Put a flat earthier into space

[taipeisafc]

The biggest and best proof is water level. Nothing else actually needs to be argued. Anyone can test this out as long as they can push aside the indoctrination of being told of a fictional spinning globe.
There is absolutely no proof of it being a spinning globe. None whatsoever.

There is plenty but it actually takes a person to cast aside the fiction of a spinning globe.

Water level and calmness of water in many instances.
Jumping up and down. Simple yet logically sound.
Hovering helicopter. Logical and simple.
Planes taking off with the so called spin would render the spin, not a spin as it reached the same speed of rotation, meaning to a pilot you would be hovering.
Obviously the list is endless but these are simple things for food for thought with any person willing to question.

There's so much contradiction with it.
The story is saturated with idiocy, in my opinion.

Is that the best you can do - jumping up and down, helicopters hovering, water level and planes taking off. Not one of them is evidence of anything to do with the shape of the earth....not one. Honestly if that is the best you can make up you need to watch more youtube videos.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Is that the best you can do - jumping up and down, helicopters hovering, water level and planes taking off.

No. That's just some of it.

Not one of them is evidence of anything to do with the shape of the earth....not one.

I never said they were.
It just tells you what it's not. And it's not a spinning globe.

Honestly if that is the best you can make up you need to watch more youtube videos.

No need to watch anything. Just a person's own simple view and experiments are enough to show we're not on a spinning globe.

 

[Keawyeds]

So after all that, it's this with a dome. (With or without the elephants and turtle)

I Imagine this has been answered already, but it's never drawn with a dome over the top. There are countries near the rim as well as the hub, so if there was a dome, the atmosphere nearer the edge would be very different to the middle.
If I had to guess I'd say there's some kind of dome or atmospheric sphere possibly around the entire thing, as it has it's own sun

 

[BigPete]

Just a person's own simple view

Bang on

 

[taipeisafc]

No. That's just some of it.

I never said they were.
It just tells you what it's not. And it's not a spinning globe.

No need to watch anything. Just a person's own simple view and experiments are enough to show we're not on a spinning globe.

So you agree that none of the proofs you stated have anything to do with the shape of the earth but do prove it isn't a globe - how?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So you agree that none of the proofs you stated have anything to do with the shape of the earth but do prove it isn't a globe - how?

Already gave plenty of reasons.

 

[taipeisafc]

Already gave plenty of reasons.

Well dodged hardly suprising

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Well dodged hardly suprising

No dodging.

 

[Nobby]

How does a hovering helicopter prove the earth is 1 not a globe and (separately) 2 not spinning

 

[BigPete]

How does a hovering helicopter prove the earth is 1 not a globe and (separately) 2 not spinning

He thinks if you jump the earth should spin below you so you land elsewhere

 

[Nukehasslefan]

How does a hovering helicopter prove the earth is 1 not a globe and (separately) 2 not spinning

The Earth is supposedly spinning at over 1000 mph.
If you were to jump up for just one second and then land, theoretically the Earth would spin from under you would land over 1000 feet away from your jump.
If you hovered in a helicopter for 1 minute you would be around 16 miles away from your initial hover point. We know this doesn't happen, obviously and for good reason. The Earth is not a spinning globe.

He thinks if you jump the earth should spin below you so you land elsewhere

Any idea why it shouldn't?

 

[payne]

The Earth is supposedly spinning at over 1000 mph.
If you were to jump up for just one second and then land, theoretically the Earth would spin from under you would land over 1000 feet away from your jump.
If you hovered in a helicopter for 1 minute you would be around 16 miles away from your initial hover point. We know this doesn't happen, obviously and for good reason. The Earth is not a spinning globe.

Any idea why it shouldn't?

You must be logged on to see media items

You must be logged on to see media items

 

[Nobby]

The Earth is supposedly spinning at over 1000 mph.
If you were to jump up for just one second and then land, theoretically the Earth would spin from under you would land over 1000 feet away from your jump.
If you hovered in a helicopter for 1 minute you would be around 16 miles away from your initial hover point. We know this doesn't happen, obviously and for good reason. The Earth is not a spinning globe.

Any idea why it shouldn't?

