Jump to content
The Corroboree
Zedo

Flat earth debate

Recommended Posts

Just now, bardo said:

It doesn't but i feel the bond that is between us all is strengthened with compassion and respect for one another, i believe anything can be expressed with this as a parameter.

 

yeah i get you, i respect that a lot.  but i also have a strong drive in me to say things as i see it.  most of my life i have been a very sensitive person that is very careful about what i say lest i hurt anyone..  i have come to feel that this can be a strength but is also a huge weakness & not always the best way to go.  In my experience the most interesting discussions are the ones where people speak bluntly & honestly without fear of offending but with the civility to not intentionally be offensive.  As long as my intention is not to hurt anyone then the reactions of others to my words is only their responsibility, as i feel my own reactions to anything out there in the world is my responsibility also..  But sometimes perhaps i don't always judge this perfectly.  i probably need to work on balancing better, what you are saying about compassionate speech and my feelings about honest fearless expression

But this is a whole philosophical discussion in itself that perhaps we don't need to go into here

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, paradox said:

and i'm sorry for too often using not very constructive terms like retarded and stupid (even though i can't deny i feel those terms are appropriate).  i'm also sorry if i gave the impression i was singling you out and attacking you personally, i never meant that, i don't think you are a spokesman for flat-earthers.  i was just using your comments as a launchpad to the things i've said.

Man i am often to sensitive, It is my issue that i dislike the word stupid and retarded when used in a derogatory manner, that is no fault of yours, you are aloud to express disparaging remarks in regards to the topic and views expressed within, it is up to me how i react, i have reacted poorly. i believe we are all teachers and  you have been a teacher to me here, reminding me that  i can not control what one says (nor do i want to) but how i react is totally in my control.

 

Now can some one tell me why no matter what altitude the horizon is always at eye level? this may be a stupid question, i have not researched it, just wondering what the thoughts might be on that.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey bardo. Not sure if this sheds any light on your question...  The only thing I'm wondering about with respect to the accuracy of the wing tip as a reference point is, as it has the tendency to flex downward on the ground, it has the same capacity to flex upward during flight. I just don't know if the flex would be as pronounced as his video demonstrates. There's also the accounts of measurements taken using an instrument called a theodolite (measures vertical and horizontal angles) which show the drop of the horizon with elevation. If these are accurate, I would assume this means our inability to perceive the drop is the reason it always appears to be at eye level.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, paradox said:

interesting insequent, i'll check it out. 

 

i agree it's hard to know what peoples real tone is in a text discussion which is why i don't let myself get personally offended by text on a screen from people i have never met.  maybe thats also the reason i don't worry too much about offending people either..  maybe thats my bad..

2XB, debate or not, why is a bunch of text criticizing an idea so offensive?  why does every conversation these days seem to come down to whether someones feelings are hurt rather than the content?  i mean, i know i have been blunt & if you don't know me you might think i'm angry & mean or something, i know i have said dismissive things which may distract from any point i have but i'm not trying to be unfair here.

 

where can you go these days to really nut out ideas.. or criticize ideas as it may be?  it seems the philosophy section here is as good of a place as many.. The willingness of people to fearlessly engage in difficult & complex discussion is always why i loved the corroboree.  or maybe i'm just being sentimental..

 

anyway 2XB, from your post it would seem that you agree with the flat earth idea.  please for the love of humanity, whether your avatar is a manky old bong or not, humor me & please take some time & explain to me why. 

The thing is I don't care for the topic at all, I prefer to fanaticise about other cool stuff.

I would like to say though that criticism can be productive, but I haven't seen any constructive criticism, only mockery and condescending comments.

I'm not offended one bit, but I did form shallow opinion when you were throwing the term retarded around so flippantly in a derogatory tone, as though it was like 1996??? 

Other than that, this thread probably wouldn't have survived with out the trolling, so there's one positive contribution!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yeah manky old bong :-) has a special place in my heart.

 

Glad you guys made up!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 2XB said:

The thing is I don't care for the topic at all, I prefer to fanaticise about other cool stuff.

 

thanks for your positive contribution. 

 

the planet is in chaos, being offended by the flippant use of the word retard is a symptom of retardation

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, paradox said:

 

thanks for your positive contribution. 

 

the planet is in chaos, being offended by the flippant use of the word retard is a symptom of retardation

 

 

I doubt anyone is offended.

Sat nam :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Insequent said:

Hey bardo. Not sure if this sheds any light on your question...  The only thing I'm wondering about with respect to the accuracy of the wing tip as a reference point is, as it has the tendency to flex downward on the ground, it has the same capacity to flex upward during flight. I just don't know if the flex would be as pronounced as his video demonstrates. There's also the accounts of measurements taken using an instrument called a theodolite (measures vertical and horizontal angles) which show the drop of the horizon with elevation. If these are accurate, I would assume this means our inability to perceive the drop is the reason it always appears to be at eye level.

