Scotty CTA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 15 hours ago, dipped flake said: You surely must be on the biggest wind up in history with this. No, although I've already stated that I'm working through it. I quoted Orwell who challenged us to give our reasons for accepting without knowing first hand. He also mentioned the 'layperson' of which I would be a good example, and I can honestly now tell you that I wouldn't know how to prove to someone that the earth is a sphere. (NASA using hairspray, green screens, CGI, and harnesses doesn't help either.) 15 hours ago, dipped flake said: Can you just answer me one thing. If the earth is flat, how far do we have to go till we fall off the end?? Antarctica would be like the crust on a circular pizza. If you sail South in any direction, you will hit it. Ice walls as high as 200 to 300 feet hold the seas and oceans in. There is no edge to fall off of. Beyond that? A dome? Who knows? One weird thing is that the only treaty signed and enforced by every government on the planet is that 'Antarctica' is off limits to the public. Now I know that tourists can fly there, and stay a short while, and take some photos, etc. but they can't go exploring on their own. No private expeditions are allowed. 15 hours ago, dipped flake said: And what possible difference does it make to God if it is flat or a sphere?? So 2 things? :wink2: As already stated... Big bang proponents would favour a heliocentric system as it would fit their 'random' view of the universe, whereas a geocentric system would point to special creation. A flat motionless earth wouldn't orbit anything.
Scotty CTA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 13 hours ago, Toepoke said: Indeed. I'd describe myself as a fairly average human in terms of adventurousness, but even I would be intrigued to visit the edge of the Earth if it existed. So how come out of the billions of others who are living or have lived, nobody, that's nobody, has witnessed the world's edge and returned with some evidence? Everything changed after WW II. 'Operation Highjump' saw Admiral Byrd, a 33 degree Freemason, lead an expedition of 30 ships and 4700 militarized soldiers to see if they could find out what was after the ice wall. Then in 'Operation Fishbowl', the Americans and The Russians fired 49 high altitude thermo nuclear rockets straight up into the sky before agreeing to a ban and going with their fake space programs instead. 'High jump'... 'Fishbowl'... get it?
Scotty CTA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 13 hours ago, iainmac1 said: You clearly need to go back to school. The flat earth society offer many plausible answers for this.on their faq and the forum. http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/home/index.php/faq It's either one of... There is no end the water goes on indefinitely. There is a big fuk off ice wall guarded by NASA guards. It's too far away from the sun. You couldn't breathe that far away and it's too cold. You automatically teleport to the other side like magic. Take your pick. The Flat Earth Society was set up by the enemy and exists only to either confuse folk or to turn people away from the truth.
Scotty CTA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 12 hours ago, Boynze said: this is a cracker: What Is Gravity? Gravity as a theory is false. Objects simply fall. And I would agree. The theory of gravity was needed to be invented to answer the question "If we are spinning really really fast, then why don't we fly off?" 12 hours ago, biffer said: That's beautifully batshit. Only because of what you have been indoctrinated with. (Think of the effort it would take you to 'unlearn'.) 11 hours ago, Orraloon said: That question is actually a very good one. Careful. The 'professing themselves to be wise 2+2=5 but that's not what we were brainwashed with crowd' might call you names. 11 hours ago, Orraloon said: Not so sure about the answer though. Many very well qualified scientists are still trying to work out what gravity is, and how it works. And I thank you for the integrity of your honest, accurate, and truthful post.
Scotty CTA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 6 hours ago, deecie said: All around the world... Correct. Magellan was the first person to organise the first circumnavigation of the circular flat earth from East to West (1519-1522). How come no one has circumnavigated the 'globe' from pole to pole? I mean... it's 2017. Wouldn't some nation like to take credit for doing that?
Scotty CTA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 3 hours ago, Och Aye said: Sounds more like The Truman Show. They have to show us. (Hidden in 'plane' sight.)
DonnyTJS Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 5 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: How come no one has circumnavigated the 'globe' from pole to pole? I mean... it's 2017. Wouldn't some nation like to take credit for doing that? Rule Britannia ...
Toepoke Posted February 8, 2017 Author Posted February 8, 2017 7 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: Antarctica would be like the crust on a circular pizza. If you sail South in any direction, you will hit it. The Earth's stuffed crust?
biffer Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 6 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: Only because of what you have been indoctrinated with. (Think of the effort it would take you to 'unlearn'.) It's very telling that the only post of mine you've responded to is this one. Probably because it's the only one that gives you a chance to come out with something condescending which means absolutely nothing. You're trolling. Your attitude to a man who achieved huge amounts in his life is a hugely un-christian attitude. It's disgusting Scott. You talk about the enemy all the time. He wouldn't want someone to perpetrate lies and ridiculous theories by any chance would he? He wouldn't want people to claim things that are false and create division based on false faith? He wouldn't want good men dishonoured and abused? You are the agent of the enemy. You've been fooled and misled in order to cause hatred and pain.
