FET is creationism, nothing more.

  • 197 Replies
  • 35952 Views
*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #60 on: June 25, 2009, 04:33:03 AM »
We're 'about' the earth being flat, and most of our theories have nothing to do with anything discussed by the Zetetic Society. Just because we talk about them, does not mean we believe everything they believe.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #61 on: June 25, 2009, 04:52:00 AM »
We're 'about' the earth being flat, and most of our theories have nothing to do with anything discussed by the Zetetic Society. Just because we talk about them, does not mean we believe everything they believe.

Actually most of your theories have quite a lot to do with those discussed by the Zetetic Society.

Tell me, as I'm not as big an expert as you on the subject of the Zetetic Society, did they discuss the EA? Or the UA? Or did they think the Earth was an infinite plane? I view those theories as our main theories.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #62 on: June 25, 2009, 06:12:10 AM »
We're 'about' the earth being flat, and most of our theories have nothing to do with anything discussed by the Zetetic Society. Just because we talk about them, does not mean we believe everything they believe.

Actually most of your theories have quite a lot to do with those discussed by the Zetetic Society.

Tell me, as I'm not as big an expert as you on the subject of the Zetetic Society, did they discuss the EA? Or the UA? Or did they think the Earth was an infinite plane? I view those theories as our main theories.

Irrelevant.  Please show a direct line of succession from Rowbotham to Daniel.  Or even from Charles K. Johnson to any member on this site.
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.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #63 on: June 25, 2009, 09:10:15 AM »
We're 'about' the earth being flat, and most of our theories have nothing to do with anything discussed by the Zetetic Society. Just because we talk about them, does not mean we believe everything they believe.

Actually most of your theories have quite a lot to do with those discussed by the Zetetic Society.

Tell me, as I'm not as big an expert as you on the subject of the Zetetic Society, did they discuss the EA? Or the UA? Or did they think the Earth was an infinite plane? I view those theories as our main theories.

Irrelevant.  Please show a direct line of succession from Rowbotham to Daniel.  Or even from Charles K. Johnson to any member on this site.

Uh, what? You realise that I am arguing we are not linked to those movements?
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #64 on: June 25, 2009, 09:23:53 AM »
Uh, what? You realise that I am arguing we are not linked to those movements?

Neeman, you always seem to confuse your own opinions as being those of every other FEer on this board. I've already directed you to the FAQ which cites Rowbotham (father of the zetetics) and his work. Likewise the majority of FEers here will cite ENaG in any debate (Protip: That's why its in the FAQ) I think I've been through this with you before.

From the board rules:

Quote
Disclaimer

The opinions and beliefs expressed in any posts do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of The Flat Earth Society Forums.
The Flat Earth Society Forums' goal is to promote the free discussion of The Flat Earth Theory as well as the free discussion of and debate of any topic of interest to our members that do not contradict Forum Rules.
The views of any individual or organization (including that of the old Flat Earth Society run by Charles K Johnson) are not necessarily shared in whole or in part by The Flat Earth Society Forums. The only person qualified to give the official position of the Forums (if required) is Daniel.
Also please remember that views of the Forum are not necessarily shared by the Forum Staff who come from both sides of The Flat/Sphere Debate and whose sole unifying purpose is to promote a smooth running forum so as to encourage the victory of truth through free discussion and argument.


The 'FAQ' is just that, and nothing more. We don't consider it a constitution, so neither should you.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #65 on: June 25, 2009, 09:42:25 AM »
Unfortunately neither Darwin, Newton nor Da Vinci went on a massively profitable tour of the country proclaiming the Bible as literally true.

Please read the quote I provided. Charles Darwin published in his Autobiography that he believed scripture in the Bible to be literally true. Should we throw away Darwin's work because of those ideas?

No. Darwin's scientific work stands on it's own, just as Samuel Birley Rowbotham's work does.

A lot of this, while typed in an eleoquent manner, is incorrect. There are conflicting stories about Darwin's religious beliefs. Darwin was agnostic and refused to believe in God or the scriptures in a literal sense. Some people maintain that he changed this belief shortly before his death and acknowledged the Christian construct of God, but I find that hard to believe (as did his family).


*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #66 on: June 25, 2009, 10:47:47 AM »
We're 'about' the earth being flat, and most of our theories have nothing to do with anything discussed by the Zetetic Society. Just because we talk about them, does not mean we believe everything they believe.

Actually most of your theories have quite a lot to do with those discussed by the Zetetic Society.

Tell me, as I'm not as big an expert as you on the subject of the Zetetic Society, did they discuss the EA? Or the UA? Or did they think the Earth was an infinite plane? I view those theories as our main theories.

