27
posted ago by throwaway_27_ ago by throwaway_27_ +44 / -17

I noticed some folks in c/Conspiracies/p/15IXWXnIo6 arguing about the shape of the Earth. It doesn't look to be in bad faith, so I create this post for anyone interested.

Personally, looking at the Sun (ouch) and the Moon is enough for me.

Comments (660)
sorted by:
17
cribbage 17 points ago +23 / -6

I think there are many compelling reasons to look into flat earth.

The suggestion that earth's atmosphere is held together by gravity, while it sits next to an infinite vacuum simply defies anything we know about physics. If space is vacuum it would be impossible for our atmosphere to exists without a solid barrier ("firmament") containing it.

It is absurd to suggest that the moon orbits around the earth in a perfectly predictable manner, like it was on rails, and this is from "gravity". Meanwhile the earth orbits around a sun in the same manner, in an exact same pattern for 1000s of years. all these forces at work moving balls millions of miles without one iota of decay or change. invisible strings is a more convincing argument than "gravity". Any scientific experiment regarding centrifugal force or attempting to model these type of orbits will invariably show decay and the 2 objects eventually collide or they fly away from one another. the predictable and reliable movements of the bodies in the sky simply has not been adequately explained by modern "science"

while not a proof of flat earth, the fact is NASA has been faking their space activities for 50+ years. They fake their photos of planets and the earth. Their videos of moon landings do not hold up as believable. There are videos showing fakes missions with the space shuttles. They are caught faking stuff with green screens on the ISS to this day. If they can't show us real videos and photos of the globe and space, why not? Its a valid starting point to question what else we are lied to about.

11
InfidelCastro11 11 points ago +17 / -6

If space is vacuum it would be impossible for our atmosphere to exists without a solid barrier ("firmament") containing it.

Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.

all these forces at work moving balls millions of miles without one iota of decay or change

Strawman. Orbits do change and decay. Why argue against something you don't understand. The actual proposed orbits are way more fucked up looking than what you saw in textbooks, all that shit is dumbed down for kids and retards.

It is an odd coincidence that the moon orbits at a rate that keeps the same side facing us at all times. Another odd coincidence is the sun being exactly far enough away from us to be the same size as the moon in the sky

NASA has been faking their space activities for 50+ years

Yep, seems that way.

12
aaarrrrjunas1 12 points ago +12 / -0

im offended at your use of "retard."

i identify as retard.

3
aaarrrrjunas1 3 points ago +3 / -0

the updoots are sending me mixed messages.

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Don't worry, only true intellectuals can give themselves shit and call themselves retarded.

1
aaarrrrjunas1 1 point ago +2 / -1

youre a GOD-DAMN FED, too.

like fcukn god-damn roaches.

MODS... if this TURD of a FCUK refuses to jack off into a coffin.... y'all need to do cleanup action on his FAKE and GAY ass.

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +2 / -0

excuse me sir, prepare your anus for the following argument of the century:

no u

1
aaarrrrjunas1 1 point ago +1 / -0

U W0t?

12
Afks 12 points ago +13 / -1

“Stop noticing things”

  • nasa
1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
InfidelCastro11 1 point ago +3 / -2

No, there isn't. A vacuum is just nothing. It's not a force, there's no reason it would rip away the atmosphere. You people really have no grasp of physics. If you have a particle floating in a vacuum, it will move towards a source of gravity. And stay there.

2
Barrabbas 2 points ago +2 / -0

Gravity doesn't exist.

1
InfidelCastro11 1 point ago +1 / -0

What do you call it when you let go of something and it falls to the ground?

1
Barrabbas 1 point ago +1 / -0

I stopped lifting something that's heavier than the air and can't glide on it, so it falls. I call it what it is. Falling.

1
InfidelCastro11 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cool story, why does it fall?

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +3 / -2

Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.

So you're saying that a force of 9.8m/s², a force so weak that a bug can fly against it, is strong enough to hold off an infinite vacuum? Do I have that right?

1
InfidelCastro11 1 point ago +3 / -2

You have no grasp of physics at all.

a force of 9.8m/s²

That's not a measurement of force. Try again

What happens when the bug stops flying? Wonder if that happens to things that aren't a bug too. "Things go up, so gravity not real" is a pretty braindead take. This whole thing would be more interesting if flat earthers had a coherent physics model, but you never have and never will.

hold off an infinite vacuum

You don't need to "hold off" a vacuum. It's not exerting force on anything. It helps to have some understanding of what you're trying to argue against.

Do things move if no force is being exerted on them?

0
VicariousJambi 0 points ago +3 / -3

Ah so I guess you’re just gonna ignore the point. Alright.

1
InfidelCastro11 1 point ago +3 / -2

I addressed everything you said. Tell me what I ignored.

0
VicariousJambi 0 points ago +2 / -2

The point is it makes absolutely no sense for an infinite vacuum to not suck all of the air off of earth.

3
InfidelCastro11 3 points ago +4 / -1

Nope. Shitty understanding of physics. A vacuum isn't a force, it's just empty space. A gas particle sitting in a vacuum has no reason not to move towards a source of gravity.

0
jack445566778899 0 points ago +5 / -5

Gas has mass. There's no reason gravity should have no effect on it.

There is if mass and gravitation are entirely mathematical fiction with no reality outside of equation! It is not coincidence that when combined they annihilate each other and return to the real and measured weight they began as!

Strawman

If it is a strawman, who are they falsely attributing the view to and when do they intend to burn it down for rhetorical purpose?

Another odd coincidence is the sun being exactly far enough away from us to be the same size as the moon in the sky

There are many such coincidences ;) The three body problem has no solution, nor did it ever.

I think I’ve invited you before, but all the same - please join us on the community I created to further explore, discuss, and exchange views on these topics!

5
InfidelCastro11 5 points ago +7 / -2

There is if mass and gravitation are entirely mathematical fiction with no reality outside of equation

TIL things don't actually fall when I drop them, it's just an equation. Flat earthers are quick to dismiss something as fiction while never providing a working model of physics.

If it is a strawman

They're strawmanning the conventional model of space. You know this. You're just being obtuse. They said that it's absurd to suggest that orbits don't change, no model of space suggests that orbits don't change. It's just mind numbing ignorance of the opposite position.

5
jack445566778899 5 points ago +7 / -2

TIL things don't actually fall when I drop them, it's just an equation.

Well you didn’t learn that from me!

Equations are just equations. Math is merely a descriptive symbolic language.

Phenomena, like falling for instance, are phenomena! They are real because we can observe and measure them, not because we can describe them in one language or another. Indeed we can describe many things (phenomena included) that do not exist to observe, and are not real. Gravitation and mass are two such examples. As I said, it is not coincidence that they annihilate one another and return to the real and measured weight they began as!

Flat earthers are quick to dismiss something as fiction while never providing a working model of physics.

I know that this has been your experience. In general, there are no flat earthers. You have been misinformed/misled by a psyop. I am a flat earth researcher, and I care about science deeply. There are good reasons and justifications for my statements that only require your interest and time to understand.

They're strawmanning the conventional model of space. You know this.

I think they are earnestly describing their understanding of the conventional astronomical model, and are not doing so for rhetorical purpose. A strawman is for the purpose of making your opponent in a debate look stupid by attributing false (and contrived) stupid views to them and then handily defeating (setting fire to the strawman/effigy) them to convince onlookers. I don’t think that is what they are doing here.

They said that it's absurd to suggest that orbits don't change, no model of space suggests that orbits don't change.

All the original ones do. Newtons did, for instance. That’s one of the reasons he invented our modern concept of the “vacuum of space”. He understood that if space were not entirely empty - then collision would upset and change the clockwork heavens which he knew from 1000’s of years of available astronomical recording did not take place. I am aware that modern models do suggest that orbits change over time, but there is precious little observation to actually support these assertions.

Archeoastronomy flatly refutes such assertions, as does the antikythera device and epicycles which are still used today for prediction of eclipses (and other things) in the most sophisticated models available.

It's just mind numbing ignorance of the opposite position.

That may be, but it isn’t a strawman (if the above is truly your view).

3
Barrabbas 3 points ago +3 / -0

Gravity doesn't exist, retard.

0
jack445566778899 0 points ago +1 / -1

Gravity doesn't exist

This is a common misconception, in my view. I think we likely agree on the meaning, and disagree on the verbiage.

Gravity, the scientific/natural law, has existed (been defined/known) for millennia. It is merely the phenomenon of falling. In its simplest form it is the statement “what goes up, must come down”. Natural laws in science are just phenomena; they do not speculate on cause and are merely “the what” established by measurement.

The people who say “gravity” causes things to fall, are imprecise with their words and incorrect. It is gravitation that is supposed to cause things to fall (though , relativistically speaking, not directly - gravitation is taught as a pseudoforce today)

I think we agree (and/or should) that the scientific law of gravity (aka falling) is demonstrably real, but that it is gravitation which doesn’t exist. Right?

retard.

If you can resist, it is best to avoid ad hominem. It is the last resort of the intellectually weak, and is across purposes to learning/teaching and communication of any kind.

1
Barrabbas 1 point ago +1 / -0

Shut up, retard.

5
Partofthepsyop 5 points ago +6 / -1

Read up on the electric universe model. The firmament is a plasma double layer created by massive voltage difference we can measure. Orbits are caused by electric currents in the interstellar plasma (space is not a vacuum).

3
VicariousJambi 3 points ago +4 / -1

I've heard of the electric universe theory before but I haven't done a deep dive on it, can you recommend a documentary on it?

5
Partofthepsyop 5 points ago +5 / -0

The Top 10 Reasons Why the Universe is Electric video series (Thunderbolts Project) on youtube or thunderbolts.info is a good place to start.

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks, will look into it. Here's the link for anyone else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZnfNuXiExQ

3
throwaway_27_ [S] 3 points ago +4 / -1

the predictable and reliable movements of the bodies in the sky simply has not been adequately explained by modern "science"

While it can still accurately predict all Solar eclipses for this century. Can you provide an instance where the current understanding of things predicted things incorrectly?

9
cribbage 9 points ago +10 / -1

My point is that we can accurately predict everything that happens in the sky - it runs like a clockwork that is quite knowable. What I am questioning is what we are told of how that reliability is maintained - i.e. "gravity" holding it all together at exact lengths and exact speeds that exactly repeat themselves year after year for 1000s of years. "gravity" as we know it would not achieve that sort of reliability and exactness, and would instead lead to a full decay of the orbit over time, or objects would eventually spin away from one another.

Also I should say this is not a flat-earth proof. I am only pointing out that our current models taught are just fairy tales and built on a house of cards. We needn't pretend that we know how the sky operates.

5
VicariousJambi 5 points ago +6 / -1

I’ve heard this claimed many times, but no one’s ever actually linked me like a working 3d model (or video of the model rather) of the heliocentric solar system / galaxy with the planets and stars accurately spinning in the right patterns and such.

1
Celest 1 point ago +3 / -2

Yes, too many variables, too perfect of an experience (physically, at least).

3
VicariousJambi 3 points ago +3 / -0

Here's one.

Pseudo-Scientific Moon Mathe-Magic [3mins 20 Seconds]- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcsazyX1fwg

Here's another

Daylight Debunks the Globe [5mins 29 Seconds] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlNhPXCH5cA

2
throwaway_27_ [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

Since those are short videos, can you lay down the most important points from them here? Makes things easier to quote and respond to, and for everyone to follow.

6
VicariousJambi 6 points ago +6 / -0

I'm not going to summarize a 3 and a 5 min video dude. People are going to either choose to watch them or not.

3
CalradianEmperor 3 points ago +6 / -3

A vacuum is just a (near)-absence of anything that has mass and occupy volume...gases have mass and occupy volume, thus gravity has an effect on gases as it does on us.

7
Celest 7 points ago +7 / -0

A gas (high pressure) will always fill a vacuum (low pressure) until pressure equalizes. You can't have the two next to each other.

Fun fact: this is also how vacuum cleaners work. A pressure drop is created within an inner chamber that forces the air outside (higher pressure) to rush into the vacuum cleaner.

2
CalradianEmperor 2 points ago +4 / -2

Gravitational attraction between the gases in our atmosphere and the Earth prevents this from occurring.

1
ChippingToe 1 point ago +2 / -1

You know how farts smell less as you move away? That's how the atmosphere works

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

You move away?

16
VicariousJambi 16 points ago +17 / -1

Here's a mega list of videos on Flat Earth I made.

https://communities.win/c/FlatEarth/p/141roCfDT4/resources/c

Anyone that feels like asking questions about the "flat earth model" feel free to shoot them at me and I'll answer as best I can.

1
Miztivin 1 point ago +4 / -3

Late but here are some question.

Why would everything be pointing at us?

If we're flat, then that means everything is flat, and facing us. Like saturn and the moon. Why us? Shouldnt some things be at an angle?

Why doesn't satalite photos of earth show all the contenints at once? I know yall think those are fake.

But if they are, then how do satalites work? How would I be using my starlink wifi right now? Or how does your GPS work?

Lastly. Why wouldnt I fall off the edge. Cant people just fly around the world? That would be a simple way to prove it. People have hobbie planes.

7
VicariousJambi 7 points ago +7 / -0

Why would everything be pointing at us?

I believe that we and this earth are created. That must just be how it was created.

If we're flat, then that means everything is flat, and facing us. Like saturn and the moon. Why us? Shouldnt some things be at an angle?

Well just because the surface of the earth is flat doesn't mean that the sun and stars are flat as well. We can't tell what they exactly are. If you zoom in on stars they're not even sphereical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr5UjBGO4BA

Why doesn't satalite photos of earth show all the contenints at once? I know yall think those are fake. But if they are, then how do satalites work? How would I be using my starlink wifi right now? Or how does your GPS work?

Balloons. They touch on this in the Level Documentary. I watched an in depth one on it once but I cant seem to find it anymore :(

Edit: I think its this https://www.bitchute.com/video/zwbXBctYHDTg/

Why wouldnt I fall off the edge. Cant people just fly around the world? That would be a simple way to prove it. People have hobbie planes.

We're not sure whats past the ice wall. Anyone claiming they do doesn't know what they're talking about. We're not sure if its an infinite plane or of it stops somewhere after the ice wall. Normal people aren't allowed to go past, which is why no one has done it in a hobby plane or successfully sailed there.

4
Celest 4 points ago +4 / -0

I watched an in depth one on it once but I cant seem to find it anymore :(

Edit: I think its this https://www.bitchute.com/video/zwbXBctYHDTg/

I haven't watched the video yet (will do), but I recognize that guy's voice. I've seen a video of him where he phones NASA and asks about the SOFIA aircraft/Hubble telescope. He makes a very convincing argument that Hubble may have never existed and that the images we've seen may have come from SOFIA.

4
PaperInk 4 points ago +4 / -0

Satellites literally don't exist my friend.

3
Celest 3 points ago +4 / -1

I suppose those are reasonable questions given what you've been taught "flat earth" to be. However, "flat earth" doesn't just stop at the surface of the Earth, but puts under question the entire construct (which, I assume, you believe to be an ever-expanding universe with objects floating about).

I suggest you watch How Everything Works on Flat Earth or Level, which is more of a movie-style presentation. You'll find answers to your questions there, and more.

0
savman 0 points ago +4 / -4

Why would you take the word of this idiot says as 'fact' vs. someone who has taken live video cameras into space from liftoff to space showing a nice, clear image of our ball earth? The amount of stupid in this video is amazing how anyone could be so ignorant of reality.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
perpetualmaniac 0 points ago +4 / -4

Why does the flat earth community cling to the earth-curvature formula of:

8" per mile squared

This quadradic is NOT how the earth curvature is measured. If for example, you traveled the circumference of the earth, the real curvature formula would yield 0, because you end up right where you started. Yet the flat earth narrative claims 8" per mile squared would yield not zero but a VERY BIG NUMBER.

Isn't this a problem for the FE community?

7
Celest 7 points ago +7 / -0

8" per mile squared

That's just an approximation that is practical only for short distances (say, up to 1000 miles). None of the curvature calculators use it, AFAIK. Here's a list of some of them:

And here's a graphic that shows how the curvature is calculated.

4
VicariousJambi 4 points ago +4 / -0

Ah, thanks for answering for me. I couldn't tell what he was exactly getting at.

1
perpetualmaniac 1 point ago +2 / -1

The 8" per mile squared is the mainstream FE argument endlessly recycled on the YouTube videos.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
ghost_of_aswartz 0 points ago +6 / -6

I want you to notice HOW many comments there are on this particular thread as compared to ALL other threads. It's almost like, a flood the zone situation or a "massively coordinated forum slide". Because in any truly democratic 'conspiracy' forum there will be a diversity of opinion, and one very strong opinion is that FE is not worthy of spending time on, when there are so many other more germaine conspiracies in the political space exploding literally every minute.

That is how you know that some group is really is pushing this. They've shown their hand here. FE threads get disproportionate activity here in this particular conspiracy forum, rather than things that actually matter more.

Say that FE is true. That means we're not going anywhere right? SPace may not be real. Or if it is, what's space doing for US? Nothing right? Maybe we're under a big bubble, or in a simulation and the earth is flat.

If you believed that were true--that the earth is flat--then why they hell would you spend your precious time in this planar existence NOT talking about other conspiraices that affect you so much more. Like 9/11, OKC, who killed JFK. These affect you much more than FE or globe earth. Right? None of us here that aren't billionaires are NEVER. EVER> going to space if the earth is round OR flat. Space = irrelevant no matter how you stand on this subject.

So why spend your time talking about FE, instead of say, Russiagate? Or Machine learning Fairness at google? Or AI / AGI? Transhumanism? Or any of the other 'threats' than people trying to fool you into thinking that the earth is round?

Its like terence mckenna says, 'what is culture doing for YOU? Nothing is what.'

switch culture for flat earth vs round earth discussion

2
ChippingToe 2 points ago +3 / -1

Flat earth is the meat shield ideology to NASA's moon hoax.

1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

"Welcome, kids, to mental gymnastics 101!"

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-3
ghost_of_aswartz -3 points ago +2 / -5

and btw, I started the first downvote on my own comment on behalf of the flat earth community. I am here to serve.

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +2 / -0

You’re not making much sense here, please make a sensible question I can answer.

1
perpetualmaniac 1 point ago +2 / -1

The question was in the very first sentence.

-5
ghost_of_aswartz -5 points ago +0 / -5

You're not going to win here Zach. I appreciate your effort, but logic and reason and facts are a prob for FEr's

4
Celest 4 points ago +4 / -0

logic and reason and facts are a prob for FEr's

It is amazing how you people throw these things around with so much ease.

What's a "flat earther" anyway?

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
10
Afks 10 points ago +13 / -3

146 comments and only +10 votes

FE posts are always suppressed

Edit: 166 comments and now only +7

Last edit: After 6 days, 410 comments and +20

5
deleted 5 points ago +7 / -2
2
junky_junk_junk 2 points ago +2 / -0

My man!

2
575guy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Figured that out a while ago

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
3
575guy 3 points ago +3 / -0

I’m on less and less lately

2
junky_junk_junk 2 points ago +2 / -0

Consume Product is still fun tho...just don't try and refute christianity, they gatekeep that shit like crazy.

3
MindlessRationality 3 points ago +6 / -3

Yeah. The shear amount of interest and engagement is shocking. I am definitely a skeptic of the shape....and maps. But neither has won me over completely.

I have read enough of the shoulders of giants to get a good idea of the globe model.

But the flat earth needs its math a bit better.

4
Afks 4 points ago +4 / -0

I’m interested in what you might be referring to with the flat earth math

Not because I’m trying to be argumentative but because I’m genuinely curious

I’m just following the evidence wherever it takes me and it’s been looking planar to me for a couple of years now but if there’s contradicting evidence to the planar surface then I’d like to investigate!

0
MindlessRationality 0 points ago +5 / -5

The math of FE has a lot to be desired.

They frequently reference perspective and density and deny gravity.

These are all mathematical concepts when it comes to modelling. Perspective they are good at describing.

Yet they don't apply the same review of density. They should be able to describe the Motions of objects in various mediums without depending on any gravity.....

That means ... How do you measure mass....write the equations that describe motion through fluids without account for gravity...etc.

These equations must exist....if they are supposed to represent the concepts accurately....

Same with curvature and the idea of relative perspective drops. If it is perspective then that would account for perceived heights....not absolute, however, if Gravity exists......then space time curves.....so light follows the curve....but is straight....so that idea also....not great....needs more math...

I suggest volume ... We should be able to devise a volumetric test which will be able to be used to discern a curve over large distances but this would require enormous expense.

6
Esuomyonana 6 points ago +6 / -0

The study of aeronautics accomplishes this. It's a mix of fluid mechanics and dynamics.

There's engineers who will never come out as FE or even question the shape. I'm a failed engineer myself, never cost anyones life though.

Buoyancy helps with movement. This is how boats float, it's how planes fly with lift.

volume = mass / density

So density = mass / volume

It's all related.

Mass is real so isn't volume.

You want an equation that suggests density over acceleration of g, equivalent to 9.8 m/s^2 or 32 ft/s^2

The problem with your question is it depends on the medium your moving through and at what angle. That's why I suggested aeronautics.

Objects tend to fall slower in water because there's more drag.

9.8 m/s^2 is basically junk physics because it just describes what can occur in a vacuum.

You did just get me thinking about why an object would fall faster in a near vacuum. If gravity is fake, it has to be because the mass is denser than that near empty space. I don't know if gravity is fake, just shooting out ideas. But given that the moon mission was likely faked, we honestly don't have a lot of other planetary bodies to run these types of experiments. on. I believe it mostly theoretical at this point.

1
brahbruh 1 point ago +2 / -1

Why do you say you are a failed engineer? Did you just give up on the career path and move on?

1
Esuomyonana 1 point ago +1 / -0

I say it because that's what I am. I like telling people the truth about reality.

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +3 / -2

They should be able to describe the Motions of objects in various mediums without depending on any gravity.....

The things you are talking about are trivial/easy.

How do you measure mass

You can’t measure things that don’t exist in reality. You can calculate them, however. Mass is merely the intrinsic weight of an object (weight minus the buoyant force).

These equations must exist

They do. But the existence of an equation proves nothing about reality.

if Gravity exists......then space time curves

Not according to newton, no.

so light follows the curve

There are no demonstrable examples of this in reality. Lights path can only be altered by direct interaction with matter.

needs more math

Math worship is a scourge. When discussing science, I prefer english (as did most all other scientists in the history of the discipline).

We should be able to devise a volumetric test which will be able to be used to discern a curve over large distances

This is an interesting idea. Even if just for the thought exercise, you should further flesh it out / refine it. Perhaps share it on the community I created to discuss such things?

1
deleted 1 point ago +4 / -3
3
perpetualmaniac 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is your guy?

$10,000(TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS) CASH, WILL BE awarded to ANYONE who can provide ONE piece of FACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE evidence to support two things. A). The CURVATURE of the alleged spinning ball earth B). The MOTION of the alleged spinning ball earth

Yeah, it's physically impossible to prove the absolute motion of earth given that THERE'S NO STATIONARY OBJECT IN SPACE WE CAN COMPARE THAT TOO.

No one is EVER getting that money.

8
Earthworm 8 points ago +11 / -3

For me, the curvature is the big issue. Clearly, we can see objects farther than just 6 miles or whatever. Things that according to the trig, should be hidden by the curvature. This is common across the world and I havent seen a reasonable explanation from globe earthers.

I am not saying the earth is flat, maybe the earth is like 1000x bigger than they say so the curvature is off.

But this is something normal people in everyday life can discuss.

I think there was a video of being able to see across one of the great lakes. That shouldn't be possible.

5
IGOexiled 5 points ago +10 / -5

When you "see" objects at a distance, what you mean is that photons originating from the object reach your eyes. Atmosphere, air, is a fluid. Fluids bend light. You can see beyond the mathematically theoretical horizon because the photons reflect off of the layers of different temperature air.

Edit: here's what I'm saying. The red is the angle of the light, the triangle represents atmosphere acting as a prism. https://ibb.co/GTNjgxb

6
MudFlood 6 points ago +6 / -0

Which is it then? Glober scientists show „curvature“ like a ship disappearing beyond the „curve“ and then someone with a scope/p900 camera zoom in on it and discount the curve.

Now all light is bending around the Earth??? With no distortion? Perfect mirages all over and fairly regularly with no reversal, distortion, etc. I don‘t buy it.

The satellite imagary looks so CGI. We should have nonstop images/video of Earth from space available all the time, but nada. We should have cameras on the moon pointing at Earth. And then there are those literally hundreds of NASA green screen mistakes.

Maybe the Earth isn‘t flat, but why all the lies and mistakes? Why is Youtube and Google so into censoring search results with debunk videos? It just doesn‘t add up.

4
aaarrrrjunas1 4 points ago +5 / -1

somebody call the clintons on this TURD.

2
throwaway_27_ [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Things that according to the trig, should be hidden by the curvature.

Please provide the calculations that you're following.

4
Afks 4 points ago +6 / -2

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature

https://earthcurvature.com/

The second one doesn't allow for altitude so I use the first one

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

And what are the values you are inputting in the first one? Do you account for your geographical altitude when you input the "eyesight level"? What do you see that doesn't match with the calculator's output?

2
Afks 2 points ago +5 / -3

I encourage you to go try this for yourself!

Me explaining to you my figures and where I went or showing you a hundred videos of others doing the same won't ever convince you

Do you have a large body of water nearby you can test for yourself?

I live near the Great Lakes so this was easy for me to go test for myself

3
VicariousJambi 3 points ago +4 / -1

Not OP but I can reply about earth curvature calculations.


You can do a search and find earth curvature calculators such as these.

https://earthcurvature.com/

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature

For an example from my personal experience I can see a city thats 20-30 miles away. Laying down on the beach doesn't really change how much I can see so I'm not gonna bother with the eyesight level differences that the second calculator has, I'm gonna use the first.

So if I plug a number into this calculator, it spits out the amount an object should be hidden... From the bottom up according to the ball model.

20 miles: 0.05052 miles = 266.75 feet

30 miles: 0.11367 miles = 600.19 feet

So that means I shouldn't be able to see the bottom 266 feet of whatever is 20 miles away. I'm not sure exactly where they're getting that, as I can still see all of the beach on that opposing shore. Nothing at all looks like its hidden.

2
throwaway_27_ [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

I can see a city thats 20-30 miles away

Do you account for your geographical altitude when inputting the values in the second calculator's eyesight height field? My city is 500 meters above sea-level, so it shows the horizon as 50mi away.

What's your reasoning for not seeing objects much further? Why can't I see the Alps from where I am?

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +3 / -1

My city is 500 meters above sea-level, so it shows the horizon as 50mi away.

Thats....... not how that works. If you put in 500 meters for the altitude its like saying you're standing on a 500 meter tall building, not that the balls radius is 500m larger. The horizon is 50 miles away because you're up so high in relation to the radius of the earth. If you scroll down on that page they go over exactly all of the variables of the equation.

What's your reasoning for not seeing objects much further? Why can't I see the Alps from where I am?

Humidity. Eventually theres too much water to see through to get a clear picture of anything. This video goes over this concept in a little more depth.

Why Can't Everyone See Mount Everest on a Flat Earth? [3mins 5 seconds] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqvH0Y1L41s

0
throwaway_27_ [S] 0 points ago +2 / -2

Thats....... not how that works. If you scroll down on that page they go over exactly all of the variables of the equation.

Okay, let's discuss this. If we can't agree on how to use a calculator, what's the point in having it. I did scroll down the page, and it does say to input your eyesight level from the sea level:

h — Eyesight level above mean sea level;

https://files.catbox.moe/rkfn1f.png

If you put in 500 meters for the altitude its like saying you're standing on a 500 meter tall building, not that the balls radius is 500m larger. The horizon is 50 miles away because you're up so high in relation to the radius of the earth.

Yes, this is correct. Which is why I'm asking you, are you accounting for your geographic altitude (from sea-level) when you use that calculator?

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well you did leave this part out of the quote where I explained why this was incorrect to do. Edit: I see you edited in a comment on it

If you put in 500 meters for the altitude its like saying you're standing on a 500 meter tall building, not that the balls radius is 500m larger. The horizon is 50 miles away because you're up so high in relation to the radius of the earth.

