A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET

  • 70 Replies
  • 12020 Views
?

Mr Pseudonym

  • Official Member
  • 5448
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #60 on: June 10, 2010, 01:17:02 AM »
Once again let's take them one at a time, starting from the bottom and where you so conveniently ignored me last time.  The ice wall is set on a huge mountain range and therefore holds in the ocean, it is not floating ice.  Next point?
Why do we fall back to earth? Because our weight pushes us down, no laws, no gravity pulling us. It is the law of intelligence.

Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #61 on: June 10, 2010, 04:07:33 AM »
Once again let's take them one at a time, starting from the bottom and where you so conveniently ignored me last time.  The ice wall is set on a huge mountain range and therefore holds in the ocean, it is not floating ice.  Next point?


Set on a huge mountain range...?  That still leaves the question of height.  If it truly holds in the atmosphere, this ice wall/mountain range must be over 500 miles high.  There's no way to hide a 500-mile high wall of ice.

Trolling makes me angry.

*

Sliver

  • 557
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #62 on: June 10, 2010, 06:14:38 AM »
Once again let's take them one at a time, starting from the bottom and where you so conveniently ignored me last time.  The ice wall is set on a huge mountain range and therefore holds in the ocean, it is not floating ice.  Next point?


Set on a huge mountain range...?  That still leaves the question of height.  If it truly holds in the atmosphere, this ice wall/mountain range must be over 500 miles high.  There's no way to hide a 500-mile high wall of ice.
Once again let's take them one at a time, starting from the bottom and where you so conveniently ignored me last time.  The ice wall is set on a huge mountain range and therefore holds in the ocean, it is not floating ice.  Next point?


Set on a huge mountain range...?  That still leaves the question of height.  If it truly holds in the atmosphere, this ice wall/mountain range must be over 500 miles high.  There's no way to hide a 500-mile high wall of ice.
Something that high would probably be visible from just about anywhere on Earth.  Next topic.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #63 on: June 10, 2010, 06:15:23 AM »
Once again let's take them one at a time, starting from the bottom and where you so conveniently ignored me last time.  The ice wall is set on a huge mountain range and therefore holds in the ocean, it is not floating ice.  Next point?

Then it's an ice covered wall, not a wall made of ice.  Please use more descriptive terms in order to avoid confusion.
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.

?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #64 on: June 10, 2010, 06:21:03 AM »
The "bendy light specialist" said this last night:

Do you have any evidence that bendy light exists?

No.

So now sunsets and the sinking ship effect are officially unexplained by FET, that is until John Davis decides that his research on "aetheric eddification" is no longer a secret.

Another win for RE!
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.

Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #65 on: June 10, 2010, 06:57:54 AM »
Well, so far none of my 5 dozen topics have been defended by FE'ers.  Sounds like 5 dozen wins to me.  It's ridiculous how few FE'ers are trying to defend FET here...

Trolling makes me angry.

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #66 on: June 10, 2010, 01:58:09 PM »
Well, so far none of my 5 dozen topics have been defended by FE'ers.  Sounds like 5 dozen wins to me.  It's ridiculous how few FE'ers are trying to defend FET here...
I answered your questions about the conspiracy, as well as a fair few others.
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #67 on: June 10, 2010, 02:03:10 PM »
Quote
It did work out. Also, I called bullshit at three of the questions, and they weren't defended so far.
They weren’t defended because A) they’re stupid questions (which happened to contain the answers) and B) because this thread is about YOU defending FET, not US defending RET.

Now, refer to the Conspiracy topic to have the other Conspiracy question answered.
Quote
Travel distances - explained in FAQ.
No, it’s not.  Stop using ‘lurk moar’ as an excuse for not knowing the answer to a question.

Quote
FET says gravity exists everywhere EXCEPET Earth - this is the first time I hear of it. I thought FET claims we don't exactly know what's going on in space, because we didn't go there, because we couldn't.

You already mentioned below how Jupiter is round.  A spherical object in space isn’t possible unless, of course, you consider gravity.

Quote
Why RE maps work as flawlessly as they do - that's a RET question. My guess would be that they had enough money to get a good map done, which FES probably doesn't

Money doesn’t matter; what matters is whether or not the map works.  Our map works perfectly; not only have images of the Earth been taken from space matched our maps, but travel distances, flight times, etc, all match up with our map.  And because making a non-distorted projection of a spherical body onto a flat, 2D surface is impossible, so is a map of the ‘flat Earth’.

