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

[patrick jane]

the bottom always disappears first, anyone can go to the ocean and se this. hard to argue against this one, im sure your going to say these perpendicular angle slants or whatever cause such an affect at such a distibce and all the rest, im going to argue common sense, hold up a basketball, run a jelly bean on it going away from you, you create the exact same affect. a child can figure this one out.

http://convexearth.org
Seven scientific experiments were carried out, including the geodesic, which consisted in measuring the distances between the bases and tops of a building in Torres (RS) and another in Natal (RN), with a distance of 3,050 km between them. reference to sea level. "The measurements were the same.

If the Earth were spherical, the measure of the distance between the bases should be smaller than the measurement between the upper parts of the buildings because they would be following the curvature of the Earth, "explains Urandir de Oliveira, founder of Dakila Research.

Engineers from the National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) participated in the action.

A long-range laser was used to measure the flatness and leveling of the waters at the Três Marias Dam (MG); in Lagoa dos Patos (RS), on Lake Titicaca, Peru; and in the seas of Ilhabela (SP) and in the Strait of Gibraltar. The tests performed up to 35 km did not identify any curvature.

Experiments with refracting and reflecting telescopes have proved that boats do not disappear on the horizon, but we lost the ability to observe them due to an optical phenomenon.

This phenomenon was studied by the researchers, who formulated a new physical theory, which explains physically and mathematically how this works.

Experiments with plumbing (verticalization) and level (horizontalization) have proved that gravity does not exist, because the physical behavior of water is to seek its original form, that is, flatness. According to Urandir, what holds us firm to the ground is the MDPL (magnetism, density, pressure and light).

 

[Right Divider]

Yeah, that's pretty much what you do, smilies.

I present simple and incontrovertible facts that you cannot understand. :cigar::banana::luigi:K::drum::nori::Wamba::french:

 

[Bee1]

http://convexearth.org
Seven scientific experiments were carried out, including the geodesic, which consisted in measuring the distances between the bases and tops of a building in Torres (RS) and another in Natal (RN), with a distance of 3,050 km between them. reference to sea level. "The measurements were the same.

If the Earth were spherical, the measure of the distance between the bases should be smaller than the measurement between the upper parts of the buildings because they would be following the curvature of the Earth, "explains Urandir de Oliveira, founder of Dakila Research.

Engineers from the National Institute of Colonization and Agrarian Reform (INCRA) participated in the action.

A long-range laser was used to measure the flatness and leveling of the waters at the Três Marias Dam (MG); in Lagoa dos Patos (RS), on Lake Titicaca, Peru; and in the seas of Ilhabela (SP) and in the Strait of Gibraltar. The tests performed up to 35 km did not identify any curvature.

Experiments with refracting and reflecting telescopes have proved that boats do not disappear on the horizon, but we lost the ability to observe them due to an optical phenomenon.

This phenomenon was studied by the researchers, who formulated a new physical theory, which explains physically and mathematically how this works.

Experiments with plumbing (verticalization) and level (horizontalization) have proved that gravity does not exist, because the physical behavior of water is to seek its original form, that is, flatness. According to Urandir, what holds us firm to the ground is the MDPL (magnetism, density, pressure and light).

Our oceans bugle outward during full moon due to gravitial pull of moon,which is round.. All major planets are round so why would the earth be flat, and there will be no sunset or sunrise if the earth was flat and I can't believe in 2018 the someone thinks the earth is flat. Where the the sun go at night if the earth was flat. Where does the moon go during the day if the earth was flat.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

 

[Nathon Detroit]

All flying shows a flat stationary earth or we would not be having this debate.

That globe earth appeals to the sun to prove a moving globe is counter intuitive. Because we live on the earth one would think that we would be able to know the shape of it from it and not from moving sun, moon and stars over it.

View attachment 26304
https://www.metabunk.org/atmospheri...-the-eratosthenes-triangulation-method.t7801/
This debate site deals with sun and refraction for flat earth model.

--Dave

That doesn't answer my question.

You posted a pic showing the sun not much higher than the clouds. Therefore I asked... why then do we not see the sun closer to us when we fly above the clouds??

