URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       <
       form action=&amp
       ;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; method=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;p
       ost&
       quot; target=&am
       p;amp;amp;quot;_top&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;cmd&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; value=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot
       ;_s-xclick&a
       mp;amp;quot;&amp
       ;amp;amp;gt; &am
       p;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hosted_button_id&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; val
       ue=&
       quot;DKL7ADEKRVUBL&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;image&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.payp
       alobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; border=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; nam
       e=&q
       uot;submit&a
       mp;amp;quot; alt=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;quot;PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!
       &quo
       t;&g
       t; &
       lt;img alt=&
       amp;amp;quot;&am
       p;amp;amp;quot; border=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypalobjects.com
       /en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; width=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; height=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/form&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Flat Earth (click here)
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 2144--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: November 12, 2018, 7:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Theo102 link=topic=19.msg2140#msg2140
       date=1542010368]
       The angle of Polaris matching the latitude of the observer
       debunks the FE pretty well, just as the consistent apparent size
       of the moon does. If the moon was relatively close then it
       should appear to be bigger overhead.
       [/quote]Apparently you haven't watched any of the videos I
       posted, nor have you ever researched flat earth. Polaris proves
       flat earth and the size of the moon is the same as the sun,
       about 50 miles wide. The sun and moon are equal in size like
       Enoch tells us and they are much closer at about 3,000 to 5,000
       miles away.
       #Post#: 2234--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: November 16, 2018, 8:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML https://i.pinimg.com/564x/3d/ed/6f/3ded6f9eb6bfbc041579410cb1f7c0bc.jpg
       [shadow=red,left]PayPal Donations :[/shadow]
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       [shadow=red,left]Patreon :[/shadow]
  HTML https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       Theology Forums :
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       Youtube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
       [glow=red,2,300]Pinterest :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       Google :
  HTML https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
       [glow=red,2,300]Linkedin :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       Twitter :
  HTML https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
       Facebook :
  HTML https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
       #Post#: 2428--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: November 22, 2018, 5:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Flight Routes Prove Flat Earth
       4 minutes
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hb17dX6MwX0&list=WL&index=33&t=0s
       [shadow=red,left]PayPal Donations :[/shadow]
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       [shadow=red,left]Patreon :[/shadow]
  HTML https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       Theology Forums :
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       Youtube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
       [glow=red,2,300]Pinterest :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       Google :
  HTML https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
       [glow=red,2,300]Linkedin :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       Twitter :
  HTML https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
       Facebook :
  HTML https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
       #Post#: 2431--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: November 22, 2018, 8:09 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Flat Earth Debate : Rob Skiba vs Robert Sungenis At FE2018 In
       Denver
       Full Debate
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9SRA_Awhbc&index=25&list=WL&t=202s
       [shadow=red,left]PayPal Donations :[/shadow]
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       [shadow=red,left]Patreon :[/shadow]
  HTML https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       Theology Forums :
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       Youtube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
       [glow=red,2,300]Pinterest :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       Google :
  HTML https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
       [glow=red,2,300]Linkedin :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       Twitter :
  HTML https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
       Facebook :
  HTML https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
       #Post#: 2508--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: November 25, 2018, 7:13 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       The heavens have an end and the heavens are measured and can be
       measured by God alone. Deep endless infinite space does not
       exist. As God tells here in Psalm 19, the sun's going forth
       (moving) is from the end of the heaven . . .  The sun moves, the
       moon moves, stars move, debris in the firmament move, the earth
       does NOT move.
       Psalm 19 King James Version (KJV)
       19 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament
       sheweth his handywork.
       2 Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth
       knowledge.
       3 There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not
       heard.
       4 Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words
       to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for
       the sun,
       5 Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and
       rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race.
       6 [size=18pt]His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and
       his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from
       the heat thereof.
       7 The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the
       testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
       8 The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart: the
       commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.
       9 The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the
       judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.
       10 More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine
       gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.
       11 Moreover by them is thy servant warned: and in keeping of
       them there is great reward.
       12 Who can understand his errors? cleanse thou me from secret
       faults.
