RE's, are you here for entertainment?

Hi All,
Are the moderators here all FE's?
Unfortunately, my post was moved to a less-read area "Angry Ranting". I didn't think I was ranting but oh well, in an effort to cooperate, I have edited my post below.
The original post can be found here...
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8117

As mentioned in the thread, this is not a post to insult the FE's, it is a post to help the RE's, which does not meet the description of the "Angry Ranting" thread. The insults to the FE's were added simply to add body and emotion to the advice to the RE's, but since this is why it was moved, I have edited it so it is now approriate.

Moderators - please don't delete my posts, cancel my account or block my IP. I don't intend staying long anyway.

_________________________________

I haven't been on this website in 3 months, I logged on cause it come up in conversation, and hey presto, the debates haven't changed a bit.

Weather it's flat or round, your time on this earth is limited (you don't debate it being called "earth" do you?). So, why are you spending to much of it on this forum?

Let's be clear about something. I came on the forum orginally with an open mind. I read through all the information, but I wasn't entirely convinced. So I asked some question... nothing. I asked some more questions and tried to be diplomatic, still nothing satisfactory. Upon providing some logical explanations for RE, I was provided with incorrehent, irregular and silly explanations for FE. I got sick and tired of dealing with people who are not prepared to look at this on an open and honest playing field, had a few debates that came to arguments, then left. This seems the pattern for almost 100% of the RE's that come on this site.

FE's, let's get something straight, NO ONE CARES! If I sit in my bedroom and look at my white carpet, then convince myself that it's black, NO ONE CARES. The only time someone would care is if I could provide substancial evidence that what we have previously believed (the carpet being white) is actually not correct.

Orginally, people believed the world was flat. It's easy to maintain common opinion, but someone eventually came up with a scientific principle that prooved beyond doubt that the earth was actually round. I am sure there were many people that tried to deny it, but obviously, science prevailed and the way people thought about the world was changed, no easy task.
At this point in time, 99% of the population still believe the earth is round. Why? Because no-one has ever come forward with tangible and logical evidence that the world is flat. Please don't bother providing flimsy explanations for this, such as the conspiracy theory or the single world-wide government preventing the news getting out. Here's something to consider FE's, the view of the world was changed once before, and with proper scientific evidence, it could be done again... but there isn't any.

The fact that it takes changes such as a universal government, changes in distances, illusions of the moon, secret ice men and god knows how many other weird inventions to proove your theory makes 99% of the population think of you and your theories as nothing more than some entertainment. No-one takes it seriously.

Am I here hoping to change your views? Absoloutly not. I'm, more writing to the RE's hoping to change their mind about wasting their valuable time here. RE's, it doesn't matter what evidence you present, or how flimsy the evidence of the FE's, they will never believe you! But don't worry, just because they believe FE strongly, doesn't mean that anyone else believes it.

One explanation to resolve the situation once and for all was simply "fly south". According to the RE model, one would pass over the top of the south pole, then continue making their way back up the other side. According to the FE model, the plane would reach the south pole (the ice wall) just before reaching space. Therefore, this fundamental difference would proove the theory.
Ironically enough, no FE was willing to take the journey. Why? Because they were too scared about being kidnapped by the "Ice Wall Soldiers". I suggested that one life was well worth sacrificing in order to proove this theory of evolution once and for all to the rest of the world. Unfortunately, no FE's were willing to do so, only RE's volunteered.
This is one of many such examples of debate-ending experiments I have seen suggested, that funily enough, were never taken up on.

The solution is simple, the FE's do not want to talk about anything that would end the argument. Why? Because they don't really care weather the earth is flat or not, what they care about is their ability to debate it. What you must remember is that this is a source of entertainment, for both FE's and RE's. If the orientation of the earth were proven one way or the other, the debate would stop, and those fanatical about either the FE or RE theory would have lost their beloved passtime.

