Jump to content

Why the extreme hostility from anti flat earthers?


Jikwan
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jikwan said:

No, dont do that. Youve written some good posts already

You give up the moment someone disagrees with you is big mistake. I am expecting no less than 50 people disagreeing with me in the next few weeks

Its exactly the nature of discussion and debate: agree disagree doubt speculation reacting defensive putting some energy sometimes a little reasonably strong etc

Most of time i post people are not liking it. Im still here. Still learning

One things kept me going is if i see both our positions are too strong i dont ever return to that poster about that particular subject. But i could and do engage with that person on a 1000 other subjects

You are right.

Sometimes or most of the time the written words come across with a different energy than the one intended as if in face to face conversation lol

But yes i will keep on expressing my thoughts and within reason keeping the "atmosphere" within a nice temperature hahahah

 

Thanks for the little kick in my but! It does help ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


Highly likely it was some kind of Meteor - at what height above the Earth did it start to burn ?
 

In flatearth philosophy meteors from "outer space" is not possibe. Nothing can enter the great water dome nothing can exit it

I reckon it a big flash EMP bomb. From where? Antarctica is my guess.

Antarctica is where all the UFOs come from imo. Where else?

We have to keep guessing till someone sends a fast freeenergy powered very fast drone with camera over there.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


l've been (reluctantly) dragged into this subject.
As a member l've said / read enough and seen enough idiocy and rudeness from both sides to never want to engage ever again.

As a Mod l am trying to give room for the subject as everything should be able to be discussed here as long as it's in a reasonable manner.
The warning of this thread possibly being locked was reasonable and open.

To say this topic is a 'hot potato' is the understatement of all time.

Mods and Admin have plenty to do already without having to referee a rehash of this endlessly cyclic debate.
 

Yes i honestly think the same.

Not an easy task at all.

I joined the forum not long ago and am still absorbing the pace of which how these specific chats go and learning the various personalities we encounter here and "adapting" to it accordingly.

But either way, i appreciate getting honest feedback towards my comments and all that, i'm all up for advice etc etc no worries about that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jikwan said:

In flatearth philosophy meteors from "outer space" is not possibe.

 

So the next question has to be - what do you think all the meteors are then ? 
Lots are documented and some filmed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Simple Actions said:

Seems like your comment on this is a bit full of anger.....don't you think?

what part of the post makes you assume I'm angry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Basket Case said:

 

So the next question has to be - what do you think all the meteors are then ? 
Lots are documented and some filmed.

Ive not done any research on it yet because i have never believed since my birth.....the idea that meteors have crashed into earth.

Ive seen docs where respected scientists point to a great hole and declared it to be a meteor that fell 1 million years ago. How do they know? Did they or anyone see it?

They have a few letters after their name is all. If you pay any scientist enough they will say anything you want them to say.

Hey, you know its not that difficult to create a crater. Tell you what...just give me enough TNT and an army of schoolboys we get it set up and detonated within 3 days

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Basket Case said:

 

So the next question has to be - what do you think all the meteors are then ? 
Lots are documented and some filmed.

Exactly, so far it has been only Documented and Filmed..... but seems to always land/crash in non populated areas....

Just a thought..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bamboozooka said:

the ppl who argue most then go on to quote nasa.

didnt nasa give the netherlands pertified wood and called it moon rock.

Yes....i believe Marcus Allen (from Nexus Magazine) is one of the experts on the subject..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Simple Actions said:

Exactly, so far it has been only Documented and Filmed..... but seems to always land/crash in non populated areas....

Just a thought..


Lots of different video sources for this one in 2013.
(Some hit the Earth - some burn up before impact, all depending on size / speed / trajectory.) 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


Lots of different video sources for this one in 2013.
(Some hit the Earth - some burn up before impact, all depending on size / speed / trajectory.) 
 

 

..damn......was just about to do that too!!! hahahaha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jikwan 

How does this fit with a Dome covering us ?
 

7 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


Lots of different video sources for this one in 2013.
(Some hit the Earth - some burn up before impact, all depending on size / speed / trajectory.) 
 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Simple Actions said:

..damn......was just about to do that too!!! hahahaha

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


Lots of different video sources for this one in 2013.
(Some hit the Earth - some burn up before impact, all depending on size / speed / trajectory.) 
 

