The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: Mark_1984 on November 09, 2017, 01:23:09 PM
-
It's well established that the earth's magnetic field 'flips' every few hundred thousand years. Scientists have developed a computer model that explains explains the earths magnetic field being generated by a solid core causing turbulence in a molten outer core, which generates electric currents that in turn generate the magnetic field. This is the same physics that allow generators to work (I'm an electrical design engineer, so you're gonna have to trust me on that one !) The same model predicts the the field flipping. Obviously, this model works for a spherical spinning earth, and wouldn't work on a flat earth. How does the fact earth theory explain how the earth's magnetic field is generated, and how it 'flips' periodically.
-
It's well established that the earth's magnetic field 'flips' every few hundred thousand years. Scientists have developed a computer model that explains explains the earths magnetic field being generated by a solid core causing turbulence in a molten outer core, which generates electric currents that in turn generate the magnetic field. This is the same physics that allow generators to work (I'm an electrical design engineer, so you're gonna have to trust me on that one !) The same model predicts the the field flipping. Obviously, this model works for a spherical spinning earth, and wouldn't work on a flat earth. How does the fact earth theory explain how the earth's magnetic field is generated, and how it 'flips' periodically.
Hi Mark,
That is cool you are an electrical engineer. I myself am a mechanical engineer (licensed PE) and am also trying to get licensed as a licensed power engineer (PE). Anyways, I am wondering what proof you have there is an outer core. If the ball earth is close to 8,000 miles in diameter and the furthest dig was done by the Russians over a 20 year period to a depth of 7.5 miles (they tried to go further for another ten years but were unsuccessful)....how can we be so sure there is an outer core? How can we be sure there is anything other than the initial 7.5 miles? If your answer is because science says so and because there are pictures showing the earth as a ball with different layers - that is not good enough for me. As an electrical engineer you may be interested in learning about Tesla and his view on the earth.
Regards,
Gary
-
It's well established that the earth's magnetic field 'flips' every few hundred thousand years. Scientists have developed a computer model that explains explains the earths magnetic field being generated by a solid core causing turbulence in a molten outer core, which generates electric currents that in turn generate the magnetic field. This is the same physics that allow generators to work (I'm an electrical design engineer, so you're gonna have to trust me on that one !) The same model predicts the the field flipping. Obviously, this model works for a spherical spinning earth, and wouldn't work on a flat earth. How does the fact earth theory explain how the earth's magnetic field is generated, and how it 'flips' periodically.
Hi Mark,
That is cool you are an electrical engineer. I myself am a mechanical engineer (licensed PE) and am also trying to get licensed as a licensed power engineer (PE). Anyways, I am wondering what proof you have there is an outer core. If the ball earth is close to 8,000 miles and the furthest dig was done by the Russians over a 20 year period to a depth of 7.5 miles (they tried to go further for another ten years but were unsuccessful)....how can we be so sure there is an outer core? How can we be sure there is anything other than the initial 7.5 miles? If your answer is because science says so and because there are pictures showing the earth as a ball with different layers - that is not good enough for me. As an electrical engineer you may be interested in learning about Tesla and his view on the earth.
Regards,
Gary
You probably already know this, but it has been determined by seismic waves. Your acceptance of science is irrelevant. The irony is you only question the things you don't agree with.
-
It's well established that the earth's magnetic field 'flips' every few hundred thousand years. Scientists have developed a computer model that explains explains the earths magnetic field being generated by a solid core causing turbulence in a molten outer core, which generates electric currents that in turn generate the magnetic field. This is the same physics that allow generators to work (I'm an electrical design engineer, so you're gonna have to trust me on that one !) The same model predicts the the field flipping. Obviously, this model works for a spherical spinning earth, and wouldn't work on a flat earth. How does the fact earth theory explain how the earth's magnetic field is generated, and how it 'flips' periodically.
