A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« on: February 02, 2016, 09:46:46 PM »
Hi guys.

The diversity of humans never ceases to amaze me. I have just stumbled across FET in the past hour and I'm very interested. I have taken the time to read your FAQ's and it is all very interesting. I have some questions that I'm confident are not covered in the FAQ's.

1) If the world is flat and Antarctica acts as "a wall around the edge" (referring to the diagram  in FAQ's). How does the very outer edge of Antarctica not erode away and inevitably dissappear completely? I would be so bold as to say that everything on this planet errodes/decays over time. If Antarctica is acting as a wall and therefore keeping the ocean "on" the earth what happens when Antarctica is not large/strong enough to with stand the enormous pressure of the entire world's ocean pushing against it?
2) how deep/thick is the flat earth? And what is the underside like? Is that immune to erosion?

3) why has no one ever seen the edge or fallen off? Human's have explored the vast majority of the planet..

4) is space travel a conspiracy? Are all the astronauts in on it? When a space shuttle takes off to go to the moon or to the ISS does it just go and land somewhere an hour later and then all the fake footage starts being fed to the public?

5) (this is in relation to previous question) what would the conspiritors have to gain from tricking the entire planet into believing we are on a spherical planet?

I am asking these questions with genuine intrigue and I am asking them with respect towards all beliefs held by anyone reading them.

In return I ask you to reply to them with respect and avoid any "you've been brainwashed by nasa" -esk replies






*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10021
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2016, 10:02:30 PM »
Hi, thanks for stopping by.

1) Generally, most of us do not speculate as to what lies beyond the Ice Wall. Many believe that it stretches out quite far beyond the known Earth, and some even go as far as to say that the Earth is infinite.

2) I have no idea how thick the Earth is, but it is most likely not immune to erosion.

3) As per 1), most believe that no one's ventured far enough to see the edge, even if there is one.

4) Probably.

5) Nothing. They're not trying to hide the shape of the Earth, merely cover up the space travel fantasy: https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline Munky

  • *
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2016, 06:16:01 AM »
Hi, thanks for stopping by.

1) Generally, most of us do not speculate as to what lies beyond the Ice Wall. Many believe that it stretches out quite far beyond the known Earth, and some even go as far as to say that the Earth is infinite.

2) I have no idea how thick the Earth is, but it is most likely not immune to erosion.

3) As per 1), most believe that no one's ventured far enough to see the edge, even if there is one.

4) Probably.

5) Nothing. They're not trying to hide the shape of the Earth, merely cover up the space travel fantasy: https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy

incorrect on point 3.

this is well documented that felicity aston recently traveled across Antartica. By all accounts if there was an edge there, she should have seen it: http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/05/travel/felicity-aston-antarctic-explorer/




Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2016, 08:20:58 AM »
I must say I was expecting a more solid debate.

Sexwarrior; you refer to "the ice wall" am i right in assuming that the general belief is that there is a large ice wall that prevents anyone actually getting to the edge? And for it to be generally un heard of to speculate what is beyond it seems a little ignorant in regards of the natural human instinct of knowledge.

And I actually feel that question number 4 was very important. There are many conspiracy theory behind many different aspects of the world. And behind every conspiracy theory there is always an advantage into successfully hiding the truth.
For example; aliens. The world leaders would have a lot to gain by successfully hiding the fact they do exists.

9/11, the world leaders need the public to believe this act was committed by extreme Islamic terrorists to keep support against the war on terror.

In contrast. There is no benefit (as far as I can see) of covering up the space travel fantasy. The knowledge we can gain from space travel and possibilities of being able to maintain life in space or even find another planet for humans to survive on is hugely advantageous.

My point being that it is would take a lot of resources and time to successfully mask the "illusion" of space travel without any real benefit. Whereas there is a lot to gain from genuine space travel.

I strongly encourage all Flat Earthers reading this to please get involved and create a stimulating debate. I am interested in all aspects of this ide of a flat earth. And as much as I appreciate your input sexwarrior I think it fair to say the answers you gave are purely opinion based and don't have any real evidence to reinforce them.

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2016, 12:07:25 PM »
Sexwarrior; you refer to "the ice wall" am i right in assuming that the general belief is that there is a large ice wall that prevents anyone actually getting to the edge? And for it to be generally un heard of to speculate what is beyond it seems a little ignorant in regards of the natural human instinct of knowledge.

