The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: wRadion on March 03, 2018, 09:33:42 AM
-
Hello there,
This post is not about proving you the earth is round, or flat, or anything. And it's not a scientific debate.
I just want to know one very simple thing :
Why do you believe that "they" lie to us about the earth shape, but not the countries shapes?
In other words,
Prove me that the countries are shaped like that:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2f/Flat_earth.png/220px-Flat_earth.png)
I'm trying really hard to understand every single argument about flat earth, so that I can convince every flat-earther that they're wrong (if I meet one). I'm not trying to convince them that the earth is round, just proving them that their theory lacks consistency.
-
We already proved that this particular map doesn't work pretty conclusively in this thread here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8995.0
I guess that means most flat Earth believers will need to rely on "we don't know what the map looks like, we just know it's flat," which is convenient. Honestly if it were me on their side that would have been my line the entire time since it's so vague it's hard to argue against.
-
We already proved that this particular map doesn't work pretty conclusively in this thread here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8995.0
I guess that means most flat Earth believers will need to rely on "we don't know what the map looks like, we just know it's flat," which is convenient. Honestly if it were me on their side that would have been my line the entire time since it's so vague it's hard to argue against.
Of course, now that people actually use Google Earth to navigate across continents, maintaining the idea that we don't know anything about the shape of countries is a bit tougher to believe.
-
The round disc makes for a nice logo, but increasing evidence shows earth is more of a splat shape.
(https://rightbasicbuilding.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/antarctic-valleys2-copy.jpg?w=450&h=535)
The map above is "A Constant-Scale Natural Boundary Map of Earth edged by Antarctic Valleys" showing the ocean currents in this example.
This is called 'splat earth theory'.
-
The round disc makes for a nice logo, but increasing evidence shows earth is more of a splat shape.
(https://rightbasicbuilding.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/antarctic-valleys2-copy.jpg?w=450&h=535)
The map above is "A Constant-Scale Natural Boundary Map of Earth edged by Antarctic Valleys" showing the ocean currents in this example.
This is called 'splat earth theory'.
This still can't explain >12 hour days during the summer in the southern hemisphere. Come on, try to think a little critically.
-
You need to read Earth Not A Globe.
-
You need to read Earth Not A Globe.
What a surprise. No real counter-argument, just a deflection. Is there a part of ENAG that somehow explains how this could ever create a 14-hour daylight like Australians experience every December?
(https://imgur.com/O0Edj7d.gif)
And no changing the shape of the coast of Antarctica doesn't change the path of the sun.
-
Yes, there is a part on that, which is why I told you to read ENaG. You think I want to reiterate the book every time someone bring us an objection that the book covers? I've been at TFES for the better part of a decade. Read the ruddy book if you want the answers, and then come back if you want to critique its points.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm
-
Hi Baby Thork,
A quick question you may be able to help answer, as my questions have gone unanswered in other threads:
If Hoaxes are unproven speculations / biases AND the Zetetic method does not speculate or imbue biases on what the answer might be before first testing out empirically through scientific inquiry -- question -- and performing experiments, than why are hoaxes (i.e. unproven speculations that NASA faked going to space) accepted and used by Flat Earth Society / Zetetic Society members as one of the means to help support the case that a Flat Earth model must exist?
(I don't believe that such speculation are what Rowbotham would subscribe to)
-
Inference is a reasonable extension of deductive logic.
The earth is flat.
Authorities tell us it is round.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related.
What else can one deduce?
-
Inference is a reasonable extension of deductive logic.
The earth is flat.
Authorities tell us it is round.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related.
What else can one deduce?
OK. Looks like you don't have the answer to my question either. Moving along.
-
I answered your question. You just don't like the answer.
The hoax isn't what makes us think the earth is flat. The earth is flat and therefore we think there must be hoaxes.
-
I answered your question. You just don't like the answer.
The hoax isn't what makes us think the earth is flat. The earth is flat and therefore we think there must be hoaxes.
OK. Understand. My argument is that:
The earth is Round.
Flat Earthers tell us it is flat.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related to Flat Earthers having a high propensity for getting caught up in ridiculous conspiracy theories and therefore many times side-stepping questions.
-
The Manhattan Project started out as a conspiracy theory.
Watergate was at first a conspiracy theory.
Asbestos causing cancer was a conspiracy theory.
The New World Order.
The Illuminati.
The Deep State.
The Federal Reserve being a private bank.
All these thing started out being dismissed as conspiracy theories and it often takes a lot of time and effort before a government is forced to come clean about its lies. Just because something is a conspiracy theory doesn't make it untrue.
-
Just because something is a conspiracy theory doesn't make it untrue.
Firm evidence contradictory to the conspiracy theory does, though.
For example;
1 Humankind has sent hundreds of unmanned craft around the world in orbit, around the Moon, and to the various planets of our solar system. Some of these craft have returned imagery which shows the globe from different angles and distances.
2 Humankind has sent hundreds of individuals, in manned craft, around the world, in orbit, and a lucky 21 of them have either walked on the Moon or gone around it. Again, these have brought back imagery, and photography, which shows the Earth as a globe from different aspects and distances.
If you don't accept the words and experiences of these few hundred, then what would it take? Another hundred repeating the exercise? A thousand? Ten thousand?
Seriously, there must come a point when X number of people say the world is round, that you accept it. What is your figure for X?
-
I don't have a figure for 'x'. If I had lived in the year 1400, absolutely everyone I ever met would tell me that Jesus was the son of God and that the Pope was God's conduit on earth. An organised institutional lie to perpetuate power and gain religious taxes, turned into a widespread delusion.
Were all the priests in on it? No.
All the monks and nuns? No.
Educators politicians and artists? No.
Family members, village officials? no.
So why the hell would foot soldiers like scientists be in on it? Religious personnel could pray and talk to God. And if they had doubts they'd keep that to themselves; its not like any of them ever got a reply. A monk without faith finds himself without a job until he comes up with the correct answer. Same with a scientist who stumbles across earth's shape. He dismisses his findings as wrong and starts over.
-
I don't have a figure for 'x'. If I had lived in the year 1400, absolutely everyone I ever met would tell me that Jesus was the son of God and that the Pope was God's conduit on earth. An organised institutional lie to perpetuate power and gain religious taxes, turned into a widespread delusion.
Were all the priests in on it? No.
All the monks and nuns? No.
Educators politicians and artists? No.
Family members, village officials? no.
So why the hell would foot soldiers like scientists be in on it? Religious personnel could pray and talk to God. And if they had doubts they'd keep that to themselves; its not like any of them ever got a reply. A monk without faith finds himself without a job until he comes up with the correct answer. Same with a scientist who stumbles across earth's shape. He dismisses his findings as wrong and starts over.
Why do you not accept that measurements prove the earth is round?
-
Should I have accepted the testimony of priests as proof of miracles?
-
Should I have accepted the testimony of priests as proof of miracles?
If the priests had recorded data from their miracles, and if others got the same data by different methods for the same miracle, then maybe you should have....
-
Yes, there is a part on that, which is why I told you to read ENaG. You think I want to reiterate the book every time someone bring us an objection that the book covers? I've been at TFES for the better part of a decade. Read the ruddy book if you want the answers, and then come back if you want to critique its points.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm
Genuinely, thanks for the more specific response, it's a lot more than I've gotten the other times I brought up this topic. Upon reading this, this topic affords us a unique possibility: here is a case where heliocentricism and FE predict two entirely different and contradictory things that are also easily testable by the common man.
