[WholeFoodsTrad]

Neil seems to have nothing to actually say about the topic of Flat Earth, other than he fears it and  wants it to go away.  I think that's pathetic.  No one really wants to talk to him on this sub-forum.  Jaynek was at least interesting, thoughtful, had a position and tried to defend it.  Even Seven seemed to put more thought into it than Neil does.  Ladislaus certainly does.  But Neil seems to have nothing to offer The Sub-Forum, but whining, complaining and scorn.  If he doesn't like Flat Earth, than why does he participate?  I think it is because he is afraid of it.  If that seems unreasonable, it is because his fear is not motivated by reason;  it is motivated by strong emotions, that have overwhelmed his reason, causing him to have such an extreme prejudice against Flat Earth, that he is motivated or rather driven to fight it, by any means necessary, regardless of their veracity/morality.  

I pity a man who is enslaved by his fears, but I cannot judge him to harshly.  Even St. Peter fearing the Jєωs, denied Christ.  

  

[happenby]

Neil seems to have nothing to actually say about the topic of Flat Earth, other than he fears it and  wants it to go away.  I think that's pathetic.  No one really wants to talk to him on this sub-forum.  Jaynek was at least interesting, thoughtful, had a position and tried to defend it.  Even Seven seemed to put more thought into it than Neil does.  Ladislaus certainly does.  But Neil seems to have nothing to offer The Sub-Forum, but whining, complaining and scorn.  If he doesn't like Flat Earth, than why does he participate?  I think it is because he is afraid of it.  If that seems unreasonable, it is because his fear is not motivated by reason;  it is motivated by strong emotions, that have overwhelmed his reason, causing him to have such an extreme prejudice against Flat Earth, that he is motivated or rather driven to fight it, by any means necessary, regardless of their veracity/morality.  

I pity a man who is enslaved by his fears, but I cannot judge him to harshly.  Even St. Peter fearing the Jєωs, denied Christ.  

  

Its sad, really.  I mean, what is so unreasonable about flat earth?  That everyone is on the same level playing field?  That God literally resides as God above all men? There seems to be an underlying jealousy, a kind of pride in being above and beyond God and other men (relatively speaking) that the globe instigates within those who choose to believe it.  It is a strange reversal of the simplicity of truth, a hope to gain human respect by explaining away contradiction and lies.  Ball earth is Gnostic through and through. The globe is a modern fig leaf for those hiding from the penetrating eyes of God.     

[Neil Obstat]

Its sad, really.  I mean, what is so unreasonable about flat earth?  

.
What's so unreasonable about flat-earth? Was that a question you want answered or is it merely rhetorical?
.
But nobody really wants to talk to me on this sub-forum, correct? So that means you don't want my answer, I guess.
.
I have one but first you have to ask me to tell you what it is, since you've taken the liberty to insult me.
.
First I demand an apology for your insult and presumption of my motive, then I need a polite request for an answer.
.

That everyone is on the same level playing field?  That God literally resides as God above all men? There seems to be an underlying jealousy, a kind of pride in being above and beyond God and other men (relatively speaking) that the globe instigates within those who choose to believe it.  It is a strange reversal of the simplicity of truth, a hope to gain human respect by explaining away contradiction and lies.  

.
The lie is flat-earthism, for which there is exactly no evidence nor data. 
.
The fact you choose to believe it without any evidence is your own choice.
.
God's existence is not dependent upon our understanding of it because God is not a contingent being, like we are.
.
Flat-earthers seem to think God must conform to our knowledge and comprehension, which is a heresy BTW.
.

Ball earth is Gnostic through and through. The globe is a modern fig leaf for those hiding from the penetrating eyes of God.     

.
Flat-earthism is gnostic (not a proper noun) through and through. The flat-earth is a modern fig leaf for those hiding from the penetrating eyes of God.
.
What's so unreasonable about flat-earth?
. 
First I need an apology then I need a request to answer the question.
.

[happenby]

.
What's so unreasonable about flat-earth? Was that a question you want answered or is it merely rhetorical?
.
But nobody really wants to talk to me on this sub-forum, correct? So that means you don't want my answer, I guess.
.
I have one but first you have to ask me to tell you what it is, since you've taken the liberty to insult me.
.
First I demand an apology for your insult and presumption of my motive, then I need a polite request for an answer.
..
The lie is flat-earthism, for which there is exactly no evidence nor data.
.
The fact you choose to believe it without any evidence is your own choice.
.
God's existence is not dependent upon our understanding of it because God is not a contingent being, like we are.
.
Flat-earthers seem to think God must conform to our knowledge and comprehension, which is a heresy BTW.
..
Flat-earthism is gnostic (not a proper noun) through and through. The flat-earth is a modern fig leaf for those hiding from the penetrating eyes of God.
.
What's so unreasonable about flat-earth?
.
First I need an apology then I need a request to answer the question.
.

No doubt you'll come up with some concocted notion, but flat earth is not unreasonable.  Suggesting people are sticking to a ball is what's unreasonable.   

[Neil Obstat]

No doubt you'll come up with some concocted notion, but flat earth is not unreasonable.  Suggesting people are sticking to a ball is what's unreasonable.  

