Please Explain Your Theories

Firstly I wish to say very clearly that I am not expressing any message of hate towards those of you who seriously do believe the earth is flat[EDIT: No, actually I've decided I am. You cannot seriously expect to be taken seriously by anyone you ever meet in your life if you take a view such as yours.]. I am merely asking for your response to certain scientific truths.

1. When the sun shines directly on the earth, and the moon is in line, we can quite clearly see that the shadow of the earth on the moon is round. Please explain this.

2. Inside an atom there are sub-atomic particles. In the middle, as you may well know, there is the nuetron, which is orbited by electrons. This is proven. This is why you are now at a computer. This proves that the theory of a round earth, orbiting a spherical sun, is plausible. I cannot find any source of evidence to say that your theory is founded in truth.

3. When a ship sails out to sea, it disappears much quicker than it ought to. This is, I believe, caused by the Earths curve. What other reason can you give me?


4. Day and night and the changing of the seasons. What causes them, if not the earths path around the sun?

5. I can see that other planets are spherical by looking in my telescope. I can also see sattelites. Why should the Earth be different, and why are satelites in the air, and I can see quite plainly that they are, if not for gravity? What keeps us down? Gravity can more or less be proven, also, so where does it come from?

Please read the FAQ and Samuel Rowbotham's Earth not a Globe.

I have taken the time to read the FAQ, and I'm sorry but that really did not help. It is full of holes and is far too vague when you look at the overwhelming evidence to suggest that a round earth is correct. It does not answer my questions, in fact it only gives me more to ask. I have seen that you are not the most intelligent people I've met, so I'll ask as simple questions as I can.

1.How could a government make money from this?

2."Q : "Why is the North pole colder than the equator?"

    A: The sun orbits over the equator, not the North pole "

In order for an orbit to work, there must be gravity. Your explanations does not give the same effect of gravity in this way, and also please understand what orbits are before you talk about them.

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist, and gravity in it's current theory is the only way we have to explain them. I do not see how your theory offers an alternete explaination.

Please actually think before you answer a question this time.

I have taken the time to read the FAQ,

Obviously not, or you'd know the answers to your questions. You also haven't read Earth not a Globe, as I instructed you to, or you wouldn't be asking such ridiculous questions in the first place.

And here the conspiracy compendium.

Now please, take some time to understand the theory and do as you're told before replying next time.

No, I really have. I'm not wasting my money buying a book dedicated to this, wasting my time is somewhat less valuble to me than wasting my money. There are attempts to answer my questions, but as I said, they are far too vague. I am asking here not to be told to read an FAQ in which a few of my questions are answered in the most appalling degradation of modern intelligence and science, but for an answer, particularly to the ones that are not mentioned in the FAQ, let alone answered. I know why of course. They pose things far too difficult for the likes of you to comprehend, but with any luck I will be able to change your mind.

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

By the way, GeoGuy linked you to an online version of the book; you don't need to buy anything.

~D-Draw

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

I have taken the time to read the FAQ,

Obviously not, or you'd know the answers to your questions. You also haven't read Earth not a Globe, as I instructed you to, or you wouldn't be asking such ridiculous questions in the first place.

And here the conspiracy compendium.

Now please, take some time to understand the theory and do as you're told before replying next time.

Did I piss you off with my strong arguments ?

You're tired of walking on your pride, defending a non-sense theory, so you refer people to other's text ?

This is second hand... and as you FEers say : "second hand is... well, second hand". And this works for your stupid book

Did I piss you off with my strong arguments ?

You're tired of walking on your pride, defending a non-sense theory, so you refer people to other's text ?

This is second hand... and as you FEers say : "second hand is... well, second hand". And this works for your stupid book

What the hell are you talking about? GeoGuy and everyone else has absolute permission to refer to the compendium any time they want; that's kind of why I made it in the first place. :roll:

And honestly, what do you expect we're going to do, come into every newbie's first thread and explain the entire theory to every single one of them in our own words? Do you think before you post? Ever?

~D-Draw

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

I didn't think you would be under the illusion that to know that something exists you must see it.
I know that Black Holes are existent because in order for the universe to function they must exist.
I have never seen, and in all liklihood never will see, CDM, but I know it exists.
God, do you even know what CDM is?
I'll use a simpler example. Air. Air is not visible, but I know it is there. In order for me to exist it must, so I come to the conclusion that it exists.

I know that Black Holes are existent because in order for the universe to function they must exist.

Why's that? If you don't mind my asking.

P.S. People would be a lot nicer and be more willing to answer your questions if you'd stop calling them idiots.

Quote from: "yop69g"

Did I piss you off with my strong arguments ?

You're tired of walking on your pride, defending a non-sense theory, so you refer people to other's text ?

This is second hand... and as you FEers say : "second hand is... well, second hand". And this works for your stupid book

What the hell are you talking about? GeoGuy and everyone else has absolute permission to refer to the compendium any time they want; that's kind of why I made it in the first place. :roll:

And honestly, what do you expect we're going to do, come into every newbie's first thread and explain the entire theory to every single one of them in our own words? Do you think before you post? Ever?

