... [clip]...
... I've been asking about the Antarctic military blockade for months. I'm trying to find out where it is so that I could go see it but damn flat-earthers are hiding it from me.
It exists on paper and is enforced by all the countries that signed it. The ships, aircraft and soldiers don't show up until you do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System
Meanwhile at NASA...  |
|
|
|
 .  . Source: NASA Artist (contractor).
 |
|
|
|
I'm sorry BADecker but that's not an argument.
Astargath why are you changing the topic you fucking weasel, huh why? You draw an angled line under the horizon to exaggerate the minor barrel distortion from the lens and window combined with the greater light intensity in the middle as your globe curvature? The proof I've provided isn't about curvature douchebag, it's a fucking strawman argument because of the uncertainty caused by an array of potential barrel distortions. Distance to the horizon, the fact the horizon rises to eye level and the fact observation of the horizon is consistent with perspective and convergence on a plane proves the earth is flat. Thanks to JTolan I have the infrared images to prove my point.
Vod, nice try but the red-shift assumes the stars are millions and billions of miles away and doesn't prove outer space is real, or that stars aren't close points of light projected off a concave mirrored dome. Given the radically different cosmology an engineered, enclosed flat earth provides an explanation for the observed wavelengths is going to be somewhat different.
Changed the topic? I didn't draw anything, it was in the comments and it's not angled, check for yourself lmao, you can see the curve. Yeah, it seems to me that all the optical illusions and effects always make it seem like the earth is a sphere, never the opposite way, huh? Yes, changed the topic from the horizon distance to the straw man of horizontal horizon curvature. Also there's an angle between the line that's been drawn and the horizon line. Rope yourself. Straw man horizon distance vs visual evidence that the earth is a sphere. Go rope yourself. You proved the globe earth with that video, thanks! How is the distance to the horizon a straw man, do explain? Horizontal curvature is not conclusive, therefor claiming that it's proof of anything is bullshit. You can't show that it's not distortion especially with the center of the image being brighter/overexposed. I've got evidence for distortion meanwhile you completely ignore the distance to the horizon based on landmarks and prop up this straw man. I've exposed your intellectual dishonesty asshole. You can't show it is distorted. Keep using straw mans to get away from real evidence. Do you not get tired of claiming everything is either Photoshoped or some weird atmospheric distortion made it look like that? I can't prove 100% it's distortion based on the image alone and you can't prove it's a curved globe, this make it inconclusive and your argument a straw man but, not one that works in your favor. The result being that you've got no argument. I've put the horizon beyond 500 miles using a landmark and that proves the earth is flat and that the curvature in your image is from distortion. My point that you're being intellectually dishonest and need to rope yourself stands. |
|
|
|
I'm sorry BADecker but that's not an argument.
Astargath why are you changing the topic you fucking weasel, huh why? You draw an angled line under the horizon to exaggerate the minor barrel distortion from the lens and window combined with the greater light intensity in the middle as your globe curvature? The proof I've provided isn't about curvature douchebag, it's a fucking strawman argument because of the uncertainty caused by an array of potential barrel distortions. Distance to the horizon, the fact the horizon rises to eye level and the fact observation of the horizon is consistent with perspective and convergence on a plane proves the earth is flat. Thanks to JTolan I have the infrared images to prove my point.
Vod, nice try but the red-shift assumes the stars are millions and billions of miles away and doesn't prove outer space is real, or that stars aren't close points of light projected off a concave mirrored dome. Given the radically different cosmology an engineered, enclosed flat earth provides an explanation for the observed wavelengths is going to be somewhat different.
Changed the topic? I didn't draw anything, it was in the comments and it's not angled, check for yourself lmao, you can see the curve. Yeah, it seems to me that all the optical illusions and effects always make it seem like the earth is a sphere, never the opposite way, huh? Yes, changed the topic from the horizon distance to the straw man of horizontal horizon curvature. Also there's an angle between the line that's been drawn and the horizon line. Rope yourself. Straw man horizon distance vs visual evidence that the earth is a sphere. Go rope yourself. You proved the globe earth with that video, thanks! How is the distance to the horizon a straw man, do explain? Horizontal curvature is not conclusive, therefor claiming that it's proof of anything is bullshit. You can't show that it's not distortion especially with the center of the image being brighter/overexposed. I've got evidence for distortion meanwhile you completely ignore the distance to the horizon based on landmarks and prop up this straw man. I've exposed your intellectual dishonesty asshole.
 Source: https://youtu.be/hobnOTKIjWEBiggest conspiracy in the history of mankind folks. |
|
|
|
I'm sorry BADecker but that's not an argument.
Astargath why are you changing the topic you fucking weasel, huh why? You draw an angled line under the horizon to exaggerate the minor barrel distortion from the lens and window combined with the greater light intensity in the middle as your globe curvature? The proof I've provided isn't about curvature douchebag, it's a fucking strawman argument because of the uncertainty caused by an array of potential barrel distortions. Distance to the horizon, the fact the horizon rises to eye level and the fact observation of the horizon is consistent with perspective and convergence on a plane proves the earth is flat. Thanks to JTolan I have the infrared images to prove my point.
