Put a flat earthier into space



legend7

Midfield
Like I said. I can accept it does.
You can accept Antarctica or the north pole exists as told but you don't know for sure if it exists in terms of a spinning global set up.And nor do any of the people who claim to have been there.

I accept people have trekked to extreme cold climates but I do not accept they hit the centre of anything, north pole or south pole as we're told.

The mere fact I do not believe we live on a spinning globe should be very clear to people that I obviously do not believe in a north or south pole as told.
So how come you can walk from one country to another directly cutting through where the crystal area should be on your map?
You can even drive to where the centre is now?
 

DaveH

Striker
Nope.


You can accept Antarctica or the north pole exists as told but you don't know for sure if it exists in terms of a spinning global set up.And nor do any of the people who claim to have been there.

I accept people have trekked to extreme cold climates but I do not accept they hit the centre of anything, north pole or south pole as we're told.
You do accept that the ancient navigation techniques exist, so either they got close to the north or south pole and then just forgot how to navigate or they lied. Which is it?

So you dismiss the existence of the moon unless each individual on this board has calculated the distance to it, same goes for every star. But you can't describe the distance to or the shape of your dome. Does that make that argument more valid or less valid?
 

SYB_DC

Winger
And so consistently. Why is the waxing crescent always in the early evening sky but the waining crescent always in the early morning sky? Exactly what you would expect with a moon orbiting a globe earth. Exactly what you would not expect in random secondary reflection world.
And moreover, why does that moon wax and wane from opposite sides depending on which hemisphere you're in, another phenomenon that comports perfectly with a round planet?
 

payne

Winger
You do accept that the ancient navigation techniques exist, so either they got close to the north or south pole and then just forgot how to navigate or they lied. Which is it?

So you dismiss the existence of the moon unless each individual on this board has calculated the distance to it, same goes for every star. But you can't describe the distance to or the shape of your dome. Does that make that argument more valid or less valid?
Not offering as proof. Proper cop out answer he gives.
 

DaveH

Striker
And moreover, why does that moon wax and wane from opposite sides depending on which hemisphere you're in, another phenomenon that comports perfectly with a round planet?
That is just your mindset. You think it so you see it because it has been drummed into you since school

See what I did there? I took something that works, dismissed it without reason then added an insult to it and made it seem like your problem that I will not accept that.*

What that doesn't do is address the fact that what you said is perfectly true, we can build a mechanical model of it, watch the cogs spin and see for ourselves that it does work as a concept. We have to keep an open mind to say that because the phase and position in the sky of the moon has the exact appearance of a moon in orbit around a globe, it does not 100% mean that this is what happens. But we do have to admit that if the earth and moon is something else, that it exactly mimics the behaviour of a moon in orbit of a globe.

For the conspiracy theorists, this gets onto very dangerous ground. By admitting it could be possible it opens the door to the fact that it may all be real after all. Especially when the alternative can not be constructed as a mechanical model we can look at and see demonstrated, the odds swing largely in favour of reality.


* a scary thought as I typed the above. Dismissal of anything positive with insult and turned around to make the issue seem like the problem of the person who said it, rather than the one who will not listen, is gas lighting and has the hall marks of phrases said in abusive relationships. I always thought it was just the conspiracy theorists typical way of deflecting anything, but it is only just now phrasing it in that way that made me think, is there something deeper going on there. Some sign of learned behaviour of something in their past?
 

The Krankie Returns

Central Defender
There is no proof you will accept, you have said that many times. Why then do you keep asking for proof when you know in advance you will dismiss it
I don’t know why I’ve come back to this thread but you’re right.
He’s a wum. It’s really that simple. I’ve said it before but I don’t believe for one second that he is a flat earth conspiracy nut. He knows the nature of the universe we live in just as much as you or me.
 

Nukehasslefan

Midfield
So how come you can walk from one country to another directly cutting through where the crystal area should be on your map?
You can't.
You can even drive to where the centre is now?
No you can't.
You do accept that the ancient navigation techniques exist, so either they got close to the north or south pole and then just forgot how to navigate or they lied. Which is it?
Nobody has to lie.
Navigation is from point A to point B, wherever that may be. It doesn't have to be at any pole.
North on a compass is towards the centre and south is away from it.
East and west are simple navigation around the circle. No globe required.
So you dismiss the existence of the moon unless each individual on this board has calculated the distance to it, same goes for every star.
I dismiss the moon as a rock and stars as burning suns regardless but the question still stands. Can anyone show me how they get the distance to the moon to know it's correct or is it simply a reliance on being told it's 238,000 miles away?
But you can't describe the distance to or the shape of your dome.
No.
I would if I offered it as factual but offering fictional calculations for it and pretending it's fact is not productive for me.
The spinning globe is offered as fact. People like yourself argue it as being fact and argue for it being fact, very strongly.
So once again, can you prove it and also can you tell me how you know the size of the moon and the distance to it?
Does that make that argument more valid or less valid?
My argument for my Earth is not valid. I keep telling you this but you keep coming back to it. Why?
 
