Put a flat earthier into space

[Nukehasslefan]

Just like literally nothing you've said on this entire thread has gotten you anywhere.

With you and your like minded friends/posters, I agree but then again I wasn't under any illusions about that.

You're still just as closed-minded and incapable of rational thought as you were at the beginning.

That's fine. You're entitled to think what you want.

Ok, what about this?

Logon or register to see this image

No.

You've been following this thread.

Does it really surprise you in the slightest that he doesn't?

We spent 30 pages trying to determine whether he could grasp the concept of a circle, a normal and a tangent.

Turns out he couldn't.

Turns out it still wasn't answered.

He has the mental age of a five year-old and genuinely believes he's a genius that has seen through the "lies" of science, maths, the education system, global politics and numerous other subjects.

Get really nasty and drop it to 4.

Ask Pythagoras

Ahhh, so that's where it stops. Ok no problem.

Just admit you can't do it.

 

[fyl2u]

To you, yes but then again you think you're spinning at over 1000 mph on an oblate spheroid in a space vacuum, around a few million mile circumference of a burning fire and water/oceans and everything stays on this spinning ball because of this gravity that nobody has a club as to what it is.

And so on.
I wouldn't say there's any failures on my part other than failure to adhere to mass global indoctrination in the eyes of those who try their best to force that..

Of course. I now want to know how it works to get the distance.

Not just to me, to everyone on the thread.

Prove that I'm wrong.

Explain how your "spirit level on a raft on a lake" proves the world isn't a globe.

According to our globe model, the spirit level on a raft on a lake will always have the bubble in the middle as if on a flat surface, regardless of whether the world is flat or a globe.

Explain how you see it differently.

You've avoided this question 10 times in the past three pages, because you know that your logic was flawed and you're too much of a liar to back down.

It's sad. Very, very sad.

Even when you've been tucked beyond shadow of a doubt, you're so insecure that you can't handle backing down on even this, one of the most obvious of your failures in the entire thread.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

@Nukehasslefan Show me how, in your world, this works

Logon or register to see this image

 

[jayjaysafc]

I can't give you anything concrete for a sun distance. It comes down to your own inquisitive mindset to decide if something is worth questioning or not.

You said you know it definitely isn't 93 million miles away. How do you know?
I can understand if you said you doubted this figure but you said know it's definitely wrong, so how do you know?

 

[Harry Angstrom]

You say you have a triangle. Tell me how.
I know you're going to say you point to the sun from each end to supposedly make it but tell me how you manage this.

light travels in straight lines. You agree?
There is a straight line between the two sticks. Your claim. I assume you agree.
We know the angles of two of the triangles. (From the shadows of the sticks) You agree?
We have assumed the sticks are 1000km apart. You agree.

Three points with straight lines is a triangle. You agree?

If that is so then you just put the data into this

You must be logged on to see external links

we know BC and a. So we can now measure how far your sun is away.

You agree?

 

[Nukehasslefan]

Not just to me, to everyone on the thread.

Prove that I'm wrong.

Explain how your "spirit level on a raft on a lake" proves the world isn't a globe.

According to our globe model, the spirit level on a raft on a lake will always have the bubble in the middle as if on a flat surface, regardless of whether the world is flat or a globe.

Explain how you see it differently.

You've avoided this question 10 times in the past three pages, because you know that your logic was flawed and you're too much of a liar to back down.

It's sad. Very, very sad.

Even when you've been tucked beyond shadow of a doubt, you're so insecure that you can't handle backing down on even this, one of the most obvious of your failures in the entire thread.

I won't back down because I have nothing to back down to except people telling me I'm wrong whilst having no clue how to offer proof.
Trying to see who can offer the best attempts at ridicule does not offer the winner any more credence on proving a spinning oblate spheroid in a space vacuum,

@Nukehasslefan Show me how, in your world, this works

Logon or register to see this image

Points of light move over and around the dome and at certain parts of it they mirror each other.

You said you know it definitely isn't 93 million miles away. How do you know? I can understand if you said you doubted this figure but you said know it's definitely wrong, so how do you know?

Because a vacuum could not offer energy transfer. Your space vacuum kills off everything we're told about so called space.
So that leaves us to wonder what's happening.
What is happening is what is inside this cell. IMO.
Does that make me know a definite in your eyes? No.
I know it to myself and that's what counts.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Points of light move over and around the dome and at certain parts of it they mirror each other.

That's it?
"Points of light move over and around the dome and at certain parts of it they mirror each other."
So explain this one....

Logon or register to see this image

just explain how it's possible and maybe we'll come back to the utter nonsense about mirroring each other later

 

[Nukehasslefan]

light travels in straight lines. You agree?
There is a straight line between the two sticks. Your claim. I assume you agree.

In your case it would be impossible for a straight line. But anyway, let's carry on.

We know the angles of two of the triangles. (From the shadows of the sticks) You agree?

Two of the triangles?

We have assumed the sticks are 1000km apart. You agree.

I agree you said they're 1000 km apart.

Three points with straight lines is a triangle. You agree?

Ok.

If that is so then you just put the data into this

You must be logged on to see external links

So tell me what you're getting it to and tell me how the points are to the sun.
Nice and simple.

we know BC and a. So we can now measure how far your sun is away.

You agree?

Show me how you're doing it.

That's it?
"Points of light move over and around the dome and at certain parts of it they mirror each other."
So explain this one....

Logon or register to see this image

just explain how it's possible and maybe we'll come back to the utter nonsense about mirroring each other later

Points of light moving around and over a dome.
What do you want me to say?
Why don't you explain what's happening.

 

[The Snockerty Friddle]

Points of light moving around and over a dome.
What do you want me to say?
Why don't you explain what's happening.

