Page 2 of 25 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 80 of 963

Thread: The earth is round

  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Most flights don't guarantee the shortest distance as they are required to take a flight path that takes them nearest to other airports in case there is an emergency, this in the event that they have to make an emergency landing.. But in regards to trans Pacific and Atlantic flights, they take the shortest route, and that is usually the northern route as is notable in your link to which demonstrates that fact.. Worse still, if they took that same route on Flat Earth, it would take them longer to reach their destination, and if they took the direct straight line route, it would have taken much less time... They would never win a time distance calculation on any trans Atlantic or Pacific flights..., hence why most of their arguments involve short distance flights where time variance becomes less of a factor due to the speed in which aircraft fly, and this is because a few hundred miles in variance in their cherry picked examples won't differ much when considering short distance flights.. But ask them to do the same calculations at the average walking speed, you can then see how erroneous most of the crap they spew is.. It gets even worse if you ask them to calculate along the same parallels , that Flat Earth flight from Tiawan to LA would be hilariously long, if not beyond the fuel capacity of most airliners.
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-25-2016 at 02:06 AM.

  2. #42
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think if the theory is so laughable then you wouldn't be spending so many hours of your time posting so much against it, which makes me wonder if you protest too much and the earth really is flat.

  3. #43
    Haikus Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    Enlightened
    Posts
    16,352
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    I think if the theory is so laughable then you wouldn't be spending so many hours of your time posting so much against it, which makes me wonder if you protest too much and the earth really is flat.
    A scientific theory must be based on observable phenomena.

    I see that you are quoting from a play that debuted at The Globe more than 400 years ago.

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    A scientific theory must be based on observable phenomena.

    I see that you are quoting from a play that debuted at The Globe more than 400 years ago.
    To add to that, what he posted is what we call an informal fallacy, and spending time combating ignorance and stupidity is never a waste of time... Those types of appeals are classical among cults and religions etc desperate for credibility, and thus why the reliance on formal and informal fallacies .. When people address such ignorance , it does not mean their fantasy has any real world credibility.. He was are essentially pleading for credibility he didn't have.. No more so than the crank videos we have thus far seen in this discussion..
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-24-2016 at 04:39 PM.

  5. #45
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheJackal View Post
    That BTW what he posted is what we call an informal fallacy, and spending time combating ignorance and stupidity is never a waste of time... Those types of appeals are classical among cults and religions etc desperate for credibility, and thus why the reliance on formal and informal fallacies .. When people address such ignorance , it does not mean their fantasy has any real world credibility.. He was are essentially pleading for credibility he didn't have.. No more so than the crank videos we have thus far seen in this discussion..
    Reading through the flat earth wikipedia and forums, there are a lot of well informed intelligent individuals there, so if "spending time combating ignorance and stupidity is never a waste of time" why are you wasting time trying to force your preferred theory about the shape of the earth at these informed and intelligent individuals? It seems to me sir that you are taking pot shots at people who disagree with you, which is a very dishonest debating tactic. Which is known as an ad hominem to justify your closed off and aggressive behaviors. Informed as you are, I believe people can see that you are not the person to turn to for an impartial, balanced view of the subject, but that your own behavior is cult like such as the behavior you try to discredit me and many others with also.

  6. #46
    Haikus Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    Enlightened
    Posts
    16,352
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default


  7. #47
    Haikus Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    Enlightened
    Posts
    16,352
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    Reading through the flat earth wikipedia and forums, there are a lot of well informed intelligent individuals there, so if "spending time combating ignorance and stupidity is never a waste of time" why are you wasting time trying to force your preferred theory about the shape of the earth at these informed and intelligent individuals? It seems to me sir that you are taking pot shots at people who disagree with you, which is a very dishonest debating tactic. Which is known as an ad hominem to justify your closed off and aggressive behaviors. Informed as you are, I believe people can see that you are not the person to turn to for an impartial, balanced view of the subject, but that your own behavior is cult like such as the behavior you try to discredit me and many others with also.
    Your attempt to use as 'evidence' someone's apparent willingness to debate the topic with you only shows that you don't have any good evidence, and that you see everything as proving that the Earth is flat. This is surely a manifestation of cult-like behaviour. By your logic, you debating the matter proves that the Earth isn't flat, because you spend an even greater amount of your time on the matter. So you are not even correct on your own terms. You are not even a joke that makes sense.

  8. #48

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    Your attempt to use as 'evidence' someone's apparent willingness to debate the topic with you only shows that you don't have any good evidence, and that you see everything as proving that the Earth is flat. This is surely a manifestation of cult-like behaviour. By your logic, you debating the matter proves that the Earth isn't flat, because you spend an even greater amount of your time on the matter. So you are not even correct on your own terms. You are not even a joke that makes sense.
    I would say the more intelligent ones on their site are POE.. I know two who are , but I would agree that his responses in regards to me are nothing more than dogmatic irrelevancy .. Furthermore I don't think he knows what intelligence even means. I believe his context was to say there are some knowledgeable people there, but intelligence is the ability to grasp and apply knowledge, and we most certainly don't see them in the scientific arena providing practical applications in regards to their fantastical beliefs anymore so than the hollow Earthers.
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-25-2016 at 02:02 AM.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheJackal View Post
    I would say the more intelligent ones on their site are POE.. I know two who are , but I would agree that his responses in regards to me are nothing more than dogmatic irrelevancy .. Furthermore I don't think he knows what intelligence even means. I believe his context was to say there are some knowledgeable people there, but intelligence is the ability to apply knowledge, and we most certainly don't see them in the scientific arena providing practical applications in regards to their fantastical beliefs anymore so than the hollow Earthers.
    Psychologists are not able to agree on the definition of intelligence, so I doubt you or your cherrypicking of a particular dictionary are qualified to claim the definition.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence#Definitions

    It is a question of listening to your credentials, your academic honesty, before accepting what you say as truth, it is far more efficient to judge an individuals character before making a decision if the 'expert' in question, you for instance, should be trusted, than spending hours researching the walls of text that you post and picking it apart when there are no tangible rewards, at least with the likes of you.

    As for the justification of FE, there are numerous articles out there, and you yourself spent over a year arguing over them, but they still stand undebunked despite your dogmatic use of your time on the matter and there are thousands of people who find them fascinating and correctly informative.

  10. #50
    FoxOnStilts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    TN
    TIM
    Fi-SLE 3w9 so/sp
    Posts
    790
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @TheJackal is my new favorite forum member can we keep him please please please I'll feed him and water him and take him out to poop

  11. #51
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,126
    Mentioned
    84 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    type him!

  12. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    For those of you who may be inquisitive, in the FE theory, the earth is infact a disc rather than a sphere.

    The North Pole is at the centre of the disc, and the earth is surrounded by a wall of ice known as the Antartic. The Sun and the Moon move over the Earth in a cyclic fashion, as such:





    A common question is why does gravity not pull the earth into a sphere, this one is easy to answer and debunk. What is referred to as gravity doesn't actually exist, instead what you find is that the earth is constantly accelerating at a speed of 9.8 m/s squared. This is the force that pushes you onto the ground. For instance, imagine being in a car which is accelerating and pushes you back onto your seat, this is similar to how the earth works.

