181

Flat Earth Theory / Re: flipping moon

« on: March 29, 2018, 08:25:08 AM »

Have you read his book? He goes into extreme detail with regards to how his experiments were conducted and the various things he took into account. And I assume you were referring to Alfred Russell Wallace who claimed to take into account refraction, yet Dr Rowbotham himself went into extreme detail as to how he took refraction into account, thereby rendering Wallace's 'experiment' invalid. Dr Rowbotham produced many experiments and the conclusions were the result of the facts. Hence the reason he revealed that the sun is less than 700 miles above the earth.

More importantly, have YOU read his book?

This remark by yourself seems more than a bit off the mark: "Hence the reason he revealed that the sun is less than 700 miles above the earth."

The rest of the FE community is of the opinion that the sun is about 3,000 miles above the earth. Did they get that number from Rowbotham, or another source? If Rowbotham indeed believed the 700 mile number, then the community seems to believe him to be in error.

Incidentally, I DID read the book and passed it off as complete hogwash, which it is, and always will be. It's part pseudo science and part religious proselytizing. Scientifically, it is deserving of no respect whatever, in my opinion. The book was written by a man simply trying desperately to cling to his bizarre interpretation of the Christian religion in the face of all evidence to the contrary. To him, a flat earth was absolutely necessary because, in his interpretation, that's what the bible indicated it to be.

I have. And it's pride of place on my shelf. The Dr Rowbotham presented many facts to back up his experiments, taking different situations into account yet each one proved the point that earth is not a globe.

And I'm not sure where other people get their information from, I can't speak for them. I do, however, trust Dr Rowbothams work.

182

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question for round earthers

« on: March 29, 2018, 08:21:10 AM »

Not really trolling, it's a sincere question. And I'm not the first to pose it, there's lots of flat earth scholars that have questioned it too.

I'd suggest that if they are questioning it then calling them "scholars" is kind, to say the least.
As I've explained, "Up" and "Down" are like "Left" and "Right", they are relative to your frame of reference.
To you, Australians might seem upside down, but to them YOU seem upside down.
For both of you "down" is "towards the centre of the earth and that is what the force of gravity is pulling you towards.
That's what keeps you and the Sydney Opera House on the ground.

I get what you are saying about up and down. However, I find it difficult to believe that we are kept on a ball by gravity. Don't get me wrong, I believe in gravity (even Dr Rowbotham did), however there's no evidence to suggest that gravity pulls the planet into a ball. Gravity therefore would have to come from the centre to pull the edges, but instead it's all across the planet, therefore cannot possibly pull the earth into a ball. If it did, the spirit level d marble took on the plane would have moved, yet move it did not.

183

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Seeing the Edge of the Earth

« on: March 29, 2018, 05:52:24 AM »

Aside from the atmosphere not being perfectly transparent, as has been said, remember that the further something gets the smaller it is.

184

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Trying to Understand FE

« on: March 29, 2018, 05:29:24 AM »

It was disregarded because we know otherwise. We have proof of otherwise. We have documented otherwise extensively, there is no logical reason to believe the earth isn't round*.
Rowbotham wasn't a genius, he was a twit unwilling to trust the proven and solved.
The only reason that notion exists here is that all that proof and documentation and knowledge is thrown away dismissively (sound familiar?) because the people whose job it is to research space had the gall to research space and communicate what they found. Shame on them.  

*The only logic I've found is 'it looks flat' and nothing more. Not exactly earthshaking evidence, is it?

Also, it was never actually discarded out of hand. Rowbotham made his name by constantly arguing and debating his points. When he lost he tended to run from the debate, or claim that he was right regardless of the evidence proving him wrong, but there wouldn't be an ENaG if his ideals were discarded immediately.

Actually, he didn't run from the debate at all, I don't know where you got that from. In fact, he showed up many in the scientific community to be rattled and poor at handling someone who holds their own on controversial topics.

As for moonlight, Dr Rowbotham only wrote the facts. He didn't make any errors. The man was a visionary, and should be respected as such.

