The Conclusive Categorical Conspiracy Compendium

A 60,000 foot wall would be visible from everywhere on earth.

Unless something like an atmosphere prevented you from seeing it.

You are talking about a wall more than twice as tall as the largest mountain on earth - and that particular mountain range is visible for thousands of miles around it.  Not even the atmosphere would be able to block site to such a giant construct, especially as it will be reflecting an enormous amount of sunlight.

So it'd look like a big shiney thing.  Anyway, no one knows how far out this wall would be on a FE.  It could be 50 000 miles out for all we know.

Given that the circumference of a FE is very important for determining how far out the government conspiracy agents have to be posted, I'd say that's a very important factor indeed.

Joking aside, the wall can't be too far out, otherwise there'd be a vast, twilight land out past antarctica (which doesn't make sense given the angle of sunlight in antarctica) where sunlight couldn't reach.

Given that the circumference of a FE is very important for determining how far out the government conspiracy agents have to be posted, I'd say that's a very important factor indeed.

They only have to be at the starting of the ring, if people don't make it past that, then they wont make it any further.

Joking aside, the wall can't be too far out, otherwise there'd be a vast, twilight land out past antarctica (which doesn't make sense given the angle of sunlight in antarctica) where sunlight couldn't reach.

You're losing me here...

Well, clearly Antarctica was explored before the conspiracy was able to set up towers and snowmobiles, since it was explored by Ross and others (if you want to trust that Antarctica even exists and is not a massive conspiracy set up to make people not visit the edge of the world!), and no one has reported back saying that Antarctica is anything but identical to the antipode of the north pole in the way it's lit and whatnot.

I disagree.  The conspiracy has guarded the Ice Wall for hundreds of years.  At least that's what Tom says.

doggplatter also believes the conspiracy has been around for hundreds of years, although I can't be sure on his stance with the guarding of the ice wall.

Hey Guys.. I've been reading the forum for the past few days and decided to sign up... I was wondering about something and I'm hoping that the FE'ers can provide me some sort of explanation about it.. This thought came to me at about page 5 of this thread, but I didn't want to have my first post be mostly quotes.. 

So... the earth is flat, and is a disc-shaped structure that is moving 'upward' at a speed that allows for the velocity of the movement to supply what we refer to as gravity. At the same time  every other celestial body, or the universe in general if you will, is ascending at this same rate...  Is the velocity of this flat earth constant? And if so how does it remain constant when material forces are applied to it. I understand that most burn up in the atmosphere, but meteorites /do/ get through on occasion and over the course of the earth's history (I know the FE model presents a shorter one but I have yet to find the number) it should very slowly pick away at the upward momentum. Other celestial bodies are, according to your model, allowed to be spherical. And many are much... much larger or without Atmo, or both. I am assuming the same applies to them.

So is there an explanation behind the /constant/ upward movement?

-= NOTE =-
I am new to the forum, and by no means a scientist. If there is somewhere else I should have posted this please just point me in the right direction.
I'm looking forward to discussions. 

Hey Guys.. I've been reading the forum for the past few days and decided to sign up... I was wondering about something and I'm hoping that the FE'ers can provide me some sort of explanation about it.. This thought came to me at about page 5 of this thread, but I didn't want to have my first post be mostly quotes.. 

So... the earth is flat, and is a disc-shaped structure that is moving 'upward' at a speed that allows for the velocity of the movement to supply what we refer to as gravity. At the same time  every other celestial body, or the universe in general if you will, is ascending at this same rate...  Is the velocity of this flat earth constant? And if so how does it remain constant when material forces are applied to it. I understand that most burn up in the atmosphere, but meteorites /do/ get through on occasion and over the course of the earth's history (I know the FE model presents a shorter one but I have yet to find the number) it should very slowly pick away at the upward momentum. Other celestial bodies are, according to your model, allowed to be spherical. And many are much... much larger or without Atmo, or both. I am assuming the same applies to them.

So is there an explanation behind the /constant/ upward movement?

-= NOTE =-
I am new to the forum, and by no means a scientist. If there is somewhere else I should have posted this please just point me in the right direction.
I'm looking forward to discussions. 

First, you need to review some basic physics. The FEers claim, without evidence, that the FE is accelerating, not moving, at a constant rate. The acceleration provides the replacement for gravity.

Second, you should know after lurking for a few days that there are two important documents to review: the FE FAQ and the RE Primer. Please make sure that you've read and understood both.

Third, welcome.

Yes, please read through the entire RE Primer before posting again.  And make sure to take notes, just so you don't get jeered again by Gulliver for possibly bringing something else up that's covered there.

