Off Topic Posts Moved Here

Van Living Forum

Help Support Van Living Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I have been lurking for a long time and have been following this conversation for a while. It has been quite entertaining. I'm not quite sure if Cosmick Gold is the ultimate troll or is serious. Either way, I will bite.

No. 3 in the cosmological red-shift interpretation." [which is] "The earth is indeed the center of the Universe."
I assume you understand what the red-shift is. If not, look it up. The universe is constantly expanding at an ever increasing rate. This is solid science. This means where ever you are at, be it earth, be it the Andromeda galaxy, etc., you are at the center of everything moving away from you. This doesn't mean you are at the center of the universe and everything revolves around you (although some like to think that!).

And while I am here, why don't you use magic to make your van invisible to people who might want to break in instead of getting all paranoid with locks, shackles, chains, rebar, guard dogs, etc.?

Anyway, back to the festivities.
 
Yes, Burbridge did the pioneering work in 1968, but the paper I'm referencing is from 1976 and states, "As of June 1975 there were 384 quazars in the category we are considering." Thus making the value "about 50 times as large as the one calculated by Burbridge in (1968)".

Please post something written in the past ten years. You are citing a paper from 1975.

Meanwhile, I think you will like this (below). I did.

https://www.livescience.com/62547-what-is-center-of-universe.html
 
I have been lurking for a long time and have been following this conversation for a while. It has been quite entertaining. I'm not quite sure if Cosmick Gold is the ultimate troll or is serious. Either way, I will bite.


I assume you understand what the red-shift is. If not, look it up. The universe is constantly expanding at an ever increasing rate. This is solid science. This means where ever you are at, be it earth, be it the Andromeda galaxy, etc., you are at the center of everything moving away from you. This doesn't mean you are at the center of the universe and everything revolves around you (although some like to think that!).

And while I am here, why don't you use magic to make your van invisible to people who might want to break in instead of getting all paranoid with locks, shackles, chains, rebar, guard dogs, etc.?

Anyway, back to the festivities.
I don't mean to be a "troll" at all. (Hope I'm not.) It's a huge frustration in my physical world where I live that I find it SO HARD to get anyone to see and understand things of major interest to me. On those subjects, they cling to incredibly limited views as though afraid to learn more. Why? What may look like honing my "trollmanship", is actually my attempt to learn how to communicate effectively in these areas. I'm both wanting to get my thoughts out and see what's really behind the short-sightedness of those around me. (Happily, you clearly don't fit in that kind of category.)

I did understand the red-shift before you so clearly explained it to me. So I don't think everything moving away from us is what indicates we are the center of the universe. I realize we would experience the universe moving away from us, at the same speed in all directions, regardless of where in the universe we were located.

In his paper, he was referring to how the amount of red-shift that has occurred on an object indicates how far away the object is from us. And since the red-shift is the same for several quasars around us, it's as if they are riding on the back of an invisible concentric sphere, making them all the same distance from us. And around that sphere is another sphere, also with several quasars on it, and over that, yet another, and another; where in the quasars in any given sphere all have the same red-shift (while in different directions away from us). If the earth were moved away from that center, the red-shift of some quasars would increase to varying degrees while others would lessen, no longer seeming to be on concentric spheres around us.

This does not indicate we were the center of the entire universe, but it does make it seem we are the center of how all these hundreds of quasares are aligned, something that seems virtually impossible to just "happen".
________________________

Your question about using magic is also a very good one. The answer pertains to how we all influence each other, on the magical level as well as on every other level. Did you read in my book about the Christian Science practitioner taking away my sore throat as I walked through the cold blowing mist in a wet T-shirt? The secret there was that she knew throughout her being that I did not need to have a sore throat and could be fine. I was so totally open to her, she was able to magically impart that knowledge from her deep subconscious to my deep subconscious, which made it so. This is something I could not have done for myself because my consciousness doesn't have a very good access to my deep subconscious to request/make such changes. (Hence the need people have for psychiatrists, etc.)

Much more recently, I was using magic experimentally to make my computer screen turn red much more often than blue, doing so as many times as possible (hundreds and hundreds of times). For days, I was able to keep the screen red 80% of the time (which is supposed to be impossible by the law of averages). Of course, I was using a software program I wrote to manage this experiment. It was using the random number generator, my hand on the space bar, and recording the results which I would examine after each experiment each day.