Hi Mark,
That is cool you are an electrical engineer. I myself am a mechanical engineer (licensed PE) and am also trying to get licensed as a licensed power engineer (PE). Anyways, I am wondering what proof you have there is an outer core. If the ball earth is close to 8,000 miles and the furthest dig was done by the Russians over a 20 year period to a depth of 7.5 miles (they tried to go further for another ten years but were unsuccessful)....how can we be so sure there is an outer core? How can we be sure there is anything other than the initial 7.5 miles? If your answer is because science says so and because there are pictures showing the earth as a ball with different layers - that is not good enough for me. As an electrical engineer you may be interested in learning about Tesla and his view on the earth.
Regards,
Gary
You probably already know this, but it has been determined by seismic waves. Your acceptance of science is irrelevant. The irony is you only question the things you don't agree with.
Did you prove it through seismic waves or are you taking someone else's word for it? If you are taking someone else's word for it - again that is not good enough for me....next!
-
It's well established that the earth's magnetic field 'flips' every few hundred thousand years. Scientists have developed a computer model that explains explains the earths magnetic field being generated by a solid core causing turbulence in a molten outer core, which generates electric currents that in turn generate the magnetic field. This is the same physics that allow generators to work (I'm an electrical design engineer, so you're gonna have to trust me on that one !) The same model predicts the the field flipping. Obviously, this model works for a spherical spinning earth, and wouldn't work on a flat earth. How does the fact earth theory explain how the earth's magnetic field is generated, and how it 'flips' periodically.
Hi Mark,
That is cool you are an electrical engineer. I myself am a mechanical engineer (licensed PE) and am also trying to get licensed as a licensed power engineer (PE). Anyways, I am wondering what proof you have there is an outer core. If the ball earth is close to 8,000 miles and the furthest dig was done by the Russians over a 20 year period to a depth of 7.5 miles (they tried to go further for another ten years but were unsuccessful)....how can we be so sure there is an outer core? How can we be sure there is anything other than the initial 7.5 miles? If your answer is because science says so and because there are pictures showing the earth as a ball with different layers - that is not good enough for me. As an electrical engineer you may be interested in learning about Tesla and his view on the earth.
Regards,
Gary
You probably already know this, but it has been determined by seismic waves. Your acceptance of science is irrelevant. The irony is you only question the things you don't agree with.
Did you prove it through seismic waves or are you taking someone else's word for it? If you are taking someone else's word for it - again that is not good enough for me....next!
LOL - I couldn't care less about what is good enough for you. As an engineer, you use the work of those who came before you all the time. If we didn't, we would never advance as a species. What experiments have you done that prove the Earth flat?? Wait, actually, don't waste your time telling me. It won't be good enough for me because you have a preconceived notion that the Earth is flat and your work hasn't been peer-reviewed.
-
It's well established that the earth's magnetic field 'flips' every few hundred thousand years. Scientists have developed a computer model that explains explains the earths magnetic field being generated by a solid core causing turbulence in a molten outer core, which generates electric currents that in turn generate the magnetic field. This is the same physics that allow generators to work (I'm an electrical design engineer, so you're gonna have to trust me on that one !) The same model predicts the the field flipping. Obviously, this model works for a spherical spinning earth, and wouldn't work on a flat earth. How does the fact earth theory explain how the earth's magnetic field is generated, and how it 'flips' periodically.
Hi Mark,
That is cool you are an electrical engineer. I myself am a mechanical engineer (licensed PE) and am also trying to get licensed as a licensed power engineer (PE). Anyways, I am wondering what proof you have there is an outer core. If the ball earth is close to 8,000 miles and the furthest dig was done by the Russians over a 20 year period to a depth of 7.5 miles (they tried to go further for another ten years but were unsuccessful)....how can we be so sure there is an outer core? How can we be sure there is anything other than the initial 7.5 miles? If your answer is because science says so and because there are pictures showing the earth as a ball with different layers - that is not good enough for me. As an electrical engineer you may be interested in learning about Tesla and his view on the earth.
Regards,
Gary
You probably already know this, but it has been determined by seismic waves. Your acceptance of science is irrelevant. The irony is you only question the things you don't agree with.
Did you prove it through seismic waves or are you taking someone else's word for it? If you are taking someone else's word for it - again that is not good enough for me....next!