And I actually feel that question number 4 was very important. There are many conspiracy theory behind many different aspects of the world. And behind every conspiracy theory there is always an advantage into successfully hiding the truth.
For example; aliens. The world leaders would have a lot to gain by successfully hiding the fact they do exists.

9/11, the world leaders need the public to believe this act was committed by extreme Islamic terrorists to keep support against the war on terror.

In contrast. There is no benefit (as far as I can see) of covering up the space travel fantasy. The knowledge we can gain from space travel and possibilities of being able to maintain life in space or even find another planet for humans to survive on is hugely advantageous.

My point being that it is would take a lot of resources and time to successfully mask the "illusion" of space travel without any real benefit. Whereas there is a lot to gain from genuine space travel.

It's not that we don't speculate what is beyond the ice wall, but that, as the sun only reaches so far, it is more-or-less impossible for humans to travel that far. So, while it is interesting to consider what may lie out there, it's just not something many of us consider all that important.

There are a few key reasons for faking space travel: money, greed, and power. For example, Lyndon B. Johnson, a former president of the United States, said this on outer space in his memoirs:

"Control of space means control of the world, far more certainly, far more totally than any control that has ever or could ever be achieved by weapons, or by troops of occupation."

*

Offline Woody

  • *
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2016, 12:57:19 PM »
And for it to be generally un heard of to speculate what is beyond it seems a little ignorant in regards of the natural human instinct of knowledge.

Speculation can be interesting, but it is not productive. We do not know what is beyond the ice wall and so we admit that we do not know. Wild hypotheticals are characteristic of so-called "science". We are not "scientists"; we are zeteticists.


Zeteticism is a system of scientific inquiry. The word is derived from the Greek verb ζητέω (zeteo), which means "I seek; I examine; I strive for".

Speculation: form a theory or conjecture about a subject, without firm evidence.

Seems that speculation would be part of seeking, examining, and striving to learn.  If know one speculates on how a FE model would work how does the theory advance?   

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2016, 01:50:18 PM »
Oscar; thanks for reply!

I understand where you are coming from regarding using space travel as a cover up for money. But I still believe there would be more to gain from actually mastering space travel. As quoted by Lonesome Cow controlling space means controlling earth.

If space travel is just a cover up to take taxpayers money, where would you propose the money goes? It clearly can't go back into the system otherwise USA wouldn't be so fucked? So it must be for personal gain. And in that case, i am assuming the person/people are already hugely wealthy and influential, wouldn't real power (in form of control of space) be more beneficial?

Lonesome Cow; thanks for taking the time to reply.

On the topic of the ice wall. It goes against basic human instinct to admit "we don't know what is over there" and not go and find out.

Also, if the world is flat and surrounded by an ice wall. And the governments/people in power are lying to the public to trick them into believing other wise. Do you think it is possible that "NASA" could be using this money to explore the ice wall and develope a way of making it inhabitable to the worlds elite?

Another point I'd like to raise is in regard to the sun rise and sunset. I have seen the diagram on the FES wiki and it shows the sun moving in a circular orbit over the flat earth. If this is so how would it appear to go down/behind the horizon at sunset ? Surely it would stay at the same height but just become very distant?

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2016, 03:41:37 PM »
I shall head straight over to the wiki now and look up the information regarding the Suns position. Thanks for the tip.

In general I must say I'm a little underwhelmed by the amount of fact and evidence to prove the earth is indeed flat.

Our environment seems to generally and unanimously indicate the world is spherical. The freedom in which the public travels the earth today, I find it impossible to believe that no one would have noticed if the earth was flat. The way we use technology to navigate in the air and on sea would all surely have to rigged to make us think we are using the idea of a round planet when actually were are in essence on a shelf.  and how do you explain, if all space travel is an illusion, the use of sat nav?

Guys, I'm really struggling to engage in a stimulating debate on this topic and therefore am struggling to take it seriously if I'm honest.

And the biggest issue I'm having is what would be the advantage of deceiving the entire human race into believing the world is spherical rather than flat? There has to be a reason to deceive someone, I am struggling to see what advantage someone would have in successfully convincing the planet is globe shape rather than the truth being known if it is flat.

*

Offline Woody

  • *
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #8 on: February 03, 2016, 04:46:12 PM »
[
Again, you are confusing the zetetic method with the so-called "scientific" method. Our theory advances on direct observation, experimentation, and reason alone.

