Jump to content

The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread


bflat

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, zArk said:

 

just tell me why you ignore Airys failure and Sagnacs experiment?

 

why do you continue without measurement of a curve?

 

 

 

Ok, ok, I've had enough of this crazy shit. I'm going to nail this right here and now. Let's see you provide a sensible answer to the following ...

 

 

Flat Earthers say the stars are projected onto, or embedded in, the firmament. They can't exist outside of it. Agreed?

 

If I'm standing at your North Pole and look up then Polaris should be almost directly above me. Agreed?

 

If I'm standing in Australia, then the Southern cross should be visible above me, albeit not directly above. Agreed?

 

Now, tell me this ...

 

Since your world is FLAT, then both Polaris AND the Southern Cross will be visible above the horizon AT THE SAME TIME!!! Agreed?

 

BUT THEY ARE NOT, and NEVER HAVE BEEN!!!

 

So how do you explain this?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beaujangles said:

May be an image of nature and sky

 

Apparently this is a rare astronomical phenomenon... An Aurora Vortex. Anyone want to shed light on how its created from a flat earth or otherwise perspective?

 

What a beautiful Picture.😀

 

Sorry-I hadn't heard of an Aurora Vortex before now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

What a beautiful Picture.😀

 

Sorry-I hadn't heard of an Aurora Vortex before now.

 

 

Yes, I found it very lovely...and wondered how such a phenomenon could form. Especially how it could evolve from a flat earth perspective or otherwise.

Edited by Beaujangles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, webtrekker said:

 

Ok, ok, I've had enough of this crazy shit. I'm going to nail this right here and now. Let's see you provide a sensible answer to the following ...

 

 

Flat Earthers say the stars are projected onto, or embedded in, the firmament. They can't exist outside of it. Agreed?

 

If I'm standing at your North Pole and look up then Polaris should be almost directly above me. Agreed?

 

If I'm standing in Australia, then the Southern cross should be visible above me, albeit not directly above. Agreed?

 

Now, tell me this ...

 

Since your world is FLAT, then both Polaris AND the Southern Cross will be visible above the horizon AT THE SAME TIME!!! Agreed?

 

BUT THEY ARE NOT, and NEVER HAVE BEEN!!!

 

So how do you explain this?

 

 

 

 

I think you can expect the same response when this question was asked last time

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beaujangles said:

 

Yes, I found it very lovely...and wondered how such a phenomenon could form. Especially how it could evolve from a flat earth perspective or otherwise.

 

I don't know about this Aurora Vortex but I believe Polaris to be Gods throne with the emerald lights being emitted from it.

Remember the film the wizard of oz ? A complete piss take against God.

 

https://youtu.be/2X92fZ6Q9C0

 

https://www.tiktok.com/@truth_seeker53.3/video/7124738383859125550?is_from_webapp=v1&item_id=7124738383859125550

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Beaujangles said:

May be an image of nature and sky

 

Apparently this is a rare astronomical phenomenon... An Aurora Vortex. Anyone want to shed light on how its created from a flat earth or otherwise perspective?

 

Looks just like a Photoshopped sunset to me, distorted by using the Rectangular to Polar Coordinates Effects filter. Here's an (admittedly very rough and quick) example I've just knocked up ...

 

Original

R-P_orig.png.7ee2cf341d032b0906f8ee5b6df79e96.png

 

Polar Distortion in PS

R-P_dist.png.567900ae3e25ec5da892bb186d1cf646.png

 

 

Cropped

R-P_crop.png.49f02d5e50e08f1d0065029e719d4d38.png

 

 

Final 'Vortex' image

R-P.png.1bc37e486113a66c57ce09aabc2b942d.png

 

I could have spent longer on this and produced a much more polished final image but I think you'll get the idea. The giveaway is the curved horizon.

 

 

 

Edited by webtrekker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webtrekker said:

 

Looks just like a Photoshopped sunset to me, distorted by using the Rectangular to Polar Coordinates Effects filter. Here's an (admittedly very rough and quick) example I've just knocked up ...

 

I could have spent longer on this and produced a much more polished final image but I think you'll get the idea. The giveaway is the curved horizon.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, could be.... thanks for posting that. I found this one as well which looks just as curved....so who knows:

 

https://science.nasa.gov/vortex-aurora-over-iceland

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

15 hours ago, webtrekker said:

Since your world is FLAT, then both Polaris AND the Southern Cross will be visible above the horizon AT THE SAME TIME!!! Agreed?

nope, thats not what is experienced with the Sun and Moon so its no different with the other Stars

 

Sunrise/set at London is a 90 degree sun at Sumatra and Galapagos , 6400 miles between London and those. Sunset/rise is a 30 degree angle, not a fixed horizon of earth. As sunlight doesnt reach London light has a finite distance through dense air (below 30 degrees visual angle)

Same with other Stars at the firmament but at varying heights

JTOLAN measured some stars at 4100 miles.

