Scientific proof, round earth confirmed
(media.conspiracies.win)
Comments (27)
sorted by:
My table is also round, is my table a sphere?
I don't know I'd have to see it before I made a judgement like that
You have never seen the earth and yet you have made a judgment that goes against physics and common sense.
There are simple tests known since Ancient Greece you can do at home today that will prove a round earth 🌍
There are simpler tests known since before ancient Greece that you can do yourself that prove the earth is a level plane.
Care to link to them? I would love to try them out
No need to link. Take container and fill it with water, observe water always finds its level and the surface is always flat.
No matter how big the container is water will be flat and level. Since the earth is mostly water it is flat and level, period.
Your ancient Greek myths are based on presuppositions of values that are unverifiable. I can take my flat table and calculate its spherical properties, it does not make it a sphere in reality.
This is some "the sun goes to sleep at night that's why it's dark" level scientific illiteracy right here. I am genuinely sorry for you my friend
Do you know the difference between round objects and spherical objects? Round objects are flat. Globes are spheres.
Now as for your implied Question. You can have a relatively flat livable space, on a massive planetoid, surrounded by an impassible ice wall. Similar to the floor beneath your feet, surrounded by the walls of your studio apartment.
is he plowing atlas in the bottom left pic?
Yes and you can see more on his Onlyfans for just 5.99 a month
The earth is flat. Suck it.
So where's the edge? Why are there no photos of it?
So where's the edge? Why are there no photos of it?
So where's the edge? Why are there no photos of it?
Come on now. Your posting a comic and claiming its a scientific proof.
Your as bad as the flat earthers. What do I expect from someone who thinks a leaky vaccine is effective, rofl.
You know I wouldnt even be shocked to find out the truth is a mixture of the two. The math proves other dimensions can exist, that we cant see or interact with.
How do we know the world isnt flat? We dont.
I agree, the world is likely a globe and moving through space, there are many experiments and things that show this to be true.
But for all intents and purposes, it does indeed look flat to us.
But this comic is as silly as the "flat curve" picture someone posted the other day, lmao.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVK5SZJicoY&list=PLH2kv7dHfdOe-bJu7Fpijk9LlGyPDE2vY&index=5
These lyrics hitting me like a hammer.
It's a joke bro
Maybe he didn't get it
Notice the "aim" in claim...suggestion aims at consent. If one calls a suggestion a claim; then one consented to the suggested, hence directing aim by becoming target.
Meanwhile; science/scio - "to know" implies ones perception, which doesn't have to be aimed; since it exists within all perceivable.
What if all is one? How could whole be more than one? To mix ones together implies within/during/in response to/transmuted out of all...
a) How does one DI-vide minds/MENS within act-ION? By tempting ones consent to react to another ones suggestion, which establishes a division called "reason".
b) Math/meth/mad/me - "mowing" aka cutting down... https://www.etymonline.com/word/math#etymonline_v_43762
What's the aftermath of claiming oneself as ME? Branding everyone else as YOU (phonetic jew).
c) ma-the-matic aka matter-theism-magic
c) If all implies one, then addition (inception); subtraction (death); multiplication (intercourse for off-spring) and division (whole into partials).
Problems (life) within solution (inception towards death)...many are being tricked by few to "solve problems" instead.
a) Knowledge implies each ones perception within all perceivable...suggested pluralism (we) tempts perceiving singular (one) to ignore self for others.
b) Try to describe a "we" in nature without ignoring each "one" thereof..
c) You and me implies each one of us...suggested "you" + "me" + "us" tempts ones perception to ignore all perceivable.
a) Intended purpose implies aiming at end...can life perceive its beginning (inception) or end (death)? What does ones (not other ones) inception and death look like?
Meanwhile, life being processed from inception towards death implies a flat-line...which one perceives as moment-um. Now what does momentum look like?
b) Indeed implies in-deed aka life within a transaction from inception towards death...ignoring this for the suggestions by another tempts one in-debt.