Okay. I want pictures of this ice wall.

Considering this goes back to the romans and maybe even earlier, can you explain to me where romans got all this technology from and, if they actually had it, why is there no remain of this so technologically advanced society besides stone ruins?

And how many Romans do you reckon sent successful expeditions to Antarctica?

Nero sent an expedition to find the source of the Nile which went as least as far as Abissinia (Ethiopia) and Uganda, but obviously did not go to "antarctica."  The romans also traded with the Indians at least as far back as 200 BC.  There is much information about this trade in 'The Periplus of the Erythraen Sea' written by a mariner from the first century AD.  And theIranians navigated at least as far as Senegal in the sixth century BC.  This is not to mention the circumnavigation of AFrica by thebiblical Pharoah Necho of Egypt around the year 600 BC and Hanno's (the navigator from Carthage) journey to the americas a century later.  

  As to an ice wall, I do believe there is a wall (reguardless of what it is made of, but it is infinitely higher than 150 feet (it is the wall that at its top curves into an arch forming the roof of the world), and I believe a further land beyond the outer ocean encircles the earth and its outlying islands.  Ancient cosmogonies attest to this outer land.  The wal would be beyond this.

  In searching for the Garden of Eden, one should take into account that the fact is India is farther east than China as older maps depict it a such until Mercator and sixteenth century scientists reoriented mapmaking.  There are many areas of the earth modern navigators never even think of exploring due to their brainwashing by the modern teaching of geography.  The fact is a terrestrial paradise does exist in the far east where the Garden of Eden is located.

  I have a copyof the Lonely Planet guide to antarctica which seems to contain more information than most other sources about this area.  It does not seem to provide any information relating to circumnavigations of antarctica which Rowbotham had written took infinetly longer periods of time than circumnavigations of the arctic circle, and he quote several sea captains and navigators who had attempted both as confirmation of this.  Plato and others mentioned a continent to the south of Africa acording to maps I have seen attempting to represent their views, but I have yet to read all of Plato's 'Timaues' which deals with these subjects like cosmology and geography.  I do not find it impossilbe for a large island to exist in the south, but I do not at all take the Lonely Planet's map of the alleged continent at face value.  The modern representation of antarctica is simply unfounded and false.  

  However, as the shape of the cosmos is based on that of the ancient Temple of the Israelites, there do exist storehouses of divers things such as snow or floodgates, et cetera alongside the four edges of the world.  This is what God was referring to when He spoke to Job out of the whirlwind.  The Book of Enoch also contains valuable information relating to this and such things as the seven pillars of wisdom and the seven mountains of the Apocalypse.  The shape of the earth does indeed seem to be a flat circle surrounded by and resting on the sea (which has a few islands in it, large and small) (and with a vast mountain in it around which the sun and moon revolve creating night by the sun's shadow), but the shape of the whole world (including earth and the outer sea) is definitly rectangular as the base of the ancient Israelite Temple in Jerusalem was as well as that of the Tabernacle that preceeded it.

 - Dionysios

However, as the shape of the cosmos is based on that of the ancient Temple of the Israelites, there do exist storehouses of divers things such as snow or floodgates, et cetera alongside the four edges of the world.  This is what God was referring to when He spoke to Job out of the whirlwind.

A bit of a nitpick here, but don't you mean the shape of the Temple of the Israelites is based on the shape of the cosmos, not the other way around?

I confess I very strongly want to insist NO, that is exactly what I mean, butI have not really investigated that. At any rate, the Temple is an accurate representation of the cosmos including the shape of it.

  Your question did bring to mind something I had read about the Ark of Aaron and the ancient Israelites which resides in Axum, Abyssinia (Ethiopia) to this day.  The Ark has a Guardian who has devoted his life to it, and is named by his predecessor on the latter's deathbed moments before his death.

  The British author Graham Hancock who had dedicated his life to finding the truth about the Ark approached this monk outside the Saint Mary of Zion Sanctuary in which the Ark resides one evening in the early 1980's.  After ascertaining to his satisfaction from the monk that This was the original Ark of Aaron and Moses described in the Bible and that he was the guardian, he had asked if it would be possibleto see it.  The monk replied in the negative as he was the only person permitted to see it.  Not the president or the king of Ethiopia or even bishops of the Ethiopian church were permitted to see it, but him alone.  It was however, brought out once a year in a religious procession (in the month of January according to the gregorian calendar).  So Hancock asked him that if he came back in January, would it be possible to see it in the procession.  To this the monk replied that he would still not be able to see the Ark even if he were present for the ceremony as before it is brought out, he must wrap it in many layers of thick cloths to protect the laity from it.  

  The monk said to protect the laity from the Ark of the Old Covenant, not the other way around.

 I have read that after descending from the summit of Sinai that Moses had to wear a veil for the rest of life to protect the people from the Glory that shone from his face.

- Dionysios

Quote from: "sto0fo0"

Considering this goes back to the romans and maybe even earlier, can you explain to me where romans got all this technology from and, if they actually had it, why is there no remain of this so technologically advanced society besides stone ruins?

