doing away with the conspiracy

Nobody is interested in Olbers' Paradox. 

That would happen if the universe was static and contained infinite stars, which would disprove the Big Bang theory. 

Also, JRowe, the time light takes to be absorbed is not a minor detail when stating the Earth would look round from orbit because of it.  We got off on the topic because you are misstating how light works. it doesn't spread from higher to lower concentrations, it travels in a straight unless it hits something (i.e. absorbed or reflected).  When I tried to get this across to you you claim I am lying. 

amazing isn't it? you happily talk about how round earth theory took centuries and experts and so many resources to reach the detail it currently has today, and yet you expect every single flat earther to manage all of that in the hours between you asking a question and their posting a response. (and don't deny it, i've seen the impatience with which you hound every flat earther).
hypocritical, really.

if there are holes in my idea, i am happy to hear them: none have been provided, unless you count straw men. what i am not happy to hear is people asking for more than even they would be willing to provide.

Just to remind yourself of when you first claimed the hounding part.  Which was  well before I started slightly hounding you for correct details.  That time you were still not listening to what I was saying either.

This is our last conversation JRowe.  I suggest you add me to your ignore list, I am not going to be continually called a liar when I am just disagreeing with you.

People thought the earth was flat a lot longer than they thought it was round. It's not our fault flat-earthers never thought of any sort of scientific stuff.

People thought the earth was flat a lot longer than they thought it was round. It's not our fault flat-earthers never thought of any sort of scientific stuff.

context of the times, length of time ago meaning much would be lost, resources they had access to...
should i go on or do you realize how utterly ludicrous your comparison is?

Very true, flat Earth belief has been around much longer.  This is in countless historical documents.  They have had thousands of years thinking the world was flat.  Once they started actually looking at things from a larger perspective, and using science and math, they realized it was in fact not flat.  Interestingly enough, one Greek scientist did measurements to determine what the circumference of the Earth was, then modern flat Earthers decided to use the same experimental results that was intended for determining the circumference to say that it proved a flat Earth if the sun were much smaller and much closer to Earth. 
So they took results from an experiment and used them for completely different purposes than what the experiment was designed for.  This BTW is their biggest piece of scientific evidence.  They can claim Rowbotham all they want, but Rowbotham's predictions of the distance from the Sun was drastically different from this one, and his changed throughout the day and seasons. 
With all the wealth of historical documents showing where they thought the world was flat, why is it that they crying about unfair standards is not flipped around?  Even in the beginning I am sure there was no crying about having to show proof, otherwise they would have never went out and provided it. 
So, flat Earth has had several thousands of years to develop something, akin to proof.  Spherical Earth has had less than 2 thousand years. 
This conspiracy is needed for the flat, dual, concave, square, or any other shape of the Earth than what we see from images from orbit.  No amount of BS can disprove that fact either, you have to say that all the photos are in fact fake, that we do not go to space, that we do not have satellites in orbit, that much of science is wrong, that gravity detecting devices showing discrepancies of gravitational force changes due to where you are on the Earth, that geometry is flawed, etc.  for any of these to be true.

Seems like a conspiracy is happening right here on this board.   Not one single flat earther has engaged with me in an honest debate.

Seems like a conspiracy is happening right here on this board.   Not one single flat earther has engaged with me in an honest debate.

why are you whining in my thread?

the chances are your questions are trivial and overdone. everyone gets bored, and a lot of newbies repeat the same old, obvious things. start another thread if you have any issues, don't derail.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 26, 2015, 12:51:32 PM

Seems like a conspiracy is happening right here on this board.   Not one single flat earther has engaged with me in an honest debate.

why are you whining in my thread?

the chances are your questions are trivial and overdone. everyone gets bored, and a lot of newbies repeat the same old, obvious things. start another thread if you have any issues, don't derail.

Hey I am not the plonker talking about the particular nature of radiation in a thread called 'doing away with the conspiracy'

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 26, 2015, 01:49:19 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 26, 2015, 12:51:32 PM

Seems like a conspiracy is happening right here on this board.   Not one single flat earther has engaged with me in an honest debate.

why are you whining in my thread?

the chances are your questions are trivial and overdone. everyone gets bored, and a lot of newbies repeat the same old, obvious things. start another thread if you have any issues, don't derail.

