# Explanation of FE gravity requested

• 43 Replies
• 10134 Views
?

#### Megaman

• 176
• Winning all the forums
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #30 on: August 22, 2012, 03:47:01 PM »
lol universal accelerator.  Is there any proof of a universal accelerator that trumps proof that... you know... the world is round?  I mean, real proof.  Not circumstantial proof.

Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?

you cannot discern between the two. This was talked about in another thread.

The point is that one is seen, while the other is not seen, regardless whether they have the same effects.

It's a matter of visible vs. invisible. I believe in the visible, while you roundies believe in the invisible.

Tom, once again you're making the mistake of assuming that you have an absolute frame of reference. The idea of a constantly accelerating Earth is just as invisible as gravitation. Stop trying to skew things.

#### Tom Bishop

• Flat Earth Believer
• 18007
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #31 on: August 23, 2012, 07:02:41 AM »
lol universal accelerator.  Is there any proof of a universal accelerator that trumps proof that... you know... the world is round?  I mean, real proof.  Not circumstantial proof.

Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?

you cannot discern between the two. This was talked about in another thread.

The point is that one is seen, while the other is not seen, regardless whether they have the same effects.

It's a matter of visible vs. invisible. I believe in the visible, while you roundies believe in the invisible.

Tom, once again you're making the mistake of assuming that you have an absolute frame of reference. The idea of a constantly accelerating Earth is just as invisible as gravitation. Stop trying to skew things.

But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

One concept clearly visible while the other is not, regardless if hypothetical mystery gravitations cause the same effects. Once is seen, while the other is not. I'm looking at a hundred dollar bill, you're imagining a hundred dollar bill.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2012, 07:16:21 AM by Tom Bishop »

?

#### MrT

• 211
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #32 on: August 23, 2012, 07:20:58 AM »
lol universal accelerator.  Is there any proof of a universal accelerator that trumps proof that... you know... the world is round?  I mean, real proof.  Not circumstantial proof.

Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?

you cannot discern between the two. This was talked about in another thread.

The point is that one is seen, while the other is not seen, regardless whether they have the same effects.

It's a matter of visible vs. invisible. I believe in the visible, while you roundies believe in the invisible.

Tom, once again you're making the mistake of assuming that you have an absolute frame of reference. The idea of a constantly accelerating Earth is just as invisible as gravitation. Stop trying to skew things.

But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

One concept clearly visible while the other is not, regardless if hypothetical mystery gravitations cause the same effects. Once concept is seen, while the other is not. I'm looking at a hundred dollar bill, you're imagining a hundred dollar bill.

I fully believe that debating with Tom Bishop is completely futile.  This exact topic has been discussed at length on at least two different occasions.  Tom will continue to spout the same lines and arguments which make no sense whatsoever.  I really don't think anything anyone could say would change his argument.
The above is not meant to be an attack or inflammatory, it's just what I think.

Quote from: Tom Bishop
I don't understand

?

#### yagerasrehtreatalf

• 36
• I like Spheres
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #33 on: August 23, 2012, 07:25:25 AM »
lol universal accelerator.  Is there any proof of a universal accelerator that trumps proof that... you know... the world is round?  I mean, real proof.  Not circumstantial proof.

Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?

you cannot discern between the two. This was talked about in another thread.

The point is that one is seen, while the other is not seen, regardless whether they have the same effects.

It's a matter of visible vs. invisible. I believe in the visible, while you roundies believe in the invisible.

Tom, once again you're making the mistake of assuming that you have an absolute frame of reference. The idea of a constantly accelerating Earth is just as invisible as gravitation. Stop trying to skew things.

But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

One concept clearly visible while the other is not, regardless if hypothetical mystery gravitations cause the same effects. Once is seen, while the other is not. I'm looking at a hundred dollar bill, you're imagining a hundred dollar bill.

But I can see my self fall towards earth when I step off a chair. I cannot see the Ua.

I saw myself fall towards earth, so gravity is clearly visible concept while UA is not. Regradless if the hypothetical UA causes the same effect. One is seen, the other is not. Im looking at an apple you imaging an apple pie.

Man you know your argument sucks when someone can swap a few words around and use it for their own argument.  Try harder bishop.

?

#### yagerasrehtreatalf

• 36
• I like Spheres
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #34 on: August 23, 2012, 07:27:19 AM »
lol universal accelerator.  Is there any proof of a universal accelerator that trumps proof that... you know... the world is round?  I mean, real proof.  Not circumstantial proof.

Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?

you cannot discern between the two. This was talked about in another thread.

The point is that one is seen, while the other is not seen, regardless whether they have the same effects.

It's a matter of visible vs. invisible. I believe in the visible, while you roundies believe in the invisible.

Tom, once again you're making the mistake of assuming that you have an absolute frame of reference. The idea of a constantly accelerating Earth is just as invisible as gravitation. Stop trying to skew things.

