Jump to content

Why the Earth cannot possibly be flat.


Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

 

Well since you ignored it all the first time I hardly find that sincere!

 

 

I don't "seem" to have so much knowledge in this area. I actually do have the knowledge. 

 

 

https://wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2013/10/04/what-would-happen-if-you-fell-into-a-hole-that-went-through-the-center-of-the-earth/

 

 

Start head first - arrive head first and vice versa. What would happen? Guinness would contact you for your endurance to digging, pressure and heat and you would get ridiculed for having a crappy Cricket team.

 

 

I see that again you have assumed a spherical earth and then used it as your proof. This is the same logical fallacy you continue to employ and it keeps you from even understanding the questions.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

😬

I see that again you have assumed a spherical earth and then used it as your proof. This is the same logical fallacy you continue to employ and it keeps you from even understanding the questions.

I have assumed nothing whatsoever. I will not be patronized by somebody with your incredibly inept understanding who has about 10 posts alone on this thread that they cowardly avoid......A person who

Posted Images

And I just thought of something else. If are not on a plane and we already have hundreds of published proofs that the earth is not a spinning ball, then what the heck are we living on?

 

1) The horizon always appears perfectly flat 360 degrees
around the observer regardless of altitude. All amateur
balloon, rocket, plane and drone footage show a completely
flat horizon over 20+ miles high. Only NASA and other
government “space agencies” show curvature in their fake
CGI photos/videos.

2) The horizon always rises to the eye level of the observer
as altitude is gained, so you never have to look down to see
it. If Earth were in fact a globe, no matter how large, as you
ascended the horizon would stay fixed and the observer /
camera would have to tilt looking down further and further
to see it.

3) The natural physics of water is to find and maintain its
level. If Earth were a giant sphere tilted, wobbling and
hurdling through infinite space then truly flat, consistently
level surfaces would not exist here. But since Earth is in fact
an extended flat plane, this fundamental physical property of
fluids finding and remaining level is consistent with
experience and common sense.

4) Rivers run down to sea-level finding the easiest course,
North, South, East, West and all other intermediary
directions over the Earth at the same time. If Earth were
truly a spinning ball then many of these rivers would be
impossibly flowing uphill, for example the Mississippi in its
3000 miles would have to ascend 11 miles before reaching
the Gulf of Mexico.
5) One portion of the Nile River flows for a thousand miles
with a fall of only one foot. Parts of the West African
Congo, according to the supposed inclination and movement
of the ball-Earth, would be sometimes running uphill and
sometimes down. This would also be the case for the
Parana, Paraguay and other long rivers.

6) If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference as
NASA and modern astronomy claim, spherical trigonometry
dictates the surface of all standing water must curve
downward an easily measurable 8 inches per mile multiplied
by the square of the distance. This means along a 6 mile
channel of standing water, the Earth would dip 6 feet on
either end from the central peak. Every time such
experiments have been conducted, however, standing water
has proven to be perfectly level.

7) Surveyors, engineers and architects are never required to
factor the supposed curvature of the Earth into their projects.
Canals, railways, bridges and tunnels for example are
always cut and laid horizontally, often over hundreds of
miles without any allowance for curvature.
😎 The Suez Canal connecting the Mediterranean with the
Red Sea is 100 miles long without any locks making the
water an uninterrupted continuation of the two seas. When
constructed, the Earth’s supposed curvature was not taken
into account, it was dug along a horizontal datum line 26
feet below sea-level, passing through several lakes from one
sea to the other, with the datum line and water’s surface
running perfectly parallel over the 100 miles.

9) Engineer, W. Winckler was published in the Earth
Review regarding the Earth’s supposed curvature, stating,
“As an engineer of many years standing, I saw that this
absurd allowance is only permitted in school books. No
engineer would dream of allowing anything of the kind. I
have projected many miles of railways and many more of
canals and the allowance has not even been thought of,
much less allowed for. This allowance for curvature means
this - that it is 8” for the first mile of a canal, and increasing
at the ratio by the square of the distance in miles; thus a
small navigable canal for boats, say 30 miles long, will
have, by the above rule an allowance for curvature of 600
feet. Think of that and then please credit engineers as not
being quite such fools. Nothing of the sort is allowed. We
no more think of allowing 600 feet for a line of 30 miles of
railway or canal, than of wasting our time trying to square
the circle”

10) The London and Northwestern Railway forms a straight
line 180 miles long between London and Liverpool. The
railroad’s highest point, midway at Birmingham station, is
only 240 feet above sea-level. If the world were actually a
globe, however, curving 8 inches per mile squared, the 180
mile stretch of rail would form an arc with the center point
at Birmingham raising over a mile, a full 5,400 feet above
London and Liverpool.

 

We have ten right here!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, amy G said:

I see that again you have assumed a spherical earth and then used it as your proof. This is the same logical fallacy you continue to employ and it keeps you from even understanding the questions.

 

I have assumed nothing whatsoever. I will not be patronized by somebody with your incredibly inept understanding who has about 10 posts alone on this thread that they cowardly avoid......A person who then spams the workings and lies of an imbecile - Eric Doyoubuy.

