Flat earth real talk

Really? This is genuine desire to understand and no one will offer insight?

File: serveimagezjgkjz.jpg (78KB, 902x960px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 902x960px

>>18273882

File: serveimage.jpg (26KB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x225px

>>18275029

File: gsr.jpg (64KB, 500x526px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 500x526px

>>18275031

>>18275034
I think he's looking for scientific explanation not scripture

>>18275041
1. Scale of the flat earth is the same as a globe, but flat.

2. The Firmament is believed to be 100km above the ground.

3. See >>18275029

>>18275065
So please explain in scientific terms:
- Why is the winter sky different from the summer sky?
- Why is the sky in the southern emisphere different than in the northern emisphere?
- Why does the sky spin in a direction in the northern emisphere and in the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere?

File: htrbsub.jpg (80KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 720x480px

>>18275194
>Because that is how the sky works? I don't know.
>Because you are on a different location and therefore see a different part of the sky?
>I doubt that. Have you seen both yourself and compared the spinning direction?

Photos of the edge or fuck off

File: 1473972034127.jpg (32KB, 717x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 717x480px

>>18275277
There is no edge, it's a dome.
Nobody can go there.

Don't believe what people tell you about this kind of stuff, just research it for yourself.

>>18275289
If it's a dome it has an edge/perimeter, ya dingus

Photos of the dome or fuck off

>>18273882
Explain how gravity works on a flat earth without the usual cop-outs like "gravity is actually electromagnetism."

>>18275029
>>18275034
>Christian
>Blindly believes the earth is flat and claps their hands over their ears when presented with anything that conflicts with their foregone conclusion
This explains a lot, actually.

File: 2.jpg (20KB, 500x237px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 500x237px

>>18273882
Top kek op

>>18275502
"Muh density" -Flat Earthers

>>18275558
you are not going to win a medal, you fucking faggot. save your time

>>18275606
Just recognized something and it made me chuckle calm yourself

>>18273882
I've seen a bunch of bunk n junk out there. I want real science, and VSAUCE just so happened to fucking bring it. Mucho respecto hermano: https://youtu.be/VNqNnUJVcVs

The Flat Earth theory is a theory that is never-ending.

You can't disprove it via science because it claims that scientific theories like gravity are not true and only work for a globe model.

You can never know the truth unless you went up into space yourself or somehow went to Antarctica and reached the end.

File: 1473984766671.jpg (351KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 1920x1080px

I'm sorry but frivolous babble about god making a stool and deciding to put humans on it is not prompt enough for me to believe any aspect of flat-earth.

Gravity and other globe-based physics were not my questions. It was simply based on geography and light.

I'm an avid caver, well traveled, and I have been to the north and south pole.

I've seen the curvature from plane flight and no, there is no secret ice wall no one is allowed to go to or cross.

>>18275065
>1. Scale of the flat earth is the same as a globe, but flat.

I actually AM interested in this. Specifically, I would like for those adhering to a Flat Earth Theory to give an approximate distance for the circumference of the Flat Earth.

When you say the scale is the same, do I take that to mean the distance between the pole and the "southern edge" is the same as the distance between the poles on the Globe Earth?

The approx. distance between the poles on a Globe Earth (going across the surface, not through the Earth) is 20,000 km. Do you agree with this distance? If not, do you have a different distance?

The flat earth theory has made a comeback because hardcore Christians are saying that God never said in the Bible that the Earth is round, so we should not believe it anymore. Because faith trumps all. Because all of those Apollo mission photos an ISS photos are really faked.

>>18273882
If you're asking about a functioning flat earth model you're not going to find one.

>>18275005
Yup, there is about 0 scientifically valid data supporting this hypothesis.

Ignoring the fact that there are photo's

And that gravity needs to either be caused by accelleration or enough mass to form a round planet

And that you can see further from a high building which should not be the case when humans can only see 15 miles

And that human eyes capture light in the form of photon's which have to be absorbed/re -flected/fracted away by something before entering our eyes in order for us to not see something (like a wall)

And that events like pearl harbor (invasion of japan) would not have been possible due to the fact that the distance covered would be too long for planes of that time

TLDR:
we prefer to use the hypothesis/theory that requires the least ammount of assumptions

Out current theory does not require us to assumme things like wether to moon needs some sort a rocket engine to move across a solid globe covering a flat landscape

>>18273882
>but also claim the apparent "horizon" is caused by the human eye only being able to see 15 miles.
If this is true then why can I see the moon and stars even though they're millions and billions of miles away?

File: 1477587798955.jpg (3KB, 76x93px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 76x93px

>>18275031

This serious scientific infograph is bought to you by Tinkerbell.

>>18276799
WUBALUBA DUB DUBZ

>>18276867
>requires the least ammount of assumptions

lmao you have to assume far more to accept a globe than to accept a flat and stationary earth

.>>18277766
>>18277766
How so?

If I assume that gravity causes matter to attract other matter then blobs of mass will form just by beeing pulled together

I don't see how a disk would form, neither how a disk would have gravity?

If you'd add enough mass under that disk to create earth like graviy you'd put so much force due to gravity on the flat part that it would just collapse into a round shape

That's (as far as i understand) why big things like planets are round and small things like asteriods bumpy

I am curious tough, plz elaborate

>>18277785
They don't believe in gravity, only that objects fall because of their weight

>>18277788
Why is the earth not falling then?

That's like one of those planes that drop mid air to simulate weightlessness

OP its not likely that Earth is flat.

Since antiquity (ancient greeks) the prevailing scientific and mathematical beliefs show the Earth as a globe. Flat earth didn't really show up until the 19th century or so. It's commonly taught in schools that columbus believed the world to be flat but this is historically inaccurate. Dont be dumb.

>>18277788
If what you're saying is true that is

>>18277798
>>18277793
I don't believe in the flat earth theory so put your pitchforks away. I'm just pointing out that they have a bullshit excuse for everything

>>18277766
>>18277785
you assume creation has to follow whatever rules you think should be followed. you are nothing in the grand scale of things. stop trying to be smarter than existence. you aren't even smarter than me.

>>18277805
That's the fun of poking in it

New concepts to think about, thinking over different hypothesés and asking questions coming from these hypothesés

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

Check this out

>>18276867
>pearl harbor

Nigga what? The planes launched from aircraft carriers.

>>18277807
Your responding to two different peeps there,

I'm not trying to look smart, I just like to hypothesize, don't worry about it

>>18273882
>the human eye only being able to see 15 miles
How the fuck would we see stars then?
Do flat earthers believe there's stars within 15 miles of us?

>>18277832
Good point, thx!
(I'm the one whom posted that)

>>18277838
About the pearl harbor thing

>>18277836
>implying stars aren't lights on the dome

>>18277843
If that's true how come the nearer stars shift from parallax depending on the season?

>>18277847
That would actually be relatively close to the dome

Also

Where did the dome just come from?

>>18277847
The dome has several layers that don't move in perfect sync

>>18277834
>Your responding to two different peeps there

I know. and im saying you both are wrong.

the problem with discussing flat earth on /x/ is that you guise try to use science to prove or disprove it.

for all we know. earth is an ice cream cone yet we percieve it whatever way we do because reality is a humongous mindfuck that something made for fun.

>>18276785
I find it funny, that no FE guy answered this

>>18277788
>only that objects fall because of their weight
so they DO believe imn gravity

>>18277860
Prove or disprove whatever,

I'm just having fun,

I would obviously use modern day science and math when in a proffessional or impactfull context

File: Neumayer-Station-Karte.png (18KB, 330x355px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 330x355px

>>18277874
The Flat Earth Society has an answer, but last time I used that even the FE Theorists dismissed the number.

I am fine with that, but I would like to see SOMEONE who accepts this theory to attempt to answer.

To continue - if the distances reported on the globe are accurate, then we can work out an estimated circumference of the disk. I'm going to use two different numbers here, as the 20k km is from the N. Pole to the South, and the Flat Earth does not have a south pole. I will instead subtract 2000 km (approx. distance between the Neumayer station in pic and the south pole), leaving us with 18,000 km for the radius of the Earth Disk.

