The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread

[peter]

 

 

 

 

 

 

6 hours ago, zArk said:

@peter all you are doing is bolstering the flat earth model and destroying the sphere model

Bullshit

In your theory the earth is flat and is covered by a dome or firmament as some would call it , this dome must be completely transparent as we can't see it  so what I would like to know is ,who maintains the dome or replaces it when need be  The earth gets hit by minute particles traveling at very high speed and cosmic rays constantly,and therefore in a short amount of  time would turn any clear material, opaque and therefore we should be able to see it, so where is it ,also if space doesn't exist how do you explain impact craters, also explain the Widmanstatton etch pattern in nickle iron meteorites as it can't be produced on earth, how dose night and day work , what causes the eclipses and the seasons, and yes the water dose spin in the opposite direction down south so how do these things work on a flat earth

[bflat]

6 hours ago, zArk said:

@peter all you are doing is bolstering the flat earth model and destroying the sphere model

And isn't it fun to just sit back and watch it happen? It's really pretty hilarious when you think on it.

[alexa]

21 minutes ago, peter said:

In your theory the earth is flat and is covered by a dome or firmament as some would call it , this dome must be completely transparent as we can't see it  so what I would like to know is ,who maintains the dome or replaces it when need be 

 

The one who created it!.......... But my guess is that it's made so well that it doesn't need replacing.

 

Edited July 31, 2020 by alexa

[zArk]

6 hours ago, peter said:

 Another brilliant insight .

I can hit a golf ball about 250 mts so the earth must be a sphere ( or there about's)

 

The 13 and 16 mile laser experiment still requires.attention

The claimed 100ft+ curvature is not observed

 

Can spherists get involved in

A. Technical error in methodology

B. Failure in recording results

C. Failure in implementation of methodology

D. Biased conclusions based upon partial evidence and results

E. Inaccurate conclusions bearing little relationship to evidence and results

 

Let's go....

[bflat]

9 hours ago, zArk said:

The 13 and 16 mile laser experiment still requires.attention

The claimed 100ft+ curvature is not observed

This is it, really.

 

It is amazing the charade continues, but again, not for long. The tech that will soon be available to all will seal the fate of this silliness once and for all. I will be shocked if very soon, a flat, stationary earth is not understood by the vast majority.

 

And let's be clear. Even using freemason math with "standard refraction," which just like axial and orbital speed has never been shown in any scientific way, we are still looking directly THROUGH A SIX STORY BUILDING!

 

And I have explained this prior, but unless you are willing to believe that photons are leaving a laser at light speed, traveling up and then down in just  0.000075154713 seconds prior to reaching an exact target, then again, WELCOME TO FLAT EARTH!

 

 

[peter]

9 hours ago, zArk said:

 

The 13 and 16 mile laser experiment still requires.attention

The claimed 100ft+ curvature is not observed

 

Can spherists get involved in

A. Technical error in methodology

B. Failure in recording results

C. Failure in implementation of methodology

D. Biased conclusions based upon partial evidence and results

E. Inaccurate conclusions bearing little relationship to evidence and results

 

Let's go....

Once again you have conveniently answered none of my questions and I would have thought they would have been basic ,how do the seasons work what causes an eclipse, how dose day and night work  on a flat earth

At least Alexa has a go which is more than I can say for you, I hope you will excuse me when I use your method of rebuttal with regards to the laser  IT'S FAKE  try answering my questions satisfactorily  and I'll give yours a go as I have done plenty of times already , So the first question I would ask is, what size and type of laser was used ,so let me know that and answer my basic questions and I'll look into it

[zArk]

31 minutes ago, peter said:

Once again you have conveniently answered none of my questions and I would have thought they would have been basic ,how do the seasons work what causes an eclipse, how dose day and night work  on a flat earth

At least Alexa has a go which is more than I can say for you, I hope you will excuse me when I use your method of rebuttal with regards to the laser  IT'S FAKE  try answering my questions satisfactorily  and I'll give yours a go as I have done plenty of times already , So the first question I would ask is, what size and type of laser was used ,so let me know that and answer my basic questions and I'll look into it

 

heh, look into it... as if you are THE authority

 

stop being so silly and quit your posturing.

 

at least try snells law or refraction or observed bending of the laser light i.e a hot day, water vapour just above the lake created a refraction of light, the laser light was bent over the curvature

 

come on @peter if you have an argument, a critique based upon something state it

[bflat]

49 minutes ago, peter said:

So the first question I would ask is, what size and type of laser was used ,so let me know that and answer my basic questions and I'll look into it

You are well aware I have stopped feeding the trolls, especially the obvious ones who refuse to research anything themselves, but:

PL-E Pro Mini 532nm wavelength 600 mw with beam expander

 

[peter]

Brilliant answer from both ,I wouldn't have expected anything else how is the explanation for the seasons and night and day going

1 hour ago, bflat said:

PL-E Pro Mini 532nm wavelength 600 mw with beam expander

Thank you, the last three words are rather telling with regards to the  video, the reason I asked for what was used I was wondering how much the focal point of  a laser would expand over a distance of 16 miles when you take the effects of temperature ,humidity, air pressure and  density into the mix , then on top of this  you tell me it is coupled with a beam expander , thank you, you have just shot yourself in the foot ,think about it. and since I have looked into your fake video as promised ,how are night and day going and the seasons ,any explanation at this point weather right or wrong would be greatly appreciated

[bflat]

RE: This is another PERFECT example of what @zArk was trying to explain to you about how you unwittingly, continue to destroy the globe theory that you are trying to protect.

 

5 hours ago, peter said:

Brilliant answer from both ,I wouldn't have expected anything else how is the explanation for the seasons and night and day going

Thank you, the last three words are rather telling with regards to the  video, the reason I asked for what was used I was wondering how much the focal point of  a laser would expand over a distance of 16 miles when you take the effects of temperature ,humidity, air pressure and  density into the mix , then on top of this  you tell me it is coupled with a beam expander , thank you, you have just shot yourself in the foot ,think about it. and since I have looked into your fake video as promised ,how are night and day going and the seasons ,any explanation at this point weather right or wrong would be greatly appreciated

 

You simply refuse to do any research in favor of these knee-jerk responses.

 

1) You are referencing what we call divergence. While great to know when purchasing your laser, it is irrelevant in our example as we are witnessing a direct strike through what spherists MUST believe is a solid barrier that is standing at an absolute minimum of six stories high.

 

NOTE: this is based on the math I showed for the 13.7 mile distance; for the nearly 17 mile experiment, the physical barrier is even higher.

 

2) You obviously did not even try to calculate the divergence. I know this because I have and if you choose to, you will find the beam diameter after 17 miles is only... are you ready for this?

ONLY 3 MILLIMETERS!

 

3) NOTE: THIS IS THE FUNNIEST PART OF IT ALL.

A beam expander is NOT what you think it is... CLEARLY, lol.

 

It is actually THE EXACT OPPOSITE. It is part of the tech that I have been referring too that is continually improving and actually allows you to FOCUS THE BEAM TO AN EVEN SMALLER POINT allowing for the divergence that reaches just 3mm to become MUCH LESS.

 

4) "shot yourself in the foot"

LMAO!

 

 

 

 

 

[peter]

Well laser expanders  can be used to either decrease or increase the diameter of the beam, they work both ways

 

19 minutes ago, bflat said:

2) You obviously did not even try to calculate the divergence. I know this because I have and if you choose to, you will find the beam diameter after 17 miles is only... are you ready for this?

ONLY 3 MILLIMETERS!

 

Maybe so, but that calculation is for a laser  in a vacuum under ideal conditions and dose not take into account any of the other factors that would influence it  over that distance , such as temperature,  humidity  air particulate concentration , it is obviously windy in the video and he said he was 9" above the surface of the water so with all the chop , waves and spray causing a high concentration of water droplets through which the laser allegedly passed over a 16 mile distance dose not bode well for a beam of only 3 mill dia , not to mention the mineral content of those droplets if any.

So given that the expanders can work in either  direction and none of the other factors have been taken into account, I simply find the video rather suspect.

I'm sorry if you don't like the answer, but there are so many things that can influence the outcome  of the experiment in that situation, and quite frankly we only have the fellow's  word as to   facts, also he is there to prove the earth is flat which indicates a rather heavily predetermined bias as to the outcome.

