Antarctica.

  • 42 Replies
  • 12750 Views
?

daz

  • 31
  • +0/-0
Antarctica.
« on: March 30, 2009, 04:23:26 AM »
People have been to Antarctica, and visited the South Pole, how can you disprove its existence?

?

daz

  • 31
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2009, 01:47:20 PM »
anyone? no?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2009, 07:18:09 PM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

WardoggKC130FE

  • 11857
  • +0/-0
  • What website is that? MadeUpMonkeyShit.com?
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2009, 07:35:22 PM »
The lesser Ice Wall.

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2009, 08:39:46 PM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.

Nobody here has shown proof that the continent Antarctica is an ice wall.

?

Proleg

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2009, 08:48:13 PM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.

Nobody here has shown proof that the continent Antarctica is an ice wall.
It is an obstruction covered in ice that impedes progress rimward. "Ice wall" is a perfectly logical term for it.

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2009, 08:49:29 PM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.

Nobody here has shown proof that the continent Antarctica is an ice wall.
It is an obstruction covered in ice that impedes progress rimward. "Ice wall" is a perfectly logical term for it.

Thanks for clarifying what you guys mean by "Ice Wall".

But yet, still no proof. Even since the existence of this Forum, no proof.

?

Proleg

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2009, 08:53:10 PM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.

Nobody here has shown proof that the continent Antarctica is an ice wall.
It is an obstruction covered in ice that impedes progress rimward. "Ice wall" is a perfectly logical term for it.

Thanks for clarifying what you guys mean by "Ice Wall".

But yet, still no proof. Even since the existence of this Forum, no proof.
What more proof do you need? The earth has been shown, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to be flat and "Antarctica" is therefore the limits of planar navigation thus permitted.

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2009, 09:01:48 PM »
Oh darn, I must have missed the thread that showed "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the earth is flat. Man that would have been a good read.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2009, 09:05:06 PM »
Oh darn, I must have missed the thread that showed "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the earth is flat. Man that would have been a good read.

Don't worry, you're only on 42 posts. There's plenty of time to lurk moar.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Proleg

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2009, 09:06:03 PM »
Oh darn, I must have missed the thread that showed "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the earth is flat. Man that would have been a good read.
There are several threads. Being the complete fucktard that you are, I suppose it should not be surprising that you are unable to use a simple search function.

Also, Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not A Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Look into it.

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2009, 09:10:08 PM »
Oh darn, I must have missed the thread that showed "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the earth is flat. Man that would have been a good read.
There are several threads. Being the complete fucktard that you are, I suppose it should not be surprising that you are unable to use a simple search function.

Also, Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not A Globe by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Look into it.

Reported for abuse.

They probably shouldn't have given you another chance with another user name, Oscey boy!  ::)
« Last Edit: March 30, 2009, 09:44:08 PM by Paralyzed Night »

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2009, 09:11:12 PM »
Oh darn, I must have missed the thread that showed "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the earth is flat. Man that would have been a good read.

Don't worry, you're only on 42 posts. There's plenty of time to lurk moar.

I love your logic. I've actually been reading for a very long time. Only decided to join up recently.

Or are you saying there is a thread that I missed, where FE was proven correct?

?

daz

  • 31
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2009, 02:37:24 AM »
If there is an ice wall, then where are the south pole, the magnetic south pole and the southern pole of innaccesability located?

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2009, 03:32:49 AM »
If there is an ice wall, then where are the south pole, the magnetic south pole and the southern pole of innaccesability located?

The magnetic south pole is located near the centre of the disk, in the Arctic Ocean near Canada.

The Geographic South Pole is located at the centre of the disk, on the opposite side to the Geographic North Pole.

The Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station is located directly beneath the South Celestial Pole to the south of Australia. This point holds no significance other than being beneath a South Celestial Pole.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

daz

  • 31
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2009, 07:08:07 AM »
So if the magnetic south pole is actually near Canada in the west, how do people reach there after docking at a port in South Africa, and heading south? Are you saying that after leaving the South African port they head back up north-west towards Canada, and all of a sudden, they're moving south?

How do compasses work?

*

WardoggKC130FE

  • 11857
  • +0/-0
  • What website is that? MadeUpMonkeyShit.com?
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2009, 08:11:41 AM »

How do compasses work?

