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.

 

The Earth Is Flat, Proof In Model - [FARCE]

page: 49
9
<< 46  47  48    50 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by logician magician
 


You seem to get your jollies having people come in and seriously debate your rubbish...

Your 'arguments' are childish, but you delight in all of the attention.

Is this some sort of High School creative writing project???

How many of your 'buddies' are crowded around the computer monitor right now, having a laugh as you eat Cheetohs and drink beer???????




posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deus Ex Machina 42
The Earth and other planets are round because they just are, that's all there is to it.


Well now, that's the best argument for a round earth I've seen so far: They just ARE!



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by logician magician
 


You seem to get your jollies having people come in and seriously debate your rubbish...

Your 'arguments' are childish, but you delight in all of the attention.

Is this some sort of High School creative writing project???

How many of your 'buddies' are crowded around the computer monitor right now, having a laugh as you eat Cheetohs and drink beer???????


My explanation for a flat earth is childish.

Your insults are not.

Grow up.



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by logician magician
 


I'm telling everyone the truth, not insulting you.

Your avatar says it all.......

The Mods have spoken as well. Hence, "FARCE"!



posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by logician magician
 


I'm telling everyone the truth, not insulting you.

Your avatar says it all.......

The Mods have spoken as well. Hence, "FARCE"!


I understand.

When you can't possibly have the mental faculty to argue a point, you result to ignoring the topic and using fallacious rhetoric as a way to chime in..

Considering YOUR posting history (and that fact that you seem to find significant meanings in the most trite things), I wouldn't expect any less of you, weedwhacker.



posted on Apr, 27 2009 @ 08:55 AM
link   
For the love of pete, please stop messing up the quote brackets!

Originally posted by logician magician
Look, if you don't want to debate me like an intelligent human, without resorting to childish antics and lies then you are free to leave the thread. You aren't fooling anyone but yourself.

I apologized for my confusion already, that's all you're going to get. If you don't want to let it go, you're free to ignore me altogether or leave.


1) It has been proven that acceleration produces g-forces.
2) We experience 1g on the surface of the Earth
3) Gravity is a fictitious force (as I have explained in detail previously)
4) G.R. dictates that a stationary surface in an inertial frame of reference in a downward motion is equivalent to a surface accelerating upwards in the absence of gravity.
5) Free-fall is defined as being 0g inertial motion. Relative to a non-inertial observer, there is no acceleration.
6) "Outer Space" is the same "space" as the "space" inside our atmosphere, only one is closer to the surface of a planet and contains more molecules.
7) As long as something is accelerating toward you, you will accelerate toward it: every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

All of this is why the ISS could not remain in orbit around a flat earth - you can only free fall so long before you hit the ground unless you're falling around a round earth. If your inverse bending of space nonsense were true, we'd experience the opposite of gravity, though as a probe or spacecraft climbed higher and higher it would experience less repulsion and eventually start "falling" back to earth where it would burn up. A probe in a high orbit would need to maintain some kind of constant acceleration to avoid falling back to the point where the inverse curvature perfectly offsets the disc's upward acceleration. Your model is deeply flawed.


[edit on 27-4-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on May, 1 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by logician magician
 


"Ignoring the topic"??!??

Your farce IS the topic!!

Nothing you have stated is based on any science, not in any way, shape or form. Your convoluted attempts to 'twist' established science into the funhouse fantasy that you wish to argue are really lacking in any logic, Mr. "magician".

But, I'll admit, your explanation for how airplanes 'fly' was truly priceless! Just think, my 30+ years of aviation experience had it all wrong!



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 07:27 AM
link   
I'm maybe a bit late in replaying to this thread but, come on.

Flat earth?

And NASA never put sattelite's in orbit?
I know we all hate NASA and all but . . . .
I can see the god damn Sattelite's in my home telescope.

You my friend need to sit down, have a break, maybe a coffee on the way, and just listen to yourself.


The earth is flat.
And i can fly.




posted on May, 3 2009 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by logician magician
 


"Ignoring the topic"??!??

Your farce IS the topic!!

Nothing you have stated is based on any science, not in any way, shape or form. Your convoluted attempts to 'twist' established science into the funhouse fantasy that you wish to argue are really lacking in any logic, Mr. "magician".

But, I'll admit, your explanation for how airplanes 'fly' was truly priceless! Just think, my 30+ years of aviation experience had it all wrong!


Yeah sure, it's easy to say "it's not this, it's not that" without actually saying what it is or why it isn't.

Each of your posts should be labeled FARCE!

Hey, just because someone can drive a car doesn't mean they know how it works, or the laws of physics which makes it go.

Same for your airplane. You can live in denial if you want, it doesn't bother me!



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by -elmo-
I'm maybe a bit late in replaying to this thread but, come on.

Flat earth?

And NASA never put sattelite's in orbit?
I know we all hate NASA and all but . . . .
I can see the god damn Sattelite's in my home telescope.

You my friend need to sit down, have a break, maybe a coffee on the way, and just listen to yourself.


The earth is flat.
And i can fly.



Again, more proof that people are just getting their idea of what this thread is about based on the ideas of others who have got the wrong idea.



posted on May, 3 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   
I have either heard or read somewhere that liquids want to be spherical. Which is believable as if you pour out drops of water out of a cup it turns to spherical droplets. Now if the creation of the planets is true. Then the hot molten “liquid” rock that would be the planet would do it’s best to form a sphere right. So the molten rock cools in the shape that it took, being a sphere. I could be wrong it wouldn't be the first time.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician
Again, more proof that people are just getting their idea of what this thread is about based on the ideas of others who have got the wrong idea.

