Put a flat earthier into space

[DPTT]

He doesn’t know what his world looks like. Just it has a dome over it, but he is not sure how big or quite where it meets the land.

Even his proofs are along the lines of “that would not look like that on a globe”, but he can’t say what they would look like on a globe so not exactly a useful test.

I’ve noticed all his “musings” are basically a carbon copy of what’s been spouted by other Flat Earthers.
Watches a You Tube video, gets excited and then basically thinks it’s all real.
Very very troubled individual to bd honest with a complete disregard for authority

 

[Deleted member 6694]

That's uncanny.

You're too good at this. I'm starting to think he's your WUM alt account.


And you've been told time and time again why your experiment is flawed and is therefore giving you an erroneous answer.

LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING

You must be logged on to see media items

 

[nahwee]

No proof of a spinning globe has been presented on this or any other thread.
Plenty of massive appeals to authority have been put forward.
Not one bit of real proof has been put forward. No facts.

There has been plenty proof and facts presented on this and other threads – read back – you don’t have to go far, DaveH gave us one a just few posts previous to this one.

I have’nt seen any ``massive appeals to authority``

Real proof has been put forward, together with facts.

But... no proof of an alternative to a globe has been presented on this or any other thread.

A proof of what?

Proof that the earth is not flat.

It's irrelevant because it proves nothing.

The pressure wave from the Krakatoa explosion spread outwards in all directions, like the rings formed when you throw a stone into a pond, around the globe, reached its antipode in Honduras and returned to the epicenter.

This happened several times.

Can you explain how this ocurred if the earth is not a globe?
As I said, it’s my opinion that the reason you keep saying it’s irrelevant to you is because it’s further proof, with facts, that the earth is a globe.

In one of your earlier posts you called this event a ``story`` Is this why you think this is irrelevant? Because you don’t believe it happened? Or don't you understand the passage of events how I've given them?

 

[legend7]

He doesn’t know what his world looks like. Just it has a dome over it, but he is not sure how big or quite where it meets the land.

Even his proofs are along the lines of “that would not look like that on a globe”, but he can’t say what they would look like on a globe so not exactly a useful test.

Aye the base meets the dome and it's too cold to get there but there is no rim, rather contradictory

Already done.
Simple water conforming and levelling in any reasonable sized container without hindrance.

Of course you naturally don't accept this because a globe does not allow this.
To me that's all the actual proof that's needed.

Anything else is based on examining your logic and asking yourself if what you're told, is viable.
Of course the answer is yes on your part and those that follow that train of thought....but, it's only viable because the model has been consistently fine tuned to cater for all misdemeanors. IMHO.

A container like a large lake that shows water curves maybe........

 

[taipeisafc]

Alternatively, do you accept that if water in a bath follows the curve of the earth, the curve of water in something as short as a bath would be a fraction of a millimetre and too small to measure?

I have tried that one the utter idiot ignored it. Unbelievably thick

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So suppose we did live on a globe, nearly 8000 miles across with a force attracting mass like gravity, what would you expect a bath of water to look like?

I don't know because the story if entirely fictional.

If you want to ask me how a bath of water would sit when dotted around a ball, or oblate spheroid then I'd tell you there would be plenty of them. Most of them would be empty, assuming cemented into the ball....or showing off level water if they're sat on the top of the ball.


Gravity has no reality an is basically, nonsense, in my honest opinion.

You tried to explain it with magnetism. Did you get that from somewhere or just make an analogy?

1. the radius of the earth plus another 35 000 feet (approx height of commercial jets) produces an arc so shallow that the degrees by which an aeroplane would have to adjust trim to ‘point downwards’ would be negligible, but also …

Absolutely not.
No matter what size people think a globe is you will not start from one point and hold the same height as you get to another point, unless you are flying over uneven terrain like hills and mountains.
If you were flying over a globe you would gain height unless the plane followed the curve.
The same with submarines, only the opposite would happen.
But it doesn't because logic dictates they are not navigating any globe.

