Okay. I want pictures of this ice wall.

well now before I post them...

if I can provide pictures of an Icewall, in high quality, which is thousands of meters high, and extends left and right as far as the camera can see, would there be any RE'ers converted to truth?

I want your solemn word on this. my bet though is you will regard them as faked.

so why even ask for them?

well now before I post them...

if I can provide pictures of an Icewall, in high quality, which is thousands of meters high, and extends left and right as far as the camera can see, would there be any RE'ers converted to truth?

I want your solemn word on this. my bet though is you will regard them as faked.

so why even ask for them?

I live in Antarctica.

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on July 21, 2009, 06:42:17 PM

I live in Antarctica.

I've never heard of it. Could you possibly mean the Ice Wall?

Mr. the Great, I am not impressed by your analysis.

Supposing for a moment that the government does guard it solely by posting men on it, these men are 150 in the air.  From that hight they can see at least 15 miles in every relevant direction (this of course is calculating using the RE model... on a FE they might see farther).  Thus you can cover the whole wall with just 78,225/30 = 2608 men.

You can decrease it further by giving them snowmobiles and having them ride between waypoints.  If they can ride 10 mph and still keep an eye on things, then in one hour one sixth the previous number -- or 652 men -- can cover the wall in an hour.  In fact, doing this gives them better coverage, since this way their 15-mile-radius field of vision doesn't have any holes.

Now take the terrain into account -- much of the Ice Wall is probably unapproachable except by air -- and you can trim down the numbers even further.

Strategically locate some helicopter pads (on the wall or floating) and you can have heavy armament on the scene in thirty minutes.  Assuming an Apache helicopter can fly 150 mph, in that time they could fly 75 miles, so we would need to place pads every 150 miles, requiring 521 pads.  Obviously, if you don't insist on thirty-minute response time, you can do with fewer.  Don't forget that the watchmen can see 15 miles away from the wall, so thirty minutes should be more than enough to intercept any boat that tries to approach, snap pictures, and sail to safety.

Of course, this is all assuming that the only means our governments have of detecting trespassers is by looking with their eyes.  We're neglecting radar and high-altitude spyplanes, probably with infrared cameras.

We're also neglecting intelligence.  Anybody who wants to travel to the ice wall has to leave from someplace, and these someplaces can be watched by agents as well.  There aren't too many good places to set on on such a journey from.  Then, such expeditions would also have to be planned, and agents could get words about them before they even start.  Once they've started, agents could monitor radio transmissions.  If they can discover tresspassers a thousand miles away instead of only fifteen, then maybe they don't need so big a force as you say.

Basically, your objection is a straw man at best.

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

Quote from: svenanders on January 21, 2009, 12:30:37 PM

Just because we do not know what causes gravity, doesn't mean it's not there. We can
observe its effect.

When I was a kid I could observe the effect of a Tooth Fairy and a Santa Clause. "Gravity" is just a theory, no more than that.

A scientific theory can be thought of as a model of reality, and its statements as axioms of some axiomatic system. The aim of this construction is to create a formal system for which reality is the only model. The world is an interpretation (or model) of such scientific theories

Quote from: WM1911 on September 28, 2007, 03:47:43 AM

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

And then the catholic church placed him under arrest for heresy.  Perhaps this explains all the good logic in the thread.

P1: we know the earth is flat.
P2: the catholic church says the earth is flat.
C: the catholic church is God's representative on Earth.

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[92]

I know I'm not in this thread at all, but I just want to point out that bit_pattern's picture is a picture of some ice at Mt. Kilimanjaro.  An honest FE'er wouldn't use pictures as evidence, since--by their own admittance--they can be faked.

But isn't that the problem of the whole FE movement?  The paradigm sort of goes as follows:

(1.) Believe everything without proof.

Quote from: literedball on August 19, 2009, 11:04:51 PM

Quote from: WM1911 on September 28, 2007, 03:47:43 AM

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

And then the catholic church placed him under arrest for heresy. 

BTW, Gallileo wasn't arrested for saying that the Earth is round (everybody knew that already).  He was arrested for saying that the Earth went around the sun.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[92]

Quote from: OptimusPrime on August 20, 2009, 06:18:02 AM

But isn't that the problem of the whole FE movement?  The paradigm sort of goes as follows:

(1.) Believe everything without proof.

Nope.  FE'ers will tell you to read Earth Not a Globe and then repeat the experiments found within so that you can come to your own conclusions.

Yeah, only Earth Not a Globe is a huge PILE written by a fucking chimp who was so embarrassed of his retardation that he had to use a pseudonym to publish his laughable gobbledy-gook.  And everybody still rightly laughed him off.

Quote from: markjo on August 20, 2009, 06:09:45 AM

Quote from: literedball on August 19, 2009, 11:04:51 PM

Quote from: WM1911 on September 28, 2007, 03:47:43 AM

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

And then the catholic church placed him under arrest for heresy. 

