1

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Albert Einstein: Father of the Universal Accelerator

« on: September 03, 2018, 05:29:59 AM »

Just wanted to say Thanks to Tom for the taking his time to reply. I might be a globetard, but I really do try to remain unbiased. I enjoy looking at both sides, not to argue but to understand. Im 99% certain the earth is a sphere. But I was also 99% sure my first marriage would last so...

I did read a biography on Einstein a few years ago, if i remember the name Ill come back an edit.

While the Video has a fake arguement for comedy sake, its not to far from the truth. These were the basic thoughts he was wrestling with. In the very beginning of his Gravity problem he did have thoughts on a flat earth. But he was certain the earth was spherical and you cannot have all sides of a sphere accelerating outwards. But a "flat earth w/ universal accelerator" thought kinda was in his head.

BUT, you cant say "Einstein said the Earth is accelerating upwards so the earth has to be flat." Thats a little bit of a cut and paste job out of context.
You either believe Einstein or your dont.

Im pretty sure until everyone saw their first Globe had the thought the earth is flat. Never stop asking question, people have been wrong about all kinds of stuff.
But dont go down the rabbit hole to far, be willing to listen to both sides with an open mind.

2

Flat Earth Media / Re: Finite Perspective and the Horizon Explained

« on: August 31, 2018, 04:43:14 PM »

Hey Tom. Still learning about flat earth. I look through the wiki and dont remember seeing. Maybe you or someone else can help?

What's the most commonly accepted avg view distance and maximum view distance under optimal conditions?

I understand sir density, humidity,polluted etc will decrease expected "horizon"

I'm guessing maximum would be around 60ish? Since we can see some cities across bodies of water?

3

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Albert Einstein: Father of the Universal Accelerator

« on: August 30, 2018, 06:18:29 PM »

Ok let me see if I can get my thoughts correct.

Newton's law of gravity will only work on a geometrically flat earth.

And Eistein law of general relativity of an upward acceleration will on work on a geometrically curved space?

Considering the shape of the earth ( whether you believe its is flat or round) is not GEOMETRICALLY flat I'm not sure of the point?

This would show the both models are not flat (geometrically speaking) which we know. But that gravity might not exists if space/time is curved. This doesnt proof of the earth is a globe or disc.

Can someone help me with this?

4

Flat Earth Community / Re: RE believers - why are you here?

« on: August 29, 2018, 06:41:23 PM »

I'm a Christian round earther. Born and raised. This is more of an educational pursuit. Like most I was taught the world was round. I didn't know it for myself, I just accepted it. Same as my faith.

I started my journey by not reading the bible... but studying the bible. Blind faith in anything is poor choice.

I saw a video online about flat earth. Like most my first reaction was "serious?"

My second reaction "What proof do I have to say otherwise?"

Ok, but I have pictures! But, for the sake of learning let's assume the pictures are fake.

Now, what proof do I have? Hence I started learning. I've always enjoyed science, but never really spent the time to push deeper. Now I'm reading about angular momentum, astrophysics, biology (human eye, perception, physcology), etc...

I dont want to come off like I'm here to debate. I'm here to see the other side. If I ask a question, it's because I want to understand your point of view.

If you have an understanding of something. But your observation says otherwise... maybe its your understanding that's wrong. So, push forward. Ask questions, keep an open mind and keep learning

5

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is FET Dangerous?

« on: August 29, 2018, 06:22:14 PM »

Flat earth itself is not dangerous.

There is nothing wrong with questions, healthy skepticism, or furthering research.

But, you have to be careful. If you fall to far down the rabbit hole then the line between healthy and unhealthy starts to blur.

You dont want to become a closed mind zealot or a conspiracy theorists who wont leave the basemen.

As long as your willing to look at both sides with an open mind, question everything you want.

6

Flat Earth Community / Re: At what point is it appropriate to call out a deliberate falsehood?

« on: August 29, 2018, 05:18:28 PM »

This is a prime example of most debates. And the best question of all "What constitutes as evidence?"

If I look up and see blue? Is it evidence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4387270/Blue-black-dress-riddle-finally-solved.html

If you hear something, is it evidence? Only to you.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/18/brainstorm-green-needle-latest-audio-riddle-tricks-brain/

But I have a picture/video! Thats evidence! Film or digital? Digital is easily editable (a lot of work to be good tho).

But science has proven it! Correct, science has proven this works in this situation until someone proves it doesnt work in another. Did you know E = MC2 isn't fully correct? E²=(mc²)²+(pc) is actually a better representation of E of a moving body. Until proven otherwise.

Science is fully of examples. We have a thought, we run test and analyze the data. If its consistent and repeatable over multiple variables then we consider it proven. Until proven it doesnt always work. BUT that doesnt mean we throw it out. We rework the problem. If we make changes and it works with the new variables AND the old variables (probably more accurate now) then its proven again.

