Flat Earth

[notbatman]

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

[Vod]

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

I've already proved (and just a few posts back) it isn't.

 

[BADecker]

How many times have I explained the Moon is an object holographically projected off of a concave mirrored dome? Your memory is so short it's almost non-existent, the keyword here is "mirror".

How many times have I explained we know the moon orbits a sphere earth at 240,000 miles?  Is your memory that short?  The keyword is "gravity".

How many experiments do I have to suggest to you before you get curious enough to investigate yourself?

Next you will claim the moon is made of green cheese, because you read that somewhere.

 

Can you guess the distance to the Moon when you bust out the sextant and measure it? Gravity is an unproven theory like the big bang, outer space, heliocentrism, the globe, dinosaurs, evolution and historical time-frames greater than 10,000 years.

As the number of experiments you suggest approaches infinity, the possibility of a globe approaches zero. Also you seem to conflate researching documented information and facts with stories written by hacks, quacks and crackpot scientists. You keep repeating these same stories that are beamed into your head via TV, can't you understand everything on TV is fake news and the government is in on it? Can you tell me the official 911 narrative resembles anything that looks like a fact? Do you think that corporations put fluoride and roundup in your beer because it helps increase your testosterone level?

Oh come on! Everybody knows that a sextant is for finding approximate relative distances between the heavenly bodies. A sextant is way too inaccurate for determining the size of heavenly objects. Why don't you come out of the ancient past by at least stepping up to modern transits and telescopes?

You measured the suns size and distance with transits and a telescope?  Explain your set up, how you took your measurements and how you derived your conclusions.  

See if you can top your explanation of how a liquid can stick to the exterior of a shape.  For all who missed it water on the interior of a glass is proof of water sticking to the exterior of a shape (according to Badecker) because the liquid in the glass is on the exterior of the interior of the glass.

Set it up on land in the same format as a sextant would be set up, and you get much more accurate readings.

[joerogers8]

How many times have I explained the Moon is an object holographically projected off of a concave mirrored dome? Your memory is so short it's almost non-existent, the keyword here is "mirror".

How many times have I explained we know the moon orbits a sphere earth at 240,000 miles?  Is your memory that short?  The keyword is "gravity".

How many experiments do I have to suggest to you before you get curious enough to investigate yourself?

Next you will claim the moon is made of green cheese, because you read that somewhere.

 

Can you guess the distance to the Moon when you bust out the sextant and measure it? Gravity is an unproven theory like the big bang, outer space, heliocentrism, the globe, dinosaurs, evolution and historical time-frames greater than 10,000 years.

As the number of experiments you suggest approaches infinity, the possibility of a globe approaches zero. Also you seem to conflate researching documented information and facts with stories written by hacks, quacks and crackpot scientists. You keep repeating these same stories that are beamed into your head via TV, can't you understand everything on TV is fake news and the government is in on it? Can you tell me the official 911 narrative resembles anything that looks like a fact? Do you think that corporations put fluoride and roundup in your beer because it helps increase your testosterone level?

Oh come on! Everybody knows that a sextant is for finding approximate relative distances between the heavenly bodies. A sextant is way too inaccurate for determining the size of heavenly objects. Why don't you come out of the ancient past by at least stepping up to modern transits and telescopes?

You measured the suns size and distance with transits and a telescope?  Explain your set up, how you took your measurements and how you derived your conclusions.  

See if you can top your explanation of how a liquid can stick to the exterior of a shape.  For all who missed it water on the interior of a glass is proof of water sticking to the exterior of a shape (according to Badecker) because the liquid in the glass is on the exterior of the interior of the glass.

Set it up on land in the same format as a sextant would be set up, and you get much more accurate readings.

LOL  Avoiding that one.  Not even a classic ridiculous response?  I'm disappointed.

Tell us exactly what you did to get your measurement of the sun 93,000,000 miles away.  Did you make any assumptions?  Come on tell us how you did it.  Let us in on the secrets.  Can't wait to hear how you used the transits.  What type of telescope did you use?

[Vod]

Can't you idiots learn how to quote properly?   

[exemplaar]

How many times have I explained the Moon is an object holographically projected off of a concave mirrored dome? Your memory is so short it's almost non-existent, the keyword here is "mirror".