The FAQ, of course, is relatively easy to swallow (though somewhat inaccurate and very incomplete; it's kind of a "jumping-off" point).

I read through the FAQ, but I wasn't aware that the Primer was something I had to download. I just finished it. I noted something amusing in it too...

FE standard evasion algorithm:
1.   If first response, then respond "Read the FAQ".

The FAQ is a bit to handle at times, it's hard to keep up with all the side-barring without going over it a couple times. :/

Their method of explaining gravity makes more sense now that I give it more thought.. I'm going to have to find a thread on tides that's current and pose another question that's eating at me. :p

I read through the FAQ, but I wasn't aware that the Primer was something I had to download. I just finished it. I noted something amusing in it too...

FE standard evasion algorithm:
1.   If first response, then respond "Read the FAQ".

The FAQ is a bit to handle at times, it's hard to keep up with all the side-barring without going over it a couple times. :/

Their method of explaining gravity makes more sense now that I give it more thought.. I'm going to have to find a thread on tides that's current and pose another question that's eating at me. :p

We're grateful for the review. Again, welcome. I look forward to your question.

Second, you should know after lurking for a few days that there is one important document to review: the FE FAQ. Please make sure that you've read and understood it.

Fixed it.

Quote from: Gulliver on July 26, 2007, 05:43:35 PM

Second, you should know after lurking for a few days that there is one important document to review: the FE FAQ. Please make sure that you've read and understood it.

Fixed it.

I'll be sure to give it yet another read. :p

Thanks.

"The acceleration provides the replacement for gravity"

and how does this acceleration keep things on the ground?

what accelerates the "flat earth"?

off the point: that quote is semantically orouborus, it eats its own tail, because in reativity acceleration and gravity are synonymus, the basis of it appears logically sound and it fits observation, therefore the relativity model appears a good model for predicting how things are.

 space appears curved cus matter and energy are equivelent- they aren't seperate entitys - one is denser i.e condensed. and because matter, synonymous with condesed energy, appears attractive at all directions in space-time(4 dimensional; 3 space; 1 time) making it "curve". that is called gravity. the fact relativity fits observation more so than other models, i rate it more probable than the flat earth theory of acceleration.

my opinion of gravity: it is not a "force" it is how matter, condensed energy, behaves because of the interaction of the 4 dimensions we find ourselves in.

p.s people who accuse me of being, or claim to be, a round earther are deluded, because the current model states explicitly that it is spherical, not just round.

Unless something like an atmosphere prevented you from seeing it.

Or mental illness...

I just now read the first page, and haven't read the 9 that follow it. So this is in response to the first post.

So wild speculation constitutes conclusive proof, these days?

You can speculate on anything you want to, cook up a conspiracy about anything you feel strongly about, it doesn't give it any more truth or basis in fact. It remains mere speculation. There comes a point where evidence is required. Yes, evidence for a conspiracy. There is no logical flaw in expecting such, as any other conspiracy at least has the conspiracy theorists finding what they presume to be evidence of said conspiracy.

The whole point was not to provide evidence of the conspiracy, but to prove it is possible.  I don't think he really proved it, but there you go.

I agree.  But how do we even know that this is even reality?  Maybe the government has us all of us hooked to a machine filling our heads up with this stupid idea of "Earth".  I read this article in a science journal, I think it was "Weekly World News" that stated "CONSPIRACY!  The Government of the planet known as 'Philanx' has billions of people hooked up into a machine that makes every one a retard!", which proves that there is no such thing as reality.............. The End

I agree.  But how do we even know that this is even reality?  Maybe the government has us all of us hooked to a machine filling our heads up with this stupid idea of "Earth".  I read this article in a science journal, I think it was "Weekly World News" that stated "CONSPIRACY!  The Government of the planet known as 'Philanx' has billions of people hooked up into a machine that makes every one a retard!", which proves that there is no such thing as reality.............. The End

Welcome to the FES boards, we don't have any cigars left so smoke this red candle that has "TNT" written on it instead.

I                                              a m

                       

a retard!               .............. The End

That's what I got out of your post!

Sorry, I don't smoke.       But seriously to the point, why don't you RE REtards think the government couldn't cover up the conspiracy?  They control the media -> the media tells you what to believe -> and BOOM! we have a round earth.

Quote from: theearthisbanannashaped on October 13, 2007, 11:59:39 PM

I                                              a m

                       

a retard!               .............. The End

That's what I got out of your post!

Roundyfilter™ FTW!

 

How the Earth really looks...