Geometry, then tells us the circumference of the Flat Earth - if these distances are not disputed - is approximately 113,100 km or 70,275 miles.

I would love some feedback from anyone proposing a FE Theory.

>>18277945
your problem is -like I mentioned here-


>>18277860
>discussing flat earth on /x/ is that you guise try to use science to prove or disprove it.


you will get nowhere

>>18277977
I'm not using science. I'm using geometry. And I'm not trying to prove or disprove, I'm looking at what this theory produces.

File: 20161001_014417.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>>18277982
>I'm not using science.
>I'm using geometry.
Choose one. Only one.

>I'm looking at what this theory produces.
The only thing this theory produces is, stupid threads full of idiots that try to rationalize the unknowable fucktuplery that is reality using what basic grasp of elementary school science they are lucky enough to have.

>>18277994
...you think geometry is science? You are as uneducated as they are.

>>18277999

http://euclid.trentu.ca/math/sb/misc/mathsci.html

>Mathematics is certainly a science in the broad sense of "systematic and formulated knowledge", but most people use "science" to refer only to the natural sciences.

Anything else?

>>18278021
>http://euclid.trentu.ca/math/sb/misc/mathsci.html

> Abstract: Mathematics is not a science, but there are grey areas at the fringes.

>Anything else?
No, not really.

>>18278025
joke's on you buddy.
you are applying GEOmetry to measure the planet. That is science. checkmate.

>>18278033
Geometry, of course, stemming from the roots "earth" and "measure"...

Perhaps you meant geology, which IS a science.

If the silliness is done, any feedback on the numbers?

>>18278065
people like you voting is why america is fucked.

see? I too, can ignore whatever parts of your post that dont favor me or my views and post unrelated facts instead

>>18278096
What part do you think I've ignored?

>>18278096
He's not wrong. The term "geometry" originally came from early engineers and surveyors that literally measured the earth when they were planning on building structures.

They devised a system of mathematics to do this, trigonometry, etc. And since then geometry has been simply a pure math, not science.

File: flat earther.jpg (2MB, 2340x4160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2340x4160px

>>18277945
>I would love some feedback from anyone proposing a FE Theory.
I would be surprised if you get it.
Pic related was done ages ago using number from the flat earth society and I posted it in countless FE threads and other places. NOBODY was able to answer this contradiction or refute it. The most people were doing was saying, that I didnt use the REAL numbers. Which would be a totally fine criticism IF they would provide the real numbers.
But they never do. True FE are too ignorant to care and trolls know that math is the weak spot

>>18278021
>but most people use "science" to refer only to the natural sciences
>anything else
no

>>18278229
I'm trying to be less confrontational about it. I want them to think about it for themselves, rather than just reacting negatively to the standard model. For instance, in your pic the 15,000 miles and 15 degree thing were thought up by someone.

>>18278234
I think you're agreeing with me, but it's easily explained.

A science uses the scientific process: observe, hypothesize, experiment, etc. It was formalized by Bacon, but rudimentary and proto-sciences abounded before him.

Mathematics, in general, do NOT use this method for advancement. The mathematical process is one of setting axioms for a system and deducing properties of that system.

In geometry, a line is a 1D figure with no curves that extends infinitely in two directions. This has NEVER been observed. It can't. It's an axiom. That's a line because we say that's a line. There's no arguing or testing this point. But we can use this axiom to develop proofs. And when a proof is developed, it cannot be disproven for that system.

It's a MASSIVE difference between math and science. Math has PROOFS because they are true for a system and nothing short of changing the axioms will disprove it. Science has THEORIES because there is always a chance, no matter how slim, that some new observation will contradict and disprove the current working model.

>>18278298
>For instance, in your pic the 15,000 miles and 15 degree thing were thought up by someone.
Well, the 15000miles thing yes. This is exactly what I was talking about. You cant just say "that is just made up". Well yeah, but then what is the "real" number? The flat earth has to have a certain diameter. And no, the 15 degrees follow mathematically from the basic measurements, which I conceded I am open for different suggestions.

The point is, the sun doesnt set on a flat earth

>>18278298
>I think you're agreeing with me, but it's easily explained.
I dont know why you explained this to me then. I obviously made the point that math is NOT science (and kind of mocking that other anon)
Not to be snarky tho, I am sure your post will give insights to some other anon

>>18278324
would you losers stop sucking each other's junk? no matter how much strawmanning, ad hominem, shilling, trolling, etc... you employ, fact is still fact.

applying geometry in the study of the structure of the earth IS SCIENCE.

something stupid to do on /x/ as I said before

>>18278533
If you measure the circumference of the earth with a ruler, you might be doing science. That doesn't mean rulers are science.

>>18275031
So, these fuckers can't even difference between flying around and flying straigh

File: Screenshot_2016-10-28-16-44-17.png (344KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 720x1280px

>>18278539

>>18278311
doesn't need to. can you see anything else that is 7500 miles away?

>>18278630
>doesn't need to
What do you mean? It the sun sets and rises every day.
No matter what your bullshit theory is, we can agree on the observation we make in nature and that is: the sun appears to go below the horizon/ rises from it

>>18278630
>>18278749
Oh, and yes, I can see many things that are more than 7500 miles away

File: image.jpg (487KB, 2053x2053px) Image search: [Google]

487KB, 2053x2053px

Sunsets on the flat geocentric model aren't entirely due to perspective. The ecliptic still intersects our earth plane.

The greater cosmos expanded correctly from this model is probably a super dimensional (toroidal?) structure as a whole, probably as above so below with our understanding of atomic level physics. What is below us, relatively, or in what way time space behaves along certain boundaries, is also uncertain,

Op, the greater circumference is not knowable at this time, or the nature of the South Pole itself. As far as celestial distances, they seem to be fixed on distinct layers increasing with distance from earth
Inb4 404

>>18278533
>o matter how much strawmanning, ad hominem, shilling, trolling, etc.
where did I do this? quote the words.

>applying geometry in the study of the structure of the earth IS SCIENCE
No, it isnt. But you seem mad and already made up your mind about this. Geometry is a tool. Math is a tool. Math is not science. No matter how much you repeat it, it wont become true, Your shit was already refuted, but please go on and still believe in it

>>18278763
here is your (You)

>>18278781
good point

>The sky looks like a dome to me because I see it's blue and therefore it must be equally far away from me wherever I look and the same god who invented 'up' and 'down' placed us all here with the sun and here's some selective evidence NASA shit about the bible which is something that I actually fucking believe in and feel excited about having discovered. By the way I'm retarded
>There are actual retards and schizos on the internet that defend this meme hypothetical
>The slightly brighter people who give these memespouts a chance, feeding their passion for theories (waste of fucking time and brainpower)
Good luck, I hope things turn out OK in the end

>>18278533
>applying geometry in the study of the structure of the earth IS SCIENCE.
>in the study of the structure of the earth

I'm not doing that. I have no hypothesis. I'm running no experiment. All I am doing is finding the circumference of a circle, and asking if people agree on the radius of the circle.

Do you have anything to add or are you so autistic that "geometry is a science" is a point you simply CANNOT let go?

It's common sense denying, edgy contrarion wannabe, self-righteous teenagers like you flat earth fuck-ups that make me want to leave /x/. How about you pick a different insanely obvious fact to disbelieve in? Like how breathing is essential to life. You gonna let those reptilian scientists convince you that you need to keep inhaling to live? Stay blue-pilled sheeple.

the earth is not flat, the earth is a sphere, as is obvious from all photographs taken from high altitudes/"space"

however, what the real lie is that we arent actually in an infinite region of empty-space.

we are actually in the middle of a giant hollow of a massive cave created by dwarves, this is why the universe is expanding and accelerating rather than slowing down as it logically should be, because of the gravity of the cavern walls.

>>18275512
athefag

>>18273882
>1. What is the scale of the earth under the flat earth theory? So many flat eat there say that the entire earth can be seen from stop the right mountain, but also claim the apparent "horizon" is caused by the human eye only being able to see 15 miles.
The earth is very very big. Its impossible to see curvature even from mountain height. This is from official science.