 

[Nathon Detroit]

The horizon line blocks what goes beyond it and is below it. Ships, landscapes, and cityscapes are perpendicular and never slant away from the viewer at distances which would be the case if there was a curve. Ships never disappear bow first as they should if the earth were curved.

Ships also disappear almost all at once in calm waters. If waves are high the bottom is hided even more.

--Dave

Dave you know that is a lie. You know that as ships sail into the distance the bottom portion of the ship is obscured by the horizon line. There are literally a million pictures and videos as well as our own personal experiences to prove this to be the case.

Your romance with this asinine flat-earth theory has turned you into a blubbering fool.

 

[Jacob]

Or maybe a flat circle, not a perfect circle though.

--Dave

no

a circle is two dimensional

what is accomplished by saying a circle is flat?

 

[Stuu]

Dave you know that is a lie. You know that as ships sail into the distance the bottom portion of the ship is obscured by the horizon line. There are literally a million pictures and videos as well as our own personal experiences to prove this to be the case.

Of course the pair of them know that. The thread is a joke, designed to be played on the righteous indigniants.

...which category I guess has to include me, since I played too. Although as DFT pointed out earlier, there is some interest value in how you would actually show the earth is a globe, given that it is not obvious to a casual observer on the ground.

But it's a different question to disprove a flat earth; that was done long ago in this thread.

Stuart

 

[patrick jane]

Of course the pair of them know that. The thread is a joke, designed to be played on the righteous indigniants.

...which category I guess has to include me, since I played too. Although as DFT pointed out earlier, there is some interest value in how you would actually show the earth is a globe, given that it is not obvious to a casual observer on the ground.

But it's a different question to disprove a flat earth; that was done long ago in this thread.

Stuart

Yeah, just ignore the fact that I just posted the results and a video released yesterday PROVING the earth is not a sphere. But yep, you proved flat earth wrong. :rotfl:

 

[Stuu]

But yep, you proved flat earth wrong.

I know. Many times over. But I have to modify what I said about it not being a very interesting conspiracy. In itself it's not a very interesting conspiracy, because it is so obviously nonsense that people could possibly conspire on that scale over that period of time, otherwise capitalism is a nonsense concept too. But it makes a change to consider the obviousness of the global earth as a variation on the usual YEC conspiracies that pop up so often.

Stuart

 

[patrick jane]

I know. Many times over. But I have to modify what I said about it not being a very interesting conspiracy. In itself it's not a very interesting conspiracy, because it is so obviously nonsense that people could possibly conspire on that scale over that period of time, otherwise capitalism is a nonsense concept too. But it makes a change to consider the obviousness of the global earth as a variation on the usual YEC conspiracies that pop up so often.

Stuart

That's hilarious coming from a guy that fully believes the biggest scams in "science" the big bang and evolution. Truly comical.

 

[patrick jane]

and its interesting how the ship disappears, it doesnt vanish all at once, it disappears from the bottom up, as if its slowly sinking into the sea. what would create such an illusion?

It doesn't disappear, it's called eyes and how they work.

 

[Right Divider]

It doesn't disappear, it's called eyes and how they work.

View attachment 26307

 

[DFT_Dave]

That doesn't answer my question.

You posted a pic showing the sun not much higher than the clouds. Therefore I asked... why then do we not see the sun closer to us when we fly above the clouds??

I didn't just put up a picture, I linked to another debate site on this so others could read it. I don't post just for you, I hope others read it. I don't know that we have any real knowledge about the sun, moon, or stars today. I'm not just content to have explained any one specific thing as "why then do we not see the sun closer to us when we fly above the clouds?" because maybe it does get closer, how do we know? When I'm being told that what I see is not what is, then everything about the cosmology of earth becomes a matter of faith in those who are telling what it is without my being able to confirm it. I study to see how all the major parts work together in a model. I created this thread in order to compare both models.

The globe model is not consistent with what we see and experience on earth. All so called proofs are coming from space as if we can know nothing of earth from earth which makes no sense.

Models of a dome that demonstrate how heavenly bodies move over flat earth are being explored and proposed. These models are more complex than the simple one often criticized for its inability to explain the path of stars in the southern region of earth and give a answer for the counter direction we see.

I almost have my head wrapped around both models. When I feel I have a grasp of both I will be able to make a fare decision as to which one make sense. Unlike most of you I want to see how both models answer the questions of what we see rather than just how one model works. I want the flat earth model to be debunked if it's not the truth. Debunking a false model of flat earth obviously proves nothing.

--Dave

 

[JudgeRightly]

I didn't just put up a picture, I linked to another debate site on this so others could read it. I don't post just for you, I hope others read it. I don't know that we have any real knowledge about the sun, moon, or stars today. I'm not just content to have explained any one specific thing as "why then do we not see the sun closer to us when we fly above the clouds?" because maybe it does get closer, how do we know? When I'm being told that what I see is not what is, then everything about the cosmology of earth becomes a matter of faith in those who are telling what it is without my being able to confirm it. I study to see how all the major parts work together in a model. I created this thread in order to compare both models.

The globe model is not consistent with what we see and experience on earth. All so called proofs are coming from space as if we can know nothing of earth from earth which makes no sense.

Models of a dome that demonstrate how heavenly bodies move over flat earth are being explored and proposed. These models are more complex than the simple one often criticized for its inability to explain the path of stars in the southern region of earth and give a answer for the counter direction we see.

I almost have my head wrapped around both models. When I feel I have a grasp of both I will be able to make a fare decision as to which one make sense. Unlike most of you I want to see how both models answer the questions of what we see rather than just how one model works. I want the flat earth model to be debunked if it's not the truth. Debunking a false model of flat earth obviously proves nothing.

--Dave

Dave, quick question, did you say you had a Nikon P900?

 

[DFT_Dave]

the bottom always disappears first, anyone can go to the ocean and se this. hard to argue against this one, im sure your going to say these perpendicular angle slants or whatever cause such an affect at such a distibce and all the rest, im going to argue common sense, hold up a basketball, run a jelly bean on it going away from you, you create the exact same affect. a child can figure this one out.

The old jelly bean test, wow, how could I have missed that one. I surrender.

The obvious perpendicular aspect of ships and buildings, etc. in the distance is proof that there is no curvature of the earth if ever there was a singular proof.

View attachment 26308 View attachment 26309

This pic which is supposed to demonstrate a curved earth is contradicted by perfectly perpendicular buildings that should look slanted away from the viewer.

That the ground/water appears to raises to our eye level and hides the bottom of the city makes more sense and explains why the buildings are not slanted away from us. There are certainly atmospheric and possible refraction aspects to this, and even height of the waves will determine how much is hidden from view.

The other argument is that if we see the curvature clearly evident in front of us then why don't we see the curvature from side to side along the horizon? If what we see from left to right over a distance is straight and flat than we must conclude that the same distance in front of us is also as straight and as flat.

Notice that the bottom of the buildings are still seen in perspective which is again evidence of and a prediction of how we see things on a plane not how see things on a curve.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave, quick question, did you say you had a Nikon P900?

No, I don't have one but I have priced them. The new P1000 is coming soon and I may wait for that one instead.

--Dave

 

[patrick jane]

I suppose none of the flat earth detractors watched the video on the previous page where they PROVED that earth is NOT a sphere. Catch up guys, it's 2018. It was released yesterday and had over 100,000 views in two languages in less than 12 hours. The debate is pretty much over. It' not a flat earth documentary, just scientific proof. That's what the globe folks want isn't it? Science?

 

[patrick jane]

[h=1]The Farce of Gravity - A Closer Look at Cavendish's Balls[/h]3 minutes - starts funny but it shows a lot of math

 

[CabinetMaker]

The Farce of Gravity - A Closer Look at Cavendish's Balls

3 minutes - starts funny but it shows a lot of math

According to your video, the combined gravitational pull of the sun and the moon during an exclpise is 0.41740756 newtons. That amounts to 1.501 ounces. A 70kg person weighs 2469.177 ounces.

 

[Stuu]

That's hilarious coming from a guy that fully believes the biggest scams in "science" the big bang and evolution. Truly comical.

I am one of those who have demonstrated that flat earthing and creationism are scams, but you haven't demonstrated that evolution or the Big Bang are scams.

Stuart