 

 

 

Is it cleared up then?  Im not familiar with this "horizon always at eye level" argument, but it seems utterly wrong.  Ive spent a fair bit of time gazing down from elevated lookouts and I dont recall ever deciding that I must be looking directly out at the horizon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

regardless of how anyone feels 2xb, do my words really have anything to do with anything?  I'm just another jerk off babbling on the internet.

 

you seem to have said you basically agree with the flat earth idea.  you obviously care enough to be posting at all, so instead of distracting the issue & making it about my naughty words why not give a positive contribution & explain why you are not retarded for doing so? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, paradox said:

regardless of how anyone feels 2xb, do my words really have anything to do with anything?  I'm just another jerk off babbling on the internet.

 

you seem to have said you basically agree with the flat earth idea.  you obviously care enough to be posting at all, so instead of distracting the issue & making it about my naughty words why not give a positive contribution & explain why you are not retarded for doing so? 

Okay doke, I'm of the opinion the earth is sphere like, a big ball holding a place in the infinite grid but am also partial to simulation ideas ;-)

What ever it is, its a guess and we really have no idea if we are honest, therefore I think its inappropriate to slander others for having different ideas than I hold.

I think compassion and love is the way forward for human kind, that doesn't mean i think we should foster preposterous ideas, just that when we are interacting with one another to be respectful.

This is a struggle for me everyday BTW, I was raised completely differently to how I wish to live my life, but this is where I am at, and will keep moving forward.

 

As for caring enough to post, well to be honest, I had hours to kill yesterday waiting for concrete to go off..... I probably would have held my tongue ordinarily. apologies for the side tracking...

 

Peace

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough bro

 

just for me, the way people often react to this kind of banter is a bit of a point of contention..

 

Our prosperous, over protective, subliminally oppressive society has produced a pandemic of mental/emotional fragility & physical incapability that is really disturbing considering that it seems our civilisation is more or less collapsing around us & there is an entire generation that is seemingly completely unequipped to deal with the kind of change that is coming on any level.

 

From my perspective I have not slandered anybody in this thread. I have made fun of an idea in a mostly light hearted but blunt way.  I don't understand why people have such trouble separating ideas from the people who are discussing those ideas..

 

I'm probably the strange one but to me, that kind of banter, in a weird way is actually a show of respect. Most people will think thats ridiculous i'm sure but thats how I see it.

I'm a very sensitive person, at least in my own fantasy world in my head I feel qualified to say that I think people need to harden the fuck up & defend their ideas rather than their hurt feelings. Granted, a lot people should do just the opposite too

 

Way too many luke warm, mediocre discussions get had these days & they never really go anywhere. Everyone is afraid to say what they really think or afraid to be called out for offending someone or afraid of being belittled for their ideas. People might think my style only perpetuates that but I think that bs, life is gritty, whether you grew up in sheltered suburb in the first world or not, shit is going to get real & i feel it's a good thing to learn to speak and act with a bit of intelligence & passion.  But again, thats just me, i'm usually pretty misunderstood in these things

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ThunderIdeal said:

Is it cleared up then?  Im not familiar with this "horizon always at eye level" argument, but it seems utterly wrong.  Ive spent a fair bit of time gazing down from elevated lookouts and I dont recall ever deciding that I must be looking directly out at the horizon.

 

 

I think this simulation gives a good description of the "horizon always at eye level" argument. I don't know that it actually sheds any light on the answer, I just threw it up to demonstrate the argument.

 

For me the clinchers for a round earth are these facts; when someone who grew up in England moves to Australia, the first thing they notice when they view the full moon for the first time, is that it appears "upside down", and the star which currently sits in the position of "the pole/north star" (sits directly above the North Celestial Pole, currently Alpha Ursae Minoris) cannot be viewed from the southern hemisphere. I don't believe a flat earth theory can explain these two things, but that don't mean it can't....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On ‎23‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 6:47 AM, Insequent said:

"horizon always at eye level" argument

 

On ‎22‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 5:02 PM, ThunderIdeal said:

"horizon always at eye level" argument

 

Hey thanks for the replies, Me asking about the horizon was in no way an argument, i am not arguing anything with that, it was a question is all, I have not put much thought into it but noticed that last time I went to a look out the horizon seemed to meet with my eye level, the vid that insequent posted pretty much clears up that it doesn't.

I have no real argument against spherical earth, it is flat earth models that has many holes in its theory that as yet I have seen no real explanations for.

I still keep an open mind and listen to anyone who shares with me and don't like to put down anyone for a belief.

