Stupid fucking flat earth thread

File: 19enmkg3rqsirjpg.jpg (30KB, 636x358px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 636x358px

>>18720610
>implying the earth is flat

File: pp-brain-eeg-energy-activity-rf-istock.jpg (471KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 2048x1536px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wExbki15td8&feature=youtu.be&t=660

File: fisheye proof.png (1MB, 1276x718px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1276x718px

Some Earths are flat, deal with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mj_mRiEN2Q

But WHY is the world flat? Like it makes no sense. Does the world just keep going on forever and ever and ever? Or like are we inside of some thing?

>>18720631
It is.

Someone explain to me how this race works in the typical flat earth model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe

>>18720697
The earth is actually riding on the back of an elephant, do you research.
And a glob can't stand on an elephant's back, it will like, roll around, and NASA still never explained it how it works

File: flat_earth.png (601KB, 1086x543px) Image search: [Google]

601KB, 1086x543px

>>18720704

>>18720717
Yes, but how do they manage to go the distance that would be necessary in that model in as little as 74 days, sailing single handedly?

How do flat earthers explain magnetic north and south?

>>18720715

But whats holding up the Elephant? I know about he turtles but cmon there has to be something. Immore inclined to believe this reality is just is what it is and its all an illusion.

>>18720715
Beneath the elephant is a giant turtle. From then on it's turtles all the way down.

people actually think the earth is a ball? its so obviously flat...

>>18720728
Another earth but upside down is holding the elephant
like an earth sandwich, with the turtles in between

>>18720732
It is.

File: article-2078301-0F45DC1D00000578-8_468x468.jpg (82KB, 468x468px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 468x468px

Can flat earthers explain this ?

Flat earth is literally the most retarded hypothesis I've ever had to endure

>>18720739
it's flat

File: spaceniggas.webm (466KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 720x540px

>hurr durr it's all cgi

>>18720748
What does this prove?

>>18720717
>>18720720
For reference here's some data on verified records for best distance sailed in 24 hours in various categories: https://www.sailspeedrecords.com/24-hour-distance

For someone to be able to sail from the northern coast of France, circumnavigate the southern hemisphere, then sail back to France in 74 days, they'd basically have to be running at world record or greater pace every single day.

>>18720746
No, it's not.

>>18720754
yes,it is

File: 1488524635739.jpg (62KB, 600x487px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 600x487px

>>18720720
>>18720749
>>18720751

>>18720770
My posts have literally nothing to do with nasa, unless they're involved in yacht racing now.

Why do people deny science?

Why are scientists so scary to them? We are just people that compare results and then make the internet and technology for you...

I'm an alcoholic I don't want to give up alcohol but it is causing nerve damage and heat intolerance that must be what it's like to be a flat earther you know that your theory is wrong and you need to change but it's really difficult

File: kektastic.gif (2MB, 286x258px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 286x258px

>>18720770
>when you get so rekt, that you have to make memes as a form of damage control

>>18720782
like i care what an alcoholic has to say

>>18720791
10/10 sick burn

>>18720755
It isn't.

I'm only seeing a few brain cells in the thread, people honestly cannot be this fucking ignorant

>>18720782
why do people try so hard to make people who understand concepts outside of their perspective as mentally ill.

Every comment is a personal projection of what you assume an anonymous person on a imageboard must be like simply because they believe something you don't or cant understand.


>you people are -x, and are -z ,because you believe +E
>you people must have grown up like -y to believe the +E

>>18720812
They are

File: 1488488168397.jpg (10KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 480x360px

>>18720791
That's pretty mean but okay. you're probably going to tell me that God says homosexuality is a sin right?

I wish people would stop spreading Flat Earth stuff it makes vulnerable people like myself want to believe you.

However I am fairly confident that the following things would not work without a round Earth:

>GPS
>satelites
>astronomy
>airplane flights
> physics

I am fairly certain that there are some people unironicly believing in Flat Earth because they've been indoctrinated by their Church and basically there's only been 500 people above the atmosphere and most of them have to sign non-disclosure agreements so until more normal people go up there this meme it's just going to keep spreading

I'm not even saying you're wrong maybe it's flat what I don't understand is why you think or people think that scientists are part of some giant conspiracy when most scientists are nice people that just want to know how the world works that's why I believe that the Earth is round I trust scientists

File: flatearthers.gif (2MB, 270x270px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 270x270px

>>18720791
>says the flattie

>>18720813
I would like to understand it simply goes against everything that I have ever learned and I don't understand.

flat earthers do not seem to use science they seem to use emotions. I have an anxiety disorder I understand being overwhelmed by emotions I do believe that NASA is lying to us but not about Flat Earth

File: 1488144923815.jpg (65KB, 640x639px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 640x639px

https://youtu.be/IIB2UD3DHXA?t=6

>>18720845
>inb4 indoctrination

Earth is "obviously" flat for the following (every day observable) reasons:

1. The corolis effects water differes between hemispheres

2. Polaris is only visible from the northern hemisphere

3. Weight differs depending on latitude, reducing as we approach the equator and increasing in both northern and southern directions

4. It is possible to walk/sled from the edge of Antarctic to the South Pole in a few weeks. You will also find that location in the centre of the landmass as a defined single point. You could side step around it, or hold hands and make a ring around.

5. The sun clearly rises from behind the horizon every morning and falls behind the horizon every evening.

6. The sun and moon are not the same size. If they were we'd have a cataclysm every solar eclipse.

7. The sun is visible for 24 hours of the day from the arctic in the northern hemisphere summer and for 24 hours of the day from Antarctica in the Southern Hemisphere summer.

8. From the observatory at Mt Teidi in Tenerife looking south you see nothing but sea.

9. From Calais and with calm seas (no waves) the seven sisters (white cliffs of Dover) can be seen but the dips/vales between them appear to touch the sea.

Round earth - 9
Flat earth - 0

What does "the man" gain from making us believe that the Earth is round?

File: 681203_zyYqcRxZ.jpg (57KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x450px

>>18720878
>4. It is possible to walk/sled from the edge of Antarctic to the South Pole in a few weeks. You will also find that location in the centre of the landmass as a defined single point. You could side step around it, or hold hands and make a ring around.

Civilians CANNOT and WILL NOT be permitted entry, by military enforcement, of the Antarctic continent.
This is fact, 100%.

>9. From Calais and with calm seas (no waves) the seven sisters (white cliffs of Dover) can be seen but the dips/vales between them appear to touch the sea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wExbki15td8&feature=youtu.be&t=660

Get out, right now, or you will be made to suffer the consequences.

