Flat Earth

[notbatman]

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.

[philipma1957]

Laser beams have gravity and can warp the fabric of the universe

It is good to know that this is confirmed.  Gravity itself is derived from the specific fact that the content of the universe itself is not mathematical infinity but is empirical infinity which happens to be a really large number.  What that means is that all generated metrics have a natural positive attraction.  Thus a laser beam will have a positive attractive force orthogonal to its direction..
 
This is why laser light is even possible.  It is sticky along parallel generation.
 
Warping local curvature is no surprise either as the actual local 'power' of attraction must be comparatively immense.

...

The team also uncovered new effects that had never been predicted before. They found that when the beam is rotating, something strange happens – it curls the nearby spacetime, the fabric of the universe, around with it.

All this flat earth density rather than gravity is bunk.

Why?

Because there is no need or percentage in lying to us that the world is round.

Unless of course this is all a simple variation of the movie the matrix.

[—]

Its like pushing nails into butter.

Highest tides in the world happening North and South at the same time, every time

For entertainment and  a good laugh


The 10 year old classic of "reality"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62_eIsxLalA

Mirin Daja displaying the true nature of existence
(The legitimacy of his abilities was confirmed by the medical community)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFoctXxfs_A

Full 45 min Swiss Doco
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g43ABQoTedw&t=32m7s

or somewhat offtrack, Prahlad Jani "IN THE BEGINNING THERE WAS LIGHT"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jLR3KaATUM


Mandela effect

[notbatman]

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.

[xtraelv]

I'm sure you can spot 8 inches per mile squared with your naked eyes from at least a mile away.







I haven't met a flat Earther yet that has been to the Antarctic to prove this is not true.

[suchmoon]

I haven't met a flat Earther yet that has been to the Antarctic to prove this is not true.

Dude... get in line. 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.

[Astargath]

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?

[notbatman]

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.

[Astargath]

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!

[notbatman]

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/hobnOTKIjWE}



Biggest conspiracy in the history of mankind folks.

[Astargath]

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?

[notbatman]

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.

[Astargath]

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.

All the photos/videos of earth show the earth is a sphere beyond any doubt, you are delusional.

[notbatman]

.

.
^{Source: NASA Artist (contractor).}

[jackyschan91]

In fact, I see the earth flat, because I only learned from books and media that the earth was round, I have not yet proved this earth in so I am like you. Earth.

[joerogers8]

In fact, I see the earth flat, because I only learned from books and media that the earth was round, I have not yet proved this earth in so I am like you. Earth.

The fact that your open is the entire battle.  There is 600 pages of information here.  Go through it.  See who is able to prove their points with real experimentation and see who cannot.  This is a great place to start the journey from.  Nobatman has put 3 years of information into one place.  If you land on the flat earth side be careful as you will be attacked verbally and with negative trust. 

[Astargath]

.

.
^{Source: NASA Artist (contractor).}

''My point that you're being intellectually dishonest'' Says the guy quoting another guy that said they have to stitch the pictures together because most of the times they can't take full pictures of earth.



Full picture of earth from a russian satellite.

[joerogers8]

.

.
^{Source: NASA Artist (contractor).}

I'm still waiting for Vod's proof he told us he has given us of spherical earth, I can't find it anywhere in here.  Hopefully he can give us a nice experiment we can all do to prove this thing once and for all.  

I'm giving him extra time since Canada just did something correct by legalizing MaryJ.

[Nicole0102]

Not sure why there is a discussion about it here. 
To those who still believe that the Earth is flat.
Here: NASA Live: Earth Views from the Space Station
See for yourself.

[—]

Not sure why there is a discussion about it here.  
To those who still believe that the Earth is flat.
Here: NASA Live: Earth Views from the Space Station
See for yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMynLy3ienc
100% true i have seen him personally much better than just a video.

btw
like to discuss some technical details about it, like power source, power storage capacity, how much power does water purification consume, how much for heating, cooking, washing,  how much power for data transmission (average city radio station uses 100,000 watt, further reach needs transmitter tower) how does going form 1 bar pressure to vacuum work without a physical barrier (when you can explain that one your are smarter than all humans combined)