[Wulf]

Either of those videos could have easily been produced on a sound stage.  Did you notice all of the cuts in both videos?

So, let me see if I have got this straight. You are suggesting that these videos were produced by a conspiracy for the sole purpose of promoting the idea that the Earth is round. And people wonder why I ended up calling you names. Are you really a moderator on this forum? You behave more like a troll.

You admitted in an earlier post that there are places in Antarctica where the sun is visible 24 hours a day.

i could have told you that was going to happen. in all honesty they could have been faked. although i'm not sure how to explain the specific path that the earth takes in each clip except by RE theory. again you are using condescending phrases and will not convince anyone like that.

[Wulf]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

[herewegoround]

Either of those videos could have easily been produced on a sound stage.  Did you notice all of the cuts in both videos?

So, let me see if I have got this straight. You are suggesting that these videos were produced by a conspiracy for the sole purpose of promoting the idea that the Earth is round. And people wonder why I ended up calling you names. Are you really a moderator on this forum? You behave more like a troll.

You admitted in an earlier post that there are places in Antarctica where the sun is visible 24 hours a day.

i could have told you that was going to happen. in all honesty they could have been faked. although i'm not sure how to explain the specific path that the earth takes in each clip except by RE theory. again you are using condescending phrases and will not convince anyone like that.

Anything in theory could be faked. My point is, why would they be faked? I take it you are new to dealing with flat Earth proponents. I started out being reasonable with them. After you get accused of being a paid shill, told you are indoctrinated, told you are a sheeple and told you can't think for yourself for the 100th time you lose patience. I have dealt with jroa several times on the other forum. The only argument he has ever put forward for the Earth being flat is, "have you looked out your window".

[herewegoround]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

Exactly. Also, the acceleration due to gravity varies over the face of the Earth. If the Earth was an accelerating disc it would be exactly the same everywhere. Assuming all the normal laws of geometry, physics and logic apply.

[Wulf]

Anything in theory could be faked. My point is, why would they be faked? I take it you are new to dealing with flat Earth proponents. I started out being reasonable with them. After you get accused of being a paid shill, told you are indoctrinated, told you are a sheeple and told you can't think for yourself for the 100th time you lose patience. I have dealt with jroa several times on the other forum. The only argument he has ever put forward for the Earth being flat is, "have you looked out your window".

caught me, yes i am. however, i intend to stay polite out of principle. insults don't bother me. my question to you is: why are you still doing this if it causes you so much stress?

[jroa]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

It is 9.8 m/s/s, which is an acceleration.  Also, it is acting on you.  The Earth is being pushed, and the Earth pushes against your feet, so you are also being accelerated upwards. 

[herewegoround]

Anything in theory could be faked. My point is, why would they be faked? I take it you are new to dealing with flat Earth proponents. I started out being reasonable with them. After you get accused of being a paid shill, told you are indoctrinated, told you are a sheeple and told you can't think for yourself for the 100th time you lose patience. I have dealt with jroa several times on the other forum. The only argument he has ever put forward for the Earth being flat is, "have you looked out your window".

caught me, yes i am. however, i intend to stay polite out of principle. insults don't bother me. my question to you is: why are you still doing this if it causes you so much stress?

I stopped going to the other forum because it descended into a complete farce. There were people there who claimed the site had been infiltrated by trolls who were deliberately making absurd comments in order to discredit FET and that this was a more serious forum. To be honest, compared to the other forum, this is like a bastion of reason and sanity.

I don't know why I keep doing it. That's a very good question. I don't think I will keep posting here for very long. I put forward the reasons why we should believe the Earth is round.

[herewegoround]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

It is 9.8 m/s/s, which is an acceleration.  Also, it is acting on you.  The Earth is being pushed, and the Earth pushes against your feet, so you are also being accelerated upwards.

UA is postulated to explain why things fall to the ground and why we have weight. If the aether is acting on us as well as the Earth then we should feel weightless.

[herewegoround]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

It is 9.8 m/s/s, which is an acceleration.  Also, it is acting on you.  The Earth is being pushed, and the Earth pushes against your feet, so you are also being accelerated upwards.

Let me ask you a couple of questions. They are simple questions which you should be able to answer.

