Money?

  • 52 Replies
  • 16159 Views
Re: Money?
« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2008, 12:18:32 PM »
Quote
Am I lost?  I thought I was on the Flat Earth Society web site? 

The Flat Earth model makes no claims on the topography of the earth or the distances between points. There are presently multiple hypothetical models and layouts being studied and discussed.

The Round Earth model does make specific claims for distance between points. You guys will have to prove, demonstrate, and provide evidence that those distances on the globe reflect reality. If you are claiming that the RE distances and figures are correct then the burden is on you to prove your claim. It's no one's job to disprove your claims. It is your sole responsibility to prove your own claims.

Sounds like FET is running way behind then.  I suggest you all get to work and at least get a map together.

Also, explain how a line of latitude 23.5 degrees north of 0 and 23.5 degrees south of 0 can be the same length on a flat round surface.  I've been racking my brain and can't figure it out.  You might need to draw a picture for us less able to visualize the magic in Flat Earth Hypothesis.
The Earth is Round.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Money?
« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2008, 12:19:06 PM »
Quote
Sure you have, but maybe not in numbers.  For example in the UN map you are claiming that the tropic of Capricorn and Antarctic circle are larger than the equator.  They would have to be in that map.

No one is claiming that the UN map is true. The UN map is a hypothesis. There are other hypothetical maps of the Flat Earth where the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capercorn are about the same size.
I see no lines of longitude or latitude drawn on that map so I don't see how you can speculate that the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn are anywhere near the same size.

Quote
Besides, you have yet to collect evidence showing that the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn are the same size. How can we know whether they are the same size if you refuse to go out and collect evidence demonstrating it so?

Tom, all of the leg work for the RE model has already been done.  When is FES going to go out and collect their own data and compile a decent FE map?  If you can't even compile an accurate FE map, then FET isn't much of a theory.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

dim

  • 404
  • More overpowered than Aristotel.
Re: Money?
« Reply #32 on: November 13, 2008, 01:05:56 PM »

Also, explain how a line of latitude 23.5 degrees north of 0 and 23.5 degrees south of 0 can be the same length on a flat round surface.  I've been racking my brain and can't figure it out.  You might need to draw a picture for us less able to visualize the magic in Flat Earth Hypothesis.


It can mean only one - maps are faked. Distances on them are incorrect.

Re: Money?
« Reply #33 on: November 13, 2008, 01:15:10 PM »

Also, explain how a line of latitude 23.5 degrees north of 0 and 23.5 degrees south of 0 can be the same length on a flat round surface.  I've been racking my brain and can't figure it out.  You might need to draw a picture for us less able to visualize the magic in Flat Earth Hypothesis.


It can mean only one - maps are faked. Distances on them are incorrect.

That would be fine if there was a map, but there isn't a map of Flat Earth.
The Earth is Round.

?

dim

  • 404
  • More overpowered than Aristotel.
Re: Money?
« Reply #34 on: November 13, 2008, 01:32:39 PM »

That would be fine if there was a map, but there isn't a map of Flat Earth.

There are examples of what map can look like and there aren't complete maps, even from the short time around 1800s when FE was reaggravated. And that it because FE doesn't limit possible borders. The distances could be just too significant for exploration. Antarctica could be just one big icy continent, and after it there is a water water and water with no plane can reach, and if it flies there he would anyhow turn himself back to  the spot he taken off becauze he is equiped with RE map and RE equipment.

or there is an Ice Wall around our world. And it only differs with RE maps that RE uses distances and FE not.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 01:36:39 PM by dim »

*

Snaaaaake

  • 1089
  • ROUND000
Re: Money?
« Reply #35 on: November 13, 2008, 01:58:00 PM »
Quote
If you make a claim its not our responsibility to prove you wrong. It is your sole responsibility to prove yourself right. A coin doesn't exist under the walnut because you say so. You must lift the walnut yourself for everyone and demonstrate that a coin indeed exists. No one should operate under a pretense that a coin exists under the walnut. That's called blind faith, and is completely disgusting.