LOL - I couldn't care less about what is good enough for you. As an engineer, you use the work of those who came before you all the time. If we didn't, we would never advance as a species. What experiments have you done that prove the Earth flat?? Wait, actually, don't waste your time telling me. It won't be good enough for me because you have a preconceived notion that the Earth is flat and your work hasn't been peer-reviewed.
I'm not making large claims such as what the 8000 mile diameter earth contains. If such a claim is made I'd expect more definitive proof other than seismic mapping.
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
The magnetic field might not flip - look at the data and judge for yourself if we can determine what occurred 100,000's of years ago. Think of this statement provided by NASA regarding pole reversal: "Earth has settled in the last 20 million years into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 to 300,000 years, although it has been more than twice that long since the last reversal. A reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years, and it is not exactly a clean back flip." The numbers in this statement are astronomical when considering the life span of a typical human (let's say 100 years). How can any information in that statement truly be proven? If you say because science says so - that is not good enough for me. The fact that those numbers are that huge explains there is no real proof of this occurrence.
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
The magnetic field might not flip - look at the data and judge for yourself if we can determine was occurred 100,000's of years ago. Think of this statement provided by NASA regarding pole reversal: "Earth has settled in the last 20 million years into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 to 300,000 years, although it has been more than twice that long since the last reversal. A reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years, and it is not exactly a clean back flip." The numbers in this statement are astronomical when considering the life span of a typical human (let's say 100 years). How can any information in that statement truly be proven? If you say because science says so - that is not good enough for me. The fact that those numbers are that huge explains there is no real proof of this occurrence.
If you continue reading the article it tells you how they determined the fields have flipped. Don't believe them, go take a core from a dried lava field of sufficient age and figure it out for yourself.
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
The magnetic field might not flip - look at the data and judge for yourself if we can determine was occurred 100,000's of years ago. Think of this statement provided by NASA regarding pole reversal: "Earth has settled in the last 20 million years into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 to 300,000 years, although it has been more than twice that long since the last reversal. A reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years, and it is not exactly a clean back flip." The numbers in this statement are astronomical when considering the life span of a typical human (let's say 100 years). How can any information in that statement truly be proven? If you say because science says so - that is not good enough for me. The fact that those numbers are that huge explains there is no real proof of this occurrence.
If you continue reading the article it tells you how they determined the fields have flipped. Don't believe them, go take a core from a dried lava field of sufficient age and figure it out for yourself.
I don't need to continue reading the article because I know things occurring in even over 3,000 years cannot be proven. They are claiming every 200,000 to 300,000 years. Why progress further?
-
Frankly, saying something doesn't happen because it happens over a long time period isn't a valid reason for refuting it. Just because it isn't good enough for you doesn't make it wrong. It would be easier to hold a logical debate if you would actually counter an argument rather than just saying "It's not good enough.... next" or "that happened thousands of years ago, so I don't think it really happened."
From National Geographic, https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0927_040927_field_flip.html (Not some crackpot web site !)
"Our planet's magnetic field reverses about once every 200,000 years on average. However, the time between reversals is highly variable. The last time Earth's magnetic field flipped was 780,000 years ago, according to the geologic record of Earth's polarity.
The information is captured when molten lava erupts onto Earth's crust and hardens, much in the way that iron filings on a piece of cardboard align themselves to the field of a magnet held beneath it."
The phenomena is generally accepted, and we know that the magnetic field does move around. Magnetic North moves about 40 miles a year further away from the geographic (true) north pole. This is well established and corrections are published for use on navigational charts. This difference is important as a magnetic compass points to magnetic north, whereas a gyrocompass points to true north.
So let's go back to the original question. We know the magnetic north moves as we can measure it. We know that the magnetic field flips from geological records. So how does the flat earth theory explain this ?
-
Frankly, saying something doesn't happen because it happens over a long time period isn't a valid reason for refuting it. Just because it isn't good enough for you doesn't make it wrong. It would be easier to hold a logical debate if you would actually counter an argument rather than just saying "It's not good enough.... next" or "that happened thousands of years ago, so I don't think it really happened."