  13. #53
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,642
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    What about seasons?
    How are daytime variations throughout the year possible?
    Solar/lunar eclipses?

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    A common question is why does gravity not pull the earth into a sphere, this one is easy to answer and debunk. What is referred to as gravity doesn't actually exist, instead what you find is that the earth is constantly accelerating at a speed of 9.8 m/s squared.
    What accelerates the earth "disc"? Does it run on gas or oil?
    Last edited by Pa3s; 01-24-2016 at 10:14 PM.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  14. #54
    Haikus Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    Enlightened
    Posts
    16,352
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    Psychologists are not able to agree on the definition of intelligence, so I doubt you or your cherrypicking of a particular dictionary are qualified to claim the definition.
    Considering that human beings in general are in disagreement over things which are readily apparent, this is a meaningless point.

    @job, does your name indicate you are a Flat Earther of the Iron Age "Abrahamic" variety?

  15. #55

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    What about seasons?
    How are daytime variations throughout the year possible?
    Solar/lunar eclipses?



    What accelerates the earth "disc"? Does it run on gas or oil?
    Just ask him how, in accordance to that model, does the sun set below the physical horizon and how light stops traveling across the plane and surface area in order to have a day and night cycle. Then ask them why the upper northern hemisphere such as Central America or places like Minnesota do not look South to view the Sun as it traverses through the sky... According to their map, people living below the equator are looking south lol.. They really aren't very well versed on issue of perspectives, it's like they failed basic math in high school . O.o So according to their model, I being a Minnesotan should only ever see the sun at only the lower southern horizon... Looks like even our sun dials are in on the conspiracy O.o ..
    @TheJackal is my new favorite forum member can we keep him please please please I'll feed him and water him and take him out to poop


    I require cookies, and state law says you have to pick up my shit

  16. #56
    كما في الأعلى كذلك في الأسفل Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,219
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    Please tell me you're referencing the movie that was said to be a remake of Day of the Jackal, only to have an extremely loose association with the original film?


  17. #57
    كما في الأعلى كذلك في الأسفل Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,219
    Mentioned
    155 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    best scene of the movie (spoilers)


  18. #58

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    "Psychologists are not able to agree on the definition of intelligence"
    Psychologists had nothing to do with defining the term "Intelligence" .. The etymology of the term directly involves the faculty of the ability to understand and apply knowledge. Your ilk can clearly do neither.. , especially when it comes to science and mathematics. There is also no definition of Intelligence that means "Knowledgeable" .. You might be more intelligent than the average rock if you can grasp and comprehend this as an example.. You can however feel free to cite your source..
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-25-2016 at 02:08 AM.

  19. #59

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That was pretty awesome ..

  20. #60

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    What about seasons?
    How are daytime variations throughout the year possible?
    Solar/lunar eclipses?



    What accelerates the earth "disc"? Does it run on gas or oil?
    Just ask him how, in accordance to that model, does the sun set below the physical horizon in his model. I would then ask him how light stops traveling across the plane and surface area in order to have a day and night cycle. If he tells you that the sun is a spotlight or like a street lamp, be prepared to giggle.. Then ask them why the upper northern hemisphere such as Central America or places like Minnesota do not look South to view the Sun as it traverses through the sky... According to their map, people living below the equator are looking south lol.. They really aren't very well versed on issue of perspectives, it's like they failed basic math in high school . O.o So according to their model, I being a Minnesotan should only ever see the sun at only the lower southern horizon... Looks like even our shadows and sun dials are all in on "the conspiracy" lol

    I will also post this just for a bit of comic relief in relation to the above flat Earth Model.

    http://astro.unl.edu/naap/motion3/an...unmotions.html

    Another amusing thing is to ask him about that bio-luminescent Moon and it's deadly light to which will give you cancer if you look at it.., especially through a telescope On the Eclipse, they believe in a magical black disc blocks our view of the Moon.., but hey, you better not look at the moon as it will give you cancer! And yes, many of them also believe the moon is flat as well.
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-25-2016 at 02:36 AM.

  21. #61
    hiatus
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    تخت نور
    Posts
    374
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    For those of you who may be inquisitive, in the FE theory, the earth is infact a disc rather than a sphere.

    The North Pole is at the centre of the disc, and the earth is surrounded by a wall of ice known as the Antartic. The Sun and the Moon move over the Earth in a cyclic fashion, as such:





    A common question is why does gravity not pull the earth into a sphere, this one is easy to answer and debunk. What is referred to as gravity doesn't actually exist, instead what you find is that the earth is constantly accelerating at a speed of 9.8 m/s squared. This is the force that pushes you onto the ground. For instance, imagine being in a car which is accelerating and pushes you back onto your seat, this is similar to how the earth works.
    Troll identified. I'm not going to bother explaining the problems with this. Seasons are a thing, man.

  22. #62

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I sort of get the feeling that he was either summoned by our other friend here, a sock puppet, genuine flat earther, or possibly just a troll. Either way, and it really doesn't matter which as his position unsupportable., the gravity argument above is agreeably flawed as anyone can go around and make local and non-local measurements of gravity to debunk that.. His case would have to assume uniform acceleration of the entire Earth or be subject to being ripped apart. Further still, we can reference P and S wave data that will also show you not only the shape of the Earth, but the fact that we have an Iron core.

  23. #63
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,126
    Mentioned
    84 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    now we just need to assemble a team to walk to the end of the disc (so as to test the theory).

    * nominates @job and @Eliza Thomason *

  24. #64

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    According to them, the Governments of the world guard it and don't allow FE explorers over the Ice Wall.. Others will contend that it infinitely extends and that there is no edge.. , as in they can't even agree among themselves ..

  25. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I would like to take this post to address some of the questions that have been put forward.

    The seasons and daylight are explained by the sun moving further away from the North Pole, the sun does of course move in a circular fashion, and you can think of the sun shining down upon us as a torch.



    When the sun is further away from the North Pole, it is therefore winter in the northern hemiplane (or hemisphere) and summer in the southern hemiplane. A simpler way to look at it is this:



    Further to this, what is perceived as the sun rising and setting can actually be explained by what is known as the perspective effect.

  26. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If I may say, thank you to all of you in extending a warm welcome to me on your forum.

    I would also like to say, to those of you who are inquisitive about this, and I can see there are a few! That there is a forum where you can come and browse through, and where you may also sign up to ask some questions http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/ ,if you wish.

  27. #67

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by job View Post
    I would like to take this post to address some of the questions that have been put forward.

    The seasons and daylight are explained by the sun moving further away from the North Pole, the sun does of course move in a circular fashion, and you can think of the sun shining down upon us as a torch.