Irrelevant.  Please show a direct line of succession from Rowbotham to Daniel.  Or even from Charles K. Johnson to any member on this site.

Uh, what? You realise that I am arguing we are not linked to those movements?

We really need a score board to keep track of who believes what around here.  :-\
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.

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #67 on: June 25, 2009, 09:10:23 PM »
"FET is creationism, nothing more."

The fact that FET accepts acceleration as the reason why we experience gravity is their flaw, and therewith, untrue.


*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #68 on: June 25, 2009, 09:17:38 PM »
"FET is creationism, nothing more."

The fact that FET accepts acceleration as the reason why we experience gravity is their flaw, and therewith, untrue.



How is that a flaw?

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #69 on: June 25, 2009, 10:35:49 PM »
"FET is creationism, nothing more."

The fact that FET accepts acceleration as the reason why we experience gravity is their flaw, and therewith, untrue.

How is that a flaw?
Well, I thought I made it pretty clear, and needed not say anything more.

Acceleration would first have to be constant, and second constantly falling (acceleration) would result a zero-gravity environment.

Like in air-plane simulators. And please don't come back saying we're falling upside down. That would be preposterous!

http://www.incredible-adventures.com/zerog.html
« Last Edit: June 25, 2009, 10:38:13 PM by Nevermind »

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #70 on: June 25, 2009, 10:37:32 PM »
"FET is creationism, nothing more."

The fact that FET accepts acceleration as the reason why we experience gravity is their flaw, and therewith, untrue.

How is that a flaw?
Well, I thought I made it pretty clear, and needed not say anything more.

Acceleration would first have to be constant, and second constantly falling (acceleration) would result a zero-gravity environment.

Like in air-plane simulators. And please don't come back telling me we're falling upside down!
http://www.incredible-adventures.com/zerog.html

You don't know the difference between constant acceleration and constant velocity do you?

An zero gravity simulator goes into free fall so it is no longer accelerating but going at a constant velocity.

Eat me.

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #71 on: June 25, 2009, 10:42:51 PM »
You don't know the difference between constant acceleration and constant velocity do you?

An zero gravity simulator goes into free fall so it is no longer accelerating but going at a constant velocity.

Eat me.
Use a dictionary.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/%20acceleration


« Last Edit: June 25, 2009, 10:53:19 PM by Nevermind »

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #72 on: June 25, 2009, 10:53:18 PM »
You don't know the difference between constant acceleration and constant velocity do you?

An zero gravity simulator goes into free fall so it is no longer accelerating but going at a constant velocity.

Eat me.
Use a dictionary.

Acceleration = Velocity

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/%20acceleration




No, acceleration is the change in velocity. Constant acceleration = constant change in velocity. Constant velocity = zero acceleration.

0/10

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #73 on: June 25, 2009, 10:57:28 PM »

No, acceleration is the change in velocity. Constant acceleration = constant change in velocity. Constant velocity = zero acceleration.

0/10
No, stop mincing words.

The definition of constant is unchanging (varying; uniform). Acceleration is the changing of velocity, therefore not constant.





Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #74 on: June 25, 2009, 11:00:38 PM »
No, acceleration is the change in velocity.

0/10
Its still velocity, I never said it was constant, you did.

Eat your words.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #75 on: June 25, 2009, 11:01:40 PM »
No, acceleration is the change in velocity.

0/10
Its still velocity, I never said it was constant, you did.

Eat your words.


Well then, if there isn't a constant velocity,  but there is a constant acceleration, we would feel it.

Let me break it down for you.

f=ma

force= mass * acceleration



Now we know that mass is constant so we will assume it is one.


force = acceleration


as long as the acceleration is constant, the force you feel is constant.

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #76 on: June 25, 2009, 11:07:58 PM »
Well then, if there isn't a constant velocity,  but there is a constant acceleration, we would feel it.
Hey are you retarded?

You have a dictionary link provided from the previous posts.  Acceleration cannot be constant. <<<-- (the black dot signifies a period)

Let me break it down for you.
Break it down for yourself. I hope other members on this forum aren't retarded as you. Constant acceleration, yeah right!


*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #77 on: June 25, 2009, 11:10:13 PM »
Constant acceleration is definitely possible.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/acons.html


here, educate yourself.

Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #78 on: June 25, 2009, 11:18:38 PM »
Constant acceleration is definitely possible.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/acons.html


here, educate yourself.
Educate me!

You can't even use a dictionary let alone are attempting to teach what you have yet to learn, physics.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #79 on: June 26, 2009, 04:01:23 AM »
The 'FAQ' is just that, and nothing more. I don't consider it a constitution, so neither should you.

I fixed that for you.

But I'm curious now...

If, as you accept, Daniel is the only person qualified to give the official position of the Forums, then why are you posting?

