This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ArishMell · 70-79, M
Instead of just saying "rhubarb" immediately, I tried to find out what the FE lot really believe, what the things they are reluctant to explain.
Firstly, their common themes though not necessarily shared by all, are a flat disc of an Earth, motionless in its geocentric Space, with no gravity; and that any statement to the contrary is a lie tantamount to heresy, to support an unstated conspiracy.:
1) How that model can explain day-night and seasonal cycles, the Moon's phases, the tides, falling weight (not the same as mass), nightly star-circling and over-year constellation changes, and rivers flowing down-hill.
2) What is the conspiracy, over how many nations and historical time, and by whom for what ends or benefits?
3) How convincing are the proponents' themselves?
[i]Answers:[/i]
1) No matter how hard I tried, nothing would fit that full FE model convincingly!
For example, making the Sun orbiting on a plane "above" the disc, but concentrically, gives either no night at all, or perhaps a gradation from full to dim light. Orbiting by going "underneath" the planet and popping up the other side, gives night and day and of local-noon; but of equal timing world-wide: everywhere is either dark or lit simultaneously.
So I tried imagining the face of the Earth being perpendicular to the orbital plane: whichever is doing the orbiting still gives no day/night cycle anything like we see, even if the Earth is still rotating on its own axis. If no axial rotation; the day-light or darkness is fixed, with no diurnal cycle. Nor could it make the seasons work.
And so it went on. No matter how I arranged the FE model, none of those familiar natural events would work.
Besides, what is "down" the sides, or what does the underside look like?
.
2) One publication, by a Thailand-resident, American yoga-teacher called Eric Dubay; blames the solar-centric round-Earth model on a so-called "Atlantean Conspiracy"; but I do not know if that is his invention or lifted from another FE-er.
These supposed conspiracies, we are told to believe, go back centuries and are international. This means they need allege countless mariners, explorers, map-makers, scientists, teachers etc, all over the world have been colluding to deceive us all in a uniform manner for so long.
Who though, could possibly have devised such a conspiracy, for what reason, and how would their descendants maintain it so thoroughly to gain from it, nowadays?
'
3) I saw two videos, one of them Dubay's, as well as reading posts here from TBLman and his supporters who seem inspired by those shows.
Dubay is alone on his site (a blog??), which must have taken hundreds of hours to create. It is a vast collection of selectively-picked (and edited by him??) passages from, or summaries of, both text-books and probably other FE sites; each illustrated by a photograph or diagram. In fact, we read it, not hear him.
Although well-made, it is full of clear flaws, including his evident poor grasp of basic geometry, let alone such advanced concepts as simple gravity; and by some very unlikely examples.
One such is the "London & North-Western Railway", London to Liverpool, about 250 miles apart, via Birmingham in the middle of England. It does not demonstrate the FE hypothesis at all. Dubay's photograph is of a single-tracked, straight, non-electrified railway line clearly not this one. The two end stations are close to sea-level, Birmingham is over 200 feet a.s.l. . The LNWR name ceased in the 1930s, but the route still exists; double-tracked (4 in places), with few long straights, and has used electric traction for years. It also crosses many gentle hills. Its relevance to FE-according-to-Dubay is not at all obvious!
'
The other was very different, and unlike Dubay's creativity and simple, calm approach; is a shoddily-made video having no personal presentation or artistic-production skills whatsoever. One clip stoops to a cruel trick on an elderly woman; elsewhere they often use a trick common in domestic abuse called in law, "coercive and controlling behaviour". Its excitable "presenters" make little or no attempt at coherence, civility, cohesive arguments, marshalled examples or even relevance - one clip is by some idiot anglers of their own straying into a Naval exercise-range - but again; collectively shows no technical knowledge whatsoever.
Still, Oscar-losing apart, its basic premise is again of a mystery conspiracy standing up to no logic; but these potty-mouthed characters openly call anyone teaching otherwise, a "liar", and even question the very existence of historical people.
.
So two contrasting approaches by different FE-fans to basically similar, conspiracy-theory based ideas; but we ought ask their motives. They seem desperate to push their beliefs; but what do they gain personally from it, if anything?
'''''''
That is my use of the abbreviation. Previously I had known FE perfectly innocently as for "Finite Element" Analysis - a mathematical tool used by professional scientist and engineers.
