Jump to content

The flat earth theory


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, bflat said:

but who the hell put that OBVIOUS fisheye lens taken photo in this link for my thread?

 

That is strange .... It isn't done by a person, the software does it!

It has taken it from another post rather than the OP?

 

Maybe the image was a good fit .... or maybe the software is a baller?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Flat Earth is a FALSE THEORY created by govts to mess up the Conspiracy space.   It is there so broadcasters like the BBC can do "Ha ha ha - MAD Conspiracy theorists believe the Earth is FLA

We've been lied to about everything since birth. When I say birth, I literally mean the second we went into the 'delivery room' as cargo, to be given a certificate of birth so we became a corp-oration

what science tells us.

Posted Images

Just now, ink said:

That is strange .... It isn't done by a person, the software does it!

It has taken it from another post rather than the OP?

 

Maybe the image was a good fit .... or maybe the software is a baller?

Cool story... I'm checking with my cool story guy right now... I'll check back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, bflat said:

Love, brother.


I like you Bflat.  

I like your determination, I like your (sometimes angry replies) but never personally insulting.  (from what I've seen from you) 
I don't sense any malevolent ego with you, you're very passionate about what you do - I respect that.
Not trying to kiss you're arse here Bflat  - just a bit of credit to you for sticking to your guns -  I'm not a flat earther'  - but with undeniable proof - of the world being flat - everyone would take their hat off to you wouldn't they?

I understand your motivation is good.

I'll keep an open mind.

 

I still think you (and others of a like mind) should team up - you should get a flipping big rocket ALL the way out there into space - thousands of miles out there - film the WHOLE planet - not just a cross section of the horizon.
Film the whole flat rock - or Globe.   One way or the other at least then we'll know - yeah?




 

Edited by sickofallthebollocks
spelling & added line
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sickofallthebollocks said:

I'm not a flat earther'

It's why I love you. You don't come on here all trolly, you don't spend every day asking questions and not listening on purpose, etc..

 

I respect sincerity, regardless of belief.

 

 

7 minutes ago, sickofallthebollocks said:

I still think you (and others of a like mind) should team up - you should get a flipping big rocket ALL the way out there into space - thousands of miles out there - film the WHOLE planet - not just a cross section of the horizon.
Film the whole flat rock - or Globe.   One way or the other at least then we'll know - yeah?

Space is a man made construct brought to via freemasonry. The rocket that got stuck 73 miles up is the farthest that we know something has gone!

 

Do you understand the implications of the laser experiments?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bflat said:

It's why I love you. You don't come on here all trolly, you don't spend every day asking questions and not listening on purpose, etc..

 

I respect sincerity, regardless of belief.

 

 

Space is a man made construct brought to via freemasonry. The rocket that got stuck 73 miles up is the farthest that we know something has gone!

 

Do you understand the implications of the laser experiments?


Peace and love to you too fellow seeker of the truth of things 🙂

Nice one - no buddy - I know fuck all about fuck all - about any of this side of things, but will continue to watch your tutelage with interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The ELITE lies about a lot of things. A LOT.

 

But so many people have flown around the globe, sailed the oceans (for hundreds of years), driven across continents, climbed tall mountains and so on.

 

A FLAT EARTH is NOT something you can hide from people. Maybe 1000 years ago. Not today though.

 

I'm sorry, but FLAT EARTH IS JUST BULLSHIT INJECTED INTO THE CONSPIRACY REALM TO MAKE EVERYONE LOOK LIKE IDIOTS.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As was previously mentioned we are deceived from birth so why should I believe anything to be true.

 

Plenty of observable evidence suggesting that the Earth is not as we are told which for me will always trump the theories we have been taught as fact in School and television etc.

 

I'll never understand when the people who say we live in a VR matrix, holographic universe or whatever alternative theory are so aggressive to flat earthers when from a mainstream standpoint all alternatives are ludicrous.

 

It's not whether it's flat,concave or hexagonal it's why they lie and what they're hiding.

 

Also YouTube never once suggested flat earth to me until 2017 when I first looked into it and I've been watching conspiracy things since 2009.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bflat said:

Who the hell put that OBVIOUS fisheye lens taken photo in this link for my thread?

 

 

13 hours ago, ink said:

 

That is strange .... It isn't done by a person, the software does it!

It has taken it from another post rather than the OP?

 

Maybe the image was a good fit .... or maybe the software is a baller?