.
There you go again presuming my intentions. 
.
Like I said, I need an apology.
.

[happenby]

.
There you go again presuming my intentions.
.
Like I said, I need an apology.
.

An apology? For what?  You believe in the globe.  Unashamedly.  There are no apologies for telling the truth even you agree with!  

[WholeFoodsTrad]

An apology? For what?  You believe in the globe.  Unashamedly.  There are no apologies for telling the truth even you agree with!  

He spams Flat Earth threads with gads of comments and goes out of his way to insult everyone who believes in a Flat Earth, but then whines for an apology, when someone complains about it, because he feels insulted:    :baby:

When does Neil intend to apologize for the dozens and dozens of insults he's hurled at Flat Earth'ers.  Answer:  when pigs learn to fly  

[WholeFoodsTrad]

.
Flat-earthism is sillier than the Muppets. You really shouldn't drag them down by association.
.

Here's one of Neil's nicer posts.  Oh, but he wants an apology.  

[WholeFoodsTrad]

Not saying he hasn't done what you did in the past, but this is a bad example. He insulted Flatearthism, i.e. your gnostic dogma, and you insulted him as a person. Big difference.
Find an example where he insults a person individually; again, I'm not implying there isn't an example. I think insulting Flatearthists as a whole is also different than insulting them individually, so you might want to steer clear of those too.
I would also like to point out that without Neil adding to your conversations, you would probably get almost no traffic in this sub-forum.

You are right.  Thanks for pointing that out.   

[WholeFoodsTrad]

Sorry for starting this thread Neil.  

[Ladislaus]

No, it's most certainly not intrinsically unreasonable.  But it's hard for people to let go of their paradigms.  If someone has spent his whole life thinking one way about the world and then is confronted with something that doesn't fit the paradigm, there are two possible reactions.  You either embrace a paradigm shift or you double down (and the emotion comes form resisting the paradigm shift).

I woke up to a lot of things when I started to look into 9/11.  So much in the world isn't what it seems, and we are regularly lied to by the Masonic powers that be.  I then came to understand that the entire moon landing was faked.  So, then, what else?  I don't put it outside the realm of possibility that there's a Masonic conspiracy to promote a false paradigm about our physical world.  In fact, relativity is nothing but a scam to explain away why the Michelson-Morley experiment determined that the earth was still and not in motion.  I've seen some footage of astronauts operating in alleged low-gravity situations that was obviously faked.  Why fake that if you're really up there in a micro-gravity environment?

[happenby]

.
What's so unreasonable about flat-earth? Was that a question you want answered or is it merely rhetorical?

It becomes rhetorical if you don't answer...but it is a viable question.
.
But nobody really wants to talk to me on this sub-forum, correct? So that means you don't want my answer, I guess.

We've probably seen your answer somewhere along the way, but I asked it to get an answer.
.
I have one but first you have to ask me to tell you what it is, since you've taken the liberty to insult me.

Taken the liberty to insult you?  How?  That was never my intention.  There are no insults in my response.  Even considering the thread was aimed at you, I specifically did not point you out, but pointed 'globers' out.  Now, if you were insulted because you chose to deposit yourself within a category for which my description was aimed, that's your problem.  But I did not set out to insult *you* nor can anything in my response even remotely suggest I was insulting you.    
.
First I demand an apology for your insult and presumption of my motive, then I need a polite request for an answer.
..
The lie is flat-earthism, for which there is exactly no evidence nor data.

Now, there is no way I can provide any kind of apology for not having insulted you.  However, if you felt insulted, my apologies.  Still, everything written in my first post on this thread was not only true, but specifically not aimed at anyone. 
.
The fact you choose to believe it without any evidence is your own choice.

We all know that we flat earthers have evidence.  That you choose not to believe the evidence, or summarily dismiss evidence is the problem.
.
God's existence is not dependent upon our understanding of it because God is not a contingent being, like we are.

What's that got to do with anything?
.
Flat-earthers seem to think God must conform to our knowledge and comprehension, which is a heresy BTW.

So, now, if I were you, (because are insulting flat earthers) I guess I would seek an apology right about now.
..
Flat-earthism is gnostic (not a proper noun) through and through.

Saying flat earthism is gnostic does not make it true. In fact, all evidence shows the opposite is true because history of the Church against the pagan globers reveal the heliocentric/globe astronomy has always belonged to gnosticism and occult pagan practice.

[Smedley Butler]

Neil has made more insults agsinst the person of the flat earthers than can be counted, and they usually consist of some adjective for stupid. 

[Meg]

Neil has made more insults agsinst the person of the flat earthers than can be counted, and they usually consist of some adjective for stupid.

And that's why I do not engage Neil in debate anymore, which is little more than an exercise in futility. Neil is capable of being civil, if he so chooses, but more often than not, he chooses to insult those who hold to FE.

[Ladislaus]

Seriously, though, Neil, what's your motivation for being so into this issue?  You've spilled a lot of metaphorical ink on this subject.

What, is it harmful to faith if some people think the earth is flat?

If I believed that something was complete fantasy or lunacy (as you claim about flat earth), let's say that someone thought we were under attack by elves from Mars, I would just say, "uh, OK" and move along.  I wouldn't stand there for five hours debating the issue.