It might very well be, but we do not yet know if "control of space" is even possible. The conspiracy has certainly been afforded a level of temporal power that is really beyond historical precedent; the hold of international globularism over the hearts and minds of our species is effectively complete. I'd personally be very surprised if financial gain was the sole motivating factor, but who is to say at this point?

It's not a lack of will that's stopping us.

It's the result of a perspective effect. There's actually a page on our wiki devoted to it.

Honestly to me if the Zetetic seems to ignore what proves a theory wrong while the scientific method not only looks at what proves a theory but also what proves it wrong.

Can you not reason if you are higher you can see further?

Why would radars be mounted on the higher part of ships to get better range?

Why do antennas with higher elevations have longer transmission and receiving ranges?

If it is a matter of perspective that causes the sun to look like it is setting why does it not appear smaller in the morning, larger in the afternoon, and smaller as night approaches?  That is part of perspective if things get further away they appear smaller.

What is actually stopping a FE?  I am seen some suggestions posted and excuses given.  It is too expensive, too hard to accomplish, etc. 

I have meet a couple that sailed to Antarctica.  They decided to go after meeting another couple who did.  The closest I have sailed there was going around the Cape of Good Hope and Cape Horn.  I did one of those single handed on a $45, 000 sail boat.  The other I was crewing on a $150,000 boat.

Why no map?  You can use known distances or if you like we will call them distances we are told.  Start charting areas where the distances would most likely be wrong. 

Why only focus on the conspiracy starting around the 1960's. At sometime after 300 BC.  As an example the Mercator map projection was introduced around the mid to late 1500's.  Since we are told a projection is required to make a flat map of an spherical object.

I would like to point out an example I thinks demonstrates this "zeteric" method of yours compared to the scientific one:

Look at the Bishop Experiment.  The stated distance is wrong and off by 10 miles.  It is offered as conclusive proof of the a flat Earth on one of the wikis and evidence in another.  To my knowledge it was conducted about 7 years ago.

With the scientific method it would have been peered reviewed, flaws in the conclusion looked for, if bias played a factor, and would require continuous validation to be considered proof.  If it was ever proven wrong it would be discarded as evidence.

Over water, on a cold day, with a telescope mounted 20 inches high, and refraction what is stated in the observations should be able to be seen at about 23 miles.  Why if the mistake is known that the distance stated stays at 33.4 miles?

By simple observation I am able to figure other experiments and proof seem to lack vital information to validate the results.  Why no distances, observer or target heights given in the same proof of a flat Earth?  There always seem to be at least one of those missing or none provided at all.  My guess like the Bishop Experiment when it is provided it can be proven that it fits into what we already know.

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #9 on: February 03, 2016, 05:05:31 PM »
Oscar.

Maybe there is a reason why I am raising questions that many others do. Id say it is simply because they are the main questions that would need answering to prove a Flat Earth Theory is true.

I came here open minded and excited to discuss all possibilities. I think I will now leave thinking that this is just another wild claim by people that have no real argument/ fact or evidence to back up such a claim.

I genuinely wish everyone on both side of the argument a happy and prosperous future.
 
I promise that should a FET be found to be correct I will think of all you guys and I will be apologetic and humble.

P.S. Elvis is still alive.

Thork

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #10 on: February 03, 2016, 10:15:33 PM »
Hi guys.

The diversity of humans never ceases to amaze me. I have just stumbled across FET in the past hour and I'm very interested. I have taken the time to read your FAQ's and it is all very interesting. I have some questions that I'm confident are not covered in the FAQ's.

1) If the world is flat and Antarctica acts as "a wall around the edge" (referring to the diagram  in FAQ's). How does the very outer edge of Antarctica not erode away and inevitably dissappear completely? I would be so bold as to say that everything on this planet errodes/decays over time. If Antarctica is acting as a wall and therefore keeping the ocean "on" the earth what happens when Antarctica is not large/strong enough to with stand the enormous pressure of the entire world's ocean pushing against it?
2) how deep/thick is the flat earth? And what is the underside like? Is that immune to erosion?

3) why has no one ever seen the edge or fallen off? Human's have explored the vast majority of the planet..

4) is space travel a conspiracy? Are all the astronauts in on it? When a space shuttle takes off to go to the moon or to the ISS does it just go and land somewhere an hour later and then all the fake footage starts being fed to the public?