You trolled too hard on that one. You were doing ok for awhile, but now you've blown your hand and made it clear you're just trolling. Later.

Why is it trolling? Because I respect Dr Rowbotham? There is no trolling whatsoever thanks.

185

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question for round earthers

« on: March 28, 2018, 10:56:27 PM »

Not really trolling, it's a sincere question. And I'm not the first to pose it, there's lots of flat earth scholars that have questioned it too. That pic is routinely used in YouTube bids to demonstrate the point, for example.

186

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question for round earthers

« on: March 28, 2018, 10:36:26 PM »

Of course. What I am saying is that as they are underneath the ball, they are upside down. You still haven't answered my original question.

From your point of view they are upside down.
From their point of view YOU are upside down.
Because Up and Down are relative to your frame of reference. Like left and right.

Well nobody is upside down I'm just using it as an example of how absurd the ball earth claim is. And my original question still stands.

you can see what happens when marquees in australia lose some stakes

That... Is basically what a ball earth would involve.

187

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question for round earthers

« on: March 28, 2018, 10:26:40 PM »

Of course. What I am saying is that as they are underneath the ball, they are upside down. You still haven't answered my original question.

188

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question for round earthers

« on: March 28, 2018, 10:17:42 PM »

I'm not. If they are underneath the ball, they are pointing downwards. So logically if they build something upwards it is, in fact, being built downwards. I don't know why this is so difficult to comprehend

189

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question for round earthers

« on: March 28, 2018, 10:01:33 PM »

Are you asking me or telling me? And if the ground is the floor, then they are upside down. And instead of building upwards, they are in fact building downwards.

190

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:53:14 PM »

If you say so. Despite saying there is no ice wall after posting a link to an image of it. Take care.

191

Flat Earth Theory / Question for round earthers

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:51:19 PM »

Okay, so all you round earthers, I have a question. Say for arguments sake the earth is a globe, and you have the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere. Take Britain, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Now Britain and Canada are pointing upwards, right? Whereas the Aussies and kiwis are pointing down, since they are underneath the ball, correct? So using that logic, if you are in Britain and Canada, then since they are on top of the ball, the earth is the floor and the sky is the ceiling. On the flip side, since the other two are on the underside of the ball, that means the floor becomes the ceiling and the ceiling becomes the floor. In other words, the ceiling is the earth and the floor is the sky. So my question to you is simple. Since they are upside down and standing on the ceiling, why don't they fall into the sky?

192

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Trying to Understand FE

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:43:36 PM »

Not really, it's just dismissed. In fact Dr Rowbotham was dismissed out of hand.

193

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:41:25 PM »

No, you are misunderstanding me. They will let you near the ice wall, we've got pics of it, that's not being disputed. However, they will only let you go so far over it. It extends for hundreds of miles, they will only let you go so far.

194

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:24:28 PM »

Once again, looks like it would impede a ship. Nobody said it couldn't be climbed, how do you think one pic would show 25k miles of ice? Think about it.

And the air force won't let people go beyond the ice wall, but as it stretches for hundreds of miles, they don't need to show their presence immediately. Nobody said they stop you going near it.

195

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:17:41 PM »

Doesn't matter that you asked for evidence of an ice wall after posting a pic of it then? Didn't think that one through really.

196

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:12:13 PM »

No, there's photos of the ice wall. Strangely, YOU actually posted a link to one of those pics yourself, and then questioned whether its an impediment but the ability to climb it was never questioned. The burden of proof is on me, yet you presented the proof yourself. So surely if its on me to prove it, its also on you to disprove it as well?

I cannot provide photographic evidence of pilots being escorted away, but we have testimonies from said pilots to go on.

As for the military, I already said they are at certain parts. It's not a case of troops patrolling the shoreline, but being ready to I intercept something if necessary, and the proximity of the bases allows for that.

