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.

 

Flat earth theory?

page: 62
14
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

That is where you are wrong. Gravity is intelligent pulling, by God:

Llandover Baptist church - What is Gravity?

Unsaved trash.




posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Yet more word salad from you the Earth is a globe not flat what do you think if you have the gnads to answer



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: Nothin

Yet more word salad from you the Earth is a globe not flat what do you think if you have the gnads to answer


Good grief!
We've been through this before, or have you forgotten?

This unfortunate situation is going-down, similar to previously:
You are asked questions: but don't answer.
You ask a question.
Your question is answered, and new questions are asked of you.
You come back and accuse me on not answering your question, all the while not answering the questions asked of you.

It's challenging to exchange with you here, sorry.

PS: What makes you think testosterone has anything with posting on the internet?



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

The Polaris thing would seem so simple to explain.
A simple Paint drawing would be sufficient.



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Bull Cookies EVERY so called FE proof has be debunked here and all over the internet.

A lot of FE suppoters are religious nutters the others don't understand science physics maths digital images and most importantly SCALE.

One of the most simple proofs the Moon is the opposite way up in the Southern Hemisphere compared to the North couldn't happen on a FE size and distance to the Sun and Moon claimed by FE cannot work now do you wont to prove that we are wrong or is it another word salad from you ;?;



posted on Nov, 23 2018 @ 08:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: Nothin

Bull Cookies EVERY so called FE proof has be debunked here and all over the internet.

A lot of FE suppoters are religious nutters the others don't understand science physics maths digital images and most importantly SCALE.

One of the most simple proofs the Moon is the opposite way up in the Southern Hemisphere compared to the North couldn't happen on a FE size and distance to the Sun and Moon claimed by FE cannot work now do you wont to prove that we are wrong or is it another word salad from you ;?;


Nope.
You just write-off all questions asked of you, and continue to expect to have your questions answered?
Probably well over 20 questions so far, that you have just ignored, or write-off with an insult.

Must also say that your blatant prejudice, is not appealing at all, and should have cut-you off a long time ago.
Am here hoping to exchange with open-minded folks, but seem to have found the opposite.
Ignorance abounds, and nobody seems to give a damn.

We're done.
Thanks for a whole bunch of very unpleasant exchanges.
My bad for continuing to respond to you, when there was already a bad feeling.
Good luck with your belief-system.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 01:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Nothin

Can you explain how the elevation of Polaris above the horizon can correspond to the latitude of the observer?

Please? I really want to know how that works on a flat Earth.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 03:15 AM
link   
Well obviously it would have to adjust its location through magic. Because the location of the observer would have to force it to move to a new location. Though how this magic is done with multiple viewers perhaps mirrors? Anyway this isnt the only thing flat earth can't explain. My favorite is if the earth is flat why does the moon flip around when people in the southern hemisphere view it. Also has to be some sort of magic done with mirrors.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 03:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: turbonium1

Could you enlighten us as to how exactly a scale works?

Or

Why we fall Through the sky when jumping out of a plane... but reach a "terminal velocity" or a "falling speed" that doesn't increase while falling... which is why we can simulate "zero gravity"... even on a rollercoaster





Referring to this as 'falling', as a 'free fall', and always indicating it as 'falling' - is MY argument. Anyone who says this, after knowing what it means, what it refers to, and that it supports only ONE argument - which is the flat earth argument - should simply use terms properly, as all other terms are used. What's even worse, is to use a term that directly undermines your entire argument, at once!

Why would anyone want to use a term, if it's not correctly used, is in direct conflict with their entire argument, and supports the opposite argument? Every scientist says terms are used correctly, because if they use wrong terms, they don't use it after knowing it's wrong. They use another, proper, correct term, afterwards.

Why wouldn't they change this one, single, term, which supports only one, opposing argument?


Why do you keep on claiming objects 'fall' to Earth?

What if I said objects were 'pulled down' to Earth? You'd be jumping all over it, because it would be in direct contradiction to my very argument. Which it would be, of course.

