Recent Posts

21
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« Last post by Tom Bishop on Today at 04:37:22 PM »
As requested, have you made observations and measurements?  If www.timeanddate.com was producing incorrect numbers we would know and nobody would be using it.

You want us to gather your evidence for your claims for you? Why would we do that? Your claim, your burden.

We have no idea how accurate timeanddate.com is. There is no transparency. We have no observational reports of verification and we don't even know how the data is being created. As far as we know that website, or the source it gets its information from, is slightly modifying the sunlight model every time someone reports a discrepancy to the point where it is no longer based on a Round Earth Model.
22
Flat Earth General / Re: The Wall
« Last post by geckothegeek on Today at 04:34:31 PM »
Actually I have only maintained in this thread that the ice wall features claimed for the Antarctic coast actually do exist, and it is the length of Antarctica which is in question, not the fact that there are walls of ice there.

Ummm........Are you saying that the length of Antarctica is in question ? Are you repeating that old flat earth word called "fake" that all the surveys, maps and aerial photographs of Antarctica are "fakes" ?
23
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Sunrise and Sunset
« Last post by inquisitive on Today at 04:05:38 PM »
You wouldn't accept us showing you a map and proclaiming that it it true and beyond question, right?

So why, then, should we accept the sun calculators as unquestionable? Claims were made in this thread, and they need to be supported with evidence. The creator of this thread is maintaining that he has posted "facts" with his sun calculator predictions and that everyone reading should accept it without question. If you guys predict that the sun will appear at a particular spot at a certain date and location, then we expect that you will be able to support your prediction. It is not automatically true.
I for one, would absolutely love to see your map.  I however would just say it’s fake.  I would attempt to verify if stands up to measured distances and so on.  Do you guys seriously not even have a map?
I did call the original sunrise time’s facts.  So what?  I immediately offered multiple other options, anything you could agree to just to get to the simple… wait for it…. Fact that the sun rises in the east.  Dun dun dunnnnnnnn!!!!!!
Just out of curiosity, how many times does a utterly simple calculator have to predict the sunrise and sunset (not to mention you can set it to times in the past) before it’s excepted?  Why haven’t you made one based on your theories yet?  Give the formula and I program it for you.

The sun predictions need to be affirmed with actual observations. We have asked for these sun observations on many occasions throughout the years, and after a lot of searching, the Round Earth proponents come up empty again and again, all while still maintaining their vague references that the plethora of data is out there, which they somehow cannot seem to find. It is getting to be quite pathetic.
As requested, have you made observations and measurements?  If www.timeanddate.com was producing incorrect numbers we would know and nobody would be using it.
24
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« Last post by junker on Today at 04:01:05 PM »
FE people say they cannot map the earth or check any models so presumably they do not believe a map of their own town or country.

This is a fantastic non-sequitur. Well done.
25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« Last post by inquisitive on Today at 03:59:00 PM »
In the bi-polar FE model, how can the sun be seen from both the north and south pole simultaneously, but not also the entire planet within the same diameter as between the two poles (which would only exclude Australia, southeast asia, and some pacific islands)?

I do not have any information on whether sun is seen from both the north and south pole simultaneously. I was saying that it does not appear to be impossible under that map. That point may as well be fiction, seeing as we were never provided a source for that claim from the person who stated that.

Quote
(And is Australia really as big as Africa? And how do flights from LA to Sydney work, because I've taken that trip twice [if you count there and back]? I don't recall flying East over the US on the way there, West over Australia on return, or over Africa at any point, or stopping for refueling?)

That is just a proposed map to showcase the concept of two poles only and nothing more. The person who proposed that map has not claimed to measure the size of continents, or the position or layouts of those landmasses.

Those two maps are not "models" . They are just projections of methods to make a 2-dimensional "flat" map from a 3-dimensional "round" object - a globe. They aren't even somethings that were developed by the FES. I think anyone who has any familiarity with maps knows them for what they are. There are simply no accurate flat maps of the entire earth simply because the earth is not flat.There is nothing original about those maps.
Good point.  FE people say they cannot map the earth or check any models so presumably they do not believe a map of their own town or country.
26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Help me, I'm being deceived
« Last post by junker on Today at 03:58:07 PM »

Like I said. It's not even fun anymore. I don't know if you're losing your edge over the years or what - but this is really tedious. It's not even a Tom Bishop post anymore without some cutesy "gotcha", exit plan in case you get cornered, or back door to wiggle out of - and never an intellectual commitment to a single conjecture, lest it have holes poked in it and/or experimentally debunked.

