[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/wsg/ - Worksafe GIF


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




File: 1658456029418515.webm (4.93 MB, 960x540)
4.93 MB
4.93 MB WEBM
>>
>>4667976
>Space is fake & gay
yea
>The earth is flat
no
>>
>>4667979
this
dunno why they are bullshitting us with those vids tho
>>
File: 1658829634901344.webm (5.47 MB, 720x480)
5.47 MB
5.47 MB WEBM
Kys and just end this thread already
>>
File: ss.webm (5.82 MB, 480x360)
5.82 MB
5.82 MB WEBM
>>
File: SN9 20210203.webm (5.83 MB, 720x405)
5.83 MB
5.83 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1416879831269.webm (2.86 MB, 1280x720)
2.86 MB
2.86 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1416879963884.webm (2.87 MB, 1280x720)
2.87 MB
2.87 MB WEBM
>>4668006
>>4668015
purposely blowup rockets to prevent revealing flat earth.
>>
>>4668017

The schizo reveals his final form
>>
File: 1649201665474.webm (5.24 MB, 540x540)
5.24 MB
5.24 MB WEBM
Conspiracy theories are immune to evidence. They are inherently self-sealing. Evidence that disproves a conspiracy theory is reinterpreted as originating from the conspiracy.
>>
File: 1628313771133.webm (4.55 MB, 1080x1080)
4.55 MB
4.55 MB WEBM
When faced with evidence that disproves flat Earth, rather than considering the evidence, flat-Earthers will simply invent an “explanation” that the evidence was fabricated by those in the conspiracy & include those who told them the evidence as being part of the conspiracy. Sometimes even evidence that can be personally verified also gets the same treatment.
>>
File: 1632714072225.webm (2.29 MB, 1080x1080)
2.29 MB
2.29 MB WEBM
>>4667976
>>
>>4668035

The funniest thing will always be flat earthers claiming that planets look like balls of plasma because they literally do not even know how to use a fucking telescope properly. It's such a weird thing to lie about
>>
File: 1_800_273_8255.gif (43 KB, 340x444)
43 KB
43 KB GIF
>>
us government spending money on useless projects.
>>
File: KSLV-II engine test.webm (5.86 MB, 569x640)
5.86 MB
5.86 MB WEBM
korea following in us footsteps
>>
File: 1658876140602176.webm (3.45 MB, 960x540)
3.45 MB
3.45 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1659000365445796.webm (2.6 MB, 1280x720)
2.6 MB
2.6 MB WEBM
>>
>>4668033
lmao this is hilarious
>>
>>4668121
watched the whole thing on yt and it could've been a great vid if only the baldie wasn't giggling like a retard the whole time.
also very interesting that the guy dodged hard, and bitched about it having it deleted, the only interesting question from a comment, which wouldn't have disproven the globe at all but was still very interesting.
>>
>>4668157

Quick reminder that FlatEarthDave is a member of Hibbeler productions, which make FE documentary videos that fucking claim there are hidden ultra-advanced civilizations and hidden continents behind the ice wall. It's genuinely hilarious. They also harassed some ""Flat earther"" old lady with some of the worst acting skills I have ever seen. They also claim people like Galileo never existed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OfbwhU5PQk
>>
>>4668017
The Soyuz has had over 1500 launches with a 98% success rate.
There are successful rocket launches practically every week you schizo.

>>4668037
The barrier to astrophotography isn't that high either, or they can watch amateurs on youtube capture photographs of nebulae and galaxies that look almost as good as Hubble.
>>
http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S179AA.htm
>>
>>4668163
yeah nah you don't have to convince me to watch other flerf stuff, wot desu.
but there was this comment that he clearly was seething about
>what properties does spacetime have such that it can bend?
>madebyjimbob
i think he's part of Owen Benjamin' s circlejerk, love the guy but he clearly sperged out about flat earth, but whatever.
the comment is very interesting and points out something that is actually a contested point in modern academics which is the "space-time" bs that retards with a degree memorize and like to parrot.
of course space is a no-thing and has no properties and low level yt science fags only ever say stuff they read about and know to be sanctioned by other fags.
now that would be an interesting conversation, but they're quite literally both retarded, one just happens to know stuff that is right, but he probably have that problem above because of the habit of making pedestrian level vids on gaytube about obvious things.
>>
>>4668171
That was a fun read thanks
>>
>>4668192
You can find copies of the actual images they drew on other sites.

flat earth I believe is pushed as a psyop to cover other things and paint conspiracy researchers as insane
>>
>>4668184
>Owen Benjamin'
FTM tranny
the flat earth movement is full of glowies and satanic trannies
>>
>>4668199
It stinks of well poisoning but it's getting very popular on places like /pol/
At this point you can easily convinced the average /pol/tard of anything as long as it goes against the generally accepted narrative they'll accept it with no skepticism whatsoever, no matter how absurd it is.
>>
>>4668203
2016 was the ultimate death of /pol/ and the latter purging of undesirables from reddit.
>>
>>4667976
Are flatearthers real? Feels more like satire. Or a big scheme to keep us from looking at the really important thing going on in the background
>>
>>4668222

there's a couple big con men at the top that trick millions into the flat earth lie. it's kinda sad. It's a huge money laundering scheme
>>
>>4668225
The Moon landing conspiracy is also a very safe and popular one.
I actually used to think it's probably fake since it seemed to be too big of a task, and remember being unconvinced by the Mythbusters episode back when it aired.
Then the more I started looking into it the more I saw absolute retardation from the conspiracy nuts (did they just leave the cameramen up there lol, this looks like it's made of papier mache etc) vs actual technical documentation about every aspect of the missions on the other.

>>4668222
Some of them are for real, if you go to /pol/ you'll see that at this point all science is just a jewish ploy to turn people away from Christ.
>>
>>4668201
>FTM tranny
wrong and not even funny, i already said he went full schizo on the flerf stuff, why do you have to double down on stuff i said was beside the point
>>
>>4667979
Based and toroidpilled
>>
>>4667976
the video is encoded to save bandwidth such that only things which are moving are sent
that way, we only have to send the data for the things in the video which are moving
the background is static, so all the needed data is present
when the bitrate of the received video is low, the moving elements glitch out, but not the background, because there's nothing indicating the background needs to be redrawn
look into how GIFs are web-optimized for a simple demonstration of this basic video encoding principle
then you won't look like such a fucking retard in future
>>
You guys are gonna feel real silly when you stand before God while he judges you. I do feel kinda bad for you. I only wait for the day when the truth will finally come out. I really try to be humble about it. It's not your fault that you are tricked by satanists.
>>
>>4668264
i expect that's accurate but do you have any links to technical information about how the ISS is transmitting?
>>
>>4668322
There's a general overview here: https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2020/space-communications-7-things-you-need-to-know
I don't have the time to comb through the technical documentation but perhaps you can find something if you're interested, it's called the ICS (Inter-Orbit Communication System)
NASA and other government space agencies are generally pretty good about providing reference documents.
>>
>>4668392
yeah they tend to be quite thorough. thanks for the start.
>>
File: 1490668923179.webm (1.52 MB, 720x576)
1.52 MB
1.52 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1638248618025.webm (2 MB, 1920x1080)
2 MB
2 MB WEBM
>>4668036
FAKE & GAY
>>
>>4668442
Watch the whole thing instead of this little clip out of context.
https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Videos/2015/04/International_Space_Station_bathroom_tour
>>
>>4668631
A shame that she doesn't like to swallow
>>
>>4668638
handles balls like a pro though
>>
>>4668638
seems to like it messy
>>
>>4668203
No it hasn't. The standard /pol/ hivemind belief is that it's a fake conspiracy used to enforce their definition of a 'conspiracy theory' which is probably true.
>>
File: 1655069967189.webm (5.49 MB, 960x540)
5.49 MB
5.49 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1637517455431.webm (2.27 MB, 1280x720)
2.27 MB
2.27 MB WEBM
>>
>>4668999
nice dubs
>>
>>4667976
Video encoding software is able to identify important objects in video so that it can alocate more bits to areas of high importance, lik people.
>>
>>4668036
>>
>>4669014
Nah that's what playing back a perfectly intact video file looks like in VLC
>>
File: 1633282858296.webm (3.83 MB, 720x720)
3.83 MB
3.83 MB WEBM
>>
>>4667976
>>4667979
>>4667981
>LOOK WE HAVE A DOZEN CHERRY PICKED VIDEO CLIPS TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT
>THAT PROVES YOUR GLOBE MODEL WRONG HAHA
>DESPITE THE FACT THAT IT'S 100% ACCURATE ALL DAY EVERY DAY
>AND OUR MODEL NOT HAVING ANY PREDICTIVE CAPABILITIES
>PLUS WE CAN'T ACTUALLY ALL AGREE ON A MODEL, BUT YOU GUYS CAN, AND YOURS IS ACCURATE
>BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN SHIT BECAUSE BASED ON MY FLAWED UNDERSTANDING OF HEBREW, "NASA" MEANS TO DECIEVE
>AND ALSO, DESPITE ALL SPACE AGENCIES AROUND THE WORLD ALSO STATING THE EARTH IS A SPHERE, AND A GOOD PORTION OF THEM HATING EACH OTHER, MOST NOTABLY NORTH KOREA- IT'S PURELY A NASA CONSPIRACY
>AND ALSO, DESPITE ALL CIVILIZED PEOPLE KNOWING THE EARTH WAS A SPHERE LONG BEFORE NASA'S EXISTENCE, I'M GOING TO PRETEND IT'S PURELY A NASA CONSPIRACY THAT THEY RECENTLY MADE UP WITHIN MY LIFETIME BECAUSE ALL THE IMPORTANT THINGS TO EVER HAPPEN HAVE TO HAPPEN WITHIN MY TINY LIFESPAN BECAUSE I'M SUPER IMPORTANT

Hmm did I forget anything?
>>
>>4669033
I see your 27 second clip and raise you a 1800 second clip that you can't even begin to debunk in any manner and will be forced to ignore :) Enjoy

https://youtu.be/FXv9AZl3fw4

Why is her necklace floating? Is it on a harness? Maybe its hairspray on her necklace?

Why is the Earth a sphere out the window when there's no fisheye lens and all other objects are perfectly straight in the foreground?

