9801

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Flat Earth Calendar

« on: December 08, 2013, 10:17:17 PM »

Another idea is to use dates from the Opinions of the Press section as important lectures Rowbotham gave with the appropriate newspaper snippit. It would provide good filler. Ie.--

On this day on May 19th, 1862, Rowbotham lectured at Greenwich University

"'PARALLAX' AT THE LECTURE HALL.--This talented lecturer is again in Greenwich, rivetting the attention of his audiences, and compelling them to submit to the facts which he brings before them--we say submit, for this they do; it seems impossible for any one to battle with him, so powerful are the weapons he uses. Mathematicians argue with him at the conclusion of his lectures, but it would seem as though they held their weapons by the blade and fought with the handle, for sure enough they put the handle straight into the lecturer's hand, to their own utter discomfiture and chagrin. It remains yet to be seen whether any of our Royal Astronomers will have courage enough to meet him in discussion, or whether they will quietly allow him to give the death-blow to the Newtonian theory, and make converts of our townspeople to his own Zetetic philosophy. If 'Parallax' be wrong, for Heaven's sake let some of our Greenwich stars twinkle at the Hall, and dazzle, confound, or eclipse altogether this wandering one, who is turning men, all over England, out of the Newtonian path. 'Parallax' is making his hearers disgusted with the Newtonian and every other theory, and turning them to a consideration of facts and first principles, from which they know not how to escape. Again we beg and trust that some of our Royal Observatory gentlemen will try to save us, and prevent anything like a Zetetic epidemic prevailing amongst us."--Greenwich Free Press, May 19th, 1862.

9802

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Flat Earth Calendar

« on: December 08, 2013, 06:24:26 PM »

Here are some ideas for you:

Modern Flat Earth events
Rowbotham's Birthday & Death
William Carpenter's Birthday & Death
Hampden's Birthday & Death
Lady Bount's Birthday & Death
Samuel Shenton's Birthday & Death
Charles K. Johnson's Birthday & Death
Voliva's Birthday & Death

Anniversary of the Bedford Level Experiment
Anniversary of the Hampden Wallace Experiment
Anniversary of Lady Boiunt's Calico Sheet Experiment
Anniversary of the founding of the City of Zion

Date for the first publication of Earth Not a Globe
Date for the third, more accepted, edition of Earth Not a Globe
Date for first publication of Lady Blount's Earth Not a Globe Review
Date for Thomas Winship's publication of Zetetic Cosmogony
Date for first publication of Charles Johnson's Flat Earth News

Nice to have:

Date Charles K Johnson's house burned down
Date Samuel Birley Rowbotham graduated Medical School

Other Historic Dates

Date Columbus discovered America
Date the South Pole was discovered/reached
Date the North Pole was discovered/reached
Date the earth was first circumnavigated
Date the earth was first circumnavigated by plane at the equator
Date Washington Irving published his lies about Columbus discovering the earth to be round
Date of Hitler's first successful firing of the V2 into the edge of space
Date of first derigible/plane to reach the edge of space
Date Einstein published his work on General Relativity
Date Newton published his Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica which establishes his theory on the three laws and his theroy of gravity as a force
Dates Graviton and Dark matter are theorized

Ancient Flat Earth Events
--Unfortunately most dates such as the rise and fall of Ancient Babylonia, and dates surrounsing ancient greek Flat Earth believers are inspecific
--May be able to get dates surrounding Cosmas Indicopleustes and the date of his publishing of The Christian Topology

NASA
--Space program dates could easily outnumber the rest of the list. I would suggest keeping it short.
--Remember to put "Claimed" and "Alleged" in the description, or otherwise start it with "On this date NASA lied about ..."

Date of first US Communications Satellite
Date of first Man in Space
Date of Apollo 11 landing
Date of first US-Russian cooperation in space
First probes to visit Venus/Mars/Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus/Neptune
International Space Station

Russia
Date the Soviet Space Agency was founded
First animal in orbit (Laika)
First artificial satellite in Earth orbit(Sputnick)
First ICBM (used to launch Sputnik)
First Russian Moon landing
MIR

ESA
Date of ESA Founding

China
Date of Chineese Space Agency founding
Date of first Chinese space walk

9803

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Which Economic System is Best?

« on: December 08, 2013, 10:43:06 AM »

It's cheaper than martial law?

Plus I suspect people in government quite like movies too.

Possibly. Although I somewhat doubt the government would take risks by filming $300 million dollar movies.

What about innovation?

When we had film cameras in an era monopolized by Kodak, someone else developed digital cameras to compete, eventually taking over the market. Today digital cameras dominate.

If the world had film cameras, sold and supplied by the government, and private enterprise did not exist, why would the government ever pour money into R&D in attempt to compete with itself? It seems like we would stay at the same technology level forever.

9804

Announcements / Re: We have our first cloud-hosted subdomain!

« on: December 08, 2013, 08:37:53 AM »

What is our hosting limit?

What do you mean by "hosting limit"? Data transfer, storage, something else?

Yes.

Specifically, can we upload large feature-length films there pertaining to the Flat Earth and NASA Hoax Documentaries?

Do you mean in general or specifically for the library?

Library

9805

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 08, 2013, 07:57:45 AM »

Would you care to cite this law, please?  To the best of my knowledge, rocket engines above a certain thrust level are regulated, but the technology itself not secret.

Just as you said, rockets past a certain threshold are restricted. See the wikipedia page on Model Rocket Motor Classification. Anything past O requires government oversight.

Since the engines in these professional rockets operate differently, it constitutes a different rocket technology. The Saturn V  rocket (A U class rocket) isn't using the same engine design as an O class rocket available to hobbiests. O class rockets are typically solid state or hybrid engines, while the Saturn V's rocket engine is a specially designed liquid rocket with special fuel injector pumps, heat exchangers, turbines, pressure tranducers, etc. -- all researched to a tune of many millions of dollars. It was not a matter of taking a high powered model rocket motor and scaling up.

The blueprints for the custom development of the Saturn V rocket engine are not available to the public, locked away as a state secret.

9806

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Zetetic Council

« on: December 08, 2013, 07:25:30 AM »

I like the idea of a Zetetic Council. It solves a lot of the problems with a dictator-like system.

A nice feature would to a way to conduct votes and make the results of who voted for what public. I'm not sure if there's a plugin for that.

9807

Announcements / Re: We have our first cloud-hosted subdomain!

« on: December 08, 2013, 04:13:17 AM »

What is our hosting limit?

9808

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 07, 2013, 07:44:27 PM »

That has nothing to do with whether or not the technology is classified and highly regulated.

It might be possible to build a rocket off-shore where american law does not apply, in countries uncooperative with the US, and launch it from international waters, as these guys are want to do.

However, it appears that this project is still in its research phase and not a real technology. Not-yet-real rocket technologies do not merit use as  evidence for the reality of space travel any more than posting a link to someone researching the possibility of time travel is evidence for the reality of time travel.

The reality if space travel was not the specific topic being debated. If you wish to concede that not all private space technology companies are NASA contractors, we can easily turn to the reality of space travel. Otherwise you are just making a straw man.

The one 'private space technology' company given as an example of a space company which does not have ties with NASA does not have a working rocket.

9809

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 07, 2013, 07:40:15 PM »

No, but amateurs live firing large, powerful rocket engines does suggest that these technologies are not as highly classified as you claim.

Incorrect. Such rocket technology is still classified under American law, wherever they do it from.

If prostitution is legal in New Zealand, it does not nullify the fact that prostitution is illegal in the US.

9810

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 07, 2013, 03:56:03 PM »

That has nothing to do with whether or not the technology is classified and highly regulated.

It might be possible to build a rocket off-shore where american law does not apply, in countries uncooperative with the US, and launch it from international waters, as these guys are want to do.

However, it appears that this project is still in its research phase and not a real technology. Not-yet-real rocket technologies do not merit use as  evidence for the reality of space travel any more than posting a link to someone researching the possibility of time travel is evidence for the reality of time travel.

9811

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: FES Video

« on: December 07, 2013, 03:49:12 PM »

We should first make a transcript and/or story board sketches and run it past the community to discuss.

9812

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 07, 2013, 02:27:36 AM »

SpaceX can't be truly private since rockets which can reach orbit are a classified technology.

Exactly which parts of this technology are classified?