How many times have I explained we know the moon orbits a sphere earth at 240,000 miles?  Is your memory that short?  The keyword is "gravity".

How many experiments do I have to suggest to you before you get curious enough to investigate yourself?

Next you will claim the moon is made of green cheese, because you read that somewhere.

 

Can you guess the distance to the Moon when you bust out the sextant and measure it? Gravity is an unproven theory like the big bang, outer space, heliocentrism, the globe, dinosaurs, evolution and historical time-frames greater than 10,000 years.

As the number of experiments you suggest approaches infinity, the possibility of a globe approaches zero. Also you seem to conflate researching documented information and facts with stories written by hacks, quacks and crackpot scientists. You keep repeating these same stories that are beamed into your head via TV, can't you understand everything on TV is fake news and the government is in on it? Can you tell me the official 911 narrative resembles anything that looks like a fact? Do you think that corporations put fluoride and roundup in your beer because it helps increase your testosterone level?

Oh come on! Everybody knows that a sextant is for finding approximate relative distances between the heavenly bodies. A sextant is way too inaccurate for determining the size of heavenly objects. Why don't you come out of the ancient past by at least stepping up to modern transits and telescopes?

You measured the suns size and distance with transits and a telescope?  Explain your set up, how you took your measurements and how you derived your conclusions.  

See if you can top your explanation of how a liquid can stick to the exterior of a shape.  For all who missed it water on the interior of a glass is proof of water sticking to the exterior of a shape (according to Badecker) because the liquid in the glass is on the exterior of the interior of the glass.

Set it up on land in the same format as a sextant would be set up, and you get much more accurate readings.

LOL  Avoiding that one.  Not even a classic ridiculous response?  I'm disappointed.

Tell us exactly what you did to get your measurement of the sun 93,000,000 miles away.  Did you make any assumptions?  Come on tell us how you did it.  Let us in on the secrets.  Can't wait to hear how you used the transits.  What type of telescope did you use?

He used occult practices and black magic just like jesuit sellout Copernicus did back in the dark age.


Meanwhile, Trump excited about The Flat Earth Event of the year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NohmB5qXO54

[joerogers8]

Millions of people have personally verified it.   Is that not enough proof?

Why do you feel the need to verify this yourself?  Humans have genetic memory, but we pick up most facts through society.

Did I do it right?

[sirazimuth]

 

[notbatman]

How many times have I explained the Moon is an object holographically projected off of a concave mirrored dome? Your memory is so short it's almost non-existent, the keyword here is "mirror".

How many times have I explained we know the moon orbits a sphere earth at 240,000 miles?  Is your memory that short?  The keyword is "gravity".

How many experiments do I have to suggest to you before you get curious enough to investigate yourself?

Next you will claim the moon is made of green cheese, because you read that somewhere.

 

Can you guess the distance to the Moon when you bust out the sextant and measure it? Gravity is an unproven theory like the big bang, outer space, heliocentrism, the globe, dinosaurs, evolution and historical time-frames greater than 10,000 years.

As the number of experiments you suggest approaches infinity, the possibility of a globe approaches zero. Also you seem to conflate researching documented information and facts with stories written by hacks, quacks and crackpot scientists. You keep repeating these same stories that are beamed into your head via TV, can't you understand everything on TV is fake news and the government is in on it? Can you tell me the official 911 narrative resembles anything that looks like a fact? Do you think that corporations put fluoride and roundup in your beer because it helps increase your testosterone level?

Oh come on! Everybody knows that a sextant is for finding approximate relative distances between the heavenly bodies. A sextant is way too inaccurate for determining the size of heavenly objects. Why don't you come out of the ancient past by at least stepping up to modern transits and telescopes?

You measured the suns size and distance with transits and a telescope?  Explain your set up, how you took your measurements and how you derived your conclusions.  

See if you can top your explanation of how a liquid can stick to the exterior of a shape.  For all who missed it water on the interior of a glass is proof of water sticking to the exterior of a shape (according to Badecker) because the liquid in the glass is on the exterior of the interior of the glass.

Set it up on land in the same format as a sextant would be set up, and you get much more accurate readings.

LOL  Avoiding that one.  Not even a classic ridiculous response?  I'm disappointed.

Tell us exactly what you did to get your measurement of the sun 93,000,000 miles away.  Did you make any assumptions?  Come on tell us how you did it.  Let us in on the secrets.  Can't wait to hear how you used the transits.  What type of telescope did you use?

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.

[joerogers8]

How many times have I explained the Moon is an object holographically projected off of a concave mirrored dome? Your memory is so short it's almost non-existent, the keyword here is "mirror".

How many times have I explained we know the moon orbits a sphere earth at 240,000 miles?  Is your memory that short?  The keyword is "gravity".

How many experiments do I have to suggest to you before you get curious enough to investigate yourself?

Next you will claim the moon is made of green cheese, because you read that somewhere.

 

Can you guess the distance to the Moon when you bust out the sextant and measure it? Gravity is an unproven theory like the big bang, outer space, heliocentrism, the globe, dinosaurs, evolution and historical time-frames greater than 10,000 years.

As the number of experiments you suggest approaches infinity, the possibility of a globe approaches zero. Also you seem to conflate researching documented information and facts with stories written by hacks, quacks and crackpot scientists. You keep repeating these same stories that are beamed into your head via TV, can't you understand everything on TV is fake news and the government is in on it? Can you tell me the official 911 narrative resembles anything that looks like a fact? Do you think that corporations put fluoride and roundup in your beer because it helps increase your testosterone level?

Oh come on! Everybody knows that a sextant is for finding approximate relative distances between the heavenly bodies. A sextant is way too inaccurate for determining the size of heavenly objects. Why don't you come out of the ancient past by at least stepping up to modern transits and telescopes?

You measured the suns size and distance with transits and a telescope?  Explain your set up, how you took your measurements and how you derived your conclusions.  

See if you can top your explanation of how a liquid can stick to the exterior of a shape.  For all who missed it water on the interior of a glass is proof of water sticking to the exterior of a shape (according to Badecker) because the liquid in the glass is on the exterior of the interior of the glass.

Set it up on land in the same format as a sextant would be set up, and you get much more accurate readings.

LOL  Avoiding that one.  Not even a classic ridiculous response?  I'm disappointed.

Tell us exactly what you did to get your measurement of the sun 93,000,000 miles away.  Did you make any assumptions?  Come on tell us how you did it.  Let us in on the secrets.  Can't wait to hear how you used the transits.  What type of telescope did you use?

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 always love having them try to explain themselves here in the forum so others can see how full of shit they are.  It's obvious all of their data comes from the stories they were told and cannot be independently verified or none of us would need to be here.  Their refusal to simply admit this makes for some classic posts and great fun at times.  Badeckers response on the exterior of the interior was so classic I was hoping with a more complex subject he would really swing for the fences!  

[Vod]

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.

Funny we don't have atmospheric distortions today, and can measure the distance to the moon, sun and many other planets and stars.

We can measure the distance to the next house, skyscraper and mountain in the same way.  All wil incredible precision.

Flat Earth is impossible.  Meaning... NOT POSSIBLE.     

[BADecker]

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.

Funny we don't have atmospheric distortions today, and can measure the distance to the moon, sun and many other planets and stars.

We can measure the distance to the next house, skyscraper and mountain in the same way.  All wil incredible precision.

Flat Earth is impossible.  Meaning... NOT POSSIBLE.    

Who knows for sure, but it was probably atmospheric distortions that got the whole FE thing started in the first place... I mean in this modern day and age. But anybody can go outside on a clear night and watch the stars twinkle. How much are they displaced by their distortion twinkle? Perhaps a tiny fraction of a degree... not enough to create all the distortion and reverse distortion needed to show a FE. Bu, a person has dreams... even FE people do.

[notbatman]

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.

Funny we don't have atmospheric distortions today, and can measure the distance to the moon, sun and many other planets and stars.

We can measure the distance to the next house, skyscraper and mountain in the same way.  All wil incredible precision.

Flat Earth is impossible.  Meaning... NOT POSSIBLE.    

