North - South

[Saros]

While I admit I picture TA as Yosemite Sam with in a lab coat, I see you not as a skeptic but as more a cheerleader in the special Olympics. You don't contribute one way or another but you are ready to cheer for the drooling Croatian kid chewing on one of the hurdles while he humps it and screams for his bible. I asked about the disappearance of objects like the moon which is one of HIS arguments yet he is unwilling therefore unable to answer it as he is willing to make up any sort of Topsy turvy bull crap about everything else. If he has incomplete arguments, why are you cheering for him! Let me guess I think I know why Arithmophobia! a fear of all those evil math problems! No wait that can't be it I submitted star trail pictures showing his south rim bosh is just bosh by the fact star motions contradict the flat earth star trails. Yet you mysteriously view him as still credible, which of his double talk fantasy world arguments instilled you with this sense of credibility?

I am not cheering for anyone. I see that you guys have nothing to offer to the discussion but mainstream science. You prefer to believe in already accepted models without questioning them which I find vapid.

Of course, Cikljamas might be wrong too, but at least he doesn't blindly believe in mainstream science. He might fanatically defend his own belief, well, you're doing absolutely the same. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they want, especially when it comes to such things, I think it cannot be determined easily so one should remain skeptical.

As for the Moon and all the celestial phenomena there might be a million explanations, just use your imagination as the 'scientists' often do. You can construct a model of your own and if you had the authority to enforce it, it would be a credible model too. That is the difference.

People five centuries ago were not dumber, they were just as smart as modern day folks, but people in general believe in whatever they are told by the 'educated' ones, so there you go. They regurgitate the information they heard somewhere, don't really think for themselves.

As for the flat Earth idea, I think it is possible, after all this idea is as old as humanity, so it pisses me off when people ignore all possibilities just because they don't like them and prefer to believe in science authority figures to appear cool, well-informed and modern.

I would know for sure if it is flat or round if I see it with my own eyes from space. However, since it appears flat it is much more rational to take it as it is than invent all kinds of complex models. How the idea that the Earth is round actually helps our civilization in any way? What is so great about it? I would understand if it is 100% proven, but that is very doubtful. People are corrupt and they lie all the time, so why should I trust 'authorities'.

Now, about rotation, that is even harder to verify through observation, so I am skeptical about that too. It can be a variety of things, but not necessarily the Earth rotating.

I am perfectly fine with a non-rotating Earth and the universe being much smaller than currently thought. Foucault pendulum and Coriolis effect might be due to other reasons, the 'scientists' haven't looked for them though, since to them it is obvious as they are deeply indoctrinated. That is not how you make discoveries and find the truth.

[cikljamas]

This debate was over long time ago, but since i wanted to beat HC empty heads on their own ground (in mud waters) that is to say: in details, i have continued to present facts which undoubtedly prove simple and clear truth that The Earth is flat!

Allow me to present you one short youtube video in which you can see a demonstration of a very simple and plausible FET proof which no round earther can refute by rolling in heliocentric mud which comes out of his hollow head:

The water surface shows neither an increase nor a decline of light reflection regardless of the distance from the observer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQRp9KAOBHA

[Ernst]

I am not cheering for anyone. I see that you guys have nothing to offer to the discussion but mainstream science. You prefer to believe in already accepted models without questioning them which I find vapid.

You are wrong! As I said numerous times, I have personally reviewed various experiments proving the rotation of the Earth. And as for its shape, read up a bit on map making.

Of course, Cikljamas might be wrong too, but at least he doesn't blindly believe in mainstream science. He might fanatically defend his own belief, well, you're doing absolutely the same. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they want, especially when it comes to such things, I think it cannot be determined easily so one should remain skeptical.

Again wrong! But, the ease of the proof also depends largely on the knowledge and understanding of the observer. The proof can be very obvious, yet you lack the skills to understand it.

As for the Moon and all the celestial phenomena there might be a million explanations, just use your imagination as the 'scientists' often do. You can construct a model of your own and if you had the authority to enforce it, it would be a credible model too. That is the difference.

And wrong again! Why haven't the both of you come up with one plausible explanation if you have millions to choose from

People five centuries ago were not dumber, they were just as smart as modern day folks, but people in general believe in whatever they are told by the 'educated' ones, so there you go. They regurgitate the information they heard somewhere, don't really think for themselves.

We have gained knowledge since then, by doing experiments. We also have tools today that were unavailable in those days. Like computers. I can model 1000 coils in 1 day and choose the one that fits my application best. In Tesla's time that was unthinkable.

As for the flat Earth idea, I think it is possible, after all this idea is as old as humanity, so it pisses me off when people ignore all possibilities just because they don't like them and prefer to believe in science authority figures to appear cool, well-informed and modern.

