Author Topic: Interesting flat earth plane flights video (Read 36751 times)

BRCatholic · « **Reply #60 on:** July 08, 2015, 09:52:07 PM »

For those who believe in gravity just use this formula for a helium balloon and the earth and tell me the results:

Fa=Fb = g*(ma*mb)/r

g=9,8 m/s²
ma= mass of the earth (kg)
mb= mass of the helium ballon (kg)
r= distance between the two (m)

ps m = meters

So that means that the helium balloon is "attracted" to the ball earth as the ball Earth is "attracted" to the helium balloon.

Okay this is Newtonian physics(magic).

So the Helium balloon and the earth has the same Force of attraction. As can shown above. Now tell me, do you believe that a helium balloon can attract the earth upwards ?

Do you believe in that ?
If you do not then you have to add the momentum to explain why the planets stay in their orbits, and then you have to invent the vacuum of space to explain why it never stops and here we go forever (and tons of other things ad infinitum because is a lie). Take your sides.

Then you are ready to accept that nothing exists and causes something. And in the invisible hand of the markets and here we are.
It is a total mess because of lack of philosophy.

Usury the same thing. That is what is all about in fact, neo-platonism at its best.
But don't worry the enlightened ones have a solution(tons of them) for you. The plagiarist JEW Albert, everything is relative voilà.

Disputaciones · « **Reply #61 on:** July 08, 2015, 10:15:14 PM »

Quote from: BRCatholic

Which video ?

I said OP video, as in video of the original or first post.

BRCatholic · « **Reply #62 on:** July 08, 2015, 11:12:07 PM »

Anyways, I wouldn't say with 100% certainty that is flat just because of electromagnetism.

But for all practical purposes it is flat.

I also enter in this field by accident, because I was wondering why cellphones with GPS needed connection to the cell towers. When I was in a farm my GPS didn't work, so I started to research about it.

Now, I think the youtube channels are there to discredit the theory. As you can research in google, setting the dates for early 90s, and you can find some articles on the subject.

The main proponents are masons/shills 100% sure.
But we should keep a eye on this because it would have various repercussions for our Faith.

Now if a mistake was made by the Church in the past, that would be completely understandable.

The heliocentric model is not compatible with Christianity though and that should be absolutely clear. And just take a look at the Sistine chapel to see that something is really wrong with the hierarchy, and that didn't started with VII, that needs to be clear for all Catholics, if we are to restore our Beloved Church.

BRCatholic · « **Reply #63 on:** July 08, 2015, 11:13:52 PM »

BTNYC · « **Reply #64 on:** July 08, 2015, 11:44:32 PM »

Quote from: BRCatholic

Anyways, I wouldn't say with 100% certainty that is flat just because of electromagnetism.

But for all practical purposes it is flat.

I also enter in this field by accident, because I was wondering why cellphones with GPS needed connection to the cell towers. When I was in a farm my GPS didn't work, so I started to research about it.

Now, I think the youtube channels are there to discredit the theory. As you can research in google, setting the dates for early 90s, and you can find some articles on the subject.

The main proponents are masons/shills 100% sure.
But we should keep a eye on this because it would have various repercussions for our Faith.

Now if a mistake was made by the Church in the past, that would be completely understandable.

The heliocentric model is not compatible with Christianity though and that should be absolutely clear. And just take a look at the Sistine chapel to see that something is really wrong with the hierarchy, and that didn't started with VII, that needs to be clear for all Catholics, if we are to restore our Beloved Church.

"Shill" is a funny word for a brand-new, single-topic poster to be using.

Regardless, do you have an explanation for how fata morgana mirages work?

And with respect to the saints you cite who could be interpreted as supporting flat-earth theory, what have you to say about the saints and doctors - of no less caliber than Bede and Aquinas - who explicitly expounded a spherical earth? What do you make of the fact that none of the Scholastics from the Middle Ages onward believed in a flat earth? Is Thomism an example of pre-V2 "corruption?" How about Saints Pius V and Pius X? Heroic papal giants, or more "corrupt" hierarchs?

