Sceptimatics theory

"Crazy" is relative.  I think people who believe the Earth is spinning 1000 mph are crazy.

Indeed it is relative. From the crazy person's point of view, the rest of the world is "crazy" but the rest of the world is the clear majority. Majority always wins.

Majority only wins by process of mental bullying and physical bullying. That's how it works.
If we are told that the sun is 92 million miles way, it's 92 million miles away or else.
If we are told that a telescope can see eruptions on the sun, 92 million miles away, then that's what you can see with that amazing telescope, or else.
Nobody wants to contemplate, (or very few) that what they see through a telescope could be a reflection of what this bubbling mass of light is actually doing in the centre of earth's circle, because, somehow that's preposterous and the floating 92 million mile, 1 million km + diameter one makes more sense.
Too many people are not prepared or are scared to even dare think outside of the box or question something that "should" make no real sense to them in the grand scheme of things and the sun is just one of many.
My only irritation is why it took me so long in life to see all the mainstream garbage for what it was.

Were you bullied mentally or physically in the past scepti?

Were you bullied mentally or physically in the past scepti?

You RE bullies have been treating him terribly in the past couple of months.

Quote from: Cartesian on September 01, 2013, 04:12:46 AM

Were you bullied mentally or physically in the past scepti?

You RE bullies have been treating him terribly in the past couple of months.

If it walks like a duck...

Quote from: Cartesian on September 01, 2013, 04:12:46 AM

Were you bullied mentally or physically in the past scepti?

You RE bullies have been treating him terribly in the past couple of months.

He was flat earther before joining this forum. So that doesn't count.

Quote from: hoppy on September 01, 2013, 06:21:37 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 01, 2013, 04:12:46 AM

Were you bullied mentally or physically in the past scepti?

You RE bullies have been treating him terribly in the past couple of months.

He was flat earther before joining this forum. So that doesn't count.

No he wasn't.

Did he convert to FE after joining here? Seriously?

Did he convert to FE after joining here? Seriously?

Sceptimatci was (or claimed to be, at least) a round earth geocentrist when he joined, which is a real pity because RE geocentrism makes a whole lot more sense than FET.

It goes to show that I've been subjected to all avenues of thought and came to a conclusion that the earth is definitely not a solid globe, whether rotating or not.
The rotating globe model was simply fed to me, which I quickly discarded quite early on. I knew the sun/moon and stars actually moved and took to thinking that the earth was a solid stationary globe with everything moving around at super speed. And then I thought, "nah, this doesn't make any sense."
I then found this forum and read it for a while and found that a flat earth actually started to make sense and I started sifting through the ins and outs of this thought. I even embraced the idea of an infinite earth and many other things, until I started to really put my mind to what it actually is, logically.

By process of elimination, I have come to the point I'm at now, which is by no means finished and there's a lot to do and fathom out.
Earthisaspaceship has put some great ideas forward, which I'm mulling over and sooner or later I will get an even bigger picture of what the earth is.

One thing I'm not, is closed minded. I'm open to all ideas that do not involve fictional forces and solid floating balls in space.
Reality is what I'm after getting to grips with, not fake video evidence or fake pictures or dressed up news feeds or the masses shouting, " it's round and everything you're taught is true, we've done the experiments", because they haven't done any experiments. They have all relied on peer pressure and false vision, plus a lot of fantasy physics, none of which can directly be provable but do make up the story of fantasy to fit the fantasy world they want us to believe we live on and the fantasy of space and exploits in space.
Gravity, the speed of light and a host of other stuff are merely falsities and I'm sick of being fed them, so I'm on a diet. It's called the reality diet, where I enjoy small portions of real logic and common sense and if one small portion doesn't quite agree with my palate, I will carefully move it to the side and concentrate on the other portions. That way, I know when I've had the right fill and can digest it with ease, instead of having to sit next to a person who ordered the 72 ounce  mainstream steak who then sits there and farts and burps out a stream of constant bull crap.

The dome makes 100% perfect sense and everything we are or see or know, is inside of it. Nothing we "see", exists outside of it, because a vacuum is the absence of all matter and all matter means that there is no existence, so space does not exist, but earth does, in suspended animation and we exist as organisms within the protective shell that holds all life, as we know it.

It goes to show that I've been subjected to all avenues of thought and came to a conclusion that the earth is definitely not a solid globe, whether rotating or not.
The rotating globe model was simply fed to me, which I quickly discarded quite early on. I knew the sun/moon and stars actually moved and took to thinking that the earth was a solid stationary globe with everything moving around at super speed. And then I thought, "nah, this doesn't make any sense."
I then found this forum and read it for a while and found that a flat earth actually started to make sense and I started sifting through the ins and outs of this thought. I even embraced the idea of an infinite earth and many other things, until I started to really put my mind to what it actually is, logically.

By process of elimination, I have come to the point I'm at now, which is by no means finished and there's a lot to do and fathom out.
Earthisaspaceship has put some great ideas forward, which I'm mulling over and sooner or later I will get an even bigger picture of what the earth is.

One thing I'm not, is closed minded. I'm open to all ideas that do not involve fictional forces and solid floating balls in space.
Reality is what I'm after getting to grips with, not fake video evidence or fake pictures or dressed up news feeds or the masses shouting, " it's round and everything you're taught is true, we've done the experiments", because they haven't done any experiments. They have all relied on peer pressure and false vision, plus a lot of fantasy physics, none of which can directly be provable but do make up the story of fantasy to fit the fantasy world they want us to believe we live on and the fantasy of space and exploits in space.
Gravity, the speed of light and a host of other stuff are merely falsities and I'm sick of being fed them, so I'm on a diet. It's called the reality diet, where I enjoy small portions of real logic and common sense and if one small portion doesn't quite agree with my palate, I will carefully move it to the side and concentrate on the other portions. That way, I know when I've had the right fill and can digest it with ease, instead of having to sit next to a person who ordered the 72 ounce  mainstream steak who then sits there and farts and burps out a stream of constant bull crap.

The dome makes 100% perfect sense and everything we are or see or know, is inside of it. Nothing we "see", exists outside of it, because a vacuum is the absence of all matter and all matter means that there is no existence, so space does not exist, but earth does, in suspended animation and we exist as organisms within the protective shell that holds all life, as we know it.

Couldn't be much of a diet cause apparently all you ingest is kool-aid.

Quote from: REphoenix on August 16, 2013, 08:20:30 AM

Question one.

Where do the stars on the ice dome come from?

The centre of earth as light through vibrating crystals.

Sorry to backtrack, but the stars are little bodies out there, and they will all fall to earth eventually. No need for them to be reflected light in anything.

Quote from: g el on August 16, 2013, 09:03:06 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 16, 2013, 08:54:10 AM

Can I prove this.?Of course not.

Scepti, you realize you are relying on theories you cannot prove, instead of sciences that has been proven over and over through years and years of experiments, and you do this just because you think every scientist in the world is lying..

First of all, I've already said I cannot prove it. Secondly, years and years of experiments are what you are told has been done, which, if you are honest, you cannot personally verify.
Of course, you can marry up figures, but they are just the figures you have been provided with that makes this fictional globe look realistic.
Thirdly, I suspect that most genuine scientists that study the earth and what's above it, very hard will probably know that things don't add up, but what do they do?
They are paid to do as they're told or hit the road if they dare to criticise.
It's like any job in life. If you stray off the course you are set, you are punished for it in whatever way is seen fit.

True dat!

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 16, 2013, 08:26:59 AM

Quote from: REphoenix on August 16, 2013, 08:20:30 AM

Question one.

Where do the stars on the ice dome come from?

The centre of earth as light through vibrating crystals.

Sorry to backtrack, but the stars are little bodies out there, and they will all fall to earth eventually. No need for them to be reflected light in anything.

  Out where? In space?

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 16, 2013, 09:10:59 AM

Quote from: g el on August 16, 2013, 09:03:06 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on August 16, 2013, 08:54:10 AM

Can I prove this.?Of course not.

Scepti, you realize you are relying on theories you cannot prove, instead of sciences that has been proven over and over through years and years of experiments, and you do this just because you think every scientist in the world is lying..

First of all, I've already said I cannot prove it. Secondly, years and years of experiments are what you are told has been done, which, if you are honest, you cannot personally verify.
Of course, you can marry up figures, but they are just the figures you have been provided with that makes this fictional globe look realistic.
Thirdly, I suspect that most genuine scientists that study the earth and what's above it, very hard will probably know that things don't add up, but what do they do?
They are paid to do as they're told or hit the road if they dare to criticise.
It's like any job in life. If you stray off the course you are set, you are punished for it in whatever way is seen fit.

True dat!

So all the work of every great thinker and great mind that has ever existed should just be discarded? Also, if scientists weren't aloud to stray the path and provide new theories then we wouldn't have any theories. This stuff came about because of free thinking.

Re: "out there": Yes, they're out beyond the dome. They will come crashing through when God has decided that his chosen people [whoever they may be] have erred enough times to finally learn their lesson.

Re: "true dat": To take a controversial example, social scientists can easily discern racial variances, but must be forever coy about how they approach that topic. In other domains, e.g., to make it as a psychologist, doctor, lawyer, etc., there are all sorts of bizarre pills one must swallow. It's not unlike the elephant and the various blind men, too. The one that thought the elephant a fan is truly content with that, and doesn't even need to mind if someone else thinks he has hold of a rope. Lots of compartmentalizing.

Re: "out there": Yes, they're out beyond the dome. They will come crashing through when God has decided that his chosen people [whoever they may be] have erred enough times to finally learn their lesson.

Re: "true dat": To take a controversial example, social scientists can easily discern racial variances, but must be forever coy about how they approach that topic. In other domains, e.g., to make it as a psychologist, doctor, lawyer, etc., there are all sorts of bizarre pills one must swallow. It's not unlike the elephant and the various blind men, too. The one that thought the elephant a fan is truly content with that, and doesn't even need to mind if someone else thinks he has hold of a rope. Lots of compartmentalizing.

didn't realize scepti was the type to share his beverage.

Quote from: hewholikespie on August 30, 2013, 07:37:18 AM

I see Scepti still can't figure out the difference between a sound- a pressure wave that moves through matter and which is interpreted by the body both as 'sound' and as vibrations in the body- and light -the product of photons hitting and reflecting off of objects, produced generally via chemical reactions or fusion.

I wonder if he might have synesthesia.

Scepti, if light is a byproduct of sound, what wavelength of sound must I generate to produce light? It must be a quite commonly occurring one.

Y'know, everyone, I'm reminded of the Emperor's new clothes. Scepti here thinks he's the one little boy, bravely telling the town it's full of shit, but really, he's just a naked man who thinks he's emperor.

Earth is a spaceship, if the chamber is a near vacuum, then under Scepti's nonsense, the light will have nothing to propagate through, and we wouldn't be able to see what as inside the chamber, regardless of there being light coming from outside it.

A near vacuum is not a vacuum.

Entirely irrelevant. Extremely low and extremely high air pressures DO measurably affect the propagation of sound, and render it impossible in extremely low pressures.

The same is not true of light. Light is not a sound. It is a wave/ particle that can propagate without a medium, and cannot travel through the same materials a vibration wave can.

Quote from: hewholikespie on August 30, 2013, 07:37:18 AM

Earth is a spaceship, if the chamber is a near vacuum, then under Scepti's nonsense, the light will have nothing to propagate through, and we wouldn't be able to see what as inside the chamber, regardless of there being light coming from outside it.

We will always see light in a chamber because it reflects off the glass or whatever the chamber is made of.

If the medium is required for light to propagate through, objects inside a vacuum tube would be hard or impossible to see. They are not. Light is not a goddamn sound wave.

Easy way to prove that light and sound are not the same. Turn up the sound on your TV and leave the room. Close the door. You can hear the TV but you can't see it. Done. They are different.

It goes to show that I've been subjected to all avenues of thought and came to a conclusion that the earth is definitely not a solid globe, whether rotating or not.
The rotating globe model was simply fed to me, which I quickly discarded quite early on. I knew the sun/moon and stars actually moved and took to thinking that the earth was a solid stationary globe with everything moving around at super speed. And then I thought, "nah, this doesn't make any sense."
I then found this forum and read it for a while and found that a flat earth actually started to make sense and I started sifting through the ins and outs of this thought. I even embraced the idea of an infinite earth and many other things, until I started to really put my mind to what it actually is, logically.

This is an interesting revelation but then I must rectify what markjo and hoppy said earlier in order to avoid any doubt. It may be true that you might not be a flat earther when you initially joined this forum but you were not round earther either. You already didn't believe in the round earth model.

One thing I'm not, is closed minded. I'm open to all ideas that do not involve fictional forces and solid floating balls in space.
Reality is what I'm after getting to grips with, not fake video evidence or fake pictures or dressed up news feeds or the masses shouting, " it's round and everything you're taught is true, we've done the experiments", because they haven't done any experiments. They have all relied on peer pressure and false vision, plus a lot of fantasy physics, none of which can directly be provable but do make up the story of fantasy to fit the fantasy world they want us to believe we live on and the fantasy of space and exploits in space.
Gravity, the speed of light and a host of other stuff are merely falsities and I'm sick of being fed them, so I'm on a diet. It's called the reality diet, where I enjoy small portions of real logic and common sense and if one small portion doesn't quite agree with my palate, I will carefully move it to the side and concentrate on the other portions. That way, I know when I've had the right fill and can digest it with ease, instead of having to sit next to a person who ordered the 72 ounce  mainstream steak who then sits there and farts and burps out a stream of constant bull crap.

I am not sure you can call yourself open minded. You already decided to reject RET even before the time you joined here. You already decided to oppose the existence of satellites although, according to my view, this is the most pragmatic concept to observe as it doesn't involve philosophy or imagination.

Entirely irrelevant. Extremely low and extremely high air pressures DO measurably affect the propagation of sound, and render it impossible in extremely low pressures.

Light is the end product of vibration/sound. It's the result of that agitation. No agitation = no heat and no heat means no light, It's as simple as that. Heat and light cannot work unless this happens, no matter how you try and dress it up.

The same is not true of light. Light is not a sound. It is a wave/ particle that can propagate without a medium, and cannot travel through the same materials a vibration wave can.

Light is the reflected product of sound and vibration. Scientists have managed to fool people into believing light is somehow this super fast thing that doesn't need anything for it to work.
If it does, then tell me what causes light. What is the reason we see light?

If the medium is required for light to propagate through, objects inside a vacuum tube would be hard or impossible to see. They are not. Light is not a goddamn sound wave.

We cannot make a true vacuum on earth for you to even say this. You are simply duped into believing that something can travel through nothing.
No matter, no existence. It should be absolute common sense but scientific story telling has warped people's minds.
Seriously, search your mind and re-evaluate what you are being fed.

Easy way to prove that light and sound are not the same. Turn up the sound on your TV and leave the room. Close the door. You can hear the TV but you can't see it. Done. They are different.

And in doing so, you have shut off the very thing that makes that light. By shutting the door, you have shut off the reflection to your eyes, so now you simply hear the vibration and sound of the TV.
If sound and vibration are not the cause of light, then tell me how light magically happens. Use a short and simple child like explanation. Do not attempt to use silly equations.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2013, 03:46:01 PM

It goes to show that I've been subjected to all avenues of thought and came to a conclusion that the earth is definitely not a solid globe, whether rotating or not.
The rotating globe model was simply fed to me, which I quickly discarded quite early on. I knew the sun/moon and stars actually moved and took to thinking that the earth was a solid stationary globe with everything moving around at super speed. And then I thought, "nah, this doesn't make any sense."
I then found this forum and read it for a while and found that a flat earth actually started to make sense and I started sifting through the ins and outs of this thought. I even embraced the idea of an infinite earth and many other things, until I started to really put my mind to what it actually is, logically.

This is an interesting revelation but then I must rectify what markjo and hoppy said earlier in order to avoid any doubt. It may be true that you might not be a flat earther when you initially joined this forum but you were not round earther either. You already didn't believe in the round earth model.

I used to believe in it, many years ago.
I think I'm very open minded, but I'm also stubborn when I believe I am on the right track and will not be nudged off course by a collective bunch of people who shout and scream that I'm wrong, simply because mainstream science "theories" tell them they are right.

Quote from: Cartesian on September 01, 2013, 10:52:10 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 01, 2013, 03:46:01 PM

It goes to show that I've been subjected to all avenues of thought and came to a conclusion that the earth is definitely not a solid globe, whether rotating or not.
The rotating globe model was simply fed to me, which I quickly discarded quite early on. I knew the sun/moon and stars actually moved and took to thinking that the earth was a solid stationary globe with everything moving around at super speed. And then I thought, "nah, this doesn't make any sense."
I then found this forum and read it for a while and found that a flat earth actually started to make sense and I started sifting through the ins and outs of this thought. I even embraced the idea of an infinite earth and many other things, until I started to really put my mind to what it actually is, logically.

This is an interesting revelation but then I must rectify what markjo and hoppy said earlier in order to avoid any doubt. It may be true that you might not be a flat earther when you initially joined this forum but you were not round earther either. You already didn't believe in the round earth model.

I used to believe in it, many years ago.
I think I'm very open minded, but I'm also stubborn when I believe I am on the right track and will not be nudged off course by a collective bunch of people who shout and scream that I'm wrong, simply because mainstream science "theories" tell them they are right.

You do realise that what you've written here is "I'm open minded about the stuff i believe in but not about the stuff I don't".

You might want to define what you believe "open minded" actually means.

I used to believe in it, many years ago.
I think I'm very open minded, but I'm also stubborn when I believe I am on the right track and will not be nudged off course by a collective bunch of people who shout and scream that I'm wrong, simply because mainstream science "theories" tell them they are right.

You're not convinced by mainscream theories? 

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 02, 2013, 03:10:30 AM

I used to believe in it, many years ago.
I think I'm very open minded, but I'm also stubborn when I believe I am on the right track and will not be nudged off course by a collective bunch of people who shout and scream that I'm wrong, simply because mainstream science "theories" tell them they are right.

You're not convinced by mainscream theories? 

Not when it comes to the earth and space, no.
To be honest. I believe we live in a world that is based on a hell of a lot of fabrication of science.

Quote from: odes on September 02, 2013, 07:31:02 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 02, 2013, 03:10:30 AM

I used to believe in it, many years ago.
I think I'm very open minded, but I'm also stubborn when I believe I am on the right track and will not be nudged off course by a collective bunch of people who shout and scream that I'm wrong, simply because mainstream science "theories" tell them they are right.

You're not convinced by mainscream theories? 

Not when it comes to the earth and space, no.
To be honest. I believe we will in a world that is based on a hell of a lot of fabrication of science.

So you're not open minded

Quote from: REphoenix on September 01, 2013, 08:39:39 PM

Easy way to prove that light and sound are not the same. Turn up the sound on your TV and leave the room. Close the door. You can hear the TV but you can't see it. Done. They are different.

And in doing so, you have shut off the very thing that makes that light. By shutting the door, you have shut off the reflection to your eyes, so now you simply hear the vibration and sound of the TV.
If sound and vibration are not the cause of light, then tell me how light magically happens. Use a short and simple child like explanation. Do not attempt to use silly equations.

More silly proofs, turn on the tv and turn your head away, you still hear it but you cannot see it. Blow in a pipe you hear it at the end, shine a light and you will not see it unless the pipe is all reflective..

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 02, 2013, 03:07:21 AM

Quote from: REphoenix on September 01, 2013, 08:39:39 PM

Easy way to prove that light and sound are not the same. Turn up the sound on your TV and leave the room. Close the door. You can hear the TV but you can't see it. Done. They are different.

And in doing so, you have shut off the very thing that makes that light. By shutting the door, you have shut off the reflection to your eyes, so now you simply hear the vibration and sound of the TV.
If sound and vibration are not the cause of light, then tell me how light magically happens. Use a short and simple child like explanation. Do not attempt to use silly equations.

More silly proofs, turn on the tv and turn your head away, you still hear it but you cannot see it. Blow in a pipe you hear it at the end, shine a light and you will not see it unless the pipe is all reflective..

Tell me what happens for that light to shine. How and why does it end up shining. Just a simple answer will suffice.