Hey I am not the plonker talking about the particular nature of radiation in a thread called 'doing away with the conspiracy'

pay attention. read the thread. seriously.
photos from space could be genuine (if space travel were possible) if light could not continue forever, and what seemed to be the edges of the earth just marked the point where light stopped being coherent.
the distance is much smaller than many believe it happens in, but it is well known that light cannot continue forever in the real world, despite mikey's asinine protestations. there are many things that could cause the effect, and i do not believe it happens, the conclusions is only that there is a possible model to allow for flat earth theory in addition to space travel and a lack of a conspiracy.

You don't WANT to get rid of the conspiracy. The beauty of conspiracy theories is that you can claim any evidence is "part of the conspiracy". Without a conspiracy, you actually have to rebut it, something FE'rs often have trouble with.

No. The only real conseracy is the mountauins and the Obomas and uthe obomunists arned those people; his commies and socialists and fascists. The Obomas built the mountains to hide their work and there Nasa work in trying to foll and the people and tax them their money. I have never seen a mountain in my life (Kansas is very fkat and I have never left) I have only seen pictures, how do I know they are real, I don;t so I think they are a farse. The pictures are either green screens put up for atheticds of mountaiuns built in th last 40 by the obomas to hide there work. Also. The ocean has not depth, if it did, the earth would not be flat. I have never seen the ocean, have you? I did not think so. The obomas are trying to dig in and hollow the oceans to hide the NAsa I but I and everyone free will stop them. KEEP THE OCEANS FLAT! KEEP THE OCEANS FREE!

No. The only real conseracy is the mountauins and the Obomas and uthe obomunists arned those people; his commies and socialists and fascists. The Obomas built the mountains to hide their work and there Nasa work in trying to foll and the people and tax them their money. I have never seen a mountain in my life (Kansas is very fkat and I have never left) I have only seen pictures, how do I know they are real, I don;t so I think they are a farse. The pictures are either green screens put up for atheticds of mountaiuns built in th last 40 by the obomas to hide there work. Also. The ocean has not depth, if it did, the earth would not be flat. I have never seen the ocean, have you? I did not think so. The obomas are trying to dig in and hollow the oceans to hide the NAsa I but I and everyone free will stop them. KEEP THE OCEANS FLAT! KEEP THE OCEANS FREE!

I smell a FlatEarthMaverik alt.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 26, 2015, 02:04:18 PM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 26, 2015, 01:49:19 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 26, 2015, 12:51:32 PM

Seems like a conspiracy is happening right here on this board.   Not one single flat earther has engaged with me in an honest debate.

why are you whining in my thread?

the chances are your questions are trivial and overdone. everyone gets bored, and a lot of newbies repeat the same old, obvious things. start another thread if you have any issues, don't derail.

Hey I am not the plonker talking about the particular nature of radiation in a thread called 'doing away with the conspiracy'

pay attention. read the thread. seriously.
photos from space could be genuine (if space travel were possible) if light could not continue forever, and what seemed to be the edges of the earth just marked the point where light stopped being coherent.
the distance is much smaller than many believe it happens in, but it is well known that light cannot continue forever in the real world, despite mikey's asinine protestations. there are many things that could cause the effect, and i do not believe it happens, the conclusions is only that there is a possible model to allow for flat earth theory in addition to space travel and a lack of a conspiracy.

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

No. The only real conseracy is the mountauins and the Obomas and uthe obomunists arned those people; his commies and socialists and fascists. The Obomas built the mountains to hide their work and there Nasa work in trying to foll and the people and tax them their money. I have never seen a mountain in my life (Kansas is very fkat and I have never left) I have only seen pictures, how do I know they are real, I don;t so I think they are a farse. The pictures are either green screens put up for atheticds of mountaiuns built in th last 40 by the obomas to hide there work. Also. The ocean has not depth, if it did, the earth would not be flat. I have never seen the ocean, have you? I did not think so. The obomas are trying to dig in and hollow the oceans to hide the INAsa I but I and everyone free will stop them. KEEP THE OCEANS FLAT! KEEP THE OCEANS FREE!

Ow...the stupid..the stupid are infekteng mee..

First, there's your total lack of evidence. You have never seen a mountain, therefore Obama built the mountains. I have never met you. Does that mean the Obomuists have a secret base inside your head? They might, there's plenty of room.