From National Geographic, https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/09/0927_040927_field_flip.html (Not some crackpot web site !)
"Our planet's magnetic field reverses about once every 200,000 years on average. However, the time between reversals is highly variable. The last time Earth's magnetic field flipped was 780,000 years ago, according to the geologic record of Earth's polarity.
The information is captured when molten lava erupts onto Earth's crust and hardens, much in the way that iron filings on a piece of cardboard align themselves to the field of a magnet held beneath it."
The phenomena is generally accepted, and we know that the magnetic field does move around. Magnetic North moves about 40 miles a year further away from the geographic (true) north pole. This is well established and corrections are published for use on navigational charts. This difference is important as a magnetic compass points to magnetic north, whereas a gyrocompass points to true north.
So let's go back to the original question. We know the magnetic north moves as we can measure it. We know that the magnetic field flips from geological records. So how does the flat earth theory explain this ?
"However, the time between reversals is highly variable. The last time Earth's magnetic field flipped was 780,000 years ago, according to the geologic record of Earth's polarity." No, just no....what geologic record? That crackpot website holding the previous quote I provided was an actual NASA.gov website. It is evident neither of us will change our views. If you believe we have records dating back over 700,000 years ago your frame of mind regarding this subject is etched in stone and it is of no use for me to post anything else regarding this subject.
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
The magnetic field might not flip - look at the data and judge for yourself if we can determine was occurred 100,000's of years ago. Think of this statement provided by NASA regarding pole reversal: "Earth has settled in the last 20 million years into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 to 300,000 years, although it has been more than twice that long since the last reversal. A reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years, and it is not exactly a clean back flip." The numbers in this statement are astronomical when considering the life span of a typical human (let's say 100 years). How can any information in that statement truly be proven? If you say because science says so - that is not good enough for me. The fact that those numbers are that huge explains there is no real proof of this occurrence.
If you continue reading the article it tells you how they determined the fields have flipped. Don't believe them, go take a core from a dried lava field of sufficient age and figure it out for yourself.
I don't need to continue reading the article because I know things occurring in even over 3,000 years cannot be proven. They are claiming every 200,000 to 300,000 years. Why progress further?
You THINK you know. FTFY. Are you an expert in all fields of study or just someone that thinks they are? Your assertions are baseless. I know dinosaurs existed because fossils. I also know that they are over 3000 years old because there is no written record of giant beasts terrorizing humans.
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
The magnetic field might not flip - look at the data and judge for yourself if we can determine was occurred 100,000's of years ago. Think of this statement provided by NASA regarding pole reversal: "Earth has settled in the last 20 million years into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 to 300,000 years, although it has been more than twice that long since the last reversal. A reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years, and it is not exactly a clean back flip." The numbers in this statement are astronomical when considering the life span of a typical human (let's say 100 years). How can any information in that statement truly be proven? If you say because science says so - that is not good enough for me. The fact that those numbers are that huge explains there is no real proof of this occurrence.
If you continue reading the article it tells you how they determined the fields have flipped. Don't believe them, go take a core from a dried lava field of sufficient age and figure it out for yourself.
I don't need to continue reading the article because I know things occurring in even over 3,000 years cannot be proven. They are claiming every 200,000 to 300,000 years. Why progress further?
You THINK you know. FTFY. Are you an expert in all fields of study or just someone that thinks they are? Your assertions are baseless. I know dinosaurs existed because fossils. I also know that they are over 3000 years old because there is no written record of giant beasts terrorizing humans.
You THINK dinosaurs existed but you do not know for sure - trust me.
-
I don't need to continue reading the article because I know things occurring in even over 3,000 years cannot be proven. They are claiming every 200,000 to 300,000 years. Why progress further?
How do you know ?
-
I don't need to continue reading the article because I know things occurring in even over 3,000 years cannot be proven. They are claiming every 200,000 to 300,000 years. Why progress further?
How do you know ?
Isn't it obvious?
-
Nope !! So go on - give me the proof !
-
Nope !! So go on - give me the proof !
I have nothing to prove because I am not making large claims of having records from over 700,000 years ago. Can you prove how we are able to obtain records dating back until then? I believe I need more proof from you regarding any of the claims.
