Creation of the earth in FET

  • 32 Replies
  • 7140 Views
?

Trollin-R-Us

  • 22
  • haha Earth ain't flat even a hick like me know dat
Creation of the earth in FET
« on: July 25, 2011, 09:10:52 AM »
i was wondering how was the earth made in FET? has it always existed as a Cylinder, or how was it made?

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2011, 11:36:01 PM »
Have you read the FAQ?

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2011, 12:47:09 AM »
Of course, go read the FAQ.  I mean, ignore that it doesn't say anything about how it was created, but go read it anyway.  I don't think most FE'ers even know what's in the FAQ and just kinda shout it as an instinctual response, but still, go read the FAQ.  Go on.  Don't just say you read it, either, actually read it, they'll know.  Well, even if you do read it you'll be accused of not reading it, but still.  Run along now.  FAQ-reading time.
Recently listened to:


*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17693
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2011, 05:44:40 AM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

?

Around And About

  • 2615
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2011, 01:07:49 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.

Uhh, what?! ???
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2011, 01:22:51 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

I am not aware of any model that says the Big Bang was unidirectional, and this does not support observed galactic expansion.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

*

Roundy

  • 131
  • Sit and Spin
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2011, 01:58:26 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;

then why is earth the only thing that is flat...

?

Verrine

  • 819
  • Friend of Dr Crustinator
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2011, 02:33:34 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;

then why is earth the only thing that is flat...

It's not.

*

Roundy

  • 131
  • Sit and Spin
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2011, 02:43:49 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;

then why is earth the only thing that is flat...

It's not.

Great rebuttal, i like the supporting evidence.

?

Verrine

  • 819
  • Friend of Dr Crustinator
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2011, 03:09:23 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;

then why is earth the only thing that is flat...

It's not.

Great rebuttal, i like the supporting evidence.

Your screen is flat, your desk is flat, your windows are flat, CDs are flat. Do you want more evidence or is it enough?

*

Roundy

  • 131
  • Sit and Spin
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2011, 03:12:55 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;

then why is earth the only thing that is flat...

It's not.

Great rebuttal, i like the supporting evidence.

Your screen is flat, your desk is flat, your windows are flat, CDs are flat. Do you want more evidence or is it enough?

successful troll is successful.

?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2011, 10:40:06 PM »
The sad thing is, he might actually think he's the first, or even hundredth person to ask this.
Can a mod lock this, and write READ THE FAQ?

Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2011, 07:37:47 AM »
The sad thing is, he might actually think he's the first, or even hundredth person to ask this.
Can a mod lock this, and write READ THE FAQ?
Why don't you try, and tell me where in the FAQ the creation of the Earth is described.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=1324.0

*

Supertails

  • 4387
  • what do i put here
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #13 on: August 04, 2011, 12:53:35 AM »
^ People like Thevoiceofreason irk me.  RE'ers make plenty of jokes about how the first response to everything is "READ THE FAQ", even if it's not in the FAQ...and then people like Thevoiceofreason come along and actually do that.
Recently listened to:


?

thefireproofmatch

  • 779
  • ಠ_ರೃ
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2011, 04:42:01 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;

then why is earth the only thing that is flat...

It's not.

Great rebuttal, i like the supporting evidence.

Your screen is flat, your desk is flat, your windows are flat, CDs are flat. Do you want more evidence or is it enough?
The majority of all celestial objects are sphere-like objects (stars, other planets, some galaxies), or irregular blotches (asteroids, most galaxies,  nebulas). Name one that is completely flat.

IMO the "explanation" in the FAQ is a cop-out.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2011, 04:44:00 PM by thefireproofmatch »
we're expected to throw up our hands and just BELIEVE.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #15 on: August 05, 2011, 12:20:28 AM »
Your screen is flat, your desk is flat, your windows are flat, CDs are flat. Do you want more evidence or is it enough?
The majority of all celestial objects are sphere-like objects (stars, other planets, some galaxies), or irregular blotches (asteroids, most galaxies,  nebulas). Name one that is completely flat.

IMO the "explanation" in the FAQ is a cop-out.
Don't feed the troll. The only way to drive Verrine insane is by ignoring his ridiculously obvious troll comments.
Actually, just ignore him even if he's being serious.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

*

hoppy

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 11803
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #16 on: August 05, 2011, 03:39:14 PM »
Your screen is flat, your desk is flat, your windows are flat, CDs are flat. Do you want more evidence or is it enough?
The majority of all celestial objects are sphere-like objects (stars, other planets, some galaxies), or irregular blotches (asteroids, most galaxies,  nebulas). Name one that is completely flat.

IMO the "explanation" in the FAQ is a cop-out.
Don't feed the troll. The only way to drive Verrine insane is by ignoring his ridiculously obvious troll comments.
Actually, just ignore him even if he's being serious.
verrine is no troll, he is a moonshramp scholar. You should not insult people for no reason, he is a brave man.
God is real.                                         
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9665708/Flat-Earth-Bible-02-of-10-The-Flat-Earth

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #17 on: August 05, 2011, 04:57:59 PM »
verrine is no troll, he is a moonshramp scholar. You should not insult people for no reason, he is a brave man.
Oh please, go away. Quit perpetuating this ridiculous troll-fest.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

?

thefireproofmatch

  • 779
  • ಠ_ರೃ
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2011, 04:59:44 AM »
Nobody has answered the question at hand yet, except for John, whose explanation has some rather large holes in it.
we're expected to throw up our hands and just BELIEVE.

?

Theodolite

  • 878
  • NASA's Chief Surveyor
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2011, 07:04:24 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

One thing you have to get used to, if you are going to frequent this forum:  they use the term model instead of unresearched hypothesis
Gather round my gentle sheep, I have a wonderful spherical story for you

Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #20 on: August 07, 2011, 02:16:33 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

Firstly, if you will forgive me, I have been absent for a while, and as such am unclear as to what the "Cambridge Model" refers to?  Would you be so kind as to clarify?


Right, now onto an actual reply...

First Point:  I am unaware of any research indicating a unidirectional "Big Bang".  Could you supply a source for this information?

Second Point:  With regard to the earth having always existed.  This runs onto problems with data, primarily from 238U -  207Pb dating, suggesting the earth was created around 4.6Ga, and data suggesting the universe itself came into being, via the big bang, around 13.9Ga.

Do you have a rebuttal?
BSc (Hons) Geology
Fellow of the Geological Society of London

*

Skeleton

  • 956
  • Frankly, I have better things to do with my time.
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #21 on: August 07, 2011, 02:47:20 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

Firstly, if you will forgive me, I have been absent for a while, and as such am unclear as to what the "Cambridge Model" refers to?  Would you be so kind as to clarify?

The "Cambridge Model" is the model that most flattists adhere to, the one with the north pole in the middle and earth as a disc being pushed upwards. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that it is referred to as the Cambridge model other than to make it sound scientific, as if some scientist at Cambridge came up with it. It has no connection with Cambridge as far as I am aware. The hardcore trolls like Davis and James like to use this term. It has been disproved, as it requires the use of UA, which has been shown not to exist by variations in gravity strength across the surface of the earth.
If the ultimate objective is to kill Skeleton, we should just do that next.

?

Theodolite

  • 878
  • NASA's Chief Surveyor
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #22 on: August 07, 2011, 02:58:00 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

Firstly, if you will forgive me, I have been absent for a while, and as such am unclear as to what the "Cambridge Model" refers to?  Would you be so kind as to clarify?

The "Cambridge Model" is the model that most flattists adhere to, the one with the north pole in the middle and earth as a disc being pushed upwards. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that it is referred to as the Cambridge model other than to make it sound scientific, as if some scientist at Cambridge came up with it. It has no connection with Cambridge as far as I am aware. The hardcore trolls like Davis and James like to use this term. It has been disproved, as it requires the use of UA, which has been shown not to exist by variations in gravity strength across the surface of the earth.