Firstly, their common themes though not necessarily shared by all, are a flat disc of an Earth, motionless in its geocentric Space, with no gravity; and that any statement to the contrary is a lie tantamount to heresy, to support an unstated conspiracy.:
1) How that model can explain day-night and seasonal cycles, the Moon's phases, the tides, falling weight (not the same as mass), nightly star-circling and over-year constellation changes, and rivers flowing down-hill.
2) What is the conspiracy, over how many nations and historical time, and by whom for what ends or benefits?
3) How convincing are the proponents' themselves?
[i]Answers:[/i]
1) No matter how hard I tried, nothing would fit that full FE model convincingly!
For example, making the Sun orbiting on a plane "above" the disc, but concentrically, gives either no night at all, or perhaps a gradation from full to dim light. Orbiting by going "underneath" the planet and popping up the other side, gives night and day and of local-noon; but of equal timing world-wide: everywhere is either dark or lit simultaneously.
So I tried imagining the face of the Earth being perpendicular to the orbital plane: whichever is doing the orbiting still gives no day/night cycle anything like we see, even if the Earth is still rotating on its own axis. If no axial rotation; the day-light or darkness is fixed, with no diurnal cycle. Nor could it make the seasons work.
And so it went on. No matter how I arranged the FE model, none of those familiar natural events would work.
Besides, what is "down" the sides, or what does the underside look like?
.
2) One publication, by a Thailand-resident, American yoga-teacher called Eric Dubay; blames the solar-centric round-Earth model on a so-called "Atlantean Conspiracy"; but I do not know if that is his invention or lifted from another FE-er.
These supposed conspiracies, we are told to believe, go back centuries and are international. This means they need allege countless mariners, explorers, map-makers, scientists, teachers etc, all over the world have been colluding to deceive us all in a uniform manner for so long.
Who though, could possibly have devised such a conspiracy, for what reason, and how would their descendants maintain it so thoroughly to gain from it, nowadays?
'
3) I saw two videos, one of them Dubay's, as well as reading posts here from TBLman and his supporters who seem inspired by those shows.
Dubay is alone on his site (a blog??), which must have taken hundreds of hours to create. It is a vast collection of selectively-picked (and edited by him??) passages from, or summaries of, both text-books and probably other FE sites; each illustrated by a photograph or diagram. In fact, we read it, not hear him.
Although well-made, it is full of clear flaws, including his evident poor grasp of basic geometry, let alone such advanced concepts as simple gravity; and by some very unlikely examples.
One such is the "London & North-Western Railway", London to Liverpool, about 250 miles apart, via Birmingham in the middle of England. It does not demonstrate the FE hypothesis at all. Dubay's photograph is of a single-tracked, straight, non-electrified railway line clearly not this one. The two end stations are close to sea-level, Birmingham is over 200 feet a.s.l. . The LNWR name ceased in the 1930s, but the route still exists; double-tracked (4 in places), with few long straights, and has used electric traction for years. It also crosses many gentle hills. Its relevance to FE-according-to-Dubay is not at all obvious!
'
The other was very different, and unlike Dubay's creativity and simple, calm approach; is a shoddily-made video having no personal presentation or artistic-production skills whatsoever. One clip stoops to a cruel trick on an elderly woman; elsewhere they often use a trick common in domestic abuse called in law, "coercive and controlling behaviour". Its excitable "presenters" make little or no attempt at coherence, civility, cohesive arguments, marshalled examples or even relevance - one clip is by some idiot anglers of their own straying into a Naval exercise-range - but again; collectively shows no technical knowledge whatsoever.
Still, Oscar-losing apart, its basic premise is again of a mystery conspiracy standing up to no logic; but these potty-mouthed characters openly call anyone teaching otherwise, a "liar", and even question the very existence of historical people.
.
So two contrasting approaches by different FE-fans to basically similar, conspiracy-theory based ideas; but we ought ask their motives. They seem desperate to push their beliefs; but what do they gain personally from it, if anything?
'''''''
That is my use of the abbreviation. Previously I had known FE perfectly innocently as for "Finite Element" Analysis - a mathematical tool used by professional scientist and engineers.
