Discussion with Hungry Wolf

butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Discussion with Hungry Wolf

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Saying 'things' means you are not going to discuss the answer(s) .. However, you are willing to discuss 'issues' whether or not they are related to the original answers / questions .. Am I right ^_^ ?

Right.

Hungry Wolf wrote:
That is absolutely right ^_^ ( I believe your biological evolution means that human beings were a simple life forms and they evolved, eventually within million of years .. Correct me please if I'm wrong ^_^ )

Essentially, yes. Billions of years.

Okay then, I have a few more easy questions for you.

Are you a heliocentrist or a geocentrist?

Do you believe that the Earth is roughly spherical or that it is a flat disk?

Should homosexuals be allowed to marry?

Should a woman ever be punished for adultery i.e. sex outside of marriage? If so, what might the punishment be?

Continued from here.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote: Are you

butterbattle wrote:
Are you a heliocentrist or a geocentrist?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
None of them ^_^

Heliocentrism is where the Earth orbits around the sun. Geocentrism is where the sun orbits the Earth.

You don't believe either of these? What is your explanation for why the sun rises in the morning and sets at night?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
But I think this question should come before the previous one .. If I believe in flat earth, it means that neither I'm a geocentrist nor I'm a heliocentrist ^_^'

Why? Conceptually, people can believe that the sun orbits a flat Earth. In fact, that is what probably most of the world used to believe.  

Hungry Wolf wrote:
hehehehehehehehe  

Why do you ask about women only ^_^ ? 

A man or a woman, if he/she committed adultery, he/she should be punished ^_^

Thanks for the answer.

Because I'm of the position that Muslims are usually misogynists and women are punished much more often and more easily than men.

Hungry Wolf wrote:
1 - If he / she is married .. He / she should be sentenced to death ..

2 - If he / she is not married .. He / she should be beaten 100 times in front of the public .. 

The beat itself should be in a way that the armpit of the executioner cannot be seen ( So, it's not a harmful beat .. Rather, It is for humiliation ) ..

Okay, so for clarification, if it were up to you, people would be executed if they're caught committing adultery when they're married. Correct?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Naked couples is not adultery .. Couples on top of each other and the special parts are not "connected" is not adultery .. Male's special part touching the female's special part from the outside is not adultery ..

Oh? So it doesn't count as adultery unless the eel swims into the cave? You could have oral sex? 

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Cameras, pictures, videos are not considered as witnesses ^_^

What about forensic DNA analysis? If we find the DNA of the man inside the woman's privates, should that have any weight in court?

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear butterbattle ^_^

Dear butterbattle ^_^ :
 

 

Quote:
Heliocentrism is where the Earth orbits around the sun

Yup ^^ .. I know that ^_^

 

I lived quarter century believing that ^_~

 

 

Quote:
Geocentrism is where the sun orbits the Earth

I know that too ^_^ .. It was a transit stage between the old belief ( scientific model of earth and universe ) and new belief ( flat earth ) ^_^

 

Quote:
You don't believe either of these?

hehehehehehe ^_^

 

Why are you surprised ^_^ ?  What I believe in is the sun ( and the moon of course ) orbiting above the earth .. Not around the earth ^_^

 

Thus, sun doesn't orbit earth .. It move in 'circle' above the earth ^_^

 

 

Quote:
What is your explanation for why the sun rises in the morning and sets at night?

Although I have illustrations and figures to explain the sun rise and the sun set while the sun is above the earth, I will upload them when the right time comes .. 

 

Now, we are in an interview ( or screening ) to know what I believe in and what I don't believe in ^_^ .. I'm answering briefly so we can move afterward in a fruitful discussion / debate ^_^

 

Thus, briefly, it is all about the eye .. You see sun goes up and goes down while it is always up and approaching and leaving you ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Why?

Simply, because in the flat earth model, the earth is the ground and sky is the roof .. All celestial objects / bodies are between the earth and the sky, nothing goes beneath earth nothing goes above the sky ( this is a rough talking ^_^ ) ..

 

 

Quote:
Conceptually, people can believe that the sun orbits a flat Earth

Orbits above a flat earth, not around ^_~

 

 

Quote:
In fact, that is what probably most of the world used to believe. 

Nope ..  The only flat earth model that I can think of is the model where the flat earth is on a turtle, and the sun orbits around the flat earth and the turtle ^_^'

 

( Though it's not my model ^_^ )

 


Quote:
Thanks for the answer

You are very welcome dear  butterbattle ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Because I'm of the position that Muslims are usually misogynists

^_^

 

Although some Muslims are misogynists, Islam ordered all men not to be !

 

It's about the orders / practices of Islam VS behaviors / practices of Muslims .. You have to criticize Islamic orders, not the practice of Muslims ^_~

You may only judge upon prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him, practice because whatever he did is part of Islam rules / policies / treatment etc ^_^

 

Prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him, told all Muslims to do good to women and treat them well ..

 

Using your natural strength against women, who are weaker by nature than men, is kind of injustice .. And Allah warned all people from doing injustice to each other !

 

 

Quote:
and women are punished much more often and more easily than men

^_^

 

I see it the other way around heheheheheh

 

Men commit crimes more than women do ^_^

 

Women are more sinner than men in general ( doing sins does not mean you have to be punished in secular life .. Sins are sins while crimes are sins + crimes ^_^ ) ..

 

In my whole life, although I don't attend executions / punishments, I've seen men been beaten in public ( for drinking alcohol ), but I have never seen a women been beaten for any case !

 

 

Quote:
Okay, so for clarification, if it were up to you, people would be executed if they're caught committing adultery when they're married. Correct?

Even though I didn't fully understand what you meant by ( if it were up to me ), but yes ^_^ .. People would be executed if they're caught committing adultery when they are married ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Oh? So it doesn't count as adultery unless the eel swims into the cave?

hehehehehhehehhehehehehehheheehhehehehehhe

 hehehehhehehehhehehehehhe

 

What a great expression you've came up with ^^

* Thumbs up *

 

What you've said is correct ^_^

 

 

Quote:
You could have oral sex?

"You could have" is a big talk >_<

 

You shouldn't even kiss !

 

But, oral sex ( using mouth ) is not adultery .. Using the chest / breast is not adultery .. Using the hand is not adultery .. Using toys ( even for lesbians ) is not adultery ..

 

Don't get me wrong ^_^' .. All of these might be considered as a crime .. However, they are not adultery, and no one will be executed for that .. In the case of beating, it will not be 100 times, and it might not be in public ^_^

 

There are lot of details with each situation ^_^ .. And what I've said is just to give you an idea about the rules and the penalties in Islam .. Scholars wrote books about adultery, books about its penalties, books about rules of Islam ( in general ), books about penalties ( in general ), books about punishments and how they are classified etc etc ^.^

 


Quote:
What about forensic DNA analysis?

What about it ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
If we find the DNA of the man inside the woman's privates

Nope ^_^

 

Of course, for case of unmarried women only, if she got pregnant it means she committed adultery >_<

 

But neither  the man when he confess nor the women when she confess should tell about his / her partner ( Unless there is an issue about what has happened ) ..

 

So, they should not look to whom the DNA belongs !

Don't investigate !

 

The main principle in Islam for the judge is : You avoid punishment / penalties upon doubting !

 

Islam wants to avoid punishment as much as possible .. Hence, in the era of Omar Ibn Al-khattab ( The second Khalifat ) , Ali Ibn Abi Taleb resigned from his position as a judge claiming that he had encountered only 4 minor cases .. What is the use to be judge !

 

Don't think that people did not commit crimes .. They did, but there were few, and nothing has been caught or reported ( plus several other reasons ) ^_^

 

 

When a companion man committed adultery during prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him, the companion came to the prophet and confessed and asked the prophet to be executed .. Yet, the prophet ignored him in the first time .. The companion came again and confessed, and asked to be executed .. The prophet told him: you might just kissed her ( he tried to find an excuse for him ) .. The companion insist it was an adultery .. The prophet told him: you might was a drunk and you think you did it .. The companion denied that and asked for execution .. The prophet went to the other companions and asked them : Is this man crazy ? They denied that he is crazy .. Then the man was executed !

( Note that the companion said nothing about his female partner, neither the prophet asked about her )

 

 

The companion women came to the prophet afterword, and she was a pregnant, and told him : You might think of ignoring me like you did with the man, I'm the women who he committed adultery with her and I'm pregnant .. He told her: Go and give the birth to your child, and then come to me again ( The prophet thought she might get scared and asked no more for execution ) .. However, she came again and showed the prophet her baby .. He told her: Go and breastfeed him and come to me after your baby can eat bread ( I don't know what you called this stage in English ^_^' ) .. Lastly, she came ( may be after two years ) and showed the prophet that the baby can eat piece of bread .. Then he took the baby, gave him to one of the companions, and ordered for her execution .. Even during the execution there was a dialog between prophet Mohammad, peace be upon him, and one the companions ..

 

Hence, when a man or women commit adultery nowadays and he / she cannot stand the sin ( he / she wants to be purified by the punishment ) .. He / she asks a scholar what to do, scholars answer is always the same: DO NOT confess ! Just repent to Allah and ask for his forgiveness .. DO NOT Confess !

 

Any scholars who asked you to confess means he doesn't fully understand the principle in Islam >_<

 

And that is why Allah made it extremely difficult to catch adultery ^_^

 

 

Quote:
should that have any weight in court?

I believe this is a controversial  issue >_<

 

Although I'm not in position to decide what the court should do, since I'm not a scholar , I'm standing against using DNA ( and science in general ) ..

But I think they will start to use the DNA as a proof for some cases shortly ( I'm talking about Saudi Arabia .. May be other Arabic / Islamic countries have already started to use it ~_~ ) ..

 

 

In these times, people are looking forward to use science in religious cases .. DNA in the court, telescopes to determine whether the crescent is born or not ..

 

Muslims are attracted to science and western civilization .. They want science and inventions to be used in all aspects of life, including religious cases ..

 

We are very very few who believe in flat earth ( < 50 I would say hehehehe ).. The majority of Saudi Arabian scholars are geocentrists while the majority of Islamic world scholars are heliocentrists ..

 

The Qura'an nowadays is being interpreted according to science ( not the other way around >_< ) .. So, if science says this universe exists because of the big bang, some so-called scholar will look for one word in Qura'an, which might be attached with the scientific theory / scientific facts, to claim that Qura'an talked about this theory 1400 years ago and this proves it is the word of Allah >_< 

 

This is ridiculous >_< .. I call who ever do this a 'clown' !

 

Mostly all Muslims ( or at least the majority ) are Creationists .. If they start to use DNA in the court, it means they admit all what science says about DNA ..

If they admit that, they should accept evolution since it is based on the science of the DNA !!

Accepting evolution is a way to be an infidel >_<

 

I doubt that any Muslim who accepts evolution is considered as Muslim >_<

 

 

For me, the enemy of Islam in this era is the modern science .. And it is the God of atheism .. Hence, my effort is to beat the science once and for all ^_______^ 

 

I believe by beating since, if it is possible hehehehehhe, Muslims will return back to be real Muslims and Christians will return back to be real Christians .. No more Christians who believe in God and evolution and / or round earth, and no Muslims who believe in Allah and round earth !

 

 

( I've talked to much hehehehehhehehehe )

 

 

In short, if science is beaten, the world will return back to its old habit and only religions will remain and keep fighting with each other hehehehehheeh

 

No more atheists if the science is beaten ^_^

 

 

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

Ja ne ~

 

 


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1830
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
 The only thing I can say

 The only thing I can say is wow... flat earth.... how do you refute that.... I mean, really how can you even begin to refute someone that believes that the earth is flat.  You could put him on a plane and fly him around the earth.... you could put him on a spaceship and show him the earth... or you could give him his medication, tighten his helmet and send him to the kiddy pool.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Hungry Wolf wrote: Although

Hungry Wolf wrote:

 

Although I'm not in position to decide what the court should do, since I'm not a scholar , I'm standing against using DNA ( and science in general ) ..

 

In these times, people are looking forward to use science in religious cases .. DNA in the court, telescopes to determine whether the crescent is born or not ..

 

Muslims are attracted to science and western civilization .. They want science and inventions to be used in all aspects of life, including religious cases ..

 

The Qura'an nowadays is being interpreted according to science ( not the other way around >_< ) .. So, if science says this universe exists because of the big bang, some so-called scholar will look for one word in Qura'an, which might be attached with the scientific theory / scientific facts, to claim that Qura'an talked about this theory 1400 years ago and this proves it is the word of Allah >_< 

 

This is ridiculous >_< .. I call who ever do this a 'clown' !

 

Mostly all Muslims ( or at least the majority ) are Creationists .. If they start to use DNA in the court, it means they admit all what science says about DNA ..

If they admit that, they should accept evolution since it is based on the science of the DNA !!

Accepting evolution is a way to be an infidel >_<

 

I doubt that any Muslim who accepts evolution is considered as Muslim >_<

 

For me, the enemy of Islam in this era is the modern science .. And it is the God of atheism .. Hence, my effort is to beat the science once and for all ^_______^ 

 

I believe by beating since, if it is possible hehehehehhe, Muslims will return back to be real Muslims and Christians will return back to be real Christians .. No more Christians who believe in God and evolution and / or round earth, and no Muslims who believe in Allah and round earth !

 

In short, if science is beaten, the world will return back to its old habit and only religions will remain and keep fighting with each other hehehehehheeh

 

No more atheists if the science is beaten ^_^

 

Scary part about all of this is that you are probably serious.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Hungry Wolf wrote:Why are

Hungry Wolf wrote:


Why are you surprised ^_^ ?  What I believe in is the sun ( and the moon of course ) orbiting above the earth .. Not around the earth ^_^

Eh, because I've never met anyone that doesn't believe in geocentrism or heliocentrism.

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Thus, sun doesn't orbit earth .. It move in 'circle' above the earth ^_^

Although I have illustrations and figures to explain the sun rise and the sun set while the sun is above the earth, I will upload them when the right time comes .. 

Okay.

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Simply, because in the flat earth model, the earth is the ground and sky is the roof .. All celestial objects / bodies are between the earth and the sky, nothing goes beneath earth nothing goes above the sky ( this is a rough talking ^_^ ) ..

So, the sky is an actual physical ceiling? 

What's at the edge of the Earth? Where are the edges?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Quote:
Conceptually, people can believe that the sun orbits a flat Earth

Orbits above a flat earth, not around ^_~

Sure they can. It wouldn't be the same model as yours, but it would still be a flat Earth.

