Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections

  • 565 Replies
  • 115847 Views
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #330 on: June 11, 2014, 11:44:15 AM »
The strange part is, not one of you has ever managed to shoot down my theories. Not one.
You pretend you have but you all failed. This is why you're getting angry, because I'm one cookie that doesn't crumble easily.  ;)

Much evidence has been presented - here and in the world's body of science - to make your hypothesis very, very unlikely. It's up to you to prove your hypothesis. In fact, the existing body of evidence makes the round Earth model the only likely and credible explanation.


Yeah, ok, I'll let you have your photon, just as long as you don't call it a particle of any description, fair deal?

There are no particles of light, it's all waves. It sort of wrecks your space but there you go.
[/quote]

How are you so sure that particles aren't in play here? Mind you, I don't claim photons to be particles. But it is known that lights behaves sometimes as a wave and sometimes a particles. How can you sort out the reality of the photon when people who dedicate their lives to such endeavors haven't even reach a solid conclusion?

And frankly, how does this play a role in your flat Earth hypothesis?

*Waits patiently for "aether" to crop [back] into the conversation.*

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #331 on: June 11, 2014, 11:48:04 AM »
I'm just being honest, Geoffrey. If I had bounced a laser beam off of the dome I would tell you. I haven't so I can't say I have and I can't calculate anything. Can you understand this.
Your calculations came from a? a what? Book? What was it?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2014, 11:51:25 AM by sceptimatic »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #332 on: June 11, 2014, 11:50:40 AM »
The strange part is, not one of you has ever managed to shoot down my theories. Not one.
You pretend you have but you all failed. This is why you're getting angry, because I'm one cookie that doesn't crumble easily.  ;)

Much evidence has been presented - here and in the world's body of science - to make your hypothesis very, very unlikely. It's up to you to prove your hypothesis. In fact, the existing body of evidence makes the round Earth model the only likely and credible explanation.


Yeah, ok, I'll let you have your photon, just as long as you don't call it a particle of any description, fair deal?

There are no particles of light, it's all waves. It sort of wrecks your space but there you go.

How are you so sure that particles aren't in play here? Mind you, I don't claim photons to be particles. But it is known that lights behaves sometimes as a wave and sometimes a particles. How can you sort out the reality of the photon when people who dedicate their lives to such endeavors haven't even reach a solid conclusion?

And frankly, how does this play a role in your flat Earth hypothesis?

*Waits patiently for "aether" to crop [back] into the conversation.*
[/quote]I've never ever mentioned aether at any time since I've been on this forum. My thoughts are my own. The flat Earthers have their own thoughts, so don't embarrass them by mentioning me in the same breath as they cringe at me worse than your globulites.


?

Whiskey

  • 122
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #333 on: June 11, 2014, 11:58:37 AM »
I'm just being honest, Geoffrey. If I had bounced a laser beam off of the dome I would tell you. I haven't so I can't say I have and I can't calculate anything. Can you understand this.
Your calculations came from a? a what? Book? What was it?

Yet you've never seen the dome or tested it's elemental makeup or been to the giant volcano at the north pole, that no one has ever seen because getting near it would be instant death. How can you calculate all these "facts" you have about them without ever have laid eyes on them?

I'll note you've never once answered this question directly, though it's been put to you a number of times.

?

Whiskey

  • 122
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #334 on: June 11, 2014, 12:07:15 PM »
I'm repetitive and a crazy psycho that knows nothing, so I should be discarded from your mind... Hahahahahahaha.

Hey, this is the first thing scepti has ever posted that I can totally agree with as fact.

Truth be told I am fascinated by the last few pages of scepti's manic ego stroking. It could be a case study in Poe's law.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #335 on: June 11, 2014, 12:15:07 PM »
I'm just being honest, Geoffrey. If I had bounced a laser beam off of the dome I would tell you. I haven't so I can't say I have and I can't calculate anything. Can you understand this.
Your calculations came from a? a what? Book? What was it?

Yet you've never seen the dome or tested it's elemental makeup or been to the giant volcano at the north pole, that no one has ever seen because getting near it would be instant death. How can you calculate all these "facts" you have about them without ever have laid eyes on them?

I'll note you've never once answered this question directly, though it's been put to you a number of times.
You've never laid eyes on anything you talk about but you talk about it all as if it's all real. Why?
I'll answer for you.
It's because you were told and read and saw pictures of this stuff and you took it all on face value. Why would they lie, right?
Why would they lie?

