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 - Pete Svarrior

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 310  Next >
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth Gravity Explained
« on: June 23, 2021, 12:03:31 PM »
True, but they are very good examples on how UA works.
Yes, they may be worth incorporating into our material in some fashion. I'm just wary of people accidentally re-discovering something that's already known, coming up with a new name, and thus diluting accessibility of our research.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Warning!
« on: June 18, 2021, 11:08:15 AM »
Guys, we're in S&C.


Personal opinions aside, this is blatantly an FAQ question, and OP was pointed in the right direction.


Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Warning!
« on: June 18, 2021, 08:42:12 AM »
Ordinarily, warnings come with a link to the message in question, so your main suggestion is more or less there.

There is a small UI bug which makes this difficult to do on mobile and sometimes forces us to issue a "generic" warning, so on rare occasions this information is missing. That will be fixed Soon™️.

In addition, we normally follow up with a post or PM, and you can always simply ask if all of that has failed (as you have today, and I hopefully helped to get to the bottom of it).

In short: AATW, we agree. In your particular case things didn't go entirely to plan, but this happens very rarely, there's a clear way out of it when it happens, and once I've found a moment to work through that bug it'll probably become a non-event.

EDIT: To give you an idea, this is what the standard message would look like if I were to warn you for this thread's OP:


You have received a warning for breaching rule 1 (no personal attacks). Please try to discuss ideas, rather than the individuals who presented them.

This is in regard to your recent post: Warning!.

Please abide by the forum rules, otherwise further action will be taken.

You may remind yourself of the forum rules here

The Flat Earth Society Forum Team.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth Gravity Explained
« on: June 17, 2021, 02:24:36 PM »
It sounds like you have, in many words, re-invented the concept of Universal Acceleration, an inseparable element of elementary FET. Please read the FAQ and skim through the Wiki before posting.

A80, this is not an S&C thread. You've also been pushing the limits recently all over the place. I politely ask you to stop.

I have found my way out of globalist thought.
Out of interest, how did you come to that conclusion?
Let's keep this on topic. I'm sure you can find other ways of reaching the OP - an obvious option would be to PM them.

I was wondering if there was a presence of Flat Earthers on Discord and if that would be a good platform to discuss on.
Generally speaking, no. There are a few Discord servers which purport to be hosted by Flat Earthers, but they're mostly troll dens operated by Round Earthers. As a rule of thumb, FE'ers prefer "slower" means of communication which allow for discussions to be more easily archived. This forum is an example - discussions which have been had 6 years ago are still commonly accessed and referenced. Chat platforms simply don't offer this.

I appreciate this format isn't for everyone, but that's currently where we are!

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trans athletes
« on: June 08, 2021, 02:12:21 PM »
Tbh, I've always thought that people "identifying as"... was complete horseshit
I think this highlights an important problem with the language we've chosen to describe these issues. It sounds a lot like "meh, they just decided they're XYZ now", and that implication is probably doing a lot of harm to public understanding. Though I have absolutely no idea how it could be described better.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 07, 2021, 01:36:45 PM »
In other news, so Trump was wearing his pants backwards?
Welp, if *Snopes* of all people are saying it didn't happen, then it probably happened. Bloody liberal elites trying to confuse us.

Science & Alternative Science / Re: FE and ICBMs
« on: June 07, 2021, 11:06:48 AM »
Having difficulty with the OP title there, Bob?
I have to concur with A80. Bob, if you don't know what the topic of a discussion is, consider finding out before posting. Moreover, do not post mid-thread just to explain that you're lost. There are better places to do that.

As for other super-clever RE trolls in this thread: please don't force me to clean this up. You'll be grumpy when it happens. Get back on topic or get out of the thread.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 05, 2021, 06:59:18 PM »
The wiki says they are incompatible because they require a spherical earth.  That doesn’t seem to leave a lot of room.
It does say that, in a sense. It's just that you chose to hyperfixate on the completely wrong interpretation of these words. Since this was pointed out multiple times to you, there is no longer any doubt that you're doing so deliberately.

