Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - SorryNotSorry

Pages: [1] 2  Next >
1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 13, 2017, 02:33:04 AM »


..... you're messing with me now right? You're really going to say EVERY PERSON, in an entire country is a lier? Farthermore, and I have brought this up multiple times... WHY DO ALL OF THE BALLOONS APPEAR TO BE LAUNCHED FROM THE CENTER OF THE EARTH? no one will even touch this. Why can we not see this ice wall from 90,000 km in the air?!?! Saying every single man woman and child in Australia is a lier.... that just.... I don't even know what to do with that, you're hopeless.

Hey, with a true flat earth, there must be light across the entire surface at one time.  It cannot be light here, and dark there.  Go ahead, shine a light from a single source onto a piece of paper.  it lights the entire surface.  If the earth is flat, how can it possibly be light here and dark there. To prove my theory I call them at noon, (them being 12 hours different) and yet they claim it's dark.  Ergo, the earth is round, or Australians are liars.  This entire site is dedicated to the earth being flat, so Aussies are liars.  Cant be any simpler.
[/quote]

I agree the earth is round, but you have to take into consideration of the fact that the globe rotates on a pivot, that's why southern hemisphere has opposite seasons as us. People in Australia are not lying to us lol

2
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 12, 2017, 07:54:14 PM »
Quote

The real question is why everybody in Australia is a liar.  I suspect it's because they're all descendants of criminals. A real flat earth should have some degree of light, and some degree of full light over the entire surface at the same time.  But whenever It's full noon here in North America, and I call Australia, they always lie and say it's dark.  SAD!


..... you're messing with me now right? You're really going to say EVERY PERSON, in an entire country is a lier? Farthermore, and I have brought this up multiple times... WHY DO ALL OF THE BALLOONS APPEAR TO BE LAUNCHED FROM THE CENTER OF THE EARTH? no one will even touch this. Why can we not see this ice wall from 90,000 km in the air?!?! Saying every single man woman and child in Australia is a lier.... that just.... I don't even know what to do with that, you're hopeless.

3
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Intelectual curiosity
« on: July 12, 2017, 04:12:56 AM »
FIRSTLY,--When a pendulum, constructed according to plan of M. Foucault is allowed to vibrate, its plane of the vibration is often stationary and often variable. The variation is not uniform--is not always the same in the same place; nor the same in its rate, or velocity, or in its direction. This great variability in its behaviour is not compatible with the assumption of an earth or world globular in form and moving with uniform velocity. It cannot therefore be taken as evidence; for that which is inconstant is inadmissible, and not to be relied on. Hence it is not evidence, and nothing is proved or decided by its consideration.

Some variability between theory and reality is always there, when this variability is small enought then the theory matches the reality of the experiment. The existence of variability does not make a theory false, the amount of variability does. Here it's only stated that it exist (which is 100% true) but no other numbers or statistical analysis to back it up. "Often" isn't acceptable as far as scientific reviews go. This point is merely a statement with no proof.


SECONDLY.--Admitting the plane of vibration as changeable, where is the connection between such change and the supposed motion of the earth? What principle of reasoning guides the experimenter to the conclusion that it is the earth which moves underneath the pendulum; and not the pendulum which moves over the earth? What logical right or necessity forces one conclusion in preference to the other?

Both statements are true, movement is only defined relative to another object (principle of relativity). So if we assume that there is variation of the pendulum's movement, then it is true that the earth moves relative to the pendulum and the pendulum moves  relative to the earth.
This second point shows a lack of understanding of the principle of relativity which is one of the two postulates that Special relativity is based on. And I read in the wiki that Special relativity is accepted as true by FE.


THIRDLY.--Why was not the peculiar arrangement of the point of suspension of the pendulum specially considered in regard to its possible influence on the plane of oscillation? Was it not known, or was it overlooked, or was it, in the climax of theoretical revelry, ignored--thought unworthy of consideration--that a "ball-and-socket" joint, or a globular point of suspension on a plane surface, is one which facilitates circular motion more readily than any other, and that a pendulum so suspended (as M. Foucault's) could not, after passing over one arc of vibration, return through the same arc without many chances to one that its globular point of suspension would slightly turn or twist on its bed, and therefore give to the return or backward oscillation a slight change of direction? Changes in the electric and magnetic conditions of the atmosphere, as well as alterations in its density, temperature, and hygrometric state may all tend in addition to the peculiar mode of suspension, to make the pendulum oscillate in irregular directions. So far, then, as we have been able to trace the subject, we are compelled by the evidence obtained to deny that the variations observed in the oscillations of a freely vibrating pendulum have any connection whatever with

This point shows the same problems than the first point, no data, no experimental process, only statements that other thing than earth supposed rotation can affect the variation in the pendulum'movement. "Changes in the electric and magnetic conditions of the atmosphere, as well as alterations in its density, temperature, and hygrometric state may all tend in addition to the peculiar mode of suspension, to make the pendulum oscillate in irregular directions." this statement is true. However it is not sufficient to prove that the earth rotation theory is false.
To understand what causes this variation you have to take into account every possible cause. And then study how much each cause (temp, pressure, earth's rotation ...) creates this variation.

