Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

11
()
posted 3 years ago by BuckeyePatr1ot 3 years ago by BuckeyePatr1ot +14 / -3
36 comments share
36 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
▲ 1 ▼
– Hand_Of_Node 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

I admit the word 'refusing' was a bit of a goad, but 'dave' does lay out the case for ball earth in a straightforward way. Flat earth proponents have nothing similar, not that they necessarily need to. (unless they wanted to spread their beliefs)

I'm convinced there's a thickness because I have a shovel, and have used it to penetrate the surface. Even had a well drilled at one point, so it's not like one of those simulated environments where the ground and objects only exist on the surface. The only question is how deep does it go beneath our feet. Is it miles, 7,917.5 miles, or infinitely thick?

"Space" as we've been programmed to believe, is scientifically impossible.

Is this related to that "vacuum versus atmosphere" thing? Does that make high and low pressure areas of our atmosphere also impossible? I'm not seeing a conflict.

I'm up to 5:45, where the beach chick sums up the previous minutes complaining about google victimizing flatters by postulating weakness in the globe model being the cause of over people talking about a stationary earth model.

So the first 5 minutes was crying victim. Now images of text from various flight testing/training organizations are being shown, with "lets start by assuming a flat non-rotating earth" sections being highlighted, as if it's some kind of admission. It would take a real 'beginner' to take this seriously so far. Zero science or credibility so far, unlike professor dave. Dave's a douche, but his arguments and references make flat heads explode.

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - ptjlq (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy