Jump to content

Mr. Nice

Members
  • Posts

    568
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mr. Nice

  1. 3 minutes ago, endfreemasonscum said:

    I also noticed, that as the distances increase, the flat Earthers are actually short-changing themselves by using that formula, as the actual math proves a greater drop.

     

    It does, but there are no distances that this matters to visible observation - no short change of any note effectively. It's accurate enough for all human visibility statements.

  2. 8 minutes ago, DarianF said:

     

    My maths is shit, so just a question I'd like to ask you. Regarding what Mr. Hancock says here (time code below):

     

    https://youtu.be/E3TQbV6cfQM?t=99

     

    If his calculations are right, the Ancient Egyptians must have also know the Earth wasn't flat? It's not a flat earth video, but I just wanted to know if he's on the right track with those calculations.

     

    Cheers.

     

    It's a bit of old cobblers. He's plucked figures from somewhere and kind of got them to work. There is no way they could know either of those two measurements. 

  3. Just now, Basket Case said:

    So the equation actually does describe an oval.......but can be used for a circle because it's close enough and errs on the side of safety for circular figures ?
     

     

    It is for a massive parabola, but for short distances there is virtually no difference. The bottom of a parabola overlays a circle very closely.

  4. 1 minute ago, DarianF said:

     

    Think of it like some fun in your spare time, this will prevent it from dragging you down because it can get depressing. Don't get drawn into a massive debate, because it's obviously absurd. Keep your powder dry for real debates that are worth full investment of time and energy. That would be my advice.

     

    I have been blocked from posting outside the members only area. Censorship and the opposite of what Icke preaches.

  5.   

    5 hours ago, endfreemasonscum said:

    So, I've had some time now to actually look at this. And honestly, for the last couple of days my head has been spinning, as I am no longer sure of our world is.

     

     

    And this was a fascinating read...

    Zetetic Astronomy

    Earth Not a Globe

    by Parallax (Samuel Birley Rowbotham)

    [1881]

    https://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/#contents

     

    Being a truth seeker, did you at any time seek to verify the claims this big pile of guff refers to? Why not!?

     

    Rebuttals to Eric Dubay’s “200 Proofs Earth is not a Spinning Ball” – FlatEarth.ws

  6. 10 minutes ago, peter said:

    Don't feel bad he called me a balltard as well and blocked me 

    Well that's the end of the flat earth thread  ,they have all moved to the affirmative only thread where they don't have to answer any questions ( not that they ever did) tell themselves how cleaver they all are and massage their highly inflated egos. Alexa blocked me as well ,I bet god told her to ,I'm still laughing

    It seems to me they got the shits ,grabbed their ball (pun intended) and went home

     

    I find it quite sad really - just refusing to debate honestlytwatty.png

  7. 1 hour ago, Basket Case said:

    @Mr. Nice 

     

    A request / question.. 

    My Maths is extremely rusty. 

    There is an accepted formula to measure the amount of fall / curve. 

    Something something something SQUARED. 

    This gives the expected curve. Which is a big point that is contested. 

    I read recently (but didn't totally understand - hence the rusty statement) or saw in a video that the accepted formula doesn't actually give the curve of a BALL. It gives the curve of an oval...? It's an 'exponential formula' hence the oval and not the ball curve..? 

    Can you please look into this and possibly explain it in a way that anyone and everyone can get their heads around. 

    Or am I barking up a wrong tree..? 

    BC 

     

     

    oval or circle.png

     

    It's close enough for both - at sea level and ignoring refraction. The squaring works for an entire parabola but just the bottom part of the Earth curve. So if you took your circle above, perhaps a 10 degree segment would be accurate, then as you went higher around, it becomes less and less accurate. It's ok for short distances, 10 degrees on that circle is 2,500 miles. I wouldn't accurately like to use it for more than a hundred miles though.

     

    Curvature = Miles squared multiplied by 8 inches. 

     

    Eight Inches Per Mile Squared – FlatEarth.ws

  8. 28 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    Earth is 70% water.

     

     

    Is it? Says who? I ask because it would appear that you are taking facts from a group of scientists who tell you how they know this - clue - it's a planet. 

     

    28 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    Water is always level on its surface.

     

    The world is pretty damn big. The curve of the oceans is so small that those who don't like science can be forgiven for thinking it's flat. But it has a gentle curve.

     

    28 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    No allowance for curvature is made in bridge and railway construction.

     

    That is a lie. Every single large structure in the world have the top of the suspension bridges farther apart than the bottom.

     

    28 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    The Panama Canal was built without any regard to curvature.

     

    Another lie. They just set local levels for sea-level because as they go around the curve, the local level changes accordingly.

    Suez Canal – FlatEarth.ws

     

    suez-canal.jpg

     

    28 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    As was the 102 mile long bridge in China.

     

    Wow, lots of lies in one post:

     

    danyang-kunshan.jpg

     

    28 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    The earth is flatter than the flattest pancake in Flat Town, Flatsville.

    Deal with it.

     

    Nope, really it isn't. Go to the clue shop and buy one.

    • Like 1
  9. 37 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

     

    I watched. I learnt that even with 12 minutes of video the guy still couldn't explain it. He said they weren't in a straight line, which is completely irrelevant. He said it was an illusion and gave no other reason except that they weren't exactly straight linear.

     

    None of that alters the fact that they disappear over the horizon just like dozens of images of wind turbines, ships and oooh, let's not forget the bleedin' Sun!

     

    37 minutes ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    Pro globe earth videos can be automatically embedded but Flat earth videos no longer can....Courtesy of You Tube.

    Now why would that be I wonder.

     

    Nonsense. Don't attribute your personal failure to accomplish this as factual for everyone.

     

    p.s. That Comedy Time bloke sure kicked everyone's butt didn't he!

  10. On 1/3/2022 at 2:32 PM, Nobby Noboddy said:

    And yes, the earth is a ball spinning, turning madly, around a ball of gas 93 million miles away, which in turn spins and hurtles through the universe, dragging us and our moon (which stays faithfully orbiting) through infinite space.

     

    That is correct. Can you explain the motions and energies involved that contradict that scenario?

  11. On 1/2/2022 at 9:23 PM, Nobby Noboddy said:

    Yeah, but the point is. The photo on the left is supposed to be from mars according to NASSHOLES.

     

    No it isn't.

     

    That is a piece of deception by a conspiracy theorist who created that meme. Identify the NASA picture containing Devon Island. You can't and won't because none exists.

  12. 19 minutes ago, zArk said:

    The moon is an image manifesting in a gas layer of the sky.

    It is the manifested form of an energy wave that affects our spirit, soul and body

     

    Nonsense. It is a chunk of rock similar to Earth's coalesced to form an orbiting body around a quarter of a million miles from Earth. It has no energy waves detectable by any instrument known to man that affect our bodies. As for spirit and soul, the sight of it is very often an uplifting experience.

     

    Are you suggesting that the Moon is not solid? In which case you explain all the data coming from it from space missions. Point the receiver at it etc. Explain how people like David Icke are somehow mistaken when they refer to it "ringing like a bell" when one of the NASA craft impacted it and one of the Apollo seismology experiments detected it and transmitted the data to Earth. That paragraph barely scratches the surface, we also have Moon bounces from amateur radio enthusiasts and laser reflecting from numerous teams over the planet that determine its distance to within a millimetre.

  13. 1 hour ago, MarcusOmouse said:

     

    This simply can't be true.

    Just ask Mr Nice.

     

    What can't be true? Some twit on Twitter making bare assertions? Little man is a little boy in a peaked cap.

     

    How come you suck this up as the "truth" - what was it that convinced you? Another ad hominem comment....do try to argue the subject. If truth is on your side you will prevail. 

  14. 1 hour ago, MarcusOmouse said:

     

    I know that the despicable behavioural psychopathic psychologists at SAGE have recently been disbanded.

    I know this world is run by a psychopathic class who invert truth and project all of their failings on others

    I get the impression that you fit the bill.

    Mr Nice indeed.

     

    Disgraceful. So your response to failure in an argument is to go after the poster. I get the impression that you are talking bollocks.

  15. 11 hours ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

     

    That's nothing......NASA claim that there are still 600 boxes , weighing over one ton, of telemetry missing from EVERY Apollo mission ... and to "lose" something of that magnitude cannot be due to any carelessness on the part of NASA employees ... If those tapes were really what NASA  claimed they were, they would have been carefully guarded in locked vaults ( like the alleged moon rocks, which turned out to be petrified wood) and not just lost in the shuffle somewhere.

    According to NASA'sversion of the events , the tapes were moved at one point from one facility to another and it was at this second location that they became "lost "

    We are lied to constantly by all governments and government agencies.

    😡

    Sheesh, this off topic nonsense gets everywhere doesn't it. Since you are using it inappropriately and inaccurately to suggest lies being told....

     

    For starters the missing tapes were BACKUPS! They were for Apollo 11 telemetry and slow scan TV. Every single piece of data from the mission was recorded on other media, or written down and thousands of reports written accordingly. They were not lost, but overwritten at a time when these kinds of backup tapes were in short supply.

     

    And what? You cite NASA telling you about this as proof that they lie? 

     

    11 hours ago, Ziggy Sawdust said:

    like the alleged moon rocks, which turned out to be petrified wood

     

    A lie. Debunked to death. Click grey arrow top right corner:

     

     

  16. 30 minutes ago, bamboozooka said:

    seeing as you are a bbc fanboi enjoy

     

    all footage does not show a sarin attack. but the footage does show the after effects of a chlorine attack. it was a false flag carried out by isis cia bad actors.

     

    Are you an alternative misinfo "fanboi"? I already said news media doesn't exactly thrill me....but your opinions on this are just that....opinions. I don't share your conclusion.

  17. 5 minutes ago, bamboozooka said:

    i'm sure youve heard the bad actors say russia will carry out a chemical attack recently.

    same playbook being repeated by the swamp rats

    https://russia-insider.com/en/russian-defense-ministry-white-helmets-staged-sarin-gas-attack-videos/ri19630

     

     

    Why do you believe that link? It's a classic misinfo type site with no direct citations....and lots of speculation.

     

    I repeat. It is going to be difficult to determine anything as correct, so pre-loaded bias won't help arrive at a valid conclusion.

×
×
  • Create New...