The fact is that there are plenty of studies about how earth's rotation explains this variation. However there is none that show temperature or pressure or the pendulum's particular build as a cause for the variation. A book that only "states" possible other causes without giving proper data to back it up isn't worth much in disproving the fact that the variation is caused mainly by earth rotation.

These experiments are quite easy to realise. It would be a great evidence of FE if you could build such an experiment to prove that Rowbowtham's explanation is right.
Just a quick note, in physics, the law of conservation of energystates that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant. What that means is that within a closed system you would see one object acting on another. This is the same effect that causes not to feel that fact that we are spinning at hundreds of miles per hour while moving around the sun are thousands of miles per hour, we don't feel it because it doesn't effect us, because we are all in a closed system. This means the pendulum is as well and therefore the movement of the earth will never have an effect on the moment of the pendulum no matter which earth model you are using.

4
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why?
« on: July 12, 2017, 04:03:16 AM »
Nothing really works in Flat Earth Theory.  There is so much โ€ซobvious evidence, still they deny all of it. It's not a theory it's a faith.

Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?

How about gravity? In order for a flat earth model to be rail gravity would have to be a lie since you would experience a different force depending on where you are. The idea that a disk is being perpetually propelled upward at a constant 9.8/ms^2 is insane, what is providing that force?

5
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 12, 2017, 04:00:31 AM »
What is your position here?
My position can be summarised as "Your data is bad and you should feel bad".

You are constantly lecturing people on the methods in which it is acceptable to communicate with you instead of just addressing the facts being presented.
Sorry, what facts? All we have here is a video showing enormous lens distortion. If the Earth were round, and if its curvature were as extreme as this video shows, the entire Earth would be smaller than the USA really is. There are no "facts" to "address" here.

If you wanted to have an exclusive club where everyone validates your conspiracy theory, why have a public site with a forum called "The Flat Earth Debate"?
What conspiracy theory?

If you are not interested in the debate, why come here and spend time blatantly avoiding the debate.
I'm always happy to debate. Just give me something to actually talk about.

You can, however, use math to verify the validity of any map that exists (keeping in mind that there is not one single "real" flat earth map that exists).
Fascinating. By all means, go ahead.

.... You do realize you're essentially arguing with one of your own people here, right? I sware you guys are just arguing for the same of arguing, you didn't even read the context.

To my point though, multiple balloons have been launched from all over the world, taking curvature out of the equation, one thing you can't argue is they a seem to apear to be launched from the center of the earth, now this is only possible on a spherical structure.

Also to my point, not one so for video has been shown a massive "ice wall" holding everything in. I even posted a video of a balloon from Australia that went up 90,000 km and no ice wall. How do you explaine that?

6
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 09, 2017, 03:42:14 AM »
Lol

7
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 08, 2017, 05:50:11 PM »
Alright, as dad as I am concerned, not one flat earther has provided a credible answer to my questions. No one is willing to launch their own balloon. No one will provide proof of this ice wall. No one will provide one shred of proof of a flat earth. And as usual when enough concreat proof has been provided they burry their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.

What are you talking about? Your "concrete proof" video was discredited in the second post of this thread.

No, it wasn't, plus there are a lot of other points brought up, no one wants to even try to answer them.

8
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 08, 2017, 03:20:04 AM »
Alright, as dad as I am concerned, not one flat earther has provided a credible answer to my questions. No one is willing to launch their own balloon. No one will provide proof of this ice wall. No one will provide one shred of proof of a flat earth. And as usual when enough concreat proof has been provided they burry their heads in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.

9
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why?
« on: July 08, 2017, 03:15:58 AM »
Alternatively new discoveries and advancements were made to make what was once deemed impossible, now possible.

"Doing the impossible" sounds like the least likely explanation if you ask me.

