« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?

  • 53 Replies
  • 21627 Views
?

brathearon

  • 199
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #30 on: February 23, 2010, 09:59:25 AM »
i think its better for the FET if antartica was not part of the ice wall, so that its simpler to explain Gauss's law of magnetism on earth :)
Logged
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7249
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #31 on: February 26, 2010, 08:36:31 AM »
Quote from: levee on February 21, 2010, 10:03:43 AM
Here is Nibiru/Black Sun, photographs taken in Antarctica by the world renowned photographer, Fred Bruenjes:

http://www.moonglow.net/eclipse/2003nov23/index.html







The Moon does not cause the solar eclipse; the heavenly body known as the Black Sun (which absorbs all visible light and emits akasha) has the same diameter as that of the visible Sun, and does cause the solar eclipse, as we can see in these extraordinary photographs.

The Sun/ISS/Mercury transit videos show clearly the real dimensions of the Sun: not 1.4 million km in diameter (or for that matter, 50 km/32 mi), but just 1000/PHI ~= 618 meters:








The Moon/ISS transits show the same diameter as that of the Sun:




Not only do these photographs taken by F. Bruenjes show very clearly that the Moon does not cause the solar eclipse, but we can go much further with our analysis.

Here is the altitude of the Schirmacher Hills, the place in Antarctica mentioned by the author of the photographs:

http://www.trulyremote.com/antarctica/schirmacher-oasis.html

Just 228 meters.

I will use now a distance of only 800 km (I could use much more, even perhaps more than 1500 km) between F. Bruenjes and the Black Sun. Furthermore, let us ascend all the way to 2 km in altitude.

Even with these numbers, we can see that there is no curvature between the photographer and the Black Sun:

Distance 800 km, elevation of photographer 2 km, then we will have a visual obstacle of:

32 KILOMETERS

Not only the transit videos, but also these photographs are pretty conclusive re: the real size of the diameter of the Sun: given the 32 km visual obstacle which does not apear at all, even with a distance of 800 km and an elevation of 2 km, we can safely say there is no curvature over Antarctica.
Logged
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #32 on: February 26, 2010, 08:40:29 AM »
Quote from: Its a Sphere on February 23, 2010, 05:06:24 AM
So the black sun moves across the sky, yet only becomes visible when it passes in front of the non-black sun?
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42856
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #33 on: February 26, 2010, 08:57:07 AM »
Quote from: Its a Sphere on February 26, 2010, 08:40:29 AM
Quote from: Its a Sphere on February 23, 2010, 05:06:24 AM
So the black sun moves across the sky, yet only becomes visible when it passes in front of the non-black sun?
You have to forgive Levee.  He doesn't understand the concept of back-lighting.
Logged
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.
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7249
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #34 on: February 26, 2010, 09:21:13 AM »
I admire your tactics, but they do not apply here; please compare these photographs with the official data re: Sun, and the videos also. I feel sorry for you, if you can resort to back-lighting in order to explain this situation.

Now, since you want to go to the limit, let us now apply the full numbers to our formula:

elevation: 228 meters

distance: 4000 km (look this up on any map, and I am being v. conservative with the 4000 km, I could use about 5000 km)

So, the visual obstacle will be:

1451,33 KILOMETERS, over 1450 kilometers of visual obstacle.

markjo, did you say something about the back-lighting?
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42856
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #35 on: February 26, 2010, 09:57:06 AM »
Quote from: levee on February 26, 2010, 09:21:13 AM
markjo, did you say something about the back-lighting?

Yes, I did.  Levee, you do realize that black is not so much a color as it is the absence of light, don't you?  Of course you do.  When an object is illuminated from behind (back lit), the front side does not receive any light and therefore appears black.  This is what happens when the moon (anti-moon or any other object) eclipses the sun.  Size and distance are irrelevant.
Logged
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.
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7249
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #36 on: February 26, 2010, 10:13:34 AM »
Size and distance are irrelevant...really?

The Sun/ISS/Mercury transit videos show clearly the real dimensions of the Sun: not 1.4 million km in diameter (or for that matter, 50 km/32 mi), but just 1000/PHI ~= 618 meters:








The Moon/ISS transits show the same diameter as that of the Sun:





Please show us markjo, where the 149 million km are in these videos...the distance from the Sun to the Earth...both transits of the Sun and the Moon show exactly the same distance Iss-Sun/Moon, not to mention the Mercury transits, relative to the Sun...

Are you going to tell us here that in the Sun transit videos there are 149 million km between the Sun and Iss? Are you?

