It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What if the Sun was not Spherical?

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   
The moon is round because we have taken images of the moon of different sides and we have been to the moon. Do you have any mathematical proof to your theories? You just come out and say whatever you need proof visuals and qoutes from the Bible isnt good enough because it proves nothing. If there was glass in the sky then how come your the only person in the world who thinks that, how come all these years no scientist came out and say theres glass in the sky?




posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by CKJC
The moon is round because we have taken images of the moon of different sides and we have been to the moon.


I could go to Jewel and pick up a copy of the National Inquirer and show you some pictures of Martians invading the White House, too. It really happened. I saw a movie about it as well. It must be true.


If there was glass in the sky then how come your the only person in the world who thinks that, how come all these years no scientist came out and say theres glass in the sky?


I'm not the only person in the world who thinks there is glass in the sky.

by the way, ever notice how we use the phrase "in the world"?
Go back in this thread and view the visual proof of images affected by glass, look at comets, meteorites, see the rainbows, halos, glories, circumzenith arcs, superior mirages, sun and moon distortion....

you gotta get out of the mindset of asking the "experts" for the truth...this is the trusting in man concept that Jeremiah warns against. Open your eyes, see the proof for yourself, don't ask your teacher if you can go to the bathroom, just go, don't ask for permission.

It's like the Emporor's new clothes concept. Only this time the invisible clothing is there. But the Emporor says that he's naked, and everyone believes him, even tho' the imagery in the sky concludes otherwise.

Yet, only the child calls a spade a spade. go figure...



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 03:38 PM
link   


If you know anything about the stone spheres of Costa Rica, you know that no one has a clue as to how they were made with such precision or how the ended up in costa rica, where there isn't a quarry anywhere even remotely close.

Well, here's another twist...what if they are fallen planets? If my small universe theory is correct, planets would be about this size, or maybe they were satellites of planets. Maybe they fell to earth prior to the great flood and suffer no crator impacts....

This one's surface texture kinda reminds me of Triton's mid-section.(minus the post-effects in color enhancement, of course)



hmmm..

[edit on 26-2-2005 by Plumbo]



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Plumbo, I like your thread and I respect your art. I did a little research and found this link here: www.sumeria.net...

It mentions Cyrus Teed and the religious cult he started. I think you mentioned that in one of your earlier posts. Am I to understand that you are not a member of his church? If so, do you have an affiliation with Teed?


There is no dark side of earth, despite what NASA has shown you all. (I can meddle in Photoshop too!)

But how about if I call my girlfriend in Asia and she says it's nighttime over there and I know it's daytime on my end of the phone (in America). How does that happen? How can we explain the simultaneous telecommunications that now happen where people can be standing at certin places on the globe and essentially confirm that one side is lit and the other side is dark?

The link I posted says the following:



What's most infuriating is that a little mathematical fiddling turns this crazy theory into a proposition that is virtually impossible to refute. The trick is done by *inversion*, a purely geometric transformation that lets a mathemetician turn shapes inside-out. When a sphere is inverted, ever point outside is mapped to a corresponding point inside, and vice versa.

The geometry is quite simple. If a sphere's center is "C" and its radius is "r," then every outside point "P" maps to an inside point "P'" such that "CP x CP' = r2"

Here's a good way to visualize it: For any outside point "P" (on the sun, or Pluto, or Cygnus X, for example), draw a circle that has "CP" as its diameter. From one of the two points where this circle intersects the earth, draw a line perpendicular to "CP." The intersection point [of this perpendicular and "CP"] is the location of "P'".

By far the largest body in our inverted Earth is the moon; a bit over half a mile in diameter and some 3,933 miles over our heads. The sun's sphere is only eight feet across. The stars ar microscopic spots clustered around the center, which is, of course, infinity.

Is there any way to prove we *aren't* inside a hollow earth? We asked H.S.M. Coxeter, mathematics professor at the University of Toronto and an expert on inversion geometry. "I can't think of any," he said. "A rocket flight, an eclipse, a Foucault pendulum, a Coriolis effect -- any observation we can make on the outside of the earth has an exact duplicate version inside. There would be no way to tell which was the truth."

Your graphics make the hollow earth theory easier to understand. Thanks for the work.


[edit on 26-2-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Feb, 26 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   


I could go to Jewel and pick up a copy of the National Inquirer and show you some pictures of Martians invading the White House, too. It really happened. I saw a movie about it as well. It must be true.


Fair enough, but then that means I cant never be sure if the earth is round, you and I can never be sure there is glass surrounding this earth until we physically be there. I dont know if Australia or India exist or rather no one is sure how the earth looks like until we go up into space to see for ourselves. Well someone might say sure the earth is round because we went out to space but then do we know that, only they do. See I'm just asumming what Im learning in school is right, earth is round, space outside the earth etc.