>>18720892
>Civilians CANNOT and WILL NOT be permitted entry, by military enforcement, of the Antarctic continent.
>This is fact, 100%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Antarctic_expeditions#21st_century

why am i even bothering though, i know you're just going to say they're all bullshit without having to worry about backing that up in the slightest

File: Screenshot from 2017-03-03 20-20-55.png (106KB, 698x441px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 698x441px

>>18720892
>Civilians CANNOT and WILL NOT be permitted entry, by military enforcement, of the Antarctic continent.
>This is fact, 100%.
I can literally book a flight and a guided tour on the continent right now

>>18720892
Source please

What about the other 7 points?

>>18720890
The deception of heliocentrism, will have been a very short lived attempt, at removing man from his and her divine nature.

>>18720892
Tell Ranulph Fiennes that
http://www.thecoldestjourney.org/the-expedition/biographies/sir-ranulph-fiennes/

>>18720897
>>18720898
Carefully guided, and monitored, tours.

>>18720908
Then go book a tour, shoot the guides and go figure out how the earth is flat yourself

>>18720892
Atmospheric lensing makes things appear bigger, you know, like how we get those huge sunsets.
Fuck, it's like they've never let you out of the asylum!

>>18720908
>2013 — In December 2013 the Expeditions 7 Team led by Scott Brady made a successful east-to-west crossing in four-wheel drive vehicles from Novolazarevskaya to the Ross Ice Shelf via the Scott-Amundsen South Pole Station. Expeditions 7’s logistic plan included providing assistance to the Walking With The Wounded expedition, which was required at latitude 88°S. From the Ross Ice Shelf the Expeditions 7 team returned to Novolazarevskaya via the same route.
Sounds like your average guided tour to me, yeah.

>>18720908
Come on, there were expeditions to the South Pole in the 17th century

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Antarctic_expeditions

>>18720908
>2016-17 -February 7 Mike Horn completes first ever solo, unsupported north-to-south traverse of Antarctica from the Princess Astrid Coast (lat -70.1015 lon 9.8249) to the Dumont D'urville Station (lat -66.6833 lon 139.9167) via the South Pole. He arrived at the pole on February 7th, 2017. A total distance of 5100km was covered utilizing kites and skis in 57 days.

>>18720908
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_Challenger_Expedition

>>18720904
If you don't stop talking like a retard, I'm not going to stop treating you like one.

File: +485.gif (423KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 320x240px

>>18720916
>>18720920
>>18720924
>>18720929
>>18720936

Well done flat earthers. You are less intelligent than my 3 year old niece. I hope you're all very proud!

>>18720939
The classic flat earther rebuttal

>>18720939
>make point
>get proven wrong
>only response is a reaction gif
I expected nothing more.

>>18720944
Talk to the hand...it offers more intelectual discussion than the face

>>18720950
>4 posts prove me wrong
>LOL TALK TO THE HAND

File: tumblr_nr7c3eEzvL1tbb76yo1_1280.jpg (821KB, 800x1181px) Image search: [Google]

821KB, 800x1181px

Stop feeding the trolls you dispshits
post your waifus

File: Hydralisk_SC1_Art2.jpg (35KB, 470x419px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 470x419px

>>18720960
Good idea

>>18720960
Don't ruin the containment thread, if we keep them engaged we can keep then in one thread instead of 8

Unless this guy is wrong about the 31 mile distance from shore to land mass, or he is potentially providing misleading info, this experiment proves the Earth isn't round. Almost the entirety of the island's land mass is viewable. The camera is so close to sea level you can see the white caps and island at the same time. At 31 miles the entire island should have sunk below the horizon slightly less than height of the Seattle Space needle.


https://youtu.be/S4oT2EbDONs

>>18721154
*intentially

>>18721154
31 miles with a drop of 19.8m

You also gain up to 4 degrees visibility over the horizon due to atmosphere refraction.
For this reason, when the sun appears to touch the horizon (at sunset or sunrise), it will actually be below the horizon. The exact amount varies but the concept is very real

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_refraction

>>18720742
explain what? why santa claus is flying??

>>18721154
At about 2:50 when they move to a higher elevation can you see more of the bottom of the island that isn't visible at sea level? If the earth is flat then why wouldn't the bottom of the island be visible at 3 ft off the ground vs 500 ft?

>>18721280
Why is any of the island vidible?

because its higher than 19.8m

>>18721373
The top portion of the island is higher than the drop off/atmospheric lensing.
So why is the bottom of the island only visible at higher elevation?

>>18720610
>flat earth
>bullshit
drone please

>>18720742
whats there to explain?

Actually its an uneven spheroid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_the_Earth

File: Pikes_Peak_summit_to_NE_1.jpg (975KB, 2592x1728px) Image search: [Google]

975KB, 2592x1728px

>>18719477
>I have a degree in philosophy
>Well, here's your problem. Learn some scientific method, discover that you're not a scientist, then we can talk....

Someone said this to me in the last thread and I just can’t let this slide. First of all, I only mentioned my degree, like I have on a few other occasions, because someone said that I don’t understand the meaning of philosophy. This was someone who called Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle scientists, mind you, and claimed that they followed the scientific method. So obviously there are some of you out there who are extremely naïve on these matters and are in desperate need of some educating.

Science, formally known as natural philosophy, is a branch of philosophy. It always has been and it always will be. What we mean when we refer to science is that it is the realm of investigation that seeks truth in the empirical realm: that which we know through our senses. This is a posteriori knowledge meaning that it comes from an external source, rather than a priori knowledge which originates from within. What a lot of people don’t seem to understand today is the vast numbers of assumptions one has to make to assume that this is at all any way to make any definite claims of truth. As philosophers have contemplated since the days of Plato, we can never be sure that we observe the material world as it is, in fact most philosophers would argue that we don’t and even modern science would agree. Ultimately, the best science can hope for in terms of confirmation is that other people perceive things in a similar enough way to you that you can come to the conclusion that it is indeed something along those lines. Of course, this all falls apart when you meet someone with a completely dissimilar perspective of the world, such as a native tribe somewhere who still sees the world through the lense of their spirituality, or when you consider that you might not be accurately perceiving your interactions with other people.

File: LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg (1MB, 2816x1880px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2816x1880px

>>18722698
Now, getting back to my fuming anger, I really can’t stand the way in which the foundational knowledge that science rests upon is completely dismissed today by these ignorant, indoctrinated imbeciles. You tell me to learn “some scientific method”? Christ almighty, how many scientific methods are there now? I learnt about THE scientific method at uni, sure. The one where you follow an endless cycle of observation, hypothesis and testing, right? It never ceases to amaze me when scientists claim over and over that science has proven something or that something is a matter of scientific fact. There is no such thing as fact in science because your method doesn’t allow it. Now this is often cited as the saving grace of the scientific method, but obviously things aren’t as noble and humble as that. You even claim that the word theory has a new meaning when used by a scientist, that it pretty much means fact for all intents and purposes. This is nothing but a devious means of falsely inflating the claims made by scientists while also allowing them an out when their theories are once again shown to be false.

