Also, do me a kindness and tell me where I used the phrase 'mental security' at all in my post. This is for fun, if you turn out to be right and you get a paper past a group of qualified individuals without it being torn to shreds or you show even the slightest proof of a conspiracy, I'll be among the first to join your championing of the flat Earth.
Who says I want losers on my side? Who says I'd let some roadworker join me? Who says I need approval from the monkeys the Consporacy calls "qualified"? They have zero talent and a piece of paper. A piece of
flat paper...like the Earth is. Which you've yet to disprove.Why would you want to be on my side? Is that what you're hoping to achieve? To ride on my glory? RET famewhores don't impress me in the leastest.
Irregardless of what you used, it's obvious you want the mental security of a safety net RET to comfort you that 'there is no FET monsters'
out there. Flat Earth Theory
flat out scares you.
Pun intendid.
So you latch unto secure sane individuals who know of the Earth's Flatness and hope to drink of our wisdom and provide narrow minded imps not much unlike yourself, with the 'security' and false safety sensation. You can't stand all the doubt we are creating, disrupting all your peaceful little RET minds cracking and tumbling and waving like a story sea shaken by the FET Superstorm, can you?
FET terrifies you. The Unknown scares you to death. So you keep working that street making it flat as the world is, unaware you are an embarassment to yourself. For denying what's in front of your very eyes, every single day.
Chose life. Chose a career. Chose a big screen television. Bla bla.
I chose not to chose. Who needs choices when you have FET?>!!?!?!?
Want another? Maps based on a globe work, while maps laid flat have significant distortions in distances. There has not been one accurate flat map that accounts for all discrepancies, while a globe does so rather well. These are just a few off the top of my head, mind, if you want more I'd be happy to continue this in PM or a new thread you create with this as the topic.
Globe maps are based on Flat Earth maps. Read my Flat Earth map applied on a globe surface for easier accesibility explanation below:...
What 'discrepancies' ?
I'm sorry roadwork in the midwest is a seasonal thing, and that I was injured rather severely earlier this year. Didn't realize you had a grudge against seasonal union workers and the temporarily disabled, looking to do their best to educate when they have time and have a bit of fun along with it.
You are not educating anyone. Because you are not fooling anyone.
Apology accepted you handicapable hero you. Go,
GO SAVE THE WORLDZ!!A train leaves a city at seventy miles per hour and remains heading east, and remains that speed until it arrives at its destination. This is the input, tell me when it arrives in Boston if the data isn't lacking.
You can't know when it arrives in Boston because it's heading east. East is where the sun appears to rise from, moving the hour zones, because your "time" factor is utterly relative here. You can't use bendy light to measure time properly, you disjointed magician!
If the train is going east at the same speed you claim is the Earth's "rotating" east at, then it would arrive faster than it should on that same distance, appearing to go at more than 70mph, because going east across the time zones to an "earlier time" will make it seem like it's going back in time or travelling much faster. Creating the illusion of time distortion because time loses an hour each time to cross a time zone going east.
Basic logic, don't even need your fake "time" or maps or your fake RET "data" to answer.
I said lacking or false. I didn't mean you necessarily started from a false premise, for all I know you started from the question of 'What shape is the Earth?' But, since i have no way of knowing, the bit about inputting false data is simply to drive the point home that a small error in data, be it by omission or incorrect information, can affect the results drastically.
Blablablablablaspamcopypastawithstupidjuice
Which is why every other object on a cosmic scale in the universe is roughly spherical, of course. Makes perfect sense, flat is nature's preferred shape, but nothing but the Earth is flat. Would you care to tell me in PM or another thread how the Earth came to be flat, why this is nature's preferred shape? I've asked before, and the response I got was, effectively, We don't know, it just is.
Name one object on a cosmic scale that you can prove is ball like. Instead of flat.
We're not talking "sense" and "makes perfect sense in some general wide halfarsed assumption" has no place in a logical argument, kid.