Imagine the Earth as a sheet of paper and arbitrarily pick one side of that paper as the top. Now take another spherical object and hold it next to the paper. If the "top" side of the paper faces the sphere, it would be daytime. If the other side of the paper faces the sphere, it's nighttime.

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Don't get me wrong ^_^' .. All of these might be considered as a crime .. However, they are not adultery, and no one will be executed for that .. In the case of beating, it will not be 100 times, and it might not be in public ^_^

Ah, I see.

They are not considered adultery, but they can still be sins and crimes. Adultery is simply a more severe crime.

So, what can you do outside of marriage that you would not be punished for? Can you look at someone lustfully? Can you touch their hand?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
The main principle in Islam for the judge is : You avoid punishment / penalties upon doubting !

Do you think DNA evidence is more reliable than a supposed eyewitness or do you simply reject the science, i.e. you do not think science accurately determines whether or not the woman and man committed adultery?

Wouldn't a person be wrongly convicted if enough people simply lied about what they saw?  

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Ghost (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Should

butterbattle wrote:

Should homosexuals be allowed to marry?

No.  We should not redefine "marriage" simply to appease a few people under the banner of political correctness.  Call it whatever you want, except for "marriage".  It is not marriage.  Marriage is only between a man and a woman.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Ghost wrote:No.  We should

Ghost wrote:
No.  We should not redefine "marriage" simply to appease a few people under the banner of political correctness.  Call it whatever you want, except for "marriage".  It is not marriage.  Marriage is only between a man and a woman.

The main point is that a man and woman can decide to join together and receive special legal rights and status while two people of the same gender cannot. We don't have to call it marriage if you want. That doesn't matter to me.  

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Groan

 

Ghost wrote:

butterbattle wrote:

Should homosexuals be allowed to marry?

No.  We should not redefine "marriage" simply to appease a few people under the banner of political correctness.  Call it whatever you want, except for "marriage".  It is not marriage.  Marriage is only between a man and a woman.

 

It's not the banner of political correctness, Ghost, it's called equal rights for all citizens. Anyone who can put up with another human being sharing a bed with them is married in my book. Marriage is a public commitment between 2 people who love each other. It's nothing else. It can't be about kids because plenty of couples can't or don't have them yet childless hetero couples are not social pariahs. Why the world's 10 per cent gay population should be excluded from an institution like marriage escapes me. Maybe gay people should not pay as much tax given they have to subsidise handouts to the legally wedded that are not afforded to them? How about that?

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear Ktulu ^_^ :  Quote: 

Dear Ktulu ^_^ :
 

 

Quote:
  The only thing I can say is wow

hehehehehehehehhe ^^

 

 

Quote:
flat earth

Yup hehehheheheheh

 

 

Quote:
how do you refute that

Easily ^_^

 

 

Quote:
I mean, really how can you even begin to refute someone that believes that the earth is flat

Just find something in common between you and him .. And try to attack him from there ^_~

 

 

Quote:
You could put him on a plane and fly him around the earth

Nope .. Doesn't work ^_^

 

 

Quote:
you could put him on a spaceship and show him the earth

Nope .. Doesn't work either ^_^

 

 

Quote:
or you could give him his medication, tighten his helmet and send him to the kiddy pool

Now this might work hehehehehehehhe

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

=============================

 

 

Dear harleysportster ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
Scary part about all of this is that you are probably serious

hehehehehehhehehehhehehehehehhehe

 

You absolutely have no idea ^.^

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

======================

   

   Dear butterbattle ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
So, the sky is an actual physical ceiling?

Ceiling, Yes ^_^

 

Physical Ceiling, I have no idea .. It's beyond my knowledge ^_^

 

 

Quote:
What's at the edge of the Earth?

Again, beyond my knowledge ^_^

 

But I will not be surprised if the edge of the earth is the same as the edge of the sky ( or the universe you know ) ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Where are the edges?

Once again, beyond my knowledge ^_^

 

But I'm pretty sure they are at the end of the earth ^_^

 

Where is the end of the earth ? No clue .. Sorry ^_^'

 


Quote:
Sure they can. It wouldn't be the same model as yours, but it would still be a flat Earth

Absolutely ^_^

 

It was my mistake in reading your question >_<

 

You are right .. And they can of course ^_^

 

Quote:
Imagine the Earth as a sheet of paper and arbitrarily pick one side of that paper as the top. Now take another spherical object and hold it next to the paper. If the "top" side of the paper faces the sphere, it would be daytime. If the other side of the paper faces the sphere, it's nighttime.

That is right ^_^

 

People 'can' put any model they want ^_^

 

 

But I thought you were talking about if the model you described above exists .. Not in my knowledge ^_^'

 

However, it is possible conceptually ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Ah, I see.

They are not considered adultery, but they can still be sins and crimes. Adultery is simply a more severe crime.

Precisely ^_^

 

They are definitely sins .. But crime, it depends on the judge or the Muslim rulers ^_^

 

 

Quote:
So, what can you do outside of marriage that you would not be punished for?

I doubt you will be punished for a kiss or touch ^_^

 

Both are sins .. But minor sins that can be erased by doing good deed ^_^

 

The problem is, these things may lead you, eventually, to commit adultery >_<

 

And there is story about one of the sons of Israel .. He was a monk who doesn't do anything but worshiping Allah .. Satan wanted to drive him away from the right path .. He, therefore, assigned one of his soldiers to take care of that monk ..

It was a time of war and three men wanted to go, but they were afraid about their sister .. That demon came and whispered to them to leave her to the our monk since he is a good fellow and will not harm her in any way ..

They went to the monk and told him to take care of their sister .. After lot of begging he agreed ..

They went to war, and the monk assigned an hour each day to make the food and bring it to the sister .. He was always putting the food in front of the door, knocking the door and leaving immediately ..

After a while, the demon whispered to him: why don't you wait just a little bit to make sure the poor sister get the food and nobody else is talking the food !

The monk decided to check before he leaves, and so he did .. He waits until her hand comes out from the door ( she slightly opens the door ) and takes the food, then he leaves back ..

After a while, the demon whispered to him: The girl must be bored to hell ! She has nobody to talk too, why don't you talk to her from outside the door ..

 

And the demon kept taking the monk step by step till the monk slept with her, she got pregnant, the monk killed her, the demon (by his ways) told about the monk, the monk asked the help from the demon ( he became infidel ), and at the end he got executed ..

 

Hence, we summarize it as fellow : A look, then a smile, then a date, then a meet, and then adultery .. Those are the steps of the devil >_<

 

Islam principle is to keep the lust down .. Don't look to a female, don't talk unless it's necessary, don't touch, keep yourself busy, female should ware something to cover their beauty and attractive parts .. No porn, no dance etc

 

If your eye by mistake looked to a female, move your eyes away and don't look back again to her ( the first look is not a sin ).. Women should do the same ..

 

All the steps before the crime itself ( adultery ) are minor sins which can be removed easily .. The problem is the mark that they leave behind .. The heart cannot stay still and the lust will rage, and then you will ejaculate or commit adultery >_<

 

 

Quote:
Can you look at someone lustfully?

It is a sin .. Not a crime ^_^

 

You can ejaculate .. However, it is sin too ( but not a crime ) ..

 

 

Quote:
Can you touch their hand?

Sin .. Not a crime ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Do you think DNA evidence is more reliable than a supposed eyewitness or do you simply reject the science

Frankly speaking, my knowledge is not that deep about DNA .. I'm not concerned about it .. If the since of DNA says we evolved, then either I reject the whole science or only the parts which lead to this result ( it depends if they can be split or not ) ..

 

As for me, I think eyewitness is more reliable ^_^

 

 

Quote:
i.e. you do not think science accurately determines whether or not the woman and man committed adultery?

I don't know ^_^

 

It doesn't necessary a rejection for the DNA, it is just a rejection for changing ( you may call is conservative point of view ) ..

 

If the system was working fine without the DNA test, why do we need to include it ?

 

For my point of view, I have to make my analysis first ^_^

 

It's just like the way to determine the age of a stone .. Talking about several hundred thousands of years is questionable to me .. The scientific way to determine the age must be examined ( although Muslims accept it blindly >_< ) ..

 

I support a moderate position toward science .. Don't reject it all, but don't accept it all .. If a science leads to something contradicts with our belief, try to find the mistake which has been done ..

If it is not touching the religion in any way, take it as it is ^_^

 

Rejected science ( at least for me ) : Astronomy ( almost the whole science ) ..

Geology ( more than half of it ) ..

Physics ( small portion .. something related to the vision and the relativity theory ) ..

psychology ( large portion ! ) ..

Biology ( what is related to evolution ) ..

 

 

But this only true for my special case .. As for other Muslims, they accept science as it is ( they reject only the evolution ) ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Wouldn't a person be wrongly convicted if enough people simply lied about what they saw? 

^_^

 

 

The scholars had mentioned lot of details and lot of situations and conditions to accept the claim .. They have even stated what should happen even if someone is wrongly convicted ^_^

 

To tell that someone committed adultery is called 'Qathf' .. The meaning is more like 'Defaming' ..  It has its own rules, conditions, policies, and penalties ^_^

 

I can't list them here ^_^'

 

 

 

 


^_^
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ja ne ~
 


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
So from what I can deduct

So from what I can deduct from your post regarding science there Hungry Wolf, if the evidence is contrary to your religious beliefs, then the evidence is wrong? Since there is and extremely huge amount of evidence for evolution, DNA, the earth, heliocentric system, and none for your god or religious beliefs beyond personal inclination or teachings........umm reality is wrong and your religion is right? That's pretty much what your stating right?

 


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
I just saw this thread. Flat

I just saw this thread. Flat earther... wow. Not even the most deluded of christian creationists will go there.


AtheistSam
atheist
AtheistSam's picture
Posts: 38
Joined: 2011-01-06
User is offlineOffline
mobile phone

  - do you have one Hungry Wolf? And how do you explain how it works? Far as I know the signals depend on all sorts of scientific technology and your world view only supports hehehe (whatever that means)? For you to call someone or send them a text, or receive same, I imagine this interferes with your beliefs and evidence ... is there any reality or rationality to your lengthy posts?

Also, do you believe that 72 virgins are waiting for you in the afterlife?

From the content of your posts I detect that you have rather an immature concept of sexuality - all the clauses, sub clauses and restrictions (unless it is in the man's favor of course).

If you are following all these rules it then makes sense that you have enough time on your hands to totally ignore most science and postulate such incredible things, seen from your non-viewpoint of technology of course ---  because recently we have used stuff like huge space lenses, amazing telescopes, photography and peer reviewed papers to come to some irrefutable conclusions.

There is a post in this forum about a woman who will be severely lashed, after she gives birth of course, because 4 or more men raped her. From what I understand of Quaranic law only 4 witnesses are needed for a conviction of adultery which is why her case is not the first, nor, I fear, the last. It would be interesting to see your humane insights on this topic.

Also, men and women being so equal and respectful of each other in the Islam tradition, why is it that men are buried up to the neck before being stoned, but the law is that women are buried from the waist up? I don't get it. But maybe I don't have to "get it" when empty swimming pools are used to murder innocent young women who have the misfortune to think they are safe in their own homes, with their own families --- only to have their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, brothers and so on use them nefariously and then cover up their own wrong doing by "saving the family honor" and having a stoning?

How does that work in real life anyway --- "hey Mohmud, Isaac, Yazeem - get the girls to bring deep pie dishes: we're having a stoning and a party after? No alcohol, but hey, we produce the heroin, export it and profit from it --- bring some pipes so we can enjoy looking virtuous?"

What Would Jesus Drive? Well, God preferred an old Plymouth, "God drove Adam and Eve out of the garden of Eden in a Fury"; Moses was said to ride a motor bike, "the roar of Moses’ Triumph is heard in the hills", while the apostles would carpool in a Honda, "the apostles were in one Accord".


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Alright, Hungry Wolf. I

Hungry Wolf wrote:
As for me, I think eyewitness is more reliable ^_^

You said, though, that you didn't know much about DNA. In what way are eyewitnesses more reliable than DNA?

What about fingerprints? Should fingerprints ever hold any weight in a courtroom? 

---

Alright, Hungry Wolf. I would like to concentrate on discussing the shape of the Earth now.

What are your reasons for believing that the Earth is flat, other than the Quran, if any?

Do you think this is an essentially accurate map of the Earth?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
But I'm pretty sure they are at the end of the earth ^_^  

Where is the end of the earth ? No clue .. Sorry ^_^'

 

Well, surely, you must have some general idea. It is not where you live, and it is not where I live. Perhaps, the sides are in the middle of the Pacific and the top and bottom are at the top and bottom of the map?

Do you think the Earth is like a circle or a rectangle?

There are pictures of the Earth from outer space. Do you think all of those pictures are fake?

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 It's hard not to sound

 It's hard not to sound condescending when you're telling someone that the earth is round. Good job Butters!

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear latincanuck ^_^

Dear latincanuck ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
So from what I can deduct from your post regarding science there Hungry Wolf, if the evidence is contrary to your religious beliefs, then the evidence is wrong?

^_^

 

Your deduction is wrong ^_^

 

If the statement / the scientific fact ( not the evidence ^_^' )  is contrary to MY religious beliefs, then ( I ) reject the scientific fact / statement since ( I am ) 100% sure there was a mistake which lead to this result  !

 

I've clearly said :

* But this is only true for my special case *

 

* I support ....... *

 

Ne ^_~

 

 

As for you atheists, you don't have to worry about that .. You have to worry only when I prove, scientifically,  to you that the scientific fact / statement is wrong to begin with, despite all evidences science has provided ..

 

It is simple .. You need many evidences to prove your self right .. However, you need only one 'valid' phenomenon ( daily phenomenon for example ) to destroy the whole issue ^_^

 

The same principle in crime cases, you need only one valid evidence to catch the suspected person .. However, the suspected person needs all evidences to be in his side to clear himself ^_^

 

 

If the scientific statement / model  fails to explain a phenomenon, there would be two possibilities : 

1 - The model is not complete yet, and it will be completed in the future ( No one would argue about this ) ..

2 - The model is wrong from the beginning ( although it manage to explain many phenomenon ) ..

 

However, if the scientific statement / model implies that something must happen which contradicts with reality, Then there is only one choice : The model is wrong ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Since there is and extremely huge amount of evidence for evolution, DNA, the earth, heliocentric system

You are right ^_^ .. And that is why I need only one conflict between the model and the reality to destroy the whole model ^_~

 

 

Quote:
and none for your god or religious beliefs beyond personal inclination or teachings

^_^

 

So, my God said something and the scientific facts came to contradict what my God said ^_^

 

If so, there will be two obvious possibilities :

1 - The scientific facts are wrong whereas what my God said is true ==> Slap to the science ^______^

 

2 - What my God said is wrong, and the scientific facts are true ==>

A ) My God is nothing but a  'clown'   >_<

B ) There is no God to begin with !

