The Krankie Returns
Central Defender
To stop us from falling off the edge.
-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.
Put a flat earthier into space
- Thread starter southstander
- Start date
I was going to post the exact same, word for word.
Probably the right answer then.
zwartekat
Striker
It's not funny. Maybe we're going to war with the rectangular planet.
DaveH
Striker
Not believing because of magic invisible signals.You do know that when you turn the radio on in your car, there are not lots of tiny people singing in your dashboard, right?
zwartekat
Striker
Proof will be required.
You do know that when you turn the radio on in your car, there are not lots of tiny people singing in your dashboard, right?
Nukehasslefan
Winger
What proof is there that you know for sure?
That's your thought on it. You don't know any of this for sure.
Maybe it could be attention seeking but then again I don't believe Earth is flat. I've said time and time again what I believe it may be.
Anyone who posts on a forum or whatever is after attention or they wouldn't post, whatever the debate is.
They wouldn't get that high, In my opinion.
That's what we're told.
I'm answering as to what I believe they are.
I'd hazard a guess that many do. However that isn't the issue. The issue is about how many people all over the known Earth believe in a god.
The same amount can be made to believe almost anything as long as it has an authority tag attached, kind of thing.
We can be coaxed into believing all kinds of stuff without even knowing f any of it has an facts/proof to it.
Peer reviewed is not proven. This is why the words "scientific theory" is bandied about. It pushes towards a mainstream truth but hides behind the word "theory." It's clever in its own way but facts are not involved.
I absolutely agree. Science is about everything, it can't be a lie because science is the entire Earth. Being a scientist is about discovering what it all is and using it.
I have no issues with any of this
Not once have I been shown a proof by anyone on here.
I've been told it's supposedly a globe by many. I've been told I need help because I don't believe it's a globe, by people who tell me it supposedly is.
I've been shown pictures by people who believe it's a globe.
I've never been shown any proof of Earth being any globe, nor a spinning globe.
Not at all.
Nothing has been explained to me that covers what I'm arguing against.
Bits of maths have been brought up that shows nothing.
If you think there has then show me a math reality that proves a globe if it's kids stuff.
Just remember, if you calculate based on what you're handed without you having a real knowledge of it then all you'll be doing would be regurgitation of whatever you decide to use.
And time and time again I've told you all that my model is not based on direct provable facts. I don't pass anything of mine off as factual.
I have my own reasons and experiments that prove a lot to me which is irrelevant to anyone who does not follow that train of thought.
My argument is against what is handed out as factual by mainstream, in terms of what we're told Earth supposedly is.
Those facts are not there.
Not really. I do experiments that show me a bit more. A lot of simple experiments show a lot more to me about what Earth is not, especially.
People ask me what those experiments are and I tell them to get themselves a simple bell jar and pump and evacuate air from it with objects and such inside.
Then there's the simplicity (like I've mentioned) of water level and water conforming to any container it is within and not conforming to any convex curve.....etc.
A bell jar and pump can show why orbits in so called space are nonsense (in my opinion).
Lots of stuff that simply takes a person who is interested to look into.
Anyone with a mindset of shrugging stuff off because a so called flat Earth nutter says it, will naturally never see anything in any experiment.
And yet nobody has.
Don't rely on anyone else. You show me one proof that is plain and obvious to you.
No. I choose to question it all and believe it to be nonsense because that's exactly how it comes across to me.
Once upon a time it all made sense to me. Why?
Because I followed that train of thought when younger. believed the stories because I felt no need to question them.
It's massively different when you start to see a lot of stuff that begs them.
I don't believe a flat Earth is being hidden from us. I don't follow a flat Earth.
You do try, I'll give you that.
You do know that when you turn the radio on in your car, there are not lots of tiny people singing in your dashboard, right?
Last edited:
zwartekat
Striker
Sorry?
payne
Striker
He believes we live in a snow globe
taipeisafc
Striker
I am still at a loss as to how a bell jar and pump disproves planetary motion
Northern Boarders
Goalkeeper
Honestly, the amount of waffle and rubbish this kid spouts is sometimes laughable but mostly pathetic.
Show me evidence - but I cant provide any evidence of my on.
Your just following stories you've been told all your life - Im going to create my own story for which there is no proof (but I'll still ask you for proof).
Renowned scientists throughout history dismissed - some nobody who believes there's a big dome over the earth (but no proof of this) knows better.
The desperation to be different to the norm & inflate their lack of intelligence is obvious.
Show me evidence - but I cant provide any evidence of my on.
Your just following stories you've been told all your life - Im going to create my own story for which there is no proof (but I'll still ask you for proof).
Renowned scientists throughout history dismissed - some nobody who believes there's a big dome over the earth (but no proof of this) knows better.
