The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
I hope it's goodbye. Silly me, it's not possible that you're wrong, don't know what I was thinking. :wave2:

There is nothing more to debate. Anyone who still thinks the world is flat is either stupid or is lying. These asinine videos you guys are presenting aren't worth another second of response. They've all be refuted over and over again and none of it moves you guys an inch. So which is it? Are you stupid (i.e. being stupid) or are you lying? It is one or the other or both. It isn't my opinion. I've got hundreds and hundreds of posts on two different threads to prove it, all of which is still available for everyone on the globe to read.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
After I move, when it warms ups here, and when I will only work part time if at all, I will do outdoor experiments. All by the end of April.

The goal here is to compare both globe and flat earth models if you like it or not. The truth will prevail, have a little faith and chill your complaints.

--Dave
I booked a tour of Antarctica. I'm going to swim the whole ice wall.
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
Why is my eyewitness testimony not enough for you? You claim your eyewitness accounts are sufficient for proving the Earth is flat but why is my eyewitness account ignored? Do you a double standard you use when listening to eyewitness accounts of others?
Like the eyewitness accounts of passengers on a plane at 30,000 feet who swear they saw the curvature?
 

nikolai_42

Well-known member
We can see ships in the distance. The Nikon P900 is 83x--magnification. And we are seeing ships, landscapes, and cityscapes at distances that we are not supposed to see if the earth were a globe.

I honestly never realized that the curvature of the earth, if it's a globe, is 8 inch per mile squared. At three miles that's a 6 foot drop. I grew up in Wisconsin, next to Lake Superior, and Minnesota, land of lakes and rivers. I know rivers that flow out of lakes and those lakes are level, not curved. There are rivers that flow into Lake Superior and rivers that flow out of Lake Superior. That, and a few other reasons, is why I decided to both investigate and have a debate on flat earth.

The air as it meets the water will create atmospheric conditions that become a barrier we cannot see past at great distances, even with a telescope. A telescope will also not be able to see beyond the horizon line at some point in the distance.

Some have argued that we should always be able to see the sun, moon, and land across the ocean if the earth were flat. But that would not be the correct model of flat earth. But if you think otherwise make your case.

--Dave

What is the theoretical limit on observation at a distance on a FE? Is it the same at higher elevations?


Sent from my iPhone using TOL
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
"The Curvature Zone" - Does the U2 Disprove the Flat Earth?

10 minutes - At about 6 minutes you'll see that it's flat in the U2
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Either way, you've disgraced yourself with this nonsense. You're an embarrassment to not just Open Theism but to the whole of Christianity, to America, to your neighborhood and to anything else to stand for or believe. An embarrassment, David. You've be-clowned yourself and ought to be ashamed.

Clete
That's the tragedy of all this. Especially from a guy like Dave who I once respected.

On the flip side.... these threads are a blast. It's like batting practice - it's not hitting the ball over the fence that's all that fun... it's seeing just how far you can send the ball out of the yard that becomes fun.
 
Last edited:

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
That's the tragedy of all this. Especially from a guy like Dave who I once respected.

On the flip side.... these threads are a blast. It's like batting practice - it's not hitting the home run that's al that fun yet it's seeing just how far you can send the ball out of the yard that becomes fun.

On the flip side maybe those globular steroids have you hallucinating.
 

nikolai_42

Well-known member
An article in Forbes written last November :

5 Impossible Facts that would be Necessary for A Flat Earth/#139f95047c4f

To summarize those facts :

1. Lunar Eclipses DON'T only occur at midnight. As a flat disk, there is only one orientation of the Sun-Earth-Moon alignment that can take place to create a perpendicular circular (as opposed to elliptical) shadow (i.e. Sun at "midnight" location) . Since lunar eclipses occur around the earth at all sorts of different times - depending on location - a FE is impossible.

2. Seasons. The angle of the suns rays creates seasons. A flat earth would require (since the sun's rays are almost parallel) the same season all over the earth at the same time.