Hmmmmmm? Why? Anything?
>>
>>4669051
lol flat earthers seething and coping
>>
>>4669033
Can you post a full link with audio?
If it's an actual bolt falling down on a hard floor because of gravity you'll hear it bounce off.
Otherwise he might as well have inadvertently flung it with his fingers the moment it became loose.
>>
>>4669058
>>4669051
My video wrecks the entire argument. It's a complete tour of the ISS and there's zero sign of harnesses or camera tricks. It's open and shut. The ISS is real. Space is real. Earth is a sphere. There isn't even anything to be gained from "the lie". We already have wealthy elites who own blue collar companies who live in mansions, they don't need to lie about space to be rich. It's not a fucking hollywood jew movie.
>>
>>4669067
I agree, but when I see something like this it gets me curios as to what I'm looking at, you know actual curiosity vs parroting the same memes in every thread and never checking them for yourself.
This is why I'm not a fucking flat earther or a moon landing conspiracy theorist, I prefer checking things for myself and they never provide answers.
>>
>>4669058
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGoBtTo4DuE
you can even see him looking down at the floor after he dropped it
>>
>>4669067
> The ISS is real.
it sure would be a long flight down to get that much floaty time.
>>
>>4667976
If you really believe the earth is flat then why not just buy a boat and sail to the edge to find the giant ice wall or whatever it is you believe prevents all the water from falling off the edge and then post a pic of it.
>>
>>4668243
I feel like the moon landing one is at least somewhat plausible. Flat Earth is Olympic level mental gymnastics.
>>
>>4668283
Your God is going to damn me for accepting evidence that the earth is round? What a capricious God he is then. However i'd like to believe that the Christian god is much more forgiving and reasonable that whatever your self-serving ideal of him is, if he exists.
>>
>>4669280
Here's how you can tell whether a conspiracy theory has any validity. Ask yourself this, Does the media/government actively ailence people who report it? If you discuss the conspiracy theory on a major social media platform will you be banned? If the answer is yes than that conspiracy theory has validity as it actually is causing issues for the powers that be to the point they need it silenced. If however you can make a claim with no issues, in fact if you can make money discussing it then the conspiracy theory is fake as it isn't of any concern to the powers that be and is probably a better distraction for real concerns.
>>
File: 1659580290742518.webm (1.93 MB, 400x457)
1.93 MB
1.93 MB WEBM
>>4669067
>>
>>4669086
This is too short to figure out what's happening, he looks like he's trying to open something, but why would anything in the ISS use a tiny thumbscrew that you can just lose if you're not careful?
Seeing it like this does makes it look suspicious but like with the supposed falling water droplet posted before when you see the whole thing you can understand what's actually happening.

>>4669388
Funny how the most reliable way to get banned from Facebook and Twitter without doing anything illegal is to talk about the jews, really makes you think

>>4669395
>old man in unflattering lighting looks scary
lol
>>
>>4668996

I'm genuinely curious, do flat earthers actually believe the Sun is IN the fucking clouds? Fucking commercial planes fly higher than that man..
>>
>>4669045

Flat earthers now claim that all of history is made up lol. They hate people like Galileo so much that they just pretend they did not exist
>>
I still don't quite understand when exactly the indoctrination is supposed to happen.
So all scientists are in on it, but at what point do the men in black come up to some undergrad and offer them a fat stack of cash and tell them that all the experiments they were performing up to this point are rigged? Do the elites really trust a bunch of 20 year olds with their evil globe conspiracy? Hard to imagine none of them leaked it yet.
>>4669806
That's the weirdest part, because with other conspiracies there is at least reason to it: government tells me thing and they allegedly would have something to gain from lying about thing so it could be a conspiracy. But we knew the earth was round way before any of the current governments existed. So I guess "all of history is fake" is about the only excuse they can come up with.
>>
Does anyone have a full version of Steven Swanson's ISS tour? I found these two
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvTmdIhYnes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efDU7KOlpKM
But I'm pretty sure I once saw a version of it that goes on for a little bit after he shows of the Soyuz. Am I misremembering or was that version of it taken down?
>>
>>4669856

Flat earthers believe the world is controlled by satanist villains with superpowers. According to them, the elites hide the shape of the Earth to make us feel unimportant and to hide God lmao.
>>
>>4669014
This convinced me. Earth is flat
>>
>>4669708
>Touches the wall
>Sounds like metal hit the floor
>Astronaut looks down
Its hilarious how far globetards will try to spin everything about space
>>
File: 1658806686897755.webm (3.93 MB, 640x480)
3.93 MB
3.93 MB WEBM
>>
>>4669014
>>4668036
>>
>>4668283
God created earth to be round. God will not damn anyone for thinking it is round. God will damn people who purposefully mislead others, though, like the people who told you that the earth is flat.
>>
File: 1653758221972 (1).webm (2.81 MB, 512x288)
2.81 MB
2.81 MB WEBM
>>4670023
>Earth is X sized sphere with Y curve
>Y cant be verified
Its that easy to debunk the globe
>>
>>4670030
>Y cant be verified
then why do we know the value of Y? checkmate atheists
>>
>>4669917
I've yet to find a sensible explanation for this. I get what the New World Order or whoever would have to gain from lying about a bunch of other stuff.
But with the other shape of the earth it's either what you said about going through all this trouble to hide god, which is silly because they might just aswell pretend to be gods servants and manipulate people that way like in the middle ages. Or it's about having some resources beyond the ice wall all to themselves. In which case those resources sure have to be worth it, since the flat earth conspiracy would require having millions of scientists being paid full salaries to do fuck-all all day every day which seems like a huge waste of money.
>>
File: 1645734083141.webm (2.63 MB, 720x720)
2.63 MB
2.63 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1640223064015.webm (3.69 MB, 1280x720)
3.69 MB
3.69 MB WEBM
Guys it's not a sphere any more, it's pear shaped (globetards actually believes this)
>>
File: 1640448945745.webm (3.79 MB, 640x360)
3.79 MB
3.79 MB WEBM
Oh nonono what are you doing Buzz???
>>
File: 1639886739476.webm (3.88 MB, 900x506)
3.88 MB
3.88 MB WEBM
Buzz you mustn't tell the girl the truth, stop it now
>>
File: 1601857350654.webm (3.95 MB, 1280x720)
3.95 MB
3.95 MB WEBM
Astronaut admits it's flat
>>
>>4670040
It's the same for any conspiracy really. Power, or that feeling of it, when you think you know something everyone else doesn't and that puts you a step above them, that makes egotistical people feel good. I live with someone in my immediate family who's gone full nutjob after the lock downs and you can tell it's because she's someone who hasn't had a great life and doesn't have much going for them anymore. She's surrounded themself with yes-men who tell her what she wants to hear and cuts out anyone who tries to point out the fallacies in what she believes now. She basically doesn't have a family anymore.
>>
File: 1640066787220.webm (1.13 MB, 320x240)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1614533048759.webm (1.3 MB, 492x360)
1.3 MB
1.3 MB WEBM
Simple test
>>
File: 1641489561669.webm (399 KB, 720x720)
399 KB
399 KB WEBM
>>4669917
Many people believe the earth to not be a sphere because of how you can't see the alleged curvature over distance.
Globetard: OY VEY THEY ONLY BELIEVE THE FLASH EASHT CAUZ SATAN
>>
File: 1601857429853.webm (3.88 MB, 900x506)
3.88 MB
3.88 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1641793472161.webm (5.1 MB, 540x304)
5.1 MB
5.1 MB WEBM
>>
>>4670072
>Many people believe the earth to not be a sphere because of how you can't see
Stopped reading there
>>
>>4667997
did a complete brainlet make this webm?
>>
File: 1658689283222529.webm (1.82 MB, 1400x672)
1.82 MB
1.82 MB WEBM
>>4670083
That's fine, globetards can kvetch all they want. Webms are highly informative while your ramblings worthless.
>>
File: 1641558443964.webm (2.74 MB, 956x720)
2.74 MB
2.74 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1493282296047.webm (2.95 MB, 1280x720)
2.95 MB
2.95 MB WEBM
>>
>>4670087
Seems like evolving to have good pattern recognition was a mistake after all. What even is the argument here? NASA couldn't be bothered to make an original shape so they just used a map? Why? If it's fake why would they bother? If I find a pic of a car that's shaped like my balls does that mean cars don't exist?
>>
>>4670087
>this one nebula looks similiar to this satelite picture (lol) of Algeria
What does this mean?
>>
File: dome1.webm (2.89 MB, 600x336)
2.89 MB
2.89 MB WEBM
>>
>>4667979
It's the opposite.
>Space is fake & gay
no
>The earth is flat
yes
>>
File: dome2.webm (2.92 MB, 600x336)
2.92 MB
2.92 MB WEBM
>>
File: dome3.webm (2.79 MB, 600x336)
2.79 MB
2.79 MB WEBM
>>
>>4669388
>Does the media/government actively ailence people who report it?
its one possible indicator but far from the only or main one. Just because you don't see anyone talking about the moon being made of green cheese doesn't give validity to the moon-is-made-from-cheese conspiracy theory. Some things are just retarded and don't need to be discussed. Flat earth is definitely in that category.
>>
>>4670085
What the problem?
Its explains in simple words that flat earth dont work and shows of a nice simple 3d animation.
what you dont understand?
>>
>>4670103
>>4670106
>>4670108
nice webm, will be a shame if someone like me ask some detail about the dome.
Like how high is the dome is and out of what supergravity stuff is made of?

I wonder if you even dare to answer without posting more webm that claim the world but deliver fuck all.
Time will tell.
>>
>>4667976
Why do flat Earthers say that the horizon rises to eye level when it's always below eye level?
>>
>>4670040
>sensible
you're asking a lot
>lying and a bunch of stuff
these theories are so retarded that if you even midly scratch the surface they all boil down to blaming jews.
>>
>>4670203
You should ask those questions to the people who wants to crack the dome, like this person: https://youtu.be/1ceoW_BBwwI
>>
File: 1655782957544.webm (2.94 MB, 800x450)
2.94 MB
2.94 MB WEBM
>>
Flat earth is a CIA/Israel funded psyop to further social insanity and to de-stabilize the middle class.
>>
File: 1657105168066.webm (1.01 MB, 568x320)
1.01 MB
1.01 MB WEBM
>>4670225
That is exactly what schizophrenia sounds like.
>>
>>4667979
/Thread
It costs such a ridiculous amount of money to put people in space that it doesn't make sense to do it

There are people in space but no, they can't do interviews
>>
>>4670030
What is the lens effect of water density in the air