SAME AS IT CONTRADICTS YOUR ARGUMENT, RIGHT?


If they wanted to use the proper term, which supports their magical force, called 'gravity, it is very peculiar that they wouldn't even consider using the proper, correct terms...Even when the term is diametrically opposed to their argument of gravity.....


There are no excuses, since changing terms is commonplace for the sciences. All the time. If you have a term that is being used everywhere, by everyone, for over a century, it doesn't happen because they're complete idiots. It's not because they have no good reason to ever change incorrect, contradictory terms, because they always do, always have, and always will.

The obvious reason for using flat-earth terminology - which says objects 'fall' to Earth - is a deliberate ploy. When we fall down, we know it is a fall, and we feel it is a fall. Saying we were 'pulled down' to Earth, after we know, and feel, it was a fall......would sound like complete nonsense, to say the least.


Terms are used to fool people's perceptions, manipulate their common sense, all the time.


'Intelligence' is another good example of a term being manipulated for ulterior motives.

'Terrorist' is another one.

Many others, as well.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 03:40 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

It's so much BS.

What's FE supposed to look like from it's side profile? Does the atmosphere stop at the so-called wall of ice or does it cover the underside too? Why do our tides behave like they're on a globe instead of behaving like they're in a round paddling pool? Is volcanic activity limited to topside? Why? Or are there plumes of magma unfolding into space from underneath? Why hasn't anyone seen them?

What happens to wind currents when they hit the ice wall? They'd have to bounce back which would create a permanent storm zone between warm winds heading to the ice walls and freezing wind coming back.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 04:49 AM
link   
'Terminal velocity' means an object in 'free fall' reaches maximum speed, during the fall....


How would that explain your magical force, that pulls all objects down to Earth? It doesn't.


Again, they call it a 'fall', or a 'free fall', of an object, which is supposedly being 'pulled down' to Earth. Why would that be?


If you simply replace the term 'fall', with the term 'pull', or 'pulled down', you might start to understand why it would become a big problem ....


Saying an object is being 'pulled down' to Earth, by a force within the Earth....

That means the force comes from below. And the force below an object must extend upward. It must follow that the force is greatest when objects are nearer to the source of that force, below the Earth. Likewise, an object further away from the source of that force has lesser 'pull' from the force, far below.


So what happens in reality?

One object is 20,000 feet above Earth, where the force is located.

Another object is 5,000 feet above Earth.


The object at 20,000 feet is dropped into air, and is 'pulled down' by the force within Earth. It soon reaches terminal velocity, the maximum speed objects are 'pulled down' to Earth.


The second object is also dropped, at 5,000 feet. It also reaches the maximum speed reached when the force 'pulls it down' toward Earth.


If both objects are being 'pulled down' by the same force, within the Earth, then distance from the source of that force would be an indication of a force, that has greater effect when objects are nearer, compared to objects further away from the force.

Otherwise, if there is NO force on those objects, 'pulling them down towards Earth', where the source is located, then both objects will simply fall in air, without being forced down to Earth. The objects will simply fall, and reach maximum speed in air, during free fall - no matter what distance they are from Earth.


The objects are falling at the same rate, while one is much closer to Earth than the other one is. Which indicates there is no such force within Earth, to apply more force on objects nearer to it, and less force applied to objects further away from the source of that force, within the Earth.


It's nice to believe in such a magical force, which is never, ever, going to be proven to actually exist, in any way, shape, or form.

Unlike real forces, which are all well=proven to exist, which can all be demonstrated to exist, which hold to our physical laws.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: dragonridr

It's so much BS.

What's FE supposed to look like from it's side profile? Does the atmosphere stop at the so-called wall of ice or does it cover the underside too? Why do our tides behave like they're on a globe instead of behaving like they're in a round paddling pool? Is volcanic activity limited to topside? Why? Or are there plumes of magma unfolding into space from underneath? Why hasn't anyone seen them?

What happens to wind currents when they hit the ice wall? They'd have to bounce back which would create a permanent storm zone between warm winds heading to the ice walls and freezing wind coming back.


Nobody can reach beyond the boundaries of Earth, to see what lies beyond it. The fact that we cannot go beyond our planetary boundaries, which serve to protect everything within it, have always existed, and no power created on Earth, by humans, will cut, or smash through, the barriers of Earth.


The features of Earth, like tidal activity, or volcanic eruptions, or earthquakes, etc. - are explained by the flat Earth, unlike the round Earth model, which fails to hold up.

And the great wall of ice prove the Earth is flat. In fact, it is not just a wall of ice, it is a grand expanse that goes on for miles beyond, and is completely flat. Below the wall, where the ocean meets it, is more ice, until the ocean floor seals alongside the wall. A true 'wall', or boundary, of ice, circling around, where the flat oceans of Earth are held within.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 05:59 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



And the great wall of ice prove the Earth is flat. In fact, it is not just a wall of ice, it is a grand expanse that goes on for miles beyond, and is completely flat. Below the wall, where the ocean meets it, is more ice, until the ocean floor seals alongside the wall. A true 'wall', or boundary, of ice, circling around, where the flat oceans of Earth are held within.


You're welcome to believe whatever you like and I won't be arguing against your beliefs.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:11 AM
link   

And the great wall of ice prove the Earth is flat. In fact, it is not just a wall of ice, it is a grand expanse that goes on for miles beyond, and is completely flat. Below the wall, where the ocean meets it, is more ice, until the ocean floor seals alongside the wall. A true 'wall', or boundary, of ice, circling around, where the flat oceans of Earth are held within.


one has to ask :

how does an ATS member " know " this ?



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:23 AM
link   
an interesting observation :

in almost 3 months - and 8 pages of thread posts :

archive

sophist troll - has NEVER questioned the " belief system " or the validity of any claim made by a flat earth proponent

says it all really doesnt it



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape

And the great wall of ice prove the Earth is flat. In fact, it is not just a wall of ice, it is a grand expanse that goes on for miles beyond, and is completely flat. Below the wall, where the ocean meets it, is more ice, until the ocean floor seals alongside the wall. A true 'wall', or boundary, of ice, circling around, where the flat oceans of Earth are held within.


one has to ask :

how does an ATS member " know " this ?


The wiser man knows not to ask.



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

oh FFS - you , i and everyone else knows :

its pulling this shiite out of its arse

an incontinent truth - but still thats the facts



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape

And the great wall of ice prove the Earth is flat. In fact, it is not just a wall of ice, it is a grand expanse that goes on for miles beyond, and is completely flat. Below the wall, where the ocean meets it, is more ice, until the ocean floor seals alongside the wall. A true 'wall', or boundary, of ice, circling around, where the flat oceans of Earth are held within.


one has to ask :

how does an ATS member " know " this ?


From the videos and images of the ice walls, for one thing.

Ancient maps also show an ice wall around the flat Earth, as well.


How did they draw maps of the entire Earth, and all the continents, in such detail, while somehow drawing a wall of ice around Earth that doesn't exist? And then others who also drew maps, with the very same wall of ice surrounding the flat Earth, which were maps from other areas, and other eras?


You don't see maps like this too often, now. They were destroyed, for some reason....why would they want to destroy maps of the Earth, now??



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:58 AM
link   
We always see one face of the moon, no matter where we are on Earth. Sometimes the moon and Sun are both seen, above us, blocking out a blue sky.

If the Sun is millions of miles away, behind the moon, which is only 250,000 miles away, and both Sun and moon are above us, side by side, why can nobody ever hope to demonstrate how this, in real world demonstrations?


Because it's impossible to demonstrate something that isn't real, of course.


They just 'say' it is true, that's good enough for some folks!



posted on Nov, 24 2018 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: ignorant_ape

I'm off to see how Rudd and O'Brady are getting on crossing Antarctica.


www.instagram.com...




top topics



 
14
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join