TBIman · 41-45, M
@ArishMell I can't speak for anyone else but my intention for bringing the FE to Similar Words was just to enlighten people to the fact that all of us have been lied to for centuries about where it is that we actually live. Also to prove that there is not even [u]ONE[/u] legitimate proof of the globe. Water always finds its own level. You cannot have gas pressure without containment. We as humans have figured this out a very long time ago. They are known as facts backed up by many experiments.
Any scientist or engineers who claim that the Earth is a spinning ball quite obviously does not know what they are talking about.
"They" (the people running the world and who are responsible for 100% of the hardships) are Satin whorshipers and want only a small number of us (Goyium they call anyone who was not born to a Jewish mother) left on the Earth to serve them. That is what this whole COVID crap was about. It was a way to depopulate the world, and it's working too.
I enjoyed enlightening you this mother of all deceptions when I thought that you were being genious, but after I answered all of your questions with completely plausable explainations and you didn't answer any of mine (except for gravity which to this very day is still an unproven [u]THEORY[/u]) I stopped replying, or maybe you stopped sending me messages. It doesn't matter why we stopped communicating. We did. I believe that it was a wise decision because although being a super smart guy you wouldn't conceed that water was incapible of curving and sticking to spinning balls within a vacuum. We know certain facts that is why they are called facts.
A short time after I sent you the last message after you totally discredited me by saying that I believed that the Earth was an upward excellerating disc which no one believes... I diabled my account. It wasn't you man... It was all of the braindead. I enjoyed our interaction.
I want peace wiith everyone.
Any scientist or engineers who claim that the Earth is a spinning ball quite obviously does not know what they are talking about.
"They" (the people running the world and who are responsible for 100% of the hardships) are Satin whorshipers and want only a small number of us (Goyium they call anyone who was not born to a Jewish mother) left on the Earth to serve them. That is what this whole COVID crap was about. It was a way to depopulate the world, and it's working too.
I enjoyed enlightening you this mother of all deceptions when I thought that you were being genious, but after I answered all of your questions with completely plausable explainations and you didn't answer any of mine (except for gravity which to this very day is still an unproven [u]THEORY[/u]) I stopped replying, or maybe you stopped sending me messages. It doesn't matter why we stopped communicating. We did. I believe that it was a wise decision because although being a super smart guy you wouldn't conceed that water was incapible of curving and sticking to spinning balls within a vacuum. We know certain facts that is why they are called facts.
A short time after I sent you the last message after you totally discredited me by saying that I believed that the Earth was an upward excellerating disc which no one believes... I diabled my account. It wasn't you man... It was all of the braindead. I enjoyed our interaction.
I want peace wiith everyone.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman If I had misinterpreted you to say you think the Earth is accelerating upwards, I am sorry, but you cannot deny you think it a disc (or other geometrical figure, such as a cuboid, with a plane surface).
No-one is going to shake you of your beliefs, not only about shapes of planets and basic physics, but apparently about human matters as well, but we all know that the more minority and unlikely the beliefs, the more desperate their advocates are to defend them.
No-one is going to shake you of your beliefs, not only about shapes of planets and basic physics, but apparently about human matters as well, but we all know that the more minority and unlikely the beliefs, the more desperate their advocates are to defend them.
TBIman · 41-45, M
@ArishMell I believe that the Earth we all live on is a stationary (non-moving) plane. That is exactly what I believe.
I am not concerned about anything other than the overall shape of the ground beneath our feet.
You can tell anyone you wish the TBIman believes that he lives on a stationary (non-moving) plane because that would be the truth. In fact, I really want people to know about the heliocentric lie that most of the world still believes with 0 physical evidence.
Thanks for the apology, Maybe you aren't a prick after all?
I am not concerned about anything other than the overall shape of the ground beneath our feet.
You can tell anyone you wish the TBIman believes that he lives on a stationary (non-moving) plane because that would be the truth. In fact, I really want people to know about the heliocentric lie that most of the world still believes with 0 physical evidence.
Thanks for the apology, Maybe you aren't a prick after all?
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman Thank you! I thought all along your belief in a flat planet is unshakeable, although I was unsure of how you envisage it, nor know why you believe it.
However, to call what almost everyone else holds as true, "lies", and thereby effectively call everyone else liars, is hardly the way to win converts to your philosophy.
However, to call what almost everyone else holds as true, "lies", and thereby effectively call everyone else liars, is hardly the way to win converts to your philosophy.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman I know you believe the Earth is flat, but what shape, size etc? What do you envisage beyond it - and if you think planets do not exist then what do you believe is out there in Space?
