Why center the "map" on the north pole?

  • 30 Replies
  • 13391 Views
Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« on: December 25, 2014, 06:04:00 PM »
So, I have read this forum for about a year now, and been amused by the back and forth. 
Question for the FE'rs that I have not seen pop up and is not answered in the FAQ or Wiki:

What is the evidence that the discoid earth has its center upon the north pole? Every "map" put forward by proponents of the Flat Earth shows that the center of the disc is the north pole, and that lines of longitude radiate therefrom.  What evidence do you have that this is true?  This seems pretty arbitrary, if the earth is a disc, then couldn't it just as easily be centered on the south pole? What is the compelling evidence that this is not so?  If nobody has in fact seen the ice wall, why is the ice wall not thought to be polar as opposed to antarctic?

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #1 on: December 25, 2014, 07:17:27 PM »
So, I have read this forum for about a year now, and been amused by the back and forth. 
Question for the FE'rs that I have not seen pop up and is not answered in the FAQ or Wiki:

What is the evidence that the discoid earth has its center upon the north pole? Every "map" put forward by proponents of the Flat Earth shows that the center of the disc is the north pole, and that lines of longitude radiate therefrom.  What evidence do you have that this is true?  This seems pretty arbitrary, if the earth is a disc, then couldn't it just as easily be centered on the south pole? What is the compelling evidence that this is not so?  If nobody has in fact seen the ice wall, why is the ice wall not thought to be polar as opposed to antarctic?

Pigfire If you are new to The Flat Earth Society Forum Website, there is a simple explantation for one of the so-called  "flat earth maps." One of them just  happens to be a carbon copy of the Azimuthal Equidistant Projection  made from the globe. It is  just one of many projections and it is centered on the North Pole simply by the design.

 Google on "Map Projections" and you will find many different maps of many different projections of the globe. On the Azimuthal Equidistant Projection, distances and shapes are vastly distorted in the Southern Hemsphere - south of the equator. This is why Antarctica is shown as the so-called "ice wall." It is just the distortion in this particular projection - made from a globe.

Another reason for the ice wall put forth by the flat earthers is that the coast line of Antarctica is actually the ice wall. But comparing the known length of the coast line of Antarctica with what would be  the length of the ice wall for  the perimeter of the disc shaped flat earth is obvious.
I think they will come up with some answers about that too.

There seem to be differences of opinions amongst the flat earthers themselves. Some say there is no flat earth map . There is also another Bipolar Projection which shows Antarctica as a continent. But there is no ice wall.

They also claim that the UN Logo is proof of a flat earth. But the UN Logo is just that - a logo of a stylized version of the Azimuthal Equidistant Projectiion of the globe to show a flat map for the purpose of the UN Logo.

One reason put forth by some flat earthers is that no one has seen the ice wall is that is guarded by NASA armed guards any any one even seeing it will be shot on sight.

Stick around. You have much to learn. LOL. A lot of the flat earth explanations are based on the works of a 19th Century person named Samuel Birley Rowbotham. Amongst other things he claimed to have degrees of MD and PhD. But no evidence has been found, much less that he even attended any universities.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 01:04:33 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 !

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2014, 12:16:27 AM »
I have seen two versions of FE map, each one is just as rubbish as the other one:





I think, therefore I am

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2014, 10:09:40 AM »
I have seen two versions of FE map, each one is just as rubbish as the other one:





BTW FWIW .The upper one is the "Bipolar Projection." I think one of the flat earth explanations as to why there is no "ice ring" on this map to keep the oceans from sloshing over the edge is that the edge is so far away from the sun that is so cold - close to absolute zero -and the oceans freeze at the edge and that keeps the oceans from sloshing over the edge of the - flat of course - earth.

There is also the great "ice dome" over the earth but that opens up a whole new can of worms. Best leave that to the flat earthers to explain for you.

Geography was not one of my fields of study, but I think both of these maps would be very familiar to those in fields of Geography or Cartography.

They are all made from ...You know what ?.....They are all made from a GLOBE.

Now. Just sit back and see if you get any replies from the flat-earthers. ROFLOL.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to both flat earthers and round earthers. :D



« Last Edit: December 26, 2014, 10:16:35 AM 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 !