-
Nope !! So go on - give me the proof !
I have nothing to prove because I am not making large claims of having records from over 700,000 years ago. Can you prove how we are able to obtain records dating back until then? I believe I need more proof from you regarding any of the claims.
You just asserted that obviously nothing over 3,000 years ago can be proven. What is your proof for that, was the question.
-
https://youtu.be/wxrbOVeRonQ?t=1m17s
Arguing with a flat earther !!
-
There is no proof that there is a molten outer core, nor a solid inner core for that matter. The structure of the earth is a theory that is supported by observable facts. E.g. Seismic surveys, the behaviour of the magnetic field, volcanic activity, tectonic plate movement, and so on. Theories change as our understanding of the planet gets better and technology improves. 40 years ago we believed the earth had a molten inner core and a solid outer core.
Anyway, I digress. The question I posed was how does the flat earth theory explain how the magnetic field of the earth flips ?
The magnetic field might not flip - look at the data and judge for yourself if we can determine was occurred 100,000's of years ago. Think of this statement provided by NASA regarding pole reversal: "Earth has settled in the last 20 million years into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 to 300,000 years, although it has been more than twice that long since the last reversal. A reversal happens over hundreds or thousands of years, and it is not exactly a clean back flip." The numbers in this statement are astronomical when considering the life span of a typical human (let's say 100 years). How can any information in that statement truly be proven? If you say because science says so - that is not good enough for me. The fact that those numbers are that huge explains there is no real proof of this occurrence.
If you continue reading the article it tells you how they determined the fields have flipped. Don't believe them, go take a core from a dried lava field of sufficient age and figure it out for yourself.
I don't need to continue reading the article because I know things occurring in even over 3,000 years cannot be proven. They are claiming every 200,000 to 300,000 years. Why progress further?
You THINK you know. FTFY. Are you an expert in all fields of study or just someone that thinks they are? Your assertions are baseless. I know dinosaurs existed because fossils. I also know that they are over 3000 years old because there is no written record of giant beasts terrorizing humans.
You THINK dinosaurs existed but you do not know for sure - trust me.
You THINK the Earth is flat but you do not know for sure - trust me. We could do this all day.
-
Nope !! So go on - give me the proof !
I have nothing to prove because I am not making large claims of having records from over 700,000 years ago. Can you prove how we are able to obtain records dating back until then? I believe I need more proof from you regarding any of the claims.
You just asserted that obviously nothing over 3,000 years ago can be proven. What is your proof for that, was the question.
Easy, oldest known texts are ESTIMATED to be +/- 3,000 years of age. How can anything outside of this range be known if records were not kept?
-
video
Arguing with a flat earther !!
Refrain from low-content posts in the upper fora. Warned.
-
Well, the oldest tree is 5062 years old. But how do you KNOW that the oldest texts were 3000 years old. It's not like they had a date on them ?
Take carbon dating. We know how long the half life of Carbon 14 is. We know that the ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 14 is constant in living things, but carbon 14 decays and isn't replenished after they die. Therefore we can date organic things up to about 50,000 years.
Oh, before you dispute carbon dating, how do you think they dated early texts ?
How old are the dinosaurs ? Do your research. There is a whole wealth information that can be found on Google. It comes from many different independent sources, so we can be reasonable sure it's reliable.
-
video
Arguing with a flat earther !!
Refrain from low-content posts in the upper fora. Warned.
Sorry, it's frustration. I ask for an explanation from a flat earth point of view, and can't get a straight answer. I get distracted, and disputed with comments that are clearly nonsense. I'm up for an honest to goodness debate, but at times it's like arguing with a 5 year old.
For the record, I haven't said the earth isn't flat, I've just asked for an explanation of an observed phenomena which fits with the flat earth theory.
-
Well, the oldest tree is 5062 years old. But how do you KNOW that the oldest texts were 3000 years old. It's not like they had a date on them ?
