Flat Earth

[notbatman]

But satellite pictures show as sphere....?

Satellites are a hoax my dear and all the pictures are faker than a reality TV show. Here's a picture taken from a weather balloon; notice two things, the horizon is perfectly flat and the hot-spot under the Sun.

Are you blind? There is curvature in that horizon!   

Time to lay off the sauce buddy the beer goggles are distorting your vision!

[the joint]

But satellite pictures show as sphere....?

Satellites are a hoax my dear and all the pictures are faker than a reality TV show. Here's a picture taken from a weather balloon; notice two things, the horizon is perfectly flat and the hot-spot under the Sun.

Are you blind? There is curvature in that horizon!  

Time to lay off the sauce buddy the beer goggles are distorting your vision!

Here's a question for you:  How would you explain the fact that, just after the sun sets, the bottom of the cloud layer becomes illuminated by the sunlight?  Specifically, how would you reconcile the fact that the sun's altitude must be below the cloud layer so as to illuminate the bottom of it with your model that claims the sun is some ~3,000 miles above a flat earth at all times, rotating in a circular orbit?

Edit: The horizon in that picture is curved, by the way.

[notbatman]

I'm starting think you guys on more than just the sauce.

...
Here's a question for you:  How would you explain the fact that, just after the sun sets, the bottom of the cloud layer becomes illuminated by the sunlight?  Specifically, how would you reconcile the fact that the sun's altitude must be below the cloud layer so as to illuminate the bottom of it with your model that claims the sun is some ~3,000 miles above a flat earth at all times, rotating in a circular orbit?
...

I crafted an image depicting just that and posted it a while back:

[the joint]

I'm starting think you guys on more than just the sauce.

...
Here's a question for you:  How would you explain the fact that, just after the sun sets, the bottom of the cloud layer becomes illuminated by the sunlight?  Specifically, how would you reconcile the fact that the sun's altitude must be below the cloud layer so as to illuminate the bottom of it with your model that claims the sun is some ~3,000 miles above a flat earth at all times, rotating in a circular orbit?
...

I crafted an image depicting just that and posted it a while back:

Comedy.

Okay, cute picture.  Now, explain to me how, when you fly in an airplane just after sunset, the top of the clouds are not illuminated (when the bottom of the cloud layer is).  I've done this multiple times.  Try it.

P.s. Thank you for highlighting the curvature with your line.  It clearly shows the assymetry of each end (compared to the middle).

[notbatman]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

[trickyriky]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

whats bugging me is, the earth allegedly spins at a thousand mile per hour, now if this was true, knowing how my sky tv works, allegedly pointed at a satellite that has to be ultra precise or you do not not get a signal, now if the earth is spinning at 1000mph or even stationary, how the hell do these satellites keep a perfect location in the sky, so millions of people can watch tv? to me the accuracy needed for satellite  must equate to these satellites being fixed, maybe even tethered

[notbatman]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

whats bugging me is, the earth allegedly spins at a thousand mile per hour, now if this was true, knowing how my sky tv works, allegedly pointed at a satellite that has to be ultra precise or you do not not get a signal, now if the earth is spinning at 1000mph or even stationary, how the hell do these satellites keep a perfect location in the sky, so millions of people can watch tv? to me the accuracy needed for satellite  must equate to these satellites being fixed, maybe even tethered

I suspect the signals are ground based and they bounce them off the ionosphere. There are several other possibilities I can think of but that seems the most likely.

