WHAT IF the Earth was Actually Flat?

[DodgebyDave]

 

[solarion]

Thank you dave! I love $10,000,000,000 cartoons, that take 26 years to make. lol

Lowest quality and least cost efficient sci-fi studio in world history. ...must now go worship NASA.

Is it me...or were special effects from Jedi better? ...in 1983?

 

[DodgebyDave]

 

[solarion]

Hey, thanks for the new NASA cartoons! I love sci-fi content. Not so sure about that pink color scheme NASA chose for their JWST sci-fi series, but I'm sure they don't want to be perceived as non-inclusive while they choose the least qualified overpaid sci-fi content creators available. Nothing says LBGTQIA+ friendly like $10b stupid looking pink space telescope cartoons.

Yes...Lagrangian mechanics. Not generally a real popular topic with ballers whose religion depends on their NOT recognizing the existence of the three body problem that makes their entire silly cosmological model based upon uni-directional gravitational "force"(not force) impossible.

NASA(government) worship...now it's not merely a religion...it's also cognitive dissonance in its most pure form.

Naturally one would have to actually understand advanced mathematics to recognize the irony of citing references to Lagrange points in support of NASA sci-fi.

In other corrupt goobermint worship news...

 

[solarion]

Solar, I know it's disgusting but some people are just into big balls, it's a sickness.

Thanks...I keep telling gf that mine are neither sick nor disgusting. lol

 

[BarnacleBob]

There are actual pictures of the planet or the planets actual shape, as the NASholes & their satellites have never traveled beyond low earth orbit...

NASA - Understanding Space Radiation

 

[DodgebyDave]

 

[solarion]

Ya know Dave. I paused your German death rocket video precisely at the point the narrator claims:

"The curvature of Earth is astonishingly apparent in this still picture from the film."(52s)

I then drew a line across the allegedly "astonishingly apparent curvature" with a line tool...and have to say that I disagree. Not only is it not "astonishingly apparent", it appears to be completely absent. Guess they hadn't perfected their fish-eye lenses yet eh?

If we're talking German WW2 era tech...perhaps we should discuss the eyewitness testimony of a German scientist who went up in a balloon. Like professor Auguste Piccard, who in an interview for popular science in August of 1931(pg 23) said "It seemed a flat disk with upturned edge".

Popular Science

Popular Science gives our readers the information and tools to improve their technology and their world. The core belief that Popular Science and our readers share: The future is going to be better, and science and technology are the driving forces that will help make it better.

books.google.ca

 

[ZZZZZ]

How socialism is like the Flat Earth Theory​

By Robert Arvay

Arguments for the Flat Earth Theory and socialist doctrine share many aspects in common. At first glance, to a casual observer, the Earth really does seem flat, and for most practical purposes, that observation is sufficient to guide our activities locally. Only when one travels far enough to change time zones, or to experience a change in the duration of daylight, does the flatness theory begin to seriously break down on the local level.

Most of us live in a family where socialist, even communist principles seem to prevail. In my family, we all produce according to our ability, and we each receive according to our need, at least within our means. Who knew that Karl Marx got it so right? Why can't the same principle apply just as well to society at large? Why can't we travel 12,000 miles east or west and not notice that we have to reset our clocks between A.M. and P.M.?

A more than cursory glance at websites promoting the Flat Earth Theory provides an amazing insight into how strongly a false idea can seem to be supported by fact. Its proponents can explain everything about the issues raised above, such as time differences, and even why the Earth looks round from space — everything, that is, if you take their arguments piecemeal, one at a time. It's like a game of whack-a-mole, where as soon as you defeat one item of contention, another one pops up. Yes, the Earth may look round from space, but then, what about this? What about that?
The bottom line is that when one compares flat versus round theories of the planet, the proposal that the Earth is round does not need to be constantly propped and patched up with every new observation. Occam's Razor, the principle of using the simplest available explanation that is consistent with all the observations, applies.

Likewise, the principle of "freedom with personal responsibility" suffices to form the basis of a successful society, successful in economics, in government, and in morality. Taken as a coherent whole, the idea does not need to be continually revised in response to every "yeah, but what about" argument that the whack-a-mole socialists present.

