I enjoyed this fan fiction.
yeah im starting to think evolution is bunk also. no missing links, no fossil records, why havnt sharks evolved at all, they've been around for ever.
It has more disproofs than supposed proofs, and was never a valid scientific theory at any point in history.
well where on this subject, whats your thoughts on dinosaurs?
I side with dogbert. "Everything that ever was, is still out there - they're just hiding." The coelacanth and many other examples are well known, but another way things hide is by becoming smaller.
The dragonfly is another example, they have changed almost none - however they have changed greatly in one way, size! They are not the only ones, and I have seen the triceratops and many others as tiny lizards. Many prehistoric creatures seem to be of more significant scale, and there is tremendous evidence (historically, iconographically, and anthropological) that dragons are (or were) real AND a real threat.
or fast petrification for that matter?
That is clearly real, confirmable, and repeatable. The assumption of perfect uniformitarianism is just a guess used until more data (from dendritics, ice cores, etc) exists, and is typically significantly incorrect.
And WHY are YOU well-poisoning with this?
Think of it as a test of your intellectual capacity. Do you have the independent research skills to refute this claim?
Most people, just like you, don't.
Did you mean something by this non-sequitur?
I like the comically egregious hairspray on the broad.
Really sells the illusion.
I asked for resources in good faith
And I'm happy to supply them. I did mention one book, if you are looking for a good place to begin research.
I'm not interested in asking piecemeal questions
If you don't ask questions, you can't learn. Sorry, there is no way around this.
surely someone somewhere in the "legitimate" research community has compiled some body of evidence that you yourself view as share-worthy, no?
Absolutely! Many have. You don't seem to understand what I mean by "diffuse". It means the "body of evidence" isn't all in one place, but across many sources. It sounds like you need to begin by reading that book, since you are incapable of asking questions.
NASA being bullshit and Stanley Kubrick filming the hoax landing aren't evidence of a flat earth.
I could not agree more. Many people misunderstand this.
Provide links that you find valid, or I'm back to genuine disinterest.
Acting like a petulant child will keep you intellectually at the same level. If you cannot even find a book recommended to you, you have no business researching anything.
Would you care to try again? Maybe ask a question or two? Continued ignorance is what you choose by refusing to do so. Consider carefully.
So you believe the Adam and Eve incest fantasy?
Lol, incest porn. The old tricks are the best tricks eh?
No, I do not believe that fantasy. Thank you for asking!
Evolution has clear proofs and it's ludicrous how some of you deny it.
Incorrect, but widely taught. The "theory" of evolution is not even a valid scientific theory. Understanding why (and even discussing it) is impossible without knowing what science is and how it is practiced.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of us are taught incorrectly, and do not even know the correct definitions of the vernacular (we learn incorrect colloquial ones instead). How could you ever hope to discern between science and pseudoscience/mythology/religion masquerading as it unless you thoroughly understand what it is (and isn't) first? You can't do that when the definitions you learn are wrong.
You're making a fool out of yourself, but keep believing your fantasy stories.
I eschew stories, fantasy, and belief in knowledge. In determining what the world is and how it works, I prefer science instead!
Don't jump to conclusions. Ask questions instead! That way you won't look so foolish!
Would you care to provide some of your favorite resources that aren't a part of the "controlled opposition psyop"?
Sure! However, the subject is one of active research and active researchers. The conclusions they reach, and the sources they employ are diffuse. There is no singular bible or textbook to point to (though many recommend "earth not a globe" as a decent place to begin - though heavily christian slanted and biblically oriented)
My favorite resource is me! I am an active researcher in the subject, focusing primarily on the scientific history regarding the subject. Please ask me anything.
The best way to understand what flat earth research is, is to ask specific questions! Through that process I can suggest more specifically relevant "resources". Otherwise the "resources" being employed are the totality of human knowledge, history, and science available to us.
I'm open to the idea of space being fake and gay (NASA's definitely full of shit), but not willing to sit through another single hour of maligned bullshit to try to find competent information (that I've currently written off as nonexistent)-- but since you seem to have already done that, surely you wouldn't mind sharing your favorite resources?
I mourn your wasted time, as I mourn my own. If I were to direct you to a video to watch, it would likely be of a direct observation or specific scientific concept and not some sort of "aggregate" infotainment video. There are undoubtedly some that are worth watching, but you have to wade through an ocean of bullshit to find them (part of that psyop, for obfuscation).
It sounds like you have already conducted a little research yourself, seeing your feelings towards nasa. What brought you around?
I need to be clear, that the vast majority of flat earth research is conducted by independent researchers (such as myself). As such, the approaches, "resources", and conclusions vary wildly. I cannot stress this enough. Even that the world is flat is not agreed upon. This is the way it OUGHT to be when good research is actually being conducted.
I can share my views, my conclusions, and my "resources". But I can't speak for anyone else.
the thing iv personally noticed is that aliens have become the atheists god in a sense.
Spot on. They are a big part of the mythology of scientism.
what bugs me about it is that all of our depictions of aliens are too similar to us.
Also spot on. It's always a humanoid. It's cheaper that way (you must consider production costs!)
if aliens evolved to have those traits it must mean that there is some form of intelligent design ensuring that this structure is formed. (im just kinda thinking out loud at this point)
A completely reasonable assertion, assuming that "evolution" exists (it doesn't) and is the cause of the creation of life (it isn't).
Cool. It's a LOT to lay on all at once though - and so best broken into smaller sections. Specific questions seeking specific answers are the best way.
In general, the posit that the world is spherical is a mere assumption more than 2 millenia old. Although commonly taught (as it was over 2 millennia ago, until now) as "fact" from childhood, no one has ever validated the assumption in all of human history.
Aliens are a much more modern invention of fiction. The stereotypical "grey" we know and love, for instance, wasn't created until the early 1990's.
In ufology, you learn that the MIC (oss first, in point of fact) has been using "little green men" and the intentional and publicized conflation with them exclusively for silencing/discrediting/slandering (researchers, scientists, reporters - you name it) for 70+ years. The reason that strategy is effective, is because people know innately and acutely how stupid and fictional "aliens" are. There has been a mass advertised effort to change this, through fiction/media, for the purposes of psychological warfare and encouraging alien worship (seen in virtually all ufology circles to some extent - positively a religious cult)
Ama!
Methinks the woman doth protest too much :)
You use too much brackets
And that made it difficult for you to understand? If you don't understand something, you should ask questions!
and that means you just want to appear intelligent.
No, I'd prefer to appear to be a moron. Ask anybody.
And stop masturbating to the shape of this ugly earth.
Ugly!? Do you live in a city?
Flat earthers are obsessed with it as if they just discovered some holy secret to the occult. (now get the fuck out of here)
That is largely a controlled opposition psyop that you have experienced. It is designed to prevent you from ever looking into the subject seriously.
Flat earthers don't really exist beyond that, a contrived stereotype for the purpose of slander. Flat earth researchers, of which I am one, are most often not flat earthers.
The truth is far more interesting.
That is the controlled opposition psyop that you are talking about (and likely all you have any experience with)
Ama!
I have never met a flat earther above 100IQ
I didn't say anything about flat earthers... Flat earthers (the few of them that genuinely exist) largely believe the world is flat (just like the globe believers do about the globe) and merely parrot what their latest "authority" told them was true.
IQ has absolutely nothing to do with the likelihood of becoming a braindead parrot mindlessly repeating what you were "taught" (through conditioning by rote under the guise of education) as gospel and inerrant truth beyond doubt.
Competent flat earth researchers most all conclude that there are no aliens except in fiction. I have a background in ufology, and can doubly confirm that aliens and the "outer space" they hail from are entirely fictional, and that is their clear and obvious origin.
Ama!
It's all true.
The vote took place on christmas, and was never actually ratified legally.
Many heard and reported the explosion of the torpedo (or on board explosive) that actually caused the sinking.
If the woods can turn into charcoal, then it is possible that woods can turn into similar oil petrol liquid, too. It is just matter of time before humanity find the formula !
Don't you ever get tired of being wrong ALL the time?
The "formula" (procedure/protocol) was discovered long ago.
If you want to understand why we don't use it, you have to understand the inherent losses involved in such "alchemy"/conversion and that oil pumps ITSELF out of the f*ing ground (or at least, it used to).
Sorry, but john c lilly was a moron.
He MAY not have started out that way, but injecting lsd will tend to have that effect on a person anyhow.
It isn't long before you are "talking to dolphins" and one of your groupies starts fucking one of them (look it up).
It's in this post. Read above and you'll find it.
I've already read it, and didn't see anything of the sort. You seem to have misunderstood them... Could you point out the line where you think OP said this?