    When the sun is further away from the North Pole, it is therefore winter in the northern hemiplane (or hemisphere) and summer in the southern hemiplane. A simpler way to look at it is this:



    Further to this, what is perceived as the sun rising and setting can actually be explained by what is known as the perspective effect.
    So let me get this straight, and me being in Minnesota, you are saying that:

    1. I should be looking low to the Southern horizon at high-noon in the winter to see the sun and then be looking north to see it in the summer.. I don't think that even my shadow is going to agree with that level of idiotry..
    2. You are basically saying that during the Summer in Minnesota that it would be freezing cold at the equator with blizzards with Minnesota like Winters, this giving an average temperature gradient of your supposed boundaries of "Summer, Winter, Spring, and Fall..."
    3. "known as the perspective effect" ... Umm is this the same perspective effect your ilk tried to use for the sinking ship? I don't think you people even understand the basic principles of geometry much-less perspectives..
    4. According to this and the other Model, I could see the sun rise in the way south East and traverse all the way North and up and over Alaska until it nearly hits Australia on the other side of the Planet.. Hence you are basically telling me that I also have more than a 24 hour day.. LMAO.. Sorry, my shadow also doesn't start off pointing north and end up pointing south either... Fuck, I have to question not only the intelligence of the person that make up your cartoon models, but also what their IQ could possibly be.. O.o
    5. In the summer your model would suggest that the majority of the northern Hemisphere is under constant daylight to which would include Canada, Alaska, northern states if the US, and Russia etc..
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-25-2016 at 11:31 PM.

  28. #68
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,672
    Mentioned
    251 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am still interested in this thread but other things are calling my immediate attention for now. I wake up now to the rising sun and imagine it circling in to us, and away, out of sight and out of lighting/heating us. I like to imagine it closer. It seems friendlier, more for us. At only 32 miles wide. I also like to look at the sky and think of the firmament. Its comforting. This enclosed place. For us. And God walks above.

    On Sunday at Mass we sang one of the new-times Catholic Hymns that I just cannot stand. Its from the 80s I think? (we sang a lovely hymn before this so things aren't all bad at my parish) When I saw it was "Gather Us In", I thought, Oh, no, I guess I am not singing. I cannot stand the 70s and 80s new hymns that are about "celebrating! we! the people!". And writer Marty Haugen is the biggest culprit in writing lame we-hymns. We have such a rich treasury of hymns of worship, then these lame things got forced on us. Basically this is a song about the wonderful amazing us!, here and now!, here in this place! I laughed when I saw the line:

    "Not in the dark of buildings confining,
    not in some heaven, light years away
    here in this place the new light is shining..."

    This is an illustration of how modern science makes us feel "light years away" from God. Yeah, it does. Is that on purpose? I know there is some serious things wrong with modern science already. There are deceptions, like the Moon Walk. Oh, and the Challenger hoax! And Sandy Hook. So there is precedence. The ball earth and outer space being a myth - that would be a deception of HUGE magnitude if it is deception. A convenient wrong for the perpetrators, too.

    Pa3s, I wanted to answer your posts. I appreciate that even when you disagree you are never unkind.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    That's a good example for what I was saying before. You don't openly admit supporting the flat Earth theory because of your open-minded self-image,
    Its a reasonable guess at my motive, but it actually has nothing to do with my self-image. Its mostly about how I think. I think the Holographic-Panoramic is an explanation. Not every H-P will choose to openly consider this theory because other H-Ps might take no interest. Take, for instance, conspiracy theories about alien abductions. I only want to look at that long enough to inform myself what they are saying out of curiosity then I am DONE with that. I do NOT want to entertain "maybe its true" because my heart tells me its not, so its not worth my time. Others here have the same attitude towards the Flat Earth Theory and I totally respect that indifference. I know what that feels like. I also don't enjoy entertaining thoughts on Cro-Magnum man, because I don't think there is such a thing. My gut tells me so, therefore, I never argue evolution with anyone. Too much indifference in myself for that topic. I respect other people's interest in that subject, and their desire to learn it, though. I also looked into Creationism some time back and was quite surprised to see there is real plausible science to it. I truly looked into it thinking there was not, that those Bible literalists were twisting science to fit their preconceived notions. But I found it explains better than anything the gaps of evolution theory that evolutionists want to ignore and gloss over. And it definitely seems to me that evolutionists bend science to fit their notion that there is no creator. However, I do not want to argue either side of that with anyone. So I don't.

    I never enjoyed the study of dinosaurs and all those ages they supposedly lived in. I learned them because I had to, I stuck all those names and times and dates in my brain long enough to be tested on them then I happily forgot them. And never took an interest again. I took my son to giant dinosaur displays and never had that feeling of awe you are supposed to have. Recently I read that too is likely a hoax. Surprise but no surprise.

    When I am on a truth seeking mission I don't let what anyone thinks of me deter me. My self-image is up for grabs as I am willing to see myself and my world in a new light. However, I am smart enough to not tell everyone what I am thinking. Their negativity might encroach on my peace and freedom to think openly, especially when I am at an early stage of learning and what to come to my own critique of a thing. Its why I like remaining anonymous here. So I can think and write openly and not worry about my image. So much, at least. We all worry about our image to some extent. But I feel that if I am true to myself and my own integrity, that's good enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    but in reality, you totally want it to be true. A flat earth supports your personal beliefs and that's it. You're not seeking truth, you're seeking consistency..
    I am not seeking what to believe in. I really don't need consistency with the Bible. I do believe the Bible is the Word of God, but I am aware that some things are allegorical and frankly I skipped over a lot of the earth quotes as they don't make sense. But I am looking at them now, and I am liking the consistency I see in some instances. Like some Job verses, which I remember being enthralled with years ago, the first time I read the book of Job. (Anyone who feels sorry for themselves in their life circumstances should read the Book of Job!). Job has all these terrible problems - death, plagues, disease, etc. and all the wise (they think they are) important men of the day go through LONG speeches telling Job what he did wrong to deserve these disasters. Turns out, as we know from the conversation between God and Satan in the beginning of the chapter, the plagues that befall Job have nothing to do with him. So the arrogant "knowing" "wise" men of the day have no problem making eloquent extremely intelligent and informed long speeches explaining to Job where he went wrong, bringing on his own destructions. Finally, God breaks in, addressing the "wise" men, saying, Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth??


    Job 38:4-7
    4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?
    declare, if thou hast understanding.
    5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest?
    or who hath stretched the line upon it?
    6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?
    or who laid the corner stone thereof;
    7 when the morning stars sang together,
    and all the sons of God shouted for joy?




    And, when i started to read FET, I remembered those verses, all these years ago, when I first read Job, enthralled, and I saw a fit to what God said of His handiwork with the FET, and I realized for the first time that what God said about the earth he built does not sound much at all like the warp-speed blue marble we all know and love.

    I did not expect that, but it was a pleasant surprise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    It may sound smug, but I don't except myself or anyone else from this effect. Your knowledge on a subject is critical if you want to evaluate a theory. .
    It doesn't sound smug. To formally evaluate a theory, yes, one needs to consider the fine points, and with accurate knowledge on points being critiqued.. I am not at the fine points. I am understanding what the theory is. And it is fascinating. So far. But I have only just begun looking at it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    And if you see truth in an argument which involves false logic and claims which are easily falsified, .
    I am skimming over logic I don't follow to look at it closer later, to discern if its me and my skimming or the logic itself, while logic that is clear is sticking with me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    you apparently lack either the knowledge or the will to refute it..
    You got it, I am not at the refuting stage at this point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    Again: everyone who knows at least the very basic mechanics of how planes fly can tell you that the argument I mentioned is totally ridiculous..
    Actually the FET are consulting experienced pilots and scientists. I am just "listening" at this point though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    Science is not a religion..
    So they say! However, when it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    Every theory goes through a process of peer review and is closely scrutinized and often challenged. At the same time, scientists are far from being perfect and make mistakes..
    I wasn't sleeping in school. I am as indoctrinated as you that this is how its supposed to be...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    However, the "curved Earth theory" is an absolutely basic issue in which all serious scientists concur.
    Virtually all, yes, this is true.

