Intelligence in Debate

You have no proof.  You have no pictures.  You have no scientific data.  No eye-witnesses.

What do you have?

Quote from: Soulfien on April 10, 2012, 06:22:32 PM

You have no proof.  You have no pictures.  You have no scientific data.  No eye-witnesses.

What do you have?

Asked and answered.

Quote from: clayman on April 10, 2012, 01:03:32 AM

Quote from: Soulfien on April 09, 2012, 09:53:31 PM

A shuttle can escape the earth's gravity and a rocket can fly to the moon and back.

Prove it.

Long since proven. Reference: http://www.nasa.gov/, http://www.federalspace.ru/?lang=en, http://www.jaxa.jp/index_e.html, http://www.cnsa.gov.cn/n615709/cindex.html, http://www.esa.int/esaCP/index.html, http://www.isro.org/, and many more.

And that's just the space agencies. Do you need help with Google or the forum's search function to get more? Pick any of the numerous areas of evidence supporting RET, and I'll help you find the evidence either already posted here or elsewhere on the Internet.

I believe the SAW could explain the distances. It would obviously increase as you go farther rimwards. Still working on the math, though, mainly because I'm lazy.

Sorry, but what's the SAW? 

SAW only works if you assume no one has ever gone south of the tip of South America, Africa, or Austrialia.   SAW only works if you can work out a reason why no one ever goes to Antarctica.  And SAW only works if you rewrite the laws of physics.

To ask a simple question... why would you think no one has ever gone to Antarctica?   

SAW only works if you assume no one has ever gone south of the tip of South America, Africa, or Austrialia.   SAW only works if you can work out a reason why no one ever goes to Antarctica.  And SAW only works if you rewrite the laws of physics.

To ask a simple question... why would you think no one has ever gone to Antarctica?

Nobody ever said that.

Sorry, but what's the SAW? 

Shadow of the Aetheric Wind.

that would account for one direction.  What about sailing in the other direction?  According to SAW, it would take twice as long, yet it doesn't.

I'm curious what the basis for this is....

When we have such brilliant minds at work researching the size, shape, and nature of the celestial heavens (I'm talking about Astronomy), how is it that these brilliant minds have got everything so wrong?

I'm talking about people such as the brilliant Stephen Hawking, one of the most brilliant minds ever to walk the earth.

What evidence is so compelling, so detailed, so EXACT, that it has escaped his brilliant mind?  And what are the formulas that are so complex that they prove his own formulas wrong?

For the earth to be flat, everything he has proven about not only the earth but the entire universe has to be wrong.   Everything.  Every star, every solar system, every galaxy, everything in the universe must stop existing as they have been proven to exist.

Do you realize what you're saying by believing that the Earth is flat?  Nothing can exist if the Earth is flat except as something to orbit this simple disc.  There has to be some REALLY great and damning formulas to prove this.  The entire universe has been mapped out by now with surprising details. 

To say that the people who have done this are ... "stupid" or "ignorant" or "just plain wrong" would require some REAL brain power.  Yet... I'm not seeing the billions of computations and evidence that would be required to prove that.

Hi Soulfien.

Unfortunately, you"ue fallen for the Stephen Hawking myth. Don"t worry, the majority of the world swallow the Stephen Hawking myth, also.

By putting all your faith into this liuing demi-god of modern science, you haue shorted-out your own critical faculty, powers of reasoning, and probably some other things, too.

Fortunately, you are now in the best place. If you stick around for long enough, you will enjoy the incredible priuelege of hauing your mind corrected by the greatest zetetic thinkers of modern times.

Uery best wishes, Mizuki x

Quote from: Soulfien on April 08, 2012, 03:19:43 PM

I'm curious what the basis for this is....

When we have such brilliant minds at work researching the size, shape, and nature of the celestial heavens (I'm talking about Astronomy), how is it that these brilliant minds have got everything so wrong?

I'm talking about people such as the brilliant Stephen Hawking, one of the most brilliant minds ever to walk the earth.

What evidence is so compelling, so detailed, so EXACT, that it has escaped his brilliant mind?  And what are the formulas that are so complex that they prove his own formulas wrong?

