- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
.
- Posts
Hi David,
Yes it is these guys who are hiding the glory of God shown in creation.
Relying on their shallow and legalistic view of scripture they make themselves gods.
Lightenup, the tacos were nice and the sauce, which this place (Tijuana’s Tacos) is famous for is flaming hot! At least you can select that level of heat if you want! I got the one that had Carolina Reaper and Habanero peppers! Yikes!!! And yes, the guacamole was so fresh it was really great!
Yes I have thought about Yeshua being the first light spoken of in Genesis. I would have to say that it is possible but I can’t say dogmatically that it is true.
Ed: Hi Mike,
You are dismissing that God may be reiterating what Happened on Day 1, The sun and earth’s rotation
Hey Ed, what possible reason would I have to consider it a reiteration? Do you suppose anyone in Moses’, King David’s, or Jesus’ day would have read Genesis and concluded that God really made the sun on day one instead of day four? Ask yourself why you’re willing to do all this scriptural gymnastics today. Can the reason be found in the words of scripture? Or does the reason have to do with the stories godless men have told us? Be honest.
Nick, I have pointed out several historical empherical scientific test that conclusivey proves the earth is not rotating. Why then would you suggest that I am loosing faith in scientists? I have to assume you are referencing the theoretical ideas that is offered as “science” today. Yes, I don’t have a lot of faith in that kind of pseudo-science.
Scientists have told us that the curvature of the earth drops at 8″ per mile squared. When we measure this we are able to see way past the curvature on a regular basis. Why would you not have faith in this scientific experiment that scientists have provided?
Also, we have the best scientist of all that says the sun has a circuit. That scientist is God!
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. 2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. 3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. 4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, 5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. 6 His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.
Hi Dig4,
Yes you seem to think you have found all there is to know.
But I am unsure if you are on the same planet.
Coriolis Effect & effect on water
The “Coriolis Effect” is often said to cause sinks and toilet bowls in the Northern Hemisphere to drain spinning in one direction while in the Southern Hemisphere causing them to spin the opposite way, thus providing proof of the spinning ball-Earth. Once again, however, just like Foucault’s Pendulums spinning either which way, sinks and toilets in the Northern and Southern hemispheres do not consistently spin in any one direction! Sinks and toilets in the very same household are often found to spin opposite directions, depending entirely upon the shape of the basin and the angle of the water’s entry, not the supposed rotation of the Earth.
It is generally true I think about the direction of water down a plug hole, but it is a weak force compared to the other influences like the direction of the water flowing into the plug hole. But let’s say you fill up a basin, wait for the water to be still, and then pull the plug. Even then I believe, the shape of the basin can override the direction. If the basin was perfectly shaped to not favour any particular direction, then it should be down to to this particular effect.
This was demonstrated to me on the equator with the same basin of water. Just a metre from the equator and the water went in one direction and a metre or say on the other side of the line and it span the other way. Not sure if this was a tourist scam or not, because you can change the direction with the slightest change such as perhaps a sneaky tilt of the basin. However, the person doing the demonstration said this is how people in ancient times knew where the equator was and it held special significance to them.
Andrew: Mike,
I’ve read on the net that the ISS can be seen with a telescope and the astronaut with Ham in the vid I do believe to be sincere.
There are definitely objects floating around above us, but they are carried by planes, gliders and balloons. I just slapped this video together for you. It’s 4 and a half minutes…
Notice the balloon satellite transiting the moon towards the end. Instead of the 3 ball-shaped balloons carrying that satellite, do you suppose it’s possible for NASA to make an inflatable ISS to float around up there so people can once in a while catch a view? Like a bounce house that people rent for kids’ birthday parties – but shaped like the ISS?
Also, please take a quick look at this one, which shows what we can do nowadays with holograms. It’s only 2 minutes…
So just because something’s up there doesn’t mean it is orbiting the earth in the thermosphere, where it is said to get up to 3600 degrees, while aluminum melts at 1200. I’m not saying there is a layer of air above the earth that gets that hot… just pointing out that satellites and the ISS, as NASA explains them, contradict NASA’s explanation of the thermosphere.
Andrew: I don’t doubt that men have been to space/earth’s orbit or that the earth is round, but for various reasons I do have doubts about the moon landing.