You can see around the world if the surface humidity is consistent

Flat earth is the equivalent of indigenous peoples' religion
>>
>>4670052
>Making an image of something so large you have to stitch pix together
>Everyone thinks it's a sphere
>Write the program to render round composite pictures
>>
>>4670079
See
>>4670261
The vapor pressure of the ocean keeps humidity perfectly consistent at low altitude making a lens much like how fiber optic cable works.
So you can look out at 50' altitude and see until the humidity gets inconsistent
>>
>>4670106
>>4670108
The dome people are the most delusional
I seriously don't understand how they get so far down the rabbit dome
>>
>>4670045
context?
>>
>>4670068
The horizon is never at eye level though.
>>
>>4670085
it was made for brainlets. if you don't get it then i'm sorry for your loss of braincells
>>
>>4670103
>>4670106
>>4670108
>physics of liquids and physics of air are similar
who woulda thunk. innit why they used tubes of colored water to see how aerodynamic some shapes are, before we invented the artificial wind machine? anyway only thing any of that proves is that there's a difference in atmosphere between where humans reside (close to ground) and where spaceships fly (far away from ground).
>>
>>4670218
but i asking you who claim not "them"(TM)
A) you have the answers to my question and refuse to tell me
B) you dont have the answers and try to throw this NWO bullshit at me in the hope i forget ever asking you

so again: Flatearthers claim there is a dome. What is this dome made of and how its not falling down on us?
>>
>>4670265
if its fake you can reverse the faking process... but you dont... wonder why people think you are wrong and a moron or improve your way of debating.
>>
I'm just going to leave this here.
https://spotthestation.nasa.gov
>>
>>4668001
They don't even try to hide the pixels in that spaceship model
>>
>>4668168
>lights in the sky mean that there are objects in space even though those"objects" have never been proven to exist, and not even space itself has been proven to exist
>>
>>4670277
Explain to us again how you can have a vacuum and a non vacuum without a physical barrier
>>
I don't care AT ALL what any scientist says. I KNOW the earth is flat because of my intuition. Even before I started looking into flat earth, before I was open to believing it, I had an experience where I distinctly felt that the sky is a ceiling and the earth is flat. I felt it through my third eye.
>>
>>4670334
at sealevel we have air pressure of 1013,25 hPa ≈ 1 bar.
The higher we go up the lower it goes.
At one point it goes co near zero and we enter what is known as the "vacuum of space".

Now explain what is so hard to understand?
>>
>>4670335
You muss be aware how crasy you sound.
>I KNOW
followed by
>my intuition
Topped by
>felt that the sky is a ceiling
and
>I felt it through my third eye.

Put away your feels and get real!
where is the math?
Why is there no unifying model of the "flat earth"?
You dont have to care what a scientist say but you cant ignore our realty just becouse you dont understand it.
>>
>>4668283
>flerf think his pet dogma is an essential doctrine
>flerf thinks rejecting his pet dogma is a sin
many such cases
>>
>>4670334
explain to us again how vacuums can suck trillions of tons of gas into space
>>
File: 1640052912949.webm (2.38 MB, 394x360)
2.38 MB
2.38 MB WEBM
>>4670344
A non explanation, lol got it.
>>
>>4670224

>UHM THE SUN IS BELOW THE CLOUDS
>NO ACTUALLY IT'S INSIDE THEM
>UH NO ACKSCHUALLY IT'S ABOVE THEM
>UH NO ACKSCHUALLY IT'S ACTUALLY ABOVE THE FIRMAMENT THATS WHY YOU CANT REACH IT LMAO

Flat earth infighting will never stop being funny.
>>
>>4670334

why would you need a physical barrier, you spastic? Do you guys not understand basic physics at all?
>>
>>4670225
It's just a bottom of the barrel conspiracy made up by idiots who are to stupid to come with a better scam with bigger payout.
>>
>>4670467

>What do these so called "satelites" do exactly?

What kind of satellite? A weather satellite? Do you believe they do not exist?!? The Moon is a satellite too.. Underwater cables transfer data. manmade satellites allow for better navigation, communication and imaging. They serve a different purpose you fucking chimp

>A non explanation, lol got it
every single fucking time

>HEY GLOBETARD KIKE NASA SATANIST SHILL GIVE ME PROOF
>ok
>NOOOO NOT THAT KIND OF PROOF THAT IS CGI FAKE SATANIST LIES AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA IT'S ALL FAKEEEEE BECCAUSE I DONT UNDERSTANNDDDDD ITTTT

kys
>>
>>4670467
>A non explanation
i can go into detail but you flateathers dont like visual media (you all it cgi all the time) or math in general. So i tryed to make a simple statment.
Sadly you dont "get it".

Let us turn this table and aks what your answer to your own question is.
If you decline me so easy you muss be ready to give me an answer that explains it better for shure right?
>>
>>4670334
Gravity is the barrier. It's not perfect, that's why there's no one singular point where the pressure changes from 1 atmosphere to 0 atmosphere, it's a gradual process. Even within the bounds of earth you can see the gradualness, just climb a mountain and you'll be out of breath, because there'll be physically less air. Extend that decrease of air all the way into orbit and at a certain point you'll just run out.
>>
File: 1645734889443.webm (2.81 MB, 1280x720)
2.81 MB
2.81 MB WEBM
>>4670502
>Can't feel gravity
>Can't measure gravity
>Zero proofs it's the correct theory of reality
>You must base your life around this magical force you can't see or feel
Just trust the science bro
>>
>>4670521
wow a whole 100meters, eh? Earth surely must be flat!
>>
File: 1641962421237.webm (2.62 MB, 964x1166)
2.62 MB
2.62 MB WEBM
>>4670526
The rounder the head the harder it is to grasp the law of perspective.
>>
>>4670538

>episode 37747883783874 of flat earthers not understand the size of the universe
>AAAAAA ALL THOSE HECKIN PLANETS ARE ROTATING TOO FAST AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA WHY DONT I FALL OFF

I don't get it. Are you guys just pretending to be completely fucking retarded? Help me understand. Surely you guys must just be trolling. There is no way you're this much of a spastic
>>
>>4670502
Wrong, try again.
Give an realistically explanation how earth's non vacuum meets the vacuum of space. Remember if you buy a tank of propane it's the canister that contains the gas, not gravity.
>>
>>4670521


Jump off a cliff so you can test out the theory of gravity yourself. It will be beneficial for everybody.
>>
>>4670548

>give me a fake explanation that a toddler can understand because I do not have the mental capacity to understand anything more complex

Do you think a vacuum is a fucking vacuum cleaner?

How do you guys explain less air and colder temperatures the higher you go up again? Why would an Earth enclosed by a dome need colder air if you go too far up?
>>
>>4670548

>What's 2+2?
>4
>U-UHM THAT'S WRONG LMAO TRY AGAIN GIVE ME A REAL ANSWER, NOT THAT "4" NONSENSE

Did your father not love you?
>>
File: 1485721806291.webm (737 KB, 720x576)
737 KB
737 KB WEBM
Rockets doesn't even work in space, retards.
>>
File: 1639889586900.webm (3.83 MB, 650x364)
3.83 MB
3.83 MB WEBM
>>
>>4670562

Your le epic movement would be taken seriously if you could actually understand basic fucking physics
>>
>>4670548
Propane is a very light gas. if you let it out the tank it'll get pushed up really fast as all the other heavier gases force their way down under it. Helium and hydrogen do the same thing. Oxygen and nitrogen not so much, which is why all that stuff mostly stays down here. Atmospheric pressure is not a result of the same situation as pressure in a tank though.
>>
File: Wires.webm (2.92 MB, 854x480)
2.92 MB
2.92 MB WEBM
>>4670580
None of this is explaining anything as you need a physical barrier to keep gas pressure.

The blind faith some of you have to a force you can't measure, feel nor observe sounds very religious. You sounds like Muslims.
>>
>>4670590
but you don't. heavy things can't lift themselves into space bro. light things can go higher but there' still al limit and takes a lot of extra energy for them to leave the atmosphere completely.

Tell me, how do you think heavy things can get into space?
>>
>>4670467
This webm is hilarious as there's literally 5% for the satellites right there in the stat it's using.
>>
>>4670590

>flat earthers literally have to use movie behind-the-scenes videos to prove Nasa fakes their shit

are you guys mentally ill? Genuinely
>>
notice how the FE schizos always conveniently ignore anything that proves them wrong or when somebody points out they do not understand 7th grade physics
>>
>>4670590
>None of this is explaining anything as you need a physical barrier to keep gas pressure.
You don't need a physical barrier to contain a pressure. Gas has mass and gasses are affected by gravity.
>>
>>4669266
they think certain militaries are guarding the ice wall
>>
>>4670521
>Can't feel gravity
If you jump you feel something pulling you down.
>Can't measure gravity
g=9.81m/s2
any object will accelerat with 9.81m per second square.
>Zero proofs it's the correct theory of reality
Show me your flat earth math or be debunked.
>You must base your life around this magical force you can't see or feel
you can see it and feel it and ontop (unlike flat earth) calculate it!

Trust the science only so far you can reproduce.
I can do math and need it for my line of work.
You on the other hand cant even trust yourself.
>>
>>4670231
This is the same thing as in high school physics where they tell you to solve assuming a frictionless environment, or in chemistry when you solve assuming an ideal gas.
>>
>>4670467
Yes, lets transfer all the data through satellites so comms get knocked out when it rains or gets moderately cloudy.
>>
>>4670562
do flat eathers really think a vacuum and a vacuum cleaner are the exact same thing?
>>
>>4670521
pretty sure it's flat eathers that invoke god and magic
>>
>>4670521
>Can't feel gravity
you can. go climb a mountain, you'll feel your body is lighter. go diving under the sea in a submarine, you'll feel your body heavier.
>Can't measure gravity
for our mother Terra, g = 9.81m/s^2.
alternatively, Force of gravity between two objects F(m1,m2) = G [gravitational constant, 6.67 x 10^-11 measured in N * m^2 / kg^2] * m1 * m2 [the masses of the two objects, in kilograms] / d^2 [distance between objects, in meters]
>zero proofs
the only proof is that all other theories fail the basic prediction test. You give it some set of parameters, the theory tries to predict what would happen, then you recreate those parameters IRL to see if the theory was right. The current scientific theory has been right in all times.
>You must base your life around
the fact that if you throw a rock forward, it'll go forward and downward. this isn't some magic, it's what you live in
>>
File: 1643455424901.webm (1.13 MB, 1920x1080)
1.13 MB
1.13 MB WEBM
>>4670642
flat earthers just use science to calculate and measure the curvature on the on the sphere. (no curve has been found)

Globetards on the other hand rely on blind faith and magical forces to make it fit their image of reality. Not much science in the heads of the globetards, it's mostly religious. They also gets triggered when someone question their faith which is extremely funny.
>>
>>4670657
note: the g in post above is Acceleration in Meters per Second squared, not a Force in Newtons. the Force of gravity between two objects F(m1,m2), however, is a force. To get acceleration from it, you multiply it by mass of the object the force is acting upon. So in essence, gravity experienced by any person A with mass Ma, against any space object S with mass Ms, is as follows
a(A -> S) = G * Ms * Ma^2 / d^2 [m/s^2]

note 2: the ^ sign stands for Exponents, also known as power, also known as squaring/qubeing things so you don't have to write the same symbol twice.
>>
>>4670538
why in hell would the solar system corkscrew around? none of the planets in the solar system corkscrew, and none of their moons do either. in fact, orbits of moons around planets, planets around stars, and star systems around the centers of galaxies are all mostly parallel to one another, with little to no corkscrewing.