- Heliocentricism predicts that locations on the same latitude North and South will experience perfectly symmetrical seasons, with the exact same amount of daylight but flipped by 6 months (e.g. if a location on the Xth parallel North experiences 18 hours and 52 minutes of sunlight on June 21st, then one on the Xth parallel South will experience 18 hours and 52 minutes of sunlight on December 21st.)
- ENAG predicts that seasons are not symmetrical between North and South, and that the Southern "hemisphere," so to speak, will be darker than equivalent opposite day in the North (e.g. if a location on the Xth parallel North experiences 18 hours and 52 minutes of sunlight on June 21st, then one on the Xth parallel South will experience significantly less than that on December 21st.)
Do you agree with this premise? If so, this is something any layperson can test and we can use it to blow the whole conspiracy open. I fully admit that if I'm wrong on this one, I'll have to reconsider my viewpoint and take a look at the other options. Do you have that same conviction? If you agree too, then we can start experimenting to find the truth.
-
Should I have accepted the testimony of priests as proof of miracles?
If the priests had recorded data from their miracles, and if others got the same data by different methods for the same miracle, then maybe you should have....
5000 people witnessed Christ turn 2 loaves and 5 fish into a feast for all of them.
200 hundred guests at a wedding in Cana saw Christ turn water into wine.
Countless people saw Christ walk on water in the sea of Galilee.
12 Apostles witnessed him net miraculous catches of fish to feed them all.
100's of lepers were cured.
I have sources such as the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark etc, artwork such as the Sistine Chapel, letters to Paul, hymns, songs, poetry, books, Roman ledgers, and more recently wikipedia.
How many sources do I need, and how many proofs are necessary to endorse Jesus Christ as a wizard?
If so, this is something any layperson can test
Yes.
and we can use it to blow the whole conspiracy open.
No. As soon as you do you end up in the same place as priests without faith. Deplatformed, ridiculed, branded an idiot, powerless. Welcome to the flat earth society.
-
Yes, there is a part on that, which is why I told you to read ENaG. You think I want to reiterate the book every time someone bring us an objection that the book covers? I've been at TFES for the better part of a decade. Read the ruddy book if you want the answers, and then come back if you want to critique its points.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm
Well, I actually read that. Or at any rate, as much as I could take. It's a genuine curiosity. There are probably people from the Southern Hemisphere reading this thread. It's possible to talk to people from the other side of the Earth live on Skype. So the waffle about Captain Ross and the idiotic nonsense about magic refraction is totally irrelevant. It is open to anyone to do the measurements live, not rely on antique documents.
The idea that the only way to tell when the Sun rises is to research ancient documents is so spectacularly wrong-headed that it's impossible to even refute it.
I'll note that the obfuscated and confusing language is no accident. Read through the bizarre word salad and you might not follow the reasoning (in fact, you certainly won't) but there's certainly plenty of it!
So far the whole matter is clear and easily understood; but in the second case, given by Captain Ross, a word is used which renders the meaning uncertain, and creates a difficulty; that word is "southern." "At midnight, in latitude 74° S., the sun was skimming along the southern horizon at an altitude of about 2°." Here, then, is evident confusion. First, it could not be the southern horizon, unless the earth is a globe; that it is not a globe has been more than sufficiently proved.
So there's an actual reference to something which is used to prove the flat Earth theory. However, the reference actually disproves the theory. So we simply ignore the testimony which contradicts the flat Earth.
That's why the arguing is ultimately futile. That someone can actually point to a reference that disproves his own contention, but say that it actually supports it because the contention is true... that's not something that can be refuted by normal argument. We're dealing with something quite different here. My own interest in this topic is purely to examine how this form of non-reasoning happens, because it's not just in the case of the flat Earth that it's prevalent.
-
Yes.
Excellent
No. As soon as you do you end up in the same place as priests without faith. Deplatformed, ridiculed, branded an idiot, powerless. Welcome to the flat earth society.
That's because you guys have been doing it all wrong this whole time. Instead of asking where the stars are on pictures of the Apollo missions or whatever, all you need to do is bring up this one thing. Which, let's dive in shall we.
Ideally we'd both book just plane tickets now, but I know that's not going to happen, so let's get some primary sources.
Sydney
Sydney, Australia sits at a latitude of 33.8° S. And is home to the newspaper of record for Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald. Almost two years ago, The Morning Herald wrote this piece merely for the information of the locals, with nothing to do with the shape of the Earth: https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/sydney-welcomes-winter-solstice-the-shortest-day-of-the-year-20160620-gpnkyj.html
On or around June 21, the sun is at its furthest point from the equator, appearing lower in the sky.
This point of the sun's 'declination' will happen at exactly 8.34am AEST on Tuesday.
According to Geoscience Australia, the sun will rise in Sydney at 7am and set at 4.54pm.
So, unless you think The Morning Herald is mistaken, data point one puts Sydney at 9 hours, 54 minutes of sun on the winter solstice.
Another Australian news site wrote this article for the 2016 summer solstice: http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2016-12-20/summer-solstice-earliest-sunrise-and-latest-sunset/8097844
This piece announces the sunset on December 21st, 2016 to occur at 9:44 PM, for a day length of 14 hours and 25 minutes. So those are our two data points so far.
Los Angeles
Next let's find a city near 33.8° N. Los Angeles is probably the best option: the city center sits on 34.0° N so any differences will be minutes at most.
For LA it was harder to find articles in the LA Times talking about it, but here's Time magazine: http://time.com/5075624/shortest-day-year-winter-solstice-sunset-time/
Los Angeles’s winter solstice sunset will take place at 4:48 p.m. and will see nine hours and 55 minutes of daylight.
And here's the longest day: https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/los-angeles?month=6
This puts the longest day at 14 hours, 25 minutes and 4 seconds in LA.
In conclusion: across 4 entirely different sources I got the times of 9 hours, 54 minutes and 14 hours, 25 minutes for Sydney at 33.8° S, and the times of 9 hours, 55 minutes and 14 hours, 25 minutes for LA at 34.0° N. That seems pretty symmetric to me, it's not looking good for Rowbotham. Would you like for me to do more? Or are you ready to admit that the spotlight-sun flat Earth model doesn't work?
-
In conclusion: across 4 entirely different sources I got the times of 9 hours, 54 minutes and 14 hours, 25 minutes for Sydney at 33.8° S, and the times of 9 hours, 55 minutes and 14 hours, 25 minutes for LA at 34.0° N. That seems pretty symmetric to me, it's not looking good for Rowbotham. Would you like for me to do more? Or are you ready to admit that the spotlight-sun flat Earth model doesn't work?
I will also note - the population of Los Angeles is about 4 million, that of greater Sydney, about 5 million. Concealing sunrises and sunsets from that many people would be quite a major undertaking. Sunsets and sunrises are quite visible phenomena.
