Ghost of V

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #120 on: April 26, 2014, 01:47:08 AM »
The flatness of the Earth is evidence of the conspiracy.

Exactly. What other proof do you need??

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #121 on: April 26, 2014, 08:13:48 AM »
The flatness of the Earth is evidence of the conspiracy.

Exactly. What other proof do you need??
To play devil's advocate for a moment: the flatness of the Earth could be evidence of there being a conspiracy, but it's not conclusive. There could be other factors. Perhaps some external phenomenon (can't say I could name one right now, but hypothetically) causes legitimate widespread confusion.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #122 on: May 01, 2014, 02:41:07 PM »
We needed another one of these threads, and the upper fora need more FET focused content.  Ask, and I shall endeavor to enlighten.
For each FE Model, please tell me what does Jupiter orbit? (I think that in all models it revolves around an imaginary point above the NP.)

For each FE model, please then tell me what Venus orbits. (I think that in all models it revolves around the Sun in the plane up and down (relative to the FE surface).)

Then check the Wiki and its claim that the retrograde motion is explained by each planet (All planets are seen to go retrograde about once every 360 days) orbiting the Sun in a plane parallel to the FE surface, ignoring the FE's terrain.

Thanks.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Offline BillyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #123 on: May 01, 2014, 06:34:52 PM »
Jupiter and Venus orbit the flat earth.  Haven't you been reading? 

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #124 on: May 01, 2014, 07:05:07 PM »
Jupiter and Venus orbit the flat earth.  Haven't you been reading?

Does reading the Wiki's Cosmos's Planet's Page count?

Quote from: FET Wiki
Solar System

Q. What does the Solar System look like in FET?
A. In FET the planets are revolving around the sun, while the sun itself revolves around the Northern Hub.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2014, 09:05:04 PM by Gulliver »
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Offline BillyBob

  • *
  • Posts: 152
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #125 on: May 01, 2014, 11:55:46 PM »
How does that nullify anything I said?  In fact, that is even more retarded that what I said. 

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #126 on: May 02, 2014, 03:53:21 AM »
How does that nullify anything I said?  In fact, that is even more retarded that what I said.
I assume that you typed "that" for "than" in error.

Why do you think that I was trying to nullify what you said? I was just answering your question, demonstrating that I had been reading.

Now you want to declare that what you said was retarded. Okay then. I appreciate your candor.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #127 on: May 23, 2014, 11:13:21 PM »

Nobody said that.  It's true that the main reason to suspect a conspiracy is indeed their depiction of the impossible, but it's not any kind of self-proving circular argument.  There are independent reasons for us to believe that the earth is flat.

Therefore any evidence which implies the contrary must be a lie, correct?

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #128 on: May 24, 2014, 12:24:41 AM »

Well, there's a plenary of evidence that the Earth is flat. Given that to be a fact (which of course can be argued, but let's not go there here), then something fishy is clearly going on with the space agencies of the world. The flatness of the Earth is evidence of the conspiracy.

I think I might go there anyways.

Perhaps your evidence is simply wrong. If you can't prove what conflicts with your ideas to be false, you can't prove that your ideas are, as a matter of fact, true.

Ghost of V

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #129 on: May 24, 2014, 12:28:09 AM »
Perhaps your evidence is simply wrong. If you can't prove what conflicts with your ideas to be false, you can't prove that your ideas are, as a matter of fact, true.

Take it up with the FAQs.

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #130 on: May 24, 2014, 01:46:54 AM »
Take it up with the FAQs.

Not very convincing stuff. Even if we assume the data to be accurate, it looks to me as if no one is taking into account that the RE model does NOT depict a perfect sphere. That of course is going to throw off calculations.

Then again, you can hardly blame them; 1904 was a long time ago.

Ghost of V

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #131 on: May 24, 2014, 04:54:04 PM »
Take it up with the FAQs.

Not very convincing stuff. Even if we assume the data to be accurate, it looks to me as if no one is taking into account that the RE model does NOT depict a perfect sphere. That of course is going to throw off calculations.

Then again, you can hardly blame them; 1904 was a long time ago.

Irrelevant. RE model is not FE model, there would be no need for this forum if so.