I can see why (wrongly) you think that shows the earth is not spinning, but can't see how it implies anything about the shape of the earth

 

[DaveH]

You’ve got to wonder why not one single photograph has been published showing this inhabitable outer zone
With all this modern technology nobody has bothered to get as close as physically possible, taken photos or whatever to show it actually exists
I wonder why

Nobody has ever documented it being there. People claim to have crossed the Arctic and Antarctic. I think the new Attenborough ship is going to circumnavigate the Antarctic. We have research stations at the Antarctic too. Humans have explored the world. A few hundred years ago it was the greatest competition between nations and rich sponsors. Some discovered islands, some discovered things like America, Australia and New Zealand, which was far more significant. But nobody ever seems to have said, "we went so far that way, then it was waaay to cold. Couldn't go further and turned back".

People have always risen to a challenge. Something that could not be reached 300 years ago when wrapped in furs, should be far more reachable these days. Perhaps not right to the absolute zero edge (pretending it exists) but a few miles further should be possible at least. Normally you would expect people to be pushing those boundaries. What is in these two zones, how close can we get. Nobody has bothered or even mentioned it. We have pushed to explore every bit of the surface we can, there was a race to see who could get to the tops of the highest mountains, people are in competition with each other to explore the deepest parts of the ocean, but the cold no zone area, lets not even mention that. Seems a bit unusual doesn't it?

There is of course the physics of such a cold zone too. Arctic winter, perhaps -40, heat of the day at the equator, perhaps 45, temperature difference across half the planet becomes about 85 degrees. But this musing has a absolute zero zone in the middle and one at the edge, with the temperature dropping to -273. So from the equator you have a gradual drop of 85 degrees and then a massive temperature gradient to for another -230 degrees? The central projection zone can't be that big. The bigger you make it, the more you have to stretch the ring of land around it and the distance between Greenland & Iceland grows.

If so inclined, you can start at Iceland and sail to the Norway coast. From there you can walk along the north Russian coast, cross the short gap of the Bearing Sea into Canada, across Canada (you will be getting really fed up of snow by now) and cross Baffin Bay into Greenland, then back across to Iceland. Or you could go further north and do a lot by sea, going Svalbard way and the other small islands.

What i'm getting at is people have a pretty good idea of the distances east to west in the north. Disc or globe, that puts a pretty accurate circumference on what is not even that specialist travel. If you believe in Pi and circles (I appreciate this can not be assumed), you can estimate a pretty good distance to the projection hole. There would need to be a pretty severe temperature drop over say 1000 miles max (I've not looked at a map to confirm distances) to the middle. That would really screw with our weather. The Antarctic is easier to explain, you can wave your hands and say the dome is further away than you think.

The Earth is supposedly spinning at over 1000 mph.
If you were to jump up for just one second and then land, theoretically the Earth would spin from under you would land over 1000 feet away from your jump.
If you hovered in a helicopter for 1 minute you would be around 16 miles away from your initial hover point. We know this doesn't happen, obviously and for good reason. The Earth is not a spinning globe.

Any idea why it shouldn't?

Same as throwing a ball in the air on a train, as has been explained at least a dozen times on this thread. When you throw a ball up on a train, you throw it up with forward momentum. You don't feel that because you are spinning too. But even if you could jump or throw a ball up and suddenly become detached from the spin of the earth, it spins at half the speed of the hour hand on a clock. The distance moved underneath would be tiny.

 

[fyl2u]

The biggest and best proof is water level.

FAIL

Tell us how water level proves the world isn't a globe.

Your bath/spirit level and lake/raft/spirit level experiments have both been shown to be failures of logic that don't prove your case, so I presume you have a third water level experiment now, otherwise you wouldn't still be bleating "water level, water level, water level" as if the previous conversations hadn't happened?

Nothing else actually needs to be argued.

If you'd given us a single experiment that actually proved the world wasn't a globe, that may well be true, but you haven't, you've given us failures of logic and lies.

There is absolutely no proof of it being a spinning globe. None whatsoever.

Admit it, you've got this statement bound to an F-key now haven't you?

There is absolutely no proof of it NOT being a spinning globe. None whatsoever.

Water level and calmness of water in many instances.

You're trying to suggest water couldn't be calm on a spinning globe?

Jumping up and down. Simple yet logically sound.

Relativity of inertial reference frames, my dear.

