Put a flat earthier into space

[Nukehasslefan]

Again I agree, looking back its with a pinch of faith, is what was written the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, I very much doubt it. Take war, the winners get the right to write the history, what did the people of tory think after the city state was sacked? We dont know as the main written accounts were from hundreds of years later in The Iliad and The Odyssey, in fact for a long time it was thought Troy didn't even exist and it was just a story.
So it is hard to know truths when looking at the past and what's been written, but is that the same in science, is that not held to a higher standard, where the science of what we understand changes as we learn more, now that doesn't account for if we are being deceived, but thats a lot of scientist that are onboard doing the deceiving if there is a way to disprove the globe theory.

The older a story becomes the more believed it becomes and the more certain people can be stood out as the overall authority/experts on retelling that story.
And what do you say about scientists and a global Earth and how many would need to lie? It's easy to see why that thought process would be there for many but that's basically because the word scientists are generally assumed as ultra intelligence over the average Joe and how could they all lie or not know facts about a globe?
However, how many scientists are dealing factually with a globe over those who are basically dealing with hypothetical and reliance on various takes from Tom Dick or Harry or Julie Ann and Mary?

You see you could equate that to, how can all teachers be lying about teaching a globe? Where do they get their info from? They follow a curriculum and scientists follow their own set patterns for innumerable things to do with Earth and theoretical's about space and whatnot.

I dont have the skills or the knowhow to run my own tests and so I am left with using the knowledge of others to make my choices, I always keep an open mind as facts have changed in science before, just like in history, sometimes we get stuff wrong and we change our thoughts on it.

And that's the best way to go. I still have an open mind to all manner of theories and I still have an open mind as to what Earth is in its entirety and what's beyond it.
The thing is I never used to have one. I simply believed all the stuff told by authority and only really opened up around 30 years old.

Having an open mind is very important, I dont believe in god, but I have kept an open mind and happily wait for someone to come along and prove to me I am wrong.

That's the same here.

recent past, distant past doesn't matter, history can be rewritten, if enough people jump on board it can become its own truth, this is very true.
But we have to be careful dont we, do we just not believe any experts moving forward, do we only trust what we ourselves can see and do, I for one dont have the equipment or training to test everything, I cant explain how a simple record works, how the groves on it make sound and how a needle running over it makes it replay the sound, but i can see it does that, just because I cant explain something doesn't mean its not so, so it comes to a point I need to trust the people that can explain it.

This is why I always say I accept a hell of a lot and find no reason to question it at any specific time, if ever.
It's all about what comes down the line as I go through the bits and pieces of trying to understand this Earth.

its like quantum physics, it blows my mind I always thought you could have something from nothing, but science has shown this is not the truth, that fluctuations in energy can spontaneously create mass not just out of thin air, but out of absolutely nothing at all.

Could the very reasons you think there's issues with the history and science behind the globe and moon landings to use your example not just be its something that hasn't been explained yet, maybe the moon landings were faked, but for a completely different reason?

Absolutely.

anyway thank you for taking the time to reply, which version of the different world do you subscribe too, as I see there is more than one version of flat earth, be interesting to read some of the things that made you change your mind over time, full disclosure I agree we are sometimes lied too, I agree sometimes we are mislead but with regards flat earth or globe issues, I have yet to watch or read anything that would prove it, with the last thing i watched on it was a laser experiment that was done to prove the flat earth theory but instead ended up going against that, but like with everything I have an open mind.

As I said above, my mind is we live inside a cell.
Can we escape it?
It's not something I know for sure, obviously but maybe we're trying to tunnel into other cells. Maybe we have.
Maybe we weren't the first to do it and maybe something else tunnelled into ours.

A wacky thought but like you mention with the so-called moon landings...maybe we're being swerve balled.

Living in a cell would mean we have to have a central core. Energy. We see that energy reflected off the dome as a sun that we're told is 93 million miles in space.

Anyway, there are many reasons I go down the route I have and a spinning globe is absolutely nonsensical to me in how we're told it is, in terms of us walking upon it. This makes it much easier to start to understand much more about an alternate.

You assume without apparently any evidence.

Isn't that what you're also doing?

The so called stays quo is not a status quo it is an evolving evidence based reality.

Such as?

The fact you choose not to accept that doesn't invalidate it or more importantly give your assumptions any equivalence.

It may not invalidate it to you but it certainly does to me with the simplest forms of evidence. I'm sure you know what I'm about to say so I'll save you the argument.

 

[BigPete]

It's not something I know for sure, obviously but maybe we're trying to tunnel into other cells

Hold on..