Last edited:
The spinning globe is offered as fact. People like yourself argue it as being fact and argue for it being fact, very strongly.
So once again, can you prove it and also can you tell me how you know the size of the moon and the distance to it?
You say you're not offering your cult-think as fact,but what you do state with absolute certainty is that there is no space, gravity, a spinning globe, right angles and a ton of other stuff. So you do offer facts, but then don't back it up.


There's been loads of proof given here. You don't and won't accept any of it. Maybe you're too far brainwashed for it now. But when you know that you are going to reject anything why keep asking for it?
 

DaveH

Striker
You can't.

No you can't.

Nobody has to lie.
Navigation is from point A to point B, wherever that may be. It doesn't have to be at any pole.
North on a compass is towards the centre and south is away from it.
East and west are simple navigation around the circle. No globe required.

I dismiss the moon as a rock and stars as burning suns regardless but the question still stands. Can anyone show me how they get the distance to the moon to know it's correct or is it simply a reliance on being told it's 238,000 miles away?

No.
I would if I offered it as factual but offering fictional calculations for it and pretending it's fact is not productive for me.
The spinning globe is offered as fact. People like yourself argue it as being fact and argue for it being fact, very strongly.
So once again, can you prove it and also can you tell me how you know the size of the moon and the distance to it?

My argument for my Earth is not valid. I keep telling you this but you keep coming back to it. Why?
Interesting response. Earlier in the thread you accepted that even with ancient navigation techniques (and ignoring modern GPS) that people could know exactly how far north or south they were. It is how sailors could cross vast oceans and come in to the port exactly right and not hundreds of miles down the coast.

So now these techniques don’t work because it might mean people have been to the north and south pole.

But then you say a compass works and you are happy with that. A compass is another way to know because, think about what would happen if you had a compass and crossed the poles. It becomes another way to confirm the destination.

Most of the people who have been to the poles have navigated successfully all over the world, but now apparently that knowledge lets them down when they get near the poles because of reasons.

Same old story. Say many things but as soon as something hints at things like the south pole existing, panic, back away, waffle.
 

fyl2u

Striker
Can anyone show me how they get the distance to the moon to know it's correct or is it simply a reliance on being told it's 238,000 miles away?

I started showing you two days ago and you ignored my post.
So once again, can you prove it and also can you tell me how you know the size of the moon and the distance to it?

Yes, I can prove it, and have proved it many times on this thread.

One of my favourite ways is with a bath full of water, a spirit level or a laser, a pen, and a highly accurate measuring device. It's an experiment anyone can do in the home as long as they have the highly accurate measuring device. It will clearly show that the curve of the earth is present in the level of the water across the length of the bath. Unfortunately, without that piece of measuring equipment, it's easy for the naked eye to be fooled into thinking the water is actually flat, because the curve across such a short distance is so small.
 
Last edited:

legend7

Midfield
You can't.

No you can't.

Nobody has to lie.
Navigation is from point A to point B, wherever that may be. It doesn't have to be at any pole.
North on a compass is towards the centre and south is away from it.
East and west are simple navigation around the circle. No globe required.
So are you now saying Greenland on your lemon squeezer isn't where Greenland is, and the same for Northern (central) Canada and Russia.
As now you're really confusing me if you're saying your map looks nothing like your map?
 
I don’t know why I’ve come back to this thread but you’re right.
He’s a wum. It’s really that simple. I’ve said it before but I don’t believe for one second that he is a flat earth conspiracy nut. He knows the nature of the universe we live in just as much as you or me.
Totally agree, he's been on a wind up from the start just looking for attention. He knows fine well he'll just keep arguing against everyone no matter what evidence/proof is offered simply because he wants the attention (which he is getting).

He claims to be interested in the deeper questions, opening his mind and believes in science. Then in the same breath he denounces current proven theories and science as fake and comes up with a theory that has no evidence, fact or experiments to back it up.

If that isn't a WUM I have no idea what one is.
 
Totally agree, he's been on a wind up from the start just looking for attention. He knows fine well he'll just keep arguing against everyone no matter what evidence/proof is offered simply because he wants the attention (which he is getting).

He claims to be interested in the deeper questions, opening his mind and believes in science. Then in the same breath he denounces current proven theories and science as fake and comes up with a theory that has no evidence, fact or experiments to back it up.

If that isn't a WUM I have no idea what one is.

If you find @The Fish 's posts a few pages back he has put links to flat earth message boards from a while back where our very own @Nukehasslefan is spouting the same old stuff, and even the people on there think he's wrong.
Don't think its a wind up. He's fell for the words of the cult.
 

Top