With that in mind, we'll see you in 5 days, hopefully you'll stop shitposting when you're back.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trans athletes
« on: June 05, 2021, 05:30:53 PM »
It seems that this is the only condition of this nature where the “right” thing to do is now seen to be to pander to the person’s delusion.
That would be because, per current medical consensus (which may change, granted, but that doesn't particularly justify gammons sitting there and claiming they know better) it is not a condition of the same nature as your other examples.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 05, 2021, 06:53:15 AM »
I don’t see how the standard dictionary definition can be considered “ambiguous”
Conveniently, I already provided you with the source of the ambiguity. I can't force you to see it, let alone to read it, but it's easily available to you should you choose to address it.

it is misleading to say they are incompatible.
That continues to be something you misread/misunderstood because you didn't bother to read on. I already asked you to move on, so now I'm warning you instead. If you can't stay focused enough to finish reading the article, or if you lack the common sense to simply ask questions about things you don't understand, then you're gonna have to take your posting to AR.

There is nothing else in the article that suggests there is any sense in which the two theories are compatible. 
This statement is false, and after the amount of wilfully obtuse behaviour from you above, I am convinced that this is completely deliberate. One way or another, this ends now.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 04, 2021, 01:03:45 PM »
The standard dictionary definition will do.
Perhaps I was too quick to assume the "awareness"... But sure. There exists such a definition of "harmony" under which the two exist in harmony, and since you chose to replace one ambiguous definition with another, you should be pretty content with that answer.

Yes, this problem will persist until you've actually read beyond the lede and understood the piece of writing you're impotently trying to "gotcha". Nobody can help you there but yourself.

I repeat (only for the second time, so I appreciate this might not have sunk in just yet): you will not be allowed to derail this thread any further. If you want to carry on shitposting, do so in the right place.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 04, 2021, 12:26:17 PM »
The wiki says that they are not, clearly and explicitly.
For the fifth time: you misunderstood this, because you hyperfixated on a single sentence in the lede. The reason I cannot help you is that I cannot force you to read further, or to exercise basic reading comprehension.

Are traditional theories of gravitation compatible with FE or not?
This strictly depends on what you mean by "compatible" - you have been using the term in two distinct meanings, seemingly interchangeably, but presumably with some awareness. Standardising this would be a good first step.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 04, 2021, 11:11:42 AM »
You can explain how traditional theories of gravitation can be both compatible and incompatible with FE at the same time.
Why would I do that? I already told you (this marks the fourth time) that this is not what's being claimed. If you're going to waste our time with low-effort strawmen, do so in the appropriate section of the forum.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 03, 2021, 01:59:03 PM »
That's direct from the wiki page.
Yes, this has been stated three times now, and I successfully read it the first time around. Once again, this has already been addressed. I don't know how to best help you beyond that.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 03, 2021, 01:52:10 PM »
Its a direct quote from the wiki that traditional theories of gravitation are incompatible with FE.
I only just finished explaining this, together with a speculation for how you could have ended up with this misunderstanding. Perhaps reading my post will help?

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 03, 2021, 01:04:39 PM »
The OP stated that Round Earth is bound by gravity.
And I explained very early on that this is not the case.

If you still believe that I am veering off topic then please correct me.
I did so twice.

The traditional theory of gravitation is incompatible with the Flat Earth Model.
This is incorrect.

At least this is what is written in the wiki on Universal Acceleration.
Not true. It sounds like you only read the lede of the article, and thus ended up with an overly simplistic understanding of the subject.

Therefore the mechanism by which the Earth maintains its shape under FE is not stated and needs to be defined.
Even if your assumptions held (they don't), this "need" would not logically follow.

Regarding the use of terms gravity and gravitation, in my native language there is only one word that covers both. Therefore it is very difficult for me to understand the difference between the two.
The difference is crucial for this discussion. Gravity is a phenomenon specific to the Earth, which you could simply describe as "things fall". Think F=mg, where g is roughly 9.8ms-2.
Gravitation is the supposed mechanism of attraction between all mass. Think F=Gm1m2x-2

Generally, you will find no FE'ers who will disagree with you that things fall. You are, however, likely to find ones who dispute the magnitude of gravitation, or, more rarely, its existence at all.

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why hasn't Earth broken apart so far?
« on: June 03, 2021, 11:13:01 AM »
Without the effect of gravity a planet would not necessarily break apart, but it would not have formed at all.
Right, but:
  • This, once again, incorrectly assumes that we should be considering a scenario "without gravity" (and I, once again, generously assume you mean "gravitation")
  • We're not currently discussing the formation of the Earth
  • We're also not discussing planets

In other words - you have veered so far away from the original question that you somehow rendered it even less meaningful than it was in the first place.

Pages: < Back  1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 310  Next >