In a discussion on the supernatural no one needs to prove that ghost's *don't* exist. The burden of proof is on the claimant.

The burden of proof is always on he who makes the claim. So where's your proof for all of your claims?

Funnily enough, you're the one making the claim that the Earth is flat in the first place. You only think it's flat just because it "appears" flat and you "read" Earth Not a Globe. You have also claimed you've done the experiments, but have provided no evidence at that you have at all. That, my friends, is the definition of blind faith.

You also NEVER dare argue against the midnight sun. All you can say is it "doesn't exist". Where's you're proof it doesn't exist? There's been plenty of expeditions to Antarctica proving the midnight sun does exist.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/541907/antarctica_land_of_the_midnight_sun.html

We told you to go to rehab, but you were all like "no, no, no!" ::)

Re: Money?
« Reply #36 on: November 13, 2008, 02:11:35 PM »

That would be fine if there was a map, but there isn't a map of Flat Earth.

There are examples of what map can look like and there aren't complete maps, even from the short time around 1800s when FE was reaggravated. And that it because FE doesn't limit possible borders. The distances could be just too significant for exploration. Antarctica could be just one big icy continent, and after it there is a water water and water with no plane can reach, and if it flies there he would anyhow turn himself back to  the spot he taken off becauze he is equiped with RE map and RE equipment.

or there is an Ice Wall around our world. And it only differs with RE maps that RE uses distances and FE not.

Then that proves we live on a round earth.  If Flat Earth doesn't use distances we would not know how much fuel our plane needed to fly to New Zealand or how much time it would take us to travel that far.  Your post doesn't make sense to me.  How can distances not be significant?
The Earth is Round.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: Money?
« Reply #37 on: November 13, 2008, 02:38:32 PM »
No one is claiming that the UN map is true. The UN map is a hypothesis. There are other hypothetical maps of the Flat Earth where the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capercorn are about the same size.

Besides, you have yet to collect evidence showing that the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn are the same size. How can we know whether they are the same size if you refuse to go out and collect evidence demonstrating it so?

You don't have to claim the UN map is true.  Listen, you don't deny that distances are traveled using RE assumptions for maps in modern day both at sea and in the air do you?

This is fact, if you map a spherical or spheroid object onto a flat surface there will be distortions.  There is no way around this.  Try taking a globe of the earth, then cut it open and try to flatten it out.  Pieces will be separated from other pieces and will have to be stretched, or distorted in order to make the pieces fit.

The same goes the other way around.  Try taking a flat map of the earth (I don't care, any one).  Then force it into a globe shape without folding any parts of the map, it's impossible.

So you see the evidence is that we are able to accurately calculate distances and travel across the world using RE maps and RE assumptions, if the earth was flat then this simply would not be possible because of the reasons I stated above.

As for the tropic of Cancer and tropic of Capricorn, why do I have to personally go out and get you data when hundreds of others already have the data.  I can certainly provide you with their data, I could probably also find out how they calculated it as well, if you believe it is wrong then show us some evidence that it is wrong.

By the way, I do not see how the Tropic of Capricorn and Cancer would be the same size on that map.  Please show me by indicating the 23.5 degree line in both the north and south hemisphere.

You haven't provided any data demonstrating whether the constellations from these far off points would or would not work, or what the reading of the compass would be from those far off points. Why not provide some actual data instead of making assumptions on what is seen and what isn't seen?

We know how a compass works, we know the location of the North and South magnetic poles, and we know that no matter where you stand on the earth, the poles are approximately 180 degrees from an observers vantage point.  That is, if an observer was looking in the direction of the north pole, on any location on the earth, the south pole would be approximately 180 degrees from where he is currently facing.

As for constellations, the southern cross and the north pole are both almost fixed in the sky.  This is what makes them good for navigation, on any of your maps they would most certainly not be fixed.