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
Plumbo, I like your thread and I respect your art. I did a little research and found this link here: www.sumeria.net...

It mentions Cyrus Teed and the religious cult he started. I think you mentioned that in one of your earlier posts. Am I to understand that you are not a member of his church? If so, do you have an affiliation with Teed?


I don't like to affiliate myself with Teed. He was a heretic. However, this doesn't mean he was wrong about us living on the inside of the earth. Alluding in fashion with James 2:19, "Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble."

Just because he knew the truth about the cosmos doesn't make him a good guy. He claimed to be the new Messiah. He was wrong.




But how about if I call my girlfriend in Asia and she says it's nighttime over there and I know it's daytime on my end of the phone (in America). How does that happen? How can we explain the simultaneous telecommunications that now happen where people can be standing at certain places on the globe and essentially confirm that one side is lit and the other side is dark?


No let me clarify, of course we see darkness on the other side of earth's interior. I mean from above the glass, or from God's viewpoint. Ps139:12.
The acute angle of deflection at the far side away from the sun never penetrates the glass, it simply curves back into space. The glass acts as a polarizer filter. It allow the earth to be seen from space as if it were daylight. See the Actual vs. Perceived graphic.


The link I posted says the following:

What's most infuriating is that a little mathematical fiddling turns this crazy theory into a proposition that is virtually impossible to refute. The trick is done by *inversion*, a purely geometric transformation that lets a mathemetician turn shapes inside-out. When a sphere is inverted, ever point outside is mapped to a corresponding point inside, and vice versa.

The geometry is quite simple. If a sphere's center is "C" and its radius is "r," then every outside point "P" maps to an inside point "P'" such that "CP x CP' = r2"

Here's a good way to visualize it: For any outside point "P" (on the sun, or Pluto, or Cygnus X, for example), draw a circle that has "CP" as its diameter. From one of the two points where this circle intersects the earth, draw a line perpendicular to "CP." The intersection point [of this perpendicular and "CP"] is the location of "P'".

By far the largest body in our inverted Earth is the moon; a bit over half a mile in diameter and some 3,933 miles over our heads. The sun's sphere is only eight feet across. The stars ar microscopic spots clustered around the center, which is, of course, infinity.


I don't quite agree with the above math and sizes of orbs. This above theory is purely taking into account the inverted squared hypothesis. They are neglecting the glass in the sky, which optically skews their answers. I think the sun is a lot bigger than 8ft. across. I think the moon is a lot bigger than 1/2 mile, too. And it sure aint 3,933 miles away, it more like 250 miles away.

Neglecting the glass has even skewed Teed and his cronies' answers, as well as the entire modern conventional view.

But this brings me to a true story. About a year ago I visited the Yerkes Observatory in Williams Bay, WI. The renowned observatory is known for housing the largest refracting telescope in the world! The funny thing is is that it is more than 100 years old. You see, they stopped making refracting telescopes, the big ones anyway, a long time ago and switched to the more convenient mirror-based reflecting ones. The problem with the big refractors was that if the glass lens became too large, it would begin to literally sag, resulting in chromatic aberration. Yerkes glass refractor is about 40in in diameter. Funny thing was that Einstein actually made it a succinct point to visit Yerkes in one of his trips to the U.S. To him it was considered one of the most desired places to visit in America.

Well, anyhow during the tour, the guide went on to explain the reason why chromatic aberration was formed and how they had tried to eliminate it with another lens. He compared it to seeing the rainbow in the sky. Being glass, the lens would divide the light into different wavelengths.

After the tour I approached the tour guide and asked him how rainbows in the sky were formed. He confessed he did not know that much about rainbows and told me to read a book called "Rainbows, Halos, and Glories". I pointed out the similarity of the glass lens in the telescope to the notion that there may be glass in the sky. And I got a quick abrupt "No!" for an answer. He didn't even want to entertain the notion. It was like somebody slapped a piece of duct tape across his mouth.

To the "Emperors" of science, it is laughable to even ponder the idea of glass in the sky. That's what makes it such a beautiful thing in the eyes of God. He has literally made their knowledge foolishness and backwards. -Isaiah 44:25, He has them in derision and laughs at them. -Psalm 2

Well after I left I concluded that I hadn't visited the largest refractor in the world. This one was not even a close second. The largest one is over 7,900 miles wide!


Your graphics make the hollow earth theory easier to understand. Thanks for the work.


Thank you for the feedback, Smallpeeps.
I'm convinced that one day the whole world will know the truth about our heaven-centered earth. It's recorded in prophecy....

Isaiah 11:9
.......for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.


take care my friend!


[edit on 27-2-2005 by Plumbo]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Thank you for the feedback, Smallpeeps. I'm convinced that one day the whole world will know the truth about our heaven-centered earth. It's recorded in prophecy....