197

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Trying to Understand FE

« on: March 28, 2018, 09:04:11 PM »

Dr Rowbotham wrote a revolutionary book but science dismissed it because science dismisses anything that isn't part of the status quo. He researched it over many years, in great detail, and dedicated his life to it.

And yes, they spent trillions, its about control. They can't have the science books rewritten, not during a space race especially.

And notice you mentioned military in that treaty. I never said they were weapons testing, proving my point that they are there.

That's not how science works. Countless experiments have been done to try and disprove Einstein's theory of relativity, for example. Challenging assertions/findings is how science moves forward.

The FET community is welcome to do the same by putting forth papers for peer review.

Yes that's true, but Dr Rowbotham challenged something that was regarded as fact and its easier to ridicule it. Almost like it wasn't worth the effort for them to do it, but clearly worth yours.

And Eric Dubay, the leader of the flat earth movement, has put forth many arguments blowing the doors off arguments by 'experts' such as Tyson.

If the evidence is so strong, I would suggest that Mr. Dubay puts forth his evidence for peer review.

A little difficult to be taken seriously when the status quo don't want to even acknowledge you.

Dr Rowbotham wrote a revolutionary book but science dismissed it because science dismisses anything that isn't part of the status quo. He researched it over many years, in great detail, and dedicated his life to it.

And yes, they spent trillions, its about control. They can't have the science books rewritten, not during a space race especially.

And notice you mentioned military in that treaty. I never said they were weapons testing, proving my point that they are there.

Saying science dismisses anything that isn't part of the status quo shows you literally have NO CLUE what you're talking about. Go read a book on science history and you'll be treated to battle after battle of ideas, data, and egos. Rowbotham was a joke. I read ENAG. It is poorly written, poorly researched, and contains error after error. I suppose you think moonlight makes things cooler...

Given that both sides would have known, you space race comment makes no sense. It would have been more advantageous to build systems that take advantage of how the Earth is really shaped. (which they did)

I never mentioned anything. I copy and pasted the treaty. It says the military CAN be there for PEACEFUL reasons. Doesn't say they are or aren't. Nor is it relevant to FEH.

They dismissed Dr Rowbotham at the time. They dismiss him now. They dismiss flat earth out of hand and say its a load of rubbish yet won't shut up about it.

Dr Rowbotham created a revolutionary book that was expertly researched and conducted. By 'poorly written', I'm assuming you are unaware that they wrote books that way in 19th century Britain. So it's not. And I'd like to see error after error.

As for moonlight, Dr Rowbotham only wrote the facts. He didn't make any errors. The man was a visionary, and should be respected as such.

198

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 08:53:25 PM »

No I know perfectly. But there's been a military presence in Antarctica before, heck Google it and you'll see. I'm not sure what your getting at, other than trying to dodge how you can't prove an ice wall isn't there.

199

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Trying to Understand FE

« on: March 28, 2018, 08:51:12 PM »

Dr Rowbotham wrote a revolutionary book but science dismissed it because science dismisses anything that isn't part of the status quo. He researched it over many years, in great detail, and dedicated his life to it.

And yes, they spent trillions, its about control. They can't have the science books rewritten, not during a space race especially.

And notice you mentioned military in that treaty. I never said they were weapons testing, proving my point that they are there.

That's not how science works. Countless experiments have been done to try and disprove Einstein's theory of relativity, for example. Challenging assertions/findings is how science moves forward.

The FET community is welcome to do the same by putting forth papers for peer review.

Yes that's true, but Dr Rowbotham challenged something that was regarded as fact and its easier to ridicule it. Almost like it wasn't worth the effort for them to do it, but clearly worth yours.

And Eric Dubay, the leader of the flat earth movement, has put forth many arguments blowing the doors off arguments by 'experts' such as Tyson.

200

Flat Earth Theory / Re: When does it end? Why can't we get there?

« on: March 28, 2018, 08:42:44 PM »

What are you talking about? Their is military presence on Antarctica, its not a secret. The Antarctic treaty even mentions military presence.