Discourse on Gravity and Evolution
« on: February 05, 2017, 11:34:41 PM »
I've noticed that the Flat Earth Theory has taken a deep breath this year, causing more people to be interested in the 'conspiracy theories' surrounding NASA. To start, I don't strongly believe, nor strongly disbelieve Flat Earth. I like the idea of it. I'm a huge folk tale lover, and the idea of an actual ice wall that guards the edges of the world is very appealing to me, among other things. Having had tastes of FET in the past, I kept my thoughts about it to myself, but with the recent hype, I was hoping to get some calm answers to a few questions.

I've seen plenty about the sun and moon; explanations for their movement, the seasons and the phases. What I've never seen is an explanation for their ability to move or to stay suspended in the atmosphere at all. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough? If anyone can clue me in on that, I would like that very much.

Second, I wont presume that all FET believers are against the Theory of Evolution, as I myself sit unknowably between the two ideas, but I've never understood why anyone thinks FET disproves evolution, except when the FET believers are bible thumping. I mean, when I think of evolution, I think less about it as 'survival of the fittest' and more of it as 'the un-survival of the not fit'. It's certainly true that biological organisms adapt and alter over time, that much can be discerned in one person's observations over one lifetime. It's true weather patterns swing from drastic to not so drastic depending on the condition of the land as the changing seasons sweep over it. And it's true that some creatures go extinct when others don't due to any such factors. I guess what I'm asking for here is an explanation about the physical origins of creatures according to Intelligent Design ideas. I don't see why evolution isn't considered the vehicle by which Intelligent Design does what it does. If there is a reason why the FET movement would benefit from discounting evolution or it's proponents, I'd like to know that too. I see also that those that believe in evolution usually ridicule Flat Earth Theorists, but I don't know who started throwing mud first.

And lastly, has anyone explained volcanoes and where the lava comes from/what the ecological point of it is, according to Flat Earth Theory? Where would the earths core be in order to produce magma?

Thank you for your time :)

Re: Discourse on Gravity and Evolution
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2017, 12:37:02 PM »
I've noticed that the Flat Earth Theory has taken a deep breath this year, causing more people to be interested in the 'conspiracy theories' surrounding NASA. To start, I don't strongly believe, nor strongly disbelieve Flat Earth. I like the idea of it. I'm a huge folk tale lover, and the idea of an actual ice wall that guards the edges of the world is very appealing to me, among other things. Having had tastes of FET in the past, I kept my thoughts about it to myself, but with the recent hype, I was hoping to get some calm answers to a few questions.

I've seen plenty about the sun and moon; explanations for their movement, the seasons and the phases. What I've never seen is an explanation for their ability to move or to stay suspended in the atmosphere at all. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough? If anyone can clue me in on that, I would like that very much.

Could be electromagnetic forces at work.

Hard to say.

I do not doubt things are able to stay aloft at a higher altitude , circling above our heads and the flat plane on which we stand.

Second, I wont presume that all FET believers are against the Theory of Evolution, as I myself sit unknowably between the two ideas, but I've never understood why anyone thinks FET disproves evolution, except when the FET believers are bible thumping. I mean, when I think of evolution, I think less about it as 'survival of the fittest' and more of it as 'the un-survival of the not fit'. It's certainly true that biological organisms adapt and alter over time, that much can be discerned in one person's observations over one lifetime. It's true weather patterns swing from drastic to not so drastic depending on the condition of the land as the changing seasons sweep over it. And it's true that some creatures go extinct when others don't due to any such factors. I guess what I'm asking for here is an explanation about the physical origins of creatures according to Intelligent Design ideas. I don't see why evolution isn't considered the vehicle by which Intelligent Design does what it does. If there is a reason why the FET movement would benefit from discounting evolution or it's proponents, I'd like to know that too. I see also that those that believe in evolution usually ridicule Flat Earth Theorists, but I don't know who started throwing mud first.

I do not believe in evolution in that a single cell organism became a multi cell organism and so on. I believe the various writings of creation and origins describe an intelligence responsible for all life appearing.

A fish is a fish, always has been a fish, and always will be a fish.

I do not consider the words evolution and adaptation to be synonymous and I do not believe creatures started in water, went to land, and then went to water, and then back to land, and then back to water...

