Dual-flat-earth theory

  • 145 Replies
  • 34635 Views
*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #120 on: November 11, 2015, 07:15:37 AM »
Quote
Who cares that there is no observable phenomenons or experiments which can prove it.
Your hypocrisy is astonishing. Just because an explanation of an observation and experiment is not in line with RET does not mean you can reject it.

  Interesting attitude. But I am not rejecting anything because it is not in line with RET. I can reject explanation if it is impractical or implausible. And also there is yet to be observation or experiment which conclusively shows that there is FE or DE. So, what observation you did that made you conclude that there is even possibility of Dual Earths?

All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.

That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #121 on: November 11, 2015, 07:31:36 AM »
Quote
Who cares that there is no observable phenomenons or experiments which can prove it.
Your hypocrisy is astonishing. Just because an explanation of an observation and experiment is not in line with RET does not mean you can reject it.

  Interesting attitude. But I am not rejecting anything because it is not in line with RET. I can reject explanation if it is impractical or implausible. And also there is yet to be observation or experiment which conclusively shows that there is FE or DE. So, what observation you did that made you conclude that there is even possibility of Dual Earths?

All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.

That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
  I can't reject things that you haven't provided. You have only provided statement, that there is Dual Earth and then started to build explanations around it. I read it, and then again and now even third time but there is no explanation how did you reach to that conclusion that there is Dual Earth. You only say that "The evidence is there by observation.". What observation? It may be self evident in your own mind but not for others and if you can't bring out even one observation that is conclusive then its quite questionable if there is any at all.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

TheEarthIsASphere.

  • 867
  • who fucking cares what shape the earth is lol
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #122 on: November 11, 2015, 07:44:57 AM »
I agree with what Zork is trying to say. You don't have any observations proving it's existence. It may be clear in your mind, but to others, and me, it's just a stupid little assumption.
Quā ratiōne nōn redimus ad senectēs societātēs sapientium patrum? Quā ratiōne relinquimus eārum sapientiam?

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #123 on: November 11, 2015, 09:19:17 AM »
I agree with what Zork is trying to say. You don't have any observations proving it's existence. It may be clear in your mind, but to others, and me, it's just a stupid little assumption.

A BIG stupid assumption, you mean. ;D

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #124 on: November 11, 2015, 12:00:28 PM »
All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.

That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #125 on: November 11, 2015, 01:34:12 PM »
All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.

That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
Here is the DEF model that "explains every single thing that we observe."  Enjoy.
(https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3040.0)
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #126 on: November 11, 2015, 01:54:42 PM »
All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.

That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.

Claims that you gave evidence are not evidence that you gave evidence  ;D

And I think you mispelled "theory" as "thread". That's a typo, right there!

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #127 on: November 11, 2015, 01:56:59 PM »
All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.

That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
Here is the DEF model that "explains every single thing that we observe."  Enjoy.
(https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3040.0)

I'll need medicine for that one. Heart medicine. You know, people already died of laughter before.

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #128 on: November 11, 2015, 02:00:45 PM »
This is the cross section of the Earth, according to Jrowe.



Yeah, and he thinks the earth being round is preposterous. Go figure

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #129 on: November 11, 2015, 02:39:48 PM »
Yes, per JRowe/JRoweSkeptic, per Occam's Razor, that is simpler than the RE model.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #130 on: November 11, 2015, 10:26:23 PM »
Yes, per JRowe/JRoweSkeptic, per Occam's Razor, that is simpler than the RE model.

He's obviously insane, then. He's having trouble just trying to explain some points of that model, it seems not even he knows about it. Childs can learn the round earth in a couple minutes, during a class.

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #131 on: November 12, 2015, 04:10:54 AM »
All of them. Every second, of every day. The DE model works to explain every single thing that we observe. You reject that because you'd rather cling to RET: this is hypocrisy.
  If I start another thread would you at last bring out some observations that show something from what you can conclusively deduct DE? Because you can say "All of them" hundreds of times but its still only in your mind. If I go out and observe "All of them" then I see zero signs about DE.
  And stop with that clinging stuff. I don't cling to RE, you cling to DE. I assure you that if you can sow reasonable doubt on RET then I can say - hmm, maybe the Earth isn't round. And if you can show me reasonable observations to deduct DE then I am - Yeah! There is possibility that there may be DE. Until then I am just on RE side because its only working thing here and you can't provide even one phenomenon that others can observe and deduct for himself that DE is possible. Even in your other forum post (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3040.0) you don't cite any repeatable observations. You say - Experiments are not required for science: observation is. . And then... zero observations about how you really saw through observation that there is DE.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #132 on: November 12, 2015, 01:13:08 PM »
Keep in mind one thing, JRoweSkeptic is only trying to show that DEF is possible. This is a total waste of time because it IS possible. Anything in a FANTASY is possible.