I've explained in full detail about my thoughts. If you haven't read them, then you will be forever wondering, or maybe not. Just stick to what you know. You know it's a spinning globe and all the other bumph so there's no real need to even bother with a fool like me, is there. Be honest: there isn't any point, as what I say is pointless to you and others.

Just be on your merry way and leave us nut cases to ponder. You have your model, you don't need to share it with people who already did so, once and discarded it as being absurd.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #336 on: June 11, 2014, 12:15:47 PM »
I'm just being honest, Geoffrey. If I had bounced a laser beam off of the dome I would tell you. I haven't so I can't say I have and I can't calculate anything. Can you understand this.
Why is it that you can't quote and figures as determined by the same flat earth scientists who figured out the size and altitude of the moon and the sun?  Surely you must have access to technical papers written by these guys?  I don't expect you to personally carry out the measurements of course, but what about the published flat earth data?  Why can't you cite that?


Quote
Your calculations came from a? a what? Book? What was it?
The correlated data sets gathered by thousands of academically accredited scientists from every country on the planet over the last couple of centuries, and published by numerous scientific journals and universities.  And every bit of it rigorously peer-reviewed, cross-checked and validated independently.

Can you tell me what sources you use when you're making statements about the earth, physics, and our universe?



*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #337 on: June 11, 2014, 12:17:20 PM »
I'm repetitive and a crazy psycho that knows nothing, so I should be discarded from your mind... Hahahahahahaha.

Hey, this is the first thing scepti has ever posted that I can totally agree with as fact.

Truth be told I am fascinated by the last few pages of scepti's manic ego stroking. It could be a case study in Poe's law.
Being a genius and wise to bull shit is never easy. I manage to cope due to my extremely strong persona and the fact that my mind opens a little more each day.

Try it. Seriously, try it. Just open your mind to one possibility and it could open a new world for you, literally. I dare you.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #338 on: June 11, 2014, 12:21:33 PM »
Why is it that you can't quote and figures as determined by the same flat earth scientists who figured out the size and altitude of the moon and the sun?  Surely you must have access to technical papers written by these guys?  I don't expect you to personally carry out the measurements of course, but what about the published flat earth data?  Why can't you cite that?
Why can't you get your head around the fact that I do not subscribe to most of what the flat Earth theorists say. I have my OWN theories.
The correlated data sets gathered by thousands of academically accredited scientists from every country on the planet over the last couple of centuries, and published by numerous scientific journals and universities.  And every bit of it rigorously peer-reviewed, cross-checked and validated independently.

Can you tell me what sources you use when you're making statements about the earth, physics, and our universe?
Yes I can. It's called my brain along with a select few others bouncing off each other. I don't need your fire worthy Earth/space books, they are filled with pathetic garbage that are neither use nor ornament.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #339 on: June 11, 2014, 12:27:40 PM »
Why can't you get your head around the fact that I do not subscribe to most of what the flat Earth theorists say. I have my OWN theories.
Fair enough.  Can you tell us briefly what those theories are, and why they differ from the rest of the flat earth theorists?  Do you have your own map of the flat earth (other than the stylized UN version)?

What major parts—specifically—of the currently accepted flat earth theories do you disagree with, and why?

Do you accept the legitimacy of Samuel Rowbotham's experiment and his ENaG writings?

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • +0/-0
  • Around the world.
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #340 on: June 11, 2014, 12:30:35 PM »
Why can't you get your head around the fact that I do not subscribe to most of what the flat Earth theorists say. I have my OWN theories.
Fair enough.  Can you tell us briefly what those theories are, and why they differ from the rest of the flat earth theorists?  Do you have your own map of the flat earth (other than the stylized UN version)?

What major parts—specifically—of the currently accepted flat earth theories do you disagree with, and why?

Do you accept the legitimacy of Samuel Rowbotham's experiment and his ENaG writings?

I don't mean to be rude aussie, but seriously, scepti has told you this over and over. FE'rs generally subscribe to all the stuff in the wiki. There are small variations of that but it's mostly the same stuff.

Scepti has the whole dome thing. Contrary to planets and stars he has reflections. Contrary to gravity or UA, he has denpressure.

?

Whiskey

  • 122
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #341 on: June 11, 2014, 12:36:06 PM »
I'm just being honest, Geoffrey. If I had bounced a laser beam off of the dome I would tell you. I haven't so I can't say I have and I can't calculate anything. Can you understand this.
Your calculations came from a? a what? Book? What was it?