Take carbon dating. We know how long the half life of Carbon 14 is. We know that the ratio of carbon 12 to carbon 14 is constant in living things, but carbon 14 decays and isn't replenished after they die. Therefore we can date organic things up to about 50,000 years.
Oh, before you dispute carbon dating, how do you think they dated early texts ?
How old are the dinosaurs ? Do your research. There is a whole wealth information that can be found on Google. It comes from many different independent sources, so we can be reasonable sure it's reliable.
Carbon dating is another thing we have been told to accept but you or I have not proven it ourselves and are accepting what the scientific community tells us about it. OK I will run with that. But what you just claimed is the carbon dating method allows us to.decipher ages of up to around 50 k years....how do you THEN explain a claim indicating something has not happened for over 700,000 years but usually happens once every 200 k to 300 k years?
-
So, you'll accept carbon dating as fact. Therefore you must accept we can have reliable records older than your 3000 years.
As for the flipping of the magnetic field, records show (geological records - they are written is stone !) that the 'flipping' is very variable.
Back to my original question. Let's assume that I am not disputing that the earth is flat. How can the magnetic pole move on a yearly basis, and flip on an occasional basis, according to flat earth theory. If you must, just answer the first part as that is indisputable. (I've seen compass errors checked first hand)
-
So, you'll accept carbon dating as fact. Therefore you must accept we can have reliable records older than your 3000 years.
As for the flipping of the magnetic field, records show (geological records - they are written is stone !) that the 'flipping' is very variable.
Back to my original question. Let's assume that I am not disputing that the earth is flat. How can the magnetic pole move on a yearly basis, and flip on an occasional basis, according to flat earth theory. If you must, just answer the first part as that is indisputable. (I've seen compass errors checked first hand)
I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. I believe this conversation has been going nowhere ever since it begun. Your view is lacking things you can prove or understand but you still stand by it, why is that so? Afraid to question things or just naive and believe everything you are told?
-
So, you'll accept carbon dating as fact. Therefore you must accept we can have reliable records older than your 3000 years.
As for the flipping of the magnetic field, records show (geological records - they are written is stone !) that the 'flipping' is very variable.
Back to my original question. Let's assume that I am not disputing that the earth is flat. How can the magnetic pole move on a yearly basis, and flip on an occasional basis, according to flat earth theory. If you must, just answer the first part as that is indisputable. (I've seen compass errors checked first hand)
I'm afraid you have misunderstood me. I believe this conversation has been going nowhere ever since it begun. Your view is lacking things you can prove or understand but you still stand by it, why is that so? Afraid to question things or just naive and believe everything you are told?
Did you ever stop to think that maybe we don't feel the need to question whether the Earth is flat because it has already been established beyond any reasonable doubt that it is?? I've been on this site for awhile now and I have yet to hear a single compelling piece of evidence that the Earth is flat. All I ever read are made up ways in which a flat Earth might match reality. They are obvious attempts at trying to polish a long disproven theory.
-
No no, I haven’t misunderstood you at all. I’ve asked easily understood questions in plain English which you haven’t answered. I assume this is because you can’t answer them, but don’t want to admit it. Mind, there is overwhelming evidence that the earth is round and you ignore that so I shouldn’t be surprised.
-
No no, I haven’t misunderstood you at all. I’ve asked easily understood questions in plain English which you haven’t answered. I assume this is because you can’t answer them, but don’t want to admit it. Mind, there is overwhelming evidence that the earth is round and you ignore that so I shouldn’t be surprised.
No, it's the fact that you have proven nothing and believe everything you are told which is troubling. You cannot tell me what is inside the earth based on a 7.5 mile deep dig and seismic waves....NOOO. You cannot tell me something has happened in the past and claim it has happened over 100,000's of years. There is no truth behind anything you have mentioned other than webpages claiming these things from some agency everyone (you and people like you) believe in. Think logically and explore some of these things for yourself. What you want me to answer is garbage because none of it is true. If you refuse to look into anything you are told then I feel bad for you.
-
No no, I haven’t misunderstood you at all. I’ve asked easily understood questions in plain English which you haven’t answered. I assume this is because you can’t answer them, but don’t want to admit it. Mind, there is overwhelming evidence that the earth is round and you ignore that so I shouldn’t be surprised.
No, it's the fact that you have proven nothing and believe everything you are told which is troubling. You cannot tell me what is inside the earth based on a 7.5 mile deep dig and seismic waves....NOOO. You cannot tell me something has happened in the past and claim it has happened over 100,000's of years. There is no truth behind anything you have mentioned other than webpages claiming these things from some agency everyone (you and people like you) believe in. Think logically and explore some of these things for yourself. What you want me to answer is garbage because none of it is true. If you refuse to look into anything you are told then I feel bad for you.
Do you have a life or do you spend every waking moment proving everything you are told? You act like you're superior because you question everything and don't believe anything some agency tells you. And yet you go along your merry way benefiting from the work done by others without question.
Prove the Earth is flat for us. This site needs a genius like yours to get to the bottom of this. ::)
-
ScaryGary
You have referred to me, and others as "sheep" who mindlessly believe what we are told. I admire the ideal of challenging facts and congratulate you on your dedication to refuting all science that you cannot personally verify.
Would you mind enlightening a sheep such as me how a mind such as yours has come to the conclusion that earth is flat?
Baaaa
-
No no, I haven’t misunderstood you at all. I’ve asked easily understood questions in plain English which you haven’t answered. I assume this is because you can’t answer them, but don’t want to admit it. Mind, there is overwhelming evidence that the earth is round and you ignore that so I shouldn’t be surprised.
No, it's the fact that you have proven nothing and believe everything you are told which is troubling. You cannot tell me what is inside the earth based on a 7.5 mile deep dig and seismic waves....NOOO. You cannot tell me something has happened in the past and claim it has happened over 100,000's of years. There is no truth behind anything you have mentioned other than webpages claiming these things from some agency everyone (you and people like you) believe in. Think logically and explore some of these things for yourself. What you want me to answer is garbage because none of it is true. If you refuse to look into anything you are told then I feel bad for you.
Do you have a life or do you spend every waking moment proving everything you are told? You act like you're superior because you question everything and don't believe anything some agency tells you. And yet you go along your merry way benefiting from the work done by others without question.
Prove the Earth is flat for us. This site needs a genius like yours to get to the bottom of this. ::)
Lol, you guys are funny, stinkyone and devilsadvocate. You guys are obvious trolls because you religiously hover around a flat earth forum. What are you so intrigued about - constantly interacting on a forum which presents an opposing view? Maybe you are not trolling and are on the fence. Anyways, I am not going to spell it out for you because the information is everywhere. The leg work has been done by others through various videos with tons of proof using factual information (can even fact check documents in most cases being presented). You need to explore what you know and discover the truths out for yourself. Don't rely on the word of an anonymous forum poster. In this thread I have just been challenging things which cannot be proven other than BS. If you do not want to go deeper than the surface on any of these topics then I cannot help you and your view is etched in stone. Happy truth hunting for you two!
-
ScaryGary
You have referred to me, and others as "sheep" who mindlessly believe what we are told. I admire the ideal of challenging facts and congratulate you on your dedication to refuting all science that you cannot personally verify.
Would you mind enlightening a sheep such as me how a mind such as yours has come to the conclusion that earth is flat?
Baaaa
Go watch some more NASA CGI, LOL. Or for more lols check out inner spaceship vids and explore the magic of harnesses being exposed everywhere. Maybe look for an air bubble or two?
-
To be fair ScaryGary, Mark has tried to bring this conversation back to the OP based on agreed upon facts and you insist on making it a conversation about epistemology without even shedding light on how you know what you know. Perhaps the topic of epistemology can be addressed in its own thread? It’s a very interesting topic.
-
Thanks RS. I think we have to come to the conclusion that Scarygary is trying to give the impression he won’t answer the questions, whereas the truth is he can’t answer the questions. Not even a simple, undisputed fact like the magnetic Poles move. Why ?
-
"Undisputed" "based on agreed upon facts"... Then why does this forum even exist? You really meant to say based on the agreed upon story we have been told. Fixed it for ya
-
See, can’t answer a simple question......
