21

Flat Earth Community / Re: Farewell

« on: April 22, 2016, 10:13:27 PM »

After that gravity thread can't say it's the worst news I have heard today.

22

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Simple Experiment for Simple Minds

« on: April 22, 2016, 11:55:53 AM »

We get sunsets at a very predictable times, with the sun certainly appearing to set behind the horizon.

Please explain how you explanation "Light decays. Also it would be affected by the atmosphere to some degree -- the reason we see reds and purples in the sky at sunset" can possibly explain that. True it does explain the "reds and purples in the sky at sunset".

You claim "Light decays"! No, light travelling through a vacuum does not decay!
Travelling through a clear atmosphere the limit is about 340 km - the Rayleigh Limit due to scattering from Oxygen and Nitrogen molecules. The actual limit varies from only a few kilometres up to this figure, depending on the clarity of the air.

With the Flat Earth model at sunset the sun is (supposedly) around 5000 km high and on the equator at an equinox around 14,400 km away (horizontally). With this geometry, and the effective top of the atmosphere is at about 10 km high.

With these distances the effective path length for sunlight at sunset is only about 30 km! Unless you come up with some very "bendy light".
And while we are at it, the sun certainly appears to stay the same size as it appears to move over the sky, yet its distance from the observer varies from 5,000 km when overhead to roughly 15,000 km at sunset - why does perspective cause it to reduce it size to less than 1/3 the size it is when overhead? The explanation we are given is "atmospheric magnification" - sure, must be a big magnifying glass up there!

That model of the sun has so holes it it's a wonder all the "phlogiston[1]" doesn't leak out.

[1] Stop laughing! Someone DID suggest that (not on this site though).

Why do you feel an incessant need to speak for others? My post was clearly intended for the OP, as an invitation to elaborate his point of view, with less arrogance and more precision.

If you think the Sun looks the same at noon as it does prior to sunset, then you are lying to yourself. To me, when I see it at sunset, it clearly looks blurrier, hazier, with a large amount of flare going on.

Quick question: When you see an airplane going away into the distance, does it or does it not sink into the horizon, regardless of altitude?

• I did not say "the Sun looks the same at noon as it does prior to sunset", I said "sun certainly appears to stay the same size as it appears to move over the sky". So I am NOT lying to myself or anyone else.
  Of course the sun looks redder and sometimes distorted and shimmery at sunset!
  But, it is absolutely true that (apart from a bit of distortion sunrise and sunset) the sun does stay the SAME SIZE as it moves across the sku!
• Yes, an aeroplane dose sink towards the horizon, it DOES NOT appear to sink BELOW the horizon.
  And their is a massive difference here the plane maybe at 10,000 m altitude and if the air is perfectly clear be visible (would need a telescope!) for up to hundreds of kilometres. At this distance it would be within a couple of degrees of the horizon.
  On the other hand, the FE sun is supposedly at 5,000 km altitude, and at sunset would be roughly (varies a lot depending on season and location) 14,400 km away. At this distance is is still at an elevation from the horizon of about 19°. BIG, BIG difference.
  So, YOU tell me how this magic FE sun of YOURS ever could appear to SET BEHIND THE HORIZON or even sink into the horizon?

The moon does essentially the same thing and is easier to observe because it is not so glaringly bright. So, please explain in words simple enough for an apparent dunder-head like me to understand just how this is possible!

Moonset

E&OE(xpected)

It may be doctored some but I don't care, still a gorgeous picture. Just needs a hammock there instead of a bench.

In reality though, the flat earth sun is heavily flawed. The speed of sunset/rise at the end/beginning  moments , the size of the sun through its "orbit", the cast of the shadows, the way the sun actually " tracks" through the sky. Also the math of the height the sun would have to be does not work. To low it wouldn't cover the required land mass, too high it would be seen at all times even when accounting for atmospheric refraction. My math says  you would have a heavy glow from upper atmospheric refraction no matter the sun's position . Also what about the daily radiation we receive that would never coincide with a sun of the FE size? I mean I guess it could be coming from another source, it's plausible though not probable.

23

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 22, 2016, 08:31:21 AM »

Once again running down the list in order

1.You are right, some situations there is no truth...I absolutely agree. This was not meant to be implied, though I can see how you would see it being implied. That was my error in wording.

2. I can agree here on point two, I see no differing of opinion here. Though I hate seeing the word "fact" so much, since true facts are very close to the reality of a mythological unicorn. However, I know you were just making a point to clarify.

3. This point I see no disagreement.

4. This point I see no disagreement.

5. This point I see no disagreement. I feel the same irritation when "free thinkers" are just replacing authoritative sourcing. "I don't trust the government but now I trust every utterance of alex jones""I don't trust NASA, but I trust every youtube video speaking against NASA" the list could go on for many moons. However, people whom are blind folded by whatever source need to be treated with love, respect, and dignity...otherwise their defenses will never drop long enough to allow a free thought to form. Also people whom are truly forming free thoughts, even if we consider them wrong..there should be the same love, respect and dignity. For they are a fellow living creature one, also who knows what could be born from their idea. Maybe you are wrong and they are right, or maybe the reverse. Possibly the truth is in the middle, so when the thoughts are combined you find the truth..possibly it would not have been available with two individual thoughts and ideology. 

6. This I believe you are saying that if someone states an obvious error that you yourself can prove as false for whatever reason, then you still respect the person, but there is no respect of the idea. If this is what you are stating, I can agree to that. Though I have to say, it takes me a long time to write off a an idea as 100 percent implausible, this is for reasons I have previously stated. Even the flat earth model for example, I began researching it because I hear all ideas for reasons stated prior. Even though I consider it a very low percentage of being correct (very low single percentage), I am still not willing to completely write it off as 100 percent incorrect yet. Also I 100 percent agree with people should not hold back on presenting evidence of why another is incorrect. That is the only way progress can be made. Fear of having ones views changed or being proven wrong is why people fear such arguments, yet the truth needs no defense, it stands under its own strength.


See this is quality, intelligent debate. The outcome is learning there is a lot of common ground here. However, this would have never been accomplished if I would have called you a s#$t eating douche for dissecting my words to spin them in an untruthful way suiting your agenda. Or you call me a dim witted, s%$t swarming fruit fly who speaks in hypocritical, deceiving circles.  Would have just ended in more insults, wasting time, and no one learning a thing about each other or ones self.