Yet you've never seen the dome or tested it's elemental makeup or been to the giant volcano at the north pole, that no one has ever seen because getting near it would be instant death. How can you calculate all these "facts" you have about them without ever have laid eyes on them?

I'll note you've never once answered this question directly, though it's been put to you a number of times.
You've never laid eyes on anything you talk about but you talk about it all as if it's all real. Why?
I'll answer for you.
It's because you were told and read and saw pictures of this stuff and you took it all on face value. Why would they lie, right?
Why would they lie?

I've explained in full detail about my thoughts. If you haven't read them, then you will be forever wondering, or maybe not. Just stick to what you know. You know it's a spinning globe and all the other bumph so there's no real need to even bother with a fool like me, is there. Be honest: there isn't any point, as what I say is pointless to you and others.

Just be on your merry way and leave us nut cases to ponder. You have your model, you don't need to share it with people who already did so, once and discarded it as being absurd.

The question was:
Quote
Yet you've never seen the dome or tested it's elemental makeup or been to the giant volcano at the north pole, that no one has ever seen because getting near it would be instant death. How can you calculate all these "facts" you have about them without ever have laid eyes on them?

And yet again you refuse to answer the question. Why is that?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #342 on: June 11, 2014, 12:45:39 PM »
Why can't you get your head around the fact that I do not subscribe to most of what the flat Earth theorists say. I have my OWN theories.
Fair enough.  Can you tell us briefly what those theories are, and why they differ from the rest of the flat earth theorists?  Do you have your own map of the flat earth (other than the stylized UN version)?

What major parts—specifically—of the currently accepted flat earth theories do you disagree with, and why?

Do you accept the legitimacy of Samuel Rowbotham's experiment and his ENaG writings?
My Earth is essentially flat. Actually slightly concave, with a dome. It's like an egg side on, sort of.
I don't have a map as of yet, except the one I put together a while back which was as rough as you can get and needs a lot of work which no one offered to help with.
It's not easy being disliked by just about everyone, hahahaha.

Yes I accept Rowbothams experiment, because my experiment achieved the same results , only in a different way.

My Earth, like the flat Earth has a rim before the dome foundation which is much further. Nobody gets to it, nobody gets out. Nobody falls off. Nobody gets in.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #343 on: June 11, 2014, 12:47:49 PM »
I'm just being honest, Geoffrey. If I had bounced a laser beam off of the dome I would tell you. I haven't so I can't say I have and I can't calculate anything. Can you understand this.
Your calculations came from a? a what? Book? What was it?

Yet you've never seen the dome or tested it's elemental makeup or been to the giant volcano at the north pole, that no one has ever seen because getting near it would be instant death. How can you calculate all these "facts" you have about them without ever have laid eyes on them?

I'll note you've never once answered this question directly, though it's been put to you a number of times.
You've never laid eyes on anything you talk about but you talk about it all as if it's all real. Why?
I'll answer for you.
It's because you were told and read and saw pictures of this stuff and you took it all on face value. Why would they lie, right?
Why would they lie?

I've explained in full detail about my thoughts. If you haven't read them, then you will be forever wondering, or maybe not. Just stick to what you know. You know it's a spinning globe and all the other bumph so there's no real need to even bother with a fool like me, is there. Be honest: there isn't any point, as what I say is pointless to you and others.

Just be on your merry way and leave us nut cases to ponder. You have your model, you don't need to share it with people who already did so, once and discarded it as being absurd.

The question was:
Quote
Yet you've never seen the dome or tested it's elemental makeup or been to the giant volcano at the north pole, that no one has ever seen because getting near it would be instant death. How can you calculate all these "facts" you have about them without ever have laid eyes on them?

And yet again you refuse to answer the question. Why is that?
see the dome all the time. I see all the reflections on it. I see the icicles falling from it. I see the sun reflected off it, as well as the moon, etc.

If you want to know if I've been up in a cage and cleaned it, then no, I haven't.  ;D

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #344 on: June 11, 2014, 12:56:47 PM »

And yet again you refuse to answer the question. Why is that?

sceptimatic would have to be one of the poorest debaters I've ever had the misfortune to encounter on any forum anywhere.  He's consistently light on facts, empirical evidence, accredited citations, names and dates, and even his own hypotheses.  He seems to rely solely on his own internalised reasoning for nearly everything that he encounters, without any reference whatsoever to books or research papers or accredited scientific web sites.

