Why is there such an insurgence of flat-earthers in 2015?

[BADecker]

Flat-earthers are simply one group of people who are beginning to see through the screwy politics that the behind-the-scenes leaders of the earth are trying to get us all to believe.

If the truth were known, the earth might NOT be flat, but the picture that standard science gives us wouldn't be anywhere near the truth either.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Since this was bumped again, lol....

25 Flat Geo Earth claims that 'Rocked' my world view by 5 part video series by TigerDan925

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball - PDF from The Atlantean Conspiracy

[wxa7115]

I don’t believe in this hypothesis but it’s still an interesting read, this reminds me of the hollow earth hypothesis.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

Coriolis PROOVES Flat Earth! - Explains how the tides work and more.

"Well, after thinking it over for a long time, the missing piece of the puzzle was provided by a little video on how water has electromagnetic properties. Science can tell you that the earth spin causes Coriolis effect but it CAN'T tell you how that spin causes weather systems to spin in opposite directions simply because the equator was crossed. This theory DOES explain just that. In fact, this is so revolutionary that flat earth is the ONLY reasonable explanation for flat earth. This also better explains the tides. Science has a lame reason for how that works. It all makes so much on a flat, non-moving earth. It is amazing what can be done when people combine brain power for the common good."

[BADecker]

Coriolis PROOVES Flat Earth! - Explains how the tides work and more.

"Well, after thinking it over for a long time, the missing piece of the puzzle was provided by a little video on how water has electromagnetic properties. Science can tell you that the earth spin causes Coriolis effect but it CAN'T tell you how that spin causes weather systems to spin in opposite directions simply because the equator was crossed. This theory DOES explain just that. In fact, this is so revolutionary that flat earth is the ONLY reasonable explanation for flat earth. This also better explains the tides. Science has a lame reason for how that works. It all makes so much on a flat, non-moving earth. It is amazing what can be done when people combine brain power for the common good."

Part of string theory suggests that nobody is any distance from anyone else. Likewise, nothing is any distance from anything else. The thing we call distance is really energy relationships between the objects.

When we move away from something, what we are actually doing is increasing the energy relationship  between ourselves and the other object. When we move toward the other object, we are shrinking the energy relationship. The interesting thing is that the energy relationships are all curved. Thus, we get a flat everything that appears curved because of string energy relationships, even though all things are flat.

[notbatman]

I don't think it's the flat Earth aspect people can't come to grips with, there's a mountain of proof for that.

The issue people can't deal with is the conspiracy, they can't come to terms with the reality that everybody in a positions of power and authority are liars, thieves, rapists, murderers, homosexuals, drug addicts, etc or are under the direct control or supervision of these people. That NASA and the entire scientific establishment is a fraud. They can't wrap their mind around the super-technology. They're stuck in their brainwashed state of mind, the social and financial pressure is too great to believe anything other than the status quo.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

I don't think it's the flat Earth aspect people can't come to grips with, there's a mountain of proof for that.

The issue people can't deal with is the conspiracy, they can't come to terms with the reality that everybody in a positions of power and authority are liars, thieves, rapists, murderers, homosexuals, drug addicts, etc or are under the direct control or supervision of these people. That NASA and the entire scientific establishment is a fraud. They can't wrap their mind around the super-technology. They're stuck in their brainwashed state of mind, the social and financial pressure is too great to believe anything other than the status quo.

I can actually understand that. People really get brainwashed into the globe earth thing when households usually have a globe around somewhere, and it's always shown on tv. It's pretty constant. Hard to believe just 100 or so years ago there was a flat earth map being used.

Even harder for some to believe is that the National Weather Service is shown currently on a flat earth map here.

[protokol]

I just visited Iceland, where the day is currently longer - the sun set about 23.00 and rose about 03.00. During the solstice, Iceland experiences almost 24hrs of daylight.

My question is this: How does the flat earth theory explain this change in daylight hours when an observer travels north or south of the equator? Or in other words, why does Antarctica and the Arctic both experience long periods of sunlight and darkness?

The explanation of a "spotlight" sun does not make sense, if we assume that the Arctic is at the centre of the disc, and the Antarctic is a boundary of the disc.

[BADecker]

I just visited Iceland, where the day is currently longer - the sun set about 23.00 and rose about 03.00. During the solstice, Iceland experiences almost 24hrs of daylight.

My question is this: How does the flat earth theory explain this change in daylight hours when an observer travels north or south of the equator? Or in other words, why does Antarctica and the Arctic both experience long periods of sunlight and darkness?

The explanation of a "spotlight" sun does not make sense, if we assume that the Arctic is at the centre of the disc, and the Antarctic is a boundary of the disc.

While I don't necessarily agree that the earth is flat, modern science is very technical in how it works. This science has not been used to explain how a flat earth would work in every way. If the minds of modern science were applied to finding out how a flat earth works, like they have been applied to a round earth, flat earth science might have advanced way more rapidly.

Perhaps the explanations are coming in the near future.

[protokol]

I just visited Iceland, where the day is currently longer - the sun set about 23.00 and rose about 03.00. During the solstice, Iceland experiences almost 24hrs of daylight.