Socialist arguments seem persuasive to so many people, only because nearly every flaw in our society can be traced, ironically, to the fact that we have become far more of a socialist nation than a free one. Every freedom we lose causes further social problems, but the popularized blame goes not to lack of freedom, but to lack of socialism, the source of the problem. Medical practice in past centuries included the treatment of anemia, a blood deficiency, by draining even more blood from the weakened patient, prolonging the ailment, and often leading to death. Likewise for socialism.

To be sure, there is no purely economic policy that can heal our nation from its present, and accelerating, decline. Even if socialism really did make everyone wealthier and more economically equal, even then, without the component of personal morality, the bloodletting would be fatal. Adherence to moral principles is at least as vital to preserving and advancing our nation as any economic policy.

The abandonment of those moral principles has sown chaos. There are now so many implementations of immoral practices, legally enforced, that once again, the whack-a-mole effect has made itself visible. For example, the myth that men and women are equivalent to each other has been shown to be ludicrous by the implementation of so-called transgender policies. It cannot be had both ways. Somewhere a comic has said that yes, women can do anything that men can do, so long as those women are men. That has become the leftist answer to the iconic and ridiculous question, "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"

While there is room for sincere debate about specific details regarding morality, there is no sustainable argument against the general concept — that the best social basis of society is the family, comprising one man, one woman, joined for life, and their children. Tolerance at the fringes for variations might not threaten the society, but we have gone so far beyond that, that we have now become a zoo of outright freakish expressions of sexual perversions, each of them praised and celebrated by the social left as a basic human right, which all of us are obligated to support, under threat of losing our livelihoods, and regardless of our own moral principles.

The left has plenty of persuasive arguments to oppose the position presented here. Indeed, leftists' arguments are almost as persuasive as those of the Flat Earthers.

How socialism is like the Flat Earth Theory

Arguments for the Flat Earth Theory and socialist doctrine share many aspects in common. At first glance, to a casual observer, the Earth really does seem flat, and for most practical purposes, that observation is sufficient to guide our a...

www.americanthinker.com

.
.

 

[solarion]

The bottom line is that when one compares flat versus round theories of the planet, the proposal that the Earth is round does not need to be constantly propped and patched up with every new observation.

Oh the irony. :) If not for that darn pesky observational evidence...ball Earth theory could finally move beyond sci-fi and into accepted fact. Well that and gravitational theory lunacy.

...and maths that govern spheroids. Nobody should be allowed to compare observational evidence to mathematical expectations. For any reason. 8 inches per mile^2 is just too complicated. Plus actual science is so 19th century.

...and water not always wrapping itself around spheroids in nature, save where ball Earth proponents need it to for their wild theories.

 

[BarnacleBob]

How socialism is like the Flat Earth Theory​

By Robert Arvay

Arguments for the Flat Earth Theory and socialist doctrine share many aspects in common. At first glance, to a casual observer, the Earth really does seem flat, and for most practical purposes, that observation is sufficient to guide our activities locally. Only when one travels far enough to change time zones, or to experience a change in the duration of daylight, does the flatness theory begin to seriously break down on the local level.

Most of us live in a family where socialist, even communist principles seem to prevail. In my family, we all produce according to our ability, and we each receive according to our need, at least within our means. Who knew that Karl Marx got it so right? Why can't the same principle apply just as well to society at large? Why can't we travel 12,000 miles east or west and not notice that we have to reset our clocks between A.M. and P.M.?

A more than cursory glance at websites promoting the Flat Earth Theory provides an amazing insight into how strongly a false idea can seem to be supported by fact. Its proponents can explain everything about the issues raised above, such as time differences, and even why the Earth looks round from space — everything, that is, if you take their arguments piecemeal, one at a time. It's like a game of whack-a-mole, where as soon as you defeat one item of contention, another one pops up. Yes, the Earth may look round from space, but then, what about this? What about that?
The bottom line is that when one compares flat versus round theories of the planet, the proposal that the Earth is round does not need to be constantly propped and patched up with every new observation. Occam's Razor, the principle of using the simplest available explanation that is consistent with all the observations, applies.

Likewise, the principle of "freedom with personal responsibility" suffices to form the basis of a successful society, successful in economics, in government, and in morality. Taken as a coherent whole, the idea does not need to be continually revised in response to every "yeah, but what about" argument that the whack-a-mole socialists present.

