Before the cuckening
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (36)
sorted by:
If I'm wrong, prove me wrong. If I'm right, either run away or post more non rebuttals like "oh how sad".
First, you used a logical fallacy as proof. Falsely claiming our ancestors "believed" it was a globe, so we should too. That's not how to use logic.
In reality, the globe wasn't mainstream outside of academia until the 1950s.
Source? Read a book called "the flat earth conspiracy" by Eric dubay.
It's in the first chapter. Flat earth a planted conspiracy for sure. But that's because the earth isn't a globe and they want to make anything that gives people any idea that it's not a globe look so rediculous that's it's not worth looking into. Obviously this psy op has worked on you.
Lastly, the earth being a globe is a theory. So it's you who has to prove its a globe. Then it's easy to see the entire scam fall apart.
You think it makes sense, because we were all indoctrinated before we could even form full sentences. But when you relearn how to think about earth, you'll see how rediculous it is. And it's so obvious that earth is not moving, not floating in space. Giant suns and distract Galaxies are all deception.
Also, I've been around long enough to know you don't prove theory, you test them to see if they hold up. The earth being a globe and moving, is the theory you have to test. So make a test of any kind and see of it hold up. Meaning, see if you can isolate an observation and test that it means the earth is a globe.
Anyway, it for very smart people. Probably over your ability at this stage in your knowledge
I'm pretty confident Eric Dubay is a psyop to prevent real flat earthers from getting real geographical data to flesh out their theory. I'm not a flat earther, but my alternate account is. The flat earth movement has legitimate concerns in (1) government suppression, (2) scientism establishment, and (3) Antarctic secrets, so I think they should be aired. But the truth is very complex, and using frames of reference the earth is both still and moving at the same time in different senses (and maybe that's what Galileo meant by saying "And still, it moves" or "And even, it moves")! I think since C.S. Lewis said Narnia was flat with a sun that a giant could reach and with waterfalls at one edge, and since England was connected to Narnia, he was trying to get the flat earth theory going in a tame and then-respectable way. Stars are real and closer than we think, and yet we have mastery over them.
I think the biggest difficulty for flat earthers is getting the math right about the horizon effect and light refraction. Flat earthers (often at Dubay's misdirection) stick to arguing about that rule of thumb 8in/mi^2 that is not the globalists' actual math and then they find themselves arguing without the real facts. The true effects of light refraction at the horizon are more subtly calculated, and the four corners of the earth and its dozens of miles of vertical variation (including Moho digs) make an accurate geoidal system very hard indeed even for a globalist. And we're not able to argue that sea level is modeled best by perfect flatness because of both waveform and meniscal effects (considering also that waters sometimes stand up in a heap), so the putting of a boundary in Antarctica doesn't dictate the geoidal model therein. So I'm hopeful that the flat earth community will get some better math in the future.
Add: I take it by your other comments that you mean we're in an atmosphere instead of a perfect space vacuum, and that we're one species without need for macroevolution from another or significant racial distinction? Thanks.
Same reason as my other reply
This one was my attempt to be sympathetic, you might want to read it a second time. Most flat earthers here do not think Dubay is the face of flat earthers, he smells manufactured. I like to hear from flat earthers because they might uncover something useful like hollow earth or Antarctica, so I wasn't intending to scare you off.
Why is the shadow on the moon from earth round? Why is there winter if earth doesn’t change position? What are your theories for these occurrences? And if any of it comes from “muh holy book” shove that shit up your ass where it belongs. Use proof and facts, as you demand others do.
The holy book is psy op for idiots. Your questions show you never did any effort to discover yourself.
You, me, every westerner was institutionalized. You can not expect to undo that with some internet comments.
You should look up your own "proofs," because arguments with strangers is fucking dumb. You have the internet and your resourceful. If you want help and guidance, then reach out when u get stuck.
Winter is easy to explain. Hint. Sun is small and local, travels above us.