So some will be seen at both London and Sydney but others will be below the 30 degree visual limit.

 

So once more i ask

 

In the helio model how does 2 equi-distant latitude points from teh equator ,on the same line of longitude, experience Equilux on different days and why dont they experience Equilux upon the the Equinox? (stanley and marys harbour)

 

15 hours ago, webtrekker said:

Flat Earthers say the stars are projected onto, or embedded in, the firmament. They can't exist outside of it. Agreed?

 

No , i dont agree. I have read many different perspectives. Some say the Stars are above the firmament, some say Stars are living in the waters above the firmament, some say the firmament contains the waters, some say.

 

 

 

 

Edited by zArk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zArk said:

nope, thats not what is experienced with the Sun and Moon so its no different with the other Stars

 

Sunrise/set at London is a 90 degree sun at Sumatra and Galapagos , 6400 miles between London and those. Sunset/rise is a 30 degree angle, not a fixed horizon of earth. As sunlight doesnt reach London light has a finite distance through dense air (below 30 degrees visual angle)

Same with other Stars at the firmament but at varying heights

JTOLAN measured some stars at 4100 miles.

So some will be seen at both London and Sydney but others will be below the 30 degree visual limit.

 

So once more i ask

 

In the helio model how does 2 equi-distant latitude points from teh equator ,on the same line of longitude, experience Equilux on different days and why dont they experience Equilux upon the the Equinox? (stanley and marys harbour)

 

 

No , i dont agree. I have read many different perspectives. Some say the Stars are above the firmament, some say Stars are living in the waters above the firmament, some say the firmament contains the waters, some say.

 

 

 

 

 

Your answer doesn't make sense.

 

How come the constellation Orion, which is still visible 75° South of the Equator, appears UPSIDE-DOWN in the sky when viewed from these southerly locations? How do you explain that in the FE model?

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

Your answer doesn't make sense.

 

How come the constellation Orion, which is still visible 75° South of the Equator, appears UPSIDE-DOWN in the sky when viewed from these southerly locations? How do you explain that in the FE model?

 

 

 

same as moon

move on to equilux

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, webtrekker said:

 

No, I'll not move on until you've made a sensible reply and provide proof as to how Orion can appear upside-down when viewd from south of the Equator in your FE model

 

i can wait like i am waiting for the explanation to when, at a Selenelion, refraction of the Sun actually happens

also i am waiting for the admittance that the 2012 blue marble of north america is obviously fake making the Suomi NPP satellite a big pile of fakery. I am also wondering if you are all-in on the the DSCVR 2015 image, which is very much similar to the celestia cgi, so we can then use it as your rule-of-thumb?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by zArk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, zArk said:

 

i can wait like i am waiting for the explanation to when, at a Selenelion, refraction of the Sun actually happens

also i am waiting for the admittance that the 2012 blue marble of north america is obviously fake making the Suomi NPP satellite a big pile of fakery. I am also wondering if you are all-in on the the DSCVR 2015 image, which is very much similar to the celestia cgi, so we can then use it as your rule-of-thumb?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you don't know! Thought so!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, legion said:

Can l suggest it's a stalemate.....and that we all move forwards and focus on other things in this Realm...?

no, because it isnt

 

Airys failure and Sagnacs experiment destroy the spinning earth and Relativity

 

If the Helios measure a curve i will be interested

 

Nasa is faking space

 

this is a fundamental issue of the world. It is part of the fear system that is destroying people.

 

The sphere model is shown to be a big lie and suddenly Amnesty is asked for.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, zArk said:

no, because it isnt

 

Airys failure and Sagnacs experiment destroy the spinning earth and Relativity

 

If the Helios measure a curve i will be interested

 

Nasa is faking space

 

this is a fundamental issue of the world. It is part of the fear system that is destroying people.

 

The sphere model is shown to be a big lie and suddenly Amnesty is asked for.

 

Distraction tactics. Just say you haven't a clue why Orion appears upside-down when viewed from Australia.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MOD NOTE: It would appear that despite regular warnings to stop the bickering, nobody is prepared to listen.

So all members posting on this thread understand clearly, anyone still bickering after the thread  is unlocked will be placed on moderation of content.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, zArk said:

go measure a curve

 

There is no need when you can actually see one, the following pictures were put up by B flat on the first page of this thread as evidence of a flat earth the first two are typical however the bottom one clearly shows curvature. Notice how the red line is thicker than the other two so it can be placed lower on the apex of the curve to hide it somewhat and also the red line does not travel to the extremities to the field of view so as not to make the curvature even more pronounced.

I have brought this to your attention a couple times now zark just to be ignored as usual

    •  
  •  

 

These are what horizons look like when not photographed by freemasons with their gopros:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RUI45ND-Hts/VMNQx2uD6XI/AAAAAAAAPgY/qIJQf7eGM_M/s1600/flat-earth-horizon-flat.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...