The Calculator would have to have even more variables, altitude above sea level of viewing position and the position of what you're viewing for it to be even more accurate. You can see how that starts to get overly complicated when you get that specific. You probably couldn't even make a calculator out of it since you're not even using a simple ball anymore. They're using 3959 (r) as a constant just to make things simpler.

are you accounting for your geographic altitude (from sea-level) when you use that calculator?

In my original example of the cities, I checked the altitudes for both the place I am and the place I was viewing and they are the same altitude above sea level. If a 3959 mile radius ball (or whatever) is now 3959.5 that isn't gonna change a whole hell of a lot in the numbers. 266 feet is a lot. According to a quick search 1 "story" of a building is 14' tall. 266/14 = 19 Wheres the 19 story building hiding?

-2
Iknowitsu -2 points ago +4 / -6

Fake and gay shills talking to eachother.

Fake conversations.

Fake discussion.

Fake debate.

Fake issue.

0
Hand_Of_Node 0 points ago +1 / -1

earth-curvature

This is not found, and the link including it fails. The site itself is up, but that specific element has been removed or broken.

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Works for me. Just google “earth curvature calculator” there’s more of them

-1
Hand_Of_Node -1 points ago +1 / -2

After the link not working and control F not turning up a 'earth-curvature' link on the page, I physically scanned down until I found this near the bottom:

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/flat-vs-round-earth

Has some simple experiments to do that they claim will prove the earth is a ball. Haven't tried any, but the sunset twice method sounds like it has possibilities.

1
Nogrim1 1 point ago +3 / -2

why cant we all see mount everest?

4
VicariousJambi 4 points ago +4 / -0

Here you go

Why Can't Everyone See Mount Everest on a Flat Earth? [3mins 5 seconds] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqvH0Y1L41s

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +3 / -1

Because there is too much stuff (largely air) in the way that diverts and/or attenuates the light!

We can’t see forever, largely because light can’t travel forever!

Join us on the community I created to further explore questions like these!

-2
Nogrim1 -2 points ago +2 / -4

please make a big batch of rat poison koolaid for your community.

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

Your hatred is irrational and misplaced.

The flat earth believers you so loathe are products of a psyop. They need help, not murder.

The community i created here is for flat earth researchers, and they are not at all what you think they are. Judgement without evaluation is the height of ignorance.

Why not put your prejudice aside for a second and engage in a conversation? You will quickly realize that you’ve been duped.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hey, if you look hard enough, you might even be able see your own ass around the curvature.

1
aaarrrrjunas1 1 point ago +2 / -1

doin the good fight.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
0
jack445566778899 0 points ago +2 / -2

You seem to have an interest in the subject!

Please join us to further explore it and exchange our views on the community I created for that!

Click my username and find the link, or let me know and i’ll pm it to you.

1
aaarrrrjunas1 1 point ago +1 / -0

GTFO FED

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +1 / -0

What have I said that would make you think (incorrectly) that I’m a fed?

I may be stupid, and I may be wrong, but what I do - I do for love, brother or sister. The feds can’t afford me; there is literally not enough money in the world.

2
aaarrrrjunas1 2 points ago +2 / -0

LOOK AT YOU.

everything about you stinks. youre POOPY FED.

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +1 / -0

So, just a baseless accusation then... I guess that’s why you responded with such childishness instead of providing even one example which led to your erroneous conclusion.

Take care kid.

1
aaarrrrjunas1 1 point ago +1 / -0

brah, you literally and figuratively stink.

do not kill the messenger.

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +1 / -0

do not kill the messenger.

I wouldn’t dream of it.

But the messenger should try harder, if they can.

8
Allas8 8 points ago +14 / -6

Here is how you can prove that the heliocentric model is false by observing the sun. The sun always moves in a clockwise direction, no matter what time of the year, no matter where on earth you are, as you see the sun move from one side of the horizon to the other, it will make a right turn, from your perspective. In the heliocentric model, when the south pole is tilting towards the sun, the sun should move in a counter clockwise direction, as it moves across the sky, from your perspective.

Same with star trails. The north star always stays stationary, all the other stars rotates around the north star. The farther south you get, the bigger of a circle the star trails will make, as they move around the point of the north star. Even when you get passed the equator, the star trails keep getting bigger and bigger, the further south you get, proving that there is no south pole. If the heliocentric model was correct, it be easy to prove that the star trails was getting smaller and smaler when viewed from say Australia, in a south ward direction, as they do in the north.

While the moon, based on every single observation I have every made, is a disc, not a ball, as I have only seen one side of the moon.

12
deleted 12 points ago +14 / -2
4
junky_junk_junk 4 points ago +4 / -0

One of the few sources of pride in life is knowing that you broke free from the matrix mental prison they've crafted for you.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
RentFreeCrisisAct 1 point ago +3 / -2

Doesn't it.bother you guys that you will NEVER get a resolution for this simple question? There is no way to PROVE it besides this YouTube video and that guys argument. Don't you think it's a little odd that this is the case? Literally EVERYONE in the know keeps their mouth shut on this one. Just seems ...unsettling somehow.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

What do you mean "there is no way to prove it"?

1
RentFreeCrisisAct 1 point ago +3 / -2

Pretty cut and dry statement..Nobody trusts NADA (typo but I like it) and nobody trusts FEers. That means we are back at square one...right?

6
Celest 6 points ago +7 / -1

You are thinking of this in the wrong terms. There is no curvature, and that's not a debate, but an indisputable fact, regardless of what NASA or "FEers" say. You can debate about intangibles, but there being no curvature is a demonstrable fact, which anyone can verify for themselves. What more proof could anyone require (after all, the curvature is the foundation of the globe Earth)? Sure, the fact there's no curvature doesn't explain how the Sun and Moon work, etc., but that's another matter altogether, which you can look into later.

So, given there is no curvature, why assume everything else they've said is true? That's how you get images of earthy rectangles floating in space. Just what the captain ordered: nonsense!

Seriously, people have been psyopped beyond belief with this stuff. It's a weird experience, not unlike seeing vaxxies defending the vax.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
6
YuuugeAsshoe 6 points ago +6 / -0

I've had the same thought about the night sky circling around the north star (polaris), and I've seen plenty of time lapse videos of this. Can anyone find a time lapse video of the night sky circling around the point above our southern pole? Polaris Australis is allegedly the star closest to the point above our southern pole, as the controllers tell us. This should settle it unless the video is somehow faked.

I haven't been to the southern hemisphere for over 10 years, I wish I had investigated this for myself. If you live in Australia or NZ (further south it would be more apparent) you can just set up a camera on a clear night, point it directly south, and take a time lapse of the sky. You should see the stars circling around the point above the southern pole, if we in fact live on a globe. If we live on the FE Allas8 described, the stars should still be circling around the north pole.

4
Celest 4 points ago +5 / -1

Yeah, stars in the southern hemisphere do seem to revolve around Polaris Australis/Sigma Octantis. There are videos of it, but you could also use https://stellarium-web.org to view [a simulation of] the sky.

There's a video Eric Dubay made about this topic: How the Southern Stars Work on Flat Earth (odysee link). I think it's a pretty good explanation for what's occurring.

5
illuphantasm 5 points ago +5 / -0

NASA's heliocentric model is clearly wrong. I enjoy the science behind Flat Earth because it creates an accurate understanding of the magnetic power behind the world. For me personally, the stars has always been the dividing line between Flat Earth and the geocentric model. This video makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

2
DangerCat 2 points ago +3 / -1

Your first paragraph makes no sense. I really don't understand what you mean. I live in a northerly country, so the sun should always rotate 'clockwise' according to the heliocentric model -- which is does.

1
CalradianEmperor 1 point ago +2 / -1

But if the sun rises in the east and sets in the west (which it does), doesn't it mean it moves counterclockwise?

5
Allas8 5 points ago +6 / -1

No. Track the position of the sun every hour you see it in the sky for a day, draw a line between the positions you have marked, and you will see that it moves in a clockwise circle, always.

0
CalradianEmperor 0 points ago +2 / -2

Don't you think it's relative though? If you're facing North, then it's moving counterclockwise, but if you're facing South, you're moving clockwise. So this argument has no validity.

1
Allas8 1 point ago +2 / -1

I do not think it is relative, no. The sun moves in a constant clockwise direction, whether you face North or South when looking at the sun. Only difference is if you are inside our outside the the circle the sun makes across our sky.

-3
Nogrim1 -3 points ago +4 / -7

the sun moves in the sky because the earth is the thing that is spinning.

go sit on a merry go round and think about it.

2
Allas8 2 points ago +4 / -2

A merry go around is flat though. Based on which way you spin, the sun will either spin in a clockwise direction, or a counter clock wise direction, no matter the position of the sun. not matter where on the Merry go around you are, perfectly demonstarting the principal I lay out.

Start spinning a ball on the other hand, and the sun will either move in a clock wise direction, or a counter clock wise direction, based on if you are on top of the ball, or under the ball.

-2
Nogrim1 -2 points ago +2 / -4

i have no reply, you clearly know what your talking about.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
6
alltheleavesarebrown 6 points ago +8 / -2

Real life observations dont match the official curve formula.

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/

Have you seen city or landscapes tilting back as they recede?

Feel the earth move? except for earthquake and xxx.

4
Menziess 4 points ago +5 / -1

I’ve shot a video of the lake I live nearby. According to the curvature calculation, I shouldn’t be able to see most of the village on the other side (about 20m behind curve of I remember correctly). But still I can see buildings, boats, trees, full windmills.

But when I look in the far distance, I see a windmill’s blades just slicing theough the water / horizon. As if it were built inside the lake.

1
alltheleavesarebrown 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep. Account for the curve of your own eyes on motionless ground.

0
brahbruh 0 points ago +1 / -1

Wait, are you saying that you see mostly full windmills all the way across the lake, but then you also see a certain windmill that looks like it is behind the curve mostly (just the blades coming out of the water)? Or is that one windmill further than the rest?

-8
Iknowitsu -8 points ago +4 / -12

More shills talking to themselves and their alt accounts to create the impression of a serious discussion.

Fake astroturfed bs.

6
deleted 6 points ago +9 / -3
-2
Hand_Of_Node -2 points ago +3 / -5

Mainly that's because of the things the flatters say. And they do say a lot instead of simply showing proof that the earth is flat, or at least not as round as reported.

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
0
Hand_Of_Node 0 points ago +2 / -2

The webpage at https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature might be temporarily down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address.

https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/flat-vs-round-earth

Found the calculator for proving ball earth before finding the earth-curvature link, which oddly refuses to open. Only clicking the link on that page works, even though it's the same address.

you sure think you know a lot of about what flat earthers say and do.

Have been exchanging messages with them since Blackguard19 on voat.

The laser video is interesting, but that guy needs to go through puberty or use a voice changer. I have a bit over 20 miles of water to look across, and am going to check the visibility for myself. What do you think of the "second sunset" exercise in the other link?

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
5
Barrabbas 5 points ago +8 / -3

Flat Earth is an iq test. If you believe you are spinning upside down, you lost.

-1
savman -1 points ago +4 / -5

OK. let's take an IQ test written by a moron. Lol.

1
Barrabbas 1 point ago +2 / -1

You already are a moron. Nothing would change for you.

4
Hand_Of_Node 4 points ago +6 / -2

Parts of the earth are flat.

6
Afks 6 points ago +7 / -1

Parts of the earth are flat, indeed!

There’s a great video by Eric Dubay pointing out many of the great flatlands around our world and I’m not even sure that he mentions the great abyssal plains which are vast flat ocean floor surfaces

Adding up all of these large flatlands, we don’t even need to consider other evidence against the globe as it would be impossibly curved in the other areas to make up for all of the lost curvature due to flatlands

0
savman 0 points ago +3 / -3

Not at all correct. The problem with you FEs is that you can't understand how large the earth is. Your perception of what is in front of you is only 5Km in each direction. From there, the curve begins to obscure the bottom of things. Flat lands and oceans all are pulled equally in all directions toward the center of the earth's mass. Einstein predicted that time slows down the closer you get to a large mass. Using atomic clocks, scientists have proven him right. With a black hole, even light cannot escape the gravitational pull. Water is an element affected by gravity, that, being pulled from all sides equally allows it to 'stick' to the curved earth, the same way Saturn's rings orbit the planet, or ice sheets spread around planets. The observations have been theorized, and then proven by people infinitely smarter than you. Your issue is intelligence. You are dumb, they are smart. Gravity is real and powerful, your brain is simply too stoopid to comprehend these facts.

4
nc777 4 points ago +5 / -1

I'm agnostic on the subject, but see some good (and bad) arguments on both sides. (This is just how I view the different arguments, I could be missing something.)

  1. Water is flat argument is flawed by droplet of water, water meniscus surface tension would hold water together in a round shape as it does in free fall state. There is video of water in fake 'space' (which is probably filmed in a free fall location showing large balls of water floating and held together. those videos don't appear to be cgi and also work with water and know it's surface tension is a strong force. - no point awarded to firmament earth.

  2. Laser measurement of large lakes or Suez Canal showing the expected drop in height due to curvature does not exist, -point goes to firmament earth.

  3. Eclipse w/ Sun and Moon the same size give low probability of natural occurrence of 2 objects at dramatically unequal distances being the exact same size (93 million miles and 239000 miles, sun and moon respectively). -point goes to firmament earth but a bit more circumstantial or probabilistic.

  4. Idea that atmosphere can't exist in vacuum of space and that this disproves ball earth - atmospheric pressure drops w/ elevation which can be observed at high elevations with either pressure gauge or just breathing. for example 4000m in altitude is a loss of ~40% pressure. at some point the pressure approaches zero. -no point awarded to firmament earth.

  5. Observation of moon showing plane of focus closer than expected for 239000 mile distance - point firmament earth.

  6. In southern hemisphere the moon rises in the sky 'upside down' from the orientation that it is observed in the northern hemisphere (i've witnessed this in australia). this did not occur in europe, north america, asia (which i've also witnessed). i don't see how this rotation and orientation is explained on the firmament earth model.

4
VicariousJambi 4 points ago +5 / -1

Water is flat argument is flawed by droplet of water, water meniscus surface tension would hold water together in a round shape as it does in free fall state.

