# Wiki?

• 35 Replies
• 10527 Views
?

#### Twerp

• Gutter Sniper
• Flat Earth Almost Believer
• 6540
##### Re: Wiki?
« Reply #30 on: September 10, 2017, 12:06:17 AM »
Read the previous posts. I would say it's not going well.
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

?

#### Sean

• Official Member
• 10740
• ...
##### Re: Wiki?
« Reply #31 on: September 10, 2017, 12:11:52 AM »
John is just having an episode he'll come around
Quote from: sokarul
Better bring a better augment, something not so stupid.

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 7249
##### Re: Wiki?
« Reply #32 on: September 10, 2017, 01:53:39 AM »
The wiki is not the only thing that has to be deleted (https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.php/faq ).

This also has to go:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0

How do you explain day and night cycles?

Day and night cycles are easily explained on a flat earth. The sun moves in circles around the North Pole. When it is over your head, it's day. When it's not, it's night. The sun acts like a spotlight and shines downward as it moves.

Totally wrong.

Why doesn't gravity pull the earth into a spherical shape?

The earth isn't pulled into a sphere because the force known as gravity doesn't exist or at least exists in a greatly diminished form than is commonly taught. The earth is constantly accelerating up at a rate of 32 feet per second squared (or 9.8 meters per second squared). This constant acceleration causes what you think of as gravity.

Completely and absolutely wrong.

The missing orbital Sagnac effect proves that the Earth is not accelerating upwards (or in any other direction).

What does the earth look like?

As seen in the diagrams above, the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge.

The Earth is in the form of a disk, but the North Pole is not located in the center.

As it were, I used to run this Wiki, with Daniel's blessing (which at least at the time superseded your own). I can assure you that nobody who contributed to the Wiki under my guard "gave up their rights to any part of it". On the contrary, it was run with a clear tracking of contributions, and with due and appropriate attribution.

The wiki/faq, both versions, contains FALSE information.

As such it is useless.

The UAFE hypothesis is false.

ENaG also contains false information, which has been used by the RE to have a field day in the debates.

A unified approach means to put forward the very best version, the best verifiable information, to the public, to the readers.

Information that has been tested in direct debates where the RE lost each and every time.

This information is available here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.0

Make use of it, my name does not have to be mentioned: it is the best FET version ever, the one that can really be used to answer each and every question the RE might have.

The UAFE has been given the chance to be a part of a valuable FET wiki/faq: no other FE theory has had this distinction, no one else has been able to incorporate their version of FET in the faq, for the past ten years, across three different websites (this one, t f e s, and the .net address), as the UAFE have had the opportunity to get their way while everybody else stood on the sidelines watching the show.

But the UAFE has been proven to be false.

It doesn't work.

Yet, there are still FE believers who stubbornly cannot understand this simple fact.

Moreover, the new radical chronology of history MUST become part of the FET: if the official version of history is true, that means that the axial precession of the Earth, as documented in the writings of Hipparchus all the way to Kepler, is a true phenomenon, thus ending the FE vs. RE debate once and for all, no need for any other discussion.

« Last Edit: September 10, 2017, 02:02:01 AM by sandokhan »

#### PizzaPlanet

• 12260
• Now available in stereo
##### Re: Wiki?
« Reply #33 on: September 10, 2017, 03:45:24 AM »
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize you gained permission for all the content you took. This is because you didn't.
The content has been re-instated in compliance with the licences it was originally released under. I didn't need to "gain" any permission because it had already been granted in advance, not just to myself, but to everyone on the Internet and beyond.

Also, Daniel ran the show for the FEW. I know this because I'm reading the threads right now.

For the record, the wiki and the FEW were established 3 years before PP was even on the scene.
Indeed. Then it died (you broke tikiwiki), then it was dead for a couple of years, then I offered to revive it with Daniel's support, and under my technical patronage (that would be the MediaWiki version previously present on this site). Then you broke that one, then it was dead for a couple years, and then you randomly brought tikiwiki back up.

I'm not sure what "threads" you're referring to since most of the conversation took place via e-mail, but I'm sure they're riveting.

So in short, go on home troll soldiers, go on home. Do you have no fucking forum of your own? For 800 years we fought you without fear - and we'll fight you for 800 more.
Have you considered the radical option of not spreading vitriolic lies about me? You may have noticed that I generally only stop by to dismiss your crazy claims.

Also, I'm quite a lot younger than 800 years old, and I imagine so are you.

The UAFE has been given the chance to be a part of a valuable FET wiki/faq: no other FE theory has had this distinction, no one else has been able to incorporate their version of FET in the faq, for the past ten years, across three different websites (this one, t f e s, and the .net address), as the UAFE have had the opportunity to get their way while everybody else stood on the sidelines watching the show.
I've made this offer to you before, and it still stands: If you'd like to host an alternative FAQ for your model on our Wiki, you're welcome to. At this stage, I can't offer for you to replace it (perhaps in the long term, but that's simply not my call to make), but they could exist side by side, and you'd have your very own section to document things under.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2017, 03:52:31 AM by PizzaPlanet »
hacking your precious forum as we speak

#### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 7249
##### Re: Wiki?
« Reply #34 on: September 10, 2017, 04:44:52 AM »
If you'd like to host an alternative FAQ for your model on our Wiki, you're welcome to. At this stage, I can't offer for you to replace it (perhaps in the long term, but that's simply not my call to make), but they could exist side by side, and you'd have your very own section to document things under.

My model has withstood the test of innumerable debates, I won every time: that should tell you something.

Your UAFE is false, the very fact that you (or whoever makes the calls) still adhere to this incorrect hypothesis is incredible.