       13 Keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins; let them
       not have dominion over me: then shall I be upright, and I shall
       be innocent from the great transgression.
       14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be
       acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.
       [/size]
       King James Version (KJV)
       Public Domain
       [shadow=red,left]PayPal Donations :[/shadow]
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       [shadow=red,left]Patreon :[/shadow]
  HTML https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       Theology Forums :
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       Youtube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
       [glow=red,2,300]Pinterest :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       Google :
  HTML https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
       [glow=red,2,300]Linkedin :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       Twitter :
  HTML https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
       Facebook :
  HTML https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
       #Post#: 3556--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: January 29, 2019, 8:34 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Bursting The GPS Bubble!!!
       Watch the whole video
       9 minutes
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AHC-41Z9QU&t=68s&list=WL&index=22
       [shadow=red,left]PayPal Donations :[/shadow]
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       [shadow=red,left]Patreon :[/shadow]
  HTML https://www.patreon.com/patrick_jane3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       Theology Forums :
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       Youtube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
       [glow=red,2,300]Pinterest :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       Google :
  HTML https://plus.google.com/u/0/113527239869543729835
       [glow=red,2,300]Linkedin :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       Twitter :
  HTML https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
       Facebook :
  HTML https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100007669219364+
       #Post#: 4517--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: March 20, 2019, 6:47 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       1. In 1905, Einstein added time dilation to length contraction
       because it was required to fit his theory, not because he
       “discovered”  it. It has since been applied  to everything under
       the sun so  that  the Einstein advocates can claim that
       everything works by SRT. So let’s assume that the GPS satellites
       are in an inertial frame. The fact is, the light beams traveling
       east-to-west are faster by 50ns than the beams traveling
       west-to-east. But according to SRT, there should beno difference
       of the two beams since both are in an inertial frame.  (And if
       they are not in an inertial frame, then SRT cannot be applied).
       So, in order to hide this discrepancy to save SRT, the GPS
       computers are preprogrammed with a Sagnac correction so that it
       appears that the east bound beam is going the same speed as the
       westbound beam, and voila! SRT is “proved.”
       2. EINSTEIN SAID THAT IF THERE WAS ANY ETHER IN SPACE, THEN HIS
       THEORY IS NULLIFIED. HE SAID : If Michelson-Morley is wrong,
       then Relativity is wrong.  (Einstein ; The Life and Times, p.
       107.) So, Einstein simply dismissed the fractional ether drift
       of MMX as a mere artifact. But the sad fact is, scientifically
       speaking, artifacts would not have appeared in all the dozens of
       interferometer experiments performed over the next 80 years.
       In 1921, Einstein wrote to a friend that if "the Miller
       experiments" produced positive results *"the whole relativity
       theory collapses like a house of cards."
       Miller's experiments produced consistently positive results.
       The experiments of Sagnac and Michelson & Gale are rarely
       mentioned. Until recently it was quite difficult to find a
       reference to them. As Dean Turner pointed out "One may scan
       Einstein's writings in vain to find mention of the Sagnac or
       Michelson-Gale experiments. The same can be said of general
       physics text-books and of the McGraw-Hill Encyclopaedia of
       Science and Technology...Such an oversight constitutes a
       stinging indictment of professional scientific reporting". It is
       indeed quite difficult to get information on these experiments.
       They seem to be such an embarrassment to relativity that those
       who know about them would rather not say too much.
       Quite a number of relativity experts, however, do know about
       them, and when pressed many admit that they show the Special
       Theory of Relativity (the theory taught to all science students,
       and the basis for much of "modern physics") to be inadequate.
       3. Not only has General Relativity failed to provide adequate
       answers for stellar aberration, rotation, and
       action-at-a-distance (that is, without resorting to Mach’s
       “distant rotating masses”), Van  Flandern
       reminds us that…
       “…it is not widely appreciated that this [General Relativity] is
       a purely mathematical model,
       lacking a physical mechanism to initiate motion. For example, if
       a “space-time manifold” (like
       the rubber sheet) exists near a source of mass, why would a
       small particle placed at rest in that
       manifold  (on  the  rubber  sheet) begin to move toward the
       source mass? Indeed, why would
       curvature of the manifold even have a sense of “down” unless
       some force such as gravity
       already existed. Logically, the small particle at rest on a
       curved manifold would have no reason
       to end its rest unless a force acted on it.”