Well if Hollow Earth theory is true, then you are certainly a pioneer and I'm sure your God will reward you. It will take a lot to convince me but I do wish to understand this theory better.

I will suggest that it wasn't very kind of you to lead people along without mentioning Hollow Earth from the start. As a result, contributors to this thread got shouted down by you when they hadn't been fully aware of what you were saying and from whence your theories sprung. Lots of people contribute to posts because they want to help you understand and it's not Christ-like to insult them when you haven't given them time to absorb the whole message, right?

I happen to like some of the people you flamed and I was disappointed to see you mock them. If you are right about your theory, I'd say Jesus would like you to be more Christ-like. After all, the goal is to win people over to your side, right? You catch more flies wit' honey than vinegar, or so the saying goes. :^)

Having said this, I do have a few more questions for you (I'm still absorbing this theory and its religious connections):

Am I to understand that it is essentially centrifugal force the keeps us stuck to the Earth? The Earth-shell rotates and that's why we stick to it? Also, what's outside this Earth-womb? What's under the tectonic plates and mantle, or are those terms incorrect also?

So then the great Flood could be seen as a rupturing of the inner sphere, after which a barrier of 'glass' remained between us and outer-space --which should actually be called INNER-space, correct?

This barrier of glass, wouldn't it be more like silica or sand floating in weightlessness? I suppose I could see that, but why does the shuttle not have glass on the bottom when it returns? You mention Frit, but I couldn't find any data on how it keeps molten glass from sticking to the shuttle.

Keep the 3D learning aids coming because I love that stuff. Do you use 3DS Max or Maya or what?

========
EDIT: Also, can you provide us with some links to studies of Teed's Hollow Earth theories? It is said that the mineshaft and rectilineator experiments have been duplicated several times but can you provide some reading material on those experiments?


[edit on 27-2-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   

I will suggest that it wasn't very kind of you to lead people along without mentioning Hollow Earth from the start. As a result, contributors to this thread got shouted down by you when they hadn't been fully aware of what you were saying and from whence your theories sprung. Lots of people contribute to posts because they want to help you understand and it's not Christ-like to insult them when you haven't given them time to absorb the whole message, right?

I happen to like some of the people you flamed and I was disappointed to see you mock them. If you are right about your theory, I'd say Jesus would like you to be more Christ-like. After all, the goal is to win people over to your side, right? You catch more flies wit' honey than vinegar, or so the saying goes. :^)


I agree. I started this thread with the spherical sun question because I wanted to see if there was room for ridiculous-alternative thought. My rebuttals were mostly improvisational. I only stumbled upon Velikovky’s anti-gravity comments about the sun after the initial post. I knew about his views, but didn’t remember him referring to the sun’s lack of pressure. I later stumbled across Maurice Ewing’s seismic data on the moon ringing as a bell, never knew about it until then. I view this as divine intervention, you may view it as coincedental. I sent a U2U last week to E_T apologizing for my insults. He can confirm this. I don’t know, I don’t really regret my tone, it shows I have feelings and emotions. I don’t like to compare myself to Jesus, he was perfect, I’m flawed, but even he had harsh words to say to the Phairsees. Maybe I was too defensive, in any event what was said was said.


Having said this, I do have a few more questions for you (I'm still absorbing this theory and its religious connections):

Am I to understand that it is essentially centrifugal force the keeps us stuck to the Earth? The Earth-shell rotates and that's why we stick to it? Also, what's outside this Earth-womb? What's under the tectonic plates and mantle, or are those terms incorrect also?


No, if it were centrifugal force, then we would be floating at the poles because there wouldn’t be enough speed there to hold us to the ground. I believe the Earth shell is stationary, there is the celestial sphere in the mid section that revolves. I believe the earth is kind of like an inflated ball which pushes its heavy objects to the inner egde. In a balloon, you might think that the greatest pressure is in the center, but this is not true. What’s really going on is that there is pressure from both the outside and the inside of the balloon. The two forces meet at the edge, where the greatest pressure occurs. Hence there is an invisible sphere of repulsion in the center of the balloon, which is relatively low in pressure compared to the edge, make sence?

As I mentioned before, I believe hell is outside of the earth. I also believe there is a layer of water beneath the tectonic plates, and beneath the water there is metal.

This is the real reason why the word "firmament" is used in Genesis 1.
All over the bible you'll see terms like how God stretched or spread abroad the earth. Isaiah 44 for one. Well, firmament means to streatch or beat metal. So the real meaning of firmament should be something like, 'the expanse created due to the firmamentation of the earth's metal edge.'

The glass bound formed after the Flood, causes even greater pressure beneath it. The bible says that after the flood God set a bound that prevented ocean waves from covering the continents-Psalm104:9, Jer 5:21-22. The sun and moon act as pressure relievers revolving around the inside, causing tidal effects to the areas beneath them.


