Flat earth theory?

originally posted by: JameSimon

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: JameSimon

originally posted by: turbonium1
If every constellation is found above one half of the Earth, wouldn't we know if there were other constellations, seen on the other side of Earth, too?


If the Earth was round, we would. But it's not round, so that's the reason.

Actually... Constellations and visible stars are dependent on the hemisphere. Good job proving the spherical earth Mr troll.

www.astro4dev.org...

Don't be afraid, little man, and then we can discuss the issues maturely, without any more ad hominem attacks.

It's getting more and more ridiculous. Are you utterly oblivious to the fact that, in your endless obsession to make these unwarranted personal attacks, you're only looking more and more like idiots?

Throwing out personal insults will not help your argument. It does the opposite, in fact. Your confidence is only because others on the thread will do the same thing, as you, because they can't address the issue, either, without a pack of cowards behind them.

Everyone can see exactly what you are up to here, btw. They see you as the schoolyard bullies, who never grew up. They have better things to do then come here, to tell you that, because it's a waste of their time. Only the other cowards will ever come in, and back you up.



As for the constellations, what I meant is that we should have seen both sides at the same time - when viewed from above the Earth, we should have many images of it. We have none.

I simply pointed out another problem with the official story, off the cuff. It's already been covered, by the 'NASA's standard excuses booklet', so don't bother replying.... unless it's on other points, of course.

You're desperate. You spent most of your reply victimising yourself because I called you a troll. My apologies, Mr Turbonium. Now, star and constellations visibility depends on the hemisphere. That alone disproves flat earthen logic, your logic. You said it yourself. Case closed.

Edit: I loved how you preached about ad hominem and called me a little man. Funny enough, I'm 5ft5, so you got me there.

Because of your repeated personal attacks, I called you a 'little man'. Which meant you acted childish, scared, etc.

As for proving hemispheres, it doesn't, as I've already explained.

originally posted by: oldcarpy



The Moon and its rotation has been understood for a very long time before NASA was born. Why your obsession with NASA?

It seems to me that you have gotten bored with arguing about Moon landing "Hoax" and are now just trolling FE. No one with half a brain can believe this nonsense about the Moon or that gravity is fake, etc.

The problem is that people must use their own brains, to figure it out...

Most people believe the 'official' story, no matter what.

While the belief of Earth being round was held, before NASA, it was not relevant....it was merely a trivial point...


NASA said it was round, and showed 'images' of Earth, from 'space', which showed us the 'real Earth'!! It 'proved' Earth was, indeed, perfectly round, just like they've claimed it was!! Nobody can ever dispute it, now!!

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
And this thread continues to remain a waste of bandwidth. Can we please just admit that Turby & Co are trolling us all, based on their repetition of the same sterile FE myths, and get a kindly mod to close this thread? We are now back to the silliness of "OMG! NASA are lying to us... about stuff that we've always known to be true for thousands of years!"
Turby & Co know that they are spouting ridiculous notions, they are just trying to get reactions from us all. Please let's not rise to their bait?

I've shown instruments on planes prove the Earth is flat, and showed other examples that prove it, too....


Gravity is not even proven to exist, let alone any proof it's the greatest force in the universe, etc....


You act like it's silly, and dumb, to ever QUESTION gravity, in any way!!


There is no proof that gravity exists, and that's why we question it...

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: Nothin

Well, time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.

Wouldn't it be nice if lunchtime actually meant that you had time for lunch?

Then what should we eat: Flat-Earth pancakes, or Spherical-Earth meatballs?

a reply to: turbonium1



So do you want to explain the second experiment when the large weight is below the smaller one and the smaller weight increases

Want to explain that using your flat Earth density

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: turbonium1

So do you want to explain the second experiment when the large weight is below the smaller one and the smaller weight increases

Want to explain that using your flat Earth density

So would this video clip be the world's first-ever physical demonstration of gravity, according to you?

You believe that nobody else, ever, has been able to physically demonstrate gravity, until this guy? Obviously, you do.


I'm going to explain that if nobody has ever been able to physically demonstrate gravity, after countless scientists have attempted it, for over a century, then your little video clip will not show gravity, either.

Are you not even aware that if this video proved gravity is real, there would already be thousands of previous demonstrations of it, by now? Seriously, that is a joke.