This is obvious misinterpretation of whats meant by "water is flat" man, come on.

atmospheric pressure drops w/ elevation which can be observed at high elevations with either pressure gauge or just breathing. for example 4000m in altitude is a loss of ~40% pressure. at some point the pressure approaches zero

This exactly makes sense with the flat earth model and density.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbCGrG0c2gI

What doesnt make sense is that the atmosphere is there at all, with no barrier between it and a vacuum.

In southern hemisphere the moon rises in the sky 'upside down' from the orientation that it is observed in the northern hemisphere (i've witnessed this in australia). this did not occur in europe, north america, asia (which i've also witnessed). i don't see how this rotation and orientation is explained on the firmament earth model.

I'm not 100% sure what you're exactly talking about here, but maybe this video can explain some.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-w8acuxF6w

1
nc777 1 point ago +2 / -1

I look at photos of curved water all the time at work. It's called a meniscus. it can curve in a lot of different directions depending on surface tension factors. I think there are stronger arguments for the firmament earth case.


Thanks for the atmosphere video, i'll check it out. Atmosphere could have variable pressure w/ altitude in the firmament model, but some claim the ball mode is invalid because it is a gas without a container next to a basically infinite vacuum.


For the moon thing, have you ever looked up and saw the 'face' on the moon or 'man on the moon'? When it rises in the southern hemisphere it comes up upsidedown to how it is seen in the northern hemisphere. it's actually kinda freaky if you're not expecting it. constellations are upsidedown too. i've seen it irl. happened in australia but not south asia or europe or north america. https://astronomy.com/magazine/ask-astro/2014/02/a-matter-of-perspective (only sharing the link for the phenomena which can be found elsewhere not necessarily the explanation.)

3
VicariousJambi 3 points ago +3 / -0

surface tension factors

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

and when surface tension is a negligible factor in the “flatness” of something, say, anything larger than a test tube, then it always appears flat. You wouldn’t say the surface of a swimming pool has any curve to it.

some claim the ball mode is invalid because it is a gas without a container next to a basically infinite vacuum.

That’s exactly what i’m saying. Gravity is a force so weak that bugs can go against it, but so strong it can hold air in against an infinite vacuum? Really?

And i think that last one i linked is the correct video to explain the differences in perception between the hemispheres.

1
Ausernamegoeshere 1 point ago +1 / -0

What holds a bug to flat earth?

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +2 / -0

Its need for food.

1
Ausernamegoeshere 1 point ago +2 / -1

Please share the math on the attractiveness of bugs to food source.

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +2 / -0

if bug fly too high for too long then bug no find food and die

2
Afks 2 points ago +3 / -1

Sit on one side of your room and look up at the light in the ceiling

Then move to the opposite side of the room and look up at the same ceiling light

It’s upside down, same as the moon when comparing n and s hemispheres

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
0
jack445566778899 0 points ago +1 / -1

If the earth is flat. That means there is a huge cover up, right?

Nope!

Humanity requires no “cover up” in order to be stupid and wrong as it historically always is!

So that means some of the flat earth arguments youve seen are strawmen.

Most of them, yes (though not technically “strawmen”, but false positions you are intended to repeat so that you may be easily discredited and drive others away from the subject) . The flat earth psyop is very real and heavily advertised (i.e. funded).

All real flat earth arguments are proofs.

Proofs don’t really exist outside of mathematics. The only “proof” (a subjective term) of the shape of any physical object (the earth included) is rigorous and repeated measurement of that object! “Flat earth arguments” can’t be proofs, for the same reason that the “globe earth arguments” can’t be. Arguments can never be proofs! Right?

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
0
jack445566778899 0 points ago +1 / -1

proofs dont exist outside of mathematics...oh jez.

Not objectively. Proof is very personal/subjective! That’s all I meant.

proof can be defined lots of ways, but in the end, it means undeniable fact

Right, that is kind of my point. There is no such thing as an undeniable fact, or a fact that does not deserve/warrant doubt/scrutiny/skepticism. Facts are merely claims declared as true by our authorities. They are arbitrary, and generally speaking - incorrect. It is merely a question of how long we must wait until we recognize why. It’s called “the half life of facts” and is a very important concept to become familiar and comfortable with. Doubt is the mother/driver of knowledge and science.

Beyond that, people are a subjective/mythological/religious/superstitious lot. It is painfully trivial to deny any fact - true or not - at a whim. This is one of the reasons that we must be ever vigilant to identify and excise belief (aka bias) within us, including the belief that what we think we know is inerrant/infallible. We must do this to have even the slim chance of objective study of reality and to know.

because you are still thinking that globe earth could be possible, and its not as i have shown in our discussion

Not me personally, no - but many/most are! Helping them to recognize why the globe model we are taught to accept is incorrect and how we can demonstrate that is very important and involves a LOT of discussion (typically). Still, we cannot force them - they must want to learn and choose to do so for themselves. No discussion can provide proof to another (even when/just because it serves as proof for you)

You think all flat earth content is psyop because earth is not flat,

I don’t feel that way at all! What have I said that made you think that?

and that makes you blind to the real flat earth content and getting it confused with the funded flat earth psyop designed to throw people off.

There is precious little “real flat earth content” but it does exist out there - and is typically individuals conducting their own independent research (no mass exposure via youtube or otherwise) for their own knowledge/edification. The rule of thumb is - if they are popular / well known / profitable, they are agents and/or useful idiots of the psyop. The psyop doesn’t just throw people off, it drives them away from earnest research and discussion thereof as well as encourages them to swallow and repeat stupid and clearly untrue things to further discredit the valuable endeavor/subject.

because its too time consuming

It is very time consuming, but it is of benefit for them as well as us! It helps to refine our own ideas/knowledge and to make it more succinct. It is an invaluable exercise for all involved. But it does take significant time. Time well spent in my view!

1
brahbruh 1 point ago +2 / -1

Interesting, I've never heard this plane of focus of the moon argument - do you have a link that explains that in more detail?

-1
jack445566778899 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Please join us on the community I created to further evaluate and discuss your answers if you are interested!

4
-2
savman -2 points ago +2 / -4

Laser light spreads out like a cone. This experiment has been debunked many times. Go to 2:05 - notice the laser lights are all 'flat' at the bottom and not a perfect circle suggesting a curved surface. A more accurate experiment would be to place something on the surface that is not a light - like a gun target and see if you can see the entire thing. You won't.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh, shit, alright!

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
savman 1 point ago +2 / -1

center of laser is center of laser. Not bending

Not how this works.

measured in micrometers

Seriously? Why do you say things you know nothing about? You're just a jack-ass the type of guy who claims knowledge but you're just an uneducated tool. Support your statement with facts. For my statement see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_divergence

experiments confirming this science, over and over.

No, there isn't.

And some people have used targets,

Show me.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
Afks 4 points ago +5 / -1

"How can it be solved? Simple: crowdfund a prize to a race"

Why a race and not crowdfund a proper science expedition, or a hundred other ideas before trying this "sailing vs journey to the edge" business

You assume that there even is an edge to be reached, though we have no evidence to corroborate that claim

This is an absurd method if the objective is to determine the shape of the world

How about this, similar to your race idea:

Your sailors are instead pilots, and they must complete their circumnavigation not by sailing but instead by flying North to South; flying directly across the supposed Antarctic island continent and popping out the other side

Every "circumnavigation" whether via boat or plane has been East/West

This fact alone should give pause for the globe believers

You're in for a reality check, glober

I'm actually jealous of you, as you have yet to experience snapping out of the spinning globe indoctrination

See you on the other side, fren

2
deleted 2 points ago +5 / -3
5
Afks 5 points ago +5 / -0

It’s cause for celebration!

I’ve always been spiritual and believed there is something more to be seen beyond the veil of what we can normally perceive with our senses, despite the globe Big Bang indoctrination, and now it only further solidifies that belief for me, if I needed more convincing in the first place

4
Celest 4 points ago +5 / -1

Realizing earth is flat is nothing compared to realizing what what means

Indeederoo. (Not claiming I know what it fully entails.)

5
VicariousJambi 5 points ago +5 / -0

It means that very, very evil people have ruled us for at least like 600 years.

4
Celest 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, that's one aspect of it. What I don't know is what this world actually is and how it came to be. Granted, those were still valid questions in the old model, but at least you were given enough breadcrumbs to partially satiate the curiosity, e.g., "oh, it's the Big Bang", "oh, it expands forever", "oh, we're just a planet", "oh, it's just pure chance", "oh, we're basically monkeys", etc. I don't even know what the word "world" refers to anymore. It's such a peculiar place to find oneself in.

3
Allas8 3 points ago +3 / -0

Circle navigating our flat world is not that hard, all you have to do is follow the path of the sun, go in a constant west ward direction. For every mile moved in a constant west ward direction, you will move 8 inches toward the north (a right turn). If you move on a south ward direction, eventually you will hit the ice wall known as Antarctica. Since the Antarctic treaty was signed, private exploration of the southern most part of our world has been forbidden.

2
Afks 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why would my position move North if my heading is exactly West?

If I go South, I expect to hit Antarctica, I agree with you there

But I don't get why if I'm flying exactly West that for every mile travelled I'm actually 8 inches closer to the North pole?

2
Poiuytrew 2 points ago +2 / -0

You can't stay within a circle by moving in a straight line.

1
Allas8 1 point ago +1 / -0

Since you make a circle. If you move west, you do not move in a straight line. Your distance to the north pole always stays the same, as long as you move in a west ward direction. Are you one meter away from the North pole, and move in a west ward direction, you would move in a 6.25 meter big circle before you got back to the point you started from.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
6
Afks 6 points ago +6 / -0

That's the model, yes

Antarctica's shoreline acts as a container for our worlds oceans

Our entire "Earth" as we know it is essentially the Antarctic basin

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
Afks 3 points ago +3 / -0

The law is no one South of 60 degrees South

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
4
Allas8 4 points ago +4 / -0

Antarctica is the end of the known world. Where the edge is, is speculation.

-1
Nogrim1 -1 points ago +3 / -4

you can still go to Antarctica, the treaty is that no one is allowed to drill or mine there.

if you own a boat no one is out there to stop you from going, they dont have a coast guard ffs.

4
hamilcar98 4 points ago +5 / -1

I have heard that you will be stopped if you try to go there. There are patrols.

0
Nogrim1 0 points ago +2 / -2

is that from the same idiots telling you the earth is flat?

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
aaarrrrjunas1 2 points ago +2 / -0

WHO DON GONE TO SPACE?

WHO?!?!?

elon, if u on here, DM me, bro.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
4
4
mrsray 4 points ago +4 / -0

AWESOME actually courtesy of Flat Earth Dave :) David Weiss is the co-host of The Flat Earth Podcast and the creator of the DITRH Youtube channel

but let me add https://odysee.com/$/search?q=proves%20flat%20earth

3
Afks 3 points ago +3 / -0

https://imgur.com/a/T2kzW4m

Imgur is lame, but it's unfortunately what I used to put these appx 50 images together

There are links to relevant videos under some of the images; the bitchute links are flagged with Imgur so you'll have to copy and paste those links

https://www.theflatearthpodcast.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/HOAX-Book.pdf

^ This isn't a collection I put together but is also excellent and very few if any repeats with the above collection I put together

Credit to Eric Dubay, OddTV, and David Weiss; I think most of the images I used are Eric and OddTV

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
Questionable 3 points ago +4 / -1

Personally, looking at the Sun (ouch) and the Moon is enough for me.

Single sentence? Throw away account? Megathread? Resolved forever?

Sure, that may as well, all have happened.

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

What's the point in linking to the Community specific domain where I'm not as active.

You have no posts here (https://ancaps.win/u/Questionable/?type=post), so you're "questionable"?

1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

You have no posts here (https://ancaps.win/u/Questionable/?type=post), so you're "questionable"?

S/he doesn't post in ancaps, it seems. I suppose you meant https://conspiracies.win/u/Questionable/?type=post?

4
throwaway_27_ [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

My point was that he linked my account on conspiracies.win domain which shows this as my first post and trying to say that it's a throwaway account (maybe just intended to stir shit here). Linking to communities.win would show my full activity on the platform, if one was interested.

1
Celest 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh, I see now. I misread, sorry.

1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

Hmm, didn't consider that. S/he may even scrap the thread entirely.

3
WindyJibbz 3 points ago +6 / -3

FE is the mac daddy conspiracy.

2
Geek-the-Mage 2 points ago +4 / -2

It seems like the least relevant conspiracy theory to me. It has no effect on anything in my life, anyway.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
-1
jack445566778899 -1 points ago +3 / -4

It seems like the least relevant conspiracy theory to me.

Calling things “conspiracy theories” is merely a tactic to discredit them and prevent research and discussion of them... right?

It has no effect on anything in my life, anyway.

When the puritans discovered there was a “new world” to travel to - did that have no effect on their lives?

Please join us on the community I created to discuss, explore, and exchange views on this subject if you are interested!

-2
jack445566778899 -2 points ago +2 / -4

Many feel this way, but in my view the shape of the earth has little to nothing to do with any conspiracy.

Humanity requires no assistance (conspiracy or otherwise) to be stupid and wrong as it historically always is.

Please join us on the community I created to further discuss, explore, and exchange views on this subject if you are interested!

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
0
throwaway_27_ [S] 0 points ago +3 / -3
  1. Water cannot bend. Water must be contained.

Wet tennis ball.

  1. how come the spin isn't felt by us?

When you're flying inside a plane, can you feel any gradual changes in speed or direction? I don't think most people can. It's no where near the scale of the planet, and our brains aren't conditioned to being inside of it like it is conditioned to being on the planet from birth. Brains ignore constant noise, like your eyes see a big nose but the brain culls it. We can observe the spin itself. Why do we have day/night cycles?

2.so how come doesn't all water on Earth flow towards the equator?

It's not spinning fast enough for its size to do that. Take that wet tennis ball and rotate it at 1 rotation/min. Does water get "flung off of it"? Still, there are instances of water being flung off of celestial bodies in our Solar System: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geyser#/media/File:Fountains_of_Enceladus_PIA07758.jpg

  1. There is no observable curvature.

There is no observable Sun at night. Does it stop existing?

4 and 5 are just statements.

4
Celest 4 points ago +5 / -1

Wet tennis ball

Are you implying that's a good example for water curving?

There is no observable Sun at night. Does it stop existing?

Have you read the rest of what I've written regarding that point? Have you considered those aspects? Are you familiar with how optics/perspective works?

When you're flying inside a plane, can you feel any gradual changes in speed or direction?