Who knows for sure, but it was probably atmospheric distortions that got the whole FE thing started in the first place... I mean in this modern day and age. But anybody can go outside on a clear night and watch the stars twinkle. How much are they displaced by their distortion twinkle? Perhaps a tiny fraction of a degree... not enough to create all the distortion and reverse distortion needed to show a FE. Bu, a person has dreams... even FE people do.

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.

[Vod]

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.

There is no joking in physics.  What I measure today can be measured by anybody else anywhere else and at any other time.

The facts do not change.

The sun is 93,000,000 miles away - if it were any closer or further we would not be in the habitable zone.

Despite all your babbling, you cannot produce any evidence other then "derp - magic!" to hint everyone on the planet is wrong, and you are right.

 

[lightlord]

1. Launch a balloon with your own camera attached to it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAifzh7_-cg


2. Sail around the world on your own.

3. Become an astronaut.

...but the curve is going the wrong way in that video!



The options were flat or spherical, now you've gone and complicated things by offering evidence for a concave earth.

If you understood simple photography, a wide-angle lens can create that kind of curvature. However, proving any information to a flat-earther is nearly impossible if not impossible. If you send one on a rocket into space and tell them to look out the window, they will say the windows are screened/faked with a display. If you put in a spacesuit into space, the glass on the spacesuit or they have been drugged.


Fish Eye Lens:

[Vod]

However, proving any information to a flat-earther is nearly impossible if not impossible. If you send one on a rocket into space and tell them to look out the window, they will say the windows are screened/faked with a display. If you put in a spacesuit into space, the glass on the spacesuit or they have been drugged.

So true - but it's fun to explain elementary school knowledge to them and watch them get all upset.

Notaman wants me dead sooooo bad because I keep exposing his lies.

 

[Astargath]

However, proving any information to a flat-earther is nearly impossible if not impossible. If you send one on a rocket into space and tell them to look out the window, they will say the windows are screened/faked with a display. If you put in a spacesuit into space, the glass on the spacesuit or they have been drugged.

So true - but it's fun to explain elementary school knowledge to them and watch them get all upset.

Notaman wants me dead sooooo bad because I keep exposing his lies.

 

His arguments are literally: ''some sort of effect/illusion'' always renders every measurement, observation useless. There is always some weird effect that always makes it look like the earth is a sphere.

[BADecker]

However, proving any information to a flat-earther is nearly impossible if not impossible. If you send one on a rocket into space and tell them to look out the window, they will say the windows are screened/faked with a display. If you put in a spacesuit into space, the glass on the spacesuit or they have been drugged.

So true - but it's fun to explain elementary school knowledge to them and watch them get all upset.

Notaman wants me dead sooooo bad because I keep exposing his lies.

 

His arguments are literally: ''some sort of effect/illusion'' always renders every measurement, observation useless. There is always some weird effect that always makes it look like the earth is a sphere.

Right. But our wish is for his betterment, isn't it? I mean, when he says that some sort of effect/illusion always renders every measurement or observation useless, why does he think that a sextant is more accurate? He really needs to get right down on the ground with a ruler so he can be sure that he's getting it right, right?

The point isn't to demean him. After all, look at everything he is trying to fight, especially in his own mind, right? First he has to fight all the proven science and observations. Then he has to fight all the people who know how to explain and use those observations. Then he has to figure out how to accept a bunch of FE observations by focusing on things that look like they are accurate. Then he has to fight himself, and his natural yearning to accept things that he knows go against common sense and standard science. Then he has to develop FE science to a point that fits reality, while not letting it slide into the realm of fantasy.

I mean, isn't a fighter like this some kind of a great guy? Who can hold his mind in place against all kinds of understanding like this? If he were a religious fighter, he would be among those who have the strongest of faith. No. I absolutely admire him.

Of course, it must be just as mentally draining for the interns at his funny farm. But, what the heck? He is still sane enough to get on the Internet and reply, right?

Bravo, nutbatman.

[notbatman]

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.

[Vod]

  4. Concern trolling and name calling.

Not only do you troll, lie and name call, but you also continue to encourage people to commit suicide.

It's odd that no one else sees what you see.  Do you need glasses?

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

Played around with you for a few days, but you should educate yourself - the sextant can be used for measuring the angle between a celestial object and the horizon.

It cannot be used for measuring the distance to an celestial object.   If you think it can - show the world!