Yeah, in honest debates you usually do get a lot of common ground. After all we are all very alike in the ways we think, if not in our opinions.

When I use the word fact, I take it only to mean a "best guess about the empirical world". Nothing like objective, immovable truth. That is, in the end, all that facts are, but that is sufficient for us to base our decisions on. Just like you get irritated by people throwing the word "fact" around and taking it to mean what it doesn't, I don't understand why people "believe" so much out of religious contexts. Either it is your best guess - then it isn't a belief; Or it isn't your best guess, and then you just claim to believe it, but don't really. It's not like anyone has objective "facts" about empirical reality, so there is no reason to couch the statement in that much uncertainity.

I understand your points about how one should be hestitant to write things off completely. But at the same time I feel that a lot of people cling to things they should, by rights, write off as implausible, at least for the moment. Writing something off as "wrong" doesn't necessarily imply it stays "wrong" forever. You can change your mind - in fact reason kinda requires you to change your mind all the time based on new information. But if there is no good reason to cling to a belief, it should simply be dropped, if only momentarily. I feel this is connected to the general reluctance of people to make up clear rules and goals. Nowadays, everything is relative, nothing is true. Everything deserves respect, but by that token, nothing ultimately gets any actual respect. Being tolerant and open minded is not the same as being undecided. I much prefer a healthy argument between people with a clear opinion to everyone taking the middle ground by default.

By the way, I did think about what you said, to TheTruthIsOnHere, about me breaking posts up into bits. It may actually be connected to the way I process information. In my field, very precise textual analysis is a key element, so I am kind of trained to dissect every single sentence.

I say "belief" or "faith" out of respect of science. Since as far as I know unless some miracle happens, I will never be able to touch, feel, prove the existance of the God I consider truth. There will never be able a test I can design to either prove or disprove Yahweh or Yehushua. Even though I have made up my mind, very honest with people of what I have chosen and the bias that exsist. I would never say "fact" on a subject like this, even though to ME I have accepted it as fact. I even spent 3 years attempting to disprove myself sticking to the scientific method as much as possible.

First I needed to find a belief that "wins" over all other beliefs. Something that is historically accurate, provided insight that was ahead of its time, the belief it self did not benefit the people at the time of its origins (financially, power, ect), when it was begun ect ect. So after thoroughly studying 240 some beliefs and religions I came to my conclusion. Then I looked at the science we have of our origins, the math used to calculate this, all the variables, the actual test themselves not the biased conclusions presented. This i actually leanred the most from, which is why i always say now science is 2 percent actual science now, 98 percent biased conclusion that supports whatever agenda needed. Compared the two and asked myself which horse I choose.

As for not deleting a theory. When I say that I don't mean keep it in your head all the time. Like flat earth, say I don't give it a thought for a decade, then some evidence comes and I say hmmm..maybe flat earth was on to something, let me investigate some more. Just once an idea is written off, don't be affraid to re approach it if need be. I think we mean the same thing just a little different wording.


This is another example of what not acting like 3 year olds and making broad biased assumptions can accomplish. Instead of calling you a troll for  dissecting my posts and making assumptions. I injected other options for your actions, which caused me to learn more of how your process info, and it seems you might have learned something about yourself at the same time.

The only reason I keep pointing out this stuff is to show by example of what can be learned in the right environment. Possibly the people who add unhealthy elements to places like this MIGHT learn something about their behavior. Though unlikely, definitely not impossible.

24

Flat Earth Community / Re: Where is the edge?

« on: April 22, 2016, 08:09:18 AM »

Damn Russians ....ha ha

As for the expedition, that would be awesome, I would throw in and join on that. However, the idea of sending a 3 stage to high orbit seems it would be safer, cheaper, and quicker. That would be awesome, it would make or break so many theories in one single shot. Shape of the earth, dome theory, if Hall boosters work in space and rockets themselves, ect ect ect.

Just need to join together to do this, I have already stated what I can assist in (propulsion, structural, some guidance, a location to build and test, donation of needed parts along with a portion of thr funding) and things I would need assistance on( ground based line of site control and guidance, software, break away times, live video feed and what cameras to actually use). Even have the basic budget set 40k (over what I am willing to provide), however 80k would be ideal so there can be a duplicate in case of failure.

Tell me how cool this would be, would be the end all be all. People have raised alot of money for stupid causes, this is a legit one and not alot of money when you think about it. The budget could be less if people involved already have preexisting items that they would donate like I would do. Tell me what is wrong with this idea?

25

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 21, 2016, 08:57:26 PM »

Sorry, I overlooked your reply. I only realized you had replied when I saw you answering to TheTruthIsOnHere.

Yes there is nothing that says the truth cant be an extreme. Though statistically it is more likely to be "in the middle somewhere". The few truths I have found in life were found in the " middle ground" somewhere, and "typically" "extremism" formed peoples opinions to be one sided. Also caused unhealthy biased that acted as binders against the truth. However, the very beginning of this paragraph is true, though unlikely.

Yeah, black and white vision is usually bad, I'd agree. It's just that I'd also caution against assuming some element of truth in every claim. Sometimes things really are as simple as they seem.

I have chosen to accept that faith as a fact, yes. However, I still recognize it as a faith, though I have accepted it as fact...lol I know circular talk, however I feel you know what I mean. Though "fact" to me, I am not jaded into not knowing it is stemmed from "faith".

I Think I get it. I would probably name it different categories of truth. There is empirical facts, there is philosophical truth, and there is faith.

To me, considering the evidence, the answers to my questions, the attitude of the "majority" of FE believers...it is that, a belief. To me this is the word that describes this movement the best, and it is a belief I find mathematically improbable to be moved any further than a belief.

Ah, ok. I didn't realize you were talking about the movement. I thought you meant that you, personally "believe" the world to be flat. I always find it odd when basic factual (i.e. empirical) questions are framed it terms of belief.

To me, I feel statistically , unbiased reasoning is one of the most sound logical approaches to finding the truth. It is when it turns to biased "feelings" that is loses its beneficial qualities.