That's uncanny.

You're too good at this. I'm starting to think he's your WUM alt account.


And you've been told time and time again why your experiment is flawed and is therefore giving you an erroneous answer.

LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING LA LA LA NOT LISTENING

There's no erroneous answer from my side.
Water level and the simple ability for anyone to picture this global we've been handed as a reality, to simply ask, how in the hell can water conform to this and be level anywhere you go.
Then it's a case of, hmmm, maybe it isn't a spinning ball in a space vacuum.

But...that's for each individual to ponder if they have the mindset to do so.
Most people likely just get on with life and never give it more than a passing thought but will argue for a globe because it's the expected norm and to do otherwise would be to be lumped straight into a FE or CT bracket.

I did once work it out and even if you did need to do this, the adjustment was something like half a degree every 5 minutes, given the average speed and cruising height of a passenger jet.

I do understand why the flattards struggle with it though and it is a difficult concept to explain. Wave a model plane above a ball and indeed it is hard to say why level flight will not see it gain altitude. But I struggle trying to explain in laymans terms how following the curve of the earth maintains a planes gravitational potential energy so it just would naturally stay at the same height if the amount of lift generated by thrust was equal to gravity pulling it down. Flying off at the tangent would be increasing altitude and therefor gravitational potential energy, so you would have to put more in.

Absolutely not. The gravity nonsense kills this right off.
You can't have it both ways.

A plane flies over rough terrain as well as water. If gravity and mass was a factor then the plane would have to be adjusted on a regular basis. Not only for the rough terrain but also for the so called global curvature.

It doesn't because it's not flying over a globe and is not being dragged down by mass attracting mass.

The main bloke has been pushing a flat earth and still is since 2015, some act that
Knew it was pointless though you'd have some dumb answer.
Why don't you try yourself at kielder to prove us all completely wrong, and all of the story telling scientists of course.

Why don't you try it and prove yourself wrong?

There has been plenty proof and facts presented on this and other threads – read back – you don’t have to go far, DaveH gave us one a just few posts previous to this one.

I have’nt seen any ``massive appeals to authority``

Real proof has been put forward, together with facts.

Dave's not offered one proof of a globe and neither has anyone else. Plenty of big appeals to authority have been put forward but no facts.

But... no proof of an alternative to a globe has been presented on this or any other thread.

No proof's, correct...but then again nobody is handing out theories as factual, except the globe believers.

Proof that the earth is not flat.

Water is flat. Earth terrain is not.

The pressure wave from the Krakatoa explosion spread outwards in all directions, like the rings formed when you throw a stone into a pond, around the globe, reached its antipode in Honduras and returned to the epicenter.

This happened several times.

Can you explain how this ocurred if the earth is not a globe?

If you sit in a bath and smash your fist into the water you will move it away in all directions and it will come right back to equalise the area you forced away.

Why would you need a globe to do that?

As I said, it’s my opinion that the reason you keep saying it’s irrelevant to you is because it’s further proof, with facts, that the earth is a globe.

And you're welcome to that but you have no real reason or facts to back that up.

In one of your earlier posts you called this event a ``story`` Is this why you think this is irrelevant? Because you don’t believe it happened? Or don't you understand the passage of events how I've given them?

A story is just that.
If the story told is about an explosion and ripples that come back to the epicentre then that's what it is, whether true or not.
The point is, it has zero proof of any globe, as explained above.
Push water away from you and it comes right back to settle back.
Just like an epicentre.

Have a think about it.

 

[taipeisafc]

Lots of incoherent drivel ignoring everything around him - you are a moron.

 

[DaveH]

. . I’ve seen some pretty stupid things said by this one, but you could not fill a bath if you lived on a globe, surely nobody can be that thick? Is that what it really comes down to?

I think part of the problem is some people can’t comprehend how big the earth is and that even mountains are insignificant compared to the size. Go up a tall tower and you are a tiny fraction of a percent of the size of the earth higher.

Then this concept of top and bottom, they can’t get their heads around the idea of gravity so there isn’t a top or bottom. It is not like the universe sits on a shelf and it all wants to settle in the dust. Get a big magnetic ball, you can stick paperclips on in any direction. But they can’t understand so have to make up conspiracy to cover up their lack of understanding.

Put it this way, I’ve never seen a flat earther who has excelled in any other field, like being a medical doctor, an engineer, another branch of science. They all seem at the lower end of the intelligence spectrum. “This is what I thought while sweeping the floor”.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

. . I’ve seen some pretty stupid things said by this one, but you could not fill a bath if you lived on a globe, surely nobody can be that thick? Is that what it really comes down to?

It hasn't really come to anything that isn't already clear about globes/balls/oblate spheroids and what not. You're simply not getting water to stay on them and aso show a level.

People are asked to take leave of their own basic logic in favour of this utter gunk.

I think part of the problem is some people can’t comprehend how big the earth is and that even mountains are insignificant compared to the size. Go up a tall tower and you are a tiny fraction of a percent of the size of the earth higher.

It's huge and we can all see that it's huge just by the terrain we visit and see.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions about that.

The size is used regularly as if it caters for water levelling on a big spinning ball.
When asked how it can stay on and not fly off with this supposed 1000 plus mph spin, people are told the spin is irrelevant and it's the rotation over 24 hours that counts.
Then they show you a small ball and ask you to turn it slowly for 24 hours until you reach the starting point.

When you ask why the Earth is a supposed oblate spheroid, you get told it's spinning so fast that it bulges out at the equator and flattens at the poles.

Absolute utter nuts but people want to believe it all because it's what's been hammered home. It was with me for long enough until I started questioning .

Then this concept of top and bottom, they can’t get their heads around the idea of gravity so there isn’t a top or bottom.

And yet we're told things fall. So, if there's no top or bottom then nothing should be falling.

It is not like the universe sits on a shelf and it all wants to settle in the dust. Get a big magnetic ball, you can stick paperclips on in any direction. But they can’t understand so have to make up conspiracy to cover up their lack of understanding.

Can you stick plastic and birds and butterflies and paper and water and sand and ...well you get the point....to it?
It's not about lack of understanding of facts it's about lack of reality to the fictional storyline.

We can all watch superman and ask how he can fly around Earth and turn back time.
We can reason it's just fiction and accept that it's not factual.

If authority came out and said there's a man that can actually do it and we all have to turn our clacks back 24 hours and make tuesday become monday, we would have to to follow that official line.

How many would believe the man actually turned back time?
You'd likely be surprised, would be my guess.

This is similar with how this nonsensical spinning global Earth has been fine tuned into a belief system. In my opinon.

Put it this way, I’ve never seen a flat earther who has excelled in any other field, like being a medical doctor, an engineer, another branch of science.

Why would you?
How do you go about finding them and seeing their credentials?

They all seem at the lower end of the intelligence spectrum. “This is what I thought while sweeping the floor”.

Naturally. Why would anyone that goes against the grain be anything else to those that follow a narrative and are governed by mass peer pressure to follow it?

 

[What A Waster]

Give a man a fish and he can live for a day.

Give him a fishing rod or a net and he'll pull you in every time on the internet.

 

[DaveH]

It hasn't really come to anything that isn't already clear about globes/balls/oblate spheroids and what not. You're simply not getting water to stay on them and aso show a level.

People are asked to take leave of their own basic logic in favour of this utter gunk.

It's huge and we can all see that it's huge just by the terrain we visit and see.
I don't think anyone is under any illusions about that.

The size is used regularly as if it caters for water levelling on a big spinning ball.
When asked how it can stay on and not fly off with this supposed 1000 plus mph spin, people are told the spin is irrelevant and it's the rotation over 24 hours that counts.
Then they show you a small ball and ask you to turn it slowly for 24 hours until you reach the starting point.

