Some new approaches

  • 47 Replies
  • 6067 Views
Some new approaches
« on: March 13, 2007, 05:26:25 PM »
I'm very glad that i finally found a place that flat/round earth discussion is carried out scientifically, and with respect.The discussion of our earths shape had been biased greatly in history. Even stating that the earth is flat had been a tabu among almost all scientific societies. Now with the opportunities that internet allows, finally a deep discussion is carried on the topic.

Having read many of the thousands of messages posted here, i feel it is unnecessary to discuss if the earth is round anymore. Thanks to the extensive work of many FE scientists, and their comprehensive explanations and proofs, this debate is nearly over. It is accepted by most of the people that our world is flat.

What i want to discuss here is the developments and new approaches in flat earth science. As many of you may have noticed the tiny holes in flat world explanations presented in this forum, come up from the assumption that the flat world is circular like a plate. New experiments are giving our research group some idea that our flat earth is not circular, but triangular (or triangles placed around some specific places around the circle). As FE scientists we should also be open-minded, so id be glad to hear your ideas about these new experimental findings.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2007, 05:32:58 PM »
I'm very glad that i finally found a place that flat/round earth discussion is carried out scientifically, and with respect.The discussion of our earths shape had been biased greatly in history. Even stating that the earth is flat had been a tabu among almost all scientific societies. Now with the opportunities that internet allows, finally a deep discussion is carried on the topic.

well good luck, because the FE explanations are "scientifically" unsound, and use measurements based off how they view their world.

Having read many of the thousands of messages posted here, i feel it is unnecessary to discuss if the earth is round anymore. Thanks to the extensive work of many FE scientists, and their comprehensive explanations and proofs, this debate is nearly over. It is accepted by most of the people that our world is flat.

This is entirely untrue, most of the world believes the world is round, and what FE scientists do you know of that have actually made some sound discoveries ?

What i want to discuss here is the developments and new approaches in flat earth science. As many of you may have noticed the tiny holes in flat world explanations presented in this forum, come up from the assumption that the flat world is circular like a plate. New experiments are giving our research group some idea that our flat earth is not circular, but triangular (or triangles placed around some specific places around the circle). As FE scientists we should also be open-minded, so id be glad to hear your ideas about these new experimental findings.

FEers are not open minded, they're narrow minded and believe literally what they want to believe and even when presented w/evidence against them, they shrug it off..
Welcome to the most hipicritical forums on the net, at least, if you're an FEer :)

With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2007, 05:34:26 PM »
Tom has an alt now?

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2007, 05:36:12 PM »
Tom has an alt now?

LOL, kinda sounds like it dont it ? a lil morality boost for the forums because honestly, REers beat teh shit out of FEers in terms of presentable evidence and logic
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2007, 05:39:36 PM »
Actually, it makes loads of sense.. It's more probable that the earth is triangular or pyramidal instead of just spherical. This is why:
Space, unlike we've always been taught, isn't only 3 or 4 dimensioned. For example, at least 80 imaginary dimensions are required to scientifically explain the phenomenon of superconductivity. Lucky for us, we can only observe and interact with 3 of these dimensions plus time. Time being flowing constantly, we're left with 3 dimensions in space. Now, If wormholes are connecting the sides of our flat earth and making it appear endless, there has to be a 3 dimensional linkage, for which a 3-sided shape - a Triangle, is most efficient and likely. The following image explains it all:

http://www.nu.ac.za/undphil/collier/202/CSfiles/Perception%20puzzles,%20Visual%20Perception,%20Optical%20illusions%20and%20Paradoxes_files/triangle.gif

Imagine you're walking on this triangle.. Would you ever reach an end, or would you go on forever, spanning every square inch of every side? This is how we expect the world can be bent (in a relativistic time-space manner, not directly)
« Last Edit: March 13, 2007, 05:44:41 PM by physics_guy »