Yes.

We can observe the spin itself. Why do we have day/night cycles?

Sure, those can both be explained by a globe Earth, but they can also be explained by the standard FE model, which covers both day/night cycles and seasons in a much more straightforward manner. To put things into perspective: globe Earth is merely "flat earth" reverse-engineered into something to, well, fit a globe hurtling through space.

It's not spinning fast enough for its size to do that. Take that wet tennis ball and rotate it at 1 rotation/min. Does water get "flung off of it"?

My point wasn't that it's flung off (I've even said so), but that if its rotation speed is so insignificant in relation to its size, such that there's no observable effect on our bodies or anything around us, why would there be a bulge at the equator? Have you read the rest of that paragraph (I've edited it slightly)?

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

Are you implying that's a good example for water curving?

It depends on what you really mean by "bending" and "curving". To me, it is a good example of water that is not "contained" adhering to a curved surface.

I'm not really interested in any particular model, but more interested in what explanations exist for what we observe, and if they can be shown wrong.

2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
1
Afks 1 point ago +3 / -2

"we can observe the spin itself because day/night cycles"

all of this stuff is 101 FE shit

watch some of the videos and then continue the discussion

https://communities.win/c/FlatEarth/p/141roCfDT4/resources/c

u/vicariousjambi has linked a series of short videos explaining most of the FAQ

3
jc99ta 3 points ago +6 / -3

It's fake and gay. Done.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
3
Celest 3 points ago +4 / -1

You're not wrong.

2
aaarrrrjunas1 2 points ago +3 / -1

takes one to know one.

welcome to the club, bro.

question authority. watch the x-files.

youre welcome.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +2 / -4
3
Wharf_Rat 3 points ago +5 / -2

Until i see a video of the ball Earth spinning from one of the hundreds of satellites we put in space, I’ll believe my eyes and instincts that we live on a flat, stationary plane.

I would love to be proven wrong because space and the planet pictures from NASA are cool as fuck

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-2
throwaway_27_ [S] -2 points ago +1 / -3

There's an ISS livestream always going on, and when it goes over your area, you can go out and see it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86YLFOog4GM

5
Wharf_Rat 5 points ago +5 / -0

But the ISS is located within part of the Earth’s atmosphere according to the experts. Therefore would be theoretically too close to capture the rotation.

With that said, this livestream is switching angles. Hard to discern if its legitimate and not some sort of CGI trickery

0
savman 0 points ago +5 / -5

No amount of evidence will satisfy you because you're a simpleton. You've watched morons on Youtube use conjecture and hypotheticals based on zero evidence to portray a narrative that no one with a practical understanding of physics will support. So, you think there is some grand conspiracy that is keeping all of us from the truth, just to satisfy your own delusions about what 'really is going on. The simple fact that you can use a telescope to see multiple moons and planets revolve around each other, and 'spin around' with your own eyes, yet fail to acknowledge that our planet must do the same is you being an obtuse 1/2 wit.

2
Celest 2 points ago +3 / -1

ISS livestream

  • Channel: Space Videos -- this isn't even "official", they just love NASA
  • Keeps interrupting/switching scenes
  • Bottom left: "recorded video" with exact GMT time 🤔
  • https://files.catbox.moe/nbhyms.png
-2
deleted -2 points ago +2 / -4
3
575guy 3 points ago +4 / -1

Yes earth is flat

2
ExorcistCandy 2 points ago +8 / -6

Flat earth is a psyOP designed to distance normies from conspiracies and alternate narratives that have merit. Check ‘em.

4
Afks 4 points ago +5 / -1

Take a peek at some of the linked material within this thread and see if you still feel the same way

3
jack445566778899 3 points ago +4 / -1

Flat earth is a psyOP designed to distance normies from conspiracies and alternate narratives that have merit

This is largely true, but kind of a “fringe benefit” of the psyop.

The flat earth psyop is really heavily advertised (i.e. funded) to prevent serious discussion or evaluation of this important and rewarding subject. That’s why it’s so overtly stupid (the advertised psyop)!

If you would like to learn about what flat earth research really is, why it is so important/rewarding, and why a psyop exists to advertise how stupid it is - please join us on the community I created to discuss, explore, and exchange views on such things!

2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
-1
ExorcistCandy -1 points ago +2 / -3

You chuds are chasing your tails. None of this matters.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
ExorcistCandy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have you noticed that anytime anyone brings up any conspiracy related topic now no matter how realistic or obvious it’s followed up with “oh you must be a flat earther”

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

That's got nothing to do with the surface of the Earth per se, but all to do with the success of the psyop that's been going on for years now. Those unfamiliar with the "flat earth psyop" will label you as a "conspiracy theorist" instead, which is just as bad (and was also orchestrated by TPTB after the JFK assassination to discredit those that dared propose an alternative to the official narrative). As an exercise, just think of "conspiracy theorist" and "flat earther" as two imaginary entities. If you're anything like me, you'll perceive no difference between the two, both being just as disgraceful/demeaning/unappealing; just this alone should be a sign that something is amiss.

The "flat earth psyop" is meant to stop people from pursuing the subject and to encourage those that have been psyopped to ridicule those that dare pursue it (kinda like what you're doing here). Ridicule is their weapon of choice, and it works great.

What do I mean by the "flat earth psyop"? Well, just search YT for "flat earth" and see for yourself. Everything you encounter is a lie, and if it isn't, they'll make damn sure to mock it so that you know to stay away from it. They'll teach you how to ridicule people, regardless of what those people say; they'll teach you to believe that you have science on your side; they'll teach you to rest assured that everything's been covered for you, that they're doing great things so that you don't have to, that they have your best interest at heart. Nothing could be further from the truth, though, because what you really have on your side is a bunch of lying science priests that have used this method to inculcate the entire world from birth [and most, to grave] with an incredible lie.

None of us adhere to any of that "flat earth" crap they present you with, and we wouldn't be so insistent if we didn't know what we're talking about; why would we endure so much shit? On the other hand, you think you know how the Earth is a globe, just like all of us did, but in reality, you've never experienced anything that would indicate that. All of it rests on an intangible globe image, intangible math applied to an intangible universe, the fear of being ridiculed and your personal incredulity ("they couldn't have possibly lied to the entire world for decades/centuries!").

Do as you see fit, but I suggest you reconsider.

0
ExorcistCandy 0 points ago +1 / -1

How would this impact your life if it were proven one way or another? The short answer is zero. This is all meant to make us all look crazy and to have all of our ideas and other conversations discounted and written off.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

How could it not matter? It is the foundation of our world. It is the most important thing in our experience; everything rests on it (including our very existence). What if this insane world they've conjured for us, and which they own, was conjured exactly because it matters? How could it matter more "what others think of us" than what the world actually is? Please, think again.

2
Merkava_4 2 points ago +2 / -0

If the Earth is flat, how thick is it supposed to be? And is it a perfect rectangle?

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

No one knows its shape. When I say "it's level/flat", I refer to its surface; I can't make any assertions about its actual shape other than "it can be anything that allows for a level surface".

Similarly, in regards to its thickness, no one (AFAIK) has ever dug a hole deeper than the Kola Superdeep, which reaches a depth of 7.61 miles (12.2 km). Wikipedia says they couldn't dig deeper...

Because of higher-than-expected temperatures at this depth and location, 180 °C (356 °F) instead of the expected 100 °C (212 °F), drilling deeper was deemed unfeasible. The unexpected decrease in density, the greater porosity, and the unexpectedly high temperatures caused the rock to behave somewhat like a plastic, making drilling nearly impossible.

Regarding the outer perimeter, it is postulated that what we call Earth is contained within a crater-like hole, which would explain how water could accumulate to form oceans. On the classic FE model, the outer rim is the "ice wall", which is actually Antarctica. Could very well be, given the restrictions surrounding free exploration of Antarctica. None of us know what lies deep beyond the rim.

I suggest you disregard any claims about its "shape" (remember shape vs. surface), because that's impossible to establish with the information we have. Moreover, it is one of the main talking points of the all-too-famous "flat earth" psyop.

0
savman 0 points ago +2 / -2

Oh right. Magellan and every ship and plane that has since circumnavigated the globe is all part of a grand psyop. Got it.

3
Celest 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sure, throw a red herring in there for good measure.

No, the globe has never been circumnavigated N/S, only E/W. Same thing applies to the classic FE model. Have you even looked at a map of it?

0
savman 0 points ago +1 / -1

Have you even looked at a map of it?

yeah, it's fucking stupid, just like you. In a flat model, you would constantly have to be turning to get anywhere so flying from South America to Australia, for example, would take way more hours than it really does. The whole idea is retarded and not supported by anyone with any formal education. Your team is comprised of morons and idiots and no one smart. Your side can't explain anything properly without claiming 'illuminate' this or 'we're in a projection' or some other simpleton statement. Seriously, if you actually studied instead of watching YouTube for your facts, you might get it.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
savman 1 point ago +1 / -0

pilot would have to decend

Both satellites and planes orbit our ball because gravity makes them constantly fall the to centre. FE map would require them both to constantly be turning. A satellite's path would be a big circular arc requiring energy (course correction) and not a straight path which you can see them doing with your own eyes at night.

A friend of mine in the navy circumnavigated the south pole clockwise, the coastline ahead was always turning to their right as they made course correction to the right, your map would require them to always be turning left. I can send photos.

Face it, you FE's are fucking stupid, make no sense and have no common sense. You just fabricate shit up to make you look 'edgy' but really, it's all just a bunch of low-IQ garbage. I'm done with you. Good luck, and please don't have children.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
0
savman 0 points ago +3 / -3

Go outside. Look for a rock ~8 inches in diameter. Pick it up. Now, as hard as you can, hit your head with it. See? You're a moron. Done.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +4 / -2

I think the confusion arises because the Earth is bigger than they say it is. Because they refuse to acknowledge the expanding nature of the planet. My two cents; the planet, it's obviously somewhat spherical, but it's the mass/volume that is at issue. The accepted model has the earth as a fixed mass throughout it's life time. This is going to fuck up all measurements and "ancestral" observations because the planet gradually expanded in size. It was 50% smaller at it's earliest. If you ignore that, then a greater expanse of land would visually appear to be flat where you would expect to notice a curve, and contrary to whatever internet calculators people are using.

3
Celest 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm open to it being thousands of times larger, but that would bring its own set of problems.

I gotta ask, though:

Why would it expand? Due to the supposed expansion of the universe?

This is going to fuck up all measurements and "ancestral" observations

Could it observably expand over a few millennia?

It was 50% smaller at it's earliest.

What is this based on?

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +4 / -1

The 50% number is based on careful examination of rock age on the sea beds, which are all far younger than the rock above sea level on the islands and continents. The rock on the sea bed ages progressively in bands, with the older bands being near the continental coastlines, and the youngest near the center of the oceans. It's deduced that the planet was first composed only of the continents, which all fit together like a puzzle, but only on a sphere that is 50% smaller than the current earth. The extra surface area on the modern earth is all the ocean beds. In the past this has been incorrectly interpreted as "continental drift" - but they are not drifting, the surface area of the planet became greater, the origin points of new mass being the center of our current oceans, and moved them apart and away from each other. Here's good video summing up some of this, and there is also an excellent book:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Othb0xsvZb4

https://www.expansiontectonics.com/wpPDF/ExpansionTectonicsHandout0915.pdf

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +2 / -1

There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest the planet is expanding. You're wrong, you know you're wrong. You are a bad faith actor

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +3 / -0

There is evidence the planet expanded in the past. It has been a topic of research for some geologists for over 100 years. You know absolutely nothing about it. Just the usual bullshit from you.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +2 / -1

There is evidence the planet expanded in the past

Prove it.

It has been a topic of research for some geologists for over 100 years.

An outright lie

You know absolutely nothing about it.

More than you, liar.

Just the usual bullshit

Pedophiles do disregard evidence and just virtue signal as usual. Look at Ezra Miller. He can't argue against evidence he can only claim the truth is "hateful". So what's the difference between you and Ezra Miller?

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Prove it.

Check my links dumb-ass

It has been a topic of research for some geologists for over 100 years.

Check my links dumb-ass

More than you, liar.

Not until you check my links dumb-ass

So what's the difference between you and Ezra Miller?

Dumb-ass.

0
DavidColeIntrepid 0 points ago +2 / -2

Links to FEd pedophile bullshit? No thanks, Ezra Miller. You don't want to talk, you just want to push your pedophile propaganda and you KNOW it's indefensible.

You're incapable of defending your position, Ezra Miller. Keep virtue signalling and calling everyone "haters".

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +2 / -1

I really can't take you seriously, lol.

1
DavidColeIntrepid 1 point ago +2 / -1

You don't take anything seriously besides subversion. Subverting children like Ezra Miller you virtue signalling, communist, fake victim ass liar.

You have no evidence.

-1
ThomasLincoln -1 points ago +1 / -2

it's obviously somewhat spherical

You're a retarded fed fag limited hangout shill.

-1
jack445566778899 -1 points ago +2 / -3

Forgive me if i’ve already invited you, but please join us on the community I created to discuss and exchange such views!

Click my username to find the link, or let me know and I’ll pm it to you!

2
free-will-of-choice 2 points ago +5 / -3

Sleight of hand from the parasitic few: "Sweet Dreams are made of these; who am I to disagree?"... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeMFqkcPYcg (also watch at 1:47 with them lying on the flat plane while letting the goyim run in circles around them).

1
justified_paranoia 1 point ago +5 / -4

There's nothing to resolve, the earth is not flat and the people who think it is cannot be reasoned with. Ignore them and they will go away.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, Del's really good at it, though I'm not too sure if approaching people on the street is the best way to go about it. I recommend you watch some of his recorded streams; he's got a sharp mind and cuts through the bullshit like no other. I think I've watched everything he's put out. 😄

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
savman 1 point ago +3 / -2

I'm frustrated trying to wake people up

That's because you're a fucking idiot pushing an equally idiotic theory.

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
0
savman 0 points ago +1 / -1

Why can I beat you in every argument we've had.

