41

Flat Earth Theory / Re: 2+2

« on: January 16, 2018, 02:42:25 PM »

I could say that (children could be on here), but you and that other (children could be on here) over there do not equal 
(children could be on here).
Yeah, I'm not going to include any of this so I've deleted it for being all disgusting, gross, and weird.  totallackey is either evil or disturbed for posting this.   

Mathematics DEFINES the numbers to mean what we intuitively think they mean...

In and of itself, no it does not.

I love how a discussion about the answer of a fairly, sorry, I meant extremely simple mathematical problem involving kindergarten-level addition can have all this vulgarity on TFES.   

42

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Credit Score Argument and Rules it Provides

« on: January 16, 2018, 01:23:01 PM »

I understand that it would draw away attention from facts and figures, but it would draw the attention towards proof.  I'm not saying that this set of ideals is perfect, but it is only the first draft.  The main idea is that you can't just say "Hey!  That isn't right!"  before you say "I've got proof here that this idea is at least partially right while yours isn't."

43

Flat Earth Theory / Credit Score Argument and Rules it Provides

« on: January 12, 2018, 06:09:39 PM »

I would like to bring this topic back, because I want FE'ers to understand it completely.  The British way to measure credit was talked about near the end, and FE'ers need to understand what it meant, because lately I've noticed that you guys aren't thinking about it.  The main idea is that when given questions or when saying you have a theory you must provide an answer and proof.  The RE has provided proof time and time again.  The FE has never given any good proof.  Therefore, they have a lower score than the RE.  In response, I have come up with this idea of some good debate rules. 
1.  If you have consistently answered questions with answers and proof, you raise your score.
2.  Proof must be sufficient, and able to explain to someone who has knowledge of the science you're talking about.
3.  This is the most important one!  If your score is lower than the other side's score, you must provide proof before you deny others.
Rule three is the one I have seen violated a lot.  FE'ers have never given proof, but they continually deny RE.  So don't annoy people by saying "Blank is wrong because of Blank" unless you have proof.  Get some darn proof before saying we're wrong!

44

Flat Earth Theory / Re: We Exist in Grounded, Objective Reality

« on: January 12, 2018, 05:47:00 PM »

I think those sound pretty good.  You're right, if those premises are observed by everyone, it would make debates better.

45

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar Eclipses in a FE world.

« on: January 11, 2018, 03:29:19 PM »

Considering I've only ever seen moderators or council members and then 3 other people argue for TFE, I think 50% of the time, the one doesn't.

46

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Gravity confirmed - UA dead?

« on: January 11, 2018, 03:26:09 PM »

The thing is, what does TFES even think powers the accerlaration(Other than nonsense talk about Dark Energy or exotic matter).

47

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar Eclipses in a FE world.

« on: January 11, 2018, 03:02:50 PM »

I think most here don't believe in the FE.  As Tom Bishop said, the ratio is 100(RE):1(FE).

48

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lunar Eclipses in a FE world.

« on: January 11, 2018, 01:27:31 PM »

I like how the Shadow Object is talked about in the Wiki like it is the only possible way for Lunar Eclipses to happen.  Seriously?  The "Shadow Object" is something that no one knows what it actually is, while on RE it is a lot easier to explain than this nonsense about the "Shadow Object".

49

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Flat Earth Sun

« on: January 11, 2018, 01:21:59 PM »

At least he has proof, because TFE has none and has never shown any, while RE has.

50

Flat Earth Theory / Re: 2+2

« on: January 10, 2018, 07:16:04 PM »

The thing is that your argument works better for the RE than the FE.  Because it may have been a long time ago when we said that the RE was right, but before that what was the old proof that was proven wrong?  The FE.

51

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Coal in Antarctica

« on: January 10, 2018, 06:47:28 PM »

I like how this has led to Trump buying a hat from China.

52

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Flat Earth Sun

« on: January 10, 2018, 06:45:11 PM »

You claim below, I choose the word beyond.

You're kidding me right?  If the sun circles overhead the earth then wouldn't it just disappear as it gets smaller and smaller?   

