Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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 mul

I dont think that flat earth is a thing. But either way - why does the shape of the world matter? If its a flat sphere or a globe - there is no difference for us in our daily lifes, is it?

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

YAY that didn't take long did it?

 

Are you on shift at the moment or did you get an alert?

 

XX

 

Ad hominem. Address the post. I was replying to an another ad hominem and saw your avatar as last poster. Bizarrely I thought for one optimistic moment you were going to post something sensible.

 

I really wish you people would act like truthers rather than crapping your pants when someone challenges your "theories".

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

 

Ad hominem. Address the post. I was replying to an another ad hominem and saw your avatar as last poster. Bizarrely I thought for one optimistic moment you were going to post something sensible.

 

I really wish you people would act like truthers rather than crapping your pants when someone challenges your "theories".

 

Yeah, but I'm not a 'truther', that's a Tavistock construct.

 

When did I 'crap my pants'?

 

Yeah, verifying it with simple observation that is so crushingly obvious it;s painful when people can't see it is personally satisfying. Try a telescope, a known elevation (my own preference is the south of England conveniently where I live and observing known landmarks, with known elevations and see for yourself that either there is something wrong with the curvature maths or there is some other unspeakable explanation.

 

I have gone out in the cold and wet and done experiments that still left me with slight doubt. I have also done ones that had results not explainable in the accepted model.

 

What have you ACTUALLY done, IN REAL LIFE, to back up your assertions?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Red pill taken said:

Hands up whos been to Australia! 

 

Me several times and the moon is definitely up the otherway! I sat there many a night staring at it.

 how is that explained in the flat earth model? 

The moon turns 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

Why would you want to 'get through to flat earthers? About what? Your belief in the spinny, water retaining, missile through oblivion earth?

 

Don't you see what you are doing?

 

What have you done? Apart from accepting what was presented long long ago when you were impressionable.

 

 

I'm not trying to 'get through' to flat earthers in the sense of getting them to change their minds. They equally have rigidly-held beliefs and will hold fast to them.

 

I just try to point out where there are holes or gaps in their reasoning and try to get them to explain.

 

 

As for what I've done, I've explained here that I came across the 'flat earth theory' a few years ago, and I took the time to look into this and try and understand it better. There was a point where I thought this could be true, but then when some fairly obvious things couldn't be explained, it all sort of unravelled.

 

See as I see it, we (as a people) have built up this knowledge and have a 'model' of how things in the universe 'work' and why things do what they do. This model may be correct and true, it may not, but it certainly provides a very plausible 'explanation'. But in order for 'flat earth' to be true and correct, everything else we have learned and discovered about our planet, solar system, galaxy and universe, must have some other scientific explanation.

 

Its not enough to dismiss everything else as "its all FAKE", there still needs to be some rational explanation.

 

Take the recent argument about solar eclipses. Someone claimed that it WASN'T the moon passing in front of the sun that causes eclipses, when pressed on "what is it then?" there was no answer.

 

Same as the explanation as to why we have seasons. There was some graphic presented that claimed the sun moves around in a circular motion overhead, and this circular path 'shrinks and expands'. But there is no explanation as to WHY the sun moves like this.

 

If you want to hold steadfast to your belief in 'flat earth' then that's fine with me. I've looked into this subject, and while I found it fascinating, I ultimately was unable to accept it as 'truth' because there was so much else that then became 'unexplainable' as a result.

 

So I'd be careful who you accuse of being 'impressionable'. The last few years have been fairly enjoyable when it comes to challenging my own beliefs, and opening my mind to all sorts of new possibilities.

 

Ultimately, as I've stated before, I don't really care whether the earth is a ball or a disc, it matters not to me. My reality is what I see in front of me with my own eyes, and for all I know nothing else exists beyond my field of vision.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

I'm not trying to 'get through' to flat earthers in the sense of getting them to change their minds. They equally have rigidly-held beliefs and will hold fast to them.

 

I just try to point out where there are holes or gaps in their reasoning and try to get them to explain.

 

 

As for what I've done, I've explained here that I came across the 'flat earth theory' a few years ago, and I took the time to look into this and try and understand it better. There was a point where I thought this could be true, but then when some fairly obvious things couldn't be explained, it all sort of unravelled.

 

See as I see it, we (as a people) have built up this knowledge and have a 'model' of how things in the universe 'work' and why things do what they do. This model may be correct and true, it may not, but it certainly provides a very plausible 'explanation'. But in order for 'flat earth' to be true and correct, everything else we have learned and discovered about our planet, solar system, galaxy and universe, must have some other scientific explanation.