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2014, 01:21:51 PM »
They claim a north centred map simply because most of the posters on here are in the northern hemisphere, and thus it's easier to pretend there is no stellar rotation around the south pole. The map with both poles on it can be dismissed because the distances between stars would need to increase and decrease throughout the night. And that doesn't happen, so that alone is enough to kill that map.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2014, 11:37:52 PM »
This is how we Aussies see the planet...





And most North Americans (including sceptimatic in the UK) envisage this sort of scenario I'm sure...


... which really proves gravity works everywhere on the planet.





Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2014, 11:49:23 PM »
They claim a north centred map simply because most of the posters on here are in the northern hemisphere, and thus it's easier to pretend there is no stellar rotation around the south pole. The map with both poles on it can be dismissed because the distances between stars would need to increase and decrease throughout the night. And that doesn't happen, so that alone is enough to kill that map.
Even the north centred one is flawed. People in South America, South Africa and Australia see stars rotate around three different South Celestial Pole. That kills the map too.

I think, therefore I am

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2014, 03:15:04 PM »
Yes Cartesian, that was my point, they use the Appeal To Majority fallacy as most of the posters are in the northern hemisphere and so cannot see the stars rotating round the south pole. So the FE'ers can say "how do you know it happens, ur rong, lololol, insert religious copypasta"
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #8 on: December 28, 2014, 02:15:55 AM »
This is a Q&A forum and I have yet to see a single reply from an FE'r.
I think, therefore I am

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #9 on: December 28, 2014, 04:06:27 AM »
This is a Q&A forum and I have yet to see a single reply from an FE'r.

They won't, because they've come up against this before. A search of the forum turned up this thread:
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=49877.0#.VJ_w9sgA
...in which the FE preference for a north centred over south centred model is bludgeoned to death.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2014, 04:32:44 AM »
I guess it's more because there is no flat earth map, or maybe, just maybe, the earth is not flat after all :)
I think, therefore I am

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #11 on: December 28, 2014, 05:27:17 AM »
This is a Q&A forum and I have yet to see a single reply from an FE'r.
This is more than common on the Q&A forum.  It's possibly because we REs ask the sort of questions the FEs have no meaningful answers for.  I posted some relevant questions HERE a week ago for iWitness (a verified FE) and he chose to avoid addressing them.

It's quite ironical actually that the moderators here often ask us to post questions in the Q&A forumórather than the general debate forumsóbut then totally ignore answering them.  I'm guessing that this is just a ruse to shift our questions on to the back burner, where they can be quietly ignored until they hopefully slip off the radar.

Maybe this Q&A forum should be retitled "Unanswerable RE Questions"?

    ;D

?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2014, 03:45:18 PM »
This is a Q&A forum and I have yet to see a single reply from an FE'r.
This is more than common on the Q&A forum.  It's possibly because we REs ask the sort of questions the FEs have no meaningful answers for.  I posted some relevant questions HERE a week ago for iWitness (a verified FE) and he chose to avoid addressing them.

It's quite ironical actually that the moderators here often ask us to post questions in the Q&A forumórather than the general debate forumsóbut then totally ignore answering them.  I'm guessing that this is just a ruse to shift our questions on to the back burner, where they can be quietly ignored until they hopefully slip off the radar.

Maybe this Q&A forum should be retitled "Unanswerable RE Questions"?

    ;D

I haven't been on this website as long as a lot of others, but it has been my experience that the so-called flat earthers have no evidence and most threads "slip off the radar."
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 !

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2014, 05:34:19 PM »
This is a Q&A forum and I have yet to see a single reply from an FE'r.
This is more than common on the Q&A forum.  It's possibly because we REs ask the sort of questions the FEs have no meaningful answers for.  I posted some relevant questions HERE a week ago for iWitness (a verified FE) and he chose to avoid addressing them.

It's quite ironical actually that the moderators here often ask us to post questions in the Q&A forumórather than the general debate forumsóbut then totally ignore answering them.  I'm guessing that this is just a ruse to shift our questions on to the back burner, where they can be quietly ignored until they hopefully slip off the radar.

Maybe this Q&A forum should be retitled "Unanswerable RE Questions"?

    ;D

I haven't been on this website as long as a lot of others, but it has been my experience that the so-called flat earthers have no evidence and most threads "slip off the radar."

