Are Flat Earth believers CRAZY? Proof the EARTH is a ball to the non critical thinker [Video]

I can't agree more with your whole post.

Liar.

Plane windows are curved, and cause distortion.

Also, the horizon is ALWAYS at eye-level, no matter how high you are.

direct personal observation is the only thing that is provable...its the ones who cite the claims of others as science or fact that are on hillbilly logic

Video duration is 1minute

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

He never talked about difference day/night or time differences in other parts of the world.

Oh that was just showing the balloon commercial.

You might find more of what you are looking for in this video though: --> [link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

Tell me oh "know it all", why is the flat earth an absurd idea?

is it because it goes against every PICTURE you have seen of the "ball" earth?

is it because it goes against what you were taught by the religion of science?

is it because you cannot trust your own eyes and reason?

tell me on great in knowledge, why is it absurd?

produce evidence from your OWN observation and not science!!

deal with this:

a plane landing on a runway. are you aware that at the equator science says the earth spins at 1000MPH?

1000M/hr * 5280ft/mi = 5,280,000 ft/hr
5,280,000 ft/hr / 3600sec/hr = 1466.66667 ft/sec of rotation.

how in any reality can an airplane land on a runway moving at 1466.6667 ft/sec?

And "we're" stupid, us flat earth tards?

How can an airplane travelling from Denver, Co to Omaha, Ne at 500MPH EVER reach it's destination which is moving away at say 600MPH at that latitude?

I fail to see, ever, any logical refutation of any flat earth observations, ever. Mostly they resort to personal attacks, "that's absurd", "your an idiot if you believe that", etc... and on and on...

focaults pendulumn?

Baloney!

You have to prove first that the ONLY effect it could be measuring IS the rotation of the earth and to this day that is only ASSUMED! Anyway, that pendulum could only measure rotation at the "POLES" of an assumed sphere!

EVERY "picture" of the earth from space is a COMPOSIT! WHY? NASA can send probes far into space yet cannot get ONE picture of the earth in totality, a sphere?

tards!

ALL OF NASA!!!

Did you know NASA is a Hebrew word meaning "to lift up", as in "We are going to ascend into heaven and get us a name!"

Reasearch!

ThinK!

or do their bidding and promulgate lies TRUSTING your masters!

This is a war against truth, against god himself.

I watched video after video of leading scientists and the ONE thing they hate the most is "creationists", or, "christians". I heard one leading scientist say, "we don't have any problem with any religion, just one small portion of a "certain" religion... christians!"

... and that id from their OWN mouths!

tell me, why are they so rabidly attacking ONE sect of a certain "religion"?

because we know the truth and they are the liars protecting their "positions". what do i or we have to protect or gain?

but they have a LOT to gain from lies, we have only the truth in gain... no recompense from speaking engagements, no boost to our ego, no gain whatsoever, only reproach!

why would a man fight in reproach and not to gain?

Yes, they are. At least for bridges. Roads and train tracks both are constructed in parts too short to worry about it.

No, they are not


Optical illusion. Humans have a tendency to look toward the vanishing point. How would that prove flat Earth anyway? The horizon should be, and is, below eye level for both flat and round Earth.

From my own observation, no matter where I've lived the Sun always rises due East on the equinoxes. That can only happen on a round Earth, won't work with flat. For most observers on a flat they would see it rise in the NorthEast.

I've seen stars rotate around the South celestial pole. Shouldn't happen at all with a flat Earth, especially because there are infinite South directions on the flat Earth map.

I've used both ground based and airborne RADAR and observed that low altitude coverage is lost with the ground RADAR at distance exactly as predicted by and exactly at the rate expected by a round Earth. Airborne RADAR range is farther the higher the platform is again exactly as expected with a round Earth.

I've stood on the beach in Mexico Beach, FL at the Bay/Gulf county line and looked South towards Cape San Blas. From that point over calm water you can NOT see the beach of Cape San Blas. Using binoculars does NOT make the beach visible. However, climbing up to road level about 15 feet up DOES make the beach visible. This is EXACTLY as expected with a round Earth.


So in your world an airplane has a magical power to lose all momentum as soon as it leaves the ground?


Then you only prove you haven't looked.


And thank you for proving you don't understand how it works. The amount the pendulum rotates changes depending on latitude. It will make a full circle in a day at a pole but will make progressively less as it moves away from the pole until it would make no rotation at the equator. That is expected and that IS how it works.


Not every pic is a composite. Thank you for proving you've barely looked.



So an acronymn happens to mean something in a different language. PROVE it was intended that way and you MIGHT have a point. So far you don't.

Oh, i have to call you out on this one, I know very different.

Can you put up a link to a whole earth picture, from NASA, that is not a composite?

I've been very open minded and had swayed slightly to FET a couple times, but I have two major evidences for spherical earth theory that cannot be explained in FET. Therefore I am very much into the Sphere(ish) camp.

Too bad this discussion always turns out as bad as religion and diet discussions, there is great opportunity for great discussion.

The Two:
- Coriolis Force Effect - Cyclonic systems (Hurricane/Typhoon/Cyclone/etc.) rotate differently in northern/southern hemispheres.
- Lunar Eclipse - you can see with your own naked eye the shadow of the earth cross the moon surface


I would like to hear the FET factual explanation for these... I've looked for it.