Socialist arguments seem persuasive to so many people, only because nearly every flaw in our society can be traced, ironically, to the fact that we have become far more of a socialist nation than a free one. Every freedom we lose causes further social problems, but the popularized blame goes not to lack of freedom, but to lack of socialism, the source of the problem. Medical practice in past centuries included the treatment of anemia, a blood deficiency, by draining even more blood from the weakened patient, prolonging the ailment, and often leading to death. Likewise for socialism.

To be sure, there is no purely economic policy that can heal our nation from its present, and accelerating, decline. Even if socialism really did make everyone wealthier and more economically equal, even then, without the component of personal morality, the bloodletting would be fatal. Adherence to moral principles is at least as vital to preserving and advancing our nation as any economic policy.

The abandonment of those moral principles has sown chaos. There are now so many implementations of immoral practices, legally enforced, that once again, the whack-a-mole effect has made itself visible. For example, the myth that men and women are equivalent to each other has been shown to be ludicrous by the implementation of so-called transgender policies. It cannot be had both ways. Somewhere a comic has said that yes, women can do anything that men can do, so long as those women are men. That has become the leftist answer to the iconic and ridiculous question, "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"

While there is room for sincere debate about specific details regarding morality, there is no sustainable argument against the general concept — that the best social basis of society is the family, comprising one man, one woman, joined for life, and their children. Tolerance at the fringes for variations might not threaten the society, but we have gone so far beyond that, that we have now become a zoo of outright freakish expressions of sexual perversions, each of them praised and celebrated by the social left as a basic human right, which all of us are obligated to support, under threat of losing our livelihoods, and regardless of our own moral principles.

The left has plenty of persuasive arguments to oppose the position presented here. Indeed, leftists' arguments are almost as persuasive as those of the Flat Earthers.

How socialism is like the Flat Earth Theory

Arguments for the Flat Earth Theory and socialist doctrine share many aspects in common. At first glance, to a casual observer, the Earth really does seem flat, and for most practical purposes, that observation is sufficient to guide our a...

www.americanthinker.com

.
.

 

[solarion]

People eat this pseudo-scientific horseshit up with a spoon. lol

 

[solarion]

 

[BarnacleBob]

If the Sun is 93 mm miles away and gives the earth its light, then why is space black?

 

[newmisty]

https://goldismoney2.com/threads/astronomy-pictures-thread.278265/page-31#post-2356764

 

[newmisty]

Flat Earth Busted​

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Essential Elements of the Globe Model​

I created this to establish a baseline of the Globe/Heliocentric model for discussions.

When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree with this model they are being dishonest.

• Earth is roughly an oblate spheroid described in the WGS-84 Reference Model having:
  ellipsoidal flattening (f) = 1/298.257223560
  equatorial radius (a) = 6378137 m
  polar radius (b) = a - a f
• Earth distance from the Sun varies from
  147095000 km at Perihelion and
  152100000 km at Aphelion
• Earth mass is 5.97237×10²⁴ kg giving a surface acceleration of 9.807 m/s²
• Earth rotates once per 23h 56m 4.100s (sidereal day, 23.934472 hr)
  Over a year, the average solar noon-to-noon time is 24h (synodic day)
• Earth obits the Sun every 365.25635535 days, and makes 365.25635535 (+1) sidereal rotations
• Moon radius is approximately 1740 km and the distance from Earth varies from 356,500 km at perigee and 406,700 km at apogee
• Sun radius is 696,342 km (±65 km) with a mass of 1.9885×10³⁰ kg (330,000x Earth)
• Earth's Obliquity (axial tilt relative to the ecliptic, or orbital, plane) varies slightly over time, as of 2019-01-01 it is ~23.4368°
• Since Gravity is proportional to mass and is a mutual attraction of ALL mass it does not "emanate" from the center of anything but rather we can treat rigid objects as a single mass in the simple case.
  
  From this principle, "down" *MEANS* closer to the center of the Earth.
  
  Someone on the other side of the Earth is not "upside down".
  
  Level is an equipotential of gravity.
• Refraction exists, and is pretty well understood, but accurately measuring the atmosphere over tens or hundreds of miles is not feasible. Under common field conditions, for shorter distances you can approximate the effect of refraction by assuming an Earth Radius of 15% larger than normal. This is a very simplistic assumption but is a good approximate when nothing else can be known.
  