I thought this was a perfectly sealed dome? Hence you refusing to acknowledge pulling and sucking.

Now we have multiple domes and people tunnelling into them?

But the globe theory is nonsense?

 

[payne]

Hold on..

I thought this was a perfectly sealed dome? Hence you refusing to acknowledge pulling and sucking.

Now we have multiple domes and people tunnelling into them?

But the globe theory is nonsense?

how long does the tunnel need to be to dig to the cell next to us?

 

[BigPete]

how long does the tunnel need to be to dig to the cell next to us?

What are they digging into?

What holds the domes if it isn't the end all..

 

[payne]

What are they digging into?

What holds the domes if it isn't the end all..

dense layers of volume - density or summit

 

[BigPete]

dense layers of volume - density or summit

If the dome is perfectly sealed with this pressure then surely a tunnel opening is going to totally fuck it

 

[payne]

all the air will be pushed out of the new hole from the high to low pressure air vibrations.

 

[fyl2u]

how long does the tunnel need to be to dig to the cell next to us?

Where are they tunnelling from? The centre where it's too cold for man or machine, or the ice wall around the outside where it's too cold for man or machine?

 

[Pink Panther]

If the dome is perfectly sealed with this pressure then surely a tunnel opening is going to totally fuck it

Everything could get sucked out!!

If sucking existed.

 

[payne]

Where are they tunnelling from? The centre where it's too cold for man or machine, or the ice wall around the outside where it's too cold for man or machine?

It must be the outer rim where the antarctic ice force knock about. They must do what the Germans did to stop Richard Attenborough getting out of camp with James Garner

 

[BigPete]

Flat Earth is becoming hollow earth with this tunneling malarkey

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

What you see and what you understand is a mixture of a few things.

Yes, two at least.

1. What you see is all explained to you, so you see that.

Well I'd see it anyway, but yes, it's been explained, but that doesn't mean I cant verify it for myself.

2. What you understand about it all is also what's been explained and offered to you as factual, so your basic reasoning is to follow that path.

If something has been explained and then verified by your own observations, only a hyper paranoid spunk bubble would have a problem with it right?

3. None of it you can prove as factual from your own arguments unless you actually use an appeal to whatever authority you use to argue for your perceived facts.

I can prove it to myself. Only your chosen path of deliberate ignorance prevents it being proof to you too.

And you only understand them because you were offered a spinning globe and also one that spins at an angle around a central sun that's apparently close to a million miles in diameter.
To you this makes sense.

You have no idea know what I understand or why. but the globe in orbit around the Sun does make sense.

To me, it actually beggars belief but the genius of the con has me holding my hands up to it but it doesn't make it any less nonsensical.

The depths of your paranoia beggars belief.

I assume lots of stuff is based on my thought process of what Earth could well be. I can explain many things and some I'm still working on.

You think you can explain many things, but this entire thread suggests otherwise.

Just remember one thing. You got your globe and all the trimmings served on a silver platter and at your convenience. You ate it all up and you can now regurgitate it at will if you so desire.
I had to cook my own based on scraps.

So it's no surprise you can argue your side in comfort with everything at your fingertips.

You say that as if there's some kind of shame in learning. We all learn from others, get over it. Learning from others does not invalidate the knowledge.
Knowledge is passed on, you can question it, that's to be encouraged, but you're not questioning, you're rejecting without checking the facts first.

 

[BigPete]

only a hyper paranoid spunk bubble would have a problem with it right?

You say that as if there's some kind of shame in learning

Think that's deep down where all this comes from.

The need to act smart and as if he knows everything. Been posters on here who he has said they are wrong when they actually work in that field in science.

Jealousy maybe that he hasn't achieved as much?

 

[chrismisterx]

As I said above, my mind is we live inside a cell.
Can we escape it?
It's not something I know for sure, obviously but maybe we're trying to tunnel into other cells. Maybe we have.
Maybe we weren't the first to do it and maybe something else tunnelled into ours.

I have not come across this theory before, the possible multi cell earth, I will give that a google and read up, as I have no knowledge about it, but it does sound a lot like the concave earth theory, I guess where we live inside the earth and not on it?

a lot of your thoughts I cant argue against when discussing the past and possible different histories and we have seen even in my lifetime some histories being rewritten, I cant fault the logical thoughts you have with being careful with what to believe as fact and to keep an open mind as I too believe in these things, history has shown mistakes are made, science is changed and sometimes the government will mislead the population.