Name one. I'll debunk it again.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
savman 0 points ago +1 / -1

the earth is rotating with a wobble,

The 'wobble' takes millennium to move. Our north star is different position than our ancestors. Please do me a favour. Try to get some really good weed , smoke some, then watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-DYgGFjI

You can do these same observations from your home,

-1
savman -1 points ago +2 / -3

Gee, funny how all the high-altitude balloon videos show a curved horizon. FAIL.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
1
Quantum_ 1 point ago +3 / -2
  1. My own observations: With a mid level telescope. I can clearly see a spherical moon, a spherical Jupiter, a spherical Saturn. While not science, I would at least hypothesize our planet would follow the clear pattern of celestial bodies I can clearly observe.
  2. Flat earth is the original hypothesis of the earth until it was discovered to be spherical. Only after much push back from the church and “science” community. Was it accepted to be spherical.
  3. Lastly, “flat” is a rather vague observation. It appears the word is used to mean “Not Spherical”. Flat is not a shape. Flat is also relative. If not a sphere what shape is it?
5
Celest 5 points ago +5 / -0

Lastly, “flat” is a rather vague observation. It appears the word is used to mean “Not Spherical”. Flat is not a shape. Flat is also relative. If not a sphere what shape is it?

We don't know what shape it is, it's just the surface that we can talk about, which many of us know to be level (there are mountains, hills, valleys, lakes, etc.). We don't know how far it extends, either.

-1
Quantum_ -1 points ago +1 / -2

Sound argument…

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

What?

3
jack445566778899 3 points ago +5 / -2
  1. Circular is not the same as spherical. The objects you are observing could be concave as well...

  2. This is untrue, but popularly taught. It seems that the author of the legend of sleepy hollow is (at least partially) responsible for this myth. Virtually all educated people from, at least, ancient greece were taught the world was spherical from childhood - just like us today!

  3. True. Some speculate disc, some concave (we live on the inside surface) - speculations abound!

If you have an interest in the subject (which it seems you do), please join us on the community i created to explore and discuss it further! Click my username and find the link, or let me know and i’ll pm it to you.

2
AlwysHideUrPowerLevl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Virtually all educated people from, at least, ancient greece where taught the world was spherical from childhood - just like us today!

They may have been "taught" that, but they were wrong. The most common evidence I've seen for that claim is Erathosenes's experiment, but that works both on a flat surface and a spherical surface, so it proves nothing.

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +1 / -0

They may have been "taught" that, but they were wrong.

I largely agree. But the history available largely demonstrates that this was the case. The myth that previous cultures thought the world was flat and were “proved wrong” by people like columbus was made up in the 19th century by the author of sleepy hollow. It is a uniquely american myth that many students today are also “taught”.

so it proves nothing.

The kicker is, it was never intended to!

People like eratosthenes and columbus had been taught from childhood that the world was spherical. They never once doubted it, and never sought to prove it right or wrong. Eratosthenes apocryphal procedure absolutely depends on the world being spherical (and many other unvalidated - and some plainly incorrect - assumptions to boot, like that all sunlight “rays” are parallel). His calculation is meaningless and nonsensical unless many unvalidated assumptions (taught to him from childhood as facts) are correct - including the one the calculation is erroneously purported to prove (that the world is spherical)! He never set out to prove anything, merely to estimate the circumference of the world by calculation already assuming it was (and dependent on it being) spherical.

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

While not science, I would at least hypothesize our planet would follow the clear pattern of celestial bodies I can clearly observe.

This is pretty much what I meant to say in the OP by referring to the Sun and the Moon, which don't even need a telescope.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
1
DR38 1 point ago +6 / -5

My thing is, I've never seen any super high IQ people (who are also based and know many conspiracy theories are true) be flat earth.

You won't hear someone like Chris Langan believing that for example. He would suggest it's a very complex psyop to make our side look stupid.

I'm open to whatever, but I have way too many people much smarter than me who understand many conspiracies but say the Earth is round.

Either way, it would be nice if people on both sides didn't attack one another because some of us genuinely want to know the truth.

And at the end of the day, this topic ends up being one not worth spending much time on for me, as one would need to be a physicist to even begin to understand half the arguments on either side.

So for me, I'm round Earth, but anti-Copernican as that's the primary issue I think, making us feel as though we weren't the center of God's creation any longer made with purpose. For this topic, see Jonathan Pageau from the Symbolic World, he lines up where I am on all of it. - A Full Frontal Attack on The Copernican Revolution If all is relative, then the Earth most certainly could be considered the center of all Creation rather than the Sun. That to me, is the most important point, rather than the general shape.

5
Afks 5 points ago +6 / -1

Unless Chris Langan has specifically called FE a psyop, or you are Chris Langan yourself, then your claim that he would suggest FE is a psyop is simply your feelings in the absence of evidence to corroborate the feelings

Making claims based on zero evidence is what we're trying to avoid

Ask those much smarter persons that you "have" who say the Earth is round for their evidence of the round Earth

You'll find the attacks are almost unanimously one-sided when it comes to the FE debate

https://communities.win/c/FlatEarth/p/141roCfDT4/resources/c

https://www.theflatearthpodcast.com/must-see-videos/

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +4 / -3
1
savman 1 point ago +4 / -3

The simpleton discredits things that they are too dumb to understand. I've never seen an atom but can understand the principles behind it and how they form elements. You've never seen the curve because our earth is fucking huge and you are an ant. The failure for you to comprehend this and think everything is fake is just you being dumb.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
1
Merkava_4 1 point ago +2 / -1

If the Earth is flat, then why is the moon a sphere?

7
575guy 7 points ago +7 / -0

A circle is not a sphere and the lights in the sky have nothing to do with the shape of the floor

0
savman 0 points ago +1 / -1

So if the moon is a flat circle how thick is it? Explain how gravity would act upon such a shape. Explain how such a shape was formed using the laws of gravity, mass and atomic physics. Actually, don't bother, it's a rhetorical question. You chumps will just say some illuminate has created holograms or some other bull shit conspiracy theory to keep us ignorant. For what purpose, none of you can explain.

2
575guy 2 points ago +2 / -0

We don’t have to explain any of that. Flat earth is an observation it’s easy. Your model is the ones that requires such stupid explanations lmao

1
savman 1 point ago +1 / -0

We don’t have to explain any of that.

Oh, gee, strong case you make. Well, I'm convinced.

1
575guy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why would I have to convince you. Flat earth is an observation, no one claims to have a complete model if you can’t see that then theirs no helping you. Globe earth needs the explanations Example: why don’t I feel the earth spinning? Example: why don’t I see any curvature? Example: how does the moon glow brighter than any rock we have on earth? Example: why does the moon travel the same path as the sun Example: why is the sun and moon the same size Example: why do we have the same constellation for thousands of years Example: how do you achieve gas pressure next to a vacuum Example: how do lasers travel hundreds of miles over earth curvature Example: why don’t planes account for earth curve or spin Example: why do countless emergency landing not make sense on a globe and line up with the flat earth Example: what is gravity

1
savman 1 point ago +2 / -1

Flat earth is an observation,

No one can see a flat earth - no photos, no high altitude balloons, zero observations. The 'flat' horizon you see is the edge of the curve on a HUGE ball.

no one claims to have a complete model

Yes, we do. See Magellan's ship's logs where he sailed West and came back from the East.

if you can’t see that then theirs no helping you.

See what? Lack of evidence from your side?

Globe earth needs the explanations Example: why don’t I feel the earth spinning?

Motion is felt by G-force - Do you feel like you're moving 500 miles per hour in a jet once you get to a 35K cruise? Once you are 'at speed' you no longer feel any G's

Example: why don’t I see any curvature?

Because you are an ant on a huge ball. Take a macro lens and put it on a basketball it looks flat. https://imgur.com/gallery/nSGtPtz

Example: how does the moon glow brighter than any rock we have on earth?

There is no atmosphere on the moon. Light has no hindrances or needs to go through anything. Here, we have air to affect light, oxygen to change colours of minerals through oxidization so on and so forth.

Example: why does the moon travel the same path as the sun

Because Earth is a huge MASS that attacks other things with MASS - which is why meteors crash into the earth. The earth 'sucks' things towards it FROM ALL SIDES - which is why water stays curved all around us, water is 'pulled' from all sides. The Moon is actually drifting away from Earth (can't recall the distance per year) but it is not 'forever' in our orbit.

Example: why is the sun and moon the same size

They are not. We see it the same size during a lunar eclipse but that is like holding a basketball at arm's length converging up the sun. Try it.

Example: why do we have the same constellation for thousands of years

We don't - the earth wobbles so in ancient times, they had slightly different angles to the constellations.

Example: how do you achieve gas pressure next to a vacuum

Gas/Air has mass just like water, it is pulled towards the center of our big beautiful ball. If the earth was flat, it would defy all physics and not explain why we have an atmosphere.

Example: how do lasers travel hundreds of miles over earth curvature

Lasers are no different than other light sources, they spread out like a cone. If you are very high up, say like a very tall mast/antenna, you can receive the light, however, given enough distance, there is a limit.

Example: why don’t planes account for earth curve or spin

Planes, like water, and air are constantly being pulled towards the center. When we fly, we fly around the ball since we never overcome the constant pull of gravity. We don't fly straight off in a line because gravity would be impossible to overcome unless we had rockets strapped to the wings.

Example: why do countless emergency landing not make sense on a globe and line up with the flat earth

What? Don't understand this one.

Example: what is gravity

Lol, even the smartest people in the world don't know everything about gravity. Gravity is something that continues to be studied since all science is based on theories. The more PLAUSIBLE a theory, the more PROBABLE. Flat earth has never been theorized by anyone in academia so it is IMPLAUSIBLE. Einstein wrote a paper "The Theory of Relativity" which was originally scoffed at by some.

If you really think the earth is flat, write a paper on it and submit it to academic publications like all the other scientists do.

https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/gravitational-waves/en/

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
savman -1 points ago +2 / -3

I noticed you never bothered to answer the 'what purpose' part of my post, you're so dumb.

You can't explain how moon was formed

Yes, actually I can: https://theconversation.com/how-the-moon-formed-new-research-133204

Gravity doesn't exist

No idiot, it does.

which is debunked completely

By no one with any credentials or academic credibility.

2
PaperInk 2 points ago +2 / -0

Its not hard to use the fake science to argue other points. Shills like you do it all the damn time.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

u/Nogrim1 u/cribbage u/VicariousJambi u/Afks u/Iknowitsu u/Celest u/mrsray u/Toatl_Loesr u/DR38 u/clemaneuverers

Any of you willing to have a live audio call? You can bring your popcorn, and we can figure out if we are genuine folks or not while we get to the bottom of it.

We can do a public broadcast on Element at a scheduled time (no registration needed): https://call.element.io/conspiracies.win

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would, sure. Never really done a live discussion on it before thought so I probably wont be quite as.... eloquent. But I'd need it to be at a scheduled time or something. I'm busy most of the night tonight, and this weekend in fact. Other than that no idea I'd have to get back to you.

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Great. If it happens, I'd strongly suggest avoiding linking to videos or other material during the call. I realize it seems like a waste of time to repeat same information over and over, but as I replied to u/Nogrim1 below, if you understood a concept clearly, you should be able to explain it to almost anyone in simple terms.

2
Afks 2 points ago +2 / -0

you want to schedule a live chat with us, so we can refer to all of the evidence that we've already provided you, and you also want to avoid linking to the same evidence?

what is this weird scenario you think is necessary to have a debate on this?

there's already thousands of hours of others doing the same live chats as you want us to do, and those chats are with the same people we are drawing our sources from

what is to be gained from this scheduled chat that hasn't already been accomplished

watch the videos if you're interested in the subject

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

The primary reason is to build trust within this community. There's too many folks that think this is just a shill topic.

The secondary reason is to avoid referring to videos and test our own understanding of things in a live setting.

3
VicariousJambi 3 points ago +3 / -0

Anyone that actually gives enough of a shit to learn about what we’re talking about has all of the available information we’re already linking.

You don’t need to trust me at all. As a matter of fact, don’t trust me at all.

Look at the sources i’m linking and make up your own mind about it.

2
VicariousJambi 2 points ago +2 / -0

It’s a broad concept that sometimes can only really be explained well in videos.

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

u/Afks u/Iknowitsu u/Celest u/mrsray u/Toatl_Loesr u/DR38 u/clemaneuverers

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Interesting. Three tags per comment.

u/mrsray u/Toatl_Loesr u/DR38

1
mrsray 1 point ago +1 / -0

interesting how

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
3
jack445566778899 3 points ago +3 / -0

If a flat-Earther was sane, they wouldn't be a flat-Earther. The only decent option when dealing with people like that is to ignore them.

Well, at least you admit how closed minded you are and useless to discuss with ;P

Seriously, people with zealous certainty looking for argument/debate should be ignored. However, curious and earnest students interested in discussing alternative views and having their perspectives rationally criticized/challenged should not be ignored (even, and perhaps especially, when their views appear crazy!).

Sitting around always agreeing with one another is as anti-intellectual and boring as refusing to consider you could possibly be wrong!

If you agree with any of the above, please join us on the community I created to explore, discuss, and exchange views on this subject!

2
throwaway_27_ [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

If you want to arrange a call for a group to discuss other subjects

That was in my mind. If there was enough interest, Conspiracies.win could schedule weekly/monthly calls, and hopefully it builds up trust within the community. Although there was already this one guy here saying that it will be just used to gather more data on the userbase, which is likely, so I don't think most folks here would risk it.

-1
Iknowitsu -1 points ago +3 / -4

Holy fuck look at this sketchy fuck trying to get your voice recorded.

What a slimy and stupid cunt.

They come here pushing flat earth shit on multiple alts, thinking that people will take the bait and engage…

And they can rile you up enough that you go in a voice call and run your mouth.

Probably wasting taxpayer money on this larping bullshit too.

So fucking pathetic and amateur.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
0
Iknowitsu 0 points ago +1 / -1

Think about it like an intelligence product.

Of course they can eavesdrop on you… but chances are you aren’t saying anything when you’re typing.

It’s not about getting the voice of the phone user because there’s still plausible deniability in terms of matching it to the actual person posting. Maybe someone hacked their phone and is using it to post here.

They want to be able to have a solid voice recording that they can directly associate with the posting account and specific things they are saying.

Its sketchy as fuck.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

They're tracking you through the interwebs, get rid of it quickly.

-3
Iknowitsu -3 points ago +1 / -4

You’re such an amateur you literally have me laughing my ass off right now.

The harder you try the more you come off as a dipshit larping low IQ fedboi.

