[juner]

In responding again to all you angsty round earth logicians at once, please go back and read the thread. If you’re still struggling with that, I don’t think there’s much I can do to help. Maybe check out rif.org and their resources to help you overcome the inability to understand what I’ve already said.

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

junker, have YOU read the thread? Our issue is literally that you are saying exactly what you are saying now. If you can make four useless comments, you can make one in-depth one. I have to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Maybe check out rif.org and their resources to help you overcome the inability to understand what I’ve already said.

You have not given us anything to TRY to understand. Please, we just want information, not more referrals.

Tom Bishop, can you help?

[juner]

junker, have YOU read the thread? Our issue is literally that you are saying exactly what you are saying now. If you can make four useless comments, you can make one in-depth one. I have to assume that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Maybe check out rif.org and their resources to help you overcome the inability to understand what I’ve already said.

You have not given us anything to TRY to understand. Please, we just want information, not more referrals.

Tom Bishop, can you help?

Of course I’ve read it. I pointed you all in a direction to try to help your very obvious deficiency when it comes to acceleration. All but one of you have ignored it and keep harping on me to hold your hand through everything. Not going to happen. If you have a specific question, I’ll do my best to answer, but I won’t entertain “hurr durr teach me about all things acceleration.”

[OrigamiBoy]

junker, the least you can do is leave a link to some sources you used to learn about acceleration instead of just saying " I pointed you all in a direction to try to help your very obvious deficiency when it comes to acceleration." Please acually point us in the right direction instead of saying "read FAQ and wiki"... we all have... we all have.

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

junker, at this point, you're just posting aggressive comments towards everybody else here. You clearly can't help us with our question, so please leave (as this is supposed to be Q&A, not RE bashing).

Do you have an answer, Tom Bishop?

[OrigamiBoy]

Yes, I personally would love to see what Tom Bishop has to say because he seems to at least do a little research before replying. I would much rather have a debate with him then junker.

[juner]

Yes, I personally would love to see what Tom Bishop has to say because he seems to at least do a little research before replying. I would much rather have a debate with him then junker.

I’ll admit Tom has infinitely more patience than me. I assume people that take the time to post on a topic have some clue about that topic. When they show otherwise (see: frequently), I run out of patience quickly and I don’t entertain demands that I teach them things they should have learned at university (or could get a basic understanding with a simple internet search).

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

junker, please. This thread is on gravity, the sun and the moon and your posts are getting increasingly off topic.

[OrigamiBoy]

junker we already knew that

[juner]

junker, please. This thread is on gravity, the sun and the moon and your posts are getting increasingly off topic.

Ah, well, gravity doesn’t exist in FET, so I’m not sure what you’re asking then since you clearly don’t understand acceleration even though I’ve tried to help.

If you ever decide to obtain a basic understanding of the topics you’re attempting to discuss, then I’ll be happy to assist. I imagine it’ll take you a long time, so best of luck, and I’ll see you around.

[OrigamiBoy]

no please don't go, i love a good laugh

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

Ah, well, gravity doesn’t exist in FET, so I’m not sure what you’re asking then since you clearly don’t understand acceleration even though I’ve tried to help.

junker.

I am referring to the title of this thread. I am not suggesting anything about gravity. And I'm not asking anything. Please make basic sense before you storm off.

[juner]

I am not suggesting anything about gravity.

This thread is on gravity... and your posts are getting increasingly off topic.

Nice meme.

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

Thanks for the meme rating, man, but since I didn't make the thread I still haven't suggested anything about gravity.

[juner]

Thanks for the meme rating, man, but since I didn't make the thread I still haven't suggested anything about gravity.

Clearly, as it is obvious you lack even a basic understanding of most of the fundamentals. I’d suggest not posting if you’re not going to contribute, especially if your post is going to simply be about how you didn’t contribute. Thanks!