Yeah, the percentage of people who believe we went to the moon are dwindling. Even many of those who call me a flattard know that 9-11 was in inside job, Sandy Hook was a false flag gun grab, and we never landed on the moon. That’s why I was surprised by Gene and T8 believing in the moon landings. Heck, a mere hour of examining NASA’s own footage and stories should cure anyone of that nonsense. Bart Sibrell’s A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon is a good place to start. You can find it on YouTube.
Andrew: If the video you put up with the man from NASA is for real, saying that we’ve lost the technology to go through the Van Allen belt and the other claiming that they are still working on and hoping to go beyond earth’s orbit-as if they-NASA have never done this-forgetting the Apollo missions; this is very fishy indeed. It’s like how could technology like that be lost? it’s not like losing a two dollar bill or instructions to your crockpot!! That seems as far fetched as dinosaurs aboard Noah’s ark!
If you’re talking about my So Fake It Has To Be Real video on YouTube, then yes, all of those are real astronauts and NASA personnel. Were you aware that when Ron Howard approached NASA about getting the original footage of the Apollo missions for his IMAX documentary (as opposed to using the grainy, ghostly images people watched on TV, due to NASA insisting that the press broadcast second generation images from a video screen instead of the original footage), they told him that they lost it. Yep, the greatest achievement in the history of man, and NASA somehow “lost”, not only the original film footage of the missions, but all of the telemetry data too. What a joke! 🙂
Andrew: Also the Apollo astronauts at the press conference-Armstrong, Aldrin and the other do seem rather lost and unprepared in their answers to the media. They certainly weren’t very convincing “devil’s masquerading as angels of light”. They certainly didn’t have their stories straight which seems good evidence of fiction, and their body language as pointed out just didn’t speak well.
They looked to me like men who found out at the last second there wasn’t going to be any moon mission, and were forced under threat of death to play along with the charade. They certainly didn’t look like the men who were about to go to the moon in the pre-launch videos, nor like American heroes who just performed the greatest accomplishment in the world flawlessly.
Andrew: I was surprised to see you say you didn’t think anyone under 65 still believed in the moon landing since everyone I’ve ever talked to about it, young or old does believe it and most have never heard anything to the contrary. I also noticed someone on the thread brought up the private company that is planning to do trips to the moon which I heard about also. I really wonder and am curious to see if anything or what comes of this in my lifetime.
We apparently run with different crowds. 🙂 And yes, they’ve been promising to send regular people to space for years now. They’re even talking about building a “space hotel” where the rich can go when they want to get away from it all. But have you noticed that every time the new forecast date arrives, they start talking about a couple more years in the future. Over and over and over, they just keep stringing people along. Think it out… we supposedly put men on the moon five times within three years… IN THE EARLY 70’s! Yet in the 50 years since, no man has even gone past low earth orbit. And just last week, NASA cancelled their most recent moon mission. So we’re not even sending professionals up there, but in a year or two, Paris Hilton and hundreds of other regular folks are going there for their vacations? 😀
Andrew: But regardless of what I or any of us believe I find this thread and conspiracy theories in general to be interesting. But what do you say to seeing the space station with a telescope if it’s not really up there? apparently people say they can.
As with anything, conspiracies require discernment. Some people are claiming all kinds of crazy things, and offer no evidence. But with things like Sandy Hook, the Boston bombing, 9-11 and the heliocentric hoax, the evidence is so overwhelming that if you spend even a little time looking into them, you’ll wonder how you ever believed the mainstream story in the first place.
Andrew, I really appreciated your post. You flat out said you believed the world is round, but you asked good questions… respectfully. I shouldn’t have said those nasty things about the members here last Sunday, and I wish I could take them back. But I sincerely did expect that this discussion would be more respectful back and forth, and a heck of a lot less, “Then how do you explain this, you deluded egocentric flattard wack job?” 🙂
Good on you, man.
Day 1
Hey Ed, what possible reason would I have to consider it a reiteration? Do you suppose anyone in Moses’, King David’s, or Jesus’ day would have read Genesis and concluded that God really made the sun on day one instead of day four?
Considering that was in the first day, then yeah, that is one good reason to believe the sun was there. So was day one, 24 hours even though there was no sun.
It does seem reasonable to assume that on day 4, the sun, moon, and stars were in the firmament, whereas they were not there before due to the primeval conditions on an ancient earth, not because they didn’t exist.
