Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - TheTruthIsOnHere

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 47  Next >
41
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 01, 2017, 04:36:11 PM »
Yeah, I don't think Bill was a pampered spoiled man-child. He was raised by his grandmother and mom in New Orleans. Then his mom married an abusive, alcoholic, car salesman.

Sure, he's good ole slick Willy. But pampered and spoiled? I don't think so.

Don't forget that he's also a rapist. I guess being rich and pampered isn't the worst thing that can happen to you, or not always a reliable metric when determining the objective morality and value of a person's character.

42
If that's the case for the sun to appear going "down the horizon", then why is the sun and therefore its light colored with a redish-orange hue during sunsets?

Because the light from the sun is traveling through more atmosphere. Just like on the RE model.

As the sun moves away from it's upper most position in the sky and closest point to us, it should get slower and slower as it descends.  Based on a flat plane perspective, as it reaches the horizon it should basically come to a stop since it is traveling almost perfectly away from us at that point. 
Above us it is traveling perpendicular to us - so it appears to move it's fastest.
at the horizon, it's moving parallel away from us so we shouldn't see it move at all.

If the the earth is a spinning sphere, it should basically look the same size as it plots across the sky most of the sky until it shines through our atmosphere - which is does.

The sun is always moving at the same height in the sky, at the same speed, always parallel to your line of sight. Your thing about it traveling perpendicular or parallel and its apparent speed and position is fun to think about, but not an acknowledgment of reality.

In my opinion, it does appear to move faster when it is over head. I know it's just an illusion though, based on how light is perceived by your eyes and interpreted by your brain, ie perspective.

43
I have to see some evidence of this "Sun looking twice as big near the horizon" claim. If anything, the Sun is either the same exact size near the horizon as it was in the middle of the sky, or slightly smaller or slightly squished vertically, based on what I've seen. I don't know if a spotlight sun is widely accepted by the FE community. I certainly don't think it is a spotlight, and from what I see, there is a gradual transition from day to night. The further the light travels, its color changes due to interaction with the atmosphere. Shortly after the red wavelength, it becomes invisible. The atmosphere isn't perfectly clear, it's opacity, and the distance to the light source, is what causes the darkness of night.

As for why it appears to go under the horizon seems to be chalked up to not knowing what a 300mi diameter object looks like as it goes overhead. If you watch a plane fly out over an ocean, even though it may be maintaining its altitude, it appears to be heading down to interact with the horizon before it becomes invisible due to the atmosphere. The assertion is we simply don't know how an object like the Sun would appear if it is beyond the vanishing point.

44
But to make an argument, as the OP does, that Russia doesn't mean what they are saying based on the technology we supposedly had "pre-Speak-and-Spell", just shows how lacking in knowledge the average FEer is in logic and basic human progress.

So, acknowledging that the technology we used 50 years ago to supposedly land on the moon is objectively inferior in every imaginable way to what we have developed since is somehow illogical?

And you're both idiots by the way

45
The only explanation in RE theory for different day lengths is an elliptical orbit of the Earth around the Sun. However, is this just an example of circle logic (no pun intended) or retrofitting an explanation to fit an observation?

46
Flat Earth Community / Re: Moon and Sun Angles Don't Line Up
« on: April 14, 2017, 06:29:23 PM »
It doesn't matter how reality appears. Either the light from the Sun travels a straight line to the moon or it doesn't.

47
Flat Earth Theory / Re: If the Earth were really round...
« on: April 14, 2017, 04:47:48 PM »
I understand why someone who has had a debate several times would not be interested in engaging it in again. But where are all of the flat earth noobs who are also just encountering these ideas? Are all of the flat earthers on here, old timers who are too tired to discuss in depth? Is this like an old monastery where all of the monks are old and no one new is joining their ranks? Why are there so few new believers attracted to this site?

Because they come here and get verbally abused a couple times and never come back. Also, seems that RE people are way more insecure in their beliefs because they have to come here every day to reaffirm them. There is no doubt a large FE community, and this one forum doesn't hardly represent its entirety. As Junker said, it gets a little old debating on the internet where the bias and the circle jerk is so strong that even a well argued point will honestly just get swept aside if it doesn't agree with the GROUPTHINK.

48
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 14, 2017, 03:11:06 PM »
Stop me if I'm wrong but: Assad bombed a location of civillians, citizens of Syria, with chemical weapons in order to kill them, yes?  Because he doesn't want them to live in his country?

