Put a flat earthier into space

[What A Waster]

That's a really interesting point. Seems odd that nobody has donated to this, even just a silly donation of a quid or whatever

Quoting yourself there?

 

[woodlebert]

Quoting yourself there?

Yes

 

[bobster999]

That's a really interesting point. Seems odd that nobody has donated to this, even just a silly donation of a quid or whatever

In his description he says he was bored so set it up. I've been bored many times and never set up a go fund me page because of it.

I can't stand it when people use the bored excuse because they've done something and put a bit of effort into it.

 

[mackembulldog]

Department of Truth (comic) covered the flat earth concept pretty well..

 

[DaveH]

They're hot because of friction/vibration.
Rub your hands together slower then faster, under less pressure then more.
You can feel the heat difference.

If you were to do that at higher friction and pressure you would create a flame or glow.
Have you ever seen friction welding?


You've seen people light fires by using a stick and wood or rock as friction to create a more widespread friction.

They reckon about 400 miles. And this approximation was not made up by a supposed flat Earth theorist.
Since we are dealing with 100 miles or less, it becomes massively relevant and also is another spanner in the global model.

there we have it members of the SMB. Chemical combustion is not a thing it is friction.

But that is not what I asked anyway. I was pointing at your post that say they fiddled the globe model because people observed different things. I was pointing out that the change was not a bodge to keep people believing as it matched observations, it is the observations were made because of the very nature of it. It is why I drew the comparison to fire. Fire is not hot because people observed it as hot and someone thought they had better write in THE BOOK fire is hot. Fire is hot, full stop, that is a property of it.

I do love your childlike simplicity for reasoning. It is like saying witches burn and wood also burns so witches are made out of wood. Wood floats and so do ducks, so if a woman weighs the same as a duck she must be a witch. A silly Monty Python scene but the same logical reasoning as I'm seeing here.

Makes no sense.
It still isn't going the opposite way, so what are we dealing with?
A mirror image or something?

He is talking about retrograde motion of the planets. They don't change direction but appear to. Similar to the way trees next to a railway line appear to move quickly compared to the hills in the background.

There is a photo of the effect and a good explanation of it here:

You must be logged on to see media items

I'd be interested in the flat earth theory* behind this. Even if it is crystals projecting on the dome (snigger) then what causes the crystals to suddenly project mars and other planets moving backwards for a bit before going back on course. And, why is this motion precisely consistent with the pure mathematics of a series of planets in orbit around the sun, so the point it can be modelled exactly in software as a simulation and predicted years in advance. These predictions use pretty basic equations that pretty much describe the relative circular motions of the planets, so if they turned out to be because of the crystals just deciding to do that (sniggering more and more) why would the mechanics precisely mirror that of the observed motion?

To me that could only happen if the crystals had been designed to do that to trick people. That opens up a whole new concept of an advanced creator who tries to catch us out (moving way beyond sniggering now).


* theory - : a

You must be logged on to see external links

or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
I'm happy to accept that a flat earth theory does not stand up to any level of inspection and can be at best be described as an unproved deranged ramble.

 

[What A Waster]

there we have it members of the SMB. Chemical combustion is not a thing it is friction.

But that is not what I asked anyway. I was pointing at your post that say they fiddled the globe model because people observed different things. I was pointing out that the change was not a bodge to keep people believing as it matched observations, it is the observations were made because of the very nature of it. It is why I drew the comparison to fire. Fire is not hot because people observed it as hot and someone thought they had better write in THE BOOK fire is hot. Fire is hot, full stop, that is a property of it.

I do love your childlike simplicity for reasoning. It is like saying witches burn and wood also burns so witches are made out of wood. Wood floats and so do ducks, so if a woman weighs the same as a duck she must be a witch. A silly Monty Python scene but the same logical reasoning as I'm seeing here.

He is talking about retrograde motion of the planets. They don't change direction but appear to. Similar to the way trees next to a railway line appear to move quickly compared to the hills in the background.