Or 384000 km between the Iss and the Moon?

Size does matter...there is only about 1 km between the Sun and Iss...these videos do not lie markjo...not by a long shot...

Where are the 384000 km between the Earth and the Moon here?



The heavenly body which cannot be detected because it absorbs all visible light (it emits akasha, or the finest aether, which in turn, becomes infrared/light/UV radiations given off the Sun) is located, as you can see, at about 800-1000 km distance from the photographer...and not by any long shot at a 384000 km distance from Antarctica...

You dodged the 1451,33 km visual obstacle argument...can you understand these numbers markjo? There is no curvature between the photographer and the Black Sun...


« Last Edit: February 26, 2010, 10:15:32 AM by levee »
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42856
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #37 on: February 26, 2010, 10:16:51 AM »
Quote from: levee on February 26, 2010, 10:13:34 AM
Size and distance are irrelevant...really?

The Sun/ISS/Mercury transit videos show clearly the real dimensions of the Sun: not 1.4 million km in diameter (or for that matter, 50 km/32 mi), but just 1000/PHI ~= 618 meters:

Levee, it is well known fact that since the earth is flat, sustained space travel is impossible and therefore the ISS does not exist.  Haven't you been keeping up?
Logged
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.
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7249
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #38 on: February 26, 2010, 10:23:13 AM »
I have already mentioned that the Iss is UNMANNED, and uses the Nikola Tesla Cosmic Ray Device...the satellites  use the same device, see here:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=543

I was the only one to explain these facts clearly a long time ago; the stratellite argument cannot be used by the FES to argue the inexistence of satellites.

These videos also show that the 32 mile/50 km diameter of the Sun data used by the FES is completely wrong, the 3000 miles altitude for its orbit is also dead wrong.

Logged
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #39 on: February 26, 2010, 10:51:56 AM »
So the black sun moves across the sky, yet only becomes visible when it passes in front of the non-black sun?
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
*

SupahLovah

  • 5167
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #40 on: February 26, 2010, 10:55:43 AM »
Quote from: levee on February 26, 2010, 10:23:13 AM
I have already mentioned that the Iss is UNMANNED, and uses the Nikola Tesla Cosmic Ray Device...the satellites  use the same device, see here:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/talk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=543

I was the only one to explain these facts clearly a long time ago; the stratellite argument cannot be used by the FES to argue the inexistence of satellites.

These videos also show that the 32 mile/50 km diameter of the Sun data used by the FES is completely wrong, the 3000 miles altitude for its orbit is also dead wrong.


Try this

measure your left thumb. Now hold it up to your left eye, an inch or two away. Now straighten your right arm out so you can see your right hand behind your left thumb.

Move your right hand in and out. Notice how when it's closer, it seems larger compared to the left thumb (that you know the measurement of) and when it's further away it's smaller?
Logged
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7249
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #41 on: February 26, 2010, 11:04:19 AM »
Quote from: Its a Sphere on February 26, 2010, 10:51:56 AM
So the black sun moves across the sky, yet only becomes visible when it passes in front of the non-black sun?

Your remark is very good...the Black Sun cannot be detected by our conventional astronomical instruments because it absorbs all visible light (emitted by the Sun); the Sun in turn absorbs akasha (sound aether, the highest form of aether, called vril by the nazis) and transforms it into infrared/light/UV; the Red Moon (the heavenly body which causes the moon eclipse) absorbs akasha, and emits x-rays/gamma rays, that is why it is transparent as it passes in front of the Moon. The only time the Black Sun becomes visible is during a solar eclipse, as it passes in front of the Sun.

The global warming is due to the renewed activity of the Black Sun; we are at the end of the fifth age, which will culminate with the so-called 2012 event (but it will happen at a different date, as 2012 was never mentioned actually by the mayas, their end date is different, but not by much, by very little).

Nibiru = Black Sun = Fenrir = Rahu

Tiamat = Red Moon = Ketu
Logged
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #42 on: February 26, 2010, 11:16:24 AM »
We have instruments that can detect portions of the spectrum other than light and  still fails to explain why I can't see it when it is not directly in front of the sun, nor does it explain why, as you just brought up, it doesn't do the same to the moon, unless you are suggesting that the mood emits only x-rays/gamma rays.  Why does this body eclipse the moon in two colors?

Clatto = Verata = Nicto
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
*

SupahLovah

  • 5167
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #43 on: February 26, 2010, 11:20:26 AM »
Quote from: Its a Sphere on February 26, 2010, 11:16:24 AM
We have instruments that can detect portions of the spectrum other than light and  still fails to explain why I can't see it when it is not directly in front of the sun, nor does it explain why, as you just brought up, it doesn't do the same to the moon, unless you are suggesting that the mood emits only x-rays/gamma rays.  Why does this body eclipse the moon in two colors?

klaatu = barada = nikto

Fixed, but why would you want to stop Gort in the first place?
Logged
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #44 on: February 26, 2010, 11:41:41 AM »
This thread does not need your incorrect corrections.

Nibiru = Fenrir = Rahu made me think of Clatto = Verata = Nicto.
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
*

SupahLovah

  • 5167
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #45 on: February 26, 2010, 11:47:32 AM »
Quote from: Its a Sphere on February 26, 2010, 11:41:41 AM
I don't care that I know nothing.

Nibiru = Fenrir = Rahu made me think of something I never understood.

Logged
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #46 on: February 26, 2010, 11:53:55 AM »
Quote from: SupahLovah on February 26, 2010, 11:47:32 AM
I fail at knowing what you are talking about so I will incorrectly correct you.
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
*

SupahLovah

  • 5167
  • Santasaurus Rex!
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #47 on: February 26, 2010, 11:59:35 AM »
Only thing I can find on Clatto Verata Nicto is WoWfags.

Sorry I don't waste money and life on a bad game.

Army Of Darkness is also not that great. It's obvious it's a nod to Klaatu Barada Nikto, which is how I've always quoted it from army of darkness, as any AoD/Evil Dead nerd should.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2010, 12:01:41 PM by SupahLovah »
Logged
"Study Gravitation; It's a field with a lot of potential!"
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #48 on: February 26, 2010, 12:03:32 PM »
Or you should try harder, you not seeing a movie isn't my fault.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106308/quotes

Ash: Clatto Verata Nicto.
Wiseman: Well, repeat them.
Ash: Clatto Verata Nicto.
Wiseman: Again.
Ash: I got it, I got it! I know your damn words, alright?

Obviously, as they felt the need to change it.....

I'll be sure to write Robert Wise's family and tell them of your devotion.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2010, 12:05:46 PM by Its a Sphere »
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42856
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #49 on: February 26, 2010, 12:05:49 PM »
Quote from: levee on February 26, 2010, 11:04:19 AM
Your remark is very good...the Black Sun cannot be detected by our conventional astronomical instruments because it absorbs all visible light (emitted by the Sun);

Ah, Dark Sucker Theory.  Now I understand.
http://www.theatrecrafts.com/humour_darksuckers.html
Logged
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.
?

ugaboga313

  • 710
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #50 on: February 26, 2010, 09:03:28 PM »
Wait why did Levee pull out this 5,000km figure?


Moving on, I posted a nice rebuttal of ice wall in another thread. It has to be taller than the atmosphere, thus making it very easy to see if it was close to the continents. Since we can't see anything, if it exists it must be wayy out there. However, being an ice continent, this would create massive weather anomalies due to the cold temperatures and low pressure. This does not happen, ergo ice wall does not exist.


BTW, needz moar conspiracy. I want to hear how history is only 300 years old.
Logged
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42856
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no
« Reply #51 on: February 26, 2010, 09:24:20 PM »
Quote from: ugaboga313 on February 26, 2010, 09:03:28 PM
Wait why did Levee pull out this 5,000km figure?

Mainstream FET holds that the sun and moon orbit about 3000 miles (5000 km) above the FE.

lrn2metric system
Logged
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.
?

ugaboga313

  • 710
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #52 on: February 27, 2010, 07:06:23 AM »
So by saying the earth is flat, he can show that there is a flat earth?


Logged
*

Its a Sphere

  • 1495
Re: FE has to take a stance. Antarctica is separate from the ice wall: yes or no?
« Reply #53 on: February 27, 2010, 09:51:26 AM »
Wouldn't it only be 5000km away directly overhead and not at the horizon?
Quote from: markjo on February 26, 2010, 09:24:20 PM
Quote from: ugaboga313 on February 26, 2010, 09:03:28 PM
Wait why did Levee pull out this 5,000km figure?

Mainstream FET holds that the sun and moon orbit about 3000 miles (5000 km) above the FE.

lrn2metric system

Wouldn't it only be 5000km away directly overhead and not at the horizon?
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on April 19, 2010, 06:34:31 AM
"We know that the sun is 93 million miles away and takes up 5 degrees of the sky.
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »