RET contradictions?

When my work started requiring travel by train, plane, and automobile I began noticing a disconnect between reality and the Earth descriptions noted in my university geology courses.  There is an obvious contradiction between my science course requirements and reality.  Note: The mini-globes displayed in classrooms are a travesty.

If FET would get back into the school system, these contradictions would not exist.   

Quote from: gotham on November 02, 2013, 06:15:23 PM

When my work started requiring travel by train, plane, and automobile I began noticing a disconnect between reality and the Earth descriptions noted in my university geology courses.  There is an obvious contradiction between my science course requirements and reality.  Note: The mini-globes displayed in classrooms are a travesty.

If FET would get back into the school system, these contradictions would not exist.   

Could you explain more? Are distances and times inaccurate, etc.?

Quote from: Adolf Hipster on November 02, 2013, 06:39:34 PM

Quote from: gotham on November 02, 2013, 06:15:23 PM

When my work started requiring travel by train, plane, and automobile I began noticing a disconnect between reality and the Earth descriptions noted in my university geology courses.  There is an obvious contradiction between my science course requirements and reality.  Note: The mini-globes displayed in classrooms are a travesty.

If FET would get back into the school system, these contradictions would not exist.   

Could you explain more? Are distances and times inaccurate, etc.?

Not distance or time issues. The physical descriptions of the Earth didn't match what I was experiencing in my travels.  I know I was required to buy into what I was reading for the exams.

To this day, whenever I speak of the globularist disconnect from reality to REers, the response is remarkably negative. They are incredibly attached to and defensive of their globes.

There is an obvious contradiction between my science course requirements and reality.

It is encouraging to see an interest in Earth shape dynamics. Casting doubt into what is currently considered the norm is of great importance. I can tell you that doubt will eventually serve you (and all) well.

Contradiction was requested and delivered.  You will have to pick up and geology textbook and open it.  Look for the pictoral representation of the Earth and see that if it mimics your classroom globe. This leap of logic from the page to the globe is where the problem lies. 

I can not stress enough that you must get outside yourselves and observe what you see around you.  You are hiding behind your belief when you request such things as "so, take me by hand and let's stand/sit/walk together observing these locations."

Let me be more specific as requested.  Read, observe, think, and resolve to reality.

Quote from: gotham on November 03, 2013, 04:50:35 AM

It is encouraging to see an interest in Earth shape dynamics. Casting doubt into what is currently considered the norm is of great importance. I can tell you that doubt will eventually serve you (and all) well.

Contradiction was requested and delivered.  You will have to pick up and geology textbook and open it.  Look for the pictoral representation of the Earth and see that if it mimics your classroom globe. This leap of logic from the page to the globe is where the problem lies. 

I can not stress enough that you must get outside yourselves and observe what you see around you.  You are hiding behind your belief when you request such things as "so, take me by hand and let's stand/sit/walk together observing these locations."

Let me be more specific as requested.  Read, observe, think, and resolve to reality.

Are you kidding me? None of the flat pictorial representations are accurate. This is well known. A flat map cannot accurately represent the real world, but whenever you take segments of the world you are able to get a fairly accurate picture. That is, the error is quite small so that it is neglectable. If you would piece together all these flat maps to form the world however you would have one big flaw again.

But I thought you would have found any contradictionin the the theory, not in the presentation. In a similar fashion that the FET contradicts itself when it comes to flight times for example, or the north and south pole issue. The seasons/daylight issue. All things which are impossible to conceive on a flat earth, but which can be accounted for once we view upon the earth as a sphere.

The fact you do not want to share any contradiction, I must take that as there is no contradiction.

I was thinking. Maybe you have to start from scratch. If the earth is flat, there is no doubt it has different mechanics than RE, so you can't translate RE things into FE.

Quote from: Adolf Hipster on November 03, 2013, 05:53:25 AM

I was thinking. Maybe you have to start from scratch. If the earth is flat, there is no doubt it has different mechanics than RE, so you can't translate RE things into FE.

