Put a flat earthier into space

[John Steed]

There's no proof today so trying to argue they knew it was a ball since the 1500's is pretty futile. By all means argue for it but know you are arguing by appealing to authority and have no means to verify a truth.

There's loads of proof.
People have been into space and seen the planet. They've taken pictures of it and videos of it. We've seen it pictured from satellites and space probes. We've seen it pictured from the moon.
Your comeback to that will be it is all faked. Your reasons why it is faked hold no water though. You're using guesswork to suit your argument. You're the one with the futile argument.
You say nobody can prove the earth is a globe but you can't prove anything you say either. Whereas there is plenty proof we are all on a giant ball. You don't accept that proof though, everybody is lying. So this discussion is pointless.
There are countless pictures and film of the planet and they all look exactly the same, it's s ball. Can you show one, just one taken from space or a great height that shows its the shape you say it is? One picture will do.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I think he's in a zero gravity situation and he did a slow rotation. I looked closely and can't see a harness, the outline of a harness or any wires attached to his body.
The rotation did look odd I must say. Not like other film we've seen of weightlessness in space. But I think that's down to the quality of the video.They're the best quality I've seen. No graininess or noise. At first I didn't realise he was in his spaceship. He's deffo weightless though.

If you can't see the doginess in that somersault then fair enough. You go with weightlessness. I could show you a lot worse than that but I won't go into it. we'll just have to disagree on it.

And yet people have been to the North Pole? And flights cross near that area often?

People have been to what they're told is the north pole.
How would anyone know any different?
Let me guess. They were stood under polaris directly above their heads and it never moved from that point, right?
They had to lay in the snow and ice so they could consistently look up at polaris. Am I getting close?

I think you’re an exquisite wind up merchant.

I think you know better than that but feel free to use it.

 

[fyl2u]

If you can't see the doginess in that somersault then fair enough. You go with weightlessness. I could show you a lot worse than that but I won't go into it. we'll just have to disagree on it.

People have been to what they're told is the north pole.
How would anyone know any different?
Let me guess. They were stood under polaris directly above their heads and it never moved from that point, right?
They had to lay in the snow and ice so they could consistently look up at polaris. Am I getting close?

I think you know better than that but feel free to use it.

They probably looked at their compass.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

To be fair, that seems to be the trait of many conspiracy nutters big on the statements but the actual details rarely work or they have no details. Flat earth, dome earth, moon landings, covid, anti-vax, brexit etc, all the big conspiracies of our time, all with nice big statements but when you get down to details there are none and even the minute bits beneath the surface are either completely wrong or conflicting.

Anything is going to conflict set narratives.
If you don't think people in power lie and all the rest of the dodgy stuff then you are welcome to that world.

Nothing wrong with trust if you are sure the trust is worthwhile and valid.

There's loads of proof.

There's none.

People have been into space and seen the planet.

No they haven't. In my opinion. You are welcome to your opinion but it's based on zero proof from yourself and your reliance is on what you believe is proof from others, which is fair enough.

They've taken pictures of it and videos of it.

Yep but from high altitude, not in space. IMO.

We've seen it pictured from satellites and space probes.

No, you've been told it's that and you believe it and fair enough...why not. We were all brought up on this (my opinion) sci-fi.

We've seen it pictured from the moon.

As above.

Your comeback to that will be it is all faked.

That's what I believe....yes.

Your reasons why it is faked hold no water though.

Maybe not to people like yourself who accept it without question.

You're using guesswork to suit your argument.

I agree. I have to use whatever I can use because I'm not privy to the proof of it being a reality.
Your belief is all guesswork.

You're the one with the futile argument.

In your mind I may well be. The fact people are still trying to argue their side when they apparently know the truth is an issue for them, not for me.
The futile argument is not from my side.
It only becomes futile when I give up or am forced to give up. I'm in charge of the first but not of the second.
The arguments are 100% valid to me and I suspect many many others.
Apparently there's a lot of people who don't believe man went to the moon, just for starters.
The thing is the narrative is about them going.
The evidence suggests otherwise. whether it's deemed circumstantial or not.

You say nobody can prove the earth is a globe but you can't prove anything you say either.

I can prove water is level but anyone who decides it's not will never be looking for proof of anything that goes against the grain.

As for me proving my own Earth theory. I don't pass it out as factual. I pass it out as a potential from my point of view.
The difference is, I don't try to tell people it's a definite reality. The global nonsense is passed off as factual.

Whereas there is plenty proof we are all on a giant ball.