the georgian polaris guidestone isn't perfectly fixed to polaris. but thankfully that doesn't matter, as even with all of the movement of our solar system around the galaxy it'll take a few hundred years for it to be significantly offset. that's a fucking large amount of time, perfectly showcases the scale of space.
the earth is not stationary, it's just very, very, VERY far away from any star that isn't Sol.
>>
>>4670665

>Hibbeler productions

From the people that think that:
>All of history is fabricated. Galileo and other globe Earthers that were persecuted by Christians did not exist
>There are ultra-advanced civilizations behind the ice wall that the government hides. They are a utopia. The Source of this claim is a fictional book about a literally made-up man that "sailed" behind the ice wall

The Next Level is a goldmine for comedy, honestly. I'll give you that. That old le crying flat earth old lady was even funnier. Especially with the schitzo's acting skills
>>
>>4670562
>push force does nada if whatever you're pushing is also getting pulled by a sucking force
incorrect. put the air balloon car into a vacuum chamber and it'll work even though there's no air around it (assuming the balloon can withstand the pressure difference, but then again real rockets aren't air in a thin rubber sphere either.)
>>
File: 1633184071213.webm (2.92 MB, 700x394)
2.92 MB
2.92 MB WEBM
>>4670690
Explain to us in your faith why the elusive curvature is missing over any distance, measured from any height.
>>
>>4670665
So far i follow flat earthers rely on god and magic.
But let us test your words with a simple question:
What is "g" if not gravity?
what do you call the force that pulls you down and how do you put this force in numbers?
>>
File: 1646648611507.gif (11 KB, 480x480)
11 KB
11 KB GIF
>>4670699
This is also a "G". Do you think means gravity?
>>
>>4670707
>no name for the thing that make rock go down even if you throw it up
you're a fake and a fraud
>>
while this nigga >>4670699
he's a real G cos he know all bout that g nigga you get what im sayin?
>>
>>4670697

The skyline of Toronto, Canada, is visible from across Lake Ontario, including from the cities of Hamilton and Niagara-on-the-Lake, as well as the Fort Niagara National Park. However, only its upper part is clearly visible, consistent with the spherical Earth model.

The upper parts of the skyline are affected less by atmospheric refraction, and more clearly visible. And the nearer to the horizon, the higher is the effect of atmospheric refraction. There are a few brighter colored buildings that appear above where they should be. These are the phenomenon of looming if they look upright, or superior mirage if they are upside down.


Flat-Earthers like to focus themselves on the visibility of the brightly colored Rogers Center on the left side of the CN Tower and ignore the rest of the buildings. From its upside-down shape, it is clearly a superior mirage. Atmospheric refraction causes the rays of light coming from the Rogers Center to reach the observer. However, these rays of light become irregular as they reach the observer and no longer resemble the actual shape of the Rogers Center.

The amount of obstruction of a distant object that is caused by Earth’s curvature depends on:

The distance of the object.
The height of the observer.
The height of the object.
The magnitude of atmospheric refraction.

Flat-Earthers like to use the visibility of a distant object to prove Earth’s curvature does not exist. Very often, they failed to account for observer’s height and atmospheric refraction, or make other mistakes, like unit conversions errors, distance calculation errors, etc. Once all are considered for, and mistakes are fixed, everything will be consistent with spherical Earth.
>>
>>4670707
Your "G" is a pitch and have nothing to do with math.
Meanwhile like buoyancy cant be calculated without g.
So please stop the stupit questions you know what topic is at hand and music pitch it isnt.
>>
>>4670713

Flat earthers think density makes things go down and that density magically knows where down is.
>>
>>4670723

he will ignore this and call refractions fake.
>>
>>4670726
>>Your "G" is a pitch and have nothing to do with math.
to play the devil's avocado for a second, pitch is very mathematical. all music is just waves at a certain rate, and the frequency of the G note in the 4th octave is approximately 391.995 Hz
>>
>>4670665
>>4670697
You clearly didn't watch
>>4667997
>>
>>4670738
fair point
now let the flat earther explain how Hz helps us calculated N=Newton's in Fb=ρVg
>>
>>4670731
They do believe in refraction but apply it in the wrong way, they try to use it as an explanation why the sun appears to be setting over the horizon rather than just getting progressively smaller as it would if it was circling over the Earth.
>>
Can a flat earth schizo guru enlighten me on how Lunar eclipses work on a flat earth?
>>
>>4670759
Here you go, have a laugh, I especially like the idea of the Antimoon, sounds very cool:
https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Lunar_Eclipse
>>
>>4670764

>Antimoon

No fucking way. This site must be a falseflag. There's no way anybody thinks there is an invisible moon in the sky
>>
>>4670030
From those distances, you can see Mt. Everest. Please don't lie next time.
I can prove it that it's visible in a globe model right now.
Actual proof:
http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+Curvature+of+the+Earth%3A+Stand-Alone+App&state=--212000-1215.7998-9-35-21-2985000-9-38848-40.54211446-10.18860393-10-1227.32753-1~56.318-51-8
Cruising altitude: 120,000m
Distance to Mount Everest: 985,000m
Mount Everest size: 8,848m
>>
>>4670280
A clip from a shitty documentary.

‘The Principle’ is a pseudoscientific documentary that promotes geocentrism, that the Earth is stationary and the center of the universe. Despite the fact that the film has almost nothing to do with flat-Earth, some flat-Earthers decide to use this film to bolster their beliefs. Because after all, in the flat-Earth model, the Earth is stationary and the center of the universe, right?

This actually gets more complicated than that. We are dealing with two forms of pseudoscience, that sometimes even goes against each other.

First, the movie ‘The Principle’ itself is dishonest. Scientists were tricked into appearing in the film. Using clever editing, their statements were deliberately misinterpreted. Practically every scientist who appeared in the film rejects their part in the movie, and that they all were misled into saying something far from the intended message.

Amusingly, the filmmaker himself is actually all-out against flat-Earth! He went as far as accusing flat-Earthers of attacking the documentary. In the movie’s official website, it is stated that flat-Earth is a plot to keep the world from seeing the documentary.

‘The Principle’ promotes geocentrism, that the Earth is stationary and the center of the universe. It is pseudoscience, like flat-Earth. Just because they are against each other, it doesn’t mean one is better than another.

https://www.theprinciplemovie.com/flat-earth-is-not-the-answer/
>>
>>4670764
While you are at it, try explaining Selenelion eclipses. Its when sun and moon are both in the sky but the eclipse is upside down.
>>
File: 1644001640214.webm (3.13 MB, 1080x1080)
3.13 MB
3.13 MB WEBM
>>4670052
>>
File: 1651747078953.webm (4.85 MB, 1080x1080)
4.85 MB
4.85 MB WEBM
>>4670056
>>
File: 1653327058590.webm (2.63 MB, 960x540)
2.63 MB
2.63 MB WEBM
>>4670060
>>
File: 1647150964011.webm (5.39 MB, 1080x1080)
5.39 MB
5.39 MB WEBM
>>4670062
>>
File: 1645112666751.webm (1.94 MB, 1080x1080)
1.94 MB
1.94 MB WEBM
>>4670072
>>
File: 1653455509827.webm (2.77 MB, 1080x1080)
2.77 MB
2.77 MB WEBM
>>4670538
>>
>>4670809
i still refuse to believe the solar system corkscrews around.
>>
File: 1634153080725.webm (3.12 MB, 1080x1080)
3.12 MB
3.12 MB WEBM
>>4670562
>>
>>4670569
-Or maybe it was because Neil Armstrong was the lead photographer in the mission. Makes sense for the lead photographer to have reins on the camera.
>>
File: 1632153543408.gif (284 KB, 1080x1080)
284 KB
284 KB GIF
>>4670697
Lol.
Lmao.
>>
>>4670769
you triggered my neuron containing the memory of the old anime "escaflowne".

The more i learn about flatearther the more i think they want our world to be a JRPG with flying island and izekai plot.
>>
>>4670815
i dont know that horror your face if i tell you the milky way does the same.
Right now we are corkscrewing with our earth around a corkscrewing sun around a corkscrewing supermassiv black hole that is about to hit the next gallaxy.
All in super slow motion counted in million years at best.
>>
>>4670467
Not that anon's problem you are incapable of understanding simple concepts such as air pressure.
>>
>>4670562
Lmao I think even children could grasp whats really going on here and draw a better conclusion
>>
>>4670844
OH NO NO NO
>>
>>4670330
is....is this bait....? Please god let it be bait
>>
>>4670863
>corkscrewing with our earth around a sun
except we're not, the earths' spin is within 30 degrees of it's orbit around the sun. and the moon's orbit is also not perpendicular to the earth-sun orbit

antichrist get ye gone
>>
>>4671139
you're in the science denial thread. every other post here is bait
>>
>>4671139
>if you can't see it with your own eyes it's not real!
>n-no you can't just look up at the sky and say stars and galaxies are real!
>>
>>4671681

I'm convinced that flat earthers all live in light-polluted cities and have never seen our galaxy
>>
>>4671694
Probably, I've had a flat earther tell me the Milky Way is not real.
These people have never camped in the middle of nowhere and looked up at the night sky.
>>
>>4671681
>lights in the sky mean we are on a spinning ball in a massive universe with giant collections of stars surrounded by big balls of gas and rock
>I see lights therefore galaxy is real
>>
>>4671701

I'd imagine they think nebulas and galaxies are painted on the firmament
>>
>>4671702

Yes. That is exactly what it means, retard.
>>
>>4671704
No, you are just so retarded that you think retardation is intelligence
>>
someone turn a part of this into a webm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8MboQzXO1o
>>
>>4671702
>To a flat earther they're just lights
>you can never look closer
>you can never analyze them
>bro they're just lights bro
>stop trying to learn about the lights dude, you're going to make god angry
>STOP STUDYING THE LIGHTS!
>>
>>4671709

Do all flat earthers suffer from Dunning–Kruger or something?
>>
>>4671719

Literally the entire FE theory is built upon Dunning-Kruger.
>>
>>4671710
holy shit

Did they seriously name a lake "mini wanker"?
>>
>>4671717
>DON'T LOOK AT THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!
>>
>>4671717
You look at them and they're still just lights. I'm not religious btw, and neither are a significant portion of flat earthers.