From my past experiences, I believed it was people's right to not experience magic they do not want to believe in, which causes magic to fail when performed in their presence. But to test that theory, I told a psychology professor friend of mine the details of my experiment, knowing he did NOT believe in magic and certainly wouldn't believe I was getting a positive result of 80%. By solidly determining I would not show him the experiment, I was making sure he would not be confronted with the reality of it, and thus be a cause for the magic to fail. But I wanted to see if just the connection with me of hearing about it would influence the results. (I didn't expect any.)

To my total surprise, having told him devastated the magic in my experiment. Starting the same afternoon after talking with him about it, I was steadily getting only the statistically-expected 50%, and never was able to exceed the normal 50% again. So just being connected with someone who becomes connected with what you are doing, is enough to strongly influence your magical ability! I'm sure that if I was strong enough in my deep inner being, I could escape such influences and succeed at the magic (respecting others' wish to not be confronted with what they don't believe). But I'm not that strong.

So my answer to your question is that with so many people around me believing (and saying) my van may get broken into, I don't believe my magic is strong enough to avoid the odds of it happening. While if I could get away from such thoughts in others, and surround myself with souls who know magic can protect my van, it would be protected. I would not need to worry.
 
Last edited:
.....The universe is constantly expanding at an ever increasing rate. This is solid science. This means where ever you are at, be it earth, be it the Andromeda galaxy, etc., you are at the center of everything moving away from you.....
It is not quite that simple.
In every quadrant astronomers look, the universe is moving away from us at an equal rate (± 1%).
I can think of three posibilities:
  • the observations are wrong.
  • the universe is expanding at different rates and the earth is moving in such a way to make it appear to be moving uniformly.
  • earth is close to the center of expansion.
  • others?
Especially in astrophysics disciplines science is a constantly shifting quicksand; not very solid.

String theory posits that our universe has 10 dimensions. In that context what is the definition of 'center'?

Even in 4 dimensions we do not know the shape or boundary of our universe.

In a practical sense the universe moves around a local coordinate system centered on 'me'.

P.S. - right now, in 3 dimensions the earth is a squished ball (oblate spheroid). Its diameter is 30 km bigger at the equator vs. the poles.
 
Ok. This is dated oct. 18, 2021, and is more of an article discussing this same topic, referring to papers both old and new.
Thank you. I started following your posts on flat earth after noticing that someone (not sure if it was you), posted that the Sloan Digital Sky Survey supported something you had posted about. But Sloan doesn't support anyone. Sloan serves as a survey and/or repository. Papers and documentation are stored there for review by fellow scientists. Something like that:D

Anyway, now I know more about Geoff and Margaret Burbidge than was intended. Seems their ideas fell out of favor beginning in the 1960's. I don't want to debate that, because it doesn't interest me. And I have zero scientific background.

Leaving you with some links that I hope you find useful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloan_Digital_Sky_Survey#Results~~~~~

Quasi-steady-state cosmology (QSS) was proposed in 1993 by Fred Hoyle, Geoffrey Burbidge, and Jayant V. Narlikar as a new incarnation of the steady-state ideas meant to explain additional features unaccounted for in the initial proposal. The model suggests pockets of creation occurring over time within the universe, sometimes referred to as minibangs, mini-creation events, or little bangs.[38]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady-state_model~~~~~

https://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/stdystat.htm~~~~~

Obituary

Geoff and Margaret held a number of positions before permanently joining the new UCSD (University of California, San Diego) campus at La Jolla in 1962. With the discovery of quasars around the same time, Geoff's fortunes began to take a different turn. With his friend Hoyle, he became increasingly disenchanted with both the conventional interpretation of quasars as very distant objects with large cosmological red shifts, and with the big bang implications that others saw in the discovery of the so-called cosmic microwave background radiation in 1965. He remained a vociferous challenger of conventional interpretations of these discoveries.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/feb/18/geoffrey-burbidge-obituary
 
Thank you. I started following your posts on flat earth . . . .
Leaving you with some links that I hope you find useful:
. . . .
Thank you, Carla. I'll study through each of the links you gave me. You are getting me closer to what I'm actually here searching for.

I'm neither a proponent of the "flat earth" nor the "round earth" theories. My view is that it's all a kind of hologram, like where the Bible says "In Him we live, and move, and have our being." I'm convinced that's correct, because magic has worked amazingly well for me (when disbelievers are not involved). So I have a lot of personal proof that "Mind" is truly the master over "Matter", not the other way around.