There is zero proof.

You don't accept that proof though, everybody is lying. So this discussion is pointless.

Nope. Everyone isn't lying. I don't believe you're a liar nor anyone else on here when relating to the global stuff and all the cast off stuff that went on and is going on. You believe what you believe because you adhere to the authority telling the stories. You follow that set up and like minded peers. I was once in that very same boat and I didn't believe I was lying.

However there are some people who are lying, in my opinion. But it all comes back to who believes they're lying for a greater good or who's doing it for more nefarious purposes.

There are countless pictures and film of the planet and they all look exactly the same, it's s ball.

They can't obviously show something entirely different for the same thing they're handing out as a reality, can they?

Can you show one, just one taken from space or a great height that shows its the shape you say it is? One picture will do.

No. I can't show you anything from space because the space they tell us about, is not a reality. IMO.

Can I give you a picture of real Earth from high altitude? Yes I can but you've seen plenty. What you haven't seen are plenty or any of a globe.
Any picture I give you would be taken from an aeroplane just like you could do. It would show Earth at that point and nothing more.
A real Earth.....but, not a globe or anything discernible at that point, other than landmass or water.

 

[John Steed]

Anything is going to conflict set narratives.
If you don't think people in power lie and all the rest of the dodgy stuff then you are welcome to that world.

Nothing wrong with trust if you are sure the trust is worthwhile and valid.

There's none.

No they haven't. In my opinion. You are welcome to your opinion but it's based on zero proof from yourself and your reliance is on what you believe is proof from others, which is fair enough.



Yep but from high altitude, not in space. IMO.

No, you've been told it's that and you believe it and fair enough...why not. We were all brought up on this (my opinion) sci-fi.

As above.

That's what I believe....yes.


Maybe not to people like yourself who accept it without question.


I agree. I have to use whatever I can use because I'm not privy to the proof of it being a reality.
Your belief is all guesswork.


In your mind I may well be. The fact people are still trying to argue their side when they apparently know the truth is an issue for them, not for me.
The futile argument is not from my side.
It only becomes futile when I give up or am forced to give up. I'm in charge of the first but not of the second.
The arguments are 100% valid to me and I suspect many many others.
Apparently there's a lot of people who don't believe man went to the moon, just for starters.
The thing is the narrative is about them going.
The evidence suggests otherwise. whether it's deemed circumstantial or not.



I can prove water is level but anyone who decides it's not will never be looking for proof of anything that goes against the grain.

As for me proving my own Earth theory. I don't pass it out as factual. I pass it out as a potential from my point of view.
The difference is, I don't try to tell people it's a definite reality. The global nonsense is passed off as factual.


There is zero proof.



Nope. Everyone isn't lying. I don't believe you're a liar nor anyone else on here when relating to the global stuff and all the cast off stuff that went on and is going on. You believe what you believe because you adhere to the authority telling the stories. You follow that set up and like minded peers. I was once in that very same boat and I didn't believe I was lying.

However there are some people who are lying, in my opinion. But it all comes back to who believes they're lying for a greater good or who's doing it for more nefarious purposes.

They can't obviously show something entirely different for the same thing they're handing out as a reality, can they?


No. I can't show you anything from space because the space they tell us about, is not a reality. IMO.

Can I give you a picture of real Earth from high altitude? Yes I can but you've seen plenty. What you haven't seen are plenty or any of a globe.
Any picture I give you would be taken from an aeroplane just like you could do. It would show Earth at that point and nothing more.
A real Earth.....but, not a globe or anything discernible at that point, other than landmass or water.

Like I said this is pointless, you just dismiss everything as fake. Or gullible people people believing what they are told. You're the gullible one mate. You've obviously read this stuff somewhere and believe it without question. You're doing what you accuse others of doing

 

[DaveH]

Got my prediction right, people don’t know they went to the north pole or not, no idea where they were, despite accepting last week that since ancient times people have been able to successfully navigate around the globe.

It is a common trait in conspiracy nutters. Everything sort of works, until it hits the point that disproves their mad theory and then it is lies or mistakes. Like the revelation last week that basic geometry breaks down over large distances.

 

[DPTT]

Got my prediction right, people don’t know they went to the north pole or not, no idea where they were, despite accepting last week that since ancient times people have been able to successfully navigate around the globe.

It is a common trait in conspiracy nutters. Everything sort of works, until it hits the point that disproves their mad theory and then it is lies or mistakes. Like the revelation last week that basic geometry breaks down over large distances.