  The problem for most long-range optical observations is that refraction can create a duct through which you can see substantial distances right over land or (more commonly) water. I'm sorry but this is just a FACT. The good news is that such views are usually highly distorted so we can identify when this is happening. However, the more common failure is harder to detect and that is cases of substantial looming which can cause distant objects to appear somewhat higher than normal. The setting sun is very commonly raised by about 34 arc minutes [see usno.navy.mil], meaning the sun has actually fully set when you see the lower limb reach your horizon. Flat Earthers need to either scientifically PROVE that this is false or stop lying about it. An easy way to observe this effect is to use a equatorial tracking mount with reasonably high-power optics (and a proper solar filter) follows the sun from about 2 hours before sunset. The tracking will be very accurate at first (and all day) and it will get slightly ahead of the Sun near sunset as the refraction increases and raises the Sun's apparent position. Measuring this shift is one way to measure the Refraction along that line-of-sight.
  
  The best way to avoid the worst variations of Refraction is to get up higher.
  
  Walter Bislin's Refraction Simulation

Atmospheric Refraction Phenomena

atmospheric refraction phenomena

aty.sdsu.edu

You don't win an argument when you create a strawman of the Model -- you LIE.


You can get the current axial tilt from timeanddate.com

And in "meme" form for sharing (minus the big Refraction Discussion)

Essential Elements of the Globe Model

I created this to establish a baseline of the Globe/Heliocentric model for discussions. When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree ...

flatearthbusted.blogspot.com

 

[BarnacleBob]

Flat Earth Busted​

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Essential Elements of the Globe Model​

I created this to establish a baseline of the Globe/Heliocentric model for discussions.

When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree with this model they are being dishonest.

• Earth is roughly an oblate spheroid described in the WGS-84 Reference Model having:
  ellipsoidal flattening (f) = 1/298.257223560
  equatorial radius (a) = 6378137 m
  polar radius (b) = a - a f
• Earth distance from the Sun varies from
  147095000 km at Perihelion and
  152100000 km at Aphelion
• Earth mass is 5.97237×10²⁴ kg giving a surface acceleration of 9.807 m/s²
• Earth rotates once per 23h 56m 4.100s (sidereal day, 23.934472 hr)
  Over a year, the average solar noon-to-noon time is 24h (synodic day)
• Earth obits the Sun every 365.25635535 days, and makes 365.25635535 (+1) sidereal rotations
• Moon radius is approximately 1740 km and the distance from Earth varies from 356,500 km at perigee and 406,700 km at apogee
• Sun radius is 696,342 km (±65 km) with a mass of 1.9885×10³⁰ kg (330,000x Earth)
• Earth's Obliquity (axial tilt relative to the ecliptic, or orbital, plane) varies slightly over time, as of 2019-01-01 it is ~23.4368°
• Since Gravity is proportional to mass and is a mutual attraction of ALL mass it does not "emanate" from the center of anything but rather we can treat rigid objects as a single mass in the simple case.
  
  From this principle, "down" *MEANS* closer to the center of the Earth.
  
  Someone on the other side of the Earth is not "upside down".
  
  Level is an equipotential of gravity.
• Refraction exists, and is pretty well understood, but accurately measuring the atmosphere over tens or hundreds of miles is not feasible. Under common field conditions, for shorter distances you can approximate the effect of refraction by assuming an Earth Radius of 15% larger than normal. This is a very simplistic assumption but is a good approximate when nothing else can be known.
  
  The problem for most long-range optical observations is that refraction can create a duct through which you can see substantial distances right over land or (more commonly) water. I'm sorry but this is just a FACT. The good news is that such views are usually highly distorted so we can identify when this is happening. However, the more common failure is harder to detect and that is cases of substantial looming which can cause distant objects to appear somewhat higher than normal. The setting sun is very commonly raised by about 34 arc minutes [see usno.navy.mil], meaning the sun has actually fully set when you see the lower limb reach your horizon. Flat Earthers need to either scientifically PROVE that this is false or stop lying about it. An easy way to observe this effect is to use a equatorial tracking mount with reasonably high-power optics (and a proper solar filter) follows the sun from about 2 hours before sunset. The tracking will be very accurate at first (and all day) and it will get slightly ahead of the Sun near sunset as the refraction increases and raises the Sun's apparent position. Measuring this shift is one way to measure the Refraction along that line-of-sight.
  