BRCatholic · « **Reply #65 on:** July 09, 2015, 07:09:38 AM »

Refute.

Prove gravity please. Explain me how a helium balloon goes up against the force which holds all oceans and the antipodes.

And if you think something about me, tell explicitly. Let your yes, be yes and your no, be no.
Otherwise guards your judgment for your pairs.

What is so hard to understand in that explanation of the spherical earth and antipodes in St. Augustine passage ?

I explained that is a completely understandable position (ball earth without antipodes), as it was irrelevant for that time (it's not nowadays) because they didn't know about the Americas or Oceania.

If I'm correct, St. Thomas viewed "gravity" as difference of density too. As Aristotle.That is correct. As I'm telling the antipodes is the core of the question as St. Augustine and the Church Fathers clearly saw.

And I'm talking Scientifically, in science (the lowest form of intellectual thought), you have to prove your assertions.

About illusions I need to check it out before I can tell you something, I don't have time now. I will do it after.

St. Thomas is my guide, don't talk about what you don't know.

BTNYC · « **Reply #66 on:** July 09, 2015, 07:49:02 AM »

Quote from: BRCatholic

About illusions I need to check it out before I can tell you something, I don't have time now. I will do it after.

Ok. Pardon me if I don't hold my breath.

Dolores · « **Reply #67 on:** July 09, 2015, 10:38:08 AM »

A helium-filled balloon is acted upon by two forces, the force of gravity and the force of buoyancy. Because, in the example of a helium-filled balloon, the force of buoyancy exceeds the force of gravity, the balloon goes up instead of down.

cassini · « **Reply #68 on:** July 09, 2015, 02:07:46 PM »

Quote from: BRCatholic

Scientifically speaking the flat earth is the only possible alternative. Because otherwise you need to INVENT a magical force like gravity, this is beyond debate.

Various Saints supported the flat earth. Some regarded as heresy. That is a fact.

Now, the only other possible solution is that we live in a sort of illusion caused by electromagnetism, but that would bend everything (as it's the shape of magnetic fields, toroidal more specifically) . In that case it would be better to keep using the flat earth model for all practical purposes.

And for those saying that we can't trust our eyes, use your touch to prove to yourself that what it appears flat it's flat. lol

This is neo-platonic bs since the inception. Aristotle >>> Plato.
If I'm not confused the Zohar (Jєωιѕн book) says something about "gravity" and ball earth too. So accusing of protestant something could be use both ways.

Electromagnetism is a suppressed subject so I wouldn't venture asserting a proposition.

About being stationary, or it's immovable or the Bible is wrong, and I don't think so, obviously.

The problem with flat earth it's the various shills in this topic. But it's impossible to beat the super fast spinning ball and magic, trickery, diversion explanations.

Chesterton knew something in this regard too, he left hints. And there is no one I trust more than him in these strange days we live in.

The burden of proof is on the spinning Ball theory, because all their explanations are bogus and they never proved gravity (obviously because it doesn't exist, anyone with a brain can see this). Mine is the only reasonable one for a spherical earth (electromagnetism).

PS. I'm a mechanical engineer.

Very interesting post BRCatholic and that includes your quotes on the Antipodes.

So, you are a mechanical engineer, that is more interesting.

The trouble with your comments BR is that I find it hard to tell when you are being sarcastic or airing your views.

I have long considered what WE CALL GRAVITY and a spherical earth. I have no doubt the earth is a sphere because of the science of GEODESY has established enough to show the earth is a sphere. What shape of a sphere they still do not know for sure.

Now take your quote of St Augustine who spoke of upside down men relative to the other side. If a fly landed on the bottom of a bulb it would find itself upside down. St Augustine simply put forward the problems to consider. To the Fathers there could not be men outside the reach of the Church, so they argued that there were no men on the opposite side of the earth beyond the reach of the gospels. And indeed they were correct about that part of the problem in that EVENTUALLY the word of God did reach 'to the four corners of the earth.' The difference between heliocentrism and the Antipodes was that the Antipodes question was never defined and declared a heresy, unlike heliocentrism.