 

Of course there is another possibility which all religious people follow: Let what God said doesn't contradict with what science found to clear the contradiction ^_^ .. Like they did with the earth (( flat VS sphere )), the universe (( 13 billion years VS 6 days )), etc ..

 

For me, again, the last possibility is lame ! It will lead you to nothing .. You cannot determine by this action whi right and who is wrong >_<

 

I may end up reinterpreting the whole bible, or the whole Qura'an in my case ~_~

 

 

Quote:
umm reality is wrong and your religion is right?

Wrong ^_^

 

Science is not the reality !

 

Science tries to explain the reality ^_~

 

And that is why science is changeable according to the new discoveries and information .. Whereas reality doesn't change, there is only one reality ^_^

 

Quote:
That's pretty much what your stating right?

Nope  ^_^

 

 

That is pretty much what you've understood from my reply, not what I've said ^_~

 

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

================================

 

 

Dear KSMB ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
I just saw this thread

^_^

 

 

Quote:
Flat earther

^_^

 

 

Quote:
wow
 

^_^

 

Quote:
Not even the most deluded of christian creationists will go there

You are wrong ^_^

 

Check the Flat Earth Society ^_^

 

5000 Christians who believe in Flat Earth ^_~

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

============================

 

 

Dear AtheistSam ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
mobile phone - do you have one Hungry Wolf?

Yes I do ^_^

 

 

Quote:
And how do you explain how it works?

Using electromagnetic waves, it transfers the signals ( the call or the message ) using a carrier ( we call it modulation ) through a channel ( the media .. In our case the air ) to the antenna ( receiver ) .. This process happen using cellular networks ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Far as I know the signals depend on all sorts of scientific technology

So ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
and your world view only supports hehehe (whatever that means)?

hehehehehehhehehe

 

It means I'm laughing hehehehehhe ^.^

 

 

Quote:
For you to call someone or send them a text, or receive same, I imagine this interferes with your beliefs and evidence

Nope .. It doesn't ^_^

 

And, hence, your assumption is wrong ^_^

 

 

Quote:
is there any reality or rationality to your lengthy posts?

Yup .. There is ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Also, do you believe that 72 virgins are waiting for you in the afterlife?

Nope ^_^

 

72 virgins is a reward for martyrs ^_^

 

So, I can't tell if there are 72 virgins are waiting for me ^_~

 

 

Quote:
From the content of your posts I detect that you have rather an immature concept of sexuality

^_^

 

May be ^_^

 

May be not ^_~

 

 

Quote:
all the clauses, sub clauses and restrictions (unless it is in the man's favor of course)

..................................

 

 

Quote:
If you are following all these rules it then makes sense that you have enough time on your hands to totally ignore most science and postulate such incredible things

^_^

 

 

Quote:
seen from your non-viewpoint of technology of course

^_^

 

Regarding the technology, I said it in the other thread since I'm very experienced and I know that someone will come and talk about technology ^_^ :

 

* .........  I'm listing and talking about these things because I DON'T WANT stupid or low-class question about why do I use computers or internet or drive cars or travel by planes etc .. I know some people like to ask these questions from both sides ( theists and atheists ) ~_~ *

 

I believe I deserve credits for this ^_~

 

 

hehehehhehehehehehe

 

 

Quote:
because recently we have used stuff like huge space lenses, amazing telescopes, photography and peer reviewed papers to come to some irrefutable conclusions

^_^

 

Fortunately, I'm the one who is handling / who will handle the refute, not you ^_~ 

 

 

Quote:
There is a post in this forum about a woman who will be severely lashed, after she gives birth of course, because 4 or more men raped her

Ok ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
From what I understand of Quaranic law only 4 witnesses are needed for a conviction of adultery

hehehhehehheheheehehhe

 

You can't even distinguish between adultery and rape hehehhehehehe

 

I believe the Islamic penalty of rape is execution ( death ) ^_^

 

 

Quote:
which is why her case is not the first, nor, I fear, the last

But the rate of raping in western society is far above the raping rate in Islamic countries ^_^

 

However, the comparison is not what I'm looking for ^_^

 

 

Quote:
It would be interesting to see your humane insights on this topic

It would be more interesting to see you developing your skills in reading ^_~

 

 

Quote:
Also, men and women being so equal and respectful of each other in the Islam tradition

Equal ^_^ ?

 

Islam doesn't look for equality .. Equality is injustice >_<

 

Rather, Islam looks for fairness ^.^

 

 

Quote:
why is it that men are buried up to the neck before being stoned, but the law is that women are buried from the waist up?

I didn't get ^_^'

 

Would you explain more please ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
I don't get it

I'm not sure about what you have mentioned .. However, as I said, Islam counts what is good for each gender, despite the equality ..

 

Men and women are equals in some issue, and are different in the others ..

 

What is the problem ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
  But maybe I don't have to "get it" when empty swimming pools are used to murder innocent young women who have the misfortune to think they are safe in their own homes, with their own families --- only to have their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, brothers and so on use them nefariously and then cover up their own wrong doing by "saving the family honor" and having a stoning?

^_^

 

Really low class way of thinking ^_^

 

And, again, I said before :

* Second : Allow me to tell you this dear atheists (I believe you should know that already !), when you want to attack a religion, you have to attack the belief not the practice ^_^ *

 

 

And even when you want to attack the practice, you have to attack what Islam says, not what people wrongly do ^_^

 

 

If you didn't recognize this before this post, you really, really, have to work on yourself and your skills ^_^'

 

 

Quote:
How does that work in real life anyway --- "hey Mohmud, Isaac, Yazeem - get the girls to bring deep pie dishes: we're having a stoning and a party after? No alcohol, but hey, we produce the heroin, export it and profit from it --- bring some pipes so we can enjoy looking virtuous?"

^_^

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

Ja ne ~

 

 


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
I'm up for this challenge

 

Hungry Wolf wrote:

Second : Allow me to tell you this dear atheists (I believe you should know that already !), when you want to attack a religion, you have to attack the belief not the practice.

 

 

Before I start, just confirm for me you believe the Koran is the word of god spoken through muhommad, pure and inviolate.

And just a simple yes or no is more than enough at this point.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Just wondering if Hungry

Just wondering if Hungry Wolf could explain why we see the Sun going out of sight every evening down below the 'level' of our Earth, then coming up on the other side, if it is supposed to be moving in a circle above it???

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


AtheistSam
atheist
AtheistSam's picture
Posts: 38
Joined: 2011-01-06
User is offlineOffline
actually the sun sets in a muddy spring ...

BobSpence1 wrote:

Just wondering if Hungry Wolf could explain why we see the Sun going out of sight every evening down below the 'level' of our Earth, then coming up on the other side, if it is supposed to be moving in a circle above it???

Dinkum! Quran 18:86 says "Till, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring ... "

I didn't get the floating sun thing until I googled it: this is priceless!

Quran 21:33 "it is He who created the Night and Day, and the Sun and Moon; each of them swim along its own course"


 


What Would Jesus Drive? Well, God preferred an old Plymouth, "God drove Adam and Eve out of the garden of Eden in a Fury"; Moses was said to ride a motor bike, "the roar of Moses’ Triumph is heard in the hills", while the apostles would carpool in a Honda, "the apostles were in one Accord".


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
 So basically I am correct,

 So basically I am correct, If reality contradicts your religious views then reality is wrong. Which basically shows your brainwashed or your just poe. Evidence vs god evidence always wins. reality over rules your god in every way, except in your case you close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and go lalalalalala god is real and nothing can change that lalaalala. Got it. 

The facts are the fact and scientific facts are usually very hard to argue against since there is far more evidence to prove them, unlike your god, which you have ZERO evidence for, just a book, which in reality is no more for evidence than harry potter is evidence for actual witches and sorcerers existing because they are written in a book. But of course lets all just ignore reality and live in a fantasy land.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
What. The. Fuck. 

What. The. Fuck.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I looked at the flat earth

 I looked at the flat earth society forum. It's pretty obvious that if someone says the earth is flat they are likely far more concerned with being argumentative than they are concerned with the shape of the earth.

Evidence of the earth's spheroidicity (it's a word) is clear, convincing, and available to everyone. Of course one may be enthralled with fantasy to the point of psychosis but I think that's rarely the explanation.  

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: I looked at

Gauche wrote:

 I looked at the flat earth society forum. It's pretty obvious that if someone says the earth is flat they are likely far more concerned with being argumentative than they are concerned with the shape of the earth.

Evidence of the earth's spheroidicity (it's a word) is clear, convincing, and available to everyone. Of course one may be enthralled with fantasy to the point of psychosis but I think that's rarely the explanation.  

 

So you think they're just screwing with people?

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
mellestad wrote:So you think

mellestad wrote:

So you think they're just screwing with people?

I don't doubt some people believe it, lots of people are delusional or ignorant. What I'm saying is that if their primary concern were the earth's shape that wouldn't be consistent with the wild conjecture and the debating so a debate is probably pointless. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear butterbattle ^_^

Dear butterbattle ^_^ :
 

 

Quote:
You said, though, that you didn't know much about DNA

That is right .. I said That  ^_^

 

 

Quote:
In what way are eyewitnesses more reliable than DNA?

In my opinion only, which has zero value without a proof ^_^

 

It is just a hunch ^_^

 

That is why I said : I think .. I didn't say : I believe .. Nor I said: Eyewitness is more reliable ( sounds like a fact ) ..

 

I have no valid argument about the issue .. You hold the upper hand in this issue for the time being ^_^

 

 

Quote:
What about fingerprints?

Fingerprints are usually used in crime cases .. Crime cases needs investigations ( unlike adultery ) ..

 

Moses, peace be upon him, used a cow to revive someone of sons of Israel to tell who killed him ( This is the ultimate case ! ) .. The story is mentioned better in Qura'an .. I would say this is the ultimate way, and it was used to determine the killer .. Any thing less would be acceptable  ^_^

 

 

 

Quote:
Should fingerprints ever hold any weight in a courtroom?

It is already holding the weight in the courtroom ^_^

 

And I don't know anyone who oppose it .. Technology is fine in investigations ^_~

 

As I said, Moses used a miracle to investigate about the murder ^_^

 

Hence, any legal and valid method is fine ^_^

 

 

Quote:
  Alright, Hungry Wolf. I would like to concentrate on discussing the shape of the Earth now

Same as you ^_^

 

 

Quote:
What are your reasons for believing that the Earth is flat, other than the Quran, if any?

The failure of the spherical ( round ) model ^_^

 

When I started to connect the pieces of science together .. I've found out they are contradicting with each other !

 

In addition, the round earth model ( as I will show you step by step ) implies that the sun must be seen during the nighttime !

 

Of course this is against the reality we now >_<

 

 

Hence, whether there is flaw in my steps ( and you have to point this flow out, if there is any ) .. Or the model really fail when you connect the facts with each other ..

 

We will see ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Do you think this is an essentially accurate map of the Earth?

 

Of course not ^_^

 

This map is not even valid for round earth model ^_^

 

This map shows you that the length of the Equator is the same as the length the Tropic of Capricorn, which is not the round earth model ..

 

 

The accurate map of the earth is the one shown in United Nations logo ( I've seen the whole map while I was in St. Jhon's, Newfoundland in Canada ..

 

This is the accurate map ( at least for the Northern Hemisphere ) :

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Well, surely, you must have some general idea

The only idea I have is the earth is very big .. That we are just moving in small portion of it .. The earth is bigger than what any map shows ..

 

 

Quote:
It is not where you live, and it is not where I live

That is for sure ^_^

 

 

Quote:
  Perhaps, the sides are in the middle of the Pacific and the top and bottom are at the top and bottom of the map?

Check this out ^_^ :

 

 

 

Just to give the credit, the one who suggested this map is the Flat Earth Society, and I loved it and adapt it ^_^'

 

The only differences between us is the white circumstance at the edges .. I think there is more ocean beyond that ( and may be some undiscovered land too ) ..

 

 

 

Now, imagine your anywhere in the map .. Let the campus always points toward the north-pole, which is in the center in our case .. You are traveling from east to west .. By using this campus, which always points toward the North, you will end up moving in circular motion above the flat earth .. It's just the contients that are arranged in circular formation ( despite the edges ) ..

 

This is also true when you use the sun .. Imagine the sun above the earth and it moves in circular path as well .. The east and the west will vary according to your position ..

 

This model doesn't prove anything .. Rather, it shows that people can return to the same point if they travel ( around ) the globe .. Hence, the model is valid, at least for travels routs ..

 

 

Now, If you want to see the edge, you have to travel / move in straight line without using any method to know the direction .. Simply, you end up being lost ^_^'

 

And that is why no body has tried it before !

 

And, FYI, there is no rout for any plane across Antarctica ! Neither I've seen a plane pass above the north-pole although the rout is waaaaaay shorter ( because I used to travel from Saudi Arabia to Vancouver in Canada, but the plane flies over Atlantic ocean in it doesn't fly in straight line ! ) .. Again, this information not to prove anything, it's just to tell that nobody went there ^_^

 

 

Therefore, I have no idea about the edges ^_^'

 

 

Quote:
Do you think the Earth is like a circle or a rectangle?

I'm really not concerned about the edges ( which determine the shape of the earth ) ..

 

As long as it is flat, I don't care if it is a circle, rectangle, triangle, or whatever ^_^

 

 

Quote:
There are pictures of the Earth from outer space

Yes of course ^_^

 

 

Quote:
  Do you think all of those pictures are fake?

Nope .. They are not fake ( at least the real pictures, not the one made with computers, i.e. CGs ~_~ ) ..

 

I have two 'hypothesis ' to explain the spherical shape of the earth in those pictures :

 

1 - It's due to the lens .. Convex-concave lenses used in telescopes / cameras that has the distortion which turns flat surfaces to spherical one ( although I'm aware that they add components to correct this distortion, the thing that it might behave differently in the outer space ) ..

 

2 - The limitation of the lenses / eyes may produce such images or photos .. 

 

Lately, I'm working on the second hypothesis / possibility to figure out the exact reason ..

 

 

 

However, put in mind that photos are not scientific evidences by themselves .. They said earth was round / sphere long before they went to space and even invented cameras ^_~

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

Ja ne ~

 


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Can we call Poe

 

on this one?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Anonymouse
atheist
Posts: 1687
Joined: 2008-05-04
User is offlineOffline
WTF is this ? Discworld

WTF is this ?

Discworld fanfiction ?