When you ask why the Earth is a supposed oblate spheroid, you get told it's spinning so fast that it bulges out at the equator and flattens at the poles.

Absolute utter nuts but people want to believe it all because it's what's been hammered home. It was with me for long enough until I started questioning .


And yet we're told things fall. So, if there's no top or bottom then nothing should be falling.


Can you stick plastic and birds and butterflies and paper and water and sand and ...well you get the point....to it?
It's not about lack of understanding of facts it's about lack of reality to the fictional storyline.

We can all watch superman and ask how he can fly around Earth and turn back time.
We can reason it's just fiction and accept that it's not factual.

If authority came out and said there's a man that can actually do it and we all have to turn our clacks back 24 hours and make tuesday become monday, we would have to to follow that official line.

How many would believe the man actually turned back time?
You'd likely be surprised, would be my guess.

This is similar with how this nonsensical spinning global Earth has been fine tuned into a belief system. In my opinon.


Why would you?
How do you go about finding them and seeing their credentials?



Naturally. Why would anyone that goes against the grain be anything else to those that follow a narrative and are governed by mass peer pressure to follow it?

I think everything you ask has been answered time and time again. No point in asking me. I can answer them in a way that a 5 year old can understand, but completely lack the ability to explain any of that to you, and I don't think you want to listen anyway.

But, what I said yesterday, do you think kangaroos exist?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I think everything you ask has been answered time and time again. No point in asking me. I can answer them in a way that a 5 year old can understand, but completely lack the ability to explain any of that to you, and I don't think you want to listen anyway.

Answering and explaining are two things. Answering and explaining something you cannot prove as factual, is another matter, whether you explain it from a 5 year olds perspective or a more complicated one.

 

[DaveH]

Answering and explaining are two things. Answering and explaining something you cannot prove as factual, is another matter, whether you explain it from a 5 year olds perspective or a more complicated one.

I can prove, but not in a way you understand. Mostly it involves detailed observation and mathematics.

 

[taipeisafc]

I can prove, but not in a way you understand. Mostly it involves detailed observation and mathematics.

We need a sesame street on a global earth maybe he will listen to Bert and Ernie. He really is a complete arse mind whether he believes all this regurgitated shite or not

 

[Northern Boarders]

He says he doesn't believe in gravity, space, other planets etc but he muses there is a giant unseen ice wall,a dome covering the earth & the sun is a projection.

And people doubt he is taking the piss.

 

[Hend79]

What a complete WUM. Ive never heard so much absolute drivel come out of any one person. He clearly has never left his basement and spends his days constantly looking at ridiculous youtube videos while ignoring studies by established scientists and accounts from space exploring agencies. He accuses these people of telling us stories and us believing them to be factual while believing stories from numpties on youtube etc.

In short, at absolute dribbling moron

 

[DaveH]

What a complete WUM. Ive never heard so much absolute drivel come out of any one person. He clearly has never left his basement and spends his days constantly looking at ridiculous youtube videos while ignoring studies by established scientists and accounts from space exploring agencies. He accuses these people of telling us stories and us believing them to be factual while believing stories from numpties on youtube etc.

In short, at absolute dribbling moron

That is the thing I find the strangest. Dismiss all known science and mathematics as invalid and just bollocks, then say no proof, then puts all his stock into something with no proof.

I read the replies like the one this morning where if you lived on a globe you couldn't fill a bath with water and think this must be someone just taking the piss. But if it was, that is someone who has spend years, writing a lot day after day, producing mental answers for everything and rewriting physics, chemistry and biology to fit his 'musings'.

If real then this is one of the stupidest people I've "met". A few of us have tried from the most basic level to explain something step by step and always fail at the very first hurdle. Almost to the level of "you know on a sunny day, the sky is blue?", said when expecting that to be the easy bit before you take a deep breath and get into the tricky stuff, and you get things to the level of "no it is not blue, it is really some other colour that I will not say but you have been told time and time again it is blue and so now that is all you can see. I used to think it was blue...." then half a page later he stops.

