Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bflat

  1. 1) No curvature has ever been seen by anyone other than freemasons. Neil the ass tyson, the freemason heliocentric priest has admitted this several times. And no, I was talking about how we know NOW that we see horizons far beyond (over ten times) where they should be. You make this hard on yourself when the video evidence is right there for you in the OP. 2) Water covers 70% of our supposed ball. The natural physics of water determines that it fills its container and lies flat on the top. The laser video in the OP illustrates this clearly. 3) It's all in the OP.
  2. Last explanation for you and then we'll agree to disagree and you will still not once focus on the impossible horizons from the OP's video evidence. I can explain it, but can't make you understand it... clearly. Hope this helps: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Vanishing_point
  3. LOL! And this is how they have taken our world map and turned it into a sphere: Urbano Monte’s Massive Map of the Earth (1587) Of course, once the image is digital you can map it into all sorts of different projections like Mercator or Ortelius oval projection. Jeremy Ashkenas even created a rotatable & zoomable globe of Monte’s map that is incredibly fun to play with. https://kottke.org/19/07/urbano-montes-massive-map-of-the-earth-1587
  4. You are distracted still with this. Who knows with the way technology continues to improve what we will see in the future or how far. Point one in the OP focuses on what we know now. We know NOW that we see horizons far beyond (over ten times) where they should be. You make this hard on yourself when the video evidence is right there for you in the OP. Try for two through five and see what you can find. Perspective. bro... and atmospheric conditions, light pollution, etc.. You've been answered multiple times. The above video is from just
  5. How can you claim to have researched this? You don't need gravity to explain the apple falling on Newton or why jumping off buildings is stupid. If you didn't understand the importance of the above pic, just google density tower. You can create one yourself.
  6. Anything distracting you from the obvious points in the OP will distract you. Here are the five simple points: 1) Impossible horizons 2) Natural physics of water 3) Natural gas law 4) Emergency landings prove pilots use a flat earth map and they have never used a globe 5) Not only pilot manuals, but nasa's own technical documents repeatedly reference a stationary flat earth! There is much more detail in the OP.
  7. Of course it is. It solves all their problems, but even the freemasons have to admit that it is nothing more than theory. Beyond that, it is a shitty theory, but it is a necessity for the freemasonic delusion to persist. Newton simply did not realize that gravity was unnecessary to explain the apple popping him on his head. Had he had a better understanding of density, let alone the conditions of the tree he was sitting under including, but not limited to how dry the stem was that was holding the apple prior to its fall, we likely would not even be here.
  8. North is simply the center of our plane. There is a magnet there that sits directly under Polaris. Compasses are based on this principle and work as they do because of our flat plane. This is why no matter where on earth you are, if you travel away from magnetic north you hit the ice wall. South is the outside of our plane according to all compasses. Now stop being distracted. Points 2-5 await you.
  9. You're back to this red herring stuff which is distracting you from the five points in the OP. We have done the impossible horizons. I have showed you the calculations. If you still have not figured out that these horizons cannot be possible on a ball the size that modern astronomy claims, it is time to move on to points two through five. I answered your question and you did not answer to my response. Please focus on the five points in the OP if you really wish to explore this topic. Thanks
  10. I'm sorry to hear that, but based on the above post, I can hardly believe you have researched this in the least. Be honest for a second. What is more likely? People would fall off of a flat, stationary plane -or- people would fall off a ball moving at a speed that is several times that of sound and in multiple different directions as it spins at over 1000 mph (faster than sound again)?
  11. This lie is put forth by freemasons. Not only has Polaris been in the same place since we looked at the sky, all the other stars form perfect circles over time. This in itself is impossible in spinning ball world.
  12. Thanks, but this is acting weird AF. Have you had trouble posting? I get messages saying I'm blocked.
  13. Yes! Do you get it now? Here is a simple calculator for you, but you really should be able to do this yourself: http://www.ringbell.co.uk/info/hdist.htm And don't forget that it always rises to eye level and remains flat. Since none of us have ever for ourselves a horizon on a ball, check this open sourced 3d model of what we should see from a hot air balloon, yet never do: See flat earth vs globe earth in the OP As stated, the truth remains and has been staring us in the face for our entire lives.
  14. You could figure this out yourself with research. This is some of THE MOST BASIC STUFF! Think of looking down a street of lamp posts. Are you honestly prepared to sit there and tell me that the light posts in the distance are shorter than those right in front?
  15. If conditions are just right, you can see Polaris from just south of the equator. https://astronomy.com/magazine/ask-astro/2018/12/polaris-from-the-southern-hemisphere Please try and hit my points now and leave these red herrings behind.
  16. I think it would be more accurate to declare that these horizons prove we cannot live on a sphere, 25,000 miles in circumference. Please research Polaris yourself. I believe this was handled prior in the thread by another very patient poster. And make sure not to assume you know things that you clearly do not. Hint: stop saying Polaris cannot be seen in what you call the southern hemisphere. It can be and these observations have been recorded several times. Freemasons explain this away with refraction... a term that most who use it do not understand.
  17. @MrA A red herring is something that misleads or distracts from a relevant or important question.... ... the red herring falls into a broad class of relevance fallacies.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring All your "concerns" can be easily understood with some very basic research, but again all this is simply distracting you from the five simple points. Hit my points first and then anything you can't google for yourself I will help you with.
  18. You have been on here having all your questions handled for pages now and still have not come close to responding to the OP. Here are the five simple points: 1) Impossible horizons 2) Natural physics of water 3) Natural gas law 4) Emergency landings prove pilots use a flat earth map and they have never used a globe 5) Not only pilot manuals, but nasa's own technical documents repeatedly reference a stationary flat earth!
  19. @Avoiceinthecrowdand @alexa Thanks so much for keeping truth alive. Both of you deserve much credit... especially for your patience. I know it can be frustrating answering the same questions again and again... especially when you are forced into discussing pro wrestling like it is real. @All y'all who have been reading along, but not posting (there are many of you). Are any of you the least bit concerned that this thread is now 12 pages long, has been read thousands of times, and not once has anyone even attempted to dispute even one of my five points I listed in t
  20. I just have a quick couple of questions if one of you would be so kind as to contact me via PM. Thanks in advance
  21. OK, trolling or serious? That is a fisheye lens (PLEASE WATCH THE VIDEOS ABOVE, neil the ass tyson even explained this for you) and the water in the sink nonsense you believe in is a carnival trick. And the "southern hemisphere" DOES NOT EXIST. PLEASE NOW, Do not turn this into a thread similar to those discussing pro wrestling like it is an actual competition. At the end of the day, do you wanna be one of those people that freemasons can trick with gopros, carnival tricks, shitty models, pitiful attempts at using special effects, cgi cartoons and obvious lies?
  22. Hi Mega, it's really all speculation. Understand the simple points above and then we might be able to get there. I will say that there is great difference between existing in a relatively small, intelligently designed, local system and an infinitely expanding cosmic accident which in effect reduces to us to some infinitely small spec of cosmic dust. You must be a freemason for they are the only ones who have seen this curvature you speak of. And even some of them can't see it, lol. One of their heliocentric priests explains: And you certainly have never s
  23. The “Nature of Reality” forum was recently hosting a thread where heated discussion was taking place regarding our plane, “a flat, nonrotating Earth” as nasa themselves reference multiple times in multiple documents. Freemason trolls were going crazy over their delusion being exposed, which in itself was fun to watch. The thread was several pages long, I believe over 40, was posted to multiple times each day, and was being viewed 100s of times each day. So, I’ll lay out the basics for discussion, the freemason trolls will come on here with nearly every logical fallacy known to man; they w
  24. Freemasons had been trolling the "nature of reality" forum and losing badly.
  • Create New...