« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Here's one for Tom

  • 35 Replies
  • 5703 Views
*

DonutGuard

  • 152
  • Deal with it.
Here's one for Tom
« on: February 20, 2007, 11:42:16 AM »
So Tom, that shadow object, does it change in shape to make different phases of the moon possible too?

and of course it's always hanging around the moon, but for some reason during Lunar eclipses, it just happens to move much more quickly than usual.

Oh I know, the government has a clock that tells the moon what phase it should be in, and lights it up accordingly... and they've been doing so ever since the middle ages.
Logged
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; if there be one, he must approve of the homage of reason over that of blind-folded fear."
-Thomas Jefferson
?

Tom Bishop

Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2007, 12:30:41 PM »
Quote
So Tom, that shadow object, does it change in shape to make different phases of the moon possible too?

Nope.

Quote
and of course it's always hanging around the moon, but for some reason during Lunar eclipses, it just happens to move much more quickly than usual.

It simply has a highly elliptical orbit around the moon.

Logged
?

firehawkws7

  • 31
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2007, 12:36:14 PM »
also, why aren't there any pictures of this "shadow object" dum dum dum! or of it obscuring the stars behind it?
Logged
?

Tom Bishop

Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2007, 12:38:23 PM »
Quote
also, why aren't there any pictures of this "shadow object" dum dum dum! or of it obscuring the stars behind it?

If you would like to observe the Shadow Object personally, look up at the crescent moon on any given night.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2007, 12:40:07 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
?

firehawkws7

  • 31
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #4 on: February 20, 2007, 12:46:32 PM »
That is not physical evidence of a "shadow object". Try again tom.
Logged
?

Xulfaeon

  • 98
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2007, 12:51:59 PM »
I've wondered the same thing. How is it this shadow thing can block the moon but not the stars? Is it made of magic?
Logged
?

Tom Bishop

Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2007, 12:58:20 PM »
Quote
That is not physical evidence of a "shadow object". Try again tom.

It's clear observational evidence of a Shadow Object obscuring the moon. If you require additional observational evidence scroll up to the the first post in this thread.

Quote
I've wondered the same thing. How is it this shadow thing can block the moon but not the stars? Is it made of magic?

Are you watching the sides of the moon at every moment of the night to make sure no star is blotted out by the Shadow Object?
« Last Edit: February 20, 2007, 01:22:20 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
?

Xulfaeon

  • 98
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #7 on: February 20, 2007, 01:02:31 PM »
Actually yes I do. I've looked at the stars for hours on end. Still haven't seen any stars close to the moon disappear.
Logged
?

firehawkws7

  • 31
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #8 on: February 20, 2007, 01:15:38 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 20, 2007, 12:58:20 PM
Quote
That is not physical evidence of a "shadow object". Try again tom.

It's clear observational evidence of a Shadow Object obscuring the moon. If you require additional observational evidence scroll up the the first post in this thread.

Quote
I've wondered the same thing. How is it this shadow thing can block the moon but not the stars? Is it made of magic?

Are you watching the sides of the moon at every moment of the night to make sure no star is blotted out by the Shadow Object?

No, that's evidence of a shadow on the moon, not of a shadow object. Try again.
Logged
?

Tom Bishop

Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #9 on: February 20, 2007, 01:20:23 PM »
Quote
Actually yes I do. I've looked at the stars for hours on end. Still haven't seen any stars close to the moon disappear.

I have never seen a star close to the moon, period.

Quote
No, that's evidence of a shadow on the moon, not of a shadow object. Try again.

I have never seen evidence proving the Earth as the entity casting the shadow. There goes your whole "show me evidence or I win" argument right out the window.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2007, 01:29:00 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
*

Pyrochimp

  • 577
  • Senator Awesome
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #10 on: February 20, 2007, 01:28:11 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 20, 2007, 12:30:41 PM


If the shadow object's orbit is how you describe, then how come it's blocking out part of the light from the moon on every single day except one, on full moons?  Wouldn't the shadow object's orbit have to be the exact opposite of what's described in the picture?
Logged
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
?

Tom Bishop

Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #11 on: February 20, 2007, 01:31:22 PM »
Quote
If the shadow object's orbit is how you describe, then how come it's blocking out part of the light from the moon on every single day except one, on full moons?  Wouldn't the shadow object's orbit have to be the exact opposite of what's described in the picture?

Artistic license. Obviously the Flat Earth would appear angled in the upper right corner if it were shown in that image.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2007, 01:33:14 PM by Tom Bishop »
Logged
*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13149
  • swiggity swooty
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #12 on: February 20, 2007, 01:33:02 PM »
Tom, the shadow shown on the moon cannot be caused by a object orbiting the moon. The reason being, is that the shadow, once full moon occurs, cycles immediately over again. If there were such an object orbiting, we would see a much longer duration of the full moon. Such is not the case.

