any flat earthers left here? how do you explain this?
(media.conspiracies.win)
Comments (110)
sorted by:
FE crowd is not about explaining anything. It is a 130-year old (Zetetic society and all that stuff in late 1800s) British elites operation to litter with grabage any uncensored platform where people dare to question official narratives.
And yet, on a flat earth, there is no explanation for why the sun falls below the horizon.
So easy that you’re physically incapable of explaining how the angular diameter of an object can become negative without it moving below the visible plane.
Translation: I can’t prove any of my claims.
Oh, so “seeing in a line”? A line that can’t stop being seen unless it’s interrupted by something? Something like the ground? The ground under which the sun “never” moves? Because otherwise you could never not see the sun, but you, the flat earther, say you can always see the sun. But the sun can’t be seen at night.
THE ANGULAR DIAMETER OF AN OBJECT CAN NEVER BE NEGATIVE.
NO MATTER HOW FAR AWAY IT IS.
Yet difficult to explain?
It’s a shame you don’t know yourself then
Not sure what you're proving here. Using the Gleason map checks out for all these. For example a Toronto to Sao Paolo flight is 11 hours, and using the distance calculation for the Gleason, it makes sense for the Sydney Houston flight.
What's the distance between Sydney and Santiago de Chile according to a flat Earth map?
I'll be honest. That's the one flight that makes the flat earth theory less tenable.
Here's what the Dubay guy says about it...
https://rumble.com/v1y50x2-how-do-flights-like-sydney-santiago-work-on-flat-earth.html
And here's what the compass readings of Max Igan showed when he took that flight...
https://youtu.be/wgDokIxCtrk?si=1XlEXmcyWA0_3bjv
Why can't you simply answer the question?
Because I've never flown that route. I've flown other long haul flights into the southern hemisphere where I now live. However, Dubay's video explains that the distance is roughly 7000 miles on the flat earth map, and that ends up fitting within the air speed of a 747 to get there within the 13 hours alotted for the flight.
The biggest thing is the report of compass readings taken by a passenger of one of those flights, as discussed in the second link I shared.
While it's not a cut and dried response, the maps you showed aren't the gotcha you may think they are. Also look up real emergency landing stories in history and see where some of these hit the ground... Those flight paths make no sense on a globe. But also not the gotcha flat earth supporters think it is.
Stalemate.
have you ever looked at the Gleeson map?
https://imgur.com/a/nBtOuoE
You sure that this is 7000 miles according to the Gleason map? that would mean the whole diameter of flat earth would be about 10000 miles.
I guess you think shit tastes delicious, right?
I don't follow, faggot.
Not surprising you needed your own worldview spelled out.
can you repeat the point in your own words?
On a flat Earth, what is the distance between Sydney and Santiago de Chile?
Its like arguing what shade of blue the sky is. It doesnt matter unless you own a spaceship. Better off putting energy in to raising chickens or buying assets that you can flip in a hyperinflation environment.
Piss off.
Thank you for admitting the Earth is not flat and that space exists.
Reported for spam.
Fuck off. Reported.
So you don't have an explanation that matched with a flat earth?
"Earth" is a tiled tessellation. If you travel east from Chicago all the way "around" until you land in Chicago again, you are in a second, distinct, yet identical Chicago. It's like a chessboard.
All airplanes are required by law to travel in such a way as to simulate globe distances, lol
Which law is that?
What's the distance between Sydney and Santiago de Chile according to a flat Earth map?
What's the distance between Sydney and Santiago de Chile according to the Gleeson map?
why can't you just give a number? you have a map, doesn;t that map show you distances?
To compare it with reality.
So, if the distance between the two on the Gleason map is 12000km, what's the diameter of the whole flat Earth?
If the Gleason map is an accurate map of a flat Earth and the distance you propose is correct, it would mean that the land masses closer to the North Pole are much, much smaller than they would be on a globe. do you agree with that?