 

https://flatearth.ws/eric-dubay

 

If you cannot answer anything posted avove then kindly go back to the other thread where you can carry on evading proof almost every post. Free speech sadly allows people to speak and then place their heads back up their bottoms to avoid responses.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  

3 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

I have assumed nothing whatsoever.

You have just done it again in the post I quoted and always do.

 

Just above you posted a link with this pic:

diagram of core of earth

And yet we have dug only 8 miles down.

 

You were asked about earth and you immediately assumed you were on a ball. Not very scientific I must say.

 

Now you have 10 stand alone proofs on this thread that you have just cowardly avoided.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, amy G said:

  

You have just done it again in the post I quoted and always do. You were asked about earth and you immediately assumed you were on a ball. Not very scientific I must say.

 

Now you have 10 stand alone proofs on this thread that you have just cowardly avoided.

 

 

Listen very carefully. I assumed NOTHING. I have already listed 10 posts or so that PROVE the Earth is a sphere. You cowardly ignored them all the first time round and subsequently are now cluttering up this thread with diversionary bullshit. You continue to cowardly avoid the posts in this thread. Do so one more and it is more than enough to qualify as trolling.

 

I don't assume we are on a ball, I know we are. Answer the posts. Answer the Moon inverted one or the Everest one. Come on Maths proponent, what are you afraid of?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  

3 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

Listen very carefully. I assumed NOTHING. I have already listed 10 posts or so that PROVE the Earth is a sphere. You cowardly ignored them all the first time round and subsequently are now cluttering up this thread with diversionary bullshit.

They were all debunked and just because you posted them several times after does not change that.

 

5 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

You continue to cowardly avoid the posts in this thread. Do so one more and it is more than enough to qualify as trolling.

That is what you just did. Why are you afraid of difficult questions? If we are not on a plane or on a globe, what do you think we are on?

 

6 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

I don't assume we are on a ball, I know we are.

You assume everything, just as you did with all your straw man arguments you pretend have not been debunked.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, amy G said:

 

They were all debunked and just because you posted them several times after does not change that.

 

That is what you just did. Why are you afraid of difficult questions? If we are not on a plane or on a globe, what do you think we are on?

 

You assume everything, just as you did with all your straw man arguments you pretend have not been debunked.

 

 

You are a disgraceful liar. None of the items presented are straw man arguments. You pretty much evaded the whole damn lot of them with a notable exception being possibly the most insane explanation for perspective ever presented. The Sun vanishing full size at the vanishing point  Comedy time indeed.

 

You are afraid to answer because we live on a globe. I strongly suspect you know this and probably have some sort of financial scam going on. Hopefuly this thread will stop a lot of punters being sucked in to it.

 

P.s. The middle paragraph above? We are on a globe....what brainless thought led you to believe I thought otherwise?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Comedy Time said:

We are on a globe....what brainless thought led you to believe I thought otherwise?

I guess from your refusal to give reasonable explanations for the 10 stand alone proofs that we are not on a spinning ball.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, amy G said:

I guess from your refusal to give reasonable explanations for the 10 stand alone proofs that we are not on a spinning ball.

 

I already answered it, perhaps you were too stuck up your bottom to notice or to click the link!!

 

You just ignored every post in this thread and splattered spam already answered on the last one. That Eric Dubay is a real arsehole - perhaps you should stop listening to such mind numbing crap and get back to your "applied mathematics"  rabugento1.gif

 

 

👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯👨‍🦯

Edited by Comedy Time
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought you didnt like Eric Dubay @bflat?

 

Tell us more about the moon disc above our heads?

 

This was your response when I asked you why nobody has ever photo'd the darkside of the moon, from the southern hemisphere, on your flatardia map? The magical upside down moon.🤣

 

 

 

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

I already answered it, perhaps you were too stuck up your bottom to notice or to click the link!!

Your words, we can goo one by one.

 

1) The horizon always appears perfectly flat 360 degrees
around the observer regardless of altitude. All amateur
balloon, rocket, plane and drone footage show a completely
flat horizon over 20+ miles high. Only NASA and other
government “space agencies” show curvature in their fake
CGI photos/videos.

 

2 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

I thought you didnt like Eric Dubay @bflat?

Many in the flat earth community agree on several things, but certainly not everything. It is why it is all the more comical watching comedy routine claim the fe people say this or that, while never quoting a specific poster. Nobody is perfect, he definitely makes errors, but Eric crushes. He has read everything there is and his explanations are wonderful as he uses facts and logic to shatter heliocentrism.

 

Comedy does his little routine to argue with his own imaginary arguments and this was pointed out to him on the other thread. How many times for how many of his points did I previously point out that he was arguing with himself? Watch comedy's responses to the globe shattering points and decide for yourself what makes more sense.

 

 

Edited by amy G
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, amy G said:

He has read everything there is and his explanations are wonderful as he uses facts and logic to shatter heliocentrism.

 

Like his giant plughole at the North pole controls the waves theory, he stole from the hollow earth, which relies on two poles. Put the crack pipe down ffs.