He seems to have a paranoid delusion that the rest of the world are liars and imbeciles, and that he's the only person on the planet that can see through some purported global conspiracy to dumb down the population. 

He's also claimed—in all seriousness—to be a scientist and a genius, and to have invented stuff we all buy every day at our local store.  He's also claimed to have carried out an expensive, sophisticated test using lasers and a 2km sheet of flat ice which has proven unequivocally that the earth is flat.  However, as it's turned out, he hasn't yet produced any viable evidence for any of this stuff.  Classic delusions of grandeur.

Unfortunately, his constant nonsensical ramblings on these forums has had the effect of derailing and disrupting many of the threads.

His puerile insults and childish behaviour also has the unintended effect of damaging the credibility of the flat earth forums, particularly to casual observers.  I've formally reported his continuing unacceptable posting practices and breaches of the forum's terms and conditions to the moderators, so we can only hope they act appropriately in order to let those of us wishing to continue a meaningful debate to do so.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #345 on: June 11, 2014, 01:08:38 PM »
Geoffrey: I can't damage the credibility of any flat Earther anymore than I can damage the credibility of any other alternate theorist. Why?
Because if you took notice, you would see that people like you make sure that they have no credibility by ridiculing them with like minded people like yourself.

I can't damage their theory I can only damage my own by being a virtual lone theoruist on it. Some people have a close theory to mine, they just differ in certain parts.

Your game is to kill off the flat Earth society. Mine is to make it flourish, even though I don;t fully follow their thoughts. That's not to say their theory is wrong and mine is right. I admire them for being able to think for themselves and if you've noticed, I rarely get into conflict with any flat Earther, except the odd ones who pretend they changed to flat Earthers whilst still attempting to batter me, so I give it back. Only Vauxhall and thermometer really attempt this which is easy meat.

If you had any sense at all you would not debate with me...but here you are debating with me. Why?
Just debate with those who are interesting and leave me to my own devices. You profess to be intelligent, so use it.  ;)

?

Whiskey

  • 122
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #346 on: June 11, 2014, 01:14:05 PM »
I see the dome all the time. I see all the reflections on it. I see the icicles falling from it. I see the sun reflected off it, as well as the moon, etc.

Again, no direct answer. What about the volcano that you describe that no one can see? Or the elemental makeup of the dome you've never been to?

I'm guessing you don't answer is because answering would mean admitting you're guilty of the same thing you accuse RE's of... believing in something you have no actual knowledge of.

The only difference is your bullshit isn't from a book, just one of your fever dreams.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #347 on: June 11, 2014, 01:21:06 PM »
I see the dome all the time. I see all the reflections on it. I see the icicles falling from it. I see the sun reflected off it, as well as the moon, etc.

Again, no direct answer. What about the volcano that you describe that no one can see? Or the elemental makeup of the dome you've never been to?

I'm guessing you don't answer is because answering would mean admitting you're guilty of the same thing you accuse RE's of... believing in something you have no actual knowledge of.

The only difference is your bullshit isn't from a book, just one of your fever dreams.
What volcano is this then?

?

Whiskey

  • 122
  • +0/-0
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #348 on: June 11, 2014, 04:10:34 PM »
I see the dome all the time. I see all the reflections on it. I see the icicles falling from it. I see the sun reflected off it, as well as the moon, etc.

Again, no direct answer. What about the volcano that you describe that no one can see? Or the elemental makeup of the dome you've never been to?

I'm guessing you don't answer is because answering would mean admitting you're guilty of the same thing you accuse RE's of... believing in something you have no actual knowledge of.

The only difference is your bullshit isn't from a book, just one of your fever dreams.
What volcano is this then?

The central sun ejects periodic debris in earth and also the ice dome drops icicles, periodically.
What you see as slow comets with tails, are icicles of helium/hydrogen interacting with the heavier gases below them, creating the tails but also creating the slow movement, due to the frozen gases being resisted by the heavier gases.
The central sun ejects debris which you will see as super fast shooting stars.

Icicles, 99 times out of 100 will evaporate in the far upper atmosphere over time.
The central sun will have volcanoes around it, ejecting debris into the air and back down.
Just like a coal fire will spit hot fragments at you.