I struggle with the concept that people aren't testing the theories out, maybe some scientists are repeating what's wrote but what about the people who are trying to figure this out, the flat earthers who are doing tests and have failed to prove theories or the other people who have discredited some thoughts, the only way that would work is if the psychics we know works on "different earth" but since a lot of the flat earth advocates say the psychics is wrong, so if its wrong how can the same psychics be proved through experiments to be right, another problem I can see is the in fighting between the flat earth groups with some groups splintering and these groups changing there views to accommodate new information, it sometimes feels like changing a few things to better fit the current narrative as opposed to following the evidence, like many theories that evolve overtime, for example ghosts went from shadowy figures to orbs with the change in tech.

Was the moon landing faked, it could have been, was it faked due to trying keep alive the globe theory, my reason would be why, wouldnt it be better to forget anything to do with rockets than open a whole can of worms and to then have to fake stuff to explain away. If the moon landings where faked its more likely to do with astronauts dying due to poor radiation shielding from having to go through the Van Allen radiation belt than flat earth theory imo, that would seem more plausible if you subscribe to the moon landing conspiracy.

I do think its unfair to mock a persons believes, its lazy, its far better to discuss and try and understand the persons view point even if you disagree, debate and engage is more productive, I find a lot of the time there is some common ground in some areas.

I have spoke to a few different people over the years who have "non everyday" view points, one thing that stands out is you tend to see a belief in one conspiracy or "none run off the mill ideas" tends to lead into a second or third, I noticed the same pattern with yourself, its seems to have been the moon landings which pointed you into the world of flat earth which has lead into the world of "other beings" "elites" or whatever name you would like to call them, being in charge and control us, some people call these beings the lizard people and claim the royal family are lizard people, some call them alien spirits.

I am not saying what you have said is wrong, I personally cant disprove it, like I said I dont have the background or the equipment to do so, but after reading a little bit from both sides I do feel you need to take a bigger leap of faith to err on the side of the flat earth argument, maybe I haven't read or watched the right stuff yet, but it does feel like the flat earth side is lacking in proof compared to the other side, another issue is the many faces of flat earth, I cant help but compare it to a religion where we have the same idea that there's a god but then it breaks down into many differing gods depending on your upbringing, which has led to each religion saying the others aren't real.

I am quite willing to read more on the subject if you want to share links or maybe you have insight to better quality information, that I have missed on my searches, I have an open mind and would read anything with an open mind, but then again if its too technical I might not understand it.

 

[BigPete]

I have not come across this theory before, the possible multi cell earth, I will give that a google and read up, as I have no knowledge about it, but it does sound a lot like the concave earth theory, I guess where we live inside the earth and not on it?

a lot of your thoughts I cant argue against when discussing the past and possible different histories and we have seen even in my lifetime some histories being rewritten, I cant fault the logical thoughts you have with being careful with what to believe as fact and to keep an open mind as I too believe in these things, history has shown mistakes are made, science is changed and sometimes the government will mislead the population.

I struggle with the concept that people aren't testing the theories out, maybe some scientists are repeating what's wrote but what about the people who are trying to figure this out, the flat earthers who are doing tests and have failed to prove theories or the other people who have discredited some thoughts, the only way that would work is if the psychics we know works on "different earth" but since a lot of the flat earth advocates say the psychics is wrong, so if its wrong how can the same psychics be proved through experiments to be right, another problem I can see is the in fighting between the flat earth groups with some groups splintering and these groups changing there views to accommodate new information, it sometimes feels like changing a few things to better fit the current narrative as opposed to following the evidence, like many theories that evolve overtime, for example ghosts went from shadowy figures to orbs with the change in tech.

Was the moon landing faked, it could have been, was it faked due to trying keep alive the globe theory, my reason would be why, wouldnt it be better to forget anything to do with rockets than open a whole can of worms and to then have to fake stuff to explain away. If the moon landings where faked its more likely to do with astronauts dying due to poor radiation shielding from having to go through the Van Allen radiation belt than flat earth theory imo, that would seem more plausible if you subscribe to the moon landing conspiracy.

I do think its unfair to mock a persons believes, its lazy, its far better to discuss and try and understand the persons view point even if you disagree, debate and engage is more productive, I find a lot of the time there is some common ground in some areas.

I have spoke to a few different people over the years who have "non everyday" view points, one thing that stands out is you tend to see a belief in one conspiracy or "none run off the mill ideas" tends to lead into a second or third, I noticed the same pattern with yourself, its seems to have been the moon landings which pointed you into the world of flat earth which has lead into the world of "other beings" "elites" or whatever name you would like to call them, being in charge and control us, some people call these beings the lizard people and claim the royal family are lizard people, some call them alien spirits.