The advanced rocketry necessary to get into space is, as a whole, a controlled technology. It is classified, and as such, the government does not allow public publication of this technology, or private development. After all, a Saturn V is 98% identical to an ICBM

Tell that to Copenhagen Suborbitals.  After all, their rocket is 98% identical to an ICBM too.
http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/

It's also 100% still-in-development

9813

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 06, 2013, 03:46:11 PM »

SpaceX can't be truly private since rockets which can reach orbit are a classified technology.

Exactly which parts of this technology are classified?

The advanced rocketry necessary to get into space is, as a whole, a controlled technology. It is classified, and as such, the government does not allow public publication of this technology, or private development. After all, a Saturn V is 98% identical to an ICBM

9814

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 06, 2013, 08:23:34 AM »

The above poster is correct. Just like Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, the space projects are being built by NASA under a different name.

It's a congressional mandate that federal agencies use contractors for most roles and proejcts. Private contractors are seen as superior and more cost efficient than government sponsored engineering. The FBI, DOJ, FDA, CIA, NSA, and all other three and four letter agencies use contractors en mass. There are significantly more people who work for the government through contractors than there are government employees. At places like NASA and NOAA, the only people working directly for NASA are the managers and security.

But this is not to say that the government has no control over its contractors. Government contractors are basically temp agencies. The contracted employees work on site at the government base, under the direction of the government civil servant, answerable directly to the government. They have secret government clearances and take polygraph tests. The only interaction the typical engineer has with his parent company is receiving his paycheck.

Do you have evidence that this is true of SpaceX?

I think that there is an abundance of evidence to support that SpaceX is radically different than you describe; that it is a genuine, private aerospace company originating from a single wealthy businessman; and, that creates and builds rockets.  If I presented you with such evidence, that SpaceX is a private firm that employs actual engineers to design and build actual rockets, would you consider it and take it seriously?

If so, what kind of evidence would you consider legitimate?  What kind of evidence do you think would be suitable to support the position I described?

SpaceX can't be truly private since rockets which can reach orbit are a classified technology. The government doesn't let that stuff into the public domain. They don't let private companies go willy nilly, building classified technology in unsecured and uncontrolled environments without direct civil servant oversight.

SpaceX company was specifically created to cater to NASA. The impracticality of a truly private space program without governmental oversight is three fold. Not only is it impossible to build orbital rockets legally, it's also impossible to breach military airspace without prior clearance and scrutiny. It's also impractical to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into building a rocket when you don't even know if NASA is going to buy your services or not; whether they would continue using their own rockets, or outsource their space program to another country with launch capability, such as the ESA. Clearly, the deal was struck with NASA before the fact.

Lastly, SpaceX has its offices on government land and the launches are conducted from military bases, which is an overt indication of its status.

9815

Flat Earth Theory / Re: SpaceX commercial satellite launch

« on: December 04, 2013, 07:38:40 AM »

The above poster is correct. Just like Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, the space projects are being built by NASA under a different name.

It's a congressional mandate that federal agencies use contractors for most roles and proejcts. Private contractors are seen as superior and more cost efficient than government sponsored engineering. The FBI, DOJ, FDA, CIA, NSA, and all other three and four letter agencies use contractors en mass. There are significantly more people who work for the government through contractors than there are government employees. At places like NASA and NOAA, the only people working directly for NASA are the managers and security.

But this is not to say that the government has no control over its contractors. Government contractors are basically temp agencies. The contracted employees work on site at the government base, under the direction of the government civil servant, answerable directly to the government. They have secret government clearances and take polygraph tests. The only interaction the typical engineer has with his parent company is receiving his paycheck.

9816

Arts & Entertainment / Re: FES Book Club

« on: December 03, 2013, 05:52:09 AM »

Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham is an enlightening pick.

9817

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Which Economic System is Best?

« on: December 03, 2013, 05:42:28 AM »

In a communist society where the government owns all means of production in the economy, what incentive is there for the government to do anything beyond providing the basic necessities for the population, such as creating Facebook, filming expensive $300 Million Dollar movies, or publishing XBox 360 games?

9818

Flat Earth Community / Re: Motive Behind the Conspiracy

« on: December 03, 2013, 05:29:23 AM »

The purpose of NASA has always been to foster America's militaristic dominance of space. Space agencies are super weapons, used to threaten other countries into submission.