Why haven't they been discovered?
The very same reason why the ice dome foundation will never be discovered.
Instant death for anyone who gets remotely close.
If you're thinking of a little north pole and believe it's all been conquered, then it's not surprising your stance will be to reject it out of hand.

Until you go on a mission yourself to see how far you would get, you will never know the real truth and even then you may not find it.

Again, how do you know all these things without actually seeing them?

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • 37800
  • +1/-0
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #349 on: June 11, 2014, 07:45:53 PM »
Everybody, please stop making personal attacks.  I don't have time right now, but this thread really needs to be cleaned up.  I will also be sending official warnings if this continues. 

*

DonaldC

  • 194
  • +0/-0
  • Physics & Philosophy guy, teach science in China
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #350 on: June 11, 2014, 11:03:48 PM »
Well as interesting this was to read, a few comments. Ones that seem to be made over and over again. Theory has a specific meaning in science. Skepti as a scientist you should know this. But as a refresher here is hypothesis and theory.

hypothesis: a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your experiment or research.

theory: a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. A theory arises from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested hypotheses that are widely accepted.
  Kendra Cherry, aboutpsychology.com

In general parlance most people use theory to mean guess or in rare instances hypothesis. Since we are discussing evidence and ideas that hopefully represent the real word, model it and make predictions we should be using these terms correctly. If you are discussing an idea that has a ponderousness of evidence and makes predictions then please refer to it as a theory, eg. Quantum Theory. If you have an idea which you cannot present much evidence for and is limited in predictive power please use hypothesis. And please none of this, well we are not scientists etc. you are putting forth what you claim to be scientific ideas. Use the correct nomenclature.

Thank you!
"Think of the average person. Now remember how stupid he is. Now realize half of them are dumber than that." George Carlin

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #351 on: June 12, 2014, 12:14:04 AM »
I see the dome all the time. I see all the reflections on it. I see the icicles falling from it. I see the sun reflected off it, as well as the moon, etc.

Again, no direct answer. What about the volcano that you describe that no one can see? Or the elemental makeup of the dome you've never been to?

I'm guessing you don't answer is because answering would mean admitting you're guilty of the same thing you accuse RE's of... believing in something you have no actual knowledge of.

The only difference is your bullshit isn't from a book, just one of your fever dreams.
What volcano is this then?

The central sun ejects periodic debris in earth and also the ice dome drops icicles, periodically.
What you see as slow comets with tails, are icicles of helium/hydrogen interacting with the heavier gases below them, creating the tails but also creating the slow movement, due to the frozen gases being resisted by the heavier gases.
The central sun ejects debris which you will see as super fast shooting stars.

Icicles, 99 times out of 100 will evaporate in the far upper atmosphere over time.
The central sun will have volcanoes around it, ejecting debris into the air and back down.
Just like a coal fire will spit hot fragments at you.

Why haven't they been discovered?
The very same reason why the ice dome foundation will never be discovered.
Instant death for anyone who gets remotely close.
If you're thinking of a little north pole and believe it's all been conquered, then it's not surprising your stance will be to reject it out of hand.

Until you go on a mission yourself to see how far you would get, you will never know the real truth and even then you may not find it.

Again, how do you know all these things without actually seeing them?
How do you know the things you know without seeing them?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #352 on: June 12, 2014, 12:58:17 AM »
Well as interesting this was to read, a few comments. Ones that seem to be made over and over again. Theory has a specific meaning in science. Skepti as a scientist you should know this. But as a refresher here is hypothesis and theory.

hypothesis: a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your experiment or research.

theory: a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. A theory arises from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested hypotheses that are widely accepted.
  Kendra Cherry, aboutpsychology.com

In general parlance most people use theory to mean guess or in rare instances hypothesis. Since we are discussing evidence and ideas that hopefully represent the real word, model it and make predictions we should be using these terms correctly. If you are discussing an idea that has a ponderousness of evidence and makes predictions then please refer to it as a theory, eg. Quantum Theory. If you have an idea which you cannot present much evidence for and is limited in predictive power please use hypothesis. And please none of this, well we are not scientists etc. you are putting forth what you claim to be scientific ideas. Use the correct nomenclature.

Thank you!
Gravity theory, quantum theory, black hole theory, Higgs boson theory, warped space time theory, special relativity theory. Need I go on? All theories that the scientific world pass off as a sort of fact but cleverly use theory as both a fact and a guess, because it leaves scope for a future where they can be proved wrong, even though everything supposedly works how they predicted it.