One is then faced with a number of options:
- Reject the entire flat Earth hypothesis (Just kidding. This obviously won't happen)
- Reject the data and insist that the exact match between the equinoxes is faked in some way
- Accept the data and insist that it actually proves flat Earth theory
- Accept the data and insist that some unknown law totally explains it
- Link to some book or video that supposedly explains the whole thing
- Issue a warning to the people talking about this
- Ignore the whole thing. (I suspect this is the winner).
I can't think of any other possibilities. Well, there's my own multiple-sun theory, which I may start pushing for real on some other flat Earth forums and see if they go for it.
-
So it seems that the discussion is not at all related to what I was first asked to a flat-earther, and I didn't even got a response x).
Just to recenter the debate:
The original question was, if you think "they" lie to us about the earth shape, why do you believe (if that's the case) the shape of the countries are right?
In other words, why would you believe anything that "they" told us from the first place? At this point, any flat-earther has to be a conspirationist (I don't know if that's the term for it but I hope you understand) from A to Z, like ALL flat-earther has to believe that everything is a conspiracy or else there is absolutely no reason to believe that "they" lie to them about something and not some other things. I mean, the first sentence you read when you go to their website is "It's true, I saw it on the Internet!" (should have been more like "I saw/learned it on <insert any media>!" but anyway...).
I'm not talking about scientific facts, timezones, proofs, or whatever. I just want to know the reasoning of a flat-earther on this particular topic.
Also, I saw a very good question in a comment on YouTube, can a flat-earther answer it? :3
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXHTV9pWAAA15Da.jpg)
-
Should I have accepted the testimony of priests as proof of miracles?
If the priests had recorded data from their miracles, and if others got the same data by different methods for the same miracle, then maybe you should have....
5000 people witnessed Christ turn 2 loaves and 5 fish into a feast for all of them.
200 hundred guests at a wedding in Cana saw Christ turn water into wine.
Countless people saw Christ walk on water in the sea of Galilee.
12 Apostles witnessed him net miraculous catches of fish to feed them all.
100's of lepers were cured.
I have sources such as the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark etc, artwork such as the Sistine Chapel, letters to Paul, hymns, songs, poetry, books, Roman ledgers, and more recently wikipedia.
How many sources do I need, and how many proofs are necessary to endorse Jesus Christ as a wizard?
If so, this is something any layperson can test
Yes.
and we can use it to blow the whole conspiracy open.
No. As soon as you do you end up in the same place as priests without faith. Deplatformed, ridiculed, branded an idiot, powerless. Welcome to the flat earth society.
Baby Thork,
Is the Flat Earth Society a conspiracy group (like the Illuminati); that exists for reasons for profit and embezzlement of funds into the pockets of high ranking FES members?
- Flat Earther and rapper B.o.B. crowdfunded $1 million via GoFundMe to launch a satellite to see if he could detect for himself the curvature of the Earth. How do we know exactly where this money is going?
- For this years Flat Earth conference, full access tickets cost up to $349 (for a VIP ticket) to $299 (for only a 2-day pass). Where is all of this money going? Full access tickets to DisneyLand / DisneyWorld cost less than this.
- "Mad Mike" Hughes is trying to raise capital through promotion of his steam-powered rocket and exploratory efforts to proven FE. How do we know that he isn't just going to pocket all of this money or squander all of this money for himself? Seems kind of fishy to me.
- FE Society exists to try and keep people like you and me from thinking they can go to space. If they have us believing that space travel is not possible, than FE believers will keep buying FE stuff and they will keep spending money to go to the FE conferences.
- Some FE say that there exists pictures of the Antarctic Ice Wall. This has to be fakery and done with CGI graphics. They likely faked the picture of the Ice Wall in a studio, with paid actors, or they faked this in a backyard setting in Canada or Alaska.
- Flat Earthers are simply mistaken about the shape of the Earth and think that it is Flat because that's what they assume it to be.
-
So it seems that the discussion is not at all related to what I was first asked to a flat-earther, and I didn't even got a response x).
Just to recenter the debate:
The original question was, if you think "they" lie to us about the earth shape, why do you believe (if that's the case) the shape of the countries are right?
In other words, why would you believe anything that "they" told us from the first place? At this point, any flat-earther has to be a conspirationist (I don't know if that's the term for it but I hope you understand) from A to Z, like ALL flat-earther has to believe that everything is a conspiracy or else there is absolutely no reason to believe that "they" lie to them about something and not some other things. I mean, the first sentence you read when you go to their website is "It's true, I saw it on the Internet!" (should have been more like "I saw/learned it on <insert any media>!" but anyway...).
I'm not talking about scientific facts, timezones, proofs, or whatever. I just want to know the reasoning of a flat-earther on this particular topic.
Also, I saw a very good question in a comment on YouTube, can a flat-earther answer it? :3
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXHTV9pWAAA15Da.jpg)
The problem with this approach is anyone who already believes that every government, scientist, and professor is lying to them is just going to shrug it off. Their thought process isn't really I did some experiments and they showed that the Earth is flat, it's that the globe doesn't feel right intuitively at first glance and of course the government is lying about it, they lie about everything. They've already placed themselves in the opposite tribe as the experts, and so telling them what scientists say would be like trying to get a Bernie Sanders-voter to support something because Trump said it or a Tea Party-er to believe in Obama's new movement. Why did the UN put the flat Earth on their flag? It's because they're evil Jews who are laughing at the sheeple, and only me and my twitter feed know otherwise. Why has NASA forgotten to photoshop stars into every single brightly-lit picture of the ISS and moon landings? It's because they're stupid and lazy, and I'm the first person in 50 years to notice the mistake.
Instead, the best way to debate someone with such a different world-view is to stick to hard facts, get them to lay out their position ahead of time, and then use neutral unbiased sources to step-by-step disprove it. Any argument through psychology or statistics just won't stick because they're operating on an entirely different set of assumptions than you and me.
-
Yeah. That's very hard to debate with people like that.
I just watched a video (in french) with a very interesting introduction. I'll try to translate it :
Imagine you are a man coming home 2 hours late. Your wife was waiting for you, and she obviously asks: "Where have you been? You've been with another girl, don't you?".
You have now 3 answers possible :
- You just say that that was the case, you slept with another woman. So she just screams at you and leaves you. So you lost.
- You say that you were in a restaurant with colleagues, so she replies "That's exactly what you would say if you were seeing another woman. I'm leaving you, bye." You lost again.
- The last chance is to present a proof, you give her the restaurant bill, with the right hour, date, and everything. She replies: "This is obviously fake, you asked a friend to give you his bill. I don't want to see you again.". Oh noes, you lost again :(.
The morale is; whatever you say or show to someone, they can easily prove you that you're wrong, unless you have a solid hard proof of this thing.
- In this case, they were no hard proof. The only thing that you could have done is taking your wife to the restaurant so she can see for herself what you were doing.
- For this flat-earth theory, the ultimate proof would be to take a flat-earther into space and show them the globe earth spinning before their own eyes.
So basically, today, that's impossible to prove that they are wrong. And don't get me wrong, it's also impossible to prove that the earth is a globe without relying on modern physics and sciences. Because, yeah, obviously all those globe earth pictures and videos are fake. The government is paying infographists all around the world just to fake some pictures for some reasons that are yet to be discussed by any flat-earther.
