and uh Why?

  • 40 Replies
  • 11356 Views
and uh Why?
« on: March 05, 2007, 05:59:40 PM »
Right right. so I fully understand this idea now. It's based on pseudo-science and anything unexplainable is because of a government conspiracy.

My only remaning question. is why? What is the purpose of the conspiracy? (You'll have to dig deep into the history books for this one, cause you're gonna have to provide explanations for why Magellan would lie to everyone.)

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2007, 06:03:58 PM »
What didn't he do that he said he did?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2007, 07:04:15 PM »
sail around the world...

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2007, 07:06:41 PM »
It is perfectly plausible for Magellan to circumnavigate the Earth in the FE theory. I don't see where you are going in this.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #4 on: March 05, 2007, 07:26:38 PM »
ok, ok, ok fine! still, why does the government want to invent this conspiracy?

?

Tom Bishop

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2007, 07:32:25 PM »
ok, ok, ok fine! still, why does the government want to invent this conspiracy?

The Government is not aware of the Conspiracy that operates within its own space programs.

The Conspiracy is operated by an elite group of conspirators who divert NASA's multi-billion dollar budget into their personal bank accounts. In exchange, they give the nation a few lousy Photoshops of a round earth and the occasional fireworks show.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2007, 07:36:55 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2007, 07:41:32 PM »
Ah. I see. So they are doing it to steal the money?

?

Tom Bishop

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2007, 07:57:15 PM »
Ah. I see. So they are doing it to steal the money?

Exactly. It's simply a perpetuation of deception and swindling that has existed since the dawn of man. In previous posts I've touched on the origins of the Conspiracy. To give you a background I'll reproduce some of them here in this thread.

    On the Conspiracy and its Origins

    Over a century before NASA the Round Earth Conspiracy was perpetuated by the Royal Astronomical Society. It began as the Astronomical Society of London in 1820 as a dummy organization to support astronomical research. It later became the Royal Astronomical Society in 1831 on receiving its Royal Charter from William IV.

    The Royal Astronomical Society was a notoriously corrupt entity, often abusing science grants to produce round earth fiction. It's members were among the upperclass elite, most of whom had little in the way of educated backgrounds. The content presented by the Royal Astronomical Society was pure fiction, full of holes and fallacies.

    The Royal Astronomical Society benefited financially from royal science grants and sales of its fictitious publications. In its time, the fame of the Royal Astronomical Society reached all parts of the world. Its scientific publications were known for breaking new ground and entertaining the public with descriptions of the universe. By latching onto the then radical Round Earth theory, the Royal Astronomical Society was able to inspire wonder and interest in its unique publications which seemed to describe how gravity worked and the true shape of the earth.

    If the Conspiracy had revealed the true nature of the universe from the start its fame would have dried up once it was revealed that the stars were actually small bright motes a few thousands miles from the earth. No one would be interested in that. By creating the necessary groundwork for vast galaxies and an infinite universe, it was free to inspire the imaginations of the world, implying that alien civilizations could quite possibly exist.

    The Royal Astronomical Society also played a big role in early science fiction. By contracting authors such as Jules Verne and Edward Elmer Smith it was able to popularize its concepts and profit on publishing science fiction along with its science "fact." The Conspiracy grew and grew on a blanket of lies. Nothig could stop its disinformation. By the mid twentieth century it was ready for the next step in its blood curdling deception: The invention of NASA.

    Today the Round Earth Conspiracy is perpetuated by NASA and its ilk. This inherently corrupt multi-national Conspiracy gives the public an impression of a large explorable universe. By doing this it allows the conspirators the freedom to make up stories and invent fictitious technologies at their whim. The Conspiracy ends up profiting on the magnitude of tens of billions of dollars a year in exchange for nothing but a few lousy photoshops and the occasional fireworks show.