So I offer this advice, if you come here for the sake of entertainment, then great, enjoy yourself. If however you come here with the view to resolve the FE vs RE debate, turn away now. You will never convince die hard FE's that the earth is round, even with un-deniable proof. They will deny the un-deniable in an effort to save their beloved passtime.

yes, i am here for entertainment.

At first I thought it was ridiculous; and now, still, I think it's ridiculous. I've looked at this from both sides, and the only thing i come up with is that FE's resort to saying things are "Fake". There isnt any proof for a flat earth, just theories. On the other hand, the RE theory has been used for hundreds and hundreds of years, backed by countless organizations and millions of dollars of research. Now, after all that, you could just say its "Fake". So there really is no winning.

I could tell you that Nasa is real, but you could say its fake. So why bother.

In part, generally, whenever I find a viewpoint I don't understand in the world, I like to try and orient myself until I can at least partially see the basis behind that viewpoint...

Stop re-posting deleted threads.

I moved the thread for the resons you suspected. Also because the middle of this thread proclaims that "NO ONE CARES". Why is this something we need on our website? It seems to me to be a post not "helping RE'ers" but shouting your opinion for all to hear, bad mouth the FES and FET in general, and re-stating things that people could easily see by using the search function.

Please advise if anyone else agrees with moving this thread, and I'll do it again.

Since what we know is only true when applied against it's given context, then all advice is opinion.
Would you like me to take the caps off so it's no longer shouting?

You don't need it on your website, but then again, this is not a forum of need, but a forum of discussion, so theoretically, none of it is needed.

The reason I re-posted was because I feel that it was moved to an area that it did not belong in. The description says "If you're planning on posting a message insulting us but don't want to bother with any thought or content, do it in here." It does not say "Post anything here that we do not need on our website". And to the contrary, I put much thought into that post.

Also, now that we have a moderator on here, just to reiterate my question... are all moderators on this site FE's?

On the other hand, the RE theory has been used for hundreds and hundreds of years, backed by countless organizations and millions of dollars of research.

Please stop referring to "the RE theory."  There is no RE "theory."  This should instead be referred to as the universally accepted fact that the Earth is round.

There is, however, a FE "theory."

HAHAHA, true.
Well, there is actually. Just that the RE theory is accepted as proven fact by most of the population, and the FE theory is not.

Quote from: "HaterAteFL"

On the other hand, the RE theory has been used for hundreds and hundreds of years, backed by countless organizations and millions of dollars of research.

Please stop referring to "the RE theory."  There is no RE "theory."  This should instead be referred to as the universally accepted fact that the Earth is round.

There is, however, a FE "theory."

More like a Flat Earth delusion.

1. Posting a thread declaring no one cares about a theory, on a website completely devoted to that theory, would seem without thought or content. Especially when the given content is re-iterations of stuff already available in the other threads in General Discussion, if any newcomers bothered to use the search function.

2. The posts following yours are a fantastic example of why this thread will eventually end up in AR as well - this thread is turning into an FE bashing exercise.

3. No, not all moderators are genuine FE believers. Note this does not automatically mean they are RE'ers.

Quote from: "HaterAteFL"

On the other hand, the RE theory has been used for hundreds and hundreds of years, backed by countless organizations and millions of dollars of research.

Please stop referring to "the RE theory."  There is no RE "theory."  This should instead be referred to as the universally accepted fact that the Earth is round.

There is, however, a FE "theory."

I'm sorry that you are incapable of thinking for yourself.  Yes, there is an RE theory; just because you have more support doesn't make you correct (SEE ALSO: World War II-Era Germany).

If it isn't a theory, then give me the cause of gravity.

Quote from: "hefdaddy42"

Quote from: "HaterAteFL"

On the other hand, the RE theory has been used for hundreds and hundreds of years, backed by countless organizations and millions of dollars of research.

Please stop referring to "the RE theory."  There is no RE "theory."  This should instead be referred to as the universally accepted fact that the Earth is round.

There is, however, a FE "theory."

I'm sorry that you are incapable of thinking for yourself.  Yes, there is an RE theory; just because you have more support doesn't make you correct (SEE ALSO: World War II-Era Germany).