There is no conclusive evidence of that being the case. But of course, don't let evidence get in the way of a juicy story. Still waiting for proof of that Trump-Russia collusion. Apparently GCHQ was spying on Trump team after all, as speculated by Judge Napolitano. But what is the crime? Where is the evidence of it? Can anyone please tell us so we can get this saga over with?

49
Flat Earth Theory / Re: If the Earth were really round...
« on: April 13, 2017, 10:15:59 PM »


If the earth were truly flat, don't you think we'd accept it?

No. Because you've been lied to since Kindergarten.

I just discovered Flat Earth about a year ago.

Which scenario do you think is more inducive to cognitive bias?

Ok, so that means that you've finally decided?

But besides that, how would a flat earth explain the video?

I decided that I don't know. And I feel a special kind of pity for those that have convinced themselves that they do.

Haven't had a chance to watch it, will check it out later.

50
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religion on Flat Earth
« on: April 13, 2017, 10:09:39 PM »

FYI. FGM is a cultural practice and isn't just Moslem, there are 17 african countries where it is practiced by christians as well.

Exactly why I added my point about cultures clashing. There is absolutely no way to look at Arab cultures objectively and say that they share your same values when it comes to women's rights and equality. You'd have to rationalize or just outright lie to say that they do.

52% of Muslims in the UK believe that homosexuality should be banned.

Same reason why there is the illegal immigration debate going on right now in America. People in Honduras are from a complete different culture than what is acceptable in civilized Western Society. The result, two of them gang rape a freshman in a high school not far from me. The people who are in charge of protecting that girl instead just call everyone a racist and protect the rapists. That is the society we live in now.

51
Flat Earth Theory / Re: If the Earth were really round...
« on: April 13, 2017, 10:08:19 PM »
If the earth were truly flat, don't you think we'd accept it?

No. Because you've been lied to since Kindergarten.

I just discovered Flat Earth about a year ago.

Which scenario do you think is more inducive to cognitive bias?

52
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religion on Flat Earth
« on: April 13, 2017, 08:25:02 PM »
Poseidon, your extremism is almost so extreme it's hard to believe you're even a real person.

You are taking away from the very real issues by injecting hatred and bigotry. It's hard to honestly discuss the problem that is Radical Islam, which is a problem and does exist, whether or not certain people acknowledge it. Also it's a culture clash issue. In my opinion, if you experimentally force different cultures, with radical different concepts on Women's rights, tolerance, sexuality etc, to coexist, you're gonna have a bad time.

53
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 12, 2017, 05:31:46 PM »
So please, enlighten us, what IS the problem?

Jihad.
Nationalism.

So celebration of a culture is bad, but the concerted effort by a major religion to destroy all other cultures is fine.

You are the problem.

54
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 12, 2017, 04:52:27 PM »
So please, enlighten us, what IS the problem?

Jihad.

55
Flat Earth Community / Re: NASA is not fake.
« on: April 12, 2017, 04:51:06 PM »
I'm referring to Tom's continuing statements that this is about "Military superiority with nukes in orbit". The nukes aren't in orbit, ever, only trajectories, and that's only when they are launched. And nuclear showdowns are not about "domination", they are world-ending events.

How the fuck do you know? Do you know exactly what each and every "satellite" is equipped with when it is launched? Either "Star Wars" exists or space travel isn't possible or feasible. There is ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE IN HELL that we haven't Weaponized space if it is even remotely possible.

56
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religion on Flat Earth
« on: April 12, 2017, 04:47:12 PM »
So I have won the argument.

Lets see, carpet bomb them, check, homosexuals-perversion, check, Muslim=animals, check, flag on lawn, red-neck, check.
Sometimes the last man speaking isn't the winner, It's just that mental case with a bible shouting from the hood of the SUV standing on bricks on his lawn, again, and there is no sport in shooting fish in a barrel, have fun.

That was just a retarded argument. Since I don't have a flag on the lawn, nor a Bible to thump (I do own many versions, just not for that purpose), and I have already stated my belief in Secularism.