But back to GRAVITY, that 'magic' that keeps things from falling off global spheres, let along supposedly causes bodies in the universe to move in orbits. There have been many THEORIES as to what causes gravity.

After Newton of course, in trying to cement his heliocentric theory, this GRAVITY was given a CAUSE that supposedly made it impossible for the earth NOT to orbit the sun. The world, both in the Church and State fell for it. At last they all thought they understood GRAVITY. Newton's and Einstein's correction of Newton's theory is the favourite because it suits heliocentrism. Accordingly it is held by man as a FACT and thus you find everywhere people talking about the earth and its smaller MASS having to be subservient to the greater Mass of the sun. Science knows it is all theory and many admit the FACT that man HASN'T a CLUE how what we call gravity works.

Personally BR I go for an electromagnetic universe if not caused by the angels for God. we know the earth has a magnetic field within and around it. A friend of mine has found a direct link with orbits and electromagnetic ovals and is currently researching this link. I believe the electric universe will be the next big breakthrough in science. Alas they will find a way to make it fit the helio fraud as another so-called proof.

BRCatholic · « **Reply #69 on:** July 09, 2015, 09:46:48 PM »

Oops my bad I sent the wrong g in the other comment. The number is huge nonetheless that is the point.
G = 6,674287 x 10^-11 m³/kg.s²

Anyways. I don't have patience to discuss the nonsensical notion of gravity.

Believe what you want. I don't give a damn, this website is full of hypocrites. I just wanted to say that. Just like any other "Traditional" catholic website, just crying babies, who don't want to look at the Truth.

Geodesy uahuah. Mercator for example a remarkable proponent. He who did the projection where Greenland is the size of Africa, nice one. On a Ball Earth everything is possible.

About the Fata morgana I saw one suspicious boat that I don't believe in it, and the other is due to known principles of optics that are correct. a.k.a Reflection and Refraction, in which medieval men were great researchers of this area.
Morgana is a famous name for a witch so I wouldn't venture in this area. As I said look at the antipodes before we can talk about another thing.

If you want to tell me exactly what you are referring to I could address the matter.

Now that some invoked the popes and saints and whatever. Tell me guys why the Sistine Chapel stand still and worst than that, it's the chosen place for the papal conclave. Since 1492 cough cough

Let me show just one picture that I guess it should be enough, it's full of nudity anyways, special attention to the fruit:

I bet there are lot of "Catholics" here saying ohh Michaelangelo, ohh da Vinci, ohh Newton, ohh Einstein...beyond pathetic

I hate the old lizard Michael Hoffman but in this regard he is absolutely correct regarding this forum. Although he is just one of those.

"Thus saith the Lord: Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. "

Amen.

BRCatholic · « **Reply #70 on:** July 09, 2015, 09:56:05 PM »

Quote from: Dolores

A helium-filled balloon is acted upon by two forces, the force of gravity and the force of buoyancy. Because, in the example of a helium-filled balloon, the force of buoyancy exceeds the force of gravity, the balloon goes up instead of down.

Buoyancy it's all that is. Dif. of density as I said.

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #71 on:** July 09, 2015, 11:27:04 PM »

Two important considerations to keep in mind:

1. Gravity is a theory with 'problematic aspects', 'theoretical concerns' and 'conflicting observations'. Newton himself had his own reservations.

2. Newton was an occultist:

- ISAAC NEWTON'S Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ The Alchemy of Science and Mysticism

- Isaac Newton: Heretical Scientist

- The Newton You Never Knew: Isaac Newton’s Esotericism Revealed

- NOVA: Newton's Dark Secrets
Centuries-old manuscripts reveal the hidden pursuits of a scientific genius
Aired November 15, 2005 on PBS

- http://koreafreemason.com/tag/issac-newton-freemason/

Disputaciones · « **Reply #72 on:** July 10, 2015, 12:00:54 AM »

I read that Newton's book "proving" Gravity is 4 times bigger than the Bible. The person who said this said it as a derogatory comment.