    And also rat poison for a blood thinner is a basic on which all medical doctors who want to keep their certification agree...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    @Eliza Thomason
    All these flat Earth arguments (and most conspiracy theories for that matter) are based on shallow thinking..
    Not so sure I agree with this assessment...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    These people may sound convincing at first, because they structure and present their cases in a seemingly logical way..
    Yes

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    Well, they do believe in their own theories, so they got to be coherent, right? But they only tell you one side of the issue, leaving everything out which contradict their position on the issue..
    True, but I already heard the other side...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    I just watched a video with "80 reasons why the Earth is flat" (which was actually more like a repetition of a handful of arguments over and over again) one "reason" was especially weak. It was pretty much like this:



    A person who believes in this argument apparently lacks the most basic understanding of flying. And I'm not saying that it's the people's fault, nobody can know everything. But those who know nothing must believe everything.

    On another note, people whose personal beliefs counter some scientific positions (for example on the origin of Earth and mankind) are certainly more inclined to give "alternative approaches" a chance..
    In the same way, people who want to defend what they take pride in knowing more than others about, in a reputable field of prestige, because it is their identity and a thing they take pride in, particularly when its a field they have invested study in and get paid for, or hope to get paid in, when its something that represents their place in society - these would be unlikely to give alternative approaches a chance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    No offense, but it's possible that you actually want the Earth to be flat.. Maybe just to see science getting knocked down a peg..
    This was not my aim. In fact my aim at looking at it at ALL into this Flat Earth Theory was that it was the STUPIDEST sounding conspiracy theory that had EVER crossed my path, and I had to read what sort of ridiculous things they could have made up. But I have now experienced those sentiments you describe here. But only after points seemed true, and the FE possibility seemed strangely POSSIBLY maybe plausible, and after I settled my horror at the idea of such a deception, then after I realized such a deception was plausible - only then did I begin to shades of such thoughts as those...

    Quote Originally Posted by Pa3s View Post
    And I'm not just saying that because you're Christian and I'm not. This applies to everyone to some extent. I'd feel very satisfied myself if a new scientific discovery proved that quantum mechanics actually aren't random after all.
    I expect you will be a Christian someday, Pa3s!
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  29. #69

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I am still interested in this thread but other things are calling my immediate attention for now. I wake up now to the rising sun and imagine it circling in to us, and away, out of sight and out of lighting/heating us. I like to imagine it closer. It seems friendlier, more for us. At only 32 miles wide. I also like to look at the sky and think of the firmament. Its comforting. This enclosed place. For us. And God walks above.
    You are starting to sound like you're trying to play the role of a PR spokes person / salesman than actually addressing the incoherence of that belief.. Sorry, but this appears to be more phishing attempts than anything else, and I am not simply going to buy into it because you say "It seems friendlier, more for us".. This as if appealing to people that they are somehow less special or important if its not.. I would also look up the definition of "Firmament"..

    On Sunday at Mass we sang one of the new-times Catholic Hymns that I just cannot stand. Its from the 80s I think? (we sang a lovely hymn before this so things aren't all bad at my parish) When I saw it was "Gather Us In", I thought, Oh, no, I guess I am not singing. I cannot stand the 70s and 80s new hymns that are about "celebrating! we! the people!". And writer Marty Haugen is the biggest culprit in writing lame we-hymns. We have such a rich treasury of hymns of worship, then these lame things got forced on us. Basically this is a song about the wonderful amazing us!, here and now!, here in this place! I laughed when I saw the line:
    Although I feel you have the right to your religious beliefs, I am not really into old Pagan Mythology from the Bronze age, especially usurped Pagan mythology for which is taken and converted into Pagan Monotheism.. The world isn't any less wonderful, amazing, or wondrous without having to believe in anything of the religious nature.... Furthermore, and since you love to discuss "hymns", the Pslams are regarded as the Hymms of the Canaanite Godhead EL ( http://www.theology.edu/ugarbib.htm ) ..., and Yahweh was nothing more than one of the70 sons of EL to who inherited the people of Israel.. Yeah, in your book of Genesis, El states that he is the god of Bethel, and Bethel predates the patriarchs and was theophory of the Canaanite god EL to whom was the patron god of Bethel. It was he to whom was associated to the image of the Bull and later assimilated by the devotees of Yahweh. The cult of Yahwists usurped EL and his epithets into the iconography of Yahweh..., who most likely originated among the semi-nomadic tribes of Canaan, and in particular the Shasu of YHW. In fact, there was no mass Exodus from Egypt, and the Israelites were the Canaanites.. Hell, Hebrew is a dialect of the Canaanite language, and you would be hard pressed to tell the differences.... Worse still, Exodus is at best a reference to the Hyksos eviction sometime around 1560 BC and shortly after the Eruption of Thera. The Hyksos lost power and collapsed as they were economically dependent to the Babylonians and Minoans.., and the funniest thing about them is that they didn't worship Yahweh and that they were of Canaanite and Syrian origin.. They worshiped Ba'al Saphon *Zaphon", their Asiatic deity in which they associated to the Egyptian storm god Seth.. He who dwelled at Mt Zaphon, the mountain of answers.. You will find Mt Saphon (Zaphon) in your bible as well.. So the likely scenario for Exodus is the possibility that the evicted Hyksos eviction returned to their Asiatic roots of Canaan and Syria.., this to where they possibly joined the semi-nomadic tribes of Canaan (The Shasu). That in itself would explain their time in the desert.. Here they depict their eviction as not a loss, but as being led to the promise land of the collapse Canaanite civilization. Here they may have taken Ba'al Zaphon and attributed him to patron deity of the Shasu of YHW along with many others such as the moon God Sin by making his abode that of Mt Sinai (Moon Mountain)...

    here in this place the new light is shining..."
    Not really impressed with Sun God worship


    This is an illustration of how modern science makes us feel "light years away" from God.
    Tell that to the Pantheists who believe Existence itself is "GOD".. Your argument becomes pleading and moot rather quickly..


    Yeah, it does. Is that on purpose? I know there is some serious things wrong with modern science already. There are deceptions, like the Moon Walk. Oh, and the Challenger hoax! And Sandy Hook. So there is precedence. The ball earth and outer space being a myth - that would be a deception of HUGE magnitude if it is deception. A convenient wrong for the perpetrators, too.
    LOL .... when you have nothing but pleading arguments, continue repeating the same pleading arguments over and over again.... If all you have is a an appeal to conspiracy, you have already failed miserably in this discussion.



    Its a reasonable guess at my motive, but it actually has nothing to do with my self-image.
    Yeah, it's reasonable to guess that you are phishing for converts to your nonsensical and intellectually dishonest religious beliefs ... O.o



    Not every H-P will choose to openly consider this theory because other H-Ps might take no interest.
    Hard to take an interest and openly consider a concept that has been debunked thousands of times over...


