How can you fly around the world on a plane if the earth is flat?

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 25, 2015, 08:13:05 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:03:20 AM

we observe its effects every day. is that not good enough for you?

Please clarify what we witness? I am asking because you are making many claims, ALL of them need to be verified.

we witness that we are able to cross the equator, that we are pulled towards the earth's surface, that the sun and moon illuminate the earth in certain paths, that the moon is bright, that stars exist... are you denying any of that?
if you are intent on pushing your theory as preferable, when something as fundamental to it as gravity baffles even the most expert of scientists, you need to make a start at denying these observations. unless you can do that, my model is simply better.

We cross the equator because the Earth is round and even slightest detectors don't see any change in special records which could prove the teleportation. We are pulled towards the Earth's surface because there is a well-known and well-proven force as GRAVITY. The Sun and Moon illuminate the Earth because Sun emits light and Moon bounces it. Moon is bright because it has white, gray and silver materials which well-bounces the light. Stars exist because they just exist. Where do you want to put aether in? Because I see there is no place for it.

we witness that we are able to cross the equator, that we are pulled towards the earth's surface, that the sun and moon illuminate the earth in certain paths, that the moon is bright, that stars exist... are you denying any of that?

Perfectly happy with all of that

if you are intent on pushing your theory as preferable, when something as fundamental to it as gravity baffles even the most expert of scientists, you need to make a start at denying these observations. unless you can do that, my model is simply better.

First, A whole lot is understood about gravity. And from that understanding many predictions can be made very very accurately.
Of course there are things that are not understood, would be a shame if that was not the case. But not understanding why something falls does not stop it from falling.
Saying that you have to throw away all of science because certain details are not understood is akin to a doctor saying you need to kill the whole patient because he has a splinter.

Please explain  how aether is a better explanation than gravity?
How does aether interact with mass at a quantum scale?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:17:29 AM

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 25, 2015, 08:13:05 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:03:20 AM

we observe its effects every day. is that not good enough for you?

Please clarify what we witness? I am asking because you are making many claims, ALL of them need to be verified.

we witness that we are able to cross the equator, that we are pulled towards the earth's surface, that the sun and moon illuminate the earth in certain paths, that the moon is bright, that stars exist... are you denying any of that?
if you are intent on pushing your theory as preferable, when something as fundamental to it as gravity baffles even the most expert of scientists, you need to make a start at denying these observations. unless you can do that, my model is simply better.

We cross the equator because the Earth is round and even slightest detectors don't see any change in special records which could prove the teleportation. We are pulled towards the Earth's surface because there is a well-known and well-proven force as GRAVITY. The Sun and Moon illuminate the Earth because Sun emits light and Moon bounces it. Moon is bright because it has white, gray and silver materials which well-bounces the light. Stars exist because they just exist. Where do you want to put aether in? Because I see there is no place for it.

has anyone ever tested for teleportation there? i'd be interested to hear it. further, we notice plenty. for example, the coriolis effect changes directions for absolutely no reason, in round earth theory.
gravity is not well known at all. no scientists pretends to know the most fundamental things about it, like, well, what it is.
there is plenty of room for aether, you have just apparently decided supposing several hundred new mechanisms somehow makes your theory more reliable.

and that's all i'm saying to you. did you seriously just make a new account? that's somewhere between desperate and pathetic.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:17:29 AM

we witness that we are able to cross the equator, that we are pulled towards the earth's surface, that the sun and moon illuminate the earth in certain paths, that the moon is bright, that stars exist... are you denying any of that?

Perfectly happy with all of that

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:17:29 AM

if you are intent on pushing your theory as preferable, when something as fundamental to it as gravity baffles even the most expert of scientists, you need to make a start at denying these observations. unless you can do that, my model is simply better.

First, A whole lot is understood about gravity. And from that understanding many predictions can be made very very accurately.
Of course there are things that are not understood, would be a shame if that was not the case. But not understanding why something falls does not stop it from falling.
Saying that you have to throw away all of science because certain details are not understood is akin to a doctor saying you need to kill the whole patient because he has a splinter.

Please explain  how aether is a better explanation than gravity?
How does aether interact with mass at a quantum scale?

a lot is understood about gravity? ok, would you care to explain something as basic as what it is. 'a force that attracts mass to mass'. how? we understand friction in terms of catching, heat in terms of movement, if gravity's so well understood could you please explain something as basic as that? or maybe it is something else entirely.
aether does not require hundreds of baseless assumptions to work. fact. i have not pretended to know everything about aether, science takes time, but i do not conveniently ignore fundamental, gaping holes, without which my theory makes no sense.

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:30:01 AM

Your model is only slightly less laughable than scepti's ice dome.

Gravity baffles scientist.........yet you want people to accept aether? Stop using Einstein as your prop for aether.....he didn't describe it or use it the same way you are. In his papers...it's something completely different than you're trying to make it.

i notice you fail to provide any evidence of your claim, and also ignore all of what i have given as evidence of aether.
if you're not going to be serious, stop posting.

I'm being very serious.

I'll provide evidence for my claim when you for yours. You have provided zero evidence of aether.

I shall rename you Scepti Jr.

my theory makes no sense.

Got that right.

But it's not a theory.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:31:19 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:30:01 AM

Your model is only slightly less laughable than scepti's ice dome.

Gravity baffles scientist.........yet you want people to accept aether? Stop using Einstein as your prop for aether.....he didn't describe it or use it the same way you are. In his papers...it's something completely different than you're trying to make it.

i notice you fail to provide any evidence of your claim, and also ignore all of what i have given as evidence of aether.
if you're not going to be serious, stop posting.

I'm being very serious.

I'll provide evidence for my claim when you for yours. You have provided zero evidence of aether.

I shall rename you Scepti Jr.

if you are going to ignore every post i have made to repeat the same bs, you'll only ignore anything else i'll say. what point is there in teaching you? you just don't listen.

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:38:34 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:31:19 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:30:01 AM

Your model is only slightly less laughable than scepti's ice dome.

Gravity baffles scientist.........yet you want people to accept aether? Stop using Einstein as your prop for aether.....he didn't describe it or use it the same way you are. In his papers...it's something completely different than you're trying to make it.

i notice you fail to provide any evidence of your claim, and also ignore all of what i have given as evidence of aether.
if you're not going to be serious, stop posting.

I'm being very serious.

I'll provide evidence for my claim when you for yours. You have provided zero evidence of aether.

I shall rename you Scepti Jr.

if you are going to ignore every post i have made to repeat the same bs, you'll only ignore anything else i'll say. what point is there in teaching you? you just don't listen.

I haven't ignored anything.....there is zero evidence in anything you've posted.

I'm sorry scepti....you're just not very good at this.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:41:14 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:38:34 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:31:19 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:30:01 AM

Your model is only slightly less laughable than scepti's ice dome.

Gravity baffles scientist.........yet you want people to accept aether? Stop using Einstein as your prop for aether.....he didn't describe it or use it the same way you are. In his papers...it's something completely different than you're trying to make it.

i notice you fail to provide any evidence of your claim, and also ignore all of what i have given as evidence of aether.
if you're not going to be serious, stop posting.

I'm being very serious.

I'll provide evidence for my claim when you for yours. You have provided zero evidence of aether.

I shall rename you Scepti Jr.

if you are going to ignore every post i have made to repeat the same bs, you'll only ignore anything else i'll say. what point is there in teaching you? you just don't listen.

I haven't ignored anything.....there is zero evidence in anything you've posted.

I'm sorry scepti....you're just not very good at this.

zero response, personal attacks, and i bet you're still thinking you're clever. wow.
you've just told me all i need to know about you. try to engage in a discussion next time.
goodbye.

I'm asking for evidence of aether. Provide some.

Have a think on it scepti and come up with something better.

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:44:01 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:41:14 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:38:34 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:31:19 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 08:30:01 AM

Your model is only slightly less laughable than scepti's ice dome.

