Pink Panther
Striker
The same way that balancing a spirit level on a ball proves the ball is flat.
-
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
- Thread starter southstander
- Start date
Of course.
Pink Panther
Striker
Logon or register to see this image
Kept on the ball by atmospheric stacking
Pink Panther
Striker
You've clearly done some research.
DaveH
Striker
What do you mean "show me distances"?
Yes, you can scale anything to fit, but the point about a globe is it is all scaled the same. You don't have the UK to one scale and Australia to another.
So with that in mind, if I measure the length of the UK on a globe would it be the correct proportion in scale with the rest of the globe.
Again you are not saying what is actually wrong with a globe and what doesn't work. You are just vaguely waving your hands with a claim it doesn't work with absolutely nothing to back it up. So give us a few test cases and we can see if you are right or not.
As for a spirit level, that was picked because it was your single experiment and it was demonstrated that while the principal was sound, you need rather a long spirit level in order to measure any curve.
I really hope you just did that to take a photo and it is not a strange stock image from somewhere!
Last edited:
Water doesn't curve man.
Well apart from the upward meniscus in a cylinder.
Oh, and waves.
Oh, and rain drops on leaves.
Oh, and around the little bubble in the spirit level.
fyl2u
Striker
No you haven't. Not even close.
No you haven't. Not honest experiments.
No you haven't.
No you don't.
Ball level nails it.
Last edited:
Nukehasslefan
Winger
That the Earth is not a spinning globe. I'm sure you don't want me to repeat myself.
It can set a level over a distance. Something a globe would not offer.
Not a truth.
In your opinion.
Correct.
Exactly.
I never said you did.
We don't live on a globe.
Also, the Earth has not been mapped in its entirety, so scale means what exactly?
I am. I'm saying you can offer anything as being to scale but it does not offer you a global reality.
I'm waving my hands because you're not offering anything realistic.
You're offering a certain scale to landmass and calling it a working globe reality.
Nah, it was picked up because it's the easiest to ridicule and use as a sort of battering ram. It actually makes me smile when it's used while the rest is quickly thrown aside.
Last edited:
I wonder how they predicted the projector would show this .....
You must be logged on to see external links
It was established we live on a globe 2500 years ago. A 5 year old can now prove we live on a globe. You have been outwitted by a 5 year old, just let that sink in
fyl2u
Striker
We want you to show your irrefutable proof that the Earth is not a spinning globe.
It will make us all eat our hats if indeed it is irrefutable.
So far on this thread, every "proof" you've shown us has been easily refuted.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
Have you ever seen this as you show it?
The Snockerty Friddle
Winger
It is and has been amply demonstrated by several on here.
and is correct as has been amply demonstrated by yourself.
See?
It's been picked up because it's the closest you've come to an experiment so far. A flawed experiment from which you draw the entirely wrong conclusions.
Nukehasslefan
Winger
People struggle today to try and show a globe so offering 2500-year-old supposed knowledge of one is hardly a compelling argument, don't you think?
A 5-year-old can also prove Santa exists.
Hmmm, are you projecting?You have been outwitted by a 5 year old, just let that sink in
fyl2u
Striker
I'd have a look tonight if it wasn't cloudy.
So you never explained how Buenos Aires is only 1000 miles further away than London from Australia on your layout based on distances you said you could accept?
Nukehasslefan
Winger
Ohhh you can find that out for yourself with easy experiments. Guess which one is the best?
A chocolate hat may be your easiest attempt.
None have but there have been many arguments saying they have been refuted with no backing evidence leading to proof.
Pink Panther
Striker
Can they?
fyl2u
Striker
No, it was picked up on because you kept repeating "water level nails it" in every single one of your posts, and your only experiments to prove this were flawed in such an obvious way that literally everybody on the thread could see it apart from you.
