Help me understand

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

First of all, wikipedia is not a reliable source. Anyone can write on it and (according to my past experience with it) it can't be listed as a reliable source anywhere.

Fine, ignore the word WIKIPEDIA, then migrate to end of the page I provided and read all those other sources.

Really...

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

Second of all, history tells us otherwise? You mean wars and all? of course, much money, time, effort and resources were spent on them to gain control of people or territory l. But there was an actual gain and profit for them! The winning side would get the territory, and therefore all the resources that territory would imply. And also, by gaining more territory you gain control over a greater number of people, and these people will now produce and do things for you that will make you even richer.

Nothing here I disagree with...

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

So, where does a lie such as the space one gets her profit? do they increase the number of territory they get? no. do they increase the number of people working for them? could be, but the money spent to keep up the lie would still be too low compared to the one you would get in return. does it bring any more resources? no.

THERE IS NO PROFIT other than control masses, which they still could do if they said the earth is flat damn it!

And this is where you and I (to a point) disagree.

I write: "If an official government declaration was issued tomorrow (THE EARTH IS FLAT!), humanity's initial reactions of shock, disbelief, feelings of betrayal, etc. would destabilize things to a point where total control would be lost. It would not be a question of whether government would be able to re-establish control via brute force. It would be a requirement, one that is not as easy as one would have you believe."

You write: "Pull a gun on many and the tendency is for the many to freeze in fear , even though the many outnumber the amount of rounds available in the chamber."

Hence, the mind seeking control looks to establish the most firm and consistent control through the act of deceit and not force.

Listen, this is a very well studied concept and has been practiced throughout history, with many examples.

Name one failure.

Name one time where deceit was used to influence the masses and power was actually lost by the ruling class.

You cannot.

The whole concept of "the divine right of kings," is based on deceit.

So is the entire global lie.

I agree that if they came up now telling the truth (that the earth is flat) there would  in fact be panic or whatever, but this doesn't explain why they would tell that lie in the first place. they could just had placed secrecy on the icy end of the world instead of spending so much in this space lie. People would still be controlled (because of all the secrecy and everything) but they would have spent nothing to fake it

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 07, 2017, 06:53:01 AM

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

First of all, wikipedia is not a reliable source.

Says you.

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

THERE IS NO PROFIT other than control masses, which they still could do if they said the earth is flat damn it!

Find that on Wikipedia?

No it's not me who says it. It's the facts! since wikipedia can be written and edited by anyone it doesn't have a confirmed source to rely on. it could be written by any douchebag so no, I don't take it as a reliable source.

And if you want to defend your opinions stop with your sarcasm (you are fooling no one) and give some arguments that could actually make sense

Because if you can't it means that there are no arguments in your favor and therefore the fact that they would lie about the shape of the earth is actually not possible.

Piss off

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 07:07:50 AM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 07, 2017, 06:53:01 AM

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

First of all, wikipedia is not a reliable source.

Says you.

Quote from: Pixie on December 07, 2017, 06:37:11 AM

THERE IS NO PROFIT other than control masses, which they still could do if they said the earth is flat damn it!

Find that on Wikipedia?

No it's not me who says it. It's the facts! since wikipedia can be written and edited by anyone it doesn't have a confirmed source to rely on. it could be written by any douchebag so no, I don't take it as a reliable source.

And if you want to defend your opinions stop with your sarcasm (you are fooling no one) and give some arguments that could actually make sense

Because if you can't it means that there are no arguments in your favor and therefore the fact that they would lie about the shape of the earth is actually not possible.

Piss off

I understand by this answer that I must be talking to a 10-year-old with nothing to do. I'll gladly piss off then.

Change your tampon.

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

That's the specific type of answer that we want.  What is gained by lying about the shape of the Earth?  It's not control, because they already need control to tell the lie.

This is simply nonsense.

You ever lie to your parents?

ANSWER = YES

Why did you lie to your parents?

ANSWER = To control your parents in that particular situation.

CONCLUSION = You do not need control to tell a lie...a lie is told TO GAIN CONTROL.

No, the lie would have been to avoid getting in trouble, or to get them to give me something I wanted.  The gain in these instances isn't control, it is either the avoiding of a punishment or actually acquiring something tangible.

Lies don't gain control, they exploit a trust that is already present.  If you don't believe me, ask a family member for some money for a fictitious medical procedure, and then make the same request of a stranger.  You are more likely to get a yes from the family member. They are more inclined to believe your lie because of the relationship you have and the trust they place in you not to lie to them. 