Hovering helicopter. Logical and simple.

Relativity of inertial reference frames, my dear.

Planes taking off with the so called spin would render the spin, not a spin as it reached the same speed of rotation, meaning to a pilot you would be hovering.

Relativity of inertial reference frames, my dear.

Obviously the list is endless but these are simple things for food for thought with any person willing to question.

The list of examples of relativity of inertial reference frames is pretty long. In the context of this conversation however it is just a list of things you don't understand. Aww, bless.

For the rest of us, these are things that have been questioned for a great deal of time by not only ourselves but by millions of others.

It's a shame your indoctrination from the flat earth society / conspiracy theorist loons doesn't allow you to see this or question the logic they've handed to you in youtube videos and on their forum.

It's a shame you're so closed-minded. The world is a truly remarkable place if you allow yourself to take off your blinkers and see it.

You say you're so keen to question things and yet you will never ever seem willing to question your own conclusions even when dozens of people are explaining how your logic is flawed.

There's so much contradiction with it.
The story is saturated with idiocy, in my opinion.

You're a contradiction that is saturated with idiocy.

Not an opinion. This one's a fact.

perhaps they have..........................am so on

Who's on first?

The Earth is supposedly spinning at over 1000 mph.
If you were to jump up for just one second and then land, theoretically the Earth would spin from under you would land over 1000 feet away from your jump.
If you hovered in a helicopter for 1 minute you would be around 16 miles away from your initial hover point. We know this doesn't happen, obviously and for good reason. The Earth is not a spinning globe.

Any idea why it shouldn't?

All together now, "Relativity of inertial reference frames, my dear."

Here's an experiment anyone can try: the next time you're on a moving train, or a moving Metro, or a moving bus, try jumping straight up into the air and see where you land. Oh, how weird, you land in the same place you took off from! How could this be? Maybe the train/Metro/bus isn't really moving? No, it's to do with..... "Relativity of inertial reference frames, my dear."

 

[zwartekat]

The Earth is supposedly spinning at over 1000 mph.
If you were to jump up for just one second and then land, theoretically the Earth would spin from under you would land over 1000 feet away from your jump.
If you hovered in a helicopter for 1 minute you would be around 16 miles away from your initial hover point. We know this doesn't happen, obviously and for good reason. The Earth is not a spinning globe.

Any idea why it shouldn't?

Your frame of reference is all wrong. You have to understand that you're spinning with the earth in the same way as you would be travelling at the same rate in an aeroplane. There is so much information out there explaining this. Take a look.

You regularly mention your simple experiments that prove the earth is not a spinning globe - do you not wonder why no-one here has been converted by these experiments?

 

[ned_werby]

not sure if posted this one before. good stuff

You must be logged on to see media items

Marvellous. Every 'flat-earth' theory comprehensively dismantled.

 

[payne]

Your frame of reference is all wrong. You have to understand that you're spinning with the earth in the same way as you would be travelling at the same rate in an aeroplane. There is so much information out there explaining this. Take a look.

You regularly mention your simple experiments that prove the earth is not a spinning globe - do you not wonder why no-one here has been converted by these experiments?

WE'RE ALL SCHOOLED INTO THE ROTATION NARRATIVE SO DON'T QUESTION. WE'RE ALL THICK AND DON'T DO OUR OWN RESEARCH. KEEP UP!

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Same as throwing a ball in the air on a train, as has been explained at least a dozen times on this thread. When you throw a ball up on a train, you throw it up with forward momentum. You don't feel that because you are spinning too. But even if you could jump or throw a ball up and suddenly become detached from the spin of the earth, it spins at half the speed of the hour hand on a clock. The distance moved underneath would be tiny.

Absolutely not the same, at all.
The train cabin is pressurised and outside of that train is atmosphere which the train is pushing into.
Your spinning globe would be like standing on top of that train as it moved along and then jumping up.

The argument of using the inner carriage is clever but useless as an argument when seen from a proper perspective.

 

[zwartekat]

Absolutely not the same, at all.
The train cabin is pressurised and outside of that train is atmosphere which the train is pushing into.
Your spinning globe would be like standing on top of that train as it moved along and then jumping up.

The argument of using the inner carriage is clever but useless as an argument when seen from a proper perspective.

What is the 'proper perspective'?