Ferdinand Magellan proved the earth is round...

so, yeah. he circumnavigated the globe thus proving that the earth is round.

I dont know if you've heard, but people have actually gone into space and observed that the earth is spherical

I dont know if you've heard, but its impossible for the earth to be flat cuz gravitational forces would warp the earth into the shape of a sphere

so, yeah. he circumnavigated the globe thus proving that the earth is round.

I wonder how the FE model deals with magnetic north and south.

I dont know if you've heard, but people have actually gone into space and observed that the earth is spherical

Apparently, that's a lie, although absolutely no credible proof from what I can tell has been provided to backup that claim.

I dont know if you've heard, but its impossible for the earth to be flat cuz gravitational forces would warp the earth into the shape of a sphere

So far, it seems that most FE model proponents believe that gravitation doesn't exist and all 'gravity' is caused by the constant acceleration of the earth in an upward direction perpendicular to the surface of the circle that continues indefinately, yet the FE model supports Einstein's theory of Special Relativity, which clearly states - if one actually takes the time to study the theory - that such a phenomena is not possible for objects with mass.

Quote from: baptist_christian2 on September 03, 2007, 06:37:31 AM

so, yeah. he circumnavigated the globe thus proving that the earth is round.

I wonder how the FE model deals with magnetic north and south.

I did see a diagram about it on here once, I'll see if I can find it for you

so, yeah. he circumnavigated the globe thus proving that the earth is round.

Many of the "ancient mariners" would return home and tell their sponsors whatever they wanted to hear.  In many cases it was a pure cash business with rich sponsors looking to make financial gains from new world gold and treasure finds etc etc

As with today, money always distorts the truth.

so, ferdinand magellan circumnavigating the globe was a fabrication?

it's perfectly possible to circumnavigate a flat earth *sighs*

so, ferdinand magellan circumnavigating the globe was a fabrication?

NOOOO.

so, ferdinand magellan circumnavigating the globe was a fabrication?

I don't know and I'm certain that you have no way of proving that he did.

All I'm doing is pointing out an historical FACT.  Many of these so-called "circumnavigators" were also called "privateers" and that was for a reason.

I can't begin to imagine Raleighs utter relief when he found some tobacco for Elizabeth to smoke otherwise he may well have been short of a head.

The times that these people lived in were poles apart from our time and that has to be borne in mind when retrospectively viewing their "recorded achievements".

Whatever, Tom.   

I know i did. Technically speaking, my namesake did as well, as he used a compass and the magnetic lines cannot exist as lines of longitude in FE.

so, yeah. he circumnavigated the globe thus proving that the earth is round.

I dont know if you've heard, but people have actually gone into space and observed that the earth is spherical

I dont know if you've heard, but its impossible for the earth to be flat cuz gravitational forces would warp the earth into the shape of a sphere

I hereby dub thee thread #147 (guestimate) to provide indisputable proof that the Earth is flat, which will get half a dozen half-hearted posts by trolls and maybe the 1 flat-earther in the world, before it falls by the wayside and people stop posting because there's really nothing intelligent to say other than "you can't prove it's NOT flat.. no, I mean with photos, not science... no, all photos are fake, so you can't use those either".

Eh? Speak English man!

As it turns out, recent evidence has shown that Magellan's expedition was riddled with fraud.

I love it. "Recent evidence." Where's the recent evidence? You always talk about the evidence, but don't let us see it. I'm uncomfortably reminded of Martin Luther and the Catholic church. They hid away the New Testament so no commoner could disprove them when they said their practices were condoned by the New Testament. Then Martin Luther became a priest, was allowed to see the New Testament, and then shot down their ideas. Seems like what's going on here.

Oh, the rest of the story, as Paul Harvey would say. Luther was called to speak before the bishops and Pope, and they told him to renounce his ideas. He didn't. They hired assassins to kill him on his way back to the university he taught at. To prevent this, his friends "kidnapped" him, and he went into hiding, translated the New Testament into German, and founded a new religion.

Why are we debating the character of the Catholic Church?