I tried really hard to understand flat-earthers. I've seen a lot of videos explaining why the flat earth theory works, and I've seen most of those explanations debunked with modern sciences. I think I'm gonna stop here and just let them in their own disillusion. Ignoring people is the fastest way to get rid of them on the internet. I'm hoping everything will do that at some point.
At this point, this is exactly like a religion : You can not prove someone that god doesn't exist, and you can not prove that he (or she/it, whatever) exists. I just hope that all these flat-earther stay away as far as possible from the scientific and education world. I don't want my kids to be educated by one of them.
So please, I don't think this message will be seen by everyone but, just leave them alone with their religion. Your just giving them visibility if you try to argue with them.
So enjoy your religion with yourselves, flat-earther, and just let us "sheeps" helping building the actual future of the human race.
-
Yeah. That's very hard to debate with people like that.
I just watched a video (in french) with a very interesting introduction. I'll try to translate it :
Imagine you are a man coming home 2 hours late. Your wife was waiting for you, and she obviously asks: "Where have you been? You've been with another girl, don't you?".
You have now 3 answers possible :
- You just say that that was the case, you slept with another woman. So she just screams at you and leaves you. So you lost.
- You say that you were in a restaurant with colleagues, so she replies "That's exactly what you would say if you were seeing another woman. I'm leaving you, bye." You lost again.
- The last chance is to present a proof, you give her the restaurant bill, with the right hour, date, and everything. She replies: "This is obviously fake, you asked a friend to give you his bill. I don't want to see you again.". Oh noes, you lost again :(.
The morale is; whatever you say or show to someone, they can easily prove you that you're wrong, unless you have a solid hard proof of this thing.
- In this case, they were no hard proof. The only thing that you could have done is taking your wife to the restaurant so she can see for herself what you were doing.
- For this flat-earth theory, the ultimate proof would be to take a flat-earther into space and show them the globe earth spinning before their own eyes.
So basically, today, that's impossible to prove that they are wrong. And don't get me wrong, it's also impossible to prove that the earth is a globe without relying on modern physics and sciences. Because, yeah, obviously all those globe earth pictures and videos are fake. The government is paying infographists all around the world just to fake some pictures for some reasons that are yet to be discussed by any flat-earther.
I tried really hard to understand flat-earthers. I've seen a lot of videos explaining why the flat earth theory works, and I've seen most of those explanations debunked with modern sciences. I think I'm gonna stop here and just let them in their own disillusion. Ignoring people is the fastest way to get rid of them on the internet. I'm hoping everything will do that at some point.
At this point, this is exactly like a religion : You can not prove someone that god doesn't exist, and you can not prove that he (or she/it, whatever) exists. I just hope that all these flat-earther stay away as far as possible from the scientific and education world. I don't want my kids to be educated by one of them.
So please, I don't think this message will be seen by everyone but, just leave them alone with their religion. Your just giving them visibility if you try to argue with them.
So enjoy your religion with yourselves, flat-earther, and just let us "sheeps" helping building the actual future of the human race.
I'm with you. The only real reason to post here is if you get some perverse enjoyment out of it, like I do. Plus I think it's healthy and helpful to be asked justify and explain your own worldviews, but that only lasts so long.
However I'm with you with it mostly being futile. That's why I've been trying to set up debates where we start by strictly framing the problem first. If you can set up the problem and get all parties to agree that If A is true then flat Earth, if A is false then globe Earth, then you avoid the trap of all evidence proving a flat Earth, regardless of what it is.
-
Yeah. That's very hard to debate with people like that.
I just watched a video (in french) with a very interesting introduction. I'll try to translate it :
Imagine you are a man coming home 2 hours late. Your wife was waiting for you, and she obviously asks: "Where have you been? You've been with another girl, don't you?".
You have now 3 answers possible :
- You just say that that was the case, you slept with another woman. So she just screams at you and leaves you. So you lost.
- You say that you were in a restaurant with colleagues, so she replies "That's exactly what you would say if you were seeing another woman. I'm leaving you, bye." You lost again.
- The last chance is to present a proof, you give her the restaurant bill, with the right hour, date, and everything. She replies: "This is obviously fake, you asked a friend to give you his bill. I don't want to see you again.". Oh noes, you lost again :(.
The morale is; whatever you say or show to someone, they can easily prove you that you're wrong, unless you have a solid hard proof of this thing.
- In this case, they were no hard proof. The only thing that you could have done is taking your wife to the restaurant so she can see for herself what you were doing.
- For this flat-earth theory, the ultimate proof would be to take a flat-earther into space and show them the globe earth spinning before their own eyes.
So basically, today, that's impossible to prove that they are wrong. And don't get me wrong, it's also impossible to prove that the earth is a globe without relying on modern physics and sciences. Because, yeah, obviously all those globe earth pictures and videos are fake. The government is paying infographists all around the world just to fake some pictures for some reasons that are yet to be discussed by any flat-earther.
I tried really hard to understand flat-earthers. I've seen a lot of videos explaining why the flat earth theory works, and I've seen most of those explanations debunked with modern sciences. I think I'm gonna stop here and just let them in their own disillusion. Ignoring people is the fastest way to get rid of them on the internet. I'm hoping everything will do that at some point.
At this point, this is exactly like a religion : You can not prove someone that god doesn't exist, and you can not prove that he (or she/it, whatever) exists. I just hope that all these flat-earther stay away as far as possible from the scientific and education world. I don't want my kids to be educated by one of them.
So please, I don't think this message will be seen by everyone but, just leave them alone with their religion. Your just giving them visibility if you try to argue with them.
So enjoy your religion with yourselves, flat-earther, and just let us "sheeps" helping building the actual future of the human race.
I'm with you. The only real reason to post here is if you get some perverse enjoyment out of it, like I do. Plus I think it's healthy and helpful to be asked justify and explain your own worldviews, but that only lasts so long.
However I'm with you with it mostly being futile. That's why I've been trying to set up debates where we start by strictly framing the problem first. If you can set up the problem and get all parties to agree that If A is true then flat Earth, if A is false then globe Earth, then you avoid the trap of all evidence proving a flat Earth, regardless of what it is.
The FE Society is on borrowed time and clinging to thin scraps of what they try to fit into their world view to be true.
What they believe rests on a very unsteady house of cards; much of it dependent upon the notion of fake space travel and a perverted view that the Earth is the center of the solar system with a very small sun going around overhead like a spotlight.
FES members talk about using principles like the Zetetic method which is an empirical and scientific question and answer approach, but then they subscribe to believing in hoaxes which is the total opposite approach as the Zetetic method intended.
It's going to be a matter of time when space travel and the like become so common (like traveling across the ocean in an airplane) that a Round Globe Earth will no longer be disputable.
I am only on this site because I think it is fascinating that there are still people that believe the Earth is flat. At first I thought it was a joke. To me, seeing folks like Tom Bishop, Pete, etc.. discuss their Flat Earth belief and the logic behind this belief is like what people believed in the 15th or 16th century.
Then there are members like J-Man that believe in a FE but have a "fire and brim-stone" literal type of belief that the Earth is Flat because of scripture.
It's really fascinating.
-
FES members talk about using principles like the Zetetic method which is an empirical and scientific question and answer approach, but then they subscribe to believing in hoaxes which is the total opposite approach as the Zetetic method intended.
Sure, if we just claimed a hoax and cited nothing to support it, you might have a point. But that is not what we have been doing.