So then the great Flood could be seen as a rupturing of the inner sphere, after which a barrier of 'glass' remained between us and outer-space --which should actually be called INNER-space, correct?


Yes.


This barrier of glass, wouldn't it be more like silica or sand floating in weightlessness? I suppose I could see that, but why does the shuttle not have glass on the bottom when it returns? You mention Frit, but I couldn't find any data on how it keeps molten glass from sticking to the shuttle.


Frit is dichroic glass. Glass already baked at extremely high temperatures. The temperature of the the shuttle penetration doesn’t exceed the temperature of the once-baked dichroic glass of the frit. So it acts as a repulsion forcefield to the atmospheric glass.


Keep the 3D learning aids coming because I love that stuff. Do you use 3DS Max or Maya or what?


Mostly Lightwave, but I’ve worked a lot in Max, too. Not Maya.

[edit on 27-2-2005 by Plumbo]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by CKJC
Fair enough, but then that means I cant never be sure if the earth is round, you and I can never be sure there is glass surrounding this earth until we physically be there. I dont know if Australia or India exist or rather no one is sure how the earth looks like until we go up into space to see for ourselves. Well someone might say sure the earth is round because we went out to space but then do we know that, only they do. See I'm just asumming what Im learning in school is right, earth is round, space outside the earth etc.


That's why I proposing that you find out for yourself. Don't take my words, pictures for it. Don't take nasa's words and pictures for it either.

But there is a book you can read......

And there a higher power you can ask......

And there are visual proofs.....and contradictions like the theory of gravity...

[edit on 27-2-2005 by Plumbo]



posted on Feb, 27 2005 @ 04:19 PM
link   
This is a good conspiracy thread and so I hope it will continue. I'd like to find the holes in your theory and if I do not find them then I will keep my mind open as to where the implications lead. I know the bible well enough, but I have moved on to lots of other books which impress me far more. All the killing and muck in the bible sorta discredits it apart from the gospels, which I do profess belief in. ATS will be like a hailstorm for you as a hollow-earther but if you endure the storm, you'll establish some credibility with those who usually read and do not post. You seem like the type of guy who can weather that scientific storm so god bless you then.

I should also mention that Simon Gray, the founder of ATS, has posted regarding hollow earth before (I think it may have been in BTS) so interest on the subject is not lacking here. You might want to break the theory down for people, historically, because there are a lot of folks who have read up on non-inverted hollow-earth but do not connect this half to your inversion-earth theory. I think the two seem to complement each other although it's all very weird. Do you believe in people who live under the earth's crust?

I'm glad you mentioned E_T 'cause I've liked his posts and anyone with an interest in outer (inner?) space can't be bad, right?


What’s really going on is that there is pressure from both the outside and the inside of the balloon. The two forces meet at the edge, where the greatest pressure occurs. Hence there is an invisible sphere of repulsion in the center of the balloon, which is relatively low in pressure compared to the edge, make sence?

Yes, I suppose this makes sense. Is there an experimental way to confirm it if I am just a hobbyist? How can I confirm this fact of higher pressure at the edge of a pressurized sphere? In a related question, how do you allow for the shape of mushroom clouds, which tend to be mathematically predictable in regard to their explosive load vs. proximity to ground? Isn't the shape of the mushroom cloud indicative of a gas cloud rushing upward from earth (squaring as it travels away from the spherical earth) and therefore dissipating into the mushroom-type crown we know? How can this be explained within the balloon metaphor you gave?



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 04:12 AM
link   
After reading this thread it seems that all save Plumbo have accepted the prevailing Copernican view of the cosmos that the Earth spins on an axis, revolves around the Sun and is but an orb in space among others. Despite the fact that terrestrial measurements have shown the Earth’s surface to be concave and experiments such as Michelson Morley have shown that the Earth isn’t moving at all, adjustments such as Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity were formulated to account for these inconsistencies to prop up the prevailing model. Because the Copernican model however has been able to make predictions and appears to be more elegant than previous models it has been elevated to a position of reality. Agreement is a powerful agent of perceived reality and alas, has been accepted as the whole truth.

Consider the possibility that the universe may be a four spatially dimensioned construct; no…not three with space-time, but four actual spatial dimensions. Despite the fact that you live on the inside of the curve, when you travel away from that surface you are traveling at a 90 degree angle to the surface and to the first three dimensions. This may be difficult to imagine with a three dimensioned mindset, but bear with me. The 25,000 mile concave surface called Earth may be embedded in a larger surface. You will have to imagine there being more space and more directions to travel in than a three dimensional view will allow. It will appear that one can have larger circles within smaller circles but that will only be valid from ones peculiar frame of reference. Also there will always be one point on the Earth’s surface that is closer to the remote observer than all others, hence the convex appearance. What appears to be a gradually shrinking globe as ones distance increases from the surface is the remote appearance of that surface from that peculiar locality.

Now you might think, well what if one could build a physical structure that would reach from one side of the surface to the other, hmmmm….maybe that’s what Nimrod was doing with that tower in Babel.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 06:03 AM
link   


Huh?
Science isn't a religion -- scientists don't decide something is "true" because that's what everyone voted on, or what those in charge decided was the "right" thing to believe. You're treating science as if it were a religion, and that's like calling bald a color of hair.

Yup! that's exactamundo! Thundercloud.
Science is not a religion.
Religion is a belief system in man-made, scientifically unproven ideas, like gravity, and an earth spinning planet.

True, pure science is like this. The problem comes with how man perceives science. Things aren't accepted as truth by the whole of the scientific field until they, as a generalized whole accept it.....so much of accepted science is controlled by the masses. ..and not just christian stupidity, at that.

Now, science is not some definition that *poof* makes true. The definition is some poor fool's attempt to describe a phenomonon. Some descriptions are better than others. The reason that you cannot accept this is because you are applying philosophy instead of looking at the basic facts:
Science is better described as a method: Basically, you look at the facts and see what fits the facts:
You decide that you want to walk on thin air and walk of a 10 ft retaining wall. Almost instantly, you fall and make contact with the ground. This confuses you, so you jump up , only to reconnect with the ground under you. This confuses you because you see birds leave the ground while you don't. There is some force that holds you back, but not the bird, for some reason. You study the bird for a while longer, then realise that the bird HAS to come down eventually, and when it does, it hops to get everywhere, just as you did in finding out there was a force against you walking on air.....therefore, you decide that there is a common force that keeps 2 things together, period (gravity). The act of the bird flying is the natural reaction of another force being stronger than your newfound gravity..... You decide to learn to fly, and flap your arms like a crazy man, but never get anywhere but tired. Eventually, you get bigger and bigger fake arms until you notice that you just can't keep them up, they are so heavy that the force of Gravity overpowers you. Eventually, through diffrent trials, you come up with this formula: F=M*A, specifically F(g)= M*A...and you eventually make a plane that fit this mathematical perameter. Gravity, the way to overcome gravity is a FACT, no matter how oversimplified the explanation. IT has absolutely nothing to do with a definition.


Why doesn't if feel like the earth is spinning.
I suspect some people do. It may explain why some people are disoriented when they are sick, why some people have no sense of balance. I'm one of those people. Why does it feel like you are sitting still when you put the car on criuse control and travel in a straight line (and that's not straight because the surface of the earth is curved)? It's because there's no discernable accleleration or sharp turns. Same thing for the earth and the orbit of the earth: it does not change acceleration in a perceptable manner, nor does it change direction in a perceptable manner (the arc is too wide for that, far wider than the curve of the earth that we drive in a straight line on).


Think about this though, the Earth is orbitting the Sun, so either the Sun decides to keep it's "bowl" to us at all times while orbitting (like the moon), in exclusion to the other 8 planets.....or it's a sphere...
You don't even have to worry about that..... we send sateites to orbit the sun, and they don't orbit at the same rate as us...so we already have a few pics of the sun's "dark side",



Socrates wasn’t loved by everyone by any means. His unorthodox religious views (that there was only one god behind the variety of Greek gods) gave the leading citizens of Athens the excuse they needed to sentence him to death for corrupting the morals of the youth of the city. In 399, he was ordered to drink hemlock, which he did in the company of his students.

According to Plato, the phenomenal world strives to become ideal, perfect, complete. Ideals are, in that sense, a motivating force. In fact, he identifies the ideal with God and perfect goodness. God creates the world out of materia (raw material, matter) and shapes it according to his “plan” or “blueprint” -- ideas or the ideal. If the world is not perfect, it is not because of God or the ideals, but because the raw materials were not perfect. I think you can see why the early Christian church made Plato an honorary Christian, even though he died three and a half centuries before Christ!
www.ship.edu... I'm not going to spend the time looking at al the great presidents who where God fearing, confessing to a ONE god, or even christianity. Benjamin Franklyn, the man who was considered to be the founding father of science in this country, was a Diest ( a form of christianity). To sit there and assume that all men who believe in 1 god, in christinaity, or anything of that nature, for whatever reason, are fools is an error of even greater stupidity than the genius, man of good repute, or general laborer. Faith has been shown to be a matter that defies intelligence, training, even personal beliefs of that same person only 5 years before the point where they deny the exisitance of any god. For the love of God, Even Darwin believed in cristianity until he faced a crisis and decided to change his field of work (he was going to be a minister in the church) (and that crisis was NOT evolution, which several thousands of people have no problem with having both at the same time as a belief, it was the scriptures that put black men (and other natives) as his equals....that's right, he was a racist of the purest degree.)