I can agree with that.

This is why I injected the 3 year old statement there. Not all flat earthers act as you describe, though the majority do. However, from the action of the majority , this goes back to my statement before of a "belief". However, even people whom pose an argument for a belief or faith, if being honest should be able to present and logically debate without resulting in childishness behavior. Even though this is predominantly present in the movement, and certainly an issue if the movement would like to be given more of a serious view. I still stand by this statement, considering a view that is outside of mainstream is the attempt at freedom of thought, alot can bloom from that. Also, the deplorable treat of people whom do not accept the mainstream point of view is a certain fact, no matter what it is(as long as it isn't causing others harm), this is unacceptable.

What frustrates me is how much those people who describe themselves as "free thinkers" actually cling to dogma. They just replace one authority with another. But you are correct about how it is sometimes sad how people treat one another. Thinking in clans and trying to assert our superiority against other groups seems to be deeply built into our psyche, though that is of course no justification.

Statement of " fact" is the only way to command respect? I would have to disagree with that. First off, absolute facts are not very plentiful in our existence. Secondly, many great things were born just from "ideas", fact or not. Say I look at this movement, I start to study it, find the world is a globe, but our theory on gravitation is incorrect. So I create something ground breaking that leads to many innovations. However, the flat earth model was the catalyst for this discovery. Many great things can be born from ideas, correct or incorrect. Ideas and freedom of thought should always be respected if presented without bias, logically, intelligently, and with respect. Number one this is a fellow human presenting it, number two, no telling what could blossum from it.

I think we have a misunderstanding here, I am sorry if I didn't make myself clear. I did not mean that only statements of fact command respect. For one, (empirical) facts are but one aspect of truth. For another, there is of course plenty of opinions that I can respect, like what faith one chooses. What I meant was that if you make a statement that can be either truth or falsehood, it can only be respected as the truth. If one considers it falsehood, there is no reason to respect it. One still has to respect the person, but their opinion does not deserve any deference. One must be allowed to point out things that are wrong, even if that is unpleasant to the person who holds the statement to be true.

Once again running down the list in order

1.You are right, some situations there is no truth...I absolutely agree. This was not meant to be implied, though I can see how you would see it being implied. That was my error in wording.

2. I can agree here on point two, I see no differing of opinion here. Though I hate seeing the word "fact" so much, since true facts are very close to the reality of a mythological unicorn. However, I know you were just making a point to clarify.

3. This point I see no disagreement.

4. This point I see no disagreement.

5. This point I see no disagreement. I feel the same irritation when "free thinkers" are just replacing authoritative sourcing. "I don't trust the government but now I trust every utterance of alex jones""I don't trust NASA, but I trust every youtube video speaking against NASA" the list could go on for many moons. However, people whom are blind folded by whatever source need to be treated with love, respect, and dignity...otherwise their defenses will never drop long enough to allow a free thought to form. Also people whom are truly forming free thoughts, even if we consider them wrong..there should be the same love, respect and dignity. For they are a fellow living creature one, also who knows what could be born from their idea. Maybe you are wrong and they are right, or maybe the reverse. Possibly the truth is in the middle, so when the thoughts are combined you find the truth..possibly it would not have been available with two individual thoughts and ideology. 

6. This I believe you are saying that if someone states an obvious error that you yourself can prove as false for whatever reason, then you still respect the person, but there is no respect of the idea. If this is what you are stating, I can agree to that. Though I have to say, it takes me a long time to write off a an idea as 100 percent implausible, this is for reasons I have previously stated. Even the flat earth model for example, I began researching it because I hear all ideas for reasons stated prior. Even though I consider it a very low percentage of being correct (very low single percentage), I am still not willing to completely write it off as 100 percent incorrect yet. Also I 100 percent agree with people should not hold back on presenting evidence of why another is incorrect. That is the only way progress can be made. Fear of having ones views changed or being proven wrong is why people fear such arguments, yet the truth needs no defense, it stands under its own strength.


See this is quality, intelligent debate. The outcome is learning there is a lot of common ground here. However, this would have never been accomplished if I would have called you a s#$t eating douche for dissecting my words to spin them in an untruthful way suiting your agenda. Or you call me a dim witted, s%$t swarming fruit fly who speaks in hypocritical, deceiving circles.  Would have just ended in more insults, wasting time, and no one learning a thing about each other or ones self.

26

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 21, 2016, 03:52:10 PM »

I don't care about agenda or sides...only truth. Between every extreme the truth exist.

That's only statistically likely, but not true in the sense that it follows from reason. There is no rule that says the universe cannot be extreme.

I think majority of "religion" is fueled by greed, power, agenda, and self interest. Just a form of control just like many forms of government control. However I believe in Yahweh and Yehushua as the ultimate truth. Some would say that is contradictory.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "ultimate truth". Belief in a highest being isn't irrational, though many specific claims about such beings are.

Flat earth...do I believe it flat, I feel it's highly unlikely.

What do you mean you "believe" it flat? The word is very poorly defined when it comes to opinions about empirical reality.

However, are these people reaching out because they feel there is something wrong and somebody is hiding something..yes. I just don't like putting things in a box of this group, that group. It's all about the search for truth for me, and usually that truth is never fully in each group because everyone tends to push for their own agenda. Usually the truth is in the outskirts somewhere, in the middle of many agendas.

Yet feelings can be a bad adviser when it comes to the search or truth. Many flaws in human reasoning are ultimately based on feelings.

Even this movement, is there errors there? Too many to count, yet it is people at least trying to think for themselves, yet look at the amount of hate generated towards them (yes I know flat earthers act like 3 year olds at times), yet they aren't hurting anyone.. Yet they are treated like cancer by most.

Trying to think for themselves? Not really. That would involve having actual honest debate, trying to refine your arguments, reading what other smart people have thought before you. That isn't happening.

This is cult mentality, not acceptance of different views or respect of the fellow man.

The fellow man can command respect by his nature, his opinion cannot. A statement of fact needs to actually be true in order to be respected.

Leave it up to you to somehow break every single word or sentence down until it doesn't make sense anymore. I don't understand your need to pick apart everything to the bone, especially when you have no actual conclusion or obvious reason to do so.