Keep in mind, that according to Sharia, which Muslims want to impose in any country in which they become the majority (there is already a Muslim political party in Holland that has as its stated purpose a REFUSAL to assimilate), atheists are punished by death. Christians and Jews may only exist if they pay a special Tax to do so, called the Jizyah Tax. They also are subject to all kinds of rules that make them Second Class citizens, such as not being able to serve as a witness in a court case involving a Muslim, men not being able to marry Muslim women, but the reverse being allowed and encouraged, being required to wear special clothing so they are immediately identifiable (shades of Nazism, anyone? The Qur'an and the Haadith had it first), and much more.

You are succeeding in making yourself look like a blithering idiot. But please: do continue. It amuses me.

Sharia law is another example of men using religion as a form of control. All organized religion operates for the same purpose. To own a Man's mind, and to extort him in the process. It is the evil men that twist Islam for their own gain that are the problem.

Everyone looks at dark ages and understands Catholicism as the problem it was, and laugh at how dumb people must have been at the time. Yet we excuse Modern Islam, which is just as oppressive, controlling, and regressive. We look at the barbaric customs and pretend it is normal for the sake of "multi-culturalism" and not being charged with hate speech (something we hopefully wont have to worry about in America thanks to our 1st Amendment).

I value Women in society, I think homosexuals have a right to consensual relationships. Most of all, I don't consider someone less than human, or worthy of death, for not agreeing with my concept of God. You can hate religion as a whole, but you have to be honest about which one goes against those basic human rights I just spoke of. We can hate Billy Graham and Evangelicals, but they aren't still executing people in the streets.

57
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: April 11, 2017, 09:07:46 PM »
So, by now we all know about the truck attack in Sweden.
Trump made the claim in February of an attack in Sweden.


Coincidence(cause he said he was referencing fox)?  Prophcy?  Did he know it would happen?  Did he inspire terrorists? 


If I were like TTIOH, I'd find this proof that Trump orchastrated this to further his adgenda and score political points just like when he bombed a Syrian airport last night.  An act he himself has said would be a pathetic way to get higher poll numbers when Obama was in power in 2012.


Sad.

No. Sweden is feeling the pain from mass refugee immigration. Paris isn't Paris anymore. Germany is also experiencing these similar low-tech terrorists attacks. This is the type of thing everyone's with a clue has been trying to prevent. But instead of people admitting there is a problem, it's just easier to call people who acknowledge the problem racists and xenophobes then bury their heads in the sand.

58
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religion on Flat Earth
« on: April 11, 2017, 04:11:46 PM »
Atheism will never be more viable that agnosticism. You can't prove the non-existence of Creator. Especially if you want to try to use Science to explain how we became man from a single cell (you cannot).

The best you can do is admit that you just don't know. The science doesn't support atheism enough for it to be mainstream. Until you can use the scientific method to accurately explain our existence then science can never replace God. Until then, there are too many logical leaps that we have to take to truly believe we are just a cosmic accident.

By the way, I don't want to drag this into the never ending shit show of the Creation/Evolution thread from last year. My only point here is that the only logical step after Creationism is Agnosticism.

59
Flat Earth Theory / Re: sun rising below the clouds
« on: April 10, 2017, 07:42:58 PM »
Note that in the first diagram with the smaller rectangle that represents the flat earth model, there is no way for the sun's rays to get under the clouds as even when the sun was far to the west, it would still be above the clouds, as even in the flat earth model, the sun is much further away than the clouds.

Have you considered that the position here is that the Sun appears to set into the horizon because of an optical illusion due to perspective? Have you accounted for that in your diagrams? Because even on a round earth, looking straight into the distance, the ground raises to meet the sky- which we know it doesn't really do.

60
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Religion on Flat Earth
« on: April 10, 2017, 07:15:43 PM »
So, ultimately, although I would LIKE it if the world were Christian (and better yet, Lutheran), and although I will work toward that, I see no need to be nasty to others about it. But, get nasty with me, and yes, I shall gladly chew you apart and enjoy every minute of it.

Do you really think it's appropriate to have a one size fits all homogenized religion? Like you said, most of them boil down to don't be a d'bag... I was always troubled by the proposition that only people who lived in the brief period of history that could have heard about Christ have a chance at being in Heaven. Especially when you're talking about an omnipresent and omnipotent God that obviously isn't bound by time it makes no sense to open Heaven to people that lived from X-Z years on Earth. The judgement day being a literal day in the future also falls apart in light of that.

Where does God exist, to you?

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 47  Next >