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2007, 05:42:27 PM »
I'd say a big sphere orbiting a star is the most likely explanation to be honest. Call me crazy.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2007, 05:47:55 PM »
the fact that FEers claim that the earth is the only "flat" being is completely selfish, this goes against nature itself because when things spin at high speeds they come together in a ball, especially if that material can bond together, now why is it even a big deal to think of the earth being round ? i mean when we already have the formulas and calculations used everday based off a round earth, that work, what's the point of even trying to prove the world is flat ? are you doing it just to say, i told you so ?
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #7 on: March 13, 2007, 05:50:32 PM »
because when things spin at high speeds they come together in a ball, especially if that material can bond together

have you ever watched a pizzaman making pizza? They spin the dough to make in into the shape of a pizza base, and I've never eaten any spherical pizza...

please observe:
http://www.paulbasye.com/cartoons/make_pizza.gif
« Last Edit: March 13, 2007, 05:53:23 PM by physics_guy »

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2007, 05:52:00 PM »
Earth is a pizza. The Ice wall is a stuffed crust. Tom is the Anchoves.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2007, 05:53:45 PM »
I'd say a big sphere orbiting a star is the most likely explanation to be honest. Call me crazy.


Kasroa do you have something new to say? You are expressing the same old belief over and over again in your posts without standing on any scientific ground. Something will not be the reality, because you just want to believe in it. I want to clarify that this topic is not about a well-long ago closed debate about RE, we all scientifically know that earth is flat. This discussion was intended to be about new approaches in flat earth science

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2007, 05:58:58 PM »
because when things spin at high speeds they come together in a ball, especially if that material can bond together

have you ever watched a pizzaman making pizza? They spin the dough to make in into the shape of a pizza base, and I've never eaten any spherical pizza...

please observe:
http://www.paulbasye.com/cartoons/make_pizza.gif

do pizzas spin at high speeds ? by no means do they, and for one, they're already together, none if it is apart, for two the pizza dough itself doesn't have near enough mass to attract another object, for three, since it is together and a very maleable type of substance, the spinning only flattens out the pizza because your center is just that, the center of the pizza, making everything spin outwards just like how pizza is made
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2007, 06:04:21 PM »
I'd say a big sphere orbiting a star is the most likely explanation to be honest. Call me crazy.


Kasroa do you have something new to say? You are expressing the same old belief over and over again in your posts without standing on any scientific ground. Something will not be the reality, because you just want to believe in it. I want to clarify that this topic is not about a well-long ago closed debate about RE, we all scientifically know that earth is flat. This discussion was intended to be about new approaches in flat earth science

Funny I could say exactly the same thing to someone who believes the Earth is flat. You don't believe the Earth is flat though so I won't say it to you.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2007, 06:08:00 PM »
I'd say a big sphere orbiting a star is the most likely explanation to be honest. Call me crazy.


Kasroa do you have something new to say? You are expressing the same old belief over and over again in your posts without standing on any scientific ground. Something will not be the reality, because you just want to believe in it. I want to clarify that this topic is not about a well-long ago closed debate about RE, we all scientifically know that earth is flat. This discussion was intended to be about new approaches in flat earth science

the entire point of this forum is to discuss the two theories, you dont already know the earth is flat, your scientific evidence isn't even there, even you can't tell me that it is, you have no proof, while we have an abundance of proof
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

?

FlatEarth4Jesus

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2007, 11:01:01 PM »
Ok, first of all, the "equations" that show a force that pulls mass inward as an object spins would not work for a spherical object, such as the earth. The earth also only spins along one axis, so how is it that it would have a centripital force with an equal radius all around in a sphere? Unless the "round" earth were to spin in random directions at very high speeds. Has there been any instance in research that a scientist was able to create a sphere using a fast spinning motion? I don't believe so.

