[Sentient Pizza]

With all of the different ideas supported by all of the different FE proponents; don't you think you should focus your efforts on the best piece of evidence you have? Seriously though. Why get caught up in the discussion of topics that don't get you anywhere.

Why not just sort out what is going on with the sun and moon? Do any of the claims (UA, bendy light, antartica, gravity, FE map, conspiracy, etc....) even matter if you don't have an explanation on the sun and moon that could survive any scientific scrutiny?

An example to put it in perspective: During the Bill Nye -V- Ken Ham debate, Mr Nye made a statement that applies here. I'm paraphrasing but the statement was something like - If you could find a squirrel in the fossil record mixed in with the trilobites you could change the world -

My point being that if you could produce a model that explains how the experienced reality of the sun and moon could be explained in another way you could change the world. It would not take a complete Flat earth theory with every little detail sorted out, only one big point to unsettle the foundation of the globularists.

I'm not asking this question to have a debate about the merits of any of the FE ideas. I am more interested in more of an explanation for the tolerance of so many conflicting views. If the case is that there are some flatists who claim to be actively working on FET and you want to lend credence to your case I think you might focus your efforts better. Forum communities like this are almost your best best for a crowd sourced simple peer review. It seems like all you have to do is put out one single piece of founded evidence and the rest of the scientific community (who are unaware of their indoctrination and take all evidence as a challenge to their knowledge) will rally to prove or disprove it. They will do all the work for you if you give them a starting point.

Instead of going on and on about how a thing is plausible or not, produce some maths and let the opposing view have a crack at it. The more you learn form the nay-sayers the closer you will be to uncovering the mystery. The people who most strongly oppose your view are, in reality, your team mates in showing the holes in your position so you can easily sort that out.

That is how peer review works at its most fundamental level. It's not about showing who is right or wrong, but about revising and revealing our understanding of reality. If the earth is flat and we could all benefit from this understanding, no amount of conspiracy could hold back the truth in today's social media climate.

Just a thought. 

[Tom Bishop]

How do you suppose we should go about figuring out things such as the mechanism for what keeps us on the ground?

[Sentient Pizza]

How do you suppose we should go about figuring out things such as the mechanism for what keeps us on the ground?

That is a good Question Tom. And thanks, by the way, for asking it. I don't think Gravitation/UA is your best point, but realistically I don't know what is.

Since Gravitation and UA are indistinguishable at a local level that is the kind of point that would need much fleshing out in concert with a ton of experiments to reconcile what has already been measured all over the world. True or not it is likely beyond the means of what this small community could support. Your task is not to show how the current accepted models are false, but rather to show how they can be legitimately explained another way. The trouble is that the existing wealth of data is created by people who don't know they are indoctrinated. Thus you have to give a concrete method to interpret existing data in a different way. If the earth is in fact flat the data is already out there but it's just interpreted wrong.

Really your mission should be to pick one thing that you can create a full hypothesis on with supporting evidence, data, experiments, conclusions, methods, and models. No amount of debate judo will shake the globular stance. I would pick the easiest thing at my disposal. One great fleshed out model that will survive peer review will start the globular sciences down the path and they will sort out the rest for you.

I wish I could be more helpful about where to start. Unfortunately I am in the RE camp and only know FET from this community. Sure I have read ENAG through a couple times and read as much literature as I could consume about the subject but even that has not dissuaded me from the RE stance, and thus makes me biased. I don't actually think there are any strong pieces of evidence to argue for FE but I am not the expert you and a few others are.

[Tom Bishop]

I'm just saying. You want us to look into things such as the true nature of gravity, the size and nature of the universe, the map of the world, and the properties of a continent thousands of miles away on a budget of $0, without resorting to "debate judo" as you call it. We will need better suggestions than that, I am afraid.

[Sentient Pizza]

I'm just saying. You want us to look into things such as the true nature of gravity, the size and nature of the universe, the map of the world, and the properties of a continent thousands of miles away on a budget of $0, without resorting to "debate judo" as you call it. We will need better suggestions than that, I am afraid.

I have not asked you guys to look into anything. I have only tried to point out flaws in the claims made by flatists(not meant in the pejorative). I would bet it comes across like "you should look into" because many of the claims made by flatists are so easily shown to be fundamentally incorrect.