I had no problem at all following what babyhighspeed said, and I agree for the most part with his message and believe it to be logically sound. What exactly are you trying to prove by meticulously fragmenting his message to the point of incoherence?

I was aware of his strategy in breaking down the post like that, it is an effective tactic to remove coherence, thus allowing the following rebuttal to include "added" context that was not originally present. It helps to support a preconceived notion and an agenda, typical strategy in scientific and religious documents. It's difficult to add context to a completed text.

However, I attempted to answer his rebuttal with as much accuracy as possible. Removing the notion that his break down was done out of malice, possibly it's just the way he processes information. I don't like making assumptions, no matter the mathematical plausibility of the assumption being correct.

27

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 21, 2016, 02:46:55 PM »

I don't care about agenda or sides...only truth. Between every extreme the truth exist.

That's only statistically likely, but not true in the sense that it follows from reason. There is no rule that says the universe cannot be extreme.

I think majority of "religion" is fueled by greed, power, agenda, and self interest. Just a form of control just like many forms of government control. However I believe in Yahweh and Yehushua as the ultimate truth. Some would say that is contradictory.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "ultimate truth". Belief in a highest being isn't irrational, though many specific claims about such beings are.

Flat earth...do I believe it flat, I feel it's highly unlikely.

What do you mean you "believe" it flat? The word is very poorly defined when it comes to opinions about empirical reality.

However, are these people reaching out because they feel there is something wrong and somebody is hiding something..yes. I just don't like putting things in a box of this group, that group. It's all about the search for truth for me, and usually that truth is never fully in each group because everyone tends to push for their own agenda. Usually the truth is in the outskirts somewhere, in the middle of many agendas.

Yet feelings can be a bad adviser when it comes to the search or truth. Many flaws in human reasoning are ultimately based on feelings.

Even this movement, is there errors there? Too many to count, yet it is people at least trying to think for themselves, yet look at the amount of hate generated towards them (yes I know flat earthers act like 3 year olds at times), yet they aren't hurting anyone.. Yet they are treated like cancer by most.

Trying to think for themselves? Not really. That would involve having actual honest debate, trying to refine your arguments, reading what other smart people have thought before you. That isn't happening.

This is cult mentality, not acceptance of different views or respect of the fellow man.

The fellow man can command respect by his nature, his opinion cannot. A statement of fact needs to actually be true in order to be respected.

Well going down the list of your replies in order.,

 Yes there is nothing that says the truth cant be an extreme. Though statistically it is more likely to be "in the middle somewhere". The few truths I have found in life were found in the " middle ground" somewhere, and "typically" "extremism" formed peoples opinions to be one sided. Also caused unhealthy biased that acted as binders against the truth. However, the very beginning of this paragraph is true, though unlikely.

I have chosen to accept that faith as a fact, yes. However, I still recognize it as a faith, though I have accepted it as fact...lol I know circular talk, however I feel you know what I mean. Though "fact" to me, I am not jaded into not knowing it is stemmed from "faith".

To me, considering the evidence, the answers to my questions, the attitude of the "majority" of FE believers...it is that, a belief. To me this is the word that describes this movement the best, and it is a belief I find mathematically improbable to be moved any further than a belief.

To me, I feel statistically , unbiased reasoning is one of the most sound logical approaches to finding the truth. It is when it turns to biased "feelings" that is loses its beneficial qualities.

This is why I injected the 3 year old statement there. Not all flat earthers act as you describe, though the majority do. However, from the action of the majority , this goes back to my statement before of a "belief". However, even people whom pose an argument for a belief or faith, if being honest should be able to present and logically debate without resulting in childishness behavior. Even though this is predominantly present in the movement, and certainly an issue if the movement would like to be given more of a serious view. I still stand by this statement, considering a view that is outside of mainstream is the attempt at freedom of thought, alot can bloom from that. Also, the deplorable treat of people whom do not accept the mainstream point of view is a certain fact, no matter what it is(as long as it isn't causing others harm), this is unacceptable.

Statement of " fact" is the only way to command respect? I would have to disagree with that. First off, absolute facts are not very plentiful in our existence. Secondly, many great things were born just from "ideas", fact or not. Say I look at this movement, I start to study it, find the world is a globe, but our theory on gravitation is incorrect. So I create something ground breaking that leads to many innovations. However, the flat earth model was the catalyst for this discovery. Many great things can be born from ideas, correct or incorrect. Ideas and freedom of thought should always be respected if presented without bias, logically, intelligently, and with respect. Number one this is a fellow human presenting it, number two, no telling what could blossum from it.

28

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 21, 2016, 08:50:51 AM »

Whose side are you on, babyhighspeed?  There are no shadow people controlling the governments.  Sure, they can be infuriating and boring  and inefficient, but that only serves to prove how mundane they are.  There is no conspiracy.  Especially not one concerning NASA.

I don't care about agenda or sides...only truth. Between every extreme the truth exist. You have the government lies about nothing (or NASA), and you have they lie about everything. In the middle somewhere is the truth in that. I think majority of "religion" is fueled by greed, power, agenda, and self interest. Just a form of control just like many forms of government control. However I believe in Yahweh and Yehushua as the ultimate truth. Some would say that is contradictory.

 Flat earth...do I believe it flat, I feel it's highly unlikely. However, are these people reaching out because they feel there is something wrong and somebody is hiding something..yes. I just don't like putting things in a box of this group, that group. It's all about the search for truth for me, and usually that truth is never fully in each group because everyone tends to push for their own agenda. Usually the truth is in the outskirts somewhere, in the middle of many agendas.

As to the people pulling the strings, I absolutely believe there are people in the shadows. This is easy to find, just follow the money. People in love with power are inlove with money, so just follow the money and it will lead you to the people. An intelligent, educated, free thinking populous would thwart the attempt at maximum power and income.

Despite my opinion of who is responsible and why, you must admit it is a certain fact America is becoming an ignorant, arrogant, self worshiping, personal and finacially greed motivated, pussy footed unproductive country. Real heros being replaced by the caitlyn/bruce jenner robot. Freedom of thought and critical thinking is absolutely not tollerated. You are stoned to death if you do such a thing.

