Recent Posts

1
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched
« Last post by junker on Today at 02:36:07 AM »
SU and I just finished binge watching Lost. She had never seen it and it has been about 5 years since I watched it.

It was good.
2
Flat Earth Q&A / Expedition
« Last post by alien experiment on Today at 02:34:52 AM »
Why haven't the LFat earth supporters put together an antarctic expedition to prove the theory of an ice wall?
3
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Last post by Particle Person on Today at 01:29:29 AM »
What Remains of Edith Finch is probably the best "walking simulator" (this term is a bit of a disservice in this case, since there are some actual fun game mechanics) I've ever played.
4
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Star Citizen
« Last post by Particle Person on Today at 01:28:23 AM »
The next update to Star Citizen will be the biggest it's ever had. This will make or break the game and the set the pace going forward (again). If these features are implemented properly Star Citizen will have a glorious future. If we get another buggy mess, it's going to be downhill from here.

That's a bit dramatic. Of course it's going to be a buggy mess - that doesn't mean that it's all downhill afterwards.
5
Well, even on a round Earth, you're not really tracing a straight line when you go east, you're traveling in a circle.  So it all seems like kind of a moot point.

See, east and west trace circles around the north pole while north and south trace circles that go through the north pole.  So the cardinal directions are as follows: North is Hubwards, South is Rimwards, East is Turnwise, and West is Widdershins.
6
So let's say I'm facing east on a flat earth.  North is 90 degrees to the left of me.  However, if I walk/run/drive/fly/etc in a straight line after a few hundred miles I will no longer be going due east.  In fact, the longer I go in that straight line the more south I will actually travel because north is always defined as the direction between an observer and the north pole.  In order to keep going due east I would routinely have to turn left.  However, we know this doesn't happen in real life.  So what explains this on a flat earth?

Red: straight line direction that starts off due east.
Green: Line showing that north is perpendicular to initial direction (proving that initial direction is due east)
Yellow: Line to north pole showing that after traveling on our straight line path for a significant distance that we are no longer going east but rather more southeast.
7
Flat Earth Debate / Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Last post by Silent Service on Today at 12:57:33 AM »
Convincing people of things they already believe in tends to be easy. 

I'll give you that one, simple typo.

This is simply untrue. You lot just insist on presenting near-identical evidence over and over. It's very unsurprising that attempting the same thing multiple times yields fairly consistent results.

And yet that evidence is never refuted.  Furthermore, most of the time the evidence is just ignored.  Take for example these posts, not a single person has provided any counter arguments to either:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6133.0
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6120.0

Have you actually found a person here who claims that the rotation of the stars is, uh, "fake"? That doesn't even convey a coherent thought.

You missed the key word in that sentence.  What I said was "The stars rotating the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere: fake."  If you talk to many flat earthers about stars rotating clockwise in the southern hemisphere (as opposed to counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere) the two most common responses are either 1) those videos are fake or 2) There's a conspiracy among compass manufacturers and people in the southern hemisphere are actually facing north when they see the rotation of the stars rather than south.  And this isn't just some random crackpots saying this, we're talking people like Eric Dubay making these kind of claims.

Actually, ships disappearing over the horizon and one's ability to recover them with a telescope is one of the strongest pieces of evidence for a Flat Earth. Again, I doubt that anyone here would call it "fake"

And that's how I know you flat earthers have never been at sea.  I've been in the Navy for 9 years with telescopes far more powerful than anyone has in the civilian sector and I can assure you that once a ship goes over the horizon there is no magnification that can bring it back.  I have literally observed thousands of ships come over the horizon or go over the horizon.  Ships always disappear hull up and the first thing that appears when a ship comes over the horizon is the mast.  We actually can calculate the distance to a ship based on how much of the ship is over the horizon and it matches up perfectly with radar, sonar and AIS.  Hell, you can even prove the earth is Round just by changing the location of your radar on a ship.  If you place the radar near the waterline then your effective range of the radar is much shorter than if you place it at the top of the ship.  That's why every ship ever build always places their radars as high as possible.  If that is one of your strongest pieces of evidence for a flat earth then I feel very sorry for you indeed.  If you look closely at every video of flat earthers performing this "experiment" you will notice that none of the ships are actually over the horizon nor do they ever appear to be over the horizon at any point during the zooming.