  The best way to avoid the worst variations of Refraction is to get up higher.
  
  Walter Bislin's Refraction Simulation

Atmospheric Refraction Phenomena

atmospheric refraction phenomena

aty.sdsu.edu

You don't win an argument when you create a strawman of the Model -- you LIE.


You can get the current axial tilt from timeanddate.com

And in "meme" form for sharing (minus the big Refraction Discussion)

Essential Elements of the Globe Model

I created this to establish a baseline of the Globe/Heliocentric model for discussions. When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree ...

flatearthbusted.blogspot.com

Almost everything posted as fact (supra) is actually unproven theories...

Is modern science polluted?

This article is from 2016 (found it in my old bookmark file) and whilst it isn't an exhaustive discussion about the matter, it outlines in enough detail what is probably the most fundamental problem with what passes for modern science...

www.goldismoney2.com

 

[solarion]

When Flat Earthers make assertions that disagree with this model they are being dishonest.

Which is not how science works. What you're implying here is that this government data is "settled science". There is no such thing as "settled science" ...there is only science and pseudoscience.

Here are 7 laser tests proving conclusively that the WGS 84 model is completely wrong.

WHAT IF the Earth was Actually Flat?

I've never claimed the Earth is flat. What a load of crap! All you do is post stuff that you say proves the Earth's surface has no curvature, but when called on it, you try to say, "I never said that!" .....and you wonder why I call you dishonest? You posted a pic of Chicago and said, "look...

www.goldismoney2.com

Actual science disproves the WGS 84 model. This happens on a daily basis when humans on Earth observe objects at distances too great to be consistent with the surface of a spheroid 7917 miles in diameter.

Gravity is proportional to mass and is a mutual attraction of ALL mass it does not "emanate" from the center of anything but rather we can treat rigid objects as a single mass in the simple case.

Are you 100% certain *THAT* is how you wish to define the word "gravity"? Doing so means you're adopting a provably wrong theory that was completely debunked by Albert Einstein in 1913. It was also debunked shortly after Newton's death in 1727 when it was observed that Newtonian gravity could not predict the motion of the planet Mercury.

If that is so, then tell me please at what speed your attractive "force" called gravity propagates.

You're welcome to go right on believing all the government propaganda you wish, just don't tell me it's science.

 

[BarnacleBob]

Which is not how science works. What you're implying here is that this government data is "settled science". There is no such thing as "settled science" ...there is only science and pseudoscience.

Here are 7 laser tests proving conclusively that the WGS 84 model is completely wrong.

WHAT IF the Earth was Actually Flat?

I've never claimed the Earth is flat. What a load of crap! All you do is post stuff that you say proves the Earth's surface has no curvature, but when called on it, you try to say, "I never said that!" .....and you wonder why I call you dishonest? You posted a pic of Chicago and said, "look...

www.goldismoney2.com

Actual science disproves the WGS 84 model. This happens on a daily basis when humans on Earth observe objects at distances too great to be consistent with the surface of a spheroid 7917 miles in diameter.


Are you 100% certain *THAT* is how you wish to define the word "gravity"? Doing so means you're adopting a provably wrong theory that was completely debunked by Albert Einstein in 1913. It was also debunked shortly after Newton's death in 1727 when it was observed that Newtonian gravity could not predict the motion of the planet Mercury.

If that is so, then tell me please at what speed your attractive "force" called gravity propagates.

You're welcome to go right on believing all the government propaganda you wish, just don't tell me it's science.

Its amazing to me that anyone could accept most of these theories as scientific facts.... some guy with a chalk board and computer states the sun is XXX miles now & XXX miles later... just guesses. The earths mass is this much, or the moon is this or that... all mathematical theories & pure guess work hoisted upon a gullible public to persistently create the illusion of the discovery of natural science & knowledge that keeps the funds flowing to these parasites....

For as long as they are distracted by the heavens, their mathematics wont be used to analyze the financial markets and .gov financial statements, etc... the parasites are kept busy creating theories of no consequence to the real PTB.