Even this movement, is there errors there? Too many to count, yet it is people at least trying to think for themselves, yet look at the amount of hate generated towards them (yes I know flat earthers act like 3 year olds at times), yet they aren't hurting anyone.. Yet they are treated like cancer by most.

This is cult mentality, not acceptance of different views or respect of the fellow man. So yes, i will agree with certain things from multiple groups? So in a way I am on no one's side( I support no agenda), yet I am on everyone's side (my main focus in life is Yahweh, Love, and the spirit of servitude..so I truly want to find the truth for my fellow man's sake). All the other stuff I do is just filler in between.

29

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 21, 2016, 06:53:05 AM »

I have stated many times before that these must be taken in context, as well if it is metaphorical or not. I have explained this, however will not again, as I have learned people don't read long post.

Also there are sections in Job speaking of earth being a sphere held up by nothing, place in Isaiah and a few others. Simple fact the Bible didn't really care. Plus translation is always an issue especially the Hebrew text, I have spent years studying it and it's the most ass backwards(literally and figuratively) sound it out language, leaves much room for error.

Simple fact if it would have been important, Christ would have said "Verily I say to you, If any should say the world is a spinning ball, rebuke them for the truth is not in them" OR " Verily I say go you, when 1988 years pass from now and the flat earth society is erected, my Name will be involved. I say to you now, the truth is not with them". Neither of these exist.

Of course, it is all metaphorical. There really is no historical context to the bible, things didn't literally happen. Staffs weren't turned into snakes in Egypt... the Red Sea didn't part. However, it is understood that the authors, through divine inspiration, describe the World as flat, stationary and fixed in the universe.

The reason why it DOES matter, and IS important, is that we're being conditioned to accept present day cosmogony-- that a big bang occurred, life emerged through primordial soup, humankind evolved from a fish and then an ape-- as incontrovertible truth. We're being conditioned to accept that humanity itself, and each and every one of us, is the product of a happy accident, on a spinning ball, in a expanding universe full of spinning balls. We're being taught that we are insignificant amalgamations of dust on an insignificant amalgamation of dust, and that our existence itself is a strictly material, fleeting thing.

I don't believe you prescribe to that. Science has long been tending towards obfuscation, rather than enlightenment. There are metaphysical aspects of our existence that science has yet to be able to understand, or blatantly unwilling to understand. Science pretends to be a study of our natural world and our physical universe, but at all turns it seeks to remove God from the equation. Creation of our universe as an obvious example, origin of life as another. The accepted dogma of the big bang and evolution are faith-based pseudoscience at best, out right manipulation at worst.

Anything that confirms or pushes the agenda that life is nothing more than coincidental, meaningless, and strictly materialistic is to be examined and taken with a grain of salt. The fact that it is being taught as fact to our children is obvious evidence of a malevolent apparatus in control of our world. Our fears and prejudices are used against us, and we are distracted by shiny flashy material things with the implication what life is about. We are being divided in each and every way imaginable, causing hatred between neighbors. A wedge is constantly being driven between us and God, and in effect the truth of our existence.

A Godless society is easier to prey upon and manipulate. The adage resonates with me, "if you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything."

Oh forgot to say, yes there are many metaphors in the Bible, yet their are many that is not. Also no historical reference??? Every time someone has tried to prove it historically wrong it ends up backfiring. Sometimes it takes a century or two, but it never fails.

30

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 21, 2016, 06:28:45 AM »

I have stated many times before that these must be taken in context, as well if it is metaphorical or not. I have explained this, however will not again, as I have learned people don't read long post.

Also there are sections in Job speaking of earth being a sphere held up by nothing, place in Isaiah and a few others. Simple fact the Bible didn't really care. Plus translation is always an issue especially the Hebrew text, I have spent years studying it and it's the most ass backwards(literally and figuratively) sound it out language, leaves much room for error.

Simple fact if it would have been important, Christ would have said "Verily I say to you, If any should say the world is a spinning ball, rebuke them for the truth is not in them" OR " Verily I say go you, when 1988 years pass from now and the flat earth society is erected, my Name will be involved. I say to you now, the truth is not with them". Neither of these exist.

Of course, it is all metaphorical. There really is no historical context to the bible, things didn't literally happen. Staffs weren't turned into snakes in Egypt... the Red Sea didn't part. However, it is understood that the authors, through divine inspiration, describe the World as flat, stationary and fixed in the universe.

The reason why it DOES matter, and IS important, is that we're being conditioned to accept present day cosmogony-- that a big bang occurred, life emerged through primordial soup, humankind evolved from a fish and then an ape-- as incontrovertible truth. We're being conditioned to accept that humanity itself, and each and every one of us, is the product of a happy accident, on a spinning ball, in a expanding universe full of spinning balls. We're being taught that we are insignificant amalgamations of dust on an insignificant amalgamation of dust, and that our existence itself is a strictly material, fleeting thing.

I don't believe you prescribe to that. Science has long been tending towards obfuscation, rather than enlightenment. There are metaphysical aspects of our existence that science has yet to be able to understand, or blatantly unwilling to understand. Science pretends to be a study of our natural world and our physical universe, but at all turns it seeks to remove God from the equation. Creation of our universe as an obvious example, origin of life as another. The accepted dogma of the big bang and evolution are faith-based pseudoscience at best, out right manipulation at worst.

Anything that confirms or pushes the agenda that life is nothing more than coincidental, meaningless, and strictly materialistic is to be examined and taken with a grain of salt. The fact that it is being taught as fact to our children is obvious evidence of a malevolent apparatus in control of our world. Our fears and prejudices are used against us, and we are distracted by shiny flashy material things with the implication what life is about. We are being divided in each and every way imaginable, causing hatred between neighbors. A wedge is constantly being driven between us and God, and in effect the truth of our existence.

A Godless society is easier to prey upon and manipulate. The adage resonates with me, "if you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything."

This I can 100 percent absolutely agree with you. Every stage of our history God has tried to be deleted. Oppression has always been attempted, with holding of knowledge, freedom of thought and "dumbing" down. There has always been groups that have tried this, succeeded to an extend, yet thanks to the fact a few voices trying to take over could eventually be stopped it could never 100 percent florish. Thanks to just the sheer mechanics of the few versus the many, the law of averages would always prevail.