What, in your model, is the topographical relationship with the Sun by which we have daylight on one area of the Earth while it is night-time in the other?A relationship that, according to our location on Earth and time of year, gives a lighting pattern that is so mathematically regularly that it can be calculated accurately for that location, well in advance?
(In practice the actual daylight pattern anywhere is sufficiently constant in human-history terms not to worry calendar publishers. Anyway, they gain sunrise/sunset times from their countries' scientific services. In the UK that is the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, on the 0º Longitude Meridien a few miles East of London.)
No of course [i]I[/i] am not spinning 360º every 24 hours. Nor is anyone else... instead they, and I, believe we are moving [i]with[/i] the surface of the Earth hence not moving relatively to it (except as we choose, by walking, driving, flying, etc.)
It's like walking along a railway-carriage aisle: you are still walking along the train at your normal 3mph walking speed, whether the train is still standing at the platform or cruising at 100mph. The difference is that in the station you are walking past fixed features on the platform at 3mph; but at speed you are moving at 97 or 103mph relatively to fixed features in the scenery; depending if you are walking towards the rear or front of the train.
What, in your model, is the topographical relationship with the Sun by which we have daylight on one area of the Earth while it is night-time in the other?A relationship that, according to our location on Earth and time of year, gives a lighting pattern that is so mathematically regularly that it can be calculated accurately for that location, well in advance?
(In practice the actual daylight pattern anywhere is sufficiently constant in human-history terms not to worry calendar publishers. Anyway, they gain sunrise/sunset times from their countries' scientific services. In the UK that is the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, on the 0º Longitude Meridien a few miles East of London.)
No of course [i]I[/i] am not spinning 360º every 24 hours. Nor is anyone else... instead they, and I, believe we are moving [i]with[/i] the surface of the Earth hence not moving relatively to it (except as we choose, by walking, driving, flying, etc.)
It's like walking along a railway-carriage aisle: you are still walking along the train at your normal 3mph walking speed, whether the train is still standing at the platform or cruising at 100mph. The difference is that in the station you are walking past fixed features on the platform at 3mph; but at speed you are moving at 97 or 103mph relatively to fixed features in the scenery; depending if you are walking towards the rear or front of the train.
TBIman · 41-45, M
@ArishMell Again, I do not believe in other planets. "Planets" are just wondering lights set above the motionless plane that we live upon. I believe in space, just not outer space.
The Earth does not move at all. It has never been proven to move, ThIs is why I claim that whatever we live on is 100% motionless, I don't see how anyone can believe that the Earth moves when there is 0 evidence to support that hypothesis.
I simply do not have the answers that you are looking for. Just because "I" do not have the answers you are looking for does not mean that they do not exist.
If the surface the Earth is moving at any rate of speed, and you are also on the surface that would mean that you are also moving at the same rate of speed, yet we don't know it? We must be indoctrinated to believe it.
I liked you a lot until you claimed that "TBIman believes that we live on an upwards accelerating disc." When I would never say such a thing.
Look man, you just aren't ready to wake up yet. You are content with believing a lie, and that is okay. Just please don't go around saying that TBIman believes this or that when I do not. I was extremely clear when I said that the Earth is 100% [u]STATIONARY[/u]. You can attempt to discredit me all you wish, as it is not hard to do.
I've told you what my beliefs are time and time again, yet you still went around telling everyone that "TBIman believes that we are living on an upwards accellerating disc. " I believe that you apologized for doing that, and I thank you for your aplogy, but the damage has been done, Everyone who saw that post now believes that I am a moron. I am not saying that I am not a moron, but I am a moron for totally different reasons other than believing my senses.
This communication is counter-productive, and I wish to stop it. I'm sure that a man of your intelligence level can find someone else to lie about.
I wish you well ArishMell. Peace,
The Earth does not move at all. It has never been proven to move, ThIs is why I claim that whatever we live on is 100% motionless, I don't see how anyone can believe that the Earth moves when there is 0 evidence to support that hypothesis.
I simply do not have the answers that you are looking for. Just because "I" do not have the answers you are looking for does not mean that they do not exist.
If the surface the Earth is moving at any rate of speed, and you are also on the surface that would mean that you are also moving at the same rate of speed, yet we don't know it? We must be indoctrinated to believe it.