I have demonstrated some of the fallacies of the scientific theory before, but why not get them out there again.

1) The requirement of the falsifiability of your theory sounds good – in theory – but it’s a completely backwards approach to proving something. In philosophy we use logic and reason to PROVE our point. If your reasoning is flawed, someone will call you out on it and your theory will be discredited. If your reasoning is sound, then you have proven your point and you can move on to something else. In science, instead of proving anything you’re meant to come up with ways in which it could be proven wrong and then proving that these are in fact wrong. In philosophy we refer to this as a logical fallacy and we call it a strawman argument.

File: Aratea_93v.jpg (404KB, 1200x1367px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 1200x1367px

>>18722711
2) No inventor has ever used the scientific method. In fact invention uses a reversed method of investigation that on the whole makes a hell of a lot more sense than your backwards approach. Let me demonstrate. The inventor:
- Makes observations about the world
- Forms a hypothesis about how they might improve something to make it more efficient
- Tests their hypothesis
- If they succeed, hypothesis proven. If they fail, back to the drawing board.
As you can see, invention is about proving theories by testing them in reality and measuring the results. Science cannot compete with this approach.

3) Science relies on “facts”, which is a nonsense word as I will demonstrate. Science has long been at odds with the humanities, which include subjects like philosophy, anthropology and history, claiming that they're not as factually sound. But what exactly is a scientific fact? When we say scientific fact we are referring to the observations or data that a scientist has written in a paper and had published by a reputable scientific journal. That’s it. Nothing else really qualifies in science. The humanities are somewhat similar except they take their facts from just about anywhere and everywhere they can, only they don’t rely on a “peer review” panel to ascertain their credibility, they must use their own resources of critical thought to cross-check and reference as many sources as they can find from that era as well as the entirety of human history to come up with a credible framework of historical fact. If they make too many assumptions or leap to conclusions, you’d best believe that there will be a real review of their work by their peers in the form of a critique. Because they’re working with a much larger timescale of information than most scientists, the historically based thinker has a much greater testing ground for any theory they would like to put forward and their critics likewise have a much greater arsenal for pointing out its flaws.

File: 2048-7.jpg (379KB, 1920x856px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 1920x856px

>>18722725
4) “Scientific fact” relies too heavily on one’s faith in the intentions of individual scientists and the institutions that fund their research and experiments. I often hear scientists spoken of as though they are these pillars of nobility and virtue, with no motives in life other than the pursuit of truth. I’ll admit that there are a good number of scientists who this can be said about, but that they are vastly outweighed by those with less pure intentions and are probably not the ones any of us are taught about. These virtues can certainly be more readily applied to your average philosopher, which literally means “lover of wisdom”, as history shows that the philosopher is generally at odds with the popular consensus of their time and often have to fight a seemingly impossible battle in their purporting of truth with little reward to gain other than the satisfaction of the task itself. On the other hand, the scientist is praised in modern society simply for their title, they are assumed to be smarter and more knowledgeable than their peers and they can publically dismiss the views and opinions of others.

That isn’t to say that it’s all that great being a scientist today, it simply isn’t. Because it has been promoted for so long as one of, if not the, highest achievements one can aim for, there is a huge glut of them and work for the qualified scientist is scarce. I know a number of PhDs who cannot find work, have to travel interstate for work if they’re lucky or overseas if they’re less lucky to find work, or hate the work they’ve been lucky enough to find. They often work long hours in cramped laboratories doing menial and repetitive tasks that are nothing like what they thought they were training their minds for for so many years. Not to mention the copious amounts of debt you wrack up just to get yourself qualified enough to be considered any use to anyone as a scientist and the time you must surrender to get there.

File: 1001854_153177514866299_939815116_n.jpg (279KB, 792x848px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 792x848px

>>18722738
To fully understand the state of modern science, one must consider the sources of scientific funding. The three main sources are: militaries, private corporations, and to a much lesser extent universities. The first we can all probably write off as having more-or-less evil intentions, or at the very least, intentions to do harm to humans of one walk of life or another. The second we can write off as having selfish intentions as it only takes a cursory knowledge of the corporate structure to understand that the bottom line is always profit. If profits aren’t rising, the whole thing collapses and there isn’t any more scientific funding for anyone. There is obvious bias inherent in privately funded science as people only invest in this sort of thing with the expectation that they will get their money back with interest. So if something is discovered or disproven which harms the potential for this profit, it stands to reason that it will be swept under the rug, sealed off and incinerated, rug and all. And maybe a few of those pesky scientists along with it. The third is probably the most trustworthy of the three, but its funding is minuscule compared to the other two. On top of that, university science departments are run by the previous generation’s scientists and thus there is an undeniable potential for institutional bias to skew the way in which experiments are conducted and then received. After all, these people’s reputations are on the line, and that’s about all they have going for them.

File: 800px-Hamat-Tiberias-119.jpg (142KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 800x600px

>>18722748
There is a fourth source of funding but it is so small that it barely warrants mentioning: independent altruistic funding. This is where the true lovers of science reside, either by donating their resources to its honest pursuit or on the scientist’s side, donating their time or taking the lesser paying job, refusing to work for nefarious institutions altogether, and often just funding their own research entirely. This is fringe science that probably won’t make it into any of those “reputable” journals and will be dismissed as pseudoscience or “bad science” as the scientific zealots will say today.

5) Scientists are not trained to be critical thinkers. What people often don’t understand about an Arts degree is the huge amount of thought required to get one. It may be easier to get into at university but that’s just part of the bias against it. The difficulty of a science degree is not in the use of one’s logical faculties, but rather in the mass absorption and rote learning of reams and reams of “facts”. Unlike the humanities which require independent research and thinking to come up with your own original ideas and conclusions, scientific studies mainly require you to repeat the information that you’re told is important, avoiding of anything you’re told is unimportant and staying between the lines of current scientific consensus when you are asked to work something out yourself. You are tested mainly with multiple-choice questions which test only that you have memorised the “correct” information and ignored the “incorrect” information. You are not asked to consider in any deep manner why we believe one theory to be correct and all of its alternatives incorrect, this sort of thing is generally brushed off with an authoritative paragraph at the beginning of the chapter of your textbook. The result is classrooms of bright students who either work at filling the holes in the official theories or are otherwise weeded out.