The frustrating thing is he passes his views off as “I cannot prove it as it’s my view” but then completely dismisses hundreds of years of research which has been proven to work.
He has some major issues with authority that’s for sure, just my “musing” of course.

 

[legend7]

People have been to what they're told is the north pole.
How would anyone know any different?
Let me guess. They were stood under polaris directly above their heads and it never moved from that point, right?
They had to lay in the snow and ice so they could consistently look up at polaris. Am I getting close?

Well no because maps work, I have drove from here to Portugal using the maps we have and guess what I ended up where I was meant to be.
Same as if I head to where Greenland is meant to be, it's there too and so on.
So if you're at the top of Canada, Greenland or russia and look out or even keep going, based on your unwrapped idea you can actually continue towards what you say is the crystal generator.
In fact people could set off from 3 different places and meet up in the middle.

This is your idea of the world "sort of" yeah, the Azimuthal projection?

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Like I said this is pointless, you just dismiss everything as fake.

But you accept it all as fact and this is where the debate lies. This is why it is not pointless.

Or gullible people people believing what they are told.

We're all gullible and naive. It's just a case of to what degree and for what offerings of storylines we choose to go with...etc.

You're the gullible one mate.

I certainly am gullible in many instances.
Remember I also believed a global Earth at one stage and many many other things I now question or disbelieve.
I can still be conned to this very day, as we all can.
If you don't think you can be gullible then you can carry on in that vein. But remember one thing. If you've been conned in any way shape or form in life, no matter how silly it is/was, you're gullible.

You've obviously read this stuff somewhere and believe it without question.

Absolutely not.
I massively question and reason it out. Whether you accept that or not is of no issue to me. It's my own thoughts and process that counts.

You're doing what you accuse others of doing

The only way to argue something is to use the something that is a basis for the argument.
I accept and follow a lot of stuff without question. It doesn't mean I believe it all to be factual, it just means I find no reason to bother to question.

Then there's stuff like this which begs questions.

Got my prediction right, people don’t know they went to the north pole or not, no idea where they were, despite accepting last week that since ancient times people have been able to successfully navigate around the globe.

No they haven't.

It is a common trait in conspiracy nutters. Everything sort of works, until it hits the point that disproves their mad theory and then it is lies or mistakes. Like the revelation last week that basic geometry breaks down over large distances.

With no reference point you don't have accurate geometry.

Well no because maps work, I have drove from here to Portugal using the maps we have and guess what I ended up where I was meant to be.

Yep, I have no issue with that. You just aren't doing it on a spinning globe.

Same as if I head to where Greenland is meant to be, it's there too and so on.
So if you're at the top of Canada, Greenland or russia and look out or even keep going, based on your unwrapped idea you can actually continue towards what you say is the crystal generator.

You may do so but it's all about where you or machine break down due to inhospitable terrain.

In fact people could set off from 3 different places and meet up in the middle.

In the pretence of your north pole, yes....on paper.

This is your idea of the world "sort of" yeah, the Azimuthal projection?

You must be logged on to see external links

Not quite but it's a decent take on it.

Add that into this shape and it gets better.

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[nahwee]

The frustrating thing is he passes his views off as “I cannot prove it as it’s my view” but then completely dismisses hundreds of years of research which has been proven to work.
He has some major issues with authority that’s for sure, just my “musing” of course.

Not strictly true.

He has just stated he can prove water is level!

Which, of course, he cannot.

 

[DaveH]

You must be logged on to see external links

surely taking the piss with that.

After all you have said about bath tubs, water level and water conforming to a container, you post a lemon squeezer earth where by your own arguments water would run out of baths one way above the trough, the other way below, in the southern continents and all pool just below the equator, leaving the southern oceans and most northern oceans empty. Those north of the equator now have pretty close to a hemisphere to live on which you swear blind does not work, those in the south are now elevated up to have a clear view of the north pole, which is the most direct route from Australia to South America.

 

[What A Waster]

But you accept it all as fact and this is where the debate lies. This is why it is not pointless.



We're all gullible and naive. It's just a case of to what degree and for what offerings of storylines we choose to go with...etc.

I certainly am gullible in many instances.
Remember I also believed a global Earth at one stage and many many other things I now question or disbelieve.
I can still be conned to this very day, as we all can.
If you don't think you can be gullible then you can carry on in that vein. But remember one thing. If you've been conned in any way shape or form in life, no matter how silly it is/was, you're gullible.


Absolutely not.
I massively question and reason it out. Whether you accept that or not is of no issue to me. It's my own thoughts and process that counts.