Do yourself a favor and switch over to auto reply bot mode, loser.

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh, perfect. Can you show me how to use it?

-2
Iknowitsu -2 points ago +2 / -4

Shill says what?

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
Merkava_4 1 point ago +2 / -1

A flat Earth makes absolutely no sense to me.

If the Earth is flat, who's living on the vertical edge? That would depend on how thick the Earth is, correct?

1
Celest 1 point ago +1 / -0

Question is, do you even care?

1
Merkava_4 1 point ago +1 / -0

I just think the flat-earthers should come with an alternative shape besides just saying it's flat. I guarantee you the mathematicians can prove that the Earth is round, but the flat-earthers would never be able to understand their language.

How about those surveying engineers? I bet they can prove the Earth is round!

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

I just think the flat-earthers should come with an alternative shape besides just saying it's flat

Sure, that's courtesy of the globe model, where everything's supposedly accounted for. We are reluctant to let go of that structure, especially when no clear alternative is available. However, and as I've said elsewhere, there's no way to determine Earth's shape without exploring more of it, which is forbidden. Nor can you know what lies beneath (or if it ever ends) if you can only drill up to a few miles. It's like living in a room your entire life and claiming to know what's outside.

I guarantee you the mathematicians can prove that the Earth is round

You can use math to fabricate/describe/make sense of any concept, but that doesn't make the concept real, and that's exactly what they did with the globe. Just think of physics engines (they're digital, intangible, but everything "makes sense", i.e., the math works out).

How about those surveying engineers?

Good question. I'd assume they know a thing or two. I don't know much about civil engineering, but I know it employs Euclidean geometry, as opposed to non-Euclidean (spheres, balls).

Either way, the more pressing question should be: why is there no curvature? Here's just one of the many videos that shows that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lLmW5Y8BFw

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
SuicideTruthbomber 1 point ago +3 / -2

You can do the following yourself:

The needle-shaped 828-metre skyscraper Burj Khalifa is a brilliant work of art and a cutting-edge piece of engineering that any other building can ever beat. Besides being the tallest building, it has another mind-blowing feature. The Burj Khalifa has two observation desks where you can view sunset twice in the same evening. What? Is that true? Yes.

During the evening if you are watching the sunset from the base layer of the skyscraper and when the sun completely disappears, run towards the elevator and press the 124th floor to see the another magic. As the visitor moves upwards, the sun reappears and set again. What is the science behind this?

Alchemy Of Height: The Sun Sets Twice From Burj Khalifa In Dubai https://www.news18.com/news/buzz/want-to-see-two-sunsets-in-the-same-evening-burj-khalifa-is-the-place-to-be-4132970.html

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
SuicideTruthbomber 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe that the real number of people who actually believe that the Earth is flat is vanishingly small.

2
Celest 2 points ago +3 / -1

Unlikely. As the saying goes: "once you go flat, you never go back", kinda like Santa.

-1
SuicideTruthbomber -1 points ago +1 / -2

I had to actually see if people somewhere had ever said anything like that online.

Thought-terminating cliché https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A9 A thought-terminating cliché (also known as a semantic stop-sign, a thought-stopper, bumper sticker logic, or cliché thinking) is a form of loaded language, often passing as folk wisdom, intended to end an argument and quell cognitive dissonance. Its function is to stop an argument from proceeding further, ending the debate with a cliché rather than a point.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
SuicideTruthbomber 1 point ago +1 / -0

None of those reasons: I think the flat earth content one sees is largely manufactured and not genuine.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
Jamezelo 1 point ago +2 / -1

It's not as simple as "resolve it once and for all" because regardless of which side you believe... it's still a matter of having to take someone's word for it.

3
VicariousJambi 3 points ago +4 / -1

You don’t have to take anyones word for it, you can go outside yourself and see that it’s not a ball of the diameter they tell us.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
1
Jamezelo 1 point ago +1 / -0

I didn't even say which side I agree with.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
1
Jamezelo 1 point ago +1 / -0

You can believe what you want but my original comment says all I really have to say.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +0 / -2
3
Jamezelo 3 points ago +3 / -0

Ok.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
Phreaksee 0 points ago +2 / -2

How to instantly discredit yourself... Talk about the Flat Earth conspiracy!

Even if this is true, which I sincerely doubt given the over whelming evidence, it 1000% causes more harm than good. i.e. Biden stole the election of Trump... "what ever you frigging flat earthier!"

What frigging difference would it make if the world is flat or a globe. Zero, none, nana, zilch..

We know that those in power have sought to discredit conspiracies, but this literary takes the cake. Move on please...

#MoreHarmThanGood

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

We know that those in power have sought to discredit conspiracies, but this literary takes the cake.

You accidentally hit the nail on the head.

A planet is the perfect mental representation of a prison (the system), its warden (TPTB), its guards (goons/politicians), the prisoner (you) and your life sentence (endless servitude). Born into such a world, you are, by default, unable to form thoughts that see past it, because all thoughts have notions of "the world" intertwined within (i.e., the world is always at the back of your mind). Luckily, you weren't born in "that world", but were taught to believe that you were; as such, and if you care about the actual world, you can undo the programming, however painful that may be.

Why it matters (3:23).

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
Nogrim1 0 points ago +6 / -6

im going to need more popcorn, the utter lack of understanding of basic physics in this thread is blowing my fucking mind.

this is the effects of American schools system on full display, if you buy this nonsense and you are from any where else please speak up.

2
mrsray 2 points ago +3 / -1

https://www.bitchute.com/video/8DbtrcxlfSbL/ FLAT EARTH PHYSICS 101 ~ SUPER-STATIONARY ~ THEMORGILE

1
dziecielina_pala 1 point ago +2 / -1

hi there. first of all it's "anywhere" not "any where", and while I'll admit the basic knowledge of history among Americans could be better, regarding the flat earth model, you know how the joke goes: "it has supporters all around the globe" ;) I'm very open to it, while typing it from across the ocean

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
Iknowitsu 0 points ago +9 / -9

Shills are currently pushing this topic on this sub.

There is no discussion to be had.

What we should be talking about is “flat brain”, since I’m supposed to believe that half this sub is suddenly literally retarded.

Yes, lots of stupidity here and dot connecting.

But this is something else. This is not natural.

This is being astroturfed HARD. This is the most fake, scripted bullshit discussion I’ve seen on this sub.

It’s not normally like this. Almost like someone flipped a switch and swarmed with shills.

90% of the people here defending flat earth are going to be shills or bots talking to eachother.

People are not this stupid and this is being pushed so they can attack the “conspiracy” community.

4
mrsray 4 points ago +7 / -3

i am neither a bot or a shill ... what you are witnessing is LOTS of people that are no longer brainwashed about 'the spinning ball'

1
Nogrim1 1 point ago +4 / -3

so the two redeemable excuses, right out the window....

4
mrsray 4 points ago +4 / -0

ok, go away then

-1
Nogrim1 -1 points ago +2 / -3

its much more fun to laugh at people this dumb, im sure your used to it.

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

Is it dumb to question and rationally criticize what you are taught, or is it dumb to blindly repeat it and flatly declare everyone of a differing perspective stupid?

People who question the true shape of the world are not dumb for doing so! You have most likely only met the members of the flat earth psyop. Flat earth researchers, on the other hand, are not dumb.

-1
Nogrim1 -1 points ago +1 / -2

i think it dumb to believe this nonsense while refusing to repeat the experiments that proved it the first time. ffs the verification that you are wrong is a sunday afternoon away and yet you are still this fucking stupid...

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

i think it dumb to believe this nonsense

I agree wholeheartedly. Belief is the enemy of knowledge, and is across purposes to objective study of any kind (it’s known as bias).

while refusing to repeat the experiments that proved it the first time

This is a common misunderstanding. We have much to discuss if you are interested! Experiments don’t prove the shapes of physical objects. They have an entirely different purpose in science (namely testing hypotheses). The shape of something is not a hypothesis (nor can it be), and there is only one way we determine the shapes of physical objects - rigorous and repeated measurement (NOT experiment)!

ffs the verification that you are wrong is a sunday afternoon away and yet you are still this fucking stupid...

Many would say the exact same of your position, but I can assure you (after years of diligent study and scrutiny) that the subject and ostensible central question (“what is the true shape of the world, and how can we validate it with certainty as independent researchers”) are far more complicated than they appear. Many flat earth researchers begin with your perspective and set out to do that “one sunday’s worth of verification” and are still at it today. It’s not because they are stupid; it’s because they realize what is wrong with the existing/known/taught “verifications”. As I said, we have much to discuss if you are interested in learning more about what flat earth research really is, as opposed to what the offensively stupid psyop has convinced you of.

-2
Iknowitsu -2 points ago +3 / -5

Shut up you dumb shill.

Go fuck off back to wherever you came from.

The quality of your shilling is so fucking bad that I just have to assume they pay you minimum wage.

Pathetic loser.

4
mrsray 4 points ago +5 / -1

such a lovely person ... your parents must be so proud

-1
Nogrim1 -1 points ago +4 / -5

im sure they are very proud he was at least able to pass grade 10 physics.

3
mrsray 3 points ago +3 / -0

lol, grow up

2
Nogrim1 2 points ago +3 / -1

i did and spent 4 years studying physics at university.

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +2 / -1

Lol. Then you know nothing.....

If you think 10th grade physics is reality....take an undergrad in physics....then take a master's....and then take a PhD....and then at every stage realise......nope...hahahaha

2
Nogrim1 2 points ago +3 / -1

again i did an undergrad in engineering... grade 10 physics is about as far as you need to get to realize flat earthers are retards. its not that complicated.

these idiots are fucking up basic principles of physics you can experiment with in your backyard. like the other guy said your either LARPing or retarded if you believe in flat earth.

1
MindlessRationality 1 point ago +2 / -1

Not really. Don't be so disingenuous.

Flat earth hasn't been disproven by anyone yet in this community.....neither you nor your fellow grade 10 educated peeps.


And it certainly hasn't been proven....


Saying the entire argument rests on one bad proposition is just as bad as blindly believing something because you don't know how to perform an experiment but thinking it's true....


Rather than waterind the whole discussion by saying grade 10 teaches you stuff......you are fucking retarded for saying that btw.....why not actually have a real discussion in good faith ...

If you are unable to...why are you at the table? To be more bad faith? Like we need more of that here....c'mon be a difficult child.....

Use that education and maybe remember the electives you were forced to take....the few since you did engineering....were probably somewhat related to logic, philosophy or some such ...since my experience is that electives need to branch out from the engineering side since it is so heavy on the math and science...

I too had an undergrad in engineering with an A- avg. I cannot prove the earth is a globe.....not without a lot of money.....

Not can I prove it's flat without a lot of money....

But I can certainly have hypothetical discussions and create testable hypotheses which maybe can be refined by the community and others.....


Saying you have been taught stuff (which at the undergrad level is still mostly rote....) Then good....you can be taught.....but can you step aside and critique it with new ideas....or just regurgitated opinions you have been taught by the system of people who told these have been tested ...but didn't do the tests......and obviously all tests are filled with errors....

These are part of the classes ehh...error calculations and derive the rough error range and bars ....

So....how about the same rigour gets applied to both sides....not just 'i was trained dto think this way...so you are wrong."

1
Celest 1 point ago +5 / -4

C'mon, we know it's you you're describing.

0
Iknowitsu 0 points ago +5 / -5

Oh look, I found one.

Typical manipulative shill response/bait.

You give yourself away with your weak logic and attempt to bait me into a nonsense argument.

You’re a fed/shill feigning stupidity. Not hard to spot.

This is what happens when you don’t pay these people enough and they get sloppy with their ops.

Or perhaps they just hire from the bottom rung… intelligence wise.

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +2 / -1

There is no discussion to be had.

Well not with that attitude - obviously not! You might be surprised if you stopped by the community I created for such discussion and engaged, however!

0
Iknowitsu 0 points ago +2 / -2

You’re a fed

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +1 / -0

What makes you think that?

I can assure you - the feds cannot afford my time. What I do, I do for love - brother or sister!

Besides, the psyop (regardless of agency responsible for it) wants you NOT to study and discuss flat earth research, and I want the opposite!

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +3 / -2

I don't like to hurl shill accusations easily, I realize that's maliciously done to break trust within a community. However I did notice many comments getting upvotes within a minute of being posted. I don't care as long as I think there's a real person on the other side who's willing to discuss things somewhat openly. At least this thread contains this discussion here.

0
Iknowitsu 0 points ago +4 / -4

It’s a fake discussion.

The whole thing is obviously fake and gay.

People are not here suddenly vibrantly discussing flat earth in a positive sense.

That’s a complete shift in sentiment from the norm here.

Looks a lot like shill accounts pushing scripted conversation to make it appear those people are way more involved on this sub than they are.

It’s a way of discrediting a given forum, and if they’re lucky, they can scoop up some useful idiots along the way to perpetuate it further.

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

The whole thing is obviously fake and gay.

That’s the flat earth psyop. It is designed to make sure you know how stupid it is so you will never seriously evaluate or discuss it further.

The subject/discussion is extremely valuable which is precisely why they spend so much money advertising why it’s too stupid for you to bother with :(. Methinks the woman doth protest too much...

-1
Iknowitsu -1 points ago +3 / -4

They targeted your post for a reason.

None of this is legitimate discussion.

I have to question you as well, since you’re the OP and posting about the same thing as these shills.

I think you’re sus too op. And if you’re not, then you’re genuinely a useful idiot for wanting people to even discuss something so incredibly idiotic and inherently intellectually discrediting.

3
mrsray 3 points ago +4 / -1

lol ... you can still 'believe' in the ball if you want ... no need to get your panties in an uproar ... no one is FORCING you to see the truth

-2
Nogrim1 -2 points ago +2 / -4

please, just don't reproduce, thats all we ask.

2
mrsray 2 points ago +2 / -0

same for you

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

My intention is to build trust within the community, and this subject is one of the most contentious. Users here hold open-mindedness in high regard, and discussing things is the only way out of it. This is why I suggest a live audio call, so we can hear each others voices, literally, and hopefully avoid the shill accusations. You're invited.

0
Iknowitsu 0 points ago +1 / -1

That’s sketchy af and exactly what a shill would want.

Audio recordings to go along with other meta data their compiling on the user base.

You are bad at your job.