UA also doesnt explain the orbits of the earth, moon and other planets
Gather round my gentle sheep, I have a wonderful spherical story for you

*

Skeleton

  • 956
  • Frankly, I have better things to do with my time.
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #23 on: August 07, 2011, 03:22:19 PM »
UA also doesnt explain the orbits of the earth, moon and other planets

UA doesnt explain anything at all. If it is the force holding us to the earth then why does it vary when the whole slab of the earth is required to move at a constant speed? What will they counter this with, bendy speed?
If the ultimate objective is to kill Skeleton, we should just do that next.

*

Username

  • Administrator
  • 17693
  • President of The Flat Earth Society
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2011, 06:25:12 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

Firstly, if you will forgive me, I have been absent for a while, and as such am unclear as to what the "Cambridge Model" refers to?  Would you be so kind as to clarify?

The "Cambridge Model" is the model that most flattists adhere to, the one with the north pole in the middle and earth as a disc being pushed upwards. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that it is referred to as the Cambridge model other than to make it sound scientific, as if some scientist at Cambridge came up with it. It has no connection with Cambridge as far as I am aware. The hardcore trolls like Davis and James like to use this term. It has been disproved, as it requires the use of UA, which has been shown not to exist by variations in gravity strength across the surface of the earth.
Its called the cambridge model much like the big bang is called the big bang.  Its not to sound more scientific, it was named in jest by one of the round earth trolls that used to visit this site to torment us.  Unfortunately, the name stuck.
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.

?

The Knowledge

  • 2391
  • FE'ers don't do experiments. It costs too much.
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #25 on: December 21, 2011, 04:12:23 AM »
Its called the cambridge model much like the big bang is called the big bang.  Its not to sound more scientific, it was named in jest by one of the round earth trolls that used to visit this site to torment us.  Unfortunately, the name stuck.

No, you can't say "unfortunately, the name stuck", because the reason it's stuck is because YOU (among others) are using it to refer to the model. And if you think that is unfortunate, use a different term in order to stop propagation of the name Cambridge Model. You can't both lament about something and then help it to happen. See yesterday's comment about both writing a book and not wanting to convince people.
Watermelon, Rhubarb Rhubarb, no one believes the Earth is Flat, Peas and Carrots,  walla.

Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #26 on: December 22, 2011, 10:49:53 AM »
i was wondering how was the earth made in FET? has it always existed as a Cylinder, or how was it made?
The answer is in the Holy Bible, not on a forum.

Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #27 on: December 22, 2011, 11:51:05 AM »
The answer is in my sig, baby.

?

Puttah

  • 1860
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #28 on: December 22, 2011, 01:56:16 PM »
i was wondering how was the earth made in FET? has it always existed as a Cylinder, or how was it made?
The answer is in the Holy Bible, not on a forum.

Which holy bible? I don't recognize the symbol in your avatar.
Scepti, this idiocy needs to stop and it needs to stop right now. You are making a mockery of this fine forum with your poor trolling. You are a complete disgrace.

?

kbthiede

  • 63
  • RE, because I actually learned high school science
Re: Creation of the earth in FET
« Reply #29 on: December 22, 2011, 06:47:59 PM »
If I were to hold a Cambridge style model to be true, the big bang was unidirectional, like a cone.  This would be a reasonable source of the UA;  since the earth was still "soft" at some point, the acceleration upwards by the ua flattened it, much like a pizza.

However, those who hold I am correct would be far more likely to say the Earth has always existed in some form.

One thing you have to get used to, if you are going to frequent this forum:  they use the term model instead of unresearched hypothesis

Exactly this. I laughed upon reading this pseudo-science garbage he calls "The Cambridge Model"

The whole Flat Earth Theory is just a massive unsearched hypothesis and any research that proves it wrong (read: almost all research up to today) is "a conspiracy".
Science - logic + (lots and lots of) magic = FLAT EARTH THEORY