 

[the_shootist]

I let the people with the big brains figure out these epic theories. Me, I don't care what the Earth is shaped like. I have more pressing concerns than to spend time arguing about something like this with anyone!

 

[solarion]

I have more pressing concerns than to spend time arguing about something like this with anyone!

I think that's a common perspective. I think also, for many, it's merely an excuse to not challenge existing belief structures. If everything people think they know about the cosmology of our sol-ar system...and indeed the shape of Earth itself is a huge lie, then it will change people's perspectives dramatically imo.

Humans do not question what they think they know.

 

[BarnacleBob]

I think that's a common perspective. I think also, for many, it's merely an excuse to not challenge existing belief structures. If everything people think they know about the cosmology of our sol-ar system...and indeed the shape of Earth itself is a huge lie, then it will change people's perspectives dramatically imo.

Humans do not question what they think they know.

Well said....

 

[BarnacleBob]

The Epic Soviet Moon Landing Prank

 

[Silvergun]

Actual science disproves the WGS 84 model. This happens on a daily basis when humans on Earth observe objects at distances too great to be consistent with the surface of a spheroid 7917 miles in diameter.

WGS84 is what googleearth is based on. North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83)/North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) are very similar to the point they're almost identical.

Even though the file we use is called geoid12B they have to break down the states into "zones" because the data will produce inaccurate measurements without it. Each State has their own coordinate system with zone breakdown. California State Plane Coordinates Zone 3 is Marin County. Each zone is a flat model plane. If you have a project large enough that it stretches into another zone (miles long) you pick one zone and stick with it otherwise you will have disaterous results on the end.

Literally every project we convert to a horizontal distance and design everything as it is a perfect flat plane. All Civil Engineering and Surveying deliverables do that.

The only thing keeping this lie alive is cartoon photos of satelittes orbiting the earth and rockets to the moonz!!!! Satelites have balloons. Why does NASA purchase so much hellium?

NASA's Scientific Ballooning Program

NASA Awards Two Contracts for Supply of Gaseous, Liquid Helium

NASA has awarded contracts to Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. of Allentown, Pennsylvania, and Messer LLC of Bridgewater, New Jersey, to supply gaseous and liquid helium.

www.nasa.gov

I let the people with the big brains figure out these epic theories. Me, I don't care what the Earth is shaped like. I have more pressing concerns than to spend time arguing about something like this with anyone!

I like your posts shootist, but you come in here every other page and say the same damn thing and are answered each time on why this topic is important. Human origins, afterlife, consciousness, hiding the mental universe, etc. This topic is foundational for REALLY waking up...im not talking uniparty country bullshit. Stuff that really matters. Everything else is worldy bullshit noise. I for one would like to get out of this physical prison (meat suit and phsical world) some day...

 

[arminius]

I for one would like to get out of this physical prison (meat suit and phsical world) some day...

Oh you will, some day, I promise. Meanwhile the task is to do the best you can.

 

[solarion]

Each zone is a flat model plane.

Which is precisely what land surveyors have been saying forever. Most buildings do not have a large enough footprint to matter much in terms of Earth's alleged curvature as 8" per mile^2 simply doesn't mean much over a few hundred feet.

...now imagine designing a bridge that's miles long...a causeway...a train track stretching hundreds of miles. Suddenly 8" per mile^2 is absolutely something to take into account, unless one wishes to fail at engineering.

1911*1911*8 = 29,215,368(inches) / 12 = 2,434,614(feet) = 461.1 MILES OF CURVATURE.

People simply do not understand how great this lie is and how easily it is debunked.

 

[the_shootist]

I like your posts shootist, but you come in here every other page and say the same damn thing and are answered each time on why this topic is important. Human origins, afterlife, consciousness, hiding the mental universe, etc. This topic is foundational for REALLY waking up...im not talking uniparty country bullshit. Stuff that really matters. Everything else is worldy bullshit noise. I for one would like to get out of this physical prison (meat suit and phsical world) some day...

I stand corrected sir!

 

[Silvergun]

I stand corrected sir!

All good. I am not trying to be a d!ck. Carry on my friend.

 

[TAEZZAR]

 

[DodgebyDave]

ouch.....feel the sting?

Ahahahhahahaha the flats can't even get their stories straight!

WHICH MODEL IS IT!