The only way to argue something is to use the something that is a basis for the argument.
I accept and follow a lot of stuff without question. It doesn't mean I believe it all to be factual, it just means I find no reason to bother to question.

Then there's stuff like this which begs questions.

No they haven't.

With no reference point you don't have accurate geometry.


Yep, I have no issue with that. You just aren't doing it on a spinning globe.

You may do so but it's all about where you or machine break down due to inhospitable terrain.



In the pretence of your north pole, yes....on paper.

Not quite but it's a decent take on it.

Add that into this shape and it gets better.

You must be logged on to see external links

Re the shape of that earth.
If that's what you described as doing with a Terry's chocolate orange wrapper, then how is there any water in the north sea and why is Brazil not submerged?

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Re the shape of that earth.
If that's what you described as doing with a Terry's chocolate orange wrapper, then how is there any water in the north sea and why is Brazil not submerged?

Choclatey pressure variations moving over and around it.

 

[payne]

Like I said this is pointless, you just dismiss everything as fake. Or gullible people people believing what they are told. You're the gullible one mate. You've obviously read this stuff somewhere and believe it without question. You're doing what you accuse others of doing

He can't have done that as it's not allowed to use any second hand information to forward ones opinion. Using his own logic everything he has said has to have been his invention or it can't be valid. These are the stringent rules he sets out for everyone else so must follow himself.

 

[ned_werby]

@Nukehasslefan - does anyone else you know share your views?

 

[John Steed]

He can't have done that as it's not allowed to use any second hand information to forward ones opinion. Using his own logic everything he has said has to have been his invention or it can't be valid. These are the stringent rules he sets out for everyone else so must follow himself.

Yes I was going to mention that. The logic is if you haven't been into space you can't know what shape the earth is. We are just reiterating what we are told by authorities. The same applies to anybody with an alternative shape theory I would have thought. But apparently he's reasoned it out and isn't one of the sheeple.
The thread is interesting but it's frustrating trying to converse with somebody who won't accept what is clearly fact. I don't know whether he genuinely believes what he's saying or this is an elaborate windup. I'd say he believes it.

 

[babyimreadytoblow]

Oh my days is this still going. How about you all block him when you read this message.

Hel be sick as a chip.

Seriously, do it.

 

[0verlord44]

You are so arrogant and condescending it’s unbelievable.

‘you conform to authority’
‘You believe the narrative’
‘You see what you want to see’

I’ve spoken to somebody who spoke like you once, he was a Holocaust denier

 

[Nukehasslefan]

surely taking the piss with that.

After all you have said about bath tubs, water level and water conforming to a container, you post a lemon squeezer earth where by your own arguments water would run out of baths one way above the trough, the other way below, in the southern continents and all pool just below the equator, leaving the southern oceans and most northern oceans empty. Those north of the equator now have pretty close to a hemisphere to live on which you swear blind does not work, those in the south are now elevated up to have a clear view of the north pole, which is the most direct route from Australia to South America.

Maybe you didn't grasp the indentations around Earth.
You think water would be on a gradient and are looking at the gradient from the picture point of view as if water just stays on an incline or decline.
Try and understand the word "container."

Re the shape of that earth.
If that's what you described as doing with a Terry's chocolate orange wrapper, then how is there any water in the north sea and why is Brazil not submerged?

Lands are raised away from water, hence why you can walk into the sea and slowly but surely walk down a gradient. A concavity.
The sea goes from shallow to deeper.
Is the UK submerged?
I mean how we look at it as an island?
No. Well everything you see above water is because the land is raised, obviously.

Oh my days is this still going. How about you all block him when you read this message.

Hel be sick as a chip.

Seriously, do it.

I agree with this. If the one's that are whining about me, b;lock me then they don't have to worry about me. I'm hoping this includes you.

You are so arrogant and condescending it’s unbelievable.

And you people aren't....right?

 

[babyimreadytoblow]

Maybe you didn't grasp the indentations around Earth.
You think water would be on a gradient and are looking at the gradient from the picture point of view as if water just stays on an incline or decline.
Try and understand the word "container."

Lands are raised away from water, hence why you can walk into the sea and slowly but surely walk down a gradient. A concavity.
The sea goes from shallow to deeper.
Is the UK submerged?
I mean how we look at it as an island?
No. Well everything you see above water is because the land is raised, obviously.

I agree with this. If the one's that are whining about me, b;lock me then they don't have to worry about me. I'm hoping this includes you.

And you people aren't....right?

Who said that?