However, now thanks to technology, one voice has the power to reach all. It has given those whom wish us the worst the power to succeed, and they are marvellously. It has been happening for generations, however it's the fact they begin their attack basically as soon as we escape the womb.

Preventing freedom of thought, expression, knowledge, originality equals slavery and our demise. This is known by the ones whom are truly in power, the people whom control the governments that are nothing but shadows and rumors. Removal of God is always the first step, the governments and people in power step in to insert themselves as the new god. Look how the majority view science and government as god. Everything said is "fact" and there is no questioning it. Freedom of thought is lost, creativity, critical thinking and the entire sense of self is gone...you are just part of the machine.

This is no secret and has been attempted since the beginning of humans time. Yet this is the only time in history I could think they have an actual chance to accomplish and  sustain it this time.

31

Flat Earth Theory / Re: India Space Program proves Apollo Mission to the Moon

« on: April 20, 2016, 08:28:55 PM »

I will say the moon landing never set right with me, I have had experience with too much aerospace propulsion systems, and their math of the mission bugs me.

Hold up; what is it about the math that's bugging you?  I've looked into a lot of different parts of the mission, and I haven't found anything that didn't sort itself out with a bit of research.

Stuff really that I can comment on from the work I do, so mainly fuel supply and propulsion. The total amount of fuel brought on the mission compared to the total amount of oxidizer when you look at the oxidizer base. The fuel supply pumps that were used compared to the storage tank material, shielding, and temp, the inner lining of the combustion chamber and the outlet cap. The leveling and pitch system that was used during the actual landing on the moon. I suppose putting it simple, they should have ran out of fuel. They should have never been able to get off the moon once landed, or break orbit and the moons gravity to head back home. Also the leveling system they used, such a slim chance to be able to land successfully considering the orbit speed and angle chosen.

Not to mention the fact all this done the first go without flaw. However, a lot of the info disappeared with the video evidence, so it could be incomplete. I have more, but I haven't slept in 2 days and need a nap, I feel as if this will read as a kinder-gardener wrote this my brain is so fried. So I will keep it super simple as this for now.

32

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 20, 2016, 05:06:17 AM »

The premise of your question is entirely wrong. 
It is NOT much trouble at all to keep the gag going. 

Who is having trouble?!?

I apologize, but that is one of the most unintelligent retorts I have seen to this question. Possibly you mean something else and I have miss understood, I just can't think of any other possible way it could be taken.

Governments and people in power don't just do things as a "gag". If there is one thing that can be predicted to a fact with people such as that, there is one motivator...power, greed and extension of family lines.

So for something so big to include every first world nation, governments , plethora of cultures, 1000s of " fake" private sector jobs that employee a combined millions, and 1000s of Joe blow businesses like my company that have had association with those companies and get paid by them. This doesn't get into the bleed down effect of sectors that would have to be "fooled" to an extent such as aviation, nautical, broadcast ect.

So to be able to orchestrate this it would take the most genius, complex, perfectly executed plot of all human history. So for trillions of dollars, man hours, universal cooperation ect ect ect, there would have to be the biggest pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Something that I cannot think what it could be. They already have effective ways to steal, lie, control, dumb down and brain wash. So if the earth really is flat, there must be something indescribable to be gained for the trouble of hiding the truth.

33

Flat Earth Theory / Re: India Space Program proves Apollo Mission to the Moon

« on: April 19, 2016, 11:30:10 PM »

I have a unique view into aerospace from what I do. I have stated my feelings on the flat and round earth debate. However, even I will say it is strange they will zoom in on "foot prints and tracks" yet never once any left behind equipment anywhere. Let's instead try to find "disturbances" "foot wide tire tracks or show impressions". Though I don't know what orbit they are holding, so I can't speak with absolute certainly. I will say the moon landing never set right with me, I have had experience with too much aerospace propulsion systems, and their math of the mission bugs me.

However, this was in the 60s, still the old generation. People weren't argumentative little politically correct babies yet, spending all day whining and speaking about what could be done, but being too lazy and ignorant/arrogant (interchangeable) to do it. People of this time worked together and did what had to be done without excuse, still plenty of the world war 2 mentality was left when this happened. These are the people that made the country great and a success at the time. All bite, no bark. Also, NASA had a 20 billion dollar budget, and if requested more they would get it if it meant to win. So considering these two things, the moon landing is certainly plausible despite my doubts.

Also view it...with the old mentality and 160 billion dollars, what would NASA be able to do now?

The link clearly shows the decent stage of the lander.
http://astrosociety.org/abh/images/ABH12-b.jpg

That is pretty cool! I was raised by my grandparents they both recently are no longer with me. My grandpa lived to be 92 and he was still working on his own electronics until his fall at 90. Self reliance , do anything it takes to get the job done, and do anything for family (only family I had) no matter what it took. I suppose I should not be surprised this generation made it happen. He was even a part of the program (guidance and altitude control hardware)(also the reason i chose my career paths) pulled him out of the Navy for it. He retired there, then Texas instruments brought him on board which he worked on the same stuff ( gyroscopes, cruise missile guidance, laser guidance, radar control) and retired from there. 25 years military, 22.5 at TI, then 30 years raising my dumb ass lol, I certainly would have never voiced my concerns over the lunar projects to him lol. (I have always said if I could be half the man he was I would consider myself a success)

Kind of cool seeing that picture though, it's an awesome tribute to what people like him did at the time. Shows how strong that mentality was, and what we as a people need to strive for. Now I need to go reexamine my math and see why the questions arrived in my head as they did. Perhaps my math has errors in it. Might explain my failure in a simulated test flight of a prototype aviation piece last month *eye roll*...I blame the schools ha ha, gotta blame someone besides my own error, I love 2016 ideology ha ha..(sacasm so there is no possible misunderstanding)

34

Flat Earth Theory / Re: India Space Program proves Apollo Mission to the Moon

« on: April 19, 2016, 10:51:39 PM »

I have a unique view into aerospace from what I do. I have stated my feelings on the flat and round earth debate. However, even I will say it is strange they will zoom in on "foot prints and tracks" yet never once any left behind equipment anywhere. Let's instead try to find "disturbances" "foot wide tire tracks or show impressions". Though I don't know what orbit they are holding, so I can't speak with absolute certainly. I will say the moon landing never set right with me, I have had experience with too much aerospace propulsion systems, and their math of the mission bugs me.