>>4671719
Your logic:
>I see lights therefore my beliefs about giant balls of burning gas and spinning rocks are true
>I see a bright circle moving around the sky therefore it's a burning ball of gas 93 million miles away
I was pointing out that your logic of "look at the sky" is retarded and not proof of globe earth or space and you couldn't even understand an obvious point like that.
>>
>>4671731
>>I see lights therefore my beliefs about giant balls of burning gas and spinning rocks are true
>>I see a bright circle moving around the sky therefore it's a burning ball of gas 93 million miles away
You think that "seeing lights" is the entire process of studying astronomy.
>>
>>4671731

>If I simplify everything like a retard and pretend that looking at lights is ALL THERE IS to this, Maybe I will look smart xD guys I am the smart schizo. Not like those weird flat earthers!!1

Observing the Galilean moons is enough to prove the world is not geocentric. So is looking at distant stars and concluding that they are probably bright balls like our sun and that they go BOOM sometimes (Several supernovas were recorded in human history). Not dots painted on the fucking firmament.
>>
>>4671736
You said that flat earthers can take photographs of the night sky or watch amateurs who did the same as if that somehow proves globetards are right.
>>
>>4671747
Are you mentally challenged? This was in response to this:
>The funniest thing will always be flat earthers claiming that planets look like balls of plasma because they literally do not even know how to use a fucking telescope properly. It's such a weird thing to lie about
>>
>>4670618
It's a very effective tactic. Just throw a lot of shit out there, ignore people proving you wrong and once you find someone that can't explain 1 thing out of the 100s you threw at them that means it's correct and the earth is flat.
>>
>>4667976
how to prove earth is round
>take two people are in different location north and south of each other.
>take measurements of the angle of North Star to horizon line.
>when they are not the same, please explain.
>>
>>4671754
It doesn't matter what anything in the sky looks like anyway because it's not proof that space is real. Why do you think that obviously doctored images from NASA and other space agencies are even accurate as to what the lights in the sky look like?
>>
>>4671770

>Uhm it's all fake CGI because... DUDE I DON'T NEED TO PROVE ANYTHING BRO DO YOU NOT TRUST YOUR INTUITION BRUV? IT'S ALLL FAKKEEEEE CGIII AAAAA LOOK AT IT IT' FAKE BECAUSE... BECAUSE I SAY SO, OKAY?!?
>IS THAT.... A COLOR CORRECTED IMAGE?!?! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA SCHIZOMAN SAVEEEEEE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>UHM BUY A TELESCOPE?!!? AND OBSERVE THOSE THINGS ALL THE SPACE AGENCIES PHOTOGRAPHED IN HIGHER QUALITY MYSELF? WHAT ARE YOU, A NASA SHILL?
>>
File: lmaogif.gif (123 KB, 720x741)
123 KB
123 KB GIF
Found the image. This one's my favorite. Flat earthers do not know how to use a telescope. They think planets are messy balls of plasma and that you can only see Saturn as a blurry smudge
>>
>>4671474
nice bait but please look at >>4670809 again
>>
>>4671779
You can't see most of the stuff yourself. NASA made tons of images of stuff supposedly very far away.
>>
>>4671794

>I can't see everything that space agencies see with high-level tech, therefore space is fake

I wonder if flat earth schizos that live in huge cities with light pollution also believe we cannot see more than 10 stars in the night sky
>>
>>4671800
>I blindly accept the claims of organizations that have been known to lie in the past
>I blindly believe what scientists say even though they have lied throughout history so that they can get money, even though science has been abused by the elites to get more power
>I make random ad hominem attacks
>>
>>4671806

>more Facebook schizo ramblings

woah you sure showed those ebil scientist satanists

too bad Nasa is not the only space agency and US is not the only country and that you can easily verify the Earth is round independently, AND observe other planets. Even if those photos were faked, space is still real and everything you can observe with a telescope is also real.

Scientists have lied. Newton was wrong about other things. Not gravity though ;) Notice how Newton's theory of gravity is used today, while things he was wrong on are not. Same with Galileo. He tried to explain why the Earth is round through incorrect methods because he was desperate to impress the Pope. He still made correct observations. People are not perfect. Science is not some magical single person. It's a pretty big fucking field full of people. And those people agree on some things. Such as gravity and space existing.

Of course, it is easier for flat earth schizos to just scream "AAAAAAAA EVERYTHING IS AGAINST ME IT'S ALLL FAKEEEEEE" because your life is boring as fuck and you have nothing better to do. You love feeling special. Like you found out some dark evil secret. All flat earthers sincerely believe they are somehow smarter than the millions of people that have dedicated their lives to studying the nature of our universe, its laws, and so on. Prime examples of Dunning-Kruger
>>
>>4671841
Pure projection
>I wasted my time and energy operating within the false paradigm of scientism therefore I'm smarter than everyone
>Wow we're so insignificant, we evolved from badger in 60+ million years and we're flying around on a big rock through an unimaginably large void
>>
>>4671873
not him but let me ask this:
If earth is not round and not old and not explained by math to death... what is it?

Its easy to claim other false but you still left with the burden of replacing it with the truth.

And dont you dare bring up the bible or the NWO. Both have nothing to do with the topic we have.
>>
>>4671873

>pure projection

That truly is how you guys are, though. A bunch of fucking Dunning-Kruger morons that do not understand basic physics. You conveniently ignore all evidence ITT and just continue bitching and moaning about imaginary ebil scientists that are tricking the world.

Even funnier when you guys can't understand scale and speed. As is evident in your own post lmao

>I DON'T UNDERSTAND SOMETHING, THEREFORE IT'S FAKE

a cult of manchildren. Nothing more, nothing less. Just deny, take things out of context, make shit up, and call everybody who's not part of your mentally ill circlejerk a shill or sheep. Everybody is against you. Everybody is out to get you. Everybody is trying to hide the truth, and you, the guy who probably did not even graduate high school, are the one who finally cracked the code. Thank god we have freethinkers such as yourself that get their evidence from Facebook FE groups

If you believe you are insignificant, that is your own problem lmao. I feel good being gifted with life and the ability to observe our universe and wonder what's out there. The universe is our playground. Intelligent life is probably ridiculously rare, yet here we are. With our little marble we call home, ready to move on to bigger things. Sorry you see yourself as a spec of dust, but please do not project it onto others lol

I get it. The scale of the universe and its complexity scares you. No need to make shit up to cope with it like a fucking toddler.
>>
>>4667976
This is why they had to make a guide called "webm for retards". They don't actually understand video encoders, so they needed somebody to write them a script. The same willful ignorance is why they think the Earth is flat.
>>
>>4671887
I don't claim to know. I don't have an accurate model of earth. I suspect we are in a realm, not on a planet. But I would need more information to know for sure. I'm skeptical of all mainstream narratives because the more I question things, the more answers I get and the more lies are dispelled. In my experience, many of the things that literally 99% would say are true are objectively, provably false. So I question scientism.

>Its easy to claim other false but you still left with the burden of replacing it with the truth.
Except that's wrong. You can claim or prove something is wrong without providing an alternative.

>>4671897
Lot of strawmen.

>Sorry you see yourself as a spec of dust, but please do not project it onto others lol
lolwut? I was giving that as an example of how "I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE" types view human life. Why would I think of myself as a speck of dust if I don't believe scientism's creation myth (the big bang), space, globe earth or evolution?

>I get it. The scale of the universe and its complexity scares you. No need to make shit up to cope with it like a fucking toddler.
I get it. The idea that you could have been lied to by malicious actors, or that they at best could simply be wrong, and therefore you are mistaken about all manner of things from human nature to the nature of reality, makes you uncomfortable. No need to hide from the truth of this realm by clinging to insane manmade religions like scientism.
>>
>>4671916

I am convinced you are just baiting, but yeah you DO need to provide an alternative model. The globe model works consistently with everything. You don't even have one you fucking spastic. Atleast you admit you don't know shit, I guess. Doesn't mean everybody else is as clueless as you.

>99% would say are true are objectively, provably false

no they are not. Stop making shit up and provide evidence. You'd see plenty of evidence in this thread if you did not conveniently ignore all of it like a fucking child.

Prove how:
>>4668118
>>4667997
for example, are not true and explain how things like Lunar eclipses happen on your little realm world.

You'd make fair points if everything did not conveniently work on a globe model, but unfortunately for you, everything makes sense on it. That's why we use it. All the "faults" of the globe come from your lack of understanding of middle school physics and straight up lying. Millions of people use the globe model every day for their jobs. Many use it to predict things. It's accurate. Every. Single. Time. Your schizo realm flat whatever fantasy world is not used because it's not fucking accurate and doesn't explain shit. It's a tool for schizophrenics.


>lied to by malicious actors

hard to fucking lie about something you can observe by yourself. I have no idea how you function in real life when you are so fucking paranoid and autistic. I actually doubt you do. I'm sure the irony is lost on you. The flat earth and "fake universe" shit is propagated by con men that make shit up to gather money from gullible faggots like you. Hibbeler productions is a good example.

>insane manmade religions like scientism

Do you genuinely believe you are the sane one? Why do you waste your time like this? Are you that fucking bored?
>>
>>4668121
>professor dave
The only fucking asshole who could actually make me a flat earth tard.
>>
>>4671916

>I don't have an accurate model of earth

stopped reading there
>>
>>4671953

Even if he supports trannies and whatnot, all his FE videos are completely factual. He's a bit obnoxious, but everything he says is correct when it comes to FE
>>
>>4667976
>tell me you know nothing about video compression without telling me you know nothing about video compression
>>
>>4667976
The background is static, the people are moving.
>>
>>4671957
That guy who so afraid of other opinions he shut down the comments? Lol let's listen to Mr Dave
>>
>>4671963

Mind linking the video? I double-checked. All of his FE videos have comments open. Even the debate ones. Are you making shit up? Woah what a surprise.

He is still correct though lol. You not watching the videos or ignoring them doesn't change reality, bro. He does pretty nicely debunk all the common FE misconceptions. He even has a series where he debunks the flat earth without using science just so you autists can't go "AAAA SCIENCE LE FAKE"
>>
>>4671916
>I don't claim to know.
yet you claim others to be false.
>I don't have an accurate model of earth.
So you not even ready to attack OR defend any model or reality? Why are you even here?
>I suspect we are in a realm, not on a planet.
"i suspect" isnt "i am right". Your point is moot from now on.
>But I would need more information to know for sure.
Information you call CGI, fake and what not. Wikipedia is not some propaganda pages its explains and links you to the source.
>I'm skeptical of all mainstream narratives...
fine and good i agree with this mindset... but how can under the line 2+2=5 in your world?
>...because the more I question things, the more answers I get and the more lies are dispelled.
Now use this superpowers to connect the pieces. Countless people report details of our world being round. From soldiers using mortas to pilots in the sky. A) All lie and only you gut feeling is right or B) you need to stop eating takos and get real for ones
>In my experience,...
The little you seen to have
>...many of the things that literally 99% would say are true are objectively, provably false.
Like... what? Are you warge on purpose?
>So I question scientism.
First of: "scientism" isnt a real word. Science is a method of finding out the hows and whys not a beliefe system.
If you have a better idea how and why something happen it will become the new norm until someone is even better then you.
It helps if you use math to explain it and power your observation up with predictions.