My question is this: How does the flat earth theory explain this change in daylight hours when an observer travels north or south of the equator? Or in other words, why does Antarctica and the Arctic both experience long periods of sunlight and darkness?

The explanation of a "spotlight" sun does not make sense, if we assume that the Arctic is at the centre of the disc, and the Antarctic is a boundary of the disc.

While I don't necessarily agree that the earth is flat, modern science is very technical in how it works. This science has not been used to explain how a flat earth would work in every way. If the minds of modern science were applied to finding out how a flat earth works, like they have been applied to a round earth, flat earth science might have advanced way more rapidly.

Perhaps the explanations are coming in the near future.

Perhaps, but the current accepted model of a globe Earth explains this already. This is the main problem with the Flat Earth theory, it seems to be a case of classic conspiracy theory where someone thinks up a hypothesis (a flat earth) and then tries to "prove" all the discrepancies with increasingly complex explanations, such as a "spotlight" sun, with no empirical evidence of said explanations.

This is not how the scientific method works, you don't just think up an idea and then think up loads of new ways in which the idea could work. You need to rigorously try and "disprove" your hypothesis, and the harder this is to do, the more weight your hypothesis has.

[BADecker]

I just visited Iceland, where the day is currently longer - the sun set about 23.00 and rose about 03.00. During the solstice, Iceland experiences almost 24hrs of daylight.

My question is this: How does the flat earth theory explain this change in daylight hours when an observer travels north or south of the equator? Or in other words, why does Antarctica and the Arctic both experience long periods of sunlight and darkness?

The explanation of a "spotlight" sun does not make sense, if we assume that the Arctic is at the centre of the disc, and the Antarctic is a boundary of the disc.

While I don't necessarily agree that the earth is flat, modern science is very technical in how it works. This science has not been used to explain how a flat earth would work in every way. If the minds of modern science were applied to finding out how a flat earth works, like they have been applied to a round earth, flat earth science might have advanced way more rapidly.

Perhaps the explanations are coming in the near future.

Perhaps, but the current accepted model of a globe Earth explains this already. This is the main problem with the Flat Earth theory, it seems to be a case of classic conspiracy theory where someone thinks up a hypothesis (a flat earth) and then tries to "prove" all the discrepancies with increasingly complex explanations, such as a "spotlight" sun, with no empirical evidence of said explanations.

This is not how the scientific method works, you don't just think up an idea and then think up loads of new ways in which the idea could work. You need to rigorously try and "disprove" your hypothesis, and the harder this is to do, the more weight your hypothesis has.

I just watched part of the first video at:

Since this was bumped again, lol....

25 Flat Geo Earth claims that 'Rocked' my world view by 5 part video series by TigerDan925

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball - PDF from The Atlantean Conspiracy

, but it was so stupid that I couldn't even finish it.

However, one of the things that the video made me think of is that there might be another design to the earth than the ones listed in the video. The earth might be like a flat earth. But rather than a flat circle, with the water being held in by ice around the edges, perhaps the earth is "humped" in the center. The center of the disc-shaped earth might be humped in the center.

Oh come on! Play with me. This is an exciting sci-fi topic that approaches reality. And if it is modern science that is the sci-fi, how exciting! We might have been living in science fiction all our lives.

[BADecker]

Since this was bumped again, lol....

25 Flat Geo Earth claims that 'Rocked' my world view by 5 part video series by TigerDan925

200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball - PDF from The Atlantean Conspiracy

Some of the points in this PDF are so laughable that I couldn't even keep reading. The laughable ones were located in the 20s. Others in the area that I was looking would need to be tested. I couldn't take the stupidity, so I quit before reaching #50.

[protokol]

Yeah that video is really stupid, the guy narrating reminds me of Alan Partridge.

I prefer sci-fi that has a plausible basis in actual science.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

I just visited Iceland, where the day is currently longer - the sun set about 23.00 and rose about 03.00. During the solstice, Iceland experiences almost 24hrs of daylight.

My question is this: How does the flat earth theory explain this change in daylight hours when an observer travels north or south of the equator? Or in other words, why does Antarctica and the Arctic both experience long periods of sunlight and darkness?

The explanation of a "spotlight" sun does not make sense, if we assume that the Arctic is at the centre of the disc, and the Antarctic is a boundary of the disc.

First, because scientists are most likely lying about how this stuff all works, it's not like you can just pick up a book and read about how it really works. I think I've even written about this before....

The way scientists talk about how the sun is so big (it's not as big as they say), but if it was, then the the scientists are lying about something. Here's that post:

NASA Contradiction LIE -Having it THEIR way CAUGHT them!

This video talks about how the light from the sun only comes at the Earth straight on, which is why there are times when the North Pole is in complete darkness for weeks at a time, etc. Then it talks about how, in order to explain blood red moons, NASA also says that the sun light comes from other angles.

1) Straight on light = days with no light in poles.

2) Multiple angels from sun = Blood red moon

You can't have it both ways, they contradict each other. Which one is right?

(click on that post to see the picture)

So science can't explain what you experienced, yet.