Gravity baffles scientist.........yet you want people to accept aether? Stop using Einstein as your prop for aether.....he didn't describe it or use it the same way you are. In his papers...it's something completely different than you're trying to make it.

i notice you fail to provide any evidence of your claim, and also ignore all of what i have given as evidence of aether.
if you're not going to be serious, stop posting.

I'm being very serious.

I'll provide evidence for my claim when you for yours. You have provided zero evidence of aether.

I shall rename you Scepti Jr.

if you are going to ignore every post i have made to repeat the same bs, you'll only ignore anything else i'll say. what point is there in teaching you? you just don't listen.

I haven't ignored anything.....there is zero evidence in anything you've posted.

I'm sorry scepti....you're just not very good at this.

zero response, personal attacks, and i bet you're still thinking you're clever. wow.
you've just told me all i need to know about you. try to engage in a discussion next time.
goodbye.

If aether exists and gravity doesn't, then why gravity can be defined by maths and aether no?

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:25:39 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

why doesn't it count for evidence of the dual earth, given dual earth explains everything without needing to appeal to anything with gaping holes in? (eg: gravity).

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:25:39 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

Please, write this to JRowe as mine comment.

If light had been also teleportated, then this teleportation would have travelled in light-speed. Then, if we had been teleportated with light, we would have seen the surface changing. Why do we don't see any alternate surface changing right below our feet?

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:29:30 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:25:39 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

why doesn't it count for evidence of the dual earth, given dual earth explains everything without needing to appeal to anything with gaping holes in? (eg: gravity).

It doesn't count as evudence for anything. And no, dual earth has a bunch of holes. What you claimed isn't even remotely true.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:38:24 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:29:30 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:25:39 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

why doesn't it count for evidence of the dual earth, given dual earth explains everything without needing to appeal to anything with gaping holes in? (eg: gravity).

It doesn't count as evudence for anything. And no, dual earth has a bunch of holes. What you claimed isn't even remotely true.

would you care to provide evidence, or are you just asserting in ignorance as per usual?

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 10:06:23 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:38:24 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:29:30 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:25:39 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

why doesn't it count for evidence of the dual earth, given dual earth explains everything without needing to appeal to anything with gaping holes in? (eg: gravity).

It doesn't count as evudence for anything. And no, dual earth has a bunch of holes. What you claimed isn't even remotely true.

would you care to provide evidence, or are you just asserting in ignorance as per usual?

You want evidence from me? You really need to shut the fuck up. I'm done with you. You are a no nothing nobody and isn't worth my time arguing with you. Enjoy operating a deep fryer your whole life.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 10:12:40 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 10:06:23 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:38:24 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:29:30 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:25:39 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:22:32 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:20:15 AM

Quote from: sokarul on March 25, 2015, 09:16:56 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 09:04:30 AM

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You know aetheric transmission theory was an ad hoc right? You have zero evidence for it.

you can cross the equator can't you? sounds like pretty convincing evidence to me, and given what we know of einstein's aether, it makes perfect sense.

you rely think that counts as evidence?

why do you cling to your view instead? just tradition?

Evidence.  You realize both in a round earth and even a flat earth, you can cross the equator? Do you see how crossing the equator is not evidence for your argument?

why doesn't it count for evidence of the dual earth, given dual earth explains everything without needing to appeal to anything with gaping holes in? (eg: gravity).

It doesn't count as evudence for anything. And no, dual earth has a bunch of holes. What you claimed isn't even remotely true.

would you care to provide evidence, or are you just asserting in ignorance as per usual?

You want evidence from me? You really need to shut the fuck up. I'm done with you. You are a no nothing nobody and isn't worth my time arguing with you. Enjoy operating a deep fryer your whole life.

thank you for proving my point. you're first in line to demand evidence and experiments from us, you ignore it when it's given, and then refuse to give any of your own.
you are the perfect example of a round earther.
goodbye.

Quote from: Umurweird on March 25, 2015, 09:00:36 AM

Here's how I know you're full of crap.

You came to this forum a month ago. You're first belief was the earth was a flat disc with an ice rim on the edge.

Then you introduced your aether idea and said that if someone goes over the edge the aether bounces them back up and back onto the disc.

