21

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Separation of Church & Science | Intelligent Design and the Flat Earth

« on: March 03, 2016, 06:06:43 AM »

TheTruthIsOnHere,
Here are potentially some divergent thoughts to this discussion.

I do not believe in creationism as described by any religion.
I do not believe in evolution as described by the non-religious.

I believe that the lack of evidence firmly placing our ancestral lineage to align with the events as it corresponds with any religion or evolution is not reconcilable. Through the time we have been here reproducing our next generations there has been a concerted effort to distort the relative time that we have been here in addition to creating a multitude of divisions within society in furtherance of distorting our true history in this environment, we call Earth. Language is of the most persistent and prevalent of the factors restraining humanity's capacity to unify and answer our most technically challenging questions regarding our environment.

The argument of the chicken or the egg is simply answered by taking a completely unsupported (religious?) belief that they both came into existence simultaneously and by a quantity sufficient to sustain a balanced growth and attrition through its tenure in this environment. This applies to all matter within our environment.

The limitations we are aware of contribute to this spontaneous existence of which begs the question, what is the catalyst, and to what is the catalyst of the catalyst? The explanation we desire is a linear explanation that simply provides best to our sensibility, given our conditioning through generations. My current approach to this question is that while there is a design we can identify given its limitations, a substrate, physical or otherwise, is not required to produce this environment and manage it from outside, or in another layer superior to our own.

We see the division in place to prevent movement towards unveiling the answers to these absolute truths. Addressing the question of our environment is the most attainable as it we can collectively experience this truth and may provide insight to the two other questions representing true value.

I would wholeheartedly believe that this is not a novel concept, and that the management of humanity is in place to prevent absolute chaos upon realization of our condition here. This same management entity would comprise of those that control the functions of society in order to facilitate the further acquisition of truth if it hasn't yet been found in conjunction to suppressing this from being known.

It is more like an ant farm, I want to break the glass, at any cost to see what happens.

22

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What happened to flight MH370?

« on: March 03, 2016, 05:37:01 AM »

Hopefully some stimulating hearsay for those reading...

This brought some interesting points to discuss. First, the fact that this event was reported indicates to me that the significant diversity of the passengers and each of their social networks would make it impossible to securely contain, by elimination any information regarding this flight ever existing. It is at that point much more manageable to to blame a factor that can be supported by the global media, a trusted source by society's majority. They provided enough potential reasons to provide fertile grounds to which discussion regarding this flight can be further divided to support each theory. This is to establish the framework of suppression.

Accompanying this is the fact that the limitations of GPS were severely downplayed, although this was visible, most people were concerned with the fate of the passengers and to know the reason why.

The signal being lost due to the transponder apparently being disabled is also exploiting the majority's conditioning as they believe an air plane is traceable anywhere on the globe because of satellites. This further supported that aircraft is untraceable by unobservable means once it is beyond the reach of GPS.

Rolls Royce engineer describing the pings received as part of their continuous monitoring of engines was also cut. However, they were disingenuous regarding the timing of this loss of contact as they stretched the limits of how far this signal from the engine monitoring system was capable of traveling. They did mention that the information was relayed via satellite, no further questions regarding this as satellites are a known and present part of our society's majority.

No wreckage was ever found. As a tie-in to this site, the pilot could have very well decided to fly southbound because he was empowered to manually fly the aircraft. There is a growing belief of mine that true value is only that of which contributes to humanity's knowledge of our environment, our purpose, and our origin. Information that is truly valuable intrinsically carries a price which is typically that it is not something that can be further distributed, since we have this problem of unlearning such valuable information. This pilot could have known that he would have otherwise lived out his meaningless existence accomplishing nothing, but instead chose to face the truth abandoning all else, including his family and those of his passengers.

No satellite data was offered, no real time recording of the globe from spy satellites was offered to trace via a recording where this plane went. After all, were conditioned to believe that a credit card number is visible from a spy satellite in space. This humanitarian effort was denied by every super power under the auspice of national security concerns. They are all in it together, which is again a common theme in this discussion as the multinational space effort transcends global conflicts.

I do not believe that any known force is responsible for such an absolute disappearance of MH370. I believe this was linked with an individual that desired true knowledge of our environment.

23

Announcements / Re: Rapper B.o.B joins the Flat Earth side!

« on: March 03, 2016, 05:01:06 AM »

While I can understand the appeal that this represents to a community regarded by the majority as an aberration, I see an extremely dangerous time for those engaged in this discussion in the near future, my guess would be this year given the release and management of the short attention span our society possesses.