For the earth to be flat, everything he has proven about not only the earth but the entire universe has to be wrong.   Everything.  Every star, every solar system, every galaxy, everything in the universe must stop existing as they have been proven to exist.

Do you realize what you're saying by believing that the Earth is flat?  Nothing can exist if the Earth is flat except as something to orbit this simple disc.  There has to be some REALLY great and damning formulas to prove this.  The entire universe has been mapped out by now with surprising details. 

To say that the people who have done this are ... "stupid" or "ignorant" or "just plain wrong" would require some REAL brain power.  Yet... I'm not seeing the billions of computations and evidence that would be required to prove that.

Hi Soulfien.

Unfortunately, you"ue fallen for the Stephen Hawking myth. Don"t worry, the majority of the world swallow the Stephen Hawking myth, also.

By putting all your faith into this liuing demi-god of modern science, you haue shorted-out your own critical faculty, powers of reasoning, and probably some other things, too.

Fortunately, you are now in the best place. If you stick around for long enough, you will enjoy the incredible priuelege of hauing your mind corrected by the greatest zetetic thinkers of modern times.

Uery best wishes, Mizuki x

i love your use of convincing evidence.

okay... convince me that the "Stephen Hawking" myth is wrong despite the massive scientific evidence there is to back it up.

Convince me with evidence of your own. 

Unfortunately, you"ue fallen for the Stephen Hawking myth. Don"t worry, the majority of the world swallow the Stephen Hawking myth, also.

And what is this alleged myth that the majority of the world swallows? Please document your evidence that the myth exists and that the majority of the world swallows it.

that would account for one direction.  What about sailing in the other direction?  According to SAW, it would take twice as long, yet it doesn't.

That has occurred to me. Rest assured, when I come public the theory will have an explanation for this.

okay... convince me that the "Stephen Hawking" myth is wrong despite the massive scientific evidence there is to back it up.

Convince me with evidence of your own. 

The whole Stephen Hawking myth, is a classic example of the emperor"s new clothes.

Read this thread, especially my post about what Bryan Appleyard says about Hawking: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=49299.0

Mizuki x

I couldn't read that rubbish.  Stephen Hawking was not battered and beaten and tortured by NASA.  He's got a neurological disease called ALS.  Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. I did a research paper on it for my Biology Course.  I'm going into Biomedical Electronics.  It's a change from what I did in the NAVY which was Avionics, but I'm sure I'll enjoy it.  Besides, I like to be well rounded.

Accusing the most brilliant mind since Einstein of being "wrong" or "silenced" or "tortured" or "controlled" is just absolute nonsense.  So instead of simply providing a mass of evidence that includes mathematical equations, formulas, data, hell, even satellite imagery, you simply say "The world hates us" and call it good?

I am willing to bet, hell, I am actually convinced that everyone here relies on weather reports.  You check the weather before you go outside or you check the forecast for the week....

That's provided by .... wait for it.... satellites in space!!!!  They map the entire globe!  Yes, yes, yes, that's proof that there IS no conspiracy!  There isn't a single square inch of the globe that hasn't been mapped out publicly!  And you KNOW this because you use the technology that's mapping out the world every single day!  It's impossible not to! 

The world has become so technologically enhanced that to believe the earth is flat, you don't need total ignorance- you need complete denial.  Ignorance isn't even good enough anymore.  Not one of you here has been able to tell me how the earth and all of the planets just spawned FLAT!   You can't do it.  Physics requires that the planets form into spheres.  It's what physics does... it's the easiest shape to have happened.  The universe was not created by any god or architect and I have seen no evidence that anyone here thinks that it was so that just leaves the laws of science to do what is impossible.  But hey, as long as you call everyone liars and victims, you can go right on using the very technology that you say doesn't exist while knowing nothing about the world your imagining.

I sign off now.  I have asked my questions and have received no answers.  I must admit, I was a bit disappointed by the lack of knowledge here.  If you're going to imagine a world, you should know everything about it.  I mean, people have been imagining a flat earth for around 500,000 years.  It wasn't until about 2,700 years ago that it was thought to be a sphere and later on it was proven to be many times over.  And yes, again, and for the last time, I've sailed the globe.  I've seen more of it than most people.  One of the benefits of being in the USN.

So long and thanks for all the fish.