A stranger is much less likely because there is no trust.  If the masses of people don't trust the people in power, then a lie this big isn't going to suddenly make that happen.  There would already have to be trust in order for a lie this big to be believed.

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

Why a sphere and not a tetrahedron, or a cylinder, or a flat plane?  What is so dangerous about the public knowing the world is flat?

Again for the umpteenth time.

"If a person could convince you of something false regarding the very nature of reality that surrounds you, what else could they convince you of?"

Again for the umpteenth time, that's not an answer, that is a question.  It's a broad and vague question that doesn't even come close to answering what is gained by convincing the people the Earth is a sphere instead of something else, or what is lost if the people know the Earth is flat.  Just give a plain, direct answer and we can get off this merry-go-round.

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

What is so dangerous about the public knowing the Earth is flat?

Answer = NO MORE CONTROL.

This is not clear.  If the people in power had told us from the beginning the Earth was flat, why would they have lost their control?  What was so important about telling this particular lie to get control?  Specifically, please.

Quote from: totallackey on December 07, 2017, 05:45:10 AM

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

That's the specific type of answer that we want.  What is gained by lying about the shape of the Earth?  It's not control, because they already need control to tell the lie.

This is simply nonsense.

You ever lie to your parents?

ANSWER = YES

Why did you lie to your parents?

ANSWER = To control your parents in that particular situation.

CONCLUSION = You do not need control to tell a lie...a lie is told TO GAIN CONTROL.

No, the lie would have been to avoid getting in trouble, or to get them to give me something I wanted.  The gain in these instances isn't control, it is either the avoiding of a punishment or actually acquiring something tangible.

Nearly every single person reading this post realizes if a child is successful in lying to the parent the child has gained a measure of control over the parent.

You merely write otherwise to be a massive troll or a tremendous douche.

Lies don't gain control, they exploit a trust that is already present.  If you don't believe me, ask a family member for some money for a fictitious medical procedure, and then make the same request of a stranger.  You are more likely to get a yes from the family member. They are more inclined to believe your lie because of the relationship you have and the trust they place in you not to lie to them. 

A stranger is much less likely because there is no trust.  If the masses of people don't trust the people in power, then a lie this big isn't going to suddenly make that happen.  There would already have to be trust in order for a lie this big to be believed.

Hence, the selling of the lie to the church.

Again for the umpteenth time, that's not an answer, that is a question.  It's a broad and vague question that doesn't even come close to answering what is gained by convincing the people the Earth is a sphere instead of something else, or what is lost if the people know the Earth is flat.  Just give a plain, direct answer and we can get off this merry-go-round.

Answer the fucking question.

it is not that fucking broad and it does answer your fucking question.

Otherwise, piss the fuck off.

This is not clear.  If the people in power had told us from the beginning the Earth was flat, why would they have lost their control?

ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT A STATE OF EXISTENCE NOT YET REALIZED. AND YOU EXPECT ME TO ANSWER IT!?!?

What was so important about telling this particular lie to get control?  Specifically, please.

I have been very fucking specific, even to most RE-tards.

See, the problem is fucking RE-tards hate losing debates, especially to me and sandokhan.

I have blasted the fucking RE-tards right out of the fucking water in this one.

ANOTHER FE VICTORY!!!

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 07:56:28 AM

Quote from: totallackey on December 07, 2017, 05:45:10 AM

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

That's the specific type of answer that we want.  What is gained by lying about the shape of the Earth?  It's not control, because they already need control to tell the lie.

This is simply nonsense.

You ever lie to your parents?

ANSWER = YES

Why did you lie to your parents?

ANSWER = To control your parents in that particular situation.

CONCLUSION = You do not need control to tell a lie...a lie is told TO GAIN CONTROL.

No, the lie would have been to avoid getting in trouble, or to get them to give me something I wanted.  The gain in these instances isn't control, it is either the avoiding of a punishment or actually acquiring something tangible.

Nearly every single person reading this post realizes if a child is successful in lying to the parent the child has gained a measure of control over the parent.

You merely write otherwise to be a massive troll or a tremendous douche.

We aren't talking about whether the child has gained a measure of control, we're talking about the motive.  The child isn't lying for the sake of control, they are exercising their control for the sake of gain or avoiding loss.  This gain or loss avoidance is the motive. 

