Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.

  • 26 Replies
  • 4201 Views
Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« on: October 14, 2006, 08:55:24 AM »
My apologies for the angry rant introduction - that was my initial response. I hope that you can accept me for a regular round-earther, not an asshat.

Anyway, on to my main point - The Ice Wall.
It is, as i see it, impossible for this wall of ice to remain in a frozen state. Where does the lack of heat come from (Hah, I know that sentence is stupid, but you get my drift). In a world that is lit by a spotlight strong enough to light entire continents to the point of > 40 degress celcius, how does it remain frozen?

I know that in the round earth scheme of things, exactly the same thing happens - a giant body of ice remains frozen (despite that it is melting...like what happens naturally) at the north and south poles. However, the atmosphere plays a big part in this. Number 1, it's pretty much overcast all the time. In a flat earth theory, clouds, and indeed anything, would have a great amount of trouble in staying at high altitudes right above the edge. Assuming the earth is flat, and is accelerating 'upwards', then this would force all matter to 'spread out' because the air beneath the air on top cannot support the weight of the air on top. You can demostrate this easily at home. Thanks to the wonderful forces of surface tension, you can just use water. Get a plate (or an even flatter object, which would be better) and try and put as much water on it without it pouring off the sides (because, like what has been said before, you'll get wet in the laps...what an odd phrase...anyway - ). Here, the earth's gravitational pull will account for the flat earth's 'falling upwards'. Now, here's the fun bit. Pour more water on the plate, in fact, pour a greater amount on each second, in accordance with 9.8 ms/s. You will notice that the water pours off. The adding of water is effectively 'the air on top' while the water you put on there is 'the air on the bottom'. The both, 'bottom air' first, begin to run off the disc.

Back to the atmosphere...
As demonstrated, clouds, and indeed probably a goodly amount of air, would be falling off the disc (and there's a little bit of the answer to "whats on the bottom?" This, therefore , removes most of the atmosphere covering the Ice Wall - add leaves it open to not only immense radiation from the sun, but also anything else coming from surrounding heavenly bodies.

Since the Flat Earth theory extends out past the earth, we can therefore assume that much of the rest of the surrounding universe (because of Quantum, other universes potentially exist, and therefore may have different mechanics) is flat as well. This also eliminates the possibilty of a Heliosphere and similar spherical bodies enveloping our solar system. As most of you well educated people should know - The Heliosphere is the first, and an important line of defense against the constant bombarding of extra-solar radiation. Without this, a flat earth would take a significant pounding - probably to the extent to where earth - flat or round - coulnd not have life existing on it. It could, resource-wise, support life - but the radation from extra-solar bodies (hell, even our own sun) would snuff out life as it tried to evolve.

Anyway, this radiation would contribute to the melting of of the Ice Wall.

Another thing - climate shifts. If it were possible to have an Ice Wall so thick that it was able to hold back the oceans, then it would gradually melt due to global warming.

What's that, you say? Global cooling? Ah! Possibly a very valid point indeed! However, Global warming and cooling - two opposing mediums. To prevent the earth from freezing over, you need global warming. To prevent the "Ice Wall" from melting you need global cooling. This suggests that there is a balance between the two. However, as you can notice in everyday life - nature cannot remain balanced - change is inevitable.
We would, over the process of many aeons, shift from bloody cold to bloody hot. The 'bloody hot' would melt the Ice Wall. There is no challenging this - ICE MELTS - as it is doing so now at our earth's polar extremeties.

Another point - flat earth claims the ring of ice around it's circumferance. This is impossible. Here is a diagram of the only possible way I can see the earth as being flat - (excuse the crudeness - I'm not that great with drawing on the computer). Not only would the earth being pushed upwards force the Ice outwards from the earth - eventually falling off the edge, but friction would break it apart as well. I'll get to that soon.







This "thicker at the middle" disc is the only way I can conceive that a flat earth is possible. You mention that the flat earth can tilt (and assuming it never falls on it's side, due to the fact the upwards force would eventually do this to it). If it tilts, and there is force pushing it, this would cause it to rotate - eventually on an axis. As you might have thought already, this will eventually form into a ball. The centrifugal/pedal (whichever you want to go with) will do this. But for now, lets say its at the state where is is going to be a disc for a rather long time. The previously mentioned forces will make this disk expand, gradually cracking it, and the additional weight of the ground and air pushing out sideways will help this.

I mentioned friction before. As you will all doubt know, ice is Slippery When Wet. There is a great amount of water pushing against this ice, and this would cause at least the sides and the ground underneath the ice to become very slippery for a good few hundred kilometres undernearth. Remember that this flat earth is still spinning. The ice over the slippery (my apologies for the use of the word 'slippery'. I need to think of a better term) land should have no trouble in keeping up with the spinning earth - centrifugal force will keep it moving at the same pace (as well as flying right off it..). However, the ice that is not in direct contact with the water will be trying to move at a different pace to the 'slippery' ice - because they interact with different physical properties with the spinning disc. This would gradually crack the Ice Wall also...and then water will invade futher, and so on and so forth. The warmth I mentioned before should help prevent ice reforming.

As a conlcuding point, for the Ice Wall, that is, I must add how the idea that the Ice Wall is completely transparent is completely ludicrous. For aeons, we have collected junk from outerspace - and this Ice Wall would be a prime target for space debris. Not only this, but junk from our own planet would be formed in the ice as well - It fact, it would be about as see-through as your own eyelids - possible, but only up VERY close and with a lot of light on one side.




In final conclusion - I suggest you find a new logo for the site, because not only does the theory contradict it'self, but so does your logo. As soon as I looked at it, I immediately saw this:



And so, in summation - The Ice Wall, and very much therefor, the Flat Earth is impossible - In pretty much any way you look at it.
 tried to be nice. I tried to not get angry at insultingly rediculous notions.

I TRIED DAMMIT

*

Dioptimus Drime

  • 4531
  • Meep.
Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2006, 09:08:50 AM »
Was this entirely necessary?

In any case, I already put my two cents in your other identical thread.  :roll:

Patience is a virtue.


~D-Draw

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #2 on: October 14, 2006, 09:21:05 AM »
I fully endorse this product. :)

By conincidence (oor because we're both geniuses) I came to pretty much the same conclusion, plus a few details and minus a few.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5821

I was in the process of explaining it, which you did the most of here.
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #3 on: October 14, 2006, 02:29:22 PM »
Quote from: "Enraged Youth"
Anyway, on to my main point - The Ice Wall.
It is, as i see it, impossible for this wall of ice to remain in a frozen state. Where does the lack of heat come from (Hah, I know that sentence is stupid, but you get my drift). In a world that is lit by a spotlight strong enough to light entire continents to the point of > 40 degress celcius, how does it remain frozen?


What continents are heated up to > 40 degrees Celsius?
 believe the Earth is round.
That doesn't mean the Earth is round.

"If you're going to yell at me every time I do something stupid, then I guess I'm just going to have to stop doing stupid things!" --Homer Simpson

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #4 on: October 14, 2006, 07:42:21 PM »
Lordy loo....

Pretty much most of the major land masses. Africa, America, Australia (ok, so we're not a major land mass but we can get  > 50 c too). Not sure about Europe or Asia, though.
 tried to be nice. I tried to not get angry at insultingly rediculous notions.

I TRIED DAMMIT

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2006, 04:22:31 AM »
Quote from: "Enraged Youth"
Lordy loo....

Pretty much most of the major land masses. Africa, America, Australia (ok, so we're not a major land mass but we can get  > 50 c too). Not sure about Europe or Asia, though.


Are you saying that America is routinely completely > 40 c in temperature? As I'm writing this, parts of Maine are < 0 c.
 believe the Earth is round.
That doesn't mean the Earth is round.

"If you're going to yell at me every time I do something stupid, then I guess I'm just going to have to stop doing stupid things!" --Homer Simpson

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2006, 06:38:29 AM »
No, I'm saying that temperatures get in excess of 40 degress every year. Don't try and be a smartarse.
 tried to be nice. I tried to not get angry at insultingly rediculous notions.

I TRIED DAMMIT

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2006, 07:49:08 AM »
Quote from: "Enraged Youth"
No, I'm saying that temperatures get in excess of 40 degress every year. Don't try and be a smartarse.


I could ask the same question of a RE. Why does Antarctica, in a RE model, stay frozen?
 believe the Earth is round.
That doesn't mean the Earth is round.

"If you're going to yell at me every time I do something stupid, then I guess I'm just going to have to stop doing stupid things!" --Homer Simpson

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
Re: Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2006, 08:38:55 AM »
Quote from: "Enraged Youth"
Back to the atmosphere...
As demonstrated, clouds, and indeed probably a goodly amount of air, would be falling off the disc (and there's a little bit of the answer to "whats on the bottom?" This, therefore , removes most of the atmosphere covering the Ice Wall - add leaves it open to not only immense radiation from the sun, but also anything else coming from surrounding heavenly bodies.


It doesn't matter how much insolation is blocked by cloud cover, the sun's rays will never be at a large enough angle to provide the heat required to melt the ice wall.
The ice wall is also highly reflective, so most of the insolation it recieves will be reflected back into space. With no cloud cover there to stop it, it won't be able to heat the air enough to melt the ice wall.

Quote
Since the Flat Earth theory extends out past the earth, we can therefore assume that much of the rest of the surrounding universe is flat as well.


What? Why?

Quote
Another thing - climate shifts. If it were possible to have an Ice Wall so thick that it was able to hold back the oceans, then it would gradually melt due to global warming.


It quite possibly is.

Quote
This "thicker at the middle" disc is the only way I can conceive that a flat earth is possible.


Um, why?

Quote
If it tilts, and there is force pushing it, this would cause it to rotate - eventually on an axis. As you might have thought already, this will eventually form into a ball.


You're going to need to explain this a little better. Why would Earth start rotating, and why would that cause it to form into a ball?
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

*

beast

  • 2997
Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2006, 09:04:32 AM »
I think it's clearly an error to assume that any science that is true in round Earth theory is still correct if we've been misled about the shape of the world.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2006, 11:48:57 AM »
Quote from: "beast"
I think it's clearly an error to assume that any science that is true in round Earth theory is still correct if we've been misled about the shape of the world.


We assume against that since it would take too long and require too many resources to go about "checking" the data.
ttp://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/search.php

"Against criticism a man can neither protest nor defend himself; he must act in spite of it, and then it will gradually yield to him." -Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

?

RE Apparent Arse

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2006, 03:19:14 PM »
Interesting how the FE people who argue against the RE people NEVER come up with any kind of real science to prove what they are saying, but rather just unintelligently bicker, creating delay.

If you don't understand some kind of theory that he explains, why don't you take the time to look it up, instead of just throwing it back at him with laziness? Is that how you came up with your great theories? By just thinking them up, and never bothering to verify anything? Evidently, if that takes too much effort. Go read the FAQ, or some books, is right. Why should I bother if you don't?

Why are the RE people so wrong if they actually bother to research all these years? Apparently, this society has been around for a while. Why don't you fly a spaceshuttle into space yourself and take a picture of this apparently flat earth instead of basing a lot of your thinking on very myopic human perspective? Example: "Well the horizon looks flat." Yeah really, it would if the world is so large, and you are so insignificantly small that you are invisible in space. It's not like this is impossible. You could very well get funding for a shuttle flight and go on a space tour with NASA, or if you're inconfident in what you see through their spaceshuttle windows, then build your own. China's doing it. Or maybe everyone is afraid to do this because they might end up wrong. And that would hurt everyone's righteous ego. It's not like this is as impossible to prove as the existence of God, geez.

And if you so argue that this Ice Wall melts very slowly and the earth's crust does wear out over time, then why are these things still here? If the earth has been around for as long as we believe it has, taking into account how long we have been around ourselves already, then that is plenty of time for everything to wear out - even slowly. It's like the tooth in coke experiment, where eventually the tooth had dissolved in the coke, but it took a long time. It seems like many of the arguments proposed here are very nit-picky, and incapable of gaining a more general (wider) view.

And out of curiousity, how do you explain the Sun and Moon being round if the earth isn't? Don't the same principles apply to all the planets and stars? Or is earth some sort of freak of physics?

And if the RE science is apparently total bullshit and just false and you are so confident in your own unproved thinking, then why should the RE people look at your science any differently? It's very possible it's absolute bullshit too! Since apparently, a photograph of the RE taken from space isn't enough to prove it is round. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg I can equally say that even if you got a photo of the world being flat from outer space, not someone's damn backyard or something minimal like that, it is bullshit too. I can just irrationally reject everything. Hey wait, maybe we're all wrong about everything, and the world is really a triangle. Or a cube, or even a pyramid, or something else strange like that.

Re: Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2006, 04:43:31 PM »
Quote from: Enraged Youth
My apologies for the angry rant introduction - that was my initial response. I hope that you can accept me for a regular round-earther, not an asshat.

Anyway, on to my main point - The Ice Wall.
It is, as i see it, impossible for this wall of ice to remain in a frozen state. Where does the lack of heat come from (Hah, I know that sentence is stupid, but you get my drift). In a world that is lit by a spotlight strong enough to light entire continents to the point of > 40 degress celcius, how does it remain frozen?
Quote





To answer this question... The conspiracy!  The conspiracy! Can't anyone just understand this?      :wink:

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2006, 09:44:47 PM »
Quote
You're going to need to explain this a little better. Why would Earth start rotating, and why would that cause it to form into a ball?


Heavens man, this is simple logic.

If  flat object is traveling at high speed in one direction and you tilt it, what happens? Surely you can figure this out by yourself.

Quote
The ice wall is also highly reflective, so most of the insolation it recieves will be reflected back into space. With no cloud cover there to stop it, it won't be able to heat the air enough to melt the ice wall.


How would you know that? Why would that ice be a thousand times more reflecting than the ice that can be found anywhere else in the world?
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2006, 09:52:56 PM »
Quote
You're going to need to explain this a little better. Why would Earth start rotating, and why would that cause it to form into a ball?


k...basically u all know how the model of gravity works (assuming this is accurate) then all mass exerts a force of attraction upon other objects. basically using common sense you can figure out that the formation of matter where the maximum force can be exerted is a sphere-like shape, and as such the matter will form this shape given enough time, and whether it is massive enough.

think about it...if two sides are attracting each other, they will move closer, and closer until an equilibrium is reached where no one side can move closer to its opposite without overcoming the gravitational force of another side of the object (hence a sphere where supposedly the radius from the centre is constant).

as for the spinning? god knows...cept i dont believe in "God" as such, but the "superior energy form" must know  :roll:

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2006, 11:23:22 PM »
Quote
as for the spinning? god knows...cept i dont believe in "God" as such, but the "superior energy form" must know


The rotation of any planet is the direct result of it's actual formation. Planets are formed from the collapse of interstella clouds. It comes from the conservation of angular momentum (does anyone here not know what angular momentum is? If so I'll have to explain it).

Simply put, a dust cloud in space will slowly collapse towards it's densest point. As we all know, interstellar clouds are very large, and can collapse from a size of a light year or so to the size of the solar system. When the planet forms, the particles that group togheter to form what will become the planet have momentum. As you know, energy cannot be created or destroyed. So that momentum/kinetic energy cannot simply disapear. So, the very slight rotation that the cloud has in the beginning is increased dramatically when the collapse takes place. It rotates very quickly in the beginning and slows down as the planet ages.
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #16 on: October 16, 2006, 12:53:28 AM »
nice reply, i was going to say that but didn't want to sound smart... :roll:

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #17 on: October 16, 2006, 08:52:33 AM »
Quote from: "woopedazz"
nice reply, i was going to say that but didn't want to sound smart... :roll:


Thanks. :)

Also, note that, in the FE thoery, gravity does not exist, thus, nebulas and interstallar clouds would never collapse, and star systems and planets would never form. I am not sure how they explain the existence of our planet and solar system in those conditions. Or that of any other planet or solar system for that matter.
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #18 on: October 16, 2006, 10:16:57 AM »
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
If a flat object is traveling at high speed in one direction and you tilt it, what happens?


Since when was Earth tilting? Are you talking about the supposed wobble that causes tides?

Quote
How would you know that?


Have you ever looked at a picture of Antarctica? What would you say the predominant colour of the continent is?
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #19 on: October 16, 2006, 11:28:57 PM »
Quote from: "EnragedPenguin"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"
If a flat object is traveling at high speed in one direction and you tilt it, what happens?


Since when was Earth tilting? Are you talking about the supposed wobble that causes tides?

Quote
How would you know that?


Have you ever looked at a picture of Antarctica? What would you say the predominant colour of the continent is?


What does the color of an object has to do with it's properties?

Maybe FE ers should start agreeing among themselves. Does it tilt or not?
atttttttup was right when he said joseph bloom is right, The Engineer is a douchebag.

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #20 on: October 16, 2006, 11:30:25 PM »
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

What does the color of an object has to do with it's properties?


Quite a bit actually.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

?

GeoGuy

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #21 on: October 17, 2006, 06:20:23 AM »
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

Maybe FE ers should start agreeing among themselves. Does it tilt or not?



Tilt:
Quote
to slope or incline (something); to slant


Wobble:
Quote
An unsteady motion.


From the FAQ:
Quote
...Note, this is a very slight wobble. Remember, these wobbles are created by very minor earthquakes...


I don't believe anyone has ever said Earth was "tilting", and the difference between "tilt" and "wobble" is fairly large.

*

Raa

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 1004
  • http://www.freewebs.com/raacoz/thesunhasnoheat.htm
Re: Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #22 on: October 17, 2006, 07:51:20 AM »
Look at the United Nations flag and study the map on it. I'll be back to answer your questions when its noon in Manitoba :P  
Quote from: "Enraged Youth"
My apologies for the angry rant introduction - that was my initial response. I hope that you can accept me for a regular round-earther, not an asshat.

Anyway, on to my main point - The Ice Wall.
It is, as i see it, impossible for this wall of ice to remain in a frozen state. Where does the lack of heat come from (Hah, I know that sentence is stupid, but you get my drift). In a world that is lit by a spotlight strong enough to light entire continents to the point of > 40 degress celcius, how does it remain frozen?

I know that in the round earth scheme of things, exactly the same thing happens - a giant body of ice remains frozen (despite that it is melting...like what happens naturally) at the north and south poles. However, the atmosphere plays a big part in this. Number 1, it's pretty much overcast all the time. In a flat earth theory, clouds, and indeed anything, would have a great amount of trouble in staying at high altitudes right above the edge. Assuming the earth is flat, and is accelerating 'upwards', then this would force all matter to 'spread out' because the air beneath the air on top cannot support the weight of the air on top. You can demostrate this easily at home. Thanks to the wonderful forces of surface tension, you can just use water. Get a plate (or an even flatter object, which would be better) and try and put as much water on it without it pouring off the sides (because, like what has been said before, you'll get wet in the laps...what an odd phrase...anyway - ). Here, the earth's gravitational pull will account for the flat earth's 'falling upwards'. Now, here's the fun bit. Pour more water on the plate, in fact, pour a greater amount on each second, in accordance with 9.8 ms/s. You will notice that the water pours off. The adding of water is effectively 'the air on top' while the water you put on there is 'the air on the bottom'. The both, 'bottom air' first, begin to run off the disc.

Back to the atmosphere...
As demonstrated, clouds, and indeed probably a goodly amount of air, would be falling off the disc (and there's a little bit of the answer to "whats on the bottom?" This, therefore , removes most of the atmosphere covering the Ice Wall - add leaves it open to not only immense radiation from the sun, but also anything else coming from surrounding heavenly bodies.

Since the Flat Earth theory extends out past the earth, we can therefore assume that much of the rest of the surrounding universe (because of Quantum, other universes potentially exist, and therefore may have different mechanics) is flat as well. This also eliminates the possibilty of a Heliosphere and similar spherical bodies enveloping our solar system. As most of you well educated people should know - The Heliosphere is the first, and an important line of defense against the constant bombarding of extra-solar radiation. Without this, a flat earth would take a significant pounding - probably to the extent to where earth - flat or round - coulnd not have life existing on it. It could, resource-wise, support life - but the radation from extra-solar bodies (hell, even our own sun) would snuff out life as it tried to evolve.

Anyway, this radiation would contribute to the melting of of the Ice Wall.

Another thing - climate shifts. If it were possible to have an Ice Wall so thick that it was able to hold back the oceans, then it would gradually melt due to global warming.

What's that, you say? Global cooling? Ah! Possibly a very valid point indeed! However, Global warming and cooling - two opposing mediums. To prevent the earth from freezing over, you need global warming. To prevent the "Ice Wall" from melting you need global cooling. This suggests that there is a balance between the two. However, as you can notice in everyday life - nature cannot remain balanced - change is inevitable.
We would, over the process of many aeons, shift from bloody cold to bloody hot. The 'bloody hot' would melt the Ice Wall. There is no challenging this - ICE MELTS - as it is doing so now at our earth's polar extremeties.

Another point - flat earth claims the ring of ice around it's circumferance. This is impossible. Here is a diagram of the only possible way I can see the earth as being flat - (excuse the crudeness - I'm not that great with drawing on the computer). Not only would the earth being pushed upwards force the Ice outwards from the earth - eventually falling off the edge, but friction would break it apart as well. I'll get to that soon.







This "thicker at the middle" disc is the only way I can conceive that a flat earth is possible. You mention that the flat earth can tilt (and assuming it never falls on it's side, due to the fact the upwards force would eventually do this to it). If it tilts, and there is force pushing it, this would cause it to rotate - eventually on an axis. As you might have thought already, this will eventually form into a ball. The centrifugal/pedal (whichever you want to go with) will do this. But for now, lets say its at the state where is is going to be a disc for a rather long time. The previously mentioned forces will make this disk expand, gradually cracking it, and the additional weight of the ground and air pushing out sideways will help this.