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #132 on: May 24, 2014, 07:43:06 PM »
Quote from: Vauxhall

Irrelevant. RE model is not FE model, there would be no need for this forum if so.

Alright, so, again assuming accuracy, you have evidence that parts of the world fit your model. While that might support your position, it doesn't prove anything. Those same results can fit the RE model as well. I'm starting to get the idea that being a FEr is more of a personal choice of worldview than anything else.

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #133 on: May 28, 2014, 09:38:40 PM »
As a student of physics and maths, I found this website and was just wondering how you could ignore the vast weight of scientific evidence? This is kind of like the MMR and autism link.... Which has been subsequently destroyed by a vast number of trials. But lets talk "real".

So as a "Flat earther". You must surely claim that physics and maths are wrong (Planetary motion, Keplers laws, Newtons laws, to name a few). And then you must also believe that all man made satellites... are fake. All satellite based technology is a fraud? Also all observations from high altitudes are somehow flawed. Okay, so going along those lines, I thought how could I look outside and see if this society is onto something. Another fraud would be round the world travel I suppose, no flying or sailing around the world. Gravity is also a myth in your view, as a flat earth would not have a correct gravitational field. I think the explanation of gravity is that the flat earth moves upwards at 9.8ms^-1 or something along those lines. (Which makes no sense as velocity is not the same as acceleration- which is caused by a force- yep gravity)

Right, well I'll start with the moon, a fairly common sight in the night sky. You can get a stopwatch and figure out how long it takes for the moon to orbit the earth quite easily. In fact, it's 27.32 days, a month. This is the period of the moon (T). Handy that. The distance (Or radius r) of the moon to the earth is about 3.84x10^8 metres. The ancient greeks had calculated this and so can you (http://io9.com/5688939/how-to-measure-the-distance-from-the-earth-to-the-moon) or (http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/gkastr1.html). That is an experiment that you yourself can do, so no trickery here. Using this data, you can calculate the speed (v) of the moon in its orbit where v=2 x pi x r divided by T. Now centripetal acceleration comes into play, as for the moon to orbit the earth it must have a constant acceleration towards the earth. If there was no centripetal acceleration, say goodbye to the moon as it's just going to fly off in a straight line. But... what causes that acceleration? A force. Newtons laws of motion remain one of the greatest mathematical works in history. They have been proven time and time again, so lets not argue over that. The force between the earth and moon can be calculated quite simply with some light maths. So how can you then claim there is no such thing as gravitational attraction? One of the four fundamental forces in our universe yet you claim it is a lie. I understand why you have to say this, because if gravity is real, your idea of the sun orbiting the earth will look quite silly. A mass that is ridiculously larger than the earth orbiting us? No, that is not how it works, the large mass has smaller masses orbiting it. Wait... That almost sounds like the moon orbiting the earth.

Now. I am trying to avoid being rude with this post, as then you won't take this as seriously. But the thing is... You can do the maths yourself! Just look up at the stars and planets in the night sky. Buy yourself a telescope and watch how Jupiter and its many moons travels in the night sky. Take notes on where it is every night and calculate the distance of Jupiter from the sun if you really need the confirmation. Oh that's a good point, Jupiter has moons orbiting it, but the earth is the centre of the universe for flat earthers. Just try and claim that Isaac Newton was wrong, because there is so much evidence that you would drown in the numbers. And then explain some other points, fusion for one. How is the sun still burning if fusion is not a thing. Do you think the atomic structure is wrong? Explain how nuclear reactors use fission if the sun is 300 miles or something away.

Final note, the flat earth society claims these bold ideas and uses maps to "prove" they are right. Okay, so use your hypothesis (And yes, it is a hypothesis) to answer some fairly simple questions. 1. Why is redshift/atomic spectra wrong (From looking at other galaxies and stars etc). 2 Gravity (The whole force). 3 Star formation....Without gravity. 4 Fairly simple things like a boat disappearing from view. 5 What the heck is that ice wall you talk about, the one nobody has ever seen

-Alex
« Last Edit: May 28, 2014, 09:43:44 PM by Pleaseexplain »

Ghost of V

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #134 on: May 28, 2014, 10:28:34 PM »
-Alex

I will try to help you, but please ask one question at a time.

What is your first question?