The desperation to be different to the norm & inflate their lack of intelligence is obvious.
payne
Striker
He's done the experiments.
Nobody can argue with the 'logic' he uses. Basically if any information is second hand or comes from any source other than ones self then you're just believing what the story makers have said. Pointless reading a book or listening to an expert in their field as they might well be lying and involved in some mass millennia secret deception to make everyone think the world is a ball.
DaveH
Striker
What is your water level experiment, and what does it prove?What proof is there that you know for sure?
That's your thought on it. You don't know any of this for sure.
Maybe it could be attention seeking but then again I don't believe Earth is flat. I've said time and time again what I believe it may be.
Anyone who posts on a forum or whatever is after attention or they wouldn't post, whatever the debate is.
They wouldn't get that high, In my opinion.
That's what we're told.
I'm answering as to what I believe they are.
I'd hazard a guess that many do. However that isn't the issue. The issue is about how many people all over the known Earth believe in a god.
The same amount can be made to believe almost anything as long as it has an authority tag attached, kind of thing.
We can be coaxed into believing all kinds of stuff without even knowing f any of it has an facts/proof to it.
Peer reviewed is not proven. This is why the words "scientific theory" is bandied about. It pushes towards a mainstream truth but hides behind the word "theory." It's clever in its own way but facts are not involved.
I absolutely agree. Science is about everything, it can't be a lie because science is the entire Earth. Being a scientist is about discovering what it all is and using it.
I have no issues with any of this
Not once have I been shown a proof by anyone on here.
I've been told it's supposedly a globe by many. I've been told I need help because I don't believe it's a globe, by people who tell me it supposedly is.
I've been shown pictures by people who believe it's a globe.
I've never been shown any proof of Earth being any globe, nor a spinning globe.
Not at all.
Nothing has been explained to me that covers what I'm arguing against.
Bits of maths have been brought up that shows nothing.
If you think there has then show me a math reality that proves a globe if it's kids stuff.
Just remember, if you calculate based on what you're handed without you having a real knowledge of it then all you'll be doing would be regurgitation of whatever you decide to use.
And time and time again I've told you all that my model is not based on direct provable facts. I don't pass anything of mine off as factual.
I have my own reasons and experiments that prove a lot to me which is irrelevant to anyone who does not follow that train of thought.
My argument is against what is handed out as factual by mainstream, in terms of what we're told Earth supposedly is.
Those facts are not there.
Not really. I do experiments that show me a bit more. A lot of simple experiments show a lot more to me about what Earth is not, especially.
People ask me what those experiments are and I tell them to get themselves a simple bell jar and pump and evacuate air from it with objects and such inside.
Then there's the simplicity (like I've mentioned) of water level and water conforming to any container it is within and not conforming to any convex curve.....etc.
A bell jar and pump can show why orbits in so called space are nonsense (in my opinion).
Lots of stuff that simply takes a person who is interested to look into.
Anyone with a mindset of shrugging stuff off because a so called flat Earth nutter says it, will naturally never see anything in any experiment.
And yet nobody has.
Don't rely on anyone else. You show me one proof that is plain and obvious to you.
No. I choose to question it all and believe it to be nonsense because that's exactly how it comes across to me.
Once upon a time it all made sense to me. Why?
Because I followed that train of thought when younger. believed the stories because I felt no need to question them.
It's massively different when you start to see a lot of stuff that begs them.
I don't believe a flat Earth is being hidden from us. I don't follow a flat Earth.
You do try, I'll give you that.
The Krankie Returns
Central Defender
He’s on a massive wind up. It’s that simple.
Others on here have suggested he is a proper flat earther and we should cut him some slack because he genuinely believes what he’s saying. He isn’t though and I can’t prove he isn’t, but I’m just following his mantra there.
Northern Boarders
Goalkeeper
Yeah I agree. What I can't get my head around is why? Why spend hours upon hours trying to wind up a bunch of strangers on the internet over something that's easily proven. At least pick a subject to wind people up on that's a bit controversial and isn't so easily proved.
So there's a dome - how high is it, who built it, what material is it built out of, when was it built, why can't I see it flying 40,000ft in a plane?