Quote
Why nobody has seen the ‘ice wall’ - armed people with guns go pew pew guns kapow.

Bullshit.  There’s no way armed guards could totally cover the ‘Ice Wall’.  Plus, the Ice Wall would have to be 500mi+ high to hold in the atmosphere… Ice also floats, making it impossible to hold in water.  Ice wall is debunked in so many ways.

Quote
Why we are (cosmically) such an anomaly - we're the only (known) planet with life present on it. We are an "anomaly" regardlessly of the shape.

So, just because we have life, we can defy the laws of physics and gravity and be flat/cylindrical, whereas all other heavenly bodies have shown to be spherical?  We’re not that special.

Quote
Why Jupiter can be seen to spin through a telescope (implying that it must be round) - because it's round, and it probably is spinning.

Ain’t gravity great?  (see above)


Quote
Why the FAQ is so f@*ked up (namely sunsets/sunrises) - no, you.

…what?  I meant, by that question, “Why is the FAQ so out-of-date/full of debunked crap?”

Quote
Coriolis Effect -
Quote from: FAQ
Q: "How come when I flush my toilet in the northern hemisphere it goes counterclockwise but I have this friend in Australia and when he flushes it goes clockwise?"

A: You are mistaken. The Coriolis effect adds at most one (counter)clockwise rotation per day, and fewer as you get closer to the equator. The water in your toilet spins much faster than that (at least once per minute, or 1440 times per day), so the additional or lost rotation from the Coriolis effect would not be noticed.

The Coriolis Effect has no effect on drains/basins.  If your water spins a particular way, it’s because the water is directed in that direction due to the engineering of your toilet/basin/whatever.  For this reason, that FAQ entry makes very little sense.


Quote
Crossing the south pole - you walk in circles.
So, we humans can engineer artificial hearts and other miracles, but we can’t travel straight?  It’s called GPS.


Quote
Google Earth/Maps - it's just another map. -1 question.

How about the images from Google Earth taken from satellites?  Pictures of places like North Korea and Area 51, where pictures from high-altitude planes would’ve been impossible?  The whole point of this argument is to prove that we have sent satellites into space, and therefore have sent men in space, therefore proving the Earth is round via valid pictures of a spherical Earth.


Quote
The 'atmolayer' (namely how it's held in by the 'icewall', which would then have to be about 500 mi high) - that's a good hypothesis.

How else is the atmosphere/’atmolayer’ held in in FET, then?

Quote
How the 'Ice Wall' holds water (ice floats, therefore cannot hold in the Earth's oceans) - unless the Ice Wall and the related mountain range are a kind of a celestial bowl, which they are.

Celestial bowl…!?  You are aware of volcanoes and the molten hot layers of the Earth, and how a ‘bowl of ice’ is impossible?  Good effort though.  I appreciate you trying to respond to my points… you’re the only one with the balls.


Did you miss that earlier?  Those are my responses to your answers.

Trolling makes me angry.

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #68 on: June 10, 2010, 02:43:16 PM »
I didn't miss it, but most of your replies are based on misinterpretation of what I said. I'll try to come with a suitable riposte later.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2010, 12:51:57 PM by PizzaPlanet »
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

*

Catchpa

  • 1018
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #69 on: June 11, 2010, 12:48:41 AM »
I didn't miss it, but most of your replies are based on misinterpretation of what I said. I'll try to come with a suitable riposte later, promise <3

Only when pressed further about the issues and the replies given to you, you're going to reveal that the reason you didn't answer was because he simply misinterpreted you. Never do you go back and think, "I should probably answer them.", but instead you wait for him to tell you twice. ::)
The conspiracy do train attack-birds

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: A Compilation of Things Yet to be Explained Properly by FET
« Reply #70 on: June 11, 2010, 05:06:16 AM »
I didn't miss it, but most of your replies are based on misinterpretation of what I said. I'll try to come with a suitable riposte later, promise <3

Only when pressed further about the issues and the replies given to you, you're going to reveal that the reason you didn't answer was because he simply misinterpreted you. Never do you go back and think, "I should probably answer them.", but instead you wait for him to tell you twice. ::)
Re-read my previous post. And how was I supposed to knows his answers are result of misinterpretation before seeing the answers?
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)