I want you to say how this works in your cell world.
One is what you'd see looking North from here in UK, the other is what you'd see looking South from say Argentina, South Africa, Australia...
Both can be seen simultaneously, both can be easily verified.
I want you to attempt to explain how this can possibly work in your cell.

They are, by the way, two entirely different sets of stars, there are no mirrors.

 

[fyl2u]

I won't back down because I have nothing to back down to except people telling me I'm wrong whilst having no clue how to offer proof.

You do have something to back down from.

You claim that a spirit level on a raft on a lake proves the earth isn't a globe. It doesn't.

You refuse to explain why you think it should prove it, because you're a liar.

Trying to see who can offer the best attempts at ridicule does not offer the winner any more credence on proving a spinning oblate spheroid in a space vacuum,

No, offering proof does. We have, you haven't, you've just lied repeatedly. And now you're trying to deflect YET AGAIN rather than explain why your experiment isn't flawed.

It's because you can't. You know it's flawed. You're lying about it because your fragile ego can't handle being proven wrong YET AGAIN.

For the thousandth time on the thread.

 

[Harry Angstrom]

In your case it would be impossible for a straight line. But anyway, let's carry on.

How? The earth is flat and light travels in a straight line. Or is there something wrong with that?

Two of the triangles?

Angles

I agree you said they're 1000 km apart.

Ok.

It was just an example. You could put them wherever you like.

 

[jayjaysafc]

Because a vacuum could not offer energy transfer. Your space vacuum kills off everything we're told about so called space.
So that leaves us to wonder what's happening.
What is happening is what is inside this cell. IMO.
Does that make me know a definite in your eyes? No.
I know it to myself and that's what counts.

Heat transfer via electromagnetic waves can occur across a vacuum ie heat radiation

 

[Harry Angstrom]

So tell me what you're getting it to and tell me how the points are to the sun.
Nice and simple.

There is one line from one stick pointing in one direction another stick pointing in another direction. Where they cross is the source of light.

Show me how you're doing it.

It is basic secondary school maths.

 

[fyl2u]

There is one line from one stick pointing in one direction another stick pointing in another direction. Where they cross is the source of light.

It is basic secondary school maths.

Can you see where you've gone wrong there?

He can't understand secondary school maths.

Anything beyond infants' school maths is beyond him.

 

[Harry Angstrom]

Can you see where you've gone wrong there?

He can't understand secondary school maths.

Anything beyond infants' school maths is beyond him.

Two sticks. He cannot explain the shadows cast by two sticks.

 

[DaveH]

I don't accept there's a god. I can argue many reasons as to why I don;t think there's a god as we're told but I can't directly prove it. Why? Because I can't disprove a person who has faith in that god and religion and the very same goes for that person trying to prove it does exist.

This is why your spinning globe model works. Because it's basically based on the very same type of concept of supposed evidence but no proof..

It is impossible in terms of what we supposedly live on.

In your mind, yes. To me, absolutely not.

It doesn't matter what I put forward. It's not passed off as fact. I simply ask people to decide what they think as possibilities.
You're coaxed into putting our a spinning globe in a space vacuum as factual because that's what you were schooled into and accept that, which is fair enough but it does not give you any credence for proof.
You cannot offer any other than what you think is a proof and trying to push that onto me as if you're showing facts.
You're not..

Don't worry about my mindset.
You're an intelligent person, use it to question your own stuff. You never know, you may surprise yourself. Or stick to the narrative. It's obviously your choice.

I can't give you anything concrete for a sun distance. It comes down to your own inquisitive mindset to decide if something is worth questioning or not.

I’d hoped that after a few days off you had come back with something new, but same old same old. Dismiss verifiable facts, then compare to religion or science fiction, one of which there is no proof the other is clearly made up. Then replace with a fantasy world of your own with no proof. Then of course because the rest of the world says different and there is a global space program is has to be a massive conspiracy as to why you are right and everyone else is wrong.

No point in trying to argue with you, it is just all really strange to me.

 

[fyl2u]

Two sticks. He cannot explain the shadows cast by two sticks.

A few pages back he was genuinely baffled about the idea of a line not having a thickness.

 

[payne]

Is this still going? Couldn’t explain the pattern of the shadow that an upright stick makes when it is in the ground.
When is in an aeroplane does he think the pilots are lying about how high the plane is and how far he is travelling? Are all maps a giant hoax?
Brilliant stuff in all honesty. I think it must be a giant wind up but part of me thinks he may be utterly mental.

this

 

[legend7]

I don't know.

I didn't say you knew I said an educated guess based on all of your experiments and musings on reflections and heat bouncing off the dome.
To come up with all of these theories that involve heat loss and light dissipation over distance you must have a rough idea in your head.
So you really can't say if you think it's closer to either 100 miles or 1 million miles or what about 100 million miles, you literally have no idea which one may be closest you say?

 

[payne]

You've been following this thread.

Does it really surprise you in the slightest that he doesn't?

We spent 30 pages trying to determine whether he could grasp the concept of a circle, a normal and a tangent.

Turns out he couldn't.

He has the mental age of a five year-old and genuinely believes he's a genius that has seen through the "lies" of science, maths, the education system, global politics and numerous other subjects.

He's a lunatic

I won't back down because I have nothing to back down to except people telling me I'm wrong whilst having no clue how to offer proof.
Trying to see who can offer the best attempts at ridicule does not offer the winner any more credence on proving a spinning oblate spheroid in a space vacuum,

Points of light move over and around the dome and at certain parts of it they mirror each other.

Because a vacuum could not offer energy transfer. Your space vacuum kills off everything we're told about so called space.
So that leaves us to wonder what's happening.
What is happening is what is inside this cell. IMO.
Does that make me know a definite in your eyes? No.
I know it to myself and that's what counts.

What a crazy attitude.