Yes you would see evidence, like when Japan fired the world most powerful LASER at Polaris and it hit Chicago, IL.




Soldier Field, Chicago, IL


Worlds most powerful green LASER,
Osaka University's Institute for Laser Engineering, Japan

I should invent a device that measures angles on a sphere, you guys are a fucking joke.




Explain using your logic, how the same angle to every telephone pole can be maintained while adding ten feet to one of them?

Of you move the pole with the extra ten feet forward it gets bigger and it will have a different angle than the one next to it, if you move it back it gets smaller and the same deal applies.

You are correct about me living in world of my own but, it's not me that's delusional. There are so many of you I'll need several Olympic sized swimming pools of grape Flavor Aid; the world needs to consider mass suicide.

Flat Earth confirmed.

How can you claim the sextant can't measure some distance if the sextants only purpose is measuring angular distance? That's like claiming a ruler can't measure.

The stars are lights projected off of a concave mirror a few thousand miles away, and thus by extension, are all relatively the same distance due to the mirror. The "red shift" is a theory that assumes the stars are trillions of miles away, their angular size at this distance alone disproves this nonsense. Not only is the distance of trillions of miles assumed but that the so-called "red shift" is caused by the stars being in motion. What if the static model of your bullshit universe is assumed and light has a non-zero mass, then the change in wavelength would be due to the emission of background microwave photons as light from a motionless star loses energy.

Can't you see how fucking delusional you are by claiming you've proven or disproven something by making a bunch of stupid off-point theoretical assumptions? So what if violin strings that are made from cat intestines, that doesn't prove a ruler can't measure!

None of your response deals with the points I made i.e. measuring angular size is impossible on a globe due the horizons curvature. Measuring distances based on angles only works on plane you massive sack of shit! Instead of lying to my face and engaging in a conspiracy against me why don't you go rope yourself instead?

If I'm the biggest liar in the world like you and everybody else here claims, how is it I'm able to:

1. make accurate angular distance measurements using a horizon created by convergence on a plane,
2. make one arcminute of angular size equal one nautical mile,
3. make the Sun and Moon both appear about 32' in diameter,
4. create the illusion that the sextant is a functional measuring device that's been in use for thousands of years when it works by measuring angles on a plane?

Isn't it more reasonable that you're the bastard liar and should consider suicide? Also, please take the rest of these clowns to hell with you; have a nice heaven's gate party!

Would you believe a bitch two miles tall? You've been lied to about fossils and the creation of Earth, fossils form like concrete and dry quickly. T-Rex is a lie, they've tricked you with a piece of giant chicken bone less than 10,000 years old and a bullshit story to go along with it.




The Sun is a light in the sky, how about you prove it's a million mile wide thermonuclear bomb Einstein. 'you gonna tell me how heavy balls in the shed proves there's a heavy spherical bomb exploding up there? Maybe tell me how the flying underwater photoshop puppet masters at NASA use their Venusian radar to measure the Sun. Perhaps you'll show me Hollywood made moves of the hydrogen bomb exploding, followed The Moon Landing, The Shining and Eyes Wide Shut.

Asshat.

^^^ If the Earth was a ball dogs would have chewed it to shreds by now.



That's like asking how far is 100 mph?

When you observe an object or area with the naked eye it has a measurable size, this is measured by viewing the angle formed between the sides of the object or area and the vanishing point at the horizon. It doesn't matter where the visible object is located in your field of view or how far away it is, the angle will always be the same and will correlate with a physical distance. In the case of an angle of 1' it correlates with a distance of 1 nautical mile.

In 1° there are 60' so if the angular size measured is 10° then the object is 600 miles wide and will most likely be a coastline or mountain range.




The Sun and Moon are holographic projections and not physical objects.

The Sun can be observed to change size while rising/setting at high altitudes when atmosphereic conditions allow for it.; the atmospheric magnification that normally occurs as a function of distance is reduced. Under average conditions at sea level with the Sun directly overhead, atmospheric distortions are minimized and the agreed upon measured angular size is 32 arcminutes. With this in mind  and considering the definition of one nautical mile is one arcminute the diameter of the Sun can be stated empirically as 32 miles.

Fact: The Sun's angular size is 32'.
Fact: One arcminute is one nautical mile.

The reason the shills are freaking out so hard is because of how the nautical mile is defined, it's based on the angle of one arcminute centered on the horizon and the physical distance that angle covers. With the globe hallucination, the horizon is the curve of a dome of water or land that's three miles out. In reality the horizon is generally the result of optical convergence and because of this, the actual size of an object can be measured by measuring it's angular size. The object having its angular size measured can be in your face or miles away and the measured angle will be the same (atmospheric effects not withstanding).

