Why it is impossible to reason with an FE'er.

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

Where in the FAQ does it say that Australia doesn't exist? 

Please don't confuse accepted FE theory with the occasional running gag that you may run into on this site from time to time.

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

If NASA is lying about their research of space, then there isn't any reason why we should believe anything that they tell us.  If you could just use search, you'll find that a conspiracy is actually quite plausible.

Also, the Australia thing was a JOKE.  The reason why some seniors continue to maintain that it doesn't exist is because they find it hilarious how some noobs get overly angry about it.

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

If NASA is so legit, how did they lose 565 Billion dollars in 48 years?

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

The other posters have told you about this already.

Quote from: ComradePoos on March 06, 2009, 11:03:47 AM

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

If NASA is so legit, how did they lose 565 Billion dollars in 48 years?

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

The other posters have told you about this already.

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

Exactly.  Therefore, lying about it instead is more profitable.

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

What are you talking about?  RE situates Australia close to Antarctica.  In FE, the Ice Wall circles the entire world.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 06, 2009, 11:33:51 AM

Quote from: ComradePoos on March 06, 2009, 11:03:47 AM

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

If NASA is so legit, how did they lose 565 Billion dollars in 48 years?

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

The other posters have told you about this already.

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

NASA didn't launch the money into space.  Maybe if you could do some simple research of your own, you'd know that the outside Auditors that do the reports for the government regularly report that NASA cannot account for all their money and they did in fact lose, not spend, but lose 565 billion dollars in money and assets during the 90ies.

You can even google it.

Quote from: mikeh12 on March 06, 2009, 02:25:22 PM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 06, 2009, 11:33:51 AM

Quote from: ComradePoos on March 06, 2009, 11:03:47 AM

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

If NASA is so legit, how did they lose 565 Billion dollars in 48 years?

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

The other posters have told you about this already.

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

NASA didn't launch the money into space.  Maybe if you could do some simple research of your own, you'd know that the outside Auditors that do the reports for the government regularly report that NASA cannot account for all their money and they did in fact lose, not spend, but lose 565 billion dollars in money and assets during the 90ies.

You can even google it.

Hmm I wonder if a FE'r was their acountant 

That would make more sense than some of the science that's being misinterpreted and butchered in the FAQ and the list of references FE'rs have.

Can you name any?

Quote from: mikeh12 on March 06, 2009, 02:25:22 PM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 06, 2009, 11:33:51 AM

Quote from: ComradePoos on March 06, 2009, 11:03:47 AM

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

If you question them about anything to do with the government, NASA, etc., It's a conspiracy. This is their main argument of course, as most modern things space/sphere earth related (Satellites, space launches, images of earth, etc) revolve around these things. Therefore they can just tell you 'it's all a lie' (Of course providing zero evidence backing up these 'lies'). Oh and anything in history to do with a round earth didn't happen either. After all it's in the FAQ so it must be true.

If NASA is so legit, how did they lose 565 Billion dollars in 48 years?

This means that whatever you throw at them will result at them telling you it didn't happen, is a government conspiracy, or it doesn't exist. In other words, our evidence isn't actually evidence at all to them. Despite being proven facts (Don't quote that telling me it's made up by the government either).

Did I mention my aunte and both my cousins moved to Australia recently? Oh wait, Australia doesn't exist, meaning she's either a government agent or she's been imprisoned in a 'fake' Austrailia which is actually a different place.

The other posters have told you about this already.

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

NASA didn't launch the money into space.  Maybe if you could do some simple research of your own, you'd know that the outside Auditors that do the reports for the government regularly report that NASA cannot account for all their money and they did in fact lose, not spend, but lose 565 billion dollars in money and assets during the 90ies.

You can even google it.

you have no close how fucking stupid you sound do you? You act like the government using money for secret operations is a bad thing anyway, when the CIA/FBI first came around they had an unlimited bank rolland only had too tell one guy what they spent it on, how can that not be the same case for NASA?

Why is it impossible to reason with them?

Put it this way, there are many psychologists that would love to speak to the people on this forum!

Whoa, whoa, whoa Godrocks! I never heard about this CIA thing. Your government can hide stuff from you and hence be unaccountable? You should be rioting about that, but you actually support that stab in the eye of democracy? You seriously don't see the problem with your sovereign stealing your money (because if they can't prove that they spent it on you) and using it for all kinds of shady deeds? Really?

Why is it impossible to reason with them?

Put it this way, there are many psychologists that would love to speak to the people on this forum!

And I'd like to speak to the morons that trust drug addled loons like Freud.