Let me show you how easy it is to debunk the UAFE.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1848154#msg1848154

As a final proof that it is movement of the receiver which is significant--not whether that movement is in a curved or straight line path--a test was run using the highly precise differential carrier phase solution. The reference site was stationary on the earth and assumed to properly apply the Sagnac effect. However, at the remote site the antenna was moved up and down 32 centimeters (at Los Angeles) over an eight second interval. The result of the height movement was that the remote receiver followed a straight line path with respect to the center of the earth.

The Sagnac effect was still applied at the remote receiver. The result was solved for position that simply moved up and down in height the 32 centimeters with rms residuals which were unchanged (i.e. a few millimeters). If a straight line path did not need the Sagnac adjustment to the ranges the rms residuals should have increased to multiple meters. This shows again that it is any motion--not just circular motion which causes the Sagnac effect.

http://web.stcloudstate.edu/ruwang/ION58PROCEEDINGS.pdf

(Conducting a Crucial Experiment of the Constancy of the Speed of Light Using GPS, R. Wang/R. Hatch)

ANY MOVEMENT OF THE EARTH, BE IT ORBITAL AROUND THE SUN OR UPWARDS (THE UA ACCELERATOR HYPOTHESIS), WOULD REGISTER IMMEDIATELY ON THE GPS SATELLITES' CLOCKS.

The GPS satellites DO NOT register/record any upward movement, therefore the UAFE hypothesis is worthless.

It is certainly your call to point out this fact to your colleagues and replace your faq with a workable hypothesis.

• 17694
• President of The Flat Earth Society
##### Re: Wiki?
« Reply #35 on: September 10, 2017, 01:14:45 PM »
The wiki is not the only thing that has to be deleted (https://theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.php/faq ).

This also has to go:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=13876.0

How do you explain day and night cycles?

Day and night cycles are easily explained on a flat earth. The sun moves in circles around the North Pole. When it is over your head, it's day. When it's not, it's night. The sun acts like a spotlight and shines downward as it moves.

Totally wrong.

Why doesn't gravity pull the earth into a spherical shape?

The earth isn't pulled into a sphere because the force known as gravity doesn't exist or at least exists in a greatly diminished form than is commonly taught. The earth is constantly accelerating up at a rate of 32 feet per second squared (or 9.8 meters per second squared). This constant acceleration causes what you think of as gravity.

Completely and absolutely wrong.

The missing orbital Sagnac effect proves that the Earth is not accelerating upwards (or in any other direction).

What does the earth look like?

As seen in the diagrams above, the earth is in the form of a disk with the North Pole in the center and Antarctica as a wall around the edge.

The Earth is in the form of a disk, but the North Pole is not located in the center.

As it were, I used to run this Wiki, with Daniel's blessing (which at least at the time superseded your own). I can assure you that nobody who contributed to the Wiki under my guard "gave up their rights to any part of it". On the contrary, it was run with a clear tracking of contributions, and with due and appropriate attribution.

The wiki/faq, both versions, contains FALSE information.

As such it is useless.

The UAFE hypothesis is false.

ENaG also contains false information, which has been used by the RE to have a field day in the debates.

A unified approach means to put forward the very best version, the best verifiable information, to the public, to the readers.

Information that has been tested in direct debates where the RE lost each and every time.

This information is available here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.0

Make use of it, my name does not have to be mentioned: it is the best FET version ever, the one that can really be used to answer each and every question the RE might have.

The UAFE has been given the chance to be a part of a valuable FET wiki/faq: no other FE theory has had this distinction, no one else has been able to incorporate their version of FET in the faq, for the past ten years, across three different websites (this one, t f e s, and the .net address), as the UAFE have had the opportunity to get their way while everybody else stood on the sidelines watching the show.

But the UAFE has been proven to be false.

It doesn't work.

Yet, there are still FE believers who stubbornly cannot understand this simple fact.

Moreover, the new radical chronology of history MUST become part of the FET: if the official version of history is true, that means that the axial precession of the Earth, as documented in the writings of Hipparchus all the way to Kepler, is a true phenomenon, thus ending the FE vs. RE debate once and for all, no need for any other discussion.

Couldn't agree more about UA. That is why I'm actively working to remove it from our site and have already removed the majority of it from non-forum pages.

This also highlights the need for the other society, and the lack of any merger ever. The other site has a radically different view of the flat earth, and they deserve to preserve it. From what I see, we just don't want it here as our official position. They have a different view on discourse in the forum, the rules that should exist, etc.

There are still errors in our content, I agree; I tried to put forth a fairly commonly held version of the flat earth to hit the broadest amount of believers and convert them into forum users. I am more than happy making your model, which you hold is correct, more prominent if we can get a coherent article on it written.

As far as some of the other points brought to the table by others, if any forum, or society, is on life support it is the other forum. The other forum has been on life support since it was created. For example, currently we have twice as many members active on our forums as of 4pm EST. This trend is pretty steady, except for a few hours of the day. All the other forum has is that they happened to optimize for a slightly different name, "Flat Earth Society" vs "The Flat Earth Society" and a troll Twitter account.

The former may be corrected in the future if I'm continually reminded of their existence.

As to other points, I see little worth in the wiki. It will be converted into useful content. I see no reason to discuss it any further as well unless someone has some valid points to put forth. Thoughtful front-facing content will always trump wiki content.

My aggression surely doesn't help issues. As we all know, my passion often outweighs my good sense. I will do better to keep this at bay. That said, the 800 years is a reference to the atrocities performed by the English against the Irish, and the long memory of the IRA.

« Last Edit: September 10, 2017, 01:19:22 PM by John Davis »
The illusion is shattered if we ask what goes on behind the scenes.