My interest in the Flat Earth theory is to help people get past unsupported "I'm right and you're wrong" statements, and look instead for what hard evidence is available to back up their claims. Right now, I'm focussing on the evidence that the earth is not moving through space, and seeking what's been done to show such evidence is false. Of course, "not moving" is only one part of the Flat Earth theory. I'll be looking into each of the parts, one at a time.
 
Last edited:
This might be a new record—after only two posts, my posts now require moderation approval.
 
Not sure what happened earlier but that post was in the approval list due to it being from a new member AND containing a link. This is an automated function to help reduce the level of spam we get from brand new accounts. It was nothing personal.

I just logged in and saw it was in the list and hit the approve button.
 
Here's another topic to chew on:

https://birdsarentreal.com/
I watched the three Birds Arent Real videos on their website, and all three were people talking who did not show any evidence. In addition, their claims are far too extreme: (1) They say billions of birds were killed all across America by government spraying and were simultaneously replaced with drones! (2) After the killing, why weren't the billions of dead bird carcasses found lying all around everywhere? (3) They say real birds are "extinct" in America, and yet, people still find dead birds that have blood and bones; while over the years, not one bird has apparently been found with wires, motors, and transistors inside. (4) Their website should at least have one video of a drone bird being dissected, showing its parts; but there's no physical evidence given at all. For these and several more reasons, I can only conclude that the whole concept was born in someone's imagination, and never physically real.
 
Last edited:
I have been . . . . following this conversation for a while. . . .
Morgan's Parrot, did you see comment #43 above? It is my long reply to your comment #41. You may not have been notified since I saved it before remembering to make it a reply to you. So then I added the "reply" section to the top of it later, saving it again. (Also, you have your private notifications turned off, hence I had to try and contact you here.)
______________________

While we're here, I'd like to add a little to the second subject you asked me about, Magic. I told how I magically acquired the perfect van for me in the last chapter of my book. But much more recently, I wanted to carry my mobility scooter in my van as well. So I took out the passenger seat and installed a hoist to lift the scooter into that same spot. It worked, but my gosh that was a struggle! It barely fit through the door, and then took way too much effort to wiggle it around into that small space. I decided, "No, that's just not going to do. There must be a better way." So...

Last month, we went to a Chinese restaurant and when they brought us each a fortune cookie at the end, I remembered that class I paid $100.00 for years ago, where I was taught how to magically get real answers from fortune cookies. It really does work, and really well! I've used it again and again. So naturally, I asked the fortune cookie to reveal info on how I can take the scooter in the van. Then broke the cookie open and found the following answer:

DSC00542.jpg
At the time, I had no practical idea what that meant. What "larger stage"? Huh? But I believed in it, and it said within a week, which was not long to wait.

Seems like it was the next day that I saw a car that had a scooter rolled up on a platform on the back bumper. BINGO!! That's the "Larger Stage" the fortune cookie was talking about! I went to amazon.com and found the perfect "larger stage" for my van. It's this one:
Image 4.jpg
Attached to the rear trailer hitch, it has a ramp that folds down so I can drive my scooter right up on it. No more struggling with the small door, or the small floor space where the passenger seat belongs. And this scooter carrier was delivered in one week, just like the fortune cookie said. Magic really does work, again and again. I wish more people knew how to use magic.
 
Last edited:
Well, I'm ready to stop talking about the "Flat Earth" theory, due to the lack of solid evidence. I had accepted a Flat Earth as a real possibility because of my belief that we live in a cosmic hologram where anything is possible. But in seeking proof the earth is flat, every concept I've examined proved to have serious flaws.

For example: It makes sense the stars would turn in a circle around The North Star since the North Pole is in the center of the Flat Earth, with the heavens circling around that pole. But since Antarctica is a ring of ice around the outer edge of the Flat Earth, we should see the most southern stars flying by horizontally, but we don't! Instead, we see another revolving circle of stars similar to the circle we see going around the North Pole.

The explanation given for the southern circling of stars is a combination of light being bent over long distances, and our seeing a reflection of the stars circling around the North Pole. They give the example of how "anti-crepuscular rays" can sometimes be seen in the east while the sun is setting in the West, as in this East-facing photo taken in Colorado as the sun set behind the camera in the West.

AnticrepuscularRays.jpg

But in reality, the Southern stars are just as bright and sharply focused as the stars in the Northern view of the sky. The Southern stars are in a totally different arrangement from those in the North, along with a brighter and larger portion of the Milky Way going around the circle and visible only in the Southern hemisphere. So in short, I can't recognize any truth in their explanation about the far Southern sky.