Anyone who does consider it a constitution is in error, and if I were you I wouldn't go around assuming to know what other people think when you've never actually asked them. Why am I posting. That's a dumb question. Because I want to?
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #80 on: June 26, 2009, 04:14:43 AM »
Anyone who does consider it a constitution is in error, and if I were you I wouldn't go around assuming to know what other people think when you've never actually asked them. Why am I posting. That's a dumb question. Because I want to?

Daniel wrote the FAQ. As you say, he is the only one permitted to act as the official voice of TFES.

Your views contradict his. So why are you posting again?

Show me which of Daniel's posts contradict my views. Seriously, go and have a look at the FAQs KillaBee. I'll be waiting right here.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #81 on: June 26, 2009, 04:38:39 AM »
Show me which of Daniel's posts contradict my views. Seriously, go and have a look at the FAQs KillaBee. I'll be waiting right here.

No problem:

Quote from: NEEMAN
You should note that some FE'ers do not regard ENAG as definitive. I certainly think there are major issues with the book.

Daniel cites Rowbotham's work as definitive evidence in the FAQ.

If Daniel thinks Rowbothams work is correct, then what right do you have to say there are major issues with it?

Daniel's post says this:

Quote
All credit for this FAQ goes to joffenz, Erasmus, Robbyj, ﮎingulaЯiτy, and Trekky0623.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12107
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #82 on: June 26, 2009, 04:55:11 AM »
Daniel's post says this:

Quote
All credit for this FAQ goes to joffenz, Erasmus, Robbyj, ﮎingulaЯiτy, and Trekky0623.

Yes. But it doesn't get entry to the FAQ without Daniels approval.

Daniel is the only official voice of TFES. He approved the FAQ. The FAQ references Rowbotham.

You see:

Quote
The opinions and beliefs expressed in any posts do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of The Flat Earth Society Forums.

And Daniel explicitly gives credit to others for writing the FAQ. Moreover, an identical FAQ is elsewhere provided by TheEngineer, with the exact same accreditation. Thus it is clear that Daniel was not posting the work as his own, but that of others.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

?

BOGWarrior89

  • 3793
  • We are as one.
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #83 on: June 26, 2009, 05:54:00 AM »
Acceleration would first have to be constant, and second constantly falling (acceleration) would result a zero-gravity environment.

Like in airplane simulators. And please don't come back saying we're falling upside down. That would be preposterous!

I don't understand.  Do you mean there is a constant jerk that results in a zero-gravity environment?  For that to be your second point, then your first point is bust, since a constant jerk would mean that your acceleration is changing (never mind what's happening to your poor velocity!) at a constant pace.

So what did you mean, exactly?  Your example helped only to muddle up what you had already said.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #84 on: June 26, 2009, 08:49:03 AM »
Constant acceleration is definitely possible.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/acons.html


here, educate yourself.
Educate me!

You can't even use a dictionary let alone are attempting to teach what you have yet to learn, physics.

Oh really? Acceleration is the derivative of velocity. Meaning it is the slope of a distance v, time graph.

Since acceleration is the slope of the velocity and not the height, this means that they could only be the same in certain cases and it is mere coincidence.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #85 on: June 26, 2009, 09:17:08 AM »
Oh really? Acceleration is the derivative of velocity. Meaning it is the slope of a distance v, time graph.

Since acceleration is the slope of the velocity and not the height, this means that they could only be the same in certain cases and it is mere coincidence.

Acceleration and velocity can never be equal.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #86 on: June 26, 2009, 09:35:05 AM »
Oh really? Acceleration is the derivative of velocity. Meaning it is the slope of a distance v, time graph.

Since acceleration is the slope of the velocity and not the height, this means that they could only be the same in certain cases and it is mere coincidence.

Acceleration and velocity can never be equal.

I simply meant equal in magnitude. Such as someone is going 0 m/s with a constant acceleration of 0 m/s/s.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #87 on: June 26, 2009, 09:37:25 AM »
I simply meant equal in magnitude. Such as someone is going 0 m/s with a constant acceleration of 0 m/s/s.

It makes no sense to equate those two. They are not comparable quantities.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30590
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #88 on: June 26, 2009, 09:43:38 AM »
I simply meant equal in magnitude. Such as someone is going 0 m/s with a constant acceleration of 0 m/s/s.

It makes no sense to equate those two. They are not comparable quantities.

That was kind of my point. I was explaining that they are not the same thing, and if they have the same magnitude it is simply a coincidence.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: FET is creationism, nothing more.
« Reply #89 on: June 26, 2009, 09:47:14 AM »
Acceleration is the derivative of velocity.

It's been a while since I've taken calculus, but don't you have that backwards?
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.