I don't follow the mainstream scientific route where Earth and space are concerned, so I will use my theory, which is my theory, not fact.
Hypothesis can be used as well but theory takes less time to type and is basically the same thing in normal terms. The scientific world use theory as a simple truth to us mere common people. You see, they won't ever say science FACT because smarter people are born every day and one day a smart person will simply destroy their theories, forcing them to make more stuff up, then tell us all that the other stuff was only theory after all.

It's a bit stupid really. It would be better for them to simply admit that they are playing guessing games and simply making crap up. But then again, that would destroy the fantasy they are trying to pacify us all with
My Earth is a much more fitting Earth than the Earth we are told to accept. Mock it if you feel the need but I'm serious and I don't need to sit and sling out calculations to explain it. It just needs to be told in simple terms for those with insight to grasp , no matter how slowly.

To grasp what I'm saying, requires people to put to bed the nonsense of gravity and a whole host of other stuff. It's not easy for anyone to do...but: if done, it opens up a whole new thinking on it all.

Most people have me down as a nut job and clueless, which is fine with me. I'm under no illusions about anything like that as I know that people aren't going to step outside of their comfort zone of mass opinion to become a ridicule target.

I get told time and time again that I don't present evidence. I present enough material to give food for thought. What I don't do, is copy and paste answers. I use my own mind and my own words.

I don't get impressed by people telling me about this and that which they copied from web pages/wiki or whatever, because that's the whole thing I'm actually dismissing. So if I dismiss mainstream web pages, I'm not exactly going to accept someone regurgitating it, am I?

The simple truth, as far as I'm concerned, which comes before I even put my THEORIES forward....is...your science is riddled with fantasy to make it all work, especially where the Earth and your space are concerned.

That's not a dig at you or even the other people that subscribe to that, as you are only caught up the same as most. A belief and trust in your higher peers.

Humans are like dogs and owners. The owners being those at the very top and the dogs being us mere common people that are given some status in the world depending on breed.
What we all mainly have in common is, we can be humiliated and kicked...ridiculed and starved.....ordered to sit and beg and perform tasks...yet be so faithful that we accept it and come back for more, rarely thinking that the potential to run free is always there....it's just a case of being domesticated enought to realise that lone survival is against you, plus the fact that if managed, the added chance of being snared and brought back into line or put down, are always the other options.

Compliance gains rewards. Pampered poodles live pampered, CONTROLLED lives. To be free, you have to be a strong breed....the wolf.

Having said all that, forgive me if my persona comes across as arrogant. I am arrogant. I'm a genius. I'm a top man in my field. I am the ultimate. I am a lone wolf.
I have to be like this because I'm dealing with ultra arrogant people, every day in all walks of life, including here.
I fight fire with fire and that's just the way it is. I afford respect to those that warrant it. I treat people in whatever manner they treat me.

I will blow my own trumpet if necessary as loud as people blow theirs, maybe even louder if need be.

The simple end to what I'm saying, is very simple. My Earth is far superior and real to the one that is portrayed to you global Earth indoctrinates. I can't really make it any plainer.

Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #353 on: June 12, 2014, 03:59:54 AM »
Well as interesting this was to read, a few comments. Ones that seem to be made over and over again. Theory has a specific meaning in science. Skepti as a scientist you should know this. But as a refresher here is hypothesis and theory.

hypothesis: a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. For example, an experiment designed to look at the relationship between study habits and test anxiety might have a hypothesis that states, "We predict that students with better study habits will suffer less test anxiety." Unless your study is exploratory in nature, your hypothesis should always explain what you expect to happen during the course of your experiment or research.

theory: a well-established principle that has been developed to explain some aspect of the natural world. A theory arises from repeated observation and testing and incorporates facts, laws, predictions, and tested hypotheses that are widely accepted.
  Kendra Cherry, aboutpsychology.com

In general parlance most people use theory to mean guess or in rare instances hypothesis. Since we are discussing evidence and ideas that hopefully represent the real word, model it and make predictions we should be using these terms correctly. If you are discussing an idea that has a ponderousness of evidence and makes predictions then please refer to it as a theory, eg. Quantum Theory. If you have an idea which you cannot present much evidence for and is limited in predictive power please use hypothesis. And please none of this, well we are not scientists etc. you are putting forth what you claim to be scientific ideas. Use the correct nomenclature.

Thank you!
Gravity theory, quantum theory, black hole theory, Higgs boson theory, warped space time theory, special relativity theory.
...
I get told time and time again that I don't present evidence. I present enough material to give food for thought. What I don't do, is copy and paste answers. I use my own mind and my own words.
...
I don't get impressed by people telling me about this and that which they copied from web pages/wiki or whatever, because that's the whole thing I'm actually dismissing. So if I dismiss mainstream web pages, I'm not exactly going to accept someone regurgitating it, am I?
There's no "black hole theory", nor "Higgs boson theory", they are a part of a bigger theory. Warped spacetime theory is the currently accepted theory of gravity. As for quantum theory...the device you are using right now to type and read messages is a product of quantum mechanics. As are a bunch of others we use regularly.
The problem is that you dismiss "mainstream" science based on nothing, or a lack of understanding which leads to an argument of personal incredulity from you
" Hahahaha, warped spacetime hahaha, how can you people believe that?
gravity hahaha, this is just magic so that the equations work and everyone stays duped by the scientists

These are not actual arguments, they are baseless opinions and hold no ground. Same goes for your hypotheses, they are not backed up by anything except by your own mind and logic, and are often self-contradictory.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #354 on: June 12, 2014, 07:11:58 AM »
I'm not contradicting myself. I'm giving out my thoughts on what I believe is the closest reality. Calculations are fine if you know exactly what you're calculating.
In your globe case, most of the calculations are based on guesswork. I could come up with calculations based on guesswork but what's the point?

I can't calculate a reflection off a dome if I don't know how high the dome is or the size of the reflection. I could guess it and make one, like I said...but why?

The plain and simple point is to get to the nitty gritty of the matter first, then you have something more concrete to work from. Unfortunately it requires us to know how big the Earth is. We only know how big the livable Earth is, in a fashion. We cannot calculate the outer ice that leads to the foundation of the dome, because like I said, we are not built to get near it and freeze to death in temperatures that are a portion of what they would be further to the foundation, not to mention the lack of air.

The same goes for the centre of Earth. We can get so far and that's that. Any further in and our compasses would be nullified, plus we would be taken apart, cell by cell the closer we got.

The Earth is a paradise and also a hell. Stay within your means and you are fine. Venture out and you suffer the consequences. Maybe many have, which gets hushed up as Bermuda triangle like phenomenon.

I don't know why it's so difficult for people to grasp that the Earth is a self sustaining cell. Why do people with so called intelligence, subscribe to a rotating ball and a 93 million mile sun in space, plus all other planets and stars just following a nice order around us. It's pathetic, seriously.

We live on lies after lies and yet very few want the truth, yet prefer to simply sit amazed at the spew that comes out of so called scientists mouths.

They spout off and tell you they found another 800 planets that can hold life and people wet their pants over it. They simply don't question it. They just accept that a floating telescope in space zooms in on them and all the other bumph that goes with it.

They tell us that stars are moving away from us. these stars we see that we supposedly see as they WERE 1000 years ago or a million years ago, etc. It's so pathetic it's actually quite sad that people don't sit there and think, " hang on a minute, what's all this crap." Instead they go, "wow, fantastic...how clever are these scientists?" The answer is simple. They are clever. They're clever at making up a big pile of ridiculous garbage because they know fine well that you all swallow it up with gusto.

Oh and yes, I know, I know you say I don't know about your science and that's why I spout this stuff. I've heard it all before; time and time again.
When someone comes to my door and tells me I've got a tiger in my garden with a gorilla riding on it's back, I'll bid the person farewell, then go and make a cup of tea. I won't look in the garden, because if I do and don't see a tiger and a gorilla, then I'd have to tell the person he's a liar, to which the person will tell me that it's there but it's difficult to see and the conditions have to be right.

If I'm stupid, I can thank him and tell him that I'll look out for it. If I'm smart, I'll just make the cup of tea and laugh about it.

It's no different to those at the top telling  people like you, similar things. The only difference is...you lot will buy all the equipment and spend years trying to spot it, or simply take it as truth and tell anyone who cares to listen.

They are taking the complete urine out of you all and you simply cannot see it. I'm being serious.
People are so brainwashed that they would need to be dragged screaming into the real world and then some, just to be able to use 0.1% of common sense reality that's ticking inside their heads yet is suppressed by hypnotic gadgets and tutors.

I was one of you lot, once. Wasted time: but probably needed because it keeps me fully focused on the deception, ensuring I never ever fall for crap like this, again.

The trouble is, I'm not infallible just like all people, so I have to be on my guard for all the installments of bullshit... keeping a mindset on questioning everything and believing nothing, ensures that I check the potential validity of what's put before me, then use my born senses to decipher it all. If I can't, then I place it on the back burner as a not sure.

If something sounds feasible, I will accept it. The problem is, we live in a world where reality can be indistinguishable from fiction, if you have the right people pulling the strings.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • +0/-0
  • Around the world.
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #355 on: June 12, 2014, 07:20:37 AM »
I'm not contradicting myself. I'm giving out my thoughts on what I believe is the closest reality. Calculations are fine if you know exactly what you're calculating.
In your globe case, most of the calculations are based on guesswork. I could come up with calculations based on guesswork but what's the point?

Which calculation contains guesswork?

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #356 on: June 12, 2014, 07:53:15 AM »
I'm not contradicting myself. I'm giving out my thoughts on what I believe is the closest reality. Calculations are fine if you know exactly what you're calculating.
In your globe case, most of the calculations are based on guesswork. I could come up with calculations based on guesswork but what's the point?

Which calculation contains guesswork?

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.
All your space calculations are guesswork, so whatever you believe is in space, is not in space and it incalculable, that's what I'm saying.

Everything  like that is based on blatant lies or simply guesswork, so you can take anything from that.
The reasons for the calculations with some, border on the absurd. I know you people fall for it but it's not really your fault as they conditioned you to believe all this tripe.

?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • +0/-0
  • Around the world.
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #357 on: June 12, 2014, 07:55:25 AM »
I'm not contradicting myself. I'm giving out my thoughts on what I believe is the closest reality. Calculations are fine if you know exactly what you're calculating.
In your globe case, most of the calculations are based on guesswork. I could come up with calculations based on guesswork but what's the point?

Which calculation contains guesswork?

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.
All your space calculations are guesswork, so whatever you believe is in space, is not in space and it incalculable, that's what I'm saying.

Everything  like that is based on blatant lies or simply guesswork, so you can take anything from that.
The reasons for the calculations with some, border on the absurd. I know you people fall for it but it's not really your fault as they conditioned you to believe all this tripe.

Yes, I understand that you assert that this is the case. I got that the first time you said it so I'll repeat myself again.

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #358 on: June 12, 2014, 07:58:17 AM »
I'm not contradicting myself. I'm giving out my thoughts on what I believe is the closest reality. Calculations are fine if you know exactly what you're calculating.
In your globe case, most of the calculations are based on guesswork. I could come up with calculations based on guesswork but what's the point?

Which calculation contains guesswork?

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.
All your space calculations are guesswork, so whatever you believe is in space, is not in space and it incalculable, that's what I'm saying.

Everything  like that is based on blatant lies or simply guesswork, so you can take anything from that.
The reasons for the calculations with some, border on the absurd. I know you people fall for it but it's not really your fault as they conditioned you to believe all this tripe.

Yes, I understand that you assert that this is the case. I got that the first time you said it so I'll repeat myself again.

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.
Like I said earlier. All of it. Sun size and distance, Earth size and shape, star distances, planet sizes and distance. The list appears endless.


?

rottingroom

  • 4785
  • +0/-0
  • Around the world.
Re: Theory: the moon, sun and stars are just reflections
« Reply #359 on: June 12, 2014, 08:01:27 AM »
I'm not contradicting myself. I'm giving out my thoughts on what I believe is the closest reality. Calculations are fine if you know exactly what you're calculating.
In your globe case, most of the calculations are based on guesswork. I could come up with calculations based on guesswork but what's the point?

Which calculation contains guesswork?

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.
All your space calculations are guesswork, so whatever you believe is in space, is not in space and it incalculable, that's what I'm saying.

Everything  like that is based on blatant lies or simply guesswork, so you can take anything from that.
The reasons for the calculations with some, border on the absurd. I know you people fall for it but it's not really your fault as they conditioned you to believe all this tripe.

Yes, I understand that you assert that this is the case. I got that the first time you said it so I'll repeat myself again.

Please tell me the equation and the variable that you consider guesswork so that we can tell you exactly how a number you have a problem with is actually NOT guesswork.
Like I said earlier. All of it. Sun size and distance, Earth size and shape, star distances, planet sizes and distance. The list appears endless.

Ok then, pick one. Let's see if there were actually any guesses involved.