File: COGNITIVE DISSONANCE-2.jpg (134KB, 720x653px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 720x653px

>>18722760
This is a particularly important point to note because it is the basis of the problem of modern-day science. It relies on “facts” even though this is contrary to the scientific method, it discourages any new theories that drastically undermine the previously established theories, it encourages the blinkered maintenance of these old theories (we have a few centuries of this that explain the current scientific model of the universe which is why they seem to have an answer for everything, even though none of it makes a lick of sense and it rests on the flimsiest of foundations), it continually destroys the scientific careers of anyone who dissents to any of this, and it creates unthinking drones who blindly do the bidding of some truly despicable people. I earlier alluded to the glut of scientists we have today all vying simply for employment in their fields. This is how they want it. They want desperate people in crippling debt who have invested so much time and effort, spending much of their youths feverishly cramming through the long hours of the night, not sleeping or socialising, not getting any sense of reality by ever setting foot in the real world. They want this kind of person looking for whatever jobs they can find so that they will willingly put aside any sense of self-respect or morality and do horrible experiments on living creatures, design things that are meant only to harm, or work out new ways to manipulate the masses. This might sound outlandish and dystopian but it’s the truth. Think about it. Think about like your schooling has never taught you to before. Think about everything I have said here, try to find my flaws, and fit together everything you cannot fault. You will see that I am right and that this explains a lot about the world we live in.

File: 4658c1a6628148f5de686310841d83f5.jpg (181KB, 720x641px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 720x641px

>>18722760
I will make one final post because there is some more I wanted to say but I didn’t fit it in where it should have gone and I can’t be bothered doing any major edits to what has already turned out to be more or less an essay.

In philosophy we make arguments to support a theory. The integrity of one’s argument rests solely on its own strength, unlike a scientific theory which generally rests upon what is declared as factual, what has been set as precedent and who has been declared the current authorities on a subject. The “facts” that a scientific theory chiefly rests upon are in themselves only as trustworthy as the journals that publish them and the scientists who report them. In trusting a scientific “fact” we must put a great deal of faith into this system of peer review and repeatability, assuming in general that if something is wrong that it will be found out before any real damage to the progress of humanity is done. This should be seen as an erroneous and dubious means of asserting fact. When you read a philosophical treatise, you are either convinced of its content by the content itself, or else you disregard it for its apparent flaws. This is not possible with science. To disagree with a scientific theory, you must (as so many of the globe earth advocates here will tell you) conduct the same experiments yourself and compare the results. This ignores the problems of funding I outlined earlier and it ignores the very real institutionalised bias that exists in the scientific community. If you want your experiment to be taken seriously in the scientific community, you must rely on it being accepted by the “peer” review panels of “reputable” scientific journals. This isn’t a jury of your peers, these are elite members of a scientific fraternity who stand to gain a lot through the power that they wield over what is declared as factual, what is acceptable to believe in and what sort of avenues our investigations are allowed in.

File: mw3.jpg (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>>18722770
Okay, one last post to finish this all off. In light of all I have said here, I would like the staunch defenders of modern science and the scientific method to answer these questions:

- Why is the scientific method the best means of ascertaining truth?
- How deep is your trust in scientists, scientific institutions, the funders of scientific research and the “peer” reviewed scientific journals?
- What are your scientific credentials?
- What experiments have you ever conducted for yourself?
- What is required for you to believe something?
- Have you ever experienced a paradigm shift where what you once believed whole-heartedly turned out to be completely erroneous?
- If so, why did you hold that belief in the first place and what made you change your mind?

When I say “in light of all I have said”, I mean that I would like proper responses to what I have written, not cherry-picked quotes and off-topic answers that completely avoid the actual points I have made. Don’t think that dishonest tactics will get you anywhere. They might confuse any TL:DRers out there, but they probably don’t care enough about any of this stuff to be swayed anyway. I only care about the people out there who give a damn about truth, who enjoy challenging their preconceptions and who think for themselves. You will not fool these people with your bullshit shill tactics, so please don’t try to waste my time with them. I’m done wasting my time with them. I simply will not any longer.

File: biblical flat earth.png (656KB, 838x945px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 838x945px

>>18720610

>>18722765
Damnit Hanz, you ruined my streak!

>>18722812
Oh go burn your house down.

>>18720610
>flat earth bullshit

I don't like your attitude to this subject. Have fun without real discussion, I'm going to the vampire thread instead.

>>18720610
F L A T E A R T H B O Y S 2 0 1 7

>>18722859
That's fine, this is a bullshit thread anyway

>flat earth
What's on the other side?

>>18720720
I'm pretty sure they were allowed to use both hands.

>>18720742
This would make perfect sense on a flat globe with the north pole at its center...

The map is even a partial flat earth....

I don't buy the bullshit of flat earth but cmon man.

>>18723400
Flat earth* not flat globe

..... lol

>>18720749
Pretty definitively that other bodies we witness are globular. This is not something you could convincingly pull of with CGI

So why would earth be so unique?

>>18720950
>intelectual
>intellectual

Bunch of threads about fairies and wizard spells but this is the one that makes people angry.

>>18720717
Why would they bother?

Why have we not left this ancient myth behind? It's on par with "the sun is a god's chariot"

File: cube_earth.jpg (51KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x450px

>2000+17
>Not believeing in cube earth theory

Haha wow

>>18720610
We've known the earth is round for a few thousand years, you know. It's quite commonly known.

there's no way a flat earth could physically exist, let alone correlate with how our real life earth operates

>>18723500
dubs
cube earth confirmed

>>18723500
Is this a real photo?

File: HnV8bNj.gif (3MB, 252x263px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 252x263px

>>18722786

>>18723533
yes

>>18722786
Great post anon, fuckin saved. Submitting this shit to plebbit too. You got any more anti Science rants?

>>18723542
Stay ignorant, plebian :∆)

>>18723749
Thank you anon. You just made it all worthwhile. I've got half-written pieces saved all over my harddrive in a fuck of a mess, probably have a few similar rants but nothing complete I'm guessing. I'll have to have a look through some of my old essays for uni cause we touched on this topic but I can't remember if I actually wrote on it. A great resource for understanding the clusterfuck of modern scientific though is Thomas S. Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which you can read in full here:
http://projektintegracija.pravo.hr/_download/repository/Kuhn_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions.pdf

>>18723542
Couldn't care less you lazy moron.

File: 1488146232442.png (227KB, 296x293px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 296x293px

how come when the sun rises it hits high points like the tops of buildings/mountains first instead of hitting everything at once; as it would if the world was flat?

File: quote-science-will-win-because-it-works.jpg (48KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 850x400px

>>18722786
Only response needed.

>>18724153
>how come when the sun rises it hits high points like the tops of buildings/mountains first instead of hitting everything at once; as it would if the world was flat?

Could you please explain why you think it would?

