Put a flat earthier into space

[Nukehasslefan]

I suppose when your busy inventing an entire new theory of everything the annoying little details that prove you entirely wrong at even the most basic level easily slip from your mind eh?

I don't see anything that's proving me wrong but I do see many things being offered as supposedly proving me wrong. Two entirely different scenarios.

Where?
In your imagination?

Where is the spinning globe? In yours? Because it's definitely not observed by you in any way shape or form except for you being told you observe it.

Jesus wept fella you are one strange individual

Surely as many have said you should be under no illusions about that.

 

[fyl2u]

but I know 100% it is not a spinning globe.

No, you don't. You keep saying this but you're very VERY wrong for more than just the usual reason of the Earth actually being an oblate spheroid.

A person can't know 100% that they exist in solid form at all, as there's always the possibility that we're just quasi-consciousnesses in a sophisticated simulation, and it would be unlikely for there to be any experiment we could perform to prove it one way or the other because any good simulation would give the same results of the test within the simulation as without.

So, bearing that in mind, it should be obvious to anyone that we can't really be 100% sure about anything, ever.

"But Fyl, if it's a simulation then we're still not living on a spinning globe!"

How do you know? The simulation could be running on a computer housed on a spinning globe, and the world we think we live on could be a recreation of the actual planet upon which our divine programmers live.

There's one thing we can be almost certain about though, and that is we 100% don't live in a lemon squeezer world encased by a superfluid helium dome (that sometimes has bits break off without in any way compromising the image quality of anything projected onto it), where gravity is replaced by denpressure (which somehow doesn't show up on any pressure-measuring equipment despite its apparent strength to keep everything on the ground and even affect currents of the oceans), reflections don't work the same way they do in all our observations in reality, light shined onto another similar light cancels it out to create darkness, not all right-angles are equal, and the objects in the skies are all a projection from a carbon arc lamp passing through precious crystals surrounded by rivers of gold where unicorns fart rainbows as they dance with fairies.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

I don't see anything that's proving me wrong but I do see many things being offered as supposedly proving me wrong. Two entirely different scenarios.

Where is the spinning globe? In yours? Because it's definitely not observed by you in any way shape or form except for you being told you observe it.

You 100% know that what I said about using a torch in a dark room applies equally to your mental projector in a cell. You know without even having to do the experiment that it does and that it proves there is no projector and no cell. That's why you're avoiding the matter, pretending to have answered it already and now deflecting with questions about the globe.

 

[fyl2u]

Many times.

Were you not worried you might get hit by some superfluid helium chunks falling off the dome onto the plane?

 

[Pancho]

And the very same man is not going to tell people the Earth is not a globe, is he? Think about it. How long do you think he'd keep his job?

I'd suggest the exact opposite.

If an airline got wind that one of their pilots was a practicing flat earther, then I'm pretty sure he'd be shown the door on purely psychological grounds.

Many times.

And every time you flew the flight plan was based upon a great circle.

And that's a stone cold fact.

The proof is in the videos that you refuse to watch because you know, like all your fellow flerfers who run in exactly the same direction, it's not debunkable.

We're still waiting for a flat earth flight plan, or was that yet another one of your bare faced lies?

 

[legend7]

Pilots follow instruments. That's it. How would they know they're flying over a globe or not? If they actually thought about it they would understand they're not flying over any globe and my guess is many do know but wouldn't openly say it for fear of not only losing their job but also being ridiculed and likely having their CV rendered useless.
The power of the masses and officialdom.

But, that's just my thoughts and I am a backward idiot, so it's only worth a laugh.

I hate flying but I have to trust the pilots and the plane and instruments to get me from A to B. That doesn't mean anything about going over any globe.

That's rubbish, if that was the case you'd be able to produce a 2d map with known distances on, you tried and made a complete mess of it now you need 2 months for some reason.
Also there would be loads out there if the could be produced yet you can't point us to a single one

 

[Nukehasslefan]

No, you don't. You keep saying this but you're very VERY wrong for more than just the usual reason of the Earth actually being an oblate spheroid.

You can say it as many times as you wish but you know for a fact you cannot offer any proof for your belief in it. I'm saying one thing for a fact and that is, Earth is absolutely not a pinning globe we supposedly live upon.

A person can't know 100% that they exist in solid form at all, as there's always the possibility that we're just quasi-consciousnesses in a sophisticated simulation, and it would be unlikely for there to be any experiment we could perform to prove it one way or the other because any good simulation would give the same results of the test within the simulation as without.

So, bearing that in mind, it should be obvious to anyone that we can't really be 100% sure about anything, ever.

If you want to argue that then you have a great point.
In the meantime, we argue about what we believe are better points than others between each other. It becomes a debate or argument depending on how each individual wants to see it.

