Flat Earth

[philipma1957]

I sailed around the world while in the U.S. N.

So the matrix showed me a globe as the truth.

Therein lies the problem.

If the matrix exists then the world could be any shape.

So the question is how do you prove that the matrix is false?

Since I already know the matrix can't be disproven and it can show me anything it wants to show me

Such as a round globe I also know it can show me other realities .

So replace matrix with universe and the earth could be what it chooses to show to us.

That's why the world could be any shape like a helix or what ever.

It is why I don't post here much as I am content to allow reality to be whatever it wants to be .

Cube tube globe.

[nomad13666]

PS; Learn to spell, you halfwit cunt.

Show me peer-reviewed scientific proof that the Earth is flat, you glue-huffing nigger.

You rely on "peers"? poor fellow

He meant "queer-reviewed".

The shirt-tucker can't type.

Goat-felching hermaphrodite.

[serbad]

PS; Learn to spell, you halfwit cunt.

Show me peer-reviewed scientific proof that the Earth is flat, you glue-huffing nigger.

You rely on "peers"? poor fellow

He meant "queer-reviewed".
The shirt-tucker can't type.
Goat-felching hermaphrodite.

peer re·view
noun
1.
evaluation of scientific, academic, or professional work by others working in the same field.
verb
1.
subject (someone or something) to a peer review.

What a bunch of fucking retarded, Flat-Earth-Believing niggers in here. Can't prove their theories, without poorly produced fringe YouTube videos made by other dumb niggers.

Found a picture of nomad13666 in my research, though.

Scientists suck more ass than you do.!

[notbatman]

The Michaelson-Morley Experiment and Airy's Failure both failed to detect any motion of the Earth and both are peer reviewed. When taken with the peer reviewed Sagnac Experiment proving the existence of an aether you've got the peer reviewed scientific evidence the Earth is flat that you're looking for, that is of course unless you want argue in favor of a geocentric sphere HAHA HAHA. ...

Bonus:

Gleason's flat-earth map is patented.

[BADecker]

The Michaelson-Morley Experiment and Airy's Failure both failed to detect any motion of the Earth and both are peer reviewed. When taken with the peer reviewed Sagnac Experiment proving the existence of an aether you've got the peer reviewed scientific evidence the Earth is flat that you're looking for, that is of course unless you want argue in favor of a geocentric sphere HAHA HAHA. ...

Bonus:

Gleason's flat-earth map is patented.

However, these things don't prove the earth is flat. Why not? There are many other things that show that the earth is nearly spherical.

At best, these experiments you list, show that some of the scientific theories we have about the way the universe works are inconclusive. The theory of the electric universe - http://www.thunderbolts.info/ - is bringing clarity to a lot of standard cosmology.

I believe the ultimate result will be the reconciliation of the ideas you talk about, with the fact of a globe earth, and a generally spherical universe.

I, also, believe that science will never get a true picture of physics. Why do I believe this? There are too many things that we don't know about the dimensions. The fact that electromagnetics is a rather easy form of energy for us to "play with," and that it took thousands of years for us to get a handle on it so that we can use it the way that we do, shows that we are simply not aware of, possibly, many other forms of "energy" that could be substantially greater than electromagnetics.

Rather than promoting flat earth, you should be throwing your energy at disproving cosmological theory that doesn't match the facts of the way things work. For example, the Theory of Relativity has been around for a long time. Although it has been proven to work in some ways, there are other ways that it doesn't seem to hold true. This is why it has not been elevated to science fact.

You could use your studies to tweak relativity theory so that a "right" relativity theory could come into existence, rather than trying to prove the existence of something that clearly doesn't exist.

[TooQik]

The Michaelson-Morley Experiment and Airy's Failure both failed to detect any motion of the Earth and both are peer reviewed. When taken with the peer reviewed Sagnac Experiment proving the existence of an aether you've got the peer reviewed scientific evidence the Earth is flat that you're looking for, that is of course unless you want argue in favor of a geocentric sphere HAHA HAHA. ...

Bonus:

Gleason's flat-earth map is patented.

We've done this dance notbatman.

Both the Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments didn't prove the presence of an aether but ironically (for you) the Sagnac effect can be used to prove that the Earth is rotating.