NOW:

Have you ever considered that all the container comments in the scriptures was a reference to having the capacity to hold something? Pitchers are not haped like bowls, NEVER have been. The same thing with cisterns. The earth contains all it's life through the assistance of the force we call gravity. THerefore it is a bowl, but not in the shape of one. Quit thinking inside the box and really look at what the reference is talking about, not what you assume. You are as hide bound as the NASA worshipers you so abhor.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Science is better described as a method: Basically, you look at the facts and see what fits the facts:
You decide that you want to walk on thin air and walk of a 10 ft retaining wall. Almost instantly, you fall and make contact with the ground. This confuses you, so you jump up , only to reconnect with the ground under you. This confuses you because you see birds leave the ground while you don't. There is some force that holds you back, but not the bird, for some reason. You study the bird for a while longer, then realise that the bird HAS to come down eventually, and when it does, it hops to get everywhere, just as you did in finding out there was a force against you walking on air.....therefore, you decide that there is a common force that keeps 2 things together, period (gravity). The act of the bird flying is the natural reaction of another force being stronger than your newfound gravity..... You decide to learn to fly, and flap your arms like a crazy man, but never get anywhere but tired. Eventually, you get bigger and bigger fake arms until you notice that you just can't keep them up, they are so heavy that the force of Gravity overpowers you. Eventually, through diffrent trials, you come up with this formula: F=M*A, specifically F(g)= M*A...and you eventually make a plane that fit this mathematical perameter. Gravity, the way to overcome gravity is a FACT, no matter how oversimplified the explanation. IT has absolutely nothing to do with a definition.


JLC, you seem like a smart guy, only it's veiled by your stupidity.

Why do olympic atheletes train in high altitudes? Why was the world record in the long jump made in Mexico City? Why do hot air balloons float? why does it usually rain when barometric pressure drops? Why do heavy jet planes travel for thousands of miles without relatively using much fuel? Could their altitude be a factor? What role does air pressure play into forcing objects to either fall to the ground or float up in the sky?


Why doesn't if feel like the earth is spinning.

I suspect some people do. It may explain why some people are disoriented when they are sick, why some people have no sense of balance. I'm one of those people. Why does it feel like you are sitting still when you put the car on criuse control and travel in a straight line (and that's not straight because the surface of the earth is curved)? It's because there's no discernable accleleration or sharp turns. Same thing for the earth and the orbit of the earth: it does not change acceleration in a perceptable manner, nor does it change direction in a perceptable manner (the arc is too wide for that, far wider than the curve of the earth that we drive in a straight line on).


Oh, ok, so the earth is spinning and we don't feel it because we're traveling in it like a car on 'da road....hmmm

so if this is true then everything under the atmosphere is spinning too right?.... hmmmm

If this is true then then there must be a tangible threshold separating what's under the atmosphere from what's above it, right?

Well if this is true them why do they say that the atmosphere gradually dissipates into nothingness, becoming thinner and thinner?

Wouldn't it make more sense if there was a concrete division which separated the spinning earth and its' outer contents from space? And if there was such a concrete physical barrier, wouldn't all the heavy matter accumulate inside the rim? Wouldn't it look like a bunch of metal and rocks up at the top of the atmosphere?....

Oh, I forgot.......GRAVITY holds it all down.
How stupid of me to forget this. Please forgive me.
It's gravity that holds the whole universe together.
Wow, you've finally gotten through to me.
Gravity is God!
Gravity is magic!......

Gravity is BUNK!!!


Have you ever considered that all the container comments in the scriptures was a reference to having the capacity to hold something? Pitchers are not haped like bowls, NEVER have been. The same thing with cisterns. The earth contains all it's life through the assistance of the force we call gravity. THerefore it is a bowl, but not in the shape of one. Quit thinking inside the box and really look at what the reference is talking about, not what you assume. You are as hide bound as the NASA worshipers you so abhor.


Pitcher is not reffering to the sun, it's reffering to the the top of the pyramid the pours out light.
Cistern is alluding to celestial womb which contains water on the inside.
Wheel is, well we all know the Journey song don't we?

He who laughs last laughs the loudest....
Ps. 2:4

next....



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
how do you allow for the shape of mushroom clouds, which tend to be mathematically predictable in regard to their explosive load vs. proximity to ground? Isn't the shape of the mushroom cloud indicative of a gas cloud rushing upward from earth (squaring as it travels away from the spherical earth) and therefore dissipating into the mushroom-type crown we know? How can this be explained within the balloon metaphor you gave?


Keep in mind Smallpeeps that both the conventional view of science and mine agree that there is greater air pressure at lower altitudes, so this said, it wouldn't make much difference if the mushroom cloud exploded on the earth or in the earth.