If the new way doesnt work for the old stuff then we have to move on. Either restart both or split the 2 into their own understandings.

Dont shoot me...
Example. We discover magnetism. But how do we stay on the ground? We try to rewrite magnetism to incorporate humans and the earth. Doesnt work. So we keep magnetism and come up with gravity.

Every truth is truth, until proven otherwise (by REPEATABLE experiments).

You have hypothesis (no evidence), theory (evidence, but could be circumstantial) and law (evidence).

"Laws are descriptions — often mathematical descriptions — of natural phenomenon; for example, Newton's Law of Gravity or Mendel's Law of Independent Assortment. These laws simply describe the observation. Not how or why they work"

The difference between scientific laws and scientific facts is a bit harder to define, though the definition is important. Facts are simple, basic observations that have been shown to be true. Laws are generalized observations about a relationship between two or more things in the natural world. The law can be based on facts and tested hypothesizes.

So, even Laws are not 100%.

So when it comes to "truth" sometimes it really does depend on where you standing.

7

Flat Earth Community / Re: YouTube now censoring and demoting Flat Earth videos

« on: August 29, 2018, 04:30:44 PM »

The thing everyone has to remember. You can't censor the internet.

But, websites (the vast majority) are privately owned and can impose whatever limitations they want. Same as a content creator can.

While I dont normally agree with blocking comments, the internet has become full of trolls and vicious hate speech. If people could be polite and use constructive criticism things would go more smoothly.

Now, on the subject of YouTube specifically. I wish they would pull 80% of the fe/re debated because its muddied with inconsistencies, false statements, lies, bad science, and poor attitudes.

There are few people in the video debates the can give clear and concise information without resorting to name calling and insults. And not just flatearthers. Round earthers are just as guilty.

People also do not want to use proper math or scientific methods. They do an experiment and claim it as proof without any idea if its repeatable or consistent.

If youtube was more like this forum things would be better.

Sometimes I think the FE and RE on youtube are just agreeing like idiots so they can make money. Simple as that.

You guys keep doing what you do and dont worry about the idiots on youtube

8

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flight route Santiago - Sydney

« on: August 17, 2018, 02:57:04 AM »

Ok, before I throw my 2 cents out here I want to explain my position. Im a Christian who believes in the Round Earth Model. Yep, you read that correctly. The Model not the Round Earth. To further explain the wording.

Do I believe the World is Round, Yes. Do I believe in Gravity, Yes. Do I have indisputable, indubitable, unquestionable, Proof that could be easily explained to even a Child? Nope. Thats why I currently choose to say the Round Earth Model. To have a discussion you have to keep an open mind and be willing to look at the subject through everyone elses eyes.

Now, here is what I have found out so far in this debate. Pictures, Videos, or Personal experiences Do Not Count as proof. Any of these "proofs" can be disputed, explained, or countered by the opposing side.
Like Chicago across the lake. Ive seen tons of pictures of the city, you really can see it... Sometimes. RE say its refraction. Ive seen tons of pictures where you Cant see the city. FE claims its waves, or atmospheric conditions, or your not aiming at the city.  I could personally fly to space and snap a Picture of a Round/Flat earth and the other side would claim it was faked.

Suspected Registered flight path by Round Earther

Flat Earth Says

Round Earth says about Flat Earth


Its a never ending cycle of doubt.
We Need a Better Idea.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The US Northeast is Too White

« on: August 16, 2018, 03:50:43 AM »

My 2 cents.

Segregation is wrong.
Forced desegregation is just as wrong.

To many black is the ghetto, move white folks in. To many whites in the trailer park, move Chinese in. China town is full of asians let's find some Hispanics. It's stupid. Dont force people out, but can't force them to be together either.

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth and The Big Bang Theory

« on: August 15, 2018, 05:58:40 PM »

Why does being flat take more energy?

Galaxies are flat. You have no problem with that. The universe is flat.
https://www.space.com/34928-the-universe-is-flat-now-what.html

But you have a problem with the energy required to make a teeny weeny planet flat? 'Immense energy' compared to a universe being created? I've told round earthers a million times on this site, not to exaggerate.

I think is a slight misconception when they say the universe is flat. They are speaking from a geometrical standpoint.

Example - on earth, if 2 people started on the equator and both started walker due north they will eventually meet at north pole. Now because the lines are not parallel neither round earth or flat earth are flat from a geometrical view point. They are both curved.

Space on the other hand is truelly flat and parallel lines will continue forever parallel (except when altered by space-time dilations). But we also know that space is 3 dimensional. So we dont know its shape. It could be a cube, a moebius strip, Klein bottles, etc..

There's an important distinction between geometry, the behavior of parallel lines, and topology, the way a space can get all twisted up. While the geometry of the universe is very well measured (again, it's flat), the topology is not.

I'm a Christian round earthers. But unlike others I'm not here to prove or disprove either theory but more or less to expand my knowledge of both. For all we know we are both wrong