Regardless, knowledge shall increase, so we are told that there would be much more knowledge about things, thus that means there was less knowledge back then, so we shouldn’t rely on antiquity or ancient man to be the standard of absolute truth.
If we are confronted with this increased knowledge, and the Bible doesn’t rule it out, then it is possible that increased knowledge and scripture are not against each other. In areas where there is conflict, then yeah let’s see the problem in either the interpretation of scripture or the problem in science. Evolution shows such a conflict and when look into it, you can clearly see the problem is the Theory of Evolution.
D4T: T8, I think I’ll save my million dollars. But since you’re close why don’t you go for it?
I will say that your point is well taken and I don’t have an answer as of yet. Kudos for putting some real thought into this!
There are a lot of things we simply don’t know. But I will point out that Mercator made his famous map (the one on the wall in all the schools) expressly for water vessel navigation. But in order of produce parallel latitude and longitude lines, he had to mess with the shape and size of the continents. There is a West Wing episode dealing with a different projection map, but the idea is the same. 4 minutes…
The point is that sailors don’t need a perfect map to navigate, as for centuries they’ve relied more on the stars than anything else. Also, about those direct flights, the most direct from Australia to South America would be a straight line over the continent of Antarctica… yet none of them do that. Why not? And if you go to “Track My Flight.com” or any other flight tracking site, you will notice that you can see exactly where the planes are at any given moment… until they are over the southern oceans. Then they just disappear for hours, and pop up out of the blue when they’re really close to the land mass on the other side of the ocean they were flying to. A little strange, don’t you think?
I don’t have the southern part of the world figured out just yet, but there are enough anomalies to make me think somebody’s not being truthful about the mainstream story. And you have to admit that those direct flights are few and far between. If you try to book one, most of them will say the flight is cancelled. You can find people claiming to have taken them, but you won’t find any video of the duration of the trip over the ocean. It’s like the people claiming to have gone to Antarctica and witnessed the 24 hour sun for themselves. Shame not one of them thinks to record the event on their phone or camera. Plus, it is abundantly clear that the vast majority of these southern flights do indeed fly hundreds of miles north – WAY off the direct route on a ball earth, but a straight line on the flat earth.
Anyway, I maintain that these things we can’t yet explain are trivial in comparison to the irrefutable proof of seeing objects that should be MILES under the curvature, seeing the moon eclipse from the top down, and seeing full moons in the daytime.
Hi Mike,
Is there no end to your dark brooding about conspiracies?
I am sure telescopes and microscopes will come under your scrutiny.
But you yet to name the ultimate cause of this amazing and coordinated work.
Also, about those direct flights, the most direct from Australia to South America would be a straight line over the continent of Antarctica… yet none of them do that. Why not?
Pretty sure one of the videos I posted mentions a direct flight (Inc flight number) between the two continents that dips South to take a more direct route. But let’s assume that dipping right into the centre of Antarctica is even shorter, (it may or may not be the case, but I can’t check right now) then the reason could be a safety thing. Imagine a woman is in labour like that flight that diverted to Alaska, then the nearest landing spot could be too far away. Or imagine the plane didn’t have enough fuel, then they would basically be dead. A bit hard to do an emergency landing there. And yes, I do realise that ocean also poses the same problem, but I’m willing to bet that a big plane could land on any number of islands deep in the South Pacific. I have visited two nations in this ocean, namely Tonga and New Caledonia. But I happen to know that there are international airports in Fiji, Tahiti, Samoa, Cook Islands, Vanuatu, Easter Island etc.
The point is that sailors don’t need a perfect map to navigate, as for centuries they’ve relied more on the stars than anything else.
While they may not actually need modern tech, they do have modern tech now and I’m guessing many can’t navigate via the stars or efficiently by the stars.
20 million dollar yacht sailing the Southern Ocean as is the case in the Volvo Ocean Race, use technology to gain every bit of advantage possible. Not even NASA technology beats some of the innovations in these boats.
Anyway, I maintain that these things we can’t yet explain are trivial in comparison to the irrefutable proof of seeing objects that should be MILES under the curvature, seeing the moon eclipse from the top down, and seeing full moons in the daytime.