>2. How far up is our "simulated sky"? So many people say "when I go to the beach I see ships that are hundreds of miles away with the naked eye!" but same issue as the first question. Why can I see the sun and moon without a telescope? Are they really only a thirty minute drive up to reach? Why hasn't anyone tried to steal them yet if so?

general consensus is karman line maybe more. sun and moon is a debate.

>3. If the earth is a Petri dish in shape, where do cave systems go? Many have been sited as being well over 15 miles deep and from all models I've seen, the earth is shallower than the sky is high.
think french press. not petri dish. Atleast thats my understanding considering geological surveys and they do not account for curvature.

heres where you can start:
"Lying generally between the foot of a continental rise and a mid-ocean ridge, abyssal plains cover more than 50% of the Earth’s surface.[1][2] They are among the flattest, smoothest and least explored regions on Earth.[3] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyssal_plain

>>18275289
I like how you flat-Earthers enter photographs as evidence when it suits you, but disavow virtually all space-based imagery. Or even that spaceflight is real.

File: 1470091368477.jpg (40KB, 960x724px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 960x724px

>>18273882

> ...I am a scientific mind...

Flat Earth is a psy-op for the stupid.

If you are stupid, you will fall for it.

> Imma do science, me! I can accept thoughts, any thoughts, no matter how absurd.

/x/ (and /pol/) is where people go to laugh at retards that actually believe this nonsense, or to join ranks with them.

> Teach me.

Stop smoking weed and let your brain grow back.

>>18273882
>1. What is the scale of the earth under the flat earth theory?
It's fictitious, so it depends on who you talk with.

>So many flat eat there say that the entire earth can be seen from stop the right mountain, but also claim the apparent "horizon" is caused by the human eye only being able to see 15 miles.
The 15 mile distance thing is crazy talk. Take a drive to anywhere you can see mountains in the distance. Still think you need to be less than 15 miles away? I see 14,000ft Mt. Rainier from here, 60 miles away.

>2. How far up is our "simulated sky"?
Again, fiction. It will vary depending on what you're arguing and how it affects their point.

>So many people say "when I go to the beach I see ships that are hundreds of miles away with the naked eye!"
They're completely out of touch with geometry and distance. Even big mountains are hard to detect at about 100 miles - you barely see their peaks.

>but same issue as the first question. Why can I see the sun and moon without a telescope?
Becasue they're big and bright.

>Are they really only a thirty minute drive up to reach? Why hasn't anyone tried to steal them yet if so?
Well, .... again, it's made up, so it depends on who you talk to and how stupid they want to get.

Simulated sky would be what makes their model work. Star distances and sizes are measured by light wavelength and the other planets are round.

>>18279522
>under the flat earth theory

>>18276785
>20,000 km
Damn, that's a long ass measuring tape

>>18276799
Van Allen Belt

>>18277793
The Will of The Almighty
If you don't acknowledge the existence of such a being, then the whole FE probably won't make sense.

But seems a tad more believable than "i don't feel the Earth moving but people say it moves so it must"

>>18273882
Book of Enokh
"Course of the Luminaries"

May not be """scientific"""
But if your mind is open to a different perspective, it should help

If anything it's an interesting read

>>18277794
Eratosthenes was wrong

Not the first (or last time) that Scientism put all its eggs in erroneous baskets
(Einstein, Darwin)

Sounds fundy
But do your oen research on it
All of what "Science" claims to be 'science' doesn't even stand up on its own legs when you REALLY look derp into it and translate it into the physical (maybe Invisible, as well) actuality that surrounds us

>>18280874
for example?
any reasoning for your statements?

I am quite interested in the flat earth theory, there is plenty of material out there that I would consider solid proof, just one thing that I absolutely don't understand:
If NASA/the government/illuminati/the jews/reptilians or who ever it is, is responsible to spread the round earth lie, what are their motives? How could they possibly benefit from the population believing the earth is round? If they just wanna fuck with us this would seem like an oddly elaborate and costly way of doing so.

It's always NASA this and NASA that, as if we haven't known the earth is round for a thousand years.

>>18281188
maybe when they introduced it they really thought the earth is round. then they told that everyone and then in the 60s they shot something up in the sky high enough to see its flat. now what to do? tell them the truth, risk losing all credibillity and authority of all the government and scientist and everyone else with similar authority, or try to preserve status quo leting you stay in power. knowing how the politicians and all think they would choose the second one.

another theory that could be about their worship of moloch/satan. if they worship him they dont want people to worship God, but as long as the earth is flat with a dome and all its pretty hard to tell people that it wasnt made by some higher, or at least further advanced beings. so lets just say its round, floats through space with billions of other rocks just like it, and come up with a story of how that could happen someone or something starting it. the people lose faith, you can bring more and more satanism into sociaty, probably without them even knowing.

im not a flat earther, but its not hard to come up with reason of why they could do it

The earth is not flat. Pretty much everyone has known that the earth is round for thousands of years. The recent flat earth movement started as a joke but apparently some retards took it seriously. Most of the people that say the earth is flat are just fucking with you.

>>18279443
why do you keep replying if you're so sure you are right?

fuck yourself, man.

They have made us believe that we live in this massive ever expanding universe to make our lives seem pointless. Making us believe in science instead of god. It makes us easier to control, makes it easier to turn us into slaves of the system.

>>18275029
So wait, Earth is flat but we're still inside a sphere of water?

>>18281141
Like the Sun God, Ra, or the God of Lightning Thor, we who practice the NASA faith worship Buzz Aldrin.

>>18280824
Straight jacket.

>>18280846
>The Will of The Almighty
And there you have it. Never need to walk out of your yard, you know all. (Yes, I think you're stupid)

>If you don't acknowledge the existence of such a being, then the whole FE probably won't make sense.
Again, you're stupid. It is only a small group of stupid literalists who believe the Earth is flat. Almost all NASA old-timer employees have been devoutly Christian, and they most certainly don't believe the Earth is flat. It is only "special" people like you who do.

>But seems a tad more believable than "i don't feel the Earth moving but people say it moves so it must"
Only to you, because you're special. I understand your need to keep everything small so you don't get scared, so go back to your Bible and read away your life. lease don't go outside and look, and above all, don't think.

>>18280874
>Sounds fundy
>But do your oen research on it
>All of what "Science" claims to be 'science' doesn't even stand up on its own legs when you REALLY look derp into it and translate it into the physical (maybe Invisible, as well) actuality that surrounds us
Making shit up doesn't really make you sound any more reasonable or sensible. You're an idiot. It's that simple. You have no basis for that claim, other than more piled-on fantasy shit.

>>18276901
Because they are super bright

You're a dummy, a duesh, a stupid man dog. Curse your balls shit monkey

>>18284269
of course, and we all know that that figure refers to the human ability to easily see up to 15 miles in total darkness.

>>18284407
How does darkness figure into seeing distance? And have you never seen the aircraft warning lights on towers in the measurable distance more than 15 miles away?

>>18284578
I pity a person who hasn't gone outside and seen a snow-capped mountain top eighty miles away.

>>18277836
Well stars give off light. An inanimate object doesn't. So light from stars travels towards us. They are talking about our visability from eye level and how far we can see out to the horizon.

>>18275029
So you could go with a submarine in the oceans and then go up in the sky?

>>18284706
>Well stars give off light. An inanimate object doesn't.

Incidentally, this is false. All objects give off light. An object which gives off 0 light is the temperature absolute zero, and therefor doesn't exist. If it previously existed, then at the moment it reached absolute zero, it then ceased to exist.

Try again, considering the the threshold for visibility in terms of luminous intensity.

>>18284706
>Well stars give off light. An inanimate object doesn't.
Stars are inanimate objects.
It also doesnt really matter if the light is actively emmited or reflected. What matters is the brightness and wavelength(s) of the light.