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

Like his giant plughole at the North pole controls the waves theory, he stole from the hollow earth, which relies on two poles. Put the crack pipe down ffs.

You habve lied many times about many things here, so I'm not taking you at your word anymore. That said, I mentioned that he is not perfect and I know that he has woken many. What I find interesting is how nasa shills are constantly claiming how mauch flat earthhers make and how they are in it for the money. I have explained already that that is false completely and in Eric's case, he amazingly has all his material available for free. He has several books published in numerous languages. I believe that 200 proofs is now published in over 20 languages. All of it is free, His PDFs to all his books, his videos (many of which are finally back up), and his fantastic collection of audiobooks. You certainly cannot say that about the shills that youtube and facebook promote who are banking huge off the gullible.

 

You should seriously watch how comedy responds as I go one by one with him through all the difficult questions that his script cannot respond logically to.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, amy G said:

You habve lied many times about many things here, so I'm not taking you at your word anymore.

 

Youll love this.

 

 

Just now, amy G said:

You should seriously watch how comedy responds as I go one by one with him through all the difficult questions that his script cannot respond logically to.

 

The only one here with the script as proven above now twice is you, spamming Eric Dubays questions.

 

Im waiting for a proper response to my previous posts you keep ignoring.

 

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

 

Youll love this.

 

 

 

The only one here with the script as proven above now twice is you, spamming Eric Dubays questions.

 

Im waiting for a proper response to my previous posts you keep ignoring.

 

Has David ever made mistakes? Have you? Take his material as an entire work and you might understand.

 

Spamming twice? Comedy posted the same stuff on the first page several times across the other thread and you said nothing? He wanted his locked thread. He will reap what he has sown and you will watch it happen as he is forced to go off script.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, amy G said:

Has David ever made mistakes? Have you? Take his material as an entire work and you might understand.

 

I admit my mistakes.

 

Just now, amy G said:

 

Spamming twice? Comedy posted the same stuff on the first page several times across the other thread and you said nothing? He wanted his locked thread. He will reap what he has sown and you will watch it happen as he is forced to go off script.

 

You are spamming Eric Dubays proofs as your own above yes & you are claiming Comedy is posting from a script. You dont see the irony.

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

You are spamming Eric Dubays proofs as your own above yes & you are claiming Comedy is posting from a script. You dont see the irony.

That is not fair at all. He posted a debunking video on the other thread that debunked nothing and this was after the mere mention of this hated work. Anyone who has read it and still believes they are on a spinning ball is either a shill or no longer working. He knew exactly these were Eric's proofs and insinuating that I stole his work is unacceptable. He purposely avoids everything that his script doesn't explain and you will watch this play out.

 

4 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

I admit my mistakes.

Let's see if that is true.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

6 hours ago, amy G said:

Your words, we can goo one by one.

 

1) The horizon always appears perfectly flat 360 degrees
around the observer regardless of altitude. All amateur
balloon, rocket, plane and drone footage show a completely
flat horizon over 20+ miles high. Only NASA and other
government “space agencies” show curvature in their fake
CGI photos/videos.

 

Many in the flat earth community agree on several things, but certainly not everything. It is why it is all the more comical watching comedy routine claim the fe people say this or that, while never quoting a specific poster. Nobody is perfect, he definitely makes errors, but Eric crushes. He has read everything there is and his explanations are wonderful as he uses facts and logic to shatter heliocentrism.

 

Comedy does his little routine to argue with his own imaginary arguments and this was pointed out to him on the other thread. How many times for how many of his points did I previously point out that he was arguing with himself? Watch comedy's responses to the globe shattering points and decide for yourself what makes more sense.

 

 

 

Answered already and ignored by you. There has to be something wrong with somebody who ignores the entire first page and then spams a load of Eric Doyoubuy shite. The claim is a meaningless and provably inaccurate piece of garbage.....

 

"The ISS shows curvature as do all the images taken during the Apollo missions. If you are just going to cry faaaaake, what's the point?

 

This is a curvature plot by altitude I did:

 

Angles.jpg

 

The Earth is very, very big. At aircraft cruising altitude you will only see 3.2 degrees of variance and that if you can see a full 90 degrees of span."

 

 

I also did number 2 as well....

 

"This is just bullshit spouted by flat earthers as if they know what they are talking about. Since the distance to horizon is almost identical to a flat earth vanishing point due to the Earth being very very big, the horizon would always be below the observer eye line for both and IS. But by how much on this video?

 

Altitude 20 miles using kilometres is 32 km. Distance to horizon at that altitude is 641.2 km.

 

Angle from eye line to horizon is.........2.82 degrees! You would need to look down 3 degrees from level to see the horizon. Oooooooh - you see when you put in the ACTUAL figures, all this flat earth hyperbole suddenly becomes meaningless piffle."

 

 

There is always an angle from eye level DOWN to the horizon. At sea level it would be a downward angle of 0.217 degrees -  6ft and 15840 (3 miles). It gets bigger the higher you go, but not much as seen from the example in italics.

 

First and second  "proofs" from Eric Doyoubuy - both bollocks. The man is an imbecile.

 

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

×
×
  • Create New...