Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
A magician's tricks must be done in secrecy, with only a select few volunteers (e.g. millionaire/billionaire crisis-actor types - Richard Branson, anyone?).
Do you have scientific evidence for this, or are you basing it on stories you read in a religious book?Time is on the side of people who believe in a flat stationary earth with the sun, moon and stars moving over the earth and waters above the earth, with God on His throne looking down.
The truth will eventually be reveled, if not before the second coming then the second coming will expose the lies.
It is really only something God can really expose.
He asked for proof of water sticking to a ball.
You were the one who claimed that there was verifiable PhD level scientific evidence for the Flat Earth.
So why do you see the need to resort to such a drivel?
Assumption: The earth is flat.
Assertion: there are things that should not work on a flat earth... like satellite navigation relying on a net of object orbiting the globe.
Claim: these things work
Conclusion: we see these things work, we have assumed that the earth is flat, so these things work on a flat earth which proves that the earth is flat.
I hope you can see why this is not a scientific conclusion. In the same way we could conclude that the earth is hollow, a torus or non existentent.
Seriously: if there is good scientific evidence for the Flat Earth, why do people come up with "demonstrate that water can stick to a spinning ball" level nonsense?
He asked for proof of water sticking to a ball, not unfounded, unproven theories. We're aware of what is claimed for magic gravity - what we lack is actual proof of the magic.
So how about providing references or links to the papers by qualified mathematicians, physicists, or engineers that provide a full mathematical treatment of flat Earth theory?There isn't a one of you that has shown any knowledge concerning the nature of the very thing you are taking your time to argue against.
I'm sorry, but you guys aren't exactly standing on solid ground when you just assume the earth is a ball and therefore anything working on a ball can't work on a flat surface. Spare me the doublethink. I was being a bit absurd to demonstrate the absurdity of the original claim. I'm a bit tired of you all just making claims that "X" won't work on a flat earth when you still think ships go over a horizon. There isn't a one of you that has shown any knowledge concerning the nature of the very thing you are taking your time to argue against.
You're welcome.
So how about providing references or links to the papers by qualified mathematicians, physicists, or engineers that provide a full mathematical treatment of flat Earth theory?
I've had a browse online and not found any serious mathematical treatments (except some debunking articles).I've done that on numerous occasions on past threads. ...I've decided if anyone really wants to find out, they will be able to find out for themselves.
I've done that on numerous occasions on past threads. Everything I posted was promptly ignored and ridiculed. I've decided if anyone really wants to find out, they will be able to find out for themselves.
I've had a browse online and not found any serious mathematical treatments (except some debunking articles).
So how about a reference or link to the posts where you provided this information, or even just the thread name(s), or perhaps some keywords to search by, such as the name of one of these qualified individuals, or similar? Is that asking too much?
When you make a claim like the one you made in post #28, or the post I'm quoting, the onus is on you to support it.
So, you won't/can't supply the name of one Flat Earth PHD, despite your claim to be able to do so ?
Just asking for a name ... who have you got ?
I dont think a single person here actually believes in a flat earth. Its simply too dumb.
This must be some kind of troll practice game thing that I'm too old to appreciate. or something.
I won't. Been ridiculed enough by the forum masses for anything I say or do on this topic. You are all on your own, and believe me, it's well-deserved.
Anyone can start with a globe covered with water rotating.
Then show how a moon 250,000 miles away, can change the unlit side, which is black in their made-up outer space, to blue as seen on earth during daylight hours.
Ah, OK. So, looking at your flat Earth posts on Christian Forums, you've posted a fair number on the subject, and refused to debate several times on account of past ridicule, which is fair enough; but to refuse to post your links to detailed analysis by qualified contributors because of past ridicule is odd, because any ridicule would be aimed at those analyses, not you.I won't. Been ridiculed enough by the forum masses for anything I say or do on this topic. You are all on your own, and believe me, it's well-deserved.
Won't, can't, butt-hurt, etc. ... makes you pretty ineffective ...
Ah, OK. So, looking at your flat Earth posts on Christian Forums, you've posted a fair number on the subject, and refused to debate several times on account of past ridicule, which is fair enough; but to refuse to post your links to detailed analysis by qualified contributors because of past ridicule is odd, because any ridicule would be aimed at those analyses, not you.
However, although you've said things like, "I've discussed the science in great detail. ... There are past threads to peruse should one feel so inclined." and you've claimed that you've provided links to papers by qualified mathematicians, physicists, or engineers that provide a full mathematical treatment of flat Earth theory, "on numerous occasions on past threads", the site search facility doesn't turn up a single post you've made that discusses the science 'in great detail', or that contains relevant links to anything more than so-called 'primer' videos.
Given that you claimed to be "not convinced of a flat earth" in April 2017, and were still "shape agnostic" in July of last year, and that the links you claim to have posted would clearly be convincing, one would have expected to find those posts sometime after April 2017... but no - and not before that date either.
My evidence suggests that you haven't "discussed the science in great detail" in these forums, nor have you posted links to papers by qualified mathematicians, physicists, or engineers that provide a full mathematical treatment of flat Earth theory "on numerous occasions on past threads". However, it's still possible that I somehow missed all those "numerous occasions", or that the search facility did not reveal them.
You're welcome to show that you have done what you claim, and prove me wrong while doing so.
He asked for proof of water sticking to a ball, not unfounded, unproven theories. We're aware of what is claimed for magic gravity - what we lack is actual proof of the magic.
I'm glad it amuses you to read it as much as it amuses me to write it.
Not at all. Just calling out what colour bunny the magician is going to pull out of the hat next. Easily refutable by picking someone new from the audience, rather than one of the stooges he planted earlier. Science is testable and repeatable, remember? A magician's tricks must be done in secrecy, with only a select few volunteers (e.g. millionaire/billionaire crisis-actor types - Richard Branson, anyone?).
I don't need to convince myself, and I won't convince the willfully ignorant. Just regard my posts as a pre-emptive "I told you so", for the day some of our globalist readers finally realise the truth.
Sorry, it is not true. It is not even false. It is just nonsense.I did say that, because it's true.
I'm sorry, but you guys aren't exactly standing on solid ground when you just assume the earth is a ball and therefore anything working on a ball can't work on a flat surface. Spare me the doublethink. I was being a bit absurd to demonstrate the absurdity of the original claim. I'm a bit tired of you all just making claims that "X" won't work on a flat earth when you still think ships go over a horizon. There isn't a one of you that has shown any knowledge concerning the nature of the very thing you are taking your time to argue against.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?