Star trails at the two celestial poles disprove the FE hypothesis.

No, they haven't. I've looked it up. If you look at how those experiments are done, they take discrete measures at various intervals, and construct a smooth line between them assuming smoothness. No one has actually tested to see if the change is indeed continuous. Most of those graphs just come from plotting the function given for gravity, with no care spent on whether it's accurate physically.

So why is yours better than RE?

RE explains everything I need to know.

Ah. I see you've taken the PapaLegba approach of copy+paste your way into humiliation.

If you do it 100 more times, I think I'll finally get it.

Or, maybe your theory doesn't make sense. I mean, look at this:

I was looking at that yesterday.   

A better drawing would help motivate the reader to explore what dual Earth theory was describing

I can't improve my artistry skills that quickly just because it'd make things easier. If you want to find an illustrator who'd copy out those images more neatly, be my guest.

I don't care about neatness, but I do care about it being to scale.

Your dwawing clearly shows a gap between the two disks, yet you say that they are actually touching with the sun and moon squished inside the earth. And instantaneous travel 180 degrees without any knowledge. And the sun and moon somehow shine through the earth, and appear above.

It is physically impossible to draw to scale a model where space is a variable. The diagrams are to demonstrate the layout and path of aether, not to standalone independent of the explanation.

So it is impossible to replicate it. Shouldn't that be a warning bell to you? It can't happen in this universe.

No, it just means it's not a 2-D environment, moron.

Build a 3-D model then and take a picture of it. I can produce a 3d model of the earth (a basketball).

No, because it would not provide any help to people trying to understand the model. I am not going to waste time just because you want everything to bow to your whims.

Why wouldn't a 3-D model help anybody visualize your model?

Please keep DET shilling in the containment thread. JRowe please stop derailing threads with your hogwash.

Just go fuck yourself OSG, you know you're just wasting time. There is a diagram. use your brain. a 3-D model is going to be little more than an hourglass with the same conventions and lines using in the 2-D diagram. just look at yourself. You're too lazy to even attempt my challenge of actually saying why the model's unclear or what's wrong with it, despite repeatedly claiming it, and yet you want me to build quite a substantial thing for no actual purpose.

I will respond when people address me. Common sense. But no, you'd never criticize the round earther who's causing this, would you?

As I've said before, in the real world, there is no "aether" to allow my dick to teleport into my butt.

I literally cannot fuck myself.

If you can prove that it is actually possible to teleport someones dick into their butt, then that would be definitive proof of DET.

No, it'd be proof you have no ability whatsoever to honestly respond to DET, so due to cowardice you resort to clearly false statements.

If you think this is a false statement:

I literally cannot fuck myself.

Then prove it.

Witness: the REer responding with clear straw men, because he knows he has no honest arguments to make. You really have to wonder why REers resort so quickly to wasting time and trolling and misrepresenting if FET is as easily debunked, or RET as strong a model, as they claim.

You were the one that told me to fuck myself.

Witness: the REer responding with clear straw men, because he knows he has no honest arguments to make. You really have to wonder why REers resort so quickly to wasting time and trolling and misrepresenting if FET is as easily debunked, or RET as strong a model, as they claim.

99 more times and I'll finally get it.

JRowe I have no idea why the mods allow you to derail every thread you come across with your DET harping. Keep it to your containment thread, please. While you're at it please address the very long post I painstakingly typed out, just for you to ignore it 

Quote from: origamiscienceguy on August 05, 2016, 03:52:15 PM

Or, maybe your theory doesn't make sense. I mean, look at this:

I was looking at that yesterday.   

A better drawing would help motivate the reader to explore what dual Earth theory was describing

Hahahaha, oh wow I can't believe this is a real "scientific document." I can't wait to show my friends, we all get a kick out of FE's.

I've just noted one thing... In order to see one star in a specific location on the sky, it would have its own flow of aether transporting the light. But there are thousands of stars, so thousands of flows. Flows that don't interact one with another. That makes even less sense than my previous arguments.

Billnye, I answer the questions proposed in the OP with a Flat Earth model. Why do you object to answers being provided?

Brouwer, i'm not sure what you're saying. The flow of aether isn't needed to transport light, aether is just space. So long as space exists, even if it isn't flowing, light would move through it.

Ah. I see you've taken the PapaLegba approach of copy+paste your way into humiliation.

Meh... wait for Cikljamas to make a re-appearance.  The master of copy pasta of links to previous posts/threads of his own copy pastas to other copy pasta posts, and in the end he loses in every one (all while derailing his own threads in multiple directions at the same time)