And lastly, has anyone explained volcanoes and where the lava comes from/what the ecological point of it is, according to Flat Earth Theory? Where would the earths core be in order to produce magma?

Thank you for your time :)

Why do you think the Earth's core produces magma?

Even in RET, the Earth's core does not produce magma.

Lava is obviously produced somewhere under the Earth's crust, the actual depth and breadth of these stores not well known and still being studied.

Re: Discourse on Gravity and Evolution
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2017, 06:46:44 PM »
I've noticed that the Flat Earth Theory has taken a deep breath this year, causing more people to be interested in the 'conspiracy theories' surrounding NASA. To start, I don't strongly believe, nor strongly disbelieve Flat Earth. I like the idea of it. I'm a huge folk tale lover, and the idea of an actual ice wall that guards the edges of the world is very appealing to me, among other things. Having had tastes of FET in the past, I kept my thoughts about it to myself, but with the recent hype, I was hoping to get some calm answers to a few questions.
Cool perspective, glad to see you haven't been black mailed out of your ability to imagine and wonder. We live on a truly magical World, any way you look at it.

I've seen plenty about the sun and moon; explanations for their movement, the seasons and the phases. What I've never seen is an explanation for their ability to move or to stay suspended in the atmosphere at all. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough? If anyone can clue me in on that, I would like that very much.
From what I can tell, Gravity doesn't really explain how anything stays "suspended." Only how things go towards each other. But yes, I imagine it would be some kind of electromagnetic force.

Second, I wont presume that all FET believers are against the Theory of Evolution, as I myself sit unknowably between the two ideas, but I've never understood why anyone thinks FET disproves evolution, except when the FET believers are bible thumping. I mean, when I think of evolution, I think less about it as 'survival of the fittest' and more of it as 'the un-survival of the not fit'. It's certainly true that biological organisms adapt and alter over time, that much can be discerned in one person's observations over one lifetime. It's true weather patterns swing from drastic to not so drastic depending on the condition of the land as the changing seasons sweep over it. And it's true that some creatures go extinct when others don't due to any such factors. I guess what I'm asking for here is an explanation about the physical origins of creatures according to Intelligent Design ideas. I don't see why evolution isn't considered the vehicle by which Intelligent Design does what it does. If there is a reason why the FET movement would benefit from discounting evolution or it's proponents, I'd like to know that too. I see also that those that believe in evolution usually ridicule Flat Earth Theorists, but I don't know who started throwing mud first.
I believe that evolution is just another arm of Big Bang Dogma. There is no true scientific explanation, just "best guesses" masquerading as answers. Creationism is central to my beliefs and aligns more with my worldview that we aren't just insignificant specs of dust in a vast, inexplicably expanding universe.

And lastly, has anyone explained volcanoes and where the lava comes from/what the ecological point of it is, according to Flat Earth Theory? Where would the earths core be in order to produce magma?
I don't know enough about volcanoes to really be any help to be honest.
Thank you for your time :)
Thanks for coming in here with legitimate questions and leaving your unhealthy skepticism at the door, very rare to see around here.

Re: Discourse on Gravity and Evolution
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2017, 09:00:33 PM »
And thank you! For answering me in kind :)

I don't think evolution would make humans insignificant per say. Existence is existence no matter how it's looked at. I don't really prescribe to the Big Bang Theory, but (and perhaps I've had too much indulgence in folk world-view) I do tend to think of 'nothingness' as it's own element. To be honest, I don't think either the Round Earth or Flat Earth theories can be true without a large leap in understanding the incorporeal aspects of creation. And science still walks on egg shells when mentioning anything remotely preternatural.

Forget I said anything about volcanoes. I have since done much research and learned that the mainstream explanations for volcanoes are satisfactorly vague, in the sense that they neither prove nor disprove either FET or RET. Sorry!

The main things about FET that I find most convincing are as follows:
-The fact that aero and nautical travel methods DO NOT account for any curvature when setting course and they have absolutely no trouble navigating.
-The building of railways and bridges also DO NOT account for curvature, and turn out functional after the building is done.
-The fact that it would be really easy to pretend a chunk of ice somewhere near the ice wall is in fact 'antarctica' when it isn't.
-The fact that in recorded cases navigators in the southern hemisphere have found themselves 15 to 30 miles off course using the global trigonometry method of navigation.
-The fact that my eyes see a straight horizon.
-The fact that I don't see why anyone cares so much about if there is something in 'outer space'....it feels like an attempt to abandon Earth, a place which I love.
-the global organisations that have an apparent ice wall surrounding a flat earth map in their logos (Lmao!)
And a few other things that escape my mind at the moment.