"But Fyl, if it's a simulation then we're still not living on a spinning globe!"

As above.

How do you know? The simulation could be running on a computer housed on a spinning globe, and the world we think we live on could be a recreation of the actual planet upon which our divine programmers live.

If that happens to be the case then we either get to that point or we carry on arguing as we do.

There's one thing we can be almost certain about though, and that is we 100% don't live in a lemon squeezer world encased by a superfluid helium dome (that sometimes has bits break off without in any way compromising the image quality of anything projected onto it), where gravity is replaced by denpressure (which somehow doesn't show up on any pressure-measuring equipment despite its apparent strength to keep everything on the ground and even affect currents of the oceans), reflections don't work the same way they do in all our observations in reality, light shined onto another similar light cancels it out to create darkness, not all right-angles are equal, and the objects in the skies are all a projection from a carbon arc lamp passing through precious crystals surrounded by rivers of gold where unicorns fart rainbows as they dance with fairies.

Whatever you think is what you have to go with until you change your mind, if ever. That's not my issue.

You 100% know that what I said about using a torch in a dark room applies equally to your mental projector in a cell.

No. You believe you know this and I simply let you get on with that thought. I'm not interested if you think like that.

You know without even having to do the experiment that it does and that it proves there is no projector and no cell.

Then keep to that and brush me aside and chat with those who can offer you better stuff.

That's why you're avoiding the matter, pretending to have answered it already and now deflecting with questions about the globe.

I avoid some things which I feel are pointless just as you and others do with me.
It's all part and parcel of how things go. But remember I'm one against the many. You throw one post in and wait for my reply whilst reading many posts thrown into me waiting for my reply.

If you think you're getting nothing then I would suggest you bypass my posts.

 

[fyl2u]

James O'Brien talking about conspiracy nutters on LBC right now...

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[Pink Panther]

And your knowledge is what?

That you aren't a pilot and know fuck all about what you are claiming when talking about flights.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Were you not worried you might get hit by some superfluid helium chunks falling off the dome onto the plane?

Not really, no. More worried about a plane with wings full of fuel and electricals and lotsof mechanical movements making it from A to B.

 

[DPTT]

You can say it as many times as you wish but you know for a fact you cannot offer any proof for your belief in it. I'm saying one thing for a fact and that is, Earth is absolutely not a pinning globe we supposedly live upon.

If you want to argue that then you have a great point.
In the meantime, we argue about what we believe are better points than others between each other. It becomes a debate or argument depending on how each individual wants to see it.

As above.

If that happens to be the case then we either get to that point or we carry on arguing as we do.

Whatever you think is what you have to go with until you change your mind, if ever. That's not my issue.

No. You believe you know this and I simply let you get on with that thought. I'm not interested if you think like that.

Then keep to that and brush me aside and chat with those who can offer you better stuff.

I avoid some things which I feel are pointless just as you and others do with me.
It's all part and parcel of how things go. But remember I'm one against the many. You throw one post in and wait for my reply whilst reading many posts thrown into me waiting for my reply.

If you think you're getting nothing then I would suggest you bypass my posts.

I done the most basic of experiments with my 5 year old nephew which debunked your water level theory. It’s also been presented to you using maths which because you cannot answer you choose to ignore.

You have a fantasy in your head which because you have said it so many times to other flat earthers you have convinced yourself it’s actually real

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I'd suggest the exact opposite.

Of course, you would. I wouldn't expect anything else from you.

If an airline got wind that one of their pilots was a practicing flat earther, then I'm pretty sure he'd be shown the door on purely psychological grounds.

I rest my case.

And every time you flew the flight plan was based upon a great circle.

A great circle tells you a bigger story than the global effort it pertains to pushing. It's just a case of doing the jigsaw but most won't and I do get it.

And that's a stone cold fact.

A stone-cold fact is, Earth is not a spinning globe we supposedly walk upon.

The proof is in the videos that you refuse to watch because you know, like all your fellow flerfers who run in exactly the same direction, it's not debunkable.

There's no proof in any of those vidoes.

We're still waiting for a flat earth flight plan, or was that yet another one of your bare faced lies?

The flights are there for you on the flight radar. Just don't think of it as a globe.

That's rubbish, if that was the case you'd be able to produce a 2d map with known distances on, you tried and made a complete mess of it now you need 2 months for some reason.
Also there would be loads out there if the could be produced yet you can't point us to a single one

Then don't worry about it.

That you aren't a pilot and know fuck all about what you are claiming when talking about flights.

Is that it?

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

No. You believe you know this and I simply let you get on with that thought. I'm not interested if you think like that.