1. How far do you believe the equator is from the North Pole?

2. What do you believe the circumference of the Equator to be?

[jroa]

1.  I have never measured the distance.  Have you?

2.  See 1.

[herewegoround]

1.  I have never measured the distance.  Have you?

2.  See 1.

I didn't ask you if you had measured them. If you have a flat Earth model surely you should have some idea of what you think these distances are. I am asking what you believe them to be.

[jroa]

So, are you asking me to guess, then?  Guessing might be OK in your round Earth model, but in FET, we like to use facts instead of just guesses. 

[herewegoround]

So, are you asking me to guess, then?  Guessing might be OK in your round Earth model, but in FET, we like to use facts instead of just guesses.

If you can't specifying exactly what you are arguing for how can I argue against it?

[jroa]

You sound like you are fishing for something to debate that you could actually defend.  While I applaud your willingness to find something in RET that is defendable, you will have to pick something that I or someone else actually stated in order to work up your rebuttal. 

[herewegoround]

You sound like you are fishing for something to debate that you could actually defend.  While I applaud your willingness to find something in RET that is defendable, you will have to pick something that I or someone else actually stated in order to work up your rebuttal.

I will state it again, please read this very carefully and think about what I am saying.

If you can't specify exactly what it is that you are arguing for, how can I argue against it?

Do you understand this very elementary point? If you can't even specify a very basic aspect of your model, like what the distance is between the North Pole and the equator, then I have nothing to argue against and this conversation is redundant.

I can specify any aspect at all of the round Earth model I am arguing the case for.

[herewegoround]

You sound like you are fishing for something to debate that you could actually defend.  While I applaud your willingness to find something in RET that is defendable, you will have to pick something that I or someone else actually stated in order to work up your rebuttal.

There is no aspect of the round Earth model that isn't defendable. There isn't even a well defined flat Earth model that you all agree on. I can accept that some of you have different models but I have never spoken to a flat Earth proponent who can specify precisely what their model is.

[Wulf]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

It is 9.8 m/s/s, which is an acceleration.  Also, it is acting on you.  The Earth is being pushed, and the Earth pushes against your feet, so you are also being accelerated upwards.

I think you misinterpreted what i was asking. I was trying to ask if the aether was acting directly on us. I think I managed to get what you meant anyway. so you mean to say The aether is not acting on us; it is acting only on the earth, and the earth is blocking the aether so that we don't experience weightlessness?

[Pete Svarrior]

I think you misinterpreted what i was asking. I was trying to ask if the aether was acting directly on us. I think I managed to get what you meant anyway. so you mean to say The aether is not acting on us; it is acting only on the earth, and the earth is blocking the aether so that we don't experience weightlessness?

Imagine you're in a river, shielding yourself from the current with a big wooden plank. The current acts on the plank, which in turn acts on you.

Similarly here, the aetheric wind doesn't act on you directly because the Earth is in the way.

[jroa]

You sound like you are fishing for something to debate that you could actually defend.  While I applaud your willingness to find something in RET that is defendable, you will have to pick something that I or someone else actually stated in order to work up your rebuttal.

There is no aspect of the round Earth model that isn't defendable. There isn't even a well defined flat Earth model that you all agree on. I can accept that some of you have different models but I have never spoken to a flat Earth proponent who can specify precisely what their model is.

How many flat Earthers have you spoken to? 

[jroa]

wait wait... if the aether is propelling the earth upwards at 9.8 m/s why is it not acting on us and the objects on top of the earth?

It is 9.8 m/s/s, which is an acceleration.  Also, it is acting on you.  The Earth is being pushed, and the Earth pushes against your feet, so you are also being accelerated upwards.

I think you misinterpreted what i was asking. I was trying to ask if the aether was acting directly on us. I think I managed to get what you meant anyway. so you mean to say The aether is not acting on us; it is acting only on the earth, and the earth is blocking the aether so that we don't experience weightlessness?

I believe that the Earth blocks most, but not all, of this force from reaching us.  A small amount permeates through the Earth and does act on us, but in a very subtle and almost imperceptible way.  This is why things have a slightly different amount of weight at different locations across the plane.