5) (this is in relation to previous question) what would the conspiritors have to gain from tricking the entire planet into believing we are on a spherical planet?

I am asking these questions with genuine intrigue and I am asking them with respect towards all beliefs held by anyone reading them.

In return I ask you to reply to them with respect and avoid any "you've been brainwashed by nasa" -esk replies

1) Space is cold. It is almost absolute zero. So you have that freezing temperature constantly cooling the perimeter of earth. Yes, costal erosion will happen, but new ice will be created as a result of the extreme temperatures. It is also a long way from the path of the sun. You read the FAQ, have seen the maps, it stays cold out there.

2) We know it is at least 13km thick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole It is hard to be exact. we just don't have the data.

3) 2 reasons. First is the Antarctic treaty that forbids people from just going there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System It is a military zone protected by the UN. Second there are accounts of people trying, but the temperature keeps declining, the weather gets worse, earth's magnetic fields gets a bit weird at the edges making navigation hard. All this is documented by explorers of the 'south pole' and we can find excerpts for bits you wish to challenge.

4) Yes, It is all fake. People cannot go to space. Space walks are conducted in swimming pools (which is why astronauts occasionally have their suits fill up with water in 'space' and also why you can occasionally see bubbles from those astronauts in space). When the shuttle takes off, it takes a nice arc to somewhere obscure and lands. It is then flown back.
Astornauts then proceed to do green screen footage, often in parabolic flight aircraft to simulate zero gravity.

5) Money. What is NASA's budget? All that money is taken, they give you a cheap Hollywood production and the rest of the cash goes into the weapons dev budget. That is what nasa is for. Developing weapons. It started during the war with Vietnam. That war was costing the US its entire GDP every year. How to get more money? Fake a space program. Those billions can also go to weapons but it doesn't seem to the public it is being wasted, it seems like science. Fast forward and it acts like the military industrial complex. A way to syphon tax payer money off without people shitting a brick over military expenses.

Asking 5 questions in one thread is always likely to get a poor response. Ask one per thread so people can go into detail on that topic. Otherwise it just devolves into an unsatisfactory crapfest of short answers with no real depth.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 10:20:52 PM by Dr David Thork »

*

Offline Munky

  • *
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2016, 01:06:35 AM »
1. Incorrect! the Temperature range of space can vary widely. "Some parts of space are hot! Gas between stars, as well as the solar wind, both seem to be what we call "empty space," yet they can be more than a thousand degrees, even millions of degrees. However, there's also what's known as the cosmic background temperature, which is minus 455 degrees Fahrenheit." http://www.space.com/14719-spacekids-temperature-outer-space.html

2. Also incorrect! The distance to the center of the Earth is 6,371 kilometers (3,958 mi), the crust is 35 kilometers (21 mi) thick, the mantle is 2855km (1774 mi) thick — and get this: the deepest we have ever drilled is the Kola Superdeep Borehole, which is just 12km deep. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/154357-earths-core-is-much-hotter-than-previously-thought-hotter-than-the-surface-of-the-sun

3. Majorly Incorrect!  The treaty you linked to states the following:

Article 1 – The area is to be used for peaceful purposes only; military activity, such as weapons testing, is prohibited but military personnel and equipment may be used for scientific research or any other peaceful purpose;
Article 2 – Freedom of scientific investigations and cooperation shall continue;
Article 3 – Free exchange of information and personnel in cooperation with the United Nations and other international agencies;
Article 4 – The treaty does not recognize, dispute, nor establish territorial sovereignty claims; no new claims shall be asserted while the treaty is in force;
Article 5 – The treaty prohibits nuclear explosions or disposal of radioactive wastes;
Article 6 – Includes under the treaty all land and ice shelves but not the surrounding waters south of 60 degrees 00 minutes south;
Article 7 – Treaty-state observers have free access, including aerial observation, to any area and may inspect all stations, installations, and equipment; advance notice of all activities and of the introduction of military personnel must be given;
Article 8 – Allows for good jurisdiction over observers and scientists by their own states;
Article 9 – Frequent consultative meetings take place among member nations;
Article 10 – All treaty states will discourage activities by any country in Antarctica that are contrary to the treaty;
Article 11 – All disputes to be settled peacefully by the parties concerned or, ultimately, by the International Court of Justice;
Articles 12, 13, 14 – Deal with upholding, interpreting, and amending the treaty among involved nations.