1
throwaway_27_ [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hhaha, good point man.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
Needmorepopcorn 0 points ago +2 / -2

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

Crater earth theory is far more fascinating imo.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
savman 0 points ago +2 / -2

Lol. No, they are both dumb.

-1
TurnToGodNow -1 points ago +3 / -4

The sun sets. End of debate.

4
Afks 4 points ago +5 / -1

Incredible

Any other awesome statements you wish you throw down?

Take a look at some of the linked material within this thread

Plenty of short videos and memes if you don’t want to commit to an hours long video

3
Celest 3 points ago +4 / -1

I appreciate your patience, fren.

The irony, though, considering his name.

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +2 / -1

The Bible mentions the "4 corners" of the Earth but in the flat earth model it is a circle and doesn't have corners. So if you want to take everything literally your model doesn't match the Bible either.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah, but you can have a circle within a square, for example. The map that's commonly shown is just what people have gotten used to and what fits best with what's observed; as such, it doesn't mean it's representative of the actual world. We don't really know how/what it is.

I've never really been interested in the Bible prior to finding out about FE; it never made much sense to me, my felt sense being that God is within me/us/everything, not in a particular book/place. Once I overcame my indoctrination (it's readily available to anyone willing to look), I realized that this is indeed a creation, what else could it be? If I ever contemplated that idea with the Big Bang as the inception point, surely it would make more sense given a smaller, dedicated realm? Genesis sure looks different now.

I've found this video (Revisiting the Firmament) (1h22m) to be pretty interesting.

1
jack445566778899 1 point ago +4 / -3

The sun does set, but not because the curve of the earth gets in the way of it!

Please join us on the community I created to discuss such topics to learn about and explore other possibilities (than the one we are taught to dogmatically repeat from childhood)!

-3
TurnToGodNow -3 points ago +1 / -4

I've seen all the flat earth explanations for a sun set and they bear no resemblance to physical reality.

The current model of the solar system accounts for sun sets perfectly. The end.

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
-2
savman -2 points ago +1 / -3
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
savman -1 points ago +1 / -2

Oooo- I've found Photoshop level filters - what the fuck does this prove? You're a fuck wit? How anyone could use that video for evidence of anything is laughable at best. What a fuck stick you are.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

I've seen all the flat earth explanations for a sun set and they bear no resemblance to physical reality.

There is no “flat earth” to receive explanations from! Most flat earth researchers are independent, and their perspectives, approaches, and conclusions vary wildly as a result! I understand that the explanations you heard were unrealistic; however, I have a realistic one for you if you are interested in hearing it!

The current model of the solar system accounts for sun sets perfectly.

But what if it was wrong despite that; wouldn’t you want to know? Models aren’t for providing explanation of phenomena... that’s what experiment is for!

The end.

I can’t and won’t force you to learn about anything, but there absolutely are other explanations that comport with reality and good reasons to suspect (and conclude) that the current model (for the solar system and many other things) is wrong!

If you are ever interested in expanding your horizons, I can assure you our conversation will be rewarding as long as you are earnest!

1
TurnToGodNow 1 point ago +2 / -1

however, I have a realistic one for you if you are interested in hearing it!

I am not going to waste time being gaslit on this. Already looked into FE arguments in depth a while ago and I know what to expect. No open mind here buddy.

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am not going to waste time being gaslit on this.

Fair enough. I recognize that many have already been gaslit by the psyop, and don’t have the tolerance or interest to potentially be burned again. Ars longa, vita brevis. We have to choose our battles/interests carefully as a result.

However, i can assure you that i would never engage in something like that willingly. What i do, i do for love and i may well be wrong - but i am earnest. I share my perspective and findings in the hopes that they will be further refined, including refuted, not to convince/manipulate or gaslight.

Already looked into FE arguments in depth a while ago and I know what to expect.

I expect you had a run in with the psyop, and not an earnest researcher like myself. My sincere condolences. I can assure you that as long as you discuss in earnest with me, as I expect you did with the psyop at one point, it will be a rewarding experience even if neither of our positions are ultimately altered. I speak from experience.

No open mind here buddy.

I understand, however if you ever change your mind or think of a good question - I hope you reconsider. You know where to find me if that is ever the case!

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
TurnToGodNow 0 points ago +1 / -1

We can't even agree on the obvious (that the sun sets). There really is no point going further.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
savman -1 points ago +1 / -2

If the earth were flat, you would always see it and never experience a 100% dark sky. Starlight travels billions of light-years without fading, so even if the sun was very small, you would still see it. The only thing that would create the blockage of sunlight would be a wall, which happens to be curved, like a ball.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
savman -1 points ago +1 / -2

"part of the psyop"

Oh please, enough of the conspiritard bull shit. No one but you children believe this crap. I suppose the 'psyop' has been going to for hundreds of years?, right. Open your mind to the fact that you are a fucking 1/2 witted loon.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
savman 0 points ago +1 / -1

you actually werent so indoctrinated.

Straw man argument

FE is the observation, scientific method and your observation is all you need.

Not how science works.

their is a 1/2 loon giving out $10k

Which he will never pay. Scroll to 3:00 - why can't we see the end of the flat disc? Thousands of man-made balloons have risen to this altitude but you never see the edge. Why? Look at why you can't see an edge .... wouldn't a roll of toilet paper make more sense than a flat disc with an end-point? Where is a photos of the end of the earth? FE is like arguing God exists. You actually can't see an edge or God, yet you believe. Weird. Whereas, we have actual photos of hundreds of satellites and orbiting live camera feeds rolling over our earth day after day. Yet you chumps think it's all CGI.

I'll give you $1,000,000 for a picture of the edge. Now, of course you'll just say; "The government does not let you near it. Yah,,. right, anyone with some money could float a balloon aloft and see the edge. This is just a joke you guys are playing.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
-1
jack445566778899 -1 points ago +2 / -3

To anyone with an interest in this subject, please join us on the community I created to further discuss, explore, and exchange views on it! Click my username and find the link, or let me know and I will pm it to you.

Personally, looking at the Sun (ouch) and the Moon is enough for me.

If we want to know the shape of the earth, we have to measure the earth - not the sky!

-1
savman -1 points ago +2 / -3

Oh boy. A community of brain-dead twits. How exciting.

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

A community of brain-dead twits

Sadly the flat earth psyop loudly advertises offensively stupid views to ensure you (and others) falsely believe this. This is done to prevent you from ever earnestly discussing or researching the valuable subject. You aren’t the only one to fall for it :(

The “brain-dead twits” are the ones who don’t question, and merely belligerently parrot their dogma. Flat earth researchers are curious, and earnest students. It isn’t a subject for, or enjoyable to, the brain-dead or the zealously/blindly certain.

Why not suspend your undue prejudice for a second and come discuss with us? I assure you that as long as you are earnest, it will be a rewarding experience.

-1
savman -1 points ago +1 / -2

"valuable subject"

ha ha ha ha.

4
jack445566778899 4 points ago +4 / -0

"valuable subject"

Extremely so! Flat earth research isn’t really about geodesy, it’s about what you know (as opposed to what you merely believe and parrot), how you know it with certainty, and how best to convey that knowledge and certainty to others. It is a profoundly valuable subject to study.

Your incredulity and mockery is expected as a result of the heavily advertised (i.e. funded) flat earth psyop - but the community I created for flat earth researchers (we study the psyop and many other related topics) is very different than you have been led to believe.

Judgement without evaluation is the height of ignorance. Why not come have a brief discussion? It won’t take long to realize you’ve been duped, and are mistaken!

2
seekingTRUTH93 2 points ago +2 / -0

you keep referring to a community but I dont see one

2
jack445566778899 2 points ago +2 / -0

It’s called flatearthresearch.

Unfortunately, if you are on a mobile browser (and in portrait) the right hand sidebar which has the link to the community doesn’t display when you click my username.

That’s why I usually say “let me know and I’ll pm it to you” for those who can’t find the link.

I’ll pm you the link as well.

2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why don't you reference it directly, like so: c/flatearthresearch? It's automatically hyperlinked once the comment is submitted.

-1
twentyonepepes -1 points ago +2 / -3

pretty sure it round

-1
aaarrrrjunas1 -1 points ago +2 / -3

JESUS FUCK, here we go.

ill give 69 TURDS, to the first 42 NIG-NOGS, that can prove theyve been to space.

never been to space? NI'NIGHT, SON. SLEEPY TIME. SHHHHH, S'OK.

-1
some_crypto_guy -1 points ago +3 / -4

Flat earth is a great way to ID and tag retards and fed posters.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
2
Celest 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep!

-1
NEETpride -1 points ago +3 / -4

Flat earth is just a way to dismiss moon landing skeptics

1
Celest 1 point ago +2 / -1

It might just be the other way around: "going to the Moon" might have been necessary to "take a picture of the Earth".

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
-1
NEETpride -1 points ago +2 / -3

how do satellites work then? why is every celestial body we can observe round and not flat?

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +2 / -1

how do satellites work then?

Balloons: https://www.bitchute.com/video/zwbXBctYHDTg/

why is every celestial body we can observe round and not flat?

If you zoom in on stars they're not even spherical.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr5UjBGO4BA

-1
NEETpride -1 points ago +1 / -2

Why do satellites move in a consistent way? What force is acting on then, if they're just held up by balloons?

I didn't say anything about stars. Why are the moon and all planets visible through a telescope round dude?

Just admit you were mistaken. Or keep coping. The choice is yours.

1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why do satellites move in a consistent way? What force is acting on then, if they're just held up by balloons?

How do you know they they do move?

Why are the moon and all planets visible through a telescope round dude?

Thats how they were made.

-1
NEETpride -1 points ago +1 / -2

Why would earth be the only celestial body in the entire cosmos that didn't form into a sphere?

0
VicariousJambi 0 points ago +1 / -1

I never said that the moon and planets were spherical, nor did I ever say they were solid objects.

1
savman 1 point ago +3 / -2

Don't waste your time. 925TheJoy is the biggest fuck wit around here. The guy thinks everything is a projection controlled by the Illuminate. Total retard Koo Koo for Coco pops level.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
-1
NEETpride -1 points ago +1 / -2

Does it not make intuitive sense to you that matter in space naturally aggregates into a sphere? This phenomenon is even observed with liquids in low earth orbit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhPVhIzMaqg

I don't question how satellites work. I know how satellites work. Do you need me to dumb it down for you?

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
-1
NEETpride -1 points ago +2 / -3

Why do you think the earth doesn't curve? Why do ships disappear bottom first over the horizon? Why is it so important to you to pretend the earth is flat?

Just asking questions ;)

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
-1
Nogrim1 -1 points ago +4 / -5

honestly i hope this thread is just a comedian looking for material to do a bit on how stupid flat earthers are.

if you are a comedian, take notes! , this is going to be a gold mine.

2
Celest 2 points ago +3 / -1

Are you iknowitsu's sibling?

-2
Iknowitsu -2 points ago +2 / -4

Not everyone is a complete moron.

NoGrim, these aren’t real people having this discussion.

It’s clearly astroturfed. This is a fake conversation being pushed by someone managing multiple accounts.

Any real people involved can be thought of as useful idiots that are falling prey and perpetuating an obvious psyop.

Don’t take any of it seriously, because it’s all 100% theatre.

3
Celest 3 points ago +3 / -0

Not everyone is retarded like you.

I know, some are more so.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-2
Nogrim1 -2 points ago +1 / -3

its entertaining at least.

-3
Nogrim1 -3 points ago +1 / -4

he is perhaps a brother from another mother buy i have no way of knowing. we just appear to share an enjoyment of mocking the mental restricted (see im playing PC mods) i love these threads, i think they should be archived like a wall of shame for people to reference before they take anything you ever say seriously.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
2
0
savman 0 points ago +3 / -3

This is why FE'ers are fucking dumb. They zoom in on a ship well within the curve and claim you just need to zoom in using 'modern technology' --- So if a zoom camera fixes everything, I want to see the waterline of a ship that is proven to be over 12 Km away. In fact, I honestly would give anyone $1,000 to show me one photo that demonstrates that the base touching the ground of an object over 12 Km can be seen.

3
-1
savman -1 points ago +1 / -2

I challenge you to give me ONE example in this video that makes the strongest case and I will debunk it.

A collection of morons who claim '666' or fail to understand flight routes of airlines does not maketh these people look anything but dumb.

0
575guy 0 points ago +1 / -1

These men prove that their radar work well past 12k. Ships, submarines and planes sorry buddy

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
0
savman 0 points ago +1 / -1

I told you. I just need one person with a science degree to support your claim. Until then, fuck your flat pancake. FE's are ignorant retards. You're a joke. You have a huge nothing burger and no, some equally inept retard on Youtube is not going to sway me. I want credible people to say it's so. Not conspiritards in a circle jerk. You're all losers.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
savman 1 point ago +4 / -3

"a product of vision/optics"

Why do you say things that you have no idea what you're talking about? I can use a Cannon XLR to zoom in on Saturn. You don't think I could zoom in on an object on a flat plane? Your statement is so dumb it defies all reason and logic. You literally are a fucking moron.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
4
savman 4 points ago +5 / -1

Yeah, at least I know what the fuck I am talking about. Go read some fucking books moron. You are an embarrassment to the thousands of explorers, and achievement of mankind. To think people like you exist is sad and pathetic.

1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
seekingTRUTH93 1 point ago +1 / -0

expanding earth theory?

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

I can imagine strait lines. You can. We all can.

Actually some people don't have an internal monologue or any visualization abilities.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
VicariousJambi 1 point ago +1 / -0

I can still imagine a line without visualizing it.

Imagining the line is visualizing the line.

Would the AR line still be at the same height? On the far end of the line.

Of course it would?

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
deleted 1 point ago +2 / -1
-1
DZP1 -1 points ago +4 / -5

Flat earthers are uneducated people who are fixated on wrong evidence. There are zero sailors who are flat earthers. There are zero pilots who are flat earthers. No scientists believe in a flat earth.

I am guessing that the flat earthers trolling here do it simply to make the site look like it attracts stupid people. It's political.

[I don't give a shit about troll moron downvotes, so fire away but you're still the uneducable spawn of ghetto single mothers.]

3
575guy 3 points ago +4 / -1

https://youtu.be/iBAAOIgt3JE 😂😂😂😂😂😂

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2