WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

[Rayvin 4949]

31 minutes ago, Andrew said:

Fish, what are you doing? 

 

I wasn't here last time wolfy was commenting and he's the first flat earther I've ever had any dialogue with  I dunno what the Fish' excuse is though.

[Alex 30245]

Rayvin, you should know you'll get absolutely fuck all sense out of him. Same goes for Wolfy

[Park Life 70]

2 hours ago, wolfy said:

I don't pay much attention to godlike productions or ATS.

As for shills; I imagine they're everywhere with everything, not just alternate theories to the science we are coaxed into accepting.

The way I see it is simple. I leave it up to each person to decide for themselves, either in the comfort of their own surroundings or as a group, depending on where they find themselves when viewing/debating topics that are deemed conspiracies.

 

As for the pressure issue you mention. It's not like a balloon and doesn't expand continually. It expands and retracts due to energy build or drop, wherever it happens on Earth.

The atmosphere is stacked and is built from the bottom up and from centre to as far as it can finish up to create effect for life to exist.

The rest is simply a break down of frozen ice from dense to less dense  the further out it goes , leading to the dome ice skin of the lightest frozen elements we know of. Basically hydrogen and helium.

 

At sea level with a balloon, you are blowing up the balloon  directly against opposing pressure and reliant of the balloon skin stretching to push away the atmospheric pressure that surrounds that balloon, which in effect is trying to crush the balloon back to equalised pressure but is stopped by the pressure build up that you provided internally of that balloon.

 

The Earth dome builds by push up and out of energy but each time it happens, it creates a skin at the dome due to molecules being allowed to expand more and more as they are stacked up.

Those molecules at sea level are under extreme pressure from the above stack but those above are under much less pressure due to expansion higher up, meaning less molecules per area and less pressure.

 

The whole lot are vibrating from bottom to top but the bottom (sea level) are vibrating under extreme pressure meaning more friction, meaning more heat generated.

Higher up we have much less vibration and so, much less friction, meaning much less heat generated...which is why you see snow covered mountains, etc.

 

This is how I know we do not live on a spinning globe moving around some huge ball of fire in a vacuum and all the rest of what... I believe... is much more nonsensical that many other theories out there.

Is Mars a cell as well?

[ewerk 26188]

4 minutes ago, Alex said:

Rayvin, you should know you'll get absolutely fuck all sense out of him. Same goes for Wolfy

 

[wolfy 12]

2 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

So you don't believe this due to the need to justify some manner of shady global conspiracy seeking to protect its own interests, you actually consider that the science alone isn't sufficient to support the 'spherical globe in space' argument. You have no agenda beyond this, you just don't believe what we're told. I actually consider that to be somewhat brave but it would also depend on how important this stuff is to your sense of self. Does this stuff define you, or is it just something you believe while living an otherwise entirely standard life?

There's a lot of stuff I do not believe is the whole truth about various stuff to do with Earth and what goes on in it.

However, I'm not about to walk about with placards declaring this and that.

Natural science is one thing and theoretical science is exactly that, no matter how close a theory is to what peers believe is the nearest to the reality.

 

Peers are merely the jury that take a theory among theories and decide which one is the more percentage, correct.

 

My agenda is basically satisfying my own mind in finding potential truth's of potential misinformation.

On top of that I have my own alternate thoughts on what Earth potential is, which I think fits better than what we are schooled into, or have been schooled into all our lives.

We are even taught to look on anyone with alternative thoughts to the norm, as conspiracy nutters and every other name.

This is just the training kicking in. Basically following protocol.

[Rayvin 4949]

8 minutes ago, Alex said:

Rayvin, you should know you'll get absolutely fuck all sense out of him. Same goes for Wolfy

 

[Rayvin 4949]

1 minute ago, wolfy said:

There's a lot of stuff I do not believe is the whole truth about various stuff to do with Earth and what goes on in it.

However, I'm not about to walk about with placards declaring this and that.

Natural science is one thing and theoretical science is exactly that, no matter how close a theory is to what peers believe is the nearest to the reality.

 

Peers are merely the jury that take a theory among theories and decide which one is the more percentage, correct.

 

My agenda is basically satisfying my own mind in finding potential truth's of potential misinformation.