It's not about belief, it's facts, undeniable, simple and demonstrable facts. You can tell the shape of something by shining a light on it and watching how the light/reflection behaves.
You have consistently asked for evidence without appeal to authority and there it is. However mental your domeworld thoughts are, I'm reasonably certain you are capable of understanding that, which is why you are avoiding it. Not because of the "one against many" not because it's pointless, but because it destroys your fantasy.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I done the most basic of experiments with my 5 year old nephew which debunked your water level theory.

You'd be surprised how many people do all kinds of experiments with their 4/5/6/7/8/910 and so on nieces and nephews and sons and daughters when a person is arguing against someone on the internet.

It’s also been presented to you using maths which because you cannot answer you choose to ignore.

What's been presented by using maths that confirms a spinning globe? I'd say none. Zilch but plenty of hot air.

You have a fantasy in your head which because you have said it so many times to other flat earthers you have convinced yourself it’s actually real

My musing is just that. It doesn't really matter what people think of my musing and you're welcome to call it whatever you wish. Many do.

 

[DPTT]

You'd be surprised how many people do all kinds of experiments with their 4/5/6/7/8/910 and so on nieces and nephews and sons and daughters when a person is arguing against someone on the internet.

What's been presented by using maths that confirms a spinning globe? I'd say none. Zilch but plenty of hot air.

My musing is just that. It doesn't really matter what people think of my musing and you're welcome to call it whatever you wish. Many do.

The experiment debunked your ludicrous claim of water level.
If you read post 17383 you would see what’s been presented using maths, but you will ignore as you have no comeback to what was put forward

 

[Pink Panther]

Is that it?

Just dealing with each ludicrous point individually, as well you know. You've been blown away on every point by numerous posters and now are resorting to shitty little comebacks like "is that it?"
Time for you to have a rethink, perhaps an actual fact based approach to things.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

It's not about belief, it's facts, undeniable, simple and demonstrable facts.

Yep, which proves we do not live on a sinning globe.

You can tell the shape of something by shining a light on it and watching how the light/reflection behaves.

What about shining it on a mirror?

You have consistently asked for evidence without appeal to authority and there it is. However mental your domeworld thoughts are, I'm reasonably certain you are capable of understanding that which is why you are avoiding it

I'm backward remember?

. Not because of the "one against many" not because it's pointless, but because it destroys your fantasy.

You are welcome to that.
If I knew for sure what you appear to know then I would not spend another minute with a big oaf like me, seriously. But here you are trying to tell this backward idiot he's wrong. You should be ignoring me or at least sitting back and deciding to concentrate on better things because this clearly doesn't offer you anything from my side but plenty on here seem to be offering stuff.

Honestly and I'm not joking. I suggest you actually cast me off as the idiot and go onto something worth your while.

The experiment debunked your ludicrous claim of water level.
If you read post 17383 you would see what’s been presented using maths, but you will ignore as you have no comeback to what was put forward

By all means, offer it up but it actually doesn't do anything at all.

Just dealing with each ludicrous point individually, as well you know. You've been blown away on every point by numerous posters and now are resorting to shitty little comebacks like "is that it?"
Time for you to have a rethink, perhaps an actual fact based approach to things.

My approach is fine.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

What about shining it on a mirror?

Then the reflection would tell you if the mirror was flat or curved. It would also give information about where the light source was in relation to the mirror.

I'm backward remember?

You are welcome to that.
If I knew for sure what you appear to know then I would not spend another minute with a big oaf like me, seriously. But here you are trying to tell this backward idiot he's wrong. You should be ignoring me or at least sitting back and deciding to concentrate on better things because this clearly doesn't offer you anything from my side but plenty on here seem to be offering stuff.

Honestly and I'm not joking. I suggest you actually cast me off as the idiot and go onto something worth your while.

Stop crying man, if you cant deal with people challenging your non-globe belief then stop stating it as a fact.
All this guff about ignoring you and leaving the conversation does is just you saying you cant answer the questions asked of you or cant deal with the answers you're given.

 

[DaveH]

I think I responded to it a long while back.

No you didn't. Do you see any fault with the maths, or do you accept you would need a 451m spirit level to measure any meaningful curve?

Meanwhile you refuse to even say what you mean by water level and make little jibes at my intelligence for not being able to read your mind. Given you redefine the English language and have different meanings of mass, density and volume, it is not safe to assume anything.

So how about making a start to define your fantasy land in more specific terns and tell us what you mean by water level?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Then the reflection would tell you if the mirror was flat or curved.

Ok, so you know it would tell you it's concave.

Stop crying man, if you cant deal with people challenging your non-globe belief then stop stating it as a fact.

I actually thought it was you crying and that's why I offered you that, seriously.

All this guff about ignoring you and leaving the conversation does is just you saying you cant answer the questions asked of you or cant deal with the answers you're given.

It seems you get frustrated so I offered you your best way out of it.