There is a photo of the effect and a good explanation of it here:

You must be logged on to see media items

I'd be interested in the flat earth theory* behind this. Even if it is crystals projecting on the dome (snigger) then what causes the crystals to suddenly project mars and other planets moving backwards for a bit before going back on course. And, why is this motion precisely consistent with the pure mathematics of a series of planets in orbit around the sun, so the point it can be modelled exactly in software as a simulation and predicted years in advance. These predictions use pretty basic equations that pretty much describe the relative circular motions of the planets, so if they turned out to be because of the crystals just deciding to do that (sniggering more and more) why would the mechanics precisely mirror that of the observed motion?

To me that could only happen if the crystals had been designed to do that to trick people. That opens up a whole new concept of an advanced creator who tries to catch us out (moving way beyond sniggering now).


* theory - : a

You must be logged on to see external links

or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
I'm happy to accept that a flat earth theory does not stand up to any level of inspection and can be at best be described as an unproved deranged ramble.

Get out of that!

 

[Nukehasslefan]

It's not a case of "acceptance of a model" or "storytellers", it's a case of "look up in the sky... oh yeah, now I can see" and "look at how mirrors or prisms work, oh yeah, now I see".

You're looking up at the sky and you see lights moving in that sky. You do not feel any motion to say it's you moving on a sphere but you are simply told, you are.
We've had this drummed into us from being a kid, so I have no issue with anyone going with that flow. I simply used to but absolutely do not for reasons I've given which you have every right to argue.

Your proposal is impossible without the use of some weird kind of all-powerful magic that distorts the way we all observe the sky at night.

To be fair that's exactly how I think of the global model.

And that's just ONE of ENDLESS different examples that can be presented that can be absolutely perfectly explained for an oblate spheroid world with simple observation and sub-GCSE maths, that cannot be explained by non-magical means if the world is ANY OTHER SHAPE.

It can be explained because it's all on a silver platter. A story telling book on a platter that has had a long time to iron out all of the stuff that begged questions.

It's told as all truth's but hidden behind the words " scientific theory" just in case someone comes along and really stumps the story tellers.

If you disagree, show us your working.

Show us your maths that explains it.
Show us your diagrams.
Show us your map of the world.
Show us ANYTHING that backs up your theory and disproves ours.

I can show you one thing among a few but they're cast off as nothing because the global storyline is far too ingrained.
Water conforming to the container it is in and absolutely not conforming to a convex curve/ball is just one nailed on realistic proof. But like I say, those who are adamant the Earth is a supposed oblate spheroid, who are in the majority, are going to discard all of the evidence in favour of the magical mysteries that show a spinning ball in a so called vacuum of supposed space with nice pictures and video etc to just push it all home.

I can't compete with that but I can certainly not believe any of it.
I just leave it up to people to decide to question it, or not. It's not my call.

All you've ever done on this forum is stick your fingers in your ears at all our irrefutable proofs and say "LA LA LA NOT LISTENING, YOU BELIEVE THAT DELUDED BRAINWASHED STORYTELLER STUFF THAT YOU WANT TO BELIEVE AND I'LL BELIEVE THE TRUTH".

There are no irrefutable proof's.

I struggle to believe that you're genuinely as thick as the persona you portray yourself as on this forum. You absolutely HAVE to be on a wind-up.

You can decide what you want about what you think I am and I'm ok with that.
If I really bother you in that sense then wouldn't it be better if you placed me on ignore?

That's the best advice I can give you but I'm not in charge of your mind, so I can't force you to do it but would prefer it if you did.

You mean the qualified scientists who have studied this kind of thing for years? Compared to the absolute fantasy scenario you have come up with in your head. You absolute clown

There's physical scientists, theoretical scientists and there's pseudo-scientists. It's all about figuring out which is which.

 

[DurhamRedStripe]

You're looking up at the sky and you see lights moving in that sky. You do not feel any motion to say it's you moving on a sphere but you are simply told, you are.
We've had this drummed into us from being a kid, so I have no issue with anyone going with that flow. I simply used to but absolutely do not for reasons I've given which you have every right to argue.


