you have it all wrong felix. the earth is not accelerating, it's at a constant speed. the down force wind created by the rising earth is what pushes you back down to earth, not earth accelerating up to you. once the wind reaches the earths surface it becomes horizontal thus creating the illusion that hides the perpendicular forces keeping us on the ground. you can infact feel this force slighty in your hair if you stand in place and jump.
In my many investigative adventures I have personally questioned high altitude pilots who state that no matter the altitude, there is no visible curvature to be seen. It definitely looks flat. There are experiments which have been conducted to prove alleged curvature, and there have been just as many to prove the absence thereof.
In regards to the photo you have produced, it will take more than photoshope NASA, KFC propaganda to convince me.
The wind is essentially allowed to do what it pleases. I could be wrong on this, however I believe it has to do once again to the slight pull of the celestial bodies.
of course it does not ignore the basic factors ingluencing the winds direction and speed, just excludes downward force as a preeminent factor.
Surely theres no shortage of folks whove gone high enough to see the curvature. Not too mention literally thousands of pictures of it. Can they all be lying? Can all the photos be photoshopped? Just to maintain the illusion of a round earth?
It has also been called a fisheye lense. The photos would be the easy part. How many people have been to space, or supposedly been? Consider the funding of all the space agencies of the world. After considering the number of people required to execute such a scam, theres more than enough to go around after the enormous amount of liabilities that must be paid.
Would be interesting to figure what gravity is before we start believing/nonbelieving in it. How do you define what gravity is? To me, jumping out of the window and consequently hitting my head against the tarmac is a pretty convincing experience to believe in gravity.
Excellent post good friend, I had forgotten to invoke the fisheye lense, this contribution is truly admirable of you!
Now, GPS, satellite TV and radio, Antartica as an ice wall, an allegedly visible ISS, tectonic plates and seismic activity, and flight times. Because a FE would be like a race track, the outside track inevitably being a longer distance to travel than the inside. And of course moonlight.......
Yes, have you heard of any alternative theories? If so what were they? If not, why then would you think it was anything other than the earths mass spinning around and about fast enough to hold you down? People simply do not question what is the so called obvious, thats why this is a truly remarkable scam. Rocket technology was pioneered around 1914 by germans. After WW1, and especially after WW2 when the technology had significant developments, many of those rocket scientists defected to american and soviet allegience. It was with there help that U.S and Soviet rocket technology developed and the first satellite was launched by the russians in 1957, called sputnik. Initially the technology was sought after due to the military implications of ICBM's. Of course there were those enthralled by the prospect of space travel, however in the U.S and U.S.S.R, which were the countries which led the world (and still do) in space exploration it was military might and superiority which dominated their exorbitant allocated budgets. The U.S and USSR space agencies worked together secretly throughout the cold war (then not so secretly during detente as I metioned earlier) To perpetuate the lie of a round earth due to the fact that there were enormous profits to be gained. On top of that, it allowed subsequent faux technologies to be developed and sold on the basis of cutting edge satellite technology. To make things better for them, one of the major FE proponents who recognized the potential profit margins for a space agency via rocket tech to feul an ever increasing war effort, was an entreprenuer himself who had a secret to creating delicious fried chicken and was promoted to Kentucky Colonel in 1935. This only made things easier and still does.
For someone not believing in the Law of Gravity you apparently go out of your way to obey it. It's easy enough to be the rebel you know.
Who goes out of the way to obey gravity and how? Its easy to be a rebel? I dont believe you in this particullar case. If we were listening to louie louie by the kingsmen and drinking steel reserve I would agree with you, however in this Particular scenario you have made a rather bold statement with little in the way of corraboration.
You may not believe in it however you sure as heck can't avoid it given your current position on this planet. Get used to it. It ain't so bad.
The OP no longer seems to be an active participant in this thread. I, in turn have employed it as a hub to promote FET. If you have any questions regarding this most excellent theory please feel free to inquire.
The OP was clearly a troll in attempt to manipulate these most excellent fora and the honorable participants thereof. Fortunately others and myself have redirected The thread to a noble cause.
I thought it was the Music section ... [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TErQbwHHh_w"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TErQbwHHh_w[/ame]
Do you have more information concerning the sun? For example, what is the shape of the sun? Even a simple sketch would be nice. A pull similar to Netwon's law of gravity? Could you provide the math describing this force? That would be helpful indeed.
It is definitley nice to have some soothing tunes in the wake of intellectual discourse. Thank you most respected friend.
Some have said the sun is a metallic disk, while others suggest it is spherical. I do not have math regarding the gravitational pull of tthe celestial bodies, sorry. However as the math based on gravity as I understand is based on theory and not fact, I am certain that more experienced FE advocates have the requested information at hand, which of course would also be based on theory.
the very foundation of our belief is The Bible. Even though this has been the case...........I do not believe in The Bible. The Bible has all been a lie and that Man is not capable of telling the truth, hence this claim of Newton in the year 1650 of gravity is of no exception. Anyone who believe in the bible, in the claim of God and in Jesus Christ cannot and is not capable of telling any truth. polscie.
Let me ask you this... If there is no gravity, and the Earth is not (relatively) spherical, how to satellites work? Or the International Space Station? How do they stay in orbit? What is an orbit with a flat Earth and no gravity? Wouldn't the Earth just fly up and meet them, causing them to crash into the Earth? But as I explained and tried to illustrate with an analogy, if those "theories" conflict with observable fact, then they are logically incorrect and thus, not theories at all. Also, you still have not answered why you believe these things?