You cannot say : |makes perfect sense| about anything, without proper experimentation. You're throwing stuff out there, pulling conclusions like magic tricks from your sleeves using false premises. On what objective proof do you "make perfect sense" that any object on cosmic scale is spherical and not flat? Or even that all of them are the way you "make sense of them" to be?
We don't need your sense of sense. We don't need your "make of sense" either. That's your personal belief which we do not share. Pancakes are flat. Galaxies look flat. The Milky Way looks circular like the Edge of the Flat Earth.
Makes Perfect Sense the Earth is just the same. And every other celestial body up there.
I don't need a PM for that. Read "Flat Sky Theory" in this thread I just posted awhile back.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php/topic,60415.0.htmlHere, allow me to direct you to a discussion I had with Gotham on this point.
No, thank you. My patience is already stretched out with your illogical irregardlessness of illogic.
It's good you're poor. The flat world would be even worse if people like you were rich.
So, we're ignoring the Arabic, Indian, and Greek mathematicians and philosophers for this point? You know, the people who gave us everything from basic arithmetic, to the number zero, to algebra? Who agreed in some capacity that the Earth was round? We're just kind of throwing that part of history out the window?
History is mostly fake(d). Read New Chronology, start with Sandokhan's.
Arabic, Indian is copied from Nordic Viking conquers of the Arian faith. Their culture is celtic-nordic. I've proven this years ago. I can do it again.
There is no "greek". Hellenic geeks were dominated by the nordic world, which was Germanic. The proper word is not "greek" but
GERMANIK. The Hellenic language is proto-germanic. Hera was a title like "Herr" (master-lord), originally used as Herra (The Mistress). Heroes was originally "Herroes" in Germanik-Hellenic. From the "Herr" or "master" root. As heroes were rewarded by noble / lord titles in Europe by Herra the Queen of the Hellenic world of an Era.
I don't care about your crapgebra.
Any number added to any number adds up to 1. 45+88 = 1. X+Y=1. They will often equal one, because adding something, anything together, creates a "whole". In german "heil". Heil = 1. 1 is the symbol of wholeness, and you obtain by any addition. Or by Blitzkrieg:
SIEG HEIL!!Your misinterpretation of numbers is a disgrace. Math is an occult art of the Magi, Zoroastrians who knew the secrets of numbers. In fact numbers themselves are secrets by nature, their true purpose is not mathematical but mystical. I can prove this, I've found countless occult meanings that prove math doesn't exist. It's just a theoretical exercise in codes and occult numerology. What would a road worker know about this? You're not even an occultist, m8. 0 isn't a number it's a non-number. A symbol of an empty space that can be filled with any other value. 0 is a lot like your intelligence. Void.
Who 'agreed' in what 'capacity' on the Earth's shape now? And how does that concern me? What about the countless who agreed in overwhelming capacity to the Earth's Flatness? Why is their knowledge disputed by your fine sloth?
Some idiots just thought up the RET as a mental exercise, to prove to people the Earth is Flat. Because of how stupid the idea of living on a ball is, that everyone with a mind got
the joke. 
RET was used as an exercise to prove FET, by showing everything in nature points to FET, but not to RET. It's a classic proof by comparisson to an obviously impossible setting.
You're pulling RET believers in "history" out of your round ass. Try linking some actual credible sources with EVIDENCE of people taking the RET seriously.
And no, globes don't prove RET, it proves FET people preffered a detailed map of the Flat Earth that was mobile and could be spinned and kept somewhere on display, since it's too complicated to work with a FE map that's stuck on a wall, or trapped on a table. So to study the Flat Earth in sections, they folded the FE map on globes to view it easier from afar. This helps with geography. They still knew it was flat, and the bottom side was the Edge of the World, which is why they added the "Hereth bee Monsturs". As an inside joke. Which you have now becomed.
I would first like to point out that you claim to be among the most intelligent minds in Europe, but use the word irregardless when regardless would suffice. You're making my case for me.
Irregardless. Regardless isn't a word, it's a contradiction. How can you be 'without regard' if regard itself is an action? A non-action makes no sense. The non-action of 'not regarding' written as "regard-less" would imply a regard. Yet a true regard in french means to view something, originally imported into english. Regard makes sense. Disregard makes sense. Regardless makes NO SENSE!! It's a paradox of saying "Thinkless" about anything. Or "Doless". I see no logic with this non-word "regardless", and it shouldn't be written or overused by so many primitives.
Without regards to, disregarding, not regarding ... these are expressions or words that make sense.
Regardless makes less sense than naught, therefore Irregardless makes sense, since it's a denial of said impossible paradox. A regard which is less, or not acted out, is no regard at all! It's a self denial of the most crass idiotic possible nature! It was carved out from Stupid with an intangible Spork by an invisible elephant in the pink room.
"Regardless" cannot exist, because there is no regard to name or mention if you don't actually do it. Because to regard is a verb. And a regard (view or sight or gaze or look from french), is a noun. These don't exist without a subject. They cannot be without existing! It's like saying "lookless". Which in all actuality should mean "blind". So regardless should also mean blind, if it has to be an "actual word".
Irregardless denies the "regardless" non-word. As a denial of the denial of "regard". A denial of a denial is real, so irregardless means 'regarding'. Do use dictionary for this, I can't be bothered to babysit maroons.
I would like to continue by stating, that you have a rather obvious and rather powerful bias against modern science, and the scientists who proliferate it. This makes your case that you are indeed a skeptic a bit harder to defend, because skeptics doesn't care about the source so long as the data is empirically proven.
Thank you.
A true skeptic is skeptic about scientists as well. As well as the data. And no data has been proven. Empirically or otherflap. Now shut your trap about this "data" you fail to offer us, of RET. You have
NONE.
Sandokhan is awesome.
Is all I read from your boring rant. Am in agreeance.
I'll ask again since I'm already here, does anyone have any contradictions in the standard model of the Earth's shape? If you don't have an account but have a discrepancy, it's free to register, and your two cents would be appreciated if only so that we might correct misunderstandings that may be prevalent in this community.
Yes. What is the standard model of the Earth's shape? Who are you a commoner to dictate to everyone else on this Flat Earth, what the "standard model" is? Your infectious parasitic delusions belong in your own head, and in scifi books.
I do not care what you think the Earth looks like.
THERE IS NO STANDARD MODEL you lying reptile.
No one ever even proved RET true, and no one ever accepted it as the "standard model". Those two words have no place in a real scientific debate.
WE ARE NOT DEBATING HISTORY AND THE PAST HERE. I DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYONE'S OPINIONS!! I HAVE MY OWN!Now listen, peon. Since there obviously is no standard model, since we've yet to finish proving the FET to everyone, FET is still one of the best realistic worldviews.
RET isn't a worldview it's a myth. A mass delusion of idiots. And tennis players who have balls on their heads or in their minds.
Spit out those tenis balls and look at the playing field, which is FLAT!! As the Earth itself.
You are asking the question wrong, you blind liar. You should be asking : "What is the standard accepted model for the Earth's shape?".
And to that I answer you: |"Flatness".
I don't care what your opinions think about RET or about "standard model", or anyone else's who doesn't grasp the FET yet is ignorant and lazy enough to join the Flat Earth Society forum only to bore us with your repetitive lies, instead of
LEARNING ABOUT THE TRUTHNESS.Now, answer this. What made you think the "RET" is a "standard model"? For .. anything?! Hmmm.. well RET is an assumption of the uneducated ignorant masses who are too unthinking, lazy and antiscience to realize how plain wrong they are. They're flat out wrong end so ar iu.
This thread doesn't say "What are the contradictions in the STANDARD MODEL OF EARTHNESS!?" it says what are contradictions in the RE THEORY. And I've said mine, if you weren't lazy to read.
RE terrorists behaviour for one, which you've failed to explain, Trick Turner. Relation to Tina?
And I didn't ask in particular "why do you do these things". I asked why do so many RETerrorists perform the same act of pathetically hoping to use a fake theory (RE) to distract us from Flat Earth Truth? It's not working, and we know you know the Earth is flat. You're just afraid to admit it, because your nanny state will stop paying you welfare.