But what I find super confusing is the debate over the circumpolar stars and the nature of the sky and it's celestial bodies if it's nature is unlike the Space we are widely taught about. Also, if the moon is closer than we think it is, then why weren't the lunar landing true? As in the moon was more accessible than they lead us to believe? And that is why their 'space' gear was so dinky lol

Re: Discourse on Gravity and Evolution
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2017, 09:38:31 PM »
-The fact that aero and nautical travel methods DO NOT account for any curvature when setting course and they have absolutely no trouble navigating.

Planes generally try to maintain a specific altitude. If they are slowly gaining altitude (due to curvature or any other reason) they will adjust trim/power until they are no longer gaining altitude. Since curvature is constant, it can be mitigated by a one-time adjustment to trim/power.

Quote
-The building of railways and bridges also DO NOT account for curvature, and turn out functional after the building is done.
...
-The fact that in recorded cases navigators in the southern hemisphere have found themselves 15 to 30 miles off course using the global trigonometry method of navigation.

[citation needed]

Quote
-The fact that my eyes see a straight horizon.

The earth happens to be quite large. It would be extremely surprising if you could see such a small amount of curvature with your naked eyes.

Quote
-The fact that I don't see why anyone cares so much about if there is something in 'outer space'....it feels like an attempt to abandon Earth, a place which I love.

Curiosity? The advancement of knowledge? Potential military/economic opportunities?

Quote
-the global organisations that have an apparent ice wall surrounding a flat earth map in their logos (Lmao!)

It's a map projection. It fits nicely into a round logo. Interestingly, if you try to point out the numerous flaws in treating the polar azimuthal projection as a literal flat earth map, the flat earthers are quick to denounce it as an actual map. "No one knows what the REAL flat earth map looks like!"

...I don't really prescribe to the Big Bang Theory, but (and perhaps I've had too much indulgence in folk world-view) I do tend to think of 'nothingness' as it's own element. To be honest, I don't think either the Round Earth or Flat Earth theories can be true without a large leap in understanding the incorporeal aspects of creation...

Feel free to elaborate on this. I am genuinely curious about what you are talking about.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2017, 09:43:48 PM by TotesNotReptilian »

Elusive Rabbit

Re: Discourse on Gravity and Evolution
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2017, 02:10:35 AM »
I've noticed that the Flat Earth Theory has taken a deep breath this year, causing more people to be interested in the 'conspiracy theories' surrounding NASA. To start, I don't strongly believe, nor strongly disbelieve Flat Earth. I like the idea of it. I'm a huge folk tale lover, and the idea of an actual ice wall that guards the edges of the world is very appealing to me, among other things. Having had tastes of FET in the past, I kept my thoughts about it to myself, but with the recent hype, I was hoping to get some calm answers to a few questions.
Keeping an open mind is important. Also, the ice wall may or may not be how things really are. We aren't entirely sure.

I've seen plenty about the sun and moon; explanations for their movement, the seasons and the phases. What I've never seen is an explanation for their ability to move or to stay suspended in the atmosphere at all. Maybe I haven't looked hard enough? If anyone can clue me in on that, I would like that very much.
Check out the Wikis! There are a few pages on the Aether and the Aether Whirlpool, which seems to be the official stance on this issue.

Second, I wont presume that all FET believers are against the Theory of Evolution, as I myself sit unknowably between the two ideas, but I've never understood why anyone thinks FET disproves evolution, except when the FET believers are bible thumping.
I'm an atheistic flat Earther who firmly believes in the Earth being billions of years old and in the theory of evolution. We're not all crazy!

And lastly, has anyone explained volcanoes and where the lava comes from/what the ecological point of it is, according to Flat Earth Theory? Where would the earths core be in order to produce magma?
I'm not too sure. I've seen a couple of models floating around, but I don't have a good answer for this one. Sorry!

Thank you for your time :)
Sure thing. Thanks for swinging on by. Feel free to hang around, keep doing some research, all that good jazz.