       “…all existing experimental evidence requires the action of
       fields to be conveyed much faster
       than lightspeed. This situation is ironic because the reason why
       the geometric interpretation
       gained ascendancy over the field interpretation is that the
       implied faster-than-light action of
       fields appeared to allow causality violations [e.g., moving
       backwards in time, according to the
       principles of Special Relativity]….Yet the field interpretation
       of General Relativity requires
       faster than light propagation. So if Special Relativity were a
       correct model of reality, the field
       interpretation would violate the causality principle, which is
       why it fell from popularity.”
       4. It is rather interesting that Relativists, on the one hand,
       claim that light is limited to 186,000 mps in Special
       Relativity, but admit that Special Relativity does not
       incorporate gravity or inertial forces.
       On the other hand, they claim gravity is limited to the speed of
       light because Special Relativity  says nothing can go  faster
       than light. But if Special Relativity has nothing to do with
       gravity, then how can Special Relativity claim that gravity’s
       speed
       is limited to light speed?
       
       Moreover, in General Relativity, light, and we presume gravity,
       is not limited to 186,000 mps, and that is
       because General Relativity deals with frames that  include
       gravity and inertial forces. But if gravity itself
       is a non-inertial frame, then how can it be limited to 186,000
       mps by Special Relativity which only deals
       with inertial frames? This shows that the two theories of
       Relativity contradict themselves.
       5. Einstein and Infield wrote in The Evolution of Physics (1938)
       :
       “…the theory of relativity resembles a building consisting of
       two separate storeys (sic), the special  theory and the general
       theory. The special theory, on which the general theory rests,
       applies to all physical phenomena with the exception of
       gravitation.”
       On this Dr. Kelly comments :
       “So, if the special theory loses its basis, the general theory
       is also without foundation.”
       The only original big idea in “Einstein's” so-called theory of
       general relativity was curved space. Yet through the 1980s and
       1990s, and  today with the Hubble space telescope, astronomers
       have methodically and painstakingly developed three-dimensional
       atlases of the universe. However, they  have detected no
       curvature of space. Theoretical physicist Paul LaViolette
       observes :
       “If space were curved by even the slightest amount, evidence of
       this would have shown up in astronomical surveys. When the data
       are checked, however, no evidence of curvature is found.
       Observations of the density of galaxies found at distant
       locations of the universe indicate that space is Euclidian out
       to the farthest limits of observation.”
       
       Please Subscribe! Join my Free Forums for discussion, debate and
       fellowship
       [shadow=red,left]PayPal Donations :[/shadow]
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       Theology Forums :
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       YouTube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpzjN3dF-_PnAc81SQVjqhg?view_as=subscriber
       YouTube Back-Up Channel :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMt94y3SDxgjpoucj6Yc_Xg
       [color=orange]BitChute : [/color]
  HTML https://www.bitchute.com/channel/xUZJpNWUz2T4/
       [glow=red,2,300]Pinterest :[/glow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       [glow=red,2,300][color=blue]Linkedin :[/glow][/color]
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       #Post#: 4907--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: April 13, 2019, 10:08 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Tycho Brahe's Arguments (see the comment section)
       Comment :
       What we have in the history of western science is a fully formed
       highly detailed geocentric cosmology and mathematical astronomy
       in the form of the Syntaxis Mathematiké from Ptolemaeus from the
       middle of the second century CE. This lays out in great detail
       all of the arguments for and against both the geocentric and
       heliocentric cosmologies known to the Greek astronomers and
       cosmologist over a period of about six hundred years. Not
       exactly fragments of ideas!
       These arguments are logically argued scientific hypotheses based
       on solid empirical observation made by Babylonian and Greek
       astronomers over a period of approximately nine hundred years.
