Put a flat earthier into space

[DPTT]

So how do we calculate the distance between any 2 places in your world? You were about to explain this yesterday.

This will be completely ignored or deflected as he has absolutely no idea how to respond to this

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

That can be leveled at anyone but I choose not to go down that route.

Anyone who repeatedly tells others where they get their knowledge from and how worthless it is

I agree there are many arguments against anything I say. This is why we're arguing. And vice versa.
The issue is, that none of the arguments can be proven

No, they can be proven, have been proven and could be proven again by anyone who chose to. The issue is that you choose not to.

and mass adherence to stories are not proven facts in arguments.

But mass adherence to proven facts is perfectly legitimate.

Whatever my responses are and how they are taken is down to each individual and I have no issue in how they are taken.

Then you wont mind me taking that as being meaningless drivel.

If you think I'm calling you and others liars then that's on you, not me.
I try my best to be civil, even when it's not afforded to me, so we'll leave it at that.

No we wont.

"a global model that you think is accurate and for no other reason than being told it is"

That's you effectively calling me a liar. I have said several times that what I believe is not only because of what I was told but you still repeat the claim that it is.

No, you can't.

Again, I'm not lying.

I don't see a globe.

Because you don't know where to look.

Once upon a time, I was told to see a globe. Schooled into it. Saw it by mass opinion based on adherence as part of a curriculum designed to indoctrinate the mind into a belief system that has zero proof of reality.

And instead you got yourself indoctrinated into a belief system that has less than zero proof of reality. Nice.

 

[chelt_mackem]

This will be completely ignored or deflected as he has absolutely no idea how to respond to this

Oh I know, I just don't want to make it easy for him to do so.

 

[DaveH]

It's basically a central gradient with indentations and then a large scoop from centre leading to an outer gradient towards the foundation of the dome or to be more clear, sloping up to the dome.


There is no north pole in terms of how you offer it for a globe. It's a central energy that can be classed as north for clarity.

Yes, they would be.

Not at all.
The only argument you would have against any of it is by using a global model that you think is accurate and for no other reason than being told it is, so I have absolutely no issues there.

See what exactly? What are you seeing?
Show me a picture of what you are genuinely seeing through your scope. I know you say you don't have one but use some picture you believe marries up with what you genuinely see.

Of course, you'd have to fill in the gaps if you had to peel the supposed globe.
You say it would distort it. I agree if we were peeling a paper globe map but that is exactly what it is. It's a model and not the real thing.
There's no distortion on the real thing and no offering for it except to use a model.

If we wanted to go with this argument I could offer fitting pieces and call that supposed distortion, not distortion from a flattened perspective.

I could then say you can't make a globe out of it unless you crease it which would distort it.
It's an argument that offers nothing either way.
As I said before, you have a majority backing for a globe model and that's it. You are not in possession of any facts.


I agree. You see, when you are not in possession of the facts and are only in possession of what you're told are the facts then your teaching to others can only ever be based on regurgitation. This is all fine if people want to hang onto that as you offer them facts and them accepting what you say as factual.

The problem you have in this case is, that I'm not one to simply believe something until I know it for a fact but I can happily accept a story told and go with it until I feel there's a time to question.
This is where I'm at and I agree it's frustrating for people like yourself because when you're in possession of a library at will, you're armed with everything you accept and believe from an authority, and what you believe is the authority on any given subject.



It depends on who is really ignorant.

Then do not repeat. You have a choice.

I’ll find a picture later.

You go on about the full facts. We are talking distances between cities ffs.

What is the distance between Rio and Sydney in your world?

 

[Pink Panther]

You can't verify it over a distance by using a globe.

What does this even mean?

 

[legend7]

I’ll find a picture later.

You go on about the full facts. We are talking distances between cities ffs.

What is the distance between Rio and Sydney in your world?

He doesn't like numbers, far too rigid for his musings.
His world is about 50000 miles across, ISS is "a few miles away" but has absolutely no idea how tall the centre is or how high the icicle covered dome is we can't see

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So they should be easily the longest travel times compared to others that are closer together on your world?

Not at all.
You mentioned opposite each other.

Especially as planes can't cross your unflyable zone in the centre so that must be quite some distance having to go around that too?

No need to go around, just a line point to point.

Yet we can fly direct in 15 hours, no refuelling at all?

And?

 

[legend7]

Not at all.
You mentioned opposite each other.


No need to go around, just a line point to point.

And?

Explain?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So how do we calculate the distance between any 2 places in your world? You were about to explain this yesterday.

I did explain it. I said speed and time.

