Flat earth or globe
04 April 2016, 01:22 PM
#241
Scooby Regular
04 April 2016, 09:22 PM
#245
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the earth is a globe as most people would agree with then why can everyone in the world no matter where they are be standing up.feet on the ground and sky above their head at the same time.
I know it's a joke to say Australians are upside down but in reality they would have to be if we live on a ball.
I know it's a joke to say Australians are upside down but in reality they would have to be if we live on a ball.
Last edited by subevo; 04 April 2016 at 09:30 PM.
04 April 2016, 09:57 PM
#247
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the earth is a globe as most people would agree with then why can everyone in the world no matter where they are be standing up.feet on the ground and sky above their head at the same time.
I know it's a joke to say Australians are upside down but in reality they would have to be if we live on a ball.
I know it's a joke to say Australians are upside down but in reality they would have to be if we live on a ball.
04 April 2016, 11:32 PM
#249
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It reminds me of a story.
Once upon a time, a King was having a leisure walk with his favourite witty courtier. They used to banter with each other something chronic. On that walk, the King pulled his witty courtier's leg by ordering him to find the centre of the earth. Witty courtier requested the King to lend him his walking stick, which king gladly did. The courtier walked about 10 steps away from the king, tapped the stick on the earth with his absolute assertion and said- "Here. Here's is the centre of the earth, your Highness". The king said- "Are you having a giraffe??? How the hell do you know that this is the centre of the earth???". The courtier replied- "I'm telling you, your Highness, that this IS the centre of the earth! I've done what you asked me to do, so my job is done here. Now that's your task to measure the distances from the ends of the earth to this point; in to determine for yourself that my finding is absolutely correct". Neither the king nor his subordinates were capable to measure such distances in those olden days, anyway. The king had to, once again, bow to the quick wit of his cheeky courtier and for the rest of their walk, he didn't half smile with his witty courtier by his side.
05 April 2016, 12:00 AM
#250
Scooby Regular
If the earth is a globe as most people would agree with then why can everyone in the world no matter where they are be standing up.feet on the ground and sky above their head at the same time.
I know it's a joke to say Australians are upside down but in reality they would have to be if we live on a ball.
I know it's a joke to say Australians are upside down but in reality they would have to be if we live on a ball.
05 April 2016, 12:26 AM
#251
I could quote engineers that dispute nists findings but what would be the point , you and many others are satisfied they did a legit investigation , so anybody saying otherwise is a nut
You can now carry on taring everybody that questions the authorities with the same brush ,
Did I say I think you are a ****** ?
05 April 2016, 12:50 AM
#252
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hodgy is not a banker. Calling him a banker is like saying that the earth is flat.
Note: I've used B for W because I don't like to use the W word unless absolutely necessary.
Note: I've used B for W because I don't like to use the W word unless absolutely necessary.
05 April 2016, 01:21 AM
#254
Scooby Regular
Hodgy you ****** , harsh I know but so **** , I was clarifying what I ment by the first of its kind (i.e, the first steel structure high rise ) which is a fact , now fact or not the reason the fire alone caused it's collapse was due to the large span off the floor beams expanding .
I could quote engineers that dispute nists findings but what would be the point , you and many others are satisfied they did a legit investigation , so anybody saying otherwise is a nut
You can now carry on taring everybody that questions the authorities with the same brush ,
Did I say I think you are a ****** ?
I could quote engineers that dispute nists findings but what would be the point , you and many others are satisfied they did a legit investigation , so anybody saying otherwise is a nut
You can now carry on taring everybody that questions the authorities with the same brush ,
Did I say I think you are a ****** ?
Anyway, the World Trade center was innovative in some aspects of its design and construction, according to doing some reading, not the first of it's kind. Wikipedia can be pretty wrong sometimes, but I feel it's ok this time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Insurance_Building
05 April 2016, 02:03 AM
#256
Scooby Regular
Just because something hasn't happened often/before/since, doesn't mean that it automatically means conspiracy. And not all architects, or even a majority, are saying that there must be some weird shenanigans going on either. So that is no argument here. Anyway, look hard enough for something you want to see and you will find the evidence to support it.....no point in too-in and fro-ing with you on this. We will never agree.
05 April 2016, 07:34 AM
#259
Scooby Regular
A lot of firsts that day
First time a fully fuel loaded airliner was flown at full speed into one of the tallest buildings in the world
Amazingly the first time a second airliner was flown into one of the other tallest buildings in the world - on the same day
Firsts happen (a controversial statement to reality deniers, but a simple fact to people who live in the reality based universe)
Unless of course you are a "no planer" - then you can make up any **** you want
A&E seem to have given up on WT1&2 and concentrate on WT7, they have got nowhere in 15 years because there is nowhere to go
Abolsoutly no evidence of controlled demolition - their only "angle" is to nit pick at the NIST report
The problem is the NIST report only really deals with the collapse mechanism - the "failure event" if you will
Once this has been established - gravity does the rest
A bit like the Lockerbie terrorist attack - once the failure event has been established - I.e. a bomb in the luggage hold
Exactly how the plane fell to the ground (and the aerie picture of the seemingly undamaged cockpit came to rest in a field) is really moot because we know that gravity was the primary cause.
Controlled demolition was not investigated because there was no evidence, the role of Shawaddy waddy in the events of 911 was not investigated because there was no evidence of Shawaddy waddy's involvment
I can list a million reason why a million thing we're not investigated - all because there was no evidence
But overwhelming evidence for what we saw - building failing due to unique events
First time a fully fuel loaded airliner was flown at full speed into one of the tallest buildings in the world
Amazingly the first time a second airliner was flown into one of the other tallest buildings in the world - on the same day
Firsts happen (a controversial statement to reality deniers, but a simple fact to people who live in the reality based universe)
Unless of course you are a "no planer" - then you can make up any **** you want
A&E seem to have given up on WT1&2 and concentrate on WT7, they have got nowhere in 15 years because there is nowhere to go
Abolsoutly no evidence of controlled demolition - their only "angle" is to nit pick at the NIST report
The problem is the NIST report only really deals with the collapse mechanism - the "failure event" if you will
Once this has been established - gravity does the rest
A bit like the Lockerbie terrorist attack - once the failure event has been established - I.e. a bomb in the luggage hold
Exactly how the plane fell to the ground (and the aerie picture of the seemingly undamaged cockpit came to rest in a field) is really moot because we know that gravity was the primary cause.
Controlled demolition was not investigated because there was no evidence, the role of Shawaddy waddy in the events of 911 was not investigated because there was no evidence of Shawaddy waddy's involvment
I can list a million reason why a million thing we're not investigated - all because there was no evidence
But overwhelming evidence for what we saw - building failing due to unique events
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 05 April 2016 at 07:37 AM.
05 April 2016, 08:01 AM
#261
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe we need a group buy on a large ship to sail the seas to actually put this rubbish to bed, if the earth was flat you wouldnt be able to keep on going round, which you can, it's not like oyu have to turn back at the end.
I do wonder what is on the other side though.......
I do wonder what is on the other side though.......
05 April 2016, 08:12 AM
#262
I think anybody that watched building 7 collapse would say it looked controlled , in fact if it was put in the middle of a compilation of videos of buildings like it being demolished through controlled demolition it would be imposable to tell which was building 7 unless you recognise the building
05 April 2016, 08:16 AM
#263
Maybe we need a group buy on a large ship to sail the seas to actually put this rubbish to bed, if the earth was flat you wouldnt be able to keep on going round, which you can, it's not like oyu have to turn back at the end.
I do wonder what is on the other side though.......
I do wonder what is on the other side though.......
I bet ships go around the perimeter, as close to the edge as they dare without toppling over. They then arrive back where they started and fool us into believing the Earth is a sphere. That must be it!
05 April 2016, 08:19 AM
#264
I can't think of a reason why they would want to demolish it or wtc 1 and 2 , not sure why crashing the planes into them wasn't enough ,
What would make it easier for me to dismiss would be pictures and videos of the fires and 10 story high hole in the side ,
Other annoying fact is the fire alarm system being set to test at the time , if it was in its normal mode fire fighters would of known where the fire started ,
Similar to all fighter jets being sent hundreds of miles away on the day ,
What would make it easier for me to dismiss would be pictures and videos of the fires and 10 story high hole in the side ,
Other annoying fact is the fire alarm system being set to test at the time , if it was in its normal mode fire fighters would of known where the fire started ,
Similar to all fighter jets being sent hundreds of miles away on the day ,
05 April 2016, 09:22 AM
#270
Scooby Regular
I think anybody that watched building 7 collapse would say it looked controlled , in fact if it was put in the middle of a compilation of videos of buildings like it being demolished through controlled demolition it would be imposable to tell which was building 7 unless you recognise the building
Gravity
the failure events differ, but the force of Gravity is universal
explain the physical process that would cause WT7 to collapse in any other way than it did - i.e. straight down?
A&E love to show footage of the collapse - but the always cherry pick the start point
they never show the east penthouse collapsing first - as a result of column 79 failing
by the time it has collapsed through the building (and when A&E start their footage) the building is fatally compromised, it is a "dead man walking"
the interior has totally collapsed - the outside walls have no support
the building was showing signs of stress, bulging etc before it collapsed, the fire dept are on record as saying it was going to collapse
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 05 April 2016 at 09:35 AM.