Could there be life on other side

  • 22 Replies
  • 3156 Views
?

novaguy

  • 27
  • Pratchett's discworld is historical fact
Could there be life on other side
« on: January 23, 2012, 04:07:34 PM »
I've had a search and could only find very old topics and none went into much detail and I understand that FEers just don't know as nobody has been there but I would like you to speculate could there be life on other side supported by another sun? Life would stick to surface either from pull of gravity of earth or in case of UA would pushed against the earth. What would happen if one was to jump on underside if UA was force at work, would one float for eternity?
There's no point arguing with an idiot, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2012, 04:49:27 PM »
I would think the shear force of the UA would not support life,
but Master James has a novel theory that life may exist beyond the great barrier,
and that creatures long though extinct, as in the Mammoths may exist beyond, with light from another star.



*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2012, 05:05:12 PM »
light from another star.

Another? What was the first one?
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2012, 05:09:46 PM »
the sun (some call Sol) is the Earths primary star, well accepted by spherical and disc earth believers.

?

novaguy

  • 27
  • Pratchett's discworld is historical fact
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2012, 05:28:15 PM »
I would think the shear force of the UA would not support life,
but Master James has a novel theory that life may exist beyond the great barrier,
and that creatures long though extinct, as in the Mammoths may exist beyond, with light from another star.




I think life could stand the sheer force of UA as I have been on rollercoasters and experienced forces greater than 1g (albeit only briefly) and am still here to tell the tale. I was also watching a nature program once where there was a fish (I can't remember name of fish or programme) that spent all it's life swimming against current of river in pretty much same spot filter feeding on stuff flowing downstream. Also what about deep sea life which is under immense pressures.
There's no point arguing with an idiot, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2012, 07:57:34 PM »
The underside is molten rock, so no.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2012, 08:09:53 PM »
the sun (some call Sol) is the Earths primary star, well accepted by spherical and disc earth believers.

Since when is the sun being a star accepted by FE'ers?
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

?

novaguy

  • 27
  • Pratchett's discworld is historical fact
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2012, 08:17:53 PM »
The underside is molten rock, so no.

Why is underside molten rock not solid? What causes it to stay molten?
There's no point arguing with an idiot, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

?

novaguy

  • 27
  • Pratchett's discworld is historical fact
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2012, 08:25:34 PM »
The underside is molten rock, so no.

Wouldn't the molten rock flow sideways when it comes into contact solid rock in a finite plane or could there be an icewall like structure not ice as it would melt on underside as well?
There's no point arguing with an idiot, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2012, 08:37:49 PM »
The underside is molten rock, so no.

Wouldn't the molten rock flow sideways when it comes into contact solid rock in a finite plane or could there be an icewall like structure not ice as it would melt on underside as well?

The UA is actually aetheric winds below the disc of the earth. This heats up the rock enough to cause it to turn molten. The winds envelope the disc and prevents the disc from sliding on the molten rock.

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2012, 08:57:18 PM »
The underside is molten rock, so no.

Wouldn't the molten rock flow sideways when it comes into contact solid rock in a finite plane or could there be an icewall like structure not ice as it would melt on underside as well?

The UA is actually aetheric winds below the disc of the earth. This heats up the rock enough to cause it to turn molten. The winds envelope the disc and prevents the disc from sliding on the molten rock.
Uhh... No.

Again, the hot-aether-winds-as-the-UA guess violates basic tenets of thermodynamics. It's bad enough the FEers claim that General Relativity is wrong (The earth doesn't bend space to produce the effect of gravity) and Maxwell's Equations are wrong (Light doesn't propagate through a homogeneous medium is a straight line, a. k. a. Bendy Light.), you really do have to start accepting reality.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #11 on: January 23, 2012, 09:03:04 PM »
Again, the hot-aether-winds-as-the-UA guess violates basic tenets of thermodynamics.

Please state which ones and why.

 
It's bad enough the FEers claim that General Relativity is wrong (The earth doesn't bend space to produce the effect of gravity)

There is no reason to assume the earth exhibits these effects simply because it must stay in line with a theory. A few parts of general relativity are correct, others are not. We do not have to take the bad with the good.

 
and Maxwell's Equations are wrong (Light doesn't propagate through a homogeneous medium is a straight line, a. k. a. Bendy Light.), you really do have to start accepting reality.

Well, yeah.

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #12 on: January 23, 2012, 09:09:49 PM »
Again, the hot-aether-winds-as-the-UA guess violates basic tenets of thermodynamics.

Please state which ones and why.

 
It's bad enough the FEers claim that General Relativity is wrong (The earth doesn't bend space to produce the effect of gravity)

There is no reason to assume the earth exhibits these effects simply because it must stay in line with a theory. A few parts of general relativity are correct, others are not. We do not have to take the bad with the good.

 
and Maxwell's Equations are wrong (Light doesn't propagate through a homogeneous medium is a straight line, a. k. a. Bendy Light.), you really do have to start accepting reality.

Well, yeah.
So FEers know more than Maxwell, Einstein, Newton, and Lord Kelvin. Amazing! Of course all of these scientist performed or devised experiments to validate their theories, so they matched reality. FEers really should either face reality or demonstrate brilliance, winning Nobel Prizes regularly for a decade or two.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #13 on: January 23, 2012, 09:10:11 PM »
Again, the hot-aether-winds-as-the-UA violates basic tenets of thermodynamics.

But remember aether-winds doesn't have a meaning. Well it did the other day, but forget about that. When Rushy says "aetheric winds" he means "not-aetheric non-wind phenomenon that creates gravity-like effects by some non-thermodynamics-basic-tenets-violating means".
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2012, 09:13:59 PM »
Again, the hot-aether-winds-as-the-UA guess violates basic tenets of thermodynamics.

Please state which ones and why.

 
It's bad enough the FEers claim that General Relativity is wrong (The earth doesn't bend space to produce the effect of gravity)

There is no reason to assume the earth exhibits these effects simply because it must stay in line with a theory. A few parts of general relativity are correct, others are not. We do not have to take the bad with the good.

 
and Maxwell's Equations are wrong (Light doesn't propagate through a homogeneous medium is a straight line, a. k. a. Bendy Light.), you really do have to start accepting reality.

Well, yeah.
So FEers know more than Maxwell, Einstein, Newton, and Lord Kelvin. Amazing! Of course all of these scientist performed or devised experiments to validate their theories, so they matched reality. FEers really should either face reality or demonstrate brilliance, winning Nobel Prizes regularly for a decade or two.
Its good to know when I asked for specifics you just stated how brilliant these "scientists" were compared to FE'ers. Maybe the question wasn't nice enough.

May you please provide the areas of thermodynamics in which UA violates at its present working form?

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #15 on: January 23, 2012, 09:20:50 PM »
Again, the hot-aether-winds-as-the-UA guess violates basic tenets of thermodynamics.

Please state which ones and why.

 
It's bad enough the FEers claim that General Relativity is wrong (The earth doesn't bend space to produce the effect of gravity)

There is no reason to assume the earth exhibits these effects simply because it must stay in line with a theory. A few parts of general relativity are correct, others are not. We do not have to take the bad with the good.

 
and Maxwell's Equations are wrong (Light doesn't propagate through a homogeneous medium is a straight line, a. k. a. Bendy Light.), you really do have to start accepting reality.

Well, yeah.
So FEers know more than Maxwell, Einstein, Newton, and Lord Kelvin. Amazing! Of course all of these scientist performed or devised experiments to validate their theories, so they matched reality. FEers really should either face reality or demonstrate brilliance, winning Nobel Prizes regularly for a decade or two.
Its good to know when I asked for specifics you just stated how brilliant these "scientists" were compared to FE'ers. Maybe the question wasn't nice enough.

May you please provide the areas of thermodynamics in which UA violates at its present working form?
Sure. Just open a new thread asking for such. Please start with a clear detailed explanation of the UA and its effect that melts the Earth.

We destroyed the latest proposal regarding the UA starting here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52647.msg1292515#msg1292515. You'll probably want to make a special pleading fallacy to adjust your guess accordingly.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #16 on: January 23, 2012, 09:24:17 PM »
Sure. Just open a new thread asking for such. Please start with a clear detailed explanation of the UA and its effect that melts the Earth.

You derail the thread and ask for the answer to a derailment to be posted in a new thread. Perhaps you do have a sense of humour.

