Jump to content

The Flat Earth Thread: The reality of our physical plane (v2)


bflat
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, alexa said:

 

Well it can't Peter this is so obvious, there has to be the firmament, I know this has been dealt with before, but when Globalists keep on repeating their nonsense, we have to keep on putting them right, wouldn't you agree ?

absolutely not ,sorry there is no up and down in space and because of that the earth and it oceans could quite happily survive between you ears 😉

Edited by peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

And here you are STILL yanking my fucking chain. 

There is 105 bloody pages now ,do you think that is the whole point , as I have said a few times they have a brilliant debating style ,people give up out of frustration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, peter said:

There is 105 bloody pages now ,do you think that is the whole point , as I have said a few times they have a brilliant debating style ,people give up out of frustration

 

It's a tricky one. I had hundreds and hundreds of posts on the old forum and almost that number wiped out from this one. Without question the tactic was always the same - splatter and dodge. No relation to this:

https://ttte.fandom.com/wiki/Splatter_and_Dodge

 

If the individual flat earther is genuinely here to debate, they aren't doing so. They are evading massively destructive posts to their claim.

If they are here to troll and have fun - they are just weirdos and should get a life.

If they are here because they are a bit "not clever" then they should at least make some attempt to educate themselves - they don't.

 

The last point there relies on them being able to do that and collectively leads me to the conclusion that no matter what, none of the flat earth participants in this thread are going to change their "minds". BUT there are genuinely people out there susceptible to horseshit who need to be shown that ..

 

a) Flat earthers are incapable of proper debate

b) They ALWAYS ignore things that prove they are wrong.

c) They cannot be reasoned with on any level.

d) No amount of proof suffices - they just label a ludicrous amount of it faaaake.

e) Their world view relies on a cast of millions being in on this crazy cult belief.

 

8fae38eededa3f7fa770340ccffdb7eb.jpg

Edited by Comedy Time
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

You are claiming that every pilot, every aircraft aviation company, Satellite, radar people, even GPS manufacturers is somehow in this hoax

No, you are employing a tactic used by professionals to stifle debate by first lying about what I wrote and then arguing with yourself.

 

12 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

you could quite easily verify..you can buy GPS watches, you can also use internet on long haul flights.

But I can no longer appeal to authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), especially from known lairs for my truth. I understand you aren't a logician.

 

12 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

But you claim there are no satellites.

I never said that either.

 

12 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

If the distances measured around the globe are a lie, then Im pretty sure someone would have noticed by now.

Many have... look into it.

 

12 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

And as usual you have no evidence to back anything you say up

That is what you did. This is another tactic used by professionals to stifle debate. Accuse your enemy of what you, yourself are guilty of.

 

12 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

everyone else on the planet whos travelled on a plane & knows full well how long it takes to get anywhere.

This is what I have been explaining and what you cannot grasp. No one can claim they know the distance they traveled because they traveled. The ridiculousness of that idea should be apparent. And this is what you were asked to provide proof of, yet again ran for obfuscation, straw man arguments and lies.

 

Or just admit that none of us know.

It's OK and really not that much of a concession.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, amy G said:

If this were so, rivers and canals would run both ways. That does not happen, therefore gravity cannot work that way.

 

 

A quite breathtakingly ignorant statement. Rivers follow the path of both water momentum and gravity, as do canals.

https://gilavalleycentral.net/if-the-earth-is-round-how-does-the-nile-river-flow-uphill/

 

Gravity works exactly as stated and in the absence of a flat earth alternative it stands. Oh go on, please tell me you think it density or some other shit like that. Or better still run away again when asked to verify your baseless claims.

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, amy G said:

No one can claim they know the distance they traveled because they traveled. The ridiculousness of that idea should be apparent.

 

In general I can agree with this for the passengers though not for the pilots. BUT there are GPS satellites orbiting the Earth ensuring anyone can see instantly where they are on the planet....and the onboard graphics ALWAYS correspond to the global map. Also the most salient point about the distance travelled is it FITS with the distance claimed and the speed of the plane.

 

On the lunatic flat earth map, where distances are ridiculous and direct routes over land , instead of sea, or vice-versa it can clearly be established that the route taken MUST exceed the maximum speed of the plane and necessitate supersonic flight and sonic booms!

 

Posted before and ignored by team Flatoutofintegrity.....