    Knowing that it is not actually possible to explore space, the Conspiracy has created an illusion designed to squeeze out trillions over the long haul. Over the next ten years the Conspiracy will promote the idea of a space elevator, and the idea of sending man to mars. Once it has sucked  the nation's economy dry, and has produced a few more stories and doctored images, it will move onto the next big frontier. Perhaps seventy five years from now the Conspiracy will be focused on inter-galactic space travel, requiring an astronomical budget in its unquenched greed.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 10:33:37 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #8 on: March 05, 2007, 11:24:37 PM »
I seriously DOUBT that anyone had the ability to make fake images of the earth back when they first became public. The first computers were massive! They are the equvilent to what we call today as the "pocket calculator". seriously. those computers were like the size of sheds and todays pocket calculator could outperform them. now how could they make a decent computer, let alone "photoshop" software to make images? and why didn't they make their own photoshop software to sell to the public and make even more money? im sick of this conspiracy bullshit. atleast 9/11 conspiracies are somewhat believable.

Think about it, if these conspiracies were indeed true, im pretty sure that there would be more than a handful of people on the internet that would know/believe it. CNN and other news companies would be all over it.

go here and check out some of the first computers and tell me if they are capable of making images. they could barely get green letters on the screen and very generic radar that looked like dots. Totally impossible with the technology we had back then. http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=old+computer&gbv=2            if NASA had the ability to do this back then, they would be making a lot more moeny in the computer business rather than space exploration. look at bill gates for example, richest man on the planet, he came up with windows.

Not a rant or whatever, just stating whats true instead of impossibilities.

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2007, 11:59:43 PM »
I seriously DOUBT that anyone had the ability to make fake images of the earth back when they first became public.

Well if Mr Calhoun doubts it's true, that's good enough for me!

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #10 on: March 06, 2007, 12:44:42 AM »
I seriously DOUBT that anyone had the ability to make fake images of the earth back when they first became public.

Well if Mr Calhoun doubts it's true, that's good enough for me!

nice comeback.

I guess you have never seen a computer from the 1960's. Does that REALLY look like it could photoshop images? If someone back then could have made some kind of awesome computer to make fake images that looked very very real, they would have done so and made billions from it back then instead of waiting until the late 90's and early 2000's to do it.

?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2007, 12:48:34 AM »
I seriously DOUBT that anyone had the ability to make fake images of the earth back when they first became public.

Well if Mr Calhoun doubts it's true, that's good enough for me!

nice comeback.

I guess you have never seen a computer from the 1960's. Does that REALLY look like it could photoshop images? If someone back then could have made some kind of awesome computer to make fake images that looked very very real, they would have done so and made billions from it back then instead of waiting until the late 90's and early 2000's to do it.


Did you own a computer in the 60's?

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2007, 12:49:50 AM »
I seriously DOUBT that anyone had the ability to make fake images of the earth back when they first became public.

Well if Mr Calhoun doubts it's true, that's good enough for me!

nice comeback.

I guess you have never seen a computer from the 1960's. Does that REALLY look like it could photoshop images? If someone back then could have made some kind of awesome computer to make fake images that looked very very real, they would have done so and made billions from it back then instead of waiting until the late 90's and early 2000's to do it.


Did you own a computer in the 60's?

Nope, but I had a computer from the late 80's and even that couldn't do it. it could barely play wolfenstine 3d

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2007, 04:17:27 AM »
Instead of a software program, couldn't they just take pictures of realistic models they created? A photoshop in the 60's does seem a little improbable.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2007, 05:27:38 AM »
The Conspiracy is operated by an elite group of conspirators who divert NASA's multi-billion dollar budget into their personal bank accounts.
If you really believe the money from the NASA budget goes straight into the pockets of the conspirators, you are a bigger idiot than I could have ever imagined.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2007, 05:30:28 AM »
Right right. so I fully understand this idea now. It's based on pseudo-science and anything unexplainable is because of a government conspiracy.

My only remaning question. is why? What is the purpose of the conspiracy? (You'll have to dig deep into the history books for this one, cause you're gonna have to provide explanations for why Magellan would lie to everyone.)