I'm still waiting for some answers to questions of my own by the way.I think it's your turn

[zArk]

3 hours ago, peter said:

 such as temperature,  humidity  air particulate concentration , it is obviously windy in the video and he said he was 9" above the surface of the water so with all the chop , waves and spray causing a high concentration of water droplets through which the laser allegedly passed over a 16 mile distance dose not bode well for a beam of only 3 mill dia , not to mention the mineral content of those droplets if any.

 

100ft+ of curvature, 33meters

 

:S

[zArk]

14 hours ago, peter said:

how dose day and night work  on a flat earth

At least Alexa has a go which is more than I can say for you, I hope you will excuse me when I use your method of rebuttal with regards to the laser  IT'S FAKE  try answering my questions satisfactorily

 

 

killbill posted this page 5 of this thread

 

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by zArk

[zArk]

On 7/31/2020 at 3:53 PM, peter said:

if space doesn't exist how do you explain impact craters, also explain the Widmanstatton etch pattern in nickle iron meteorites as it can't be produced on earth, how dose night and day work , what causes the eclipses and the seasons, and yes the water dose spin in the opposite direction down south so how do these things work on a flat earth

 

1. electric universe explains 'craters' and will explain the thousands of circles found on the african continent spoken about by Michael Tellinger

2. dunno tbh but theres loads that cant be explained with conventional science

3. night and day  -- see previous post

4. eclipses --- awesome ...

 

spherist calcs and theory of solar eclipse put in a difficult position

 

time locked to start at a little quote re: lunar eclipse and moves into a detailed examination of 'solar eclipse'

 

i would repeat my statement on the previous page regarding solar eclipse but this fella sorts it

 

 

 

5. water spinning --- if 100% demonstrable omitting the water entry angle, shape of container etc then great but i seem to have read that many experiments provide varying results so it is a failed point which is persistently used for some odd reason

[bflat]

6 hours ago, peter said:

Well laser expanders  can be used to either decrease or increase the diameter of the beam, they work both ways

 

 

Maybe so, but that calculation is for a laser  in a vacuum under ideal conditions and dose not take into account any of the other factors that would influence it  over that distance , such as temperature,  humidity  air particulate concentration , it is obviously windy in the video and he said he was 9" above the surface of the water so with all the chop , waves and spray causing a high concentration of water droplets through which the laser allegedly passed over a 16 mile distance dose not bode well for a beam of only 3 mill dia , not to mention the mineral content of those droplets if any.

So given that the expanders can work in either  direction and none of the other factors have been taken into account, I simply find the video rather suspect.

I'm sorry if you don't like the answer, but there are so many things that can influence the outcome  of the experiment in that situation, and quite frankly we only have the fellow's  word as to   facts, also he is there to prove the earth is flat which indicates a rather heavily predetermined bias as to the outcome.

I'm still waiting for some answers to questions of my own by the way.I think it's your turn

I know you feel like everyone is going after you, but you are bringing this on yourself. The deceptive nature of your posts appear to have no bounds. You entirely skipped the main point of the post above that you even quoted from.

 

Here is the important part that you clearly NEEDED to skip over:

1) You are referencing what we call divergence. While great to know when purchasing your laser, it is irrelevant in our example as we are witnessing a direct strike through what spherists MUST believe is a solid barrier that is standing at an absolute minimum of six stories high.

 

NOTE: this is based on the math I showed for the 13.7 mile distance; for the nearly 17 mile experiment, the physical barrier is even higher.

 

I will leave it for the readers to decide for themselves why you would do this.

 

Bottom line? Large bodies of water do not stick to the outside of any shapes, let alone a gigantic spinning ball. These laser experiments prove this point. We have now falsified the "radius" multiple times, thus falsifying the globe and everything else within heliocentrism that goes along with the idea that we are on a ball with a radius of just under 4000 miles.

[peter]

2 hours ago, zArk said:

killbill posted this page 5 of this thread

and I posted this

 

 

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by peter

[bflat]

2 hours ago, zArk said:

100ft+ of curvature, 33meters

Hopefully, anyone reading along understands by this point why the spherists must run from these simple, replicated results we are obtaining from all over our earth.