[link to www.nasa.gov]

That's the first that came to mind. There are plenty more if you look up weather satellite images, if you care to look.

Lunar eclipse....the shadow is a globe?

As a critical thinker you should take that example and see what the spherical earth argument is for that case.

It's great that FET has this airplane/flight hypothesis, now challenge it and see if it can be disproved. A Spherical earth theory will tell you that flight is relative to airspeed, not ground speed.

This is a valid hypothesis as well. While I believe the Spherical earth theory to have more substance behind it and more likely accurate I would be willing to call this point a draw.

Now tell me how Hurricanes/Typhoons/Cyclones/etc. will spin differently based on if they are in the northern or southern hemisphere. Spherical earth theory has a very "neat" explanation for this, I have yet to hear the FET account. So far Sphere earth > FET.

How do the flat earther's explain Foucaults pendulum?

Instead of answer/opinion at this stage lets look at the two arguments.

Sphere earth theory concerning Lunar eclipse in a bastardized nutshell: The spherical(ish) earth is directly between the sun an moon. The earth casts it's shadow on the moon. During a partial lunar eclipse you can see the "edge" of the earths shadow on the moon, the earths shadow will/does have a curved edge as it moves across the moon.

Who can please provide the FET explanation for these observations? honestly I would like to know what the argument is for this one. I'm open minded and even willing to call this one a possible draw if there is an argument here. I just have not heard it yet.

Once we get the two arguments side by side we can evaluate and see if either hypothesis stands alone or is adequately challenged.

Flat Earth tards are so awesome. When I read their awesome thread I get the same feeling I get when I watch Hoarders. It's like, "damn that house is soooo disgusting boy I'm sure glad I'm not that disgusting" and with flat earthers it's like "holy crap is this a joke? Can a human be that stupid?"

It confirms my suspicion that dumb people don't realize just how dumb they are.

If you want to watch some real dumb shit, check out Lord Steven Christ.

Why is it a perfect sphere? Modern science says its an oblate spheroid

Anyway, a link for your perusal: [link to aplanetruth.info]

Last Edited by Oracio on 11/03/2015 10:01 PM

The amount of difference from a perfect sphere is less than one percent. You wouldn't see it with your eyes.


What an ignorant page.
the pic showing the duplicated sections is from a DIFFERENT pic. There are no duplicated sections on the pic I posted.
The rest about Apollo keeps going back to the lack of stars. Really? Stars are relatively dim. They won't show up in a picture exposed for sunlit terrain.

Any FET protagonist willing to engage in discourse related to the two evidences posted above?

I posit that these two arguments alone we cannot have anything but a spheroid earth. (not saying "only" these two arguments exist, there may be many more if given the time to research thoroughly)

I was/am open minded on FET, but could not get past these two items, please help me.


For anyone who is very into the FET camp, you should understand these arguments as well.

I'm specifically talking about the Coriolis Force effect and Lunar eclipses at this time.

foucaults is one of the cheesiest proofs ever offered, its a carny gimmick, a fakirs sleight of hand scam..i mean come on they actually have regular manual manipulation of the damn thing to keep it on track for their show...not saying flat earthers can use this to their advantage but the pendulum is one the corniest fakes of them all

You need to make certain assumptions about the Sun and Moon for this to work with either model.

If the question is "What is the shape of the Earth", can it not be answered directly by observing the Earth itself, and not making an argument based upon the heavenly bodies, of which we may know even less?

By the way, the Flat Earth model does not say what the entire Earth is shaped like; it just says that the inhabited part is flat. For the sake of argument, the inhabited part could be in a crater on a much larger spherical planet, the "ice wall" being the edge of the crater.

Unless you make a direct measurement (curvature, exact distances, etc) of the Earth itself, you will be basing you beliefs on assumptions and arguments.

I like the discussion, what would the assumptions that would have to be made for the FET to include the Lunar Eclipse observations?

I do not disagree with any of your points. I am actually very much in agreement. The problem being, there are so many observations and evidences where you can fit a series of assumptions to benefit either theory.

If a logical argument (including assumptions) can be made for both spherical and flat scenarios, then I will either call it a draw or dig in to begin disproving one or the other.

I am drawn to the Coriolis Force effect and Lunar Eclipse right now because I have yet to hear any "fit" in the FET model. I am actually very interested in what assumptions would have to be made to make it fit.

For example, with a lunar eclipse, the assumption is that the moon is lighted by the Sun, and it is being occluded by the Earth, and not by some other object. Then after you assume it is the Earth's shadow, you make a conclusion about the shape of the Earth. While these assumptions may be simple and reasonable, they are still assumptions.

Isn't the Coriolis Force effect an issue having to do with the supposed rotation of the Earth, not the shape?

It is very interesting that wind patterns seem to make the most sense on the Azimuthal Equidistant (Flat Earth) map.

FCK 0ff - One of eric dubay's top 10 theory is that direct flights to south america don't exist.. according to the gleason FLAT map - you can't even reach it in less than 24 hours from Australia.

Don't waste time on this... FE's need to rebel against all is simply stronger than their need to reason. So be it.

FE's need to rebel against all bullshit is simply stronger than their need to reason with said bullshit.
Go on - waste more time - you will learn stuff!!!
- It is WORTH wasting time on!!!!
The Earth is Flat!
So Be It!

Oh come on, the "before" footage was obviously shot with a reverse fish-eye lens!