>>18724158
Beep boop

>>18723873
He was mocking you, idiot. Also good job wasting your time getting a degree in philosophy instead of something actually fucking useful like oh I don't know, fucking science? Moron

>>18724588
Nice.
Philosophy is a bullshit degree

>>18723542
>>18724158
>>18724588
>>18724685
About the caliber of response I would expect from you people.

>>18724868
And yet you continue posting. Something something definition of insanity.

>>18724919
Am I really starting to get to you shills?

>>18722698
Scientific method = you make a prediction based on your theory. Your predictions must be validated by experiments and be falsifiable.
Philosophy does not make falsifiable predictions. So, philosophy is not science.
It has a value, like literature, but it tells us nothing about reality.

>>18720782
The fact that you accept anything a man in a lab coat tells you is what's worrying to me.

>>18724925
How am I a shill exactly? All I did was make a snarky comment. You realize not everyone who pokes fun at you is doing so because they're a secret government agent on a mission to discredit you, right?

>>18724981
>lab coats make you a pathological liar who spends all their time figuring out how to fuck with tinfoil hats online
Glad I never put one on, sounds like some Kill La Kill type shit.

>>18720797
The part of the Earth where the camera is placed is rotating away from the sun. This causes the sun to shrink "visually" the farther from the camera it gets and to sink below the horizon. Hold a paper edge under the sun in this video and watch it sink below the paper edge completely before it ever disappears. This would not be possible on a flat Earth. It's round. They literally disproved themselves with their own video while trying to prove their theory. Literally an example of how dumb you have to be to believe the Earth is flat kek.

>>18720610
I like this game. Let's do some other ones. Water is actually gasoline. Chickens are actually cats. Salt is actually pepper. Human feces is actually something you ingest, not meant to be excreted.

>>18720782

99.9% of people who promote flat earth theory on the internet are trolling.

File: 1488185110215.jpg (129KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 960x960px

>>18720748
It's obviously cgi

File: Africa_sunset_timelapse.webm (606KB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 720x576px

>>18725048
You are so wrong

>>18725126
>says without any further discussion whatsoever

Literally putting your fingers in your ears and going "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU"

File: ISS-hatch.webm (733KB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

733KB, 720x576px

>>18720878
1. Coriolis effect exists only on paper, nobody ever takes it in consideration in real life

2. Wrong, it's visible from at least 20 degrees south of the equator

3. Wrong. Every object has the same weight no matter where you are on this plane

4. Wrong, this is phisically impossible.

5. See >>18725126

6. You are assuming the sun is 93 million miles away, which is not the case

7. The Antarctic 24 hours sun videos are actually shot in the Arctic region. You ((cannot)) prove they are from Antarctica.

8. No shit sherlock

9. What is atmospheric lensing?

Try harder shill, you're not fooling anyone with your weak arguments.
Also, this is your beloved ISS, and you'll argue there is nothing wrong with that hatch.

File: hqdefault.jpg (17KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 480x360px

>>18720830
This explais the problem with how theory works in science today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeIGrEtPMmE

>>18725118
This place is so huge you can't notice the change

>>18723542
This gif always pisses me off. The grammar is atrocious.

File: Ecuador_sunrise.webm (422KB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

422KB, 720x576px

>>18725126

File: 1876362017-02-16.jpg (513KB, 1380x487px) Image search: [Google]

513KB, 1380x487px

>>18725048
>>18720878
>>18720897
>>18720920
>>18720925
>>18720936
>>18720944
>>18720997
>>18724588
>>18725013
Dear shills, your actions are futile

>>18720925
>phoneposter
Opinion discarded

File: 1487217503580.png (868KB, 1169x6371px) Image search: [Google]

868KB, 1169x6371px

Learn to spot the shills

File: 1486092951334.jpg (385KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

385KB, 1920x1280px

>implying we aren't an archipelago on a giant ringworld

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR2296df-bc

File: hull-down-03[1].png (2MB, 2154x994px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2154x994px

>>18725223
Number of facts disproven by actual proof = 0

Keep on failing, boy

File: shutterstock_55329781.jpg (54KB, 1063x712px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1063x712px

>>18725262
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wExbki15td8

>>18725262
Are you trying to say a container ship which is further away on the water appears smaller and that the waves obscur more of the hull than on the closer ship?

You are one smart shill, i'm almost impressed

>>18725273
https://youtu.be/wExbki15td8?t=662
11:02 FUCKKK

>>18720703
No it isnt

>There are people so into role-play on the internet that they pretend the earth is flat.

Guys, just go larp, or join a gaia forum. You're all ding dongs.

>>18725299
>>18725293
>>18725273
So you're saying that "it's flat, it just LOOKS like it's round"?

Keep on failing, boy

>>18725271
Do the proof yourself, kiddo.
You'll be surprised.....

File: total-lunar-eclipse-december-2011-iran_45475_600x450.jpg (14KB, 320x212px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 320x212px

>>18725315

Try harder shill

>>18725282
But with a powerful enough telescope you can literally see it for yourself anon. Find someone with a good telescope, or double down and buy one.

Of course once you see that you've been acting the fool, you'll double down AGAIN and suffer some cognative dissonance and claim it was all a dream or some gay shit you tremendous faggot holy shit you're a fag.

>>18725324
You can see the curve in the shadow retard.

>>18725325
>But with a powerful enough telescope you can literally see it for yourself anon.
Tell your boss this line alone exposes you pathetic fucks, you should stop using "you can see X object from Apollo Y on the moon with a telescope" meme

>>18723873
I was not mocking you at all, I'm going to read the thing you linked too. Great stuff, keep fighting.

>>18725291
So you're saying that Australia is bigger than Asia and nobody noticed?

Keep on failing, boy

>>18725340
>Doubling Down again.
You can literally see the shit on the moon from earth.
Get a good telescope, find a place that isn't suffering from light pollution, and have your mind blow flattie.

File: 700px-Horsecock_crossed[1].jpg (85KB, 700x541px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 700x541px

>>18725340
MFW you can actually trace the ISS in the sky and look at it with a cheap, affordable telescope
http://www.isstracker.com/

>>18725340
>Here's a thin that blows my stupidy out of the water.
>Quick!
>Call it a meme, that makes me right!

>>18725340
>using the "posters must work for NASA meme"
Step it up Sempai. You're looking like a fringe Kook.

File: Red-Bull-Stratos-3-15-12-Ready-To-Jump.jpg (84KB, 530x738px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 530x738px

>>18725326

>>18725159
1. Watch https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aDorTBEhEtk

2. Not from sea level it's not. A few degrees over the horizon from just south of the equator is possible die to atmospheric refraction. For this reason stars below 20 degrees above the horizon are not used for navigation without correcting for the refraction.

