LOL at the sheeple who believe the Earth actually exists outside of a computer simulation. The Earth is "shaped" like 0's and 1's, morons.
LOL at the sheeple who believe the Earth actually exists outside of a computer simulation. The Earth is "shaped" like 0's and 1's, morons.
Wouldn't flat earthers be primarily Te PoLR? There seems to be an overall enormous disregard for established facts and evidence as we know it. Just like with creationists in general. (Not to say all creationists are Te PoLR but the ideology or mentality itself surely is.)
@Eliza Thomason Why is Earth the only flat planet when the moon and other planets in the solar system are spherical? This is proven with usage of a telescope or are you doubting this too?
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
I'm convinced the earth is flat after having a robust number of life experiences that deeply affected me throughout the years. For one, when I took a plane from California to New York, the ground remained even and the plane travelled in one direction. For example, the plane did not do any loopty loops. Furthermore, if the earth is "round", as most people say, then how come architects design houses, skyscrapers, etc. on a flat grid? Would buildings not have round floors if the earth was "round?" Moreover, if the earth was "round", how come the ocean remains cupped within the confines of continental shores? If the earth was "round", wouldn't the ocean drip off?
I don't believe that the world is flat. I don't believe that it is round, either. According to my observations and calculations, it is in fact a spinning cube! The sun, on the other hand, is pyramid-shaped. The moon: definitely octahedron. Why don't you all expand your theories, I'm so surprised we still debate the earth.
All I can say to this part is that I do not live in such an evil version of earth in this universe (perhaps in the multiverse there is a version of me that does.) and from my perspective, the elite nor society governs the way I experience my reality except in very peripheral ways or when I allow the influence to penetrate deeply and warp my perception.
We already had a couple posts, back and forth, on Antarctica where I explained why I disagree with what you believe about it. I am not blindly subscribing to the idea of earth's shape, or the exploration of the universe either, just because it was taught to me. I hope you don't assume I have not done my own research. I came to my conclusions based not only on the information available but also intuitively. I have beliefs about the universe that were not taught to me in school, church or the internet. They are my own and would not be easily translatable for public consumption.
The way I see it, power will only corrupt those who are already corruptible which includes the power someone can have over their partner/spouse, children, extended family, friends, students or coworkers. It doesn't have to be wide scale. A person abusing power can spend a lifetime and only affect one other person if that is their choice. This is my experience of reality so it cannot be invalidated but I am open, to a shift in perspective. I am not open to the idea of mass scale deception. You have your own version of reality based on your own beliefs which I am trying hard not to dismiss but having been raised on a similar religion it is often hard for me not to when I feel I have moved past the limitations my past religious affiliations imposed on me.
So in a way you have played devil's advocate for an opposing point of view from what is common here but do not believe to be true as much as it is an interesting idea? I was just responding to the posts in superlatives and had all but forgotten this thread until recently.
Don't take it from me. I am not any kind of FET expert. I have no intention of summarizing FET here, and amnot qualified to, and have made no attempt to, so my posts are the wrong place to go for a summary. I just comment randomly, sharing miscellaneous thoughts as they occur to me. Like right now, for instance. I have not given a single thought to FET in months, and I randomly came to this thread and commented.
There are pictures of earth from space so you are going on information that is outdated. I do not need you to research for me since I did my own. You may want to reread my response. I am aware that a lot of them are CGI and it is for a good reason. One being distance. With newer satellites at greater distance there are images of the whole earth. At least that is my current understanding. I posted links. Before they had to piece together because of distance. CGI is a useful tool to help people conceptualize. I am pretty sure I mentioned this in my post along with links that you might have missed seeing.
Aylen, those are CGI images. They are ALL - meaning every.single.one. - CGI images. There are NO pictures of earth from space. None. Not one. Confirmed by NASA. I am not going to research links for you because its easy-peasy to do it yourself (thought I put one link in that sentence). Repeating: there are NO pictures of earth from space. ALL are CGI.
[All of NASA's pictorial discoveries are CGI. Thinkabout thedetailed pics of distant planets! If they can get accurate, clear pictures SO far away, why do we not have photos of every pebble on the moon magnified 100x?!.]
I have researched so much information on the universe, not because of this thread but because that is my interest. I have a strong desire to reconnect with my origins (remember them) since I do not plan to incarnate on this planet again.