 

On the flat "map" the circumference running through Sydney / Santiago is very economically 32,000 (nearer 35k). Divide by pi = 10,184 straight line distance, which incidentally takes you over America and not 100% across the water as the flight is.

 

Here's your starter for 10:

GLOBE: Sydney to Santiago - flying time 12 hours 35 minutes  - distance 7,046 miles. Boeing 787 cruising speed 561 mph. Works just fine.

FLAT: Sydney to Santiago - flying time 12 hours 35 minutes  - distance 10,184 miles. Boeing 787 cruising speed 561 mph. Not so much.

 

Can you explain that? It's ok, we both know you aren't going to answer it. 

 

Oh and PS:

 

@oddsnsods said: You are claiming that every pilot, every aircraft aviation company, Satellite, radar people, even GPS manufacturers is somehow in this hoax

@amy G said: No, you are employing a tactic used by professionals to stifle debate by first lying about what I wrote and then arguing with yourself.

 

You didn't say it, but you MUST be implying it, because there is NO OTHER explanation!

 

 

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, amy G said:

No, you are employing a tactic used by professionals to stifle debate by first lying about what I wrote and then arguing with yourself.

 

Oz to Chile direct ON TIME.

 

https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/QFA27

 

 

3 hours ago, amy G said:

 

But I can no longer appeal to authority (argumentum ab auctoritate), especially from known lairs for my truth. I understand you aren't a logician.

 

Teach then.🦜

 

Global Position System.

Satellites.

WIFI on a plane at 30,000ft

 

Suspense is killing me...😲🍿💀

 

THE "STAGE" IS ALL YOURS AMY "G" !!!🎙️

 

0?e=1605139200&v=beta&t=Lt4llrvVW_fPdF9k

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, shabbirss said:

 

 

How can one believe in Astrology & Flat Earth same time? When Flerthers claim space doesnt exist.

 

Bonacci in an interview I listened to claimed pilots were Satanically possessed coz they ate meat & were in a hypnotic state when flying. True story bro.

 

Yes I used to watch his syncretism occult videos years ago, but hes gone seriously batshit crazy or compromised like I mentioned earlier. 

After he was arrested & put in jail.

Edited by oddsnsods
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, amy G said:

If this were so, rivers and canals would run both ways. That does not happen, therefore gravity cannot work that way.

 

 

In your own words "water finds its own level". Rivers and streams flow down mountains and hills to sea-level because of 'gravity'.

 

Canals do not 'run' because they are built level, hence why you have 'locks' along them.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, alexa said:

Well @Comedy Time explain this.......

 

1415126448_AWATER.PNG.6139d4c3a9677d150b4303b8ed33f4fd.PNG

 

Dear me, I can see what that image is trying to represent, but it is missing the bit where the water is pouring off the bottom.... 😄

 

This is the bit that some 'flat-earthers' seem to struggle to comprehend. When you're considering a huge globe planet in space, there is no 'up or down'. Gravity is relative to the centre of mass. Water does find its level, but the level is also relative to the centre of the mass. And thats also why people in Australia don't fall off the planet and into space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

 

Show us on the flat map how it works. Answer the two simple bolded questions and then I will demonstrate why THAT cannot work, no matter WHAT you type. That is why none of you will answer. @Nobby Noboddy gave me a figure and I annihilated his numbers with trigonometry (needless to say he ran away). I picked an unfeasible lowest distance for the Sun (Everest height) and showed that even THAT cannot work with trigonometry.

 

 

I didn't run away, I have a life outside of here. So a little early for triumphalism.

 

I'll admit I have some doubt's here and there and that anything high above us is subject to whatever knowledge others give us about it. I've never been higher than a commercial airline flight.

 

I'm pretty convinced that there's a problem with curvature though. I've done some rudimentary experiments but lack a really good telescope to make some local verification. I will add that I'm not afraid to prove myself wrong in doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

Gravity is relative to the centre of mass. Water does find its level, but the level is also relative to the centre of the mass.

 

 Your right G/O I don't understand and will never understand how water can possibly curve as water always finds it's own level no matter what??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

Oz to Chile direct ON TIME.

 

https://uk.flightaware.com/live/flight/QFA27

Great point! The flight only shows the beginning and end. The dotted line represents an area where your beloved satellites do not work. This happens on every single one of these southern hemisphere flights.

 

2 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

In your own words "water finds its own level". Rivers and streams flow down mountains and hills to sea-level because of 'gravity'.

 

Canals do not 'run' because they are built level, hence why you have 'locks' along them.

 

 

I'm not here to argue, but that is just not true.

 

Suez Canal, Arabic Qanāt al-Suways...

The canal extends 120 miles...

The Suez Canal is an open cut, without locks,...

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Suez-Canal

 

1 hour ago, Basket Case said:


Water can be round too..
 

 

I'm sorry, but this is this is a perfect illustration of the type of pure obfuscation that the flat earth community faces.

 

Does that have anything at all to do with large bodies of water curving around a ball or sticking to the outside of any container?

 

And are you claiming a "zero-G" environment because 'space?'

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, amy G said:

Great point! The flight only shows the beginning and end. The dotted line represents an area where your beloved satellites do not work. This happens on every single one of these southern hemisphere flights.

 

You was going to explain about GPS & satellites?..miss flatulence.🤭

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

I'm pretty convinced that there's a problem with curvature though. I've done some rudimentary experiments but lack a really good telescope to make some local verification. I will add that I'm not afraid to prove myself wrong in doing so.

 

There isn't a problem with curvature. There is a thing called refraction and it explains things perfectly. 

 

 

@amy G HELLO????? Oh look the boat is over the horizon and it is zoomed in and tiny. The Sun? Same size. How come!

maxresdefault.jpg

Edited by Comedy Time
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


l'm claiming that water can curve..
 

OK, well why would you post that on this thread? What does that possibly have to do with this topic? How is that not the pure obfuscation that I have been pointing out?

 

8 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

 

You was going to explain about GPS & satellites?..miss flatulence.🤭

 

After you admit, finally, that none of us have any idea of what the actual distances are between any two distant points on earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, amy G said:

OK, well why would you post that on this thread? What does that possibly have to do with this topic? How is that not the pure obfuscation that I have been pointing out?

 

After you admit, finally, that none of us have any idea of what the actual distances are between any two distant points on earth.

 

Honestly dude, your evasion is something to behold. It's almost as though you're afraid to look ignorant.

 

 

 

Why are you afraid to answer basic easy stuff?

The Moon is upside down in Australia - explain

Star fields rotate in opposite directions by hemisphere - explain.

How can an object ABOVE eyeline drop below the horizon?

How can an object disappear full size anyway!!?

 

I did some maths showing the Sun as close as bloody Mount Everest...you ran away like a coward and said to use proper numbers. The lower to the surface the Sun is, the less distance must the Sun be to the horizon. As you go higher it gets progressively more and more ridiculous!! Since I started at a fucking ridiculous height to begin with, that is STILL a crazy distance to the horizon! , you have nowhere to go....

 

SO. Let's get really silly shall we? Mount Everest is 5.5 miles high  - we shall substitute x for 5.5 miles. Nobody is THAT dumb to claim the Sun is below the damn mountain - but shall we work it out anyway?

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

A= 0.01 degrees

a=5.5 miles

 

The Frickin' Sun is 31 500 miles away!

 

@Nobby NoboddyDude, save yourself, come back from the dark side that's tempting you. Look what all the flat earthers do, they actually totally ignore slam dunk posts like this, make loads of noise and then back to normal  twatty.png

 

 

@amy G You are toast. Totally afraid to answer anything!

Here's your starter for 10:

GLOBE: Sydney to Santiago - flying time 12 hours 35 minutes  - distance 7,046 miles. Boeing 787 cruising speed 561 mph. Works just fine.

FLAT: Sydney to Santiago - flying time 12 hours 35 minutes  - distance 10,184 miles. Boeing 787 cruising speed 561 mph. Not so much.

 

Can you explain that? It's ok, we both know you aren't going to answer it. 

Edited by Comedy Time
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, alexa said:

 

 Your right G/O I don't understand and will never understand how water can possibly curve as water always finds it's own level no matter what??

 

45 minutes ago, amy G said:

 

 

Does that have anything at all to do with large bodies of water curving around a ball or sticking to the outside of any container?

 

 

 

 

24 minutes ago, Basket Case said:


l'm claiming that water can curve..
 

 

11 minutes ago, amy G said:

OK, well why would you post that on this thread? What does that possibly have to do with this topic? How is that not the pure obfuscation that I have been pointing out?

 


On topic.
Your point ?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Grumpy Owl changed the title to The Flat Earth Thread: The reality of our physical plane (v2)
  • Grumpy Owl locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...