• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Put a flat earthier into space

Why would there be any reason to doubt world war two? It's acceptance because of the infinite amount of resources available
Your wasting your time, basically unless you can take him into orbit and show him personally he won't accept it. Anything short of that he will claim isn't proof but "reliance on authority".

Is he on a wind up or does he believe it? either way it matters little, but again either way suggests a serious inability to function normally in society and he probably deserves our pity more than anything else
 
Last edited:

Your wasting your time, basically unless you can take him into orbit and show him personally he won't accept it. Anything short of that he will claim isn't proof but "reliance on authority".

Is he on a wind up or does he believe it? either way it matters little, but again either way suggests a serious inability to function normally in society and he probably deserves our pity more than anything else

He said previously he wouldn't go in the rocket but would allow his own filming devices be loaded on board.

We all know he'd just say the footage was doctored when the images returned.

For someone who says he's not dealing in facs he seems pretty sure of the fact that mainstream facts aren't facts.
 
Last edited:
So you don't have any argument about those star distances.
How about the moon. Have you measured that size and distance?
Are you simply reliant on being told your closest star is 40,208,000,000,000 km away, as you're told?

The moon distance should be a doddle for you, shouldn't it?


You haven't set any challenges.


Prove what?


You don;t need to provide anything. You can deck out at any time and I won't think any less of you as a poster.
You've accepted you can't calculate distances for lights in the sky so I say, fair enough.


You provided something and said it's because of a spinning globe but didn't elaborate.
Ge the book back out and lets see what it says.

Show me why it's correct.
As for dancing to my tune, feel free to do or don't.

Who's doubting it?
You need accurate measurements during an eclipse or transit of venus from multiple locatioms, to measure solar system scales, or at least that was how they first did it.

I did provide something but you got stuck. I can’t help you further.
 
You need accurate measurements during an eclipse or transit of venus from multiple locatioms, to measure solar system scales, or at least that was how they first did it.

I did provide something but you got stuck. I can’t help you further.

If only you hadn't been schooled you'd be able to make something up easy and it wouldn't be from authority or have the need to be any way testable. Fool!
 
Your wasting your time, basically unless you can take him into orbit and show him personally he won't accept it. Anything short of that he will claim isn't proof but "reliance on authority".

Is he on a wind up or does he believe it? either way it matters little, but again either way suggests a serious inability to function normally in society and he probably deserves our pity more than anything else
Deliberate wind up now. Just repeating stuff and look at the sly dig in his reply to me, saying what I presented was from a book and not me own. Just looking for reactions now. Enjoying being the thicko really.
 
So you don't have any argument about those star distances.
How about the moon. Have you measured that size and distance?
Are you simply reliant on being told your closest star is 40,208,000,000,000 km away, as you're told?

The moon distance should be a doddle for you, shouldn't it?
I know that, unfortunately, you don't understand things like this but you could try something along these lines. You never know....


 
Deliberate wind up now. Just repeating stuff and look at the sly dig in his reply to me, saying what I presented was from a book and not me own. Just looking for reactions now. Enjoying being the thicko really.

Does anyone else think that over the last couple of days the standard of English is a lot better than we are accustomed to from Nuky.
Maybe he has enlisted help?

Or is this just copy and paste?
The silly thing is, no matter whether someone is regarded as a CT or whatever, we do get lied to.
Is everything a lie? Obviously not because we can verify a lot of stuff for ourselves.

From that point it comes down to acceptance of anything we cannot prove for ourselves.
This is where a gain in mass acceptance and belief can gain a majority if he stuff told and sold becomes the widespread norm.

The same thing with religion.
The second anyone in a crowd starts to question accepted beliefs they are immediately set aside as an outcast and basically grilled on why they do not accept certain stuff.
Any answer given will never be valid to those whose mindset is firmly entrenched into the mainstream norm.

That's just the nature of the beast.

In terms of arguing for anything that goes against a global spinning Earth, many people will take a sort of offence that their upbringing and schooling being questioned and some will immediately go into verbal attack mode, using their trusted off the shelf books and what not to lend them credence against someone who has questions and even alternate thoughts to that accepted norm.

The strangest thing is, the arguments from people who follow this global train of thought, is based entirely on acceptance of it being what they were told...without any real proof of it being so and yet some will argue till they're blue in the face that they know for sure yet can never offer the proof.

It's easy to offer up a video or pictures or as many books as is on offer as their evidence but it carries no proof for the person offering this, except appeals to that authority when in argument/debate.

Once a person realises they can't offer real proof they then start to go into psychology mode, telling all and sundry how the person they're arguing with likely lives in a basement wearing a tin foil hat and white gravy stained vest and Y fronts, being subsidised by the mother/father and have no education to speak of....and so on and so on and so on.

The amusing thing about this is, it puts that picture into the minds of many and that's how they see anyone who questions the norm.
It's much easier to just follow the norm even if you don;t agree with some of it, for many, because....well.....why would anyone want to be cast out as a CT nutter on the basis of having questions against certain things? Most won't so it's pretty easy to just follow the pied pipers of the world.

Then some will go that little bit further and cite all of their own life's certificates as if it lends massive credence to the argument.

When it becomes hard to batter down the doors to the mind of an alternate thinker, all the guns start blazing and everything and anything is used to still try to change that person's thought process to get in line with the accepted norm.

Someone told me they know star distances because they use trigonometry. I asked how and they didn't offer the result in how they did it.

If anyone knows how you calculate a star distance using trigonometry and knows this to be a truth, I'm all internet ears.
 
Interesting thread. Quite a lot of comparisons can be made in the language and logic demonstrated to that often seen in those with diagnosed delusional disorders
 
Interesting thread. Quite a lot of comparisons can be made in the language and logic demonstrated to that often seen in those with diagnosed delusional disorders
Like I said earlier this guy has issues. It doesn't matter if he is a WUM or he believes it, the depth he has gone to and time he has spent suggest he needs help
 
Like I said, evidence does not constitute any proof.
You should know this.


No you haven't. You tried to tell me about star distances and angles then stopped when I asked for proof of distances.

Because there's no end product to what I'm asking for in terms of proof. There's plenty of digs, such as, "even school kids grasp this" and all the rest of it, with vague explanations that leads to nowhere.

I keep seeing stuff like " I have a telescope and you haven't used one."
All this stuff is not a proof of anything.

Why would anyone complain about you?
You're giving out what most people are acclimatised to.

Ask them.
As I've said earlier. Get a telescope, look at jupiter, see for yourself you thick tw@t
 
You need accurate measurements during an eclipse or transit of venus from multiple locatioms, to measure solar system scales, or at least that was how they first did it.

I did provide something but you got stuck. I can’t help you further.
As long as we're sure about you not knowing any distances to any lights in the sky and nobody else knowing it.
It's clear to see it's all guesswork by those that push this stuff and this is what I was saying about calculations being made to fit.
It's not about maths being wrong, it's about people who throw calculations out for this kind of stuff based on gobbledygook stories.
I know that, unfortunately, you don't understand things like this but you could try something along these lines. You never know....


And now onto the sun.
As I've said earlier. Get a telescope, look at jupiter, see for yourself you thick tw@t
See for myself, what?
That it's a big gaseous planet?
What are you seeing with your telescope that tells you it's this big gaseous planet?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top