-
Yea that's cool and all, zetetic and stuff... Can I get an answer, one day? From an actual flat-earther?
-
FES members talk about using principles like the Zetetic method which is an empirical and scientific question and answer approach, but then they subscribe to believing in hoaxes which is the total opposite approach as the Zetetic method intended.
Sure, if we just claimed a hoax and cited nothing to support it, you might have a point. But that is not what we have been doing.
Hey Tom. Can I get your opinion on the issue I raised for the "spotlight" model, where it drastically underestimates the amount of sunlight we actually see south of the equator? I lay out my arguments here:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9082.msg143291#msg143291
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9082.msg143298#msg143298
I'd genuinely like to get your opinion, I've raised it a few times now and never gotten a satisfactory counter-argument.
-
However I'm with you with it mostly being futile. That's why I've been trying to set up debates where we start by strictly framing the problem first. If you can set up the problem and get all parties to agree that If A is true then flat Earth, if A is false then globe Earth, then you avoid the trap of all evidence proving a flat Earth, regardless of what it is.
I agree that this is the optimum approach. However, it is as doomed as all the others. You'd think it would be straightforward to get the FE crowd to agree to an experiment, easily performed by ordinary people, which would demonstrate the truth or falsity of the hypothesis. However, you'll never get them to accept that any experimental result could ever disprove the Flat Earth, because they start with the premise that the flat Earth is true, and that things that seem to disprove it should be ignored.
-
I am only on this site because I think it is fascinating that there are still people that believe the Earth is flat. At first I thought it was a joke. To me, seeing folks like Tom Bishop, Pete, etc.. discuss their Flat Earth belief and the logic behind this belief is like what people believed in the 15th or 16th century.
Then there are members like J-Man that believe in a FE but have a "fire and brim-stone" literal type of belief that the Earth is Flat because of scripture.
It's really fascinating.
For me, it's a useful exercise because when you see the arguments used to defend an obviously false hypothesis like the flat Earth, you can tease out the common elements. The same arguments used by flat Earthers are used by a wide range of people out there. All the logical fallacies and absolute certainty prevalent here is out there among the sane people too.
-
FES members talk about using principles like the Zetetic method which is an empirical and scientific question and answer approach, but then they subscribe to believing in hoaxes which is the total opposite approach as the Zetetic method intended.
Sure, if we just claimed a hoax and cited nothing to support it, you might have a point. But that is not what we have been doing.
Yet you still fail to describe how you would determine the size and shape of the earth.
-
FES members talk about using principles like the Zetetic method which is an empirical and scientific question and answer approach, but then they subscribe to believing in hoaxes which is the total opposite approach as the Zetetic method intended.
Sure, if we just claimed a hoax and cited nothing to support it, you might have a point. But that is not what we have been doing.
You kinda have. You have a few links in the Wiki to some conspiracy nonsense, but when Elon Musk shot a car into space I saw no-one offer any evidence that it was faked.
Rather you seem to fall back on this reasoning
https://wiki.tfes.org/Place_of_the_Conspiracy_in_FET
P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated
P2) The Flat Earth is an obvious truth
So, according to you it's obvious the earth is flat ergo Musk's launch must have been fake. No evidence provided or required.
This is not rational thinking, one should always be prepared to alter one's opinions in the light of new evidence.
If I see David Copperfield flying in a magic show then I might not be able to see a wire but my experience is that
a) Magic shows are about being tricked and
b) People can't fly
So I can fairly confidently assume that there is a wire or something supporting him. I don't change my views on whether people can fly or not. If someone shoots a car into space then if I believe that space travel is not possible then my immediate reaction may be that it's fake. But if that person has a history of customers who have paid him to shoot other things into space, and has a queue of other customers waiting for him to do so. If I notice that my GPS and satellite TV work, I'm shown evidence that the ISS can be seen from earth. As more and more evidence builds that actually we do now have the technology to shoot stuff into space it becomes more and more irrational to dig my heels in and claim it's all fake with no basis.
How you arrive at P2 remains a mystery to me. A flat earth is arguably the simplest conclusion if you understood nothing about the way the world works, just look out to sea and observe a horizon which appears flat (note the "appears" and consider the limits in our visual accuity). But as someone else noted, even the ancients wouldn't have thought that the sun was circling above a flat plane. The simplest conclusion would be that the sun is circling above and below a flat plane, they probably thought that when it was night it was dark everywhere on earth. Now we know better.
Your circling sun with its change in orbit to create the seasons and change in height to create moon phases is all rationalisation. It's a fudge which you try to use to explain observations but it fails on many levels. It cannot explain the observations of sunlight hours in the southern hemisphere, much less 24 hour sunlight in Antarctica. It cannot explain the consistent size of the sun (so you rationalise again and make up another fudge, some magnification thing). It cannot explain sunset (so you rationalise again and make up some new rule of perspective which attempts to explain how a the gap between a sun THREE THOUSAND MILES above the earth cannot be seen and the disc is observed to sink slowly behind the horizon). It cannot explain the consistent angular speed of the sun over the course of the day - I haven't heard a response to that one yet. Your model fails, it does not match empirical observations - something you claim to think important. And yet you don't change your model or opinion. Odd.
-
Sure, if we just claimed a hoax and cited nothing to support it, you might have a point. But that is not what we have been doing.
Yea right. Might be because nobody is answering simple questions then.
I have a ton of questions to ask to a flat-earther (see some in my signature). But still, since I arrived, I asked 2 simple questions. I got no response from a FE so far. Why do you think so? My questions are so "obvious"? Or futile? Or stupid? Then why nobody told me that? I mean, it's not like I asked for a 50-pages book or anything, I just want 2 or 3 lines of text of explanation.
-
I'll just note that not only will you not get answers to those simple questions, but for pointing out that you won't get answers, you'll be accused of "shitposting" and given a warning - presumably leading to a ban.
Yeah, I've no problem with that. We are in the "Flat Earth Debate" forum. I asked questions, I'm expecting answers. And from those answers, we can debate properly. But for now I got nothing to debate on. So, yeah, they can ban me if they want. That'll prove once again that the flat-earthers can't debate on this because of their lack of logic and reasoning. I didn't even ask a scientific question, I'm just basically expecting opinions to see how they can answer that.
-
I'll just note that not only will you not get answers to those simple questions, but for pointing out that you won't get answers, you'll be accused of "shitposting" and given a warning - presumably leading to a ban.
Yeah, I've no problem with that. We are in the "Flat Earth Debate" forum. I asked questions, I'm expecting answers. And from those answers, we can debate properly. But for now I got nothing to debate on. So, yeah, they can ban me if they want. That'll prove once again that the flat-earthers can't debate on this because of their lack of logic and reasoning. I didn't even ask a scientific question, I'm just basically expecting opinions to see how they can answer that.
I'm engaged in an actual debate in an entirely different forum, dealing with different issues, and it's quite a different experience. Here there's a moment's satisfaction while you put forward a point, and wait for a response which never comes. There's the illusion of an argument, but the argument never really happens. Someone will say "that's in the FAQ" or "that's in this book" or "stop discussing this in this way" but they'll never coherently explain why you're wrong.
In general, in most situations, when you're debating with someone, and instead of counter-arguments, you're given a reading list, that's a pretty good indication that they have no idea what's wrong with your arguments.