>>18284758
>Stars are inanimate objects.

loooooool, it's a god damn nuclear explosion

>>18284764
Ignore my nitpick if you disagree with the semantics on that one. The maint point was the one about visibility

>>18275262
I have, I've taken long exposer shots from my home in ohio and also when I was on vacation in NZ, different constellations and the stars spun the other way.

>>18275262
obviously the kraut liked outer space, all he wanted to do was launch a moon rocket for most of his life

>>18275289
that's the ross Ice shelf, it doesn't encircle the continent, ive been to antarctica on a cruise, pretty cold and boring.

>>18275837
If antarctica was the edge why is a circumnavigatory journey across the southern ocean similar in length to one across the arctic ocean? If the earth was flat it would take years.

>>18277832
retaliatory bombers were launched from a US pacific airbase and attacked the home islands

>>18281753
Sure I'm right about WHAT??

All I've asked is if people agree with the distances I noted. NOT A SINGLE FLAT EARTH PERSON HAS RESPONDED DEFINITIVELY.

So let me ask again: does anyone who asserts a Flat Earth agree that the distance from the Central Axis to the Outer Edge is approx. 18,000-20,000 km? If you do not, what is the distance between these points? Or as a last ditch effort - is there ANY measured distance on Earth you agree with?

>>18277982
>>18277994
>>18277999
>>18278021
>>18278025
>>18278033
>>18278065
holy fuck you are both stupid, science and math are both reason. Which is something you both (as well as the FE fucktards) clearly lack

>>18278757
>as above so below

only because our primitive brains are designed to pattern match. Let me know when astronomers find probability waves in the CMBG.

>>18279469
it's always the fucking dwarves, digging to deep, drinking all the alcohol, why cant they leave us alone?

>>18285110
Except neither of us were discussing what category both science and math fall under. We were discussing whether math was a science. It's like two people talking about whether oranges and lemons are the same thing, then you came along and shouted "they're both fruits!"

Also, you're wrong. Math is logic based, but science is NOT. Science is logical, but it is based off of empirical observation. If observation and logic disagree, science sides with observation. If this were not true, we never would have QM filled with things like superposition.

>>18280824
there are three of them and they are not spherical. Try again.

>>18280866
literalist scum

Damn good work /x/ I was expecting the flat earthers to be out in force but we did a good job proving them wrong.

>>18273882
Wait
Are there actually people in this thread, who are serious with this shit?
1.Go to your faucet
2. Turn it on
3. Turn it of slowly
4. See drops falling down.
5. Think about which form the drops and everyfucking thing take when exposed to greater force.
6. You realize it's a sphere
7. You realize that a plate can't have a rotating core made out of iron with gigantic crystaline iron tornadoes creating a magnetic field, which protects you from solar wind.

1.Go to Nasa TV
2.Satellite
3. Get the date
4.See what the weather was at three different spots on earth that you can see on stream on said date.
5 look at weather reports.
5. Be enlightened

1.Read a 6th. grade physics book.

>>18285198
all lies propogated by NASA, you've let them influence you to the point where you cant even see the truth with your own eyes! Dont belive me? Try to fly a plane across antarctica and see what happens.

>>18285247
Bait is too obvious. Shoukdn't have taken such a standard argument.

File: contrail_nick_guy_masonville_co_30dec2013.jpg (935KB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

935KB, 3264x1840px

Contrails prove a flat earth. Jetliners maintain the same altitude over long distances, yet the contrails are perfectly straight instead of going in a slight arc.
Ships seem to disappear behind the horizon after a couple of miles, but that is an optical illusion. You see the light reflecting from the object, not the object itself.
Space travel and the infinite material universe is a fabrication of lunatics.

>>18285060
and he did it. The absolute madman

File: howamisupposedtocrashthisplane.png (10KB, 961x530px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 961x530px

>>18285272
Kek
this """argument""" always cracks me up. I cant even imagine how many misconceptions go into this ass backward conclusion

File: Straight_Line.jpg (1MB, 3264x1840px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x1840px

>>18285272

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nB7HgA49UBA

>>18275289
Obvious shoop is obvious

>>18285272
>contrails are perfectly straight

They aren't. You can see them curve overhead.

Https://youtube.com/watch?v=St4W3RBK1Wo

>>18285315
Nice rebuttal

>>18285326
>he can't tell which part is being distorted by the wind
Kek. Go look at more images to get a better picture, or alter just look at the sky once in a while.

File: 1427231086861.png (331KB, 499x403px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 499x403px

>>18273882
This guys videos are very thorough and he explains pretty much everything if you look for it
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmiAycMDMUDPGSb40Ry8kKmTWUh4DCfwf

>>18285379
>rebuttal
Against what exactly? I am not going to explain you how the atmosphere is not static or how planes dont fly in a perfectly straight line or all the other reasons why your line of thought is retarded

Here's an issue: The explanation for why things fall to the Earth without gravity is always that the Flat Earth is accelerating upwards at 9.81 m/s.

This is a problem, of course, because if Earth has been accelerating at this rate for the Young Earth Creationist model of time (there's a lot of overlap in the communities I've noticed), means that the Earth and everything on it is currently hurtling through space at an upwards velocity of 1.8 x 10^12 meters per second and still accelerating at an even pace. Which means that the Earth is currently travelling through space several thousand times faster than a beam of light.

>>18285379
Mmm no.

I've got a better idea; you find me a picture of a contrail that actually is straight. Find me that perfect picture with the ideal atmospheric conditions, with a resolution high enough to differentiate the curvature of a 6371km radius sphere, compared to a whatever-geometry the Flat Earth is supposed to be. How does that sound?

>>18285556
That's not how relativity works.

You can theoretically accelerate in the same direction for an infinite amount of time. It's just that the size of space shrinks while you do this. But, there's nothing stopping you from supplying energy to a linear thruster for an indeterminate amount of time. That would in itself violate locality, since you could just calculate the misfire of the thruster system to measure the relative velocity of any arbitrary set of objects, which obviously doesn't happen.

>>18285272
>Space travel and the infinite material universe is a fabrication of lunatics.
That made my day

File: nah man i haven't smoked today.png (102KB, 353x313px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 353x313px

>For hundreds of years the elites of society have been concocting a completely false but logically consistent and mathematically sound model of a fictitious universe that is completely opposite to the way the real universe works but in a way which is not easy for your average joe to prove or disprove but which seems to handily explain every falsifiable event in the natural world, often with stunning accuracy even after the 'fake' mathematical or scientific prediction is made
>Create a false model of the world and present it to the people ignorant of it, even though your conspiracy must include a vast amount of millions of mathematicians, geologists, pilots, aerospace engineers, meteorologists, astronomists, any sort of space, math or science enthusiast, ship crews, cartographers, physicists, every member of every government or military, and people who travel a lot, who must never let out the truth and must in fact operate in a roundabout way to avoid accidentally revealing that the Earth is in fact not flat
>So that you can sell Star Wars action figures one day and funnel that money into pointless rocketry programs


yeah sure sounds legit

>>18285556
Nope. That wouldnt happen. Not even a FE and there is a shit ton of problem with the acceleration bullshit. But you wouldnt just accelerate to a velocity several thousand times faster than a beam of light. You wouldnt even reach c

File: atlas_29.jpg (33KB, 300x255px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 300x255px

>>18273882
This was settled thousands of years ago, are christcucks trying to trick people into thinking it's flat again?

>>18273882


Stop playing so much minecraft.

File: flat earth.jpg (12KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 225x225px

I'm genuinely curious about FE theory. I always want to know more about this model.

What is the Sun made of? Where does it get its energy from?

What is the Moon made of?

What is keeping these bodies afloat in the air?

What is moving these bodies through the air in predictable patterns?

What do these bodies not succumb to atmospheric friction, unlike everything else we observe on Earth?

What occurs during a solar eclipse?

What occurs during a lunar eclipse?

If there is no horizon, what is stopping the Sun's light from reaching us at night?

If there is not horizon, how can the Sun light the Moon in predictable patterns, yet it does not light to Earth?

What force is pushing dense objects towards the Earth?

If this force is gravity, why is it evenly distributed along the flat Earth?