To be fair that's exactly how I think of the global model.


It can be explained because it's all on a silver platter. A story telling book on a platter that has had a long time to iron out all of the stuff that begged questions.

It's told as all truth's but hidden behind the words " scientific theory" just in case someone comes along and really stumps the story tellers.





I can show you one thing among a few but they're cast off as nothing because the global storyline is far too ingrained.
Water conforming to the container it is in and absolutely not conforming to a convex curve/ball is just one nailed on realistic proof. But like I say, those who are adamant the Earth is a supposed oblate spheroid, who are in the majority, are going to discard all of the evidence in favour of the magical mysteries that show a spinning ball in a so called vacuum of supposed space with nice pictures and video etc to just push it all home.

I can't compete with that but I can certainly not believe any of it.
I just leave it up to people to decide to question it, or not. It's not my call.



There are no irrefutable proof's.



You can decide what you want about what you think I am and I'm ok with that.
If I really bother you in that sense then wouldn't it be better if you placed me on ignore?

That's the best advice I can give you but I'm not in charge of your mind, so I can't force you to do it but would prefer it if you did.

There's physical scientists, theoretical scientists and there's pseudo-scientists. It's all about figuring out which is which.

What do you do for work?

 

[tunstall birdman]

What do you do for work?

He works for the police, he's a Flaty. lol

 

[Roman maroni]

You're looking up at the sky and you see lights moving in that sky. You do not feel any motion to say it's you moving on a sphere but you are simply told, you are.
We've had this drummed into us from being a kid, so I have no issue with anyone going with that flow. I simply used to but absolutely do not for reasons I've given which you have every right to argue.


To be fair that's exactly how I think of the global model.


It can be explained because it's all on a silver platter. A story telling book on a platter that has had a long time to iron out all of the stuff that begged questions.

It's told as all truth's but hidden behind the words " scientific theory" just in case someone comes along and really stumps the story tellers.





I can show you one thing among a few but they're cast off as nothing because the global storyline is far too ingrained.
Water conforming to the container it is in and absolutely not conforming to a convex curve/ball is just one nailed on realistic proof. But like I say, those who are adamant the Earth is a supposed oblate spheroid, who are in the majority, are going to discard all of the evidence in favour of the magical mysteries that show a spinning ball in a so called vacuum of supposed space with nice pictures and video etc to just push it all home.

I can't compete with that but I can certainly not believe any of it.
I just leave it up to people to decide to question it, or not. It's not my call.



There are no irrefutable proof's.



You can decide what you want about what you think I am and I'm ok with that.
If I really bother you in that sense then wouldn't it be better if you placed me on ignore?

That's the best advice I can give you but I'm not in charge of your mind, so I can't force you to do it but would prefer it if you did.

There's physical scientists, theoretical scientists and there's pseudo-scientists. It's all about figuring out which is which.

You don't feel constant motion.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

there we have it members of the SMB. Chemical combustion is not a thing it is friction.

Everything is friction.
Nothing works without it.

Energy equals vibration/friction and pressure and frequency.
A medium that has to be, always or nothing works/exists.

But that is not what I asked anyway. I was pointing at your post that say they fiddled the globe model because people observed different things. I was pointing out that the change was not a bodge to keep people believing as it matched observations, it is the observations were made because of the very nature of it.

The observations match what the story tellers portrayed.
A man in a red and white suit with a white moustache and beard riding a sleigh with Reindeer, into the night sky is what kids believed was and is their truth.
Even as adults we all still have that thought although we now realise it's a story with films and men in stores and in grotto's.....etc.

It's all about what people want to believe is a story.
If enough people follow it, it becomes a reality.
The more that believe a story the more difficult it is to alter that view. Peer pressure sees to that.

It is why I drew the comparison to fire. Fire is not hot because people observed it as hot and someone thought they had better write in THE BOOK fire is hot. Fire is hot, full stop, that is a property of it.

It is hot but we can physically see it and feel it and know to be careful around it, in any form.
People have no real need to go any further with it if it doesn't peak any interest. All they need to know is the comfort and dangers it offers.