[peter]

2 hours ago, zArk said:

 

 

killbill posted this page 5 of this thread

 

 

As a tennis tennis player once said ,You can't be serious , look at the string at 4:06 to 16, even if it wasn't tied in a different position ,it still wouldn't make any difference, this has to be a wind up,when the sun hit the firmament what causes it to change direction 180 deg and come back ,with sun set there has to be sun rise

 like I have said before ,I'm still waiting for some answers to basic questions , it looks like the end of time can't come soon enough your you lot because every one has been ignored so far

Edited August 1, 2020 by peter

[peter]

8 hours ago, bflat said:

I know you feel like everyone is going after you, but you are bringing this on yourself. The deceptive nature of your posts appear to have no bounds. You entirely skipped the main point of the post above that you even quoted from.

 

Here is the important part that you clearly NEEDED to skip over:

1) You are referencing what we call divergence. While great to know when purchasing your laser, it is irrelevant in our example as we are witnessing a direct strike through what spherists MUST believe is a solid barrier that is standing at an absolute minimum of six stories high.

 

NOTE: this is based on the math I showed for the 13.7 mile distance; for the nearly 17 mile experiment, the physical barrier is even higher.

 

I will leave it for the readers to decide for themselves why you would do this.

 

Bottom line? Large bodies of water do not stick to the outside of any shapes, let alone a gigantic spinning ball. These laser experiments prove this point. We have now falsified the "radius" multiple times, thus falsifying the globe and everything else within heliocentrism that goes along with the idea that we are on a ball with a radius of just under 4000 miles.

1 No, I don't feel like everyone is going after me, sorry , I actually feel that there are one or to people that are so hell bent on being correct as to the flat earth theory that they are willing to stoop to any method to prove a point

I will leave it for the readers to decide for themselves why you would do this.

do what? ignore every question I have asked of you , yes we should let the readers decide who has been deceptive or not . you asked me to explain what I thought of the laser experiment and  I answered you  so there was no misunderstanding , if you didn't like the answer I can't help that .

I have been asking you  the same questions  for nearly the last 60 bloody pages and I'm continually ignored , obviously the term deceptive has a rather liberal meaning when applied to yourself, if you cant answer them just say so

 

Bottom line? Large bodies of water do not stick to the outside of any shapes, let alone a gigantic spinning ball.

says who? you , well that must be right then

Once again the questions are

1 explain the seasons  2 night and day ( and don't just re-post that dumb ass video that Zark put up) and 3 what causes an eclipse with regards to the flat earth theory. I have plenty more but those three will do

Edited August 2, 2020 by peter

[zArk]

8 hours ago, peter said:

As a tennis tennis player once said ,You can't be serious , look at the string at 4:06 to 16, even if it wasn't tied in a different position ,it still wouldn't make any difference, this has to be a wind up,when the sun hit the firmament what causes it to change direction 180 deg and come back ,with sun set there has to be sun rise

 like I have said before ,I'm still waiting for some answers to basic questions , it looks like the end of time can't come soon enough your you lot because every one has been ignored so far

It's showing vanishing point and perspective

 

For the travelling motion see here 

[zArk]

8 hours ago, peter said:

 like I have said before ,I'm still waiting for some answers to basic questions

You mean like the 100ft + of curvature disappearing

 

Maybe it's behind the fridge or fell between the couch cushions

 

 

 

[peter]

So the sun light goes to the extremity of the green circle, I will just wait for your reply to confirm that before I continue

[peter]

1 minute ago, zArk said:

You mean like the 100ft + of curvature disappearing

 

Maybe it's behind the fridge or fell between the couch cushions

 

 

 

great answer that will further your cause

[zArk]

12 minutes ago, peter said:

great answer that will further your cause

peter, its not a cause and you will deny all disproofs of sphere model.

 

for me , it is simply being shown things that sphere science cannot explain or events that sphere science contradicts itself over

 

i.e the earth curvature. people have the equipment, the method and the science. the curve is not there to be observed when viewing lasers across a lake or objects across the sea.

 

[zArk]

19 minutes ago, peter said:

So the sun light goes to the extremity of the green circle, I will just wait for your reply to confirm that before I continue

 

peter, fella, the info is there for you to find but for the life of me i cant find a neil tyson, brain cox , or another 'sphere scientist' explaining where 100ft+ of curvature has disappeared to

 

 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2020 by zArk