-
Baby Thork,
Is the Flat Earth Society a conspiracy group (like the Illuminati); that exists for reasons for profit and embezzlement of funds into the pockets of high ranking FES members?
TFES is not for profit. No money is made. The only money taken goes directly to cafe-press if you want a T-shirt or something (people request this a lot) and as a public service we make them available, but at zero mark up. TFES costs the administrators of this site. No one has ever made a penny from it.
- Flat Earther and rapper B.o.B. crowdfunded $1 million via GoFundMe to launch a satellite to see if he could detect for himself the curvature of the Earth. How do we know exactly where this money is going?
B.o.B. isn't a member of the flat earth society. Maybe he's using the money to buy diamond studded underpants ... but that is him as an individual and not TFES.
- For this years Flat Earth conference, full access tickets cost up to $349 (for a VIP ticket) to $299 (for only a 2-day pass). Where is all of this money going? Full access tickets to DisneyLand / DisneyWorld cost less than this.
Again, this is not the flat earth society. Personally I'd avoid these charlatans at all cost unless you have a morbid curiosity and are happy to set fire to your money.
- "Mad Mike" Hughes is trying to raise capital through promotion of his steam-powered rocket and exploratory efforts to proven FE. How do we know that he isn't just going to pocket all of this money or squander all of this money for himself? Seems kind of fishy to me.
Mad Mike Hughes is 2 cogs short of a celestial gear and is going to boil himself to death, live on CNN. Again, not the flat earth society. Just a lunatic.
- FE Society exists to try and keep people like you and me from thinking they can go to space. If they have us believing that space travel is not possible, than FE believers will keep buying FE stuff and they will keep spending money to go to the FE conferences.
Again the flat earth society isn't making money. When an Indian tech scammer rings you up and says "Hello, I'm from Microsoft and we have detected you have a wirus on your dextop, and to fix it, do one simple thing. Send me your mastercard or Wisa details" do you assume that money goes to Microsoft?
- Some FE say that there exists pictures of the Antarctic Ice Wall. This has to be fakery and done with CGI graphics. They likely faked the picture of the Ice Wall in a studio, with paid actors, or they faked this in a backyard setting in Canada or Alaska.
Everyone is in agreement that there is an Antarctic ice wall. The question is does it wrap around into a continent or does it wrap around the edge of the world.
- Flat Earthers are simply mistaken about the shape of the Earth and think that it is Flat because that's what they assume it to be.
Well I could say the same about Round Earthers.
-
Baby Thork,
Is the Flat Earth Society a conspiracy group (like the Illuminati); that exists for reasons for profit and embezzlement of funds into the pockets of high ranking FES members?
TFES is not for profit. No money is made. The only money taken goes directly to cafe-press if you want a T-shirt or something (people request this a lot) and as a public service we make them available, but at zero mark up. TFES costs the administrators of this site. No one has ever made a penny from it.
- Flat Earther and rapper B.o.B. crowdfunded $1 million via GoFundMe to launch a satellite to see if he could detect for himself the curvature of the Earth. How do we know exactly where this money is going?
B.o.B. isn't a member of the flat earth society. Maybe he's using the money to buy diamond studded underpants ... but that is him as an individual and not TFES.
- For this years Flat Earth conference, full access tickets cost up to $349 (for a VIP ticket) to $299 (for only a 2-day pass). Where is all of this money going? Full access tickets to DisneyLand / DisneyWorld cost less than this.
Again, this is not the flat earth society. Personally I'd avoid these charlatans at all cost unless you have a morbid curiosity and are happy to set fire to your money.
- "Mad Mike" Hughes is trying to raise capital through promotion of his steam-powered rocket and exploratory efforts to proven FE. How do we know that he isn't just going to pocket all of this money or squander all of this money for himself? Seems kind of fishy to me.
Mad Mike Hughes is 2 cogs short of a celestial gear and is going to boil himself to death, live on CNN. Again, not the flat earth society. Just a lunatic.
- FE Society exists to try and keep people like you and me from thinking they can go to space. If they have us believing that space travel is not possible, than FE believers will keep buying FE stuff and they will keep spending money to go to the FE conferences.
Again the flat earth society isn't making money. When an Indian tech scammer rings you up and says "Hello, I'm from Microsoft and we have detected you have a wirus on your dextop, and to fix it, do one simple thing. Send me your mastercard or Wisa details" do you assume that money goes to Microsoft?
- Some FE say that there exists pictures of the Antarctic Ice Wall. This has to be fakery and done with CGI graphics. They likely faked the picture of the Ice Wall in a studio, with paid actors, or they faked this in a backyard setting in Canada or Alaska.
Everyone is in agreement that there is an Antarctic ice wall. The question is does it wrap around into a continent or does it wrap around the edge of the world.
- Flat Earthers are simply mistaken about the shape of the Earth and think that it is Flat because that's what they assume it to be.
Well I could say the same about Round Earthers.
Any comment on my response to you here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=9082.msg143298#msg143298 ?
I can't help but notice you skipped right over responding to it for some reason.
-
I have already addresses the credibility of multiple sources in the face of mass delusion, using the miracles of Christ as an example.
Specifically, looking at your sunset shenanigans is wildly off topic, hence the reason I skipped it.
-
I have already addresses the credibility of multiple sources in the face of mass delusion, using the miracles of Christ as an example.
Specifically, looking at your sunset shenanigans is wildly off topic, hence the reason I skipped it.
The whole point of those sources is they just list the time the sun rises and sets on a certain day. Are you really suggesting that The Sydney Morning Herald is wrong with what time the sun sets? And no one in a city of 5 million people has ever noticed? I'm in genuine disbelief that someone could think that, that's one of the most easily observable things imaginable. Plus you're not even saying they're just slightly off. The Morning Herald claims the daylight on the solstice lasts for nearly 14 and a half hours while at the very best the FE model can account for 10 of those, so you must think they're nearly 50% off.
Can you imagine if you checked the paper or online when planning a summer BBQ to find out when the sun would set and it set 2 hours before hand? You'd think it was the end of days. Ok, now imagine the entire southern hemisphere has the potential to do that for 6 months out of the year. Unless your stance is no one south of the equator owns a clock, I just don't understand how you could fool yourself into believing that. You don't seriously believe that this is possible, do you? Is this just a joke?
-
The whole point of those sources is they just list the time the sun rises and sets on a certain day. Are you really suggesting that The Sydney Morning Herald is wrong with what time the sun sets? And no one in a city of 5 million people has ever noticed? I'm in genuine disbelief that someone could think that, that's one of the most easily observable things imaginable. Plus you're not even saying they're just slightly off. The Morning Herald claims the daylight on the solstice lasts for nearly 14 and a half hours while at the very best the FE model can account for 10 of those, so you must think they're nearly 50% off.
Can you imagine if you checked the paper or online when planning a summer BBQ to find out when the sun would set and it set 2 hours before hand? You'd think it was the end of days. Ok, now imagine the entire southern hemisphere has the potential to do that for 6 months out of the year. Unless your stance is no one south of the equator owns a clock, I just don't understand how you could fool yourself into believing that. You don't seriously believe that this is possible, do you? Is this just a joke?