You haven't provided us evidence of a Midnight Sun over Antarctica period. Get back to me when you guys have some actual evidence to bring to the table.

Again, plenty of other people have, why don't you prove them wrong.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Money?
« Reply #38 on: November 13, 2008, 08:02:30 PM »
Quote
If you make a claim its not our responsibility to prove you wrong. It is your sole responsibility to prove yourself right. A coin doesn't exist under the walnut because you say so. You must lift the walnut yourself for everyone and demonstrate that a coin indeed exists. No one should operate under a pretense that a coin exists under the walnut. That's called blind faith, and is completely disgusting.

In a discussion on the supernatural no one needs to prove that ghost's *don't* exist. The burden of proof is on the claimant.

The burden of proof is always on he who makes the claim. So where's your proof for all of your claims?

Funnily enough, you're the one making the claim that the Earth is flat in the first place. You only think it's flat just because it "appears" flat and you "read" Earth Not a Globe. You have also claimed you've done the experiments, but have provided no evidence at that you have at all. That, my friends, is the definition of blind faith.

You also NEVER dare argue against the midnight sun. All you can say is it "doesn't exist". Where's you're proof it doesn't exist? There's been plenty of expeditions to Antarctica proving the midnight sun does exist.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/541907/antarctica_land_of_the_midnight_sun.html

Search for "sky mirror".
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Money?
« Reply #41 on: November 13, 2008, 09:14:34 PM »
Quote
You don't have to claim the UN map is true.  Listen, you don't deny that distances are traveled using RE assumptions for maps in modern day both at sea and in the air do you?

Actually, I do. Where's the direct evidence that worldwide flights in the travel the exact distances you need them to travel?

Quote
We know how a compass works, we know the location of the North and South magnetic poles, and we know that no matter where you stand on the earth, the poles are approximately 180 degrees from an observers vantage point.  That is, if an observer was looking in the direction of the north pole, on any location on the earth, the south pole would be approximately 180 degrees from where he is currently facing.

Proof?

Quote
Again, plenty of other people have, why don't you prove them wrong.

I don't see any direct evidence of that phenomenon in Antarctica. Maybe once you bring some evidence to the table we can continue this conversation. But as it is you just keep on making claims without proof to back up your statements.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2008, 09:17:55 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Money?
« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2008, 05:11:26 AM »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: Money?
« Reply #43 on: November 14, 2008, 06:57:22 AM »
Actually, I do. Where's the direct evidence that worldwide flights in the travel the exact distances you need them to travel?

So you are claiming that they use FE distances and assumptions to travel?  How many people are in on this conspiracy Tom.  What exactly are you claiming is used to travel if it isn't RE based maps?

Quote
We know how a compass works, we know the location of the North and South magnetic poles, and we know that no matter where you stand on the earth, the poles are approximately 180 degrees from an observers vantage point.  That is, if an observer was looking in the direction of the north pole, on any location on the earth, the south pole would be approximately 180 degrees from where he is currently facing.

Proof?

I have to prove to you how a fucking compass works now?

I don't see any direct evidence of that phenomenon in Antarctica. Maybe once you bring some evidence to the table we can continue this conversation. But as it is you just keep on making claims without proof to back up your statements.

This is somebodies first hand account of 24 hour sunlight in Antarctica.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/541907/antarctica_land_of_the_midnight_sun.html?cat=16


I see you completely ignored this:

Quote
As for the tropic of Cancer and tropic of Capricorn, why do I have to personally go out and get you data when hundreds of others already have the data.  I can certainly provide you with their data, I could probably also find out how they calculated it as well, if you believe it is wrong then show us some evidence that it is wrong.

Again, if people have already done the work then why do I have to prove it too you personally?

Also, you understand this concept right?