How are any of these responses Flat Earth Questions or Answers?  Guess what?  FE'ers get sick and tired of having to wade through all of the RE responses, put downs, one liners, and low content posts in the FE Q&A section and these make it hard to even bother responding to a legitimate question.  I am going to finally put my foot down and start banning the permanoobs who think it is funny to disrupt the FE Q&A section repeatedly, even after receiving warnings.  Don't be surprised if your little jokes get you some time off.  All of those individuals whom I quoted above, consider this your final warning. 

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #14 on: December 28, 2014, 06:01:58 PM »
How are any of these responses Flat Earth Questions or Answers?  Guess what?  FE'ers get sick and tired of having to wade through all of the RE responses, put downs, one liners, and low content posts in the FE Q&A section and these make it hard to even bother responding to a legitimate question.  I am going to finally put my foot down and start banning the permanoobs who think it is funny to disrupt the FE Q&A section repeatedly, even after receiving warnings.  Don't be surprised if your little jokes get you some time off.  All of those individuals whom I quoted above, consider this your final warning.

I really think you need to calm down a bit jroa, and instead of repeatedly berating round earthers for what you personally regard as off-topic and/or low content posts, think of preferably taking some time to address some of the more pertinent questions that often go unanswered by other flat earthers.

A week ago ago in this forum, iWitness (a confirmed flat earther) commented as follows...

Quote
My theory, is JFK was heavily involved in the early space program, and after finding out the earth was flat he was considering telling the public... but that didn't sit well with other world powers, and you know what happened next. RIP last great President.


I then asked a few perfectly reasonable questions as per...

Q1.   What credible evidence do you have that proves JFK was "heavily involved" with the space program?  What does heavily involved mean exactly?
Q2.   What evidence do you base your claim on that JFK was "considering" telling the public the earth was (purportedly) flat?
Q3.   Why weren't any of the other confidantes of Kennedy silenced as well?  Hundreds of technicians would've also been aware of it.

Can you please tell my why iWitnessóor any other flat eartheróhas not addressed my questions?  (And note too that iWitness has visited the site since the time I posted my questions.)

So... are you prepared to answer my three questions jroa?  Or should I await iWitness's response in due course?

Finally, can I take it that you've given me a "final warning"?  And if so, may I ask for what specific reason(s)?


?

robintex

  • Ranters
  • 5322
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #15 on: December 28, 2014, 06:10:26 PM »
Maybe it would be better if all "Round Earthers" left this website to the "Flat Earthers ?"

It really does no good to try to explain to them why the fact that the  earth is not flat anyway.
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 !

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #16 on: December 28, 2014, 06:15:49 PM »
ausGeoff, your questions are directed at iWitness.  Whether or not he chooses to answer your questions is up to him/her.  However, from what I can tell, iWitness has not even posted in this thread and you have not asked these questions until now.  They were originally recently posted in another thread, and now you seem to be trying to derail this one with the same repeated questions.  Stop.

googleotomy, take a day off for posting a low content post right after being issued a warning. 

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #17 on: December 28, 2014, 06:20:22 PM »
ausGeoff, your questions are directed at iWitness.  Whether or not he chooses to answer your questions is up to him/her.

Yeah... I understand that jroa.  It just gets a wee bit frustrating when we ask legitimate questions but often get no responses.  I guess I'll have to wait for iWitness to log in again.

Thanks anyway.   :)

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #18 on: December 28, 2014, 06:26:19 PM »
Finally, can I take it that you've given me a "final warning"?  And if so, may I ask for what specific reason(s)?

Please see this thread for an explanation. 

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #19 on: December 29, 2014, 07:35:43 PM »
Finally, can I take it that you've given me a "final warning"?  And if so, may I ask for what specific reason(s)?
Please see this thread for an explanation.
Thanks for the link jroa; read and noted.

One of its proposals reads:  "The only people allowed to answer questions are flat-earthers or people giving genuine flat earth responses".

Are you now claiming that my questions regarding the JFK assassination (in response to a FE comment) are inappropriate for the Q&A forum?

Quote
Q1.   What credible evidence do you have that proves JFK was "heavily involved" with the space program?  What does heavily involved mean exactly?
Q2.   What evidence do you base your claim on that JFK was "considering" telling the public the earth was (purportedly) flat?
Q3.   Why weren't any of the other confidantes of Kennedy silenced as well?  Hundreds of technicians would've also been aware of it.

And can you please tell me which forum to post these questions on (for the fourth time LOL) would be more appropriate, or explain why not one FE has attempted to address my questions?  There's really not much point in REs posting legitimate questions here if no FE is prepared to provide any sort of answer, other than simply sidestepping the thrust of the thread.