 

Thought I will share this fellas comment that I came across and quite like, it is not my view or opinion but like what the fella had to say -

 

At least we can be in agreement that the educational system is about programing the masses. But this whole flat earth kick you are on is just as unhealthy as brainwashing our youth to be goyem economic slaves.

You still miss the point. The earth is neither flat nor spherical while it is both simultaneously. You are the perceiver of your reality. To you the earth is flat because that is what you believe. Because of this you will find evidence that will reaffirm that notion.

The dao di jing tells of two men that see a thing that one man holds is wrong while the other asserts that it is right. While the truth is that the thing is simply a thing. It cannot be wrong nor right. It can only be as it is.

while this is kindergarten stuff. It is more revealing to ask "Does the thing really exist, and if so why and how."
Just like this cellphone in my hand while I post this. Does it really exist? You have never seen my cellphone but if I were to show it to you, you would immediately recognize that it is a cellphone. This occurs because we have similar programming concerning our physical/3d universe. If I were to show my cellphone to some technologically disconnected aboriginal human they would not perceive 'cellphone' but mysterious object that is not understood because of lack of experience. But this technologically deprived person is still ingrained with how physical objects in a 3d universe generally behave. But these things are not truth or not at least complete or whole truth.

Physical objects as we perceive them are 98% nothingness. If you were to take all the physical matter in your kitchen table and condense it down so that all of the particles were adjacent and touching the surrounding particles it would be microscopic. But here we go further down the rabbit hole. What is matter? well science is still out on this little definition and this is where science begins to go wrong. Matter in truth is the collapse of the energetic waveform within your perception. You expect the table to be there and to be solid and to hold your beer when you set it atop of it. Therefore it dose. There is no mathematical construct in physics that prevents your can of beer from falling through the table as you set it down. The only thing causing objects and the universe to act in the way in which it dose is our perceptions and programming.

So if all I say is true than what does it matter if you think the earth is flat while I like to think it round. It matters because your concern with this or any question of similar nature only serves to keep you stuck in this materialistic dualism you are conditioned to stay in. And while you argue about the flatness of the earth or if Trump is an asshole your life is wasted while you learn nothing of truth.

Turn from your programming and embrace the self that you have forgotten. You are more than material and energy. You are an infinite conscious being.?

 


Show less

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bardo said:

Me asking about the horizon was in no way an argument, i am not arguing anything with that, it was a question is all

Yeah man. I get what you were asking. The reason I referred to it as an argument is because those debating from a flat earth perspective (and I know you're not), use the perception the horizon is always at eye level as part of their argument. And to explain to Thunder what "it" was. My bad for not presenting a clearer context.

 

14 minutes ago, bardo said:

Turn from your programming and embrace the self that you have forgotten. You are more than material and energy. You are an infinite conscious being

And I just love this. His whole dialogue is a wonderful way to bring a difference of opinion back into perspective. At the end of the day, flat or otherwise only appears to matter as far as what we choose to believe or what our perceptions would have us believe. It is what it is and it isn't what it isn't. It don't really matter at all.

 

And to return the thread back to it's origin, while I think it's almost impossible to discuss the math's apparent failure to describe a convex curvature to the earth without all the discussion which naturally follows on, Zedo did say his interest was the math. (And as Mapacho mentioned, the physics). I haven't taken the time to look more into the math he refers to, other than watching a few presentations/discussions on YouTube and the stuff I dredged up about celestial mechanics. It has just been way to easy to follow said discussion. It's been fun for me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh true it was supposed to be about the math, i haven't seen any math prove a flat earth, the math does the opposite, There is not one flat earth model i have seen that works and compares to what can be observed, it is a little scary cause flat earth is like a cult in some ways and for those consumed by it they seem to not be able to accept views that are contrary to there belief,

I think it is way outta hand, the seriousness of it all is extreme in some cases, for some there relationship with family and friends is affected by this strange movement.

It is impressive how this thing is spreading and some arguments are fun and interesting to get carried away with but some drift so far off into it and cant make there way back no matter how much valid info conflicts with there views, Many are justified in there non trust of government and officials etc. but in my view this flat earth thing when taken to seriously achieves nothing in the way of creating a positive change, it can create interesting talk and help open closed off minds and i like that about it but if taken to far i feel It distracts from issues that i feel really matter like family/community unity, food/resources, pollution, climate change, inequity etc.

It is like a plot from some crazy movie and it feels like the flat earth thing is contributing to something sinister that is going to go down but that is all just speculation, It is madness i tell you madness lol

Anyhow i don't really mind either what people think about it and yeh i reckon it is a fun thing as long as it is not creating any harm which it seems to be doing for some folk.