[notbatman]

The Michaelson-Morley Experiment and Airy's Failure both failed to detect any motion of the Earth and both are peer reviewed. When taken with the peer reviewed Sagnac Experiment proving the existence of an aether you've got the peer reviewed scientific evidence the Earth is flat that you're looking for, that is of course unless you want argue in favor of a geocentric sphere HAHA HAHA. ...

Bonus:

Gleason's flat-earth map is patented.

We've done this dance notbatman.

Both the Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments didn't prove the presence of an aether but ironically (for you) the Sagnac effect can be used to prove that the Earth is rotating.

Fuck off, both M&M and Airy's Failure (keyword here is failure), prove the Earth is motionless. As for Sagnac's interferometer measurements at 10% of the predicted velocity of Earth's rotation and with a sidereal cycle they most certainly do not prove the Earth is rotating but that there's an aether drift.

So yes, we've done this dance before and you're still on the losing side of the argument, faggot.

[BADecker]

The Michaelson-Morley Experiment and Airy's Failure both failed to detect any motion of the Earth and both are peer reviewed. When taken with the peer reviewed Sagnac Experiment proving the existence of an aether you've got the peer reviewed scientific evidence the Earth is flat that you're looking for, that is of course unless you want argue in favor of a geocentric sphere HAHA HAHA. ...

Bonus:

Gleason's flat-earth map is patented.

We've done this dance notbatman.

Both the Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments didn't prove the presence of an aether but ironically (for you) the Sagnac effect can be used to prove that the Earth is rotating.

Fuck off, both M&M and Airy's Failure (keyword here is failure), proves the Earth is motionless. As for Sagnac, at 10% of the predicted velocity of Earth's rotation and with a sidereal cycle it most certainly does not prove the Earth is rotating but that there's an aether drift.

So yes, we've done this dance before and you're still on the losing side of the argument, faggot.

Oh, that's right! I forgot in my previous post that you are a funny farm fantasizing fanatic. Amidst all that logical fantasizing, you seem to be in the expletive, foul language direction, as well. Perhaps not perverted as noWman13666, but in that general direction. Sorry about offering a more or less, logical post previously.

[notbatman]

^ Thanks for quoting however, I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.

Also stop with the Relativity bullshit, big E was a kike and his theory literally saved the world i.e. the M&M Experiment had proven the Earth motionless and Relativity saved the globe by explaining away the empirical results with an absurd ass backwards theory of waves in nothing.

[BADecker]

^ Thanks for quoting however, I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.

Also stop with the Relativity bullshit, big E was a kike and his theory literally saved the world i.e. The M&M Experiment had proven the Earth motionless and Relativity saved the globe by explaining away the empirical results with an absurd ass backwards theory of waves in nothing.

Until you start to realize that the earth is a globe, and...
... the aether is a solid with ...
... a bunch of parallel universes occupying it...
... all out of phase with each other...
... thereby creating the appearance of space...

... you are going to keep on missing some of the greatest aspects of the aether.

[kn7777777]

Flat Earth may be you have in mind that

 

[notbatman]

^ Thanks for quoting however, I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.

Also stop with the Relativity bullshit, big E was a kike and his theory literally saved the world i.e. the M&M Experiment had proven the Earth motionless and Relativity saved the globe by explaining away the empirical results with an absurd ass backwards theory of waves in nothing.

Until you start to realize that the earth is a globe, and...
... the aether is a solid with ...
... a bunch of parallel universes occupying it...
... all out of phase with each other...
... thereby creating the appearance of space...

... you are going to keep on missing some of the greatest aspects of the aether.

There's a difference between you and me that is that I understand the quaternion based vector calculus that Maxwell devised to explain electromagnetism. You're just full of it dude, you have no clue what the aether is.

[notbatman]

Flat Earth may be you have in mind that

 

No we're not a disc floating in space, think snow globe. Oh wait....

[nomad13666]

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jesuits+catholics+%22flat+earth%22

[BADecker]

^ Thanks for quoting however, I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.

Also stop with the Relativity bullshit, big E was a kike and his theory literally saved the world i.e. the M&M Experiment had proven the Earth motionless and Relativity saved the globe by explaining away the empirical results with an absurd ass backwards theory of waves in nothing.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wBzqOa9y02I/hqdefault.jpg

Until you start to realize that the earth is a globe, and...
... the aether is a solid with ...
... a bunch of parallel universes occupying it...
... all out of phase with each other...
... thereby creating the appearance of space...