 

I would guess that the auto-embed function is using the first uploaded (attached) image in that topic rather than any embedded 'external' image. Nothing sinister going on here!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@HistoryIsComplex look at Gleason's map...circumnavigation is a doddle

Flying around the plane is also a doddle

 

On the 1000years  ago..the sea apparent horizon, inferior mirage and refraction was an easy con job on people

It still is today

High tech is providing us evidence which is refuting sphere models but also highlighting the crap special effects used in the past and today

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

 

I would guess that the auto-embed function is using the first uploaded (attached) image in that topic rather than any embedded 'external' image. Nothing sinister going on here!

Come on, Grumpy! This so obviously and PROVABLY false that I am at a loss as to why you would even come on here saying it.

 

THIS is the first uploaded (attached) image in that topic... our perfectly flat horizon:

empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-11073022

Do you see the PERFECTLY FLAT HORIZON THAT WE ALL SEE DAILY?

 

Second uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

8-650x675.jpg

 

Third uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

oceanf11.jpg

 

Fourth uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

imp1imsibys31.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&a

 

Fifth uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

main-qimg-ee1fb0a6f4e101d514714cb518daab

 

Sixth uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

gleasons-map-high-resolution-restored-1-

 

Seventh uploaded (attached) image in that topic:

3525206-human-fingers-ready-to-push-a-sm

 

EIGHTH!

bb.jpg

 

Let us be very, very, very, very, clear here:

This clearly deceptive image was posted 8th... NOT 1st!

 

Fuckery afoot? Nothing sinister going on here?

 

Yeah, OK.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, bflat said:

Come on, Grumpy! This so obviously and PROVABLY false that I am at a loss as to why you would even come on here saying it.

 

THIS is the first uploaded (attached) image in that topic... our perfectly flat horizon:

empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-11073022

Do you see the PERFECTLY FLAT HORIZON THAT WE ALL SEE DAILY?

 

 

EIGHTH!

bb.jpg

 

Let us be very, very, very, very, clear here:

This clearly deceptive image was posted 8th... NOT 1st!

 

Fuckery afoot? Nothing sinister going on here?

 

Yeah, OK.

 

Seriously, you need to get some help if you think that explaining the difference between an 'external' and 'internal' URL is also some kind of 'conspiracy'.

 

Your first image is an 'external' image:

https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-1107302222.jpg

The forum automatically 'embeds' this when you paste the link, like so:

empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-11073022

The image that is shown when a topic link is embedded, is the first one in that thread that was actually 'uploaded' as an attachment.

 

https://forum.davidicke.com/uploads/monthly_2020_05/bb.jpg.ae4410ba035c84930a7cceef5bccbb0d.jpg

You can tell it is an 'upload' because the URL starts with forum.davidicke.com/uploads - this is an 'internal' URL.

 

bb.jpg

 

If you're still going to argue the toss over this, then there really is no hope for you, and you're just going to make yourself look silly.

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

 

Seriously, you need to get some help if you think that explaining the difference between an 'external' and 'internal' URL is also some kind of 'conspiracy'.

 

Your first image is an 'external' image:

https://image.shutterstock.com/image-photo/empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-1107302222.jpg

The forum automatically 'embeds' this when you paste the link, like so:

empty-wooden-pier-view-on-260nw-11073022

The image that is shown when a topic link is embedded, is the first one in that thread that was actually 'uploaded' as an attachment.

 

https://forum.davidicke.com/uploads/monthly_2020_05/bb.jpg.ae4410ba035c84930a7cceef5bccbb0d.jpg

You can tell it is an 'upload' because the URL starts with forum.davidicke.com/uploads - this is an 'internal' URL.

 

bb.jpg

 

If you're still going to argue the toss over this, then there really is no hope for you, and you're just going to make yourself look silly.

Yeah, I'm the silly one, yet the 8th, and the only clearly deceptive image out if the first eight images is chosen. Makes perfect sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, bflat said:

Yeah, I'm the silly one, yet the 8th, and the only clearly deceptive image out if the first eight images is chosen. Makes perfect sense.

 

So you're going to hold fast to your belief, and even after my explanation still think that I am incorrect?

 

You don't like it when the shoe's on the other foot do you? 😆

 

I could try and prove I am right, by uploading one of your images as an attachment to your first post, then see if it changes? Would you then accept that you are wrong?

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

 

So you're going to hold fast to your belief, and even after my explanation still think that I am incorrect?

 

You don't like it when the shoe's on the other foot do you? 😆

 

I could try and prove I am right, by uploading one of your images as an attachment to your first post, then see if it changes? Would you then accept that you are wrong?

I understand your point, and yeah, should it not be obvious that the pic needs to be changed to an image that was not created to be purposely deceptive?

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, bflat said:

and yeah, should it not be obvious that the pic needs to be changed to an image that was not created to be purposely deceptive?