However, this was in the 60s, still the old generation. People weren't argumentative little politically correct babies yet, spending all day whining and speaking about what could be done, but being too lazy and ignorant/arrogant (interchangeable) to do it. People of this time worked together and did what had to be done without excuse, still plenty of the world war 2 mentality was left when this happened. These are the people that made the country great and a success at the time. All bite, no bark. Also, NASA had a 20 billion dollar budget, and if requested more they would get it if it meant to win. So considering these two things, the moon landing is certainly plausible despite my doubts.

Also view it...with the old mentality and 160 billion dollars, what would NASA be able to do now?

35

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 19, 2016, 09:19:51 PM »

Yes I have ran across many of these "arguments " and "facts" along you tube which is where I first found this theory. I was actually shocked that flat earth was still a thing. My theory when first hearing it, the theory is so crazy either it's true and we have stumbled across an awakening. Or it is the ultimate troll test. This is why I decided to actually come to forums to see if I could find itelligent people on their theory to help me understand it's possibility. The YouTube arguments was doing them no justice, basically either saying it's all a lie with no substance to support the claims. Or saying God said so. Which I believe Yahweh and Yehushua to be the ultimate truth, yet I don't use that in arguments of this nature. Not to mention there is nothing in the Bible that says the earth is flat, and actually things that elude to a globe.

So far it is seeming this is a troll movement. I am trying to prove otherwise with little avail

However, someone did say that satalites was actually allowed in this model which would explain where my parts went and the things I have seen personally. Yet that opens up a whole other box of questions. What are they "orbiting" and how do they maintain altitude as well as flight path since there will be no sling shot effect. The fuel they take up with them would barely keep them on target and in flight for a day. I am awaiting a response perhaps I will be surprised.

You sound a lot like me. I first heard of this theory on YouTube and the arguments they used didnt sound all that valid so I came to the other site first and found this. I believe the Bible is true but the Bible doesn't say that the earth is flat and in fact if anything it says its round. BTW I also call Jesus Yeshua and in prayer I call God Yehovah.

Please post your scripture that says the earth is round. I will reply with the litany of scripture stating otherwise if you can.

I have stated many times before that these must be taken in context, as well if it is metaphorical or not. I have explained this, however will not again, as I have learned people don't read long post.

Also there are sections in Job speaking of earth being a sphere held up by nothing, place in Isaiah and a few others. Simple fact the Bible didn't really care. Plus translation is always an issue especially the Hebrew text, I have spent years studying it and it's the most ass backwards(literally and figuratively) sound it out language, leaves much room for error.

Simple fact if it would have been important, Christ would have said "Verily I say to you, If any should say the world is a spinning ball, rebuke them for the truth is not in them" OR " Verily I say go you, when 1988 years pass from now and the flat earth society is erected, my Name will be involved. I say to you now, the truth is not with them". Neither of these exist.

36

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 18, 2016, 05:30:11 PM »

Believe me, if I would have seen anything to tip me off towards a flat earth in my experience thus far I would be on all the flat earth YouTube videos. Hi I am, this is my company, this is who I have worked for, this is who my clients are or have been, and this is what I have seen. My life revolves around love, the spirit of servitude and truth. I could careless about money or anyone's agenda. I also love to design and build things, and design and build music lol. But that is another post, also I know people don't read all my long post as I have already said this stuff...but oh well:)

37

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 18, 2016, 05:17:12 PM »

This is priceless: 

Also accusing me of hypocritically being open minded?? Did you not read what I do for a living? If people even got wind of me taking the slightlist interest into this, I would be blacklisted in bankruptcy. So to even tiny bit risk that would certainly show I look for truth at any corner until that corner has dried up or shows to be promising .

Let me get this straight.....   

You work for folks who would blacklist you into bankruptcy for showing the slightest interest into this.....   that sounds extreme. 
Yet you are asking how a conspiracy can occur.......??   

The world needs people like you to keep it turning!!

Sigh....cherry pick one quote out of entire paragraphs I have written, typical. I have already admitted certain professions, education levels and so forth swarm in cult theology (obviously you did not choose to quote that) I also stated alternative theology swarms in the same cult mentality( obviously you did not choose to quote that either). 

Yes, I have stated even questioning equations can get people's feathers ruffled ( have lost one client because of this, and it is my own company, I haven't worked for anyone in 11 years). Much less something questioning the very foundation of the earth. The majority of people in my field are not open minded, so I just go my own way and leave them out of it. I personally watched escape dynamics and beal get torn apart when they went against the grain. Especially beal, NASA and their government enforcer. This was the same time almost all my aerospace business dried up. I would have went out of business as well if I didn't have other lines I worked in.

With all this admitted, it still doesn't account for the size and possibility of the coverup. Someone would have said something somewhere, out of the government, out of one of the 1000s of private sectors. A disgruntled $10 an hourly Sat dish repairman..or one of the other millions of employees who was finally just fed up with the lie.

Also there is no big purpose. Can't be to squash religion, the government has already done that fairly well. Can't be for money, they can just blow it all they want and when things get tough, just blow up another wing of a government building that had all the "evidence", blame it on Isis and call it a day. Can't be to dumb is down, for they have more than enough programs for that and it has obviously been working like a charm. I mean even as I type this all I really want to do is find out how much jiggle Kim K's ass has at different elevations .

A conspiracy this big would have to have the ultimate end game, really would be the biggest conspiracy of all ages. What possibility could have an end game so rewarding to be worth this much trouble, not to mention be pulled off so well?

38

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 17, 2016, 08:57:57 PM »

Yes I have ran across many of these "arguments " and "facts" along you tube which is where I first found this theory. I was actually shocked that flat earth was still a thing. My theory when first hearing it, the theory is so crazy either it's true and we have stumbled across an awakening. Or it is the ultimate troll test. This is why I decided to actually come to forums to see if I could find itelligent people on their theory to help me understand it's possibility. The YouTube arguments was doing them no justice, basically either saying it's all a lie with no substance to support the claims. Or saying God said so. Which I believe Yahweh and Yehushua to be the ultimate truth, yet I don't use that in arguments of this nature. Not to mention there is nothing in the Bible that says the earth is flat, and actually things that elude to a globe.