>>18285109
anyone?

>>18273882
Flat Earth Theory is 100% provably bullshit. If the earth was flat, a weather balloon would be able to see the sun 24/7, since you would have no obstructions, but you obviously can't see the sun in Maine when its over Australia.

>>18276785
>>18278229
>>18286639

Flat earthers? Please answer these
Seems like you are not so confident when it comes to outlining your own theory.

>>18286639
>I'm genuinely curious about FE theory. I always want to know more about this model.
It isn't a theory, and it isn't a model. It's not even a hypothesis. It's just a narrative.

File: flat earth muller.png (100KB, 599x1082px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 599x1082px

>>18288254
I know, but its still neat

>>18277876
Not if you asked one of them.

There are so many logical loops in the FE theory that if you tied a string to their train of thought it would form a Gordian knot in under ten seconds.

>>18288264
This guy sounds like a condescending tool.

Why do Flat Earthers always rush to Bible and magical explanations, when we might as well be on a generation ship like the Whorl from Gene Wolfe's books?

Which would explain the Bible AND Ancient Aliens at the same time.

but i never get a response for this

>>18289237
It's also a pathetic argument, though I doubt he is trying to actually use that argument. If you're going to be so self-centeredly boorish, you might as well keep going like Descartes and doubt any tool-assisted experiment (how do YOU know thermometers and rulers give accurate information?), then doubt your own senses (how do YOU know what you see is what is actually there?), then doubt absolutely everything but doubt itself.

At which point the discussion breaks down. Why are you talking about things you aren't certain exist with people who might be hallucinations?

>>18289263
Flat Earthers have no positive information of their own. They only make REALLY bad attempts to contradict established information. Once they have to build something up, they realize they don't have any tools to do so so they rush to whatever Absolute Authority they know.

Which is HIGHLY ironic considering almost every argument against NASA, photographs, telemetry, ship logs, GPS, surveyor data, etc. is that they are appealing to authority.

>>18284764
Well if you're going to nitpick, active stars are not nuclear explosions. They're fusion reactors. "Dead" stars shine with latent heat.

>>18275262
>Have you seen both yourself and compared the spinning direction?
What difference would it make if he had? It's not like you'd accept anyone's word anyway. You're not here to learn or consider. You're here to lie your way into convincing yourself that your Bible interpretation is holy and correct. You're shutting yourself off from teh universe. You're pitiful.

>>18285089
Dude, what are you smoking?

>>18286639
>. I always want to know more about this model.
It's not a model. It's the result of an interpretation of a couple of sparse references that have been interpreted through at least two languages and then some Charlatan pastor decided he'd be a hero by coming up with this idiocy. Now it's one lie on top of another.

>>18273882
>So why if I can see the sky, which must be lower than my 15 mile range of vision, can cave explorers go deeper than 15 miles
>So many people say "when I go to the beach I see ships that are hundreds of miles away with the naked eye!"

this is so retarded i dont even know what to say

>>18285272
>the cointrail is straight
>shows a contrail no more than 2km in lenght
try again

>>18285089
If you're talking about the initial Doolittle raid, those were light bombers launched from carrier decks.

If you're talking about later in the war, the U.S.'s "island hopping" campaign brought it to islands like Okinawa and Tinian, which were close enough to support bombing strikes from air fields.

File: peters map.png (61KB, 1204x796px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 1204x796px

>>18289585
Don't forget to look at the size of Australia on that map. Here is a map that is most accurate to land area.

File: kondensstreifen_1458216714.jpg (45KB, 640x425px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x425px

>>18289780

File: Copy-20of-20a5.jpg (28KB, 572x322px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 572x322px

>>18289780
>

File: ob_aefd8d_p1120994-2.jpg (279KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 800x450px

>>18289780
>>

File: 549541265.jpg (218KB, 1024x639px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1024x639px

>>18289780
>>>

File: max_image_view-d1ca4c701df44f65b59f964e1a562123.jpg (50KB, 994x559px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 994x559px

>>18289780
>>>>

File: kondensstreifen-cirrus-4e1bf33c-aaeb-4658-9848-e05eb0cc5dea.jpg (35KB, 579x400px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 579x400px

>>18289780
>>>>>

>>18291074
do you understand that contrails arent static objects and that even if they were that and appear straight, that it wouldnt disprove "round earth"? Do you have a sense for scale?

>>18291073
>>18291069
these r obviously curved

>>18291065
>>18291067
>>18291071
>>18291074
>image appears straight
>photo taken with curved lens

guess what that means for the original? fucking retard, just shot yourself in the foot

>>18291159
>ship disappears behind the horizon after a couple of kilometers
>"look! this proves that the earth is a sphere!"
>contrails of jetliners go on for a much greater distance, straight as a ruler
>"d-do you have a sense for scale?"

>>18291163
lay off your mad and just accept your defeat

>>18291272
do you?
it seems like you dont

>>18291272
a jet liner dissappears later behind the horizon than a ship because of its altitude

>>18275620
Dont listen to them anon, it was funny

>>18291272
The dropoff speed behind the horizon is 8 inches per mile squared. If a plane in 40,000 feet in the air. It would take √ (40,000/8) for it to disappear.

The plane would disappear when it was roughly 71 miles away from you, as opposed to the ship which starts to disappear when its 3-4 miles away from you.

Do you understand now what people mean by a sense of scale?

Flat earther here. Ask me nothing.

>>18287286
Your arguement uses the assumption that you know the true nature and speed of light. On the flat earth, light isn't infinite and it bends gradually
See >>18285465 please

>>18291627
I live about 5 miles from an airport and the planes disappear very soon after flying over the sky.

>>18292429
thats not an assumption. We have theories about the behavior of light that can be proven ann its predictions can be reproduced in experiments.

A youtube video is not a very good source of information and saying it bends "somehow" away and "isnt infinite" is totally besides the point and doesnt explain why we cant see things very far away on the FE: It is merely dodging the problem by dropping buzzwords

>>18292478
maybe it is because you only live 5miles from an airport

>>18285465
He doesn't explain anything and just makes up random bullshit.

At one point he takes a toilet paper roll and cuts it at an angle and calls it a cone. Even though it's still a cylinder.

>>18292478
those plains are not 40,000 feet in the air

>>18277843
Are you retarded? Look up red shift and blue shift.

>>18273882
Yes, people his stupid are voting for Trump.
/thread

>>18285060
Decades after his death and still, there has been no significant technological leap from his rocket fuel fueled rockets

>>18277843
then how do you explain parallax?

File: FE.png (20KB, 1037x810px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 1037x810px

>>18291627

>>18291272
Don't reply, they just make up whatever narrative suits their lies

>>18293674

No u r stupid

>>18294016
>what you should see
Nope. thats not expected based on the "globe earth model". You are basically strawmanning. Do the math and you will see, that the arc is so shallow, that it is almost impossible to recognize with the naked eye.
All this is of course ignoring the fact, that contrails are absolutely useless for this sort of observation

>>18294016
I will take that as a "no" to the question "do you have a sense of scale".

>>18294016
>flat earthers are this retarded
Do you have any idea why a ship can get from Europe to New York faster if its route is curved to the North? If the Earth was flat, that wouldn't make any sense.

>>18294302
>>18294016
Tbh it isn't "faster if it's curved to the north," it just shows you a southward curve or northward curve because it's a flat fucking map on a round earth.

File: image.jpg (327KB, 1600x786px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 1600x786px

>>18294310
Pic

File: air routes.jpg (56KB, 560x424px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 560x424px

>>18294312
>all those routes avoiding the mid-east
looool

At least use an image where flights aren't avoiding sand people with SAMs.

File: nasasnake.jpg (430KB, 1167x686px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1167x686px

>Trusting a company with this logo

>>18294532
>trusting NASA

NASA was created in the mid 20th century. People have known about the round earth a lot longer than that.

also

>you can tell whether or not an administration is lying based on their logo

That should make things very simple then, right?

>>18281141
A lot of old religions got something wrong? I'm shocked.