3. No you are wrong, a 100g weight will weigh a few micro grams less at the equator than at the poles:
http://www.shimadzu.com/an/balance/support/hiroba/bean/bean06.html

4. It has been done and documented many many times:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Antarctic_expeditions

5. Go to the beach or a hill and watch the sun set tonight yourself. Film it and post it if you fancy.

6. No just assuming they are the same height and size as claimed by flat earth theory. They've not yet collided so I'll take this as evidence that they are in fact not the same size and distance from earth.

7. You can go and film it yourself. There are no penguins in the arctic yet can be seen in many of the Antarctic videos showing the sun 24 hours of the day. Go watch some wildlife live streams and watch the penguins for a bit.

8. From 3,718m you should be able to see south all the way to the Antarctic..if the earth were flat that is...you can't by the way

9. Atmospheric lending is the magnification caused by atmospheric refraction, it's why the sun can appear massive and red at sunset. It's all to do with refraction:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_refraction

Globular earth: 9
Flat earth: 0

>>18725326
GO PRO

File: zxM4Lakm[1].jpg (55KB, 673x673px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 673x673px

>>18725324
No, i'm enjoing the thousands of taxpayers dollars per post NASA is paying me to make fun of retards on X too much

>>18725377
I know.
GoPro footage is the ((only)) way to see earth's curvature

>>18725206
What are you trying to show exactly?

>>18725359
>>18725364
>>18725369
>>18725374
>desperation

>>18725207
You don't leave the atmosphere in directly vertical direction. You have to, you know, steer!

>>18725239
All except the first 2

File: idiots-quotes-6[1].jpg (18KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x300px

>>18725383
LOLno, you can always see it: just notice how things "disappear" below the horizon in the distance. You know what's causing this? The curve of the earth.

Or go to New York with a laser rangefinder and measure both the top and the mottom of Verrazzano bridge.... You'll see the bottom is CLOSER than the top

>>18725397
>>18725390
>>18725381
>>18725376
>>18725369
>>18725374
>>18725364
>>18725359
>>18725353
>>18725411

You'll have to do better than this, shill.

>>18725246
Post your source

>>18725418
I bet you can read

>>18725416
Earth is round.

>>18725247
No one flies over the South Indian Ocean, it is one of the remotest locations on earth with nowhere to land and no/little chance of rescue. Flight mh370 for example.

File: 66299079[1].jpg (113KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 400x400px

>>18725387
>>18725416
Facts disproven = 0

>>18725250
They'd have to send a separate satélite just to take photos of the first.

Go outside with a good pair of binoculars and on a clear night you can see the ISS

>>18725432
How do ((you)) ((know)) that's the ISS?

>>18725258
It's either a satellite or a dead pixel. Maybe time for a new camera.

>>18725424
Where is the wall in the edge of the earth?
Ow, right, you can't see it because it's hidden behind the curvature of the earth.

>>18725435
Yeah, ((they)) put yo momma in low earth orbit just to fuck up with your brain

Why isn't the moon always full? Because Earth is round.

God created dinosaur fossils and satellites to test our faith.

>>18725261
Or ghosting, lense flare, imperfections in the photographic process, something in th silver halide, a dirty thumb or scuff as it came out of the fix. This is pre digital remember and taken on a hasselblad (the body of which is still on the moon)

Yes there's something there which could be a light source but that is all you can confidently conclude from that photo

>>18725267
Things do get tested before they're used you know.

>>18725118
>hurr i quote big numbers
You realize that pretty much every actual star we see would also be rotating around the same point our solar system is, yeah? And the time we've been tracking constellations for doesn't even make up one hundredth of one percent of one galactic year, so how likely is it that anything would have gotten out of sync even accounting for a wide variation in orbital periods between our sun and other stars?

>>18725281
As in experimenter bias must be controlled against

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

12KB, 225x225px

Nice derailing shills, you are really getting more and more desperate and pathetic.

Remember this, there is NOTHING you can do to stop the flat earth awakening.
NOTHING
O
T
H
I
N
G

No 'flat earther' ever went back to believing in heliocentrism.

>>18725458
>galactic year
>225 to 250 million terrestrial years
Nice precision there m8.
Talk about faith.

>>18725340
Why?! It's true! Go do it yourself if you don't believe us.
You can bounce lasers off the reflectors that were left up there too. Measure the time it takes to receive the light back and you can calculate the distance of the moon.
Cool stuff ay! Science is awesome!

>>18725483
Not a flat earther, but you do realise they don't believe in the moon landings, so your lasers on reflectors argument is falling on deaf ears

>>18725201
>>18725126
All I see is the sun getting brighter the higher it is, causing it to appear larger on a camera.

>>18720610
>the earth is flat.

Then how do you explain time zones and it being daytime in Japan whilst it is night in America?

File: ball_earth.jpg (269KB, 1800x1197px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 1800x1197px

Even from a high mountain you can see earth's curvature

File: 17rk5gdm0duxijpg.jpg (48KB, 636x358px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 636x358px

>>18725664
le obvious hairspray

>>18725707
Yes, it's pretty obvious.
If the ISS was real, I bet one of the main rules for astronauts would have been to keep their hai no longer than 1/4 inch to prevent any electrostatic that could ruin some electronics.

But they went out of their way with the hairspray, it baffles me how people are so blind.

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-z-qISGgAUs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfVSAC1_Mug

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13KJDGE9KbM

>>18725026
>lad coats make you unshakeningly honest, virtuous, and unable to make mistakes
And they say Scientists haven't replaced Priests in the modern world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIB2UD3DHXA
This is to demonstrate that flat earth has always been around and the spinning ball earth deception is very new and will be short-lived.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xa5rGCur7g
The flights listed in this video especially Air France 447 shows that airplanes are flying straight paths which only makes sense when the path is on a flat plane. If the earth were an oblate spheroid, when flying from South America to North America airplanes would have to tilt their nose down almos 180 degrees.

File: rounwrld.jpg (30KB, 288x451px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 288x451px

>inb4 g
>inb4 r
>inb4 a
>inb4 v
>inb4 i
>inb4 t
>inb4 y

>>18723270
Why do you ask?

>>18725385
You dense fuck.

>>18725752
No they wouldn't, like a plumb line always stays vertical, the plane is always level in relation to earth. It maintains a constant altitude as it traverses the atmosphere. A plane doesn't just fly off into space unless the pilot points it at the floor.
Have you never flown?!

>>18725910
See
>>18725903

>>18725903
No really. What is that picture an attempt at showing?

>>18725917
Again, have you ever flown?