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #135 on: May 29, 2014, 02:38:25 AM »
Alex, greetings, & welcome to the weird & wacky. I can already see you're likely British, Australian, or NZ, & in the sciences or maths (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm English, living in the USA, Jewish, & in History. My particular study is Middle Ages & Renaissance England. I've recently moved beyond that to write a dissertation on Christopher Columbus. Introductions being done for my part, I'll give you some, shall we say, both scholarly & friendly advice about FEers. 1st, NEVER expect a straight answer to any ?. If they can't defend their 'theory', they will blame 'the conspiracy' or other such silliness. Their 1st dodge will be what Vaux just tried. 'Ask 1 ? @ a time.' He could easily have answered each ? in the order you gave them. I'm a REer, & NOT a scientist, so I can't begin to answer your ?s, but I can probably critique an FE answer for logic's sake. I look forward to following this thread.

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10174
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #136 on: May 29, 2014, 04:50:43 PM »
I think the explanation of gravity is that the flat earth moves upwards at 9.8ms^-1 or something along those lines. (Which makes no sense as velocity is not the same as acceleration- which is caused by a force- yep gravity)

Under the UA theory, the Earth is not moving at a constant velocity, it is accelerating at ~9.8m/s^2 which would have the same effect as gravity.  No one said it was moving at a constant velocity.

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #137 on: May 29, 2014, 10:04:48 PM »
I think the explanation of gravity is that the flat earth moves upwards at 9.8ms^-1 or something along those lines. (Which makes no sense as velocity is not the same as acceleration- which is caused by a force- yep gravity)

Under the UA theory, the Earth is not moving at a constant velocity, it is accelerating at ~9.8m/s^2 which would have the same effect as gravity.  No one said it was moving at a constant velocity.
That, of course, is incorrect. On a RE, gravity has a detectable and expected radial nature. Einstein's EP applies only to a point, not a surface.
Quote from: http://aether.lbl.gov/www/science/equiv.html
At every spacetime point in an arbitrary gravitational field, it is possible to chose a locally inertial coordinate system such that, within a sufficiently small region of the point in question, the laws of nature take the same form as in unaccelerated Cartesian coordinate systems
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

*

Offline jroa

  • *
  • Posts: 3094
  • Kentucky Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #138 on: May 29, 2014, 10:32:30 PM »
I think the explanation of gravity is that the flat earth moves upwards at 9.8ms^-1 or something along those lines. (Which makes no sense as velocity is not the same as acceleration- which is caused by a force- yep gravity)

Under the UA theory, the Earth is not moving at a constant velocity, it is accelerating at ~9.8m/s^2 which would have the same effect as gravity.  No one said it was moving at a constant velocity.
That, of course, is incorrect. On a RE, gravity has a detectable and expected radial nature. Einstein's EP applies only to a point, not a surface.
Quote from: http://aether.lbl.gov/www/science/equiv.html
At every spacetime point in an arbitrary gravitational field, it is possible to chose a locally inertial coordinate system such that, within a sufficiently small region of the point in question, the laws of nature take the same form as in unaccelerated Cartesian coordinate systems

Kind of funny that you go to a website about Aether to try to teach us FE'ers about gravity.  Ironic maybe? 

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: Ask a Flat Earth Theorist Anything
« Reply #139 on: May 29, 2014, 11:08:57 PM »
I think the explanation of gravity is that the flat earth moves upwards at 9.8ms^-1 or something along those lines. (Which makes no sense as velocity is not the same as acceleration- which is caused by a force- yep gravity)

Under the UA theory, the Earth is not moving at a constant velocity, it is accelerating at ~9.8m/s^2 which would have the same effect as gravity.  No one said it was moving at a constant velocity.
That, of course, is incorrect. On a RE, gravity has a detectable and expected radial nature. Einstein's EP applies only to a point, not a surface.
Quote from: http://aether.lbl.gov/www/science/equiv.html
At every spacetime point in an arbitrary gravitational field, it is possible to chose a locally inertial coordinate system such that, within a sufficiently small region of the point in question, the laws of nature take the same form as in unaccelerated Cartesian coordinate systems

Kind of funny that you go to a website about Aether to try to teach us FE'ers about gravity.  Ironic maybe?
  • Why do you say that the website is about "Aether"?
  • Surely the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab is well known and an accepted source.
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.