>>18294532
great argument. I am actually amazed

File: nasa2.jpg (82KB, 960x668px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x668px

>>18294554
>NASA was created in the mid 20th century. People have known about the round earth a lot longer than that.
Who is keeping the lie alive?
>you can tell whether or not an administration is lying based on their logo
not even responding to that, fuck off, nasa, you've been found out.

>>18294612
kek

>>18294532
>company
Heh.

>>18294612
I've always thought one should strive to be more like god. Nice goal.
Wtf I love NASA now

>>18294612
>that's a lie

Which part? That NASA's only been around a little while, or people didn't think the earth was round before NASA?

>I won't respond to the logical conclusion of my own argument

Yeah, it was a pretty stupid argument.

File: nasa3.png (404KB, 599x470px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 599x470px

>>18294626
>company
What is it then? English is not my first language, forgive me.
>I've always thought one should strive to be more like god. Nice goal.
What do you even mean by this?
You realize this speaks about Lucifer?

>>18294661
>this speaks about Lucifer
who strives to be like god. Do you even read your own shitty pics?

File: nasa4.jpg (88KB, 1100x600px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1100x600px

>>18294656
Q: Who is keeping the lie (that the earth is round) alive?
A: NASA
>you can tell whether or not an administration is lying based on their logo
The phrase "speaks with a forked tongue" means to deliberately say one thing and mean another or, to be hypocritical, or act in a duplicitous manner. In the longstanding tradition of many Native American tribes, "speaking with a forked tongue" has meant lying, and a person was no longer considered worthy of trust, once he had been shown to "speak with a forked tongue".
If they don't lie, it's the worst choice of a logo, ever.

>>18294678
But it's only a forked tongue when you shoop in the snake. By your own argument, nobody should trust you because you made it a forked tongue.

Also, people have known the earth was round for 3,000 years.

>what is it then

An administration. It's even in the name.

>>18294678
So you your argument is indeed based on the logo. Holy fucking shit, this is a new low. Even for flatearthers.

Pretty sure I can somehow implement the logo on a cock. GAY CLUB CONFIRMED

File: enthusiastic.jpg (212KB, 1268x1695px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1268x1695px

>>18294678
Wait in a minute. That means that 4chan actually brings me luck! No doubt about it. Solid logic! Logo says it all!

File: 1432919733001.jpg (21KB, 331x380px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 331x380px

>>18294684
>But it's only a forked tongue when you shoop in the snake. By your own argument, nobody should trust you because you made it a forked tongue.
There's no point in arguing with you, try to summen a sucky bus or something.

>>18279469
Its actually not a sphere, Neil Disgrace Tyson says it's pear shaped. Take the tinfoil off its making you deluded.

>>18281141
>Hindu
I think you mean Terry Pratchett.

>>18294704
>There's no point in arguing
because you have no arguments?
Well, we had a good laugh snake-boy

>>18294704
There's no point in arguing with me because I'm right and you're wrong, and nothing you can say will change that.

>>18286209
Not even Christians, at least not exclusively. Just general stupid people.

>>18289585
>South Celestial Pole
>SCP
And that doesn't make you the least bit suspicious?

>>18293674
Not even Trump believes in Flat Earth.

I mean, that said, I don't know for sure. He just seems like an idiot, but not that much of an idiot.

>>18294661
It's a government agency, paid for by tax dollars.

>You realize this speaks about Lucifer
And Lucifer had a reason to be pissed off. If we assume he is real and was a far superior being to us, it would be reasonable for him to be upset by being placed second-best by his father. Perhaps a little selfish, but God could have handled that a bit better, knowing how Lucy would obviously react.

But still, Lucifer was very much like god in most respects, except perhaps not as apt to throw people into a supposed lake of eternal anguish.

>>18294792
He thinks vaccines cause autism and global warming is just a conspiracy made up by China to trick the US into reducing pollution.

So if he's not a flat earther, it doesn't matter much.

>>18294704
Why would I summon a sucky bus? There's a perfectly good bus that comes through this way every other hour.

File: scott kelly iss hurricane patricia.jpg (82KB, 1023x681px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1023x681px

You flat earthers do realize there are other space agencies than NASA, right? Are you seriously implying NASA, Space X, CNSA (China), RFSA (Russia), and the countless other agencies are all in on a big practical joke?

Also, a shitton of people have crossed Antarctica. FE has been debunked a million times over.

Main question: If you got to sit in a space plane or rocket and sent up to the sky high enough to see the earth with your own eyes, would you believe it? Chances are it'll be somewhat affordable within our lifetime. I just wonder if you would just say "it's just a simulation I'm not really in a real rocket", but that's just how I see you guys... What will it take for you to give up on this FE nonsense?

>>18294857
>What will it take for you to give up on this FE nonsense?
They never will. People like that are so dedicated to their misconception that they have mastered the art of goalpost-shifting.

>>18293674
>>18294792
>>18294801
Nice shilling! Will vote for her now!

>>18275029
I like the version with the turtle better.

>>18295003
>Nice shilling!

WTF I hate Hillary now!

File: deliriousbiznasty.gif (3KB, 90x104px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 90x104px

>>18294803
rekt

File: questioning elf man.jpg (8KB, 250x249px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 250x249px

>>18294678
If the goal of NASA was to trick people, why would they advertise this in their logo

>>18295144
It's so they can hide in plain sight. So only true geniuses like anon can figure it out.

>>18295144
WOULD YOU STOP ASKING QUESTIONS THAT DON'T PROMOTE THEIR NARATIVE PLEASE?

FUCKING SHILLS

>>18285066
why didn't you look for the entrance to the hollow earth

Soon you'll be able to book flights to the stratosphere and see the curvature of the world , but then they'll say the windows are actually tvs lmao.

>>18295924
Who says he didn't?

>>18279483
Makes more sense than believing a magic bearded man in the sky created the universe you fucking tool.

How to prove a flat earth exists, by me

Build a plane, not buy. That way the loominati can't fuck with you

Starting in California, fly towards China, but don't land keep going.

In flat earthopia, you will hit the wall and die

In round earth land, you will end up on the east coast

Get back to me.

>>18299241
Zeus didn't create the universe

>>18299250
You're thinking of the wrong mythology. That's neogreek paganism.

Although within that context you are correct, Zeus is not said to have created the universe.

>>18299246
You're gonna run out of fuel if you try that, on a flat earth or a round one.

>>18301597
Zeus didn't create the universe or earth in the original greek myths either.

He's the grandson of the earth.

>>18301709
>what is reading comprehension
>>18301597
>Although within that context you are correct, Zeus is not said to have created the universe.

>>18275502
Or "gravity is God's love holding you down"

>>18275558
Lol! Some truth here, and im a tgirl

>>18275837
You can and soon we will even more with commercial space travel.

File: just to get your attention.jpg (81KB, 427x640px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 427x640px

Knowing the earth is not a globe I can attest that there is something making things having a true up and down in nature or buoyancy and density. so gravity isn't entirely written off, but it certainly doesn't make sense on a globe model. We will call it gravity but it isn't an actual thing but an orientation, a concept.

I KNOW the earth is stationary and not moving up and anyone who points that out as a flat earth belief is naive to the subject and doing a disservice to people who want to look into it.

Now the most or current sources of today in flat earth concepts that seem to have explanations readily available is Eric Dubay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-lT2EZJ69E

>>18302137
what force is pushing denser things downwards?
what is causing this force?
why does this force not affect the sun or the moon?

>>18302152
>what force is pushing denser things downwards?
i dont know.

>what is causing this force?
I do not know. the fact that everything you see before you has taken form as separate material objects (a rock is vastly different from a tree) and your cells in the body works under specific direction suggests that nothing is truly random.

>why does this force not affect the sun or the moon?
how is it that if we are told that large bodies of mass attract other masses lesser than it, why doesn't the earth crash into the sun if the sun is many time larger.

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

File: wateriss.jpg (168KB, 1700x1161px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1700x1161px

>>18302250
>Why doesn't the earth fall into the sun

It is being pulled towards the sun. It's also moving sideways. So it's constantly falling down, and also missing the sun. This is called an "orbit."