You clearly do not understand the Treaty or probably did not take the time to read it. Everyone, meaning you, me, and anyone else, as long as it is not a military activity, has the right to go to the south pole. And DO go there now. ( see link http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/05/travel/felicity-aston-antarctic-explorer/ )

4. Prove that Nasa is faking their space missions with something other than "because I said so" or  "because I read somewhere" or "because I saw some video"
Site your information and sources that proves that the space missions are fake. no need to dispute photos, that has been talked to death by FE'ers. Provide concrete Proof.

5. Prove that Nasa is developing weapons for the military. Same requirements apply as item 4. Provide a Nasa Budget that outlines such Military activity or roster.


*

Offline Woody

  • *
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #12 on: February 04, 2016, 01:17:09 AM »

3) 2 reasons. First is the Antarctic treaty that forbids people from just going there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System It is a military zone protected by the UN. Second there are accounts of people trying, but the temperature keeps declining, the weather gets worse, earth's magnetic fields gets a bit weird at the edges making navigation hard. All this is documented by explorers of the 'south pole' and we can find excerpts for bits you wish to challenge.

4) Yes, It is all fake. People cannot go to space. Space walks are conducted in swimming pools (which is why astronauts occasionally have their suits fill up with water in 'space' and also why you can occasionally see bubbles from those astronauts in space). When the shuttle takes off, it takes a nice arc to somewhere obscure and lands. It is then flown back.
Astornauts then proceed to do green screen footage, often in parabolic flight aircraft to simulate zero gravity.

5) Money. What is NASA's budget? All that money is taken, they give you a cheap Hollywood production and the rest of the cash goes into the weapons dev budget. That is what nasa is for. Developing weapons. It started during the war with Vietnam. That war was costing the US its entire GDP every year. How to get more money? Fake a space program. Those billions can also go to weapons but it doesn't seem to the public it is being wasted, it seems like science. Fast forward and it acts like the military industrial complex. A way to syphon tax payer money off without people shitting a brick over military expenses.


3. Citation?  The Antarctic Treaty basically says it is to remain open for scientific observation and no military equipment and personnel are allowed except in direct support of scientific studies. I meet a couple in South Africa who sailed there and the reason they decided to go was after talking to another couple who went.  You can book trips to go there and even, if you happen to have around $40k to spend, can go directly to the pole.

 4.  Why would NASA use pools while people in Hollywood use other convincing methods that do not require them to worry about air bubbles?  That nice arc you see with rockets and shuttle is the most efficient way to get to space.  Do you think they should go straight up then make a 90 degree turn to get to orbital velocity?

5.  What was the reason for the conspiracy prior to the 1960's?  There is a whole lot of evidence that it had to start prior to man 1st leaving the atmosphere.  As an example from 100 Proofs written in 1885 t is stated:

"Surveyors' operations in the construction of railroads, tunnels, or canals are conducted without the slightest "allowance" being made for "curvature," although it is taught that this so-called allowance is absolutely necessary!"

My Thoughts:
The Mercator projection was introduced around the mid to late 1500's.  Sailors and cartographers were told it was necessary to use projections to make a flat map.  If the maps without projections were fine for navigation and had no errors no one would have developed a projection to use.  Which suggest maps provided to people were intentionally made with errors, since mapping a flat surface would not introduce these types of errors or require the need of projections.  So someone needed to falsify maps and introduce errors and then tell people the solution to the problem is they need to use a projection.


Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2016, 02:31:58 AM »
It clearly can't go back into the system otherwise USA wouldn't be so fucked? So it must be for personal gain. And in that case, i am assuming the person/people are already hugely wealthy and influential, wouldn't real power (in form of control of space) be more beneficial?


You will need to take a step back and look at economics and what it really is.

Your phrase USA is f*&#! $ is elementary thinking.

The rich have only gotten richer since the 2008 economic "disaster".

The stock market is what sets the standard for economy in the US.

The economic "meltdown" in 2008 was nothing more than the rich selling off their share of the market, then guess what? Buying back in.

Now... Economics are designed for you and I. Not the rich and powerful. They control it, we get to use it.

Using money to control people is no new concept. And the idea of economics goes back further than could know.

But I'd like to point you to this tidbit of info:

Copernicus who first introduced the Heliocentric model in the 1500's was also a mathematician and economist.

He also was the first person to introduce the "quantity theory of money," the theory that prices vary directly with the supply of money in the society.