We've been asking for the motive for pages and you keep dancing around it.  Yes, powerful people have control.  Yes, this control allows powerful people to tell lies to people.  What is the fucking motive for this particular lie.  What do they gain?  I can't make it any simpler. 

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

Again for the umpteenth time, that's not an answer, that is a question.  It's a broad and vague question that doesn't even come close to answering what is gained by convincing the people the Earth is a sphere instead of something else, or what is lost if the people know the Earth is flat.  Just give a plain, direct answer and we can get off this merry-go-round.

Answer the fucking question.

it is not that fucking broad and it does answer your fucking question.

I'll actually play along.  If a person could convince me of something false regarding the very nature of reality that surrounds me, they could convince me of anything.  Happy?

My turn fuckwit.  Now that we agree they could convince me of anything, WHY DID THEY CHOOSE TO CONVINCE ME THE EARTH IS A SPHERE INSTEAD OF FLAT?  WHAT BENEFIT DOES THIS PARTICULAR LIE GIVE THEM? Your turn to answer the fucking questions.

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 04:55:15 AM

This is not clear.  If the people in power had told us from the beginning the Earth was flat, why would they have lost their control?

ASKING A QUESTION ABOUT A STATE OF EXISTENCE NOT YET REALIZED. AND YOU EXPECT ME TO ANSWER IT!?!?

You said the dangerous part of the public knowing the Earth is flat is NO MORE CONTROL.  I'm asking you to explain why that is true.  It's your fucking statement that I'm asking you to clarify you ignorant piece of shit.

See, the problem is fucking RE-tards hate losing debates, especially to me and sandokhan.

I have blasted the fucking RE-tards right out of the fucking water in this one.

ANOTHER FE VICTORY!!!

I thought you were opposed to "States of existence not yet realized."  I've never seen either you or Sandokhan win a debate.  All you do is embarrass yourself repeatedly. 

We aren't talking about whether the child has gained a measure of control, we're talking about the motive.  The child isn't lying for the sake of control, they are exercising their control for the sake of gain or avoiding loss.  This gain or loss avoidance is the motive. 

We've been asking for the motive for pages and you keep dancing around it.  Yes, powerful people have control.  Yes, this control allows powerful people to tell lies to people.  What is the fucking motive for this particular lie.  What do they gain?  I can't make it any simpler. 

At this point, you are being purposefully obtuse.

So be it.

The motive for all lies is to gain control, in some or fashion, upon which more leverage can be further exercised, in order to gain more control. It is never ending.

How fucking hard is this to understand?

I'll actually play along.  If a person could convince me of something false regarding the very nature of reality that surrounds me, they could convince me of anything.  Happy?

My turn fuckwit.  Now that we agree they could convince me of anything, WHY DID THEY CHOOSE TO CONVINCE ME THE EARTH IS A SPHERE INSTEAD OF FLAT?

Because the sphere is the lie.

WHAT BENEFIT DOES THIS PARTICULAR LIE GIVE THEM? Your turn to answer the fucking questions.

Because it is such a big, fat outrageous lie as to be totally fucking devoid of common fucking sense, that those who believe it are capable of being convinced they are fucking geniuses even though they believe something so fucking stupid.

You said the dangerous part of the public knowing the Earth is flat is NO MORE CONTROL.  I'm asking you to explain why that is true.  It's your fucking statement that I'm asking you to clarify you ignorant piece of shit.

Only an ignorant piece of shit would ask such a stupid fucking question. It is a question ASKING ABOUT A STATE OF EXISTENCE NOT YET REALIZED!

I thought you were opposed to "States of existence not yet realized."  I've never seen either you or Sandokhan win a debate.  All you do is embarrass yourself repeatedly.

Au contraire mon frer...

Au contraire...

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 09:09:25 AM

We aren't talking about whether the child has gained a measure of control, we're talking about the motive.  The child isn't lying for the sake of control, they are exercising their control for the sake of gain or avoiding loss.  This gain or loss avoidance is the motive. 

We've been asking for the motive for pages and you keep dancing around it.  Yes, powerful people have control.  Yes, this control allows powerful people to tell lies to people.  What is the fucking motive for this particular lie.  What do they gain?  I can't make it any simpler. 

At this point, you are being purposefully obtuse.

So be it.

The motive for all lies is to gain control, in some or fashion, upon which more leverage can be further exercised, in order to gain more control. It is never ending.