~D-Draw

I'm talking about their fucking book by I don't know the fuck who wrote it on sacred-text.

I think the one who should think before he even breathe would be... YOU.

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

I'm talking about their fraking book by I don't know the frak who wrote it on sacred-text.

Rowbotham? You mean the guy who came UP with the theory in the first place, and has his book sourced on the internet? Yeah, I'm sure he cares a whole lot that other people refer to his work. And again, the latter point still remains true. Why would we spend time explaining the theory over and over again every time somebody gets a new account when all of the materials are right there for their own research?

Why's that? If you don't mind my asking.

I'd quite like to know that as well.

I have never seen, and in all liklihood never will see, CDM, but I know it exists.
God, do you even know what CDM is?
I'll use a simpler example. Air. Air is not visible, but I know it is there. In order for me to exist it must, so I come to the conclusion that it exists.

You happen to be the most pretentious person I have ever met on this board, and that is no lie. Just because you know something that makes you think that you sound intelligent for knowing doesn't mean you are absolutely required to flaunt it, much less proceed to make fun of somebody for not knowing what you know, even though you don't know that they don't know what it is.

As for your latter "argument," if air didn't exist, we wouldn't be able to breathe, thus it's quite evident that it DOES exist, considering the fact that I think it's a valid assumption to presume that I am actually alive AND breathing. Not to mention, we can observe air and what it's made up of rather easily with modern technology.

~D-Draw

Quote from: "DiegoDraw"

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

They won't give any credibility to a source. It's second hand.

...

Pathetic

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact.

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact. I actually am, you will find, very intelligent, not pretentious, and I know a lot about varied areas of physics.

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

I do believe I have a grasp on what a black hole is, thanks. Nevertheless, by "see" I meant "observe," though the whole "have you ever seen one" was actually more of a sarcastic joke of an argument that obviously never really docked.

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact. I actually am, you will find, very intelligent, not pretentious, and I know a lot about varied areas of physics.

And what tells you that we are idiots? Modern scientific society? Have you ever thought about thinking for yourself and pulling together your own theories about the shape of the Earth based on what YOU know?

As for the latter, knowing things doesn't go hand-in-hand with arrogance. Inherently intelligent doesn't mean inherently condescending.

~D-Draw


DiegodrEDIT: You know there's a little edit button up there, right? It says "Edit"

Quote from: "DiegoDraw"

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

3.Black holes. I know for a fact that they exist

Interesting. Have you seen one for yourself?

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact. I actually am, you will find, very intelligent, not pretentious, and I know a lot about varied areas of physics.

They defenitely won't hear you.

Everything you can come up with will be either the same as the FE model, an illusion, or a conspiracy.

Don't expect any intelligent discussion here : you'll get stupid amusement of seeing them unable to answer you and changing the subject.

They defenitely won't hear you.

Everything you can come up with will be either the same as the FE model, an illusion, or a conspiracy.

Haven't seen you come up with any good counter-arguments for why it can't be, then. If it's so ridiculous, why can't you prove me wrong?

Don't expect any intelligent discussion here : you'll get stupid amusement of seeing them unable to answer you and changing the subject.

Right, because the Flat Earthers are the source of entertainment on this forum... :lol:

~D-Draw

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact.

Ad hominem attacks are ridiculous and childish. If you ask someone a question, and then call them an idiot, don't be surprised if they don't answer.

I actually am, you will find, very intelligent, not pretentious, and I know a lot about varied areas of physics.

And you are doing a fantabulous job of demonstrating this.

Quote from: "Explain Electric"

Before I go on, you absoloute twat, black holes are invisible. So no I can't say I have seen any of them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
Hopefully this should explain.

I do believe I have a grasp on what a black hole is, thanks. Nevertheless, by "see" I meant "observe," though the whole "have you ever seen one" was actually more of a sarcastic joke of an argument that obviously never really docked.

Quote

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact. I actually am, you will find, very intelligent, not pretentious, and I know a lot about varied areas of physics.

And what tells you that we are idiots? Modern scientific society? Have you ever thought about thinking for yourself and pulling together your own theories about the shape of the Earth based on what YOU know?

As for the latter, knowing things doesn't go hand-in-hand with arrogance. Inherently intelligent doesn't mean inherently condescending.

~D-Draw


DiegodrEDIT: You know there's a little edit button up there, right? It says "Edit"

If you had bothered to look at the link, you will have noted that in the section detailing the history of the Black Hole it says that Hawking proved that Black Holes are inevitible as certain masses degenerate.

I do consistently question what I know and the theories I conclude are logical and have evidence to back them up.

Also I assumed that you would not know about CDM as in order for it to exist you must believe in gravity and you seem to have come up with your handy new system, so I thought you may not want to look in to one of the most complex areas of a subject which you entirely reject.

On the arrogance, In the words of Richard Dawkins "What's wrong with being arrogant, when you are right?".

