User talk:RealGeo

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Doug Weller talk 11:31, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, RealGeo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Figure of the Earth. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!  Tuxipεdia ( talk ) 10:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

If you wish to push the view that the earth is flat, you need to do it elsewhere.
We are a mainstream encyclopedia. Our articles should be based on reliable sources as described at WP:VERIFY and WP:RS. You are clearly trying to get articles to state that the earth is flat. Please just stop or you will be blocked. Read some of the links I'll add in a message. Doug Weller talk 11:31, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

You've done it again but perhaps there wasn't enough time between my message and your edit. Just stop, please. Doug Weller talk 11:34, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I do have reliable sources and 20% of the population in modern countries already know that the earth is flat. How do you share knowledge to young ones when they are being molded and brainwashed in schools? When is it not common knowledge that something is what it appears to be? I won't stop. You need to teach me or block me but one day when the truth is accepted will you still believe in the globe? lol RealGeo (talk) 11:50, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * You don't have sources meeting WP:RS. Young Earth Creationists think they have reliable sources. UFO believers do also, as do all of those who think most ancient people explored America. It's all anti-scientific nonsense. Doug Weller  talk 13:25, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Please tell me how a book title=Terra firma : the earth not a planet, proved from scripture, reason and fact; is #51 in Books > Politics & Social Sciences > Philosophy > Religious #955 in Books > History > World on Amazon is not to be considered a reliable source? Reminder, it was first published in 1901 and more recently in 2010. Just read the positive reviews on Amazon. If this was a dumb topic to consider seriously than why is it not losing popularity? It is also held in Cornell University Library. Knowledge should not be biased.RealGeo (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It's also certainly in the Library of Congress, along with virtually every book on Mu, UFOs, Bigfoot, etc. Tell you what, go to WP:RSN, that's where people argue a book is a reliable source. Don't take my word for it. Doug Weller  talk 16:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that those who do not believe the popular scientific consensus are wrong even if they have a valid reason not to?

And are you claiming that if a source is not supporting the current accepted scientific consensus than it is unreliable even if the source has science proving that the earth is flat? Flat earth is not a theory but a fact. There is a growing scientific evidence and public debate on the flat earth.RealGeo (talk) 18:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. It's nonsense. Take it to WP:RSN for another opinion. Doug Weller  talk 18:08, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We are thought to trust science because it is based on facts and what is sad about science today is the fact that allot of people lost their faith in God because they were only showed the science that wants to disprove Him.RealGeo (talk) 18:45, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If that is your motive, please remain assured that people will not lose their faith if they decide that the world is flat, nor would they come to faith if they decided that the world isn't flat. Besides, seeing as you wish to talk on the matter of sources, there are overwhelmingly more sources that state that earth is not flat. Finding a single source which supports your claim is not going to tip the scales. I would suggest that you practise editing uncontroversial topics and once you understand how Wikipedia works, you may begin to approach topics like this without causing disruption. —  Tuxipεdia ( talk ) 23:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)