If it isn't a theory, then give me the cause of gravity.

larger masses attract smaller masses

and before you put up a "bowling ball and tennis ball on table, bowling ball does not attract tennis ball" let me remind you any experiment you try will be affected by the earth itself.

Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"

Quote from: "hefdaddy42"

Quote from: "HaterAteFL"

On the other hand, the RE theory has been used for hundreds and hundreds of years, backed by countless organizations and millions of dollars of research.

Please stop referring to "the RE theory."  There is no RE "theory."  This should instead be referred to as the universally accepted fact that the Earth is round.

There is, however, a FE "theory."

I'm sorry that you are incapable of thinking for yourself.  Yes, there is an RE theory; just because you have more support doesn't make you correct (SEE ALSO: World War II-Era Germany).

If it isn't a theory, then give me the cause of gravity.

larger masses attract smaller masses

and before you put up a "bowling ball and tennis ball on table, bowling ball does not attract tennis ball" let me remind you any experiment you try will be affected by the earth itself.

I asked you "how?", not "what?".

you specifically asked for a cause, or 'why?', not 'how?'

larger masses attract smaller masses

How?  Don't give me the observed effect of gravity, give me the cause.

1. Posting a thread declaring no one cares about a theory, on a website completely devoted to that theory, would seem without thought or content. Especially when the given content is re-iterations of stuff already available in the other threads in General Discussion, if any newcomers bothered to use the search function.

So, does that mean that you guys, talking about a Flat Earth theory on an earth that is predominantly accepted by most as round, is without thought or content? Of course not. It just means that the content and thoughts you are portraying are not widely accepted in the given environment or by the appropriate authorities. Just like my post on the flat earth society about the earth being round was not without thought or content, you talking about a flat earth to people that generally accept the earth as being round is not without thought or content.
Maybe I did bother to use the search, but choose to find a path of my own. Almost everything being said at this time in all threads has been offered before, but that's why it's a discussion forum, not a reference essay.
 

2. The posts following yours are a fantastic example of why this thread will eventually end up in AR as well - this thread is turning into an FE bashing exercise.

No, it will end up there because the moderators will choose to put it there. I don't know if you have noticed, but nearly every thread on this whole forum has turned into a "FE Bashing Excersize" of some sort. It is not my fault that people after my post choose to bash you. I edited my post so that it would fit in with your request.

3. No, not all moderators are genuine FE believers. Note this does not automatically mean they are RE'ers.

Thank you. I have another, more accurate question then. Are there any RE moderators?

because, smaller objects are attracted to larger objects.

to be more complicated, they are attracted because the larger object bends space more.

i'm going to be more specific: Wikipedia.
thats right wikipedia

to be even more specific:

To deal with this difficulty, Einstein proposed that spacetime is curved by the presence of matter, and that free-falling objects are following the geodesics of the spacetime. More specifically, Einstein discovered the field equations of general relativity, which relate the presence of matter and the curvature of spacetime and are named after him. The Einstein field equations are a set of 10 simultaneous, non-linear, differential equations whose solutions give the components of the metric tensor of spacetime. A metric tensor describes a geometry of spacetime. The geodesic paths for objects in inertial motion in a spacetime are calculated from the metric tensor of that spacetime.

because, smaller objects are attracted to larger objects.

to be more complicated, they are attracted because the larger object bends space more.

i'm going to be more specific: Wikipedia.
thats right wikipedia

to be even more specific:

Quote from: "wikipedia"

To deal with this difficulty, Einstein proposed that spacetime is curved by the presence of matter, and that free-falling objects are following the geodesics of the spacetime. More specifically, Einstein discovered the field equations of general relativity, which relate the presence of matter and the curvature of spacetime and are named after him. The Einstein field equations are a set of 10 simultaneous, non-linear, differential equations whose solutions give the components of the metric tensor of spacetime. A metric tensor describes a geometry of spacetime. The geodesic paths for objects in inertial motion in a spacetime are calculated from the metric tensor of that spacetime.