So airplanes don't exist? Nuclear power plants don't exist? That small device in your pocket doesn't have the processing power it claims to? All of those things were once deemed impossible, all now happen on a regular and daily basis. The impossible becoming the possible is practically a motto for applied sciences and tech for the past few decades. But sure, it happening similarly in this one area, is less likely than thousands of people, over a span of over 4 decades, from 15+ different countries, all lying. To serve what end? That is the million dollar question now then.

The existence of airplanes and smart phones are an empirical truth. Rockets capable of going into orbit are classified military-controlled technologies and do not meet the standard of empirical truth.

This is false. Space X is not a classified military operation. Multiple privet companies have launched independent satellites. Space X has launched multiple space flights and virgin galactic is not so far behind.

10
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 07, 2017, 01:53:05 PM »
Quote
Why would you be able to see where it is night?

Because of the time? Lol

I guess I don't understand your question. A round earth won't obscure your ability to see the horizon line, you can see this line from a 747 on a trans Atlantic flight. More to that point at that altitude you can see a slight curvature to the earth too.

Lack of light tends to obscure visibility.

A black body object is always visable on the background of space.

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 07, 2017, 04:00:11 AM »
Quote
Why would you be able to see where it is night?

Because of the time? Lol

I guess I don't understand your question. A round earth won't obscure your ability to see the horizon line, you can see this line from a 747 on a trans Atlantic flight. More to that point at that altitude you can see a slight curvature to the earth too.

12
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 06, 2017, 10:22:56 PM »
Another good argument is that, no matter where the balloon in launched from it always appears to be in the center,
What???

This has made my day, I'm off to work...

Sorry,

I should qualify this statement by asking why doesn't that above principal apply with a flat earth model.
Just stand still and do a 360 degree turn on the spot and tell me its because you are on a round earth that this is possible, are you not now the centre of all you survey?

Upon reaching the upper atmosphere's, where your vision allows you to see further, you should be able to begin to see the edges. A ballon launched in Australia should not see the world extend out beneath them equally in all directions on a flat Earth. Because the view would look past the 'ice wall' into nothingness. Actually now I'm curious what one launched from the Antarctic would see, if it's been done. Because it should see a long wall of ice curving off into the distance all along one side, would it not?

Here is a link to a video launched from southern Australia, no ice wall anywhere to be seen, and still equal land on all sides.


13
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 06, 2017, 10:19:26 PM »
Another good argument is that, no matter where the balloon in launched from it always appears to be in the center,
What???

This has made my day, I'm off to work...

Sorry,

I should qualify this statement by asking why doesn't that above principal apply with a flat earth model.
Just stand still and do a 360 degree turn on the spot and tell me its because you are on a round earth that this is possible, are you not now the centre of all you survey?

Standing on the ground does not help the argument for the same reason gaurd towers on built high up. You can see a greater distances and over obsitcals from an increased altadtude. As the person above me said a balloon launched from an area close to the edge of a flat earth should be able to see this wall and would not appear to be in the center of the map. In the flat earth model it is usually stated that the north poll is at the center, so the only place you should see equal land on all sides would be a balloon launched at the north poll. In fact any balloon launched should be able to see this wall before you see off into space above the horizon line.

14
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 06, 2017, 07:32:17 PM »
I'd just like to point out that the true curvature of the Earth is visible in all the weather balloon videos out there on YouTube.  It is true that the camera lens is distorting the horizon across the screen from left to right, but that isn't the only curving of the Earth in these pictures.  In all the videos you can see that the Earth curves away from us into the distance.  If the Earth was flat, we should be able to see hundreds or thousands of miles away into the distance as we rise higher.  Instead we always see the edge of the Earth in a sharp line as it curves away from us.



This screen shot at 6:16 from the video posted above shows the horizon from left to right looking as if the Earth's curve is concave.  We all know that is not correct, it is a lens distortion.  However in this same image, we can see that the Earth curves away from us into the distance.  It is very clear that anything moving away from you would fly out and down around the bend and out of sight as the Earth curves away.  Every balloon video that I've ever watched on YouTube shows this same thing; even the ones claiming 100% proof that the Earth is flat.  As I look at them, they all show camera lenses distorting a picture of a spherical Earth curving away out of sight.

Another good argument is that, no matter where the balloon in launched from it always appears to be in the center, this would not be possible with a flat earth. Disregarding the curvature and lense distortion, a ball on launched in California and one launched in Germany would not both appear to be launched at the center of the earth, this effect is only prevalent in a round earth model. A flat earth would show more land in one given direction than the other, where a spherical earth will always appear to be launched at the center and have equal land on all sides. This takes the argument of lense distortion completely out, I would like to see a counter argument on that point.