I once heard gravity makes compasses work.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • +0/-0
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2009, 08:20:40 AM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.

Agreed, however FE does deny the existence of 24 hour daylight in Antarctica.

?

niceguybut

  • 184
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #18 on: March 31, 2009, 10:58:15 AM »
If there is an ice wall, then where are the south pole, the magnetic south pole and the southern pole of innaccesability located?

The magnetic south pole is located near the centre of the disk, in the Arctic Ocean near Canada.

The Geographic South Pole is located at the centre of the disk, on the opposite side to the Geographic North Pole.

The Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station is located directly beneath the South Celestial Pole to the south of Australia. This point holds no significance other than being beneath a South Celestial Pole.

In that case, would it not be better then if the FE folks made more use of the terms "hubward" and "rimward", rather than "north" and "south", as adjectives to describe geographic features on the surface of the disc?  What you're saying seems to describe them all as being "north"?
"The Zetetic Astronomy has come into my hands ... if it be childish, it is clever; if it be mannish, it is unusually foolish."

A Budget of Paradoxes - A. de Morgan (pp 306-310)

?

daz

  • 31
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2009, 01:55:47 AM »
Haha you're exactly right! it doesnt matter though because doing simple things like that is too confusing for the FE folks. I dont think theres anyone on the whole forum thats had a straight answer that has made sense hahahaha.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2009, 11:56:56 AM »
If there is an ice wall, then where are the south pole, the magnetic south pole and the southern pole of innaccesability located?

The magnetic south pole is located near the centre of the disk, in the Arctic Ocean near Canada.

The Geographic South Pole is located at the centre of the disk, on the opposite side to the Geographic North Pole.

The Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station is located directly beneath the South Celestial Pole to the south of Australia. This point holds no significance other than being beneath a South Celestial Pole.

In that case, would it not be better then if the FE folks made more use of the terms "hubward" and "rimward", rather than "north" and "south", as adjectives to describe geographic features on the surface of the disc?  What you're saying seems to describe them all as being "north"?

Well, north and south are relative directions, in both FE and RE.  So if something is to the north of me it is closer to the center; if it's south of me it's closer to the edge.  It's not that difficult to figure out.

There was an attempt at one time to change the directional names to hubward, rimward, turnwise, and widdershins, but that proved too confusing to many of the noobs here so we've pretty much just gone back to the directional names with which everyone is familiar.

Haha you're exactly right! it doesnt matter though because doing simple things like that is too confusing for the FE folks. I dont think theres anyone on the whole forum thats had a straight answer that has made sense hahahaha.

Hmm.  Tell me what you don't understand and I will try to explain it like I would to a six-year-old, so it's at a level you might be able to comprehend.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

DD2014

  • 60
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2009, 05:27:59 PM »
Get in a boat and see for your self.

Antarctica is there.
You can sail around it.
There are no "Guards" patroling in -60 degree weather

And as soon as you find some proof, I'll shit out a gold brick for ya!
« Last Edit: April 01, 2009, 11:09:46 PM by DD2014 »
I am from NASA, and I am here to disinform you...

?

LUNCH

  • 191
  • +0/-0
  • THE ULTIMATE CHERRY/DICK. mmmm cherry dick
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2009, 11:52:41 PM »
Get in a boat and see for your self.

Antarctica is there.
You can sail around it.
There are no "Guards" patroling in -60 degree weather

And as soon as you find some proof, I'll shit out a gold brick for ya!


this is the part where they say "you could go around the 'continent' but all you would be doing is going around outter rim/coast of FE"

(other than the obvious distance difference of the two (Antarctica: continent & Antarctica: ice wall) there is no way to disprove the ice wall theory by circling the continent, you would have to fly directly south over the continent (assuming your navigational equipment will allow you to do so)

*question*
Does FET have a guesstimation on the circumference of Antarctica/Ice Wall?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2009, 12:29:15 AM by LUNCH »
There is no theory of evolution. Just a list of creatures Chuck Norris has allowed to live.
Uh, first of all you're an idiot.

*

DD2014

  • 60
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2009, 02:07:30 PM »
Get in a boat and see for your self.

