Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeI've taken the Bible to be the authority on all matters, but I don't apply a literal translation where it appears otherwise inappropriate, e.g., assigning human characteristics to God and the like.
Ah, so the Earth is only poetically flat...
Despite my biblical upbringing (abandoned for a time and then resumed later in adulthood), I never once saw the Bible saying emphatically and literally that the earth was flat.
As with the overwhelming majority of people educated in the system, I grew up and held the world to be a sphere... all the way until about two years ago.
Also similar to others herein, I scoffed at the idea of anything BUT a round ball spinning on its axis, chasing around the sun and screaming through the universe.
I didn't look any further than my education.
Or, better: indoctrination.
I call it indoctrination on the basis of its inability to withstand baseline scrutiny.
If an idea lacks the vigor to be considered in the light of reality, it must be discarded.
A globe model cannot answer the issues related to lack of curvature.
The model currently accepted requires the propaganda of a government agency which was established with the use of Nazi sympathizers for the express purpose of controlling the heavens as though it were a battlefield.
To be sure, I need to revisit the biblical passages which speak of the earth in terms of a table... but this isn't what prompted the inquiry in the first place, sadly.
Originally posted by sonhouseHere's something even funnier than your fat-fingered attempts at typing out cogent thought.
There is no refuting his religion. He is hard wired now to fall for the entire house of cards.
There is literally nothing whatsoever within my posts which indicate a lack of perspicacity: the thoughts are lucidly expressed, sentences soundly constructed and otherwise all signals indicate a person in control of their faculties.
You might not agree with the topic or my conclusions, but you certainly can't fault my perspective on the basis of a lack of intellect, nor can you assume from anything other than your disagreement with my conclusion anything related to a loss of mental acuity on my end.
The same cannot be said for the detractors (yourself included), however.
Each of you have struggled to remain on point, often supplying responses to arguments not made in addition to lacking anything to do with the topic at hand.
More specifically, you have routinely confused which model uses an oblate spheroid to describe the earth.
Too, you have had difficulty discerning posts which argued from the assumption of the other position or often argued against patently absurd (or patently obvious) points.
The coup de grâce to your position was your insistence on resorting to attacks on the person instead of annihilation of the argument.
My points were two in number and exceedingly simple, but neither of you were able to refute them, due mostly to an unswerving commitment to evade them altogether.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWe didn't evade anything. YOU are the one evading. I posted 10 separate issues you refuse to even acknowledge much less try to find a flat Earther rational.
Here's something even funnier than your fat-fingered attempts at typing out cogent thought.
There is literally nothing whatsoever within my posts which indicate a lack of perspicacity: the thoughts are lucidly expressed, sentences soundly constructed and otherwise all signals indicate a person in control of their faculties.
You might not agree with the ...[text shortened]... f you were able to refute them, due mostly to an unswerving commitment to evade them altogether.
I answered your questions, I said NASA doesn't lie. That IS an answer. You just choose not to acknowledge that as an answer. Every image produced by the entire space faring community is faked according to you but all you do is present opinion, never refutations.
To refute the fake image idea you have to have an independent digital video expert go over the so-called fakes and they are pretty good at their jobs but I see no such attempt by you or your FE buddies.
There IS no refutation of your view because it is your religion, just like people believe JC and the boys are going to save their sorry asses when they die.
Same thing and nothing anyone can say will change your mind or that of the deluded christian or Jew or Muslim or Hindu or flat Earther. All deluded.
Earth was known to be a globe 2000 or more years ago but it is really only in the 19th century it became a religious movement which you no doubt are familiar with.
So as a religious movement nothing anyone can say will change your or any other flat earther mind.
Originally posted by sonhouseI asked you to provide a SINGLE image which is NASA produced which you consider to be free of alteration.
We didn't evade anything. YOU are the one evading. I posted 10 separate issues you refuse to even acknowledge much less try to find a flat Earther rational.
I answered your questions, I said NASA doesn't lie. That IS an answer. You just choose not to acknowledge that as an answer. Every image produced by the entire space faring community is faked accordi ...[text shortened]... as a religious movement nothing anyone can say will change your or any other flat earther mind.
You've provided not one.
I asked you to explain how distant objects which should be below the horizon are otherwise visible.
You offered "refraction of light," without understanding even the basics of the phenomenon.
Everything you've offered is either lacking in applicability or completely off base.
How can anyone argue with that?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNo comment. I told you I am through arguing, you are coming from a religious POV and there is no arguing that. You are beyond reason.
I asked you to provide a SINGLE image which is NASA produced which you consider to be free of alteration.
You've provided not one.
I asked you to explain how distant objects which should be below the horizon are otherwise visible.
You offered "refraction of light," without understanding even the basics of the phenomenon.
Everything you've offer ...[text shortened]... is either lacking in applicability or completely off base.
How can anyone argue with that?
Originally posted by sonhouseAs I said, no argument can be made with you as you refuse to do anything remotely objective.
No comment. I told you I am through arguing, you are coming from a religious POV and there is no arguing that. You are beyond reason.
And then to claim the issue is religious based, when anything discussed up to this point has been focused on math and the record?
You're simply grasping at non-existent straws... very much like all of your other statements, really.
Originally posted by sonhouse"Your fantasy world is so all encompassing and you are so fully brainwashed you will never get out of it."
All you are doing is moving the goalpost, unable to answer the most basic questions, instead bringing up such ancient objections to rockets as if that was somehow real.
Your fantasy world is so all encompassing and you are so fully brainwashed you will never get out of it.
A psychologist would have a ball with your delusional world. He would be unable ...[text shortened]... ough with you, this is my last note, have a great delusional life.
Enjoy posting to yourself.
So the pot calls the kettle black! Very interesting. 😉
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWithout gravity there is mass but no weight. Is that right?
The mysterious means of the atmosphere spinning in excess of 1000 MPH with the earth while buttressed by nothing betwixt it and the vacuum of space is, as we all know--- and by "know," I mean are able to recite but are otherwise unable to understand how it works, exactly--- is gravity.
Gravity keeps the atmosphere just enough intact to create a type of wa ...[text shortened]... st enough to let high and low pressure expand and retract all on their own.
Good ol' gravity.
And to think I don't know squat about science. 😉
Originally posted by wolfgang59"You exert a pull on the Earth equal to the Earth's pull on you."
Just read this nonsense.
Gravity acts on all mass.
You exert a pull on the Earth equal to the Earth's pull on you.
There is attraction between all mass.
What do you not get?
But then wouldn't that make you weightless? Or perhaps double your weight?
Originally posted by josephw???
[b]"You exert a pull on the Earth equal to the Earth's pull on you."
But then wouldn't that make you weightless? Or perhaps double your weight?[/b]
The Earth pulls me with a force of 90N.
And I pull the Earth with a force of 90N.
The force on me is 90N.
Not 180N or zero!!!
1 edit
Originally posted by sonhouseWithout God there would be no universe, but that's not the point of my previous post. 😉
Wrong. Without gravity there would be no UNIVERSE.
I asked, "Without gravity there is mass but no weight. Is that right?"
I suppose you mean that if gravity didn't exist the universe would disintegrate into the smallest particles of matter possible?