*

Pongo

  • Planar Moderator
  • 6753
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #20 on: December 30, 2014, 08:41:52 AM »
Finally, can I take it that you've given me a "final warning"?  And if so, may I ask for what specific reason(s)?
Please see this thread for an explanation.
Thanks for the link jroa; read and noted.

One of its proposals reads:  "The only people allowed to answer questions are flat-earthers or people giving genuine flat earth responses".

Are you now claiming that my questions regarding the JFK assassination (in response to a FE comment) are inappropriate for the Q&A forum?

Quote
Q1.   What credible evidence do you have that proves JFK was "heavily involved" with the space program?  What does heavily involved mean exactly?
Q2.   What evidence do you base your claim on that JFK was "considering" telling the public the earth was (purportedly) flat?
Q3.   Why weren't any of the other confidantes of Kennedy silenced as well?  Hundreds of technicians would've also been aware of it.

And can you please tell me which forum to post these questions on (for the fourth time LOL) would be more appropriate, or explain why not one FE has attempted to address my questions?  There's really not much point in REs posting legitimate questions here if no FE is prepared to provide any sort of answer, other than simply sidestepping the thrust of the thread.

Why are you bringing up JFK questions here?  At best you're woefully off topic, at worst, you're arguing with moderation.  If you want to complain about moderation then do it in S&C.  If you want questions about JFK in regards to a flat-earth, start your own thread.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #21 on: December 31, 2014, 12:13:10 AM »
Why are you bringing up JFK questions here?  At best you're woefully off topic, at worst, you're arguing with moderation.  If you want to complain about moderation then do it in S&C.  If you want questions about JFK in regards to a flat-earth, start your own thread.

You're obviously unaware that it was iWitness ( a confirmed flat earther) who first introduced the theory of JFK being assassinated because he was about to spill the beans regarding the "truth" of a flat earth (in this Q&A forum) Pongo.  Why did you not rebuke him at that point?  Simply because he's one of your flat earth flock presumably?  How is it that his JFK comments weren't regarded as "off topic" at that time? 

I was merely responding in answer to his claims in the appropriate thread, where it had obvious relevance to the claims.  Are you really suggesting I start a dedicated "JFK Conspiracy" thread in preference to posting a single comment response?

But I'll take your advice Pongo, and lodge a formal complaint in the S&C forumóalthough I doubt it will get any sort of unbiased response from the moderating team who seem intent on shutting down any meaningful negative FE commentary right across the forums.

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2016, 03:05:25 PM »
Finally, can I take it that you've given me a "final warning"?  And if so, may I ask for what specific reason(s)?
Please see this thread for an explanation.
Thanks for the link jroa; read and noted.

One of its proposals reads:  "The only people allowed to answer questions are flat-earthers or people giving genuine flat earth responses".

Are you now claiming that my questions regarding the JFK assassination (in response to a FE comment) are inappropriate for the Q&A forum?

Quote
Q1.   What credible evidence do you have that proves JFK was "heavily involved" with the space program?  What does heavily involved mean exactly?
Q2.   What evidence do you base your claim on that JFK was "considering" telling the public the earth was (purportedly) flat?
Q3.   Why weren't any of the other confidantes of Kennedy silenced as well?  Hundreds of technicians would've also been aware of it.

And can you please tell me which forum to post these questions on (for the fourth time LOL) would be more appropriate, or explain why not one FE has attempted to address my questions?  There's really not much point in REs posting legitimate questions here if no FE is prepared to provide any sort of answer, other than simply sidestepping the thrust of the thread.

Why are you bringing up JFK questions here?  At best you're woefully off topic, at worst, you're arguing with moderation.  If you want to complain about moderation then do it in S&C.  If you want questions about JFK in regards to a flat-earth, start your own thread.

As for your Question 1: Here are several links from NASAs own website to establish JFKs heavy involvement with the space program.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/history/features/john_f_kennedy.html#.VzekoGOq6Ug

It's Nasa page with photographs and anecdotal evidence of JFKs involvement with NASA; includes 23 photographs from various events that JFK attended with high-ranking nasa officials.