3. Different stars visible from different parts of the earth. There are some stars that are just never visible from the North pole that are visible from the South pole - indeed even stars visible to the northern hemisphere that are never visible to the southern hemisphere. Not everyone sees the same night sky as would be (essentially) necessitated by a Flat Earth.

4. Mauna Kea - highest peak in Hawaii - is nearly 13800' above sea level. One of its sister islands (Kauai) has the 7th highest point at over 5200' AMSL (Kawaikini). As the crow flies, they are 303 miles apart. On a flat earth, they would be visible to each other. However, they are never visible from each other's location. {My note here is that you can't use environmental factors blurring or obscuring vision as an excuse. We are capable of seeing further than 300 miles with the naked eye into the sky.}. EDIT : This would be a hard thing to overlook if true. I only take it as true since it has been asserted as such and I don't have evidence of this negative.

5. Sunsets and Sunrises. If FE is true, then it couldn't be daytime in one part of the earth and nighttime in another. The article says it would have to be daytime everywhere all at once. I can see that being not necessarily true, but the extended periods of daylight and night at the poles during winter and summer (while the rest of the earth sees more or less regular daylight transitions) can't be explained using FE.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Since we're always looking for a better flat earth model, I found two images I haven't posted before and it's what I imagined.
cf3af70a1c4ad18e489b75e692004303.jpg
Patrick based on your flat earth map above how would it be possible to take a non-stop flight from Sydney Australia to Santiago, Chile?
 

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
An article in Forbes written last November :

5 Impossible Facts that would be Necessary for A Flat Earth/#139f95047c4f

To summarize those facts :

1. Lunar Eclipses DON'T only occur at midnight. As a flat disk, there is only one orientation of the Sun-Earth-Moon alignment that can take place to create a perpendicular circular (as opposed to elliptical) shadow (i.e. Sun at "midnight" location) . Since lunar eclipses occur around the earth at all sorts of different times - depending on location - a FE is impossible.

2. Seasons. The angle of the suns rays creates seasons. A flat earth would require (since the sun's rays are almost parallel) the same season all over the earth at the same time.

3. Different stars visible from different parts of the earth. There are some stars that are just never visible from the North pole that are visible from the South pole - indeed even stars visible to the northern hemisphere that are never visible to the southern hemisphere. Not everyone sees the same night sky as would be (essentially) necessitated by a Flat Earth.

4. Mauna Kea - highest peak in Hawaii - is nearly 13800' above sea level. One of its sister islands (Kauai) has the 7th highest point at over 5200' AMSL (Kawaikini). As the crow flies, they are 303 miles apart. On a flat earth, they would be visible to each other. However, they are never visible from each other's location. {My note here is that you can't use environmental factors blurring or obscuring vision as an excuse. We are capable of seeing further than 300 miles with the naked eye into the sky.}. EDIT : This would be a hard thing to overlook if true. I only take it as true since it has been asserted as such and I don't have evidence of this negative.

5. Sunsets and Sunrises. If FE is true, then it couldn't be daytime in one part of the earth and nighttime in another. The article says it would have to be daytime everywhere all at once. I can see that being not necessarily true, but the extended periods of daylight and night at the poles during winter and summer (while the rest of the earth sees more or less regular daylight transitions) can't be explained using FE.
Those are already debunked and would would work easily on FE.

A hundred proofs the Earth is not a globe - The Flat Earth Wiki

Flight%20Path%20Time%20Distance%20Speed%20Sydney%20Santiago%20Flat%20Earth%20SteemTruth.jpg
 
Last edited:

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
FLAT EARTH - Nonstop Southern flights (Sydney to Santiago) EXPLAINED

8 minutes

:rotfl:

So your answer is that planes are actually going nearly 900 mph because some moron on youtube who knows ZERO about commercial airlines said so?? I love the way he glossed over the return trip flying against the trade winds.

Furthermore... he never addresses how the plane could ever make it on fuel without making a stop.

And the most hilarious part is when he said they probably cancel flights when the trade winds are low.

Classic stuff man.... :rotfl:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top