And how many Romans do you reckon sent successful expeditions to Antarctica?

If the romans believed in this flat earth theory wouldn't they know about the ice wall. Other wise that would mean flat earthers have added ideas to the theory over the course of time to help support their ideas.

Quote from: "Dogplatter"

Quote from: "sto0fo0"

Considering this goes back to the romans and maybe even earlier, can you explain to me where romans got all this technology from and, if they actually had it, why is there no remain of this so technologically advanced society besides stone ruins?

And how many Romans do you reckon sent successful expeditions to Antarctica?

If the romans believed in this flat earth theory wouldn't they know about the ice wall. Other wise that would mean flat earthers have added ideas to the theory over the course of time to help support their ideas.

Isn't that the way all theories work?

could i just point out that if the govornment were to let us get our hands on a picture, or indeed get near the wall then they would in fact have failed in keeping us from the truth, so possibility of evidence is next to none.

I still don't understand why.  Why would over 1/3 of the entire world try constantly to keep the rest of us from knowing what shape the earth is?  It makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.

neither do we, thats the point, we wander as to why they keep it secret from us, by we, i mean you, i am slightly enlightened into some of the govornment plans (read my other post)

here is what it looked like millions of years ago

I have to admit, this was really creative.

I still don't understand why.  Why would over 1/3 of the entire world try constantly to keep the rest of us from knowing what shape the earth is?  It makes absolutely no sense what-so-ever.

Who says it's a third of the world? I generally assume the conspiracy's membership to be much smaller. Still at least in the millions, but nowhere near a third of the Earth.

tbh there are enough sonar bouys in the sea to spot any ship that gets within 1000 km of it easy, and there are also enough radar sites that can do the same.


and you wouldn't need to send someone there to kill them,  just a cruise missile. the new range of destroyers can give you a firing solution on a tennis ball going at mach 5 afterall.

A CRUISE MISSILE? You can take cruise ships to Antarctica (your purported ice wall), you know.

Yes you can, to the gov't controlled areas like research stations.


On a similar note, I was so happy when reading this thread, only to have my hopes crushed, I thought Dionysios started posting again, as I saw his sig.

Discuss.

hahaha brilliant! icewall AND penguins!!!

There is no ice wall. Even if they had a million people guarding it, there would still be "curious" people (if I may call them that) who would try to see it or take pictures of it; there are people who crash into buildings and die willingly, despite air defense systems and patrolling military aircraft, if you know what I mean, yet you think that such people wouldn't be able to reach the "ice wall" - not ONE proof of it in over 1000 years?

While the inexistent ice wall guards could now have helicopters and guns and launching pads and sharks with lasers attached to their heads guarding their precious secret 24/7, they didn't have those 500 years ago. At that time they would've had swords and armors and shields and they would've frozen at -50 degrees Celsius. And while the "curious" wouldn't have been able to take pictures back then because cameras didn't exist, there would've been at least ONE written mention by some brave knight who fought through frozen ice wall guards and got a glimpse of this magnificent structure.

And those damn ice wall guards! When they retire, they keep their secret SO safe, that of ALL the conspiracies in this world (even the 1947 Roswell crash) only this one didn't leak (not even ONE retired ice wall guard told his wife and children that he guarded it in a moment of drunkenness, or on his deathbed - man, ALL of these guys are SO well trained!)... and remember, it's been around for over 1000 years, with no proof backing it up!

Yes, there is definitely an ice wall at the end of our flat earth... also Cuba is the most democratic country on earth and Eastern Europeans discovered America.

Also, therewould have been a leak in the government. Or one of the thousands of past "ice wall" guards would have told people. There is no way that you can say that they wouldn't say anything, NO WAY!!!

Also, therewould have been a leak in the government. Or one of the thousands of past "ice wall" guards would have told people. There is no way that you can say that they wouldn't say anything, NO WAY!!!

Well after each tour of duty, they take the guard and hold up this silver tube with a red light.  One flash and the guards memory is wiped.  The guys who control the tubes wear dark sunglasses that protect them, and black suits...Kind of like the Blues Brothers.

Also, therewould have been a leak in the government. Or one of the thousands of past "ice wall" guards would have told people. There is no way that you can say that they wouldn't say anything, NO WAY!!!

The ice wall is constructed from the frozen bodies of retired ice wall guards from throughout human history. They never told anyone.

Can somebody explain where this logic that there would be a leak in the conspiracy.

How do we know how many secret conspiracy exist without leaks?  It could be none, it could be bazillions.  The point about a secret conspiracy is that if it remains secret we can never know about it.  Therefore we can't know how much phase space we have to calculate the odds of a conspiracy remaining secret because we don't get to know about any secret conspiracies that succeed.

Can somebody explain where this logic that there would be a leak in the conspiracy.

How do we know how many secret conspiracy exist without leaks? It could be none, it could be bazillions. The point about a secret conspiracy is that if it remains secret we can never know about it. Therefore we can't know how much phase space we have to calculate the odds of a conspiracy remaining secret because we don't get to know about any secret conspiracies that succeed.