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Hungry Wolf wrote:When I

Hungry Wolf wrote:

When I started to connect the pieces of science together .. I've found out they are contradicting with each other !

How?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
In addition, the round earth model ( as I will show you step by step ) implies that the sun must be seen during the nighttime !                

Of course this is against the reality we now >_<

If the Earth were round, then nighttime would be when the side of the Earth that I am standing on is opposite the sun. So, the Earth would be between me and the sun. Why would I be able to see the sun?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Of course not ^_^

This map is not even valid for round earth model ^_^  

This map shows you that the length of the Equator is the same as the length the Tropic of Capricorn, which is not the round earth model ..

It is an equirectangular projection.

The people who make these kinds of maps know that it is not accurate. Though it distorts areas and angles, it is popular between because it is convenient and the x and y-axis of the map correspond to latitude and longitude.

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Check this out ^_^ :

Just to give the credit, the one who suggested this map is the Flat Earth Society, and I loved it and adapt it ^_^'  

The only differences between us is the white circumstance at the edges .. I think there is more ocean beyond that ( and may be some undiscovered land too ) ..

So, Antarctica is a really big ring?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Now, imagine your anywhere in the map .. Let the campus always points toward the north-pole, which is in the center in our case .. You are traveling from east to west .. By using this campus, which always points toward the North, you will end up moving in circular motion above the flat earth .. It's just the contients that are arranged in circular formation ( despite the edges ) ..

So, when I flew in a plane from the U.S. to China while staying above ocean the whole time, it was actually because we made a big u-turn? Why don't we realize that we're turning slightly as we fly?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
This is also true when you use the sun .. Imagine the sun above the earth and it moves in circular path as well .. The east and the west will vary according to your position ..

This model doesn't prove anything .. Rather, it shows that people can return to the same point if they travel ( around ) the globe .. Hence, the model is valid, at least for travels routs ..

What about people that have claimed to get the South Pole and come up the other side of the Earth? Are they lying? Is the information about these expeditions false?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
Now, If you want to see the edge, you have to travel / move in straight line without using any method to know the direction .. Simply, you end up being lost ^_^'

And that is why no body has tried it before !

But, people have claimed to travel around the world in a straight line. With the technology we have today, you can fly all the way around without stopping. Do you not agree?

Hungry Wolf wrote:
And, FYI, there is no rout for any plane across Antarctica ! Neither I've seen a plane pass above the north-pole although the rout is waaaaaay shorter ( because I used to travel from Saudi Arabia to Vancouver in Canada, but the plane flies over Atlantic ocean in it doesn't fly in straight line ! ) .. Again, this information not to prove anything, it's just to tell that nobody went there ^_^

Shouldn't planes just fly over the North Pole then? Wouldn't that be much faster? 

Hungry Wolf wrote:
I have two 'hypothesis ' to explain the spherical shape of the earth in those pictures :

1 - It's due to the lens .. Convex-concave lenses used in telescopes / cameras that has the distortion which turns flat surfaces to spherical one ( although I'm aware that they add components to correct this distortion, the thing that it might behave differently in the outer space ) ..

2 - The limitation of the lenses / eyes may produce such images or photos .. 

Lately, I'm working on the second hypothesis / possibility to figure out the exact reason ..

All of them?

Then, why do pictures seem to show different sides of the Earth? Wouldn't we always see the same picture of the Earth, but round?

Why does it always look the same? Can't someone design a camera that at least distorted the shape of the Earth in a different way? Does this mean that the moon and all other planets and celestial bodies are flat as well? After all, when we take pictures of them, they also look round in the same way.

How can the sun be coming up from the horizon? 

Why do pictures and videos in low orbits always show the Earth as curved?  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwwioJhQzeg

What about time elapsed pictures showing the Earth rotating; it looks like a sphere rotating? How is this possible? Does the Earth move?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vmmv0gOfWw

If it was a optical illusion, then why would it only apply to the Earth? Why do we see the astronauts and satellites exactly as they are?

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear Atheistextremist ^_^

Dear Atheistextremist ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
I'm up for this challenge
Ok ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Before I start

Yes ?

 

 

Quote:
just confirm for me you believe the Koran is the word of god spoken through muhommad, pure and inviolate

Yes, I confirm I believe that ^_^

 

( May I ask what does this have to do with the discussion / challenge ^_^' ? )

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

===========================

 

 

Dear BobSpence1 ^_^ :

 

 

 

Quote:
Just wondering if Hungry Wolf could explain why we see the Sun going out of sight every evening down below the 'level' of our Earth, then coming up on the other side, if it is supposed to be moving in a circle above it???

Yes I can ^_^

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

=====================

 

 

Dear latincanuck ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
So basically I am correct

No ^_^

 

Your are wrong ^_^

 

 

Quote:
If reality contradicts your religious views then reality is wrong

I'm not sure if you understood what I said ~_~

 

First, you said before : If the evidence  ....

Now you are saying : If the reality .....

 

And I'm saying : Neither the evidence nor the reality are the correct terms !

 

It seems, for you, evidence = reality = scientific statement / scientific fact !

 

Whereas the right thing is : Reality = Phenomena ( I'll stick with natural phenomenons ) = What is happening and everyone can observe it ( sun rises and sun sets ) ..

Scientific fact = The (( right )) explanation of the reality / phenomenons ( Earth rotates about its axis / Earth rotates around the sun ) .. Normally, no one on earth can observe the rotation of the the earth around its axis !! 

Evidence = Tools to verify scientific statements ( Foucault Pendulum ) ..

 

 

In my religion : Reality ( phenomenons ) cannot contradict with my belief or what my God said  ^_~

Allah said earth is flat .. We see by our own eyes earth is flat !

Allah said the sun moves .. We see the sun moves everyday ..

 

If there is no  God, then at least Mohammad, peace be upon him, told what he sees ==> He told phenomenons ==> There is no conflict between what is being said and what we can see ^_~

 

 

 

Now the explanations .. Explanations pass through stages, and the last stage is the scientific fact .. For example, the orbiting of the earth around the sun was a theory which Galileo struggled to prove !

Was it obvious for everyone and can be seen naturally ? No ^_^

After being a theory, it becomes a scientific fact in our era ^_~ 

 

For this, the conflict is possible ^^

 

 

 

Evidences, are the tools to prove the validity of the scientific statements .. Reality doesn't need evidence since it is obvious .. However, hypothesis and theories need evidences .. When they are verified ( regardless of the way ) , they become facts ^_^

 

( Why do I need to explain this T_T ) 

 

 

 

Second, you are wrong because if there is conflict, it means one of them is correct and the other is wrong, assuming no third statement  ( we haven't decided yet who is right and who is wrong ) .. 

 

When you say : If reality contradicts your religious views then reality is wrong ==> There is only 1 possibility which is (( scientific fact is wrong )) .. I'm telling there are 2 possibilities and you insist it is only 1 >_<

 

 

Now, when it comes to me ( and I'm saying me ), I'll choose the possibility that the scientific statement / fact is wrong because I'm totally confidant about my God's knowledge ^_^

 

Again, this is not necessary that the scientific fact is wrong .. We will see who is right and who is wrong ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Which basically shows your brainwashed or your just poe

hehehehehhehehehehehhe

 

It basically shows two things ^_^ :

 

1 - You have problem with the terms ^_^

2 - You cannot distinguish between 1 possibility and 2 possibilities ^_^

 

 

Quote:
  Evidence vs god evidence always wins

^_^

 

 

Quote:
reality over rules your god in every way

^_^

 

 

Quote:
except in your case you close your eyes, stick your fingers in your ears and go lalalalalala god is real and nothing can change that lalaalala

^_^

 

I wonder who are you talking about ^_^ ?

 

Let us check what I said before :

 

2 - What my God said is wrong, and the scientific facts are true ==>

A ) My God is nothing but a  'clown'   >_<

B ) There is no God to begin with !

 

This shows :  3 -  You have problem with your vision ( assuming you read my post ! ) >_<

 

 

Quote:
  Got it

I wonder ^_^

 

 

Quote:
The facts are the fact

^_^

 

Quote:
and scientific facts are usually very hard to argue against

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !

 

Very hard ^^

 

But it is not impossible ^_~

 

However, phenomena are impossible to argue against .. Phenomena can be explained, but not be refuted ^^

 

 

Quote:
since there is far more evidence to prove them

^_^

 

Quote:
unlike your god

^_^

 

Quote:
which you have ZERO evidence

^_^

 

 

Quote:
for, just a book

^_^

 

Quote:
which in reality is no more for evidence than harry potter is evidence for actual witches and sorcerers existing because they are written in a book

^_^

 

 

Quote:
But of course lets all just ignore reality and live in a fantasy land

Who knows ^_~

 

 

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ja ne ~

 


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Do you watch anime or

Do you watch anime or something? It'd be really funny if you did.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Hungry Wolf wrote: I'm not

Hungry Wolf wrote:

 

I'm not sure if you understood what I said

No I understand, I think you don't understand what evidence and science are exactly I shall show you below

Quote:

 

And I'm saying: Neither the evidence nor the reality are the correct terms 

 

It seems, for you, evidence = reality = scientific statement / scientific fact ! 

 

Whereas the right thing is : Reality = Phenomena ( I'll stick with natural phenomenons ) = What is happening and everyone can observe it ( sun rises and sun sets ) 

Scientific fact = The (( right )) explanation of the reality / phenomenons ( Earth rotates about its axis / Earth rotates around the sun ) .. Normally, no one on earth can observe the rotation of the the earth around its axis !! 

Evidence = Tools to verify scientific statements ( Foucault Pendulum )

This shows why you don't understand the scientific method or what I mean by reality and evidence.

Reality is backed by evidence and I see the scientific method a far more reliable method than believing what is in a book written by people ignorant many aspects of the world and the universe around them. There is no evidence what so ever to back up your religious belief that the earth is flat, nothing at all. The reality is reality does contradict your belief in every aspect. First and foremost a flat earth we could not go from one point of the earth and go either east or west completely around to the same point in one direction. On a flat earth there is an edge which we could not pass. Second our entire satellite system would not function correctly as they would not be able to Orbit a flat earth, and some how your saying that the earth is the ONLY flat planet in our solar system while all other planets are round/spherical. The fact that all evidence and any method to prove a flat earth have completely failed proves that the earth is spherical and not flat, shows your belief to be wrong, yet you discard this reality and insert your fantasy instead, and ignore all evidence to the contrary. Astronauts observe the earth rotating on it's axis, they also observe the earth to be spherical. So your statement that we cannot observe a spherical earth is wrong. However you are free to ignore this reality.

For me it goes like this reality is composed not merely by what I can observe, but what can be tested and proven as well to explain natural phenomenas, the explanation that the earth is flat doesn't explain all the other phenomenas and observations about the earth.

Evidence is not a tool of science. The tool is the scientific method. The scientific method requires that an explanation be tested and retested by many scientific peers until it is proven wrong or until the test are proven correct. Far better than it's in my holy book therefore it is true.

 

Quote:

In my religion : Reality ( phenomenons ) cannot contradict with my belief or what my God said 

Allah said earth is flat .. We see by our own eyes earth is flat 

Allah said the sun moves .. We see the sun moves everyday ..

 

If there is no  God, then at least Mohammad, peace be upon him, told what he sees ==> He told phenomenons ==> There is no conflict between what is being said and what we can see 

 

Except the entire flat earth part is completely been proven wrong, the evidence proves your book to be wrong. Yes the sun seems to move across the sky, however the reality is the earth rotates on an axis and as well orbits the sun, as well the rotation is the reason the "rises" in the west and "falls" to the east. Again the evidence to back this is beyond doubt. However of course if it will contradict your religious views you have already stated here that you will ignore the evidence. Thank you for proving my point. Reality does contradict your god and the statement in your book. Just because something appears to move does not mean the it really is, we have to understand and test and observe and keep on doing that until a proper explanation is given, and the scientific method has properly explained this, far far more superior to your holy book, which at this moment regarding the flat earth is wrong. 

 

 

Quote:

Now the explanations .. Explanations pass through stages, and the last stage is the scientific fact .. For example, the orbiting of the earth around the sun was a theory which Galileo struggled to prove

Was it obvious for everyone and can be seen naturally ? No

After being a theory, it becomes a scientific fact in our era 

 

For this, the conflict is possible 

Evidences, are the tools to prove the validity of the scientific statements .. Reality doesn't need evidence since it is obvious .. However, hypothesis and theories need evidences .. When they are verified ( regardless of the way ) , they become facts

No scientific hypothesis is tested and retested until it passes all tests and then it can become scientific theory, which is basically scientific fact. Theories are backed by evidence and testing and facts, Theory is a proven explanation to an observed and tested phenomena, basically a fact. Evidence is not a tool, Evidence is proof for an explanation, but it is not a tool, the scientific method is the tool

Galileo didn't struggle to prove it, he proved the earth rotated around the sun, the church, much like you it seems, struggled with this fact and suppressed it and of course arrested Galileo because he wouldn't say otherwise. He did observe the rotation of the planets around the sun, the moons rotating around planets and this observations where the basis for his explanation for heliocentrism, which has been proven true.

 

Quote:

Why do I need to explain this 

because without a proper explanation one cannot determine truth, I do not believe a person merely because they say it's true. If your going to claim the earth is flat your going to have to come up with a far better explanation than because you says so and because your holy book says so, because the evidence contradicts both of your statements so far.

 

Quote:

you are wrong because if there is conflict, it means one of them is correct and the other is wrong, assuming no third statement  ( we haven't decided yet who is right and who is wrong ) 

Yeah no your wrong, there is a third, and different explanation for a natural phenomena, which is why i prefer the scientific method, if the theory is wrong, the look over the evidence again and try to explain the evidence the observations. 

Quote:

If reality contradicts your religious views then reality is wrong [/color] ==> There is only 1 possibility which is (( scientific fact is wrong )) .. I'm telling there are 2 possibilities and you insist it is only 

you may believe there are 2, but reality there is only one truth and one proper explanation, one has evidence the other requires the discarding of reality and inserting belief.

Quote:

 

Now, when it comes to me ( and I'm saying me ), I'll choose the possibility that the scientific statement / fact is wrong because I'm totally confidant about my God's knowledge

Exactly what I have said you keep saying I am wrong, your statement basically says if it contradicts my religious beliefs than reality is wrong. The fact is the earth is not flat and that is proven, you ignore that and state that reality is wrong and your god is right, thank you for proving me right Laughing out loud

I need to go no further than this, your statements have proven what I have stated already about your, you cannot accept any evidence that contradicts your beliefs in god. Your brainwashed. If you can provide the evidence that your god exists, then go right ahead, so far you have done and extremely poor job at it.