In your video, gravity is pulling on both the air and the balloons. Because the air is denser, it's pulling on the air more, so the balloons go up. They'll keep going up until they're the same density as the air, and then gravity keeps them in place.

If you remove gravity from the equation, then density doesn't affect anything. Pic related. The water is denser than the air surrounding it. How come it's not falling down relative to the air? What happened to the force of density? Oh, that's right. There's no such thing as the force of density. It's floating in air because gravity has been removed from the system.

>>18302137
>Polaris can be seen from 23.5 degrees south latitude

Nope. Polaris disappears at the horizon on the equator. Dubay has gotten 23.5 from the tilt of the earth, but that has nothing to do with Polaris, as it's aligned with the earth's pole, not the plane of the ecliptic.

Polaris is directly over head at the north pole, on the horizon at the equator, and disappears from view south of the equator. This is proof of a round earth.

>>18302408
that picture was taken aboard a dc-9 aircraft with a max altitude of 37,100 feet doing "zero g" maneuvers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTqLQO3L4Ko

>>18302415
>on the horizon at the equator, and disappears from view south of the equator. This is proof of a round earth.

just means that the further you go south the more the orientation of the north star is towards the vanishing point of the horizon. Much like a street light on a level road that appears on the ground when viewed from far away.

>>18302468
The street light would appear to get closer to the horizon. It would not disappear unless the earth is curved. Stars do not disappear unless there is an object which comes within line-of-sight.

>>18302446
Doesn't matter if it were on an airplane or an ISS. The effects of gravity are removed from the system, and the water floats in the air, despite being denser.

Apparently you've taken an argument meant to "debunk" the International Space Station, and applied it to your misunderstanding of gravity, without realizing it was moot.

Also, no, that's Clay Anderson aboard the ISS, with ISS cabinetry in the background, April 2010.

Nice grasping at straws though.

>>18302604
>It would not disappear unless the earth is curved.
Thats what they thought about boats sinking in the horizon. turns out that's not the case.

>The effects of gravity are removed from the system, and the water floats in the air, despite being denser.

if the effects of gravity are removed on an airplane doing parabolic turns at high altitude then its likely a concept to explain a round earth rather than an actual force with the power to keep millions of tons of water and earth sticking but birds, which are multiple times lighter, to fly in the air with ease. Much like how water simulates "space". The suns gravity should have stripped the earth of its atmosphere if gravity where true.

debunked your argument. look at the water at minute mark 4:18.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQbAwE83phk

>>18302767
Do you have an estimate for the circumference of the Flat Earth? Do you agree that the distance between the central axis and the outer edge is about 20,000km?

If you have no answer, do you find it odd that in all the history of the Flat Earth Theory, not one proponent has given testable measurements of the distances on Earth?

>>18302415
Not quite the equator. There is a band extending above and below the equator where one could see the north star in winter/summer and the southern cross in the opposite season.

>>18302839
>not one proponent has given testable measurements of the distances on Earth?
if you wanted to hide land maybe.

>>18302938
What?? Who's hiding land? What does that have to do with distances?

I'll take a stab at understanding you; do you mean Globe Earthers are hiding land with a fake distance of 20,000km? Following this, the distance from the pole to the "coast of antarctica" is roughly 2000km. Do you accept the distance as around 18,000km?

IF NOT, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER MEASUREMENT????

Seriously, it's like you actively don't want to know the world you live on.

I really do not believe in the flat earth for various reasons, but as to how gravity works I think i have one possible explanation. If the earth is a dome surrounded by water then either A. We are at the base of whatever is holding the water in place. B. We have achieved a perfect bouyancey where we neither sink nor float at a great amount to where we could notice it.

The whole reason I don't believe in "flat earth" is because our eyes have convex lenses. So flat is just in our perception.

>>18303012
The UN is hiding land. And people.

>>18303088
You didn't come anywhere close to the question.

What is the distance from the central axis to the outer edge?

>>18303054
A - without gravity, how does the base hold the water in place? How does this cause my pencil to fall to the floor?

B - how does buoyancy make sense without gravity? Why would we float or sink if our buoyancy weren't perfect?

>>18302767
>if the effects of gravity aren't removed.

Gravity isn't removed, it's only removed with respect to the other objects. They're all falling.

>millions of tons of water sticking to earth

You just said it yourself, the water weighs millions of tons. You'd expect something that weighs millions of tons to just float away?

>birds can fly

Yes, because birds don't weigh millions of tons. Birds weigh very little, which is why it takes little force to lift them into the air.

>the sun's gravity should have stripped the earth of its atmosphere if gravity is true

The sun's gravity is indeed pulling on the earth's atmosphere. The earth's atmosphere is in orbit around the sun, same as everything else. If the sun weren't pulling on the earth's atmosphere, the atmosphere, and earth itself, would go flying off into space.

>look at the water at 4:18

I see the water going in all sorts of directions, which debunks your "density" theory.

>>18303088
The U.N. will tell you how big the world is, its circumference, and where everybody is. Flat earthers cannot do this.

>The U.N. is hiding land and people

show evidence of this.

>>18303190
Ok. search for Admiral Byrd on youtube. Look up the gleastons map. Take note how the UN symbol is itself a flat earth.

But before you do all that, let me say this to you. The more you try to fight the truth, the more you're just going to ignore it's simplest most beautiful features.

Good luck!

>>18303169

Because theres gravity outside of our dome! In the idea that this is all real, it's more of a fun speculation I dont think you even fully read my post.

In the beginning, "Lower Earth Island" is a ranking subsidiary account for Common Language. Sane Agency is emboldened and kept public beyond other sources, so as to suppress the United Nations by running directing the codes wholly object and strategically characterized in its predecessors and its main dignity and a quality world into the expanses of faith by bought dune leaving missionaries along with fellow Multi American Associations presided by earlier Swiss defense votes, besides conventions, and the new location of the Jerusalem Board. As with fixed surveys of the English language or ethnically-consumed places. Surfaces also served as the most populous nucleus to manify the northern coast; in some manifolds, our own climate (built). They are only dense in indication of the empirical time, or simply at every state of health. This technique, in Turanian follow up to different types of phenomena, would suggest differential of the same known as Generally nasaline, switch and lu beam. At each state of understanding the scent system is admitted from the subservient system, whereas the Glider C prescriptions informed but partially identified the decision of air passenger tankemete that can only direct and maximise T&T services needed to enable the use of executive and strategic planes with cardiors, catering to take an electronic way, mutually in projectile research from the MPCs (that differ). They define systems toasteris to the result with a perspective, under twenty-four samples of rheotropinology is absolutely considered, the distinction between Einstein's logical tabulation, relative vibration to use a rock block on the nearby version.

File: wpff6575c8_06[1].png (300KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 600x450px

Concave earth was here, flat earth is a loser.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYt55SzcnQs

>>18303208
You haven't explained anything about how gravity works. What's the difference between the gravity in the dome and outside? Why are you introducing unobserved and unnecessary complications?

File: image001.gif (14KB, 270x261px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 270x261px

>>18303203
the symbol for the UN is a world map because it shows all the countries on earth at once in a 2d space, something you cannot do with a globe, thus the existence of maps.

As a cartographer by trade and geospatial engineer by profession I feel the need to say that the flat earth theory can be debunked by the following.

1. we can measure the parameters of countries and of the world, however there is no way to incorporate that in a 2d environment without distortion, implying that a 3rd dimension must exist.

2. I have helped launch satellite and been involved closely with LiDAR data collection, as have almost anybody from any government agency or private sector who works with Geodosy, cartography, geomatics, and geospatial engineering. This applies to any government agency (literally any, agriculture, statistics, military, education, etc... all use GIS data regularly) from any government in the first world, as well as thousands of private industry ranging from forestry, to mining, to surveying, to engineering firms.

>>18301955
Okay, granted. However, you can't disprove it to someone who believes it's true because they refuse to acknowledge any evidence to the contrary.