BTW, Gallileo wasn't arrested for saying that the Earth is round (everybody knew that already).  He was arrested for saying that the Earth went around the sun.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[92]

Sorry, my bad.  Turns out the greeks proved the Earth round circa 4th c. BCE, which became universal knowledge (the eurocentric "universal").  but then Christians denied it and destroyed as much earlier enlightened knowledge as they could, hence the "Dark Ages".  Unfortunately, some would prefer that the dark ages continued on forever...

But I do wonder about my question: Is there anyone who actual believes this drivel that has no religious motivations? there is probably a thread on it, guess i'll do some searching...

there going to show you pictures of antarctica. This is where there ice wall is, because antarctica goes all the way around the world.

As commercial aircraft fly at 30,000 ft, how is it that no one has photograhed not only the Ice Wall, but the edge of the world which at 30,000ft would visible from hundreds of miles away?

You know what I'm gonna do?
I'm going to launch a very large missile at the supposed location of the ice wall, at a part that is cruicial to the containment of the ocean.

Now, even with 2000 something guards on snowmobiles (assuming they have enough fuel to power those snowmobiles year round), there's no way they could stop a nuclear attack on said ice wall.

If the oceans drain, and the ecosystem fails, and we all die, I'll admit I was wrong.

Wait a second... If your flat earth theory is true, and so is global warming, then we're all fucked anyway.

Quote from: literedball on August 20, 2009, 12:33:02 PM

Quote from: markjo on August 20, 2009, 06:09:45 AM

Quote from: literedball on August 19, 2009, 11:04:51 PM

Quote from: WM1911 on September 28, 2007, 03:47:43 AM

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

And then the catholic church placed him under arrest for heresy. 

BTW, Gallileo wasn't arrested for saying that the Earth is round (everybody knew that already).  He was arrested for saying that the Earth went around the sun.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[92]

Sorry, my bad.  Turns out the greeks proved the Earth round circa 4th c. BCE, which became universal knowledge (the eurocentric "universal").  but then Christians denied it and destroyed as much earlier enlightened knowledge as they could, hence the "Dark Ages".  Unfortunately, some would prefer that the dark ages continued on forever...

But I do wonder about my question: Is there anyone who actual believes this drivel that has no religious motivations? there is probably a thread on it, guess i'll do some searching...

Come on. Haven't you worked these guy's out yet. It's purely & simply a debate. None of them actually believe the Earth is flat. When they say they do that is all part of the role play!
It makes for a pretty interesting forum.

Quote from: preco on August 20, 2009, 04:48:33 PM

Quote from: literedball on August 20, 2009, 12:33:02 PM

Quote from: markjo on August 20, 2009, 06:09:45 AM

Quote from: literedball on August 19, 2009, 11:04:51 PM

Quote from: WM1911 on September 28, 2007, 03:47:43 AM

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

And then the catholic church placed him under arrest for heresy. 

BTW, Gallileo wasn't arrested for saying that the Earth is round (everybody knew that already).  He was arrested for saying that the Earth went around the sun.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[92]

Sorry, my bad.  Turns out the greeks proved the Earth round circa 4th c. BCE, which became universal knowledge (the eurocentric "universal").  but then Christians denied it and destroyed as much earlier enlightened knowledge as they could, hence the "Dark Ages".  Unfortunately, some would prefer that the dark ages continued on forever...

But I do wonder about my question: Is there anyone who actual believes this drivel that has no religious motivations? there is probably a thread on it, guess i'll do some searching...

Come on. Haven't you worked these guy's out yet. It's purely & simply a debate. None of them actually believe the Earth is flat. When they say they do that is all part of the role play!
It makes for a pretty interesting forum.

Don't tell me what I believe.

Quote from: W on August 22, 2009, 03:32:05 PM

Quote from: preco on August 20, 2009, 04:48:33 PM

Quote from: literedball on August 20, 2009, 12:33:02 PM

Quote from: markjo on August 20, 2009, 06:09:45 AM

Quote from: literedball on August 19, 2009, 11:04:51 PM

Quote from: WM1911 on September 28, 2007, 03:47:43 AM

I think the biggest irony is that some guy hundreds of years ago, named Galileo, went out of his way to disprove a flat earth. And he used better scientific examples than these guys.

And then the catholic church placed him under arrest for heresy. 

BTW, Gallileo wasn't arrested for saying that the Earth is round (everybody knew that already).  He was arrested for saying that the Earth went around the sun.

Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei#Church_controversy

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy," namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture. He was required to "abjure, curse and detest" those opinions.[92]

Sorry, my bad.  Turns out the greeks proved the Earth round circa 4th c. BCE, which became universal knowledge (the eurocentric "universal").  but then Christians denied it and destroyed as much earlier enlightened knowledge as they could, hence the "Dark Ages".  Unfortunately, some would prefer that the dark ages continued on forever...

But I do wonder about my question: Is there anyone who actual believes this drivel that has no religious motivations? there is probably a thread on it, guess i'll do some searching...

Come on. Haven't you worked these guy's out yet. It's purely & simply a debate. None of them actually believe the Earth is flat. When they say they do that is all part of the role play!
It makes for a pretty interesting forum.

Don't tell me what I believe.

Sorry! Am I spoiling it for you?