 


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
It's quite simple, Hungry.

Hungry Wolf wrote:

Dear Atheistextremist ^_^ :

 

Quote:
I'm up for this challenge
Ok ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Before I start

Yes ?

 

 

Quote:
just confirm for me you believe the Koran is the word of god spoken through muhommad, pure and inviolate

Yes, I confirm I believe that ^_^

 

( May I ask what does this have to do with the discussion / challenge ^_^' ? )

 

 

If you believe the Koran is the pure word of god, you believe this:

 

"Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise."

 

And as a result you are a moral ingrate, devoid of true empathy and in case anyone did not realise this yet, your beliefs are all about yourself.

There's no atheist on this site who would worship an invisible muderous torturer. Even on pain of death. But Hungry Wolf does.

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear butterbattle ^_^

Dear butterbattle ^_^ :



Quote:
Quote:
When I started to connect the pieces of science together .. I've found out they are contradicting with each other !

How?


Starting with basics, let us focus on the sun .. All what I'm going to say is the scientific statements / facts ( forget about the flat model in the time being ) ..


The Sun, unlike the stars,  is a non-point source of light ( Stars are also non-point source of light .. However, due to their distance from earth, they can be treated as point sources of light ) ..


So, what does non-point source of light mean ? Basically, each point on the sun's surface emits light independently from other points .. We can say that each point on the sun surface is an independent point source ( Huygens principle I guess ) ..


If so, then the light beams on non-point source are crossing each other, and the following picture illustrates this :



Of course, there are infinite number of points along the circumstance of the sun ( the circle / the sphere ) .. And, thus, infinite number of crossing between these beams ..


Upon this scientific statement, science has defined what is called umbra and penumbra to describe the shadow resulted from light source ( Although both terms are applied for any shadow in general, I'll focus only on the umbra and penumbra during the eclipse ) .. The following figure illustrates them :



So, we can see ( of course this is an illustration only ) how light beams are intersects with each other .. And science uses these intersections to explain some " phenomena " ..

 

Until now, we are fine and there is no conflict ^_^
 

So, let us move to something else,  crepuscular rays ^^
 

Crepuscular rays are sun rays of course ^_^ .. The interesting thing about these rays, as science claims, they are near-parallel !

( Although I've found some sites consider them parallel )

 

Those rays of sun doesn't intersect with each other !

There is no ray crosses another ray  ^_^
 

Now this is a conflict !!
 

( Before you explain anything, do you or don't you agree that it is a conflict ? )
 

 



Which one is true ? Do Sun's rays intersect since the sun is non-point source, or are they parallel ( near-parallel ) ?

 

Let us check the reality to see which one is the right answer ^.^ :






 

Clearly, the right answer is that rays don't intersect with each other ^_^

 

Therefore, the scientific fact / statement about the sun has 2 conflicts :

1 - Conflict with another scientific fact / statement ( scientists just cannot put the pieces together ~_~ ) ..

2 - Conflict with the reality ( as we can see the sun rays ^_^ ) ..

 

Not only that, but even the so called near-parallel is wrong >_< ( science claims that they are parallel but we see them converging because of perspective ! )

 

Those rays are not parallel, nor they are near-parallel .. They are converging toward the center of the sun ( or diverging from the center of the sun ) .. In fact, any natural light source will be the same ^_^

 
Now, let us move one step forward to prove what I said about the sun "scientifically" ( but with my analysis and theories ^____^ )

 

Starting with Huygens principle, let us consider the sun as non-point source of light in which each point on the surface acts independently and can be considered as tiny point source of light .. My explanation will be on 2D model of the sun ..
 

Thomas young had done his famous experiment, the double-slits experiment, and shown the interference of light waves ..

In brief, if two waves are in phase, the interference will be constructive .. If they are out of phase, they will cancel each other ( destructive interference ) ..
 

We want to see the effect of the interference on the points in circular constellation ( to represent the sun surface ) .. Although I have a MATLAB code to show the results, I'll put the result which I got using Java console first ^_^
 

 
There are two observations from this picture / simulation : 1 -  There is only one big circle ( wave ) and its center is in the middle ( instead of countless number of circles like you will see in the next simulation ), and its brightness is about to vanish ..


2 - The brightest light appears in the center as only one point .. It's actually a perpendicular line / or orthogonal to the XY-plane ( Like a Z-axis coming out of the screen ) ..

This orthogonal line represents the sun rays / the crepuscular rays ^_^ .. I assume he big circle will vanish totally if the number of the points on the circle constellation is infinity, other wise this circle represents the glow around the the source light ..

 

Now, this result match with the reality, the only thing I did is to put the point on circular constellation ( though I predicted the result from the beginning before doing the simulation ^_^' ) ..

 

The following figures show the result from the MATLAB simulation ( I'll not talk about the code and you have the right to ask me about it .. I'm just being lazy ~_~ ) .. The first one is the result in 2D :

 

The second one is in 3D :

where the longest curve is the Z-axis in the animated simulation ..

  

And the third one is a Top View for the 3D version :

where you can see at the center exactly the brightest point ( the peak of the curve in the first 3D figure ) .. The other white point is due to imperfect circle I made using MATLAB ..

 

Put in mind that the accumulated peaks, which are result from the constructive interference, will give stronger wave ( the amplitude of the wave >>> the amplitude of individual points ) .. This is again match the reality ^_^

A sun ray even as thin as needle ( I would say a photon ) is way stronger than the photon ( the light ) comes out from the cigar ^_~

 

Note that my simulation was only in one circle .. You can extend the simulation by imagining enormous number of circles that in total will represent a sphere, where each circle produce an orthogonal ray ( inside the screen and outside the screen ) ^_^

 

The final result will look like this :

 

  

Here is the web page  that I used to do the animated simulation, you can try it yourself ^_^ :

 

 

Although scientists have reached result similar to mine when they tried the same method with the lens ( I forgot what they called it >_< ), no body thought about this, as far as I know, when they talk about light sources ..

 

Thomas Young split a 'combined' light and he observed the re-combination of the light again ~_~ .. The electromagnetic light waves interfere with each other from the original source itself, not after passing through the slits !  That was a re-interference ^_^

  

You can even see same result without constructive and destructive interferences ( your eye will notice the big circle generated near the end of the frames while the center takes a constant shape ) :



 
 

"Any natural source of light is a point source" is right for any closed regular / symmetric shape of light source ( square - rectangular - triangle - flame shape .. etc ) .. The thing is, the result of any multiple points ( independent points ) will be as if the center of all these points is the source that has bigger and larger power .. For irregular shapes, the fighting between the points will be inside the shape, but the waves outside the shape are smooth ..

  


Of course this thing will even show other wrong explanation that science came up with in other different areas .. But I'll talk about that later ^_^  .. For the time being, if the sun is a huge point source of light, what science says about umbra and penumbra is rubbish ^_~
 

( Just to name another thing, the explanation of the vision will sever a complete damage .. And the psychological explanation of the vision will fall apart consequently ) ..


 
Allow me to stop here ^_^
 

Quote:
If the Earth were round, then nighttime would be when the side of the Earth that I am standing on is opposite the sun

You are right ^_^

 

Quote:
So, the Earth would be between me and the sun


That is right too ^_^

 

Quote:
Why would I be able to see the sun?


Because of the scientific explanation of the curvature of the round earth ^_^

 

Science says that, as an observer from the earth or the land ( assume the sun moves instead of rotation of the earth just to make the explanation simple ), I see the sun sinks into the sea / ocean because the sun goes below the 'True Horizon Line', which is imaginary of course .. The true horizon line in the tangent line which touch the round earth at the point of observer's horizon :



 

 
According to this ( scientific fact ), we will have 3 situations for any celestial body :

1- The celestial body has exactly the same size of the earth, then the total angle between an observer for the rise and an observer for the set of this celestial body = 180 degree exactly :

 

which also means exactly half of the people on earth can see it, and the other half cannot see it at the same time ..
 


2- The celestial body size is smaller than the size of the earth ( the moon for example ), then the total angle between an observer for the rise and the set of this celestial body < 180 degree :

 

which also means less than half of the people on earth can see it, and more than half cannot see it at the same time ..

 


3- The celestial body size is larger than the size of the earth ( the sun for example ), then the total angle between an observer for the rise and the set of this celestial body > 180 degree :

 

which also means more than half of the people on earth can see it, and less than half cannot see it at the same time ..

 


For our case, we care about #3 since it is similar to the sun situation ..

 

Now, consider the huge point source of light ( the sun ) .. Because the sun rays are emitted the way I explained above, The curvature / roundness of the earth doesn't allow that light to reach half of the earth .. It means, the sun enlighten less than half of the earth !


Now, combine #3 with the huge point source sun ^_^ .. What we will end up with ?

 

If we combined these two information, it means that the tangent line allows the observer  to see the upper part of sun while the curvature blocked the light coming from the center of the sun :

 

As you can see, the tangent between the upper part and the earth touch the earth in the negative part of imaginary the X-axis while the tangent that comes from the light ( center of the sun ) touch he earth in the positive part of the  imaginary X-axis !

 

This means I can see the sun prior to its light  .. When the light comes ==> It's the day time .. When there is no light ==> night time !

 

In other word, If the earth is round ==> I can see ( in normal situations ) the sun during the night time !

 

Do this happen in the reality ?

The answer is : Never !

 

Although the difference between both events is very small ( since the sun is very far from the earth, and as the celestial body goes away further, the red tangent will be near-horizontal, but it would never be totally horizontal .. Similarly, the purple tangent will be near-horizontal, but it would never be totally horizontal ) ..

 

The reality is the other way around ^_~

First, it's nighttime .. Second, it's Dawn time .. Finally, the sun rises ..

So, darkness .. Then, light starts to reach the earth and the dawn phenomenon take place .. At the end, we see the sun after half an hour of dawn ..

You would never ever see the sun prior to it's light, nor you see the sun at the same time you see it's light ^_~

 

 

Note that, I've assumed the earth as full circle ( perfect sphere ) .. As science claims, the pole-diameter < equator-diameter ..

This will make the scenario worse >_< .. It will increase the "very small" difference between the two tangents !

 

Note also, I've neglected the effect of atmospheric refraction .. It will just make the scenario even worse >_<

( I'm doing science lot of favors hehehehehehhehehe ^.^ )

 

If the roundness of the earth implies that I have to see the sun prior even to the dawn time, and this not happening in reality ==> Earth cannot be round ^_^

 

Remember, I used scientific facts about every thing .. I came only with the part about the relation between the true horizon and the celestial bodies, which can be concluded easily by using simple geometry math ^_~

 

If you still have objections, I will be more than happy to hear them ^_^ ( Just don't say it's negligible cause is too lame excuse for such a fatal fault >_< )

If you, by any chance, agreed with me .. Then we will talk about the consequences of this ^_^

 


Quote:
It is an equirectangular projection

That is right ^_^ 

 

 

Quote:
The people who make these kinds of maps know that it is not accurate

^_^

 

Your question was :

* Do you think this is an essentially accurate map of the Earth *

 

Hence, we agree with each other ^_~

 

Quote:
Though it distorts areas and angles, it is popular between because it is convenient and the x and y-axis of the map correspond to latitude and longitude

They are free to do what they want ^_^

 

The thing is the arrangement of the continents and the distances are not the actual one in the round earth model ^_^

 

Quote:
So, Antarctica is a really big ring?

I just mentioned that I don't agree with them about the white circumstance ^_^'

 

For the Flat Earth Society, this white ring in the wall .. Huge wall of ice that surrounds the globe, and its the edge of the earth ^_^

 

Again, the I don't assume there is a white wall / mountain around the earth ^_^

 

As I said, it is beyond my knowledge ^_^'

 

 

Quote:
So, when I flew in a plane from the U.S. to China while staying above ocean the whole time, it was actually because we made a big u-turn?

I haven't flew from North America to China, so I don't know the route ^_^

 

However, I think they are doing exactly like they do when we fly over the Atlantic Ocean toward Canada at least ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Why don't we realize that we're turning slightly as we fly?

Since I don't know the route for US ==> China, I'll show you the route as it appears in the screen for Frankfort / London ==> Vancouver / Montreal :

So, the plane passes over the Green Land instead of direct path toward Canada !

 

However, If you applied the same route on the actual round earth / ( suggested ) flat earth map, it will make sense ^_~ :

 

It's almost a straight line between Frankfort and Vancouver ^_~ ( forget about my poor line, cause I'm just using the mouse + I don't put the route exactly ) ..

 

Therefore, you will travel mostly in straight line if you go from one country to another ^_^

 

 

Quote:
What about people that have claimed to get the South Pole and come up the other side of the Earth? Are they lying? Is the information about these expeditions false?

Would you please name some ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
But, people have claimed to travel around the world in a straight line

No body travels the globe in actual straight line ^_^

 

Not Magellan, nor the flights today ^_^

Planes have to stick with map, and the map itself is in circular formation / constellation ^_~

 

As I just showed you, if you consider the rectangular map, you will not travel in straight line .. However, if you consider the circular map, you will travel in straight line from one place to another, yet you cannot do the same if you want to travel the globe .. You will have to move in circle direction to do so ^_~

 

Plus, nobody travels without a compass to know where the North is .. To travel is straight line, you shouldn't use any direction equipment, don't even use the sun or the stars to know where you are .. Just keep moving ^_^

 

 

Quote:
With the technology we have today, you can fly all the way around without stopping. Do you not agree?

I doubt that you can do it without stopping !

 

But again, even if you can, you still have to carry / use something to help you with the direction .. Once you use it, the method will become invalid ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Shouldn't planes just fly over the North Pole then? Wouldn't that be much faster?

I can agree no more ^_^ .. I wonder why they don't fly over the north pole .. I will ask a pilot one day ^_^

 

I've just found this ! Though it's old  :

 

[font=timesnewroman][size=16][b]I've also checked the Wikipedia, Some flights from NY to China have Polar Route track ^_^ .. It means they fly over the North Pole ( no need to ask a pilot then hehehehehehhehehe )

 

 

Quote:
All of them?

Still not sure ^_^

 



Quote:
Then, why do pictures seem to show different sides of the Earth? Wouldn't we always see the same picture of the Earth, but round?

I didn't get your point ^_^'

 

Different sides of the earth = different places you took the picture from ^_^'

 

 

Quote:
Why does it always look the same?

It doesn't ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Can't someone design a camera that at least distorted the shape of the Earth in a different way?

People ( I mean normal people, not NASA nor the astronauts ), can have picture of part of the  earth from exactly same position + same altitude, one shows the horizon straight and the other shows the same horizon curved !