The video shows metal balls, which also mean they have magnetic properties, which attract them to each other. Why wouldn't he show what happens with other, non-metallic objects? It would work the same way, right?


Wrong.


Why don't you demonstrate gravity, yourself, since you believe this video is legit?

Why not back up your claim?...

a reply to: turbonium1

The video shows metal balls, which also mean they have magnetic properties, which attract them to each other.

They are lead which is ferromagnetic that means it cannot be magnetized.

If you don't believe it then replicate the experiment and prove it wrong.

You don't even know what the materials are, first of all. Lead interacts with magnetic fields, anyway.

Show me any video that uses non-metallic materials, if you can.

Apparently, this is the first-ever physical demonstration of gravity, which no scientist could figure out!!


Metal balls have never been thought of before, in demonstrations of gravity, it seems!!

a reply to: turbonium1

You don't even know what the materials are, first of all. Lead interacts with magnetic fields, anyway.

Are you deaf or dumb? I know the balls are lead because the video explains it. Lead is pushed away by a magnetic field so they should do the exact opposite of what the video shows if magnetic fields were used.

Show me any video that uses non-metallic materials, if you can.

Why?

Apparently, this is the first-ever physical demonstration of gravity, which no scientist could figure out!!

No. That is an experiment that has been around for a long time that experiment and many like it can be found in school science books usually under the name "Motion and Forces". That experiment goes back to at least the 1940s in an old science book I have.

Your ignorance of these things is your own fault. Libraries are open to the public.

a reply to: turbonium1


Were did I say it's the first experiment to prove gravity you obviously didn't listen to it.

It may work using you as you show all the attributes of a dense material

a reply to: Nothin

The post didn't claim that anything is real. Rather: it was hinting at nothing being real.

yes and you have trying to derail the thread with every post by insinuating this.


The thread is about physical flat earth in the shared reality we are experiencing not whether the reality we experience is real or not.

One idiot showing how stupid a human can be and you just trying talk about something no one is discussing.

That was not my claim in the post.

No but was insinuated in just about every post of yours and it seems many readers picked up on your attempted derailing but still entertained you for so long.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Nothin

The post didn't claim that anything is real. Rather: it was hinting at nothing being real.

yes and you have trying to derail the thread with every post by insinuating this.


The thread is about physical flat earth in the shared reality we are experiencing not whether the reality we experience is real or not.

One idiot showing how stupid a human can be and you just trying talk about something no one is discussing.

That was not my claim in the post.

No but was insinuated in just about every post of yours and it seems many readers picked up on your attempted derailing but still entertained you for so long.

There was also ideas about this contextual situation, which you choose to ignore, in order to criticize the aspects that you don't like?

There are potentially multiple contexts at play, and so why must we all lock-in to the one you choose?

You wrote this in a post, here on August 28th:

Flat earth thread have a minimum of 60 pages. Its just a rule. Trolls, debunkers, skeptics and believers alike all fall for the scent of good flat earth thread. Just look at the posts, humour, frustration, absolute ignorance. These threads are entertaining and should be taken as such.

Insinuations?
Hints and allegations?

You are responsible for your own assumptions.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Nothin

At this point im really not sure you believe what you believe and are therefore confused and looking for answers the same as everyone else in this illusion

but the illusory aspect of reality is not the subject of discussion , in this situation we are quite happy to accept the reality is real because we experience it daily some differently than others depending on your state of consciousness but none the less more real than dream state per say and in this illusion we all share , we have unanimously agreed that the earth is spherical based on the illusory evidence presented to our conscious experience !

I really cant argue you with you on the illusion that is reality because I know its all an illusion
the realness , doesnt take away from the fact that the earth is spherical in this illusion !

Dont worry I wouldnt stress about it too much probably in one of the multiverse illusions there is indeed an earth where it is completely flat as suggested by FE theory!

Maybe something we hadnt considered, are the FE people really just interdimensional travellers who come from a universe where the earth is flat and they have accidentally crossed into our timeline ?

Have been thinking about your post, and didn't really know what to reply.
Am not confused, nor looking for answers.

Something like is mentioned in the post with In-Ex, where he requests me to stay within the standardly accepted context.

It's all a bit funny, that this thread has been moved from Skunkworks, to LoL, and yet some folks still seem to be taking this stuff seriously.