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

I took the time to review your posts in that thread. The links seem to be broken. I'll assume that over time that blog posts were moved (or were deleted); however, you still haven't made your case.

For example, is the myth that Hawking exists?
Is it that he profoundly respected?
Is it that he's published fantastic revelations?
Is it that he's tolerant of laziness, willful ignorance, and the other usual failings of FEers?

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 05:12:50 AM

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

I took the time to review your posts in that thread. The links seem to be broken. I'll assume that over time that blog posts were moved (or were deleted); however, you still haven't made your case.

For example, is the myth that Hawking exists?
Is it that he profoundly respected?
Is it that he's published fantastic revelations?
Is it that he's tolerant of laziness, willful ignorance, and the other usual failings of FEers?

Hi Clocktower.

Of course he exists. And yes, he is indeed respected by the majority of people.

If you know the story of the emperor"s new clothes, you"ll understand the point i am making about Hawking. Whether you agree with me or not.

Mizuki x

One note on Stephen Hawking...  Are you basing your belief on his quote in "A brief history in time"?  Because if so, you're sorely mistaken.  He used a joke about a flat earth belief.

Also that journalist's opinion that he was wrong had nothing whatsoever to do with any flat earth belief.  He was attacking other theories.  Please start doing your homework.  Stop making such idiotic claims.  It's... not a way to present your case.

Quote from: ClockTower on April 14, 2012, 05:36:41 AM

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 05:12:50 AM

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

I took the time to review your posts in that thread. The links seem to be broken. I'll assume that over time that blog posts were moved (or were deleted); however, you still haven't made your case.

For example, is the myth that Hawking exists?
Is it that he profoundly respected?
Is it that he's published fantastic revelations?
Is it that he's tolerant of laziness, willful ignorance, and the other usual failings of FEers?

Hi Clocktower.

Of course he exists. And yes, he is indeed respected by the majority of people.

If you know the story of the emperor"s new clothes, you"ll understand the point i am making about Hawking. Whether you agree with me or not.

Mizuki x

So, you still can't even state the "myth". How sad. I was hoping to actually discuss your outlandish, unsupported claim, but all we get is innuendo. I know of nothing about the great man that warrant any myth, especially regarding the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes.

ETA:
Given levee's recent fraud, I've come to doubt the honesty of many FEers, you included. So, with a live link, I asked Mr. Appleyard to respond to your posts in this thread using the form on his blog site.

He ever so kindly responded:

I have never viciously attacked him. I have pointed out he misunderstood Wittgenstein and was, indeed, bone-headedly wrong about a quote he used from Shakespeare. In a very favourable profile I did of him in 1988 I also reported what his then wife said about his severe religious intolerance. He refused to be in the same room as her religious friends. My review of Universe in a Nutshell was favourable but for pointing out his misuse of the quote from Hamlet. I do regard his abrupt scientism as not worthy of him. If you regard any of this as vicious rather than normal, robust discourse, then so be it but I don't
Best Wishes,
Bryan Appleyard

I guess we know that you are misrepresenting Mr. Appleyard's position. I hope that you were just biased, forgetful, of both. I'd hate to add you to the list of frauds (leeve and fabricating quotes; Tom Bishop and fabricating experimental results).

Of course, you're welcome to ask him yourself via the same form.

Quote from: Soulfien on April 13, 2012, 07:26:42 PM

okay... convince me that the "Stephen Hawking" myth is wrong despite the massive scientific evidence there is to back it up.

Convince me with evidence of your own. 

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

The whole Stephen Hawking myth, is a classic example of the emperor"s new clothes.

Read this thread, especially my post about what Bryan Appleyard says about Hawking: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=49299.0

Mizuki x

Two things.  First, please link to the specific post that you are referring to.  Second, please make sure that the link that you are referring to is still live.

I remember reading Appleyard's review of 'A Brief History', - it was scathing but fair.

Here's a link to Appleyard's review of Hawking's 'Universe in a Nutshell', for anyone who is interested: http://www.bryanappleyard.com/2001/11/stephen-hawkings-universe-in-a-nutshell/

Mizuki x

It's a change from what I did in the NAVY which was Avionics,

Excellent. You would be most welcome in the "INS disproves FE" thread where, despite having achieved the objective of its title, there is a dunderheaded FE insisting that Schuler tuning doesn't exist. You would also be able to peer review my method of how INS does disprove FE and objectively critique my argument.