Again, that's not even a coherent thought. You lot get confused because you insist on interpreting the Flat Earth map as if it were a Cartesian plane. Can't help you with that one.

And you act like what you're saying is a coherent thought.  Its like people claiming that "perspective" accounts for the massive difference between actual angles to polaris and the angles that the flat earth model predicts.  In theory it sounds great but when you actually crunch the numbers its a load of rubbish.  The truth is that it is physically impossible for a flat earth to exist if it takes equal amounts of time to circumscribe the planet in the northern hemisphere as the southern hemisphere. I explained this pretty clearly in this post and I've yet to get a response:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6133.0

Y'know, the longer you list these, the longer I think that you haven't spoken to many people here.

I've seen some posts on the issue.  None that actually explain why snipers need to account for additional drift in their shot depending on what cardinal direction they face.  In fact, the only answer I've heard is "wind."  Yes, I'm sure that professional snipers forgot to account for wind and they are confusing that with the rotation of the earth (end sarcasm.)


That's literally all you people do here.  Instead of answering the question with some actual proof you just attack the person and call them stupid.  That's not debating and it shows how flimsy your arguments are.  If you want to disprove something then attack my arguments, don't attack me.

You flat earthers have really proven nothing. Your models cannot predict any stellar phenomena or explain literally anything about our physical world which proves how horrible of a model you have.  I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and let you know where your arguments are weak and instead of bolstering your arguments with actual facts, logic and reasoning you just resort to insults.  Its really quite hilarious, pathetic and ironic in a way.

Also, I love how you COMPLETELY avoided the question.  How big is the conspiracy?  Really, please tell me.  Because I'm doing the math and it looks like hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of people have to be involved in this conspiracy to fake everything that you claim is fake.
8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« Last post by rooster on April 29, 2017, 10:44:15 PM »
But... but... but you were the one who originally brought up... oh never mind.
I'm saying that recent US Presidents were all pampered spoiled man-children. I'm not saying you should turn this into a dick-measuring contest between them. Comparing them to one another is meaningless as far as establishing the truth of my statement goes.
I don't think we're really comparing one President to another. At least I'm not. I just don't think they were really pampered, spoiled, man-children before they took office. But I guess that depends on your personal qualifiers. Money, confidence, privilege?
9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Your double space isn't double enough!
« Last post by Lord Dave on April 29, 2017, 09:37:27 PM »
Well, if you allow leniency on the format you're basically letting some students insert more content than others. If my essay has 4 four lines per inch and yours has 3, I'm getting more words per page, which makes it unfair for all other applicants.


Also, "apply some common sense, people!" is the dumbest reasoning you can ever have when dealing with law, especially law that grants people money.


Except it was a college administrator that failed, not students.

I don't see how that affects my point. Just replace "students" with "administrators".
1. A word count is likely part of it, thus your argument is irrelevant since more words would fail you anyway, formatting being irrelevant.


2. Formatting is not so you have precise word count.  Part of it is legebility.  Most of it, like all rules of grants, is to deny them.


Normally, when you have to award a grant but have limited funds, you make up rules to use in deciding between two equally valid groups.


However, if an organization has been doing the grant for decades, does it make sense that suddenly they'd be denied?  Unless there was a sudden surge of exceptional programs that forced the department to cut out a very successful one with decades of history, this screams funding cuts.


As I said, the formatting rules are for deciding between close competitors.  And it wasn't just one organization awarded either.  So call me paranoid but this looks exactly like a "deny any you can with any technicality".




But we won't know until we get the award list.  But I am sure either not all the money was given out or it was given to new programs that are more in line with DeVos's ideology.
10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Your double space isn't double enough!
« Last post by Rushy on April 29, 2017, 08:55:43 PM »
Well, if you allow leniency on the format you're basically letting some students insert more content than others. If my essay has 4 four lines per inch and yours has 3, I'm getting more words per page, which makes it unfair for all other applicants.


Also, "apply some common sense, people!" is the dumbest reasoning you can ever have when dealing with law, especially law that grants people money.


Except it was a college administrator that failed, not students.

I don't see how that affects my point. Just replace "students" with "administrators".