Please read the FAQ and Earth: Not a Globe or I will report you to the Mods for being so ignorant.
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.

?

Tom Bishop

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2007, 10:01:44 AM »
Quote
I seriously DOUBT that anyone had the ability to make fake images of the earth back when they first became public.

It is very likely that the first images of a round earth were simply high altitude pictures of the Flat Earth taken with a slight fisheye lens. This would give the desired Curvature of Field effect. No computer is needed for that. The creation of lenses is a technology that dates back to the 1600's.

On another note, I'm surprised that no one has asked how we know so much about the Conspiracy and its origins.

It is little known that for a time, years before the publication of Earth Not a Globe, Sir Samuel Birley Robotham himself had infiltrated of the Conspracy. In 1841, based on his esteemed credentials and educational background, a bright young 25 year old Robotham was invited to join the ranks of the highly exclusive Royal Astronomical Society. At that time the Conspiracy was already at full steam. With dozens of publications on the shelves, the conspirators had created a solid foundation for their Round Earth fiction.

On his first visit to the Royal Astronomical Society Robotham discovered to his amazement that the conspirators themselves seemed utterly convinced of a Round Earth. As a product of decades of self deception and self convincing, the belief of a Round Earth was set in stone among each of the society’s members. No amount of inquiry or questioning could persuade the beliefs of a Round Earther. Robotham was completely out of place, a stranger in this environment of sheeple. Even in the year 1841 the belief of a Round Earth was as dogmatic as a religion.

But deep down the conspirators knew the truth, however. They knew exactly what they were doing. Each of the conspirators knew in their hearts that the world flat and that stars were small bright motes a few thousand miles from the earth. But a dull universe doesn’t sell books. A dull universe doesn’t afford the luxury of a sprawling estate. The public at large desires a vast complex universe full of mystery and magic.

Robotham learned, after gaining the trust of a few conspirators, that the round shape of the earth stemmed from the early necessity to fabricate a mysterious force that could turn down into up and up into down. A mysterious force that could imply the absurd notion that Australians hung upside down from their feet. It was the sort of theory designed and calculated for the public to throw money at. The sort of theory that could win a royal science grant from an amused king. Warping the earth into a ball and creating the ficticous force of gravity was a theory born of pure greed.

It was at that point Sir Robotham dedicated his career to exposing the truth about the world. Through eight years of laborious study and experimentation Robotham was able to demonstrate, through various proofs and observations, that the true shape of the earth was that of a flat disk. He published his findings in a book called Earth Not a Globe in 1849. Later he published a second edition in 1865, and a third edition in 1881. Rowbotham and his followers gained notoriety by engaging in raucous public debates with leading scientists of the day. One such clash, involving the prominent naturalist and conspirator Alfred Russel Wallace, led to several lawsuits for fraud and libel.

« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 11:03:02 AM by Tom Bishop »

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2007, 10:33:29 AM »
Up until the 1960s, geologists did not believe that "land" was able to "drift" around the globe, however once various disciplines started gathering evidence from the field thanks to ever improving technology, the consensus slowly began to change and the old theories had to be revamped to fit the new ideas. It's the paradigm shift. I fail to see how theories from the 1800's can be considered sound science today after all disciplines of science have moved on to a different understanding, especially due to the advent of modern technology. Does it not worry you that your beliefs are basically based on one man from a time when technology was very basic, and understandings relatively primitive? Could it not be that, like so many others, he was wrong? You don't have to be a bad scientist to be wrong, for example Sir Charles Lyell was an excellent geologist of the 1800's, but he would not have believed in the theory of plate tectonics; yet he would have been evidently wrong to doubt the theory. Even the work of Charles Darwin has evolved (excuse the pun) so much in the last 100 years that some say his original work was virtually all eronous.

Also, I can't help wonder about all the other governments and earth science institutions around the world, that are completely isolated from America. How can they possibly be in on the conspiracy. I am a geologist, and I certainly haven't been informed that all my work is a lie!