The shill will continue to REEEEEEEEEEEEE NASA's Venusian radar proves the Sun is 93,000,000 miles away, it's a bomb a million miles wide, REEEEEEEEEEEEE! !!!!!!!! Nautical miles are impossible REEEEEEEEEEEEE! !!!  The size of angles can't be measured REEEEEEEEEEEEE! !!!!!!! The sextant doesn't work REEEEEEEEEEEEE! !!!!! GLOBE GLOBE GLOBE! !!!!!!

Please consider suicide.

Your first fact is correct, you would not be able to see the Sun 93 million miles away if it were 32 miles in diameter.

You second "fact" is not only wrong but irrelevant as the fact, the Sun is visible with an angular size of 32' proves it's not 93 million miles away.

The angular measurement of 32' is confirmed by Google. Also what evidence do you have that discredits the sextant, a distance measuring device? At this point you're just making fallacious claims. The sextant's ability to give a precision measurement to the Sun is irrelevant if the measurement is only off by a few hundred miles; you're conflating "can't measure" with "can't measure with precision".

Why are you not swinging from a rope?

^^^

Fact: The Sun's angular size is 32 arcminutes.

Source:




Fact: One arcminute is equal to one nautical mile.

Source:




Fact: The Sun is 32 miles in diameter.
Source: Google & Wikipedia



Fact: The Sun is 32 miles in diameter.
Source: Direct measurement with a sextant.

^^^ Continually accusing the target of doing what you're doing while you're doing it is a big part of this horrible conspiracy. The Sun's diameter is 32', see you in hell.  



Vod: "I'm reading 93,000,021.18 mm, that coin is huge!"

If you're lying to my face or even unknowing pushing false information as part of a horrible conspiracy, then how is telling you to go kill yourself unreasonable? As for the hard proof, I don't even to do a triangulation song & dance to calculate the distance, the sextant directly measures the Sun's diameter at 32' (nautical miles). Fuck you.

The last few pages of discussion have focused primarily on the distance to the Sun. This is a make or break issue and the two sides of the argument can be broken down as follows.


Flat Earth:

   1. A sextant empirically measures the Sun's diameter at 32' (nautical miles) with a triangulated distance of about 3,000 miles.

   2. People that openly deny an empirically measured value should rope themselves.


Globe Earth:

   1. Using a powerful telescope in an attempt to observe a theorized stellar parallax, a measurement so small that it's dwarfed by distortions caused by atmospheric turbulence (star twinkle) thus making conclusive observations impossible, the globalist claims he's able to triangulate the distance to the Sun at exactly 93,000,000 miles.

   2. NASA (a globalist organization) claims to use a Venusian radar system to measure it's exact distance to Earth then triangulate the distance to the Sun at 93,000,000 miles.

   3. The globalist makes the unsubstantiated and refutable claim is made that the Sun is always viewed the same size. This claim is refuted by images and photographs that show atmospheric magnification is occurring as a function of distance and that, under the right weather conditions, at higher altitudes the Sun is shown to change size drastically by shrinking to a point as it sets.

   4. Concern trolling and name calling.

All of your claims about stars being billions of miles away rest on that "Perhaps a tiny fraction of a degree" measurement, the distortions are greater than the measurement your parallax claims are based on. Then in the same post you claim the sextant is inaccurate while your margin of error is give or take 93 million miles? The angular size of objects doesn't lie and claims that objects seen with the naked eye are hundreds of thousands, millions and billions miles away are absurd. Both the Sun and Moon are measured at 32' (59 kilometers across) this makes your billion miles away claims a fucking joke, a big one; go rope yourself.

He's using stellar parallax to measure the distance to Venus then triangulating but, atmospheric distortions render this method completely useless as even the smallest distortions are bigger than the measurement he's claiming to make. So to avoid having you debunk his method he's making claims while omitting details of the method used. The sextant may be somewhat inaccurate for measuring the distance to the Sun but the margin of error sure as hell isn't 93,000,000 miles.

Astargath did this to me with Eratosthenes experiment, he kept claiming adding a 3rd well debunked flat earth but when I asked how and why he wouldn't answer. It turns out the experiment was taking the effects caused by refraction and claiming it was proof of curvature. The whole argument rested on the numbers NASA provides (we have to trust they are correct) for refraction.

I'm reasonably certain this proves the Earth is flat and motionless.

Vod is a special guy.

^^^ The path of a fool is a wide one.

Narrow: 32 arcminutes
Wide: 1876 arcminutes

To put this into perspective, Vod's observation of the angle displayed by the sextant is off by 5862.5% when measuring the size of the Moon.