 

 

Quote:
same Does this mean that the moon and all other planets and celestial bodies are flat as well?

Nope ^_^

 

I told you that it is a ground / floor and the ceiling, and all celestial bodies are in between .. Thus, you cannot compare the earth to the sun or the moon .. You can compare the earth with the sky ^_~

 

Don't forget, all things are in between = They are smaller than the sky and smaller than the earth ( yea, sun is smaller than the earth in the flat earth model ^_^ )

 

 

Quote:
After all, when we take pictures of them, they also look round in the same way

If you took picture from plane or from ground, it looks like circle ^_^

 

Not a sphere ^_~

 

 

Quote:
How can the sun be coming up from the horizon?

First, I'll show in brief the limitation of the eyes ^_^

 

Science, again, claims that I don't see any thing on the earth after the true horizon line because of the curvature of the earth ..

Thus, at least if I looked to a mountain beyond the horizon, I'll see part of it clearly. if the curvature is the only reason ..

 

 

 

Let us apply this for mountains ..  Any observer who looks toward mountains will notice the followings :

1 - As the mountains get away from the observer, the color of the mountains change from green / sandy / stony color to blue color, although they are not at the horizon yet !

2 - The mountains at the horizon points, although they are higher than the level of curvature, the observer can barely see them ( not clearly )!!

 

 

( Look at the very back of the last three pictures ..You can barely distinguish mountains from the sky ! )

 

The conclusion, you cannot see the mountains beyond the horizon although they are above the curvature level of the round earth !

 

This brings the topic of the limitation of the eyes .. Despite the reason, the fact is as an object moves away from the eye, it tends to vanish !

Not only the color changes, but also the size and height of the object .. Now, Consider the following figure :

 

Let the origin represents the eye .. the eye can see all four circles .. However, since they are on different distances, the vision angle varies .. It's largest when the object is near the Y-axis and smallest when the the object goes toward ( + infinity ) ..

 

After showing this, let's move to the horizon .. Imagine the dash-quarter circle is the horizon ( last point you can see when you are on sea level ) and the X-axis is the sea level :

 

 In normal situation, you cannot see an object beyond horizon .. However, there are factors that affect the vision even for an object beyond the horizon .. Those factors are : 

 

** The size of object : Since any object looks smaller when it is far from the eye, the size play rule in seeing the object .. If the size was small, it will vanish from the view even before reaching the horizon .. On the other hand, if the object was considerably big ( like the mountain ), the chance too see it is greater .. Yet, another factor has contribution to this, namely the brightness ..

 

** Light source / brightness or Object : For the objects, they tend to vanish even if  they are big since they are getting the same color of the sky .. For a powerful source of light on a mountain, you still can see it as long as it is have certain level of altitude ..

 

** Altitude : In general, as the object get higher, it has better chance to be seen ( as long as it satisfies the other two conditions ) ..

 

 

Ok .. The last figure shows that the object which is beyond the horizon will be seen on the horizon itself .. However, the level will be lower and the size will be smaller ..

As the object goes to infinity, the angle between the object and the eye get smaller, and the image of the object will approach the X-axis ( as the angle approaches zero ), until it get nears the X-axis ( the angle is almost zero ) where it vanish completely ^_^

 

As the object moves toward the observer ( or the observer move toward the object ), the image of the object will rise from the X-axis ( or near X-axis ) in circular path .. Hence it appears like the object itself is rising from seal level / ground level where in fact the object is only approaching ^_~

 

This is the situation of the sun ^_^ .. At the sea level, you can see up to 4 km ( 4 - 5 km ) .. If you are in US and the Sun is above India, you cannot see the sun despite how higher it is, how bright it is, and how big it is .. Once the sun reaches the Atlantic Ocean, eastern part of US will start too observe the sun rising from the sea level ( while it is actually in the sky of the flat earth ) as the sun move toward US ..

 

Why the sun rays cannot reach US even if the sun in Asia .. Very simple, the sun can lighten half of the flat earth ( remember that the sun is smaller than the earth + it is not as far as science says ! ) .. It is like when you hold a torch and enter a huge cave or hall .. The torch will no be able to lighten the whole place .. Rather it lightens part of the place, depending on it's power ^_^

 

That is how you see the sun rising from sea level while it's actually orbiting above the globe in the flat earth model ^_^

 

Opps, forget to mention something ! As your level increase ( you go up by any means ) your horizon point will change and the quarter circle will expand .. Thus, you can even see the sun before someone on the see level see it .. And the great things is you see it above the see level when the one on the sea level cannot see it yet ^.^

 

 

I hope this answers you and BobSpence1 ^_^

 

Quote:
Why do pictures and videos in low orbits always show the Earth as curved? 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwwioJhQzeg

Some of them, I feel are man made pictures .. The others, as I told you, it's due to the lens or due to the limitation of the lens / camera / eyes ..

 

 

Quote:
What about time elapsed pictures showing the Earth rotating; it looks like a sphere rotating? How is this possible? Does the Earth move?  [/b][/size][/font]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Vmmv0gOfWw

Obviously, this is a man made video / animation ^_^'

 

 

In the previous link ( the 6 min video ), at time 1:25 - 1:37, the video shows the earth like it's rotating .. When you want to show that earth is rotating, you have to fixed the camera to observe the rotation .. If you fixed the camera, no matter how long you will keep recording, the amount of light from your view is fixed + The sun position ( with respect to you ) is fixed too ..

However, neither the lighten portion is fixed, nor the sun position is fixed !

 

If we assumed a fixed position of the camera in that part of the video, we will see the sun is coming up ( which contradicts with the scientific facts that the sun is in fixed position with respect to earth ) + We will see the lighten part of the earth is moving toward the viewer / camera ..

 

If non of these should happen, then we have to choices : 1 - The camera is moving not the earth ==> What are you arguing about ^_^'

2 - The camera is fixed, but the whole footage is a man made ^_^

 

Choose any one you like ^_^

 

And the same is applied for other scenes .. However, there are no enough details to prove that is it's man made ^_^

 

 

Quote:
If it was a optical illusion, then why would it only apply to the Earth?

It's not applied to the earth only ^_^

 

It's applicable to any thing at the horizon / end point ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Why do we see the astronauts and satellites exactly as they are?

The same reason you are seeing people here as they are ( although the distortion here is quite big ! ) :

  

 

Ironically, the second picture shows the earth is curved in the opposite direction heheheheheheheh ^.^

 

 

Quote:
Do you watch anime or something?

Yes, of course I do ^_^

 

I has been watching Anime since my childhood ^_^

 

 

Quote:
It'd be really funny if you did

Why is it funny ^_^' ?

 

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

 

Ja ne ~

 


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
The distance to the Sun

The distance to the Sun doesn't change a lot, which is why it does not change noticeably in size or brightness. So the only way it can go dark is by being blocked by the earth, which is what we see when it sets. It is still the same apparent size, and therefore about the same distance, and the same brightness.

It goes dark because it is hidden from half the earth's surface at any point in time by the bulk of the earth itself, and those parts experience darkness.

Even if the Earth were a flat disk, it still looks like a distant sun going around and underneath the earth at night. But that would mean that everyone experience night at the same time, which is no the case.

Because it is so far away, it looks about the same size as the moon, and it can be seen from only slightly more than half of the earth's surface.

The standard idea of a round earth going around a distant sun, easily explains all we see, so it is pretty silly to try and go to all this trouble just to try and make it fit  the unenlightened ideas of the Islamic Prophet (may he suffer in eternal agony).

 

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Rich Woods
Rational VIP!
Rich Woods's picture
Posts: 868
Joined: 2008-02-06
User is offlineOffline
Fellas... please stop

Fellas... please stop discussing science with people who, despite no matter how much evidence you offer them will never recognize it as truth for their limited frontal lobes have caused them to reason that knowledge = evil....

 

You're right mr. whoever you are...The earth is flat,  the sun hovers in the sky, and I promise that I won't cum in your mail.


Tapey
atheist
Tapey's picture
Posts: 1474
Joined: 2009-01-23
User is offlineOffline
The earth is indeed flat, it

The earth is indeed flat, it is held up by elephants standing on the back of a turtle not gravity. Well what is the turtle standing on you may ask? Well you know the phrase


It's turtles all the way down

 

However "It's a turtle, for heaven's sake. It swims. That's what turtles are for.", one can never know the truth. The word of discworld has many interpretations.

 

Before you rubbish this... Have you seen the other side of our wonderful flat earth? There be turtles I tell you.

 

You are so close to the truth it saddens me to see you lead down a false path.

 

The holy book that is Discworld tells us it is so.

Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 The person has already

 The person has already casually waved off direct evidence. This conversation can only go downhill from here.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
 As much as your trying to

 As much as your trying to sound smart, your sounding more and more stupid every time, the earth only LOOKS round because of the lens of the camera or because OUR eyes make it seem round? Forget that the pictures that you posted are done on purpose, forget the fact that astronauts have taken photos of earth and actually observed earth from space to be round/spherical, and it's not an optical illusion as you say because we would always see everything around us as round/curved as in those pictures if our eyes caused the so called illusion. Forget the rest of the evidence that proves a spherical earth right? You realize that sound plain out stupid at this point? You do realize that with a spherical earth we should be able to see mountain before than land and the higher you are the farther you can see right which what those pictures of mountains prove, which wow,we do, amazing that this actually proves more a spherical earth than flat earth. That as you sail away from land you will see the tallest objects sink below the horizon last but on a flat earth that would not happen, yet it does, another proof of a spherical earth. If the earth wasn't rotating and spherical, then satellites would not be able to rotate the earth and be geostationary. As well the constellations shift relative to the horizon as you move north and south, something that could not happen on a flat earth.  As well with your flat earth idea then it would always be day at the same time across the earth, however while in hawaii it's noon in moscow it's 12 midnight, which cannot not happen on a flat earth, only on a spherical earth. There is far far far far more evidence for a spherical earth than a flat earth.

As for your whole sun part, yeah lets admit your stupid now, because of the atmospheric refraction we see sunlight before the sun, but of course if you include this part well your whole little diatribe and picture show falls apart. Which is also possible with a spherical earth, while on your flat earth you would see the sunlight at the same time as the sun....but if course at this point in time, it's really a just a waste of time dealing with you as you seem to just ignore all the evidence and actual explanations and just use bits and pieces of information then mangle it to fit your religious views.

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Rich Woods wrote:Fellas...

Rich Woods wrote:

Fellas... please stop discussing science with people who, despite no matter how much evidence you offer them will never recognize it as truth for their limited frontal lobes have caused them to reason that knowledge = evil....

 

 Rich, I have to agree.

It is really hard to believe that such a conversation as this thread would be taking place in the 21st Century.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3729
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Wow, I am genuinely amazed

Wow, I am genuinely amazed at the amount of effort that Hungry Wolf has put into this. I'm not kidding; so much studying and thinking to rationalize that the Earth is flat and all celestial bodies travel in 2 dimensional circles "between" the Earth and the "sky"......pity. He's like a professional Flat Earth apologist. 

 

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2927
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:Wow, I am

butterbattle wrote:

Wow, I am genuinely amazed at the amount of effort that Hungry Wolf has put into this. I'm not kidding; so much studying and thinking to rationalize that the Earth is flat and all celestial bodies travel in 2 dimensional circles "between" the Earth and the "sky"......pity. He's like a professional Flat Earth apologist. 

 

 

I think the parallel is quite appropriate, actually.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
  *Facepalm*I was just

  *Facepalm*

I was just dropping by to make sure that Eloise and Bob were okay (for some reason I think Eloise said she lived around Brisbane?)... and just, wow.

 

Wolf, could you explain how Google Earth & Google's associated mapping tools (which anyone can try for themselves to gauge their accuracy) manage to work? I mean, if the Earth is just a 2-Dimensional plane, the technology should not work at all since it's modeled on a 3-Dimensional sphere and the distance measurements from a sphere will not accurately map onto a 2-Dimensional shape.

 

Can you also explain why an aircraft flying directly 'North' on your hypothetical map (East in reality) does not ever run into Antarctica? 

 

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
They are ok, Kevin.

Kevin R Brown wrote:


I was just dropping by to make sure that Eloise and Bob were okay (for some reason I think Eloise said she lived around Brisbane?)... and just, wow.

 

Both got surrounded by water but not flooded.

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Thanks for the thought,

Thanks for the thought, Kevin.

Eloise was much closer to the flood in her area than I was in mine. I had to go a mile or two in any direction before I could see the water.

For a few days it was difficult or impossible to get to other parts of the city because of flooded roads.

My main concern was prolonged loss of power and possible loss of clean drinking water and food supplies. As it turned out, I only lost power for a few hours, fresh supplies of some foods were short for a while, but are mostly getting back to near normal, and clean water from the taps was never a problem.

I am at least 50 feet above the peak of the flood, maybe 100, depending how much I can trust the elevation reading on my GPS.

 

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


Hungry Wolf
Hungry Wolf's picture
Posts: 25
Joined: 2008-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Dear latincnnuck ^_^

Dear latincnnuck ^_^ :

 

Quote:
No I understand

^_^

 

Quote:
I think you don't understand what evidence and science are exactly

Nope .. I understand very well ^_^

 

 

Quote:
I shall show you below

Go a head ^_^

 

 

Quote:
This shows why you don't understand the scientific method or what I mean by reality and evidence

How ^_^ ?

 

Quote:
Reality is backed by evidence

Period ^_^

 

Reality = Adjective ..

evidence = Subject ..

 

I'm glad you now know that evidence is not reality ^_^

 

But wrong again >_< .. Scientific statements are backed by evidence ( not reality ) .. Reality is obvious to everyone .. Anything against reality must be explained properly, otherwise it's wrong ^_^


Quote:
and I see the scientific method a far more reliable method than believing what is in a book written by people ignorant many aspects of the world and the universe around them

ya ya ya ~_~

 

Like non-point source Vs near-parallel rays, right ^_~ ?

 


hehehehhehhehehe

 

 

Quote:
There is no evidence what so ever to back up your religious belief that the earth is flat

Who knows ^_^

 

 

Until now, I hold the upper hand ^_~

 

 

Quote:
nothing at all

Who knows ^_^

 

 

Quote:
The reality is reality does contradict your belief in every aspect

Who knows ^_^

 

 

Quote:
First and foremost a flat earth we could not go from one point of the earth and go either east or west completely around to the same point in one direction

I didn't understand this ^_^

 

But I think I've already explained the technique .. If you want, ask butter ^_^

 

Quote:
On a flat earth there is an edge which we could not pass

^_^
 

Even in the round earth model, there is an edge for the universe which we couldn't pass either ^_^


The difference is you put the edge faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar away that no one could think to do the the edge of the universe ^_^

 

Quote:
Second our entire satellite system would not function correctly as they would not be able to Orbit a flat earth

You don't have any idea about satellites ^_^

 

Quote:
and some how your saying that the earth is the ONLY flat planet in our solar system

Wrong ^_^

 

That what you have assumed ^_~

 

The flat earth is not a planet .. Nor there is "our solar system" .. Earth is the floor of the secular life .. Earth is no floating in space .. You cannot go beneath earth .. There are 7 earths ( on top of each other ) and 7 skies ( on top of each other ) .. We are in the highest earth and facing the lowest sky ..

