Jump to content

Flat Earth: the last thread about this subject on this forum


 Share

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, peter said:

The points I made about the laser across the lake experiments are fundamental to all these experiments ,therefore

In my estimation the only experiment of this nature that could have any validity what so ever should be held at see level with regards to the ocean, however I can still see problems with ,air pressure, wind, temperature, time of day , mirage , salt content of surrounding air, refraction, reflection, humidity etc etc

 

Lake ijssel

 

Like you, Peter, there will be many many many Helio centric people looking at the experiment (lots will probably watch the experiment video, read the notes) and will be looking to find fault, error or something missing/added to the environment.

 

I cant change the result of the experiment.

 

I would also suggest that the Heliocentric people go out and create their own experiment to prove the curve.

Since 2015, when this issue rose massively, there has been one notable experiment performed (stephen hawking helicopter experiment) and that was faked by the team. faked. fraud. disgraceful.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, peter said:

( unless we are talking about the oceans and gravity)

 

Talking about Ocean's and Gravity, How is it possible for the oceans to stay on a spinning ball, wouldn't this happen?

 

image_2021-10-15_080014.png.46b4e536df5f8398d84e60e91dbd2cf6.png

 

I never did understand how this gravity thing works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More miss direction

 

comment on this if you will , which I have been trying to get you to do for 25 pages or so

 

Now look at the scale, a lake no matter how big,it is minuscule to the earth , we have also herd on more than one occasion that water finds it's own level as evidence the earth is flat ,and yes it does in a container ( unless we are talking about the oceans and gravity), so no matter how big a lake is it is essentially just a container for the water and therefore one would expect the level of the water to be flat ,and as such isolated from the curvature of the earth, to me these types of videos are nothing more than a  cleaver magicians slight of hand and the same could be said for your fence  logic as well.

 

you site Lake ijssel to refute what I said because it is a closed inlet in your words ,so if it's closed it then become a container.

 

57 minutes ago, zArk said:

I would also suggest that the Heliocentric people go out and create their own experiment to prove the curve.

Since 2015, when this issue rose massively, there has been one notable experiment performed (stephen hawking helicopter experiment) and that was faked by the team. faked. fraud. disgraceful.

Well I haven't seen it and I don't watch them anyway, I only have your word for it and given my past experience ,well anyway what has one so called faked experiment  got to do with what I said ? absolutely  nothing more misdirection.

Then you say go and do your own experiment to prove a curve, why? the theory is already in place, it has observational compliance and integrity  plus astronomical predictability ,it explains the seasons ,eclipses, night and day etc etc etc, it seems to me the onus should be on yourself to prove otherwise and in my opinion you have failed miserably, you have been less than honest and used subterfuge with you star chart drawings and have also been rather selective in you quotes as people can see with your last half dozen posts .

the old adage of occam's razor rings true, with the globe theory as you put it you don't require an invisible firmament that is scarred,  two bodies that are orbiting above the firmament through water because space doesn't exist and refracts the image of the moon and sun which doesn't exist either , on the inside of the firmament solely because of firmament scarring and one has to be hot enough to illuminate and heat the earth as it travels through the water not to mention your gas layers , need I go on ?

If you don't wish to comment on what I said about the laser experiments ,and I doubt you do so be it

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

Talking about Ocean's and Gravity, How is it possible for the oceans to stay on a spinning ball, wouldn't this happen?

 

image_2021-10-15_080014.png.46b4e536df5f8398d84e60e91dbd2cf6.png

 

I never did understand how this gravity thing works.

  maybe if you took the time to read  gravity by Wheeler and Thorn there is one other author ,but I cant remember his name at the moment, maybe you may glean an inkling as to what is going on

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, peter said:

  maybe if you took the time to read  gravity by Wheeler and Thorn there is one other author ,but I cant remember his name at the moment, maybe you may glean an inkling as to what is going on

 

 

Thanks but I Can't be doing with all that studying, can't you just explain it in layman's terms ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

Thanks but I Can't be doing with all that studying, can't you just explain it in layman's terms ?

yes, but your not really interested are you as it definitely falls outside the confines of your book and besides there has been a quite a few threads where this has been covered , the previous flat earth thread ,space doesn't exist and  gravity doesn't exist , there are a couple competing theories , the standard model ,nassim harrimen's theory and sub quantum kinetics by Paul  LaViolette  even though theories are different and have supporting math  as to the cause they all agree that it exists so do some research  yourself, personally I think Harrimen is very close to the mark if not spot on

I understand what you are trying to do and it hasn't worked so it looks like its back on your knees and more praying for you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Shrug your shoulders. Admit defeat. You're wasting your time trying to reason with people who don't want to be reasoned with. Step away from this thread, and find other topics where people want to discuss stuff.

 

That's my advice.

 

Grumpy, I have given irrefutable evidence of the moon bounce, that cant be explained & of course it wasent that difficult to do of course as millions have proven this experiment & there is nothing he can add to counter the evidence that makes any sense. 

 

Its not just about flat earth, is about the distance to the moon & proving he is spouting nonsense about the moon being nearer or a manifestation. Which he offers no evidence for atall but is super confident in his theory.

 

So hardly me admitting defeat. Am just sick of his lame replies now.

 

Atleast he bothers to try & explain his theories I guess, the others on here offer zero science.

They are welcome to their little fantasy world. I personally dont see why they should be on the forums latest post list tho. Looks like disinfo central from that standpoint & the only reason I jumped on this thread in the 1st place.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, alexa said:

Rob Skiba has died:classic_sad:, anyone who's an ardent believer in flat earth will know who he is. This is Rob in the Middle. May he RIP & I thank him for all his hard work he has done for us Flat Earthers.