Toepoke Posted February 8, 2017 Author Posted February 8, 2017 11 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: Everything changed after WW II. 'Operation Highjump' saw Admiral Byrd, a 33 degree Freemason, lead an expedition of 30 ships and 4700 militarized soldiers to see if they could find out what was after the ice wall. Then in 'Operation Fishbowl', the Americans and The Russians fired 49 high altitude thermo nuclear rockets straight up into the sky before agreeing to a ban and going with their fake space programs instead. 'High jump'... 'Fishbowl'... get it? I'm more inclined to believe the official history here... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Highjump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fishbowl Out of interest do you have a satellite dish?
Orraloon Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 3 hours ago, Toepoke said: The Earth's stuffed crust? That might explain why some folk are so worried about the polar ice melting. One wee hole in that ice wall and all the water would run off the edge. Not sure where it would go to though. Maybe it it would run underneath the earth and put out the fires of hell? So, maybe global warming is a good thing after all?
Toepoke Posted February 8, 2017 Author Posted February 8, 2017 19 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: The theory of gravity was needed to be invented to answer the question "If we are spinning really really fast, then why don't we fly off?" I'm sure if Earth were spinning at several thousand rpm like that tennis ball we'd fly off too...
Eisegerwind Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 The tennis ball anology is'nt the best for lots of reasons, youd get that effect at 10's of rpm rather than 1000's rpm. The answer to your question is online and is a surprisingly low 0,011 rpm for someone on the equator neglecting lots of other factors of course.
Toepoke Posted February 8, 2017 Author Posted February 8, 2017 58 minutes ago, Eisegerwind said: The tennis ball anology is'nt the best for lots of reasons, youd get that effect at 10's of rpm rather than 1000's rpm. The answer to your question is online and is a surprisingly low 0,011 rpm for someone on the equator neglecting lots of other factors of course. Interesting. Although even at that speed a day would only last about 80 minutes so I doubt the planet would be particularly hospitable...
Scotty CTA Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 What about curved water? You guys believe in curved water on a 'globe'? You know, where 'gravity' is strong enough to hold curved water in place on an ocean but not strong enough to keep a mosquito down?
DonnyTJS Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 School-room physics: you know, where gravitational effect on an object is dependent on its mass. The oceans have rather more mass than a mosquito (which, when in flight, is 'working' to 'reduce' the effect; you don't get something for nothing). We witness curved water every day, whenever we see a droplet of the stuff, so we know water coheres (we even know why), so its oceanic mass is colossal. You never got back to biffer to explain away the movement of dust on the moon, btw ...
Eisegerwind Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 5 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: What about curved water? You guys believe in curved water on a 'globe'? You know, where 'gravity' is strong enough to hold curved water in place on an ocean but not strong enough to keep a mosquito down? That is fcukin scary.
Toepoke Posted February 9, 2017 Author Posted February 9, 2017 6 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: What about curved water? You guys believe in curved water on a 'globe'? You know, where 'gravity' is strong enough to hold curved water in place on an ocean but not strong enough to keep a mosquito down? Curved air is even lighter. (just had a Sonja Kristina moment mmmmmmmmm)
Orraloon Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Toepoke said: Curved air is even lighter. (just had a Sonja Kristina moment mmmmmmmmm) Lighter than what?
biffer Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 8 hours ago, DonnyTJS said: School-room physics: you know, where gravitational effect on an object is dependent on its mass. The oceans have rather more mass than a mosquito (which, when in flight, is 'working' to 'reduce' the effect; you don't get something for nothing). We witness curved water every day, whenever we see a droplet of the stuff, so we know water coheres (we even know why), so its oceanic mass is colossal. You never got back to biffer to explain away the movement of dust on the moon, btw ... He never does, because there's not an answer.
Toepoke Posted February 9, 2017 Author Posted February 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Orraloon said: Lighter than what? Water. (I appreciate that "less dense" would be a more appropriate comparison).
Orraloon Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 3 minutes ago, Toepoke said: Water. (I appreciate that "less dense" would be a more appropriate comparison). When you are trying to educate the ignorant you should at least try to use the correct terminology to avoid confusion.
DonnyTJS Posted February 9, 2017 Posted February 9, 2017 20 minutes ago, Orraloon said: When you are trying to educate the ignorant you should at least try to use the correct terminology to avoid confusion. To be fair, he only brought up curved air to get in the Sonja Kristina reference; I'd considered doing the same thing, but didn't think anyone on here would get it ... (plus, I always find the Stewart Copeland connection off-putting).
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.