    Take, for instance, conspiracy theories about alien abductions.
    They are crank..., and as crank as those ancient aliens pseudo-documentaries..


    Theory and I totally respect that indifference.
    No you don't, you woefully ignore it and any contrary evidence to your beliefs... Not once have you even bothered to engage this discussion with any sort of intellectual integrity.. Confirmation Bias being one of your problems..




    . I also looked into Creationism some time back and was quite surprised to see there is real plausible science to it.
    Incorrect, Creationism is not science, and nor is there any science involved ..., and people like Ken Ham are cranks..




    I truly looked into it thinking there was not, that those Bible literalists were twisting science to fit their preconceived notions.
    This is exactly what they do.. Twisting science, and most often in the use of quote mining it... You know, like that crank in your posted video who addresses a scientific diagram he couldn't even read much-less comprehend..


    But I found it explains better than anything the gaps of evolution theory that evolutionists want to ignore and gloss over.
    Such as? let me know when you can post a complete taxonomic tree as accurately as those in reference to cladistics ... This is like asking to you provide us a navigable coordinate system of your Flat Earth, and we all know why you don't have one.




    And it definitely seems to me that evolutionists bend science to fit their notion that there is no creator.
    This is where I begin to question your level of IQ... Evolution doesn't address that issue, and nor would Evolution invalidate any such thing... Hence what makes you think that your God didn't create life to evolve? Where do you even get that bullshit argument from? And do you realize that many theists believe in evolution right? But hey, you can feel free to explain the processes involved in how we go from a wolf skull into a bull dog's skull.. If you say through breeding and genetics, you might just win a cookie today as that is by definition "Evolution":

    Wolf to bull dog.jpg

    Now it's funny that a Creationist will agree to the above example and they claim the below example is magically impossible.. Creationist arguments are sadly laughable!:
    Australophitiecus to human.jpg
    Is it really that far fetched and difficult to imagine? Well, I would dare say a Creationist would claim the bull dog never had evolved from wolves should they have found, hypothetically, a wolf's fossilized skull and remains as an extinct common ancestor of the Bull Dog. Such morphology is impossible they say, or that it's micro-evolution and cosmetic. And thus they will demand evidence of millions of transitional stages to which we all know do not exist. This being of course due to the fact that even small microscopic changes in a genome can in fact result in macro-scale morphological changes in a species, or in cases of speciation. Hence gene expression plays a much larger roll than they are willing to admit since they still believe modern evolutionary synthesis and theory is stuck in the Darwinian era before the discovery of DNA, or the establishment of modern genetics for that matter. The changes we see between the wolf and the bull dog are no more drastic in scope than the changes we see between our early primate ancestors and ourselves. Morphological speaking of course since we have since genetically speciated from our primate cousins of the monkeys and the great apes. This Homology is damning evidence that cannot simply just be ignored if we are to have any credibility, and it's not just with the skeletal structure as it is with how and where muscles and tendons are attached, these to which also give away the fact we have evolved from early primates.

    You can read my full article on Lucy here if you want to see how intellectually dishonest and inept Creationists are, especially when they misrepresent science.. :


    http://matt-mattjwest.newsvine.com/_...claim-of-fraud


    However, I do not want to argue either side of that with anyone. So I don't.
    That would be wise because you would lose that argument anyways if you argued for "Creationism" over modern evolutionary synthesis..


    Their negativity might encroach on my peace and freedom to think openly, especially when I am at an early stage of learning and what to come to my own critique of a thing. I
    You act like any criticism to your bull shit is an attack on your freedom to think openly.. Well, it's not


    I am not seeking what to believe in. I really don't need consistency with the Bible.
    That might be because there isn't any..




    I do believe the Bible is the Word of God, but I am aware that some things are allegorical and frankly I skipped over a lot of the earth quotes as they don't make sense.
    Then you believe in a deity with a pretty low IQ, and just so you know, the bible doesn't just use allegory, it also consists of a lot of anthropomorphism and animism of nature and natural phenomenon.., much of which the people of the contemporary time period had no real understanding of. If you read Psalms 18, your god is not only described as the spirit of the erupting mountain, but also literally the erupting mountain itself.. In fact, the spirit of said god is regarded as the ever lasting and consuming fire.. That is animistic anthropomorphism.., and he who is referred to as the "Rock of Israel". You might know him as "El Shaddai" (God of the Mountains), and depending on the spelling "God almighty"., the Godhead of both the Amorite and Canaanite Pantheons. Even the book of Job rests heavily on the volcanic animism and anthropomorphic nature of this mountain god:

    http://www.sacred-texts.com/atl/rag/rag26.htm

    You can also read the book of Enoch ( http://www.scriptural-truth.com/stuff/BookOfEnoch.pdf) , or see how much mountain god worship (this being among other influences) has influenced the writings of the bible here:

    1.) This explores the hypothesis put forth by Sigmund Freud .. , and though we can conclude that Yahweh is most certainly the assimilation of much more than this, we can't deny the influence of Pagan Mountain god worship attributed to Yahweh, this to which had been assimilated into his iconography..
    https://thejackelscolumn.wordpress.c...re-god-of-war/

    2.) This following link Explores more in regards to "The Rock of Israel" and how rocks and mountains have not only influenced the Abrahamic religions, but others as well..:
    https://thejackelscolumn.wordpress.c...ock-of-israel/


    I would be interested in how you think your version of Pagan mythology, philosophy, and oral traditions is magically less mythological than that which it derived from, or how your religious pleading magically validates your belief that the Earth is Flat.
    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-26-2016 at 08:38 AM.

  30. #70
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,672
    Mentioned
    251 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheJackal View Post
    You are ...
    ...
    ...
    ...
    I don't know why you waste your typing to me when I am clearly not intelligent enough for you to bother with.
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  31. #71
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,928
    Mentioned
    394 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I know there is some serious things wrong with modern science already. There are deceptions, like the Moon Walk. Oh, and the Challenger hoax! And Sandy Hook. So there is precedence. The ball earth and outer space being a myth - that would be a deception of HUGE magnitude if it is deception. A convenient wrong for the perpetrators, too.
    You are not saying that Sandy Hook is a hoax, please?
    “Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
    ― Anais Nin

  32. #72
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,672
    Mentioned
    251 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kim View Post
    You are not saying that Sandy Hook is a hoax, please?
    If you followed the news coverage (and who could not?), this does sound insane. I know, Kim. I also saw the extensive news coverage, too, and I grieved with the grieving families and it felt my world was changing.

    Now I live not so far from there. And one day I looked at what had to be ridiculous "hoax coverage", and saw the slow-down and the details of the videos the newscasts used, that I had seen and believed, showing the WRONG school, the firehouse scene with the fake milling "crowd", and I knew obviously SOMETHING here had been hoaxed. I was confused. Maybe they tried to make it worse so they could make their gun-control point better. So I put it off to an exaggeration.