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2007, 10:44:36 AM »
Up until the 1960s, geologists did not believe that "land" was able to "drift" around the globe, however once various disciplines started gathering evidence from the field thanks to ever improving technology, the consensus slowly began to change and the old theories had to be revamped to fit the new ideas. It's the paradigm shift. I fail to see how theories from the 1800's can be considered sound science today after all disciplines of science have moved on to a different understanding, especially due to the advent of modern technology. Does it not worry you that your beliefs are basically based on one man from a time when technology was very basic, and understandings relatively primitive? Could it not be that, like so many others, he was wrong? You don't have to be a bad scientist to be wrong, for example Sir Charles Lyell was an excellent geologist of the 1800's, but he would not have believed in the theory of plate tectonics; yet he would have been evidently wrong to doubt the theory. Even the work of Charles Darwin has evolved (excuse the pun) so much in the last 100 years that some say his original work was virtually all eronous.

Also, I can't help wonder about all the other governments and earth science institutions around the world, that are completely isolated from America. How can they possibly be in on the conspiracy. I am a geologist, and I certainly haven't been informed that all my work is a lie!

I don't know where this conspiracy theory came from, but I DO know that old knowledge is valid. Look at the Bible, surely you would agree that it's completely accurate and it's thousands of years old! Sir Rowbotham merely confirmed the truth in the bible with his experiments.
Proving something absolutely is as pointless as claiming that all viewpoints, no matter how poorly constructed, are equally valid.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2007, 10:54:48 AM »
I believe the bible was written some 2000 years ago, and a Jesus did exist, but no, I do not believe it is accurate. I do however believe that it was written to provide explanations for phenomena that could not be explained based on their standard of knowledge of the people at the time. That's not to say the bible is invalid, but to me it isn't the slighest bit scientific. 

?

Tom Bishop

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2007, 11:20:10 AM »
Quote
Up until the 1960s, geologists did not believe that "land" was able to "drift" around the globe, however once various disciplines started gathering evidence from the field thanks to ever improving technology, the consensus slowly began to change and the old theories had to be revamped to fit the new ideas.

In the 1800's Samuel Birley Robotham was well ahead of his time on many of the major scientific theories. If you read his book Earth Not a Globe you will note that continents are also able to drift in his model. He had predicted the shifting of continents over a century before RE scientists discovered it for themselves. Robotham championed the realm of science, and made many accurate predictions based on his studies that hold up to this very day.

Quote
I fail to see how theories from the 1800's can be considered sound science today after all disciplines of science have moved on to a different understanding, especially due to the advent of modern technology.


The advent of modern technology simply allows greater accuracy in measuring phenomena, nothing more. Modern technology does not make a person smarter, or somehow better than a scientist of the 1800's. A modern scientist still must use his mind to make sense of his observations and measurements. The biggest tool in the scientist's arsenal is his mind. No tool of technology could match that.

Quote
Does it not worry you that your beliefs are basically based on one man from a time when technology was very basic, and understandings relatively primitive?

Does it worry you that your science is based on a book written in the 1600's? Certainly a much more primitive time than the 1800's.

Quote
Also, I can't help wonder about all the other governments and earth science institutions around the world, that are completely isolated from America. How can they possibly be in on the conspiracy. I am a geologist, and I certainly haven't been informed that all my work is a lie!

The modern Conspiracy is not an American entity. It is a multi-national organization primarily based in Europe. By manipulating budding space programs in other countries it is able to extort billions of dollars in research grants from many of the big players in space exploration.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2007, 07:50:51 PM by Tom Bishop »

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #21 on: March 06, 2007, 11:20:51 AM »
Good job Tom Bishop. You didn't cite your sources though.  :-\
« Last Edit: April 19, 2007, 09:41:10 PM by Tom Bishop »
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #22 on: March 06, 2007, 11:34:39 AM »
Firstly, my science is not based upon a book written in the 1600's, it is based upon hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed papers, which together allow for such grand theories to be taken as the most accurate. All these papers are essential, as they are the building blocks of the science. A science based upon one or two papers, to me, is very unsound and not very scientific. That's not to say such theories are invalid, merely that they lack the credible support of thousands of knowledgeable men and women. I personally have a very critical mind, I challenge and doubt everything I read; however, if I can see evidence for a theory that is backed by other theories, I am likely to accept it. I never take science as fact though, and indeed would gladly except any of my work to be incorrect if the general view of things change and someone else can provide a better explanation.