I ran across FET before, as well as the hollow earth theory. I think I mentioned I found hollow earth more fascinating than flat earth. It is more charming. I know some irl FETs and we have had some debates that left me exhausted and frustrated. I guess youtube does have a lot of influence on what people will believe or not believe lately. I have managed to get one person to dismiss the validity of FET based on what I had to say. I probably was a bit dismissive at first but then I tried to be accepting of his beliefs. He is easily influenced by new and exciting ideas too but because I know him well and he is very intelligent I found it a bit irritating that he was buying into it. Maybe it is his Ne but his isn't even valued.
I am not invested in you changing your mind though. Like you I am just sharing. Maybe what I post also lets people consider something else. Human truths can be important but I don't care as much about them since they do change over time. There is something even bigger than truth.
I have read and watched so much regarding the cosmos that I can't possibly explain it all but if you are interested perhaps look into the other side as thoroughly? For me there is much more evidence against a "flat earth" than for it but the best part of looking into the other side is that a whole new universe may open up to you. It is unfathomably huge, beautiful, terrifying and mysterious. Nothing inspires a greater sense of awe in me. Even the beauty and diversity of earth does not compare to the unknown and what we are going to find.
Speaking for myself I am mostly, if vaguely, aware of my origins and lifetimes in different galaxies and dimensions. The more I explore the more I am triggered into bringing those distant memories into my current incarnation. From our interactions in this thread I can see you are not aware of many things I have learned through research and by expanding my own consciousness so I don't think there is a point to me going into subjects like distant galaxies, black holes, dark matter dark energy and the big bang. It is transcendent if you decide to look into it. I am not judging that your way is bad and mine is good. Just a difference of where I put my attention. Your purpose in life is different than mine. You probably make more of an impact on people and contribution to society as whole every day, through your profession. My impact will not be large but I am fine with that.
It isn't a matter of it being boring. It just doesn't make sense to me and the only thing I find interesting about it is the mindset of those people but I am sure some people find my mindset weird too. I have looked at the videos and links you have posted so if you linked to debunkers then I probably read them too.
I think the bulk - maybe all of your reading on FET (Flat Earth Theory) is from FET Debunkers. That's pretty boring reading. Really dry stuff, and really not interesting. Compared to real FET, the debunkers are so, so boring and totally un-stimulating. It will tranquilize you, though, and it's comforting to think that everything you know is true and its worth reading boring stuff if it can tell you that and make you feel fine in that way. But the FET is SO INTERESTING! And I think you have not read a lot of real FET or seen their videos or sat through one thoughtfully is because I have found pretty much across the board the FET people are rally using their minds AND, I want to tell you this: they do not get "riled up". They are calm and thoughtful. That's my experience. Its those who are trying to "debunk" that are all riled up". Pretty much, across the board, that's the truth.
(there is a lot of detracting FET videos and sites out there, to reel you in and then say fake things that real FE theorists would never say.)
An example is FE theorist that is everythingbut riled up is Mark Sargent. So, so mellow. And intelligent and interesting. But he is an example of so many other FE theorists. Its like they are no longer upset that the world is not as it was taught them, but accept it. They are not upset that the reality of earth is not neatly laid out in textbooks and "accurate" detailed maps, etc. They see earth as a mystery to contemplate with the amazing instrument: the human mind, and they are at peace about exploring it.
It is not about trusting youtube comments. It is the type of personality that posts what I find to be stupid, hateful comments while telling us we are stupid and hateful for not believing in FET. I don't think these people are pretending to be FETs to make people think they are stupid and hateful. Reading youtube comments is often toxic anyway.
That's an interesting way to make a judgment on the topic. Sort of circuitous -- and I relate to circuitousness, because I approach learning things that way a lot of the time. Yet, I do not think I would trust youtube comments to tell me a great deal. I mean, really, the vast majority are just reactions - and first, off-the-cuff immediate reactions at that - from people who have given it NO THOUGHT. So to me, they just aren't useful. Its sort of like in forums, where if you pose and a thoughtful question, the FIRST answers you get are often sort of frivolous and not useful; they are simply the off-the-cuff reactions of "first responders" who have a shallow response to everything they just read, and are not worth much. Its later in that you get the thoughtful comments from those who cogitated on what you posed.
I hope you are well, Aylen! I think of you a lot. I have been busy. I am at a crossroads, and at the beginnings of some changes (nose to the grindstone and no reportable changes)...
You may learn best through circuitous methods but I do not learn best that way. For me it would be a huge distraction and knock me off course while learning.
Thank you for taking the time to respond. I was going to delete my post when I saw the thread bumped because I don't really have the energy to put into this right now but I am doing ok. At least it is related to a subject I am really focused on right now (not FET). My usual life, death, rebirth, cosmic connection stuff. I have a lot of focus there atm. More than usual.
I hope your are well too.
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
“The very word intuition has to be understood. You know the word tuition—tuition comes from outside, somebody teaches you, the tutor. Intuition means something that arises within your being; it is your potential, that’s why it is called intuition. Wisdom is never borrowed, and that which is borrowed is never wisdom. Unless you have your own wisdom, your own vision, your own clarity, your own eyes to see, you will not be able to understand the mystery of existence.”
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
After floating around for 14 minutes, and swallowing a bubble of water that is floating in midair, she looks outside @ 14:10 and no, it isn't CGI. You can see everything.
Some, maybe most (?), FETs don't even believe the space station is even up there. Sites with outdated information and pictures don't help since it seems some see something is off but fail to notice that the site is not connected to ISS or NASA. They just think it is filmed in a studio. I saw some of this on the links Eliza posted.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37778973
This one is just so far out there... I hope it is satire but maybe not. :/
http://heiwaco.tripod.com/moontravel.htm
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Okay then, since wisdom has to come from within and can never be borrowed you quit trying to inspire wisdom in me by the use of words, which are a language borrowed from the outside world and not originating inside me. Better yet, feck off with trying to smear that shit all over the outside world if it has to be so secluded from the outside world that it can't even interact with the empirical and the quantifiable.
You see how enshrining this way of thinking could become a problem, right?
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Yet you don't see me crawling out of the woodwork to give you a goading gentle slap in the face half of the time the lot of you circlejerk to shit on on fi or si. Don't I get to be offended too? Where's the fairness? Or does some unquantifiable game-breaking rule of your Ni absolve you of fairness too?
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
Aylen "9k posts" voice of wisdom and not a single memorable post. yeah grendel is the hardhead here
Proverbs 17:28
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
retard: a person who is obtuse or ineffective in some way
obtuse: not sensitive or observant
I mean unless you're admitting there's nothing to be sensitive to, in which case we agree
my posts not memorable.! its yours that aren't memorable!Probably half of them 20,000 characters and not one memorable.
Guys, stop fighting... you both worship this thing called "intuition" and "Ni".
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
haha jokes on you, I was just teasing
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I love the name of this thread.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Fi, Ni, it's all the same... just some mysterious process that can't be clearly explained. Keep that in mind when you're making stereotypes. NTs are the mystical geniuses, and NF are the mystical mystics. These will only give you mysterious answers.
Anyway, what's less interesting is whether the Earth is round or flat, since we have already established that from what we know and from all sorts of calculations and inferences that we have made, the Earth does appear to be round. But ON TOP OF THAT, the flat-earthers are asserting that it's due to a government conspiracy that's fooling us (also, what's behind the whole thing?). So they have an extra explaining to do, when the round-earthers are already done with their explaining.
What's more interesting is the amount of computation that it would require if the whole thing is indeed a simulation by NASA, that it's all just a "planetarium" in the sky. The computer has to use the formulae provided by astronomical theories; in fact the computation is identical to the one that it would perform if it were calculating predictions of where an observatory should point its telescopes to see real planets and stars.
The amount of computational power required would be 1:1. You would require an entire universe to simulate another universe.
So it would amount to this:
"If a substantial amount of computation would be required to give us the illusion that a certain entity is real, then that entity is real."
How do the satellites used to upload internet posts stay in orbit around a flat earth?
Half the universe’s missing matter has just been finally found
The missing links between galaxies have finally been found. This is the first detection of the roughly half of the normal matter in our universe – protons, neutrons and electrons – unaccounted for by previous observations of stars, galaxies and other bright objects in space.
You have probably heard about the hunt for dark matter, a mysterious substance thought to permeate the universe, the effects of which we can see through its gravitational pull. But our models of the universe also say there should be about twice as much ordinary matter out there, compared with what we have observed so far.
Two separate teams found the missing matter – made of particles called baryons rather than dark matter – linking galaxies together through filaments of hot, diffuse gas.
“The missing baryon problem is solved,” says Hideki Tanimura at the Institute of Space Astrophysics in Orsay, France, leader of one of the groups. The other team was led by Anna de Graaff at the University of Edinburgh, UK.
https://www.newscientist.com/article...finally-found/
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
I am sensing a certain level of tension in this thread.
I very much appreciate the flat earth community insofar as they expose NASAs bullshit (no real pictures of earth, “ISS” astro-nots using green screen and wires etc.) but there are many shills among them doing a bad job on the earth-shape issue:
ILI (FINAL ANSWER)
crispy you are the ultimate troll
"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"
.
.
.