    Recently, after a shopping trip to Newton, I learned of the book, "Nobody Died at Sandy Hook". That page has a link to the free pdf book, which was being sold in droves on Amazon before the government censored it - so much for freedom of speech. Anyway - Nobody? How could it be NOBODY?? But the evidence for that is pretty hard to explain away. Its VERY EASY to discount if you have never seen any of these videos debunking Sandy Hook. We WANT to believe it to be some crazy conspiracy theorists, not the news media that we love and trust. Cognitive Dissidence. Its not a great place to go.

    Most recently I found a Yahoo article about the Sandy Hook police commissioner retiring at 60. Clearly his statements show he REALLY did not want to be asked about Sandy Hook! In fact, he tried to tell us it was unimportant! The viewer comments to this retirement article were enlightening. The vast majority have seen the fakery explained on the internet, and they believe it to be the hoax. [And you can be sure the next Sandy Hook article Yahoo publishes will NOT allow viewer comments!]. That majority was interspersed with those saying, "You crazy conspiracy theorists" and "I know someone who knows someone who died at Sandy Hook" or "I know someone who knows someone who went to a Sandy Hook victim funeral". That I have also heard around here - always 2nd hand of course. They know someone who knows someone. And yes, there were funerals. I have also observed dead silence when "Sandy Hook" is mentioned (and its not the "grieving" kind of silence...).

    3 of the interviewed grieving victim's families are 2x Connecticut lottery winners? How that that possibly be a coincidence??
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  33. #73
    Kim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    TIM
    IEE e7 783 sx so
    Posts
    6,928
    Mentioned
    394 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    If you followed the news coverage (and who could not?), this does sound insane. I know, Kim. I also saw the extensive news coverage, too, and I grieved with the grieving families and it felt my world was changing. Now I live not so far from there. And I looked at what had to be ridiculous "hoax coverage" one day, with news videos showing the WRONG school, the firehouse scene with the fake milling "crowd", and I knew SOMETHING here was hoaxed. I was confused. Maybe they tried to make it worse so they could make their gun-control point better. So I put it off to an exaggeration.

    Recently, after a shopping trip to Newton, I learned of the book, "Nobody Died at Sandy Hook". That page has a link to the free pdf book, which was being sold in droves on Amazon before the government censored it - so much for freedom of speech. Anyway - Nobody? How could it be NOBODY? But the evidence for that is pretty hard to explain away. Its VERY EASY to discount if you have never seen any of these videos debunking Sandy Hook. We WANT to believe it to be some crazy conspiracy theorists, not the news media that we love and trust. Cognitive Dissidence. Its not a great place to go.

    Most recently I found a Yahoo article about the Sandy Hook police commissioner retiring at 60. Clearly his statements show he REALLY did not want to be asked about Sandy Hook! In fact, he tried to tell us it was unimportant! The viewer comments to this retirement article were enlightening. The vast majority have seen the fakery explained on the internet, and they believe it to be the hoax. That majority was interspersed with those saying, "You crazy conspiracy theorists" and "I know someone who knows someone who died at Sandy Hook" or "I know someone who knows someone who went to a Sandy Hook victim funeral". That I have also heard around here - always 2nd hand of course. They know someone who knows someone. And yes, there were funerals. I have also observed dead silence when "Sandy Hook" is mentioned (and its not the "grieving" kind of silence...).

    3 of the interviewed grieving victim's families are 2x Connecticut lottery winners? How that that possibly be a coincidence??
    A very close friend of mine knows Adam Lanza's father because he works with his wife. It's not a hoax and it's revolting to play politics on the backs of dead children and grieving parents.
    “Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
    ― Anais Nin

  34. #74
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    6,126
    Mentioned
    84 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I am still interested in this thread but other things are calling my immediate attention for now. I wake up now to the rising sun and imagine it circling in to us, and away, out of sight and out of lighting/heating us. I like to imagine it closer. It seems friendlier, more for us. At only 32 miles wide. I also like to look at the sky and think of the firmament. Its comforting. This enclosed place. For us. And God walks above.

    [...]

    "Not in the dark of buildings confining,
    not in some heaven, light years away
    here in this place the new light is shining..."

    This is an illustration of how modern science makes us feel "light years away" from God. Yeah, it does.
    modern science makes me feel closer to "god" - it's an intimate but maybe crude way to try to seek. but also the huge distances in the universe and how it's apparently just expanding on and on - the aloneness and isolation - it just makes me feel somehow *more* connected to the spiritual sense. maybe because of the longing and the pain which i find puts me more in contact with the ache inside which in a way is the most real part of me - and is the part that would be able to "speak" with "god."

    but i'd also say that it doesn't matter what shape the earth is, or how vast the universe is, or which bodies are orbiting which... none of that would make god closer or farther away. this isn't "god's" plane but the plane of "creation" (this isn't a way i would typically say this). god's plane i would see as intersecting through consciousness. it's the only real connector. all things infused with some sort of consciousness are directly or psychically linked to "god" (which depending how you define that - perhaps you could say it exists at the quantum level or something and so is in all matter - it's just a rock would be consciousness without any experience, and so it seems dead).

    but i always imagine "god" hovering above and within the entirety of "creation" and so any loneliness or disconnect is just an illusion of the human ego. you don't even need the universe to connect to god, just your own mind. it's just we apparently need the whole universe to have a place for minds like ours to dwell. (and there are so many ways to make oneself feel at the center of things - you could tell yourself, god had to create this entire universe, just to create me. i don't really look at it that way, but i do think that if you were trying to create a human being, you might actually have to create the entire universe - it's like a divine engineering problem or something).

    (i don't understand how you can believe all those things you mentioned are hoaxes - but perhaps you live a sheltered life within a religious community?)

  35. #75
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,642
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Pa3s, I wanted to answer your posts. I appreciate that even when you disagree you are never unkind.
    Thanks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Take, for instance, conspiracy theories about alien abductions. I only want to look at that long enough to inform myself what they are saying out of curiosity then I am DONE with that. I do NOT want to entertain "maybe its true" because my heart tells me its not, so its not worth my time.
    This illustrates my point very well. If you want to know the truth, your "heart" (it's a figure of speech, I know) is a very unreliable advisor. We all have this part in us and we all are influenced by it. But it doesn't help at all if you seek knowledge, it just gets you sidetracked. This is easy to explain: A good scientist is open for everything and can assess everything (as long as he has the tools, i.e. the knowledge on the subject). In the case of the "UFO files", one can look at all the evidence presented, evaluate them and then judge the plausibility of the case. He may be wrong, but science is always the best "guess" according to all available information (which can be proven).

    But if you just go with your gut, there's no way you can be sure that it's the truth. You said you seek the truth whether it's convenient or not. But your heart will only tell you what's convenient, hence my assumption that the FET is actually a convenient theory according to your world view.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    Others here have the same attitude towards the Flat Earth Theory and I totally respect that indifference. I know what that feels like. I also don't enjoy entertaining thoughts on Cro-Magnum man, because I don't think there is such a thing. My gut tells me so, therefore, I never argue evolution with anyone. Too much indifference in myself for that topic.
    The problem is: truth is not subjective. You are free to ignore every theory you don't like, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. I can ignore all the evidence and deny my own mortality. But that doesn't matter, because at the end of my life, I will die. That's the truth, whether I like it or not.