 

1484576675_askib.jpg.c9ca17f20d82a45848111c467a598d08.jpg

 

https://usdaynews.com/celebrities/celebrity-death/rob-skiba-death-cause/

I am shocked. This man was one who seriously tried to extend the horizon of understanding. He was one of the important ones who made me seriously consider Enoch's book to better understand my encounters with something impossible. Even though I can never be a Flat Earther, I found certain details that took me further. Michael Talbot also died much too early. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, peter said:

yes, but your not really interested are you as it definitely falls outside the confines of your book and besides there has been a quite a few threads where this has been covered , the previous flat earth thread ,space doesn't exist and  gravity doesn't exist , there are a couple competing theories , the standard model ,nassim harrimen's theory and sub quantum kinetics by Paul  LaViolette  even though theories are different and have supporting math  as to the cause they all agree that it exists so do some research  yourself, personally I think Harrimen is very close to the mark if not spot on

I understand what you are trying to do and it hasn't worked so it looks like its back on your knees and more praying for you

 

So you don't know then ? I was hoping you could explain it to me in simple terms, but I guess not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, alexa said:

 

Talking about Ocean's and Gravity, How is it possible for the oceans to stay on a spinning ball, wouldn't this happen?

 

image_2021-10-15_080014.png.46b4e536df5f8398d84e60e91dbd2cf6.png

 

I never did understand how this gravity thing works.

 

Now you're just trolling again, of course that wouldn't happen...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, alexa said:

 

So you don't know then ? I was hoping you could explain it to me in simple terms, but I guess not.

OK in simple terms so even you can understand

more mass ,more gravity, earth's mass big gravity big ,water stick to ball

I hope that helps

Now do some research and fill in the blanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, peter said:

Now look at the scale, a lake no matter how big,it is minuscule to the earth , we have also herd on more than one occasion that water finds it's own level as evidence the earth is flat ,and yes it does in a container ( unless we are talking about the oceans and gravity), so no matter how big a lake is it is essentially just a container for the water and therefore one would expect the level of the water to be flat ,and as such isolated from the curvature of the earth, to me these types of videos are nothing more than a  cleaver magicians slight of hand and the same could be said for your fence  logic as well.

 

you site Lake ijssel to refute what I said because it is a closed inlet in your words ,so if it's closed it then become a container.


 

Your example of a container would necessarily require the closed inlet to have its water level higher than the sea level at the barrier, which it doesnt/didnt/wont. 🤷‍♂️ [of course on a sphere the effect would be all around]

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, peter said:

Well I haven't seen it and I don't watch them anyway, I only have your word for it and given my past experience ,well anyway what has one so called faked experiment  got to do with what I said ? absolutely  nothing more misdirection.

Then you say go and do your own experiment to prove a curve, why? the theory is already in place, it has observational compliance and integrity  plus astronomical predictability ,it explains the seasons ,eclipses, night and day etc etc etc, it seems to me the onus should be on yourself to prove otherwise and in my opinion you have failed miserably, you have been less than honest and used subterfuge with you star chart drawings and have also been rather selective in you quotes as people can see with your last half dozen posts .

well of course Dogma is ruling the roost in the helio science world atm.

ignoring the Stephen Hawking experiment failure seems to be a command from the helio high command

21 hours ago, peter said:

the old adage of occam's razor rings true, with the globe theory as you put it you don't require an invisible firmament that is scarred,  two bodies that are orbiting above the firmament through water because space doesn't exist and refracts the image of the moon and sun which doesn't exist either , on the inside of the firmament solely because of firmament scarring and one has to be hot enough to illuminate and heat the earth as it travels through the water not to mention your gas layers , need I go on ?

well for starters you need a curve on earth which is no-where to be found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zArk said:


 

Your example of a container would necessarily require the closed inlet to have its water level higher than the sea level at the barrier, which it doesnt/didnt/wont. 🤷‍♂️ [of course on a sphere the effect would be all around]

 

 

why? once it becomes a container the water level is flat, the dead sea is lower than sea level ,it also is a container and obviously doesn't have to be higher than sea level

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zArk said:

well of course Dogma is ruling the roost in the helio science world atm.

ignoring the Stephen Hawking experiment failure seems to be a command from the helio high command

well for starters you need a curve on earth which is no-where to be found.

Ha ,the straws are on the far table with the condiments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zArk said:

well for starters you need a curve on earth which is no-where to be found

many videos have it,even the photos which FE crowd posts have it,they just pretend it's not there 

and for videos they say it's fish eye lens 

 

round and a round it goes and we stop at psyop ,to discredit conspiracys people and along they way take some of your free time and energy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zArk said:

well for starters you need a curve on earth which is no-where to be found.

 they also put blinkers on horses so they can only look in one direction, give it a rest zark you have proved absolutely nothing ,and to put it in your own words ,that's a fact

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, screamingeagle said:

many videos have it,even the photos which FE crowd posts have it,they just pretend it's not there 

and for videos they say it's fish eye lens 

 

Nonsense

Apparent horizon is not curvature

 

The horizon officially at 3miles changes to 17 miles when a camera or telescope with long Focal length is used

 

Variable horizon is not curvature

 

It's heliocentric dogma . 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, peter said:

why? once it becomes a container the water level is flat, the dead sea is lower than sea level ,it also is a container and obviously doesn't have to be higher than sea level

For your argument it does. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, peter said:

 they also put blinkers on horses so they can only look in one direction, give it a rest zark you have proved absolutely nothing ,and to put it in your own words ,that's a fact

Just 'put up or shut up'

 

Show the Helio experiment proving the curve. Optical effects not allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...