[sandokhan]

We're perfectly happy to make changes to the FAQ. All you need to do is write them up and put them on S&C for public approval. Once you have the members' support for your changes, I'll gladly introduce them for you.

No other member is going to support to do the right thing: delete the entire faq and start all over again using the correct FET.

As things stand right now, the most that can be done is to add another subsection here:

http://wiki.tfes.org/The_Flat_Earth_Wiki

That is, after Frequently Asked Questions, another (new) section:

Advanced Flat Earth Theory (Flat Earth Ether Physics)


Either give me the power to edit ONLY that section (that is, I will add certain links which deal with terrestrial gravity, ether physics, and much more), or we will do it one special topic at a time right here.

[Lord Dave]

I'll support whatever Sandokhan puts in the FAQ.

[Pongo]

I mean this in the nicest way possible, Sandokhan, but I think that the FAQ is best served as a light introduction to some common questions people have that also serves as a pamphlet-like education on the topic.  Your research on flat-earth theory is generally layered in waves and waves of links that come gushing at the reading like a waterfall.  The topics come with little or no discernible flow that leaves the reader droning in half-concluded thoughts and advanced concepts not properly addressed.

I fear that giving you the power to directly change the FAQ will turn the document into a full-fledged, novel-sized, book of labyrinthine structure that will confuse the fact seeker more than help them.

[Pete Svarrior]

For the record, I share Pongo's concern, hence my clear request that any changes be written up and approved by our members prior to being introduced. I would be very reluctant to take blanket statements like Lord Dave's into account.

[sandokhan]

Your FAQ has gotten you nowhere so far.

Just take a look at the questions about the ham radio distance to the moon measurements: it took five minutes to debunk the entire faq.

Now, my advanced flat earth thread is, by far, the most successful thread ever posted on any FE boards: almost 250,000 views.

I will have power ONLY in the subsection that presents the ether physics part.

I know very well how to sell an idea relating to FET, don't you worry about that.

In fact, if I only post one single link to the 14 page AFET, it will make a lot of difference.

Certainly your faq cannot answer the major questions: gravity, radio waves, venus angular size, gyroscopes, precession, and much more.

[Pete Svarrior]

I know very well how to sell an idea relating to FET, don't you worry about that.

We will let the people be the judges of that. Write up your proposed FAQ. If they "buy" it, they'll support it. This is a simple concept.

[sandokhan]

Fine, I will write up a one page faq (most important questions) and post it here.

Then, you will create a new section (advanced flat earth theory): it will be featured there, right after the faq section.

We will let the people be the judges of that.

The people have already judged a long time ago: my AFET answers all the questions immediately, and has been tested fully in direct debates.

[Pete Svarrior]

Fine, I will write up a one page faq (most important questions) and post it here.

Then, you will create a new section (advanced flat earth theory): it will be featured there, right after the faq section.

Sounds good, provided that that section will be subject to the same approval process.

We will let the people be the judges of that.

The people have already judged a long time ago: my AFET answers all the questions immediately, and has been tested fully in direct debates.

Then this will merely be a formality. If you're correct, you'll receive overwhelming support and everything will happen without a hitch.

[Thork]

Just don't forget the purpose of an FAQ. It is to stop every person who comes here asking "why do you think the earth is flat?", "what evidence do you have?", "Coriolis, ha!".

It is not meant to answer anything that anyone could possibly think of. Otherwise what will they post as their first introductory question on the forum? You also shouldn't need a PhD in physics to understand the answers. TFES should be as accessible to a 12 y/o high school kid as it is to a bored aerodynamicist on his lunch break.

Think, what type of question won't get a response from anyone because we are all so bored of it, we couldn't be bothered to answer it.
If you want to make unbunkable detailed explantions, that is what the wiki is for. The point of the FAQ is not to shut down debate. Just bridge the gap where debate would likely stall or to give people a flavour of FET so they can ask something more interesting. It is designed to encourage debate, not shut it down ... this is a forum after all. If you want to make advanced bullet-proof commentaries, that has to go in the wiki as the wiki is a reference for us to lean on during debate. The FAQ serves merely as an intro to the forums.

[sandokhan]

Nothing complicated, perhaps one link (or at most two links) per subject (some of them, of course, to this very site): people want direct proofs very fast, they don't have time to waste on things which don't work.


DIRECT FLAT EARTH PROOFS:

Tunguska Event Data: no curvature across 5,200 km

Lake Ontario file: no curvature across 55 km

Strait of Gibraltar (video/phot): no curvature across 13 km

English Channel: no curvature across 34 km

Lake Michigan: no curvature across 128 km


PHYSICS OF THE GEOCENTRIC PLANETARY/STELLAR SYSTEM:

Faint Young Sun Paradox

Distance to the Sun/Ham Radio Measurements Debunked

Gas Cloud Formation Paradox

Helium Flash/Triple Alpha Process Paradox

Jupiter's IR Anomalous Radiation & Angular Momentum of the Sun Paradoxes

Comets' Tail Paradox

Electric Comet Theory

Star Trails

Venus Angular Size



ETHER PHYSICS:


Ether Drift Proofs

Allais Effect Proofs and Applications

Double Forces of Attractive Gravitation Paradox

Lamoreaux Effect

DePalma Effect

Kozyrev Effect

Biefeld-Brown Effect

Restoring Forces Paradox

Geocentric Coriolis Force

Clouds Weight and Trajectories Paradoxes

Sirius Meridian Transit Points Data

Extended Schroetter Effect


SOLAR PRECESSION EXPLAINED:

Gauss' Easter Formula Applied to the Axial Precession Paradox

Archaeomagnetic Dating of the Artifacts at Pompeii


FLAT EARTH ETHER QUANTUM DYNAMICS:

Subquark Structure of the Atom

J.C. Maxwell Original Set of Ether Equations

Beam Neutrinos Explained

Ring Laser Gyroscopes Explained

[Pongo]

What reader questions are you addressing with this litany of proofs?

Also, I don't think that any links should be to other flat earth society message boards (or vice-versa).  It's very difficult to maintain and endorse a document that you don't have direct control over.

[Blanko]

These topics seem like they're better suited as individual articles for the Wiki, not the FAQ itself.

[sandokhan]

Also, I don't think that any links should be to other flat earth society message boards.

A possible merger might be in the works: no problem then.

If not, I will do the following: I will put up a single link to the other website, just mention these subjects, and let the reader follow up (if they are interested).


Remember, that as things stand right now, you have NOTHING going for you over here (just like the other website): no answers whatsoever when it comes to radio waves, terrestrial gravity, beam neutrinos, and much more. Using your solar orbits maps, it becomes impossible to explain the solar precession (1.5 km per year westward shift).


These topics seem like they're better suited as individual articles for the Wiki, not the FAQ itself.

Fine, but there is a problem: they are all related to ether physics and not to the UAFE theory; that is, they belong in the same category.

There is no need to concern yourselves now with this: I am in no hurry to make any changes to your faq, just some simple suggestions.

[Lord Dave]

For the record, I share Pongo's concern, hence my clear request that any changes be written up and approved by our members prior to being introduced. I would be very reluctant to take blanket statements like Lord Dave's into account.

I sure as hell wouldn't take my statement into account.  I haven't been to the upper forums in many months.  (Maybe a year?)

Nothing complicated, perhaps one link (or at most two links) per subject (some of them, of course, to this very site): people want direct proofs very fast, they don't have time to waste on things which don't work.

....

Where are the questions?

[sandokhan]

If you want to attract new readers, to be at the forefront of FET, you are going to have to change the wiki/faq completely (a carbon copy of the other wiki/faq).

The wiki/faq is supposed to answer questions, not baffle the reader.

A simple question was asked:

How do you explain the measurements of the distance from the earth to the moon by laser beam measurements by astronomical observatories and by the amateur radio operators in their "Moon Bounce" operations of "bouncing" radio signals off the Moon ?

Within the context of UAFE, you cannot answer this question at all.

A radio wave is an ether wave which travels/propagates through aether; the very definition of a radio wave involves at once ether physics; yet, no mention is made of this fact in any flat earth wiki/faq.

[Fat Earl]

Nothing complicated, perhaps one link (or at most two links) per subject (some of them, of course, to this very site): people want direct proofs very fast, they don't have time to waste on things which don't work.

Looks very good.

How to strike a balance between the objective of communicating concepts requiring the capacity for abstract thinking and the objective to reach those that don't have it?

[jroa]

This is just my opinion, for what it is worth, but the faq should contain very few links.  It should present a common question, a short summary that explains the flat Earth side, and maybe an illustration or two.  I think it would be a bad idea if the faq simply contained links to threads, even if the thread does cover the subject of the question.  You might as well just have the faq say, "Use the search function" if you expect them to read through ten pages of a thread to get the answer to their question. 

[sandokhan]

My initial offer was to let me write the short summary; they declined.

Then, my suggestion was to at least include a single link to my AFET, the only flat earth theory that answers the most important questions.

People do not want to read about Earth is not a Globe, or countless historical references, or the obsession with the UA: they want results, proofs, exactly what the wiki/faq is missing now.

[Lord Dave]

If you want to attract new readers, to be at the forefront of FET, you are going to have to change the wiki/faq completely (a carbon copy of the other wiki/faq).

The wiki/faq is supposed to answer questions, not baffle the reader.

A simple question was asked:

How do you explain the measurements of the distance from the earth to the moon by laser beam measurements by astronomical observatories and by the amateur radio operators in their "Moon Bounce" operations of "bouncing" radio signals off the Moon ?

Within the context of UAFE, you cannot answer this question at all.

A radio wave is an ether wave which travels/propagates through aether; the very definition of a radio wave involves at once ether physics; yet, no mention is made of this fact in any flat earth wiki/faq.

That is not a simple question.
Probably not even frequently asked.

You seem to want to create an index of all possible questions with corresponding answers.  Which is fine.  But it isn't an FAQ then.

[JRowe]

A subsection at the end of the FAQ wouldn't go amiss. Just a final section called 'Alternative Models' or 'Further Reading,' where links to the outlines of models can be give. It doesn't interfere with the main running of the FAQ, but it acknowledges that there are other models not necessarily in line with the above. That way curious readers can still look at alternatives that don't match exactly what's outlined in the wiki.
One thing to avoid would be the kind of monopolizing that takes place on other forums, like Dubay's. "This model and only this model is correct." This site is better than most, but there's still a clearly favored model.