Also, this dark object defies the laws of physics. The only known stellar objects known to be "invisible" are black holes. The shadow object would have to be one of these objects, but it cannot be because you claim it orbits the moon. If that were the case, there would be great relativistic effects occuring near the moon and possibly here on earth as well.

And although the existence of "mini" black holes are theorized, their existence is yet to be proven, and even if the shadow object was one of these "mini" holes, they would still retain the basic characteristics of a regular black hole, and all the same effects should still apply.

Also, this shadow object is what you are claiming to be the cause of the shadow on the moon, and the cause of the lunar eclipses, both partial and full. This isn't possible.

Disregarding a lot of other logistics in this argument, take a look at this:

You'll notice that the shadow couldn't possibly be caused from a shadow object. If you look at the very first image of the moon, that would be the exact same formation as the shadow object passed over the moon. However, it very clearly starts to change shape, turning into a "straight" line when at the half moon phase. I don't know about you, but I doubt the shadow object can change shape at will, because it would have to in order to make the following happen:

As you can see, it's a partial lunar eclipse, and the shadow maintains it's shape pretty well, exhibiting the shape of an object passing over or in front of it. However, you should also note that the moon "changes color" during this. If the shadow object was the cause of both phenomenons, then shouldn't the phases of the moon also have this coloration?

The simple fact is, there is not a shadow object, the occurances in which you are arguing for it to exist are not consistent. If it does exist, it has to be able to change shape (and there's no known solid body (planets, stars, moons) that can do this), also has to be a black hole to not reflect/shine light, and must also have "half" an orbit to create the phases of the moon, because if it was a "full" orbit, the full moon phase would be much longer.
Logged
?

absolutedisgrace

  • 70
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #13 on: February 20, 2007, 02:32:03 PM »
Also it should be pointed out that if the "shadow object" was on the orbit as given by Tom, then actual covering of the moon itself over the 28 day period would not be so linear as we see it in reality.
Logged
*

Pyrochimp

  • 577
  • Senator Awesome
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2007, 02:34:24 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 20, 2007, 01:31:22 PM
Quote
If the shadow object's orbit is how you describe, then how come it's blocking out part of the light from the moon on every single day except one, on full moons?  Wouldn't the shadow object's orbit have to be the exact opposite of what's described in the picture?

Artistic license. Obviously the Flat Earth would appear angled in the upper right corner if it were shown in that image.

It's not just how the orbit's shaped, it's how it says IN WORDS how the orbit is supposedly very long on the "back" of the orbit.  Hara explained why you're wrong much better then I have the effort to though.
Logged
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
?

MooBs

  • 574
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2007, 03:25:47 PM »
Tom, prove the shadow object's existence using MATH and SCIENCE.
Logged
Quote
In FE Literature there are three celestial bodies that inhabit the sky. The Sun. The Moon. And the Shadow Object.
Quote
You have performed an illegal operation. Tom Bishop will now shut down, you will lose all unsaved arguments.
?

staticus

Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #16 on: February 20, 2007, 03:51:11 PM »
see what happens is the moon right. well its a marble, and God himself carved it out of stone. Now this marble is round, but its flat also, and at night God observe man kind  When God needs to look upon man, he just blocks the sun. Now the sun on the other hand in orbiting God, not earth. This is because the Sun is created by God to guide him. the sun is actually triangle shaped and flat. It spins in a ultra fast sequence making the illusion of being round, and the orbit created around God causes gravity. I point out that Tom's model is actually correct, BUT its just a simplified version of what I'm trying to explain. If there are any questions, just ask tom. I'm sure he've explain it well. If he cant, I've try to come back to you guys later. The government has a conspiracy behind this because they can't let people know there is a God. This is because God in actual, is a super being. It did create us, but it does not have the ability to think like us. What the government has to do is be in control. Think about it. If people knew God does not have the ability to punish, and is not like us. lot of religious fanatics would commit suicide or cause riot. There would a world of people who is not scared of Hell. Religion is actually controlled by the government. Not in the way you think either. The Priests and Rabi ETC, all are true believers. However the top of the branch for religion are controlled by the government. This is a good thing or bad, because even though religion is semi-unreal, it has helped mankind to shape and mold the society. To create moral understanding and self control. I will explain the significance of all of this later on, as i am currently residing in a lab and time is limited. I am typing this now in a library. I do not know if the FES is controlled by the government also, but if my post happens to be put down. copy and paste this everywhere. let the world know slowly. Knowledge is created for all, saids Einstein. He was a believer in this also. 
Logged
*

unclegravy

  • 957
  • I feel so fucking high!!!!!!
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #17 on: February 20, 2007, 04:00:16 PM »
Pretty nice explanation, Hara.
Logged
Quote
The people who feast on exclamation marks will never go hungry agaaaain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13149
  • swiggity swooty
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #18 on: February 20, 2007, 04:48:22 PM »
I try.