    As far as I know, the Cro-Magnon man is well researched. Now ask yourself: Don't you believe in it because you don't want to? Are you inclined to believe in the FET because you want to? It seems so. But can you know that it's the truth, apart from your feeling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I never enjoyed the study of dinosaurs and all those ages they supposedly lived in. I learned them because I had to, I stuck all those names and times and dates in my brain long enough to be tested on them then I happily forgot them. And never took an interest again. I took my son to giant dinosaur displays and never had that feeling of awe you are supposed to have. Recently I read that too is likely a hoax. Surprise but no surprise.
    Again, you see a theory and instead of judging it with the help of the available information (fossils, ect.), you asked your gut and left it at that. Then you read an article which supported your gut-feeling (which is at odds with the mainstream opinion) and it gave you the confidence to keep believing that dinosaurs are a hoax so you are also inclined to believe the article.

    I think I made my point now. You don't have to agree, I just want to ask: Do you know what I mean?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    When I am on a truth seeking mission I don't let what anyone thinks of me deter me. My self-image is up for grabs as I am willing to see myself and my world in a new light.
    When I was talking about your image, I was not referring to your image in the minds of other people, but to the one in your own mind (of yourself). You claimed to be an independent, open-minded person and a truth-seeker. But the FET is labeled as a wacky conspiracy theory. So in order to "save" your self-image of being an independent thinker, you can't completely subscribe to the theory. However, you'd probably like to be true regardless. That was my psychological explanation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    I expect you will be a Christian someday, Pa3s!
    This is very unlikely to happen. But coming from you, I know it is well-meant.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  36. #76
    Haikus Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    Enlightened
    Posts
    16,352
    Mentioned
    299 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Eliza Thomason I understand that the Catholic Church discouraged or outright forbade the reading of the bible (nevermind books in general) amongst laypersons for centuries (lest they saw that Catholic teaching was not supported by scripture or even contradicted it) and only in recent decades permitted it (and even now, there is a culture which sees the reading of scripture amongst the laypeople as "un-Catholic").

    Do you have such an aversion to reading books? (I highly recommend you read some).

  37. #77
    Robot Assassin Pa3s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    Ne-LII, 5w6
    Posts
    3,642
    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    I understand that the Catholic Church discouraged or outright forbade the reading of the bible (nevermind books in general) amongst laypersons for centuries (lest they saw that Catholic teaching was not supported by scripture or even contradicted it)
    The fact that almost everyone had to rely on priests to read and interpret the Bible was certainly contributing to their position of power. It was Martin Luther's lifework to translate the Bible and make it widely available to the common people, after all.
    „Man can do what he wants but he cannot want what he wants.“
    – Arthur Schopenhauer

  38. #78
    Seriously Judicious Emotivist Eliza Thomason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    eastern U.S.
    TIM
    ENFp, IEE
    Posts
    2,672
    Mentioned
    251 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    @Eliza Thomason I understand that the Catholic Church discouraged or outright forbade the reading of the bible (nevermind books in general) amongst laypersons for centuries (lest they saw that Catholic teaching was not supported by scripture or even contradicted it) and only in recent decades permitted it (and even now, there is a culture which sees the reading of scripture amongst the laypeople as "un-Catholic").

    Do you have such an aversion to reading books? (I highly recommend you read some).
    LOL, Subteigh. I can't STAND books. Didn't you know?

    As a convert from longtime Evangelical Protestant practice of Christianity (various denoms), I've been long-aware of the shocking un-Christian allegations against Catholicism, propagated by mostly good-intentioned persons (since the average Christian would be careful not to make the mistake of bearing false witness). Converting to Catholic involved first reconciling such things by learning what the Catholic ChurchACTUALLY teaches, which is easy for any seeker on the internet. Yours is a common allegation.

    Here is one reputable place where someone asked that question, and its answered by eminent historian and Catholic theologian Dr. Wm Carroll: http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showme...=&Pgnu=&recnu=
    "A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
    ........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........


    "Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
    by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
    attitude acceptable to today's standards."
    - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"

    .
    .
    .


  39. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    LOL, Subteigh. I can't STAND books. Didn't you know?

    As a convert from longtime Evangelical Protestant practice of Christianity (various denoms), I've been long-aware of the shocking un-Christian allegations against Catholicism, propagated by mostly good-intentioned persons (since the average Christian would be careful not to make the mistake of bearing false witness). Converting to Catholic involved first reconciling such things by learning what the Catholic ChurchACTUALLY teaches, which is easy for any seeker on the internet. Yours is a common allegation.

    Here is one reputable place where someone asked that question, and its answered by eminent historian and Catholic theologian Dr. Wm Carroll: http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showme...=&Pgnu=&recnu=
    This is a really good point.

    A lot of dis-information was spread by Protestant establishments in regards to Catholicism, for the same old reasons as they are reasons today: money, power, land, to ostracize groups of people opposing said, personal gain, to name but a few.

    This is a good example of how for instance, FE or another idea which is not accepted by the mainstream, is worth giving a cursory glance if you wish to, rather than a small number engaging in their desire for condemning free thought or actions for whatever personal reasons one may say they have.

    I have posted on this thread, the means to look into the idea more so if someone wishes to, and I do not feel the compulsion to engage in 'debates' with others who have their own motives which to me appear to be to push onto anyone their agenda that I would describe as fanatical positions as if a religion for them, I have seen this before and learned it is rather fruitless to engage with an alternative consideration to possibilities. It might be amusing for others to view, possibly, and it might even be called 'informative' for others, but I am not for that on here and if anyone wishes to look at the idea of FE or anything else then they should be given freedom to do so, and respected for it, not have frequent referrals to their intelligence, their spiritual beliefs in some form of derisory way.

    Indeed, one does not even have to be religious to be a Flat Earther, for those insisting so intently on this, a simple glance at the Q&A would show otherwise,

    "Is Flat Earth Theory connected to a religion?

    Flat Earth Theory is neither officially nor unofficially associated with any religion. Throughout the ages various religious institutions have championed a flat earth model for the world. Unfortunately this leaves us with the vestigial thought that Flat Earth Theory and religions are symbiotic. They are not, even though many religions today, both mainstream and otherwise, still teach its followers that the world is flat. While they are not incorrect, believing in a flat earth isn't contingent upon believing in a deity or being a part of any religion."

    http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0#.VqfSTyqLTcs

    Peoples own opinions are their own, I feel I have answered some of the questions and gave a simple overview of some of the key points, if someone wishes to read further, then they can, or if not, then not There is nothing pressing I feel for personal attacks or loosing time for other matters, I feel, and I suspected at one point that certain critics would not even go so far as to entertain clicking on any links, but be full of
    boisterous opposition.

    I feel the conversation for me, has already gone far enough in this particular thread at this particular time, and if anyone has cared to read this, thank you for not joining in a group 'witch hunt' towards those who like to feel mentally or indeed moving to physically refreshed, via looking at other ideas

  40. #80

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eliza Thomason View Post
    LOL, Subteigh. I can't STAND books. Didn't you know?

    As a convert from longtime Evangelical Protestant practice of Christianity (various denoms), I've been long-aware of the shocking un-Christian allegations against Catholicism, propagated by mostly good-intentioned persons (since the average Christian would be careful not to make the mistake of bearing false witness). Converting to Catholic involved first reconciling such things by learning what the Catholic ChurchACTUALLY teaches, which is easy for any seeker on the internet. Yours is a common allegation.

    Here is one reputable place where someone asked that question, and its answered by eminent historian and Catholic theologian Dr. Wm Carroll: http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showme...=&Pgnu=&recnu=

    Your source says that Catholics don't read the bible, but the irony of that is that most Christians don't either.. Furthermore, most don't even have a formal education concerning their religion or the Bible.. They also don't seem to realize that the Church in many sects of Christianity reside on confirmation bias, fraudulent references, and corrupt Greek texts etc.. Take for example that your source discusses unauthorized translations and questionable translations that were "anti-Catholic", as in those that don't conform to their sectarian denomination among 33,000 + others.. Worse still, the corrupt Greek translations exist in the NT when they reference much of the OT due to the differences in the grammar between Hebrew and Greek, or in other cases dealing with Latin.. As an example we notice that many Christians believe Emmanuel (*Immanuel) was a prophecy of Jesus and his virgin birth when in fact he was no such thing. Thus in speaking of such Prophecies, one of the worst is of course in Matthew regarding Jesus's birth from a virgin.

    Matthew 1:22-23 :
    Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.


    This is quote mining Isaiah 7 and 9 to construct a prophecy of Jesus. Never-mind the word Almah actually means "Young Woman" to which Matthew incorrectly translates into Greek "Virgin" by using Greek Grammar. Worse still Immanuel was not Jesus or a prophecy in regards to him, he was the son of Isaiah to whom was among the 3 signs (children of Isaiah).. (I)Emmanuel was born in chapter 8. Hence Isaiah was prophesying his own children, and prophesying Immanuel to take and hold stewardship of the throne of David in relation to the turmoil of his time. It doesn't take a genius to figure this out and realize that the whole story of Jesus is made up.. Emmanuel would also have been Canaanite and theophory of the Canaanite God EL (El is with us) with his relation to the land of Canaan as that of his land., and I will provide you the academic sources as your source would so demand..:

    Isaiah 7:1-8:15, although set in the time of king Ahaz, apparently dates from the reign of Ahaz's son Hezekiah some thirty years later
    , and its purpose was to persuade Hezekiah not to join with other kings who intended to rebel against their joint overlord, Assyria. Isaiah points to the dreadful consequences that followed for Judah's northern neighbours, the kingdom of Israel and Aram-Damascus (Syria) when they rebelled in the days of Ahaz and brought the Assyrians down on themselves. In the event, Hezekiah ignored Isaiah and joined the rebels, and the prophet's warning came true: the Assyrians ravaged Judah and Hezekiah barely escaped with his throne. A century later, in the time of Josiah, the prophecy was revised to present Ahaz as the faithless king who rejected God's promise of protection for Jerusalem and the house of David, with the result that God brought Assyria to devastate the land until a new and faithful king (presumably Josiah) would arise.

    ^ Sweeney 1996, p. 159.

    That is Isaiah 7 in a nutshell..It was present tense to that era, and was later edited and revised.. But that's not the important part, the following is:
    Isaiah 7-8 mentions three children with symbolic names: Shear-jashub, meaning "a remnant shall return"; Immanuel, "God is with us"; and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, "the spoil speeds, the prey hastens".[4]
    ^ Barker 1996, p. 506.
    These 3 children are the 3 signs. and it deals within Isaiah's own time period as we can note the following to which tells us that the children are most likely that of his own:
    Isaiah 8:18 informs the reader that Isaiah and his children are signs ("Here am I, and the children the Lord has given me. We are signs and symbols in Israel from the Lord Almighty, who dwells on Mount Zion"). The meaning of these name-signs is not clear: Shear-jashub has been variously interpreted to mean that only a remnant of Ephraim and Syria will survive the Assyrian invasion, or that a remnant of Judah will repent and turn to God, while in Isaiah 10:20-23 it seems to mean that a remnant of Israel will return to the Davidic monarchy.[5]
    Finlay 2005, p. 178-179.

    Again, this is present tense to the termoil of their time to which carries over to chapter 9 where the child is born:
    6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

    This can only be in reference to (E)Immanuel, not the other children or Jesus for that matter.. Hence "IS born" and not will be born some day off into the 700 year future. The NT is a really bad copy missing important segments of Isaiah. Furthermore, The woman in Isaiah was likely Isaiah's own wife, or a mistress.. And the word there is referenced not as a virgin, but rather as a young woman of marriageable age. The woman in Isaiah is correctly denoted in Hebrew Grammar as a young woman. Strong's translation admits this.. :

    Yoel explains as follows
    You form the feminine by adding heh
    Yeled (boy)/Yaldah (girl)
    Kelev (male dog)/Kalbah (@!$%#)
    Eved (male servant)/Avdah (female servant)
    Melekh (king)/Malkah (queen)
    ---->Elem (young man)/Aalmah (young woman)


    The few variations in melech/malkah and kelev/kalbah are only phonetic. It is the same letter used, but the pronunciation goes from soft to harsh when the female ending is added.

    Thus the proper Hebrew words are as follows:
    Betulah -> means virgin
    Aalmah - > means young woman

    Strong's entry for 'aalmah (5959) states that it is the feminine of 'elem' (5958).<--- Pay close attention to that because that actually determines what is actually said in Isaiah. . That entry also lists "lad, young man, stripling" but accurately mentions nothing of virginity.

    There is another word which can mean 'young woman' to which is "Naarah", and as you can see that proper Herbrew grammar for directly citing a virgin is "Naarah betulah" to which could also have been written as "aalmah betulah":
    In Deuteronomy 22:25 we have 'naarah betulah' to mean ' young woman who is a virgin'.
    Betulah (virgin) is not used in Isaiah what-so-ever, and you do not find this above phrase in Isaiah. The correct translation is thus "Young Woman". Christians literally have no academic citation to note she was a virgin, much-less any that could pin her as an actual prophecy to the Virgin Marry. The writers of the NT often quote mined the OT to make up such prophecies, and Matthew quote mines Isaiah and incorrectly translates aalmah into virgin in Greek grammar in order to make up said prophecy in reference to Jesus. Thus unlike the Hebrew term aalmah, the Greek term for maiden can mean either a young woman of marriageable age, or a virgin as a proper definition of the term. And of course Matthew finds it more miraculous to assume a virgin birth, and likely so to compete with other pagan mythologies in the geopolitical environment. Those to the likes of the Mithras ect..


    However, when it comes to religion, uncomfortable facts are woefully ignored because they rest entirely on confirmation bias as does the church.. We see this not just in Christianity of course, but also with Flat Earthers, Consipacy buffs, the Ancient Aliens pseudo-documentary followers, and all sort of other crank cults etc.. Though those who are POE, likely do it out of either the fun of it, or to profit off the ignorance and gullibility of those that would give them money..., kind of like the Church and Mega Churches..

    Last edited by TheJackal; 01-28-2016 at 11:44 AM.

Page 2 of 25 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •