Things yet to be explained(Properly) by FET.

It lives!I also think this thread needs more links.

Actually most of these topics are discussed in Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

Not that I expect any RE'er to do the slightest bit of research.

ENaG and it's amazing work like the Bedford Canal experiment?

Actually most of these topics are discussed in Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

Not that I expect any RE'er to do the slightest bit of research.

Now that's just not fair... I've been doing research on this as I can... slow going as I have other priorities in my life other than the shape of the earth itself, but I'm still reading it.  Should I cop off with insults against FE'ers in general as a retaliation to your prejudiced opinions?  I think not.

If UA is universal and universal means everything - does that not mean that Earth is also accelerating at the same rate as we are? Then why do I get forced downward after I jump? Am I not accelerating the same rate as the Earth upward?

(Sorry if this in opposition of some scientific theory taught to school children - I'm very poor at science.)

If UA is universal and universal means everything - does that not mean that Earth is also accelerating at the same rate as we are? Then why do I get forced downward after I jump? Am I not accelerating the same rate as the Earth upward?

(Sorry if this in opposition of some scientific theory taught to school children - I'm very poor at science.)

We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

You lost me. Dark energy is somehow connected to the function of UA? (I honestly don't know)

Quote from: Harutsedo on July 02, 2011, 12:59:18 PM

We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

You lost me. Dark energy is somehow connected to the function of UA? (I honestly don't know)

I believe it is what powers UA,or the earth,or something like that.

Quote from: Death-T on July 02, 2011, 01:02:25 PM

Quote from: Harutsedo on July 02, 2011, 12:59:18 PM

We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

You lost me. Dark energy is somehow connected to the function of UA? (I honestly don't know)

I believe it is what powers UA,or the earth,or something like that.

Worthy of the list?

Quote from: The Question1 on July 02, 2011, 01:26:48 PM

Quote from: Death-T on July 02, 2011, 01:02:25 PM

Quote from: Harutsedo on July 02, 2011, 12:59:18 PM

We are shielded from the dark enegry ny the Earth.

You lost me. Dark energy is somehow connected to the function of UA? (I honestly don't know)

I believe it is what powers UA,or the earth,or something like that.

Worthy of the list?

I am going to search the forums before i add it.

Actually most of these topics are discussed in Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham.

Not that I expect any RE'er to do the slightest bit of research.

Ive read it and its full of crazed nonsense, assumptions, untruth, cherry picking between contradictory "evidence" with no reason other than "Observation A supports my theory while Observation B does not, therefore A is correct and B is wrong/mistaken/lies". There is no science to it whatsoever. Come join us in the Hypocrisy of Rowboatham thread if you think I am inaccurate in what I say.

I like how this has turned into a "let's bitch about FET 'cause they're too scared to argue back" thread. I think this is the first FE defeat iv'e ever seen. Well done boys. Well done.

FErs do not respond to threads this old because most of the people in the thread have left. Its like yelling to yourself.

Personally I never answer threads like this, even when they are new. I looked through and indeed I played no part in this one. But its not because it terrifies me.

These are list threads, with someone spouting off 15 different reasons. A one line answer isn't sufficient to answer any of the reasons satisfactorily.
I could spend hours constructing answers for all the objections in the thread, but it would most likely be met with tl;dr or people would take bits each and fragment the thread making it huge. In short, list threads take little time to put together, and massive amounts of time to answer. They are unrewarding, not worth the investment and hence ignored.
If someone wants a proper answer to something, they should make a thread about just that.

Things not explained on FE.

Firstly,a post that summarizes nicely why i believe in RE over FE.
http://theroundearthsociety.net/index.php?topic=9.msg107#msg107

-GPS
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=36546.0
-Equinox
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=25336.0
-Midnight Sun
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=25214.0
-Tropic Lines
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39167.0
-Moon Shadow
Instead,a theory about an anti-moon
-Large distances required for travel in the southern hemisphere.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39227.0

-The fact that gravity varies on the planet(For those who believe in UA.)
-Falling Meteors.
if EVERYTHING is going up because of UA,why not Meteoroids?
-International Space Station(ISS)

Quote from: Mykael on December 03, 2009, 12:48:06 PM

I think ISS's exact speed and altitude is irrelevant. The fact that it can disappear behind clouds means that it is at least 5-10km high (the usual altitude of Cirrocumulus clouds). The only other object, other than an orbiting body, that could remain at that altitude is some type of high-altitude plane. No exhaust trail or rocket flare has been observed, so it couldn't be a rocket plane. Balloons are out, as no balloon or any similar structure has been observed on the ISS.

That leaves some sort of high-altitude jet. This is unreasonable for several reasons:

• Aerodynamics-wise, the ISS's design is horrible.
  
• If it were a jet-powered aircraft, it would have to refuel at least once per day. Not only is this conspicous and difficult to keep quiet (even more people, an air force base's worth, have to brought into the "Conspiracy"), but it would likely be very expensive. A craft the size of the ISS would require a large amount of fuel to ascend back up to altitude and remain there, and even more people would have to be paid to keep quiet. The supposed motive of the Conspiracy is monetary gain, so why would they spend so much on a deception. Surely cheaper methods of trickery are available.

An orbiting body is really the only explanation for the ISS.

-Compass
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=38554.0
-Sunrise/set
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39283.60
-Angular Diameter
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39735.40
Daylight hours.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=39400.0
) Earthquakes thread showing P-waves and S-waves being consistent with RET
) Why the distance of the moon and sun are accurately measured using Radar, triangulation, and parallax.

Bedford canal: http://theroundearthsociety.net/index.php?topic=76.0

Disproved proofs: http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=25232.msg560231#msg560231 Note this one link contains other links.


Now,i know someone is going to say something like "Lurk moar"
But i have been to threads where these questions have been asked,and have not been given satisfactory answers.

Anything else that needs adding i will do so.

The world is round, get over it.

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

And I've seen you FE'rs map, dumbest thing I've ever seen. What's on the "dark" side of your map?

The world is round, get over it.

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

And I've seen you FE'rs map, dumbest thing I've ever seen. What's on the "dark" side of your map?

Please substantiate your claims. Lurk more or get out.

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

Thork has postulated the theory that it is either static or the strong and weak nuclear forces.

Quote from: ThreeBoysOnePriest on July 13, 2011, 12:16:43 PM

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

Thork has postulated the theory that it is either static or the strong and weak nuclear forces.

^This is trolling. I hope John Davis gives you the little holiday you seem to be so desperately seeking.

Quote from: Skeleton on July 13, 2011, 02:10:11 PM

Quote from: ThreeBoysOnePriest on July 13, 2011, 12:16:43 PM

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

Thork has postulated the theory that it is either static or the strong and weak nuclear forces.

^This is trolling. I hope John Davis gives you the little holiday you seem to be so desperately seeking.

Not at all. You postulated that these forces might be responsible for the results of the Cavendish Experiment, therefore implying that these forces might also be what hold us to the ground. When asked to disprove that it might be static sticking us to the ground, you were unable to do so. I think this is an area which you should devote great energy to exploring, there would be a Nobel Prize in it if you were correct.

No, I postulated that those or any other of a number of forces maybe responsible, for 2 metals balls to attract one another. I have always maintained our ground dwelling, to be the result of Universal Acceleration.

No, I postulated that those or any other of a number of forces maybe responsible, for 2 metals balls to attract one another. I have always maintained our ground dwelling, to be the result of Universal Acceleration.

Why do you maintain its an unknown force when it is undeniably possible that it might be static? At the tie of posting there is no proof that it is not static holding us to the ground.

And as for your implication that I should get a ban - my last three day ban lasted for about four months, I eventually had to e-mail another forum member to ask for it to be lifted. So I think if any banning is to be done, I have already served more than my time.

The world is round, get over it.

Gravity doesn't exist? What the hell holds us down then - our weight?

And I've seen you FE'rs map, dumbest thing I've ever seen. What's on the "dark" side of your map?

-___-
Please re-read the op.By that i mean read the second sentence.

FErs do not respond to threads this old because most of the people in the thread have left. Its like yelling to yourself.

Personally I never answer threads like this, even when they are new. I looked through and indeed I played no part in this one. But its not because it terrifies me.

These are list threads, with someone spouting off 15 different reasons. A one line answer isn't sufficient to answer any of the reasons satisfactorily.
I could spend hours constructing answers for all the objections in the thread, but it would most likely be met with tl;dr or people would take bits each and fragment the thread making it huge. In short, list threads take little time to put together, and massive amounts of time to answer. They are unrewarding, not worth the investment and hence ignored.
If someone wants a proper answer to something, they should make a thread about just that.

I understand,but i honestly tried to raise a discussion on the southern hemisphere in this thread
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=3b0f24647cc9d0f01df8d062b8bfa3ec&topic=39227.0

And nobody could give me a solid answer.Hell even Ski said:

Without a doubt the distances/geography of the southern hemi-plane are a serious cause of concern for FET.

I understand,but i honestly tried to raise a discussion on the southern hemisphere in this thread
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=3b0f24647cc9d0f01df8d062b8bfa3ec&topic=39227.0

And nobody could give me a solid answer.Hell even Ski said:

Quote from: Ski on May 28, 2010, 07:06:08 PM

Without a doubt the distances/geography of the southern hemi-plane are a serious cause of concern for FET.

This is gonna seem a bit selfish of me, but there are certain subjects I hate.

Specifically:
Coriolis
Conspiracy Theory
Ships on the horizon
Southern Hemisphere related hi-jinx.

If I see any of these do you know what I think to myself? This is going to to sound awful but I think "I'll leave that one for Tom Bishop."

Its not because I don't have an answer or I am scared of it, or its nonsense. Its just they take forever to explain and they come up all the time.
Coriolis
Coriolis
Coriolis
Coriolis
Coriolis
Coriolis
Coriolis

^That's just a few I found that I answered.

Someone else asked me the same thing today about the SH and I referred him to a bunch of links.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=49548.msg1216657#msg1216657

The answer is there if you want to have a look for it. If you want to discuss it you will have to wait for the next FEr to come along. I'm just not ready to discuss it all again so soon. I'd rather spend my time on other topics for now.

Oh, look at This

I <3 Tom Bishop. <---Not for signatures!

Oh, look at This

I <3 Tom Bishop. <---Not for signatures!

I'll wait for something much sillier to come from you.

Quote from: Thork on July 14, 2011, 03:11:01 PM

Oh, look at This

I <3 Tom Bishop. <---Not for signatures!

I'll wait for something much sillier to come from you.

Selfish pr*ck! You could use that signature space to advertise Tomartini^TM instead.

Oh, look at This

I <3 Tom Bishop. <---Not for signatures!

This map has been kicking around on here for years being promoted by Lard Willmire. It was torn to shreds many times and has even more hideous problems than the normal FE map has, mostly to do with the areas of the surface that would be illuminated at any one time. There is an animation somewhere showing the illumination problem but I dont know where.

There is an animation somewhere showing the illumination problem but I dont know where.

How convenient.

Quote from: Skeleton on July 15, 2011, 11:10:55 AM

There is an animation somewhere showing the illumination problem but I dont know where.

How convenient.

Fine, plot the patches of light and dark yourself and see it zetetically

Quote from: Thork on July 15, 2011, 11:24:35 AM

Quote from: Skeleton on July 15, 2011, 11:10:55 AM

There is an animation somewhere showing the illumination problem but I dont know where.

How convenient.

Fine, plot the patches of light and dark yourself and see it zetetically

July 15, 2011    1545 PDT

^ Is that supposed to be evidence of something? It gets more and more like a kindergarten in here each day.

Besides, just so you know, I don't subscribe to that model. You were given it by a different FEr. I think it unlikely the earth is in that form. For a start it would mean no ice-wall and secondly it would mean you could sail off the edge.