Then it became a two sided disc with magic aether that transports you from one side to the other.

You've changed your "model" 3 times in a month.........and expect everyone to believe this is a well thought out, researched "theory".



You're too dumb for words scepti.

yet again personal attacks, and a lack of substances. desperate much?
science evolves. when i heard of aetheric transmission theory, i realized it could be used to refine the model. my theory always featured aether, i simply refined it as time went by.
it's amazing why refining my theory is a weakness for me (when my theory has remained fundamentally the same), and a strength for your science.

You "refined it as time went by" ?

It's been a month.

Quote from: LogιcalKiller on March 25, 2015, 08:32:01 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:17:29 AM

Quote from: MaNaeSWolf on March 25, 2015, 08:13:05 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on March 25, 2015, 08:03:20 AM

we observe its effects every day. is that not good enough for you?

Please clarify what we witness? I am asking because you are making many claims, ALL of them need to be verified.

we witness that we are able to cross the equator, that we are pulled towards the earth's surface, that the sun and moon illuminate the earth in certain paths, that the moon is bright, that stars exist... are you denying any of that?
if you are intent on pushing your theory as preferable, when something as fundamental to it as gravity baffles even the most expert of scientists, you need to make a start at denying these observations. unless you can do that, my model is simply better.

We cross the equator because the Earth is round and even slightest detectors don't see any change in special records which could prove the teleportation. We are pulled towards the Earth's surface because there is a well-known and well-proven force as GRAVITY. The Sun and Moon illuminate the Earth because Sun emits light and Moon bounces it. Moon is bright because it has white, gray and silver materials which well-bounces the light. Stars exist because they just exist. Where do you want to put aether in? Because I see there is no place for it.

has anyone ever tested for teleportation there? i'd be interested to hear it. further, we notice plenty. for example, the coriolis effect changes directions for absolutely no reason, in round earth theory.
gravity is not well known at all. no scientists pretends to know the most fundamental things about it, like, well, what it is.
there is plenty of room for aether, you have just apparently decided supposing several hundred new mechanisms somehow makes your theory more reliable.

and that's all i'm saying to you. did you seriously just make a new account? that's somewhere between desperate and pathetic.

Change of directions is SUBJECTIVE. And that's what is the Coriolis effect. It's a SUBJECTIVE change of directions - plane pilots think they fly straight, astronauts think they flight is curved. Just because we don't know what causes gravity, it doesn't mean that gravity isn't well-known. It is. We've got several equations and we can predict everything with an error of 0,00001. And know it's the time you accept that gravity is a proven idea and correct and well-known and stated by every scientist and aether is just a thing created of a flat Earth creep and isn't proven at all. You can see it in this topic - http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=63149.0#.VRMBcfyG_zM

LK, do you have any idea how cringe-worthy it is to see you on every thread, trying to address someone who has you blocked, pleading with other people to quite you at them, and apparently making an alt just to respond to something not remotely directed at you?
Just stop, seriously. If you can't handle not being part of a discussion, honestly you need to grow up: if you can't handle seeing JRowe being an idiot, block them. It's just getting tedious.

It is magic that makes you fly around the Earth. While flying around the side of the cone you will stay in the atmosphere. When flying from base to vertex, you exit the atmosphere and die. This is why no one visits me at the vertex, I'm so lonly.😔

LK, do you have any idea how cringe-worthy it is to see you on every thread, trying to address someone who has you blocked, pleading with other people to quite you at them, and apparently making an alt just to respond to something not remotely directed at you?
Just stop, seriously. If you can't handle not being part of a discussion, honestly you need to grow up: if you can't handle seeing JRowe being an idiot, block them. It's just getting tedious.

There are two things why I answer him

1. I can't take it easily when I see how much idiotic he behaves.
2. I don't know how to block him. I look for options but I don't see any.

I don't know how to block him. I look for options but I don't see any.

'Profile', 'Forum Profile', and when there: 'modify profile', 'buddies/ignore list', 'edit ignore list', type in JRoweSkeptic.