Choose something that isn't so fecking ridiculous ffs.
fyl2u
Striker
For some reason the link thumbnail views show the first post of each page rather than the post I linked in each case, but if you click the links it'll take you straight to each of the actual intended posts:
On this thread alone there's been:
Experiments for kids and also how the ancient Greeks determined the shape and size of the Earth:
Put a flat earthier into space
Anyone who questions space travel/moon landings or the spinning globe is automatically a flat earth believer with the normal put up of a flat disc held up by elephants and a turtle with water cascading off the edge. There are many theories out there, alternate to what a spinning globe is...
www.readytogo.net
Observing France from Dover at cliff level but not being able to see it from sea level:
Put a flat earthier into space
Found an article for you You must be logged on to see this Back to the stick? Can you tell me how a stick proves a rotating globe?
www.readytogo.net
How a Foucault Pendulum shows that the Earth is rotating, and how the motion of the pendulum is different depending on where on Earth you do the experiment:
Put a flat earthier into space
No problem. I have no issue with that. Each to their own. Proof of what? I'm joining in...you're far too smart to be a flat earther 👍
www.readytogo.net
A group of professional flat-earth youtubers spending $20k on a special kind of gyroscope to prove the Earth isn't a spinning globe, the device proving them wrong, and them covering it up so they can keep milking their cash cow:
Put a flat earthier into space
Very simple. Pour water into a container and it will find its level. always. You'll never find any level on any convex curve. You can argue for gravity if you want but it's an argument based on absolutely no proof. Have you any proof of your version of events?
www.readytogo.net
Observing the lights in the sky to see their apparent rotation...
Put a flat earthier into space
You must be logged on to see this 5 June 2021 A long exposure photograph captures the rotation of the earth as the stars blur into circles over Knowlton church ruins in Dorset
www.readytogo.net
Put a flat earthier into space
I'm asking questions. What are you getting so wound up about? That are getting answered, however when you are asked questions you spout an absolute load of rubbish. Like I said, I hope you are just on a wind up as I fear for humanity if there people that stupid out there :lol:
www.readytogo.net
Put a flat earthier into space
Some pretty abusive and condescending people on this thread, it's not nice to read, I don't care what you believe or think you believe, going on like that makes a lot of you look embarrassing. I agree with @Nukehasslefan on one thing for sure. That we are inside a cell, or an organism or...
www.readytogo.net
Observing Mars in the night sky to show the different orbits of Mars and Earth around the sun:
Put a flat earthier into space
A different orbit of the sun? Can you elaborate on this? Yes. You must be logged on to see this
www.readytogo.net
Put a flat earthier into space
A different orbit of the sun? Can you elaborate on this? Yes. You must be logged on to see this
www.readytogo.net
Using a telescope to measure the angle between the ground and Polaris from different vantage points:
Put a flat earthier into space
Oh dear, I think that is where the problem lies. Mathematics is all about proof, proving one thing equals another. Some areas of science are 'to the best of our knowledge at this time' and theories are refined on as knowledge progresses, but maths is absolute. 2+2=4. That is not brainwashing...
www.readytogo.net
Put a flat earthier into space
Yes he did. No, he hasn't. But a part from the link to the maths...... You don't know how this game is played. Ignore content of previous posts, even when quoted. That gets a FFS sake response from the poster. Make them type it out again in detail. Then ignore bits you don't like and then say...
www.readytogo.net
Put a flat earthier into space
Yes he did. No, he hasn't. But a part from the link to the maths...... You don't know how this game is played. Ignore content of previous posts, even when quoted. That gets a FFS sake response from the poster. Make them type it out again in detail. Then ignore bits you don't like and then say...
www.readytogo.net
I debunked this nonsense for you in the bottom portion of this post:
Put a flat earthier into space
Some pretty abusive and condescending people on this thread, it's not nice to read, I don't care what you believe or think you believe, going on like that makes a lot of you look embarrassing. I agree with @Nukehasslefan on one thing for sure. That we are inside a cell, or an organism or...
www.readytogo.net
Can you explain what you mean by this? What exactly was your bell-jar/pump experiment and what were the results?
Last edited:
payne
Striker
For some reason the link thumbnail views show the first post of each page rather than the post I linked in each case, but if you click the links it'll take you straight to each of the actual intended posts:
On this thread alone there's been:
Experiments for kids and also how the ancient Greeks determined the shape and size of the Earth:
Put a flat earthier into space
Anyone who questions space travel/moon landings or the spinning globe is automatically a flat earth believer with the normal put up of a flat disc held up by elephants and a turtle with water cascading off the edge. There are many theories out there, alternate to what a spinning globe is...
Observing France from Dover at cliff level but not being able to see it from sea level:
Put a flat earthier into space
Found an article for you You must be logged on to see this Back to the stick? Can you tell me how a stick proves a rotating globe?
How a Foucault Pendulum shows that the Earth is rotating, and how the motion of the pendulum is different depending on where on Earth you do the experiment:
Put a flat earthier into space
No problem. I have no issue with that. Each to their own. Proof of what? I'm joining in...you're far too smart to be a flat earther 👍
A group of professional flat-earth youtubers spending $20k on a special kind of gyroscope to prove the Earth isn't a spinning globe, the device proving them wrong, and them covering it up so they can keep milking their cash cow:
Put a flat earthier into space
Very simple. Pour water into a container and it will find its level. always. You'll never find any level on any convex curve. You can argue for gravity if you want but it's an argument based on absolutely no proof. Have you any proof of your version of events?