I mentioned friction before. As you will all doubt know, ice is Slippery When Wet. There is a great amount of water pushing against this ice, and this would cause at least the sides and the ground underneath the ice to become very slippery for a good few hundred kilometres undernearth. Remember that this flat earth is still spinning. The ice over the slippery (my apologies for the use of the word 'slippery'. I need to think of a better term) land should have no trouble in keeping up with the spinning earth - centrifugal force will keep it moving at the same pace (as well as flying right off it..). However, the ice that is not in direct contact with the water will be trying to move at a different pace to the 'slippery' ice - because they interact with different physical properties with the spinning disc. This would gradually crack the Ice Wall also...and then water will invade futher, and so on and so forth. The warmth I mentioned before should help prevent ice reforming.

As a conlcuding point, for the Ice Wall, that is, I must add how the idea that the Ice Wall is completely transparent is completely ludicrous. For aeons, we have collected junk from outerspace - and this Ice Wall would be a prime target for space debris. Not only this, but junk from our own planet would be formed in the ice as well - It fact, it would be about as see-through as your own eyelids - possible, but only up VERY close and with a lot of light on one side.




In final conclusion - I suggest you find a new logo for the site, because not only does the theory contradict it'self, but so does your logo. As soon as I looked at it, I immediately saw this:



And so, in summation - The Ice Wall, and very much therefor, the Flat Earth is impossible - In pretty much any way you look at it.
Everything, is in EMBRYO, not in mathematics. 
Please look at the 1/4 moon when it's around at noon ; We cannot see anything between it and the sun.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #23 on: October 17, 2006, 10:37:30 AM »
Quote from: "holybrain"
Quote from: "Enraged Youth"
Anyway, on to my main point - The Ice Wall.
It is, as i see it, impossible for this wall of ice to remain in a frozen state. Where does the lack of heat come from (Hah, I know that sentence is stupid, but you get my drift). In a world that is lit by a spotlight strong enough to light entire continents to the point of > 40 degress celcius, how does it remain frozen?


What continents are heated up to > 40 degrees Celsius?



The indian subcontinent routinely superceeds 40 C.  Much of africa routinely supercedes 40c.  THe australian outback is frequently above 40c.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #24 on: October 17, 2006, 10:42:07 AM »
Quote from: "GeoGuy"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

Maybe FE ers should start agreeing among themselves. Does it tilt or not?



Tilt:
Quote
to slope or incline (something); to slant


Wobble:
Quote
An unsteady motion.


From the FAQ:
Quote
...Note, this is a very slight wobble. Remember, these wobbles are created by very minor earthquakes...


I don't believe anyone has ever said Earth was "tilting", and the difference between "tilt" and "wobble" is fairly large.


tilting is the FE explanation for tides.  a tilt back and forth.  

WHen a disc wobbles, it MUST tilt, as it is a planar surface.  

A disk rotating isn't wobbling or tilting.  A disk rising or falling along it's Z axis is not wobbling.  

If the disk is rising along it's z axis, as FE suggests, and is also wobbling, that means that it is tilting, changing the angle between the central axis and the direction of up, determined by the direction of it's acceleration.

try to make a plate wobble without altering it's axial relation to up and down.

You can't.

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #25 on: October 17, 2006, 04:58:10 PM »
Quote from: "TheEngineer"
Quote from: "phaseshifter"

What does the color of an object has to do with it's properties?


Quite a bit actually.


Especially when we're talking about how reflective it is.

Quote
Does it tilt or not?


Not aside from the supposed wobble causing tides.
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

Please. Try to prove this wrong. Don't just ignore it.
« Reply #26 on: October 17, 2006, 05:53:30 PM »
Slorrin  "try to make a plate wobble without altering it's axial relation to up and down. "
"You can't."

I presume the "plate" in the analogy to be the FE;
a circular disk of this area moving at stated speeds through space along a central axial line Z (up) can experience small vassilations +/- in both X and Y axis without affecting overall trajectory.
How much wobble is required to account for tidal activity?
 believe that; the Earth is flat until such time as I stand within the Space Station and personally see that it is a Globe.
or that the Earth is a sphere until such time as I stand upon the Icewall and personally see that it is a Flat Disk.