Debating Tom is kind of like showing up to a gentleman's boxing match - rested and prepared, and with well-defined ethical rules of the bout...only to face off with a cowardly little fat little man who gets naked and smears grease all over himself, and does nothing but scurry about putting buckets of paint on top of ladders and lighting bags of dog poop on fire, giggling at his cleverness all the while.

You are pushing it. If you want to bitch about Tom, do it in AR or CN. But you are not going to continue to derail discussions in the upper fora. Warned (again).
27
Flat Earth Q&A / MOVED: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« Last post by junker on Today at 03:53:23 PM »
28
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« Last post by junker on Today at 03:53:04 PM »
You suggest there is a group of identified and known people who form a society and are actively working of proving the shape of the earth.

Clearly this is not true, it is just a bunch of random people posting on forums, each trying to maintain their own scheme for entertainment.

I don't know. They seem organized enough to put together a few basic websites and discussion boards. (Though it would seem at least two of them run on the same SMF discussion board software, and three of them have more or less the same members. I wasn't even sure which one to join to see the old gang again. I picked one at random.)

And by their own admission, "Like all cults, we have been waiting for a prophet. A messiah. A new president to lead our society. I believe such a man now exists." Seems like they've identified a couple of promising candidates. (I'd hate to be that guy, "Messiah" seems like a tall order with a usually bad ending.)

But maybe they are right. They are obviously more cult-like than science-minded, and in ten years they've yet to form a coherent, self-consistent umbrella hypothesis. On youtube and these boards, they are all over the map. I don't think any two agree on even the biggest questions. Maybe they do need some charismatic messiah to reign them in. As an RE'er and one who thinks religions and cults are signs of mental illness, I'd applaud that (for their own good). Maybe then they could get on with the business of actually investigating and answering questions.

...As long as this messiah doesn't go overboard and start passing around the Nike shoes.

This is fantastic. You un-ironically quoted a post made by Thork. That exemplifies how willing you are to display your ignorance of the community. You do it so confidently, too.

Also, I am going to have to ask that you refrain from derailing topics in the FE discussion fora. If you want to shitpost and/or complain about FES, we have fora dedicated for that exact purpose. Consider this a warning.
29
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Explain this to me
« Last post by junker on Today at 03:48:40 PM »
It can be rationally explained in that it's a rough approximation.

Just as assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, assertions made using "rough approximations" as evidence can be dismissed with rough approximations.

Was there a point you were trying to make here? Nothing you said runs counter to my reply. Of course it can be dismissed if that is what you prefer. So, thanks for pointing out the obvious I guess.
30
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Antarctic 24-hour sun cycle
« Last post by geckothegeek on Today at 03:45:27 PM »
In the bi-polar FE model, how can the sun be seen from both the north and south pole simultaneously, but not also the entire planet within the same diameter as between the two poles (which would only exclude Australia, southeast asia, and some pacific islands)?

I do not have any information on whether sun is seen from both the north and south pole simultaneously. I was saying that it does not appear to be impossible under that map. That point may as well be fiction, seeing as we were never provided a source for that claim from the person who stated that.

Quote
(And is Australia really as big as Africa? And how do flights from LA to Sydney work, because I've taken that trip twice [if you count there and back]? I don't recall flying East over the US on the way there, West over Australia on return, or over Africa at any point, or stopping for refueling?)

That is just a proposed map to showcase the concept of two poles only and nothing more. The person who proposed that map has not claimed to measure the size of continents, or the position or layouts of those landmasses.

Those two maps are not "models" . They are just projections of methods to make a 2-dimensional "flat" map from a 3-dimensional "round" object - a globe. They aren't even somethings that were developed by the FES. I think anyone who has any familiarity with maps knows them for what they are. There are simply no accurate flat maps of the entire earth simply because the earth is not flat.There is nothing original about those maps.