The two items that formed my stance here are:
Aha! So, they DIDN'T say that and you "deduced" it through two other statements which were NOT the statement you claimed they said? I just want to make sure I understand what you are saying.
complaining that smoke rises, and
No one complained about smoke rising either. If you wish to "cite" this statement, that would be helpful as well!
that we can fold paper.
Yes, no one doubts that we can fold paper... Do you?
Smoke rises and we can fold paper. It doesn't have anything to do with FE one way or another.
I generally agree with that. The shape of the earth has to do with he shape of the earth, not a whole heaping of bullshit that is NOT the shape of the earth.
However, those people started dying prior to the administration of any vaccines, so the premise is automatically invalidated by reality :(
That doesn't contradict any of the statements about 5G, except for the "vaccine" bit.
Do try to do better in the future
Nope.
Fair enough.
Complaining that smoke rises is indefensible
When did they do that?
This explanation flies in the face of Newton's Laws, so I suspect you think those are fake as well.
Not really, newton is just very badly misunderstood (due to intentional miseducation to make him an idol). Gravitation is not newton's idea, and he specifically asked that his name not be associated with it because of how stupid and philosophically unsound it was. You can read about it in his own pen if you wish.
Taking for granted that weight is a constant
Well, it is and it isn't. It is constant (or at least primarily constant in stable substances/atomic structures) in regards to intrinsic weight (weight without buoyant force), and varying in effective weight (weight with buoyant force factored in).
does everything fall to earth at the same rate in a vaccume?
Excellent question, and a splendid place to begin.
Firstly, it is worth understanding that a vacuum is not an attainable thing in reality. You cannot devoid any area in existence of all matter - it cannot be done, even theoretically. Nature abhors a vacuum. So we are discussing partial vacuums only (i.e. chambers that still have, at least, gas filling them)
In partial vacuums, archimedes law (and drag) still applies. The answer to your question, is NO. Only things that are the exact same density and shape could possibly fall exactly the same way (probably for TOTAL exact, you'd need the volume to match too...) Of course, functionally the difference is so slight that our "rule of thumb" is typically adequate for use.
If so, how much does the earth weigh
No one has any idea how much the world weighs, obviously.
and why doesn't fall beneath our feet?
Ah, the famous "out of phase" paradox. What keeps them from just falling through the floor now that they are "out of phase"?!
In science we try and explain phenomenon that ARE, not that you think OUGHT to be. Leave the scifi fanboy snark for hassling capt kirk (i.e. nitpicking fiction).
We don't imagine phenomenon that aren't and then contrive fiction for why it ISN'T (not in f*ing science anyway).
The world doesn't fall beneath our feet. So we have no need to explain why it should. Does this make sense to you?
All of the matter is stacked on all the other matter. What is at the bottom you ask? Why it is turtles, all the way down - naturally. When you ask stupid questions, get ready for stupid answers!
Is there an infinite ground below us?
No one knows. The deepest we have ever drilled is around 8 miles. We haven't the foggiest what is down there, and anyone who says otherwise is deluded or lying.
If that's the case, how is it possible for one to traverse all continents and end up in the exact same place by heading in a single direction long enough?
Technically/pedantically, it isn't. Essentially no one can go in a single direction for an entire trip (even around their house, let alone the entire f*ing world). It isn't possible, and it isn't verifiable/validateable because of the challenges of motion through the world.
Now let's actually address your question in earnest. Circumnavigation is a large circle over a large plane (possibly bowl or other shape, but essentially certainly not spherical). You pass over the continents when they are beneath you, and you end up where you started when you complete the circle. No, you cannot fly over the south pole in order to get to the north one on the other side. In fact, there may be no (singular) south pole at all.
Ama!
I'm advocating for density and buoyancy, and where did I say heat doesn't rise?
It doesn't! Technically...
Heat is actually radiation, so heat technically radiates.
Upon absorption of that radiation, the gas expands which decreases its density which causes the phenomenon of convection (aka, "heat rises" - which it ("heat" actually referring to the hot gas, NOT heat) doesn't, it goes all directions)
Way to stay frosty, brother or sister!
You're supposed to know this stuff in kindergarten.
You are also supposed to progress beyond your kindergarten level understanding...
Ad hominem is the last resort of the intellectually weak. Out of incompetence and the inability to address the thought, they attack the thinker instead.
Do try to do better in the future. :)
Aka antigen test (it is a form of one)