Everything Wrong with FET

  • 51 Replies
  • 7282 Views
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #30 on: November 08, 2013, 09:34:11 PM »
If you use binoculars, then the vanished perspective should be restored, as you have changed the optical distance to achieve 1 arcsecond. It of course is not.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Ah yes. So, I lived on the coast. You can watch ships sailing away. So you wait until the hull of the ship "sinks," and is no longer visible -- RE'ers say it is because the ship's hull is below the horizon, vanishing perspective theory says it is because the diameter of the field of vision has resulted in an opening angle of 1 arc minute (I said one arc second in my previous post, this was a mistake). Now, use a good pair of binoculars and look at the ship again. You see that the hull is still missing, even though the rest of the ship is quite magnified. The vanished perspective has NOT been restored! If vanishing perspective theory was true, as Rowbotham has described it, you should see the hull restored in your view.

I could not believe this at first. I tried different magnifying devices...even my telescope -- which is kind of crappy, but really gives a good zoomed-in view.

It really does happen this way. In honest zetetic fashion, I MUST abandon this theory, otherwise my approach is not truly zetetic at all -- it does not agree with basic observations.

?

11cookeaw1

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #31 on: November 09, 2013, 04:21:18 AM »
Perspective makes it look like it is getting close to the horizon.  After that, it is just too far away to see.  Light can not penetrate through an infinite distance of air.  Air is not perfectly transparent.
If the sun set is a perspective effect and we can't see the sun at night because of it being to far away, then it wouldn't reach the horizon. using the accepted FE sun height of 4800 kilometres, then even at 40000 the sun would still be 7 degrees above the horizon.

Also we should be getting further and further away from the source of UA
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 04:26:48 AM by 11cookeaw1 »

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2013, 06:08:04 PM »
Now what about Foucault's Pendulum? You've given terrible answers to all my other questions, let's see if you can do better with FP

*

Junker

  • 3792
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #33 on: November 09, 2013, 10:15:03 PM »
Now what about Foucault's Pendulum? You've given terrible answers to all my other questions, let's see if you can do better with FP

Please lurk moar.  This has been covered.  Over, and over, and over again.

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #34 on: November 10, 2013, 12:13:21 PM »
Please. All I've seen are magnets under the table argument. Anything else? Or are you going to keep dodging my questions.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #35 on: November 10, 2013, 12:59:02 PM »
You didn't do a great job, but whatever.

How bout the one about the earth accelerating constantly, never slowing down, only speeding up, and yet never reaching the speed of light? I want to know a little more about that. Anyone else who would like to pitch in is welcome.

You need to use the composition law for velocities for special relativity.  Speed is relative.  Don't use the same same formulas for speed that we can use here on Earth.
There's no law of anything anywhere that says if you add up 9.8 enough it wont equal the speed of light in m/s.
Special relativity applies if there is energy being expended, because you'd need an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light in a vacuum, and we all know that isn't possible.
As you approach c, more energy is needed to accelerate at a constant rate.
We would notice a decrease in gravitational acceleration every day, slight though it may be.
That being said, this :
Quote
There's no law of anything anywhere that says if you add up 9.8 enough it wont equal the speed of light in m/s.
Use your head, man.
EDIT : Study Lorentz contraction and constant acceleration to the speed of light in a vacuum and you'll have a better grasp on why the UA breaks special relativity.
It isn't applicable.
Stop using it as a cop-out.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2013, 01:03:07 PM by th3rm0m3t3r0 »


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #36 on: November 11, 2013, 05:19:53 AM »
But, it does get dimmer and dimmer.  The sun does not act like a light bulb and just turn off at dusk.  The light gets dim and eventually stops reaching you.  Have you never been outside during the sunset?  What do you think twilight is?

We covered this in a different thread, jroa, and your theory was never substantiated.  You failed to provide any empirical data from repeatable experimentation that showed by what degree light is diminished by graduated distances of air.  As I said before it's no good just telling us how far away the Sun is, if you can't combine that with data showing that those distances would in fact partially or completely block the Sun's rays.  Did you forget about the other thread or have you conceded defeat?  We want to see the data!

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16862
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #37 on: November 11, 2013, 06:41:55 AM »
Ok, let me just say from the start that I am RE. Firmly so. But if you could present solid evidence, FErs, in your favor, then I may just believe you. Also, please don't reference FAQ, because I have read it many times.

First of all, let me just say that the amount of work required to pull off this "hoax" of a round earth would be far greater than the fiscal benefit of doing such. Imagine all the photos to fake, sets to build, mapmakers to bribe, astronauts to brainwash, and tricks to pull. And what would they get out of it? Almost nothing.

Now let's dive into the problems of a flat earth. Everybody with any brains at all knows that on a perfectly clear day, looking out over the ocean, you can see the mast of a boat coming toward you before the body. This can only be the case in a round earth. Think about it. Also, because the earth is round, on that perfectly clear day, you can see no farther with a telescope than you can with the naked eye. If the earth were flat, you should be able to see all the way to the ice walls/dams.
I'm no stranger to the ocean, and have traveled to many bodies of water all over the world. I have trouble recalling this happening with a ship, at least comparatively to the far more oft occurrence of a ship fading out, of which I can easily bring to memory many instances. Not that I discount the apparent experience and similar ones, which I have witnessed -  just that I discount the notion of a "perfectly clear day", especially when considering the typical nature of air above large bodies of water.

That said, this is described in our models by either aetheric eddification or the more documented and popular "Bendy Light" hypothesis.
Quote
Now I'm sure this has been brought up before, but what about Foucault's pendulum? The pendulum that demonstrates the earth's rotations? Are all of those fake? Are they all part of the conspiracy?
Actually, building a foucault pendulum that is accurate is an almost impossible feat, if done fairly. Quite often instead a foucault pendulum will be magnet guided to have any hope of receiving an intelligible result. Its simply a hard to deal with experiment.

The rotations however found by a correctly set up pendulum are actually, in many flat earth models, the rotating reference frame of either the earth, or the heavens above and their gravitational influence.
Quote
And what about the sun? I saw how they explained it in FAQ, which still makes no sense. Every evening, the sun appears to "set" below the horizon, and if the FE model of the world holds, this would mean that the sun somehow goes below the earth. Now please don't give me that bs about the sun being too far away to see, you and I both know that's ridiculous. By the FE model, when the sun is below the earth, all of the earth is dark. And we all know that isn't true. Half is dark while the other half is light. Explain that, please.
I don't know of any modern FE model that holds the sun dips below the earth or even that states it moves horizontally such a grand distance. 
Quote
Also, about not ever being able to reach the speed of light, that's junk science. Particles have been made to go 99 percent that speed, and if they were physically able to accelerate more, they would reach the speed of light. The speed of light, 186,000 MPH roughly, is a fixed speed, that would be reached if the earth were to accelerate as FErs propose it does.
If they were physically able to accelerate more, they would still not theoretically, at least according to relativity, reach light speed but instead some fraction of the difference between their current speed relative to an observer and light speed.
Quote
I have many more concerns with FET, but don't have time to right them down. Answer these please!

Thanks!
Also never discount the minds job; It builds us a model of the surrounding world to make useful various sensory inputs. The untrained mind will see what it wants to much of the time. This is known as "Conventional Sight".

We have received hundreds of reports of people discerning curvature at sea level on a beach, or by eye from a low flying airplane. These are paradoxical when we realize that Round Earth models unilaterally damn such accounts as nonsense. It would seem that if we expect to see something, we will more or less fool ourselves into seeing it. This effect can be so profound that if we wear lenses that flip our field of vision horizontally, the mind will eventually correct for this. It takes the data that fits its hypothesis, first and foremost. Consider the amount of junk information you have to ignore without knowing it on a daily basis.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2013, 06:53:11 AM by John Davis »
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #38 on: November 11, 2013, 07:14:54 AM »
Can you provide a link about magnet-guided Foucault's Pendulums?  Also, do you think that it is pure coincidence that the variation in motion on a F. Pendulum varies with latitude in the exact manner predicted by a round Earth?
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #39 on: November 11, 2013, 08:12:47 AM »
http://itotd.com/articles/362/foucaults-pendulum/r2

I located this article.  The magnets are there to just keep the pendulum going.  From my understanding, the magnets, being circle, do not effect the rotation of the pendulum.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16862
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #40 on: November 12, 2013, 01:43:40 PM »
Can you provide a link about magnet-guided Foucault's Pendulums?  Also, do you think that it is pure coincidence that the variation in motion on a F. Pendulum varies with latitude in the exact manner predicted by a round Earth?
I posted some a few years ago. I'll try to set aside some time to look for it. However, no I do not think its a pure coincidence. I think its predicted by an alternate model equally as well. I'm not convinced that model is that of the rotating heavens, but that has been a common explanation I've seen here. In my framework, it would be tied to the nature of the larger spacial dimensions.


@BJ Yes, the claim is that they are there simply for a constant speed.
Quantum Ab Hoc

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #41 on: November 12, 2013, 02:52:55 PM »
Can you provide a link about magnet-guided Foucault's Pendulums?  Also, do you think that it is pure coincidence that the variation in motion on a F. Pendulum varies with latitude in the exact manner predicted by a round Earth?
I posted some a few years ago. I'll try to set aside some time to look for it. However, no I do not think its a pure coincidence. I think its predicted by an alternate model equally as well. I'm not convinced that model is that of the rotating heavens, but that has been a common explanation I've seen here. In my framework, it would be tied to the nature of the larger spacial dimensions.


@BJ Yes, the claim is that they are there simply for a constant speed.

I would love to see a theoretical framework for this, and I think it would be of tremendous benefit to the FE community.

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #42 on: November 12, 2013, 04:25:47 PM »
If you use binoculars, then the vanished perspective should be restored, as you have changed the optical distance to achieve 1 arcsecond. It of course is not.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Ah yes. So, I lived on the coast. You can watch ships sailing away. So you wait until the hull of the ship "sinks," and is no longer visible -- RE'ers say it is because the ship's hull is below the horizon, vanishing perspective theory says it is because the diameter of the field of vision has resulted in an opening angle of 1 arc minute (I said one arc second in my previous post, this was a mistake). Now, use a good pair of binoculars and look at the ship again. You see that the hull is still missing, even though the rest of the ship is quite magnified. The vanished perspective has NOT been restored! If vanishing perspective theory was true, as Rowbotham has described it, you should see the hull restored in your view.

I could not believe this at first. I tried different magnifying devices...even my telescope -- which is kind of crappy, but really gives a good zoomed-in view.

It really does happen this way. In honest zetetic fashion, I MUST abandon this theory, otherwise my approach is not truly zetetic at all -- it does not agree with basic observations.

For anyone who has ever been to sea, this "recoverning a sinking ship with a telescope" is one of the most
easily de-bunked notions of the FE. And just one of many that make absolutely no sense.

Just another is the fact that one FE has said "there is no FE Map" and maps of the world, based on projections from a globe are accepted standards. The so-called "Unipolar Map" is simply a North Polar Projection of a globe and everything and distances south of the equator are vastly distorted.

Quite honestly I am in agreement that most of the posts from FE's simply do not make sense. But it  is equally
enticing to post well known facts and evidence of a "Round Earth" that do make sense. That IMHO is what makes  this website so interesting to the so-called "RE's."
« Last Edit: November 12, 2013, 04:32:47 PM by Googleotomy »
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16862
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #43 on: November 13, 2013, 06:57:42 AM »
Can you provide a link about magnet-guided Foucault's Pendulums?  Also, do you think that it is pure coincidence that the variation in motion on a F. Pendulum varies with latitude in the exact manner predicted by a round Earth?
I posted some a few years ago. I'll try to set aside some time to look for it. However, no I do not think its a pure coincidence. I think its predicted by an alternate model equally as well. I'm not convinced that model is that of the rotating heavens, but that has been a common explanation I've seen here. In my framework, it would be tied to the nature of the larger spacial dimensions.


@BJ Yes, the claim is that they are there simply for a constant speed.

I would love to see a theoretical framework for this, and I think it would be of tremendous benefit to the FE community.
Thanks!

I agree, it will be a huge benefit. Unfortunately, I am midway through my book right now. I have since learned that promising it at a certain time is not what I should be doing as its unfolding at its own rate; I will say it won't be another few years until its out - I'm hoping this year. Its based off research and revelation from the last ten years, and as such its not something I really feel like throwing out to the public or close friends just yet.

There are some hard dates set for my various projects that are slightly beyond my influence. What I can say, despite that I can't reveal such dates, is that they will be finished before then.  The time is almost here though. As some might say, it's one of the final countdowns.
Quantum Ab Hoc

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #44 on: November 13, 2013, 07:13:15 AM »
Can you provide a link about magnet-guided Foucault's Pendulums?  Also, do you think that it is pure coincidence that the variation in motion on a F. Pendulum varies with latitude in the exact manner predicted by a round Earth?
I posted some a few years ago. I'll try to set aside some time to look for it. However, no I do not think its a pure coincidence. I think its predicted by an alternate model equally as well. I'm not convinced that model is that of the rotating heavens, but that has been a common explanation I've seen here. In my framework, it would be tied to the nature of the larger spacial dimensions.


@BJ Yes, the claim is that they are there simply for a constant speed.

I would love to see a theoretical framework for this, and I think it would be of tremendous benefit to the FE community.
Thanks!

I agree, it will be a huge benefit. Unfortunately, I am midway through my book right now. I have since learned that promising it at a certain time is not what I should be doing as its unfolding at its own rate; I will say it won't be another few years until its out - I'm hoping this year. Its based off research and revelation from the last ten years, and as such its not something I really feel like throwing out to the public or close friends just yet.

There are some hard dates set for my various projects that are slightly beyond my influence. What I can say, despite that I can't reveal such dates, is that they will be finished before then.  The time is almost here though. As some might say, it's one of the final countdowns.

Well, keep up the good work!!!! I await your publication with enthusiasm!

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #45 on: November 13, 2013, 02:54:51 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #46 on: November 13, 2013, 02:59:25 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Well, frogs have been levitated in a magnetic field, which is a fact. So it seems you do actually believe some facts, but not others. What is your criteria for which facts you believe?

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #47 on: November 13, 2013, 03:41:31 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Well, frogs have been levitated in a magnetic field, which is a fact. So it seems you do actually believe some facts, but not others. What is your criteria for which facts you believe?

Pure satire.

Did you even read my post?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2013, 03:43:07 PM by youkandewitt »

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #48 on: November 13, 2013, 03:45:56 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Well, frogs have been levitated in a magnetic field, which is a fact. So it seems you do actually believe some facts, but not others. What is your criteria for which facts you believe?

Pure satire.

Did you even read my post?

I'm sorry you took it that way. I always read posts to which I respond. From what I can determine, you accept some facts, such as frogs and proofs by Ulysses Grant Morrow, but you don't accept other facts. My question is simple: what is your criteria?

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #49 on: November 13, 2013, 04:08:02 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Well, frogs have been levitated in a magnetic field, which is a fact. So it seems you do actually believe some facts, but not others. What is your criteria for which facts you believe?

Pure satire.

Did you even read my post?

I'm sorry you took it that way. I always read posts to which I respond. From what I can determine, you accept some facts, such as frogs and proofs by Ulysses Grant Morrow, but you don't accept other facts. My question is simple: what is your criteria?

Nono, i'm sorry - i dont think you were quite getting me. I was the one being satyrical.

Ulysses Grant Morrow is described and referenced on the same wikipedia page that describes and references the Bedford Level experiment. His results entirely contradicted Rowbothams as the atmospheric conditions differed (both of which were incorrect).

Frogs can be levitated, of course that is what i said. What facts was i not accepting?

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #50 on: November 13, 2013, 04:39:35 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Well, frogs have been levitated in a magnetic field, which is a fact. So it seems you do actually believe some facts, but not others. What is your criteria for which facts you believe?

Pure satire.

Did you even read my post?

I'm sorry you took it that way. I always read posts to which I respond. From what I can determine, you accept some facts, such as frogs and proofs by Ulysses Grant Morrow, but you don't accept other facts. My question is simple: what is your criteria?

Nono, i'm sorry - i dont think you were quite getting me. I was the one being satyrical.

Ulysses Grant Morrow is described and referenced on the same wikipedia page that describes and references the Bedford Level experiment. His results entirely contradicted Rowbothams as the atmospheric conditions differed (both of which were incorrect).

Frogs can be levitated, of course that is what i said. What facts was i not accepting?

Oh....I definitely was not getting you at all. My apologies for this. You were being satirical and I took the post as 100% serious. I retract my statements, any inference I made about you not accepting facts was based on a faulty premise of mine.

My goodness, what is wrong with me today! Thank you for your patience.

Re: Everything Wrong with FET
« Reply #51 on: November 13, 2013, 04:42:20 PM »
See the one problem here is that everyone is wrong.. Ulysses Grant Morrow has already proved that the world is concave.

Actually, we are living inside a spherical space, inside a quasar (who's beam provides our magnetic poles).

The huge amount of magnetic energy outside the thick layer of rock that surrounds us acts like gravity to pull us outwards (just like frogs levitate in a magnet). The extreme energy outside is constantly heating the rock that keeps us safe and keeps the illusion of 'the core' super heated.

If you want to know more you should have read the FAQ.

Please feel free to ask questions which i will answer at will. Please do not provide any facts as they are not helpful and are usually just conspiracies drummed into you by your governments, friends, family and everyone around you except for about 10 people on this forum who try so hard to educate but have been misinformed themselves.

Just remember, don't trust anything except your eyes.. unless you are blind in which case would you like a lollipop?

Well, frogs have been levitated in a magnetic field, which is a fact. So it seems you do actually believe some facts, but not others. What is your criteria for which facts you believe?

Pure satire.

Did you even read my post?

I'm sorry you took it that way. I always read posts to which I respond. From what I can determine, you accept some facts, such as frogs and proofs by Ulysses Grant Morrow, but you don't accept other facts. My question is simple: what is your criteria?

Nono, i'm sorry - i dont think you were quite getting me. I was the one being satyrical.

Ulysses Grant Morrow is described and referenced on the same wikipedia page that describes and references the Bedford Level experiment. His results entirely contradicted Rowbothams as the atmospheric conditions differed (both of which were incorrect).

Frogs can be levitated, of course that is what i said. What facts was i not accepting?

Oh....I definitely was not getting you at all. My apologies for this. You were being satirical and I took the post as 100% serious. I retract my statements, any inference I made about you not accepting facts was based on a faulty premise of mine.

My goodness, what is wrong with me today! Thank you for your patience.

Sweet no worries mate, people often don't get my satire even when i include tone of voice ;-) (at least i find it funny lol)