 

Its not enough to dismiss everything else as "its all FAKE", there still needs to be some rational explanation.

 

Take the recent argument about solar eclipses. Someone claimed that it WASN'T the moon passing in front of the sun that causes eclipses, when pressed on "what is it then?" there was no answer.

 

Same as the explanation as to why we have seasons. There was some graphic presented that claimed the sun moves around in a circular motion overhead, and this circular path 'shrinks and expands'. But there is no explanation as to WHY the sun moves like this.

 

If you want to hold steadfast to your belief in 'flat earth' then that's fine with me. I've looked into this subject, and while I found it fascinating, I ultimately was unable to accept it as 'truth' because there was so much else that then became 'unexplainable' as a result.

 

So I'd be careful who you accuse of being 'impressionable'. The last few years have been fairly enjoyable when it comes to challenging my own beliefs, and opening my mind to all sorts of new possibilities.

 

Ultimately, as I've stated before, I don't really care whether the earth is a ball or a disc, it matters not to me. My reality is what I see in front of me with my own eyes, and for all I know nothing else exists beyond my field of vision.

yurp

 

If you don't care then why post?

Why bother saying you're not bothered?

What do you see in front of your eyes? Have you done ANY experiments for yourself? Have you been outside?

 

I'm sad.

 

You make me sad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

yurp

 

If you don't care then why post?

Why bother saying you're not bothered?

What do you see in front of your eyes? Have you done ANY experiments for yourself? Have you been outside?

 

I'm sad.

 

You make me sad.

 

You're right, I don't know why I bother posting in this topic, its all a waste of time and effort really.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

yurp

 

If you don't care then why post?

Why bother saying you're not bothered?

What do you see in front of your eyes? Have you done ANY experiments for yourself? Have you been outside?

 

I'm sad.

 

You make me sad.

I do an experiment at least once, usually twice a week when I go to the beach and watch the ships disappear from the keel  over the horizon, and please don't reply with the horizon is actually behind the ship and what I'm witnessing is an illusion of some sort as that is just complete and utter crap and in no way matches the constant observational results

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

You're right, I don't know why I bother posting in this topic, its all a waste of time and effort really.

 

 

 

 

Exactly.  I don't want to persuade you and I feel you don't want to persuade me.

 

I'm only interested in exploring the subject in the same way I'm exploring the ideas of Bachamp. With FE there are things I can do for myself to prove or disprove. And I'm only trying to prove/disprove for myself. I couldn't care less about anyone else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, peter said:

I do an experiment at least once, usually twice a week when I go to the beach and watch the ships disappear from the keel  over the horizon, and please don't reply with the horizon is actually behind the ship and what I'm witnessing is an illusion of some sort as that is just complete and utter crap and in no way matches the constant observational results

Twat

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

either there is something wrong with the curvature maths or there is some other unspeakable explanation.

 

 

Or option 3, a speakable explanation. Refraction.

 

http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Advanced+Earth+Curvature+Calculator

 

2 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

I have gone out in the cold and wet and done experiments that still left me with slight doubt. I have also done ones that had results not explainable in the accepted model.

 

The problem is not the results. It is your understanding of "the accepted model".

 

http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Advanced+Earth+Curvature+Calculator

 

Punch in what it should be on that website the 3 variables with yellow background, then toggle the Refraction setting left and right. 

 

2 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

What have you ACTUALLY done, IN REAL LIFE, to back up your assertions?

 

About 2000 posts on the old forum, a few hundred on this.

 

A blog....https://penguinsfalloff.blogspot.com/2017/06/as-internet-debates-go-one-concerning.html

 

A thread on this forum with every post on page 1 sealing the deal on its own.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

What do you see in front of your eyes?

 

You make me sad.

 

The Sun disappears over the horizon without changing size. 

The Moon is upside down in Australia. The face is visible at the same time to Perth and Sydney, they are around 2000 miles apart. Yet the exact same face is visible to each place.

 

bollocks.png%C2%A0

 

 

Now do something amazing and acknowledge the glaring problem with that!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

man, you like to post.

 

You so scared not to let other decide for themselves.

 

I think you love bibi, I think you kissed.

 

And once again you crap yourself and avoid the post.

 

Man you like to run away. Decide for themselves? Go on then...jog on. Go find out.