This is also this from NASAs own website, "The Decision to Go to the Moon:President John F. Kennedy's May 25, 1961 Speech before a Joint Session of Congress"

http://history.nasa.gov/moondec.html

JFK made several public declarations concerning US ability to reach the moon. I consider public declarations as valid proof of being "heavily involved." In my own life, when i make i declaration it signifies that i am completely involved in the fulfillment of that declarations stated terms. That's called honoring your word and for many people their word is worth dying for.

Obviously, quotations don't prove anything beyond circumstantial evidence (Charles Manson was convicted only upon circumstantial evidence), but there are plenty of public statements made by JFK that show he held both a personal and civic investment in winning the space race.

"We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of preeminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war."  --"Address at Rice University in Houston on the Nation's Space Effort (373)," September 12, 1962, Public Papers of the Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1962.

"We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must fully share...I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth."  --"Special Message to the Congress on Urgent National Needs (205)," May 25, 1961, Public Papers of the Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1961.

"This nation has tossed its cap over the wall of space, and we have no choice but to follow it."  --"Remarks in San Antonio at the Dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center (472)," November 21, 1963, Public Papers of the Presidents: John F. Kennedy, 1963. (The original anecdote from which Kennedy derived this comparison is in Frank O'Connor, An Only Child, London: MacMillan & Co. Ltd., 1961, p. 180.)

 ďWe choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win.Ē


― John F. Kennedy


I don't think any one thing proves JFK was "heavily involved" with NASA but i do know that all of his recorded history is evidence proving he was heavily involved with NASA.

It's my opinion the reason people didn't respond to your 3 silly questions is because they are so easy to debunk; the others probably (i don't have any evidence to prove it) presumed that you hadn't done any research.

The naivete and lack of serious thought behind your post presents you as a troll to many people. I am not gonna judge you because you are unaware of the facts of the case. I do hope i provided you with enough direct evidence to show JFKs involvment with NASA and, specifically, the Apollo space program.


As for Question 2: If he was murdered to keep the secret and it was a secret of such importance it was worth murdering the president, then he probably died with the truth along with the other 50+people who were either associates of jfk or material and/or circumstantial witnesses to the crime and/or subsequent investigation who died under mysterious circumstances within 3 years of the assassination.

As for Question 3: These people are just a few of the many people you will find who were murdered or committed suicide right after JFK died; Grant Stockdale, a close friend of JFK fell from a 13th floor office window 12/2/63; CIA agent Gary Underhill who made public statements that it was an inside job and was murdered on May 8, 1964; Mary Pinchot Meyer, a JFK mistress was murdered on 10/12/64...i believe there are more than 50 people close to either JFK or the investigation who were murdered or committed suicicide in the 3 years immediately following the assassination.

Plus, Kennedy's own brother bobby was publicly assassinated, JFKs own assassin Lee Harvey Oswald was also publicly assassinated immediately following JFKs death (these two murders send very clear messages to anyone involved). Oswald's assassin Jack Ruby had his case overturned on appeal while sitting on death row, but died while still being held on death row while awaiting re-trial.

I really have to ask you what proof you have that it would take "hundreds of technicians" to silence kennedy and keep the secret. Most of your workers in the cia and secret service and space program have specialized tasks and don't oversee every aspect of every launch or every event the president attends. In fact, military and intelligence protocol is to only know what you need to know.

This idea of compartmentalizing work flow systems was one of the most profound changes in American business culture bought about by the industrial revolution because of the development of the assembly line process in manufacturing. In most US companies there is very little cross-training. Colleges and trade schools emphasize specialized fields. And this compartmentalization and specialization of tasks and responsibilities is approached with even greater emphasis in governmental bureaucracies such as the military, secret service, and the like.

Now, I am certain you are an excellent employee and know much more about your employer and the day to day operations of your company than anyone else there. But do you see every garbage can get emptied at your place of employment? Where is the dumpster? What is the name of the person who cleans the toilets? Who unlocked the door this morning? Who locked it last night? How about the boiler room...ever been there? Is your place of employment heated with an immersion heater, pipe heater, circulation heater, cartridge heater, or a duct heater? How much of your supervisor's work are you allowed to supervise? Is everyone at your work allowed to issue payroll checks? Are you allowed in the payroll system if you don't work in payroll? Where does your company get their toilet paper for the restrooms? Who decides how many personal holidays employees are allowed to take each year? Does every one get the same number of holidays? If so, how do you know?

The questions I just asked are not trade secrets or questions of national security. Your company probably has very little to hide. Your company is probably not immersed in a culture of paranoia. Your company is probably not directly or indirectly involved with armed insurgencies in third world countries. Your company probably doesn't have 4 or 5 officially sanctioned intelligence gathering agencies. I mean, within your companies HR department are there committees or specialized fields of intelligence workers who function as equivalents to the FBI, CIA, NSA, Secret Service (does your companies owner(s) travel with armed security detail?).

Most employees in your company probably know little beyond what they do even though there is probably no real reason for the employers to keep any business details from any of the employees. Wouldn't you expect a company like the US federal government to at least require security on the level of ACME Mfg, AnyTown, USA? The first step of corporate security is only allowing employees to know what they need to know. In fact, here is an FBI document on Economic Espionage that states that intellectual knowledge should be confined to a "need to know basis"

https://www2.fbi.gov/hq/ci/economic.htm

"How to Protect Your Business from Espionage:  6 steps
1. Recognize there is an insider and outsider threat to your company.
2. Identify and valuate trade secrets.
3. Implement a proactive plan for safeguarding trade secrets.
4. Secure physical and electronic versions of your trade secrets.
5. Confine intellectual knowledge on a "need-to-know" basis.
6. Provide training to employees about your company's intellectual property plan and security."


You, like most people, probably know very little of the day to day operations of your company other than what you need to know.

If you are coordinating a coup and you need a secret service agent to be an unknowing accomplice, you just have on of his superiors tell him to stand at a certain spot. Secret service agents entrusted with guarding the president don't question the command of a superior officer; they have all been rigorously vetted by psychologists to weed out the rebellious types that question authority, so they won't hesitate to protect the president during a crisis. Secret service agents are men who follow orders without question. If the supervisor doesn't tell them he is moving them to accommodate an assassination, they probably won't ask. Any authority will be able to move your coup of agents around with ease by just saying that we need him stationed somewhere else for another security detail. One person with authority could, armed only with that authority, order a few subordinates around with no suspicion.

If you factor in the idea of a manchurian candidate, you don't even need proper authority.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2016, 04:37:52 PM by revugee »

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2016, 04:38:10 PM »
Good luck waiting on a response on a 2 1/2 year old post.  Did you not read the warning in red text that said your post was more than 120 days old when you hit the reply button? 

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 19571
  • Or should I?
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2016, 05:48:50 PM »
Good luck waiting on a response on a 2 1/2 year old post.  Did you not read the warning in red text that said your post was more than 120 days old when you hit the reply button?

It's even in red so guys like jroa don't have to read, and can carry on just looking at the pictures saying they understand.
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #25 on: May 14, 2016, 06:01:15 PM »
Good luck waiting on a response on a 2 1/2 year old post.  Did you not read the warning in red text that said your post was more than 120 days old when you hit the reply button?

It's even in red so guys like jroa don't have to read, and can carry on just looking at the pictures saying they understand.

Oh, wow.  You sure got me.  ::)

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #26 on: May 16, 2016, 04:26:39 PM »
What is the evidence that the discoid earth has its center upon the north pole?
Easy:  The sun goes around the north pole. 

Next shilly question? 

*

Blue_Moon

  • 846
  • Defender of NASA
Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #27 on: May 16, 2016, 05:06:21 PM »
What is the evidence that the discoid earth has its center upon the north pole?
Easy:  The sun goes around the north pole. 

Next shilly question?

But it also goes around the south pole...
Aerospace Engineering Student
NASA Enthusiast
Round Earth Advocate
More qualified to speak for NASA than you are to speak against them

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #28 on: May 17, 2016, 09:48:19 AM »
What is the evidence that the discoid earth has its center upon the north pole?
Easy:  The north pole is the center of our world. 
How else SHOULD the true form of the earth be displayed??? 

My question for the shills:  Why do you care? 

Re: Why center the "map" on the north pole?
« Reply #29 on: May 17, 2016, 09:57:59 AM »
What is the evidence that the discoid earth has its center upon the north pole?
Easy:  The north pole is the center of our world. 
How else SHOULD the true form of the earth be displayed??? 

My question for the shills:  Why do you care?

So your evidence for why the north pole is at the centre is "because it is".
Your billy goat will be delivered in 30 minutes. Enjoy your meal.
Founder member of the League Of Scientific Gentlemen and Mademoiselles des Connaissances.
I am pompous, self-righteous, thin skinned, and smug.