Although when I do such a thorough job, versus one-liners, I'm the one who gets called an idiot, my education gets attacked, etc.  ::)
Logged
?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #19 on: February 20, 2007, 04:55:44 PM »
Quote from: UnicronISround on February 20, 2007, 01:02:31 PM
Actually yes I do. I've looked at the stars for hours on end. Still haven't seen any stars close to the moon disappear.



GUISE! THIS DOOD HAZNT SEEN IT SO IT CANT EXIST! FLAT EARF JUST GOT OWNED!!!1111
Logged
?

Xulfaeon

  • 98
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #20 on: February 20, 2007, 05:06:37 PM »
At least you can admit it  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Logged
?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #21 on: February 20, 2007, 05:15:55 PM »
Quote from: UnicronISround on February 20, 2007, 05:06:37 PM
At least you can admit it  ;D ;D ;D ;D


I'm not sure if any of you are aware, but Tom isn't the only one to suggest the shadow object/dark matter object. Perhaps if anyone bothered to search...
Logged
*

unclegravy

  • 957
  • I feel so fucking high!!!!!!
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #22 on: February 20, 2007, 05:16:58 PM »
I don't think the matter of the Dark Object has been settled.
Logged
Quote
The people who feast on exclamation marks will never go hungry agaaaain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
?

Xulfaeon

  • 98
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #23 on: February 20, 2007, 05:19:31 PM »
It hasn't.  :o
Logged
?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #24 on: February 20, 2007, 05:22:18 PM »
Quote from: unclegravy on February 20, 2007, 05:16:58 PM
I don't think the matter of the Dark Object has been settled.

According to you guys, it's been settled as a crazy Tom theory.... Try to be a little open minded  ::)
Logged
*

unclegravy

  • 957
  • I feel so fucking high!!!!!!
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2007, 05:22:48 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on February 20, 2007, 01:20:23 PM
I have never seen evidence proving the Earth as the entity casting the shadow. There goes your whole "show me evidence or I win" argument right out the window.
Tom, you used the phrase "seen any evidence", which is sacriledge, since this board does not accept photographic evidence.

And when you look at the moon at times, there is a shadow, yes?
And you claim it is made by a shadow object. Well and good.

But how come none of us have ever seen the shadow of the earth on the moon?

How come I have never, upon looking at the moon, seen a shadow blocking it out like so:
, which would suggest a flat earth?
Logged
Quote
The people who feast on exclamation marks will never go hungry agaaaain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*

unclegravy

  • 957
  • I feel so fucking high!!!!!!
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2007, 05:23:49 PM »
Quote from: Rick_James on February 20, 2007, 05:22:18 PM
According to you guys, it's been settled as a crazy Tom theory.... Try to be a little open minded  ::)
You could hardly blame us.
We made two topics asking about the dark object and if all the other FE'ers believed it but we were ignored.
Logged
Quote
The people who feast on exclamation marks will never go hungry agaaaain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
?

Kasroa Is Gone

  • 6869
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2007, 05:24:03 PM »
Let's be open minded guys ffs! Let's believe a shadow object orbiting the moon can slowly move across the front of the moon over a period of approx 1 month but once it's past the moon it orbits around again in the space of a day.
Logged
?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2007, 05:31:05 PM »
Quote from: unclegravy on February 20, 2007, 05:22:48 PM


But how come none of us have ever seen the shadow of the earth on the moon?

Clearly because the sun never goes behind the earth in relation to the moon.

Do you see why we get slightly frustrated? It's obvious you haven't read enough to know the most basic parts of FE theory.
Logged
?

Rick_James

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4311
  • Rick <3 Gayer
Re: Here's one for Tom
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2007, 05:32:01 PM »
Quote from: unclegravy on February 20, 2007, 05:23:49 PM
Quote from: Rick_James on February 20, 2007, 05:22:18 PM
According to you guys, it's been settled as a crazy Tom theory.... Try to be a little open minded  ::)
You could hardly blame us.
We made two topics asking about the dark object and if all the other FE'ers believed it but we were ignored.


They were ignored because you chose to make new topics and not use the existing ones. Kinda like this thread....
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »