WHAT IF the Earth was Actually Flat?

[Joe King]

which of course you cannot prove, but are perfectly comfortable assuming, likely because your NASA heroes told you so.

That's every bit as weird as the fact that it's 1/400th the size of the sun and also just so ha

They don't have to tell me shit. Just walk outside and look at it at different times of the Month. It's round all the time.

Apparently you are one without eyes to see.

ppens to be 400x nearer...so that they both mysteriously appear to be the same size from the perspective of a human on Earth.

Coincidence.
...but it still has no bearing on whether or not the Earth is a sphere.

It's just more of your nonsense you have to believe in order to make sense of your flat Earth hokum.

 

[solarion]

Says the dude that invents silly theories to ignore the numerous problems with the ball Earth model...then refuses to ever discuss it again.

Could have been some truly great work joking...that magic air sphere momentum savings plan theory. Too bad you abandoned it without ever explaining away the problem for which you made it up. You should take pride in your ridiculous made up nonsense. lol

 

[Zed]

You poop on people from a great height, you don't ask any real questions.

<edited so as not to offend the sensitive flat earth intelligentsia - my apologies gentle folk>

 

[arminius]

^^^ I complained to the moderators about this morons language above, LOL, and guess who answered my complaint with a threat...

the fucking degeneracy is everywhere.

 

[BigJim#1-8]

 

[BarnacleBob]

^^^ I complained to the moderators about this morons language above, LOL, and guess who answered my complaint with a threat...

the fucking degeneracy is everywhere.

I'm interested, who answered your complaint???

 

[Bottom Feeder]

A neighbor and I watched the moon rise the other night when I stated I wished I knew what the moon really is. He confidently stated it was a space rock caught in Earth's gravitational orbit....

I responded by saying really, who told you that & why did they program you with that response... He started to become agitated with the question so I then asked.....

"Have you ever noticed the sun & the moon in the same sky during mid-day while the moon was waxing at not quite half-phase? One must ask & inquire based upon conventional beliefs brought to us by & thru scientism "Why is the moon only partially lit? If the moon is allegedly being lit by the sun which is in full view and close to it with nothing in-between and the moon is located at the 11:00 sky position with the sun located at the 2:00 position, then WHY isn't the moon fully illuminated and HOW can it only be lit less than fifty-percent (50%).... Why is the unlit portion of the moon the same color as the sky behind it? Thus seemingly the moon appears transparent.... !!! Hmmm... What really is the moon???"

He quickly changed the subject...

Jeeze, it's saturday and the puppets are off. I'll just have to break out the crayons to address this...

Earth, moon, sun — one day.
I'll work somethin up with the puppets next week for those of you who are still confused on this subject.

Oh, BTW, an easy to use Horizon Calculator

 

[Joe King]

Says the dude that invents silly theories to ignore the numerous problems with the ball Earth model...then refuses to ever discuss it again.

What kind of bullshitting liar are you? I already addressed that when I explained that I was merely trying to answer your idiotic question of "why can helicopters hover".

It was just another case of you grasping at straws in order to protect your inability to discern the true shape of the object you live on.

Also, be I right or wrong, over the years I have at least tried answering every wacko idea you've put forth on this subject.
....but you won't even address the problem(s) with your own so-called "evidence". Once it is shown that it's wrong, you ignore it and shift to yet another wacked out idea.

 

[solarion]

^^^ I complained to the moderators about this morons language above, LOL, and guess who answered my complaint with a threat...

the fucking degeneracy is everywhere.

I interact with that individual as seldom as possible. His participation in this thread is merely to lob insults with the intent to suppress conversation.

Jeeze, it's saturday and the puppets are off. I'll just have to break out the crayons to address this...

View attachment 234382

View attachment 234383

View attachment 234384​

Earth, moon, sun — one day.
I'll work somethin up with the puppets next week for those of you who are still confused on this subject.

Oh, BTW, an easy to use Horizon Calculator

Ummm...you seem to be ignoring a very obvious point. First, the moon's face is unchanging from the perspective of a human on Earth(the tidal lock excuse)...there would be no terminator line visible in your illustrations given that we're told the sun is 400x the size of the moon and 93m miles away from it. Ball Earth theory calls for parallel light rays from the sun...unlike your illustration.

Allegedly, the rays from the sun are parallel, unlike your illustration...so no, it doesn't make any sense and in no way compares to observation.

 

[Bottom Feeder]

Heh, heh, heh. Sol I see you failed remedial crayon drawing in grade school. The sun is always drawn like this:

You prolly stayed home that day.
BF

 

[solarion]

What kind of bullshitting liar are you? I already addressed that when I explained that I was merely trying to answer your idiotic question of "why can helicopters hover".

No need to get triggered slick, I was merely curious why you refuse to elaborate on your childish theory used to ignore a blatantly obvious problem with the air covered spinning mud ball model. 3 years and still you haven't addressed how this alleged "shedding" of momentum for later recovery can take place? This after we'd made so much progress with you FINALLY admitting an aircraft operating in your spinning air ball would violate Newton's laws of motion.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, if you'd like to claim these are not your words, then that's fine, but we both know you wrote this silly rubbish to ignore a problem with the air covered spinning space pear model. You don't elaborate on this incredible(bs) theory, because you know it's a crap theory with zero scientific basis and you'll get schooled if you do.

...sorta like how you glossed over the blatantly obvious problems with how wind can work on the air covered spinning mud ball model, as well as how you ignored the simple fact that air pressure changes with elevation would require increased grabbity magic to maintain angular momentum. You address the numerous problems with your precious air covered spinning space ball by spewing word salads with zero scientific basis and then claim you "explained" it. ...which is lulzy.

Heh, heh, heh. Sol I see you failed remedial crayon drawing in grade school. The sun is always drawn like this:

View attachment 234386​

You prolly stayed home that day.
BF

LOL Well I have worked tirelessly to forget all the crap I was taught to regurgitate in fool skool. :)

On the contrary, I'm a big fan of non-parallel solar ray concepts. In fact I find the "explanation" proposed by mainstream ballers for ignoring observable evidence with regard to the sun's apparent location to be very underwhelming(crepuscular rays). There's a video floating around taken from a high altitude balloon that shows a very bright hot spot on the top of a cloud that's very compelling, though naturally ballers have more excuses why humans should distrust their own perceptions. Those excuses are allegedly based in science, but seldom hold up to scrutiny.

Edit: Found it.

 

[Joe King]

Oh, BTW, an easy to use Horizon Calculator

Apparently not easy enough for all. Lol

 

[Joe King]

No need to get triggered slick,

Not triggered, but rather was simply stating a truth.
As I said, be I right or wrong on a particular answer, at least I have tried to address your ideas.

You on the other hand have never uttered a word about that pic of Chicago and why water appears to partially block the view.

The only thing anyone can figure, is that you cannot address it because there is no way to explain using your flat Earth ideas why the water does that.

So as far as I am concerned, you are a total and complete hypocrite. You demand answers from others when you think they are wrong, but will not provide the same to those who see fault in your "proof" of the Earth being flat.

silly rubbish

Says the guy who is the King of silly mind polluting rubbish. Lol

 

[Bottom Feeder]

I'm a big fan of non-parallel solar ray concepts.

OK, back to the crayons...
Inna dark room with a hole in the wall
a light is turned on in the other room
The light only goes in parallel lines through the hole?
No, I think it's more like this:

 

[solarion]

That horizon calculator shows the same thing as the rest, it's just a bit simpler to enter data and offers less granularity in the displayed results. Even so the distance to horizon is 3.5 miles at an elevation of 8 feet. Yet when confronted with a photo that clearly shows objects several times further away, ball proponents...as usual...claim observation is "wrong" and should be ignored.

3.5 < 10.10 last I checked and the horizon is very clearly even further. The response from ballers? ...buh buh buh...refraction!

So once again joking, exactly how far can light bend around your air covered spinning water fruit? At every opportunity you claim observational evidence is "wrong" and the questionable spinning air ball covered space/time pear model theory is "fact", but you serially fail to explain away the many problems with the model where it clearly contradicts observation.

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. ~Richard Feynman

Now you claim Professor Feynman is wrong...claiming arbitrary "theories" you refuse to elaborate upon. What you're doing joking is defending a religious based belief structure...not scientific fact.

 

[Bottom Feeder]

Apparently not easy enough for all. Lol

Uhn, but the calculator says the same thing sol says: 3.5 miles.

BF

oh — nevermind
sorry sol

 

[solarion]

OK, back to the crayons...
Inna dark room with a hole in the wall
a light is turned on in the other room
The light only goes in parallel lines through the hole?
No, I think it's more like this:

View attachment 234393​

I don't have a big problem with that concept, however humans truly do not know how light works. Seemingly simple questions like "is light a wave or a particle" are often met with spooky answers like "yes...depending on whether or no a consciousness is observing it".

 

[Bottom Feeder]

is light a wave or a particle

Yeah, that's always bothered me too.

 

[Joe King]

Yet when confronted with a photo that clearly shows objects several times further away,

Atmospheric refraction is the answer to why we can see what we see in your pic.

You may not like that answer, but it is in fact an answer.

So why can't you even attempt an answer as to why the water partially blocks the view in your pic of Chicago?

So once again joking, exactly how far can light bend around your air covered spinning water fruit?

It varies based on local conditions at the time.
Is the weather the exact same everyday? No, it is not. Different conditions result in different amounts of visibility.

A person would have to be mentally deficient (ie:retarded) to not realize that.

Are you capable of realizing that weather conditions change, resulting in different amounts of visibility day by day?

Even the moron flat Earther who took that pic acknowledges that fact.
....but you try to pass of an anomalous situation as being the normal situation.

Imho, only an inherently dishonest person would do that.

 

[Joe King]

Uhn, but the calculator says the same thing sol says: 3.5 miles.

BF

oh — nevermind
sorry sol

Yet he seems incapable of using one in order to determine how much of an object beyond the horizon will be exposed above the horizon.

I used a horizon calculator to determine how much of downtown Chicago is hidden behind the horizon in @solarion 's pic he posted.
Using one for that purpose seems lost on him.

 

[newmisty]

What kind of bullshitting liar are you?

A very persistent & consistent one

 

[solarion]

Nice. You two are obviously more comfortable name calling than discussing anything relevant to the thread. lol

How does wind work on the spinning air covered mud ball model? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
What is gravity? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
How can gas pressure exist in direct contact with a vacuum? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
How does an aircraft traversing the air sphere maneuver given the laws of motion? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
How can humans on Earth observe objects further than would be expected? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"

Don't question the ball Earth model...as it triggers some very sensitive folk. Some even pull stupid theories from their asses to ignore obvious problems with their own beliefs, then call others liars for pointing out the obvious problems with their non-scientific theories. Sad really, but keep your belief structures and don't ask any questions if it makes you feel better. Just don't expect me to give a damn about your feelings.

 

[Bottom Feeder]

OK, more crayon work here...

So who now was the trigonometric math whizard?
Does this work right? Or are the gravity monkeys messing with light again?

BF

 

[Joe King]

Nice. You two are obviously more comfortable name calling than discussing anything relevant to the thread. lol

I sincerely apologize for having intruded into your domain.

 

[solarion]

Official spinning space ball theory is that the sun is an average of 93m miles from Earth(1AU)...a number arrived at over the course of millennia. This "official" distance has varied wildly over time and has been repeatedly changed(last in the 1940s), though NOW pseudoscience claims they have it zeroed in. Given that questionable cosmological model, the angle of photons from the sun perceived on Earth relative to one another would be nearly indistinguishable from parallel.

Given that, a hot spot on Earth should be impossible, as it implies a "focusing" of energy...or non-parallel rays. Doubtless a ball Earth theory defender would reach into their worn out excuse book and claim...refraction. Like gravity, refraction is a nebulous and inane excuse to ignore observational evidence, though it often sounds reasonable to people that don't spend any time thinking about how the claim affects other claims.

...like the speed of light being constant.

 

[solarion]

How can individual A hear individual B in the above illustration?

Question. If Earth is an air covered pear shaped spheroid rotating West to East 1037mph at the equator, and the speed of sound through air is 768mph at sea level...then how can humans communicate verbally on the surface of said spinning space pear? Given that sound travels through a medium, if that medium is moving at 1037mph(mach 1 +269mph) in the opposite direction...then how can that work?

 

[Joe King]

the angle of photons from the sun perceived on Earth relative to one another would be nearly indistinguishable from parallel.

Until they hit the atmosphere. It's a well known fact that as light enters a different object or substance that has a different refractive density, that the path it takes, changes.

Have you never noticed how a straw looks in a glass of water? Or is that invisible to you too?

 

[newmisty]

Nice. You two are obviously more comfortable name calling than discussing anything relevant to the thread. lol

How does wind work on the spinning air covered mud ball model? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
What is gravity? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
How can gas pressure exist in direct contact with a vacuum? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
How does an aircraft traversing the air sphere maneuver given the laws of motion? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"
How can humans on Earth observe objects further than would be expected? "STFU, what are you, stupid!?!"

Don't question the ball Earth model...as it triggers some very sensitive folk. Some even pull stupid theories from their asses to ignore obvious problems with their own beliefs, then call others liars for pointing out the obvious problems with their non-scientific theories. Sad really, but keep your belief structures and don't ask any questions if it makes you feel better. Just don't expect me to give a damn about your feelings.