I am not saying what you have said is wrong, I personally cant disprove it, like I said I dont have the background or the equipment to do so, but after reading a little bit from both sides I do feel you need to take a bigger leap of faith to err on the side of the flat earth argument, maybe I haven't read or watched the right stuff yet, but it does feel like the flat earth side is lacking in proof compared to the other side, another issue is the many faces of flat earth, I cant help but compare it to a religion where we have the same idea that there's a god but then it breaks down into many differing gods depending on your upbringing, which has led to each religion saying the others aren't real.

I am quite willing to read more on the subject if you want to share links or maybe you have insight to better quality information, that I have missed on my searches, I have an open mind and would read anything with an open mind, but then again if its too technical I might not understand it.

Start from page one loads of good information.

 

[chrismisterx]

Start from page one loads of good information.

going to settle down and read throughout the whole thread later on with a coffee, could be an interesting journey for sure. Doing a crash course on some of these views via google, been enlightening to say the least, I had no idea the scope and difference in these beliefs.

I really didn't know how many different flat earth / different earth theories there is out there.

 

[BigPete]

going to settle down and read throughout the whole thread later on with a coffee, could be an interesting journey for sure. Doing a crash course on some of these views via google, been enlightening to say the least, I had no idea the scope and difference in these beliefs.

I really didn't know how many different flat earth / different earth theories there is out there.

You'll see it doesn't just boil down to flat earth beliefs with him.

He doesn't accept the fundamentals of science even when he has been presented it.

 

[payne]

going to settle down and read throughout the whole thread later on with a coffee, could be an interesting journey for sure. Doing a crash course on some of these views via google, been enlightening to say the least, I had no idea the scope and difference in these beliefs.

I really didn't know how many different flat earth / different earth theories there is out there.

That's because they are just making shit up as they have no evidence for anything. Mainstream ideas are mainstream is because there's a consensus because many competing groups get the same result. Our resident flat earther is even ridiculed by the flat earth forum for his stance.

 

[Hend79]

The older a story becomes the more believed it becomes and the more certain people can be stood out as the overall authority/experts on retelling that story.
And what do you say about scientists and a global Earth and how many would need to lie? It's easy to see why that thought process would be there for many but that's basically because the word scientists are generally assumed as ultra intelligence over the average Joe and how could they all lie or not know facts about a globe?
However, how many scientists are dealing factually with a globe over those who are basically dealing with hypothetical and reliance on various takes from Tom Dick or Harry or Julie Ann and Mary?

You see you could equate that to, how can all teachers be lying about teaching a globe? Where do they get their info from? They follow a curriculum and scientists follow their own set patterns for innumerable things to do with Earth and theoretical's about space and whatnot.


And that's the best way to go. I still have an open mind to all manner of theories and I still have an open mind as to what Earth is in its entirety and what's beyond it.
The thing is I never used to have one. I simply believed all the stuff told by authority and only really opened up around 30 years old.

That's the same here.


This is why I always say I accept a hell of a lot and find no reason to question it at any specific time, if ever.
It's all about what comes down the line as I go through the bits and pieces of trying to understand this Earth.



Absolutely.


As I said above, my mind is we live inside a cell.
Can we escape it?
It's not something I know for sure, obviously but maybe we're trying to tunnel into other cells. Maybe we have.
Maybe we weren't the first to do it and maybe something else tunnelled into ours.

A wacky thought but like you mention with the so-called moon landings...maybe we're being swerve balled.

Living in a cell would mean we have to have a central core. Energy. We see that energy reflected off the dome as a sun that we're told is 93 million miles in space.

Anyway, there are many reasons I go down the route I have and a spinning globe is absolutely nonsensical to me in how we're told it is, in terms of us walking upon it. This makes it much easier to start to understand much more about an alternate.

Isn't that what you're also doing?

Such as?

It may not invalidate it to you but it certainly does to me with the simplest forms of evidence. I'm sure you know what I'm about to say so I'll save you the argument.

You really are an absolute loon

As others have repeatedly asked you and you have constantly ignored..... Your theory is against the status quo, therefore the obligation is on you to prove your theories. But you won as you constantly deflect attention and change the subject. So Ill ask again, give us proof of your theory or our thoughts will be confirmed

 

[Nobby]

It may not invalidate it to you but it certainly does to me with the simplest forms of evidence. I'm sure you know what I'm about to say so I'll save you the argument.

The evidence that's so simple yet conclusive you won't share it!!!!!

The police caution springs to mind as being a good view the inference of non disclosure. You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.