Put a flat earthier into space

[DPTT]

I absolutely agree.


I agree. One thing can spiral into many, as you say.
The thing is the waters can easily become far too muddied for certain people to ever gain any foothold on what and why they originally started to question if they try to take in all sides of all stories or conspiracies.
It's easy to do but the problem arises when you believe you've spotted a lie. Trust starts to wane and trust itself is hard to gain in the first place but so easily lost on the back of just snippets of disinformation or misinformation.



It can be compared to a religion to be fair but no more or less so than the global Earth religion other than the obvious majority.
The thing about a globe is, it only takes one thing to destroy it, not a myriad of different Earth views.
Nobody has to be a flat Earther or any variation of it to simply question the global model.

People laugh and mock when the water level is used. It's plain to see it always finds its level and it's plain to see it will never do so on a curve.
Of course, it can be argued with gravity and stuff but when people argue it and are asked what it is, people simply say, it just is because scientists and Einstein say it is.

So, although it appears more points to a global Earth, it always would do when the story sold is just that.
It has been tweaked and better tweaked to iron out the flaws in that story in order to make it difficult to argue the magical fantasy of it. IMO.


All I can say to you is take in whatever info is put out and evaluate it as you do.
I think the best way to start is not to look at other theories but to look at the global storyline and do the very simple in-your-face experiments that require little to no cost and take it one step at a time because once you find one headscratcher your mind will open up to further investigate.
Doing this on your own and without the pressure of mixed views will gain you traction. It did for me.

These “scientists” actually do research, experiments and have everything peer reviewed to verify their “musings”.

You on the other hand

 

[Nukehasslefan]

These “scientists” actually do research, experiments and have everything peer reviewed to verify their “musings”.

You on the other hand

Scientists do lots of things.
What is a scientist?
I'll help you. You are one and so am I and every other person with a mind.

Now then what we have to go on from this point is what's accepted and what class a scientist has to be placed into to become top of the class to those who are deemed irrelevant.

And peer review is peer review by who and what makes them expert in order to peer review?

 

[DPTT]

Scientists do lots of things.
What is a scientist?
I'll help you. You are one and so am I and every other person with a mind.

Now then what we have to go on from this point is what's accepted and what class a scientist has to be placed into to become top of the class to those who are deemed irrelevant.

And peer review is peer review by who and what makes them expert in order to peer review?

No you are not a scientist, that’s a fact!

You have watched you tube and came to the conclusion from what others have said that we are not on a globe.

That is fair enough but you have used other peoples ideas to get to your own.

You’ve done no experiments or if you have they haven’t been cross examined at all.

Mate have all the musings in the world but you’re inability or refusal to accept what others have done is dangerous to yourself.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Scientists do lots of things.
What is a scientist?
I'll help you. You are one and so am I and every other person with a mind.

Now then what we have to go on from this point is what's accepted and what class a scientist has to be placed into to become top of the class to those who are deemed irrelevant.

And peer review is peer review by who and what makes them expert in order to peer review?

Well a top class scientist would share their experiments, methods, findings and results, meaning another scientist could repeat them and see if their findings agreed.
Whereas a paranoid Youtube scientist would do away with all of that and just muse on it, while accusing the real scientists of deception and/or stupidity.

 

[Nukehasslefan]

No you are not a scientist, that’s a fact!

That's your fact for yourself.

You have watched you tube and came to the conclusion from what others have said that we are not on a globe.

I've watched many things and many things have aided in my quest to find out what's what with this Earth and all the rest of it.

That is fair enough but you have used other peoples ideas to get to your own.

It's a mixture.
For me to argue against a globe I first must be told about a globe so I initially relied on that, right?
No difference.
As I said before it all comes down to appeals to or against authority for many many arguments.

You’ve done no experiments or if you have they haven’t been cross examined at all.

You can decide anything you want to.

Mate have all the musings in the world but you’re inability or refusal to accept what others have done is dangerous to yourself.

My refusal to accept what others have done?
As in what. What do you know for sure someone has done that I refuse to acknowledge?

Well a top class scientist would share their experiments, methods, findings and results, meaning another scientist could repeat them and see if their findings agreed.

And you're sure this applies to all and nobody could ever be stopped from putting forward their view or experiments?

Whereas a paranoid Youtube scientist would do away with all of that and just muse on it, while accusing the real scientists of deception and/or stupidity.

When anything is questioned then someone has to be not entirely trusted for whatever it is that's on offer.

 

[What A Waster]

The method of scientific investigation is nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind. It is simply the mode at which all phenomena are reasoned about, rendered precise and exact. There is no more difference, but there is just the same kind of difference, between the mental operations of a man of science and those of an ordinary person, as there is between the operations and methods of a baker or of a butcher weighing out his goods in common scales, and the operations of a chemist in performing a difficult and complex analysis by means of his balance and finely graduated weights. It is not that the action of the scales in the one case, and the balance in the other, differ in the principles of their construction or manner of working; but the beam of one is set on an infinitely finer axis than the other, and of course turns by the addition of a much smaller weight.


From We Are All Scientists. 1863

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[BigPete]

What is a scientist?

 

[DPTT]

That's your fact for yourself.

I've watched many things and many things have aided in my quest to find out what's what with this Earth and all the rest of it.

It's a mixture.
For me to argue against a globe I first must be told about a globe so I initially relied on that, right?
No difference.
As I said before it all comes down to appeals to or against authority for many many arguments.

You can decide anything you want to.

My refusal to accept what others have done?
As in what. What do you know for sure someone has done that I refuse to acknowledge?

There are many on this thread who have offered experiments that they have personally done (through work and as a hobby) and you have dismissed every single one
(Do your own research before asking me to show you which ones )

We don’t appeal to authority as you keep on saying. Some are intelligent enough for have the resources at hand to be able to verify for themselves what has been said and have put them on here, again you dismiss.

I still find your water level statement laughable, not once have you gone into any detail of said statement.

Your ideas are fascinating but will forever be in the sci-fi section of the library matey

 

[BigPete]

So...

Those superfluid experiments?

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

And you're sure this applies to all and nobody could ever be stopped from putting forward their view or experiments?

Anyone can put forward their view/theory. For it to become accepted it has to be examined and tested by others.

When anything is questioned then someone has to be not entirely trusted for whatever it is that's on offer.

Questioning is to be encouraged. Fanatical dismissal of all that's accepted (simply because it is accepted)is not.

 

[DaveH]

Molecular stacking and the varying densities of each stacked layer.

Why is one layer more dense than the other?

Scientists do lots of things.
What is a scientist?
I'll help you. You are one and so am I and every other person with a mind.

Now then what we have to go on from this point is what's accepted and what class a scientist has to be placed into to become top of the class to those who are deemed irrelevant.

And peer review is peer review by who and what makes them expert in order to peer review?

I think he was talking about professional scientists who follow scientific method for a living. Not some bloke with a spirit level in a bath and some crayons.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Try to explain this in terms of a naturally occurring projector...

Logon or register to see this image

...paying particular attention to showing how/why the stars to the right curve the opposite way to the ones on the left.

You could easily learn to do this and verify it for yourself if the truth mattered to you more than your Faith.

You must be logged on to see external links

More info on there than you'll ever need, more than you'll probably care to look at, but there you go.

 

[DaveH]

Try to explain this in terms of a naturally occurring projector...

Logon or register to see this image

...paying particular attention to showing how/why the stars to the right curve the opposite way to the ones on the left.

You could easily learn to do this and verify it for yourself if the truth mattered to you more than your Faith.

You must be logged on to see external links

More info on there than you'll ever need, more than you'll probably care to look at, but there you go.

Magnification and demagnification of atmospheric distortion refracting through the atmosphere to give make it appear the two sets of stars rotate the other way.

