Mr. Nice

Fiction. There have been many experiments by the snake-oil flat earth salesmen sucking in gullible people to their conferences etc. However pretty much every experiment made ignored refraction - a fundamental property of light on the Earth. Lol. There is no baseless theory about viruses. There is a massive branch of science that studies them. Round of applause - what are you trying to do with that mini speech? Garner support for the Earth being flat when it's a planet?

@zArk @alexaand anyone else who thinks the sea "finds its level" or whatever:

Wow, straight out the gate with another daft conspiracy. You want to debate Apollo and show me your "debunks"? Go find a thread and I will absolutely destroy your arguments, every one of them. If you rely on silly old youtube videos then this will be fairly short. I know a fair bit about the Apollo program, it is one of my personal interests. I want to know two things from you. Why the hell do you give that much of a crap about what I care about? Why the hell do you not pick up on the regular flat earth posters and ask them how the hell they can post their claims?

Joke request. You deny without any reason, the methodology by which it is measured.. I find it absurd that you dismiss every single picture and video as being faked, some from well before digital editing was available. Effects of Earth curvature on atmospheric correction for ocean color remote sensing - ScienceDirect I doubt that. On "record" from flat earth "methodology" that ignores refraction and the tendency of laser light to curve with pressure. The video shown below identifies curvature as expected. Its content is up to the 5 minute mark - then just music.

Bare assertion that disputes the word, research, experiments, hard evidence of a ridiculously big number of people over many hundreds of years. Don't tell me, they used a surface hugging laser. Why do you believe experiments by charlatans yet dismiss many, many more by people who aren't trying to suck in gullible punters? Show your source for this claim. There is curve and you have been given hundreds of examples. You just make up imaginary nonsense to refute them. None of it fails. You can't even explain a sunset. You can't explain why the Moon inverted in the Southern hemisphere is not inverted across the same hemisphere on opposite sides. See the row of pylons on page 6? Curvature. I could list 20 questions that fundamentally destroy your claims and you would fail to answer every single one. You do this on every flat earth thread. I avoid nothing and have verifiable answers for any of your claims.

I'm lost now, did you not make a point about vaccines? The sars2 vaccines are based on research that is relatively new, and the results of which are based on shorter than usual field trials. It has no resemblance to the colossal weight of science that shows we are on a planet. Have you ever seen your insides? All surgeons are lying. Have you ever climbed Everest, all climbers are liars. That argument is a very, very poor one. It relies on you dismissing clear evidence such as satellites and their data, satnav systems that use them, TV satellites, visible ISS, astronaut accounts, numerous companies who build satellites and space craft, personnel who launch and track them and so, so many scientists who receive data from space and work with it. I won't even mention the Apollo space program that has more evidence than most deniers have any comprehension about. So yes, I choose to believe something that has an alternative that is preposterous and is based on a massive volume of evidence. Then you cannot devalue such a large volume of people because you have an alternative view on their education and have no idea what corroboration they have been through as part of it. I know first hand what is involved in higher education and there is no indoctrination involved and a substantial amount of go off and do your own verified research. So every spacecraft that has studied it is fake? All data is fake? Anyway that is not what I meant. Try again: The yellow ball that lights and heats the Earth (or whatever, appears to) does not change in size at any time of day, at any location and sets FULL SIZE. Now how is that possibly a flat earth? Because there is only one explanation for every observable thing and it is a globe.

OK, time to partake. Your realm has a full sized star disappearing exactly as it should over the horizon if we are orbiting it. Exactly in line with every measurement made over thousands of years and predicted for the long distant future. Care to explain? Because flat earthers cannot even explain this simple, simple thing. If you are on a flat surface, any object moving parallel to the ground above eyeline cannot fall below it. It is a physical impossibility.

I don't need to take a close look at systems designed to educate and pass on scientific knowledge. I got to experience, experiment and verify much of what I learned. There is no "theory" about the planet. We live on a planet.

In your case the example relies on speculative research backed up by trials. In the case of planetary science it is many levels of proof beyond that and with hard evidence from space travel, satellites and data received from them. So why is YOUR research about tidal waves any more informed about the colossal consensus concerning the shape of our planet?

Hey no problem at all. We both know that you cannot answer any of my responses to you anyway. You expected your cut and paste claims to go unanswered and they were taken apart. Never mind. I will never lose hope that one day, somewhere I will come across somebody who has fallen into this trap of incorrect knowledge but is able to get themselves out of it. Oh look at that impossible solar illumination pattern! Look at that impossible setting Sun or changing Moon face. God still loves you on his beautiful planet (if religion floats your boat). God can make big bangs. God can make primordial soup. But on planet flat, God forgot to explain how things work the way they do, especially when they appear 100% to look like a planet.

That is a very simplistic interpretation of what he is saying. He stresses the quantum non-physical nature of the world. But quite clearly at 1:53 he says it appears to be a planet/universe and solid. Yes he qualifies then that it is not the case, but he is making this a holographic universe/simulation statement. The fundamental issue is that the simulation of which he speaks about is a a planet shaped one within an encoded universe.

That is a non-sequitur argument, enticingly off topic. Especially when you consider that mRna is not genetic altering. Holds breath awaits torrent. No. Would you stand in front of a tidal wave just because a small minority said it wouldn't be dangerous?

Construction – FlatEarth.ws

Oh stop splitting hairs It is universally considered amongst that entire list that we are on a planet. There is consensus across the board that is to all intents and purposes everyone bar a few fringe participants. Going through schools and being in a position to verify things for yourself is not a bad thing - you imply people learning by indoctrination.

https://flatearth.ws/high-altitude-balloon Curvature of the Horizon in High-Altitude Balloon Footage

No, not even close to reason enough. And who exactly is "they"? Your silly picture says depicting the flat flying space pizza/pancake as a glorious and beautiful planet somehow denies the existence of a creator? How does it exactly? They: Every scientist on the planet. Every physicist. Every cosmologist. Every astronaut. Every person who has worked within spacecraft design. Everyone involved in the many space agencies. Every amateur and professional astronomer Every amateur radio enthusiast who has bounced radio off of the moon. For how long: Thousands of years. Considering man has trouble keeping any secret, that is some stunning feat of deception. They have made marvellous use of celestial objects like the Sun and Moon setting full size. Or every visible planet spinning on its axis including the Sun! Why are you so afraid to be wrong about this?

I asked you what curve you would expect to see. This is what should be visible at sea level on the globe as given? Let me assist you. First off, if we are talking about the eye, the brain does an instantaneous assembly of what the eye scans and gives an effective viewpoint. It does not allow a single spanned view point as the central vision is a very narrow section. So let's talk about a camera....one with a large field of view - say 90 degrees. Now at sea level, 2m viewing height: 5.1km / 3.2 miles. Distance to the Horizon Calculator (ringbell.co.uk) 1. Now a 90 degree span gives two back to back 45 degree triangles and a visible distance of 6.4 miles / 11,264 yards. 2. Curvature is near as dammit 8 inches squared by mile - 328 inches / 9.1 yards. Now we can work out the elevation change formed by any curve, with two sides of an triangle. Right-Angled Triangle Calculator (cleavebooks.co.uk) a is 9.1 / b is 11264 - this gives an angle between the flat and the visible curve of...........0.046 of a degree. To those who have no idea what I mean, that is the curvature at sea level is so small the eye or a camera cannot detect it! No. There is a real horizon, things disappear over it. BIG things like the Sun! Once again bare assertion. There is curve but once again it's fairly small. From my blog: Now one of the key issues the flat earth crowd complain about is not seeing the curve. If you use simple trigonometry and take a bog standard visual span of 90 degrees, at sea level head height, the human eye will simply be unable to detect the 4 hundredths of a degree of variance. At 1000 metres it's still a paltry 1 degree and by the time you get up to cruising altitude for a jet it has only mustered over 3 degrees. Just about visible. Going higher, at 100 kilometres it is still only 10 degrees variance. The Earth is very big, that is why we don't see much curvature. Here is a simple plot of the curvature :

This is a mixture of bare assertion and straight denial. Are you going to answer questions? At sea level what curve should you see? In an airplane at cruising height, through a small window you'd barely notice. @Ziggy SawdustYour strawman picture means nothing. The cabin window is curved so distorts. The cockpit is very iften not and offers a much wider field. Pilots will tell you all about the curvature. Nasa is one of many space agencies. Countless launches and the idea they are faking it all is beyond ludicrous. Thousands of pictures, data from space that would fill a thousand hard drives, live video, personal accounts, the visible ISS.

Tell me why the Moon is inverted in the Southern hemisphere. A reason that also works when it is on the horizon(yours didn't) and why people on opposite sides of the world by latitude are not affected the same way. @alexawhen will you ever answer this?

And I'm getting a deja vu avoid posts again. Consider yourself an amazingly observant person with your astute detective skills and kindly answer my posts instead of ad hominems which invariably get raised in my direction.

Then you have been misinformed. Many people who have fixed views find it hard to consider they are wrong and choose instead to label the people who counter their arguments in such a way. Who are you!?

Ok, so you're just going to spam pictures are you? Water Level Demonstrates The Dip of the Horizon and Proves Earth’s Curvature – FlatEarth.ws

Why do you feel the need to post about who I am rather than join the debate? Are my posts upsetting you? Do you feel empowered with detective skill noting something so obvious?

I'm curious to know what motivates you to care? Knowing what motivates me will not change anything one iota. Why not ask any flat earther what motivates them to post in the face of a wall of knowledge spanning thousands of years? I'm curious to know why you care so much to have bothered replying?

You aren't playing ball here are you. Not replying to my response. That IS a fish eye lens on the former, but where is the whole flat earth!? The second one shows about 5 degree of arc and once again has the curvature near the centre of the lens distorting it very slightly. I thought you said it was all CGI, did they just get lazy?