The ocean has not depth, if it did, the earth would not be flat.

Thanks for the proof. I have seen the ocean BTW, I live in @#$%*@^#$^$*@ CALIFORNIA!

Then there's your basic stupidity. As per usual, I bolded all your typos. What fun!

Then there's your basic stupidity. As per usual, I bolded all your typos. What fun!

The clues are there, if you read between the lines,  it's likely to be a Kansas radio station   96.9 KTROLL   ( ok that was a guess )  and they are just trolling the flat earth boards looking for program material,  or maybe just entertainment.   Must get pretty lonely out there in the suburbs of Topeka, what with screen doors a bangin, and one want's a changin.

Multiple writing styles, multiple personalities.  lots of alts. 

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 27, 2015, 02:56:41 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 26, 2015, 02:04:18 PM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 26, 2015, 01:49:19 PM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 26, 2015, 12:51:32 PM

Seems like a conspiracy is happening right here on this board.   Not one single flat earther has engaged with me in an honest debate.

why are you whining in my thread?

the chances are your questions are trivial and overdone. everyone gets bored, and a lot of newbies repeat the same old, obvious things. start another thread if you have any issues, don't derail.

Hey I am not the plonker talking about the particular nature of radiation in a thread called 'doing away with the conspiracy'

pay attention. read the thread. seriously.
photos from space could be genuine (if space travel were possible) if light could not continue forever, and what seemed to be the edges of the earth just marked the point where light stopped being coherent.
the distance is much smaller than many believe it happens in, but it is well known that light cannot continue forever in the real world, despite mikey's asinine protestations. there are many things that could cause the effect, and i do not believe it happens, the conclusions is only that there is a possible model to allow for flat earth theory in addition to space travel and a lack of a conspiracy.

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

techros, there is very little actually blamed on the conspiracy, round earthers like to sensationalize.

bosnian, you are deluded.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

So you don't know.  Fascinating.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:50:06 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

So you don't know.  Fascinating.

why do you think ignoring every word of a post to makes you look clever? it's pathetic. i didn't go into detail because i have no desire to waste hours when round earthers like you only ignore every word.

Quote from: Rama Set on April 28, 2015, 04:53:13 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:50:06 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

So you don't know.  Fascinating.

why do you think ignoring every word of a post to makes you look clever? it's pathetic. i didn't go into detail because i have no desire to waste hours when round earthers like you only ignore every word.

Why do you think that pretending that others are ignoring every word you say makes you look like a tortured genius?  I like debating you because you are hilarious.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:55:26 AM

Quote from: Rama Set on April 28, 2015, 04:53:13 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:50:06 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

So you don't know.  Fascinating.

why do you think ignoring every word of a post to makes you look clever? it's pathetic. i didn't go into detail because i have no desire to waste hours when round earthers like you only ignore every word.

Why do you think that pretending that others are ignoring every word you say makes you look like a tortured genius?  I like debating you because you are hilarious.

you're not debating, you're evading. if i'm so hilarious, pose actual, relevant questions, maybe you'll like the answers, maybe you'd even learn something.
i'm not pretending, it's clear as day.

Quote from: Rama Set on April 28, 2015, 04:53:13 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:50:06 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

So you don't know.  Fascinating.

why do you think ignoring every word of a post to makes you look clever? it's pathetic. i didn't go into detail because i have no desire to waste hours when round earthers like you only ignore every word.

No, it's pretty clear you don't know.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:55:26 AM

Quote from: Rama Set on April 28, 2015, 04:53:13 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on April 28, 2015, 04:50:06 AM

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

So you don't know.  Fascinating.

why do you think ignoring every word of a post to makes you look clever? it's pathetic. i didn't go into detail because i have no desire to waste hours when round earthers like you only ignore every word.

No, it's pretty clear you don't know.

if you actually have a question to ask, then ask it.
i will not spend hours on something that will only be ignored, but i have clearly responded to the question shown. if you cannot see that, you are illiterate, and there is nothing more to say.