I do love your childlike simplicity for reasoning. It is like saying witches burn and wood also burns so witches are made out of wood.

That's your reasoning, not mind.

Wood floats and so do ducks, so if a woman weighs the same as a duck she must be a witch.

Again, your reasoning.

A silly Monty Python scene but the same logical reasoning as I'm seeing here.

Your reasoning.

He is talking about retrograde motion of the planets. They don't change direction but appear to. Similar to the way trees next to a railway line appear to move quickly compared to the hills in the background.

There is a photo of the effect and a good explanation of it here:

You must be logged on to see media items

I'd be interested in the flat earth theory* behind this. Even if it is crystals projecting on the dome (snigger) then what causes the crystals to suddenly project mars and other planets moving backwards for a bit before going back on course. And, why is this motion precisely consistent with the pure mathematics of a series of planets in orbit around the sun, so the point it can be modelled exactly in software as a simulation and predicted years in advance.

Apparently 2000 years to work it out.
I've never seen it happen but if it did it would likely be an optical illusion upon the dome.

These predictions use pretty basic equations that pretty much describe the relative circular motions of the planets, so if they turned out to be because of the crystals just deciding to do that (sniggering more and more) why would the mechanics precisely mirror that of the observed motion?

When a story is told then sold it becomes the reality for those who adhere to it.

To me that could only happen if the crystals had been designed to do that to trick people. That opens up a whole new concept of an advanced creator who tries to catch us out (moving way beyond sniggering now).

We have many optical illusions and mirrored stuff so strange carry on's in the sky would not surprise me.

* theory - : a

You must be logged on to see external links

or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena

Plausible is not a truth.
It's a possibility to any person that deems it to be so.

I'm happy to accept that a flat earth theory does not stand up to any level of inspection and can be at best be described as an unproved deranged ramble.

You're welcome to that, of course.
I'm not asking you to accept anything of a flat Earth. I'm simply saying a spinning globe is utter nonsense in my honest opinion.

 

[Hend79]

What do you do for work?

You're looking up at the sky and you see lights moving in that sky. You do not feel any motion to say it's you moving on a sphere but you are simply told, you are.
We've had this drummed into us from being a kid, so I have no issue with anyone going with that flow. I simply used to but absolutely do not for reasons I've given which you have every right to argue.

Again this has been explained to you already. You can sit in a car blindfolded, maintaining a steady speed and you wouldnt be able to tell you are in motion.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Again this has been explained to you already. You can sit in a car blindfolded, maintaining a steady speed and you wouldnt be able to tell you are in motion.

Actually you would.
It doesn't really matter though, because we can look up at the night sky and know we are not in motion, without a blindfold.

The thing is, if it's been drummed into people that they spin on a ball at over 1000 mph in a space vacuum then that's what's happening for them.

 

[Hend79]

Actually you would.
It doesn't really matter though, because we can look up at the night sky and know we are not in motion, without a blindfold.

The thing is, if it's been drummed into people that they spin on a ball at over 1000 mph in a space vacuum then that's what's happening for them.

There really is no hope for you

 

[Nukehasslefan]

There really is no hope for you

You have no need to worry about that. Just concentrate on your own well being and I'll do likewise with mine. Cheers.

 

[DaveH]

Everything is friction.
Nothing works without it.

Energy equals vibration/friction and pressure and frequency.
A medium that has to be, always or nothing works/exists.


The observations match what the story tellers portrayed.
A man in a red and white suit with a white moustache and beard riding a sleigh with Reindeer, into the night sky is what kids believed was and is their truth.
Even as adults we all still have that thought although we now realise it's a story with films and men in stores and in grotto's.....etc.

It's all about what people want to believe is a story.
If enough people follow it, it becomes a reality.
The more that believe a story the more difficult it is to alter that view. Peer pressure sees to that.



It is hot but we can physically see it and feel it and know to be careful around it, in any form.
People have no real need to go any further with it if it doesn't peak any interest. All they need to know is the comfort and dangers it offers.


That's your reasoning, not mind.



Again, your reasoning.


Your reasoning.



Apparently 2000 years to work it out.
I've never seen it happen but if it did it would likely be an optical illusion upon the dome.



When a story is told then sold it becomes the reality for those who adhere to it.




We have many optical illusions and mirrored stuff so strange carry on's in the sky would not surprise me.



Plausible is not a truth.
It's a possibility to any person that deems it to be so.



You're welcome to that, of course.
I'm not asking you to accept anything of a flat Earth. I'm simply saying a spinning globe is utter nonsense in my honest opinion.

People have observed the retrograde motion of the planets, they have not observed Santa, but apart from that, you are spot on.

Pour ethanol in a bowl, wave lighted match above. Friction?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

People have observed the retrograde motion of the planets, they have not observed Santa, but apart from that, you are spot on.

If they have then there's no definitive facts to it. It's a guess as to it happening because of a supposed globe spinning faster than another one.
Either way it still makes little sense....but, it's not an argument to be had.
Changes in motion of lights can easily be catered for with optical illusions on a dome. In my opinion.

Pour ethanol in a bowl, wave lighted match above. Friction?

Absolutely.
Even the match is under it which creates it's friction burn.

Put towards a flammable liquid and that liquid is already under friction before the struck match hits it. It then goes into a much bigger friction from the agitation of the lit match.
Energy/pressure = friction/vibration and frequency.

 

[legend7]

If they have then there's no definitive facts to it. It's a guess as to it happening because of a supposed globe spinning faster than another one.
Either way it still makes little sense....but, it's not an argument to be had.
Changes in motion of lights can easily be catered for with optical illusions on a dome. In my opinion.


Absolutely.
Even the match is under it which creates it's friction burn.

Put towards a flammable liquid and that liquid is already under friction before the struck match hits it. It then goes into a much bigger friction from the agitation of the lit match.
Energy/pressure = friction/vibration and frequency.

Rearrange these letters...

Space ends lie

 

[Roman maroni]

Actually you would.
It doesn't really matter though, because we can look up at the night sky and know we are not in motion, without a blindfold.

The thing is, if it's been drummed into people that they spin on a ball at over 1000 mph in a space vacuum then that's what's happening for them.

Unbelievable tripe that you spout.

If they have then there's no definitive facts to it. It's a guess as to it happening because of a supposed globe spinning faster than another one.
Either way it still makes little sense....but, it's not an argument to be had.
Changes in motion of lights can easily be catered for with optical illusions on a dome. In my opinion.


Absolutely.
Even the match is under it which creates it's friction burn.

Put towards a flammable liquid and that liquid is already under friction before the struck match hits it. It then goes into a much bigger friction from the agitation of the lit match.
Energy/pressure = friction/vibration and frequency.

Absolute gibberish.

 

[keybuk]

It’s fairly obvious he’s on a wind up.
I have this theory that he’s a 45 year old bloke still living with his mam in a two bedroom flat above a laundromat in Dunston. He’s never had the pleasure of a lady, weighs somewhere in the region of 30 stone, lives off oven pizza which his mam brings into his bedroom which he never leaves. He leaves the crusts which get fed to the dog who, because @Nukehasslefan is mildly agoraphobic doesn’t get walked and therefore shits all over the kitchen/dining/living area.
His mam, 76 years old who is on the NHS waiting list for a double hip replacement and walks with two sticks has to pick up the shit when the smell gets too much because he won’t as he struggles to bend over due to the size of his gut. The smell doesn’t bother him at all due to his own body odour being so much worse. This will be compounded by the stench emanating from his bedroom that he has set up as his own little wank palace, the floor of which is covered with wank socks that even though he lives above the laundromat never see the inside of a washing machine. His main ‘turn on’ for his mastabatory sessions revolve around French midget porn but when he gets bored with that he comes onto the SMB where threads like this serve to fill those socks with semen in much the same way.
Like I said, it’s a theory. It may be true or it may not be but it’s as good as any other.

As theories go it holds far more water than the tripe he comes out with.