1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: What is beyond the Ice Wall?

« on: February 11, 2018, 09:50:03 PM »

Then set up an expedition, because we don't know either.

Why not? Why is it that no one has even seen this ice wall? Or if they have, they hadn't taken photos of it?

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to get to the other side?

« on: February 11, 2018, 09:48:23 PM »

I love the RE'er use of "legitimate question". What even is an "illegitimate question"?

It doesn't matter if there is an edge. If someone tries to fly over the "edge" and it doesn't exist, they (and perhaps we) will learn something.

And how will you establish that it doesn't exist?

He literally just explained how to establish that it does or doesn't exist.  If someone would fly over it, they'd find out if it did or did not exist, but Pete, what's stopping people from flying over it? Why has it not been done?

3

Flat Earth Community / Re: What would it take to convince you that the earth is round?

« on: February 10, 2018, 07:11:01 PM »

You can buy a flight on Qantas 63 from Sydney to Johannesburg, it doesn't go over the pole itself, but you can see Antarctica and the travel time contradicts the unipolar flat Earth model.
Here is someone's edited video of such a trip.

But to them that's not true, they'll dismiss it as fake, not give a logical explanation. Maybe say it's CGI or part of some random glacier. They honestly will just keep dismissing all information you throw at them, even if it's right in front of their eyes.

4

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Do rockets like SpaceX Falcon Heavy actually reach speeds of approx 17, 500 mph?

« on: February 10, 2018, 07:07:59 PM »

It's picking up speed to get out of the earth into space, it doesn't reach that speed while it's accelerating though the atmosphere, it reaches that when it's in space. There's plenty of research out there that you could look up this answer yourself.

5

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Still don't understand why anyone would want to hide a flat Earth if it was flat

« on: February 10, 2018, 07:04:54 PM »

Your argument basically seems to be "I don't understand how rockets work, therefore they don't".
That really isn't an argument.
The SpaceX launch is all on video, there are numerous witnesses to the launch and lots of amateur footage.
Someone did some excellent analysis on another thread comparing weather patterns from weather satellites compared with the SpaceX live stream.
While we are here, I've seen a Shuttle launch with my own eyes one time I happened to be on holiday in Florida at the right time.
If you have any evidence that the launch was faked then please present it. You not understanding how rockets work isn't evidence.

Agreed, they launch. They go up, then turn sideways, then go off over the ocean and land in the ocean. I meant it was fake in the sense that it doesn't go 17,500 mph into space.

Your response basically ignored the point I was making, and just attempts to shut down the conversation. Answer the real question here: do you believe the rocket goes 17,500 mph into space?

Why is that so crazy to believe that the rocket can reach speeds of 17,500 mph? Is that for some reason some magical thing that humans can't hope to achieve?

6

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How big is the galaxy

« on: February 10, 2018, 06:57:28 PM »

It is vast, likely thousands of miles across, and who knows how deep. It might even be as big (or bigger?) as the Earth.

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not, it's clearly far bigger than the earth, the Earth circumference is millions of miles around. There are so many things about the Galaxy if we do not comprehend, and can't even begin to think we can comprehend. Sure there are theories, but the size of the Galaxy isn't anything any human can currently accurately measure.

The round earth theory uses the parallax method to determine the size of the galaxy, which would put it at 100,000 light years across.  I think you could use the same method for a flat earth model, but you would have to take two measurements simultaneously at a distance far enough apart to see a change in angle and know the exact distance between the two points. I haven't been able to find any flat earth research into this topic, tho it is completely possible to do.

But really those are just guesses. They're "educated" But it's something far beyond what any human can know right now. We can know if the earth is flat or round by going up high enough to see. Or by going to the wall/barrier of the edge of the world

However for size of the galaxy, That's a guess, we don't even know and probably will never know what it looks like.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How to get to the other side?

« on: February 09, 2018, 12:13:18 AM »

It doesn't.

Pretty sure he's saying hypothetically, could you please give more than just "it doesn't" what if someone were to fly to the edge and try to fly off the edge, what would happen? Why hasn't it been tried yet?

8

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 08:01:46 PM »

You are dismissing it though.

Okay, well, if you're not willing to accept that I probably know my own intentions better than you do, I sincerely doubt that this conversation is going to take us anywhere at all.

And there you go ignoring the other bits, If you know your own intentions then explain how what we saw was an incomplete account in your eyes. Explain how you disagree with what we saw.

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 07:55:43 PM »

And Pete, I'm still waiting to hear why you say you have no opinion, yet dismiss the people who claim they were actually there and tell them that their decision is Zealous and a snappy decision.

I do not dismiss them. I've done anything but that. I said (to paraphrase) "You saw what you saw, and that's fine by me. We might disagree, but there's nothing wrong with disagreeing." You are extremely intent on claiming that I said things I didn't say, and you simply refuse to accept any attempts at clarification. If you're not interested in what I'm actually saying, why ask? Why not just debate your strawman in the comfort and privacy of your own bedroom?

You are dismissing it though. "If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology."  And you somehow disagree with what we saw. Yet you haven't explained why our accounts of what happened were incomplete, you haven't explained why you disagree with our methodology, and you haven't explained on how you disagree with a conclusion that some people who witnessed first hand have come up with claiming it's incomplete. When you yourself did not see it. You apparently haven't even made an opinion on what you saw during a live feed (or replay of a live feed ---- even though you said in that one post that you can't believe everything you see on tv---or internet --- which is an opinion).

But long story short, you're trying to say that it's just our opinion is that they launched the rocket with a car in it into outer space. Meanwhile, it's not an opinion, it's a fact that was observed by many people. --- Everything you have been saying to us, has been you dismissing what we say because it's not factual enough for you since you weren't there.

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 07:43:49 PM »

Back on topic though Rushy, ---- If we have proof and you just dismiss it as fake no matter what because you weren't there or didn't see it. How can we who were there and did see it prove to you that it happened?  No matter what you're going to say it's not true because you didn't see it so, how can we prove it to you?

11

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 07:36:14 PM »

Also, Rushy has a post at the top of page 3 quoting me referencing war of the worlds, but my post along those lines is now missing. Like, clicking the quote link just reloads the page

I know I'm not deleting my comments, so Junky either there's a problem on the servers end with the comments being deleted for no reason. Or there's an admin/mod doing it.

12

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 07:27:16 PM »

Prove that it's not real...

Nice, asking to prove a negative.

Put another way, he's saying prove that the footage and eyewitness accounts are fake. It's not unfalsifiable

The only thing I asked you to prove is that there is in fact a roadster in orbit. Instead of saying "I can't" you'd rather post incorrectly about fallacies.

Many people watched it get put there Rushy, that's the proof. Although to you, that's not enough proof that people watched and recorded it get put there. Because as we said, so even though people have shown proof, your mindset is that of "If I didn't see it, It's not true". So, how even when we can show you proof (like the entire launch of the rocket, to where the car is in space) when all you'll do is say it's fake because you weren't there and we don't have any images proving that it's there right now?

There was a string of comments between Pete and I that were about his non-opinion and us being "Zealous people" for being able to make a snappy decision about what really happened while we were watching it happen first hand. it was right at the end of page 2, now there's a page 3, and those comments between Pete and I are gone.

Users can edit/remove their own posts. It wasn't moderation/admin. I see your "zealous" posts/quotes in this thread.

I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.

ones like this, Junker, Pete and I had a few posts after this one on page 2 that  You see my Zealous Posts/Quotes that were the recent ones of me asking him for a response after the original ones are gone. There were multiple ones after the last post of mine on page 2. I don't know if Pete deleted his posts, but I sure didn't and they're no longer there.

It was something close to Pete quoted one of the few things at the end of page 2 that I posted. Then said something about how i misunderstood it.

I posted a thing quoting it saying it wasn't quite misunderstood as it was mis-wrote, and allaround and I were still waiting to hear what reasoning he had to not believe that we saw what we saw.

Pete posted he had no opinions on it because he isn't a Zealous person enough to make snappy decisions that weren't well thought through.

I posted that I don't understand how being there and confirming with my own eyes using multiple devices to watch the machine be thrown further and further into space is snappy and not well thought through.

he posted something about he didn't have an opinion and we just think he did.

I asked him what his opinion was then. ------ a few hours later I"m back and this entire discussion in this thread is gone.

13

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 07:18:32 PM »

Prove that it's not real...

Nice, asking to prove a negative.

Yet, any proof that people do post of them being there, or them watching the feed while being there is immediately shunned and labeled as fake. It's just an infinite circle of "Prove it" -posts proof- "I wasn't there so it's not true."

Also, Admins who keep deleting comments, Why do you keep doing that?

No one is deleting comments. Sometimes off-topic comments will be split from a thread and moved to another forum/topic. I don't see any recent comments in this thread being split or moved.

There was a string of comments between Pete and I that were about his non-opinion and us being "Zealous people" for being able to make a snappy decision about what really happened while we were watching it happen first hand. it was right at the end of page 2, now there's a page 3, and those comments between Pete and I are gone.

14

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 07:09:57 PM »

Rushy, that's tu quoque. Deflection. Present your own reasoning and stop dancing like a troll

The Fallacy Fallacy is not an argument. Your failure to address my point, regardless of whether or not it is fallacious (it isn't) is its own form of deflection. Perhaps you should answer the very to-the-point question I asked you earlier instead of busying yourself addressing non-existent fallacies.

Rushy, the same logic can be applied against yours. Prove that it's not real, thousands of people including myself watched this being launched into space, watched it being released, watched it going further and further out. How can you prove that what I saw, when you didn't see it, fake? Again this comes down to the same nonsense as the religious fanatics saying their bible is the right bible because it's what's written on the paper. Or The Mass shootings were staged, or government planned. People were there, People saw it. You didn't see it, so you want proof. But any video proof people give you, you automatically turn against it with "It's a video, it's not proof".... So how on earth are we supposed to prove to you that we were there, when even if we gave you proof you'd automatically say it's fake? You're really open minded....

Also, Admins who keep deleting comments when people are trying to have a discussion, Why do you keep doing that?

And Pete, I'm still waiting to hear why you say you have no opinion, yet dismiss the people who claim they were actually there and tell them that their decision is Zealous and a snappy decision.

15

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 05:48:42 PM »

I do not yet have an opinion strong enough to bring to the table. That's why I haven't brought one. Unlike some of the more zealous individuals here, I don't make snap decisions about things like this.

So witnessing an event in multiple viewpoints, then making a decision based off of what we witnessed first hand makes us "zealous individuals making snap decisions"? Are you saying something could have been faked with what we saw? That someone could have on-the-fly edited the video to make it exactly what we saw at the same moment?

16

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 05:03:02 PM »

I didn't state an opinion on the subject. If you guys want to argue against what you've decided my opinion is, that's fine by me.

Okay Pete, what's your opinion then?

17

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 04:59:05 PM »

I'm not the only one, could it possibly be you worded it in a way that could be taken more than one way purposely to make argument?

By "the situation" I mean what people may or may not have seen during the launch, not my words just now.

Really Pete? Is that the only part you're going to make a comment on? You're just going to ignore the rest? You're just going to leave another vague response Pete?

Pete, This is exactly what we're talking about, you keep saying "Nuh Uh" doing basically nothing more than "Nuh Uh" without giving any decent sort of debate. Meanwhile we're giving logical responses that can't be misinterpreted. How does this make you any different from Religious nuts saying their religion is the right one because the book someone wrote thousands of years ago is the right book. Or the people saying that the mass shootings are all staged by the governments to warrant war against whatever, whoever?  You have to provide logical information to be perceived as anything more than just a troll Pete. You can't just pick and choose whatever response you want to make another vague, moot reply to and think you're making the intelligent response by only giving a half-assed response to one portion. 

18

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Car in Space

« on: February 08, 2018, 04:22:43 PM »

So from your perspective, all of the videos that you've seen of the rocket launching could have been faked, since you were not there?

No, my presence at the launch site would have had no impact on the video's perceived validity.

How would it have no impact on the validity, if you have a telescope, had it with you, and were following the rocket as it went out into space, while also having the live stream playing? I'd figure that would make quite the impact.

I'm just trying to understand your logic. I'm basing this comment off of: "That's fine. You guys saw what you saw, you reached your own conclusions. I may disagree, but I see no issue with disagreeing." Which reads to most people as even though we say what we saw, you disagree with what we saw.

Not at all. I'm just leaving my options open. It is possible that you misinterpreted the situation.

I'm not the only one, could it possibly be you worded it in a way that could be taken more than one way purposely to make argument?

