# FE Theory and the Bible

• 31 Replies
• 3805 Views
?

#### BibleBeliever

• 11
##### Re: FE Theory and the Bible
« Reply #30 on: August 18, 2012, 04:25:46 AM »
You are referring to one of the FET maps.  I have yet to find a map that I 100% agree with.

And you don't see that as a problem? FET can't even produce a map that you like?  If FET is true, then it ought to produce superior maps for at least two reasons: 1) it would have a more accurate view of the world and 2) it wouldn't have to worry about the problem of representing a spherical surface on a flat surface.  So if there isn't a single map that you 100% agree with, show me the map you agree with the most, and let's see how well it works.

If the earth is about 25,000 miles in diameter, and if Australia and Chile are near the edges of the earth on opposite sides of the earth, then any plane will have to travel a high percentage of the diameter of the earth to make it from one country to the other.  Add to that the fact that the flight will have to take an indirect route to keep the plane over water so as not to disturb all the RE people on the plane, and you have one monster-long flight.  So you tell me, in the map you like the most, how far is Santiago de Chile from Sydney, Australia?

?

#### KristaGurl

• 141
##### Re: FE Theory and the Bible
« Reply #31 on: August 20, 2012, 11:09:25 AM »
The heavens observed match the result. At the equator where the relative motion of the stars is divergent, no result is observed, as predicted by Mach.

This is stupid.  Do you not understand that Mach's principle does not prove at ALL that a pendulum works because the stars are pulling it on a flat earth?  Yes, Mach's principle is correct, but it does not prove that the stars would have that kind of effect on a pendulum.  Wouldn't the gravitational pull of the sun or moon override that power?  I mean, to me... if the stars are as close as FE'ers think, they would be WAY too small to have any kind of effect on a pendulum.  What you guys are doing is called misdirection.  You're trying to get us to focus on the idea of Mach's principle without proving that Mach's principle really has anything at all to do with how a pendulum works.
...does anyone find it funny that the Flat Earth model is actually round?