If anyone has any solid evidence to share that shows the earth to be flat, I'd love to learn about it. I'm not saying the Earth isn't flat, I'm only saying I've been unable to find any real evidence that it's flat. But there are flaws in the Round Earth theory as well! For example, I often hear that seeing a ship disappear over the horizon -- bottom first -- shows that the Earth is round. This concept just isn't true at all! See my comment here for three short gif videos demonstrating how flaw-prone the over-the-horizon "evidence" is.
_______________________

Now there is one part of the Flat Earth theory that does have real evidence. That's the part claiming the earth to be stationary at the center of the Universe. There are two strong indicators that seemingly "prove" this part of the Flat Earth theory to be true:

(1) Science says we are sailing forward through the universe at more than a million miles per hour, so a star's light coming to us from 90 degrees to the right should be observed as coming from a slightly smaller angle than 90 degrees as a result of the combined movements of the light and the earth. Also, light travels through air at 186,000 miles per second, but through water at only 140,000 miles per second. So when we observe that same star's light traveling through water, the angle of the light should be slightly changed to match the changed combination of Earth and light motions. But it isn't! The Air and water angles of the star's light remain precisely the same, as though the earth is not moving at all!

(2) A number of quasars in the sky are all the same distance from Earth, as though riding on a sphere with the earth at its exact center. And around that are a number of additional such spheres of quasars, each sphere having Earth as its exact center. Between these spheres are hundreds of lightyears of empty space containing no quasars. The same is true of galaxies found to be in matching distances from Earth, with Earth at the center, and hundreds of lightyears of empty space between each sphere of galaxies. The chance of all this incredibly accurate spacing happening by chance is too infinitesimally small to even consider. So is Earth really sitting quietly in the center of everything?

Well, with that, I'm ready to stop talking about Flat Earth, and turn my attention to writing about, working on, and living in my van White Cloud! Life is truly interesting! (...especially VanLife.) ☺️
 
Last edited:
... dissected...
.
I remember a lab during Anatomy&Physiology.
I was just out of a calculus weekend intensive, and had bisecting and bisectors circling the fringes of my tiny brains.
.
I inadvertently misspoke 'dis-sect' as 'di-ssect', and was quietly reminded by the instructor -- plus several co-students -- of the correct pronunciation... drilled into us from the first day, the entire class speaking as one voice:
* "We bi-sect a triangle, we dis-sect a cadaver!"
.
.
PS:
Since Cos introduced the subject, I firmly believe my addition to this thread is both timely and inspirational and contributes to maintaining the established momentum and offers my humble mentoring to those in dire need of such.
You may make your memorial donation in my name to the charity of your choice.
 
That would sort of be like having to put a quarter in the swear jar wouldn’t it! Lol!!!
 
. . . . Since Cos introduced the subject, I firmly believe my addition to this thread is both timely and inspirational and contributes to maintaining the established momentum and offers my humble mentoring to those in dire need of such. . . .
(????) OK. I'm a bit lost.

The original subject was The earth is flat!!! introduced by rruff. And several of us were really enjoying researching the issue and coming back to post our findings in support of our choice of either Flat Earth or Round Earth viewpoints. After a couple of days of having a really good time at it, the thread was blocked from further posts by rvwandering for *gasp* "arguing"! (Who would have thought anyone would want to argue in a debate? Unheard of!) That was so sad, for both rruff and I had just been searching, found new data, and wanted to enter our posts, but couldn't.

So I looked to see where rvwandering was, and found him in Moderation and deleted posts. Since that thread's title seem right on subject, I replied to rvwandering there. That caused a stir in that thread as several people started voicing their views about such actions.

Eventually, rvwandering posted:
This thread was started to familiarize everyone with Bob Well's vision of why this forum was created because it's easy to miss that information especially if you've recently joined the forum. It was not meant to be a platform for debating closed threads and discussing deleted posts or other topics. I have moved the latest group of that kind of post to this thread - Off Topic Posts Moved Here

So that is how this thread came to exist, automatically making me the first post. But I don't think I "introduced" anything, did I?
 
Well, I'm ready to stop talking about the "Flat Earth" theory, due to the lack of solid evidence.
You left out actual photos from space, but that’s all part of the conspiracy. Why a conspiracy? The most probable reason is that the devil is behind it. Let’s not talk about evidence for the devil though, as that simply has to be accepted.
 
Top