Quote from: Aliveandkicking on April 27, 2015, 03:46:13 PM

If you do not require a conspiracy then you need to:

1.   Explain why GPS is not cast iron proof the Earth is round.    GPS satellites are sending their position relative to the centre of a round earth.   The satellites are at least 20,000km above the surface of Earth.   The satellites are only using radio transmissions and any amateur radio enthusiast can monitor the satellite transmissions

2.  Explain why inertial guidance systems are not cast iron proof the Earth is round.  A 747 flying at 900km per hour rotates 8.1 degree per hour around a round earth while an inertial guidance system can detect rotation to 0.01 degree per hour.   All long distance jets are carrying these systems.   They are commonplace for many decades

How can a flat earth be possible unless huge numbers of ordinary people are belonging to a massive conspiracy?

they work on given and known distances, not the overall size and shape of the earth. that's clear. in addition they invent fictitious forces to explain what doesn't work, and don't take into account some other elements. hoest mistakes.

[/quote]

1.  The exact positions of the satellites relative to the centre of a rotating round earth is transmitted to the receiver.   The receiver cannot work out a position from a made up none existing position.

2. The inertial guidance systems show the 747 is descending in three dimensional space as it  flies at the same altitude where 8.1 degrees of curved flight per hour is 60 x 8.1NM per hour travelled

No fictitious forces are needed.  Ordinary men and women are servicing the equipment - particularly the aircraft systems.   But even radio amateurs can receive satellite information and build their own receivers.

You need a massive conspiracy with death threats to keep them all silent.

JRowe, for god's sake, does it not seem even slightly weird that after centuries of debate, you are the first person to publicly declare the existence of "aetheric whirlpools"? No? I can think of several ideas from various sources, including games such as Xenoblade Chronicles, where "ether" is just used as a convenient explanation for everything the writer's didn't want to explain. Coincidence? If there's not a conspiracy, then why are we arguing? The moon landing has been conclusively proven. Argue evolution. Argue gravity. All of it is proven, you can't pick and choose what pieces of conclusive evidence you believe. If Earth isn't spherical and we never made it to the moon, there is a conspiratorial source.

JRowe, for god's sake, does it not seem even slightly weird that after centuries of debate, you are the first person to publicly declare the existence of "aetheric whirlpools"? No? I can think of several ideas from various sources, including games such as Xenoblade Chronicles, where "ether" is just used as a convenient explanation for everything the writer's didn't want to explain. Coincidence? If there's not a conspiracy, then why are we arguing? The moon landing has been conclusively proven. Argue evolution. Argue gravity. All of it is proven, you can't pick and choose what pieces of conclusive evidence you believe. If Earth isn't spherical and we never made it to the moon, there is a conspiratorial source.

i did not invent the idea of aetheric whirlpools, and aether is well defined, proven to exist, and all of its traits are logically deduced, in the model i am proposing.
you are new, that's fine, but don't swagger in and assume you're an expert. educate yourself. you don't understand what you're talking about, that much is clear. you seem to have even missed the first post in this thread.

Quote from: Why-Am-I-Here? on April 30, 2015, 11:01:06 AM

JRowe, for god's sake, does it not seem even slightly weird that after centuries of debate, you are the first person to publicly declare the existence of "aetheric whirlpools"? No? I can think of several ideas from various sources, including games such as Xenoblade Chronicles, where "ether" is just used as a convenient explanation for everything the writer's didn't want to explain. Coincidence? If there's not a conspiracy, then why are we arguing? The moon landing has been conclusively proven. Argue evolution. Argue gravity. All of it is proven, you can't pick and choose what pieces of conclusive evidence you believe. If Earth isn't spherical and we never made it to the moon, there is a conspiratorial source.

i did not invent the idea of aetheric whirlpools, and aether is well defined, proven to exist, and all of its traits are logically deduced, in the model i am proposing.
you are new, that's fine, but don't swagger in and assume you're an expert. educate yourself. you don't understand what you're talking about, that much is clear. you seem to have even missed the first post in this thread.

If that's the case then will you finally post aether prediction math so we can test your theory scientifically?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on May 01, 2015, 08:50:47 AM

Quote from: Why-Am-I-Here? on April 30, 2015, 11:01:06 AM

JRowe, for god's sake, does it not seem even slightly weird that after centuries of debate, you are the first person to publicly declare the existence of "aetheric whirlpools"? No? I can think of several ideas from various sources, including games such as Xenoblade Chronicles, where "ether" is just used as a convenient explanation for everything the writer's didn't want to explain. Coincidence? If there's not a conspiracy, then why are we arguing? The moon landing has been conclusively proven. Argue evolution. Argue gravity. All of it is proven, you can't pick and choose what pieces of conclusive evidence you believe. If Earth isn't spherical and we never made it to the moon, there is a conspiratorial source.

i did not invent the idea of aetheric whirlpools, and aether is well defined, proven to exist, and all of its traits are logically deduced, in the model i am proposing.
you are new, that's fine, but don't swagger in and assume you're an expert. educate yourself. you don't understand what you're talking about, that much is clear. you seem to have even missed the first post in this thread.

If that's the case then will you finally post aether prediction math so we can test your theory scientifically?

what is wrong with you? you have an argument shredded, and yet you continue to derail, and ignore any and all answers you're given.
learn. tehre is no point in talking if you refuse to learn.

Quote from: mikeman7918 on May 01, 2015, 10:28:14 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on May 01, 2015, 08:50:47 AM

Quote from: Why-Am-I-Here? on April 30, 2015, 11:01:06 AM

JRowe, for god's sake, does it not seem even slightly weird that after centuries of debate, you are the first person to publicly declare the existence of "aetheric whirlpools"? No? I can think of several ideas from various sources, including games such as Xenoblade Chronicles, where "ether" is just used as a convenient explanation for everything the writer's didn't want to explain. Coincidence? If there's not a conspiracy, then why are we arguing? The moon landing has been conclusively proven. Argue evolution. Argue gravity. All of it is proven, you can't pick and choose what pieces of conclusive evidence you believe. If Earth isn't spherical and we never made it to the moon, there is a conspiratorial source.

i did not invent the idea of aetheric whirlpools, and aether is well defined, proven to exist, and all of its traits are logically deduced, in the model i am proposing.
you are new, that's fine, but don't swagger in and assume you're an expert. educate yourself. you don't understand what you're talking about, that much is clear. you seem to have even missed the first post in this thread.

If that's the case then will you finally post aether prediction math so we can test your theory scientifically?

what is wrong with you? you have an argument shredded, and yet you continue to derail, and ignore any and all answers you're given.
learn. tehre is no point in talking if you refuse to learn.

Refusing to learn?  I just asked you for a very important detail about your theory and you proceed to say that I am refusing to learn?  I am not following your logic here.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on May 02, 2015, 08:57:04 AM

Quote from: mikeman7918 on May 01, 2015, 10:28:14 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on May 01, 2015, 08:50:47 AM

Quote from: Why-Am-I-Here? on April 30, 2015, 11:01:06 AM

JRowe, for god's sake, does it not seem even slightly weird that after centuries of debate, you are the first person to publicly declare the existence of "aetheric whirlpools"? No? I can think of several ideas from various sources, including games such as Xenoblade Chronicles, where "ether" is just used as a convenient explanation for everything the writer's didn't want to explain. Coincidence? If there's not a conspiracy, then why are we arguing? The moon landing has been conclusively proven. Argue evolution. Argue gravity. All of it is proven, you can't pick and choose what pieces of conclusive evidence you believe. If Earth isn't spherical and we never made it to the moon, there is a conspiratorial source.

i did not invent the idea of aetheric whirlpools, and aether is well defined, proven to exist, and all of its traits are logically deduced, in the model i am proposing.
you are new, that's fine, but don't swagger in and assume you're an expert. educate yourself. you don't understand what you're talking about, that much is clear. you seem to have even missed the first post in this thread.

If that's the case then will you finally post aether prediction math so we can test your theory scientifically?

what is wrong with you? you have an argument shredded, and yet you continue to derail, and ignore any and all answers you're given.
learn. tehre is no point in talking if you refuse to learn.

Refusing to learn?  I just asked you for a very important detail about your theory and you proceed to say that I am refusing to learn?  I am not following your logic here.

you repeated a bs argument that has been shown to be a stupid question multiple times. if i asked you to provide a photo you'd taken from the surface of the moon, you could not. if i asked you to derive the equations governing all of your round earth theory from scratch for me, you could not. you are purposefully being intellectually unfair and moronic.

but, as you've said:
"It's really complicated and I don't have time to explain it all right now."
that must be a valid response, if you're using it.

Jrowe, I don't expect you to understand aether perfectly but if you don't understand it then don't claim to know it so well like you do.  That was the main point I was trying to make.

Skeptic - do you have any proof, evidence or falsifiable hypothesies that we can investigate?