 

BUT...you are posting your inept fumblings on a debate forum for some reason. So you are trying to influence others. I'm showing you why you are wrong and offering dead obvious things to help.  You are afraid to acknowledge them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

Twat

Come on let us know what you really think.

I'm sorry if a simple observation doesn't agree with your so called experimental findings

Occam's razor's a bitch

Edited by peter
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

Take the recent argument about solar eclipses. Someone claimed that it WASN'T the moon passing in front of the sun that causes eclipses, when pressed on "what is it then?" there was no answer.

 

as i said, the omission of an alternative doesnt validate the failure of the established sphere model

the sphere model fails because its own calculations when applied to the solar eclipse do not fit

  • the moon shadow would move outside the circumference of the earth before the observed experienced eclipse finishes
  • the final experienced observed eclipse would be rotated around away from the sun/moon at the time recorded
  • the moon is not observed prior or post eclipse

its a hole in the sphere model.

just like the curvature model which fails because now we have technology like telescopes available to everyone

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, zArk said:

as i said, the omission of an alternative doesnt validate the failure of the established sphere model

the sphere model fails because its own calculations when applied to the solar eclipse do not fit

 

The sphere model works fine and your "omission" of a magic alternative object is one of the most ludicrous head up the backside explanations I've ever seen.

 

36 minutes ago, zArk said:

The moon shadow would move outside the circumference of the earth before the observed experienced eclipse finishes

 

Being a bullshitter when this has been explained to you numerous times is not cool. Your reference comes from an idiotic yooootub video where he lifts the data for the penumbra and uses it for the shadow. You ignored all posts explaining this to you.

 

36 minutes ago, zArk said:
  • The final experienced observed eclipse would be rotated around away from the sun/moon at the time recorded

 

 

Gibberish, no it wouldn't.

 

36 minutes ago, zArk said:
  • the moon is not observed prior or post eclipse

 

A brainless observation. Neither is your magic bullshit alternative!! The Moon has no light on it and it is broad daylight. Atmospheric scattering occludes stars during the day. Clearly, anyone with eyes can see the dark part of the Moon is much dimmer than stars when viewed at night.

 

36 minutes ago, zArk said:

its a hole in the sphere model.

 

It's a vacuous hole in your understanding.

 

36 minutes ago, zArk said:

just like the curvature model which fails because now we have technology like telescopes available to everyone

 

Hahahaha....new "technology"? They've had them for hundreds of years dude!! It doesn't fail, flat earthers don't consider refraction and ignore things disappearing over the curve!

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, zArk said:

The moon turns 

 

Uhuh. You and your team of flat earthers are absolutely appalling the way you ignore so, so many things.

 

The "turning" moon. Identical in its orientation to the ground in two places at once, 2000 miles apart. You are full of crap!

 

The Moon is upside down in Australia. The face is visible at the same time to Perth and Sydney, they are around 2000 miles apart. Yet the exact same face is visible to each place.

 

bollocks.png%C2%A0

 

We could just as easily use something MUCH wider in an example, such as Sierra Leone to Columbo , 6,256 on roughly the same latitude and identical views of the Moon!!

 

 

Now do something amazing and acknowledge the glaring problem with that!

 

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2020 at 6:28 PM, Grumpy Owl said:

See the thing is that I see those who 'believe in Flat Earth' are equally indoctrinated by bogus videos on Youtube

I understand your point about bogus video, but I see this used far more by the 'debunking' sites. Some of these videos have been posted here and debunked, but life goes on.

 

And what about those like myself posting original work? Can you understand that youtube is merely a platform and an easy way to share your observations/experiments with family and friends? Do you understand that I have added or deleted nothing from the videos that I have been posting? Do you understand that you are able to watch exactly what happens as light passes through the lens of my camera?

 

Here are two quick clips just to illustrate the rules of perspective that is only denied by the FE debunkers, but accepted as self evident by the rest of humanity.

 

 

 

 

 

@peter, I am not sure if you saw my response to your last point (15). I am ready to proceed with my 15 points. Let me know when you have a chance.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How dare this bloke seek to "educate" people with his stupid "I just go me a camera  innit" videos.

 

Perspective is all about the vanishing point....something that is bloody obvious.

 

Things vanish as they reach it!! They don't just bloody disappear. 

 

Sunset. Flat earth splattered.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Grumpy Owl changed the title to The Flat Earth Thread: The reality of our physical plane (v2)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...