So far you claim that we all are false just becouse you feel like it.
Maybe you are just stupit (if we asume you arnt a troll (poe's law and all))
>>
>>4671945
>no they are not. Stop making shit up and provide evidence.
I am talking about things that aren't relevant to this discussion.

>Atleast you admit you don't know shit, I guess.
I don't know about this stuff because I haven't experienced it. I don't really even believe anything about it, because I haven't looked into it. I'm just skeptical.

>Doesn't mean everybody else is as clueless as you.
You think you know things but you do not. What you believe is based upon the religion of scientism.

>hard to fucking lie about something you can observe by yourself.
You have observed ball earth?

>The flat earth and "fake universe" shit is propagated by con men that make shit up to gather money from gullible faggots like you. Hibbeler productions is a good example.
I have never and will never give money to random people online.

>Do you genuinely believe you are the sane one?
Yes, because I don't believe in any religions, I eat well and get sunlight. Mental illness is 99% from bad diet and lifestyle.

>Why do you waste your time like this? Are you that fucking bored?
I got laid off from my job because of budget cuts. But yeah, it's a waste of time. I could ask you the same though.
>>
>>4672005

Must be fun living in a bubble where you call every proof fake

Being skeptical is not denying shit because you don't understand it like a fucking toddler

In this thread, you have not debunked any globe evidence, nor shown any of your own evidence. Why are you even here?
>>
>>4672005
What will happen to your mind if i tell you electronics and computer science is powerd my demons and there runes?
You have no way to disprove this idea unless you are like me an electronics technician.

the modern world must be a scary place for you.
>>
File: 1655385850726.webm (3.8 MB, 610x343)
3.8 MB
3.8 MB WEBM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpuKu3F0BvY
>>
File: 1651513745476.webm (3.76 MB, 610x343)
3.76 MB
3.76 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1635915012659.webm (3.76 MB, 610x343)
3.76 MB
3.76 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1646607644254.webm (3.82 MB, 854x480)
3.82 MB
3.82 MB WEBM
>>
>>4671992
>yet you claim others to be false.
When I look at the sun and its rays I can tell it isn't millions of miles away. When I look at the sky it looks like a ceiling.
>Why are you even here?
Webms, youtube videos, etc
>Information you call CGI, fake and what not.
A lot of it is admitted to be cgi, plenty of it looks fake, and they have lied before, so why would I trust them as incontrovertible proof that they are correct?
>Countless people report details of our world being round
Lots have said otherwise.
>The little you seen to have
The things that I have experienced. My human experience trumps the claims of doctors, scientists, journalists, and so on. If I experience reality and it is different from what they say then I know they are wrong and I am right.
>Like... what? Are you warge on purpose?
For example, germ theory and allopathic medicine. I know from my human experience that both are complete nonsense. I can get into it if you want but it isn't really relevant.
>First of: "scientism" isnt a real word. Science is a method of finding out the hows and whys not a beliefe system.
Scientism is a real word and it is distinct from science. Scientism is blind faith in scientific consensus, peer review, and scientific authority , without considering mistake, bias or conspiracy as potentially being the reason why some information is supported and other things suppressed. Scientism is believing that we need to have a scientific study to be able to draw a conclusion, that no other sensory input or instinctive feelings are valid.

>>4672015
Things like the big bang theory and dark matter are speculative, made up. Scientists claim all the time that they know things which they are only truly capable of believing.

>>4672021
>What will happen to your mind if i tell you electronics and computer science is powerd my demons and there runes?
I'm not going to believe something just because someone says it. I don't have to disprove something to not believe it.
>>
File: 1632290811584.webm (3.82 MB, 700x393)
3.82 MB
3.82 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1654033694616.webm (3.84 MB, 700x393)
3.84 MB
3.84 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1634771698957.webm (3.9 MB, 854x480)
3.9 MB
3.9 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1638757850239.webm (3.84 MB, 854x480)
3.84 MB
3.84 MB WEBM
>>4672058
>>
File: 1633882683372.webm (3.81 MB, 700x393)
3.81 MB
3.81 MB WEBM
>>4672060
>>
File: 1658445714990.webm (3.83 MB, 700x393)
3.83 MB
3.83 MB WEBM
Why does globetards hate webms so much?
>>
>>4672040
>>4672042
>He didn't take part in your cult behavior so that means he's lying
I wouldn't swear on the bible about eating dinner even though I just did it. The dinner industry is one big hoax. Wake up sheeple.
>>
File: 1640237512801.webm (3.82 MB, 854x480)
3.82 MB
3.82 MB WEBM
>>4672063
>>
File: 1630657572245.webm (3.85 MB, 854x480)
3.85 MB
3.85 MB WEBM
>>4672064
>christian refuses to swear on the bible he went to the moon
>Hmm how should I spin this BRING OUT THE STRAWMAN
>>
File: 1629779372908.webm (3.77 MB, 854x480)
3.77 MB
3.77 MB WEBM
>>4672069
>>
File: 1645358908850.webm (3.77 MB, 854x480)
3.77 MB
3.77 MB WEBM
thats a lot of wires on the moon
>>
File: 1643945711920.webm (3.79 MB, 854x480)
3.79 MB
3.79 MB WEBM
>>4672073
>>
>>4672035

I liked the bit where a non-NASA composite photo made up of 7 photos by a space Artist with a false sun added for effect is presented to the expert photographers to analyze the lighting and don't notice it is a composite.
>>
File: 1642712587339.webm (3.85 MB, 854x480)
3.85 MB
3.85 MB WEBM
>>4672074
>>
>>4672076
timestamp?
>>
File: 1653931588967.webm (3.84 MB, 700x393)
3.84 MB
3.84 MB WEBM
>>4672076
link the photo
>>4672078
>>
File: 1656013016947.webm (3.88 MB, 854x480)
3.88 MB
3.88 MB WEBM
>>4672083
>>
File: 1640774179355.webm (3.76 MB, 690x388)
3.76 MB
3.76 MB WEBM
>>4672084
>>
File: 1640199402735.webm (3.98 MB, 700x393)
3.98 MB
3.98 MB WEBM
>>4672076
Found the globetard that didn't like that someone would analyze his beloved moon photos.

Here is one of the photo segement where they show that sunlight is not the same as studio light.
>>
File: 1629460938925.webm (3.86 MB, 700x393)
3.86 MB
3.86 MB WEBM
>>4672093
>>
File: 1647851105003.webm (3.86 MB, 854x480)
3.86 MB
3.86 MB WEBM
>>
File: 1629498598093.webm (3.84 MB, 700x393)
3.84 MB
3.84 MB WEBM
>>4672101
>>
File: 1647263618345.webm (3.8 MB, 700x393)
3.8 MB
3.8 MB WEBM
>>4672104
>>
File: 1655764860278.webm (3.95 MB, 700x393)
3.95 MB
3.95 MB WEBM
>>4672105
>>
File: 1641758358649.webm (3.8 MB, 700x393)
3.8 MB
3.8 MB WEBM
>>4672109
>>
>>4672047
>My human experience trumps the claims of doctors, scientists, journalists, and so on.
Oh that arrogance, that hubris.
Please hold for me this two 6mm wires for me. Ignore the fact that one is connected at a 240V, 50A and 60Hz DC transformer without any RCD or fuse.
NOTHING
WILL
GO
WRONG
THRUST
ME!
>>
>>4672047

>a lot of it is admitted to be cgi
You do not know what CGI is. Changing the color of a photo is not faking it
>plenty of it looks fake
not an argument
>my human experience trumps the claims of doctors, scientists, journalists, and so on
No it does not
>Long paragraph of you not knowing what science is
Instinctive FEELINGS are not valid enough to draw conclusions. Science studies reality and draws conclusions using experiments and often tools that provide much higher accuracy than your fucking bare eyes. Other ideas are not "suppressed". They are ignored or no longer used because they can be proven to be wrong and idiotic. E.g. the flat earth theory. Science finds solutions to the issues of reality and kicks out solutions that have been proven to be false and outdated. The Globe Earth is a solution that will not change because we now have technology that allows us to leave our world and see it in its entirety. We can also observe its curvature and drift on the surface. See:
>>4668033


The Globe earth is consistent with all our observations. The flat earth model cannot even be used to explain why Lunar eclipses happen. Flat earthers had to make up a new fucking reason for it because lunar eclipses don't make sense on a flat earth with a local sun and moon. They now claim the Moon creates its own light and that it's see-through, even though you can very easily observe lunar mountains, valleys, and so on through a telescope. Even the shadows they cast.

Your worldview has nothing to support it other than your feelings. It is not objective and will never be. You crying and bitching and pissing yourself over it will not change reality

If you believe science is some ebil field full of heckin libtards and paid shills that lie about everything, there is no saving you. Consider a psychiatrist.
>>
>>4672069
>christian
You just made that up. Neil was calling himself a deist. Also, he knew the person asking it was a conspiracy theorist so not taking part in his clown show is a very reasonable response. And I'm also pretty sure the whole "swearing on a bible and lying will get you in trouble" is bullshit. That only applies to official situations, not some guy walking up to you with a camera. Even if we assume you are right then why didn't he just do it? I mean the whole US government is on it so who would punish him? Why would he be afraid of doing it?
>STRAWMAN
There is nothing strawman about what I said. Do you even know what that means?
>>
>>4672114
>The Globe earth is consistent with all our observations
except the big one where there is no curvature when you actually check for it instead of dreaming a dream
>>
>>4672067
The fake moon rock story was one of the things I always accepted without looking into it, when I was still skeptical of the moon landings.
Then when I actually read about what happened it turned out to be completely different from what conspiretards are implying. Surprise surprise.

>>4672093
>>4672095
>>4672101
It's almost as if a brightly lit white space suit reflects the sunlight providing diffuse illumination and lighting up the ground under it.

>>4672117
It's been posted here in this thread you disingenuous fuck
>>
>>4672093

Remind me, how does a faked moon landing prove that the earth is flat and that space does not exist? It was the cold war. Faking it would be a matter of national pride. Doesn't mean space doesn't exist lmao. Schizos love to jump to conclusions, though.
>>
>>4672093

>found the globetard

your webm literally used a sun that is far away to prove a point. The guy behind the documentary is obviously not a flat eather you retard
>>
File: 1634285475359.webm (2.92 MB, 854x480)
2.92 MB
2.92 MB WEBM
>>4672118
>>4672118
LOL

Give us your retarded take on the fall off of light in the moon photos please.
>>
>>4672117
Proof of curvature is posted in every single flat earth thread.
>>
File: 1630323562357.gif (117 KB, 1271x756)
117 KB
117 KB GIF
>>4672121
definitely not, this is the first warning from the documentary
>>
>>4672113
>Oh that arrogance, that hubris.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HOLY SHIT
THIS IS WHAT SLAVES ACTUALLY BELIVE
>YES, IGNORE YOUR SENSES AND HUMAN EXPERIENCE, GOY
>>
>>4672109

*sigh*

Why does he imply that reflections from the lunar surface are the same as from manmade reflectors when they clearly do not give the same results? Scientists have to aim at the reflectors and when they hit it, a distinct signature is returned, and can’t be confused with just it bouncing of the moons surface. If it was that simple, the USSR would not have installed their own reflectors, and China would not be using the US reflectors for their space program.
Why does he not reveal that 380kg of moon rocks were brought back, and that rocks from Antarctica are impossible to pass off as coming from the moon? The re-entry changes themselves would give it away and their exposure to moisture would change the chemical composition of the rocks. And it is impossible to fake the structure of rocks never exposed to weathering or water, have high Helium-3 content, micrometeorite impacts on the outside, and changes consistent with billions of years of solar wind exposure.
Why, in arguing that a line in the horizon separating foreground and mountains proves that front projection was used, doesn’t show the many other pictures without a line? How are these front projection then? You can’t just pick a couple that have the line because they are in a valley or crater, and then not show the other pictures. Plus there is video of the astronauts running 50 to 100 yards towards the horizon and over that so called line that separates the front projection screen, as well as 360 degree pans of over 30 different sites on the moon. How do they do that?
>>
>>4672113
>Even though you KNOW something you actually don't because muh "experts" said otherwise.
I'm not joking, I want you to kill yourself. This world will be better when cattle like you die.
>>
>>4672143

Why, when they show the Apollo 15 landing model used for simulation, he only compares the images of the simulator with the images of Apollo 15 as they would appear a few km up, and don’t show the ever-increasing details in the Apollo videos as the LM descends and lands?
Why does he lie that the moon orbiters before the moon landing had the resolution to be able to produce the fine details of the moon's surface seen in the moon videos? NASA did not have the knowledge beforehand of what the surface looked like closer than a few kilometres up.
Why, when talking about the Van Allen Belt, does he rely on quotes from Van Allen from 1959 and 1961, but doesn’t quote his more recent one in 2002 where he says radiation is not a problem? He claims the Soviets believed the radiation was too high, but they sent a probe with two tortoises to the moon and back that survived, and they would not have spent billions attempting to go to the moon if the VAB was such a danger.
Why does he not clarify that rivets were used for structural components in the LM, while tape was used only for exterior panels that were meant to cover fuel tanks and wires and had no structural purpose? Why doesn’t he show the internal construction of the lander which shows reinforced walls?
Why, does he not include pictures from the Chinese Lander Rabbit, which in 2014, showed no blast crater, illumination of areas that should have been in shadow, and wet looking tracks in the dirt? This is independent evidence, from a source other than NASA, that confirms the Apollo pics for not having a blast crater, that artificial backlighting was not needed and that the soil does in fact look wet on the moon.
Why does he only show videos of visible exhausts in space, where there are many videos of rockets having a clear exhaust in space? The visible examples are during short bursts or the initial firing of engines which is visible due to the uneven combustion at the start.
>>
>>4672146

Why, when finding just two examples of audio delay not present, didn't he have them examined by an expert to determine if they were originals or had been edited?
Why does he imply that the flaps of the rover were moving because of wind when clearly, they were moving because they were being squashed by the astronaut cleaning the rover as the flap bends it half - would wind bend a flap in half?
Why, when implying the live broadcasts should have dropped out because of misalignment of the antenna, did he not reveal there were many instances when the dropping out did happen?
Why did he lie about the dust coming out from behind the lunar rovers shows evidence of being suspended in air when it clearly did not? Why does he leave out that there is a published paper that analysed the dust and found it to be consistent with Moon's gravity and being in a vacuum.
Why did he not explain that the use of wires in Hollywood always require CGI or other techniques to remove evidence of the wires, and that there were hours of video where this would have had to be done?
Why did they only show pictures where wires could have been used, and not video where it would have been impossible to set up given the large areas and incompatible movements of the astronauts?
Why does he remove footage before and after the one that shows the astronauts feet sliding forward and implied it was because he was held up with a wire? If he included the extra footage, you would clearly see the astronauts’ feet appear and demonstrates it only looked like that because he was on a slope and trying to gain a foothold, and the feet sliding forward was an illusion.
>>
>>4672141
So if I don't personally know the 929 million Mandarin native speakers that means it's not a real language? Like I don't think I can trust those statistic made by them
>>
>>4672150

Why, when trying to explain flag movement, did he carry out an experiment to show how static could not have caused movement, but then did not do the same to show whether air displacement could do it? The astronaut was so far away from the flag that air displacement would not cause any movement but he did not test to prove this.
Why did he not use original footage for one case of the flag moving, but a restored footage which was clearly an artefact of the restoration?
Why, when dismissing the venting of the LM as a cause of the flag movement did he not explain that the venting occurred at exactly the same time as the flag moved?
Why, in order to show the effects of radiation on film the producer irradiated film directly from an x-ray machine which is many times stronger radiation than on the moon, whilst the film in the Apollo missions were protected by cannisters, the spacecraft and the camera?
Why did he show poor quality photos which had their contrast deliberately altered to imply spotlights were used?
Why did he show only one photo with non-parallel photos that converge to a point, and not the dozens of others which either show parallel shadows where the ground is flat, or non-parallel shadows that don’t converge as is found on Earth?
Why does he dismiss lunar dust sticking because of electrostatic forces when there are several peer review papers that show that this is the case? Why does he imply there is water in the dirt to make it stick and form clumps when the complaint from astronauts was that it was fine dust that was the problem and could get in between creases and small gaps?
>>
>>4672153

Why does he consistently use a leaf blower as an analogy for the descent engine exhaust when it is well known that the exhaust spreads out in a vacuum and does not produce a focused jet like in a leaf blower?
Why did they lie about the NVIDIA simulation to infer that the main result was that Neil Armstrong was the reason Buzz lit up in that first photo, rather than the real finding which was that the lunar soil reflected enough light to light up Buzz completely?
Why did he not show the pictures of the Astronauts after they just returned to Earth where they were ecstatic, but focused on a press conference weeks after, which included quarantine and a room full of reporters.
>>
>>4672145

That's the problem. You don't actually know shit. You just pretend and think you do. Dunning-Kruger
>>
>>4672143
>>4672146
>>4672150
>>4672153
>>4672156

he will ignore this or call you a globetard
>>
>>4672114
>No it does not
Yes, it actually does. You are a niggercattle SLAVE

>>Long paragraph of you not knowing what science is
Fuck, you're actually braindead. I even said that science is distinguished from scientism, moron. And everything I listed does happen because scientism has many followers.

>Other ideas are not "suppressed". They are ignored or no longer used because they can be proven to be wrong and idiotic
To give two examples of things which are factually correct but suppressed by the orthodox scientism establishment: race realism and terrain theory (as opposed to germ theory)

>science is some ebil field full of heckin libtards and paid shills that lie about everything
This, but unironically. Of course, it isn't completely like that, but almost every, if not every, facet of science has been corrupted. You are a true believer in scientism to the point where you discount observable reality and lived experience because someone with "authority" disagreed.

>Consider a psychiatrist.
The entire field of psychiatry is a scam and a lie.
>>
>>4672157
>you don't know things that you have actually experienced, those authority figures know better than you
I do not say this lightly: you are a slave.

>>4672151
Complete strawman, but that's not surprising coming from a cultist who doesn't understand basic epistemology.
>>
>>4672164
>strawman
You are saying that you cannot trust anything that you didn't see and prove yourself, right? So for you countries you haven't been in don't exist, right? Or do you just apply that to stuff you don't like?
>>
>>4672170
>You are saying that you cannot trust anything that you didn't see and prove yourself, right?
That's not exactly what I said, but I implied it to an extent. In this age of deception it is better to be wary and skeptical.

Your post was irrelevant. A non-sequitur. I was talking about my lived experience proving so-called experts wrong, which it does, and I gave examples as to what I meant.
>Don't trust your lying eyes
This makes you an ideologue and a slave
>>
>>4672141
i hope your pet rock is made of uranium
you know... uranium that gives you cancer... oh wait there is no cancer in your perfect little world so you dont have to fear anything but your own little shadow.
Dont tell me shadows are also not real...
>>
>>4672174
>that post
lmao
You are either extremely retarded or a bot/shill
>>
>>4672143
>>4672146
>>4672150
>>4672153
>>4672156
nice break down of typical moonhoax/flat earth poor thinking habits coupled with incredible dishonesty and deception
>>
>>4672162

uh ohh liwttle bawby is gewtting madddd :((

>race realism
>muh racial feelings
no basis in reality. IQ is environmental
>Terrain theory
It is important to live in a healthy environment, but if you happen to become sick, you still should be treated. Irrelevant to the discussion.

They are not "suppressed". Just ignored. You won't lose your job for believing in Terrain theory lmao. You'll be asked to prove your claims through experiments.

>You are a true believer in scientism to the point where you discount observable reality and lived experience because someone with "authority" disagreed.

you like to say that to delude yourself, but you can observe that the Earth is ball-shaped. Notice how you ignore every single piece of evidence I give you for this. You just continue going "B-BUT MUH SCIENTISM MUH FEEWWINGS" like an autist. Your "experiences" mean jackshit when you are objectively wrong.

Tell me what experience and observations YOU have made to conclude the Earth is not a sphere. Do not dodge this request, please.

science being perhaps wrong about certain things does not disprove other things that you can observe by yourself you fucking retard "freethinker". Globe earth is not scientism. It just happens to be the objective truth. So is space. If you go "NUH UH THAT IS FAKE BECAUSE THIS ONE SCIENTIFIC THEORY IS FAKE ACCORDING TO ME LMAO" you just look like a retard. Sorry man. Get help.