There must be millions of ancient believes that have proven to be nonsense. Example: The drinking of the urine of a mule would improve fertility, because a mule can not reproduce. This 'void of fertility' would attract fertility, just as cold attracts heat, + attracts -, etc.

I would know for sure if it is flat or round if I see it with my own eyes from space. However, since it appears flat it is much more rational to take it as it is than invent all kinds of complex models.

Again, try making a map of Russia, or North America with all distances to scale.

How the idea that the Earth is round actually helps our civilization in any way? What is so great about it?

For instance that we CAN actually make maps now. Those things are quite useful, don't you agree?

I would understand if it is 100% proven, but that is very doubtful.

It is indeed very doubtfull if you would ever understand it. And it HAS been proven 100% numerous times. You just fail to understand this evidence.

People are corrupt and they lie all the time, so why should I trust 'authorities'.

Modern Science: If you loose 4 litres of blood, you will die.
Modern Science: If you run 5 amps DC through your body, you will die.
Modern Science: If you hold your breath for 10 minutes, you will die.
Modern Science: If you inhale pure H2S, you will die before you exhale.
Modern Science: You need legs to walk.
Modern Science: Chlorophyll makes most plants look green.
All these facts you must doubt, because modern science says so?
There is a difference between an open mind and a stupid one!

Now, about rotation, that is even harder to verify through observation, so I am skeptical about that too. It can be a variety of things, but not necessarily the Earth rotating.

I am perfectly fine with a non-rotating Earth and the universe being much smaller than currently thought. Foucault pendulum and Coriolis effect might be due to other reasons, the 'scientists' haven't looked for them though, since to them it is obvious as they are deeply indoctrinated. That is not how you make discoveries and find the truth.

If you could understand the derivation of the coriolis force as I showed a few pages back, you would understand that there is absolutely no other option than a rotating system. The same goes for Foucault's Pendulum. If you could only understand it.

If modern science warns you that you are about to fall into a deep hole, ignore that because you can never trust authorities.
If modern science warns you that you should not go to an Ebola invested village, go there and find out what they were trying to hide!
If modern science tells that grass is green, cheer for everyone who says it is red.
But do not expect to be taken seriously.

Ernst.

[Hrothgar]

My point made

I am not cheering for anyone. I see that you guys have nothing to offer to the discussion but mainstream science. You prefer to believe in already accepted models without questioning them which I find vapid.

Of course, Cikljamas might be wrong too, but at least he doesn't blindly believe in mainstream science. He might fanatically defend his own belief, well, you're doing absolutely the same. Everyone has the right to believe in whatever they want, especially when it comes to such things, I think it cannot be determined easily so one should remain skeptical.

As for the Moon and all the celestial phenomena there might be a million explanations, just use your imagination as the 'scientists' often do. You can construct a model of your own and if you had the authority to enforce it, it would be a credible model too. That is the difference.

People five centuries ago were not dumber, they were just as smart as modern day folks, but people in general believe in whatever they are told by the 'educated' ones, so there you go. They regurgitate the information they heard somewhere, don't really think for themselves.

As for the flat Earth idea, I think it is possible, after all this idea is as old as humanity, so it pisses me off when people ignore all possibilities just because they don't like them and prefer to believe in science authority figures to appear cool, well-informed and modern.

I would know for sure if it is flat or round if I see it with my own eyes from space. However, since it appears flat it is much more rational to take it as it is than invent all kinds of complex models. How the idea that the Earth is round actually helps our civilization in any way? What is so great about it? I would understand if it is 100% proven, but that is very doubtful. People are corrupt and they lie all the time, so why should I trust 'authorities'.

Now, about rotation, that is even harder to verify through observation, so I am skeptical about that too. It can be a variety of things, but not necessarily the Earth rotating.

I am perfectly fine with a non-rotating Earth and the universe being much smaller than currently thought. Foucault pendulum and Coriolis effect might be due to other reasons, the 'scientists' haven't looked for them though, since to them it is obvious as they are deeply indoctrinated. That is not how you make discoveries and find the truth.

you just aren't willing to contribute anything so you poopoo everything!

My argument was that he doesn't have a solid argument because he has no viable explanation for his numerous inconsistency's yet you think he might be right simply because modern evil non-bible types are here to bully him. Guess what the very notion of a round earth came into being 600 years earlier than Christianity! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

[cikljamas]

But do not expect to be taken seriously.
Ernst.

100 % cow plop, as usually...

you just aren't willing to contribute anything so you poopoo everything!

100 % cow plop, as usually....

Conclusive conclusion about garbage pendulum "argument":



From the above table it is seen that the temperature gradually decreases from the equator towards the pole, which would of necessity contract the substance of the pendulum, or starting it and cause it to vibrate more rapidly.

Besides the temperature of a given latitude the pressure and density of the air must be taken into account. In numbers 294 and 480 of the "Philosophical Transactions," Dr. Derham records a number of experiments with pendulums in the open air, and in the receiver of an air-pump, which he summarises as follows:--

"The arches of vibration in vacuo were larger than in the open air, or in the receiver before it was exhausted; the enlargement or diminution of the arches of vibration were constantly proportional to the quantity of air, or rarity, or density of it, which was left in the receiver of the air-pump. And as the vibrations were longer or shorter, so the time were accordingly; viz., two seconds in an hour when the vibrations were longest, and less and less as the air was re-admitted, and the vibrations shortened."

Thus it is evident that two distinct and tangible causes necessarily operate to produce variability in the oscillations of a pendulum at different latitudes, without having recourse to a flattening at the poles of an imaginary globe.

Firstly: The gradual diminution of temperature as the pendulum is carried from the equator to the polar region, tends to shorten its length, and thus to increase its number of vibrations per hour or day;

Secondly: As the polar centre is approached the air is colder, therefore denser, and therefore the "arches of vibration" shorter, and the times of oscillation less, or in other words the number of vibrations greater in a given period.

Thirdly:From the foregoing remarks and quotations it is obvious that the assumption of Sir Isaac Newton that the earth is an oblate spheroid, is not confirmed by experiments made with the pendulum.

Now, you can show us some NASA's pictures from "space", it is the only remaining RET "argument", as it has been the case from the very first moment of this thread...

Round heads, that's all you've got, and what you've got is simply and plainly NOTHING!

Pendulum "argument" is still in use in the 21th century, as main RET argument? Is it for real??? Dear reader, can you believe your eyes?
Dear RET empty head what you've got your senses for? To enjoy your own bull plops? So, just keep enjoy it, empty heads...

[TheoriaApophasis]

below you will find a picture of the most INSANE mad cow nonsense





enjoy the insanity

[Saros]

You are wrong! As I said numerous times, I have personally reviewed various experiments proving the rotation of the Earth. And as for its shape, read up a bit on map making.

Again wrong! But, the ease of the proof also depends largely on the knowledge and understanding of the observer. The proof can be very obvious, yet you lack the skills to understand it.

And wrong again! Why haven't the both of you come up with one plausible explanation if you have millions to choose from

We have gained knowledge since then, by doing experiments. We also have tools today that were unavailable in those days. Like computers. I can model 1000 coils in 1 day and choose the one that fits my application best. In Tesla's time that was unthinkable.

There must be millions of ancient believes that have proven to be nonsense. Example: The drinking of the urine of a mule would improve fertility, because a mule can not reproduce. This 'void of fertility' would attract fertility, just as cold attracts heat, + attracts -, etc.

Again, try making a map of Russia, or North America with all distances to scale.

For instance that we CAN actually make maps now. Those things are quite useful, don't you agree?

It is indeed very doubtfull if you would ever understand it. And it HAS been proven 100% numerous times. You just fail to understand this evidence.

Modern Science: If you loose 4 litres of blood, you will die.
Modern Science: If you run 5 amps DC through your body, you will die.
Modern Science: If you hold your breath for 10 minutes, you will die.
Modern Science: If you inhale pure H2S, you will die before you exhale.
Modern Science: You need legs to walk.
Modern Science: Chlorophyll makes most plants look green.
All these facts you must doubt, because modern science says so?
There is a difference between an open mind and a stupid one!

If you could understand the derivation of the coriolis force as I showed a few pages back, you would understand that there is absolutely no other option than a rotating system. The same goes for Foucault's Pendulum. If you could only understand it.

If modern science warns you that you are about to fall into a deep hole, ignore that because you can never trust authorities.
If modern science warns you that you should not go to an Ebola invested village, go there and find out what they were trying to hide!
If modern science tells that grass is green, cheer for everyone who says it is red.
But do not expect to be taken seriously.

Ernst.

I don't have so much time to argue with you. I just expected you to show a bit of skepticism in SOME of the scientific dogma, and you're not willing to admit that science can be sometimes wrong.

By the way, I see you have a lot of questions for the non-believers of science, if you really want to argue go check out The Wild Heretic | "When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." and argue with the author.

He doesn't support flat Earth but Concave Earth instead.

You might want to try to convince him that the Earth is a round sphere and we live on its surface. Try to argue with the guys on www.cluesforum.com, I would love to see that.

In the meantime, let me just tell you that understanding an explanation of something doesn't mean that it is true.

Virtually everyone understands in theory what science has proven, but that means absolutely nothing.

You lack the basic ability to be skeptical about things you haven't experienced and can't possibly experience.

Your analogies are inappropriate as all those things can be tested and verified by people, but you cannot experience the Earth being round in any way. You need to believe in that. Believing in something like that doesn't make you smart. That is dogma. It might be true, but it is still dogma.