Anyway, I maintain that these things we can’t yet explain are trivial in comparison to the irrefutable proof of the continent of Antarctica, yacht and ship navigation of the Southern Ocean, seeing moons and planets via telescopes, satellites, a permantly visible Southern Cross in NZ and South America at the same time while not being visible from North America which lies in between,
and how the Heliocentric model turns all wandering stars into a circular orbit around the sun compared to a much more complex and unexplainable orbit around the Earth.As for your points in the quote, I will post up the explanation for seeing full moons during the day.
We’ve all heard of the legendary Southern Cross. It’s possible to view it from the Northern Hemisphere if you’re in Hawaii, or south Florida, or south Texas.
Here’s an interesting video on star trails. I can’t say it happens this way but it makes sense.
The point was how you could have a wind that is going against a 1,000 mph rotation. It would seem that all winds would have to follow or lag behind the spin of the globe.
Hi Dig.
That is what I have always thought as well – that would mean Weather from East to West, but we see the opposite.
____________
God bless
Ed JNot only that Ed, but as you go higher in elevation the atmosphere would have to rotate faster because of the greater circumference. Not only that but of the way the atmosphere stays in contact with the earth is by shear force then the heat would also increase. Shear force is kinetic energy which generates heat. This heat would have to go somewhere, presumable into space which would mean that the overall energy is dissipating and earth is loosing energy. How long could this go on for?
Anyway, some pretty interesting points to consider. Here’s a video with an engineer that is working on such problems.
Maybe instead of a flat earth at the centre of God’s creation, God is at the centre of his own creation. And he creates all the worlds around him and his creation is orbiting him. And by his Spirit he can enter his own creation. It seems more feasible to me that God is the centre not man.
The globe tilts providing seasons and also allows some northern areas to peek at the Southern Cross for a time
We’ve all heard of the legendary Southern Cross. It’s possible to view it from the Northern Hemisphere if you’re in Hawaii, or south Florida, or south Texas.
The globe earth explains that beautifully. The Earth tilts to create seasons and thus some places dip down and then up. When the northern part dips down, some can see it. While the Flat Earth can invent a way to explain it, I bet it will again be more complex with zero proof and perhaps no explanation as to why.
Just like wandering stars. Their orbits are as simple as can be from the heliocentric model. In the Flat Earth model, they go forward, stop, and go backwards for a time. And what is the chance that the wandering stars all just happen to be simple orbits around the sun when you project their path in that view. Is that just a massive coincidence? Come on.
The Globe Earth model beautifully explains why southern areas can see the Southern Cross all the time, Hawaii can see it sometimes, and it also explains the orbits of wandering stars. Funny how this model and gravity explains everything beautifully, simply, and elegantly. But them we also have photos, video, and other proofs outside of the imagined model. SO many proofs in fact that you would need a conspiracy of massive proportions always deceiving involving millions of willing subjects. What is easier to believe, a beautiful theory that explains everything we observe, or a theory that doesn’t explain everything at least not in simple terms and is being promoted by a Globe Earth conspiracy involving millions of people.
The atmosphere spins with the earth
The point was how you could have a wind that is going against a 1,000 mph rotation. It would seem that all winds would have to follow or lag behind the spin of the globe.
Earth’s rotation is 24 hours. Try staring at a clock and the little hand to see how slow that is relatively speaking. Then divide that by half. But yes, given the size of the Earth, the surface velocity is quite fast, but that itself will not cause wind as the atmosphere spins with the earth. And space doesn’t resist the atmosphere either from what I just read. And why does the atmosphere and Earth spin together? I just read this:
The friction between the earth’s surface and the atmosphere. The atmosphere rotates along with the Earth due to the friction. Friction makes molecules that are in contact with the ground to move. The friction between the air molecules (air viscosity) causes the upper molecules to move.
A simple beautiful model vs a giant conspiracy
The Globe Earth model beautifully explains why southern areas can see the Southern Cross all the time, Hawaii can see it sometimes, and it also explains the orbits of wandering stars. Funny how this model and gravity explains everything beautifully, simply, and elegantly. But then we also have photos, video, and other proofs outside of the imagined model. So many proofs in fact that you would need a conspiracy of massive proportions always deceiving and involving millions of willing subjects. What is easier to believe, a beautiful theory that explains everything we observe and doesn’t rule out a creator but even gives more reasons for one, or a theory that doesn’t explain everything at least not in simple terms along with belief in a Globe Earth conspiracy of gigantic proportions that has zero proof for the whole time it has existed.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