Wait to see what will happen to B.o.B. and Tila Tequila, it will not end well and the common denominator will be their thoughts on the Flat Earth. These two prominent cases will provide the foundation for what I fear to be corrective measures taken upon individuals that exhibit early symptoms of this contrived "form of mental illness".

Most of us are familiar with the typical reaction observed when this discussion is brought in public. If mental illness is associated with any amount of agreeing with a Flat Earth then people will steer clear of you in fear of being adjudicated by association.

This is conjecture, and my intent is not to spread FUD and I apologize in advance as it may seem as such.

24

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Polaris proves the earth is round.

« on: March 03, 2016, 04:50:17 AM »

The flat earth and heliocentric models are opposites in almost every way. Is it really that hard to tell which is correct?
The answer is NO. The earth is a sphere. It's obvious by the apparent positions of the celestial objects in the sky as observed from earth. By simple observation you can determine conclusively that the earth is round and that a flat earth is impossible.

One of the simplest examples illustrating this is Polaris. See why here:

http://debunkingflatearth.blogspot.com/2016/02/debunking-flat-earth-how-polaris-proves.html

Your entire post was an unsupported opinion. The link you provided has the following requirements that the information conveyed requires to be valid.

1) The Earth revolves around the Sun.
2) The Sun moves throughout the galaxy.
3) The sphere earth rotates on an axis.
4) The stars also move relative to the galaxy.

Any observer in the moon given these 4 requirements would not be able to produce a photograph with star trails as they are rotating away from the Stars while the planet they are on is moving through the galaxy. The trails presented on these images do not comport with these given requirements. As a natural result one would have to being eliminating the points representing the source of the conflict until the results can be reconciled. This wouldn't leave any points on the list above remaining.

The example you provided is void as the fact that star trail photos have been reproduced numerous times indicates that the star trails form in a singular direction, predictably, and persistently through the ages.

25

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Water finding it's own level

« on: March 03, 2016, 04:39:30 AM »

The tub example is insufficient as the constant rotation of the water in the tub going in one direction would never demonstrate the water receding from its original position, only maintaining its bias towards one side of the tub relative to the direction spinning preventing it from self leveling as it did when the body of water in the tub was at rest.

Observable by anybody at the shore of any ocean is the water producing a motion that approaches the shore and recedes back to whence it came. If the rotation was truly one direction or happening at all this movement of the water is in conflict of the constantly rotation being provided by a sphere Earth.

If anything the water's behavior relative to the tub example is that of a tub moving back and forth, assuming nothing but the tub's movement is responsible for the water's movement.

26

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Did I do something wrong?

« on: March 03, 2016, 04:23:31 AM »

This has been done many times, but I've personally saw, unaided by optics,Tokyo from the top of Mount Fuji in Japan. I saw the sunrise from the peak of Mount Fuji as well.

Cooler weather throughout the visible area will provide an extended range in what you can view compared to hotter weather.

A Nikon P900 mounted on a tripod with a geared head will provide a significant boost in the distance you can observe from a given point. If you can travel as frequently as you do, this bit of kit will enhance your trips quite a bit and will cost about $1200 USD.

27

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Moon Landing

« on: March 03, 2016, 04:03:34 AM »

Hi everyone, first thread here! Thanks for having me.

I'm recently awakened to the truth of flat earth and one thing i'm pondering is this:

Does the truth of Flat Earth NECESSARILY logically mean that a Moon landing is impossible? If you launched while the Moon was above Earth, at it's shortest trajectory away, and departed back to Earth when you were facing the right way again, presumably you'd be able to make the trip. Perhaps the astronauts rode the Moon all the way around the Earth-disc and NASA is keeping that info hidden. Maybe NASA even has photos of the underside of Earth.

Thoughts?

There is no evidence of a terrestrial craft progressing beyond where we can fly high altitude craft.

This claim that there is no evidence is supported by the complete absence of continuous footage from launch to orbit amongst the multitude of space launch videos provided by NASA, ESA, and the like. The moment things will reach a transition from high altitude to orbit, the video either completely stops or inexplicably transitions into a CGI/computer view of the space craft with telemetry data rather than maintaining the same camera view we had since launch.

My thoughts, as some others conclude is that the footage of the launch and high altitude provides the foundation of a cognitive bridge built to guide the viewer to resigning further critical thought of what they are witnessing while simultaneously exploiting the viewer's reliance on the "trusted" source such as your national space agency.

28

Flat Earth Community / 3D engines fails to reproduce round earth as we experience it

« on: March 03, 2016, 03:53:02 AM »

I've posted this before on a forum that is now closed and thought I would try again.

The 3D engines that the gaming industry uses to create games using a first person perspective have all used a mapping engine that produces flat maps with the a flat horizon.