There is no need to disprove something that was born out of thin air. There is no proof, nor observations confirming the existence of such a conspiracy. Please state your proof or observations of a worldwide conspiracy and then, if incorrect, we will disprove them.

What are you talking about?


A number of REers have said that the conspiracy can't exist because if it did somebody would have leaked the information and we'd know that the world was flat.

Look here is a quote:

Also, therewould have been a leak in the government. Or one of the thousands of past "ice wall" guards would have told people. There is no way that you can say that they wouldn't say anything, NO WAY!!!

Do you see?  I didn't write that - somebody else did.  A number of other REers have said the same thing.  I'm trying to understand what the logic behind that statement is.

Regardless of if there is a need to disprove the conspiracy or not they are trying to and that is the logic they are using.  I am responding to what they've said with a logical argument saying that what they are saying is false.  I'm not even saying that the conspiracy exists - just that their logic is a fallacy.  I'm sorry this is so hard for your brain to comprehend.

I comprehend your nonsense - as much as it can be comprehended. Unfortunately you are wasting your time trying to correct others when your initial claims (that there is a government conspiracy) rests on nothing. All that people are trying to show you is that IF there was a conspiracy (which there isn't) it wouldn't have been able to remain hidden under the circumstances that you've presented (with no proof, may I add). It's very easy.

Yes I understand what they're saying.

What I'm asking is:

How do we know that it couldn't remain hidden if it did exist?[/size]

And the reason I'm asking is because we can't, by definition, know how many secret conspiracies remain secret so we can't calculate any odds of a conspiracy remaining secret since we only find out about the ones that fail (and not the ones that succeed).

We know that it couldn't remain hidden if it existed because the circumstances under which it's been put forth do not allow it to remain hidden. Many people are intelligent and resourceful; many of those are also curious.
The fact that this conspiracy is simply too "big" to stay hidden, coupled with the curious human nature, implies that it would've leaked eventually. Failure to understand this simple point only shows that you don't have common sense, and instead prefer to complicate things beyond any reasonable doubt.

So you are saying that it is theoretically impossible for the conspiracy to have existed?

Surely you can see the difference between something being unlikely and something being impossible. the-earth-is-roundLH claimed that there was "NO WAY" that the conspiracy could remain secret but if that is the case surely you can provide logical proof of why this is.  I accept the fact that it's unlikely but even if the odds of it remaining secret were 1 to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 then there would still be 1 way that it could happen.

No, I'm not saying that it is theoretically impossible for the conspiracy to have existed.
I am only saying that if it existed:

The fact that this conspiracy is simply too "big" to stay hidden, coupled with the curious human nature, implies that it would've leaked eventually.

It didn't leak, so it doesn't exist.

In reply to

I accept the fact that it's unlikely but even if the odds of it remaining secret were 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 then there would still be 1 way that it could happen.

all I can say is that you clearly are one of the people whom I was referring to and likes to complicate things beyond any reasonable doubt if you prefer to believe the chance of 1 over 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Therefore you are unreasonable and lack common sense.

So you are saying that it is theoretically impossible for the conspiracy to have existed?

Surely you can see the difference between something being unlikely and something being impossible. the-earth-is-roundLH claimed that there was "NO WAY" that the conspiracy could remain secret but if that is the case surely you can provide logical proof of why this is.  I accept the fact that it's unlikely but even if the odds of it remaining secret were 1 to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 then there would still be 1 way that it could happen.

Why would you beleive in such an unlikely occurance rather than just beleive that there is no conspiracy?

I'm not saying that I do believe such an unlikely occurance or that the odds are as dramatic as I pointed out.

What I'm saying is that I don't understand how people can say with such surety that there is "NO WAY" that such a conspiracy could go undetected.  I'm saying this is the case because we can't know how many conspiracies go undetected so we can't know how hard it is - and even if we did know how many did go undetected we can still see theoretical ways that such a conspiracy could go undetected.  What I'm saying is that this claim that there is "NO WAY" that the conspiracy could go undetected is a false claim that isn't based on logic.

So to be clear - I am speculating in this argument.  I am not trying to present a correct or incorrect view of reality.  I'm trying to show that there are actually some ways that the conspiracy could go undetected and that we can't calculate the odds of that happening anyway.

I have to agree with beast here.  How would you know that the conspiracy would have to be leaked?  Regardless of how improbable it seems, it is by no means impossible to contain such a thing.  And you cannot say "it would require so many men it would have to be leaked by someone."  The government has technology that the general public does not have.  I don't think anyone will disagree with this.  We can't say they don't have the manpower or technology to pull off such a feat.  They may very well have the technology to pull it off, and they may be doing it with very few people.  I know it may seem frustrating to argue against, but there really is nothing you can do to disprove the statement.

EDIT:  Look up "possibility falacy."

EDIT:  Look up "possibility falacy."

Hmm, I don't think I've ever heard of this one. I can only find one site that mentions it.