Or he might go back to the "but a planetarium has a video projector" defence, which is back to suggesting that there is some transparent object with stars and planets in, which is then being projected on the sky.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Magnification and demagnification of atmospheric distortion refracting through the atmosphere to give make it appear the two sets of stars rotate the other way.

Well yes, obviously there's the magnification and demagnification of atmospheric distortion refracting through the atmosphere to give make it appear the two sets of stars rotate the other way. But....

Or he might go back to the "but a planetarium has a video projector" defence, which is back to suggesting that there is some transparent object with stars and planets in, which is then being projected on the sky.

...that. I wouldn't want him to say no-one ever pointed out the absolute impossibility of a naturally occurring projector that could produce the exact same counter-rotation effect which is visible and verifiable by anyone, anywhere at any time and yet not one person has ever found those pesky points of light to be anywhere other than expected. Almost as if it were us who moved.

 

[3.142]

I assume lots of stuff is based on my thought process of what Earth could well be. I can explain many things and some I'm still working on.

Given you seem so definitively certain about almost everything you post, this is an interesting titbit about accepting there are some things you don't yet understand.

Can you share what they are?

 

[chrismisterx]

Try to explain this in terms of a naturally occurring projector...

Logon or register to see this image

...paying particular attention to showing how/why the stars to the right curve the opposite way to the ones on the left.

You could easily learn to do this and verify it for yourself if the truth mattered to you more than your Faith.

You must be logged on to see external links

More info on there than you'll ever need, more than you'll probably care to look at, but there you go.

going to give that link a read, thanks for sharing, always loved this kind of photo.

Well yes, obviously there's the magnification and demagnification of atmospheric distortion refracting through the atmosphere to give make it appear the two sets of stars rotate the other way. But....


...that. I wouldn't want him to say no-one ever pointed out the absolute impossibility of a naturally occurring projector that could produce the exact same counter-rotation effect which is visible and verifiable by anyone, anywhere at any time and yet not one person has ever found those pesky points of light to be anywhere other than expected. Almost as if it were us who moved.

Isnt the whole universe moving, or have I picked that up wrong, sure we ( our galaxy ) going to crash into another one at some point in the distance future?

way above my pay grade for sure, my brain hurts when you look into it, I have seen some of the maths in books that proves some things and to be honest its like its a complete alien language, but I do enjoy when its dumbed down to a level that I can sort of understand, it blows my mind how violent the universe really is.

 

[fyl2u]

This is the main issue. Scientists change theories all the time and we know governments and high authority spin all kinds of webs of disinformation and misinformation.

All the time, eh?

Name one that's been changed in the past ten years that was previously taught as "fact" but is now considered false because of new information.

we live on a spinning globe and that's why we see the sun and the moon moving in the sky

Yes.

it's us moving and the sun and moon are still.

Not exactly, but it's closer than your lemon squeezer world with a projector in the middle. In actual fact we're moving and so is the moon and so is the sun.

To cater to this and the seasons and all the rest of the stuff they have to tilt the Earth

No, the earth is tilted anyway. We didn't tilt it.

and then they have to invent a reason as to why any person would stay on this spinning ball

No, that's called gravity. It wasn't invented to explain why we don't fall off a spinning ball. It was an effect that was observed and measured. Its effect is now completely predictable in experiments that can be replicated anywhere in the world. Even your bathroom.

and go against the natural reasoning of what happens when someone is placed on something like that and it's rotated. They fall off.

They would only fall off if the centrifugal force of the spin outweighed the gravitational force holding us to the ground.

Fortunately for us, it doesn't, so we stay fixed to the floor.

So gravity comes in.

Gravity was always there. It wasn't brought in to spite you and your flat earth buddies.

Nobody knows what it is but they offer what it does.

Everyone knows what it is except you.

It becomes a magical force

No, it isn't magical.

pulls everything towards the centre of the Earth to stop them from flying off into space.

Yes.

The same for orbits.

Sort of.

They all go against reasoning

Actually they go WITH all reasoning. They're completely predictable using the same laws we use to predict how long it would take for an apple to hit the ground when dropped from a tree. Laws that we've known about for hundreds of years.