 

Would it not be better to state that you comprehend that the image was not done purposely and that you were incorrect and yes please could you edit the opening post so that links reflect and image in the OP?

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

 

Would it not be better to state that you comprehend that the image was not done purposely and that you were incorrect and yes please could you edit the opening post so that links reflect and image in the OP?

I trust you, ink, so do whatever you feel is right. As you might know, I feel pretty handcuffed here on what I can point out so I'm going to get back on topic. Thanks for your help with this, regardless of what you choose.

 

Sorry alexa, I really didn't want this so far off topic. So, let's look at nasa's own technical manuals, shall we?

 

NASA Technical Memorandum 104330; Predicted Performance of a Thrust-Enhanced SR-71 Aircraft with an External Payload (Page 8 - Digital Performance Simulation Description) "The DPS equations of motion use four assumptions ... a nonrotating Earth."

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88507main_H-2179.pdf

 

NASA Technical Note: A Method for Reducing The Sensitivity of Optimal Nonlinear Systems to Parameter Uncertainty (Page 12 Problem Statement) ... "(2) A flat, nonrotating Earth"

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710018599.pdf

 

NASA Technical Note; Calculation of Wind Compensation for Launching of Unguided Rockets (Page 8 Trajectory Simulation, 2nd Paragraph) ..."this simulation assumes ... the missile position in space is computed relative to a flat nonrotating Earth"

 

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20040008097.pdf

 

NASA Technical Paper 2768; User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models (Page 12, Program Overview) ... “Within the program, the nonlinear equations of motion include 12 states representing a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth”
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88072main_H-1259.pdf

 

NASA Technical Paper 2835; "User's Manual for LINEAR, a FORTRAN Program to Derive Linear Aircraft Models" (Page 1, Summary) AND (Page 126 , Report Documentation Page, Section 16) "The nonlinear equations of motion used are six-degree-of-freedom equations with stationary atmosphere and flat, nonrotating earth assumptions."

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890007066.pdf

 

NASA Technical Memorandum; Determination of Angles of Attack and Sideslip from Radar Data and a Roll Stabilized Platform (Page 2, Section 16.) “The method is limited, however, to application where a flat, nonrotating earth may be assumed.”

 

NASA Contractor Report 186019; An Aircraft Model for the AIAA Controls Design Challenge (Page 11, Equation of Motion and Atmospheric Model) ... “The nonlinear equations of motion used in this model are general six-degree-of-freedom equations representing the flight dynamics of a rigid aircraft flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat nonrotating Earth.”

 

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88248main_H-1777.pdf

 

NASA Contractor Report 3073; Investigation of Aircraft Landing in Variable Wind Fields (Page 6, Chapter II - Aircraft Landing Model) ... "The Aircraft trajectory model employed in this study was derived based on the following assumptions: a) The Earth is flat and non-rotating. "

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19790005472.pdf

 

NASA Technical Memorandum 81238; A Mathematical Model of the CH-53 Helicopter (Page 17, Equations of Motion) .. "The helicopter equations of motion are given in body axes with respect to a flat, nonrotating Earth."

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19810003557.pdf

 

Engineering Experiment Station, Georgia Institute of Technology, Prepared for NASA; Atmospheric Oscillations (Page 10) ... "A model frequently used is that of a flat, nonrotating earth." ... (next paragraph) .. "The most one can profitably simplify the problem is to consider an isothermal atmosphere, plane level surface, and a nonrotating Earth."

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19650015408.pdf

 

NASA Tecnical Paper 2002-210718; Stability and Control Estimation Flight Test Results for the SR-71 Aircraft With Externally Mounted Experiments (Pages 10-11 Equations of Motion) ... "These equations assume a rigid vehicle and a flat, nonrotating Earth."

 

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88733main_H-2465.pdf

 

NASA Technical Memorandum 100996; Flight Testing a VSTOL Aircraft to Identify a Full-Envelope Aerodynamic Model (Pages 4-5, State Estimation) ... “For aircraft problems, the state and measurement models together represent the kinematics of a rigid body for describing motion over a flat, nonrotating Earth…”

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19880014378.pdf

 

NASA Ames Research Center; Singular Arc Time-Optimal Climb Trajectory of Aircraft in a Two-Dimensional Wind Field (Page 2, Section II. Singular Arc Optimal Control) ... “In our minimum time-to-climb problem, the aircraft is modeled as a point mass and the flight trajectory is strictly confined in a vertical plane on a non-rotating, flat Earth."

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060053337.pdf

 

This makes perfect sense, yes?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...