So anyways, believe me when I tell you that USA isn't in a jam as the media makes it out to be.

They are simply using the wrong buzz words. Collapse, recession, meltdown, disaster...

The words they should be using are Control, Fraud, Control.

Economics really is that simple. Money isn't real, just designed for the poor so we don't kill each other, and/or "them".
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 02:49:56 AM by Bookish Neptune »

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2016, 04:04:27 AM »
5) money, black-mail and control


Honest map-making is an odd business because it is impossible for an honest map-maker to survive for the glaringly obvious reason:  NOBODY CAN CLAIM ORIGINAL OWNERSHIP OF A TRUE MAP.  Map-makers struggled to keep their maps under controlled eyes lest their maps be copied.  There were no copyright offices at the time and even if there were, what difference, at that point, would it make?  A copy-cat could just claim that he made the same observations.   

How did map-makers get around this challenge?  They deliberately inserted falsehoods in their maps.  The preponderance of false maps only makes sense if you look at human behavior. 

THERE IS NO REASON FOR ANYBODY other than God, His Son and or His prophets TO DISCLOSE THE TRUE MAP OF THE EARTH.  There is every reason to keep it hidden. 

Monarchs do not want anybody to know how to reach their kingdoms. 
Conversely, outlaws do not want any kings to reach their bugouts. 

The false globe map satisfies all interests because it makes it virtually impossible for an ignorant invader/army to travel. 

What better protection for a king's kingdom than to have all gullible pirates attempt to sail across the pacific ocean or sneak around the south "pole" or any other attempt to make a short-cut based on a false globe map??????





It makes perfect sense for multiple competing statesmen to keep the true form of the earth secret.  If I had to write a Hollyweird space movie, it would involve Russian/Chinese actronoughts laughing all the way to the bank. 

Chinese pool-boy to Rusky cosmonaut :  "Every year, we call up NASA jokers and tell them to send us more money!  They beg me to make more stupid videos for them to keep their jokes alive.  I do not complain."
Rusky cosmonaut to Chinese pool-boy:  "Ha! Ha!  You work too hard!  We stopped that charade long ago.  Now, we tell them to stick their costumes up their arses and just send us the money.  I put video on Youtube and they scramble to take it down.  I scramble faster and faster and faster until they send me more money."
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 04:12:30 AM by Charming Anarchist »
watch?v=xhcVJcINzn8

*

Offline Woody

  • *
  • Posts: 241
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2016, 06:47:20 AM »
5) money, black-mail and control


Honest map-making is an odd business because it is impossible for an honest map-maker to survive for the glaringly obvious reason:  NOBODY CAN CLAIM ORIGINAL OWNERSHIP OF A TRUE MAP.  Map-makers struggled to keep their maps under controlled eyes lest their maps be copied.  There were no copyright offices at the time and even if there were, what difference, at that point, would it make?  A copy-cat could just claim that he made the same observations.   

How did map-makers get around this challenge?  They deliberately inserted falsehoods in their maps.  The preponderance of false maps only makes sense if you look at human behavior. 

THERE IS NO REASON FOR ANYBODY other than God, His Son and or His prophets TO DISCLOSE THE TRUE MAP OF THE EARTH.  There is every reason to keep it hidden. 

Monarchs do not want anybody to know how to reach their kingdoms. 
Conversely, outlaws do not want any kings to reach their bugouts. 

The false globe map satisfies all interests because it makes it virtually impossible for an ignorant invader/army to travel. 

What better protection for a king's kingdom than to have all gullible pirates attempt to sail across the pacific ocean or sneak around the south "pole" or any other attempt to make a short-cut based on a false globe map??????





It makes perfect sense for multiple competing statesmen to keep the true form of the earth secret.  If I had to write a Hollyweird space movie, it would involve Russian/Chinese actronoughts laughing all the way to the bank. 

Chinese pool-boy to Rusky cosmonaut :  "Every year, we call up NASA jokers and tell them to send us more money!  They beg me to make more stupid videos for them to keep their jokes alive.  I do not complain."
Rusky cosmonaut to Chinese pool-boy:  "Ha! Ha!  You work too hard!  We stopped that charade long ago.  Now, we tell them to stick their costumes up their arses and just send us the money.  I put video on Youtube and they scramble to take it down.  I scramble faster and faster and faster until they send me more money."

I take by this post your belief in a FE is based on religion.

Just curious what bible verses very clearly state the earth is flat?  What I have read seems ambiguous to me. 

Why did God create a flat Earth and not a round one?

Why does the firmament need to be at the edge of our atmosphere?  Why not our solar system? Galaxy? Universe?  The translations I have read state that God called the firmament Heaven.  Where exactly is that?

IMHO if  you can answers these questions without a doubt in your mindabout of being correct then you are basically saying you know the will, plan and design of God.

Revelations 7:1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.

Does this mean the Earth is square?

Job 26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

Could this mean space?

Job 26:10 He described a circle upon the face of the waters, until the day and night come to an end.”

Depending how a person decides to translate from Hebrew it could be circle or sphere.

*

Offline rabinoz

  • *
  • Posts: 1436
  • Just look South at the Stars
    • View Profile
Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #16 on: February 04, 2016, 08:28:51 AM »
It clearly can't go back into the system otherwise USA wouldn't be so fucked? So it must be for personal gain. And in that case, i am assuming the person/people are already hugely wealthy and influential, wouldn't real power (in form of control of space) be more beneficial?
You will need to take a step back and look at economics and what it really is.
Your phrase USA is f*&#! $ is elementary thinking.
The rich have only gotten richer since the 2008 economic "disaster".
The stock market is what sets the standard for economy in the US.
The economic "meltdown" in 2008 was nothing more than the rich selling off their share of the market, then guess what? Buying back in.
Now... Economics are designed for you and I. Not the rich and powerful. They control it, we get to use it.
Using money to control people is no new concept. And the idea of economics goes back further than could know.
But I'd like to point you to this tidbit of info:
Copernicus who first introduced the Heliocentric model in the 1500's was also a mathematician and economist.
He also was the first person to introduce the "quantity theory of money," the theory that prices vary directly with the supply of money in the society.
So anyways, believe me when I tell you that USA isn't in a jam as the media makes it out to be.
They are simply using the wrong buzz words. Collapse, recession, meltdown, disaster...
The words they should be using are Control, Fraud, Control.
Economics really is that simple. Money isn't real, just designed for the poor so we don't kill each other, and/or "them".
What ever does any of this have to do with evidence that the earth if a Globe or a Flat disk?
That was well accepted for some two millenia before Copernicus came along!

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #17 on: February 04, 2016, 10:50:27 AM »
Hi guys.

The diversity of humans never ceases to amaze me. I have just stumbled across FET in the past hour and I'm very interested. I have taken the time to read your FAQ's and it is all very interesting. I have some questions that I'm confident are not covered in the FAQ's.

1) If the world is flat and Antarctica acts as "a wall around the edge" (referring to the diagram  in FAQ's). How does the very outer edge of Antarctica not erode away and inevitably dissappear completely? I would be so bold as to say that everything on this planet errodes/decays over time. If Antarctica is acting as a wall and therefore keeping the ocean "on" the earth what happens when Antarctica is not large/strong enough to with stand the enormous pressure of the entire world's ocean pushing against it?
2) how deep/thick is the flat earth? And what is the underside like? Is that immune to erosion?

3) why has no one ever seen the edge or fallen off? Human's have explored the vast majority of the planet..

4) is space travel a conspiracy? Are all the astronauts in on it? When a space shuttle takes off to go to the moon or to the ISS does it just go and land somewhere an hour later and then all the fake footage starts being fed to the public?

5) (this is in relation to previous question) what would the conspiritors have to gain from tricking the entire planet into believing we are on a spherical planet?

I am asking these questions with genuine intrigue and I am asking them with respect towards all beliefs held by anyone reading them.

In return I ask you to reply to them with respect and avoid any "you've been brainwashed by nasa" -esk replies

1) Space is cold. It is almost absolute zero. So you have that freezing temperature constantly cooling the perimeter of earth. Yes, costal erosion will happen, but new ice will be created as a result of the extreme temperatures. It is also a long way from the path of the sun. You read the FAQ, have seen the maps, it stays cold out there.

2) We know it is at least 13km thick. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_Superdeep_Borehole It is hard to be exact. we just don't have the data.

3) 2 reasons. First is the Antarctic treaty that forbids people from just going there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System It is a military zone protected by the UN. Second there are accounts of people trying, but the temperature keeps declining, the weather gets worse, earth's magnetic fields gets a bit weird at the edges making navigation hard. All this is documented by explorers of the 'south pole' and we can find excerpts for bits you wish to challenge.