       Thanks to Ptolemaeus we know exactly why geocentrism was the
       standard. A standard that was accepted and defended in the works
       of Plato, Aristotle and many other Greek philosophers and
       mathematical commentators. This standard was also maintained and
       defended by many, many Islamic philosophers and astronomers from
       about 800 CE into the Early Modern Period.
       The geocentric hypotheses of Greek and Islamic cosmology and
       astronomy were not based on religious beliefs but on solid
       empirical observations. The religious views of the astronomers
       and cosmologists who presented those hypotheses did not play a
       significant role in their work.
       However the three main players in the introduction of
       heliocentric cosmology in the Early Modern Period Copernicus,
       Kepler and Newton (contrary to popular opinion Galileo only
       played a very minor role) were all deeply religious and the
       religious views of two of them did play a highly significant
       role in their scientific thought.
       Copernicus was a cannon of a Catholic cathedral. Kepler trained
       for the priesthood in a Lutheran seminary and remained devotedly
       religious all of his life believing that he was serving his God
       through his astronomical work. Newton was by any standards a
       religious fanatic who believed that he had been special chosen
       by God to reveal the secrets of His creation.
       10 minutes
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEKOyGNLL58&t=384s
       #Post#: 4943--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: guest8 Date: April 14, 2019, 8:58 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=patrick jane link=topic=19.msg4907#msg4907
       date=1555168113]
       Tycho Brahe's Arguments (see the comment section)
       Comment :
       What we have in the history of western science is a fully formed
       highly detailed geocentric cosmology and mathematical astronomy
       in the form of the Syntaxis Mathematiké from Ptolemaeus from the
       middle of the second century CE. This lays out in great detail
       all of the arguments for and against both the geocentric and
       heliocentric cosmologies known to the Greek astronomers and
       cosmologist over a period of about six hundred years. Not
       exactly fragments of ideas!
       These arguments are logically argued scientific hypotheses based
       on solid empirical observation made by Babylonian and Greek
       astronomers over a period of approximately nine hundred years.
       Thanks to Ptolemaeus we know exactly why geocentrism was the
       standard. A standard that was accepted and defended in the works
       of Plato, Aristotle and many other Greek philosophers and
       mathematical commentators. This standard was also maintained and
       defended by many, many Islamic philosophers and astronomers from
       about 800 CE into the Early Modern Period.
       The geocentric hypotheses of Greek and Islamic cosmology and
       astronomy were not based on religious beliefs but on solid
       empirical observations. The religious views of the astronomers
       and cosmologists who presented those hypotheses did not play a
       significant role in their work.
       However the three main players in the introduction of
       heliocentric cosmology in the Early Modern Period Copernicus,
       Kepler and Newton (contrary to popular opinion Galileo only
       played a very minor role) were all deeply religious and the
       religious views of two of them did play a highly significant
       role in their scientific thought.
       Copernicus was a cannon of a Catholic cathedral. Kepler trained
       for the priesthood in a Lutheran seminary and remained devotedly
       religious all of his life believing that he was serving his God
       through his astronomical work. Newton was by any standards a
       religious fanatic who believed that he had been special chosen
       by God to reveal the secrets of His creation.
       10 minutes
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEKOyGNLL58&t=384s
       [/quote]
       [shadow=blue,left]No but many have tried.
       Blade[/shadow]
       #Post#: 6166--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can You Debunk Flat Earth? 
       By: patrick jane Date: June 8, 2019, 5:47 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Science and academia still cannot disprove flat earth. They
       can't even prove the earth moves !!!
       PayPal Donations :
  HTML https://paypal.me/ThankYou3169
       Flat Earth Forums :
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com/index.php?action=forum
       [shadow=blue,left]Theology Forums :[/shadow]
  HTML https://theologyforums.com/index.php
       Youtube :
  HTML https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMt94y3SDxgjpoucj6Yc_Xg?view_as=subscriber
       Twitter :
  HTML https://twitter.com/patrickjane3169
       Linkedin :
  HTML https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-jane-833769164/
       Gab :
  HTML https://gab.com/patrick_jane
       [shadow=red,left]Pinterest :[/shadow]
  HTML https://www.pinterest.com/patrickjane3169/
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page