Prove to me that that is the cause of gravity, and that the cause is not something else.

That still doesn't explain the cause of gravity.

Quote from: "RESOCR"

because, smaller objects are attracted to larger objects.

to be more complicated, they are attracted because the larger object bends space more.

i'm going to be more specific: Wikipedia.
thats right wikipedia

to be even more specific:

Quote from: "wikipedia"

To deal with this difficulty, Einstein proposed that spacetime is curved by the presence of matter, and that free-falling objects are following the geodesics of the spacetime. More specifically, Einstein discovered the field equations of general relativity, which relate the presence of matter and the curvature of spacetime and are named after him. The Einstein field equations are a set of 10 simultaneous, non-linear, differential equations whose solutions give the components of the metric tensor of spacetime. A metric tensor describes a geometry of spacetime. The geodesic paths for objects in inertial motion in a spacetime are calculated from the metric tensor of that spacetime.

Prove to me that that is the cause of gravity, and that the cause is not something else.

ah, then we get into hypotheticals and theories.

yet, you cannot prove the acceleration theory either

so, stalemate.

because, smaller objects are attracted to larger objects.

So two equal sized objects will not attract?

Quote from: "BOGWarrior89"

Prove to me that that is the cause of gravity, and that the cause is not something else.

ah, then we get into hypotheticals and theories.

yet, you cannot prove the acceleration theory either

so, stalemate.

Gravity is the oldest known force, yet, ironically, we know little about it.

Absoloutly... stalemate. It's always a stalemate. Why? Because FE's refuse to accept absoloutly anything the supports commonly accepted modern science. In fact, just about anything that support the RE model, regardless of how logical.

Absoloutly... stalemate. It's always a stalemate. Why? Because FE's refuse to accept absoloutly anything the supports commonly accepted modern science. In fact, just about anything that support the RE model, regardless of how logical.

um, no, its just because this site has a rigid standard of evidence. Specifically, it only allows primary observational evidence.

they do have a point, the gravity/acceleration points are dead ends as they have not been proven.

um, no, its just because this site has a rigid standard of evidence.

Correct.
Rule1 - all evidence must support FE theory
Rule2 - no evidence must deny FE theory
Rule3 - all evidence must deny RE theory
Rule4 - no evidence must support RE theory
Rule5 - all evidence not obeying rule 1-4 will be accepted as supporting FE theory.

it only allows primary observational evidence.

Which is denied as a personal unproved experience, unless the use of camera equipment is employed, in which case, they will say it's a fake.

Quote from: "RESOCR"

um, no, its just because this site has a rigid standard of evidence.

Correct.
Rule1 - all evidence must support FE theory
Rule2 - no evidence must deny FE theory
Rule3 - all evidence must deny RE theory
Rule4 - no evidence must support RE theory
Rule5 - all evidence not obeying rule 1-4 will be accepted as supporting FE theory.

Quote from: "RESOCR"

it only allows primary observational evidence.

Which is denied as a personal unproved experience, unless the use of camera equipment is employed, in which case, they will say it's a fake.

now you're just being stupid. Some of their ideas, normally sound, has been thwarted by observations. However, primary sources, IE you or a direct quote, is all thats accepted besides a form of solid math.

now you're just being stupid. Some of their ideas, normally sound, has been thwarted by observations. However, primary sources, IE you or a direct quote, is all thats accepted besides a form of solid math.

"Stupid" is being nasty. "Sarcastic" or "Sinical" would have been more polite, and more accurate. Yes I am. You get to a point when that's all that's left.

My other point still stands though.

Which is denied as a personal unproved experience, unless the use of camera equipment is employed, in which case, they will say it's a fake.

Absoloutly... stalemate. It's always a stalemate. Why? Because FE's refuse to accept absoloutly anything the supports commonly accepted modern science. In fact, just about anything that support the RE model, regardless of how logical.

This is double standards. You won't accept FE because of the "holes" in it, but are fine with these magical "gravitons"