4) Yes, It is all fake. People cannot go to space. Space walks are conducted in swimming pools (which is why astronauts occasionally have their suits fill up with water in 'space' and also why you can occasionally see bubbles from those astronauts in space). When the shuttle takes off, it takes a nice arc to somewhere obscure and lands. It is then flown back.
Astornauts then proceed to do green screen footage, often in parabolic flight aircraft to simulate zero gravity.

5) Money. What is NASA's budget? All that money is taken, they give you a cheap Hollywood production and the rest of the cash goes into the weapons dev budget. That is what nasa is for. Developing weapons. It started during the war with Vietnam. That war was costing the US its entire GDP every year. How to get more money? Fake a space program. Those billions can also go to weapons but it doesn't seem to the public it is being wasted, it seems like science. Fast forward and it acts like the military industrial complex. A way to syphon tax payer money off without people shitting a brick over military expenses.

Asking 5 questions in one thread is always likely to get a poor response. Ask one per thread so people can go into detail on that topic. Otherwise it just devolves into an unsatisfactory crapfest of short answers with no real depth.

Thanks for taking the time to write such s great reply. I really enjoyed reading it.

First of all I must say your point regarding the constant rejuvenation of the ice wall due to cold temperatures is certainly feasible. Although I don't think it's enough to maintain a barrier strong enough to with stand the enormous pressure of the entire oceans pushing against it.

While I see your point regarding the possibility of NASA being a cover up to funnel money into weapon development. I disagree this is necessary, the government can sell snow too Eskimos. If it wanted to use more money to develope weapons it could just do it. Americans love the idea of dominance in the military(check what Trump is saying very half hour). I just don't think it needs to create a cover up to pump more money into weapon development.

My main issues with accepting a FET is the advantages of deceiving the public into believing the planet is spherical. The time money and effort put into maintaining the illusion greatly out weighs the benefits.

Now I could almost see the advantages of faking space travel to create an illusion of power and dominance. BUT I believe that genuine space travel and exploration would be far more advantageous to the entire human race.

With consideration of your final remark regarding me posting to multiple questions in one thread I will now ask 1 question.

What is the advantages of hiding the fact that the world is flat?

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #18 on: February 04, 2016, 01:26:58 PM »

What ever does any of this have to do with evidence that the earth if a Globe or a Flat disk?
That was well accepted for some two millenia before Copernicus came along!
[/quote]

Nothing. Absolutely Nothing.

I think that was my point if you looked beyond what you read.

The person I was quoting in this thread has the assumption that NASA couldn't be a fruad. And their reasoning is because of America's economic status.

Hence he said "USA is f*&/#!"

I was simply giving another view to economics other than using an elementary statement as he did.

But if you'd like to know how it correlates with FE vs RE...

I can add that I find it peculiar that the history of astronomy is woven in with the history of economics.


Thork

Re: A few genuine questions from a "round earther "
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2016, 01:33:03 PM »
Regarding the icewall, bear in mind the artic is an ice sheet, the Antarctic is a continent - at least it is ice on top of rock. A rim of rock with ice on top. The rock takes the bulk of that pressure.

The whole moon race thing is more complicated than I stated. You asked a lot of questions. A longer answer is you have to consider the context of the time. America was heamoraging money in Vietnam. They also had a cold war going with Russia. So not too much cash and a major rival.
The lessons of WW2 taught you need to win the hearts and minds of your own people if you wish to win a war. We saw this again in Iraq. As the war became unpopular, it lost support.
Russia and the US both had nukes in the cold war era. But how do you justify using them? You have to be able to convince your people that it was necessary. It is never necessary. Killing civilians by the millions cannot be justified because of economic rivalry. So they had a space race. The space race was not a science engineering race. It was a battle of hearts and minds. Kennedy laid down the gauntlet after the Russian's successfully convinced its public it had sent Yuri Gagarin into space (it hadn't). He challenged Nikita Khrushchev and the USSR to convince their people of something ridiculous ... a man walking on the moon. Whoever could convince their people they had done it first, would win the propaganda war. The USA recruited Stanley Kubric to mastermind the production off the back of his excellent work on 2001 space odyssey out a year earlier. America won the space race, not because they had better technology, but because they had Hollywood. Surely the US government could convince Americans now using their media and film special effects that nuclear strike was justified based on made up atrocities of Russians if required, people were stupid enough to believe there was a man walking on the moon.