Some FE ideas are plausible in principle, but they fall appart once the concept is applied to any number the vast observations/experiments made in reality. This is due to the great accumulation of knowledge that humans have compiled, and how easily it can be accessed in this modern era.

The push back you get from globularists is more like "well if that thing you claim is true then why is this other thing like this?". Thus your exploration of the components of FE have to be far reaching and require a great amount of data and experiments of their own to properly back up. otherwise you will have to endlessly endure the same basic questions about the same basic assertions that flatists make. 

I think you misunderstand my suggestion Tom. I'll shorten it up a bit.

IF
- you desire to have the great conspiracy unraveled
- you truly believe you are on to something that is hidden
- you are serious in any way about FE

AND
- your resources are limited
- the scientific prowess/ability of your community is limited

THEN
- you should focus on your best topic only. Flesh it out completely and put it out for the world to criticize. If there is any merit the sciences will find it and very rapidly have to revise and find the other flaws (that FE theorists have yet to flesh out) to better resolve our combined understanding of reality. If there is any merit to your assertions, the world (hungry to expand understanding of reality) will do the rest of the work for you.

No amount of forum debate judo will accomplish this on its own. Especially when there are so many vague fall back points as shown by this community. In truth, the criticisms you encounter should be the exact things you try to resolve in a concrete form. You are getting a crude, crowd sourced, peer review every time you claim something on these fora.

[Tom Bishop]

IF
- you desire to have the great conspiracy unraveled
- you truly believe you are on to something that is hidden
- you are serious in any way about FE

AND
- your resources are limited
- the scientific prowess/ability of your community is limited

THEN
- you should focus on your best topic only. Flesh it out completely and put it out for the world to criticize. If there is any merit the sciences will find it and very rapidly have to revise and find the other flaws (that FE theorists have yet to flesh out) to better resolve our combined understanding of reality. If there is any merit to your assertions, the world (hungry to expand understanding of reality) will do the rest of the work for you.

But we've already demonstrated that there is a conspiracy.

See: http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy

No reasonable or coherent explanations have been given for these things. The evidence is so powerful that even the most ardent RE'er I've come across eventually breaks down when these things are discussed and admits that there may be a conspiracy of some sort.

[Sentient Pizza]

But we've already demonstrated that there is a conspiracy.

See: http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy

No reasonable or coherent explanations have been given for these things. The evidence is so powerful that even the most ardent RE'er I've come across eventually breaks down when these things are discussed and admits that there may be a conspiracy of some sort.

And so the Judo begins? Just can't stay away from it can you? I applaud your devotion to the distract and de-rail stance of the flatists. If nothing else you are consistent in this regard Tom.

Maybe you can't see that I am suggesting something that would be beneficial to your cause. I am trying to show you how a small shift in thinking could help your goals manifest in reality. I can understand your inability to see this. After years of constant bombardment, and general disrespect by the other side, it would be difficult for me too see it a different way too.

You should at least in part abandon the great conspiracy as a talking point. Even the space missions, landings, rovers, and all of that. Perfectly reasonable and coherent explanations have been given for all of the things listed in that link over and over again. Even if those pieces of the conspiracy are true it does not equal a Flat earth.

[Tom Bishop]

But we've already demonstrated that there is a conspiracy.

See: http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy

No reasonable or coherent explanations have been given for these things. The evidence is so powerful that even the most ardent RE'er I've come across eventually breaks down when these things are discussed and admits that there may be a conspiracy of some sort.

And so the Judo begins? Just can't stay away from it can you? I applaud your devotion to the distract and de-rail stance of the flatists. If nothing else you are consistent in this regard Tom.

Maybe you can't see that I am suggesting something that would be beneficial to your cause. I am trying to show you how a small shift in thinking could help your goals manifest in reality. I can understand your inability to see this. After years of constant bombardment, and general disrespect by the other side, it would be difficult for me too see it a different way too.

You should at least in part abandon the great conspiracy as a talking point. Even the space missions, landings, rovers, and all of that. Perfectly reasonable and coherent explanations have been given for all of the things listed in that link over and over again. Even if those pieces of the conspiracy are true it does not equal a Flat earth.

No reasonable or coherent explanations have been given for the things in the link. For the sneaker footprint in the lunar soil picture people still claim that an astronaut "twisted his foot around" in the soil and caused the wide horizontal grooves turn into thin diagonal treads... Every point in that link need to be explained. Round Earthers must be willing to step up to the plate in the face of overwhelming evidence and address them full front and center, not hide and ignore. If NASA is truly an honest organization then these things should be able to be explained easily.

It is not evidence of a Flat Earth, but it is evidence of a conspiracy. If you read the motive section you would know that the conspiracy isn't about the shape of the earth. All we need to do is show that there is a space travel conspiracy.

I asked you how we should go about figuring out the true nature of gravity and your answer was basically that we can't. I think that pretty much squashes your suggestion. Where else is there to go with your thread from there?

How are we supposed to study Antarctica, the infinite earth, the map of the world, on a budget of $0? Maybe if you had some real suggestions, we would consider it. All I have seen from you is some criticism that we should do something, but that you have no idea what we should do or how to do it when questioned further.

[Sentient Pizza]

No reasonable or coherent explanations have been given for the things in the link.

Blah blah blah FE/RE claim
nu uh
uh huh
nu uh
nu huh
Don't you get tired of this Tom?
I'll start another thread so we can go over that link and all the ways it fails. That is not the point of this thread but if you insist we can go down that road so this thread can stay on topic.

I asked you how we should go about figuring out the true nature of gravity and your answer was basically that we can't. I think that pretty much squashes your suggestion. Where else is there to go from there?

Tom. This thread is not about or to engage in debate judo. Still not on the topic of the thread. If you bothered to read my OP you would see that my suggestion was that you work on the issue of Day and night. That (in my opinion) is the simplest and easiest way to provide an alternative explanation for what we see in reality. There are two other threads currently active threads where you have weighed in and provided illustrations without the model to support the way those illustrations were made. I think that is a great starting point. But I'm not in the FE camp and do not need ideas for how to solve the FE problems. I'm trying to show your camp a different way to see these fora as a tool for the actual development of your ideas. If you really want to work on gravitation and how it works in the FE model then do that. No matter what the topic is you should look to the critics of each assertion for the ways in which it fails so you can do the work needed to better flesh out your model. After years of these fora most of the troubleshooting work has been done for you in a very detailed manner.

How are we supposed to study Antarctica, the infinite earth, the nature of light, on a budget of $0? Maybe if you had some real suggestions, we would consider it. All I have seen from you is some criticism that we should do something, but that you have no idea what we should do or how to do it when questioned further.

This is precisely the point to this thread. Do you even read the posts you are responding to? I'll boil it down to one sentence for you...

You do not need to explain every detail of every claim, just provide a full explanation for one claim.


How hard is that to understand? I'm not trying to debate the merits of any of the FE claims. I'm trying to help you get some forward progress by changing your methods. Is the concept of getting the maximum output for the minimum input so confusing? Is it so difficult to accept suggestions of how to improve you methods, even if it is from the other side? It does not matter which issue you choose to go after, just pick one and flesh it out.

[Tom Bishop]

No reasonable or coherent explanations have been given for the things in the link.

Blah blah blah FE/RE claim
nu uh
uh huh
nu uh
nu huh
Don't you get tired of this Tom?
I'll start another thread so we can go over that link and all the ways it fails. That is not the point of this thread but if you insist we can go down that road so this thread can stay on topic.

I asked you how we should go about figuring out the true nature of gravity and your answer was basically that we can't. I think that pretty much squashes your suggestion. Where else is there to go from there?

Tom. This thread is not about or to engage in debate judo. Still not on the topic of the thread. If you bothered to read my OP you would see that my suggestion was that you work on the issue of Day and night. That (in my opinion) is the simplest and easiest way to provide an alternative explanation for what we see in reality. There are two other threads currently active threads where you have weighed in and provided illustrations without the model to support the way those illustrations were made. I think that is a great starting point. But I'm not in the FE camp and do not need ideas for how to solve the FE problems. I'm trying to show your camp a different way to see these fora as a tool for the actual development of your ideas. If you really want to work on gravitation and how it works in the FE model then do that. No matter what the topic is you should look to the critics of each assertion for the ways in which it fails so you can do the work needed to better flesh out your model. After years of these fora most of the troubleshooting work has been done for you in a very detailed manner.

How are we supposed to study Antarctica, the infinite earth, the nature of light, on a budget of $0? Maybe if you had some real suggestions, we would consider it. All I have seen from you is some criticism that we should do something, but that you have no idea what we should do or how to do it when questioned further.

This is precisely the point to this thread. Do you even read the posts you are responding to? I'll boil it down to one sentence for you...

You do not need to explain every detail of every claim, just provide a full explanation for one claim.


How hard is that to understand? I'm not trying to debate the merits of any of the FE claims. I'm trying to help you get some forward progress by changing your methods. Is the concept of getting the maximum output for the minimum input so confusing? Is it so difficult to accept suggestions of how to improve you methods, even if it is from the other side? It does not matter which issue you choose to go after, just pick one and flesh it out.

I did just point you to a topic we have fleshed out. The Conspiracy. There's a motive and a means, and plenty of evidence. Instead of discussing the matter, you ran away, claiming that everything was explained.

As per the sun and moon, I don't have a problem with the current explanations.

[Sentient Pizza]

I did just point you to a topic we have fleshed out. The Conspiracy. There's a motive and a means, and plenty of evidence. Instead of discussing the matter, you ran away, claiming that everything was explained.

Wow Tom. Fleshed out? Ran away? I'm happy to sort out how the conspiracy fails just like every other critic that comes to this community.  That - is - not - on - topic - for - this - thread. Try - for - once - to - stay - on - topic - please.

As per the sun and moon, I don't have a problem with the current explanations.

And that is why your community is looked at like a troll circle jerk.

You really don't get that I am trying to help do you?

OR- There really is no basis for ANY flatist claims and you just don't want to admit it.


Are there any other FE proponents that want to chime in here? Anyone who would care to discuss the possibility of actually focusing efforts to further your cause? It seems Tom is content to let your community remain in obscurity.

[juner]

That - is - not - on - topic - for - this - thread. Try - for - once - to - stay - on - topic - please.

Please stop with the membrating. If you have an issue with a post, report it. However, I don't see an issue with what Tom is saying. It may not be exactly what you want, but don't reply to it if it isn't something you want to discuss.

And that is why your community is looked at like a troll circle jerk.

And please stop with these kinds of attacks and acting like a child in the upper fora, take it to CN or AR. This is a warning.

[Sentient Pizza]

That - is - not - on - topic - for - this - thread. Try - for - once - to - stay - on - topic - please.

Please stop with the membrating. If you have an issue with a post, report it. However, I don't see an issue with what Tom is saying. It may not be exactly what you want, but don't reply to it if it isn't something you want to discuss.

And that is why your community is looked at like a troll circle jerk.

And please stop with these kinds of attacks and acting like a child in the upper fora, take it to CN or AR. This is a warning.

Got it.

Tom can do what he wishes despite my repeated requests to stay on topic and open a constructive dialogue, rather than debate the individual merits of FE, which was not the point of the thread anyway.

I legitimately try to help the FE cause, and get "warned" for my behavior because I make an observation about the community that is not favorable, and not a secret. That's why I made the thread in the first place. To help FET (if it has any merit at all) unify one single position and demonstrate some count of seriousness.

Thanks for making my point for me.

Are there any FE contributors willing to even discuss what this thread is about?

I'll re-cap the basic question/intent of the thread:What is your best pillar of evidence that would require the least resources to flesh out? What would the best use of your limited resources be to accomplish this? (Since the $4M ice wall expedition is far from being funded, it might be easier to fund a smaller project that could net better results)

I'm not trying to poke holes in individual FET components here. Quite to the contrary. I am attempting to create a context (similar to the ENAG update) that might get some forward progress on your mission. 

[Ghost of V]

Are there any other FE proponents that want to chime in here? Anyone who would care to discuss the possibility of actually focusing efforts to further your cause? It seems Tom is content to let your community remain in obscurity.

I am currently in the process of modifying the aetheric wind theory to encompass all of FET. My current theory explains the wall around the Earth, the Sun & Moon, and UA, among many other things. It is a work in progress, but I will post a diagram shortly.

[Sentient Pizza]

I am currently in the process of modifying the aetheric wind theory to encompass all of FET. My current theory explains the wall around the Earth, the Sun & Moon, and UA, among many other things. It is a work in progress, but I will post a diagram shortly.

Thanks Vauhall! I don't think this thread is the one to post it in but I look forward to seeing it wherever you end up showing it!

I am guessing you feel that aetheric wind is the place to focus then? is there a specific aspect to it that makes it your best position to claim? are there areas where you feel like you could use help from other flatists? or where efforts could be combined as a force multiplier to get better or faster resolution on your work?