Quote
This is fact, if you map a spherical or spheroid object onto a flat surface there will be distortions.  There is no way around this.  Try taking a globe of the earth, then cut it open and try to flatten it out.  Pieces will be separated from other pieces and will have to be stretched, or distorted in order to make the pieces fit.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Money?
« Reply #44 on: November 14, 2008, 11:50:15 AM »
Quote
So you are claiming that they use FE distances and assumptions to travel?  How many people are in on this conspiracy Tom.  What exactly are you claiming is used to travel if it isn't RE based maps?

Pilots aren't really in a position to use any maps beyond comparing the shapes of landmasses to the shapes of landmasses on maps. The primary focus of the pilot is to get his plane to a certain longitude and latitude, which is usually done by autopilot anyway.

Quote
I have to prove to you how a fucking compass works now?

You'll have to prove that the compass shows what you're saying it shows on the opposite side of Antarctica.

Quote
This is somebodies first hand account of 24 hour sunlight in Antarctica.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/541907/antarctica_land_of_the_midnight_sun.html?cat=16

Who is studying the midnight sun and making those claims? Scientists stationed on the government's antarctic military bases, perhaps?

Quote
As for the tropic of Cancer and tropic of Capricorn, why do I have to personally go out and get you data when hundreds of others already have the data.  I can certainly provide you with their data, I could probably also find out how they calculated it as well, if you believe it is wrong then show us some evidence that it is wrong.

If you can provide actual raw data, provide it then. I've been waiting for your evidence for a while now.

Quote
Again, if people have already done the work then why do I have to prove it too you personally?

The burden is on he who makes the claim. If you are making claims for certain distances between points, the burden is on you to provide direct evidence for your claim.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Money?
« Reply #45 on: November 14, 2008, 12:08:45 PM »
Quote
So you are claiming that they use FE distances and assumptions to travel?  How many people are in on this conspiracy Tom.  What exactly are you claiming is used to travel if it isn't RE based maps?

Pilots aren't really in a position to use any maps beyond comparing the shapes of landmasses to the shapes of landmasses on maps. The primary focus of the pilot is to get his plane to a certain longitude and latitude, which is usually done by autopilot anyway.

Not all planes have autopilot.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17920
Re: Money?
« Reply #46 on: November 14, 2008, 01:45:07 PM »
Quote
Not all planes have autopilot.

In situations where autopilot is not available the pilot must constantly check his latitude and longitude manually and make the appropriate adjustments to his course.

Quote
Yes Tom, this thread is to do with money. The FE claim is that NASA, or the government, or the Lizard Army I'm not sure which, is making money hand over fist by deceiving Joe Public (in fact every person on the planet). I showed you how it would in fact be very expensive to replace the satellite system with stratellites, and I think Rig or ragnarr showed how wasting fibre optic cables would (as the title suggests) be pretty expensive.

So what evidence can you produce that NASA is spending little of its budget (on the conspiracy naturally) and then pocketing all the rest?

As you say yourself, the burden is on he who makes the claim, so let's have it.

Hold on there. I don't need to prove that NASA *isn't* spending its money on space research. I don't need to prove that they *aren't* going into space. I don't need to prove a negative. Those are all your claims. The burden is on you to prove that those science fiction fantasies are true.

What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter straight up at 7 miles per second (3rd stage of the Saturn V), and that NASA can do the impossible on a daily basis, explore the cosmos, and constantly wow the nation by landing a man on the moon and sending robots to mars; or is the simplest explanation that they really can't do all of that stuff?

The burden of you is to prove these things to us. You're the one making the claim. The simplest explanation is that NASA really can't do all of that stuff.

If two people are having a debate, should the burden of proof rest on the shoulders of the person who make the most complicated claim, or should the burden of proof rest on the shoulders of the person who makes the simplest and easily observable claim?

In a discussion on the existence of ghosts should the burden of proof be on the group mumbling "just because you can't see something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist," or should the burden of proof be on everyone else to prove that ghosts *don't* exist?

