Some Unanswered Questions...

Hello,

Though I am new here, I have been reading this site for about a year on and off.  Frankly, it astounds me that people actually believe in a flat earth in this day and age.  But that is aside the point.  I just wanted you guys to know my stance before getting to my question.

Please don't ask me to read the FAQ, as I have gone over it numerous times.  And if you are going to cite "Earth: Not a Globe," please tell me where specifically you are pulling information from.  I have the digital copy to go on, and can't find a needle in a haystack.



Now, I understand that you believe in the Ice Wall.  And it's obvious that there is air in our atmosphere, else how would we breathe?  Is it your stance that the atmosphere only extends so high?  Such as 150 miles or something?  If so, what keeps the air from "falling off" the world?  It can't be the ice wall, can it?  If it were, the ice wall would be very visible, wouldn't it?

Or is it your stance that there is no such thing as the vacuum of space?  In this case, how do you explain the thinning of the air as one travels to greater altitudes?  It can't be that the acceleration of the earth is "catching" the air and making it denser. 



I will leave my queries at that, since all other questions I have have been asked and "answered" previously.  This one I have not found addressed anywhere and I am baffled when it comes to finding any way to make logical sense out of this.  (Well, as logical as anything else on this site...)

Read the FAQ. Read "Earth: Not A Globe".

Seruosly though, there is some bizzare and fantastical reason for the air staying on the FE, I don;t know exactly what it is but trust me, it's there. Just like the reason the sun appears to set, the UA and pretty much every other part of the FE theory. I'm sure a genuine FE'er will fill in the "details" for you.

Read the FAQ. Read "Earth: Not A Globe".

Seruosly though, there is some bizzare and fantastical reason for the air staying on the FE, I don;t know exactly what it is but trust me, it's there. Just like the reason the sun appears to set, the UA and pretty much every other part of the FE theory. I'm sure a genuine FE'er will fill in the "details" for you.

you just threw away any respect i had for this site, seriously
you guys honestly don't have proof of anything for this, and you just say there "must" be a reason for it, but we dont know it exactly? and i laughed at the part where you said "I'm sure a genuine FE'er will fill in the "details" for you." We have yet to hear from one...
im sorry but aren't these questions supposed to be answered? none of you can answer serious questions like this with a real response, but you believe that someone else knows the answer to it. nonono, YOU are the one that believes that the earth is flat, so you should be able to disprove and answer any questions like this. otherwise it shows that there is a possibility your theory is completely false and untrue.

Why would you assume that Darth Bishop believes the earth is flat? 

1)  The ice wall is a mountain range covered in ice and snow.
2)  The reason the atmosphere stays on the earth is still in contention.  I think I will take a page from the RE play book and just make up a force to explain an observation:  The atmosphere stays on the earth due to the Dark Energy Field. 

I think I will take a page from the RE play book and just make up a force to explain an observation:  The atmosphere stays on the earth due to the Dark Energy Field. 

 

1)  The ice wall is a mountain range covered in ice and snow.
2)  The reason the atmosphere stays on the earth is still in contention.  I think I will take a page from the RE play book and just make up a force to explain an observation:  The atmosphere stays on the earth due to the Dark Energy Field. 

Truly, this is the best you can come up with?  TheEngineer, I am disappointed.  As much as I have disbelieved all your theories, at least most of the time they make a sort of logical sense if you assume the world is, in fact, flat...



Oh, and FYI, I have already stated that I read the FAQs.  I know what the Ice Wall is proposed to be. 

Truly, this is the best you can come up with?  TheEngineer, I am disappointed.   

What's wrong with it?

Quote from: questions on November 03, 2007, 02:38:11 PM

Truly, this is the best you can come up with?  TheEngineer, I am disappointed.   

What's wrong with it?

At least come up with SOME theory, something you can say which would make sense.  Anything.  FE is supposed to be a credible theory, right?  "Taking one out of the RE'ers book" implies that 1) RE'ers are full of it, and 2) so is your theory. 

How did that not make sense?
Made sense to me.

At least come up with SOME theory, something you can say which would make sense.  Anything.  FE is supposed to be a credible theory, right?  "Taking one out of the RE'ers book" implies that 1) RE'ers are full of it, and 2) so is your theory. 

RE'ers make up forces to explain observations all the time.  Gravity, for one...

Now the DEF is a concept that is not well understood, but it is obvious it must work, otherwise we would all suffocate.

How did that not make sense?
Made sense to me.

