• 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

Nukehasslefan said:
Ok. So it's not pear shaped after all....right?
NDT says it is.
You must be logged on to see media items


Of course I don't. Gravity doesn't exist so how can I understand it?

It's all atmospheric pressure against any dense mass. No gravity involved.
Gravity is complete and utter nonsense which was made up to hide the reality of the simple observation of atmospheric pressure we are under and which we can test.
Take away gravity and you take away the globe and space vacuums...etc...etc.
It's plainly obvious why the magical fantasy is used.

Nope.


Under water.



This.
Click to expand...
So with zero evidence we can at least agree that chances are pretty high that it doesn’t exist👌
 

Nukehasslefan said:
It doesn't matter where the video comes from. Is that NDT and is he saying Earth is pear shaped?
Click to expand...

No he isnt any real sense he is saying the southern hemisphere is slightly fatter than the north by about a hundred meters, if you had watched the original unedited video you would know this.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
It doesn't matter where the video comes from. Is that NDT and is he saying Earth is pear shaped?
Click to expand...

It is NDT and he's saying that the Earth is an oblate spheroid whose top is marginally closer to the middle than its bottom, and then he uses the pear-shaped analogy as a visual aid. At no point does he say that the earth is the shape of a pear.

Logon or register to see this image
 
fyl2u said:
A cell, absolutely.

Logon or register to see this image




You haven't. Maybe nobody's ever told you this, but you're horrible at explaining things. Half the time your sentences are a jumbled mess of words that don't work together as a sentence and half of the rest of the time you're leaving out key parts of it as if you're assuming everyone can read your mind and will just automatically know what you mean.
Click to expand...
Needs padding.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
You'll always see fluctuation in pressure. From a barometer to whatever dense mass you place into an area.

It does. I'm sure you understand what I've said but by all means overlook it.
Click to expand...

Answer the question, what fluctuations will i see and what effect will they have i will then look through the data
 
DPTT said:
So with zero evidence we can at least agree that chances are pretty high that it doesn’t exist👌
Click to expand...
From your point of view...absolutely.

Your Earth belief is in your face. It's on a sliver platter. That's your reality no matter how odd it all is in terms of told and sold storyline to you and others and I respect that.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
That doesn't make a pear shape, does it?
Click to expand...

He specifically describes it and names the shape an oblate spheroid, then goes on to fully describe that it's actually a little bit fatter at the bottom than at the top, so rather than being a perfectly symmetrical oblate spheroid, there's a very slight bulgeyness to the bottom compared with the top.

When the host suggests it's "chubby" NDT says "chubby is a good way to describe it, is like pear-shaped".

But you're ignoring the entire explanation to nitpick on one word that he's just using as a visual aid.

If you were to go up to him with an actual pear and say "hey NDT, is this the shape of the earth?" he would tell you a resounding no, or explain it is a highly exaggerated way of looking at it and totally not what he was getting at in the interview.

He'd probably then shove the pear up your arse.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
From your point of view...absolutely.

Your Earth belief is in your face. It's on a sliver platter. That's your reality no matter how odd it all is in terms of told and sold storyline to you and others and I respect that.
Click to expand...
That’s the crux of it all though🤷‍♂️
You are so dismissive of science and replacing it with absolute fiction. You have provided absolutely nothing to defend your cell theory and reject anything and everything provided to you which disproves your “musings”
 
taipeisafc said:
Answer the question, what fluctuations will i see and what effect will they have i will then look through the data
Click to expand...
It depends on what you put up against the atmosphere in terms of dense mass.
This is why things weigh on a scale plate. The scale is a spring foundation which measures the dense mass displacement of atmosphere of any object placed upon that scale.
No gravity involved, at all.
fyl2u said:
It really doesn't. I don't know what piece of information you're trying to get from me with the question.
Click to expand...
Ok then, How about you measure the fall per mile squared on your global/oblate spheroid model.
What A Waster said:
How come?
Click to expand...
How come what?
DPTT said:
That’s the crux of it all though🤷‍♂️
You are so dismissive of science and replacing it with absolute fiction.
Click to expand...

I could very well be replacing it with absolute fiction. I don't know the absolute truth of what Earth is and to say I do would be an outright lie.
But then again I don't offer it out as factual.
What I do know is, Earth is absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum.
DPTT said:
You have provided absolutely nothing to defend your cell theory and reject anything and everything provided to you which disproves your “musings”
Click to expand...
Anything I provide is from my own deduction. It's not there to be defended, it's told to those who are asking about it.
 
Last edited:
Nukehasslefan said:
It depends on what you put up against the atmosphere in terms of dense mass.
This is why things weigh on a scale plate. The scale is a spring foundation which measures the dense mass displacement of atmosphere of any object placed upon that scale.
No gravity involved, at all.

Ok then, How about you measure the fall per mile squared on your global/oblate spheroid model.

How come what?


I could very well be replacing it with absolute fiction. I don't know the absolute truth of what Earth is and to say I do would be an outright lie.
But then again I don't offer it out as factual.
What I do know is, Earth is absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum.

Anything I provide is from my own deduction. It's not there to be defended, it's told to those who are asking about it.
Click to expand...
How old do you think this cell is?
How old do you think the human species are?
 
Nukehasslefan said:
It depends on what you put up against the atmosphere in terms of dense mass.
This is why things weigh on a scale plate. The scale is a spring foundation which measures the dense mass displacement of atmosphere of any object placed upon that scale.
No gravity involved, at all.

Ok then, How about you measure the fall per mile squared on your global/oblate spheroid model.

How come what?


I could very well be replacing it with absolute fiction. I don't know the absolute truth of what Earth is and to say I do would be an outright lie.
But then again I don't offer it out as factual.
What I do know is, Earth is absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum.

Anything I provide is from my own deduction. It's not there to be defended, it's told to those who are asking about it.
Click to expand...

How come the sea won't be deeper off the coast of the southern tip of Argentina compared to the sea in the Arctic circle?
 
This is just concerning tbh.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say its ALMOST bullying.

For want of a better way to describe it.

This thread should really be closed now.

It's either a windup or serious mental issues and either way enough is enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top