[trickyriky]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

whats bugging me is, the earth allegedly spins at a thousand mile per hour, now if this was true, knowing how my sky tv works, allegedly pointed at a satellite that has to be ultra precise or you do not not get a signal, now if the earth is spinning at 1000mph or even stationary, how the hell do these satellites keep a perfect location in the sky, so millions of people can watch tv? to me the accuracy needed for satellite  must equate to these satellites being fixed, maybe even tethered

I suspect the signals are ground based and they bounce them off the ionosphere. There are sever other possibilities I can think of but that seems the most likely.

i agree, but again it kinda proves there are zero satellites in "geostationary" orbit as they allege haha, and if there are no satellites then we must be on a flat earth lol, im not saying we are, just the evidence suggests we are, im still open to physical indisputable physical evidence for sphere or hollow earth though, 3 brilliant concepts which show off reality that we are educated into a belief system  

[the joint]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

Why don't you tell me how a sun 3,000 miles in altitude illuminates the bottom of the cloud layer after sunset, but doesn't illuminate the top of the cloud layer?  Light isn't a boomerang.

[notbatman]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

Why don't you tell me how a sun 3,000 miles in altitude illuminates the bottom of the cloud layer after sunset, but doesn't illuminate the top of the cloud layer?  Light isn't a boomerang.

Pictures or it didn't happen.

[the joint]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

Why don't you tell me how a sun 3,000 miles in altitude illuminates the bottom of the cloud layer after sunset, but doesn't illuminate the top of the cloud layer?  Light isn't a boomerang.

Pictures or it didn't happen.

Oh, the incredible irony of asking for pictures.  Perfect -- ignore all photos that don't match your thinking, unquestioningly accept all photos that do, and make immediate, unreasonable demands for personal photos about scenarios that are so common and that literally thousands of people experience every single day (when a better alternative is to pull your head out of your ass).

Let's simplify it since this is apparently so difficult for you -- just after sunset, your 3,000 mile-high sun illuminates the bottom of the clouds, but not the fucking ground.  Show me your MS Paint skills for that scenario.

[notbatman]

[the joint]

But you don't trust pictures, remember? 

[exemplaar]

Why don't you two come back when you can provide some proof, any proof at all that the Earth is a spinning globe. I've provided a whole lot of evidence that it's flat and undeniable proof (Airy's failure experiment) that it's motionless. Because right you guys look like total fools trying to say there's curvature in that photo while ignoring the fact there's a hot spot under the Sun.

Why don't you tell me how a sun 3,000 miles in altitude illuminates the bottom of the cloud layer after sunset, but doesn't illuminate the top of the cloud layer?  Light isn't a boomerang.

Pictures or it didn't happen.

Oh, the incredible irony of asking for pictures.  Perfect -- ignore all photos that don't match your thinking, unquestioningly accept all photos that do, and make immediate, unreasonable demands for personal photos about scenarios that are so common and that literally thousands of people experience every single day (when a better alternative is to pull your head out of your ass).

Let's simplify it since this is apparently so difficult for you -- just after sunset, your 3,000 mile-high sun illuminates the bottom of the clouds, but not the fucking ground.  Show me your MS Paint skills for that scenario.

Maybe this could help a bit - understanding of perspective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63bK7AnWNWw

[Lifeisverystrange]

Obviously it is flat, how else would we be able to walk? I called it.

[BADecker]

Obviously it is flat, how else would we be able to walk? I called it.

No, no. I live in a valley. It's concave. I roll up one side and down the other. This is because up and down are reversed.

[tekno]

earths structure likes a baloon. its growing slowly and grounds far away between them slowly.

[notbatman]

...clip...

Maybe this could help a bit - understanding of perspective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63bK7AnWNWw

Excellent video, funny how somebody can graduate from university and never once be taught this in all those years of school.

[exemplaar]

...clip...

Maybe this could help a bit - understanding of perspective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63bK7AnWNWw

Excellent video, funny how somebody can graduate from university and never once be taught this in all those years of school.

Agreed.

Also this one is "a must watch".

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

Thanks to the uploader for his hard work.

Movement is now really gaining momentum.

[BADecker]

...clip...

Maybe this could help a bit - understanding of perspective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63bK7AnWNWw

Excellent video, funny how somebody can graduate from university and never once be taught this in all those years of school.

What's even more funny is that, in order to even understand what is being explained, because it is so different than the way the laws of science explain things about perspective, one has to become a believer in flat earth, just to understand the video.