On top of that I have my own alternate thoughts on what Earth potential is, which I think fits better than what we are schooled into, or have been schooled into all our lives.

We are even taught to look on anyone with alternative thoughts to the norm, as conspiracy nutters and every other name.

This is just the training kicking in. Basically following protocol.

 

I don't even entirely disagree with the premise that we're all schooled in a certain direction as far as thoughts go, and that deviating from this and arriving at our own conclusions is important. I just don't get why this issue is the hill to die on, so to speak. But maybe that's what makes your position genuine.

[wolfy 12]

7 minutes ago, Park Life said:

Is Mars a cell as well?

I don't believe in planets like we are told.

I know, I know...but we can see them in space.

What can we really see and what are we coaxed into accepting that we see?

Two totally different scenarios, but still, it's just my opinion.

[Park Life 70]

The problem people have is that your reasoning is so vague. You can believe whatever you want but it doesn't get interesting unless you come up with something concrete.

[Meenzer 13982]

Concrete is a myth.

[wolfy 12]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

I don't even entirely disagree with the premise that we're all schooled in a certain direction as far as thoughts go, and that deviating from this and arriving at our own conclusions is important. I just don't get why this issue is the hill to die on, so to speak. But maybe that's what makes your position genuine.

To be blunt and honest, it's just my thought process merely challenging what we were basically schooled into, like I mentioned.

However, as much as it appears like this is my life; it's not. It's merely a small part of one of many hobbies, with this being mainly a thought process for a hobby with a few minor experiments to go with it to aid in my thinking on certain stuff.

 

Chances are that I will expire with little truth's told about Earth. The chances of anything official coming out to say that this and that has been a fabrication are extremely slim, I would think.

 

That's fair enough, because nothing I think of or do will change a thing. I just want to see as much truth gleaned from stories told and pictures sold to us as fact, that reek of fiction in many cases, as far as I'm concerned.

 

I don't have a wall full of newspaper cutting and all of that stuff. lol

[Renton 17628]

The huge majority of science is based on empiricism, which involves testing hypotheses, rather than just making them up and accepting them because they feel right. Where the evidence thus approach works? I'd suggest it is clear from the massive technological advances we have had since the enlightenment period. 

 

It's all very well to say all beliefs are equally valid and must be respected but this is patent nonsense. Because it doesn't get us anywhere. If everyone was a "free thinker" like Wolfy we'd all be sitting around in caves scratching our arses still, which is pretty much what Wolfy does. There is a reality, a real physical universe. And the only way to understand it is to observe and measure it, through the application of scientific method.

 

Praise be to science.

 

P.s. Rayvin, avoid getting bogged down with arguing facts or details of any kind with Wolfy. Anything that doesn't fit with his own version of "reality" he dismisses as "fake". As noted, he won't provide a motive for this vast conspiracy though. 

[Rayvin 4949]

2 minutes ago, Renton said:

The huge majority of science is based on empiricism, which involves testing hypotheses, rather than just making them up and accepting them because they feel right. Where the evidence thus approach works? I'd suggest it is clear from the massive technological advances we have had since the enlightenment period. 

 

It's all very well to say all beliefs are equally valid and must be respected but this is patent nonsense. Because it doesn't get us anywhere. If everyone was a "free thinker" like Wolfy we'd all be sitting around in caves scratching our arses still, which is pretty much what Wolfy does. There is a reality, a real physical universe. And the only way to understand it is to observe and measure it, through the application of scientific method.

 

Praise be to science.

 

P.s. Rayvin, avoid getting bogged down with arguing facts or details of any kind with Wolfy. Anything that doesn't fit with his own version of "reality" he dismisses as "fake". As noted, he won't provide a motive for this vast conspiracy though. 

 

Nah I'm trying to argue less on here anyway. Was just interested in his motivations for believing what he does.

 

I agree with what you've said here btw, but also can't help vaguely admiring someone prepared to go against the grain on conventional thought - as long as it's well reasoned.

[wolfy 12]

4 minutes ago, Park Life said:

The problem people have is that your reasoning is so vague. You can believe whatever you want but it doesn't get interesting unless you come up with something concrete.

My reasoning is always going to be so vague if people are not of the mind to grasp what I'm talking about.