Stating objective facts isn't "name calling" .

 

[Joe King]

Given that, a hot spot on Earth should be impossible, as it implies a "focusing" of energy...or non-parallel rays.

Only if one limits their thinking to the idea that the Earth must be flat.

On the surface of a ball, the Sun's rays, when measured at the surface, are less concentrated the further North or South one goes.

See how the same amount of light hits a larger area in the North in the above pic?
Less light equals less energy (ie:heat) delivered by that light.
....but I realize this is all lost on you, as you have convinced yourself that the Earth is flat. Which is why you must also believe that gravity doesn't exist, space isn't real and that atmospheric refraction is a fairy tale.
edited to add: and why you wonder about why helicopters can hover.

 

[solarion]

Ah, so your "explanation" is that the alleged "air sphere" is bending light(changing its speed) causing a focusing effect AND that the speed of light is constant as Einstein hypothesized? ...and/or the the imaginary stick through the Earth called an "axis" upon which it allegedly rotates is tilted at 23.5 degrees and therefore...hotspot.

...and this alleged "air sphere" that allegedly magically rotates with the mud ball Earth is how thick? ...and grabbity magic allegedly maintains this synchronous rotation throughout despite a reduction in mass as one moves away from the center of mass? That concept directly contradicts gravitational theory.

How thick is Earth's alleged "atmosphere". Pick one...

A) 51 miles
B) 62 miles
C) 73 miles
D) 100 miles?
E) 249 miles?
F) 300 miles?
G) 6,214 miles?
H) 22,236 miles?
I) 390,000 miles?

Is the ISS within Earth's "air sphere"? ...is the moon? Has a human EVER left Earth's "air sphere"? Does anybody have any ACTUAL concrete data on the spinning space ball model? ...or is everything just changed on a near daily basis? Hell, they cannot even settle on a shape of the Earth itself. lol

The trouble with stacking theoretical bs upon more theoretical bs to support a "model" is that it requires increasingly nonsensical gibberish to sustain itself.

Until they hit the atmosphere. It's a well known fact that as light enters a different object or substance that has a different refractive density, that the path it takes, changes.

Which is a word salad that means simply: THE SPEED OF LIGHT CHANGED.

Is the speed of light constant? ...or is general/speshul relativity complete bullshit?

 

[solarion]

edited to add: and why you wonder about why helicopters can hover.

Uh no, I used a hypothetical argument involving a hovering helicopter to completely destroy you in an intellectual debate. :) That's why you keep ignoring me when I post links to the conversation.

That discussion is why you eventually invented a stupid theory with momentum being "shed" and then later "reclaimed" to avoid admitting that aircraft moving through the alleged "air sphere" routinely violate Newton's laws of motion. ...but thank you for once again displaying your rampant intellectual dishonesty. lol

Space, What is it?

Of course the air pressure in the cabin doesn't rise, but it rises relative to the outside. Yes, that is in fact true. It rises in relative pressure, but not in absolute pressure. ...but that's not how what you wrote came across. If you fill a container with air in our atmosphere and then take...

www.goldismoney2.com

 

[Joe King]

Ah, so your "explanation" is that the Earth is in fact a sphere?

Yes, exactly!
...and fify

 

[Joe King]

That discussion is why you eventually invented a stupid theory with momentum being "shed" and then later "reclaimed" to avoid admitting that aircraft moving through the alleged "air sphere" routinely violate Newton's laws of motion. ...but thank you for once again displaying your rampant intellectual dishonesty. lol

Again, I was merely trying to answer you brain dead asinine question about helicopters. There's no dishonesty there at all.

At least I didn't ignore you. So why do you ignore my comments pointing out the fatal flaw in your pic of Chicago?

Use your flat Earth bs to explain why water is blocking part of the view.

 

[newmisty]

Uh no, I used a hypothetical argument involving a hovering helicopter to completely destroy you in an intellectual debate. :) That's why you keep ignoring me when I post links to the conversation.

That discussion is why you eventually invented a stupid theory with momentum being "shed" and then later "reclaimed" to avoid admitting that aircraft moving through the alleged "air sphere" routinely violate Newton's laws of motion. ...but thank you for once again displaying your rampant intellectual dishonesty. lol

View attachment 234412

Space, What is it?

Of course the air pressure in the cabin doesn't rise, but it rises relative to the outside. Yes, that is in fact true. It rises in relative pressure, but not in absolute pressure. ...but that's not how what you wrote came across. If you fill a container with air in our atmosphere and then take...

www.goldismoney2.com

1 clear & simple questions for you sol:

Please, in as succinct a manner as you can, explain in simple terms your understanding as to the size and shape of "the Earth" and what causes the seasons and hemispheric differences between the USA and Australia based upon your data?