-
"Undisputed" "based on agreed upon facts"... Then why does this forum even exist? You really meant to say based on the agreed upon story we have been told. Fixed it for ya
I didn’t say “undisputed” and I said “agreed upon facts” because you agreed to concede certain facts for the sake of conversation. Now, that being said, don’t tell me what I mean today because I said what I wanted to say. It doesn’t need your snarky attempts to shoehorn me in to your worldview. Deal with what others actually believe in good faith and perhaps you can try and change a mind along the way.
-
See, can’t answer a simple question......
Questions will be answered in the order they are received when you do prove the Earth's magnetic field in fact has changed. Good luck proving based on the 780,000 year number we are given when the last change occurred.
-
I see you can’t read either. I also said that the magnetic North Pole is moving about 40 miles per year. Currently ! Now ! If you do not believe me, do your research. I won’t bother asking you for an explanation as you clearly have less intelligence than there is Cheese in Monty Python’s Cheese Shop sketch.
-
I see you can’t read either. I also said that the magnetic North Pole is moving about 40 miles per year. Currently ! Now ! If you do not believe me, do your research. I won’t bother asking you for an explanation as you clearly have less intelligence than there is Cheese in Monty Python’s Cheese Shop sketch.
According to who is the North Pole moving? If it is the same people who are saying the earth's magnetic field has changed 780,000 years ago with the magnetic field change typically happening every 200,000 to 300,000 years - then what makes you believe their claim of the magnetic North Pole is moving 40 miles per year? It is all the same to me. Besides - the title to this thread named by you is "the earth's magnetic field flipping". You insulting my intelligence and my reading comprehension skills is unnecessary. I wish we could just all hold hands and hug it out. I never once questioned your intelligence but I do ask you to first explore some of the things we are being told objectively before immediately accepting the view as true. You seem like a nice guy Mark and I hope you have a good weekend.
-
You haven’t explored these things either. You were not even aware of the claim that the magnetic pole was moving 40 miles per year. Why the double standard?
-
According to who ? Me actually, I've seen compass corrections done many times using the precession marked on nautical charts. The nautical charts have a date by the magnetic compass rose and a note saying how many fractions of a degree is changes per year. Guess what, the figures work ! Like I said, do some research. Not EVERYTHING on the web is false.
-
According to who ? Me actually, I've seen compass corrections done many times using the precession marked on nautical charts. The nautical charts have a date by the magnetic compass rose and a note saying how many fractions of a degree is changes per year. Guess what, the figures work ! Like I said, do some research. Not EVERYTHING on the web is false.
So you agree magnetic north moves then! Why did you question it? Perhaps you could stop being obtuse about it and answer the question presented to you? It would be a jolly friendly thing to do.
-
According to who ? Me actually, I've seen compass corrections done many times using the precession marked on nautical charts. The nautical charts have a date by the magnetic compass rose and a note saying how many fractions of a degree is changes per year. Guess what, the figures work ! Like I said, do some research. Not EVERYTHING on the web is false.
So you agree magnetic north moves then! Why did you question it? Perhaps you could stop being obtuse about it and answer the question presented to you? It would be a jolly friendly thing to do.
Umm, Rama? Mark there is the OP. Might wanna double check usernames. XD
-
According to who ? Me actually, I've seen compass corrections done many times using the precession marked on nautical charts. The nautical charts have a date by the magnetic compass rose and a note saying how many fractions of a degree is changes per year. Guess what, the figures work ! Like I said, do some research. Not EVERYTHING on the web is false.
So you agree magnetic north moves then! Why did you question it? Perhaps you could stop being obtuse about it and answer the question presented to you? It would be a jolly friendly thing to do.
Umm, Rama? Mark there is the OP. Might wanna double check usernames. XD
Oh Jesus. Thanks Curious Squirrel and sorry Mark.
-
No worries RS. I think we’ve established beyond any reasonable doubt that it’s something else the flat earthers can’t answer.
-
No worries RS. I think we’ve established beyond any reasonable doubt that it’s something else the flat earthers can’t answer.
Haha, good one Mark. :o