If the Earth is flat - how it’s possible:
You can make the following flights, starting at 9am, finishing at 3pm (or earlier) and staying at the hotel till the next day:
-
London, Uk => New York => Los Angeles => Tokyo => Doha => London, UK
-
The above series of trips starts and ends in the same place.
-
All the time, while flying, you’ve got the Sun on the left hand side.
You can only explain that in 2 ways:
-
Earth is a globe as we know it, or
-
Earth is flat, but then it needs to have a shape of a donut where the sun is in the center of it, so you fly around it.
The second would mean: when you fly South of London you should cross the middle of a donut (which is the Sun) after 12 hours of trip.
Let’s fly towards the sun:
London, UK => South Africa => the Sun.
Unfortunately, after 12 hours you end up in an extremely cold area.
It moves in a circle bro, along the equator, therefor it “sets” in the west for everyone. The continents are not aligned like you see in a zoomed out version of google maps. You will also notice on goog maps Antarctica goes over the whole bottom of the map. Why? If this is the case, why is the north pole not depicted in the same way? Because NP is centre and Antarctica is an ice barrier circling the world.
Light from stars travels billions of years yet somehow people on the other side of your flat disc don't see the sun 24 hours a day.
You are seriously a fucking idiot.
Ah, but does it really?! We are certainly taught that it does, and required to repeat it in order to matriculate...
Right, because the sun isn’t bright enough AND there is too much matter in the way.
I recommend viciously attacking the thought, but never the thinker. Ad hominem is the last resort of the intellectually feeble. Your ideas/positions should stand on their own merits, and not require such mudslinging.
There are other views than your own, and everyone who considers them is not automatically an idiot for doing so.
Yeah, based on the physics of parallax & trigonometry. Something your little brain did not study, so you think it's all fake. If you want to argue against the physics of light, you go right ahead.
BTW, odd that you should use the word matriculate since you are claiming things without any empirical evidence, which is the fundamental basis of science.
So sure, claim anything you want, but until you provide such evidence, you're just a wanker with a keyboard.
I don't argue with people who think rationally and can provide facts to support their claims. I argue with low-IQ morons who think they are smarter than those that matriculate. Lol.
So we are taught. But there are many unvalidated assumptions baked into such calculations. Astronomy is rife with them.
No, i have concluded it is wrong; slightly different.
The physics of light doesn’t prove nor measure a distance to a star.
Like what? If you are looking for empirical evidence, just ask!
Agreed.
Personally, i don’t think you should argue at all. It’s for fools. But if you had to - people who think rationally and can provide evidence for their claims would be more interesting than others, surely.
That is very sad. Arguing with idiots makes you even stupider (and belligerent) than they are :( I urge you to reconsider. Capable students prefer earnest discussion and research, and the intelligent have no need to argue with fools to feel better about themselves.
The concept is clearly above your IQ level. Maybe try figuring out the conspiracy about bert and ernie being accused of stealing the cookies while cookie monster is covered in crumbs.
Dude is Mr Round Earth if there was ever such a thing. He's a great guy who cusses everyone he meets. I hope to get him drunk one day, he'd be a blast.