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #17 on: January 23, 2012, 09:34:43 PM »
Sure. Just open a new thread asking for such. Please start with a clear detailed explanation of the UA and its effect that melts the Earth.

You derail the thread and ask for the answer to a derailment to be posted in a new thread. Perhaps you do have a sense of humour.
Feel free to avoid the challenge any way you want. I would consider your failure to respond as great proof that you can't defend your claims, including that the UA melts the underside of the FE.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #18 on: January 23, 2012, 09:43:56 PM »
Sure. Just open a new thread asking for such. Please start with a clear detailed explanation of the UA and its effect that melts the Earth.

You derail the thread and ask for the answer to a derailment to be posted in a new thread. Perhaps you do have a sense of humour.
Feel free to avoid the challenge any way you want. I would consider your failure to respond as great proof that you can't defend your claims, including that the UA melts the underside of the FE.

Funny, since you are the one who avoided a direct question, twice.

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #19 on: January 23, 2012, 09:48:15 PM »
Sure. Just open a new thread asking for such. Please start with a clear detailed explanation of the UA and its effect that melts the Earth.

You derail the thread and ask for the answer to a derailment to be posted in a new thread. Perhaps you do have a sense of humour.
Feel free to avoid the challenge any way you want. I would consider your failure to respond as great proof that you can't defend your claims, including that the UA melts the underside of the FE.

Funny, since you are the one who avoided a direct question, twice.
That's simply false. Follow the link provided.

Again: We destroyed the latest proposal regarding the UA starting here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=52647.msg1292515#msg1292515. You'll probably want to make a special pleading fallacy to adjust your guess accordingly.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #20 on: January 24, 2012, 07:48:00 AM »
the sun (some call Sol) is the Earths primary star, well accepted by spherical and disc earth believers.

Since when is the sun being a star accepted by FE'ers?


Yes, some disc earth thoerists believe the sun is not a star, but the majority however believes it is.
Also, the ones that believe the earth is endless, thoerize that other stars light part of the disc, with possible different worlds.

*

zarg

  • 1181
  • Saudi Arabian inventor of Dr. Pepper
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #21 on: January 24, 2012, 09:44:06 AM »
but the majority however believes

You say this a lot, but never prove it. "The majority doesn't believe in a conspiracy, the majority doesn't believe in the FAQ, the majority doesn't believe in stars being tiny and close, the majority doesn't believe in this map, the majority doesn't believe in this or that."

You like to pretend that True Zetetic Disc Earth Theorists are sane people who reject outrageous beliefs, but you have no evidence that this is true. Even your foster dad Master Lord Wilmore supports the things that you claim he doesn't.

Not to mention you only hurt the theories you supposedly support by attacking the pillars upon which they stand. For instance, if you say there is no conspiracy, you have just validated piles of evidence that disprove FET;  and if you say stars are distant suns, you have destroyed the explanation for why the sky looks different in the north and south.
Quote from: Cat Earth Theory
[Lord Wilmore's writings] are written the way a high schooler thinks an educated person should sound like.  The pathetic pseudo-academic writing can't hide the lack of any real substance.

*

Rushy

  • 8971
Re: Could there be life on other side
« Reply #22 on: January 24, 2012, 10:10:52 AM »
but the majority however believes

You say this a lot, but never prove it. "The majority doesn't believe in a conspiracy, the majority doesn't believe in the FAQ, the majority doesn't believe in stars being tiny and close, the majority doesn't believe in this map, the majority doesn't believe in this or that."

You like to pretend that True Zetetic Disc Earth Theorists are sane people who reject outrageous beliefs, but you have no evidence that this is true. Even your foster dad Master Lord Wilmore supports the things that you claim he doesn't.

Not to mention you only hurt the theories you supposedly support by attacking the pillars upon which they stand. For instance, if you say there is no conspiracy, you have just validated piles of evidence that disprove FET;  and if you say stars are distant suns, you have destroyed the explanation for why the sky looks different in the north and south.

Iwanttobelieve believes in a sort of smoke and mirrors type of light movement, meaning NASA pictures are not fake but at the same time don't represent the reality of the earth's shape due to limitations of the nature of light itself.