It's only natural that what I'm saying will come across as nonsense to those who have their own ideal picture that they learned many many years ago which is basically officially ingrained.

Let's face it, we were all basically trained to accept what was on offer which is the reason why we get grades for exam sheets, based on regurgitating what was schooled into our heads from nursery to university, in terms of what I'm talking about.

 

Those who recall and regurgitate the most will get the better grades.

To put it in simple terms, let's look at astronomy.

 

Start at the basics or what so called star formations are and then follow some routes to what they are and what they're part of, etc, etc.

How many people who study astronomy actually physically know what's what?

I don't mean what they were told. I mean by legitimate means of working it out for themselves?

 

People can argue and say ," I've been an astronomer for 35 years, so don't tell me I don't know astronomy."

Ok, I wouldn't, because I don't know what astronomy is except that the telescope is the tool of use, as a major player.

 

A scuba diver can view a certain part of the sea and physically interact with a lot of the things under it.

All I'm saying is, we are reliant on a lot of story telling and guesswork, plus fantasy, all passed off as reality but shrouded behind the word "theory" which gives chance to change as a sort of contingency plan.

 

 

[wolfy 12]

8 minutes ago, Renton said:

The huge majority of science is based on empiricism, which involves testing hypotheses, rather than just making them up and accepting them because they feel right. Where the evidence thus approach works? I'd suggest it is clear from the massive technological advances we have had since the enlightenment period. 

 

It's all very well to say all beliefs are equally valid and must be respected but this is patent nonsense. Because it doesn't get us anywhere. If everyone was a "free thinker" like Wolfy we'd all be sitting around in caves scratching our arses still, which is pretty much what Wolfy does. There is a reality, a real physical universe. And the only way to understand it is to observe and measure it, through the application of scientific method.

 

Praise be to science.

 

P.s. Rayvin, avoid getting bogged down with arguing facts or details of any kind with Wolfy. Anything that doesn't fit with his own version of "reality" he dismisses as "fake". As noted, he won't provide a motive for this vast conspiracy though. 

 All I need to do is play the inquisitive and see what magic comes from it.

I ask how oceans manage to adhere to a spherical Earth rotating in a vacuum and yet it acts like it's sitting in a concave holder that appears to keep it all in.

We get told that gravity manages this just fine.

The very same gravity that allows clouds to rise.

The very same gravity that supposedly pulls lead weights towards each other (Cavendish experiment, allegedly) and yet a grain of sand does not get attracted to a mountain.

 

Water is flat. We know it's flat and level over an area.

The issue is, we are coaxed into believing it bends around a ball and not only does gravity hold it on the ball, it also allows a sun and moon to grab it with their gravity supposedly pull it up and push it back down, creating tides.

 

Why does this seem logical to the masses against rational thought?

It's because we were all schooled into that belief.

 

It's all about who has the mind to want to question this stuff. Many don't because most people just want to go about their routines, which is fair enough.

 

[The Fish 8950]

2 minutes ago, wolfy said:

 All I need to do is play the inquisitive and see what magic comes from it.

I ask how oceans manage to adhere to a spherical Earth rotating in a vacuum and yet it acts like it's sitting in a concave holder that appears to keep it all in.

We get told that gravity manages this just fine.

The very same gravity that allows clouds to rise.

The very same gravity that supposedly pulls lead weights towards each other (Cavendish experiment, allegedly) and yet a grain of sand does not get attracted to a mountain.

 

Water is flat. We know it's flat and level over an area.

The issue is, we are coaxed into believing it bends around a ball and not only does gravity hold it on the ball, it also allows a sun and moon to grab it with their gravity supposedly pull it up and push it back down, creating tides.

 

Why does this seem logical to the masses against rational thought?

It's because we were all schooled into that belief.

 

It's all about who has the mind to want to question this stuff. Many don't because most people just want to go about their routines, which is fair enough.

 

 

It's lizards really. I mean logically, if you think about it, it's lizards.

[Park Life 70]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet

[wolfy 12]

5 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

It's lizards really. I mean logically, if you think about it, it's lizards.

I watched that film years ago. The first one with Mark Singer as the leader battling the lizards.