Considering that the flat earthers on this thread have not had a consistent theory put forth but instead each seems to bring their own version, some of which include fake satellites, his criticism is not unfounded. Your own model fails to explain how satellites and space probes are possible without introducing an antigravity effect that should repel us off the planet and cause satellites that go too high to come crashing back down.

[edit on 4-5-2009 by ngchunter]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician
Again, more proof that people are just getting their idea of what this thread is about based on the ideas of others who have got the wrong idea.


"IF" the earth was flat, how would you explain day and night on different parts of the "flat" earth?.

Surly every country should see sunrise and sunset at the same time if earth was a flat disc shaped.
Or am i missing something in your "idea"?.

No joke, i am curious.

And i do apologize if you already explained this. such a long thread, hard to keep every idea in mind.



[edit on 5-5-2009 by -elmo-]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by -elmo-
"IF" the earth was flat, how would you explain day and night on different parts of the "flat" earth?.

It seems that the various flat earthers to visit this thread can't keep their story consistent, but the way I've usually heard it explained, the sun is actually much smaller and closer than in mainstream astronomy and acts like a spotlight as it circles the "flat disk" of the earth as if it were a record player. The same is true for the moon. Some problems with this theory include the fact that neither the sun nor moon are noticeably smaller in apparent size at setting or rising, and the fact that there should be significantly greater parallax from daily libration visible in moon images taken at rising and setting on a single day.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   
Doesn't the fact that people have visited the South Pole as well as the North Pole... ...kind of make the North Pole centre-of-the-world thing somewhat problematic?
And has everyone forgotten what the Skunk Works forum is for already?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician
I've seen many misconceptions from people who say the Earth is actually somehow a round ball in space. It is beyond absurd and preposterous. So, to try and clarify it for them, I've made a quick diagram showing just exactly how the Earth is flat and why it appears to be round from space. The reason that the earth appears round from higher up is because gravity bends light, so the father you get away from the light, you become aware of just how powerful an influence gravity and refraction have on it. It's not that the Earth is actually curved, it's just that the light is curving away from your eyes. The first picture here merely looks like a round object, but it is obviously fake because it only shows part of the landmass - an obvious hint that there is a conspiracy cover up.




 


Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 4/20/2008 by SkepticOverlord]


You sir, need help. Before you do that, may i ask you what substances have you taken? So I can purchase them as well.

Wait let me guess - amphetamines? Magic Mushroms? Green Paya? Ah c'mon, tell me ...

PS: I read your thread an i LOL'd, i still am



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician

Yeah sure, it's easy to say "it's not this, it's not that" without actually saying what it is or why it isn't.

Each of your posts should be labeled FARCE!


You expect people to take you seriously? And i was worried people would laugh at me for theories of time travel!



Originally posted by logician magicianHey, just because someone can drive a car doesn't mean they know how it works, or the laws of physics which makes it go.

Same for your airplane. You can live in denial if you want, it doesn't bother me!


And what have you done to prove your theory? It's not based on any science whatsoever, and you are telling us about physics!? Physics itself brings down your whole "Flat Earth theory" if only you look at its laws and the relationship atoms have among themselves, what the hell is wrong with you? Have you hit your head somewhere along the way? It would explain everything ...



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 01:42 AM
link   
I have really studied this thread and given it some thought and I agree with the OP. THE EARTH IS FLAT! It totally makes sense to me now. If the earth were a sphere and you viewed it from space the light would bend inward toward the center, which is more dense, and make the earth appear smaller than it really is. It is much more likely that the Earth is flat and the light is bent to make it appear round.

I recommend the MOD's take the FARCE label off of this thread as there is no more proof that this is a farce than there is proof of a NWO, Reptillians, UFO's, speaking with Aliens through meditation, 911 Being a conspiracy, etc.

[edit on 9-5-2009 by justsomeboreddude]



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I suppose the Earth would be flat if we cut off the crust and completely destroy the under ground.
I honestly don't understand where these people randomly start screaming that the Earth is flat.

__________-- How we Know --___________
Q: How can one prove the earth is round?
A: Now that we have access to space, the easiest way to prove the Earth is spherical is to leave it and view it from a distance. Astronauts and space probes have done just that. Every picture of Earth ever taken shows only a circular shape, and the only geometric solid which looks like a circle from any direction is a sphere.

One of the oldest proofs of the Earth's shape, however, can be seen from the ground and occurs during every lunar eclipse. The geometry of a lunar eclipse has been known since ancient Greece. When a full Moon occurs in the plane of Earth's orbit, the Moon slowly moves through Earth's shadow. Every time that shadow is seen, its edge is round. Once again, the only solid that always projects a round shadow is a sphere. *extracted from source:www.physlink.com...*
_______
There is your answer.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Breifne


Sorry about that.



Seriously though, you expect me to believe that the Earth is flat? So, when you are in an aeroplane above 35,000, do you not see something that resembles a 'curviture' on the horizon? What are we then, a flat disc with every satelite (including commercial) projecting images of a 'circular' world - is there a point to this opinion / conspiracy?

Just trying to answer this makes me feel like the town fool.

Magician, yes, you'd have to be: Logician - no.

Good thread though.



Huh hum, Brei.


The Bible God states the earth is "fixed" and does not "move". The earth sits on it's foundation, and has pillars, and water beneath. We read about the 4 corners of the earth. How can this be reconciled to science? Can someone please tell me?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 46  47  48    50 >>

log in

join