I liked you a lot until you claimed that "TBIman believes that we live on an upwards accelerating disc." When I would never say such a thing.
Look man, you just aren't ready to wake up yet. You are content with believing a lie, and that is okay. Just please don't go around saying that TBIman believes this or that when I do not. I was extremely clear when I said that the Earth is 100% [u]STATIONARY[/u]. You can attempt to discredit me all you wish, as it is not hard to do.
I've told you what my beliefs are time and time again, yet you still went around telling everyone that "TBIman believes that we are living on an upwards accellerating disc. " I believe that you apologized for doing that, and I thank you for your aplogy, but the damage has been done, Everyone who saw that post now believes that I am a moron. I am not saying that I am not a moron, but I am a moron for totally different reasons other than believing my senses.
This communication is counter-productive, and I wish to stop it. I'm sure that a man of your intelligence level can find someone else to lie about.
I wish you well ArishMell. Peace,
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman You can't wriggle out of your calling anyone who openly opposes your belief, a liar. YOU use the words. "lie, "liar" and "lying".
You will not - perhaps cannot - explain why you believe as you do, but your tactics include not clearly explaining the physical form of the cosmic model you propose. If anyone reading this thread thinks you want any other model suppressed, would they be correct? If so, [i]why [/i]do you?
You will not - perhaps cannot - explain why you believe as you do, but your tactics include not clearly explaining the physical form of the cosmic model you propose. If anyone reading this thread thinks you want any other model suppressed, would they be correct? If so, [i]why [/i]do you?
TBIman · 41-45, M
@ArishMell Dude for the very last time, I believe that the Earth is a motionless plane BECAUSE water cannot curve around spinning balls in space vacuums. What else do you want me to say?
All you can do is parrot things like "gravity", or "refraction." I believe that you've picked my brain for long enough. I wish you well in your space fantasy world.
All you can do is parrot things like "gravity", or "refraction." I believe that you've picked my brain for long enough. I wish you well in your space fantasy world.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman I KNOW you believe that! You've kept saying it, and that you cannot see how water can stay on the Earth if that is a sphere moving through Space.
I was trying to get you to explain how, in [i]your[/i] view, it all works: how[i] you[/i] conceive its geometry, extent, thickness, boundary conditions, relationships with the Sun, Moon, etc., the day/night mechanism; the nature of other heavenly bodies.
But you won't. You just attack anyone who does not share your basic belief, you try to twist their words, or to manipulate them into twisting your words as a weapon against them. Given that behaviour, and the elaborate stuff some other Flat Earth enthusiasts publish, is this all actually some form of cult you are in?
I don't parrot "gravity" _ but seem to recall you denying it exists; which would make locating any loose objects on any-shaped Earth difficult.
"Refraction"? When did either of us mention that even once, previously? Others may have done, but I am fairly certain I haven't, and I don't think you have.
I was trying to get you to explain how, in [i]your[/i] view, it all works: how[i] you[/i] conceive its geometry, extent, thickness, boundary conditions, relationships with the Sun, Moon, etc., the day/night mechanism; the nature of other heavenly bodies.
But you won't. You just attack anyone who does not share your basic belief, you try to twist their words, or to manipulate them into twisting your words as a weapon against them. Given that behaviour, and the elaborate stuff some other Flat Earth enthusiasts publish, is this all actually some form of cult you are in?
I don't parrot "gravity" _ but seem to recall you denying it exists; which would make locating any loose objects on any-shaped Earth difficult.
"Refraction"? When did either of us mention that even once, previously? Others may have done, but I am fairly certain I haven't, and I don't think you have.
DocSavage · M
@TBIman
[quote] believe that the Earth is a motionless plane BECAUSE water cannot curve around spinning balls[/quote]
I thought you said before the the earth is constantly moving in an upward direction. And it’s the downward pressure that keeps things falling.
So wouldn’t the water slide off the edge ?
What force is keeping us moving ? It would have to run out of energy sooner or later.
[quote] believe that the Earth is a motionless plane BECAUSE water cannot curve around spinning balls[/quote]
I thought you said before the the earth is constantly moving in an upward direction. And it’s the downward pressure that keeps things falling.
So wouldn’t the water slide off the edge ?
What force is keeping us moving ? It would have to run out of energy sooner or later.