But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

One concept clearly visible while the other is not, regardless if hypothetical mystery gravitations cause the same effects. Once concept is seen, while the other is not. I'm looking at a hundred dollar bill, you're imagining a hundred dollar bill.

I fully believe that debating with Tom Bishop is completely futile.  This exact topic has been discussed at length on at least two different occasions.  Tom will continue to spout the same lines and arguments which make no sense whatsoever.  I really don't think anything anyone could say would change his argument.

Well you see Bishop is what you may call a idiotic bonehead.

#### markjo

• Content Nazi
• The Elder Ones
• 42732
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #35 on: August 23, 2012, 08:56:29 AM »
But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.
What does seeing or not seeing a graviton have to do with your frame of reference?
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.

#### garygreen

• 603
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #36 on: August 23, 2012, 09:12:42 AM »
But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

1.
...you should put more effort into your posts and avoid misspellings if you want to be taken seriously.

2.
Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?
What a silly way to ask that question.

Correct question: Step off of a chair.  Do you see yourself falling to the Earth, or do you see the Earth rising upward to meet you?

Correct answer: based on that extremely limited/intentionally misleading observation, it is impossible to tell.
Also, the people on your websites are specifically framing their claims, not to learn the truth of the matter, but because they want to "debunk" Apollo Hoax claims --

?

#### Megaman

• 176
• Winning all the forums
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #37 on: August 23, 2012, 09:25:23 AM »
lol universal accelerator.  Is there any proof of a universal accelerator that trumps proof that... you know... the world is round?  I mean, real proof.  Not circumstantial proof.

Step off a chair. Do you see graviton particles/bending space or do you see the earth rise upwards to meet you?

you cannot discern between the two. This was talked about in another thread.

The point is that one is seen, while the other is not seen, regardless whether they have the same effects.

It's a matter of visible vs. invisible. I believe in the visible, while you roundies believe in the invisible.

Tom, once again you're making the mistake of assuming that you have an absolute frame of reference. The idea of a constantly accelerating Earth is just as invisible as gravitation. Stop trying to skew things.

But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

One concept clearly visible while the other is not, regardless if hypothetical mystery gravitations cause the same effects. Once is seen, while the other is not. I'm looking at a hundred dollar bill, you're imagining a hundred dollar bill.

You actually can't see an accelerating Earth. In your example it is impossible to tell which object (the observer or the Earth) is moving and which is accelerating. Your arguments are rubbish Tom.

#### Moon squirter

• 1405
• Ding dong!
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #38 on: August 23, 2012, 10:07:51 AM »
But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

...And yes...another classic False Dilemma from the Bishop.  Do we dare to dream of a third by the end of the week?
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.

?

#### EmperorZhark

• 2229
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #39 on: August 23, 2012, 10:40:03 AM »
But I can see an accelerating earth when I step off of a chair. I cannot see a gravitation.

...And yes...another classic False Dilemma from the Bishop.  Do we dare to dream of a third by the end of the week?

I think he must have fallen too many times from his chair on the head.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

?

#### BoatswainsMate

• 675
• You just been Tom Bishop'ed
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #40 on: August 23, 2012, 11:58:49 AM »
Tom needs to have a post limit for the week.

And we need to come up with the "Tom Bishop 100 wackiest posts!"

Easy to find 100 dumb posts by him. Hard to rank them.

?

#### EmperorZhark

• 2229
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #41 on: August 23, 2012, 12:46:40 PM »
Tom needs to have a post limit for the week.

And we need to come up with the "Tom Bishop 100 wackiest posts!"

Easy to find 100 dumb posts by him. Hard to rank them.

We must let him talk: the more he talks, the less good he does for FET.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

?

#### Megaman

• 176
• Winning all the forums
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #42 on: August 23, 2012, 01:16:08 PM »
Tom needs to have a post limit for the week.

And we need to come up with the "Tom Bishop 100 wackiest posts!"

Easy to find 100 dumb posts by him. Hard to rank them.

I'm gonna start compiling this. If you come across any good ones message me a link to the specific page.

?

#### Whovian

• 30
##### Re: Explanation of FE gravity requested
« Reply #43 on: September 09, 2012, 09:51:00 AM »
I'm an RE-er myself, so I'd like to ask a similar question.

Please correct any reasoning that I make that is clearly faulty.  Under the FET, if a baseball is at the height of, say, the sun, then it should be affected by UA and not move relative to the Earth.  Correct?

Moving it down a few miles shouldn't affect this phenomenon, and moving it to a few feet above the ground shouldn't change this.  And so a baseball shouldn't appear to fall.

I have thought of an explanation of this, which is that objects directly above the Earth to a certain distance aren't affected by UA.  Is this the general explanation?