Nobody called Trump the common man, you dumb fuck.
We refused to take that shit even when Trump was pushing it, glowboy. This isn't about republican vs. democrat. This is about the common man vs. the corrupt establishment.
Speak for yourself, Yank.
At least he's honest about his convictions.
Australia is America's dickhead.
A good number of them have found out but continue to lie to themselves out of spite, rather dying than admit wrong.
It's Were (past tense of are) - Stir (as in stirring a pot) - Sher (lock Holmes) Were-Stir-Sher
They didn't get the order, I recall.
Just commenting on what is depicted. A large (relative to the earth) unmoving sun.
The sun is actually large and unmoving. A step in the right direction.
The teacher that wrote that shit made two spelling errors and two punctuation errors.
In a document of about fifty words.
It looks that way because the earth isn't flat. On a flat earth, again, the sun would never disappear over the horizon. Ever. That is literally impossible. If you roll a marble down an infinitely long flat plane, the marble never dips below the plank. That would make it a ghost marble. Similarly, an object circling above a plane can never drop below it. (Obviously it could disappear behind a feature like a mountain, but never the ocean.) Even visually. It would simply shrink in a spot (very close, but still) above the horizon.
I went over this. If it circled over a disc, it wouldn't be able to disappear over the horizon and would instead curve out of view near the bottom right/left.
I doubt you're even aware what the pavement outside your house looks like.
"Stop them from breathing on other patients." and "stop them from breathing." are not necessarily the same thing, you know.
I'm not debating the effecacy of ventilators, but at least keep the arguments against the whole covid situation sane. You're obviously misrepresenting the doctor's statement, here.
Nice call to authority from someone who hasn't even witnessed a sunset in their life, though. (Because if you had, you wouldn't ever have posted this bullshit.)
Not only do the horizontal lines actually show the earth curving in the background, it actively shows the sun going down over the horizon and only then does it inexplicably start shrinking after. Nothing in this video disproves anything I've said. In fact, it mostly supports it. And even still it's all total bunk.
In a model where the Sun circles above a disc, it cannot physically draw a straight line in the sky, and it also cannot dip over the horizon. No amount of word salad and empty statements change that.
That is not how perspective works in the flat earth model. It will get very close to the horizon (if the earth is considered many times its actual size, or the sun many times smaller) but it will never cross it.
Obviously that's how it works in the 'roughly spherical' model, but unless the sun literally goes over the side of 'the disc' it CANNOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE go below the horizon.
I've witnessed many sunsets (and sunrises) and none of them looked like this, meaning one of two things:
- This is doctored footage.
- Distorted view due to some sort of natural phenomenon. Perhaps the heated desert air causes some sort of mirage effect?
For one, if the earth was flat and the sun did 'get smaller' as it 'circles above the earth disc' it would never EVER disappear below the horizon, it would vanish into a point in the sky (actually it wouldn't disappear at all, unless it were some kind of massive spotlight instead of an orb, a theory this very video would disprove. Lose lose for flat earth. ) That's basic perspective and requires no math or physics. Unless of course you want to argue the fucker is landed at night and turned off (or shielded with the world's largest, invisible lampshade), at which point I could only urge you to seek immediate mental help.
In the scope of an object as massive as the sun, it makes total sense.
The sun's color hasn't (well, it has, minutely. Which is exactly how it should be as a star ages.) changed, as can be verified by physical photo prints from those nineties you speak of. Even when the sun isn't in the print, lighting hasn't magically changed in the pictures, friend. If the sun changed colors you'd see drastic differences between your childhood pics and modern ones.
Let me know when you're done grasping at straws. In the meantime, I'm more than entertained by you scraping this barrel of bunk arguments.
I don't take anything anyone says as truth. I say he is right because I've done these experiments myself over fifteen years ago in high school. We tested how radio waves travel through a medium and used a vacuum chamber as a control.
It is if it can literally make material glow red hot. Or are you insinuating the glow is reflection, which disproves the very concept of the sun being an object floating over a disk, as is dictated by perspective. Either the sun would be supermassive and far beyond the end of the earth, or it's tiny and cannot cast a reflection like in the image. Both are mutually exclusive, so no matter how you try to worm yourself out of the trap you literally talked yourself into, you've proven your own stance wrong.
The lower the resolution, the less likely a photo WASN'T doctored, you imbecile.
What do you think is harder to counterfeit? A master painter's magnum opus, or a kid's finger painting? Yeah. That's basically the same for high resolution photographs vs. Low.
Gonna make an actual argument for once?
If the sun was so close it could create hotspots on earth, you'd burn alive on a day with a clear sky. Fucking morons.
No. I'm saying we don't give a shit about what talking head is in office. They're all part of the corrupt elite.