How fucking hard is this to understand?

No dipshit, the motive for lies is to gain something.  The mechanism of lies is control.  When a con man tricks you into giving him your identity, your money, or whatever, the end goal isn't control over you.  The end goal is your identity, your money, or whatever.  He uses tricks to control you into giving him what he wants.  The control is a means to an end, not an end itself. 

How fucking hard is this to understand? 

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 09:09:25 AM

I'll actually play along.  If a person could convince me of something false regarding the very nature of reality that surrounds me, they could convince me of anything.  Happy?

My turn fuckwit.  Now that we agree they could convince me of anything, WHY DID THEY CHOOSE TO CONVINCE ME THE EARTH IS A SPHERE INSTEAD OF FLAT?

Because the sphere is the lie.

For fuck's sake, why this lie?  I see no apparent gain and I want, so desperately, for you to explain what they get out of it that they couldn't have also gotten from any other lie that ALSO has a material reward at the end. 

Why not convince us that a giant monster eats the family of anyone who hasn't given all of their money to the government before they die?  Or tell us anything valuable is actually dangerous and should be surrendered to the authorities for our own safety?  I can see the gain of money or valuables from these lies, but I don't see any corresponding value in lying about the shape of the Earth.  Where is it?

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 09:09:25 AM

WHAT BENEFIT DOES THIS PARTICULAR LIE GIVE THEM? Your turn to answer the fucking questions.

Because it is such a big, fat outrageous lie as to be totally fucking devoid of common fucking sense, that those who believe it are capable of being convinced they are fucking geniuses even though they believe something so fucking stupid.

To what end?  You're talking in circles.   Great, they've pulled off the hugest whopper of them all on the entire planet.  Now what?   Laugh to themselves about how funny it was that everyone believed them?  Is that the payoff?  Is the superior feeling the limit of their ambition?

Quote from: ItsRoundIPromise on December 07, 2017, 09:09:25 AM

You said the dangerous part of the public knowing the Earth is flat is NO MORE CONTROL.  I'm asking you to explain why that is true.  It's your fucking statement that I'm asking you to clarify you ignorant piece of shit.

Only an ignorant piece of shit would ask such a stupid fucking question. It is a question ASKING ABOUT A STATE OF EXISTENCE NOT YET REALIZED!

I'll rephrase it for you.  Why were the powerful people who originated the spherical Earth fable afraid that knowledge of the flat Earth would compromise their power.  What were they trying to prevent by convincing everyone the Earth was a sphere.  You said they would have had no control if knowledge of the flat Earth was widespread.  Why do you think control is dependent on the public perception of the Earth's shape?

You say fuck a lot. I stopped reading your angry round-earth rant

You say fuck a lot. I stopped reading your angry round-earth rant

I apologize if your sensibilities were offended, but I respond to people in the same tone they use with me.  In this case, when totallackey lost his control and started cursing me out, I responded in kind. 

Feel free to read my earlier posts in this thread if you would like to see the exact same points without the profanity.

Quote from: realNarcberry on December 07, 2017, 10:25:53 AM

You say fuck a lot. I stopped reading your angry round-earth rant

I apologize if your sensibilities were offended, but I respond to people in the same tone they use with me.  In this case, when totallackey lost his control and started cursing me out, I responded in kind. 

Feel free to read my earlier posts in this thread if you would like to see the exact same points without the profanity.

If you're so easy to mimic other people's moods imagine how easy it would be to brainwash you into believing a round earth theory. There, I said it, and did you a huge favor!

I don't think we are ever going anywhere with these people. I already noticed this behavior in many other sites: they just won't directly answer a question and they will just go round and round on things that can kind of make sense, but that if looked deeply into, just make none of it.

Many round earthers have this frustration. It goes away once you consider the flat earth theory and discover, for yourself, it is reality.

Many round earthers have this frustration. It goes away once you consider the flat earth theory and discover, for yourself, it is reality.

Yeah since you can't explain it just believe like it is. That's the right choice.
Too hard to prove? let's just believe it and that will make it believable

Just read the links in my signature and you'll come around pretty quick.

Quote from: th3rm0m3t3r0 on December 06, 2017, 01:32:20 PM

How many rockets do they launch a year? How much does a rocket that doesn't need to go to space cost?