In fact it's by application of these very laws that the planet Neptune was discovered. Astronomers had noticed that Uranus's orbit wasn't quite the shape they would expect, but had some perturbation at certain points. By examining this motion they realised that at certain points in the orbit, the gravitational force of another planet that hadn't yet been discovered must have been affecting it. They could even tell where in the sky this planet should be because of how that gravity was affecting Uranus's orbit. They looked in that area and discovered the planet we now call Neptune in exactly the position they expected to find it. All because of the known laws of gravity and the fact that orbits DO in fact obey those laws.

but it's accepted because gravity was made up along with a whole host of other stuff when faults were being picked out.

Not even slightly what happened. An absolute falsehood that you're spouting.

We see the sun and moon moving. We do not feel ourselves moving.

True.

But as we know we can argue that sitting in a car next to another parallel to it at traffic lights or whatever and that car slightly moves backward or forwards, it can almost seem like it's you that's moving.

Yes, that's relative motion in a straight line. If there's zero acceleration, then there's zero force being applied to the body, because as every schoolboy will tell you, force is mass times acceleration: F=ma

So there's the argument.

It's not an argument, it's you not understanding.

Which is. Earthmoving or something in the sky.

Actually, it's both.

This is a small snippet

...of your catastrophic lack of understanding of physics.

but think about it with any scientist reasoning any of this.

We have. You haven't.

the moon is a rock covered in fine dust like cement.

Yes.

Mars is red dust and rock

No.

and had an atmosphere close to a vacuum

No.

as we're told and shown by landing space hoppers

No.

with vehicles inside onto ti or flying helicopters designed to work in this vacuum

No.

or a rover with battery life so long it just shows what can be done for a few billion dollars apiece.

A nuclear battery. You probably don't want them in your walkman.

All amazing stuff.

Yes.

Big 3000-ton rickets

That's a serious vitamin C deficiency.

just lifts off at bicycle speed and then accelerate all the way into space and to the moon in the '60s.

Sort of.

It's all fantastic stuff

Yes.

and the stuff of fantasy

No.

and joy

Yes.

But is it just that or is it a reality?

It's a reality.

It comes down to whether anyone questions the entirety of it all and marries stuff up to see if is something more or less than we are told.

Let him who hath understanding count the number of the beast, for it is a man's number. The number is six hundred, threescore and six.

I genuinely believe we get mocked on a mammoth scale but that's just my thoughts.

You do, and rightly so.

But I also believe there's a little magic show going on where they equally impress the public with their tricks and sleight of hand, kind of thing.

No.

You do realise you're going down down, deeper and down with all this? (sorry, couldn't resist. it's about as invested as I can get with this utter garbage he spouts these days.)

The thread certainly is a wanderer.

Molecular stacking and the varying densities of each stacked layer.

MOLECULAR STACKING

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

going to give that link a read, thanks for sharing, always loved this kind of photo.

There's a couple of diagrams showing how you can tell the direction by which way the stars appear to move, it would only work on a spinning globe and can be tested by anyone who cares

 

[fyl2u]

Scientists do lots of things.

They get out of bed on their own.
They put their clothes on by themselves.
They cook their own meals.

Just three ways they differ from yourself.

What is a scientist?

Something you are not.

I'll help you.

No, you won't.

You are one

I'm an enthusiast. And a bachelor of science. "ScienTIST" may be pushing it, but I'm a hell of a lot closer than you are, so I'll let you have this one.

and so am I

No. You are very much not a scientist. You're the opposite of a scientist.

and every other person with a mind.

Wrong.

Now then what we have to go on from this point is what's accepted and what class a scientist has to be placed into to become top of the class to those who are deemed irrelevant.

Gibberish.

And peer review is peer review by who and what makes them expert in order to peer review?

A peer is a peer. Our peers can appear to peer at our work while eating a pear on a pier.

 

[ned_werby]

The thread certainly is a wanderer.

His logic is certainly down the dustpipe