A company called Mollar International claims to have invented a flying car with safety comparable to a land vehicle, an outstanding performance of a 400 mile range, and sophisticated never before seen computer control. They claim that the Sky Car is ready to be mass produced if only they got a few more big investments. They've released a few videos of it hovering a short distance off the ground in test flights. Should the burden of proof be on the Moller proponents who are absolutely certain that all of Moller's claims are true, or should the burden of proof be on everyone else to prove that Moller's claims are *not* true?

So where's your proof that NASA does all the things you claim they do?
« Last Edit: November 14, 2008, 01:55:14 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: Money?
« Reply #47 on: November 14, 2008, 01:58:40 PM »
Quote
Pilots aren't really in a position to use any maps beyond comparing the shapes of landmasses to the shapes of landmasses on maps. The primary focus of the pilot is to get his plane to a certain longitude and latitude, which is usually done by autopilot anyway.

Actually pilot carefully plan out their flight plan before they take off using maps.  You just made that up:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_navigation

They also use dead reckoning and now Inertial Navigation System to determine their positions and how far they have gone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_navigation_system

Quote
You'll have to prove that the compass shows what you're saying it shows on the opposite side of Antarctica.

Magnetic poles are always opposite each other.  Break a Bar magnet in half, and you have two separate magnets each with its own set of poles.

Quote
Who is studying the midnight sun and making those claims? Scientists stationed on the government's antarctic military bases, perhaps?

I thought it was only NASA in on the conspiracy?  Government scientists are not the only ones who visit Antarctica.  There were 13,000 visitors to the continent in 2003.

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/an.htm
Quote
Population Officially none, but governmental research stations are populated with small groups of scientists at all times. In addition, in 2003, over 13,000 tourists visited the continent.
 


*

Snaaaaake

  • 1089
  • ROUND000
Re: Money?
« Reply #48 on: November 14, 2008, 07:45:18 PM »
Quote
Who is studying the midnight sun and making those claims? Scientists stationed on the government's antarctic military bases, perhaps?

Ooh...so close, but wrong again, like always.

If you really wanted to, you could plan an expedition to Antarctica and see it for yourself. Being the dirty liar you are, you'd come back and say you didn't see anything.

Also Tom, don't even bother saying that I have to do it. You're the one making the claim it doesn't exist.
We told you to go to rehab, but you were all like "no, no, no!" ::)

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Money?
« Reply #49 on: November 14, 2008, 08:06:00 PM »
Quote
Who is studying the midnight sun and making those claims? Scientists stationed on the government's antarctic military bases, perhaps?

I thought it was only NASA in on the conspiracy?  Government scientists are not the only ones who visit Antarctica.  There were 13,000 visitors to the continent in 2003.

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/an.htm
Quote
Population Officially none, but governmental research stations are populated with small groups of scientists at all times. In addition, in 2003, over 13,000 tourists visited the continent.
 

There are even people who run marathons in Antarctica.
http://www.marathontours.com/index.cfm/page/Event-Information/pid/10738
http://www.adventure-network.com/display.asp?navid=1&id=59
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: Money?
« Reply #50 on: November 15, 2008, 09:14:43 AM »
Right, all Tom has to do is say that they are making money, and that makes it true.

Re: Money?
« Reply #51 on: November 17, 2008, 08:22:13 AM »
Besides Tom, you can't just say what is the simplest explanation possible.  It isn't what NASA has done, the achievements man has made in order to make space flight possible; it's all the holes Flat Earth Hypothesis has to jump through in order to not make it possible.  That is what places the burden of proof on your Flat Earth Hypothesis.  Space flight is accepted by almost everyone walking the face of this planet.  All the hoaxes and crazy theories Flat Earth Hypothesis has to come up with to explain away accepted belief places the belief back on you.
The Earth is Round.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: Money?
« Reply #52 on: November 19, 2008, 10:07:06 AM »
Quote
Theres supposed to be people making money out of a 'round earth'. How?

NASA rakes in billions of dollars every year. If they're not doing space research, where is the money going?

Also statements like this which are completely untrue.