As I explained, this depends upon what happens and how many people are in on it.
The more people you have in on it, the less it will cost.
If no one is in on it except the high ups, it would cost the exact same as a rocket to go to space.
This is because it would have the exact same payload, with the same amount of fuel and so on.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 06, 2017, 11:30:00 PM

Why would any of the engineers have any idea what actually happens to those things after they "leave the atmosphere"?

Again, I explained that. They don't necessarily need to. But if they don't, that means the money is wasted on producing something which will serve no purpose.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 06, 2017, 11:30:00 PM

Every satellite that gets launched into orbit needs to go through NASA by law.

BS.
What law established that?
Preferably provide a law which also requires other countries to obey.

Quote from: sceptimatic on December 06, 2017, 11:30:00 PM

As for data, does a meteorologist build and send a satellite into space, or do they just get handed a data set? What are you even talking about?

For the most part they just get a lot of data. This data needs to be reliable, and if space isn't real, would need to be fabricated.

I'm going to go on record saying I really hate what you did to my name here. I know you know I don't like him, but come on. As much as you might not agree with me, at least I speak English.

So how much does a regular rocket cost, then? 450 million including salaries? Okay, that leaves 19 billion to work with.

It's not a waste of money. It's insurance for not getting caught. How is that a waste?

As Bullwinkle pointed out, it's not NASA, but there is a small government organization who has to clear all things "going to space".

As for the last part, stratellites.

Why don't you perform your little "proof by contradiction," exercise and get your own answer?
Jesus...
Governments suddenly come out and write the following: "THE EARTH IS FLAT!"

Why would they?
You aren't meant to be explaining it from now.
You need to explain why they would lie in the first place.

You can't say they would contradict themselves if they said Earth was flat. You need to say why they would say Earth is round in the first place.

Try again.

If you do not think control over a populace = a benefit, then you are stupid.

If you think telling people Earth is round as opposed to flat magically gives people control, then you are stupid.

You have failed to pay attention.
You have received the answers.

Not to the questions asked.
You repeatedly avoid them because you are unable to provide a rational answer (to the question asked) which aligns with your claim.

You are a discredited failure.

I am yet to be discredited or fail here.

Nearly every single person reading this post realizes if a child is successful in lying to the parent the child has gained a measure of control over the parent.

No, they don't.
The ability to lie and convince their parents of the lie is the control.
A specific lie does not magically mean they have control.
It is the ability, not the lie itself.

Now can you address the question asked?

Quote from: JackBlack on December 07, 2017, 12:26:59 AM

Also note that these are typically complex materials which don't form naturally.

Oh, I missed this nugget. (pun)

Are you suggesting these typically complex materials arise spontaneously?
Or suggesting these typically complex materials have some mystic origin?


Do you deny they exist?
If not, prey tell, do they form super naturally?

I am suggesting they are man made as opposed to naturally occurring.

You say fuck a lot. I stopped reading your angry round-earth rant

It seems to be an angry FE rant, bitching about how telling people Earth is round magically gives people control.

Many round earthers have this frustration. It goes away once you consider the flat earth theory and discover, for yourself, it is reality.

No. I have considered FE models, (they aren't theories), and discovered they do not match reality.

Do you mean it goes away when you delude yourself into thinking they are reality?

Just read the links in my signature and you'll come around pretty quick.

Your signature is a single link.
That then has a bunch more links.

Some of which are pure stupidity, like claiming that 9*1/9 (i.e. 0.9 recurring) does not equal 1, or pathetic strawmen.

So that just further confirms my prior conclusions, FEers need to blatantly lie to pretend FE is better than RE.

9*1/9 (i.e. 0.9 recurring) does not equal 1

It doesn't

I'm going to go on record saying I really hate what you did to my name here. I know you know I don't like him, but come on. As much as you might not agree with me, at least I speak English.

My bad, fixed it now.

So how much does a regular rocket cost, then? 450 million including salaries? Okay, that leaves 19 billion to work with.

That is closer to the target they want with one specific launch vehicle.
The shuttle program had a cost of roughly 1.5 billion per launch.

The cost varies depending on where you want to go.
Low Earth Orbit has a relatively small cost. Geosynchronous (or geostationary) and high earth orbits cost a lot more. Deep space missions cost even more.
Apparently, with SpaceX it costs closer to 200 million per launch to LEO

But that is just the launch itself, of which there are several each year.

You then have other costs such as the payload; and then like I said the cost of fabricating all the data.

It's not a waste of money. It's insurance for not getting caught. How is that a waste?

