cause your penguin ass inbread families alot of tramma. id tell you to shoot yourselfs in the head but theres no brain to blow on the wall next to you. fuck you penguins and HAIL SATAN!

*

Midnight

  • 7669
  • +0/-0
  • RE/FE Apathetic.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #21 on: August 18, 2007, 10:21:52 PM »
It's a shame, he said he was here to debate.  Guess he didn't have much of an argument.  :(

OMG GASKET BLOWING!!!!!!!!!!!
My problem with his ideas is that it is a ridiculous thing.

Genius. PURE, undiluted genius.

*

Jimmy Crackhorn

  • 545
  • +0/-0
  • Not the Physics Wiz everyone else seems to be here
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #22 on: August 18, 2007, 11:52:09 PM »
It's a shame, he said he was here to debate.  Guess he didn't have much of an argument.  :(

uh...WTF? cant you pieces of shit read! jesus fucking christ! grow a fucking brain! or if you have 1 then use it, honestly i hope you all die a painfull death and cause your penguin ass inbread families alot of tramma. id tell you to shoot yourselfs in the head but theres no brain to blow on the wall next to you. fuck you penguins and HAIL SATAN!
There's better beliefs to be pissed off at. Go see a KKK forum.

*

skeptical scientist

  • 1285
  • +1/-0
  • -2 Flamebait
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2007, 02:30:16 AM »
I personally love the apparent fact that helicopters fly because they 'decrease aerodynamics'.
You're a pilot, and you didn't know that? For shame! I'd never trust you to fly me anywhere!
-David
E pur si muove!

*

Mr. Ireland

  • 14986
  • +0/-0
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2007, 10:08:30 AM »
It's a shame, he said he was here to debate.  Guess he didn't have much of an argument.  :(

uh...WTF? cant you pieces of shit read! jesus fucking christ! grow a fucking brain! or if you have 1 then use it, honestly i hope you all die a painfull death and cause your penguin ass inbread families alot of tramma. id tell you to shoot yourselfs in the head but theres no brain to blow on the wall next to you. fuck you penguins and HAIL SATAN!

Uhhm, he didn't.  Where are you going with this, other than to show your stupidity and give us all a bit of a laugh?

Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2007, 10:16:39 PM »
It's a shame, he said he was here to debate.  Guess he didn't have much of an argument.  :(

uh...WTF? cant you pieces of shit read! jesus fucking christ! grow a fucking brain! or if you have 1 then use it, honestly i hope you all die a painfull death and cause your penguin ass inbread families alot of tramma. id tell you to shoot yourselfs in the head but theres no brain to blow on the wall next to you. fuck you penguins and HAIL SATAN!

This douche actually signed up to this site just to say that.

*

paradiselost

  • 191
  • +0/-0
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2007, 03:27:09 AM »
You: I ask lots of noob questions! ME: Yes, you do
Dumbshoe

*

Spacehopperjoe

  • 225
  • +0/-0
  • He dosnt sleep, he waits.
Re: I'm a non-believer, here to debate.
« Reply #27 on: December 02, 2007, 11:51:18 AM »

 What could the POSSIBLY gain from it?[/b]



THATS WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO HIDE! If we knew why they lie to us then there would be no point in lying to us.
Read the FAQ first, it will save half of you looking like fools!