Dragons, unicorns, flying monkeys and pigs, suns and moons inside of planets, argon atmospheres, Aether, etc. are ALL possible in a FANTASY.

There are many computer games, books and movies with rivers and trees and stars and the Sun and Moon in them as well. They have S. Poles. They have star trails above the S. Pole. All these we accept as possible for a FANTASY.

If we are only to take DEF as a FANTASY - DONE! I don't think ANYONE will dispute it. IT IS POSSIBLE. You can have unicorns and dragons on the Hemidisks - whatever.

It is when anyone says that these are TRUE and represent the world we live in, that they are trying to move from Fantasy and Fiction to Hypothesis and Theory. These need falsifiable tests (hypothesis) and LOTS of evidence (theory). Until DEF produces any, it will ALWAYS remain a FANTASY.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #133 on: November 12, 2015, 01:23:13 PM »
Keep in mind one thing, JRoweSkeptic is only trying to show that DEF is possible. This is a total waste of time because it IS possible. Anything in a FANTASY is possible.

Dragons, unicorns, flying monkeys and pigs, suns and moons inside of planets, argon atmospheres, Aether, etc. are ALL possible in a FANTASY.

There are many computer games, books and movies with rivers and trees and stars and the Sun and Moon in them as well. They have S. Poles. They have star trails above the S. Pole. All these we accept as possible for a FANTASY.

If we are only to take DEF as a FANTASY - DONE! I don't think ANYONE will dispute it. IT IS POSSIBLE. You can have unicorns and dragons on the Hemidisks - whatever.

It is when anyone says that these are TRUE and represent the world we live in, that they are trying to move from Fantasy and Fiction to Hypothesis and Theory. These need falsifiable tests (hypothesis) and LOTS of evidence (theory). Until DEF produces any, it will ALWAYS remain a FANTASY.

Good point. DEF is in fact fantasy, but fails to explain reality. Could be a good setting for a book, a movie or even a game. Or maybe all of it!

Maybe JR should consider a career in book writing or screenplays. Many series do well without reflecting reality - think about "The Walking Dead": Zombies are an impossibility, but still make a good story, appreciated by many. Maybe DEF has potential as a background for a fantasy story - Just like "Ringworld", maybe?

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #134 on: November 12, 2015, 03:31:12 PM »
I agree. Look at the movie "Elysium" where people live on an open space station spinning to keep the air in. The book "Rama" is also excellent (people can travel inside a rotating Pepsi can. The rotation produces gravity and keeps the water on the ground). Look at "Core" where people are trying to go to the center of the Earth to start the core with some nukes. DEF could be a good starting point (can they drill and get to the Sun or Moon or the other side?).
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #135 on: November 13, 2015, 01:20:52 AM »

We get it, you're JRowe's alt, can you please stop clogging up every thread with Kirk Jadyynson? You pretty much only engage with him, you keep a thread at the forefront when he's said he's not coming back to it, you make sure everyone's talking about a dual earth despite the fact only one person accepts it...
I wonder how many people have looked up the dual earth purely out of curiosity at your claims.
I spy an alt.

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #136 on: November 13, 2015, 01:41:11 AM »
We get it, you're JRowe's alt, can you please stop clogging up every thread with Kirk Jadyynson? You pretty much only engage with him, you keep a thread at the forefront when he's said he's not coming back to it, you make sure everyone's talking about a dual earth despite the fact only one person accepts it...
I wonder how many people have looked up the dual earth purely out of curiosity at your claims.
I spy an alt.

You must be really desperate to resort to ad-hominem.

Truth to be told, I REALLY intended to take dual earth fantasy seriously. Even called it a "theory" out of etiquette. But the so called "theory" is complete nonsense. Refuted anyway...  ;D

Can you refute my refutation?  ;D

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #137 on: November 13, 2015, 01:48:11 AM »
We get it, you're JRowe's alt, can you please stop clogging up every thread with Kirk Jadyynson? You pretty much only engage with him, you keep a thread at the forefront when he's said he's not coming back to it, you make sure everyone's talking about a dual earth despite the fact only one person accepts it...
I wonder how many people have looked up the dual earth purely out of curiosity at your claims.
I spy an alt.

You must be really desperate to resort to ad-hominem.

Truth to be told, I REALLY intended to take dual earth fantasy seriously. Even called it a "theory" out of etiquette. But the so called "theory" is complete nonsense. Refuted anyway...  ;D

Can you refute my refutation?  ;D

I'm not interested in it, I don't accept it. I'm just making sure everyone can see how obvious it is that you're an alt. Look how defensive you get.

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #138 on: November 13, 2015, 02:01:12 AM »
I'm not interested in it, I don't accept it. I'm just making sure everyone can see how obvious it is that you're an alt. Look how defensive you get.

You're quite skilled making claims and disappearing when asked for evidence that backs it up. You just changed the subject: The behavior is the same.

However, even IF I was an alt: That won't prove anything in favor of DEF. My rebuttal can still be read by anyone.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #139 on: November 13, 2015, 05:31:56 AM »
That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
Hilarious that the most active discussion about DET is in a thread I asked you not to resurrect because it misrepresents the model. Cowards much?
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

?

Jadyyn

  • 1533
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #140 on: November 13, 2015, 01:37:34 PM »
That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
Hilarious that the most active discussion about DET is in a thread I asked you not to resurrect because it misrepresents the model. Cowards much?
It has been updated here with the newest version. People can get a sense of where the DEF came from. Sometimes history is useful. They can see past arguments and how you handled them.

I'm also confused. The link you sent me a month ago has the same stuff that was discussed back in June. The last post here, before we started discussing it was August - 2 months after your DEF wall of text. So why is DEF from June "alive" and this thread "dead"? So why are you complaining? Trying to take it out of mothballs and make it "fresh" again? More BS.
“If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.” W.C. Fields.
"The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #141 on: November 13, 2015, 01:53:35 PM »
That is all I'm going to say here: I'm not interested in resurrecting a dead thread, like Kirk's dishonest tactic. Start another one, or accept an answer when it's given.
Hilarious that the most active discussion about DET is in a thread I asked you not to resurrect because it misrepresents the model. Cowards much?

And yet, no evidence presented. It's like DEF has 0 scientific evidence to back it up. Why is that? I wonder...

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #142 on: November 13, 2015, 03:21:08 PM »
Get a fucking life. Talk in threads that deserve to be discussed in, this is a thread when I was developing the model, derailed and ruined by trolls and REers and now you and Kirk. And, for once, stop lying.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #143 on: November 13, 2015, 03:24:09 PM »
Get a fucking life. Talk in threads that deserve to be discussed in, this is a thread when I was developing the model, derailed and ruined by trolls and REers and now you and Kirk. And, for once, stop lying.

You were developing dual earth. We asked for evidence. How is that derailment? Please, determine what you mean by "derailment" then.

*

JRoweSkeptic

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 5407
  • DET Developer
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #144 on: November 13, 2015, 03:25:59 PM »
Get a fucking life. Talk in threads that deserve to be discussed in, this is a thread when I was developing the model, derailed and ruined by trolls and REers and now you and Kirk. And, for once, stop lying.

You were developing dual earth. We asked for evidence. How is that derailment? Please, determine what you mean by "derailment" then.

Get a fucking life. Talk in threads that deserve to be discussed in, this is a thread when I was developing the model, derailed and ruined by trolls and REers and now you and Kirk. And, for once, stop lying.
http://fet.wikia.com
dualearththeory.proboards.com/
On the sister site if you want to talk.

*

Cirshiss

  • 19
  • Religion is crowdcontrol. Most often not needed.
Re: Dual-flat-earth theory
« Reply #145 on: September 05, 2016, 07:06:48 AM »
I'm still sticking with "You're literally just describing RET."
Your aether is now gravity, and the Sun shines directly above the equator, and the Earth 'bulges' up and down either side, to give the sun further access. In what way is that not RET?

no, it's not. just because you're obsessed with your gravity and round earth doesn't mean you get to force it on to everyone else. the earth is flat.
I can't say I've had more fun in days then when I found this thread! Bulge, "What you describe is RE and gravity." "No I'm not!" LOL! :D Priceless
« Last Edit: September 05, 2016, 07:08:20 AM by Cirshiss »
  • Absolute power corrupts absolutely
  • The road to "hell" is paved with good intentions
  • Reap what you sow

Is love a measurement of how far one can distract oneself from ones own mortality?