• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Put a flat earthier into space

Nukehasslefan said:
Ok then, How about you measure the fall per mile squared on your global/oblate spheroid model.
Click to expand...

By saying "Fall per mile squared" you're still showing that you don't even understand the maths of curves.

"Something per SomethingElse squared" is the formula for a parabola, not a spheroid.

You're still just closedmindedly clinging to the acquired knowledge you've been brainwashed with. These are nothing more than stories that were written by The Man that wrote the Flat Earth guidebook 200 years ago, and you're just repeating them back to us like a happy parrot without fact-checking them or testing them for yourself.
 

Nukehasslefan said:
We are told to believe the Earth spins and the atmosphere and everything in it spins in unison.
This is why they argue a hovering helicopter doesn't see the solid ground moving beneath it because it's supposedly carried along in unison with the atmosphere in friction with the Earth.

And then they use coriolis effect to argue Earth's spin.
And then Brian Cox uses a pilot and jet to stop the sun setting by catching up with the Earth's spin
.
The contradictions are literally off the scale.

You can do the same experiments yourself. You do not need me to show you. I tried to explain what to do but was waved away so I accepted that as nobody wanting to go against the grain, which is fair enough.

I can't show anyone.
People can either do it all for themselves or go with water curving around a ball and staying on by magical gravity.
Anyone that really wants to test it out to show level can do so.
Anyone that wants to pretend the curve over distance makes it look flat can also do so.

The thing is, what can be done on a big scale can also be done on a small scale.
Water adhering to a ball on a small scale is impossible just as it is on a large scale.

But....I mean we're shown a big blue marble in space so water has to stay on....right? Because none of it is CGI....right?
None of it are composites....right?

ANyway, you get my meaning and if you don't....no worries.


It wo n't prove me wrong.
It would prove you wrong.


You have no clue what I do or don't do but you can certainly think what you like.


For what purpose?
You're seeing no curve.

I'm sure you can do them....right?
Let me know how you get on.
Click to expand...
Your two examples of a hovering helicopter and a moving jet aircraft are two completely different things.
A craft hovering wouldn't see the earth move under it as it would be carried along by the earth's rotation. That can't be compared with a moving jet though because the jet isn't hovering on the spot. So if you travel fast enough you never would see the sun go down.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
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.
Click to expand...

By saying that you KNOW, you're offering out as factual that "Earth is absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum".

How do you know this?

Sounds like you're offering that out as an absolute truth to me, so using your words from the first line of your post, I guess that by saying you know it is "absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum" is an outright lie.
 
legend7 said:
Well how far in your world Is alaska/North pole to the bottom of South America appx?
Click to expand...
Not entirely sure. I haven't gauged it.
According to map distances it appears to be half of what you said. Is that true? I don't know but 9000 seems excessive.
zinedine said:
Your two examples of a hovering helicopter and a moving jet aircraft are two completely different things.
A craft hovering wouldn't see the earth move under it as it would be carried along by the earth's rotation. That can't be compared with a moving jet though because the jet isn't hovering on the spot. So if you travel fast enough you never would see the sun go down.
Click to expand...
Makes no sense at all.
You're saying a hovering helicopter gets taken along with a solid Earth spin which means it has to be pushed along by an atmosphere that follows a solid.
And then you try and argue a jet defying it.

Nahhhh. Absolute contradiction.
 
Last edited:
fyl2u said:
By saying that you KNOW, you're offering out as factual that "Earth is absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum".
Click to expand...

Yep. the one thing I am.
fyl2u said:
How do you know this?
Click to expand...
Lots of things but water level alone nails it.
fyl2u said:
Sounds like you're offering that out as an absolute truth to me, so using your words from the first line of your post, I guess that by saying you know it is "absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum" is an outright lie.
Click to expand...
To you, maybe.
 
fyl2u said:
By saying that you KNOW, you're offering out as factual that "Earth is absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum".

How do you know this?

Sounds like you're offering that out as an absolute truth to me, so using your words from the first line of your post, I guess that by saying you know it is "absolutely not a spinning globe in a space vacuum" is an outright lie.
Click to expand...
His usual answer is that it makes no sense to him and that counts as proof. However detailed proof the other way is waved away as bollocks for no reason.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Yep. the one thing I am.

Lots of things but water level alone nails it.

To you, maybe.
Click to expand...
:D back to the whole measuring water with a spirit level when we both know the distance over the length of a spirit level is around one micron, which most people can't see by eye with a builders tool.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
Not entirely sure. I haven't gauged it.
According to map distances it appears to be half of what you said. Is that true? I don't know but 9000 seems excessive.
Click to expand...

I believe you have me on ignore, but what an incredible fruit loop. From Santiago de Chile to Panama City alone is around 3000 miles (I use this just because I've taken that flight myself; it's operated multiple times a day and takes over 6.5 hours). Seattle to Anchorage (another flight I've personally taken) is around 1500 miles. That's already 4500 miles.

And then you still need to cover the distance between Santiago and the South Pole and then all the way across Central America, and the entire N-S distance across the United States. Neither of those distances are as small as your bathtub.
 
DaveH said:
:D back to the whole measuring water with a spirit level when we both know the distance over the length of a spirit level is around one micron, which most people can't see by eye with a builders tool.
Click to expand...
Argue as much as you feel but no matter what distance is chosen it's always going to be level.
 
DaveH said:
Ah, that would work, but that does mean that our entire topography of the oceans joins the list of what is also wrong.
Click to expand...
Exactly and the seas would be hundreds if not thousands of miles deep off the coast of South America if the sea is level and the "base" of the orange peeler theory stands.
 
SYB_DC said:
I believe you have me on ignore, but what an incredible fruit loop.
Click to expand...
I don't and you're welcome to whatever you feel I am.
SYB_DC said:
From Santiago de Chile to Panama City alone is around 3000 miles (I use this just because I've taken that flight myself; it's operated multiple times a day and takes over 6.5 hours). Seattle to Anchorage (another flight I've personally taken) is around 1500 miles. That's already 4500 miles.

And then you still need to cover the distance between Santiago and the South Pole and then all the way across Central America, and the entire N-S distance across the United States. Neither of those distances are as small as your bathtub.
Click to expand...
Aye, it was my mix up.
 
Nukehasslefan said:
I have absolutely no idea.
I could take a wild guess but that's all it would be.
How old do you think Earth is.

Maybe at a wild guess, 10,000 maybe or 20,000 or less.
I'd say no more than 20,000 but potentially 10 or below.
Click to expand...
I believe the Earth to be what they say, over 4 billion years old and humans as we are roughly today about 4/5 hundred thousand years.
I also think we are nowhere near the first either but that’s just my “musings “😜😂
 
legend7 said:
I'm going from a high point on your "map" to a point in the lower bowl.
Click to expand...
Aye I misread thinking you said north America.

However it still doesn't change my stance on the land mass.
You're still offering a 9000 mile distance as if water runs down a slope.
You seem to think the gradient is so big it has to make water deeper than it has to be.

I can only think you believe my take on the map is having landmass sitting high up a mountain.
DPTT said:
I believe the Earth to be what they say, over 4 billion years old and humans as we are roughly today about 4/5 hundred thousand years.
Click to expand...

4 billion years old?
And humans 4 to 5 hundred thousand years old?
Only in a few thousand years have we actually gained in advancement but only in the past few hundred years have we actually advanced at a rate.
500,000 years seems a massive stretch even if people want to argue for ape looking.
It makes no sense to me but if you believe it then fair enough.


DPTT said:
I also think we are nowhere near the first either but that’s just my “musings “😜😂
Click to expand...
First humans?
I agree but I still don;t think it's anywhere near 500,000 years.

I mean they had dinosaurs at 60 million years didn't they?

I just have to shake my head.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top