BTNYC · « **Reply #73 on:** July 10, 2015, 03:34:59 AM »

Quote from: BRCatholic

Believe what you want. I don't give a damn, this website is full of hypocrites. I just wanted to say that. Just like any other "Traditional" catholic website, just crying babies, who don't want to look at the Truth.

Pot, the kettle hath called thee black.

Perhaps. If we.

Spoke in short.

Truncated semi-sentences we.

Might appear sophisticated and technical.

Like you.

And thereby.

Grasp.

Your gnostic "truth."

...or at least dazzle our opponents into submission with the impression we give of being just too caught up in the celestial echelons of gnosis to condescend to speaking intelligibly to mere mortals in full and comprehensible sentences and paragraphs.

You put me in mind of Glaston. You wouldn't happen to be a sock puppet or side project of his, would you?

Quote from: BRCatholic

About the Fata morgana I saw one suspicious boat that I don't believe in it, and the other is due to known principles of optics that are correct. a.k.a Reflection and Refraction, in which medieval men were great researchers of this area.

Go to a very hot or very cold place with open views of the horizon and you'll see them. Indiana residents have reported seeing the skyline of Cleveland (300 miles away) hovering above the horizon on very hot summer days. The mechanics are simple - super heated strata of air causes an extreme refraction of light such that it is bent at a greater degree than the curvature of the earth, making very distant objects visible when the curvature of the earth would ordinarily obscure them.

It's a simple, common phenomenon; its mechanics easily explicable. The fact that you lot have nothing to offer to explain it is far more deadly to your theory than any of you admit.

Quote from: BRCatholic

Morgana is a famous name for a witch so I wouldn't venture in this area.

Gosh, what an awfully convenient instance of Jack Chick-like superstition masquerading as piety and prudence.

Go ahead and run from the scary optical phenomenon that disproves your asinine theory.

Better raid your medicine chest and throw out all your witch hazel too, you know, for consistency's sake.

Quote from: BRCatholic

Now that some invoked the popes and saints and whatever.

Yeah. "Whatever." The great Doctor of the Church St. Bede for one, who could not have been more explicit in his affirmation of a spherical earth.

Are you going to anathematize him, or will merely dismissing him with words like "whatever" suffice?

Quote from: BRCatholic

Tell me guys why the Sistine Chapel stand still and worst than that, it's the chosen place for the papal conclave. Since 1492 cough cough

Those are not sentences, by the way. That's not how the English language works. Even the glorious likes of you has to submit himself to the rules of the language if we're going to hold a discussion.

That's not a tangential point, either. Being able to communicate properly is pretty central to making yourself intelligible to others. If being intelligible to others doesn't interest you, then get off the forum and return to your contemplative study of your own navel.

Quote from: BRCatholic

Let me show just one picture that I guess it should be enough, it's full of nudity anyways, special attention to the fruit:

I bet there are lot of "Catholics" here saying ohh Michaelangelo, ohh da Vinci, ohh Newton, ohh Einstein...beyond pathetic

Strawmen and association fallacies aplenty from the newbie.

Well, most of us here do swoon in admiration for the likes of St. Pius V and St. Pius X, both of whom were elected in that chapel. Is that "beyond pathetic?" Ought we look askance at those superheroic champions of Catholic Orthodoxy just because you say so?

Quote from: BRCatholic

I hate the old lizard Michael Hoffman but in this regard he is absolutely correct regarding this forum.

I doubt you hate him. You sound an awful lot like him, in your castigation of more than a millennium's worth of popes - some of them great saints - simply because they dare to differ with your own pet obsession. Why if your great intellect has arrived at this conclusion, who are they to contradict it?

Get wisdom, because it is better than gold: and purchase prudence, for it is more precious than silver. The path of the just departeth from evils: he that keepeth his soul keepeth his way. Pride goeth before destruction: and the spirit is lifted up before a fall. It is better to be humbled with the meek, than to divide spoils with the proud.

Proverbs xvi:xvi-xix

Amen.

BRCatholic · « **Reply #74 on:** July 10, 2015, 08:02:17 AM »

You are gnostic, Wolfgang Smith was associated with Rene Guenon.

Enough said go research.