I thought that this argument was pretty much settled centuries ago but as of recently, it appears as though it is still a topic that is being discussed. Share your thoughts!
This is not a problem of intelligence or knowledge, it is a problem of trust.
Flat Earthers, Creationists, et al. just don't trust scientists and people who defend scientists.
This is mostly due to either bad personal experiences with science or modern society, or education for kids raised in such families.
Reasoning with these people will get you nowhere, instead you should find the reason for which they don't trust all the sources that contradicts what he believes and why he trusts the sources he believes. Then, if possible, try to solve the underlying problem.
Jesus Christ, I am not a fucking therapist. I won't solve their daddy issues. If they can't seem to hear reason despite all the evidence, taking a contrarian attitude at every step, inventing implausible alternative explanations on the go, then that's all on them.
the problem with most people is thinking of a flat earth while still using heliocentric models and mainstream cosmology. All of that can be taken down just by questioning the contradictions of gravity and its current understanding.
When i think flat earth, i think terrarium. The earth is just a giant terrarium and space is an illusion only to be pushed by NASA and hollywood.
So essentially, when someone mentions flat earth, they are describing a massive terrarium with a magnetic center in which the sun and moon revolve in a circuit.
ask yourself how the vacuum of space doesn't suck out the atmosphere if gravity cannot be measured or is too weak so much a bird can overcome it with its muscles and the moon can affect the oceans at ground level.
ask yourself if mass comes first or gravity? is gravity predetermined?
Both "flat earthers" and "round earthers" agree that there is something that helps orientate true up and down, but "round earthers" have a much much harder time attempting to explain their model and its affects to their paradigm.
why bother with calculating rotation of the earth, curvature and moving atmosphere for flight models if it has no practicality and doesn't reflect reality?
NASA tries to push a snowball lie with pretending to discover a new planet every month, yet cannot determine how many planets our solar system has.
>Explain GPS on flat earth
GPS is land based communication. It always has been. It started as LORAN in WW2 and can be used as a backup.
"That year, Congress debated whether to retain and upgrade the LORAN-C infrastructure to become E-LORAN, a national backup to GPS. In October 2009, Congress enacted a DHS appropriations measure allowing LORAN-C termination. The Coast Guard began shutting it down in February 2010 "
" Localization may occur either via multilateration of radio signals between (several) radio towers of the network and the phone, or simply via GPS."
You do know that 99% of all communication is landbased right?
Did you know that all google maps employ high altitude spy planes? These are your real satellites that you assume are in space and are the ones that you track with apps.
Satellites you assume that are in the thermosphere do not exist and they are just truly high altitude drones and spy planes that can stay up for months and years. Satalites cannot possibly in the upper thermosphere because the solar cells used to power the machines would not work under melting temperatures because the sun heats things up.
gallium arsenide is used as a conductor for solar cells of satellites. the melting point is 1,238 °C (2,260 °F; 1,511 K). The sun heats gasses in the thermosphere to higher temperatures, therefore the solar cells would not function. This is probably why everything is land based.
the earth is not round and it is not spinning. its is a terrarium with the north pole at the center and surrounded by an ice barrier.
Can't we just put all flat earthers on some spaceship and make them see how the earth actually is? We can forget about them since they'll probably want to kill themselves and they have the entirety of space to do it
you said nothing about the toilets sperglord.
Also, I'll post it again in this thread so you can fuck off now
I have my hypothesis about you flat earthers.
Most of you are not as dumb as other people who believe in ideologies, but you still believe your shitty ideology. Why is that?
The reason has to be the following:
Most of you started to attempt universities (or college) but failed badly. Most of you started in some sciences but fucked up in the first 2 semesters. That's the reason most of mainstream science is a big fat lie for you.
>but muh memes
I have something for you: >https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jan/26/secret-success-equations-give-calculations-for-keeping-conspiracies-quiet
>Through his equations, Grimes calculated that hoax moon landings (410,000 people) would have been revealed in three years eight months, climate change fraud (405,000 people) in three years and nine months, a coverup of unsafe vaccinations (22,000) in three years and two months and a suppressed cancer cure (714,000 people) in three years and three months.
>“My results suggest that any conspiracy with over a few hundred people rapidly collapses, and big science conspiracies would not be sustainable,” he said.
That es even considering everybody is a really really good liar.
the paper is cited in the article.
>mfw i wasted time for your shit
now go fuck yourself
I think the earth was originally flat, and was sent through space and wrapped around an ocean ball planet, creating modern day earth.
The reason why all the continents fit together is because they were once part of a flat land, and later separated as they wrapped around the ocean ball.
It's also the reason for the ice age, etc. No sun nearby.. we were essentially moving around.
I just recently read about a mathematic formula that proposes that for a conspiracy to work you can't have more than X people involved otherwise the probability of someone spilling it over time approaches 100%
Like if the moon landing was really a conspiracy and with the minimum of 400 k people involved it would take 3 years tops to uncover it.
if the earth is flat
then where are the edges of the earth, and why has nobody documented them ?
and if the earth is flat, why is there sunlight on one side and not on the other side
the end :^)
To be entirely fair, the scientific world sticking to a completely incorrect interpretation of the world for decades or hundreds of years despite evidence to the contrary (even going as far as making theories which include the contradictory evidence, changing its nature to fit current ones once said contradiction is found) is pretty much how old and current science works.
That said, a simple balloon and a camera shows the curvature of the earth. Or just going to a high mountain. Confirming the roundness of earth on your own is amongst the easiest things you can go out and prove in modern science.
Anon was talking about the Coriolis Effect, and how it imparts different rotations between the north hemisphere and the south hemisphere.
It is actually a common misconception that the effect is strong enough to influence the rotation of a toilet flush. Over small distances, like the diameter of the toilet bowl, the effect is basically non existent. However, if the toilets were very very large, then the force would be significant enough to impart a consistent and strong rotation that would be very difficult to overpower.
For an example of the Coriolis Effect in reality, look at the difference in hurricane rotations north and south of the equator.
But the Thermosphere begins at around 50mi up and ends at about 1,000 miles up. GPS satellites are 12,500 miles up.
also, "The highly diluted gas in this layer can reach 2,500 °C (4,530 °F) during the day. Even though the temperature is so high, one would not feel warm in the thermosphere, because it is so near vacuum that there is not enough contact with the few atoms of gas to transfer much heat. A normal thermometer would be significantly below 0 °C (32 °F), because the energy lost by thermal radiation would exceed the energy acquired from the atmospheric gas by direct contact."
boy temperature in space is a hard thing for people to grasp. As is altitude, apparently
You see, I am all for alternative derivations and novel theories which don't quite fit current data but go to explain or expand known failures of standard ones.
But this... what the fuck is this?