>>18725916
The speed of the plane and the profile and size of the wing govern lift.
If it takes x amount of lift to maintain y altitude, you cannot increase y without increasing x. As such a plane maintains a constant altitude

File: 1473979545221.png (1MB, 1700x2200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1700x2200px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5EFzAKhOqM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkEL4yBJxm8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPrXgc-y5lo

File: 1469538900288.png (126KB, 1169x817px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1169x817px

>>18725241
THIS
Shills are easy to spot once you know how they operate.

File: 1469546029819.png (246KB, 1169x1390px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1169x1390px

>>18726143

File: 1486487059117.jpg (1MB, 2340x2335px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2340x2335px

On the moon you say?

>>18726219
what is this supposed to be showing

>>18726219
What says otherwise? 2 footprints, one clearly older.
Mr austronaught goes to the moon, finds footprints from a precious landing and puts his foot next to it.
I'd probably do the same.

Previous not precious

>>18726260
>finds footprints from a previous landing
Are you sure you really wanted to say this?
If yes, then this is the ignorance level of the typical globe earth believer.
OR you're around 12 yo

>>18726279
Without checking the number of that photo and cross referencing it with the NASA archive...while on my phone...I'll say that is what it appears to show.
The older looking print has lost a bit of edge defenition and shows signs of damage/interference.
It may be a footprint from when they made that rover track, maybe it was the day or a few hours before. I do not know the inns and outs of lunar tracking, sorry.

File: 1471569594584.jpg (23KB, 646x236px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 646x236px

NASA

>>18726322
That's a bit like using numerology as an argument

>>18725275
>That meme where a flat earthed accidentally disproved flat earth lol

what's the government getting out of this lie?

>>18725737
>one of the main rules for astronauts would have been to keep hair no longer than 1/4 to avoid frying electronics.


This makes sense. Because here on earth anybody with long hair is constantly frying any electronics they try to keep.

File: Boggy.jpg (34KB, 559x476px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 559x476px

>>18726687
They get your soul

flatties = 0

ballers = 1

>>18726687
If you can make a person believe their most basic intuitions about the world are wrong, you can make them believe anything.

>>18726529
Where did they get all those different pictures from?

>>18726741
space

>>18726768
>but space isn't real

>>18726771
Sure it is. Defined as the area between a flat earthers ears

>>18725648
>hmm should i believe the one with evidence? nah

>>18725118
>earth spinning at 1000 mph
>earth circumference at equator is 40075.017 km
That means 1 rotation in 24.9 hours. Even longer than a solar day.

>>18720610
Degenerates
All of you

>>18726882
Well it's about 1,000 miles an hour, not exactly 1000 mph. And yes, a sidereal day is different than a solar day.

This guy does a pretty good experiment. Science tells me that the landmasses should be invisible behind 600 feet of water due to curvature. But you can clearly see them sitting there, at sea level, from 31 miles away.

https://youtu.be/S4oT2EbDONs

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=30&h0=0&unit=imperial

>>18725375
Courve is visible though...

>>18726922
>crop the camera down a hundred feet worth of angle and you still can't see the other island's shore in either one
>and you can only see West Ancapa, which is the highest of the three and has that 930 ft peak he's staring at
Brilliant

>>18726922
>does a pretty good experiment
>camera isn't at sea level
>observes land mass that also isn't at sea level
>makes no accounting for refraction
>doesn't even do the math right
>pretty good

>>18726985
>crop the camera down a hundred feet worth of angle and you still can't see the other island's shore in either one
Why would you be able to see the shore 30 miles away? Curvature would eliminate that pretty easily.

>and you can only see West Ancapa, which is the highest of the three and has that 930 ft peak he's staring at

How do you know that is only West Ancampa? It is clearly several separate islands representing the entire cluster.

>>18727011
>camera isn't at sea level
Maybe watch the entire video next time

>be mad
>can only reply in sarcastic maymay arrows
>an argument

Brilliant

>>18727177
>Why would you be able to see the shore 30 miles away? Curvature would eliminate that pretty easily.
It does. That's the point.

>How do you know that is only West Ancampa? It is clearly several separate islands representing the entire cluster.
You believing this is the problem, it could very easily be 2 level but high cliffs and 1 peak representing just West Ancapa, which is the largest of the three. Based on the angle the guy seems to have been at, Middle Ancapa should be completely obscured.

>>18727203
Also
>Ancapa
I keep doing this.
It's Anacapa.

>>18727203
>You believing this is the problem, it could very easily be 2 level but high cliffs and 1 peak representing just West Ancapa

You believing that is the problem, shill

>>18727238
So the beach just doesn't exist? It's the upper-half of the mountains and nothing else?
Perhaps they're levitating and it's just water under it?

File: pZ8D8rF.jpg (7KB, 326x326px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 326x326px

So can anyone show me what the earth looks like if it's flat?
Because we know it isn't the UN map.

>>18724970
As I've already explained, if you would know if you actually read my posts, this is known in the logical world as making straw man arguments. It is a logical fallacy and not at all a good way to put forward your theory.

Philosophy is entirely concerned with describing reality. You obviously know nothing of its history if you are so quick to dismiss it in this way. If I were to dismiss it, and to some extent I do, it would be because it is too literal in its descriptions and sort of ruins some of the mystique and "you'll get it when you get it" quality of mythology. Nevertheless there is a lot of beauty and art form in the way a good philosopher can create the linguistic equivalent of a mathematical proof. If you want to understand how this can be possible, I suggest you look into logic in relation to computer programming. Code is based on both mathematics and linguistic logic, the latter of which simply isn't found in the scientific process.

File: Screenshot_2017-03-04-12-52-06.jpg (112KB, 718x1012px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 718x1012px

>>18720610
No longer seeing this retarded bitch

File: Ya Blew It!.png (218KB, 500x374px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 500x374px

>>18727480
>Quoting her entire message in your reply

You were lucky to ever find a girl willing to look past your obvious autism.

File: worried-man-620x400.jpg (44KB, 620x400px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 620x400px

>>18720610
mfw people don't know that earth is actually a polygon

>>18727636
Do you understand how conversations work through texting? Why the fuck do you think we green quote text on here....So you know the person understands what you are replying to.
There were multiple messages above that she wrote.
Nice try though
P.S. ((your)) a faggot!!!!!

File: globe_comparison_with_distance.jpg (261KB, 1600x700px) Image search: [Google]

261KB, 1600x700px

>>18720892
That fucking moronic image is easily explained by perspective and focal length of cameras. Your entire argument is based on people being fucking morons and not understanding how things work.

>>18725322
Dumb faggot doesn't understand perspective.

>>18725326
>>18725322
>>18725375
This completely proves that the earth is round you moronic fuck.

>>18725657
What is a composite image?

>>18728034
Thanks for conveniently linking those pictures together so that anyone who isn't completely blinkered to reality can see how dumb that shit is.