Vod, nice try but the red-shift assumes the stars are millions and billions of miles away and doesn't prove outer space is real, or that stars aren't close points of light projected off a concave mirrored dome. Given the radically different cosmology an engineered, enclosed flat earth provides an explanation for the observed wavelengths is going to be somewhat different.
Changed the topic? I didn't draw anything, it was in the comments and it's not angled, check for yourself lmao, you can see the curve. Yeah, it seems to me that all the optical illusions and effects always make it seem like the earth is a sphere, never the opposite way, huh? Yes, changed the topic from the horizon distance to the straw man of horizontal horizon curvature. Also there's an angle between the line that's been drawn and the horizon line. Rope yourself. |
|
|
|
|
So there you have it folks, my critics here can't address the evidence I put forth that proves my claims without changing the subject. Horizon curvature is not the argument, it has an array of possible causes and introduces an uncertainty as to the cause. Landmarks on the other hand can still be positively identified even in the case of severe image distortion.
|
|
|
|
NPC detected! How am I trolling? There's still profitable coins to mine even though the margins are slim and, my suggestion that market forces play the dominant role in mining profitability is hard to argue against. Any arguments regarding asics are moot this point as asic mining is just as hurt as gpu' and not part of any argument I'm making. |
|
|
|
|
There's still a weak pulse, if we see BTC returning to ATH territory things will pick up; market forces are the determining factor here IMO.
|
|
|
|
Thanks to JTolan I have the infrared images to prove my point.
Thanks to my own brain I have the ability to look at an image and identify a round object. You seem to have omitted an important point. ... it's a fucking strawman argument because of the uncertainty caused by an array of potential barrel distortions. ...
If you have to change the subject from distance to the horizon to a provably strawman argument then you're being dishonest or stupid, take your pick. |
|
|
|
|
I'm sorry BADecker but that's not an argument.
Astargath why are you changing the topic you fucking weasel, huh why? You draw an angled line under the horizon to exaggerate the minor barrel distortion from the lens and window combined with the greater light intensity in the middle as your globe curvature? The proof I've provided isn't about curvature douchebag, it's a fucking strawman argument because of the uncertainty caused by an array of potential barrel distortions. Distance to the horizon, the fact the horizon rises to eye level and the fact observation of the horizon is consistent with perspective and convergence on a plane proves the earth is flat. Thanks to JTolan I have the infrared images to prove my point.
Vod, nice try but the red-shift assumes the stars are millions and billions of miles away and doesn't prove outer space is real, or that stars aren't close points of light projected off a concave mirrored dome. Given the radically different cosmology an engineered, enclosed flat earth provides an explanation for the observed wavelengths is going to be somewhat different.
|
|
|
|
^^^ I've included physical and mathematical proof if you don't trust your eyes.
If seeing the proof, calculating it with mathematics or interacting with it mechanically isn't your thing you can feel it. You've got a sixth sense you can use to prove it, your sense of balance; the earth isn't spinning.
Math is not a language, can't prove anything with it. You didn't prove anything, show me the flat earth. ...
The distance to the horizon on a globe at 33k' is 222.7 miles, if you can find a photo of an object on the ground below the horizon line and prove it's greater than 222.7 miles from the aircraft then you've got mathematical proof the earth is flat. There's infrared images available (just ask) that conclusively show landmarks of over 500 miles that are below the horizon.
If there's an island between your aircraft at 33k' and the globe horizon at 222.7 miles and, you can positively identify that island and determine the aircrafts current position then, you can calculate the distance from the aircraft to the island and, if that island is 500 miles away then you've got proof, mathematical proof the earth is flat. Like the convex dome of water 3 miles out that ships sail up, over and behind, a horizon formed by the top of a dome 222.7 miles out while flying at 33k' is unavoidable on a globe. Then do it, show it and you will finally prove the earth is flat, what are you waiting for? You certainly have a lot of free time, might as well use it for something. First we need to agree on a couple of points: 1. Assuming a globe earth, the visible horizon line at an altitude of 33,000 feet is about 222.7 miles from from the observer. TRUE or FALSE? 2. Any point on the ground between the visible horizon line and the observer at 33,000 feet has a distance of less than 222.7 miles on a globe earth. TRUE or FALSE? edit: Here's one example:  Source: https://youtu.be/7CpAlOuZb2o |
|
|
|
|
What a lot of bullshit, I created this thread after a single solitary post was removed. I was then advised that it was removed because it violated the multiple posts in a row rule. Now we're on the second page of this thread with multiple users telling me how I'm bad and wrong and that I violated the rules. This kind of behavior is called gaslighting.
The claim my single solitary post violates the multiple posts in a row rule is about as valid as the claim we live on a spinning ball in a vacuum
|
|
|
|
^^^ I've included physical and mathematical proof if you don't trust your eyes.
If seeing the proof, calculating it with mathematics or interacting with it mechanically isn't your thing you can feel it. You've got a sixth sense you can use to prove it, your sense of balance; the earth isn't spinning.
Math is not a language, can't prove anything with it. You didn't prove anything, show me the flat earth. ...
The distance to the horizon on a globe at 33k' is 222.7 miles, if you can find a photo of an object on the ground below the horizon line and prove it's greater than 222.7 miles from the aircraft then you've got mathematical proof the earth is flat. There's infrared images available (just ask) that conclusively show landmarks of over 500 miles that are below the horizon.
If there's an island between your aircraft at 33k' and the globe horizon at 222.7 miles and, you can positively identify that island and determine the aircrafts current position then, you can calculate the distance from the aircraft to the island and, if that island is 500 miles away then you've got proof, mathematical proof the earth is flat. Like the convex dome of water 3 miles out that ships sail up, over and behind, a horizon formed by the top of a dome 222.7 miles out while flying at 33k' is unavoidable on a globe. |
|
|
|
|
^^^ I've included physical and mathematical proof if you don't trust your eyes.
If seeing the proof, calculating it with mathematics or interacting with it mechanically isn't your thing you can feel it. You've got a sixth sense you can use to prove it, your sense of balance; the earth isn't spinning.
|
|
|
|
^^^ The NPC meme comes to mind, they have no internal dialog on any level other than impulse according one recent scientific study.  edit: I remember those bible thumping religious nuts decades ago telling me that not everybody had a soul, like quite a few other things it turns out they're probably telling the truth. Back then I knew better because science of course. Yup, a glass dome surrounding the earth they told me and globe in mind I couldn't stop laughing at their foolishness. It turns out the concave layer of nickel-iron oxide on the dome above us is very much like glass; I'm not laughing at them anymore. |
|
|
|
Don't you just love notbatman and his buddies? The more they talk, the more they tell us that they have a comical, pseudo, flat-earth religion going for themselves. And the pictures show it best of all. Probably this thread is one of the most religious threads in this whole forum. Watch, now. if they answer my post here, it will be with more FE religion content.   I can show you the horizon rising to eye level, can you show me a convex dome three miles out that causes your horizon? You're fucking with me here bro, you can't back up your claims, period.  Image: CGI rendering of a commercial attitude indicatorGo drink yourself to death motherfucker! You can't, it's photo shopped and you are spreading propaganda. You can't back up your claims, period. Shows us the projectors or the flat earth. I don't need a physical image to show the horizon rising to eye level, I can just point to it and say look, it's consistent with perspective and convergence on a plane. What kind of evidence that a commercial attitude indicator (artificial horizon) points directly at the horizon at any altitude do you need? There are purely mechanical variants available and when you see how they work with the gyroscope, you know it doesn't correct for 8" per mile squared worth of horizon drop (3 degrees at 33k'); the gyroscope is locked in position. This is physical proof the earth is flat. The distance to the horizon on a globe at 33k' is 222.7 miles, if you can find a photo of an object on the ground below the horizon line and prove it's greater than 222.7 miles from the aircraft then you've got mathematical proof the earth is flat. There's infrared images available (just ask) that conclusively show landmarks of over 500 miles that are below the horizon. |
|
|
|
|
@FHF,
You need Jesus in your life.
|
|
|
|
|
@suchmoon,
This isn't about multiple posts in a row, it's about you finding an angle of attack for making a point that contradicts the one you've adopted. You've noticed that I'm not always the best at following the rules to letter and that this can be exploited.
|
|
|
|
|
The thread rarely sits more 24 hours, I'm always responding; this isn't a thread that needs me to bump it. People make a few posts and I make a few responses, it's an ebb & flow not something I'm forcing.
As for the conspiracy they absolutely don't want God interfering so there's a set of rules they follow and tactics they use; the Devil needs you to to sign on the dotted line for his own safety.
|
|
|
|
I hope you're happy now you fucking gaslighting cock smoker. It was a single post that was removed not 5, that's why I'm here bitching about it.
LOL. That made me chuckle. I'm not a mod, but to answer your question about censorship and the values of bitcointalk, no I don't think any moderator here is going to delete your posts because of the ideas therein, however wacky they are. Theymos is all about freedom of speech, and IMO not enough posts get deleted forum-wide (but not because of political leanings). It's the consecuposting that got you in trouble. That's one way you can get posts deleted and get a temp ban, too. Gleb Gamow is notorious for posting many times in a row, and he didn't even get away with it when his good reputation was intact, before he tried to sell his account, defaulted on a loan, and got negged by DT members. In other words, consecuposting is something mods take seriously. It's not personal and it's not censorship. You see that's the problem here it was a single post that got removed, not 5 consecutive ones. I didn't know this until after I created this thread and hilariousandco told me the logs said the deletion was for 5 consecutive posts. Just look suchmoon's comments on how he's saying he going have the evidence I've posted deleted/censored using the multiple posts excuse, that's fucking censorship pretending to be manners. They're not looking to have spam removed, it's the proofs I've posted they're after, the posts I put hard work and research into, that's what they're after! |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