Observing the lights in the sky to see their apparent rotation...
...and how those observations change the further south you go:Put a flat earthier into space
You must be logged on to see this 5 June 2021 A long exposure photograph captures the rotation of the earth as the stars blur into circles over Knowlton church ruins in Dorset
...and...Put a flat earthier into space
I'm asking questions. What are you getting so wound up about? That are getting answered, however when you are asked questions you spout an absolute load of rubbish. Like I said, I hope you are just on a wind up as I fear for humanity if there people that stupid out there :lol:
Put a flat earthier into space
Some pretty abusive and condescending people on this thread, it's not nice to read, I don't care what you believe or think you believe, going on like that makes a lot of you look embarrassing. I agree with @Nukehasslefan on one thing for sure. That we are inside a cell, or an organism or...
Observing Mars in the night sky to show the different orbits of Mars and Earth around the sun:
...and...Put a flat earthier into space
A different orbit of the sun? Can you elaborate on this? Yes. You must be logged on to see this
Put a flat earthier into space
A different orbit of the sun? Can you elaborate on this? Yes. You must be logged on to see this
Using a telescope to measure the angle between the ground and Polaris from different vantage points:
...and...Put a flat earthier into space
Oh dear, I think that is where the problem lies. Mathematics is all about proof, proving one thing equals another. Some areas of science are 'to the best of our knowledge at this time' and theories are refined on as knowledge progresses, but maths is absolute. 2+2=4. That is not brainwashing...
...and...Put a flat earthier into space
Yes he did. No, he hasn't. But a part from the link to the maths...... You don't know how this game is played. Ignore content of previous posts, even when quoted. That gets a FFS sake response from the poster. Make them type it out again in detail. Then ignore bits you don't like and then say...
Put a flat earthier into space
Yes he did. No, he hasn't. But a part from the link to the maths...... You don't know how this game is played. Ignore content of previous posts, even when quoted. That gets a FFS sake response from the poster. Make them type it out again in detail. Then ignore bits you don't like and then say...
I debunked this nonsense for you in the bottom portion of this post:
Put a flat earthier into space
Some pretty abusive and condescending people on this thread, it's not nice to read, I don't care what you believe or think you believe, going on like that makes a lot of you look embarrassing. I agree with @Nukehasslefan on one thing for sure. That we are inside a cell, or an organism or...
Can you explain what you mean by this? What exactly was your bell-jar/pump experiment and what were the results?
You already know he's gong to say that none of that is proof of any kind and just what you have been told.
Please explain this, thank you.
fyl2u
Striker
And just in case you need a visual aid and further explanation of this...
Logon or register to see this image
At the top of this drawing, the black outline represents a convex container full of blue liquid.
Below that container, the dotted lines indicate the distance from the bottom of the container to the centre of gravity (in our case, this is the centre of the planet Earth because this is our net centre of gravity.)
The labels r1, r2 and r3 represent the distances from the bottom of the container to the red dot.
The red dot represents the point of the net centre of gravity.
What you have said is that the liquid will never conform to a convex container such as the one in my drawing.
What I am saying is that it all depends on the values of r1, r2 and r3. If r2 is less than or equal to r1 and r3, then the water will conform to the container
When you try this experiment at home, it is easy to get r1 and r3 to be equal. You just find a flat surface and put the container down on it. You can use a spirit level to find a properly flat surface.
The problem is r2, which is effectively the measurement that determines exactly how deep the curve of the container is.
If r2 is equal to r1 (and also therefore equal to r3 as we know r1 and r3 are the same on this flat surface we've measured) then the liquid will perfectly conform to the container. The depth of the liquid will be exactly the same everywhere in the container (assuming it is a liquid with zero
You must be logged on to see external links
, otherwise there would be a tiny variation at the very edge where it meets the container).If r2 is less than r1, the liquid will be deeper in the middle than at the edges.
If r2 is greater than r1, the liquid will be deeper at the edges than in the middle.
It is clear from your posts about this scenario that whenever you personally have visualised this experiment, you have always used a container that has an r2 significantly greater than r1, and so in your version of the experiment the liquid will obviously always be deeper at the edges than in the centre or spill out of the edges of the container.
.
This is why your version of this experiment is flawed and leads you to an incorrect conclusion that has helped to paint your incorrect view of the possible shape of the Earth. You've started with a mistake so it's no surprise your final conclusion that uses this as evidence is erroneous.
Last edited:
