Put a flat earthier into space



legend7

Midfield
Atmospheric mass stops you seeing too far, as it basically dampens reflection back to your eyes.

The higher up you are the farther you will see because you are looking through angled atmospheric mass rather than at sea level where you are looking much more horizontally.
But how come from South America I can see the sun from the central point through all of the dampening but say at "night" from somewhere really close like Greenland you should be able to see it still?

What even 20m, surely that can't make that much difference?
 

Nukehasslefan

Midfield
Let's just imagine you are correct about everything: we have been mislead, the earth is flat etc etc. What difference would it make. Would I be able to do things I can't do now, what specifically would change?
It depends on what a person thinks and does.
It's like the butterfly effect.
As it stands with us merely talking about it, it likely changes nothing more than you deciding to enter this thread to ask these questions.
If you found something in your life to be untrue would you change anything about your life in order to lessen that effect?
It's easy to say no but think about it.

The same can be said for anything.
If you are religious and now find Earth is not a spinning globe in a space vacuum, what does that make all those who said it was?
What does it do for religious belief systems?
What does it do for those who wish to explore?
What about those who adhered to space adventures.

It has to change minds and perceptions which will inevitably create that butterfly effect.
But how come from South America I can see the sun from the central point through all of the dampening but say at "night" from somewhere really close like Greenland you should be able to see it still?

What even 20m, surely that can't make that much difference?
Where are you getting 20 miles from?
 

legend7

Midfield
It depends on what a person thinks and does.
It's like the butterfly effect.
As it stands with us merely talking about it, it likely changes nothing more than you deciding to enter this thread to ask these questions.
If you found something in your life to be untrue would you change anything about your life in order to lessen that effect?
It's easy to say no but think about it.

The same can be said for anything.
If you are religious and now find Earth is not a spinning globe in a space vacuum, what does that make all those who said it was?
What does it do for religious belief systems?
What does it do for those who wish to explore?
What about those who adhered to space adventures.

It has to change minds and perceptions which will inevitably create that butterfly effect.

Where are you getting 20 miles from?
I never mentioned 20 miles.
The 20m was in reply to your lighthouse rubbish
 

RollingStone

Reserve Squad
It depends on what a person thinks and does.
It's like the butterfly effect.
As it stands with us merely talking about it, it likely changes nothing more than you deciding to enter this thread to ask these questions.
If you found something in your life to be untrue would you change anything about your life in order to lessen that effect?
It's easy to say no but think about it.

The same can be said for anything.
If you are religious and now find Earth is not a spinning globe in a space vacuum, what does that make all those who said it was?
What does it do for religious belief systems?
What does it do for those who wish to explore?
What about those who adhered to space adventures.

It has to change minds and perceptions which will inevitably create that butterfly effect.

Where are you getting 20 miles from?
Sorry but that's just woffle. You haven't identified a single tangible difference or benefit. If there's some sort of conspiracy to hid the truth there must be some tangible payoff. You do understand the difference between possibly and probability as assume?
 

BigPete

Striker
It depends on what a person thinks and does.
It's like the butterfly effect.
As it stands with us merely talking about it, it likely changes nothing more than you deciding to enter this thread to ask these questions.
If you found something in your life to be untrue would you change anything about your life in order to lessen that effect?
It's easy to say no but think about it.

The same can be said for anything.
If you are religious and now find Earth is not a spinning globe in a space vacuum, what does that make all those who said it was?
What does it do for religious belief systems?
What does it do for those who wish to explore?
What about those who adhered to space adventures.

It has to change minds and perceptions which will inevitably create that butterfly effect.

Where are you getting 20 miles from?

Means fuck all to religion as they believe in something even more daft than you do.

There is no point in hiding it.
Interesting acknowledgement of Newton's laws of motion, hidden away in your post there.
:lol:
 
So basically you have no clue.
Like I said, do the research and let me know. But I suspect my guess is closer to the truth than yours.
I do look it all up and the answers just seem like utter gobbledygook. Maybe they're not explaining simple enough. Can you offer an answer in simple terms bearing in mind I'm a retard and simpleton as I've been regularly told.
The simplest and easiest answer to my questions would help.
Yes I can and did. The fact that you refuse to accept the existence of gravity might be a hinderance to you understanding, but it exists all the same.
I've seen you referred to as a retard twice now, and both times it was by you.
It's actually not clear at all. It is clear to anyone who follows peer pressure and bias for a global Earth and spin but I don;t follow that which makes it unclear to me.
And to repeat myself, I once was biased towards a spinning globe and I thought anything other was preposterous.
Why?
Because that's what I was schooled into, just like I was schooled into believing Santa and religion and the tooth fairy, plus the devil in hell...etc....etc....etc.
You see how in one sentence you're bleating on about being called a simpleton, then a few lines on and you're dissing anyone who believes in the globe like they are unable to check the facts of what they are told for themselves. It's not the fact that you don't follow the mindset that makes it unclear to you, it's either your inability or your unwillingness to understand.

As for my claim that you cant fit the entire known, accurately mapped, observable and verifiable sky onto the dome....
Of course you can.
Yes, you can, but only if the dome is spherical.
Think of it like looking around your room, the ceiling, the floor and all four walls, everything around you, and then trying to project it all onto just the ceiling and two of the walls, while still appearing to look like the original room. It's not possible.
That is what you're claiming for the sky which you have clearly never studied in any depth. There are two hemispheres to the star map and they do match up around their circumferences and they do fit together to give the appearance of being inside a sphere of stars. Note that I said "give the appearance of" so don't be claiming I said it is a sphere. There is no possible way that any naturally occurring and thoroughly non-existent crystal projector has by pure chance come up with a system that manages to accurately fake the same appearance on an equally non-existent dome. You know this. If you believed in your theory you would have come up with an adequate illustration or explanation by now. If you were truly questioning and open minded you'd have studied the star map and seen sense.
 

DaveH

Striker
Like I said, do the research and let me know. But I suspect my guess is closer to the truth than yours.

Yes I can and did. The fact that you refuse to accept the existence of gravity might be a hinderance to you understanding, but it exists all the same.
I've seen you referred to as a retard twice now, and both times it was by you.

You see how in one sentence you're bleating on about being called a simpleton, then a few lines on and you're dissing anyone who believes in the globe like they are unable to check the facts of what they are told for themselves. It's not the fact that you don't follow the mindset that makes it unclear to you, it's either your inability or your unwillingness to understand.

As for my claim that you cant fit the entire known, accurately mapped, observable and verifiable sky onto the dome....

Yes, you can, but only if the dome is spherical.
Think of it like looking around your room, the ceiling, the floor and all four walls, everything around you, and then trying to project it all onto just the ceiling and two of the walls, while still appearing to look like the original room. It's not possible.
That is what you're claiming for the sky which you have clearly never studied in any depth. There are two hemispheres to the star map and they do match up around their circumferences and they do fit together to give the appearance of being inside a sphere of stars. Note that I said "give the appearance of" so don't be claiming I said it is a sphere. There is no possible way that any naturally occurring and thoroughly non-existent crystal projector has by pure chance come up with a system that manages to accurately fake the same appearance on an equally non-existent dome. You know this. If you believed in your theory you would have come up with an adequate illustration or explanation by now. If you were truly questioning and open minded you'd have studied the star map and seen sense.
That last bit is a key bit. We can demonstrate with a mechanical model exactly how the stars and planets will appear, They used them before computers. We can literally see it working to match the night sky. And on the other hand we have someone throwing around the words refraction and wavelength like they know what they mean.
 

payne

Winger
That last bit is a key bit. We can demonstrate with a mechanical model exactly how the stars and planets will appear, They used them before computers. We can literally see it working to match the night sky. And on the other hand we have someone throwing around the words refraction and wavelength like they know what they mean.
for someone who distrusts science and scientists he sure tries to use their terms a lot in his mythical world explanations (word jumbles).
 

DPTT

Winger
Call me dumb but am confused (again) with day/night on this dome thingy 🥴

On our reality we know the sun falls over the horizon etc and it become darks yes🤷‍♂️
On planet Dome how does this happen😳

What stops us from seeing the Sun from a distance if it is essentially always above us?

And does the sun go from
Right to Left then Left to Right or what🤷‍♂️
Our Sun revolves around the earth etc but wtf goes on on Dome world 🤔

think I’ve lost it chaps😞😂
 

fyl2u

Striker
Call me dumb but am confused (again) with day/night on this dome thingy 🥴

On our reality we know the sun falls over the horizon etc and it become darks yes🤷‍♂️
On planet Dome how does this happen😳

What stops us from seeing the Sun from a distance if it is essentially always above us?

And does the sun go from
Right to Left then Left to Right or what🤷‍♂️
Our Sun revolves around the earth etc but wtf goes on on Dome world 🤔

think I’ve lost it chaps😞😂

Something about reflections, projections, spotlight effect, dense air pressure dampens the light over distances and somehow an extra reflection of the thing that looks like a ball of flame seems to look just like a moon would, complete with dents that look just like asteroid craters, and... I don't know, it makes no sense at all to anyone except NutCaseLeFop.
 

Nukehasslefan

Midfield
I never mentioned 20 miles.
The 20m was in reply to your lighthouse rubbish
Lighthouse?
what is 20m then. Is it metres?
What are you getting at?
That's not even a passable attempt at inquiry. The question is answered in the post you're responding to.
Well I still want to know how they're spinning globes. Show me some pictures/video of them being spinning globes.
I don't mean NASA/Hollywood type, I mean the observable one's that's said to be the case.
You still haven't acknowledged this post. I know there's no pictures but it answers all your previous questions.

Put a flat earthier into space

I have answered it and I said it makes no sense.

Interesting acknowledgement of Newton's laws of motion, hidden away in your post there.
There's one law of motion.
For every action there's and equal and opposite reaction. That's basically it. It applies to everything.
You only get out of something what you put in.
Sorry but that's just woffle. You haven't identified a single tangible difference or benefit. If there's some sort of conspiracy to hid the truth there must be some tangible payoff. You do understand the difference between possibly and probability as assume?
You asked a question and I answered it.
Make it more specific if that didn't suit you.

As for understanding possibility and probability. In essence both can explain something that may or may not happen.
An instance.
Will that man punch you in the face? Probably, because I called his family.
Will that stranger punch you in the face. Probably not because I haven't upset him but it is possible.
Means fuck all to religion as they believe in something even more daft than you do.
Millions and millions of people believe in it. Are they being lied to or are they all in on the lie?
Could you stand alone and argue they're wrong and walk away knowing you are right?
As for my claim that you cant fit the entire known, accurately mapped, observable and verifiable sky onto the dome....

Yes, you can, but only if the dome is spherical.
Only because that's what you are shown.

Think of it like looking around your room, the ceiling, the floor and all four walls, everything around you, and then trying to project it all onto just the ceiling and two of the walls, while still appearing to look like the original room. It's not possible.

Of course it's not possible by looking around a room. You can't look around Earth that way so using one room as an entirety would not offer any realistic view of the potential of what we are living on/in.

Sheer size and following a circle will offer you two different light point set ups. One set for Each side with some of those set ups actually being see from each side, only sort of mirrored.
That is what you're claiming for the sky which you have clearly never studied in any depth.
Correct I haven't studied the points of light in depth. I don't need to.
There are two hemispheres to the star map and they do match up around their circumferences and they do fit together to give the appearance of being inside a sphere of stars.

It's a map showing movement around a north and south hemisphere mindset.
The spinning globe from so called space shows the map of the world to people's minds.
Global maps on paper.
Google Earth zoom in.

You may think you're offering me proof but you're doing so because you simply accept what you're told is your reality. I don't follow that.
Navigating a circle by points of light is easy to see in how it's done by simply picking out certain points of light to follow.

On a spinning globe it's absolutely not feasible except in the fictional story books.
Note that I said "give the appearance of" so don't be claiming I said it is a sphere.
You basically are saying it is.
There is no possible way that any naturally occurring and thoroughly non-existent crystal projector has by pure chance come up with a system that manages to accurately fake the same appearance on an equally non-existent dome.

But you clearly know a man made projector can offer you a visual on points of light upon a dome....right?
But you don't think it's possible we could have a naturally centred one.
You know this. If you believed in your theory you would have come up with an adequate illustration or explanation by now.

I've given you the basics. It's clear as to what you think so adding extras won;t change anything. I try to answer to those who ask but as an overall Earth cell to give you an accurate rebuttal to your belief system. It's just not going to work unless you put in the effort to figure some of it out.

That doesn't seem to be the case as your posts clearly show and I'm fine with it.
If you were truly questioning and open minded you'd have studied the star map and seen sense.
I've seen enough of it to understand it's moving round a dome.
You believe they're stationary and the Earth spins to make them appear to move. That's your prerogative but you know what I think about that.
 
Last edited:

fyl2u

Striker
I have answered it and I said it makes no sense.

You didn't, you ignored it.

There's one law of motion.

WRONG

For every action there's and equal and opposite reaction. That's basically it. It applies to everything.
You only get out of something what you put in.

That's one of them. Congratulations, you do know SOMETHING. That's actually Newton's THIRD law of motion.

From here, an inquisitive mind might research the other two.
 

Kevj

Striker
You didn't, you ignored it.



WRONG



That's one of them. Congratulations, you do know SOMETHING. That's actually Newton's THIRD law of motion.

From here, an inquisitive mind might research the other two.


Or realise he has finally accepted the basis of spaceflight, which has argued against for so long

As soon as you think you’ve turned a corner and there’s a glimmer of hope the penny will drop, he returns to type and flatly denies everything (pun intended).
 

Nobby

Central Defender
As soon as you think you’ve turned a corner and there’s a glimmer of hope the penny will drop, he returns to type and flatly denies everything (pun intended).
Yeah he will either deny saying it, ignore any reference to having said it or caveat it IE effectively deny having said it.

Otherwise he has to accept spaceflight is possible
 

Nukehasslefan

Midfield


That's one of them. Congratulations, you do know SOMETHING. That's actually Newton's THIRD law of motion.

From here, an inquisitive mind might research the other two.
No need to research. I know what the supposed laws are but there is only one.

I'll go through the supposed laws and explain why there's only one and the rest are the same or not feasible.

Third law.
Newton's Third Law of Motion states that any time a force acts from one object to another, there is an equal force acting back on the original object. ... Basically for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Bang on.

Newton's Second Law of Motion defines the relationship between acceleration, force, and mass.
The acceleration of an object depends on the mass of the object and the amount of force applied.
Or to be blunt, it means every action has an equal and opposite reaction. As above.


This is the nonsense piece, below... and isn't a law of any kind because it simply cannot work. Reason?.....Take a look at the other two which are basically just an extension of one simple law.

Newton's First Law of Motion states that in order for the motion of an object to change, a force must act upon it. This is a concept generally called inertia.
An object at rest remains at rest, and an object in motion remains in motion at constant speed and in a straight line unless acted on by an unbalanced force.

Ok, first of all an object is never at rest, it's always moving, however small, due to expansion and contraction of it and what is under and around it.
Secondly an object cannot remain in motion at a constant speed because it is always acted upon by an unbalanced force.

This law insinuates an object will never encounter resistance. It implies a fictional vacuum where one push force upon the object would offer it a motion, constantly, never speeding up nor slowing down. It's impossible so isn't a law at all. It'/s a fantasy. A fiction.

I know people will argue it but the reality is clear to us all. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
A fictional vacuum offers no action and no reaction if we want to go down the nit pick hole.
Basically everything requires a medium in order to operate in. Everything with absolutely no exceptions.

It's easy to be offered a mind picture about pushing a space ship and it never stopping until it hits some kind of force. It so easy to just go with that story because there's no way for anyone to physically disprove it. It comes down to simple logic which means a person has to sidestep the fantasy in order to see the reality of what is, not what is told, is.
Or realise he has finally accepted the basis of spaceflight, which has argued against for so long
Not in the way we are told, I won't be....ever.
Yeah he will either deny saying it, ignore any reference to having said it or caveat it IE effectively deny having said it.

Otherwise he has to accept spaceflight is possible
In the space they tell us about....it's not possible.
 
Last edited:

Top