 

Brain's thinking cogs are moving fast and will need some more coolant....lol

 

As we only get the distances and all the calculations from specific organisations that so far seems to be lying all the time to keep the ''momentum'' going, we cannot really say for sure the real height of which these Objects are passing by and also the lack of understanding on comparing object sizes in order to determine the proportion against another object we are familiar with so then we probably could make an assumption on ''IF'' there is a Dome, then the height of the object would or could be X Miles heigh ''under the Dome'' meaning possibly just some sort of ''rocket/missile'' type of thing to make believe its a meteor..........OR MAYBE lol :) perhaps there isn't a Dome up there and its actually a real Rock that travelled an infinite distance to purposedly pass by earth just to say hello....but with an early warning so everyone can get their cameras out and film it at the very same time in all corners of the Earth capturing the side to side ''fire line'' either right to left or vice versa and never a video showing the Object coming straight in the camera(s) direction.........

 

Yes im having a non stop verbal diarrhoea due to watching a short clip of the Liberty Statue shaking hands with Eifel Tower on top of an elephant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


Lots of different video sources for this one in 2013.
(Some hit the Earth - some burn up before impact, all depending on size / speed / trajectory.) 
 

 

That "comet" would not be difficult to manufacture

Quite a large bodied hydrogen powered rocket

Location of lauch the arctic region

Point it siberia way

Whe it nears a certan altitude valves are opened near the tip of rocket hydrogen ignited for that fiery ball look

At a certain time a detonator makes the whole thing explode in mid air

Inform all mafia owned news statioms to teport comet sighting

Make sure there are some "amature" video recorders in the area coincidentally pointing cameras at sky at that exact moment

Voila!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @peter I hope you don't mind asking you a question or two, but in your opinion, what are the two most verifiable tests that we can all do at home to prove that the earth is round? 

 

I hope you don't mind me asking. Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jikwan said:

I found something really good

 

The flatearth society forum

 

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=qm70c67ordao6ib0oguu3u2qq0&

 

I would personally be very happy if people who want to discuss this subject disappeared over there. 👍

 

However, for those who wish to pursue this discussion here, may I ask you to take a look through the last lengthy Flat Earth topic here:

 

Before proceeding any further with this thread.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Morpheus said:

Hi @peter I hope you don't mind asking you a question or two, but in your opinion, what are the two most verifiable tests that we can all do at home to prove that the earth is round? 

 

I hope you don't mind me asking. Thanks. 

No I don't mind at all

First I don't think the earth is round or a sphere ,I think it is  spheroid in nature

1 the seasons

2 watching boats with the naked eye at the beach go below the horizon

3 eclipses , full or partial.

I really don't want to go down this road again,I find it rather tedious but here are three simple ones, explain them using a FE scenario

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, peter said:

I really don't want to go down this road again,I find it rather tedious

Well if you don't want to go through it is there any point? I'm not attempting to be devisive, but I know you're quite knowledgeable on the heliocentric model, I also think you're reasonable, so thought we could thrash it out without the nonsense of the other thread and without it descending into playground infantile behaviour. 

 

To respond and I'm quite surprised you brought up the boat one because I think that's the easiest to dismantle. 

 

As we can all agree our eyes can only see so far, so we have one degree of perspective when viewing things from afar. 

 

But I hope we also agree that water finds it own level (flat) no matter what it sits in, can we agree on that? If we do agree on that then we also agree that there is no such phenomena as bendy water. 

 

So as @Jikwan discussed photographs have been taken at distances that make no sense to curvature at all. The distance these photos are taken show no display of curvature and if anything show it is flat. 

 

I would also point out that navy gunships do not account for curvature when deploying their weapons. Most US navy gun ships use direct lines of sight (laser sight) and simply do not account for curvature. They account for how the boat is moving in the water and the laser sight which is used is within point degrees, therefore, if curvature was in play against a line of sight weapon deployed on a boat, then every shot should miss based on the quoted 8 inches per mile. They would shoot straight over the target due to curvature. 

 

However that simply does not happen because water, no matter what it sits in finds it level, flat. So I don't agree there is curvature based on the above, you can't get bendy water. Plus using a laser sight, using direct line targeting proves to me that the water is just as flat as what it sits on. 

 

That's my take on that. 

Edited by Morpheus
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Morpheus said:

I would also point out that navy gunships do not account for curvature when deploying their weapons. Most US navy gun ships use direct lines of sight (laser sight) and simply do not account for curvature. They account for how the boat is moving in the water and the laser sight which is used is within point degrees, therefore, if curvature was in play against a line of sight weapon deployed on a boat, then every shot should miss based on the quoted 8 inches per mile. They would shoot straight over the target due to curvature

Well here we go again,you have obviously just quoted something you have seen before but never thought about, we are not talking about guided missiles here because they use a combination of different targeting systems.

I may be wrong but I will assume you would be referring to a large deck gun that fires an explosive projectile

How high do you think the deck is from the water  for a gun ship  ,conservatively without looking it up 60 feet or so, I would think the targeting laser would be at the highest practical point to facilitate the longest range.

So if the gun can shoot 30 miles , I don't know if it can or not 8" per mile the ship would have slipped 240 " below the horizon which is twenty feet so there is plenty more for the direct line of sight laser to target so the weapons control computer system can make the calculations and fire

 

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, peter said:

So to actually believe that, you would have to also have to assume  there is no such thing as gravity or the earth's Coriolis effect which by the way snipers have to include in the calculations for shots taken at a couple of k or more  ,so here we go again, and I'm not playing,been there done that read the flat earth thread for my explanations,there is plenty there weather you agree with them or not is no concern of mine

 

For someone who posted earlier they're not angry, your replies are very aggressive in return. I think it's best if we stop then because you've clearly had enough of the topic from other people and you appear to be assuming I'm approaching you in the same manner as those people, and I'm not. But thanks anyway Pete, I appreciate your time. 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Morpheus said:

Well if you don't want to go through it is there any point? I'm not attempting to be devisive, but I know you're quite knowledgeable on the heliocentric model, I also think you're reasonable, so thought we could thrash it out without the nonsense of the other thread and without it descending into playground infantile behaviour. 

 

To respond and I'm quite surprised you brought up the boat one because I think that's the easiest to dismantle. 

 

As we can all agree our eyes can only see so far, so we have one degree of perspective when viewing things from afar. 

 

But I hope we also agree that water finds it own level (flat) no matter what it sits in, can we agree on that? If we do agree on that then we also agree that there is no such phenomena as bendy water. 

 

So as @Jikwan discussed photographs have been taken at distances that make no sense to curvature at all. The distance these photos are taken show no display of curvature and if anything show it is flat. 

 

I would also point out that navy gunships do not account for curvature when deploying their weapons. Most US navy gun ships use direct lines of sight (laser sight) and simply do not account for curvature. They account for how the boat is moving in the water and the laser sight which is used is within point degrees, therefore, if curvature was in play against a line of sight weapon deployed on a boat, then every shot should miss based on the quoted 8 inches per mile. They would shoot straight over the target due to curvature. 

 

However that simply does not happen because water, no matter what it sits in finds it level, flat. So I don't agree there is curvature based on the above, you can't get bendy water. Plus using a laser sight, using direct line targeting proves to me that the water is just as flat as what it sits on. 

 

That's my take on that. 

Thats the 1st time i heard that point of view. Could be youre the first one to discover this angle on it

This the reason we must have a thread where new information, new evidence is posted.

This flatearth investigation is picking up speed. The geat mafia doesnt want it. So they send in their dogs to tear these threads apart.

I havnt seen any of these "dogs" on the thread yet. The classic dog is the likes of truegroup....the undisputed king of all dogs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jikwan said:

Thats the 1st time i heard that point of view. Could be youre the first one to discover this angle on it

This the reason we must have a thread where new information, new evidence is posted.

This flatearth investigation is picking up speed. The geat mafia doesnt want it. So they send in their dogs to tear these threads apart.

I havnt seen any of these "dogs" on the thread yet. The classic dog is the likes of truegroup....the undisputed king of all dogs

It's not my theory, watch that video above, honestly the guy has great credentials and covers exactly what Pete is saying about the coriolis effect who can eloquently describe how this doesn't actually factor into their deployment of missiles at all. It's a great listen. He also did some of his own tests at home when he was on leave. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...