Also the idea of gravity, a force that exists purely because of a mass being present, is absurd. Please explain to me how it is possible for such a powerful force to be created, just by the fact that the earth is there. Forces such as electrical forces and magnetic forces, and intermolecular forces have a sound explanation, however, gravity does not, the formulas which inculde gravity do not prove its existance, it merely assumes that it is there.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2007, 04:08:04 AM »
but assuming it's there, our predictions and calculations are 100% correct, presuming an ice wall being real is just as absurd as the idea of gravity
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

?

Tom Bishop

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #15 on: March 14, 2007, 09:33:17 AM »
but assuming it's there, our predictions and calculations are 100% correct, presuming an ice wall being real is just as absurd as the idea of gravity

Hey dumbshoe, rotational forces would eventually make a malleable object flat.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #16 on: March 14, 2007, 10:15:17 AM »
Quote
Funny I could say exactly the same thing to someone who believes the Earth is flat. You don't believe the Earth is flat though so I won't say it to you.

Yeah Kasroa i dont believe Earth is flat, it is scientifically explained over and over that earth is flat. So it is not a belief but a clear and well grounded scientific observation.

Quote
the entire point of this forum is to discuss the two theories, you dont already know the earth is flat, your scientific evidence isn't even there, even you can't tell me that it is, you have no proof, while we have an abundance of proof

WasteofHumans im aware that the purpose is discussing two theories but it is a closed debate in scientific sense: earth is flat. I think this forum enables scientists to inform the crowd about the world. I understand it is hard for you people to change your old beliefs dictated by your peers and elders.And this is why the discussion continues: to replace your narrow minded beliefs with scientific truths.

*

YL Groper

  • 1014
  • Supreme Allied Commander of a local N.I.G.G.A.
Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #17 on: March 14, 2007, 10:37:32 AM »
Ok, first of all, the "equations" that show a force that pulls mass inward as an object spins would not work for a spherical object, such as the earth. The earth also only spins along one axis, so how is it that it would have a centripital force with an equal radius all around in a sphere? Unless the "round" earth were to spin in random directions at very high speeds. Has there been any instance in research that a scientist was able to create a sphere using a fast spinning motion? I don't believe so.

Also the idea of gravity, a force that exists purely because of a mass being present, is absurd. Please explain to me how it is possible for such a powerful force to be created, just by the fact that the earth is there. Forces such as electrical forces and magnetic forces, and intermolecular forces have a sound explanation, however, gravity does not, the formulas which inculde gravity do not prove its existance, it merely assumes that it is there.

Please explain what is accelerating the flat earth
N.I.G.G.A. stole my bike, sir!

~D-Draw

N.I.G.G.A. Saved me alot of money on my car insurance.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #18 on: March 14, 2007, 04:23:46 PM »
but assuming it's there, our predictions and calculations are 100% correct, presuming an ice wall being real is just as absurd as the idea of gravity

Hey dumbshoe, rotational forces would eventually make a malleable object flat.

haha, so the earth is malleable ? since when ? even when it was collecting it's mass it still wasn't "malleable" it was rock and heat, nothing more, nothing less .. unless of course the earth started out as a ball of water, now that's an interesting theory lol
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

?

Oblivious

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #19 on: March 14, 2007, 06:01:10 PM »
Something will not be the reality, because you just want to believe in it.

It seems like you should take that statement to heart.

?

FlatEarth4Jesus

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #20 on: March 14, 2007, 11:39:53 PM »
You can assume anything, and fit it into equations, and you just assume gravity is a real force? What holds us down on the flat earth, is God's force keeping us away from heaven, once you die, he releases the force on your spirit, and you float into heaven, or if you were a sinner, he drops you off the edge.

?

FlatEarth4Jesus

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2007, 01:54:33 AM »
haha, so the earth is malleable ? since when ? even when it was collecting it's mass it still wasn't "malleable" it was rock and heat, nothing more, nothing less .. unless of course the earth started out as a ball of water, now that's an interesting theory lol
what is this now? You said before that the earth spinning at high speeds would make it round, but if its not "malleable" which means able to change shape, that would mean you're contradicting yourself. If a large mass is malleable enough to spin into a sphere like you claimed that it did(but would not happen because spinning motion will not create a spherical shape, instead would be a pizza like suggested), it should definately be malleable enough to become flat, especially because you said that earth spins at such high speeds.