 

You cannot assume a model you imagine and start to attack you model ^_^

 

You have to stick with what I told you ^_^

 


Quote:
while all other planets are round/spherical

This is the whole point ^_^

 

Since it is no logic for all planets to be round while the earth is flat, the earth cannot be created by nature .. There is someone who created earth flat and made the planets round .. He is the God ^_~

 

 

Quote:
The fact that all evidence and any method to prove a flat earth have completely failed

If I understand this sentence right, you are saying all evidence has proved earth is round and any attempt to prove earth flat has failed .. That is what do you want to say ^_^ ?
 

I'm not sure about the attempts / evidence to prove earth is flat .. No body tried too .. The ancient idea was earth is flat, and the some 'scientists' created their own model ( the round model ) and started to 'enlighten' people !

 

No body fought them back scientifically .. All what ancient people did is to say it contradicts with our believe ==> It's wrong >_<

 

( This not what I'm doing btw ^_^ .. I'm going to take science DOWN scientifically ^_~ )

 

Quote:
proves that the earth is spherical and not flat shows your belief to be wrong

Indeed ^_^
 

If ( and I'm saying If ) the earth is spherical, then my belief is wrong .. And I should look for another belief or become atheist ( I've already said that in different way though ~_~ ) ..

 

Essential part of my believe that the God is omniscient .. If he wasn't, he doesn't deserve to be worshiped  >_<

 

Hence, this will destroy my belief ^_^

 

Quote:
yet you discard this reality and insert your fantasy instead

Wrong ^_^
 

I re-evaluate the scientific facts ^_~

 

 

Quote:
and ignore all evidence to the contrary

Wrong again ^_^

 

I take evidences into consideration, And either I prove their invalidity or I offer better explanation that match the reality ^_^

 


Quote:
Astronauts observe the earth rotating on it's axis

I doubt that ^_^

 

The video shows earth is geocentric !
 

But people don't pay attention to details >_<

 


Quote:
they also observe the earth to be spherical

Any flat surface like a wall can be turned into spherical by a lens ^_^

 


Quote:
  So your statement that we cannot observe a spherical earth is wrong

I didn't say you cannot observe a spherical earth .. I'm saying the is no spherical earth to be observed hehehehehehhe ^.^

 


Quote:
  However you are free to ignore this reality

^_^

 


Quote:
For me it goes like this reality is composed not merely by what I can observe, but what can be tested and proven as well to explain natural phenomenas

Like sun rays for example ^_^ ?

 


Quote:
the explanation that the earth is flat doesn't explain all the other phenomenas and observations about the earth

Because you haven't tried to explain it based on flat earth model + you are not giving it a chance + you are not welling too ^_~

 

And if, by any chance, tried to explain it from flat earth perspective, don't assume any thing ^_^

 

 

Quote:
Evidence is not a tool of science

Yes it is ^_^

 

Quote:
The tool is the scientific method

Nope .. The scientific method is the "way" or "strategy" that science work upon ^_^
 


Quote:
The scientific method requires that an explanation be tested and retested by many scientific peers until it is proven wrong or until the test are proven correct

^_^


It's called a method ^_^ .. Method = way to do something = strategy to do something ^_~
 

Evidence are the tool to prove your self right or wrong ^_^

 


Quote:
Far better than it's in my holy book

Nope ^_^

 

You try to know something that you don't know .. However the holy book is giving you the answer directly because the creator is God and he knows what he created + the holy book is giving you the answer from omniscient perspective ^_~

 


Quote:
therefore it is true

^_^

 

Yet, till now, I haven't said earth is flat because my holy book say so ^_^
 

I'm telling you earth is flat because the round model has many conflicts with its own parts + has conflicts with reality ^_^

 

You are, theists, the one who kept saying I'm true because of my holy book .. I haven't said that ^_^

 


Quote:
Except the entire flat earth part is completely been proven wrong, the evidence proves your book to be wrong

Did you even get the point ~_~ ?

 


Quote:
Yes the sun seems to move across the sky

Period ^_^


So this is reality, despite the explanation ^_^
 


Quote:
however the reality is the earth rotates on an axis and as well orbits the sun

This is explanation -_-'

 


Quote:
as well the rotation is the reason the "rises" in the west and "falls" to the east

Explanation again -_-'


Explanation might be right might be wrong .. You claim it's 120% right .. It's a 'fact' .. All these are fine with me .. But Don't call it reality ^_^
 

 

Quote:
  Again the evidence to back this is beyond doubt

ya ya ya ^_^
 


Quote:
However of course if it will contradict your religious views you have already stated here that you will ignore the evidence

Nope ^_^

 

I didn't say that ^_^


Why are you talking in behalf of me ^_^' ?

 

Quote:
Thank you for proving my point

hehehehehehheheheheheh

 

Although I haven't proved your point, but you are welcome anyway ^_^

 


Quote:
Reality does contradict your god and the statement in your book

* Sigh *

 


Quote:
Just because something appears to move does not mean the it really is

hehehehehhehehe

 

In the same way, just because earth appears as a sphere from outer-space, it does not mean it really is ^_~
 

But in fact, it seems, somehow that you can see earth spherical, from outer-space which is reality .. But, it need to be explained if we assume a flat earth model ^_^

 


Quote:
we have to understand and test and observe and keep on doing that until a proper explanation is given

And the proper explanation is " sun a non-point source" although the rays are parallel !

 


Quote:
and the scientific method has properly explained this

Of course it did hehehhehehehhehhe


The funny thing is, when it's required to use the parallel rays, science uses it ^_^ .. When the non-point source are in need, the science uses it ^_^
 

Your science is miserable ^_^

 


Quote:
far far more superior to your holy book, which at this moment regarding the flat earth is wrong

ya ya ya ^_^

 


Quote:
  No scientific hypothesis is tested and retested until it passes all tests and then it can become scientific theory

^_^

 


Quote:
which is basically scientific fact

Nope ^_^


Scientific theories are not scientific facts ^_^
 

And scientific facts are not necessary facts ^_^

 


Quote:
Theories are backed by evidence and testing and facts, Theory is a proven explanation to an observed and tested phenomena, basically a fact. Evidence is not a tool, Evidence is proof for an explanation, but it is not a tool, the scientific method is the tool

Quote from wiki :

* In the most basic sense, a scientific fact is an objective and verifiable observation, in contrast with a hypothesis or theory, which is intended to explain or interpret facts *

 

Do you really know how to distinguish between scientific terms, or are you just blindly defending science without knowing what you are talking about ~_~ ?

 


* Sigh *
 

 

Quote:
Galileo didn't struggle to prove it

I meant he struggles to prove it to the people / church ^_^
 

Sorry, I didn't clarify that ^_^

 


Quote:
  he proved the earth rotated around the sun, the church, much like you it seems, struggled with this fact and suppressed it

If it suppressed it without a debate ==> The church didn't struggle .. It just used the simplest method ^_^

 


Quote:
and of course arrested Galileo

Hence, Galileo struggled ^_^

 


Quote:
because he wouldn't say otherwise

He struggled ^_^

 


Quote:
He did observe the rotation of the planets around the sun, the moons rotating around planets and this observations where the basis for his explanation for heliocentrism, which has been proven true

^_^

 

Quote:
because without a proper explanation one cannot determine truth

I meant why do I have to explain the terms to you ^_^'
 


Quote:
  I do not believe a person merely because they say it's true. If your going to claim the earth is flat your going to have to come up with a far better explanation than because you says so and because your holy book says so

hehehehhehehehhehehe

 

For the ( i don't know how many ) times, I haven't claim that earth is flat because my God or holy book or prophet said that .. It's flat because it can explains all major phenomena while the the round earth fails too ^_^

 

So, there are two reasons ( one is the ability to explain / match up with .. the other is round earth model fails to ) .. Only one is not enough ^_^

 


Quote:
because the evidence contradicts both of your statements so far

I wonder ^_^

 


Quote:
  Yeah no your wrong, there is a third, and different explanation for a natural phenomena, which is why i prefer the scientific method, if the theory is wrong, the look over the evidence again and try to explain the evidence the observations

It's again science's statement .. I didn't say there is only one scientific explanation !

 

But, logically, when science claims that its explanation is a fact, I wonder how can it be wrong afterwords ?

 


Therefore, there are only 2 ^_^
 

 

Quote:
you may believe there are 2

AAAAAAAAAAAAAh !
 

Finally, at least you understand that I may believe there are 2 ^.^

 

Good progress ^_^

 


Quote:
but reality there is only one truth and one proper explanation

I agree with you ^_^

 

But I'm putting the 2 possibilities for a reason ^_~

 

If science, after my assessment, is right, then I'll become an atheist ^_^

 

If science, after my assessment, is wrong, then I'll bring science and atheism down ^_^

 


Fair and square ^_^

 

Quote:
one has evidence the other requires the discarding of reality and inserting belief

My assessment will be based on 'scientific methods' not on 'belief' ^_^
 


Quote:
Exactly what I have said you keep saying I am wrong

Because you are wrong hehehehehehhehe ^_^

 


Quote:
your statement basically says if it contradicts my religious beliefs than reality is wrong

* Sigh *

 


Quote:
The fact is the earth is not flat and that is proven, you ignore that and state that reality is wrong and your god is right
* Sigh *

 

Quote:
thank you for proving me right Laughing out loud

* Sigh *
 

You are welcome ^_^

 


Quote:
I need to go no further than this, your statements have proven what I have stated already about your, you cannot accept any evidence that contradicts your beliefs in god

* Sigh *

 


Quote:
Your brainwashed. If you can provide the evidence that your god exists, then go right ahead, so far you have done and extremely poor job at it

hehehhehehehheheh

 

And when I start to bring your science down, you lost your temper hehehehhehehe

 

 

 


^_^


 

 

==============================================

 

 

Dear Atheistextremist ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
If you believe the Koran is the pure word of god, you believe this:

"Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise."

Of course I believe it ^_^

 

 

Quote:
And as a result you are a moral ingrate

hehehehheheheh

 


Is this your challenge ^_^ ?



Quote:
devoid of true empathy

^_^



Quote:
and in case anyone did not realise this yet, your beliefs are all about yourself

^_^


 

And ^_^ ?



Quote:
There's no atheist on this site who would worship an invisible muderous torturer

^_^



Quote:
Even on pain of death. But Hungry Wolf does

Is this the best you can do ^_^ ?



Note that, as I said before, I will not use the Qura'an or any Islamic narrations ^_^ .. I've used only mathematics to face your science .. Can you do the same and prove me wrong ^_^ ?

 

 

^_^





==========================================

 

 

Dear Bob ^_^ :



Quote:
The distance to the Sun doesn't change a lot, which is why it does not change noticeably in size or brightness

That's a big talk !

 

The brightness doesn't change 'noticeably' O_o !

 

Then tell me why you cannot look at the sun at noon with the naked eyes while you can see it clearly before the sunrise and the sunset ?!

 

 

 

Do you even think before you reply ?

 

Btw, the sun in the second picture tends to vanish waaaay above the horizon line ^_~



Quote:
So the only way it can go dark is by being blocked by the earth

Wrong ^_^ .. This is not the only way ^_~

 

It can go dark if the ray cannot reach faraway places ^_^

 

Again, you have to stick with my explanation to refute my point .. And I've told you the the sun is smaller than earth in the flat earth model, and it's like giant torch which has the ability to lighten half of the flat earth only ^_^

 

 

Quote:
which is what we see when it sets

Which the second picture tells you that you are wrong ^_^

 

And this a present for you ^_^ :

 

This is according to round earth model, and it's a scientific explanation ^_~


 

Oh ! and here is another one which was taken recently ( 2 days ago ) in my city ^_~ :

 


"Brightness doesn't change noticeably ", teh !
 

 

Quote:
It is still the same apparent size, and therefore about the same distance, and the same brightness

Would you please observe the sunset for once before talking about what you don't know ^_^'



Quote:
It goes dark because it is hidden from half the earth's surface at any point in time by the bulk of the earth itself

Are you telling me something I don't know, or are you trying to refute my point ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
and those parts experience darkness

Then solve the 'puzzle' I made in my previous post if you are so confident about your round earth ^_^



Quote:
Even if the Earth were a flat disk, it still looks like a distant sun going around and underneath the earth at night

AAAAAAAAAAAAAH !


Previously, you understood what I said, and you asked :

 

* if it is supposed to be moving in a circle above it *

 

But now, you are talking about "underneath" while I was clear to butter that it is above not underneath ^_~


 

I wonder whyyyyyyyyy ^_~

 


hehehehhehehehehhehe
 

 

Quote:
But that would mean that everyone experience night at the same time, which is no the case

Because you've assumed that the sun goes under the flat earth ^_^



Allow me to analyze what happened ^_^

 

In your first post, although you didn't show your tone, your question wasn't to know the answer since you really believed that I'm just bluffing .. You might expected stupid answer with no supporting or evidence .. Or even you might didn't expect any answer at all ^_~

 

Your purpose of the question was to give me a hint about the meaning of what I'm saying ( You know there is way that the sun is up and someone can see it at the sea level ) .. Or to just "bust" me ^_^

 

Let us check what you have said again :

* Just wondering *

Nope, you weren't wondering ^_^ .. You were confident that I cannot explain it ^_~

 


And then :

if it is supposed to be moving in a circle above it

I can imagine you stressing on this part or doing a 'quotation move' with your fingers

 


And the last thing :

???

Three question marks to give me a message that you are asking me to do the impossible ^_~


 

You wouldn't imagine that I might answer the question .. When I did, you couldn't refute me back ( you already wouldn't expect such respond hehehehehhehehehe ^.^ ) .. Therefore, you have twisted the thing to come up with new argument ( that the sun goes beneath the earth, and that cannot  be true since the globe doesn't experience darkness at the same time ! ) which is not what I've been saying ^_~


 

^.^



 

Quote:
Because it is so far away, it looks about the same size as the moon, and it can be seen from only slightly more than half of the earth's surface

 Why are you telling me this ^_^ ?

