Put a flat earthier into space

[DPTT]

No response to my train diagram either

You would have got at least a B+ at school for that like matey

 

[BigPete]

You would have got at least a B+ at school for that like matey

Cheers

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Go on then, tell us what would constitute proof? What could any of us offer that you'd be prepared to even look at and think about?

This is the conundrum. This is why this argument rolls on with neither side being able to nail proof to each other except to themselves.
It's about food for thought more than anything from both sides of the coin.

 

[fyl2u]

No response to my train diagram either

Or my parabola graph.
Or my post explaining the burden of proof vs the status quo.

This is the conundrum. This is why this argument rolls on with neither side being able to nail proof to each other except to themselves.
It's about food for thought more than anything from both sides of the coin.

You're wrong. Here's why.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

This is the conundrum. This is why this argument rolls on with neither side being able to nail proof to each other except to themselves.

That's only because when given proof you need to see and understand for yourself, you reject it without looking. You'll call it an appeal to authority when it clearly is not and then change the subject with some ever more ridiculous claim about what does or doesn't exist.
We're about two weeks away from an equinox, the effects of which you don't even know, let alone understand but you will reject them anyway. Effects utterly impossible to explain by your dome musings but absolutely as is to be expected on a globe orbiting the Sun. No appeal to authority involved.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

That's only because when given proof you need to see and understand for yourself, you reject it without looking.

Not at all. One time I accepted it all but that was when I had little time to bother to question it.

You'll call it an appeal to authority when it clearly is not and then change the subject with some ever more ridiculous claim about what does or doesn't exist.

It clearly is appealing to authority. There's no argument with it really.

We're about two weeks away from an equinox, the effects of which you don't even know, let alone understand but you will reject them anyway.

Effects utterly impossible to explain by your dome musings but absolutely as is to be expected on a globe orbiting the Sun. No appeal to authority involved.

And you only understand it because you're told what's supposed to be happening. You are reliant on the stories.

 

[Nobby]

Not at all. One time I accepted it all but that was when I had little time to bother to question it

Ok let's look at this another way.

You used to believe in a global earth but then having questioned it, found it flawed.

What arguments did you find to be flawed and what evidence did you rely on to reach those conclusions?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Ok let's look at this another way.

You used to believe in a global earth but then having questioned it, found it flawed.

Absolutely.

What arguments did you find to be flawed and what evidence did you rely on to reach those conclusions?

So many and I've mentioned quite a lot. I'm sure you haven't forgotten.

 

[Nobby]

Absolutely.

So many and I've mentioned quite a lot. I'm sure you haven't forgotten.

I don't recall the evidence that led you to your conclusions.

Please refresh my memory

 

[Nukehasslefan]

I don't recall the evidence that led you to your conclusions.

Please refresh my memory

No need.

 

[Nobby]

No need.

Why not, perhaps after a long an meandering thread a refresh may help people understand the merits of your argument

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Why not, perhaps after a long an meandering thread a refresh may help people understand the merits of your argument

People can take what they wish from whatever I say, as I said earlier.
How about you offer one proof for your spinning globe that is not reliant on acceptance from other sources?

This is really where you should start.
Without help can you name one thing that you can offer to show you live on a spinning globe? Let's see an answer to that if you want to. If not then fine.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Not at all. One time I accepted it all but that was when I had little time to bother to question it.

And you're rejecting it without consideration right now, in this very post. Exactly as I said.

It clearly is appealing to authority. There's no argument with it really.

It clearly is not. I've even left you to look and see for yourself rather than tell you what to see.

And you only understand it be cause you're told what's supposed to be happening. You are reliant on the stories.

No, I understand it because I can look and see.
You don't because you wont.

People can take what they wish from whatever I say, as I said earlier.
How about you offer one proof for your spinning globe that is not reliant on acceptance from other sources?

This is really where you should start.
Without help can you name one thing that you can offer to show you live on a spinning globe? Let's see an answer to that if you want to. If not then fine.

Equinoxes and star trails.

 

[DaveH]

This is the conundrum. This is why this argument rolls on with neither side being able to nail proof to each other except to themselves.
It's about food for thought more than anything from both sides of the coin.

That is not quite true though is it? You are provided proof many times every day. You refuse to accept or listen to any because it goes against your blinkered religious belief so your refuse to listen. Even when something very simple is put in front of your face, like a right angle, you refuse to acknowledge it is there.

Until you can open your mind and attempt to learn, you will never progress.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

And you're rejecting it without consideration right now, in this very post. Exactly as I said.

My rejection of it comes way before I ever knew this forum existed.

It clearly is not. I've even left you to look and see for yourself rather than tell you what to see.

I'd like to know what you see without the aid of others because this is where the real debate comes in instead of relying on authority as your backup.
Let's argue without those aids and base it on what we really do perceive, whichever way.