>>18727791
Yeah, I'm sure she really would've had a hard time figuring out what you were referring to. Seriously, quoting someone like that in a personal text conversation is beyond Asperger's.

>>18725657
Actually that's a real photo, not a composite. The clouds just happened to look kinda similar.

>>18726718
The ISS doesn't have grounding tho.

>>18726794
How can space be real if we can't go to the moon?

>>18727480
When you'll realise that the earth is indeed flat, i hope she won't get back to you.

File: 1478114097890.png (404KB, 599x470px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 599x470px

>>18727954
Perspective and focal lenght don't explain why earth looks the same size but the continents don't.
Stay mad globetard.

>>18728022
What perspective retard? Thats a gopro with fisheye lens you stupid fuck

>>18729282
That is exactly what is happening in the picture, holy shit

>>18728034
>A fisheye lens GoPro proves the earth is round
See >>18725238 and also watch the video.

>>18729300
No. You miss the main point, which is the distance between camera and your toy globe is the reason for that distortion

>>18729316
You have to be trolling.
It's showing that exactly

>>18720610
Weird this thread seems to be about the moon landing being fake and flat earth being real.

Moon Landing is 100% fake. Biggest smoking gun about this is simply why haven't we been back? Really that simple, but you can find other evidence also.

Flat Earth theory is an attempt to discredit other conspiracy theories. They chose the dumbest theory to make all people who are into this stuff look crazy as fuck.

>>18729392
>airless rock with no valuable minerals and nothing of value
>costs half a billion dollars to get there
>WHY HAVEN'T WE GONE BACK HUH?

>>18725244
Holy shit
You know that's a tool right?
Not some ancient artifact only illuminertee freemasins Nasa CIA masters use?
>inb4 shill
Shill this shill that you're just a shill >:(

>>18720797
the sun doesnt change size here. its always that small in the sky, what youre witnessing here is lens flare/ sun glare. pretty easy one desu

>>18729392
we have been back dickhead do your research

>>18729637
Yes it does change size, are you blind?
Thats not lens flare.

File: 1477593483177.jpg (83KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 720x480px

What did he meant by this?

Earth is flat.

>>18729768
You can interpret this in many ways, but personally I think it means that the vastness of the outer space shows how glorious the creator of this universe is; and that the stars in the sky are proof of his craftsmanship.

File: 1480828670092.png (791KB, 976x1024px) Image search: [Google]

791KB, 976x1024px

>>18729725
Hold some welders glass up to the sun at midday. You'll see it's the same size as in the video just before it sets.
The other anon was right man.
Just accept you bought into a shitty psy-op.

>>18730041
Now wait a second, by creator you mean the Bigbang right?

File: 1487914485258.jpg (43KB, 345x395px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 345x395px

>>18728501
Or it shows good communication skills.
I work for DEP and we constantly quote back the previous transmission so communication is clear.
Ive done it many times and it doesn't seem to detour any girl I've talked to. Please take your bullshit somewhere else.

>>18729266
LOL
Why would I keep texting a mentally challenged girl.
I feel like an asshole that is taking advantage. No thanks

File: look at how round it is.jpg (306KB, 1024x835px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 1024x835px

Oh hey this thread again

File: 1487317757353.png (76KB, 1090x667px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1090x667px

>>18730468
I think it's possible the day will come when you'll feel like shit for breaking up with her because of this.

Regarding this Flat Earth thing, what is your theory on it?
Do you believe it's a mass hallucination/mental illness?
Could it be a psyop, and if yes, what could be the purpose for the us government starting it?

I'm just saying, every day more and more people start looking into this stuff and for most of them it's paradigm changing.

Plus it's the only conspiracy theory that drives some people mad, suggesting assasination/euthanasia or incarceration of those who believe in it.

It's absolutely amazing to see some of the reactions some people have (online and in real life) when hearing these two simple words "flat earth".

I believe it should be studied more.

File: sun-hotspot-on-clouds.jpg (150KB, 854x444px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 854x444px

>>18730266

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdBR3tDXyVw

It's always fun to see globers struggling to explain how could this be possible.

Mental gymnastics at its bets

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aA0yfQkfqw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0dDw-8Nhow

Many people think that modern astronomy’s ability to accurately predict lunar and solar eclipses is a result and proof positive of the heliocentric theory of the universe.

The fact of the matter however is that eclipses have been accurately predicted by cultures worldwide for thousands of years before the “heliocentric ball-Earth” was even a glimmer in Copernicus’ imagination.

Ptolemy in the 1st century A.D. accurately predicted eclipses for six hundred years on the basis of a flat, stationary Earth with equal precision as anyone living today.

All the way back in 600 B.C. Thales accurately predicted an eclipse which ended the war between the Medes and Lydians.

Eclipses happen regularly with precision in 18 year cycles, so regardless of geocentric or heliocentric, flat or globe Earth cosmologies, eclipses can be accurately calculated independent of such factors.

>>18731197
“Those who are unacquainted with the methods of calculating eclipses and other phenomena, are prone to look upon the correctness of such calculations as powerful arguments in favour of the doctrine of the earth's rotundity and the Newtonian philosophy, generally.

One of the most pitiful manifestations of ignorance of the true nature of theoretical astronomy is the ardent inquiry so often made, ‘How is it possible for that system to be false, which enables its professors to calculate to a second of time both solar and lunar eclipses for hundreds of years to come?’

The supposition that such calculations are an essential part of the Newtonian or any other theory is entirely gratuitous, and exceedingly fallacious and misleading.

Whatever theory is adopted, or if all theories are discarded, the same calculations can be made.”

-Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!” (151)

>>18731207
“The Chaldeans used to predict the eclipses three thousand years ago; with a degree of accuracy that is only surpassed by seconds in these days because we have wonderful clocks which they had not.

Yet they had an entirely different theory of the universe than we have.

The fact is that eclipses occur with a certain exact regularity just as Christmas and birthdays do, every so many years, days and minutes, so that anyone who has the records of the eclipses of thousands of years can predict them as well as the best astronomers, without any knowledge of their cause.”

-Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (40)

File: 20170227_174308.jpg (198KB, 909x640px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 909x640px

>>18730353
Big bang.

>>18730964
This!
It can't be as far away as nasa says.

>>18730464
>I work for DEP and we constantly quote back the previous transmission so communication is clear.
So much 'tism. Do you also schedule meetings when you need to talk?

>>18730785
>Plus it's the only conspiracy theory that drives some people mad, suggesting assasination/euthanasia or incarceration of those who believe in it.
I would add vaccines to that list. People think you should be killed just because you don't want someone injecting shit into your newborn. Very dubious shit to say the least.