Flat Earth

[exemplaar]

Stop arguing something so obvious, !!

Ball earthers are good at "finding" ways they think will "debunk" flat earth tesis

Well now I'll do the same with you, ball earthers and you should never post any ball earth crap from now on..
With something so simple even a child could understand..

If earth is a ball, Why the moon is always illuminated at night? why sunlight can always reach the moon if it is not because sun is only far away but in an horizontal line, not in a vertical line somewhere in other part of your "globe".

Not sure if trolling, but in any case I used ms paint to show you. It's to do with angles.



The only time the sunlight can't directly hit the moon is during a lunar eclipse, where the Earth is directly between the Sun and moon. You might think the moon would disappear fully and turn black, but there is a certain amount of light that refracts through the Earth's atmosphere, causing a shift in light frequency and making the moon appear red, rather than totally black (and invisible).

This "artwork" is a complete insult to a God given common sense. It seems that you are a joker or a totally deluded globe-head.

Don't fall for that ball earth indoctrination. For anyone interested below is a link with complete debunk of a "lunar eclipse debunks flat earth". it is on the contrary - a lunar eclipse debunks ball earth, end of debate. 

With two practical observations - research: https://youtu.be/sAay4rF30g8?t=15m2s

[protokol]

Stop arguing something so obvious, !!

Ball earthers are good at "finding" ways they think will "debunk" flat earth tesis

Well now I'll do the same with you, ball earthers and you should never post any ball earth crap from now on..
With something so simple even a child could understand..

If earth is a ball, Why the moon is always illuminated at night? why sunlight can always reach the moon if it is not because sun is only far away but in an horizontal line, not in a vertical line somewhere in other part of your "globe".

Not sure if trolling, but in any case I used ms paint to show you. It's to do with angles.



The only time the sunlight can't directly hit the moon is during a lunar eclipse, where the Earth is directly between the Sun and moon. You might think the moon would disappear fully and turn black, but there is a certain amount of light that refracts through the Earth's atmosphere, causing a shift in light frequency and making the moon appear red, rather than totally black (and invisible).

Why didn't you put the moon exactly in the back of the earth in your drawing? in your draw, there are still light coming from the sun, if you put the moon little down, there is no way it can be illuminated..

Or will you believe the brainwash theory saying the moon is always in that possition you put it?  

I didn't put the moon directly in line with the sun and Earth, because as I explained that would constitute a lunar eclipse. We are talking about seeing the moon not being in line with the sun and Earth, and as my super sophisticated diagram shows, the sun's light reflects off the moon, and is visible from the Earth!

I addressed what would happen if the moon was directly in line with the Earth - Lunar eclipse, which I explained in my previous post.

[Przemax]

God must have special place for those that mock his words so badly as flat earthers.

Repent and leave this devils joke..... if its not too late.

You have been proven times and times again that its just a joke. Its illogical.

Maybe it was funny... yeah... but snap out of it.

[protokol]

This "artwork" is a complete insult to a God given common sense. It seems that you are a joker or a totally deluded globe-head.

Don't fall for that ball earth indoctrination. For anyone interested below is a link with complete debunk of a "lunar eclipse debunks flat earth". it is on the contrary - a lunar eclipse debunks ball earth, end of debate.

With two practical observations - research: https://youtu.be/sAay4rF30g8?t=15m2s

Hah, no my artwork was intended as an insult to flat-Earthers - I can stoop to your level and use MS Paint to prove some of you wrong.  

As for the shadow of the Earth going the "wrong way" during a lunar eclipse, that can be easily explained by your position on the Earth and the speed at which the moon travels round the Earth - a lot slower than the 24 hr orbit of the Earth.

http://moonblink.info/Eclipse/why/solar Scroll down to "It Goes the Wrong Way!"

Mystery solved!

[TooQik]

The fact that lunar eclipses even occur debunks the flat Earth theory. So much so that flat Earth believers had to invent another celestial body to place between the Sun and the Moon for a lunar eclipse to even occur in their world.

Of course this new celestial body only ever causes the blocking of the Sun's ray during a lunar eclipse, at all other times you can't see it or its affect on any other object. 