Mathematics and verbal rhetorics are not necessarily always equivalent to truth.

So yeah, I would love to see how you prove to wildheretic that he is completely wrong. The guy is not religious so you bull**** argument against Cikljamas won't be an excuse.

[TheoriaApophasis]

He doesn't support flat Earth but Concave Earth instead.

Oooooh, even better.


The earth is a giant SALAD BOWL

[cikljamas]

[cikljamas]

[Ernst]

I don't have so much time to argue with you. I just expected you to show a bit of skepticism in SOME of the scientific dogma, and you're not willing to admit that science can be sometimes wrong.

Again.... not true. Let me say it out loud for you:
SCIENCE CAN BE WRONG, AND OFTEN IS WRONG A NUMBER OF TIMES BEFORE THEY GET IT RIGHT.

Does that satisfy you? It is just that in THIS PARTICULAR CASE I am 100% confident that science is correct and that the Earth is spherical.

By the way, I see you have a lot of questions for the non-believers of science, if you really want to argue go check out The Wild Heretic | "When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." and argue with the author.

He doesn't support flat Earth but Concave Earth instead.

You might want to try to convince him that the Earth is a round sphere and we live on its surface.

As if this jamas character isn't enough! No! I am not looking for a daytime job trying to convince complete morons of the obvious.

Try to argue with the guys on www.cluesforum.com, I would love to see that.

PLEASE!!!

In the meantime, let me just tell you that understanding an explanation of something doesn't mean that it is true.

Correct! But it does mean that you can form a well founded opinion about it. Both of you do not understand the meaning of the Foucault Pendulum nor do you grasp the Coriolis force, yet you do vent your opinion about it which is based on nothing (but misunderstanding).
Your master just added a post here to prove again that he has absolutely no clue of what the Foucault Pendulum does.

Virtually everyone understands in theory what science has proven, but that means absolutely nothing.

I strongly disagree. Almost no one understands modern science. Can you explain General Relativity for me? Can you explain the tunnelling effect? Can you explain the interference pattern caused by electrons in a double slit experiment?

You lack the basic ability to be skeptical about things you haven't experienced and can't possibly experience.

... Saros, poor soul, can you read?

Your analogies are inappropriate as all those things can be tested and verified by people, but you cannot experience the Earth being round in any way. You need to believe in that. Believing in something like that doesn't make you smart. That is dogma. It might be true, but it is still dogma.

... how many times do I have to repeat myself...

Mathematics and verbal rhetorics are not necessarily always equivalent to truth.

So yeah, I would love to see how you prove to wildheretic that he is completely wrong. The guy is not religious so you bull**** argument against Cikljamas won't be an excuse.

Having this discussion with a non-religious lunatic would be more interesting for sure. But I am not going to seek out loonies for a discussion!

Take care, Saros!

Ernst.

[Saros]

Again.... not true. Let me say it out loud for you:
SCIENCE CAN BE WRONG, AND OFTEN IS WRONG A NUMBER OF TIMES BEFORE THEY GET IT RIGHT.
....

Having this discussion with a non-religious lunatic would be more interesting for sure. But I am not going to seek out loonies for a discussion!

Take care, Saros!

Ernst.

I guess you shouldn't discuss with the people here either, if you're not seeking out loonies for a discussion. But it seems you have plenty of time to respond to Cikljamas posts. Anyway, I am done here, it is pointless to talk to someone who is 100% confident he is correct.

[cikljamas]

It is just that in THIS PARTICULAR CASE I am 100% confident that science is correct and that the Earth is spherical.

By saying what you just have said (after all irrefutable evidences that i have presented in this thread), you have just provided to us one more example of your extreme folly, now we all now (for sure) how extreme lunatic you are! Don't worry, we won't forget it, you don't have to provide to us no more examples of that kind, we are absolutely sure about the firmness of your insanity!

Max PlanckAnd indeed it was not by accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were deeply religious souls.

[Ernst]

I guess you shouldn't discuss with the people here either, if you're not seeking out loonies for a discussion. But it seems you have plenty of time to respond to Cikljamas posts.

Correct, and I already wrote something about that as well. Does it bother you?

Anyway, I am done here, it is pointless to talk to someone who is 100% confident he is correct.

True, if you insist on being incorrect. You could also wonder why am I so confident, just as I did about your master. Apparently I am more eager to learn than you.
No problem though! We are all different and that is exactly how it is supposed to be.

=== why do I believe that? Because nature/God/whatever it is that you believe in would be extremely inefficient if it created 6 billion carbon copies. Such inefficiency you see nowhere around you in nature's creations, making it extremely unlikely that for us nature would have made an exception. ===



Ernst.

[Hrothgar]