How much more can I start from scratch by just pointing to the things I observe in the real world?
Then the FET has no answers to those observations, but the RET has...

FET doesn't even know what the world looks like, which is quite problematic. But why don't they know how the world looks like? Because none of the ways account for the real world observations. When you take out a sphere, everything seems to work out perfectly....and I yet have to find any RET contradiction.

You have to think from  different perspective, too. Everything in RE works prefectly - is it because the earth is round, or has everything been set up to work with a round earth?

Ok, since no one else has made a map of "Flat Earth" I have made one for you, I hope it is acceptable.

http://randomnessofevil.blogspot.com/2013/11/i-made-map-of-flat-earth.html

Quote from: Adolf Hipster on November 03, 2013, 09:38:36 AM

You have to think from  different perspective, too. Everything in RE works prefectly - is it because the earth is round, or has everything been set up to work with a round earth?

If it would be made up to work with a round earth, but then the earth is in fact not round, then you would run into contradictions. Also, since your profile says you're unsure about the earth's true shape....let me ask you this.

Why would they lie about something as the shape of the earth?  What benefit does a round earth has which for example a cubic earth does not.

What contradictions did you find in the RET?  which made you think...there has to be a flat earth!

I do not mean NASA is fake and that kind of stuff. Also not that the earth looks flat from up close. What theory of the round earth is contradicting itself?

For example, the FET there are plenty of examples in which it contradicts itself (thus the earth can't be a flat earth), but all of that aside...

What is the contradiction in RET?

If your going to have a low-content post, you should at least have some content, saying that you believe nothing about RET but providing no evidence to contradict it is kind of a theme for this forum, but still....

Give me something.

Sorry, that was more of a "statement" meant to use shock value to explain what I disbelieve about the RET. Which is : everything.
Do I edit that post, or do I explain here?

To continue where I'd left off:
The reason for this topic existing is so that the RET conspiracy will improve their manipulations and try to draw attention away from these flaws we'll be exposing in their fake theory!

So they're using our intelligence to "fool proof" their RET and make sure idiots in the mass majority won't find the same errors we did with RET, and won't be able to challenge it on a massive professional level.

Some contradictions are....why am I standing still? I can feel I'm standing still. Just like I feel when I am moving in a car, train...I feel every little movement. Yet the so called movement of the "Earth" is beyond all reason & senses!!!

Something that cannot be felt, experienced, seen, understood is something I am obligated to doubt. Maybe it's my rational side of the mind's process, Idk. I just find no rational natural logic in RET what so ever. It's all just baloonery made to sound good, with extra sugar on top to rob people through RETerrorist governments of "space money".

Investing in stupid things that we have no use for, and they use to better hide the FET from everyone. Money rules the minds of the greedy majority, so RET is proven by greed. And by basic psychology - sociology.

Culture however, proves FET. So does History! So those are 4 sciences that DISPROVE RET, and that PROVE FET!!

That's enough for me. Plus RET was never convincing to me. It was just something I laughed at and rebelled against, considering it an immense pile of stupidity piled in a garbage can. I then decided to set it on fire, and cleanse my mind of all the impossible lies that RET was trying to pollute me with. And studied FET, and other True Sciences which are also censored.

Using those I created a weather manipulating device that can create massive destructions in nature. This is my revenge against RETerrorism. I use the True Science of FET to cause billions in damage. And they have no legal means of even proving it was me, so this high level of intelligence proves to me I'm right about FET. And FET is true, because I'm so smart and control technology vastly superior to the RETerrorists.

There is no financial benefit to being on a Round Earth compared to a Flat Earth other than everything you try to calculate actually works correctly on a Round Earth.

Since everything actually works correctly if the Earth is Round, I stick by the Round Earth.

I know, it does not comply with a literal interpretation of the bible, but the bible isn't literal.

Actually it is just a book...

Written, rewritten, and altered through time depending on who was in power and what they wanted to interpret from it.

Unlike science which if it is found to be incorrect we look at why it is incorrect people seem to rather bury their heads in the sand and say GOD DID IT, IT MUST BE SO!

I say, no....

Flat Earth Theory, much like the Bible is full of contradictions.

Therefore, it cannot be correct.

But don't you see!
If your round earth science is found to be incorrect, then a lot of stuff has ridden on that science, including space flights,etc.

Just for the record, you came to terms that spaceflight is real?

Now, if some of it gets pulled apart, then the boffins will have to rig up another load of baloney to make up for their exploits.

There are many things about a rotating globe that would make no sense whatsoever and actually don't make sense, except that they are made to fit by usage of words that explain what's happening, even though any rational person should call foul on it right away.

If it does not make sense to you, it does not mean it is fake. If it would be contradicting itself, then you would make a point, but there are these observations independent from the theories. Take gravity for example. It is a notion of how the earth could have formed into a sphere, but even if gravity is false or non existent, we would still observe a spherical earth. Gravity is an explanation why it turned into a sphere, but not a substitute of our observations. Observations are for example flight paths, sinking ships, able to look further at higher altitudes.

Just one example:
The earth spinning on some kind of axis in a VACUUM. I mean, what would make it do that? Rationally, what would make it do that?

Well space is not a complete VACUUM. It isn't empty, since there are planets, stars and other celestial bodies. Does it float in nothingness, or emptiness? That is the question which has not been answered yet. A property of space we do know is that there is no friction, so what once has been set in motion will stay in motion. Unless another force is acting in the opposite direction. These are the basic rules of physics. How did it get in motion in the first place? Also that is an answer which can only be guessed at. The big bang. Astronomers have observed the universe expanding over time, so if you would reverse time, the logic way of thinking is that at one point is must have been at one point. Do we know it for sure? No, absolutely not! Looking at our observations though it is what makes the most sense. 


It's easy to just say, "oh, well, it's just the way it is."  It's clap trap. It's not just the way it is at all. There's no reason and no logical way that it should act in this way. None whatsoever.
Forgetting the fact that nothing can exist in a vacuum and going by lying science, how can the earth be spinning on it's axis and not only that, but circle around the sun...and not only that, but circle in an elliptical so called orbit, moving closer as it goes round and farther as it comes back around and yet the sun is supposedly a massive ball of nuclear fusion, all around, yet this earth manages to orbit it, not only against uniform movement around it, but also on a frigging tilt.

This is just one of umpteen things that SHOULD make absolutely no sense to anyone who cares to have a real good think about it and yet here we are dealing with  intelligent people who go on as if they understand it all, when in truth it's a mystery to them but science said it's so, so that's that.

I will see if I can make a very basic illustration to demonstrate you this. I will get back to you once I have it.

Odds are, Scepti's already seen or heard something similar.  Most of this stuff is not new to us here Don.  Just like you REs, we need definitive proof in order to change our minds.  Thanks for the effort though.

Quote from: EarthIsASpaceship on November 05, 2013, 07:21:25 AM

Odds are, Scepti's already seen or heard something similar.  Most of this stuff is not new to us here Don.  Just like you REs, we need definitive proof in order to change our minds.  Thanks for the effort though.

In that case I will save the effort, but you have to understand that we all have questions about why we're here, how the universe has been created. Humanity does not have the answers to that yet, we can only look and observe things  as they are and try to explain why it is what it is. This is what science is all about, trying to find the thruth.

They use methods to determine certain things. I will use a very basic thing to explain this. How can you determine the age of a tree? You know there are tree rings, right? but how would you know how much these rings grow each year? You will have to come up with a method to determine that. Scientists do the exact same thing in everything they explore. They use preset methods  to determine things and the cool thing about science is that the methods they use and the experiments they run are repeatable, so you can test and retest that your previous results were accurate.