If just a WUM account, then there is someone out there who has invested hours in a fake internet identity making strangers think they are a dribbling moron.

Some days I think this is so stupid it can't be real then others I look at the amount of effort and think, surely nobody is that invested in making a fake? The other SMB WUMs just throw in the odd one liner, probably a cut and paste job, then run.

 

[Hend79]

That is the thing I find the strangest. Dismiss all known science and mathematics as invalid and just bollocks, then say no proof, then puts all his stock into something with no proof.

I read the replies like the one this morning where if you lived on a globe you couldn't fill a bath with water and think this must be someone just taking the piss. But if it was, that is someone who has spend years, writing a lot day after day, producing mental answers for everything and rewriting physics, chemistry and biology to fit his 'musings'.

If real then this is one of the stupidest people I've "met". A few of us have tried from the most basic level to explain something step by step and always fail at the very first hurdle. Almost to the level of "you know on a sunny day, the sky is blue?", said when expecting that to be the easy bit before you take a deep breath and get into the tricky stuff, and you get things to the level of "no it is not blue, it is really some other colour that I will not say but you have been told time and time again it is blue and so now that is all you can see. I used to think it was blue...." then half a page later he stops.

If just a WUM account, then there is someone out there who has invested hours in a fake internet identity making strangers think they are a dribbling moron.

Some days I think this is so stupid it can't be real then others I look at the amount of effort and think, surely nobody is that invested in making a fake? The other SMB WUMs just throw in the odd one liner, probably a cut and paste job, then run.

Yeah im conflicted like. He clearly believes what he is saying is true but to say all of the evidence and proof that the Earth is a globe is nonsense while not having any solid evidence to back up his own claims is ridiculous

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I can prove, but not in a way you understand. Mostly it involves detailed observation and mathematics.

Then you can't prove anything.
Using the old .... I can prove it but it's too complicated for the layperson....is just words that mean nothing.

If you can prove it and can offer facts, then feel free to do so.

We need a sesame street on a global earth maybe he will listen to Bert and Ernie. He really is a complete arse mind whether he believes all this regurgitated shite or not

Any simple explanation that shows facts is welcome. I prefer the simplest terms. It's just that the global Earth storyline does not offer anything of the sort.
It does off all kinds of unprovable stuff but this is not what it's about...is it?

He says he doesn't believe in gravity, space, other planets etc but he muses there is a giant unseen ice wall,a dome covering the earth & the sun is a projection.

And people doubt he is taking the piss.

The word "muses" is key in this instance.
When I offer it as factual I must back it up.
This is all I'm asking of you people for your global Earth.

 

[Hend79]

Then you can't prove anything.
Using the old .... I can prove it but it's too complicated for the layperson....is just words that mean nothing.

If you can prove it and can offer facts, then feel free to do so.

Any simple explanation that shows facts is welcome. I prefer the simplest terms. It's just that the global Earth storyline does not offer anything of the sort.
It does off all kinds of unprovable stuff but this is not what it's about...is it?

The word "muses" is key in this instance.
When I offer it as factual I must back it up.
This is all I'm asking of you people for your global Earth.

Ill ask again, please provide us with your "facts"

Then you can't prove anything.
Using the old .... I can prove it but it's too complicated for the layperson....is just words that mean nothing.

If you can prove it and can offer facts, then feel free to do so.

Any simple explanation that shows facts is welcome. I prefer the simplest terms. It's just that the global Earth storyline does not offer anything of the sort.
It does off all kinds of unprovable stuff but this is not what it's about...is it?

The word "muses" is key in this instance.
When I offer it as factual I must back it up.
This is all I'm asking of you people for your global Earth.

We dont have to, its been proven by people far more intelligent than the majority of us. Its up to you to come up with evidence of the drivel you are putting forward as the only people who do share your opinion on things are absolute loons on youtube.