As far as ATS is concerned: Flat-Earth Theory is a Ludicrous Online Lie.
Considering that: how would any of us truly know what motivates the profiles that appear to support FET?

If FET is a joke: then why do so many folks get their panties in a bunch over it?

How do we know the motivations of anyone?
How might we know why some of those cranky buggers, disguised as debunkers, come-in here like old-time high-school bullies, as if they are seeking a final bastion where they can gang-up like a bunch of snot-nosed, punk-ass twirps, and call others names?

Ya: much more interesting to discuss potentialities of the Multiverse Theory, where Flat-Earth can be conceptualized, just for fun.

'Inter-dimensional travelers' you say? Hmmmmm?

a reply to: Nothin

There was also ideas about this contextual situation, which you choose to ignore, in order to criticize the aspects that you don't like?

No, not ignoring anything and you couldn't further from the truth about what I like.

There are potentially multiple contexts at play, and so why must we all lock-in to the one you choose?

I choose?


I am not the OP and I didn't title the thread.

You wrote this in a post, here on August 28th: Flat earth thread have a minimum of 60 pages. Its just a rule. Trolls, debunkers, skeptics and believers alike all fall for the scent of good flat earth thread. Just look at the posts, humour, frustration, absolute ignorance. These threads are entertaining and should be taken as such. Insinuations? Hints and allegations? You are responsible for your own assumptions.

Yes and?

your point is?


What assumptions?


Seriously WTF are you on about?

I know why I posted that, maybe explain why you think I did so you clear up exactly what you are getting at.

Something like is mentioned in the post with In-Ex, where he requests me to stay within the standardly accepted context. It's all a bit funny, that this thread has been moved from Skunkworks, to LoL, and yet some folks still seem to be taking this stuff seriously.

because the things you want to discuss are very serious and to me very important and shouldn't be in this thread seeing as what the tread is about the flat earth theory in a physical sense not something metaphysical.

The flat earth ideas and concepts can be brought into a thread about reality being not what you or I believe but not the other way around.

and finally I made absolutely no requests, I gave an observation about your tactics and an opinion based on the OP and the thread title what the thread is about and what its not about.

If FET is a joke: then why do so many folks get their panties in a bunch over it?

Because reality isn't as it seems but the nonsense about ice walls and what not and a flat disc we live on is a joke brought forth make fun of questioning reality.

How might we know why some of those cranky buggers, disguised as debunkers, come-in here like old-time high-school bullies, as if they are seeking a final bastion where they can gang-up like a bunch of snot-nosed, punk-ass twirps, and call others names?

calling others names?

snotty nosed punk ass twirps is regarded as calling names


ignorant, idiot, fool, are all descriptive words of what one person does.

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Nothin

There was also ideas about this contextual situation, which you choose to ignore, in order to criticize the aspects that you don't like?

No, not ignoring anything and you couldn't further from the truth about what I like.

There are potentially multiple contexts at play, and so why must we all lock-in to the one you choose?

I choose?


I am not the OP and I didn't title the thread.

You wrote this in a post, here on August 28th: Flat earth thread have a minimum of 60 pages. Its just a rule. Trolls, debunkers, skeptics and believers alike all fall for the scent of good flat earth thread. Just look at the posts, humour, frustration, absolute ignorance. These threads are entertaining and should be taken as such. Insinuations? Hints and allegations? You are responsible for your own assumptions.

Yes and?

your point is?


What assumptions?


Seriously WTF are you on about?

I know why I posted that, maybe explain why you think I did so you clear up exactly what you are getting at.

Something like is mentioned in the post with In-Ex, where he requests me to stay within the standardly accepted context. It's all a bit funny, that this thread has been moved from Skunkworks, to LoL, and yet some folks still seem to be taking this stuff seriously.

because the things you want to discuss are very serious and to me very important and shouldn't be in this thread seeing as what the tread is about the flat earth theory in a physical sense not something metaphysical.

The flat earth ideas and concepts can be brought into a thread about reality being not what you or I believe but not the other way around.

and finally I made absolutely no requests, I gave an observation about your tactics and an opinion based on the OP and the thread title what the thread is about and what its not about.

If FET is a joke: then why do so many folks get their panties in a bunch over it?