>>18273882
dude there is no 15 mile deep cave systems that's full retarded.

>>18302152
I am going to answer these questions as if I am a flat earther, but for the record, I'm not actually a flat earther.

>what force is pushing denser things downwards?
Density.

>what is causing this force?
*cricket sounds*

>why does this force not affect the sun or the moon?
>believing in the sun and moon

>>18304324
Density doesn't explain why Styrofoam falls at the same rate as lead.

>>18275031

I'm not a flat-earther. But, their most compelling argument is the flight paths one. https://www.flightradar24.com

Find flights from U.S/Canada to Europe or vis-versa. Fucking pure chaos. Let's fly North over Greenland, don't stop, then back down into Europe. If you look at a flat-earth map, it makes sense. I don't like that it makes sense.

>>18304350
It makes perfect sense on a sphere if you understand geometry. The geometry of the great circle is exactly why the path looks straight on a flat, polar projection.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great-circle_navigation

For shorter distances like NY to Paris, you'll notice plenty of direct flights as following the great circle wouldn't noticeably improve flight time.

>>18304384

Fuck. Thank you. That was the last piece of flat-earther BS I couldn't get passed.

>>18303203
I've looked up Admiral Byrd. He's got fuck all to do with the flat earth. Admiral Byrd went to the south pole and Antarctica, which debunks both the flat earth and the Gleason map. The U.N. logo is not a map of the earth, just a logo. Much of the earth isn't even on the U.N. logo. Yes, it's flat. Most logos are flat.

>The more you try to fight the truth, the more you're just going to ignore it's simplest most beautiful features.

right back at you.

>>18302250
If you don't know, then why do you disbelieve the warping spacetime explanation of gravity?

>>18302446
it wouldn't make a difference if it was

Things in orbit aren't actually weightless. They're just falling at a speed equal to their lateral movement, giving the appearance of weightlessness.

>>18277843
>2016
>having never used a telescope

File: elec11.jpg (27KB, 300x271px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 300x271px

>>18273882

As above, so below.

I understand many flat earthers are not going to agree what I have to say, but I believe it as the truth for myself. I thought I'd chime in on this.

The Earth is not flat, but it's not a ball either. There's alot of weird physics I could go into, but it's not the traditional "gravity" which bends space. We live on a plane formed very similarly to a torus. Why? It's basically because of our magnetic field.

The magnetic field is structured in loops very similar to onion layers. Imagine toroidal bubbles within' bubbles within' bubbles and so on. An electron is comprised of many active layers of energy, modernly referred to as bands or waves. Who is to say that this slice of an electron is just a torus sliced in 2D? These waves are standing and resonating in-place, but have to be separated by something, and that is the insulator / our atmosphere. Remember, this atmosphere breaks down much like a capacitor during storms, resulting in lightning.

We live on just ONE toroidal layer. There are most likely many others. The way to these other planes is through the poles, because energy flows in toroidal patterns. The reason the military are guarding these zones surrounding the poles is because there is an probably indentation which represents a torus within' the framework of the Earth, as well as a ways to another layer. And yes, UFOs and other entities are coming from these poles. Obviously, they don't want anyone getting any ideas..

One thing I've learned after years in this stuff:
God loves donuts.

File: magFm.gif (19KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x300px

>>18306173
>The magnetic field is structured in loops very similar to onion layers.
The magnetic field of Earth is MUCH more chaotic and complex than a simple bar magnet. Our models and diagrams are simplified to show toroids, but when you look at the actual field, they simply aren't there.

http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/magnetism/magnetism.html
>This picture was created by a computer from a mathematical model, shows the solid inner core region (inner circle) surrounded by a molten outer core (the area between the two circles). The currents flow in the outer core, and the lines of force shown in yellow, travel outwards through the rest of Earth's interior.

>>18275194
You just ruined some flat earthers life with astronomy 101

>>18306286
Magnetic fields can control energy flow, and even moving energy produces a magnetic field. The process isn't perfect and contributes to the spin of Earth, which leads to its complexity. Although, I just see simpler than others.

As for NASA, some people actually have become part of this "flat earth" movement because of their many alleged lies. I don't think everything NASA has told us is indeed the truth, same as with any government entity. This is especially noticeable in some of its subsidiaries, as they seem to fit a money laundering scheme. Getting paid millions of dollars by the government (tax-payer money) and then reporting a profit of the same exact amount at the end of the year repeatedly is fishy as fuck. If you look at the financial documents, it becomes clear, they ain't doing shit, but they're sure paying themselves well!

>>18306396
>contributes to the spin of Earth
Doubtful. It is more likely the differing spins of the Earth's crust and core that cause the dynamos producing the magnetic field.

>As for NASA
NASA is only where I got the pic. I would think the studying was done by other scientific orgs or universities. If any govt. body got involved it was probably the USGS.

That's a severe knee-jerk, pavlovian response you got there.

>>18306173
Xd. That pic of energy waves looks just like a fingerprint or thumb ridges... the relation to what's going on inside of the matter of those thumb ridges is cool to think about

Neways great post.. thanks for sharing.

>>18306396

> I don't think everything NASA has told us is indeed the truth, same as with any government entity.

This is the problem. Retards like you are paranoid faggots who want to believe that they see through the matrix and the big bad machine's lies. You shouldn't blindly trust any government, but automatically assuming that every single government organization is lying because it's the big mean government is retarded. You just want to feel superior to everyone else by deluding yourself into thinking you've seen "the truth".

File: th (1).jpg (9KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 300x225px

>>18273882
So if you're feet are not on the ground and you cannot put your hands on it and turn it over then it may as well take any shape. It doesn't matter to me what shape it would appear to be, because I'm sure it could be either. If you propel off of the ground high enough to see the Earth and come back down then what you saw was irrelevant. More likely than not you would return into the same place and the corealis effect is a hoax but had you landed in a different place, then you still are just seeing an illusion.
>I think it definitely could be flat

>>18306396
>Moving energy produces a magnetic field

No it doesn't. You might be thinking of electricity. But if you're confusing energy with electricity, you know very little indeed.

>Magnetic fields contribute to the spin of the earth.

No it doesn't. The earth's spin is due to inertia. It spun as it formed, it continues to spin today, because there's nothing to stop it. Planets without magnetic fields spin just the same way the earth does.

>Some people believe flat earth because of NASA's many lies.

Which goes to show you how stupid flat-earthers really are, because they can't actually come up with one case where NASA has lied to the public about anything.

The make up shit about the moon landing being faked, which it wasn't, and then based on that NASA lied, and thus because NASA lied about one thing (which they didn't), then therefore NASA lies about everything, and therefore the earth is flat. It's just one dumb logical fallacy after another.

>reporting a profit

See, this is just another example of dipshits making things up. NASA doesn't report profits. Why? Because it's not a business. It doesn't sell a product. It's a government agency, not a company. You don't accuse the U.S. Army of taking government money and the making profits off of that.

>if you look at the financial documents

You say this without having looked at any financial documents, or even understanding how finances work.

>>18304348
>rate
Learn english lmao

>>18307681
that's not an incorrect usage.

It's bordering on vague, but it's not wrong.

>>18307681
>>18307690
>a measure, quantity, or frequency, typically one measured against some other quantity or measure

It is neither wrong nor vague. Gravity is a continual force; it accelerates objects. The RATE of acceleration on Earth is approx. 9.8 m/s/s. Everything with negligible mass (compared to the Earth's) will fall at the same RATE of acceleration.

If you think I should have used the word speed (which would be wrong, falling objects are continually changing speed until they hit terminal velocity) -

>speed: 1. the RATE at which someone or something is able to move or operate

We should get all the flat earthers and send them on the Mars mission.
That way they can see that we don't live in a fucking snowglobe and we also get rid of stupid people.

>>18308529
But then Mars will be populated by stupid people.

I prefer my idea of sending all Europeans, Africans, and Asians with a double-digit IQ to the Americas, and sending all Americans with a triple-digit IQ to Europe, Africa, and Asia.

Simple, albeit expensive. And it solves a lot of problems in the long run.