"Taking one out of the RE'ers book" implies that 1) RE'ers are full of it, and 2) so is your theory. 

Basically, his comment implies he's pulling something out of his ass in absence of an explanation.  Which isn't good enough.  I'd like a real answer.  I'm perplexed at how this model is supposed to work.  FE'ers have had centuries to hypothesize.  Please don't tell me you still have no ideas.

Now the DEF is a concept that is not well understood, but it is obvious it must work, otherwise we would all suffocate.

...Unless the earth is not flat, in which case it is moot. 

We at least have some idea of how gravity works (bodies attracting bodies, earth being by far the larger of the two).  How does this DEF work?  What holds it in place?  Is it everywhere?  Is the universe endless?  How "thick" is it?  Why doesn't it "push down" on the atmosphere we have here on earth and push it off the edge (as we accelerate upward)?

Okay, I have another question that I never saw an answer to:

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.

A2: There is a counter-mass which pulls the Earth back into a disc shape.

Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"

A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.

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.

So, is there such a thing as gravity or not?  Can't have it both ways.  If so, what causes that gravity?  Is it the mass of the stars and moon?  Is it what they're made of?  Please don't tell me it's related to DEF again.    This isn't about "moon and stars having gravity VS. earth having gravity," BTW, which is what is addressed in the FAQ.

The DEF is an energy field that satisfies the Einstein Field Equations.  This field has a certain gradient which is greatest at the boundary layer, or the interaction layer with the atmosphere.  This field is a vector, which interacts with the magnetic field vector of the Earth.  These vectors create a force vector that is orthogonal to the other forces in four dimensional space.  This force is always normal to the boundary layer, thus providing a type of containment for the atmosphere.

So, is there such a thing as gravity or not? 

Not as a force.  Only as a concept.

Quote from: TheEngineer on November 03, 2007, 02:48:22 PM

Now the DEF is a concept that is not well understood, but it is obvious it must work, otherwise we would all suffocate.

...Unless the earth is not flat, in which case it is moot. 

We at least have some idea of how gravity works (bodies attracting bodies, earth being by far the larger of the two).  How does this DEF work?  What holds it in place?  Is it everywhere?  Is the universe endless?  How "thick" is it?  Why doesn't it "push down" on the atmosphere we have here on earth and push it off the edge (as we accelerate upward)?

I now have a clearer understanding of WHAT the DEF is supposed to be, but still do not understand how that relates to the bold sections above.  Is it everywhere?  Is it just in a "bubble" of sorts around the FE solar system (I don't know what else to call it)?  If it's a bubble, what holds it in place?  If it's everywhere, why doesn't it push down on the atmosphere?

Quote from: questions on November 03, 2007, 03:24:47 PM

So, is there such a thing as gravity or not? 

Not as a force.  Only as a concept.

Okay... So, are you saying that, in the FE, the stars and moon hold no gravitational properties?

Quote from: FE FAQ

Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"

A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.

Is the FAQ incorrect?  I thought it was the compendium of theories pertaining to the FE. 

If the FAQ is, in fact, correct, please answer: What makes the stars and moon have that gravitational pull? 

Quote from: Darth Bishop on November 03, 2007, 01:31:51 PM

Read the FAQ. Read "Earth: Not A Globe".

Seruosly though, there is some bizzare and fantastical reason for the air staying on the FE, I don;t know exactly what it is but trust me, it's there. Just like the reason the sun appears to set, the UA and pretty much every other part of the FE theory. I'm sure a genuine FE'er will fill in the "details" for you.

you just threw away any respect i had for this site, seriously
you guys honestly don't have proof of anything for this, and you just say there "must" be a reason for it, but we dont know it exactly? and i laughed at the part where you said "I'm sure a genuine FE'er will fill in the "details" for you." We have yet to hear from one...
im sorry but aren't these questions supposed to be answered? none of you can answer serious questions like this with a real response, but you believe that someone else knows the answer to it. nonono, YOU are the one that believes that the earth is flat, so you should be able to disprove and answer any questions like this. otherwise it shows that there is a possibility your theory is completely false and untrue.

You had respect for this site? You just threw away any respect I had for you.

God damn the inability to express sarcasm on forums.

Quote from: TheEngineer on November 03, 2007, 03:33:24 PM

Quote from: questions on November 03, 2007, 03:24:47 PM

So, is there such a thing as gravity or not? 

Not as a force.  Only as a concept.

Okay... So, are you saying that, in the FE, the stars and moon hold no gravitational properties?