Secondly, technology has definitely aided one's understand of science. With computers, complex calculations can be computed whilst virtually eliminating error (especially human error). My point is, at present, the thought of us living on the moon is absolutely ridiculous, however, if someone developed the science and technology to allow that to happen, it will become a reality, and my old belief that it was impossible will have to be revised.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #23 on: March 06, 2007, 11:37:08 AM »
Firstly, my science is not based upon a book written in the 1600's, it is based upon hundreds of thousands of peer reviewed papers, which together allow for such grand theories to be taken as the most accurate. All these papers are essential, as they are the building blocks of the science. A science based upon one or two papers, to me, is very unsound and not very scientific. That's not to say such theories are invalid, merely that they lack the credible support of thousands of knowledgeable men and women. I personally have a very critical mind, I challenge and doubt everything I read; however, if I can see evidence for a theory that is backed by other theories, I am likely to accept it. I never take science as fact though, and indeed would gladly except any of my work to be incorrect if the general view of things change and someone else can provide a better explanation.

Secondly, technology has definitely aided one's understand of science. With computers, complex calculations can be computed whilst virtually eliminating error (especially human error). My point is, at present, the thought of us living on the moon is absolutely ridiculous, however, if someone developed the science and technology to allow that to happen, it will become a reality, and my old belief that it was impossible will have to be revised.

Sir/ma'am,
Keplers laws of planetary motion was written in almost the same time, but do you not believe them?
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #24 on: March 06, 2007, 11:41:04 AM »
If there are many hundreds, or thousands of papers that support the theory, then yes I would. If, however, the theory had never been looked at again, and no more scientific, peer reviewed, papers had been written about it, then I would doubt it's credibility.

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #25 on: March 06, 2007, 11:41:52 AM »
 ::)
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.

?

Slayer_2

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #26 on: March 06, 2007, 11:47:46 AM »
So you guys really belive this is a conspiracy to hide the "fact" that the world is flat? :o Wow you gotta have imagination to do that.
Slayer_2

*

Pyrochimp

  • 577
  • Senator Awesome
Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #27 on: March 06, 2007, 11:48:06 AM »
In the 1800's Samuel Birley Robotham was well ahead of his time on many of the major scientific theories. If you read his book Earth Not a Globe you will note that continents are also able to drift in his model. Robotham championed the realm of science, and made many accurate predictions based on his studies that hold up to this very day.

http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11197.msg141617#msg141617

An excellent post detailing just some of the totally ridiculous claims made by Rowbotham, particularly in the area of light from the sun/moon.
Some people are ****ing stupid! ~ George Carlin

Mathematical proof of the flat Earth:
[{(Diameter of Earth)*(tan[distance from Earth to sun/distance from North pole to equator])}2]/0

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #28 on: March 06, 2007, 11:48:45 AM »
If I said that you were able to jump off a cliff and be able to fly, based upon one book written in 1800's that no scientific body has followed up since, would you believe me? If I were then to provide you with a lorry load of papers, all providing explanations that all support each other and the original book that leans towards the idea that you would be able to fly, would you not be more likely to believe me?

Re: and uh Why?
« Reply #29 on: March 06, 2007, 11:54:31 AM »
So you guys really belive this is a conspiracy to hide the "fact" that the world is flat? :o Wow you gotta have imagination to do that.
Slayer_2

Wow, you have to have a great imagination to come on here and not read the FAQ.
Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell.... Kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change.