 

 

Quote:
The standard idea of a round earth going around a distant sun, easily explains all we see

I believe the geocentric model ( with spherical earth ) easily explains all what we see as well ^_^

 

However, the geocentric model is not accepted ^_^ .. Henceforth, the issue is not about which model explains all phenomena easily .. The issue is which model has no flaws ^_~



Quote:
so it is pretty silly to try and go to all this trouble

Leave this troubles to me ^_~



Quote:
just to try and make it fit  the unenlightened ideas of the Islamic Prophet (may he suffer in eternal agony)

^_^

 

The geocentric model would fit the Islamic idea about the sun and the moon ^_^

 

Yet, I didn't consider it as the right explanation ^_~ .. Thus, it's not about the Islamic idea, it's about what is the truth ^.^




^_^





===========================================

 

 

Dear Rich Woods ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
Fellas... please stop discussing science with people who, despite no matter how much evidence you offer them will never recognize it as truth for their limited frontal lobes have caused them to reason that knowledge = evil....

 

You're right mr. whoever you are...The earth is flat,  the sun hovers in the sky, and I promise that I won't cum in your mail

Clown ^_^




 

^_^




 

================================

 

 

Dear latincanuck ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
As much as your trying to sound smart, your sounding more and more stupid every time

hehehehhehehhehehehehhe


 

You've lost your temper now hehehehehhehehe


 

^.^



Quote:
the earth only LOOKS round because of the lens of the camera or because OUR eyes make it seem round?

I don't remember that I said 'only' ^_^

 


Those two are suggested explanations ^_^

 

There might be another reason, who knows ^_~



Quote:
Forget that the pictures that you posted are done on purpose

I know ^_^


 

But the pictures I posted to show butter that the camera can show curved horizon while the near objects appear normal ^_^


 

If I want to tell you abut the affects of concave-convex lenses, I'll bring you the scientific facts about the lens and the way they correct the distortion in telescopes ^_^



Quote:
  forget the fact that astronauts have taken photos of earth and actually observed earth from space to be round/spherical

hehehehehhehehehe


 

This is what I'm arguing about  ^_^ .. I didn't say they lied about what they saw or the photos were faked ^_^'

 

 

I'm saying there is a reason for the curvature of the earth, and it's related to the eye / lens / limitation and not related to the earth itself ^_~

 

 

Quote:
and it's not an optical illusion as you say

But I've just shown the limitation of the eyes ^_^



Quote:
because we would always see everything around us as round/curved as in those pictures if our eyes caused the so called illusion

You are missing the point ^_^


 

You don't see the spherical shape while you are on earth because you haven't reached the limit of your eyes yet ^_^

 

You actually see the disc-shape while you are on sea level or in the plane if you had the chance to look at the horizon with nothing in the way that blocks the way to horizon ^_^



Quote:
Forget the rest of the evidence that proves a spherical earth right?

Nope ^_^


 

I'm either discussing them ( finding explanations ) or refuting the ( pointing flaws ) ^_~



Quote:
You realize that sound plain out stupid at this point?

Nope ^_^


 

I realized you are raging with angry hehehehehehehehhe

 

 

Quote:
You do realize that with a spherical earth we should be able to see mountain before than land and the higher you are the farther you can see

The pictures of the mountains show the mountains at the horizon are barely to be seen .. This tells you that you might not see a big mountain beyong the horizon not because the earth is round but because it vanishes ( something to do with light / eyes / colors etc ) ^_^

 

I don't know any scientific reason for ""color changing" .. Put in mind that there are no clouds that block the view ^_~



Quote:
right which what those pictures of mountains prove

It doesn't prove you .. It actually proves that there is flaw in round earth's explanation for the disappearing of objects ^_~

 

 

Quote:
which wow,we do

Nope .. You don't ^_^ 

 

 

Quote:
amazing that this actually proves more a spherical earth than flat earth

Nope .. This actually proves you know nothing + You don't try to understand hehehehheheheheheh

 

 

Quote:
That as you sail away from land you will see the tallest objects sink below the horizon last but on a flat earth

But my explanations gives you the reason clearly ^_~

 

 

It's you problem that you don't understand .. Not mine ^_~

 

 

Quote:
that would not happen

That would happen in a flat earth model too ^_^

 

Yet, the spherical model didn't explain the change in the color while my model put in into account ^_~

 

 

Quote:
yet it does, another proof of a spherical earth

hehehhhehehehehhehe

 

 

You are just like an angry kid who like to twist everything  hehehehehehehhe

 

 

Is this all what you have ^_^ ?

 

 

Show me at least where I did the mistake in taking down your spherical earth .. That is, if there is any ^_~

 

 

Quote:
  If the earth wasn't rotating and spherical, then satellites would not be able to rotate the earth and be geostationary

OOOOOOOOOH ^_^

 

So, if there is a geostationary satellites, does it mean earth is not rotating ^_^ ?

 

Let us check ^.^ :

 

* Geosynchronous satellites

Some satellite phones use satellites in geostationary orbit, which are meant to remain in a fixed position in the sky. These systems can maintain near-continuous global coverage with only three or four satellites *

 

 

* A satellite in a geostationary orbit appears to be in a fixed position to an earth-based observer *

 

 

Of course, if you assume the earth rotates ==> The geosynchronous satellites are rotating in synchronization movement with the earth ..

 

If you assume earth is flat / fixed ==> The geosynchronous satellites are fixed too ^.^

 

The result of the two are the same, these kind of satellites remain in fixed position in the sky ^_^

 

 

And they are famous ^_^ :

 

* This is the list of satellites in geosynchronous orbit. These satellites are commonly used for communication purposes, such as radio and televison networks, backhaul, and direct broadcast. *

 

 

Btw, all these quotations are from Wikipedia ^_^

 

 

Quote:
As well the constellations shift relative to the horizon as you move north and south, something that could not happen on a flat earth

You assume it will not happen for the flat earth model .. But then again, you assumed every thing will not happen for flat earth, and yet I'm proving one by one they are happening ^_~

 

This not an argument ^_^

  

Don't assume any thing my dear .. Just point out the mistakes like I do ^_~

 

 

Quote:
As well with your flat earth idea then it would always be day at the same time across the earth

Another assumption ^_^

 

However, I've already refute this assumption even before you pointed out ^_^ :

 

* Why the sun rays cannot reach US even if the sun in Asia .. Very simple, the sun can lighten half of the flat earth ( remember that the sun is smaller than the earth + it is not as far as science says ! ) .. It is like when you hold a torch and enter a huge cave or hall .. The torch will no be able to lighten the whole place .. Rather it lightens part of the place, depending on it's power ^_^ *

 

You haven't come up with something new to me .. Debating you is no fun at all >_<

 

 

Quote:
however while in hawaii it's noon in moscow it's 12 midnight, which cannot not happen on a flat earth

It can happen very easily ^_^

 

 

Quote:
only on a spherical earth

Nope ^_^

 

It can happen in your flat room too ^_~

 

 

Quote:
There is far far far far more evidence for a spherical earth than a flat earth

* Sigh *

 

Again, I'm not concern about your evidence ^_^ .. I want you to defend the mistakes of the round earth model .. If you manage to defend all of them in a way that doesn't rise a conflict with reality or with another scientific fact, you will not need to prove anything, nor you will have to attack the flat earth model ..

 

 

Two models explain every thing cannot happen ^_^ .. One of them must fail .. If I couldn't bring the round earth to its downfall, there is no chance for the flat model to rise ^_^

 

 

Quote:
As for your whole sun part, yeah lets admit your stupid now

Butter, who is my real opponent, doesn't agree with you hehehehehhehehehe

 

Now, let us see how you refute my explanation and let us see also how stupid I'm ^.^

 

 

Quote:
because of the atmospheric refraction we see sunlight before the sun

hehehehehhehehehehehehe

 

Really, you have to go back to school to learn how to read ^_^

 

The problem is your model implies that we have to see the sun BEFORE the sunlight  ..

 

Your answer should be, at least, as follows : because of the atmospheric refraction we see sun before the sunlight .. It should be this way if you really understood what I've said .. But you didn't .. And I'm afraid you will not >_<

 

 

Quote:
  but of course if you include this part well your whole little diatribe and picture show falls apart

Nope ^_^

 

It will sever your model even more hehehehehehhehehehehehehe

 

But again, you didn't understand ^_^ .. So don't bother refuting me ^_~

 

If you still insist to have a rebuttal with me, you have to comment on the conflict first .. Are you afraid to admit that the ( non-point source ) contradicts with the ( crepuscular rays ) ^_~ ?

 

I have more conflicts for you my dear ~

 

 

Quote:
  Which is also possible with a spherical earth, while on your flat earth you would see the sunlight at the same time as the sun

ya ya ya ^_^

 

 

Quote:
but if course at this point in time, it's really a just a waste of time dealing with you as you seem to just ignore all the evidence and actual explanations

I don't ignore ^_^

 

I examine them ^_~

 

 

Quote:
and just use bits and pieces of information then mangle it to fit your religious views

^_^

 

 

 

have you finished already ^_^ ?

 

What a shame ^_^

 

 

 

 

^_^

 

 

 

 

===============================

 

 

Dear butter ^_^ :

 

As I'm always saying .. I don't want people who agree with what I say  .. Rather, I want people who understand what I say ^.^

 

 

Quote:
Wow, I am genuinely amazed at the amount of effort that Hungry Wolf has put into this

And I'm genuinely pleased that there is someone who at least understood what I post up there

 

Since the begging you were special dear butter ^_^

 

Have my gratitude ~

 

 

Quote:
  I'm not kidding

I'm honored ^.^

 

 

Quote:
so much studying and thinking

^_^'

 

 

Quote:
to rationalize that the Earth is flat and all celestial bodies travel in 2 dimensional circles "between" the Earth and the "sky"

hehehhehhehehe

 

Actually, to beat the science ^_^

 

I'm not putting that much effort to explain phenomena ( I focus only on the major ones since the flat model will not be valid without these explanations ) .. Rather, my effort is to find out where the science / scientists did the mistake to end up with the an acceptable round model !

 

I went back to the begging  .. To the Greeks since they were the first who came up with the round earth !

 

Earth is round .. Sun is greater than Earth .. Universe is waaaaay old .. They came up with all essential parts that we knows today ^_^

 

Science just extends their thoughts and theories and modified the others .. But they were the original problems >_<

 

 

Quote:
pity

hehehehhehehehehheheheheh

 

 

Quote:
  He's like a professional Flat Earth apologist

I'm honored again ^_^

 

Yet, I'm looking for something bigger as I said before ^_^

 

 

Now, you've missed couple of things :

 

** You haven't told me if you want to complete what we have started or not ( at least for discussing the earth ) .. And if you want to move on, I suggest we focus on the round model for two reasons :

1 - If the round model explained everything with no conflicts or major issues , the flat earth model doesn't have any chance .. I must take down the round model first ^_^'

2 - Unlike the science, I lack many explanations ( specially when we come to details ) since I'm still working on that ^_^ .. On the other hand, science has explained mostly everything ( at least on our earth ), and it's hard that we discuss something science has never talked about ..

 

** You haven't answered whether you consider what I said is conflict or not ..

 

** You haven't said your opinion about the constructive / destructive interferences ..

 

** And the last thing, you haven't answer my question about the anime hehehehehehhehe ^_~

 

 

 

I want to continue with you for 2 reasons : You are a high-class person, and your major is physics ( and I attack physics the most ) ^_^

 

Even If you will not accept the flat earth model .. The discussion with you is so beneficial ^_^

 

 

I'll wait for your answers ^_^

 

And whatever your answer is, have my respect ^_^

 

 

 

 

==================================

 

 

Dear Kevin ^_^ :

 

 

Quote:
  *Facepalm*

hehehhehehehehehehehehe

 

 

Quote:
Wolf

Sir ^_^

 

 

Quote:
could you explain how Google Earth & Google's associated mapping tools (which anyone can try for themselves to gauge their accuracy) manage to work?

I see no problem at all !

 

Google Earth use photos which are already had been taken !

 

What is the problem ^_^'

 

 

Quote:
I mean, if the Earth is just a 2-Dimensional plane, the technology should not work at all since it's modeled on a 3-Dimensional sphere and the distance measurements from a sphere will not accurately map onto a 2-Dimensional shape

[font=timesnewroman][size=16][b]Nope .. You are wrong ^_^

 

The 2D circular map of the earth ( which is the same for the round earth model and flat earth model , at least for the hemisphere ) is very accurate !

 

I see no problem or conflicts between 2D and 3D representations ^_^'

 

 

Quote:
Can you also explain why an aircraft flying directly 'North' on your hypothetical map (East in reality) does not ever run into Antarctica? 

I didn't got your question ^_^'

 

I've explained the routes thing, and showed it's valid even for the flat earth model ^_^'

 

Would you explain your question more ^_^

 

 

^_^

  

 

 

Ja ne ~


BobSpence
High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Ok, the amount of light

Ok, the amount of light reaching us from the sun can also reduce if cloud and/or dust in the atmosphere gets in the way, I figured you were smart enough to know I was not referring to the effects due to such local variables. Silly assumption.

In a clear sky, if it is far enough way to send us, say, a quarter of the usual light and heat, it would have to appear half the diameter.

It never changes in apparent size anywhere near this amount, let alone enough to reach the darkness of night.

As it gets near the horizon, it looks different in shape and size dues to two effects:

1: The refraction of the light rays as the hit the atmosphere at an angle;

2. A subjective effect where objects that appear close to others, as when the sun is near the horizon, can actually seem larger than when we see them well away from any others, as when the sun is high overhead.

You are either a deliberate troll, or really, really deluded.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
BobSpence1 wrote:Ok, the

BobSpence1 wrote:

Ok, the amount of light reaching us from the sun can also reduce if cloud and/or dust in the atmosphere gets in the way, I figured you were smart enough to know I was not referring to the effects due to such local variables. Silly assumption.

In a clear sky, if it is far enough way to send us, say, a quarter of the usual light and heat, it would have to appear half the diameter.

It never changes in apparent size anywhere near this amount, let alone enough to reach the darkness of night.

As it gets near the horizon, it looks different in shape and size dues to two effects:

1: The refraction of the light rays as the hit the atmosphere at an angle;

2. A subjective effect where objects that appear close to others, as when the sun is near the horizon, can actually seem larger than when we see them well away from any others, as when the sun is high overhead.

You are either a deliberate troll, or really, really deluded.

I am going beyond troll, I am going brain dead zombie, just reposting things that have been so refuted that it's not even bothered to discuss anymore by any serious rational thinker, scientist or even most believers in god.