The only reason they would get caught is for saying Earth is round in the first place.
If they didn't say Earth was round and instead devoted the small portion of the budget to "secret military research" there would be basically no questions asked (and no answers provided) and they wouldn't be able to get caught.
So why lie and say Earth is round?

As for the last part, stratellites.

Won't work.
They would send back pictures of a flat Earth, blowing the whole operation.
You need people fabricating the images.
You then have the costs associated with these secrete stratellite launches and their operation.
Unlike satellites they need fuel to stay up there.
Then there is the issue of geosynchronous ones.

You also need so many of them it isn't funny to replace a single geosynchronous satellite to be able to get the angle right for all the different receivers.
This just adds more and more costs.

Quote from: JackBlack on December 07, 2017, 12:02:29 PM

9*1/9 (i.e. 0.9 recurring) does not equal 1

It doesn't

Really?
So 9*1/9 does not equal 1?
Even though 9*1=9?
That is saying 9/9 does not equal 1.
What do you think it equals then?
What is 9 divided by 9?

As Bullwinkle pointed out, it's not NASA, but there is a small government organization who has to clear all things "going to space".

Interesting how the US government tried to intervene and even punished North Korea for wanting to put their own satellite in orbit.

Quote from: realNarcberry on December 07, 2017, 12:31:17 PM

Quote from: JackBlack on December 07, 2017, 12:02:29 PM

9*1/9 (i.e. 0.9 recurring) does not equal 1

It doesn't

Really?
So 9*1/9 does not equal 1?
Even though 9*1=9?
That is saying 9/9 does not equal 1.
What do you think it equals then?
What is 9 divided by 9?

The value is so infinitesimally close to 1 that it appears that way in measurement.

The value is so infinitesimally close to 1 that it appears that way in measurement.

No, not infinitesimally close to 1. It is 1. The 2 values are the same. There is no number in between them.
Perhaps this is simpler, what is 1 times 9?

Quote from: realNarcberry on December 07, 2017, 12:42:00 PM

The value is so infinitesimally close to 1 that it appears that way in measurement.

No, not infinitesimally close to 1. It is 1. The 2 values are the same. There is no number in between them.
Perhaps this is simpler, what is 1 times 9?

Do you mean 0.999...999 or do you actually mean 1?

Do you mean 0.999...999 or do you actually mean 1?

I mean 1.
What is 1 times 9.

Quote from: realNarcberry on December 07, 2017, 01:13:34 PM

Do you mean 0.999...999 or do you actually mean 1?

I mean 1.
What is 1 times 9.

Do you mean 8.999...999 or do you actually mean 9?

Quote from: Pixie on December 04, 2017, 03:35:29 PM

Quote from: totallackey on December 04, 2017, 03:13:58 PM

Quote from: Pixie on December 04, 2017, 02:57:50 PM

about the self-sealing and self-illuminating things, round-earth teories are always backed by physics theories. and yes, they may be just theories, but with mathematics and calculations, all their theories work, everything that they prove actually gives a mathematic outcome that is right according to their calculation models. Therefore, even if they are just theories, they work all together.

For the flat earth theory I find very little scientific proof that could actually work. All I find are "believe what you see" and "see: the earth is flat out of a plane" or "we can't feel the movement of the earth, therefore it doesn't move" or things like this.

Of course we could believe anything if we just want to believe it, but creating a working method (like physics and mathematics) that anyone smart enough to understand is able to use to demonstrate round-earth theories is not so simple.

And about santa claus... I hope you are kidding. Even if the concept of money put into christmas or the round-earth scam is similar, there is no way someone would lie about something like this just because it's fun to see the happy faces on people... (or whatever you think this "big christmas" of the round-earth could do to humanity). People don't care about other people, especially if they are rich or powerful. They don't care if normal people like us believe in round or flat earth. They would never go through all this effort just to make us believe something that doesn't bring to any outcome (not for them, not for us).

A lovely and flowering response, none of which has ever been posted before in the annals of these forums.

Of course the rich and powerful do not care about us.

That is why millions upon millions of dollars are spent to maintain power over...wait for it...

US!

Ok, they want to control us. How are they doing it by telling us that the earth is a sphere? How is is a different kind of control than if they told us the earth was flat? What would change in their control over us if they told us the earth is flat?

If a person could convince you of something false regarding the very nature of reality that surrounds you, what else could they convince you of?

Doesn't even remotely address the question.