So far it is seeming this is a troll movement. I am trying to prove otherwise with little avail

However, someone did say that satalites was actually allowed in this model which would explain where my parts went and the things I have seen personally. Yet that opens up a whole other box of questions. What are they "orbiting" and how do they maintain altitude as well as flight path since there will be no sling shot effect. The fuel they take up with them would barely keep them on target and in flight for a day. I am awaiting a response perhaps I will be surprised.

You sound a lot like me. I first heard of this theory on YouTube and the arguments they used didnt sound all that valid so I came to the other site first and found this. I believe the Bible is true but the Bible doesn't say that the earth is flat and in fact if anything it says its round. BTW I also call Jesus Yeshua and in prayer I call God Yehovah.

The pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton will forever be a debate. I finally agreed on Yahweh from my Hebrew studies. As it translates into the third person of saying "I am, I will show you I am by my actions", though Yehovah is a viable option as well. Yehushua, yeshua, and yeshu all appear, I believe Yeshua appears the most, yet Yehushua is more of a direct translation " yah is salvation". Only thing I can say on these names is try to understand how He thinks, His history in the Bible. There is always great meaning behind any name.

However, He is not a dumb God, and He knows when we are talking to Him, and He understands language issues. Of course though, I want to know the name 100 percent because there is importance in a name. The name of Christ is pretty cut and dry, however the Tetragrammaton is very frustrating lol.

39

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 17, 2016, 01:21:38 PM »

I surely agree with you rabinoz, that is why I more mentioned the position of the sun and Moon instead of earth curvature. In my opinion a night time launch , at just the time when the sun should be "180" out would be very promising or damaging for this theory. I use these terms losely of course to prevent my overly long winded messages. Also there are designs that help bring stability and minimize sheer of the platform.

Though I love the idea of building a 3 stage to  send on a suicide mission. Build a line of sight communications array along with 4 individual chemical burners with 15 seconds of run time. Just enough to position the unit toward earth at 40,000 km, for that hopefully one perfect picture of the earth. That distance would 100 percent prove or deny this theory, plus if FE theory is correct, should be able to see the sun and Moon as well.

This method would save on fuel, complexity of the rocket, and wouldnt have to worry about finding its components or them even surviving whenever it found its way back here. The most complex thing to "me" at least would be ground control. Though this may be simple to someone who works in this field. I think this would be an amazing way to go, would just require some serious commitment of a group of people.

40

Flat Earth Community / Re: Genuine question

« on: April 17, 2016, 08:12:17 AM »

"There is tons of flat earth proof in the Bible"

I just don't see it that way, one of my past times is studying the OT in the original Hebrew and the NT in the original Greek. Sure there are a few things in the OT, however it was used in ways such as "I am going to rock your world!" Am I going to literally rock the world underneath you?? Of course not! There are also passages in job speaking of the world being a globe supported by nothing.

"Give some creditionals or you are full of crap"<~~ paraphrased

I have fell into this trap ONE time before. Decided I would finally send something, posted copies of my doctorate in mechanical engineering and my masters in music theory (I know the second one doesn't matter, but I am proud of it and music is one of my passions on earth). They were fake! Was going to post pictures of me with certain people. Fake. Finally offered to do a video of me walking through my warehouse showing some of the fun stuff I work on now. Nope doesn't prove anything FAKE!! I down sized and went to a one man show a few years ago, got tired of running a full sized business. But kept my warehouse , with 12,000sq for fun (have anything to a Lamborghini and a Ferrari I am doing fab work on, a permanent magnet motor I tried to build when they were the rage, built the magnets on a camshaft system to reduce drag, still didn't get to unity without a load. Bunch of aerospace and aviation parts tossed around and many other weird things) as I said I just do what I want now. I invested the money I originally made and now only make money when I want to.

Especially after I lost my family so early, that is when I really went into "mad scientist"mode. Making and experimenting with some interesting things. Even have a guitar and piano halfway done in the  enclosed 600sq I dedicated to the music room.

My whole point is I have tried to prove who I was one time before and I just got tired of sending things and being called fake. I could literally CRAP a fully assembled satellite on its launching counterpart in a mall infront of the world and it would still be fake. Just was rediculous and pointless.  So what do you want for credentials I may or may not play?

One of the best things I can offer is I have I think 6 high altitude sounding balloons (135,000) left from some line of sight altimeters I was testing, plus some really cool hardware to send up with it. I have been attempting to find a cool level headed community in this field to work with. A group that is as serious to find the truth (no matter what it may be) as I am. So if there is a group like this I am willing to donate these things, or do certain requested tests to look at position of the sun ect ect ( I am in the Dallas ,TX U.S. area).

The cool thing with this theory is its pretty easy to prove true or false, which many theories do not have this option.

Also if there are any SERIOUS members whom really want to look at the world from a birds eye, I am willing to donate the parts I can for a "small" 3 stage "hold 25 kg payload" (this depends what fuel source that will be used, and that depends on what favors I can cash in and what they have, I can get smaller amounts of any fuel, however start getting bigger quantities, and things get exceedingly difficult) and help with the design. Also willing to donate financially to the cause and open up my facilities for the build (would like to put my company name on it, I will just keep it quiet why it's being built ha ha). From stuff I can't provide and fuel there would prob be a 40k financial deficit. I can help with some of that on top of what I offered prior. There will be some red tape,  will have to prove it is not capable of orbit, flight path, design, and more than likely an official will monitor the launch after approval. Breaking high orbit would end all doubt I "think".

I know this is a LOONG shot to find a group this serious about seeing what's out there, but if there is, I will see it out to the end with them. Truth is something I am very serious about obviously. Though a line of site ground control and live monitoring system (for cameras, ect) would be something i need a little help with. That is stuff I am not the most knowledgeable on.

However, the sounding balloons is stuff I already have and can be done ASAP. My whole point is I want to help, and I get carried away once on a mission just like I do on my post. Sigh ...I apologize.