 

[Joe King]

The trouble with stacking theoretical bs upon more theoretical bs to support a "model" is that it requires increasingly nonsensical gibberish to sustain itself.

That's what you do with your flat Earth crapola.

To say the Earth is flat you gotta suspend reality and believe that....
No such thing as space
rockets can't work
Einstein was wrong
Gravity doesn't exist
helicopters can't hover
...and about a dozen other wacko beliefs.

While knowing that the Earth is a sphere requires no suspension of reality in order to believe it.

 

[newmisty]

That's what you do with your flat Earth crapola.

To say the Earth is flat you gotta suspend reality and believe that....
No such thing as space
rockets can't work
Einstein was wrong
Gravity doesn't exist
helicopters can't hover
...and about a dozen other wacko beliefs.

While knowing that the Earth is a sphere requires no suspension of reality in order to believe it.

Not to mention those involved in sailing, flying, photography, communications, warfare, astronomy, cosmology, meteorology, geology and just plain folks growing their fruits & vege-tables, would all be in on an elaborate conspiracy to fake the planets physics and it's profound objective effects on everything, everywhere, since always.

 

[arminius]

I'm interested, who answered your complaint???

Zed, who stated in a pm, "I have your number now."

What exactly do you mean you have my number, zed?

If that's not a threat, what is...

But regarding this fascinating thread, I'm amazed how much I'm learning but what continues to amaze me is that some folks here, the "ballers" are so rabidly sure of their belief and are getting their asses kicked by the actual facts. So they relie on character assignation. That's when you know they're trolls. They have some other reason to do that.

And for sure none of us can really know unless we get in a rocket ship and actually circumnavigate the planet. That's not doable for pretty much all of us. So we can't possibly really know, and that's all Sol is saying while proposing some fascinating information.

So, why are these folks so sure about something they can never prove, but accept on faith? IMHO, What that might get to is where is all that money going to the space agencies really going. Space agencies that have been spewing fictions about their accomplishments, and diverting the cash elsewhere, kinda like all the dough being made on a totally fake pandemic today. These same folks are also positive that planes cannot spew chemtrails. Which perhaps IMHO is where some of this poison viri is coming from...

What does that tell you about these folks.

BTW, I'm old, and I've had a good life. I'm not afraid to die.

Are you?

 

[BarnacleBob]

Zed, who stated in a pm, "I have your number now."

What exactly do you mean you have my number, zed?

If that's not a threat, what is...

But regarding this fascinating thread, I'm amazed how much I'm learning but what continues to amaze me is that some folks here, the "ballers" are so rabidly sure of their belief and are getting their asses kicked by the actual facts. So they relie on character assignation. That's when you know they're trolls. They have some other reason to do that.

And for sure none of us can really know unless we get in a rocket ship and actually circumnavigate the planet. That's not doable for pretty much all of us. So we can't possibly really know, and that's all Sol is saying while proposing some fascinating information.

So, why are these folks so sure about something they can never prove, but accept on faith? IMHO, What that might get to is where is all that money going to the space agencies really going. Space agencies that have been spewing fictions about their accomplishments, and diverting the cash elsewhere, kinda like all the dough being made on a totally fake pandemic today. These same folks are also positive that planes cannot spew chemtrails. Which perhaps IMHO is where some of this poison viri is coming from...

What does that tell you about these folks.

BTW, I'm old, and I've had a good life. I'm not afraid to die.

Are you?

No, I'm old too... Not afraid to go, reconciled the end of my days years ago.

Indeed, the debates & arguments from the various camps are very, very interesting...

The nukes & so called space age, all fake... Where did all the money go. Great ??? .....

 

[Joe King]

And for sure none of us can really know unless we get in a rocket ship and actually circumnavigate the planet.

BS

You can do it in a plane too. Just go up high enough to see the curvature. No need to go around the World.

Or you could just go outside and do an experiment that anyone could do, and prove it for yourself that the Earth's surface has curvature consistent with that of a 7901 mile sphere.

Or you could look at sol's pic of Chicago to see it too, Are you capable of looking at a picture?

 

[arminius]

Bullshit, a pic isn't even legal in a traffic camera.

Oops, don't mean to get caught up in this, I'm done with this thread, you ballers can keep masturbating your venom.

We're getting dragged into all kinds of fuckery these days, aren't we.