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

Have you forgotten our previous comments on how you aren't adding to this conversation? Well, you still aren't. You have helped nobody on this thread and nobody appreciates you being here. Please leave so a more helpful FE can answer our questions instead of reducing it to pointless aggression like you have.

[ScienceFirst]

junker, you have not given any examples of how you believe acceleration should work, you've just told people to look at the FAQ. The only thing I could find there was the the Earth is accelerating and "dark energy is involved." This is obviously a very skimpy explanation and we're asking you for elaboration. But if you've couldn't explain it to all those people over the years, I couldn't expect you to do it now.

The mechanism is unknown. What is hard to understand about that?

If the mechanism is unknown, I'm curious as to why that is thought to be the explanation for gravity? If I said that the Sun is a flat circle because a flat circle is what we see in the sky, and said the reasons for that are unknown, would you accept that as a valid argument?
Again, I don't mean to be rude. I myself have some opinions that differ from the majority (not in terms of the earth's shape but in other aspects) and so I respect the importance of questioning why we believe in things, and discussing them. But the basis of discussing something that is against popular belief is to try to explain to other people why you believe what you do, because at the end of the day that is the reason this forum has been made, and this site has been made- to propagate your belief of what is correct science, isn't it? So if there is a question that so many people have, be it acceleration or whatever, providing an explanation for why your opinion differs from everyone should be something you are happy to do! And if it's getting repetitive, maybe adding it to the FAQ might be a good idea? Rather than questioning the competence of those who are interested enough in your theories and science to register on here and comment without being rude!
We learn the basics of physics and why the earth is round in high school. Surely there can be simple explanations for atleast the basis of the evidence for your theory?
I am new here and I feel like I have been asking the same questions again and again with no answer, so I would appreciate some respect to my curiosity rather than being assumed as stupid.

[ghostopia]

Junker, you are you saying acceleration does not require energy? Because we had been arguing that for constant acceleration, constant energy is required. However, you just said that we don't understand the acceleration. Which part are we not understanding correctly?

junker, you have not given any examples of how you believe acceleration should work, you've just told people to look at the FAQ. The only thing I could find there was the the Earth is accelerating and "dark energy is involved." This is obviously a very skimpy explanation and we're asking you for elaboration. But if you've couldn't explain it to all those people over the years, I couldn't expect you to do it now.

The mechanism is unknown. What is hard to understand about that?

If the mechanism of dark matter accelerating the Earth is not known, than how do you know that it is dark energy that is accelerating the Earth? As Mora said earlier, it can be a potential explanation, but the wiki states it as if it is a fact. If this is the case, can you change the wiki?

[juner]

Have you forgotten our previous comments on how you aren't adding to this conversation? Well, you still aren't. You have helped nobody on this thread and nobody appreciates you being here. Please leave so a more helpful FE can answer our questions instead of reducing it to pointless aggression like you have.

Turns out round earth logicians get upset when someone points out their ignorance.

I think I’ve helped plenty of people by pointing out you’re attempting to discuss a topic you have no idea about. Also, I’ll gladly post in any topic I see fit, so I’ll ask you not to attempt being a moderator, given that you aren’t a moderator. Next one will be a warning and we can take it from there. If you decide you want to actually discuss the topic, that would be great.

[IHaveSeveralQuestions]

The only time I get frustrated is when moderators think they have ultimate power, especially on a website like this. I have literally no concern for anything you could do, as I'm just going to leave this site anyway. I'll be happy if I can get you to leave this thread and let the nice people continue talking.

Man, you haven't even pointed out our ignorance. We've been asking you questions and all you've been doing is talking about how stupid we are that we aren't Flat Earthers and don't know your point of view. You're so stubborn about everything that I'm starting to think that you're a parody Flat Earther... which actually makes me respect you a lot if that's true. It makes everything you've done really amazing, and that's probably how I'll think about you from now on so I don't get sad thinking about a middle-aged man sitting at a computer 24/7 proud of the fact that he moderates the Flat Earth forum.