I didn't take too much notice of the newer one. Did you watch that one?

[Renton 17628]

13 minutes ago, wolfy said:

 All I need to do is play the inquisitive and see what magic comes from it.

I ask how oceans manage to adhere to a spherical Earth rotating in a vacuum and yet it acts like it's sitting in a concave holder that appears to keep it all in.

We get told that gravity manages this just fine.

The very same gravity that allows clouds to rise.

The very same gravity that supposedly pulls lead weights towards each other (Cavendish experiment, allegedly) and yet a grain of sand does not get attracted to a mountain.

 

Water is flat. We know it's flat and level over an area.

The issue is, we are coaxed into believing it bends around a ball and not only does gravity hold it on the ball, it also allows a sun and moon to grab it with their gravity supposedly pull it up and push it back down, creating tides.

 

Why does this seem logical to the masses against rational thought?

It's because we were all schooled into that belief.

 

It's all about who has the mind to want to question this stuff. Many don't because most people just want to go about their routines, which is fair enough.

 

 

There's just no excuse for your ignorance in this day and age. We've walked you through all this stuff before, holding your hand. Your not only rejecting the entirety of science, but also common sense. Could give you so many examples, such as how airplane pilots are inducted into your grand conspiracy, but what's the point? Been there before and was only mildly less annoying than a cluster headache.

 

The World works as described. This is what gets to you imo. I'm happy for that to remain the case. 

Edited May 16, 2017 by Renton

[Park Life 70]

11 minutes ago, wolfy said:

 All I need to do is play the inquisitive and see what magic comes from it.

I ask how oceans manage to adhere to a spherical Earth rotating in a vacuum and yet it acts like it's sitting in a concave holder that appears to keep it all in.

We get told that gravity manages this just fine.

The very same gravity that allows clouds to rise.

The very same gravity that supposedly pulls lead weights towards each other (Cavendish experiment, allegedly) and yet a grain of sand does not get attracted to a mountain.

 

Water is flat. We know it's flat and level over an area.

The issue is, we are coaxed into believing it bends around a ball and not only does gravity hold it on the ball, it also allows a sun and moon to grab it with their gravity supposedly pull it up and push it back down, creating tides.

 

Why does this seem logical to the masses against rational thought?

It's because we were all schooled into that belief.

 

It's all about who has the mind to want to question this stuff. Many don't because most people just want to go about their routines, which is fair enough.

 

Water isn't water Wolfie it's Hydrogen and oxygen particles that interact with each other and their surroundings. Gravity is a weak force but the earths gravity is enough to hold the particles in place even though they are also 'attracted' to the moon (tides).

[The Fish 8950]

1 minute ago, wolfy said:

I watched that film years ago. The first one with Mark Singer as the leader battling the lizards.

I didn't take too much notice of the newer one. Did you watch that one?

 

No Wolfy I don't believe it exists because I haven't experienced it for myself and my staggering arrogance on this makes me a freethinker, and not a sheeple.

[wolfy 12]

6 minutes ago, Park Life said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnet

Yeah. Imagine what could be going on in the centre of this big Earth.

Imagine a massive magnetism created by energy, causing super friction and the glow of a sun  that is reflected back to us as light and radiated heat due to spectrum colouring waves and also the heat waves in terms of the infra reds and what not.

 

 

[wolfy 12]

3 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

There's just no excuse for your ignorance in this day and age. We've walked you through all this stuff before, holding your hand. Your not only rejecting the entirety of science, but also common sense. Could give you so many examples, such as how airplane pilots are inducted into your grand conspiracy, but what's the point? Been there before and was only mildly less annoying than a cluster headache.

 

The World works as described. This is what gets to you imo. I'm happy for that to remain the case. 

Do airplane pilots sit in tin cans using electrical instrument panels for navigation?

How are they supposed to know?

[The Fish 8950]

3 minutes ago, wolfy said:

Do airplane pilots sit in tin cans using electrical instrument panels for navigation?

How are they supposed to know?

Because a great deal of pilots have flown sufficiently high to witness the curvature of the earth with their own two eyes.

 

But I guess they're just in on the grand conspiracy, right?

[Renton 17628]

Ahh yes, tin cans and fake instruments. Brilliant.