If you want to prove RE theory, at least make sense.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2007, 02:47:03 AM »
for an object to be malleable, it has to be an object first, the earth was created from many different objects colliding into eachother and fusing together .. this is not the same meaning as malleable, once it was big enough, it attracted more and more rock because of it's gravitational pull and kept forming .. even after the moon hit the earth giving us our rotation, we had more than enough form to not spin out into a disc like shape, this is why this works
With no south pole, there is no electromagnetism, giving us no protection from the sun's harmful radiation--we'd all be dead right now.
The ice wall, supposedly made up of antartica lies around the edge of the earth, why no one has recorded it, who knows

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2007, 02:53:40 AM »
If you keep spinning a pizza, it keeps getting flatter.  What makes our flat earth not get flatter?

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2007, 06:18:49 AM »
If you keep spinning a pizza, it keeps getting flatter.  What makes our flat earth not get flatter?

It's the mid-dimentional force (also known as subicicular thread). You see, the ice walls can't be separated for more than some distance. That's what keeps our earth just as flat as it is now.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2007, 10:36:46 AM »
If you keep spinning a pizza, it keeps getting flatter.  What makes our flat earth not get flatter?

It's the mid-dimentional force (also known as subicicular thread). You see, the ice walls can't be separated for more than some distance. That's what keeps our earth just as flat as it is now.

The ice wall holds the earth together?  What about the sea of magma underneath?  Wouldn't that have huge amounts of pressure on the "outside" edges of the world from spinning?

*

YL Groper

  • 1014
  • Supreme Allied Commander of a local N.I.G.G.A.
Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #26 on: March 15, 2007, 11:43:53 AM »
Ok, first of all, the "equations" that show a force that pulls mass inward as an object spins would not work for a spherical object, such as the earth. The earth also only spins along one axis, so how is it that it would have a centripital force with an equal radius all around in a sphere? Unless the "round" earth were to spin in random directions at very high speeds. Has there been any instance in research that a scientist was able to create a sphere using a fast spinning motion? I don't believe so.

Also the idea of gravity, a force that exists purely because of a mass being present, is absurd. Please explain to me how it is possible for such a powerful force to be created, just by the fact that the earth is there. Forces such as electrical forces and magnetic forces, and intermolecular forces have a sound explanation, however, gravity does not, the formulas which inculde gravity do not prove its existance, it merely assumes that it is there.

Please explain what is accelerating the flat earth

Nothing? haha

http://tinyurl.com/2hgo5o
N.I.G.G.A. stole my bike, sir!

~D-Draw

N.I.G.G.A. Saved me alot of money on my car insurance.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #27 on: March 15, 2007, 04:35:54 PM »
Now, If wormholes are connecting the sides of our flat earth and making it appear endless, there has to be a 3 dimensional linkage, for which a 3-sided shape - a Triangle, is most efficient and likely.

Why would an efficient 3-dimensional linkage be in the shape of a triangle or pyramid?  Why not a more uniform shape, such as a sphere?
Quote from: Raist
One thing we have learned is don't fuck around in Africa. It leads to bad.

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #28 on: March 15, 2007, 04:37:49 PM »
If you keep spinning a pizza, it keeps getting flatter.  What makes our flat earth not get flatter?

If I keep spinning a basketball, does it become flat (without puncturing it)?
Quote from: Raist
One thing we have learned is don't fuck around in Africa. It leads to bad.

?

Tom Bishop

Re: Some new approaches
« Reply #29 on: March 15, 2007, 05:07:56 PM »
Quote
If I keep spinning a basketball, does it become flat (without puncturing it)?

If you constantly spun a basketball for 4.5 Billion years, I'm sure it would become quite flat.