I think the explanation that is generally talked about is that the sun rotates around the earth, and during the summer, the sun is closer to the north (in the center of the flat earth map), and farther away from the south (the outer ridge of the flat earth map), which is why days are shorter in the winter (no matter where you are) and days are longer in the summer (no matter where you are). So the sun is seen for longer a time next to Iceland. As seen here: How the 4 seasons work on the Flat Earth model.

[MakingMoneyHoney]

I just visited Iceland, where the day is currently longer - the sun set about 23.00 and rose about 03.00. During the solstice, Iceland experiences almost 24hrs of daylight.

My question is this: How does the flat earth theory explain this change in daylight hours when an observer travels north or south of the equator? Or in other words, why does Antarctica and the Arctic both experience long periods of sunlight and darkness?

The explanation of a "spotlight" sun does not make sense, if we assume that the Arctic is at the centre of the disc, and the Antarctic is a boundary of the disc.

While I don't necessarily agree that the earth is flat, modern science is very technical in how it works. This science has not been used to explain how a flat earth would work in every way. If the minds of modern science were applied to finding out how a flat earth works, like they have been applied to a round earth, flat earth science might have advanced way more rapidly.

Perhaps the explanations are coming in the near future.

Perhaps, but the current accepted model of a globe Earth explains this already. This is the main problem with the Flat Earth theory, it seems to be a case of classic conspiracy theory where someone thinks up a hypothesis (a flat earth) and then tries to "prove" all the discrepancies with increasingly complex explanations, such as a "spotlight" sun, with no empirical evidence of said explanations.

This is not how the scientific method works, you don't just think up an idea and then think up loads of new ways in which the idea could work. You need to rigorously try and "disprove" your hypothesis, and the harder this is to do, the more weight your hypothesis has.

As I've mentioned they can't prove why there are blood moons or they can't prove why there are places that have light all day. It's either/or.

They also haven't proved why the storm fronts are counter clockwise/clockwise based on what hemisphere it is. Though there's a really great reason why according to flat earth.

Science says the moon reflects the sun's rays, and that's why it gives light, why does the moon give off a colder light?

[protokol]

MMH you're talking nonsense. Of course you can have lunar eclipses (blood moons in bible speak) and have perpetual sunlight at the poles, they are two totally separate things (the shadow of the Earth on the Moon, and the tilt of the Earth causing the extended day/night at the poles).

The reason the moon sometimes appears red is because of light scattered by the atmosphere, and by different levels of shadow falling across it. Again, this has nothing to do with my point about daylight hours, you're seriously misunderstanding how this works if you think this is a case of "either/or".

As for your comment about colder light from the moon, you actually believe that moonlight is cold? You think this is why night is colder than day?

[MakingMoneyHoney]

MMH you're talking nonsense. Of course you can have lunar eclipses (blood moons in bible speak) and have perpetual sunlight at the poles, they are two totally separate things (the shadow of the Earth on the Moon, and the tilt of the Earth causing the extended day/night at the poles).

The reason the moon sometimes appears red is because of light scattered by the atmosphere, and by different levels of shadow falling across it. Again, this has nothing to do with my point about daylight hours, you're seriously misunderstanding how this works if you think this is a case of "either/or".

As for your comment about colder light from the moon, you actually believe that moonlight is cold? You think this is why night is colder than day?

The reason night is colder than day is because the sun isn't shining on us.

[BADecker]

MMH you're talking nonsense. Of course you can have lunar eclipses (blood moons in bible speak) and have perpetual sunlight at the poles, they are two totally separate things (the shadow of the Earth on the Moon, and the tilt of the Earth causing the extended day/night at the poles).

The reason the moon sometimes appears red is because of light scattered by the atmosphere, and by different levels of shadow falling across it. Again, this has nothing to do with my point about daylight hours, you're seriously misunderstanding how this works if you think this is a case of "either/or".

As for your comment about colder light from the moon, you actually believe that moonlight is cold? You think this is why night is colder than day?

The reason night is colder than day is because the sun isn't shining on us.

Yabut, what's the reason for moonlit nights being colder than when there is no moon?

 

[notbatman]

MMH you're talking nonsense. Of course you can have lunar eclipses (blood moons in bible speak) and have perpetual sunlight at the poles, they are two totally separate things (the shadow of the Earth on the Moon, and the tilt of the Earth causing the extended day/night at the poles).

The reason the moon sometimes appears red is because of light scattered by the atmosphere, and by different levels of shadow falling across it. Again, this has nothing to do with my point about daylight hours, you're seriously misunderstanding how this works if you think this is a case of "either/or".

As for your comment about colder light from the moon, you actually believe that moonlight is cold? You think this is why night is colder than day?

The reason night is colder than day is because the sun isn't shining on us.

Yabut, what's the reason for moonlit nights being colder than when there is no moon?

 

My theory (untested) on why light from the Moon is cold is that when an object absorbs and re-emits moonlight the high temporal coherence of the light causes the momentum of the objects particles to change. This compresses the velocity distribution of the particles thereby cooling them.

[RodeoX]

Can you guys pass me your joint? It must be epic weed your smoking.