15
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 06, 2017, 12:47:45 AM »
The video you posted is using a wide angle lens, the curvature of the earth changes depending on where the camera is looking in the scene.

Show me s video of a flat earth then.

Showing photos of round (or flat) horizons convinces nobody.   If we saw a photo of a high-altitude, flat horizon - then that too could be the result of lens distortion.

It's truly a waste of time to try to present this stuff as evidence...and I say this as an RE'er.

I vote we find three FE'ers and three RE'ers with cameras - two who live in the UK, another two who live in East Africa and a third pair who live in South Africa (or choose Canada, Mexico and Argentina - or some place in north/central Russia, Japan and Australia...so long as they are on roughly the same line of longitude, I don't care) - have all of them photograph the moon at about the same time on the same night, preferably when it's close enough to the horizon to get both moon and horizon in shot - then have all six of them post their photos here and have a team of experts on either side of the debate explain to the rest of us what these photographs show.

Honestly - this is a ridiculously easy experiment...if it's done honestly by FE'ers AND RE'ers and we can compare their shots - then it's going to be hard for either side to claim "FAKE!" - there can be no possible conspiracy - and it WILL show whether the world is round or flat in a manner that everyone can easily understand.  Lens distortion won't matter - I can think of no way for this to fail.

I volunteer from northern California to take a picture.

16
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Google Earth
« on: July 04, 2017, 08:07:32 PM »
This is my first post, so greetings everyone!

I think the earth is round, and I have a strong background in conventional physics/engineering, but of course I'm open to the idea that it is all wrong, if you have a compelling alternative.

As for google earth - I think the existence of google earth (any atlas/highly detailed map of the globe really), along with so many people able to verify its accuracy at their home, is the strongest evidence for a round earth. I will assume that the earth is flat, or any other non spherical shape (so technically this reasoning doesn't disprove a hollow earth), and that google is in on the conspiracy and has practically infinite capabilities. They would have to build a false spherical model of the earth that is locally accurate everywhere that there are people who can search up their own address. They would find that it is impossible to stretch a flat surface around a round one without creating discontinuities like stretching and incorrect scaling in different places. There would end up being ripples or folds that have to be cut out of the model or moved around, and detail everywhere would have to be made up. Even placing a single small continent on the globe would be challenging because the perimeter would be too big to fit on a sphere without stretching it around.


This stretching problem I think is the same reason that there are no good detailed maps of the flat earth. It is impossible to create because every continent has a spherical surface, and would result in stretching if you tried to put it on a flat map. The existence of a map of the flat earth with road or maybe even town border level of detail would be proof of a flat earth, if the earth were flat. If you were to set off and start building a digital 3d map of the world, you would eventually find things not quite lining up, for example distances between landmarks far away from the center of your map would appear farther apart from each other.

I would like to know if anyone has a FET explination to how google has accomplished this global model if it is fake yet still lines up everywhere locally.

^^ what this guy said. ๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ‘๐Ÿ‘

17
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why?
« on: July 04, 2017, 07:58:36 PM »
My only question is, why? Although i've never come face-to-face with a Flat-Earther, I know they're incredibly stubborn. Unable to be open to new ideas. I've seen others try to reason with them, but in the end fail. Today I am not here to argue with any FEs, but to ask a question, why? Why do you think that the Earth is flat? No society nor government has any reason to lie about the shape of a planet. There is literally no reason whatsoever to lie about the SHAPE OF A PLANET. I know that no amount of stone cold facts I state will ever change any minds, so i'll leave it at that.

I agree, the idea that every country with a space program (United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, South and North Korea, Iran, Canada, ect...) are all spending trillions of dollars to fool everyone into thinking the earth is round is just crazy. There is no benefit, what do they gain from it? Or are they just doing it so they can have a good laugh?

18
Flat Earth Theory / Re: This video shows Flat earth and Globe earth?
« on: July 04, 2017, 07:46:36 PM »
How can you say every single lense is a wide angle lenses when we have seen absolutely no footage of a flat earth?

19
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 04, 2017, 07:38:47 PM »
The video you posted is using a wide angle lens, the curvature of the earth changes depending on where the camera is looking in the scene.

Show me s video of a flat earth then.

20
Flat Earth Theory / Re: For the love of all that is holy, read this.
« on: July 04, 2017, 05:18:50 AM »
Someone, anyone, give me evidence that I can't scientifically disapprove.

And between all of you, I challenge you to get $500 together and do the balloon test, I've seen hundreds of these tests done and not one shows a "flat earth"

Pages: [1] 2  Next >