53

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Project ESDR

« on: January 10, 2018, 06:34:58 PM »

The main problem is the cost. 
Raspberry Pi 3:$35.00
GoPro 3:$249.99
Metric Ton of Ammonium Perchlorate(Average):$2550
Total:$2834.99
Would TFES fund this Rocket?  Knowing it could bring them down, put them in more ridicule then they're in right now, and that it would cost more than twenty-eight hundred dollars?  Would they risk it?  Would they be ready to have to accept the truth, in their favor or not?   It doesn't cost much, but it could cost them a lot.  I don't think so. 

54

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Project ESDR

« on: January 10, 2018, 02:42:35 PM »

I am not a shouting troll. 

55

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Project ESDR

« on: January 10, 2018, 01:27:10 PM »

I like how when FE'ers rant it is all perfectly okay, but when a RE'er gets a little excited, it is placed in Angry Ranting.

56

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Show me your physics

« on: January 07, 2018, 07:21:53 PM »

I wasn't saying that it wasn't compatible.  I was saying it would render Einstein, Galileo, and TFES untrustworthy.

57

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Discussion with Admins on Membership

« on: January 06, 2018, 10:12:00 PM »

1. We open up Flat Earth Society membership to all who want it. As a member of the Flat Earth Society your name goes onto a roster, you agree to fight globularist heresy in all its forms, and you will receive a certificate reflecting this (virtual or printed TBD).

2. As a official member of the Flat Earth Society you receive standing recognition and access to in the Zetetic Council Board

3. Zeteic Council members are elected and are tasked with creating and putting proposals to a vote. Zetetic Council members provide organizational guidance, but are not considered the workhorses.

4. Official members of the Flat Earth Society vote and comment on the proposals, and in doing so self motivate themselves to begin the project and see it to completion.

I have to say that this doesn't seem like a good idea.  Arguing about FE vs. RE has taught me a lot about physics and has made every RE believer have to  work hard and think a lot.  It isn't right to only allow FE believers on, because theories must be constantly testified against and win until proof is shown to increase their foundations.

58

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Show me your physics

« on: January 06, 2018, 10:03:31 PM »

It was, unless you're counting your unfounded opinion that the Earth is round and therefore all astronomical observations must align with RET as an argument.-Parfisal

You are very wrong.  The RE has many theories that are thought of as facts supporting it, while the FE is the group that is unfounded.  You run away from the facts we present you with, you have never done any experiments of your own to support your theory even when presented multiple times with the idea of launching a CubeSat, and the closest you have gotten to doing a single thing to support TFE is when a Limo driver/self-taught rocket scientist tried to use a steam-powered rocket into the air to prove you guys right.  Your theory of UA is completely untrustworthy, because the reason we're not going past the speed of light is the theory of relativity.  It is Einstein's(RE) generalization of a principle from Galileo(RE).  If they got some major theories right and the largest theory ever wrong they are inconsistent.  Trustworthiness requires consistency.  Not only do we have to say that Einstein and Galileo are untrustworthy, but we must consider UA, and therefore TFES with it, untrustworthy. 

59

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earthers what are you thinking? please explain :(

« on: January 03, 2018, 06:41:00 PM »

If you want more, look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_scientific_discoveries#14th_century

60

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earthers what are you thinking? please explain :(

« on: January 03, 2018, 06:39:10 PM »

What's wrong with the 1800's? Is Darwin's Origin of the Species invalid because it is old?

Are you suggesting that before the 1900's there was no government cover-up? If so......:
Seleucus of Seleucia: discovery of tides being caused by the moon in the 10th century
Nicole Oresme: discovery of the curvature of light through atmospheric refraction in the 14th century
1543 – Nicolaus Copernicus: heliocentric model
1570s – Tycho Brahe: detailed astronomical observations
1600 – William Gilbert: Earth's magnetic field
1609 – Johannes Kepler: first two laws of planetary motion
1610 – Galileo Galilei: Sidereus Nuncius: telescopic observations
1619 - Johannes Kepler: third law of planetary motion
1687 – Sir Isaac Newton: classical mathematical description of the fundamental force of universal gravitation and the three physical laws of motion
1865 – Rudolf Clausius: Definition of Entropy
1877 – Ludwig Boltzmann: Statistical definition of entropy