Much like how AllAroundTheWorld put it: "But...this isn't like some "UFO" footage where it's some smudge and people can interpret how they like. This was a rocket launch all in full HD and reported by basically every major news agency and witnessed by hundreds of people and there was then a live stream from it. I don't think we are leaping to conclusions here.".

That's okay. You are welcome to believe in whatever you wish. If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology. But that's neither here nor there in the context of my appeal.

How is my account incomplete? I watched it until it got too far for my eyes to see, I watched it from a telescope after that, meanwhile taking turns with a pal who had a stream of it from it's view. I'd say that's a pretty complete account, the rocket didn't just vanish into nothing, it kept going until the telescope couldn't see it, it didn't come back to Earth, it kept going. So, what about that account makes it incomplete? Why do you disagree with methodology of seeing something with your own eyes and believing it instead of thinking it was somehow magically faked when it happened right in front of you? Is it simply because you yourself were not there to experience it so therefor anyone's account other than yours is incorrect? What you're spouting makes no sense to me, and it makes you sound like possibly you're just a troll trying to get a ruse out of the society.

Also I didn't know x-ray gave a telescopic property but... Did you know, that there are these really awesome focal devices called telescopes, binoculars, telescopic camera lenses? They allow you to see very far away, much further than the human eye, are easy to obtain, and let you see things after they are too far away for you to see with your naked eyes.

Yes, I happen to own one of those mythical devices. As a friendly tip to a newcomer, you're not going to engage many people by asking questions like this. Instead, you're likely to confine yourself to the "uninteresting debaters" list.

"you're not going to engage many people by asking questions like this. Instead" Says the guy who gave the silly response of accusing me of having X-ray vision to see far distances without using your brain to think "Maybe this guy had a telescope."  By your recent responses I'm shocked to see that people take you seriously in this website. As so far, honestly, you're far over the border of "This guy is a troll".

But you have provided no evidence for your opinion because you have none.

Actually, I haven't provided an opinion.

You've provided your opinion quite clearly to us who say we were there and witnessed it, your opinion is "You are welcome to believe in whatever you wish. If your incomplete account is all you need, I choose to disagree with your methodology." showing that you actually do have an opinion on this matter, only you aren't giving your side of it, how you think it was faked, what you think wasn't real about it, where you think the rocket mysteriously vanished to. I'm all ears... or eyes in this case to what your opinion on this is. However, instead of trying to debate about it, or showing us what your full thought on it is you say:

Our opinions clearly differ. I see no benefit to continuously exchanging "nuh uhs" and "yuh uhs"

So how is this going to get anywhere with moot responses such as that? The same thing AllAroundTheWorld is doing --- we're inferring your opinion based on your lackluster "nuh uh" comments that seem to be nothing more than "nuh uhs" without giving the other side (whom give more insight to their "yuh uhs") insight into why you say "nuh uh".

That's only natural. Your side is losing ground at a rapid pace. I would expect you to be nothing but disappointed about it.

The IQ rate of the world is also going down at a rapid pace, so I'd say the disappointment is pointed at people believing in this nonsense. It's exactly like those people who say recent mass shootings were all staged by the government.

19

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The International Space Station

« on: February 08, 2018, 09:33:51 AM »

In the other thread Pickel said

In the traditional flat earth model, an explation for satellites would be that they move in a circular path around the north pole because they possess technology to move, or an unknown natural whirlwind-like force may be propelling the satellites.

And she said it may be a balloon.

And she's a genius so she should know.

That's a really odd shaped balloon that I would like to see. So even after all this scientific research is being shown to show that this is the ISIS, they tried this proving it by saying it's debris, or balloon with no actual backing or proof? Also, how much space debris is there that's that size? I think the last record I read said less than a thousand pieces of debris larger than a softball where in orbit.

20

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How big is the galaxy

« on: February 08, 2018, 09:10:46 AM »

It is vast, likely thousands of miles across, and who knows how deep. It might even be as big (or bigger?) as the Earth.

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not, it's clearly far bigger than the earth, the Earth circumference is millions of miles around. There are so many things about the Galaxy if we do not comprehend, and can't even begin to think we can comprehend. Sure there are theories, but the size of the Galaxy isn't anything any human can currently accurately measure.