[edit on 28-2-2005 by Plumbo]



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Plumbo, I have done a little more reading about Cyrus Teed. I found the following link interesting: crm.cr.nps.gov...='cyrus%20t eed%20book'

This essay talks in depth about Teed and the Koreshians. Apparently 'Beth Ophra' was the founding of Teed's religion and that was in your town, Chicago. This is interesting to me. Do you have any generational connection to Teed, like, do your parents or grandparents speak about him? Do you have other family members who are believers of inverted-hollow-earth?

Why is Teed a heretic? If I go down to the Koreshan area of Florida and start asking questions, I'll probably find a follower of his or two. What will they tell me that will corrupt my mind as compared to what you will tell me?

I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with your tone. You aren't really seeking any converts, are you? You're too abrasive for that. More like you want to tease us with what we do not know. I guess that's fine, as long as you continue presenting your points, but in the end, aren't you going to be alone among an earth full of 'deceived-spherical-earth-dunces' like us? Do you see yourself like the prophet Jeremiah where you are preaching to an obstinate people? Calling people stupid is what children do. You realize this, right? It doesn't help you or make people listen.

You said you don't compare yourself to Christ but aren't you acting in a manner different than he used? Didn't Christ encourage His followers to be 'like him' as much as possible? Do you believe in karma, reincarnation or rebirth/samsara? What will be your heavenly reward for your faith and your sharp-tongued internet-chastizing of misguided folks like us? I am curious as to what you are after.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
Plumbo, I have done a little more reading about Cyrus Teed. I found the following link interesting: crm.cr.nps.gov...='cyrus%20t eed%20book'

This essay talks in depth about Teed and the Koreshians. Apparently 'Beth Ophra' was the founding of Teed's religion and that was in your town, Chicago. This is interesting to me. Do you have any generational connection to Teed, like, do your parents or grandparents speak about him? Do you have other family members who are believers of inverted-hollow-earth?


Yeah, I found that to be kind of interesting too. But, I'm almost positive I have not blood connections with Teed.
I don't believe in reincarnation, like Teed who did, so I am sure I am not the reincarnated Cyrus Teed.
I've been called by someone who follows his religion as being like him, however. But I am my own entity, I can assure you of this.


Why is Teed a heretic? If I go down to the Koreshan area of Florida and start asking questions, I'll probably find a follower of his or two. What will they tell me that will corrupt my mind as compared to what you will tell me?


You by now, probably know more about his religion than I do. So I'm not sure what they(if there's anyone left there) would tell you. But I know that Teed thought that the New Jerusalem would be established in Florida. My graphics suggests a more literal approach to where the Holy City is located. He believed to be the Messiah and his followers thought he would never die. But he did. Self-proclamed messiahs are heretical.


I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with your tone. You aren't really seeking any converts, are you?


Well, I'm seeking people who believe the literal existence of God in the heart of the earth. I'm seeking scientific truth. I'm proposing that the modern establishment is in dire need of a sensical revolution.

But, as far as converts, I'm only preaching salvation by faith in the risen Lord Jesus Christ. By pointing to his literal existece, I'm showing the hypocrocy of the believing Christian who doesn't believe the truth about heaven and earth, whether that person is a creationist or a evolutionist. Beside one being saved and the other lost, they both should understand the truth.


You're too abrasive for that. More like you want to tease us with what we do not know. I guess that's fine, as long as you continue presenting your points, but in the end, aren't you going to be alone among an earth full of 'deceived-spherical-earth-dunces' like us?


I pretty much already am alone. Haven't got much to loose in that respect. The MO I've taken in supplying hints is scriptural. I want you all to come to the understanding by yourselves and by the conviction of the Holy Spirit. Sometimes ya gotta be bruised before you can be healed. That's scriptural too. But, keep in mind, that he loves you just like a father loves his child. Heb. 12:6

I hope someday you can see my gentle side. It's quite attractive to say the least. But, remember Smallpeeps, it was you who mentioned your distaste for the bloody Old Testament. Perhaps your grievance should be directed to your heavenly Father, not me, no?


Do you see yourself like the prophet Jeremiah where you are preaching to an obstinate people? Calling people stupid is what children do. You realize this, right? It doesn't help you or make people listen.


Jeremah was a gentle soul. But when he spoke God's heart he was like a unquenchable fire. You have to understand I have the Father's heart in this, I know he backs me, maybe not every insult, but he backs me as a whole, I'm sure of it.


You said you don't compare yourself to Christ but aren't you acting in a manner different than he used?


Matthew 23


Didn't Christ encourage His followers to be 'like him' as much as possible?


yes.


Do you believe in karma, reincarnation or rebirth/samsara?


No.


What will be your heavenly reward for your faith and your sharp-tongued internet-chastizing of misguided folks like us? I am curious as to what you are after.


One day I'll find out.

God Bless You,
If you really believe the gospels like you said you did, then I consider you my brother in the faith. It doesn't matter what you believe about the earth, what we're talking about is not required for salvation. But remember that brothers can fight like cats and dogs. I have 3.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Glad to see you didn't give up, Plumbo! Your rants and raves make my day.