... you are going to keep on missing some of the greatest aspects of the aether.

There's a difference between you and me that is that I understand the quaternion based vector calculus that Maxwell devised to explain electromagnetism. You're just full of it dude, you have no clue what the aether is.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5d/3b/99/5d3b99ad88627616ae389fb1415ce66e.jpg

Good. Then you know that Maxwell's work is just theory. Isn't it about time that you admit that flat earth has not even been recognized as theory? Why? Because there is proof that the earth is a globe. Go ahead and understand the theory. But if you understand it the same way you understand flat earth, all you are doing is understanding science fiction.

[BADecker]

^ Thanks for quoting however, I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.

Also stop with the Relativity bullshit, big E was a kike and his theory literally saved the world i.e. the M&M Experiment had proven the Earth motionless and Relativity saved the globe by explaining away the empirical results with an absurd ass backwards theory of waves in nothing.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wBzqOa9y02I/hqdefault.jpg

Until you start to realize that the earth is a globe, and...
... the aether is a solid with ...
... a bunch of parallel universes occupying it...
... all out of phase with each other...
... thereby creating the appearance of space...

... you are going to keep on missing some of the greatest aspects of the aether.

There's a difference between you and me that is that I understand the quaternion based vector calculus that Maxwell devised to explain electromagnetism. You're just full of it dude, you have no clue what the aether is.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5d/3b/99/5d3b99ad88627616ae389fb1415ce66e.jpg

Good. Then you know that Maxwell's work is just theory. Isn't it about time that you admit that flat earth has not even been recognized as theory? Why? Because there is proof that the earth is a globe. Go ahead and understand the theory. But if you understand it the same way you understand flat earth, all you are doing is understanding science fiction.

BADecker,  but Bible says Earth is flat.

FE model matches exactly what is described in the Bible.  Firmament, waters above and below, when Jesus will come back EVERYONE on Earth will see him,  heavens will open and he will kinda drop on the elevator, there was a piece about the tallest tree where you can see all the world to the edges (Antarctica on the flat model I assume).

So how can you believe in the Bible but not believe in the FE model?  Just curious.

FE model matches perfectly the Bronze Age model described in the Bible. 

For the simple reason that, anybody, as a simple person, living in his/her simple life, would see exactly the same thing on either a flat earth or a globe earth. God was writing for simple people... people who at the time had no scientific knowledge. If God had explained earth to them in the scientific way, they wouldn't have understood. Nowadays we have been able to explain globe earth to ourselves in ways that we understand.

The point is, you and I can go out and look at the sky and the ground, right now, and see the same thing that would be seen on either a flat earth or a globe earth. That is the thing that God describes for people... not the thing that they would see if they understood science, nor the thing that they would see if they were a hundred-thousand miles off into space.

[serbad]

^ Thanks for quoting however, I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.

Also stop with the Relativity bullshit, big E was a kike and his theory literally saved the world i.e. the M&M Experiment had proven the Earth motionless and Relativity saved the globe by explaining away the empirical results with an absurd ass backwards theory of waves in nothing.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/wBzqOa9y02I/hqdefault.jpg

Until you start to realize that the earth is a globe, and...
... the aether is a solid with ...
... a bunch of parallel universes occupying it...
... all out of phase with each other...
... thereby creating the appearance of space...

... you are going to keep on missing some of the greatest aspects of the aether.

There's a difference between you and me that is that I understand the quaternion based vector calculus that Maxwell devised to explain electromagnetism. You're just full of it dude, you have no clue what the aether is.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/5d/3b/99/5d3b99ad88627616ae389fb1415ce66e.jpg

Good. Then you know that Maxwell's work is just theory. Isn't it about time that you admit that flat earth has not even been recognized as theory? Why? Because there is proof that the earth is a globe. Go ahead and understand the theory. But if you understand it the same way you understand flat earth, all you are doing is understanding science fiction.

BADecker,  but Bible says Earth is flat.

FE model matches exactly what is described in the Bible.  Firmament, waters above and below, when Jesus will come back EVERYONE on Earth will see him,  heavens will open and he will kinda drop on the elevator, there was a piece about the tallest tree where you can see all the world to the edges (Antarctica on the flat model I assume).

So how can you believe in the Bible but not believe in the FE model?  Just curious.

FE model matches perfectly the Bronze Age model described in the Bible. 

For the simple reason that, anybody, as a simple person, living in his/her simple life, would see exactly the same thing on either a flat earth or a globe earth. God was writing for simple people... people who at the time had no scientific knowledge. If God had explained earth to them in the scientific way, they wouldn't have understood. Nowadays we have been able to explain globe earth to ourselves in ways that we understand.

The point is, you and I can go out and look at the sky and the ground, right now, and see the same thing that would be seen on either a flat earth or a globe earth. That is the thing that God describes for people... not the thing that they would see if they understood science, nor the thing that they would see if they were a hundred-thousand miles off into space.

So that's your answer 'god lied to us'
You make me sick you intolerable rat weasel bastard.!

[nomad13666]

Don't be a retarded and racist Brokeback hermaphrodite.

RESEARCH FLAT EARTH
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22flat+earth%22

[BADecker]

For the simple reason that, anybody, as a simple person, living in his/her simple life, would see exactly the same thing on either a flat earth or a globe earth. God was writing for simple people... people who at the time had no scientific knowledge. If God had explained earth to them in the scientific way, they wouldn't have understood. Nowadays we have been able to explain globe earth to ourselves in ways that we understand.

The point is, you and I can go out and look at the sky and the ground, right now, and see the same thing that would be seen on either a flat earth or a globe earth. That is the thing that God describes for people... not the thing that they would see if they understood science, nor the thing that they would see if they were a hundred-thousand miles off into space.

So that's your answer 'god lied to us'
You make me sick you intolerable rat weasel bastard.!

No, God didn't lie. How do we know He didn't lie? Because He didn't leave us in a prison of ignorance. Rather, He gave us enough freedom so that we could find the rest of the truth any time we wanted. This is the thing that we have found starting thousands of years ago... that the earth is a globe.

Imagine that you wanted to explain Quantum Physics to a 5-year-old. Would you throw a bunch of high math on a blackboard and say to the kid (who can't even read, yet), "Pretty clear, kid, right?"

God explained what we were seeing in the way we would understand. But he left the ways open for us to find out more when the time would come that we would be able to understand.

Since your language in your post shows intent to defame me, and maybe God at the same time, you SHOULD be sick. But it is you making yourself sick by your wicked attitude.

[TooQik]

The Michaelson-Morley Experiment and Airy's Failure both failed to detect any motion of the Earth and both are peer reviewed. When taken with the peer reviewed Sagnac Experiment proving the existence of an aether you've got the peer reviewed scientific evidence the Earth is flat that you're looking for, that is of course unless you want argue in favor of a geocentric sphere HAHA HAHA. ...

Bonus:

Gleason's flat-earth map is patented.

We've done this dance notbatman.

Both the Michelson-Morley and Sagnac experiments didn't prove the presence of an aether but ironically (for you) the Sagnac effect can be used to prove that the Earth is rotating.

Fuck off, both M&M and Airy's Failure (keyword here is failure), prove the Earth is motionless. As for Sagnac's interferometer measurements at 10% of the predicted velocity of Earth's rotation and with a sidereal cycle they most certainly do not prove the Earth is rotating but that there's an aether drift.

So yes, we've done this dance before and you're still on the losing side of the argument, faggot.

Your ability to draw conclusions from data is right up there with your ability to will over people using your eloquent terms of endearment for others who don't share your point of view.

First you state that Michelson-Morley's and Airy's experiments prove that the Earth is motionless, then you go on that Sagnac's experiment proves that there's an aether drift. Your failure here is that if there is an aether drift then the Earth is moving through this aether and your two statements contradict each other.

[...snip...] I made a minor edit; M&M actually measured the aether drift (10% predicted velocity), I believe they used Sagnac's interferometer.[...snip...]

Again, if the experiment proves an aether drift then it proves the Earth is moving.

Lastly, Sagnac didn't perform his experiment until the early 1900s and yet you believe that Michelson and Morley used his version of interferometer back in 1887??? Lift your game son.