If you had bothered to look at the link, you will have noted that in the section detailing the history of the Black Hole it says that Hawking proved that Black Holes are inevitible as certain masses degenerate.

That explains how black holes would be formed if there actually were gases and such out there that degenerated. Theoretically. Hypothetical situations don't really work out when you're running experiments, though, as I believe you would agree. Nevertheless, I'll keep my out for those black holes whenever I'm nearby degenerating stars.

Also I assumed that you would not know about CDM as in order for it to exist you must believe in gravity and you seem to have come up with your handy new system, so I thought you may not want to look in to one of the most complex areas of a subject which you entirely reject.

If you assumed that I didn't know it, was there absolutely any pragmatic reason to bring it up, other than to make yourself look more intellectual and to make fun of me without further knowledge of what I know?

On the arrogance, In the words of Richard Dawkins "What's wrong with being arrogant, when you are right?".

There's a level of arrogance which is acceptable, but you are at the point of completely ignorant and conceited pretention that is to the point of obnoxiousness (as well as utter bias).

~D-Draw

And you are idiots. I'm just stating a fact. I actually am, you will find, very intelligent, not pretentious, and I know a lot about varied areas of physics.

In the middle, as you may well know, there is the nuetron, which is orbited by electrons. This is proven. This is why you are now at a computer. This proves that the theory of a round earth, orbiting a spherical sun, is plausible.

You may know a lot, it's just too bad it's all wrong.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain.

By all accounts I am completely arrogant. Bringing up CDM was really both for the benefeit of those who knew of it, and more to make you look the fools you are, rather than make myself look intelligent. I find that I do not need to make up outrageous claims to understand the mechanisms of the universe. I also see that your membership has severely dwindled since the early nineties and you are in fact without a leader. Your 'society' is merely an online forum. Eventually there will be none of you left and there will be no more of your pathetic organization. I can only hope that this comes sooner rather than later.

And by the way, your eccentric, dimwitted, English founder is just about the first person idiotic enough to think that the earth is flat in history. Ancient civilisations thought that it was a cube. You are actually less mentally developed than them, which I consider to be quite an achievement. So well done for denying that which is all but proven, making up complete crap, and actually convincing yourself of it. It takes a special kind of moron to do that.

making up complete crap, and actually convincing yourself of it. It takes a special kind of moron to do that.

The same can be said of you.

It could, but you see I have evidence. Just because you refuse to consider it does not make it any less so.

I also have an I.Q that goes beyond single digits, which does kind of help...

By all accounts I am completely arrogant. Bringing up CDM was really both for the benefeit of those who knew of it, and more to make you look the fools you are, rather than make myself look intelligent. I find that I do not need to make up outrageous claims to understand the mechanisms of the universe. I also see that your membership has severely dwindled since the early nineties and you are in fact without a leader. Your 'society' is merely an online forum. Eventually there will be none of you left and there will be no more of your pathetic organization. I can only hope that this comes sooner rather than later.

And by the way, your eccentric, dimwitted, English founder is just about the first person idiotic enough to think that the earth is flat in history. Ancient civilisations thought that it was a cube. You are actually less mentally developed than them, which I consider to be quite an achievement. So well done for denying that which is all but proven, making up complete crap, and actually convincing yourself of it. It takes a special kind of moron to do that.

I think one of the strongest marks of intelligence is people's ability to see what is to be taken literally and what is an allegorical concept.  It is the ability to see beyond the surface that separates the intelligent from the stupid.  You may feel that the people on this forum are stupid for believing the Earth is flat.  You may feel that you have an amazing intellect and that you know how the world works.  If that's how you feel, and you've given every indication that it is, you've completely missed the point and we're operating on completely different depths of reasoning.  You may know what the surface looks like, and props if you do.  Unfortunately for you, there is much to the world that has more depth than that.

Everyone's laughing at you, Electric. Keep that in mind as you post.

I think one of the strongest marks of intelligence is people's ability to see what is to be taken literally and what is an allegorical concept.  It is the ability to see beyond the surface that separates the intelligent from the stupid.  You may feel that the people on this forum are stupid for believing the Earth is flat.  You may feel that you have an amazing intellect and that you know how the world works.  If that's how you feel, and you've given every indication that it is, you've completely missed the point and we're operating on completely different depths of reasoning.  You may know what the surface looks like, and props if you do.  Unfortunately for you, there is much to the world that has more depth than that.

No, I do not feel that I have an amazing intellect, and nor do I think that I, or anyone for that matter, know much at all about how the world works.
I just cannot see why anyone would be inclined to disregard that which most can accept. This is not blind faith. It is based on what we understand to be fact. I do not see that there is any depth in the world. In my opinion we are all complete accidents. If you want to carry on with this then I'm just going to stand back. Maybe I'm wrong. Fine. I can accept that. I can accept that we opperate on different levels entirely. I guess that I must have understood you wrongly, but that's just how I see the world.
Sorry to those who I offended.