I'm not. I mentioned how I was uncomfortably reminded of its practices in the 1500's, the hiding of evidence from the layman. I just want to see the recent evidence that disproves Magellan's findings.

I'm not. I mentioned how I was uncomfortably reminded of its practices in the 1500's, the hiding of evidence from the layman. I just want to see the recent evidence that disproves Magellan's findings.

You were too, look back to your last post. Why are all RE'ers endowed with the memory of flies?

It takes two people to debate. I mentioned their practices. I, one person, cannot debate with myself on a message board. If you would like to debate them, let me know. I'll gladly make a thread for it. But, I did not debate. Mentioning is not debating.

Now, I ask again...may we see this evidence that disproves Magellan's findings?

Google it yourself.

Perhaps you can give evidence of your outlandish claims about Martin Luther King Jr. You are an idiot, he was a civil rights advocate, not a catholic priest. No wonder you guys think the world is round...

Martin Luther. Not Martin Luther King Jr. Two different guys. Martin Luther lived in the 1500's.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm

That's the guy I'm talking about.

Now, again. Can I see your Magellan evidence?

Wow, was Martin Luther named after Martin Luther King Jr?  That's a pretty funny coincidence.

Martin Luther. Not Martin Luther King Jr. Two different guys. Martin Luther lived in the 1500's.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm

That's the guy I'm talking about.

Now, again. Can I see your Magellan evidence?

Oh great, now you are denying Magellan existed too? I wish I could alter history as quick as you.

Yeah, I'm saying that everybody important in history never existed.

Really, narcberry, you deserve an award. I ask for evidence and you go on an entirely different tangent. You really make me want to believe in FET. I wish I could dodge requests for evidence as easily as you.

Yeah, I'm saying that everybody important in history never existed.

Really, narcberry, you deserve an award. I ask for evidence and you go on an entirely different tangent. You really make me want to believe in FET. I wish I could dodge requests for evidence as easily as you.

You still have failed to present any evidence that Martin Luther King was a civil rights advocate in the 1950's and 1960's. How is my character under such scrutiny in light of your unaccomplishment?

QED the world is FLAT

And I have told you that Martin Luther King Jr. and Martin Luther are two different people. You told me to use google, now use it yourself. Search them both seperately. There's all the evidence you'll need.

Martin Luther: Religous reformer in the 1500's
Martin Luther King Jr.: Civil rights advocate in the 1950's and 1960's.

And I'm sure you know this yourself. Assuming that's you in the graduation robe in your avatar. Because normally, people who have a college education know the different between Martin Luther and Martin Luther King Jr.

Now, let's get back on topic. I still want to see your recent evidence that disproves Magellen's findings.

And I have told you that Martin Luther King Jr. and Martin Luther are two different people. You told me to use google, now use it yourself. Search them both seperately. There's all the evidence you'll need.

Martin Luther: Religous reformer in the 1500's
Martin Luther King Jr.: Civil rights advocate in the 1950's and 1960's.

And I'm sure you know this yourself. Assuming that's you in the graduation robe in your avatar. Because normally, people who have a college education know the different between Martin Luther and Martin Luther King Jr.

Now, let's get back on topic. I still want to see your recent evidence that disproves Magellen's findings.

Oh right, google. Let me go ahead and shovel whatever government propaganda is out there into my head. Give me a real source.

Martin Luther:  http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm

Martin Luther King Jr.  http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html

There's your sources. There's plenty of others. Even better, go to http://www.cune.edu/6604/ and e-mail or call any of the people there, and ask them the difference.

Now, how about the evidence I asked for earlier? The evidence to disprove Magellen's findings? Because soon I'll have to assume that it doesn't exist.

... great, you have evidence of something that is totally unrelated to the topic at hand. Thanks for derailing an entire thread. (And no, those sources don't prove them to be two different people).

And I continue to ask for the evidence you say you have about Magellan. And I have the memory of a fly? So, let's get back to the topic at hand.

May I please see this evidence that you say you have that disproves Magellan's findings?