Whoa, whoa, whoa Godrocks! I never heard about this CIA thing. Your government can hide stuff from you and hence be unaccountable? You should be rioting about that, but you actually support that stab in the eye of democracy? You seriously don't see the problem with your sovereign stealing your money (because if they can't prove that they spent it on you) and using it for all kinds of shady deeds? Really?

Quote from: Graham_evo on March 06, 2009, 04:18:06 PM

Why is it impossible to reason with them?

Put it this way, there are many psychologists that would love to speak to the people on this forum!

And I'd like to speak to the morons that trust drug addled loons like Freud.

you havnt heard about it because you have no clue of fucking history that has evidence and facts to back it up, and i dont see it as a stab in the back i see it as them keeping information that doesnt need to be public ( such as spying ) due to the information it is uncovering and how it may shock society as a whole to the point of riots.

So they risk riots so as not to risk riots? Your country's worse than ours on the whole fascism front.

Can you name any?

Why don't you use the FAQ and the search facility?

I don't need to, I've been here for two years and already know that you don't.

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

i think since this tom bishop site he only one that really understand flat earth. all other seem not understand flat earth science at all

Quote from: ComradePoos on March 06, 2009, 11:03:47 AM

Because they have the same argument all the time. You can throw you're proven scientific facts at them, but they will always have some sought of reply, going along these lines.

i think since this tom bishop site he only one that really understand flat earth. all other seem not understand flat earth science at all

Actually, this is Daniel's site, but he doesn't post much.  Tom is an FE believer who doesn't seem to post as much as he used to lately.

I don't need to, I've been here for two years and already know that you don't.

*begins acting like you and the other trolls*

Yes but I could answer your question but I'd rather put more effort into insulting and telling you to use the search facility of the forum.

*incomes the troll crowd*

HAHAHAHA your so funny your my forum buddy I think I'll join in.

*insert other random insult*

HAHAHAHAHA

*the end*

It's like a script. I've seen it in many many threads using the search function and the question is still not answered.

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 09:04:02 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

I have to disagree with your last point, Mothernature couldn't get that job as the crash-test dummy.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 07, 2009, 09:12:42 AM

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 09:04:02 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

I have to disagree with your last point, Mothernature couldn't get that job as the crash-test dummy.

I have to admit a bit of lol. 

Quote from: mikeh12 on March 06, 2009, 02:25:22 PM

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

Exactly.  Therefore, lying about it instead is more profitable.

Quote from: mikeh12 on March 06, 2009, 02:25:22 PM

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

What are you talking about?  RE situates Australia close to Antarctica.  In FE, the Ice Wall circles the entire world.

R=real
F=fake

Quote from: Saddam Hussein on March 06, 2009, 02:31:36 PM

Quote from: mikeh12 on March 06, 2009, 02:25:22 PM

launching shit into space isn't exactly pocket change.

Exactly.  Therefore, lying about it instead is more profitable.

Quote from: mikeh12 on March 06, 2009, 02:25:22 PM

can anybody answer why australia isn't cold if its close to so much ice?

What are you talking about?  RE situates Australia close to Antarctica.  In FE, the Ice Wall circles the entire world.

R=real
F=fake

If you would look at the FAQ, you'd know that FE stands for Flat Earth and RE stands... well, you should be able to figure that out on your own.

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 09:04:02 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

I wasn't wrong. It was you who wasn't reading the references you provided.

I even told you where you should read them. I still don't think I was wrong. You can conduct the experiment at home. I haven't seen anything in the FE'rs literature that tells me why the Coriolis effect exists within the FE model. There's some reference to a cog and gear motion that's associated with stellar movements but I can't see how that relates to the coriolis effect.

You second point is half valid. I agree people should admit they are wrong (I have admited it on this forum). The blind faith part is what most FE'rs are doing.

You all have better things to be doing than crashing into brick walls?

Well what better things is that? Insulting people? Because thats all I've seen you and your crew doing.

I've seen many RE'rs crashing into many brick walls with FE'rs. Simply because the FE'rs scientific method is seriously flawed and they can't understand it.

This is one of the arguments I've seen:

If you can't do the experiment at home then I don't except it's true. It's not peer reviewed.

This is a stupid way of approaching science. It shows that 'in psychology terms' the FE'rs is in some way paranoid and not willing to accept the fact that there are scientific discoveries that can't be conducted on a home built apparatus. It shows that they don't trust the science being presented to them even though countless people with the appropriate qualifications are saying it's correct.

I've worked at the ILL in France and I have seen the equiptment working with my own eyes. If they are going to claim a theory is wrong because of this 'home built' argument then they should at least verify their suspicons and go to a scientific facility and see them work with their own eyes.

Until they do that then simply saying I don't believe it is not a good argument for the FE theory.