Because reality isn't as it seems but the nonsense about ice walls and what not and a flat disc we live on is a joke brought forth make fun of questioning reality.

How might we know why some of those cranky buggers, disguised as debunkers, come-in here like old-time high-school bullies, as if they are seeking a final bastion where they can gang-up like a bunch of snot-nosed, punk-ass twirps, and call others names?

calling others names?

snotty nosed punk ass twirps is regarded as calling names


ignorant, idiot, fool, are all descriptive words of what one person does.

No, not ignoring anything and you couldn't further from the truth about what I like.

Not ignoring anything? Wow! Supposedly most of us ignore billions of bits of information a second.

The brain processes 400 Billion bits of information a second. BUT, we are ONLY aware of 2,000 of those?" -Dr. Joseph Dispenza, D.C.

BK-101

Ok. Ok. You most probably meant from my previous comment. That's what "choosing" was referring to as well.
How you chose to respond to certain comments, and chose to not reply to others.
Seems like we all do, very often here on ATS.

Didn't really say anything about your 'likes', so not sure what that is about.

What assumptions?


Seriously WTF are you on about?

You said that there were insinuations, and so that was the reply.
Insinuations or not: "You are responsible for your own assumptions".
Make more sense now?

...
The flat earth ideas and concepts can be brought into a thread about reality being not what you or I believe but not the other way around...

Didn't know that. Where have you heard that?

...and finally I made absolutely no requests, I gave an observation about your tactics and an opinion based on the OP and the thread title what the thread is about and what its not about.

Won't you agree that ATS threads very often end-up with multiple directions and contexts?
Multiple contexts abound, even already within this thread, even without my comments.

Because reality isn't as it seems but the nonsense about ice walls and what not and a flat disc we live on is a joke brought forth make fun of questioning reality.

Interesting.
So you think that FET is a lark, with the purpose of ridiculing enquiry into the nature of reality?
Do you believe it may be some kind of psyop?

Hey! You've brought us full-circle, back to the OP! Good job!

originally posted by: Grimpachi

Are you deaf or dumb? I know the balls are lead because the video explains it. Lead is pushed away by a magnetic field so they should do the exact opposite of what the video shows if magnetic fields were used.

Your video 'explains it', and that's how you 'know' it is true?!?

But only in a video that supports your argument, right? Any video that doesn't support your argument is lying!!


Is that about it?

Show me any video that uses non-metallic materials, if you can.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Why?

Are you serious?

Apparently, this is the first-ever physical demonstration of gravity, which no scientist could figure out!!

No. That is an experiment that has been around for a long time that experiment and many like it can be found in school science books usually under the name "Motion and Forces". That experiment goes back to at least the 1940s in an old science book I have.



They have done the very same experiment, before, which they did in the video?

Now, show me any of your sources on that, and we'll know exactly what it is they are claiming, with their experiments....


Support your claim, if you can....

a reply to: turbonium1

Can you find some lead magnets for me? That would be worth a fortune. Any way heres a experiment that didnt use weights but still proves gravity exists.

www.sciencemag.org...

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: turbonium1

Can you find some lead magnets for me? That would be worth a fortune. Any way heres a experiment that didnt use weights but still proves gravity exists.

www.sciencemag.org...

I'll go to space, and check out if there's any gravity, okay?

I've asked you for a source, on those demonstrations you mentioned were done before....


No sources?

a reply to: Nothin

Didn't really say anything about your 'likes', so not sure what that is about.

so who was posting on your behalf when I quoted you ?

Now I get why you posted this

"You are responsible for your own assumptions".

It was directed at yourself, right?


Or did I assume wrong, again, maybe?

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Nothin

Didn't really say anything about your 'likes', so not sure what that is about.

so who was posting on your behalf when I quoted you ?

Now I get why you posted this

"You are responsible for your own assumptions".

It was directed at yourself, right?

Or did I assume wrong, again, maybe?

so who was posting on your behalf when I quoted you

Why do you assume that?

"You are responsible for your own assumptions".

You quoted me mentioning something about what you DON'T like, not what you like.

It was directed at yourself, right?

Now why would you go and assume that?

"You are responsible for your own assumptions".

Or did I assume wrong, again, maybe?

Maybe just take a break from making assumptions?

"You are responsible for your own assumptions".