Antarctica is there.
You can sail around it.
There are no "Guards" patroling in -60 degree weather

And as soon as you find some proof, I'll shit out a gold brick for ya!


this is the part where they say "you could go around the 'continent' but all you would be doing is going around outter rim/coast of FE"

(other than the obvious distance difference of the two (Antarctica: continent & Antarctica: ice wall) there is no way to disprove the ice wall theory by circling the continent, you would have to fly directly south over the continent (assuming your navigational equipment will allow you to do so)

*question*
Does FET have a guesstimation on the circumference of Antarctica/Ice Wall?

Quote from: myself
Well all you really must do is sail back to the same place while keeping said "ice wall" to one side.

In RE: Antarctica coastline is approx. 14000 miles

In FE: Ice Wall inner coastline approx. 75000 miles

If you only travel about 14000 miles while keeping the "ice wall" to your left, and end up back where you started, RE proven

If you travel about 75000 miles while keeping the "ice wall" to your left and end up in the same place....I'll Fucking Shoot My Self
I am from NASA, and I am here to disinform you...

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2009, 05:34:49 PM »
'Hmm.  Tell me what you don't understand and I will try to explain it like I would to a six-year-old, so it's at a level you might be able to comprehend.'

To start, 'Roundy the Truthinessist', I have an I.Q. of 164, and I will not be insulted by someone displaying a level of ignorance normally reserved for the religious purists that complain about heavy metal.

Hey, if you don't want to be insulted, don't start with the insults.  You just seem pretty slow on the draw for someone with an IQ of 164.  Mine's in the 150s, by the way.

Quote
You have provided no proof whatsoever, for any of your theories.
None.
Whatsoever.

That's fine because I'm not trying to prove anything.  You must have our positions reversed in your mind for some reason.  Of course, I'm sure I don't have to tell someone with an IQ of 164 that "proof" has no place in science.

Quote
Some ignoramus on a web forum clearly making it up as he goes along is NOT proof,  so don't ever attempt to say you will clearly be able to explain anything, because, to repeat what i said before, you are nothing but an ignoramus.

Before you retort with the expected, 'no YOU are the ignoramus', i urge you to give me solid, pictorial proof of absolutely ANYTHING you have put forward.

There you go with the insults again.  You seem like an extremely enlightened person.  How's this: proof is important to you, not me.  I feel no obligation to prove anything to you because that is not what this website is about.  So I'm afraid you're being a huge ignoramus.  Call a spade a spade.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2009, 05:37:34 PM by Roundy the Truthinessist »
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Taurondir

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #25 on: April 08, 2009, 12:17:33 AM »
Oh darn, I must have missed the thread that showed "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that the earth is flat. Man that would have been a good read.

Don't worry, you're only on 42 posts. There's plenty of time to lurk moar.

Good example of this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_ridicule, but not science. Try again.

?

Round Man

  • 9
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #26 on: April 10, 2009, 12:26:26 PM »
Nobody here denies that people have been to the Ice Wall.

Nobody here has shown proof that the continent Antarctica is an ice wall.
It is an obstruction covered in ice that impedes progress rimward. "Ice wall" is a perfectly logical term for it.

Yea but people have been to the north pole.

Fuck, Jeremy Clarkson and James May drove right ontop of the geographical north pole.

Actually they only drove to the magnetic north pole

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear:_Polar_Special

Read the fist paragraph.


*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • +0/-0
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2009, 12:36:36 PM »
So if the magnetic south pole is actually near Canada in the west, how do people reach there after docking at a port in South Africa, and heading south? Are you saying that after leaving the South African port they head back up north-west towards Canada, and all of a sudden, they're moving south?

They don't. They reach the magnetic north pole by such a journey.

How do compasses work?

They align themselves with the local magnetic field.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

?

Taurondir

Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #28 on: April 11, 2009, 09:00:56 PM »
Look at all the countries involved in the conspiracy here:

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

Apparently each country has a non existent section of Antarctica, had a fictional base camp there, as per here:

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

and a nice map of all the fictional expeditions that have gone there is here:

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

Happy reading.


?

daz

  • 31
  • +0/-0
Re: Antarctica.
« Reply #29 on: April 18, 2009, 04:41:13 AM »
IQ tests prove nothing except that youre good at IQ tests. I told you mine cos i knew this weird lot would start the engines trying to proves whos is larger haha. Also, 238, do not make me laugh.

The fact you're following this weird strain of society proves you are not smart.

You're all just good at wriggling your way out of explaining things properly.