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 07, 2009, 09:12:42 AM

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 09:04:02 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

I have to disagree with your last point, Mothernature couldn't get that job as the crash-test dummy.

Point proven I think

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 07, 2009, 09:12:42 AM

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 09:04:02 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

I wasn't wrong. It was you who wasn't reading the references you provided.

I even told you where you should read them. I still don't think I was wrong. You can conduct the experiment at home. I haven't seen anything in the FE'rs literature that tells me why the Coriolis effect exists within the FE model. There's some reference to a cog and gear motion that's associated with stellar movements but I can't see how that relates to the coriolis effect.

You second point is half valid. I agree people should admit they are wrong (I have admited it on this forum). The blind faith part is what most FE'rs are doing.

You all have better things to be doing than crashing into brick walls?

Well what better things is that? Insulting people? Because thats all I've seen you and your crew doing.

I've seen many RE'rs crashing into many brick walls with FE'rs. Simply because the FE'rs scientific method is seriously flawed and they can't understand it.

This is one of the arguments I've seen:

If you can't do the experiment at home then I don't except it's true. It's not peer reviewed.

This is a stupid way of approaching science. It shows that 'in psychology terms' the FE'rs is in some way paranoid and not willing to accept the fact that there are scientific discoveries that can't be conducted on a home built apparatus. It shows that they don't trust the science being presented to them even though countless people with the appropriate qualifications are saying it's correct.

I've worked at the ILL in France and I have seen the equiptment working with my own eyes. If they are going to claim a theory is wrong because of this 'home built' argument then they should at least verify there suspicons and go to a scientific facility and see them work with their own eyes.

Until they do that then simply saying I don't believe it is not a good argument for the FE theory.

First, the man would created the theory behind the effect said that it would take a Perfect sink under heavily controlled laboratory conditions... this is a man with proven skills and experience.

Now, you, an unknown being on the internet, with no known skills or training and say, "Oh, no, you can do the experiment in a bucket in your yard."

Do you not see why we're not taking your word for it?  Proven scientist vs. internet typist.  Which one would you believe?

And now, since you think we've been insulting you, allow me to show you what insulting you really is. 

You are full of shit.  You claim to be an educated person, but you cannot use simple English properly, certainly not to any standard I have ever seen in any higher education facility.  Note your post above.  I skimmed it once, not expecting to find anything worth replying to and then read it.

While I did that, I marked a few of the simple errors that any professor or higher level instructor should know better than to make.  Other people have pointed errors out to you, so this is not a once in awhile thing, but a continuous series of errors.

I don't believe that you are a graduate of any decent school.  You may be a student in college.  Insufficient data for a conclusion in that.

You are possibly the most pig headed person posting on this board.  I do believe that you even outdo Tom and Kingman in sheer stubborn crap.  You made a claim, three people showed you that the claim you made was wrong, that your experiment wouldn't work according to the pioneer of the field and still you insist it will work.  That is either an inability to change your mind or an ego the size of Bill Gates' bank account.

You criticize us for shoddy science, but your idea was to use a bucket with a hole punched in it with a screwdriver.  This is the best science you could come up with?  At the very least, drill the hole in the bucket, since no two holes done with a screwdriver are going to be the same.

In short, you are either a zealot, so absolutely certain of your own correctness that you couldn't change your mind at gun point or a particularly sneaky troll, hiding an attempt to annoy people under pseudo-science.

Either way, your combination of bullheaded ignorance, sloppy work and sheer mental blindness has lost it's attraction.  I was hoping, when you first arrived, that you would be a welcome addition to FES, with posts worthy of discussion.  Instead, you're just another /b/tard with a better vocabulary.

Now, I have called you stupid, ignorant, a lying weasel and mentally ossified.  Now, you have been insulted, not that you will care.  No mere words typed on any screen could penetrate that armour of self righteous bullshit that you wrap around yourself like a cloak.

Goodbye,

Raven

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 12:10:00 PM

Quote from: Ravenwood240 on March 07, 2009, 09:12:42 AM

Quote from: MotherNature on March 07, 2009, 09:04:02 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on March 07, 2009, 08:57:08 AM

There's one big flaw (among the many small ones) in that, and it's that you think it's easier to answer the question than insult you. In fact, insults jump to the forefront of my mind whenever you post.

So why are you here?

To insult people?

Because that's all I've seen so far.

Possibly that would be because you don't listen to anyone trying to talk to you.  The first thread you were in you made a point and at least three different people proved your point wrong and you wouldn't accept it.

Debate assumes that both sides have an open mind and are willing to admit that they might be wrong.  No one here is going to waste time debating with someone who has blind faith in their own opinions.

We all have better things to do than crashing into brick walls.