Use of a 3D engine to create spheres representing planets in space with the surface interaction visible and interacting with the space between other planets are all out of scale.

Use of a 3D engine to create spheres representing planets in space with no surface interaction visible are actually representations of an in-engine planet but upon approaching close proximity of this representation a transition occurs in which you exit the "space map" and load a "planet surface map" and this transition can be obscured by thick cloud layers, motion blur, a cut-scene or any number of other methods to provide the sensation of going through an atmosphere of sorts.

I've seen every game up to Star Citizen which has the most impressive presentation yet, but still falls in the later category in which the transition is just that.

A game such as Minecraft, has a finite limit to the depths one may dig down and ascend to the skies limit. However, there is an "infinitely" procedurally generated terrain for the players moving along the X axis. The player will never circumnavigate their world. This however is by design, as the game doesn't intend to ever wrap around because it isn't spherical and this is geometrically impossible. This example is more of an aside.

I feel that it is peculiar that we may generate such surreal first person environments in the computer, but fail to reproduce a, to-scale reproduction of a spherical earth.

29

Flat Earth Community / Re: Argument via Empericism

« on: March 03, 2016, 03:24:49 AM »

Tom,
I agree with everything except the FET gravitation portion as it is not evidence enough of Earth's upward movement.

30

Flat Earth Theory / Re: End of the earth

« on: February 21, 2016, 10:20:58 PM »

Hi all,
I am very green on this particular subject as i only came accross this website and subject yesterday and it has grabbed my attention in a big way. At first thought i was thinking "no way is this possible" but after a few hours of research i can quite clearly see you guys are on to something here.
I have a question though or maybe two that i would love to know the answers to.
Q1: The only way to prove this theory conclusively would be to go to the end of the world. Has anyone done this or is anyone planning to?
Q2: What benefit does the government gain in leading us into believing that earth is a sphere?

Look forward to responses.

Regarding Q1, correct. There are two approaches to this. The first is to find the truth for yourself. This trip is much cheaper to plan and requires on contingency as you must expect this to be a one way journey. The second is to find the truth and bring it back in a form that cannot be refuted. Your hurdles include and are not limited to:

1) Isolation on the ocean.
2) Your vessel's capabilities against the rigors of inclement weather.
3) No true measure of how many supplies to bring.
4) Managing a crew if any, relative to the size of your vessel.
5) Possibility of military interference.

Don't expect to use the internet or attempt to as you will only produce a signature. Don't expect to use fuel for the same reason. Spray your sail boat down in thermal resistant coating. Without putting too much thought in it there you go.


Regarding Q2, the huge benefit is maintaining order. Society is functional and managed at this time and there is no benefit to introduce turbulence to an otherwise perfect system of management.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Do other planets exist?

« on: February 21, 2016, 10:08:22 PM »

Roundy,
Your responses were insufficient to demonstrate to others, this conviction you hold.

Icaruss,
I agree that the sudden attack is a low level response and suspicious.

Earthisround,
This phrase, "people living this day and age" is commonly used to assert the negative connotation with questioning one's environment. Interesting to see so many people repeat this mantra in any discussion related to this subject.

With our society's focus fixated outside of our own environment it assists greatly in dismissing any notion that the Earth is anything but round.

I assume that these planets, as they are classified are either an independent light source or reflections.

32

Flat Earth Theory / Re: RE gravity vs FE acceleration

« on: February 21, 2016, 09:40:31 PM »

Earthisround,
The only demonstrable evidence of gravity is what we observe on Earth. Taking this exclusive demonstration of gravity and creating a narrative to which other bodies are influenced by such a force is a farce.

There are too many contradictions in how gravity applies to give any certain definition to it. However, a narrative is required for the public to which we arrive at this impasse.

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: what about the edge of earth ?

« on: February 21, 2016, 09:32:38 PM »

Rakkan,
I'm one to assume that there is currently no information to support the composition of the "edge" if any exists.

The following pertains to your response and is meant to address it generally as a reminder of the hurdles that obstruct any progress towards the truth. While I can understand your disappointment, which I believe is a product of our society's bias towards convenience.

This truth that you seek on an internet forum can't be acquired so easily. Finding such an answer, whatever it may be, will require the fortitude and conviction and the appropriate financial backing if you want to come back with an answer.

Now a one way trip is much easier to plan. Afterall, truth is what we make of it. To accommodate the effort in convincing others only compounds the requirements to get the truth in distributable form.

