Put a flat earthier into space


That depends on the light reflected back to the eye.
If you're looking down a hole your light will be blocked if there's no reflection back to the eyes.
Weather conditions can hamper view.

A lot of view from distance is massively dependent on the weather.
Most times the human eye will see short distances. A telescope can magnify what's in that distance but ultimately the density of atmosphere will scupper most opportunities to see into the distance. It takes certain days where you manage to get more clearer views over distance. You know this so there's no need to argue this point.

The simple end product is, if Earth was the globe we're told it is then we should not be seeing any distant buildings....ever.

Not one single shot has hit its target but the shooting keeps coming.
Not one of you has any proof and you know it.

The tangled web of contradictions come from the global side.

Then don't give me any attention.
So you can’t give examples of where else this rare Chicago effect is seen? Surely by your own argument if clarity is dependent on weather, you would see massive distances everywhere at least occasionally. Like I said, this would be especially so in less moist less dense winter air. The Chicago effect is seen when it is warm and humid.

You still have not given a reliable experiment for proving that water is flat.

Reading your posts it sounds like you are really struggling now. Should we stop?
 
No need. If the loss of a ship is being put down to falling over a curve then there must be a clear view of an angle for that to happen. Not just as ship descending as if it was going down a lift shaft.
Put your mind to it.

It's not falling though is it. Remember your maths from yesterday's class.
It's not going down a roller coaster style dip.
 
So you've never bothered to actually observe this.
It gets smaller because it's further away. You bring it back into focus but part of hull is missing, yet the deck, cabins, mast all still there. It moves further away so keeping it in focus as it keeps moving the deck is now disappearing yet still perfectly focussed.

Why not go and try it yourself, it's easily done.


Nailed it
The key is your theoretical horizon line.
 
So you can’t give examples of where else this rare Chicago effect is seen? Surely by your own argument if clarity is dependent on weather, you would see massive distances everywhere at least occasionally. Like I said, this would be especially so in less moist less dense winter air. The Chicago effect is seen when it is warm and humid.

You still have not given a reliable experiment for proving that water is flat.

Reading your posts it sounds like you are really struggling now. Should we stop?

You can see Las Vegas from LA with a telescope like
The key is your theoretical horizon line.

Also once i was in Lowestoft and i could see Denmark when I stood on my tip toes
 
Last edited:
No need. If the loss of a ship is being put down to falling over a curve then there must be a clear view of an angle for that to happen. Not just as ship descending as if it was going down a lift shaft.
Put your mind to it.
The angle of tilt would be way too small to see, same as the curve of your bath water. You'd never see it.
 
So you can’t give examples of where else this rare Chicago effect is seen? Surely by your own argument if clarity is dependent on weather, you would see massive distances everywhere at least occasionally.
You do.
Like I said, this would be especially so in less moist less dense winter air.
It's not less dense, it's more dense and magnified.
The Chicago effect is seen when it is warm and humid.
No it's not.
You still have not given a reliable experiment for proving that water is flat.
To you I haven't and that's fair enough. I quite happy with what I've said and absolutely not in any way put off by what you've said. You believe your Earth is a spinning globe. Why would you think water was flat when you believe it is level around a ball.
Reading your posts it sounds like you are really struggling now. Should we stop?
To you it may seem like I'm struggling. I actually think that about you but I won't dwell on that.
It's not falling though is it. Remember your maths from yesterday's class.
It's not going down a roller coaster style dip.
Then you can't argue for the hull disappearing and then the mast, by eye over the short distance you see it happening which is only a few miles..
The angle of tilt would be way too small to see, same as the curve of your bath water. You'd never see it.
As above. You can't argue for a ships disappearing hull first over a few miles and then argue tilt would be too small to observe.
 
Last edited:
If you placed that tube and a same size tube that was opaque and both stood upright against the ground, you would see the ground much better through your clear plastic tube to the ground much much better than looking down your opaque tube.

Obviously lol that's like saying fill the tube full of Coca-Cola then look through it.

Of course you will see better through a clear plastic tube. You'd also see better through water.

Whats that got to do with the price of cheese?
 
You do.

It's not less dense, it's more dense and magnified.

No it's not.

To you I haven't and that's fair enough. I quite happy with what I've said and absolutely not in any way put off by what you've said. You believe your Earth is a spinning globe. Why would you think water was flat when you believe it is level around a ball.

To you it may seem like I'm struggling. I actually think that about you but I won't dwell on that.

Then you can't argue for the hull disappearing and then the mast, by eye over the short distance you see it happening which is only a few miles..

As above. You can't argue for a ships disappearing hull first over a few miles and then argue tilt would be too small to observe.

Go and try it for yourself
 
You brought it up.
As you said looking down gives you better vision.

Then for some reason bring up a opaque tube saying how you would see better through the plastic one. Not answering if your vision would get better from looking down the clear plastic tube.

Obviously if it's opaque it will be harder to see through but that doesn't answer the first question.

Would my vision get better then if I looked down through a clear tube?

As apparently that's the way to defeat the atmospheric stack by looking down.
 
You brought it up.

I'm fine with it. I know exactly what I'm saying and I know exactly what I see.
What are your many experiments that led you to the conclusion the centre was made of crystals not something else.
I've asked this about 5 times with no response?
Why don't you amend my section drawing to get it closer to your lemon squeezer section to explain sea depths.
 
What are your many experiments that led you to the conclusion the centre was made of crystals not something else.
I've asked this about 5 times with no response?
Why don't you amend my section drawing to get it closer to your lemon squeezer section to explain sea depths.

I think he's completely made it up but had to stick with it even more when it's been absolutely blown apart by people on here. Probably encounters little resistance or critical analysis from the flatties on the other forums but on here people have pointed out things that just wouldn't work so other things get tacked on as he goes. His head must be battered with all these spinning plates of lies
 
I think he's completely made it up but had to stick with it even more when it's been absolutely blown apart by people on here. Probably encounters little resistance or critical analysis from the flatties on the other forums but on here people have pointed out things that just wouldn't work so other things get tacked on as he goes. His head must be battered with all these spinning plates of lies
Are the plates spinning though.....so if you jumped up on one would you land somewhere different.....
 
His lack of understanding of scale is fabulous. The way he keeps banging on about being able to see the curve at sea level with the naked eye is hilarious.

He actually comes out with this stuff and thinks he's being reasonable and logical.

It's tragic as well as frightening that a bloke of 60 has the mind of less than a child but thinks he's smarter than the whole of the human race.

It's definitely mental illness and or saddening that he's been brainwashed to this extent.
 
His lack of understanding of scale is fabulous. The way he keeps banging on about being able to see the curve at sea level with the naked eye is hilarious.

He actually comes out with this stuff and thinks he's being reasonable and logical.

It's tragic as well as frightening that a bloke of 60 has the mind of less than a child but thinks he's smarter than the whole of the human race.

It's definitely mental illness and or saddening that he's been brainwashed to this extent.

I'm amazed that it has never at any single instance in this thread had him go "oh right, actually you might be right. I don't understand that."
Everything is wrong, no humility or awareness of his own limits, reject it all, deny it all. Not even once. Because as soon as one thing is acknowledged then if that is accepted, this must be as well, then this. Total denial. To the point where right angles are no longer trusted because the diagram looked like a globe with an axis and he wasn't sure where it might lead. We've even now had it said that flat earthers are in on the lie. It's incredible
 
His lack of understanding of scale is fabulous. The way he keeps banging on about being able to see the curve at sea level with the naked eye is hilarious.

He actually comes out with this stuff and thinks he's being reasonable and logical.

It's tragic as well as frightening that a bloke of 60 has the mind of less than a child but thinks he's smarter than the whole of the human race.

It's definitely mental illness and or saddening that he's been brainwashed to this extent.
His lack of understanding of anything is fabulous. In his reply to me he is literally saying the opposite of what is true, measurable or even what happened in a video he posted. I can't be arsed to reply to that.

This is black. No it is white. Erm what it is black. No it is white, but you go on thinking it is black if it pleases you.

I think someone said in the first couple of pages. Don't argue with morons. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
 
Ah OK, so inadmissible to the debate? Got it.


Wow.

Here's a quick sketch to show how wrong you are AGAIN.

Logon or register to see this image

Went back and read a few early pages. Similar results
The problem with flat earthers is proven on this thread. There have always been people who have been misinformed then formed a severe cognitive bias so that any and all evidence contrary to their decision is ignored while obviously flawed "evidence" in favour of their belief is quoted as literal gospel.

The problem isn't those people, it is our engagement with them. The constant always on, always consuming content nature of the internet, social media and modernised comment- and consumption- driven classic media has led to a genuine belief that "my ignorant belief should be as respected as your knowledgeable one". People then discuss the foolishness with the fool on those terms and the very second you give them the impression you are having a discussion about a foolish belief in terms of "science" then as far as they are concerned they are having a scientific discussion about two competing scientific theories. They will invent more pseudo scientific arguments around their belief and the fact they are actually and obviously even dumber than the original belief doesn't matter - by discussing them in these terms, even entirely negatively, you are fuelling their delusion.

The fact this ignorance feedback loop is actually now being weaponised by profit driven corporations and politicians is seriously concerning but really all that is needed to stop it dead is for people to stop engaging.

5 months ago but worth re-reading
 
Last edited:
As you said looking down gives you better vision.

Then for some reason bring up a opaque tube saying how you would see better through the plastic one. Not answering if your vision would get better from looking down the clear plastic tube.

Obviously if it's opaque it will be harder to see through but that doesn't answer the first question.

Would my vision get better then if I looked down through a clear tube?

As apparently that's the way to defeat the atmospheric stack by looking down.
It's about light being reflected through it and what you see.
I still don't get what you're saying about a clear plastic tube.
I'm amazed that it has never at any single instance in this thread had him go "oh right, actually you might be right. I don't understand that."
Everything is wrong, no humility or awareness of his own limits, reject it all, deny it all. Not even once. Because as soon as one thing is acknowledged then if that is accepted, this must be as well, then this. Total denial. To the point where right angles are no longer trusted because the diagram looked like a globe with an axis and he wasn't sure where it might lead. We've even now had it said that flat earthers are in on the lie. It's incredible
I I accepted one thing that gave me an inkling that Earth was a globe I'd be more than happy to go along that route.
Nothing adds up. Nothing.
It doesn't add up to anyone that water stays on a ball but the indoctrination is severe to the point of it being akin to religion.
I fell for it all and this is where I'm at now, because I actually decided to question all this stuff.

One day you might.
His lack of understanding of anything is fabulous. In his reply to me he is literally saying the opposite of what is true, measurable or even what happened in a video he posted. I can't be arsed to reply to that.

This is black. No it is white. Erm what it is black. No it is white, but you go on thinking it is black if it pleases you.

I think someone said in the first couple of pages. Don't argue with morons. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
I'll try not to.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top