Yet you have zero facts or evidence of your "world" simply musings and map so unbelievable you won't share it

Of course. I've tried to tell you this many times.

Why has nobody in your cult flew up to prove the ISS isn't real?

What cult?

 

[Pink Panther]

Not at all.
You mentioned opposite each other.

You agreed.

Of course. I've tried to tell you this many times.

So, given the evidence available, you must agree that your current set of  musings couldn't possibly be correct? Without agreeing that the globe is right, you surely agree that your ideas are impossible?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

No, they can be proven, have been proven and could be proven again by anyone who chose to. The issue is that you choose not to.

Again, your reliance is on being told it's proven, you do not actually know for sure.

But mass adherence to proven facts is perfectly legitimate.

Of course, when mass adherence to proven facts is the reality. In this case, it's mass adherence to the stories told of alleged facts.

Then you wont mind me taking that as being meaningless drivel.

Absolutely not. You are free to take it in any way you feel is best for you.

No we wont.

"a global model that you think is accurate and for no other reason than being told it is"

That's you effectively calling me a liar. I have said several times that what I believe is not only because of what I was told but you still repeat the claim that it is.

Not at all. You can take it as me saying you are mistaken in your belief but I won't call you a liar. Why should I? I respect that you believe in what you believe in, I just don't share it and my argument is not with you, it's with the storytellers but it's argued in their favour by you and others.

And instead you got yourself indoctrinated into a belief system that has less than zero proof of reality. Nice.

I am massively indoctrinated. Saturated and have been all of my life.
I do not deny any of it.
I'm now questioning some of it.
We are all massively indoctrinated so it's not a dig at anyone and I certainly do not deny my side.

 

[DPTT]

I did explain it. I said speed and time.


Of course. I've tried to tell you this many times.

What cult?

Using speed and time.
Is this why you won’t show your map as it will obviously have to perfectly match the globe model otherwise the data would not match.
And you need it to match as this is what is actually happening.
No wonder you refuse to answer this one

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I’ll find a picture later.

You go on about the full facts. We are talking distances between cities ffs.

What is the distance between Rio and Sydney in your world?

I don't know.

What does this even mean?

It means distance verification is not done using a globe, just the pretence of one.

He doesn't like numbers, far too rigid for his musings.
His world is about 50000 miles across, ISS is "a few miles away" but has absolutely no idea how tall the centre is or how high the icicle covered dome is we can't see

ISS isn't a few miles away. I've never said that.
I said whatever is up in that sky is only a few miles away.
The ISS does not exist.

 

[Pink Panther]

It means distance verification is not done using a globe, just the pretence of one.

Nobody has suggested using a globe to measure.
Miles and kilometres are more usual forms of measurement.

 

[BigPete]

 

[chelt_mackem]

I did explain it. I said speed and time.


Of course. I've tried to tell you this many times.

What cult?

You didn't explain the calculation, but fair enough, if we have to travel between the 2 cities to determine the distance between them, how do we know which way to point our vehicle (let's say a plane) to travel between Rio and Sydney in the shortest possible time?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Explain?

Simple. You don't go around anything you go from point to point in a straight line, generally, once your course is set up from take off to bearings and onto destination then only veer off to the airport.

 

[Pancho]

What cult?

The cult that is populated exclusively by spectacularly dumb delusional narcissists such as yourself.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

You agreed.

So, given the evidence available, you must agree that your current set of  musings couldn't possibly be correct? Without agreeing that the globe is right, you surely agree that your ideas are impossible?

Not at all.
You say the globe is right without knowing you're even on a globe.

Using speed and time.
Is this why you won’t show your map as it will obviously have to perfectly match the globe model otherwise the data would not match.
And you need it to match as this is what is actually happening.
No wonder you refuse to answer this one

Not at all.
I can check any distance if I have the means to transport and know the speed and time to the destination from departure.
A plane would offer me a more direct route to a destination where obstacles would be an issue for other transport.
A level flight would then offer me my approximate distance.

Nobody has suggested using a globe to measure.
Miles and kilometres are more usual forms of measurement.

But you're still using a globe as the premise for measurement.

 

[legend7]

Simple. You don't go around anything you go from point to point in a straight line, generally, once your course is set up from take off to bearings and onto destination then only veer off to the airport.

No I mean explain the opposite bit.
You said that like your lemon squeezer map south america and Australia were still opposite each other so both furthest away from the centre.
How can we then fly direct in 15 hours over such a vast distance and on your map if you draw a line you have to cross the central projector area so you would have to go around that too?