 

[solarion]

Nobody knows Dave, how could they? Most think they know the shape of Earth, but really they just choose to believe what they've been told without question.

Ball Earth theory has numerous explanations of the shape of Earth as well. Neil Tyson says Earth is a chubby little pear. lol

 

[TAEZZAR]

Nobody knows Dave, how could they? Most think they know the shape of Earth, but really they just choose to believe what they've been told without question.

Ball Earth theory has numerous explanations of the shape of Earth as well. Neil Tyson says Earth is a chubby little pear. lol

YUP and a couple of other things come to mind, that we just accept because we were too young to question.

 

[engineear]

YUP and a couple of other things come to mind, that we just accept because we were too young to question.

Yeppers, and Snopes is based on facts! Trvth!

 

[DodgebyDave]

Just as I suspected, more shoe gaze from the flats!

 

[solarion]

Have you ever tested the shape of the ground upon which you walk? ...by chance Dave? Ever wonder why so many people "fall for" the flat Earth meme...or are you just more comfortable insulting them and feeling superior...somehow?

You do realize that you really do not have to take anyone's word for it. Either the ground exhibits curvature consistent with the exterior surface of a spheroid 24,901 miles in circumference or it does not. You could simply check...right?

That is, btw, the number one reason so many people lose confidence in the ball Earth model proponents. ...they checked.

 

[TAEZZAR]

Travelling between central Orygun & San Diego, I have noticed a difference in my gas mileage.
I have been doing this for 28
years, which pretty much takes care of variations of speed & other factors, in ether direction.
My overall MPG going south to San Diego is 18.7 MPG. My average coming home is 17.4 MPG.

I believe that I have figured out why this is, can you ?

 

[solarion]

You're more of a lead foot driving home? If Earth were a spheroid, your millage going South from Orygun would be worse than going home...as it'd be uphill. ...the way the Mississippi river allegedly flows.

Fortunately, most don't spend any time thinking about this stuff...because they "know" all about the shape of Earth. Nobody's going to tell them otherwise.

 

[Silvergun]

View attachment 240476

I know this is a joke post, but its somewhat interesting.

Using that picture...

Accepted as fact:
Water always keeps level, but the oceans bend around the "globe" because of "gravity".

Accepted as Comedy:
LOL noob! Water cant stick to a 90 degree angle because of "gravity".

I just find that to be funny. Seems we pick and choose what to "believe" just like politicians choose when the constitution suits them. Just an observation is all...

 

[TAEZZAR]

You're more of a lead foot driving home? If Earth were a spheroid, your millage going South from Orygun would be worse than going home...as it'd be uphill. ...the way the Mississippi river allegedly flows.

Fortunately, most don't spend any time thinking about this stuff...because they "know" all about the shape of Earth. Nobody's going to tell them otherwise.

Yes I am a "lead foot" - both direction's !
I think you miss read my post.
BTW that is an 1100 mile trip & I do it in 17 hours total time, portal to portal.

 

[solarion]

Travelling between central Orygun & San Diego, I have noticed a difference in my gas mileage.
I have been doing this for 28
years, which pretty much takes care of variations of speed & other factors, in ether direction.
My overall MPG going south to San Diego is 18.7 MPG. My average coming home is 17.4 MPG.

I believe that I have figured out why this is, can you ?

Why would traveling "South" be down hill when the direction of travel is toward the greater diameter of the alleged globe? Travel toward the equator would always be "up hill" on the exterior surface of a spheroid...local land features aside of course. Orygun to San Diego should be a near due South trip, depending on where in Oregon you're starting out. That being the case it's an uphill trip in the Northern hemisphere on the globe model.

As mentioned above, I think you intend this as a joke, but I think also you're turned around in your thinking...or perhaps you mistyped it? On it's surface it appears to be evidence against the mainstream globe model...though there are too many variables to draw any significant conclusions imo.

Perhpas you're referring to topography?

While topography is certainly a factor, it's far from decisive on a ball Earth model. The distance from Portland to San Diego is 1083 miles. 1083*1083*8 = 9383112(inches) / 12 = 781,926 feet of expected curvature. The shape of Earth, were it a spheroid 7917 miles in diameter at the equator, would overwhelm topographical features during such a trip...resulting in an uphill trip South and a downhill trip North.