Flat earth theory explains why you get longer days. I already linked the chapter in ENaG where it expressly explains this. You are telling us we are making an argument that we aren't making, and then complaining that the argument you put forth makes no sense.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za25.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm
You are being ignored and passed over because you can't be bothered to even read the basics before you complain about it.
-
The whole point of those sources is they just list the time the sun rises and sets on a certain day. Are you really suggesting that The Sydney Morning Herald is wrong with what time the sun sets? And no one in a city of 5 million people has ever noticed? I'm in genuine disbelief that someone could think that, that's one of the most easily observable things imaginable. Plus you're not even saying they're just slightly off. The Morning Herald claims the daylight on the solstice lasts for nearly 14 and a half hours while at the very best the FE model can account for 10 of those, so you must think they're nearly 50% off.
Can you imagine if you checked the paper or online when planning a summer BBQ to find out when the sun would set and it set 2 hours before hand? You'd think it was the end of days. Ok, now imagine the entire southern hemisphere has the potential to do that for 6 months out of the year. Unless your stance is no one south of the equator owns a clock, I just don't understand how you could fool yourself into believing that. You don't seriously believe that this is possible, do you? Is this just a joke?
Flat earth theory explains why you get longer days. I already linked the chapter in ENaG where it expressly explains this. You are telling us we are making an argument that we aren't making, and then complaining that the argument you put forth makes no sense.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za25.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm
You are being ignored and passed over because you can't be bothered to even read the basics before you complain about it.
You already linked me that second one and I already read it. It still doesn't come close to explaining why the "spotlight" sun would have look like this to explain the sunrise/sunset times we actually see: (https://imgur.com/bAfTQfZ.jpg)
There's just no other geometric way for a spotlight to illuminate the southern hemisphere for >12h a day while keeping the northern hemisphere dark for >12h. Until you can explain that simple fact (which really shouldn't be that hard), you have to accept your model doesn't work and start over with a new one.
-
Inference is a reasonable extension of deductive logic.
The earth is flat.
Authorities tell us it is round.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related.
What else can one deduce?
This is my biggest problem with the whole "it's a conspiracy thing". How does me thinking the Earth is round give the government any tangible control over me? The shape of the planet doesn't influence my spending, voting, political views. Realistically, the shape of the planet is completely irrelevant to every single person living on it, this way of thinking gives governments absolutely no power over us, no control. If the government came out and admitted the world was flat, people would be pissed that the government lied, then completely move on, no one really cares. You ask a Flat Earther about NASA and ESA etc, their only response is "it's a conspiracy" but when you really look at it, there is no point for there even to be a conspiracy, who cares? There's a reason for the govt to cover up the causes of 9/11, or the Watergate Scandal, or possibly the Kennedy assassination. There is not one single, tangible reason for the government to lie about the shape of our nice little blue marble.
-
Sure, there's a reason for such a conspiracy. You just haven't worked out what it is yet.
I was gutted when I saw Mark Sergant's video 'hiding god' as the final in his series. He was so close and then missed. The whole point of the conspiracy is to remove you from God. If you knew how the earth worked, how special it is and its place in the centre of the universe you would see what God is. God is the force, the energy, the thing that created the universe. Not a man with a beard or fairy that grants wishes or a pschyopath that instructs one nation to go to war with another. To understand God and why they hide him you must understand the purpose of religion.
Religion is a blue print for civilisation. All religions share common themes. There is law. Thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal. In Islam they have sharia law. All religious books do. Its a way to keep order. To make people think they are being watched when no one is around and prevent crime. Remember there were no forensics until recently. All religions have praying, songs, worship, kneeling or bowing. Ways of brain washing you into constantly making you think about them (attending church, 5 am prayers whatever) and surrendering to a higher power. They also have a human or organisation between you and God. the pope and Vatican, religious leaders, divine right kings. Religion is used so you obey leaders and follow order.
Religion also provides other things. A reason to make men die for you. Crusades, Jihads etc. It is the elite making you look to them.
New Atheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism) is a new religion. It is belief based. They believe there is no God. And I find the likes of Richard Dawkins very amusing. He is setting out to disprove God. He wishes to know all the science and hopes it will kill belief in God. But mathematics is god's language. Its the way everything is described. Let there be light has some truth. God did say that. He described it in his own language and it was so. If Richard Dawkins ever discovered how something can be from nothing, the forces that created the universe, do you know what he'd have to call that thing? God. Richard Dawkins can only disprove God by discovering God. The irony is delicious.
Atheism is designed to remove you from organised religion. An illuminati goal for hundreds of years. They don't want your money going there. They want it. Money is power. Atheism is designed to make you feel small and insignificant. you are on one of trillions of planets orbiting trillions of stars on a tiny spec of dust and you are meaningless. Its a horrible religion. It takes hope from the downtrodden, comfort from the bereaved, strength from the sick, justice from those who have been wronged. Its the only religion that takes everything from you and offers nothing in return. If a 5 year old child is dying of cancer and asks "will I see mummy again?" all religions are designed to comfort her ... you will see her in heaven. Atheism tells her she's worm food.
So why the movement to atheism now? Its about replacing God. you are told by shills like Edward Snowden that the state sees everything you do. Tracks your every move, listens to your every phone call, monitors your social media, reads all your e-mails. They claim to be all seeing ... like God. Its actually bollocks. Have you tried using Siri? that dumb thing can't even find me a McDonalds. How is it going to decipher a conversation on a phone. You think the NSA have better technology than Apple, Microsoft, Intel? With hundreds of billions in R&D budget? you think they have better voice recognition from that paltry 'black budget' of theirs? I see things like "They'd need quantum computers to crack encryption so they must have quantum computers". No they don't The NSA out techs Intel when that is all Intel do? Bollocks. They have secret weapons no one knows about that can read thoughts or fly at hypersonic speeds? That one government budget is used to out tech the entire private sector? Its rubbish.
They want you to look to the state as a God. It is omnipotent and it is all powerful (has crazy weapons you can only imagine).
Below is a video from the 60's when they were trying out subliminal messages on the public in America. Note the subliminal message at about 40 seconds in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnkg-yCPryE
"God is real, God is watching, believe in Government God". Chilling stuff. Fortunately subliminal messages don't really work, so we aren't all mindless zombies at this stage.
You posted we don't believe in conspiracies. Most conspiracies are made up to get you thinking they see everything. Know everything, and you need to obey. The truth is government never out does the private sector. Its why they buy weapons from private firms like Lockheed and computers and servers from Cisco. Tech hasn't really moved on since the 60's. Processors got smaller. Everything else is just small improvements. The entire car industry makes slightly better engines with all that R&D. Few real drugs have been discovered by pharma since the 60s. All the best ones like anti-biotics, steroids, major vaccines have been around for decades. there is no amazing tech. Its hyped to make you think you are helpless against an all powerful state. If Snowden had really been a whistle blower, the news would not have been allowed to report his work. Its orchestrated. The press is controlled. Its about you thinking they are God. As its always been. And that is why they hide the reality of the universe from you. To control you. That's the reason for the conspiracy. Its not complicated. And before you say "but we see things like the SR-71 after they are commissioned ... you think that's a leap? It has jet engines (been around since the late 40's), they stuck cones on the front to compress the air (Like a turbo on a car from the 70's), and could now contain the heat using better alloys thanks to the private sector. But it just made a plane a bit faster and a bit higher. Its not like believing they decrypt 30 billion e-mails a day and decipher several million phone calls.
So Aurora ... nope ... NASA lies and hype. Roswell Aliens with secret technology. Don't be silly. They'd love you to think they have that. HARP ... literally studies the make up of the atmosphere.
So back to FET. FET is beautiful and everything matches. You can seamlessly explain one thing from another to another. Its the reason for everything, its the only thing that matters. That's the truth they hide. And mathematics and science are the answer. They are the tools we can use to prove we are right. We need only speak the language of God to reveal Him (it). From fibbonachi sequences to explain the petals on a plant, the ratios of bones in our hand and the shape of a snails shell, to the movement of the heavens, to probabilities, chaos, and ultimately how something came from nothing.
-
Sure, there's a reason for such a conspiracy. You just haven't worked out what it is yet.
I was gutted when I saw Mark Sergant's video 'hiding god' as the final in his series. He was so close and then missed. The whole point of the conspiracy is to remove you from God. If you knew how the earth worked, how special it is and its place in the centre of the universe you would see what God is. God is the force, the energy, the thing that created the universe. Not a man with a beard or fairy that grants wishes or a pschyopath that instructs one nation to go to war with another. To understand God and why they hide him you must understand the purpose of religion.
Religion is a blue print for civilisation. All religions share common themes. There is law. Thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal. In Islam they have sharia law. All religious books do. Its a way to keep order. To make people think they are being watched when no one is around and prevent crime. Remember there were no forensics until recently. All religions have praying, songs, worship, kneeling or bowing. Ways of brain washing you into constantly making you think about them (attending church, 5 am prayers whatever) and surrendering to a higher power. They also have a human or organisation between you and God. the pope and Vatican, religious leaders, divine right kings. Religion is used so you obey leaders and follow order.
Religion also provides other things. A reason to make men die for you. Crusades, Jihads etc. It is the elite making you look to them.
New Atheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Atheism) is a new religion. It is belief based. They believe there is no God. And I find the likes of Richard Dawkins very amusing. He is setting out to disprove God. He wishes to know all the science and hopes it will kill belief in God. But mathematics is god's language. Its the way everything is described. Let there be light has some truth. God did say that. He described it in his own language and it was so. If Richard Dawkins ever discovered how something can be from nothing, the forces that created the universe, do you know what he'd have to call that thing? God. Richard Dawkins can only disprove God by discovering God. The irony is delicious.
Atheism is designed to remove you from organised religion. An illuminati goal for hundreds of years. They don't want your money going there. They want it. Money is power. Atheism is designed to make you feel small and insignificant. you are on one of trillions of planets orbiting trillions of stars on a tiny spec of dust and you are meaningless. Its a horrible religion. It takes hope from the downtrodden, comfort from the bereaved, strength from the sick, justice from those who have been wronged. Its the only religion that takes everything from you and offers nothing in return. If a 5 year old child is dying of cancer and asks "will I see mummy again?" all religions are designed to comfort her ... you will see her in heaven. Atheism tells her she's worm food.
So why the movement to atheism now? Its about replacing God. you are told by shills like Edward Snowden that the state sees everything you do. Tracks your every move, listens to your every phone call, monitors your social media, reads all your e-mails. They claim to be all seeing ... like God. Its actually bollocks. Have you tried using Siri? that dumb thing can't even find me a McDonalds. How is it going to decipher a conversation on a phone. You think the NSA have better technology than Apple, Microsoft, Intel? With hundreds of billions in R&D budget? you think they have better voice recognition from that paltry 'black budget' of theirs? I see things like "They'd need quantum computers to crack encryption so they must have quantum computers". No they don't The NSA out techs Intel when that is all Intel do? Bollocks. They have secret weapons no one knows about that can read thoughts or fly at hypersonic speeds? That one government budget is used to out tech the entire private sector? Its rubbish.
They want you to look to the state as a God. It is omnipotent and it is all powerful (has crazy weapons you can only imagine).
Below is a video from the 60's when they were trying out subliminal messages on the public in America. Note the subliminal message at about 40 seconds in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnkg-yCPryE
"God is real, God is watching, believe in Government God". Chilling stuff. Fortunately subliminal messages don't really work, so we aren't all mindless zombies at this stage.
You posted we don't believe in conspiracies. Most conspiracies are made up to get you thinking they see everything. Know everything, and you need to obey. The truth is government never out does the private sector. Its why they buy weapons from private firms like Lockheed and computers and servers from Cisco. Tech hasn't really moved on since the 60's. Processors got smaller. Everything else is just small improvements. The entire car industry makes slightly better engines with all that R&D. Few real drugs have been discovered by pharma since the 60s. All the best ones like anti-biotics, steroids, major vaccines have been around for decades. there is no amazing tech. Its hyped to make you think you are helpless against an all powerful state. If Snowden had really been a whistle blower, the news would not have been allowed to report his work. Its orchestrated. The press is controlled. Its about you thinking they are God. As its always been. And that is why they hide the reality of the universe from you. To control you. That's the reason for the conspiracy. Its not complicated. And before you say "but we see things like the SR-71 after they are commissioned ... you think that's a leap? It has jet engines (been around since the late 40's), they stuck cones on the front to compress the air (Like a turbo on a car from the 70's), and could now contain the heat using better alloys thanks to the private sector. But it just made a plane a bit faster and a bit higher. Its not like believing they decrypt 30 billion e-mails a day and decipher several million phone calls.
So Aurora ... nope ... NASA lies and hype. Roswell Aliens with secret technology. Don't be silly. They'd love you to think they have that. HARP ... literally studies the make up of the atmosphere.
So back to FET. FET is beautiful and everything matches. You can seamlessly explain one thing from another to another. Its the reason for everything, its the only thing that matters. That's the truth they hide. And mathematics and science are the answer. They are the tools we can use to prove we are right. We need only speak the language of God to reveal Him (it). From fibbonachi sequences to explain the petals on a plant, the ratios of bones in our hand and the shape of a snails shell, to the movement of the heavens, to probabilities, chaos, and ultimately how something came from nothing.
Were the ancient Greeks in on this conspiracy too? Honest question.
-
No. You can pretty much pin point this to Copernicus (the economist and banker) who happened to reshuffle the planets around as well in his spare time to funnel some money/power away from the church by discrediting it. He is after all the founder of the quantity theory of money and around at about the time the illuminati is founded by bankers ... he's got to be ground zero.
-
No. You can pretty much pin point this to Copernicus (the economist and banker) who happened to reshuffle the planets around as well in his spare time to funnel some money/power away from the church by discrediting it. He is after all the founder of the quantity theory of money and around at about the time the illuminati is founded by bankers ... he's got to be ground zero.
You are such a confused and misguided person. And, you don't even see it.
-
No. You can pretty much pin point this to Copernicus (the economist and banker) who happened to reshuffle the planets around as well in his spare time to funnel some money/power away from the church by discrediting it. He is after all the founder of the quantity theory of money and around at about the time the illuminati is founded by bankers ... he's got to be ground zero.
You are such a confused and misguided person. And, you don't even see it.
One of us has to be wrong. If I'm wrong, no one got hurt.