Peace and love not flat or sphere lol

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMG_0260.JPG

Edited by siks3
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a bloke lay the whole flat earth rave on me, and although he had the whole spiel down pat, 

I made a mental note never to see him again, as it seemed totally paranoid driven. 

The thing is, and in my skimming of these posts it doesn't seem to be mentioned.

Once you "buy into and swallow" the flat earth rhetoric, you must also embrace the onslaught of conspiracy stuff that goes with it.

Massive cover ups and global lies. NASA and everyone in on it. Secret nation past Antarctica. 

And WHY, go to so much fabrication about our geography, oh the usual Archons and Reptilians yadda yadda ad infinitem.

All based on FEAR. 

Sorry folks, flat or round I dont do global fear spreading, time is too precious. 

There is barely enough time to do all the medicine work folks require.

Set and setting, how you going to dose successfully when you mind is running fear based programs?

 

Quite honestly I thought the flat earth thing was an internet style prank, fake news thing, designed to illustrate how gullible folks are.

Blur the lines, so nobody knows the truth any more. Our whole education a false flag orchestration.Hologram Matrix reality etc

Now its become a lifestyle choice.Requiring a defensive stance

And a choice to alienate all your friends and family, who will only listen to your rantings once.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So (pours diesel on the flames...) either way, flat earth/spherical earth, doth the sun revolveth around the earth, or doth the heavenly bodies orbit the sun?

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually orbit everything because the sun shines out of my arse? :o:huh::unsure::blush:*

 

* abuse of emoticons noted

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎24‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 10:36 PM, siks3 said:

IMG_0260.JPG

Hey I don't know much about the mechanics of it all but I believe it is gravity that holds the atmosphere down, maybe its a little like a magnet with lots of little iron shards sticking to it, the ones closer to the magnet are stuck well but as it gets thicker, the further out shards don't stick so well ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Horus said:

All based on FEAR

Fear based thinking often leads one to live in trepidation, there is heaps of awful shit out there and it maybe wise to be aware and use discernment but when it consumes you, you feed it with your energy, think peace and love, that's what i wanna feed : )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

edit: i thought i had quoted siks3 with the following -

"The only way you can seperate two zones of pressure is with a solid space e.g the firmament aka the dome. Like a light bulb."

 

 

earths atmosphere is a dense cloud of gas molecules, those molecules have mass, therefore are drawn by gravity to the surface of the planet.  at sea level the atmosphere is at it's densest & the density of gas molecules gets lower & lower, the further you ascend in altitude, therefore the pressure also gets lower & lower the higher you go, the density of gas molecules & subsequent air pressure tapers off gradually & continually until there are no air molecules at all & you have only vacuum, there isn't some mystical boundary line with a vacuum on one side & full sea level atmospheric pressure on the other.  The density of gas in the upper atmosphere is so low that gravity is able to overcome the vacuum.

Edited by paradox
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25-6-2017 at 2:49 PM, bardo said:

Hey I don't know much about the mechanics of it all but I believe it is gravity that holds the atmosphere down, maybe its a little like a magnet with lots of little iron shards sticking to it, the ones closer to the magnet are stuck well but as it gets thicker, the further out shards don't stick so well ?

 

Actually its very simple, things expand.

Take two different size marbles and expand them, look at the smaller marble...it got pushed away, thats gravity.

 

Untitled-1.thumb.jpg.c6bed36993ccd55312e2ccc0d8d9648b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/06/2017 at 10:49 PM, bardo said:

Hey I don't know much about the mechanics of it all but I believe it is gravity that holds the atmosphere down, maybe its a little like a magnet with lots of little iron shards sticking to it, the ones closer to the magnet are stuck well but as it gets thicker, the further out shards don't stick so well ?

 

To elaborate on what Paradox wrote the mass of the earth is said to bend space time and that bend acts on anything with mass (gas molecules etc ) more when they are in close proximity to the object (the earth)  creating that said bend in space time.. So the further those objects are from the large object that's creating that bend in space time the less attraction there is and the less apparent gravity there would seem to be. So objects with minuscule mass (gas) get to a radius where the bend in space time has no effect on them and are no longer drawn in by the rift - a threshold radius if you will.

 

The theory works fine on a planetary scale but has a few hiccups if you try to apply it on a quantum level or to an electrical model.

 

That's the approved Einsteinian model anyway, if we consider the Tesla model we'd all be building over unity cat/toast free energy devices in our kitchens.

 

I've really got to stop buying into these intellectual debates when I'm so drunk. 

Edited by Sallubrious
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After crunching the numbers it seems like we're going to need a new theory of magnetism to explain the cat/toast device under the newly established paradigm of a flat earth.

 

hB01A0D1A

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×