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 05:55:58 AM

Quote from: ClockTower on April 14, 2012, 05:36:41 AM

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 05:12:50 AM

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

I took the time to review your posts in that thread. The links seem to be broken. I'll assume that over time that blog posts were moved (or were deleted); however, you still haven't made your case.

For example, is the myth that Hawking exists?
Is it that he profoundly respected?
Is it that he's published fantastic revelations?
Is it that he's tolerant of laziness, willful ignorance, and the other usual failings of FEers?

Hi Clocktower.

Of course he exists. And yes, he is indeed respected by the majority of people.

If you know the story of the emperor"s new clothes, you"ll understand the point i am making about Hawking. Whether you agree with me or not.

Mizuki x

So, you still can't even state the "myth". How sad. I was hoping to actually discuss your outlandish, unsupported claim, but all we get is innuendo. I know of nothing about the great man that warrant any myth, especially regarding the fable of the Emperor's New Clothes.

ETA:
Given levee's recent fraud, I've come to doubt the honesty of many FEers, you included. So, with a live link, I asked Mr. Appleyard to respond to your posts in this thread using the form on his blog site.

He ever so kindly responded:

Quote from: personal email to CT on 2012/04/14 from Bryan Appleyard

I have never viciously attacked him. I have pointed out he misunderstood Wittgenstein and was, indeed, bone-headedly wrong about a quote he used from Shakespeare. In a very favourable profile I did of him in 1988 I also reported what his then wife said about his severe religious intolerance. He refused to be in the same room as her religious friends. My review of Universe in a Nutshell was favourable but for pointing out his misuse of the quote from Hamlet. I do regard his abrupt scientism as not worthy of him. If you regard any of this as vicious rather than normal, robust discourse, then so be it but I don't
Best Wishes,
Bryan Appleyard

I guess we know that you are misrepresenting Mr. Appleyard's position. I hope that you were just biased, forgetful, of both. I'd hate to add you to the list of frauds (leeve and fabricating quotes; Tom Bishop and fabricating experimental results).

Of course, you're welcome to ask him yourself via the same form.

Firstly, Mr Clocktower, i certainly did not misrepresent Mr Appleyard"s position on anything. I prouided a link to an interuiew and also some quoted text of his own words from an interuiew.

Secondly, can you post up your post to Mr Appleyard? I couldn"t find it on his blog. Thank you.

Mizuki x

Firstly, Mr Clocktower, i certainly did not misrepresent Mr Appleyard"s position on anything. I prouided a link to an interuiew and also some quoted text of his own words from an interuiew.

Secondly, can you post up your post to Mr Appleyard? I couldn"t find it on his blog. Thank you.

Mizuki x

1) I did not post to Mr. Appleyard's blog, nor did I claim to have done so. Please pay attention.
2)  Yes, you did misrepresent Mr. Appleyard's position. For example:

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 10:10:14 AM

Firstly, Mr Clocktower, i certainly did not misrepresent Mr Appleyard"s position on anything. I prouided a link to an interuiew and also some quoted text of his own words from an interuiew.

Secondly, can you post up your post to Mr Appleyard? I couldn"t find it on his blog. Thank you.

Mizuki x

1) I did not post to Mr. Appleyard's blog, nor did I claim to have done so. Please pay attention.
2)  Yes, you did misrepresent Mr. Appleyard's position. For example:

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 05:12:50 AM

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

How conuenient it was a liue link. So there"s no record of what you said.

You should be ashamed Clocktower. Going onto Mr Appleyard"s blog and bothering him when he"s probably busy writing about science and things.  Anyway, if Mr Appleyard reads my posts, he"ll see that i did not misrepresent him.

Your opinion doesn"t matter to me.

Mizuki x

Quote from: ClockTower on April 14, 2012, 10:16:36 AM

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 10:10:14 AM

Firstly, Mr Clocktower, i certainly did not misrepresent Mr Appleyard"s position on anything. I prouided a link to an interuiew and also some quoted text of his own words from an interuiew.

Secondly, can you post up your post to Mr Appleyard? I couldn"t find it on his blog. Thank you.

Mizuki x

1) I did not post to Mr. Appleyard's blog, nor did I claim to have done so. Please pay attention.
2)  Yes, you did misrepresent Mr. Appleyard's position. For example:

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 05:12:50 AM

Ok Soulfien. But don"t you find it at least a little intriguing that the respected science journalist, Bryan Appleyard, belieues that Hawking, in his book, was "bone-headedly wrong about everything!" ?

Regardless, i wish you well with your studies.

Mizuki x

How conuenient it was a liue link. So there"s no record of what you said.

You should be ashamed Clocktower. Going onto Mr Appleyard"s blog and bothering him when he"s probably busy writing about science and things.  Anyway, if Mr Appleyard reads my posts, he"ll see that i did not misrepresent him.

Your opinion doesn"t matter to me.

Mizuki x

Based on his response and the prompting from me, I confidently infer that he read your posts before replying. (I gave him links to the worst of your misrepresentations.)

I assure you that Mr. Appleyard was very prompt and as you can see polite. I don't think he would have taken the time to reply in such detail if correcting misrepresentations wasn't important to him.

Oh and I do have documentation of what I said on his site, but you should contact him yourself--as I already suggested if you wish to confirm his reply. I'm sure he'd love to have some words directly with you over these misrepresentations.

If Mr Appleyard is concerned in any way, he"s free to contact me. He"s a capable man.

I"m sure it was a pleasure for him to meet you, Clocktower (albeit, only on the internet). I bet he"s had to go for a bit of a lie-down!

Mizuki x

If Mr Appleyard is concerned in any way, he"s free to contact me. He"s a capable man.

I"m sure it was a pleasure for him to meet you, Clocktower (albeit, only on the internet). I bet he"s had to go for a bit of a lie-down!

Mizuki x

You contact him, you slime.  You're the one misrepresenting his position and you should at least have the decency to discuss it with him now that you know that that's a possibility.

Either that, or give this whole line of argument up because all you look like now is a fraud.

Quote from: Mizuki on April 14, 2012, 10:38:55 AM

If Mr Appleyard is concerned in any way, he"s free to contact me. He"s a capable man.

I"m sure it was a pleasure for him to meet you, Clocktower (albeit, only on the internet). I bet he"s had to go for a bit of a lie-down!

Mizuki x

You contact him, you slime.  You're the one misrepresenting his position and you should at least have the decency to discuss it with him now that you know that that's a possibility.

Either that, or give this whole line of argument up because all you look like now is a fraud.

So tell me, how is prouiding a link to an interuiew and posting-up an interuiew, a misrepresentation?

And why are you being so abusiue? Is that really called for?

Mizuki x

It's an accurate descriptor for you.  Only you can change this by either

A.  Not acting like a slime anymore and contacting him

or

B.  Admitting you misrepresented his writing

I doubt you'll do either of those things, so I think it's more than fair to consider you a fraud.

For those who haue a genuine interest, here is an excerpt from an interuiew that Bryan Appleyard did with The Fortean Times (as regards his opinion of Hawking, i think it"s pretty damning. Others may think differently):-



'In 1988 I interviewed Stephen Hawking just before A Brief History of Time came out. I come from a scientific family, but I wasn’t particularly interested in science as such.

I’d been writing a book about post-war British culture and I’d vaguely, without thinking about it, assumed that science and the humanities had accepted some sort of deal: science ‘explains’ one type of thing, and religion and so on ‘explained’ other things. When I interviewed Hawking, my complacency fell apart. I thought the man was bone-headedly wrong about everything!

He wasn’t even right about the stuff he put in his book. He misunderstood Wittegenstein. I tried to explain this to him, but he just wheeled himself away. I was shocked. He had this view that science was ‘completable’, that it would have this Theory of Everything within weeks. I just thought that was irrational. After all, every physicist who has ever lived has thought they were on the verge of a Theory of Everything. Also, we know from the Incompletness Theorems of  Gödel that mathematics is not completable. Finally, how would we know we had the Theory of Everything? There are various answers to that, but I think they are all likely to be wrong.'

Source: http://thefrogweb.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/bryan-appleyard/

Mizuki x