Quote from: questions on November 03, 2007, 03:24:47 PM

Quote from: FE FAQ

Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"

A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.

Is the FAQ incorrect?  I thought it was the compendium of theories pertaining to the FE. 

If the FAQ is, in fact, correct, please answer: What makes the stars and moon have that gravitational pull? 

Magic.

I now have a clearer understanding of WHAT the DEF is supposed to be, but still do not understand how that relates to the bold sections above.  Is it everywhere?  Is it just in a "bubble" of sorts around the FE solar system (I don't know what else to call it)?  If it's a bubble, what holds it in place?  If it's everywhere, why doesn't it push down on the atmosphere?

The DEF is a direct consequence of the interaction of Dark Energy and the magnetic field of the Earth.  Dark Energy is responsible for the acceleration of the visible celestial bodies. 

Yes, the wonderous USA.

Okay... So, are you saying that, in the FE, the stars and moon hold no gravitational properties?

I'm saying that the force of gravity is nothing of the sort.

Gravitation exists, gravity as a force does not.

yeah, right. i once heard of an experiment where someone took 2 weights, one large and one small, both hanging down.

when he passed near a mountain, the smaller weight MOVED SIDEWAYS. why? because of THE MOUNTAIN'S GRAVITY!

yeah, right. i once heard of an experiment where someone took 2 weights, one large and one small, both hanging down.

when he passed near a mountain, the smaller weight MOVED SIDEWAYS. why? because of THE MOUNTAIN'S GRAVITY!

First off, you were lied to.  The mountain would have to be extremely dense and very small in order to perform an experiment of that kind. 

Second, that experiment does nothing to show that gravity as a force exists.

Questions I still want an answer for:

Okay, I have another question that I never saw an answer to:

Quote from: FE FAQ

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.

A2: There is a counter-mass which pulls the Earth back into a disc shape.

Q: "Why does gravity vary with altitude?"

A: The moon and stars have a slight gravitational pull.

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.

So, is there such a thing as gravity or not?  Can't have it both ways.  If so, what causes that gravity?  Is it the mass of the stars and moon?  Is it what they're made of?  Please don't tell me it's related to DEF again.    This isn't about "moon and stars having gravity VS. earth having gravity," BTW, which is what is addressed in the FAQ.

Quote from: questions on November 03, 2007, 03:36:31 PM

I now have a clearer understanding of WHAT the DEF is supposed to be, but still do not understand how that relates to the bold sections above.  Is it everywhere?  Is it just in a "bubble" of sorts around the FE solar system (I don't know what else to call it)?  If it's a bubble, what holds it in place?  If it's everywhere, why doesn't it push down on the atmosphere?

The DEF is a direct consequence of the interaction of Dark Energy and the magnetic field of the Earth.  Dark Energy is responsible for the acceleration of the visible celestial bodies. 

Now, I understand having to change the model of an FE universe with the times and undebatable scientific fact.  (Boy, did THAT sound funny, on account of the nature of what we're discussing.  XD)  And I understand that all of what you're hypothesizing is impossible to prove, if I grant you that we "have never sent anything to space."  However, based on what you assume to be rock-solid scientific fact, I'd like ideas on the questions above.  Not FACTS, as it would be impossible to determine (to your satisfaction) whether they are, in actuality, facts.  Just your hypotheses. 

I know it's easier to ignore questions which are difficult or uncomfortable to answer, but for your theory to have any credibility, you can't just answer the questions you like and forget the ones you don't.  Please provide some speculation.


PS, I will not be online again for a few days, so feel free to take a while thinking if it's required.  But don't forget to answer, please. 

Please answer.  I give you FE'ers more credit than most people coming to this site.  I am asking for credible hypotheses.  Not for definite answers.  Please answer me. 

Yes I came to this site so that I could perhaps get some credible reasons for a FE model. But all I have had is abuse from the members and being stubbornly told to read the FAQ which I have done and then had questions which I wished to ask.

I mean my simple questions thread highlights some problems with the FE model and so has my other two posts for observing stellar parallax. It would be nice to get the FE model take on these natural observations.

Genmotty

The DEF is an energy field that satisfies the Einstein Field Equations.  This field has a certain gradient which is greatest at the boundary layer, or the interaction layer with the atmosphere.  This field is a vector, which interacts with the magnetic field vector of the Earth.  These vectors create a force vector that is orthogonal to the other forces in four dimensional space.  This force is always normal to the boundary layer, thus providing a type of containment for the atmosphere.

This should be added to the FAQ.

It's genius.

I thought so.