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: GPS

« on: May 17, 2015, 04:25:38 AM »

Skywave propogation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skywave

35

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Conspiracy

« on: May 17, 2015, 04:22:40 AM »

Because shadow governments get to pocket the money they are actually spending on space travel. If what you're really asking is, "Doesn't it make more sense that we are capable of space travel than having to construct an intricate and far-ranging global conspiracy just to explain away what amounts to a huge problem for Flat Earth theory?" then the answer is, "Yes."

Why not spend all this money on exploring "real" flat earth? The science discovered from exploring a flat earth would be more beneficial and profitable because it would be based on "real flat earth science".

Binder,
To the majority, there is no "real" flat earth to explore, this was taken care of by Copernicus and  associated parties and dogma. To the minority, this wouldn't happen if the intentions were pure as they are mutually exclusive.

Digging a hole is what man can do. Somebody should find land somewhere and create something akin to Burning Man but the purpose is to gather once a year to dig down a hole. Or if somebody has money and land, buy some digging equipment and dig a 100,000 square foot area and lets see how deep we can get.

Otherwise half the model cannot be explained. There are enough conflicts between the RE and FE models that would put a discerning individual on the fence about either model, however both models lend themselves to a degree of faith as they explain how various (difficult to prove) elements are based on either research that is not reproducible or simply by convincing as the case.

36

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What keeps the sun & moon from falling?

« on: May 17, 2015, 04:10:58 AM »

Mostlyharmless,
I don't believe all FE models have upward acceleration as the cause for the sun and moon to remain in position relative to the observer.

Mr. Richardson,
I apologize in advance for the non-answer as I do not have one that I can support. But related to your query the first step to answering it would be to determine the ongoings at the Karman line. What happens beyond the Karman line does not occur elsewhere on Earth and what is beyond that point may follow rules that vary from what we are familiar with.

37

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why not send a drone to fly over Antarctica?

« on: May 17, 2015, 03:55:57 AM »

The drone would require a robust logistics channel to support the mission, if you wanted to collect any data from the drone.

There is also the regulatory concern, that Antarctica is a protected region by a number of nations and I would expect a reasonable capacity to respond to any unauthorized flights over the region. Simply put, any notion of flying over the area while retaining the data from the flight is currently out of reach.

It has been proposed before but three boats setting course towards the Antarctic landmass and the first ship  holding position while the other two ships sail with their starboard and port sides respectively, towards the Antarctic landmass while maintaining line of sight with said landmass will eventually record the distance that the landmass encompasses, this data will have been recorded twice by the two ships sailing along the landmass to reduce the margin of error.

This is more feasible than a fly over as the logistics involved are simplified and should not provoke a military response.

The first step is to answer the question regarding the purported nature of the Antarctic landmass, as it is too convenient to simply agree.

I am not aware of a private entity having performed this evaluation. Australia can be the starting point. Bring a compass, sextant and high power lens.

38

Flat Earth Community / Re: What is there under a flat earth

« on: May 17, 2015, 03:36:01 AM »

I felt I understood Mr. Bishop's response as I was curious to see any answer to this as there is none. If you want documentation on what has been done do some reading on the Kola superdeep project. Otherwise you have two options:

1) Nobody knows anything else.
2) Any other information is well managed.

I would like to see a wealthy individual or perhaps a nation undertake an expansive drilling/digging project downwards in a 100,000 square foot area with a webcam feed. The KOLA superdeep project took place in a fairly small building and I'm no scientist but I can't see why a larger area wasn't used.

39

Flat Earth Community / Re: Eric Dubay shot us down

« on: May 17, 2015, 03:10:40 AM »

I don't see the need to install any individual. There are apparently a wide variety of nuances splintering those interested in further discussion on the topic of the FE model.

Answering simple questions is the best start, finding empirical, repeatable procedures. There is no business discussing what cannot be proven or repeatable. Otherwise the discussion holds as much water as any other supposition.

I wish to see a forum that is free of politics as it only serves to divert the subject at hand.

40

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: REQUEST FOR COMMENTS: Reunification Proposal

« on: May 17, 2015, 02:59:16 AM »

Well, it's looking like a rival flat earth group is forming around Eric Dubay who is decidedly more energetic and definitely critical of Daniel Shenton. I noticed that Dubay has another kind of demon, a different weakness: hard core crude anti-semitism which is unfortunate, but he's obviously a better researcher than Daniel.

Dionysios,
I don't know whether what you assert of Mr. Dubay is true. If you wouldn't mind perhaps supporting this assertion, although it is not related to this topic. I dislike unsupported statements.

I was banned from IFERS for similar asking for support on assertions (on a FE related matter), hardly worthy of banning but I must respect that every house has their rules! I registered there today, and was on for 30 minutes prior to the being struck down by the ban hammer.

What I gained from that experience is that whatever I posted could not be reconciled by a response and I'll leave it at that.