[Przemax]

The fact that lunar eclipses even occur debunks the flat Earth theory. So much so that flat Earth believers had to invent another celestial body to place between the Sun and the Moon for a lunar eclipse to even occur in their world.

Of course this new celestial body only ever causes the blocking of the Sun's ray during a lunar eclipse, at all other times you can't see it or its affect on any other object.  

Listen people they are for real here from flatearthsociety .org

A Lunar Eclipse occurs about twice a year when a satellite of the sun passes between the sun and moon.

No........ Its a month cycle. Why do you think we call it a mo(o)nth? Satelite of the sun? What? Where? And no.... its not those brainiacs mason conspiracy. You have eyes? Right? Right. Or are you have antieyes every 5 months that masons have implemented in every single human. Damn those Nasians they purposefuly make lunar eclipse more often too fool you. You are too smart to not notice that. Damn those fake Nasians and reptilians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_orP5JHZWE

People.... snap out of the flat earth if you have any brain cells left.

[Przemax]

...explained by your position on the Earth and the speed at which the moon travels round the Earth - a lot slower than the 24 hr orbit of the Earth.

Fun Fact: Venus takes 224.65 days to complete it's orbit around the sun, but it takes 242 days to complete a full rotation of it's axis.

Which means? Venus is not a planet. Its some object on the sky. Its too coincidencial statisticly speaking. Ofcourse statistics can be wrong, but it gives you a hint.

[Przemax]

...explained by your position on the Earth and the speed at which the moon travels round the Earth - a lot slower than the 24 hr orbit of the Earth.

Fun Fact: Venus takes 224.65 days to complete it's orbit around the sun, but it takes 242 days to complete a full rotation of it's axis.

Which means? Venus is not a planet. Its some object on the sky. Its too coincidencial statisticly speaking. Ofcourse statistics can be wrong, but it gives you a hint.

What do you mean Venus is not a planet ?
What is coincidental, statistically speaking ?
Why is this the only planet in our solar system that has a longer axial rotation period than it's orbital period ?

http://www.popsci.com/yes-weve-seen-surface-venus


^--- Photograph from the surface of Venus

^- photograph is taken from the surface of bullshit.


^- We have found an aliens on the surface of mars. Halleluyah!


We can play copy paste all day.

Its not that its longer shorter or whatever. If there is a corelation in play in statistic, there is something that need to be further explained. And as youve stated the correlation is almost 100%.

In other words its not statisticly random so it must further explained. And planets are supposedly made randomly. Right? So they should not be correlated with anything unless this "anything" is further explained.

Sorry but that Venus looks like dried up salty lake with a yellow blending. Not at all convincing. Outside of that supposedly on venus are huuuge, enourmous temperatures. Why is not the view blurred from an extreme temperature - 462 celsius degree.

[serbad]

We can play copy paste all day.

We sure can, except that one of us is pasting accepted scientific facts, and the other is posting conspiritard imagemacros.

Which one is which ?

Hmm.

Wake up!!!!
Nasa is big budget bullshit!!
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Przemax]

We can play copy paste all day.

We sure can, except that one of us is pasting accepted scientific facts, and the other is posting conspiritard imagemacros.

Which one is which ?

Hmm.

No. Just answer me why the picture is not blurred in that supposed to be venus images. The image is so still like its just some 20 degree celcius with mild breeze and fresh air. It was just an infantility on my part with that picture exchange action lol.

[AiloveYouks21]

The earth is only flat to those who don't actually know how to Google search.

[notbatman]

The earth is only flat to those who don't actually know how to Google search.

--->   https://youtu.be/HuKTENd1wTc

[notbatman]

The earth is only flat to those who don't actually know how to Google search.

Way to be intellectually dishonest. Expect no-less from you.

Thanks for supporting the baby fucking faggots and cannibals who rule the population with their massive lies, murder and faggotry.

...

Wikipedia, a completely unreliable source for finding the truth

But the case could really be about anything and still highlight a fundamental reality: Wikipedia is not the be-all, end-all source of fact and truth in the world. Regardless of its level of accuracy on the issue of yoga, the open-source website is still made up of user-composed information that is ultimately screened and censored by an army of unidentified "editors" who decide whether or not it is "accurate."

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), for example, was exposed by BBC News back in 2007 for tampering with content posted on the site. A tool known as "Wikipedia Scanner," which was hailed as being capable of identifying some of Wikipedia's user editors, revealed the CIA as an active manipulator of sensitive information. The U.S. military has also been caught editing tens of thousands of Wikipedia entries to suit its own interests.

"The sad truth about the Internet is that what started as a liberating multiplicity of informational sources has dwindled to a handful of knowledge-monopolies with Google and Wikipedia leading the pack," writes Micah White for Adbusters.org in an unrelated piece. "Wikipedia is a particularly unreliable source of knowledge and yet, because of a rumored secret-deal with Google, it ranks highly on many searches."

...

Source: http://naturalnews.com/041406_wikipedia_propaganda_disinformation.html



The only intellectual dishonesty here is from faggots like you, Google and the CIA run Wiki.

[Przemax]

Yeah including a flat earth. Why do you exclude yourself? Some part of american public believe it. Its like a bufour of safety. Child playground for non threating infantiles. Grow up people.

Insert Quote
Quote from: Przemax on January 14, 2017, 08:59:12 AM
Just answer me why the picture is not blurred in that supposed to be venus images.

The systems in Venera 13 were designed to be optimally operated, briefly, in those hostile environs.
Posted on: January 14, 2017, 06:38:16 PM Posted by: BobLawblaw

Hercules 23, Dionisius 452 + other rnd person from mythos + rnd number. Makes sense.............. not. Its highly unlikely. If I were them I would mke the pictures the most believeble not less ffs. They should keep those others pictures as well right if you have said its just for a brief moment. Show me the worse pictures or didnt happen. None of them? Oh what a pity. They need to photoshop.

[notbatman]

... Why do you exclude yourself? ...

Because my version of Flat Earth doesn't involve information from a third party.

1. Alice sends a message to Bob, which is intercepted by Mallory:
       Alice "Hi Bob, it's Alice. Give me your key." →     Mallory     Bob

2. Mallory relays this message to Bob; Bob cannot tell it is not really from Alice:
       Alice     Mallory "Hi Bob, it's Alice. Give me your key." →     Bob

3. Bob responds with his encryption key:
       Alice     Mallory     ← [Bob's key] Bob

4. Mallory replaces Bob's key with her own, and relays this to Alice, claiming that it is Bob's key:
       Alice     ← [Mallory's key] Mallory     Bob

5. Alice encrypts a message with what she believes to be Bob's key, thinking that only Bob can read it:
       Alice "Meet me at the bus stop!" [encrypted with Mallory's key] →     Mallory     Bob

6. However, because it was actually encrypted with Mallory's key, Mallory can decrypt it, read it, modify it (if desired), re-encrypt with Bob's key, and forward it to Bob:
       Alice     Mallory "Meet me at the van down by the river!" [encrypted with Bob's key] →     Bob

7.    Bob thinks that this message is a secure communication from Alice.

8.    Bob goes to the van down by the river and gets robbed by Mallory.

^{Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-in-the-middle_attack}



edit:

On a side note dude that fake picture of a terrestrial Mars with a rodent in it is a CGI composite image and the source images are from photos taken on Devon Island in Canada and that Animal is a Lemming!

See my "NASA Sucks" thread for more information! --> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=962628.0

A quote from that thread (keep in mind this was penned before I figured out the Earth was flat):

I'm seeing double!


The lemming's camouflage works on all predators including the vipers at NASA.

[Przemax]

... Why do you exclude yourself? ...

Because my version of Flat Earth doesn't involve information from a third party.

It does not involves logic as well. The only logical explanations are that the earth is convex or even more logical - concave. The only reason convex earth is semi logical is because they invent shits from an ass like dark matter and a theory of relativity. Those things does not exists but... at least a convex earth model does not contradicts itself. How flaters contradicts themself? For example they had invented a satelite of the sun to make their story logical. Kind of. But at the same time they dont believe that other satelites are real and no objects is sateliting around anything else. You've got my point? Or should I draw it?

That was just an example of this model not involving a complexity of reasoning that people above 110-120 Iq should posses. Yes it looks ok. Before you try to compare one phenomen to another. Yes taken individualy. Yes it seems ok. Flat earth is fine. Until you imply any complexity to it. Its just melt as a theory. Its impossible to exist.

Concavity of the earth you can check for yourself by doing a simple experiments. You dont have to believe any object in the sky. You can do experiments of earth. You dont have to believe that there is invisible satelite of the sun as well.

You dont have to have any degree or knowledge. all you have to know is how scientific experiment works.

[notbatman]

... Why do you exclude yourself? ...

Because my version of Flat Earth doesn't involve information from a third party.

It does not involves logic as well. The only logical explanations are that its convex or even more logical - concave. The only reason convex earth is semi logical is because they invent shits from an ass like dark matter and theory of relativity. Those things does not exists but... at least it does not contradicts itself. How flaters contradicts themself? For example they had invented a satelite of the sun to make their story logical. Kind of. But at the same time they dont believe that other satelites are real and no objects is sateliting around anything else. You've got my point? Or should I draw it?

That was just an example of this model not involving a complexity of reason that people above 110-120 Iq should posses. Yes it looks ok. Before you try to compare one phenomen to another. Yes taken individualy. Yes it seems ok. Flat earth is fine. Until you imply any complexity to it. Its just melt as a theory. Its impossible to exist.

Concavity of the earth you can check for yourself by doing a simple experiments. You dont have to believe any object in the sky. You can do experiments of earth. You dont have to believe that the there is invisible satelite of the sun as well.

You dont have to have any degree or knowledge. all you have to know is how scientific experiment works.

Dude, you can't even form proper sentences much less defend your inside-out ball Earth nonsense. Earth is not a ball or a pear or any other kind of fruit you fruit.

[BADecker]

Dude, you can't even form proper sentences much less defend your inside-out ball Earth nonsense. Earth is not a ball or a pear or any other kind of fruit you fruit.

Says someone who believes the Earth is flat !

This thread is the gift that keeps on giving lulz. Just when you think it can't get any more retarded, we now have people arguing their lunatic, fringe beliefs amongst each other !

Highly entertaining.

<eating_popcorn.gif>

Like the CIA director said...



So, they are going to keep on trying with everything, even flat earth. They are trying to judge their success, based on the number of responses to this thread.

[Przemax]

Dude, you can't even form proper sentences much less defend your inside-out ball Earth nonsense. Earth is not a ball or a pear or any other kind of fruit you fruit.

Says someone who believes the Earth is flat !

This thread is the gift that keeps on giving lulz. Just when you think it can't get any more retarded, we now have people arguing their lunatic, fringe beliefs amongst each other !

Highly entertaining.

<eating_popcorn.gif>

It does not look like he is arguing with me. He just used a rhetoric figure that Shoppenhuaer has devised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Being_Right

Im not sure if its:

31 This Is Beyond Me

or

38 Become Personal, Insulting, Rude (argumentum ad personam)

He should name what sentence I've made wrong. If he would not do that, you can be sure he had used a logical fallacy. What is a logical falacy? Its an utterly wrong argument that appear right only because it abuses the flaws in a human psychology.

But what do I expect? All of the flat earth concept is just an abuse of a human psychology.

All flat earthers have ever did was calling a sky uncomprehensible because:

a) God have made it. - its a logical fallacy of calling idem per idem. They try to explain the unknown by the unknown. It doesnt mean that stating anything about God is false. But putting a God into unlogical sentence does not make sentence right, it just makes God look ridiculous.
b) Sky is only a hologram - its fallacy of basicly the same nature as above. They wrongly assume that if something is just a refference like a computer screen you can make everything up and everything is possible. No its not possible. There are some rules even for a holographic projections.

P.S you can call me a lunatic all day. You wont scare me away by insults. The concave earth have such a bad reputation because people associate it with flat earth. Thats just a deliberate psyop.

If its quote time here are some nice ones:

"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently". Friedrich Nietzsche

"Anyone who has declared someone else to be an idiot, a bad apple, is annoyed when it turns out in the end that he isn't." Friedrich Nietzsche

[serbad]

^^^^^^
So here we got

Flat earth'ers
Ball earth'ers
Inside out ball earth'er (just one)

You are a lunatic.