I wasn't wrong. It was you who wasn't reading the references you provided.

I even told you where you should read them. I still don't think I was wrong. You can conduct the experiment at home. I haven't seen anything in the FE'rs literature that tells me why the Coriolis effect exists within the FE model. There's some reference to a cog and gear motion that's associated with stellar movements but I can't see how that relates to the coriolis effect.

You second point is half valid. I agree people should admit they are wrong (I have admited it on this forum). The blind faith part is what most FE'rs are doing.

You all have better things to be doing than crashing into brick walls?

Well what better things is that? Insulting people? Because thats all I've seen you and your crew doing.

I've seen many RE'rs crashing into many brick walls with FE'rs. Simply because the FE'rs scientific method is seriously flawed and they can't understand it.

This is one of the arguments I've seen:

If you can't do the experiment at home then I don't except it's true. It's not peer reviewed.

This is a stupid way of approaching science. It shows that 'in psychology terms' the FE'rs is in some way paranoid and not willing to accept the fact that there are scientific discoveries that can't be conducted on a home built apparatus. It shows that they don't trust the science being presented to them even though countless people with the appropriate qualifications are saying it's correct.

I've worked at the ILL in France and I have seen the equiptment working with my own eyes. If they are going to claim a theory is wrong because of this 'home built' argument then they should at least verify there suspicons and go to a scientific facility and see them work with their own eyes.

Until they do that then simply saying I don't believe it is not a good argument for the FE theory.

First, the man would created the theory behind the effect said that it would take a Perfect sink under heavily controlled laboratory conditions... this is a man with proven skills and experience.

Now, you, an unknown being on the internet, with no known skills or training and say, "Oh, no, you can do the experiment in a bucket in your yard."

Do you not see why we're not taking your word for it?  Proven scientist vs. internet typist.  Which one would you believe?

And now, since you think we've been insulting you, allow me to show you what insulting you really is. 

You are full of shit.  You claim to be an educated person, but you cannot use simple English properly, certainly not to any standard I have ever seen in any higher education facility.  Note your post above.  I skimmed it once, not expecting to find anything worth replying to and then read it.

While I did that, I marked a few of the simple errors that any professor or higher level instructor should know better than to make.  Other people have pointed errors out to you, so this is not a once in awhile thing, but a continuous series of errors.

I don't believe that you are a graduate of any decent school.  You may be a student in college.  Insufficient data for a conclusion in that.

You are possibly the most pig headed person posting on this board.  I do believe that you even outdo Tom and Kingman in sheer stubborn crap.  You made a claim, three people showed you that the claim you made was wrong, that your experiment wouldn't work according to the pioneer of the field and still you insist it will work.  That is either an inability to change your mind or an ego the size of Bill Gates' bank account.

You criticize us for shoddy science, but your idea was to use a bucket with a hole punched in it with a screwdriver.  This is the best science you could come up with?  At the very least, drill the hole in the bucket, since no two holes done with a screwdriver are going to be the same.

In short, you are either a zealot, so absolutely certain of your own correctness that you couldn't change your mind at gun point or a particularly sneaky troll, hiding an attempt to annoy people under pseudo-science.

Either way, your combination of bullheaded ignorance, sloppy work and sheer mental blindness has lost it's attraction.  I was hoping, when you first arrived, that you would be a welcome addition to FES, with posts worthy of discussion.  Instead, you're just another /b/tard with a better vocabulary.

Now, I have called you stupid, ignorant, a lying weasel and mentally ossified.  Now, you have been insulted, not that you will care.  No mere words typed on any screen could penetrate that armour of self righteous bullshit that you wrap around yourself like a cloak.

Goodbye,

Raven

lol

Hmm I wonder why you are so annoyed?

Anyway

You've discredited my experimental procedure because I said use a screw driver. If you'd of read the next paragraph you would of seen a remark about the hole. The final post also comments on it.

The reason why I know I'm right with this experimental procedure is because I know it works. The papers and references that you've quoted don't give any idea as to how much the external parameters will effect the result. They simply say they have an influence.

Have a look at these papers

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6X1B-4PJ6BS7-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=5fae882c517325f4cfd76576bb2d22e9

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118538745/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=PHFLE6000018000012125108000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TVK-4CMJFVC-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=8850b00c1659d88d2729445b751f7047

Thats just some of the papers I have found. These papers quantify the force of the coriolis effect and show that it is more dominant than you and many others seem to think it is.

If you have access to a university you should be able to access the full papers. Also there were many more papers that I could of quoted that quantify and show the coriolis effect is not just something that should be ignored.

The coriolis effect can be tested at home. Whether you use a bucket or another symmetrical containg vessel.