Originally posted by 1werner
After reading this thread it seems that all save Plumbo have accepted the prevailing Copernican view of the cosmos that the Earth spins on an axis, revolves around the Sun and is but an orb in space among others...


There are thousands of satellites in Earth's orbit right now. Some, like weather satellites, take actual photographs of the Earth from space. Not just raw data, in the form of tables of numbers, but actual photographs. You can see some of them every hour on the Weather Channel.
Especially during hurricane season, when the meteorologists like to show a zoomed out picture, including all of North America and the Atlantic Ocean, you can clearly see that the Earth is spherical.

For many govnernments, their national security depends on the data some of these satellites provide. For many corporations, billions of dollars in profit depends on the data some of these satellites provide. Don't you think that, with so much at stake, that these governments and corporations would make sure they knew what was going to happen when they launched those satellites?

Not only that, but humanity has also had probes orbit our Moon, and almost every other planet in our solar system (including some of their moons). We've also got satellites that orbit the Sun. And, we've got photos from almost all of those places -- not just photos from the surface of the planets and moons, but photos from a far enough distance out to see that they are all spherical, but not so far away that they're not just dots of light anymore.

Even better, we have at least one probe (Voyager 2) which left our solar system entirely, taking photos of our entire solar system from a distance as its course took it away from our solar system and to that of another star close to Earth (if it has a solar system to see).

Now, you come to a point when, even without considering the actual scientific proof, that (1) these satellites are real, and I use many of them in my day-to-day life when I check the weather forecast, make a long distance cell phone call, or surf the Internet; or (2) there's a huge government conspiracy going on to hide the truth, because... well... science is evil, or something like that.

I'm betting the most common (2) type response will be that all the science textbooks around the world have puposefully false equations in them (otherwise, all satellites launched to orbit a sphere from the outside would have crashed back to Earth), and that this is to hide some horrible truth that "they" don't want you to know...


Originally posted by smallpeeps
Why is Teed a heretic?


In 1870, Cyrus Teed, a former corporal in the Union medical corps during the U.S. Civil War, said that he was the "seventh messenger of God", and adopted "Koresh" as his new surname. Teed claimed that an angel had visited him, telling him that he was the reincarnation of Jesus himself, and that it was his job to gather the 144,000 faithful to await the Last Judgement. (Teed's legacy came to a climax in the 1990s, with the rise of another Koresh, David, who located his gathering of the faithful near Waco, Texas.)

I'm sure that thinking that you're the reincarnation of Jesus himself would make you a heretic amongst most branches of Christianity; and just insane to everyone else. I've read about the possibility that Teed contracted syphillis while serving in the Union army during the Civil War (syphillis was a major problem during the Civil War), and that the untreated disease later caused brain damage -- and thus hallucinations, schitzophrenia, etc. -- which would explain a lot of what he thought and did in his later years after the Civil War was over. It's been reported that family and friends had concerns for his mental health before the Civil War, and surviving a war, followed by untreated syphillis, might have just been enough to drive the guy over the edge.



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   

(Teed's legacy came to a climax in the 1990s, with the rise of another Koresh, David, who located his gathering of the faithful near Waco, Texas.)

TC: Excellent info there. Was there a blood connection between David Koresh and Teed other than the name they took? Are you implying that David Koresh of the Waco Murders was similarly a Teed inverted-hollow-earth believer?



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps
TC: Excellent info there. Was there a blood connection between David Koresh and Teed other than the name they took? Are you implying that David Koresh of the Waco Murders was similarly a Teed inverted-hollow-earth believer?


It's a strong possibility. Then again, he may have just taken the name "Koresh" to use the historical connections to his personal advantage. I just don't know whether Koresh was David's actual last name, or one he chose, like Teed had over a century earlier.



[edit on 2/28/2005 by ThunderCloud]



posted on Feb, 28 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   

There are thousands of satellites in Earth's orbit right now. Some, like weather satellites, take actual photographs of the Earth from space. Not just raw data, in the form of tables of numbers, but actual photographs. You can see some of them every hour on the Weather Channel. Especially during hurricane season, when the meteorologists like to show a zoomed out picture, including all of North America and the Atlantic Ocean, you can clearly see that the Earth is spherical.


ya gotta remember that there is appearance and reality. Perceived and actual. All non-doctored photos above the glass will imply that the earth is spherical.

But ask yourself how the so-called 4 geosynchoneous satellites stay fixed in space. Without using gravity in the answer. Phew, thats a lot of distance to travel at such a great distance away ~150,000 miles radius, let alone keeping in almost perfect synch with the spinning globe.

My model proposes there's a magnetic equilibrium hovering somewhere in line with the 4 corners of the New Jerusalem. Alas, geostationary is a far better adjective.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join