No, I understand it because I can look and see.
You don't because you wont.

I understand a story if the story's been fashioned to mean one thing, even if it's never been true to life. However, I can't then argue for it to be factual if I don't know how it can be.
This is where you can look into your own acceptance of the stories told.

 

[Nobby]

People can take what they wish from whatever I say, as I said earlier.
How about you offer one proof for your spinning globe that is not reliant on acceptance from other sources?

This is really where you should start.
Without help can you name one thing that you can offer to show you live on a spinning globe? Let's see an answer to that if you want to. If not then fine.

Your repeated refusal to offer any evidence, is I think quite telling.

The logical conclusion is that if you consistently refuse to present your evidence for consideration, then you either have little faith in the rigour of that evidence or alternatively you have no evidence

 

[Nukehasslefan]

That is not quite true though is it? You are provided proof many times every day.

No.
I'm provided stories of what you and others proclaim to be proof, yet you do it by relying on the storytellers and not direct proof from yourselves.
Saying it many times does not offer proof unless you can offer it. Otherwise, we are arguing/debating those stories based on how we perceive things to be and this is exactly where we are and why this debate rumbles on.

You refuse to accept or listen to any because it goes against your blinkered religious belief so your refuse to listen.

The thing is I've listened and better listened and went over many many times, many things to do with a spinning globe and so-called space as we are told and all the shenanigans that come with it. It hasn't been a 5-minute job and it didn't stem from here, so offering what you have means absolutely nothing, and offering it in all kinds of different formats to get to the same conclusion still means nothing.

Even when something very simple is put in front of your face, like a right angle, you refuse to acknowledge it is there.

Not at all.

Until you can open your mind and attempt to learn, you will never progress.

I'm doing just fine.
I could actually offer the very same to you but it then becomes a teet for tat and goes nowhere.

Your repeated refusal to offer any evidence, is I think quite telling.

Of course, it is, to you.
You are 100% global minded so absolutely anything I say that even remotely offers anything aside that is deemed nuts and a whole variety of nothings. I get it and I accept it from the side you take as I do with others who follow that set path.

The logical conclusion is that if you consistently refuse to present your evidence for consideration, then you either have little faith in the rigour of that evidence or alternatively you have no evidence

What is the evidence?

Is evidence a truth?
What variations of evidence make a truth?

When does evidence become absolute proof?

There are answers in all of those and to know then would be to understand that we are and still will be in a debate and likely always.

 

[Nobby]

No.
I'm provided stories of what you and others proclaim to be proof, yet you do it by relying on the storytellers and not direct proof from yourselves.
Saying it many times does not offer proof unless you can offer it. Otherwise, we are arguing/debating those stories based on how we perceive things to be and this is exactly where we are and why this debate rumbles on.

The thing is I've listened and better listened and went over many many times, many things to do with a spinning globe and so-called space as we are told and all the shenanigans that come with it. It hasn't been a 5-minute job and it didn't stem from here, so offering what you have means absolutely nothing, and offering it in all kinds of different formats to get to the same conclusion still means nothing.

Not at all.

I'm doing just fine.
I could actually offer the very same to you but it then becomes a teet for tat and goes nowhere.

So you are doubling down on your last refuge of "appeals to authority".

As I say if your evidence has merit present it for consideration, or continue to try and play word games to avoid addressing the issue

 

[Nukehasslefan]

So you are doubling down on your last refuge of "appeals to authority".

As I say if your evidence has merit present it for consideration, or continue to try and play word games to avoid addressing the issue

My evidence has absolutely no merit to those who refuse to think outside of the global indoctrinated belief system. I get it, as I've repeatedly said and will say as many times as I think warrants it.

If you think I have nothing then your argument with me would be better off ceasing. However, I genuinely believe that quite a few people on here have their interest peaked.

The debate rolls on because as much as people like yourself try your best to brush aside anything against a globe you also have nothing to back it up except for massive appeals to authority.
It's not a dig, it's the nature of the beast within us to follow a trait, basically.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

My rejection of it comes way before I ever knew this forum existed.

I'd like to know what you see without the aid of others because this is where the real debate comes in instead of relying on authority as your backup.
Let's argue without those aids and base it on what we really do perceive, whichever way.

Well I did mention the equinox and how to see the effect in plenty of time before the previous one, you rejected it without consideration. There's another in about two weeks. You could see it for yourself if you wanted to. But you don't.

I understand a story if the story's been fashioned to mean one thing, even if it's never been true to life. However, I can't then argue for it to be factual if I don't know how it can be.
This is where you can look into your own acceptance of the stories told.

It's not a story. It's a real and visible effect which can be easily explained on a globe in orbit, but impossible on your dome.