>The entire field of psychiatry is a scam and a lie
Please never procreate, so at least your children won't suffer under the leadership of such a retard
>>
>>4672164

>Everyone is an npc slave cattle sheep brainwashed by the evil government 5G beams xD

Conspiracy theorist schizos will go to great lengths to prove they are special boys. Do you guys feed on attention? Woah dude you are such an epic freethinker free from the evil satanist influence. Do you have any other personality traits, though? Do you want a fucking medal for searching for a minute on Youtube and finding the supposed "censored" flat earth videos and finding "evidence" in fringe facebook groups and /pol/?
>>
>Euros wake up
>Thread goes to shit and gets filled with schizos that are off their meds

Nuke Europe already
>>
>>4672177
Ah that oneliner
if you have no argument, insulting is the worst way to admit defeat.
To explain my post for your small brain: uranium can give you cancer becouse its radioactive.
Assuming (because of no experience or trust in experts with radioactivity) said rock to be safe is simply suicidal.
>>
File: 1632396581238.webm (2.5 MB, 1280x720)
2.5 MB
2.5 MB WEBM
>>
>>4672173
You've proven shit. You are "skeptical" of stuff and yet trust some randos on youtube who apparently cracked the code but none of them can create a model that explains the most basic shit. You can't even fucking explain a lunar eclipse without some invisible yet sun blocking sci-fi moon. Every time someone asks you questions to explain something you either ignore it or deflect with "slave".
>>
>>4672192

woah why is the firmament getting thinner?? I thought nothing could get through it. Any flatchads on the case?
>>
>>4672180
You are nothing more than a slave to contemporary ideology. Calling you what you are, a braindead niggercattle slave and a moronic retard, doesn't mean I'm mad. I want you and everyone like you to FUCKING DIE, though, because your mindless compliance with authority is creating hell on earth. Trust the science, bro. Go get injected with toxic heavy metals as a treatment against viral infection when viruses don't even exist in the first place. Go live in a pod and eat insects and soi burgers to "save the planet". Give up privacy and freedom and everything it means to be a human because experts told you it was the right thing to do. Get all blended up in a shit colored slave-mass, because "race doesn't real shekelburg told me so, ignore your instincts and believe what antiracist cultists say."
You don't know how to think for yourself. I feel a cold hatred for all you niggercattle, and with a smile on my face I'd burn you all. Stone-fucking-cold, I want you dead.

>you like to say that to delude yourself, but you can observe that the Earth is ball-shaped. Notice how you ignore every single piece of evidence I give you for this. You just continue going "B-BUT MUH SCIENTISM MUH FEEWWINGS" like an autist. Your "experiences" mean jackshit when you are objectively wrong.
I wasn't talking about earth at that point. I was talking about you holding the standard for being correct as "scientists told me so, ignore your lived experience".

>Tell me what experience and observations YOU have made to conclude the Earth is not a sphere. Do not dodge this request, please.
I never claimed anything about that. The only thing I can say is that from my perspective I don't think the sun is millions of miles away. I have looked at it and I don't believe it.

>Get help.
Die in a fire.

>Please never procreate, so at least your children won't suffer under the leadership of such a retard
t. true believer
>>
>>4672211

>schizo baby has a meltdown and spews all his other conspiracy theories he learnt on /pol/ and facebook
>I-IM NOT MAD BTW

LOL

>The only thing I can say is that from my perspective I don't think the sun is millions of miles away. I have looked at it and I don't believe it.

You "not thinking" it's far away doesn't mean it's not though lmao. Literally feelings over facts. You not believing does not change reality.

Flat earthers have a problem understanding scale, so it's okay. You'll get there maybe one day

>N-NOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T USE ADVANCED TOOLS TO OBSERVE THE WORLD WWE MUST BE CAVEMEN FOREVER TRUST YOUR HECKIN EYES BROOOOOOO NEVER STRIVE FOR MORE KNOWLEDGE

>Die in a fire.
No seriously, get help. It's never too late to actually go talk to people irl and not live in your imaginary conspiracy bubble where everything and everybody is against you

Man I thought maybe you were the one tard who is well educated and very smart, but no. You are human trash like every single flat earther I talk to. I doubt your IQ is much higher than those niggers you oh so much despise lmao
>>
>>4672192

stretch the video out and use a ruler lmao. Why do you guys even bother?
>>
>>4672211
pi is 3,1415926535
g is 9.81m/s^2
2+2=4

your view on things dont change that.
And if you to stupit to see the bigger picture you better leave the internet.

Also: you dont make friends or even a good conversation if you with everyone around death and demise.
Hope you are ready to be killed oneday becouse who is wish harm to others will only get harmed by others.
>>
>>4672183
>Everyone is an npc slave cattle sheep brainwashed by the evil government
Yes.
It's not that I'm special. I woke up.

>>4672189
You made an irrelevant shitpost and ignored the very obvious point that I made. I understood what you were saying, but I'm not as retarded as you, so I recognized that it isn't related to that post chain in any way and didn't bother to give a substantive response to an insubstantive post.

>>4672195
Damn, you guys are actually retarded and ignored the entirety of what my most recent posts are about. It had nothing to do with flat earth at that point. What I have been talking about is basic epistemology, which is controversial only to followers of scientism. If you genuinely believe that you can't draw conclusions or know something from lived experience if it's contradicted by something
I am skeptical of FE, I don't claim to know that it's true.

>>4672218
It's not imaginary, you retard. You are just so ignorant that believe all their narratives and you are sleepwalking into tyranny while dragging every awake human with you. If I could kill everyone like you I absolutely would, just to save myself. You can read government and ngo documents and see that they admit what they are doing, they admit their plan.
>You "not thinking" it's far away doesn't mean it's not though lmao. Literally feelings over facts. You not believing does not change reality.
>Literally feelings over facts. You not believing does not change reality.
I agree in principle, but in this specific case, you have not proven that the sun is 93 million miles away. You do not know that the sun is 93 million miles away.
>No seriously, get help.
The only help I need is help escaping this hellscape of modern society.
>>4672224
>even a good conversation
I don't even care about that. Not with people who can't even respond to what I actually said.
>will only get harmed by others
I would be harmed either way in the years to come. I accept the nature of life, which is struggle.
>>
File: Pi-unrolled-720.gif (141 KB, 720x228)
141 KB
141 KB GIF
>>4672234
they see me rollin' they hatin
>>
>>4672234

You sound like a larping bitching 16year old. If you want to escape from nwo, put a bullet in your head and stop being obnoxious
>>
>>4671792
yes and? all of the orbits in that pic of planets in the solar system are mostly parallel to one another, and the orbits of moons are also parallel-ish to that.
>>
>>4672248
>sick back and forth
still not a corkscrew.
but maybe i'm just angry at space not being perfectly simple like it is in my videogames
>>
>>4672245
Moon spins around earth
but earth (with moon) spins around the sun
An observer on the sun seen the moon doing some sick back and forth.
Now imagen how stupit the our moons orbit look for aliens in the center of the milky way?
>>
File: isq.gif (32 KB, 600x330)
32 KB
32 KB GIF
>>4672211
>The only thing I can say is that from my perspective I don't think the sun is millions of miles away. I have looked at it and I don't believe it.
The intensity of light decreases rapidly with distance we know the formula and you've observed this in your own life as well, if you try to deny something as objective as that then you're not arguing in good faith.
Because of this alone a small local sun is simply not possible and would not look like what we're seeing, not to mention it contradicts all other observations we've made.
Just because you've seen something and drew a conclusion doesn't mean it's the correct conclusion.

I also see that you're implying that "science" is one monolithic entity, and that you need blind faith to accept the conclusions of experts, because through the prism of your religious views everyone else must also be a believer in something.
While I personally can't validate everything I'm being told, for the most part I don't have to, if we had the wrong idea about math and physics then the all of the high tech shit we use today just wouldn't work.
Another thing people like you love to say is that if we don't have the answers to absolutely everything then we might as well know nothing at all, and that somehow your ideas are just as valid, they're not.
>>
>>4672234

You will regret being such an abhorrent schizo in a few decades when everyone you know will already be happily married and have children while you will waste more time believing the newest conspiracies you heard online. I am glad, honestly. I hope you shower in shame for being such a pathetic loser
>>
>>4672252
you didn't fix your typos
but anyway i concede the point, see also >>4672251
>>
>>4672251
i changed sun to the moon
becouse for a milky way observer our sun moves like a planet but our moon muss look like some realy drunk madlad.
>>4672252
>>
>>4672260
that's because the observer in the rest of milky way (or worse, beyond it) will understand that the biggest gravity force enacting on Luna is from Terra, the nthe second biggest is from the rest of the Solar System, then the next is from the galactic center of Milky Way and the rest of the star systems around. Thus, to look at Luna's path on it's own will be as retarded to the observer as eating soup with a fork
>>
>>4672218
>governments, NGOs, media, scientists, doctors, etc all pushing pro-vegan malnutrition diet propaganda and fighting against meat consumption so the meat supply is already lower and meat is more expensive and it's only going to get worse because they are working towards the complete eradication of private farms and red meat production
>governments, NGOs, media, etc all spouting anti-White propaganda, criminalizing white in-group preference and racial solidarity and supporting mass immigration and race mixing, meaning that whites are expected to become a minority within all their own lands by the mid-21st century
>scientists disproving germ theory and virology yet governments, NGOs, media, etc forcing a scamdemic on us to take away our freedom and steal money from the middle and lower classes and give it to the rich
>governments, NGOs, media, etc talking about the future being humans owning nothing, living in slave pods in smart cities and eating bugs
All this and more can be observed. But it's just a conspiracy bro. Those mountains of evidence should be discarded because a talking head on tv told me it's a crazy conspiracy theory.
Watch your world as it crumbles.
btw my dad is genius level IQ and I didn't fall far from the tree
as for psychiatry
https://pastebin.com/rzWAPZTT

>You are human trash
You are not even human. You are a slave. Sincerely.

>>4672244
>If you want to escape from nwo, put a bullet in your head and stop being obnoxious
No, I won't.

>>4672234
should say
*contradicted by something an "expert" says, you are a slave, not a human.

>>4672253
I am talking about scientism. Scientism has many proponents, including the scientific establishment (in other words, the mainstream), and many followers who repeat their talking points in lieu of exercising skepticism and common sense. The claim that race isn't real is an example of scientism in action. The claim that male-to-female transgenders are women is another.
I am not religious in the slightest
>>
>>4672266
why i have to imagen a gray alien with a fork eating soup saying: "wait there moon does what orbit? How is this even in line with our geocentric model?!"
>>
>>4672254
You are delusional and your world view is not based in reality. Things will get very bad very quickly unless humans stand up and throw off their shackles. If that happens then people will be happily married and have children, otherwise humans will live as slaves.

You can't actually contradict anything in my post so you resort to name-calling and tone-policing. I will be glad when cattle like you get exactly what you deserve, which is a culling and eternal slavery.
>>
>>4672234
>If you genuinely believe that you can't draw conclusions or know something from lived experience
ever consider that your eyes and ears can't detect everything that exists around you, and can also lead to misunderstandings due how perception works? You can't just look at the sun and know everything about it. You have to use other tools to get the full picture.
>>
>>4672273
>The claim that race isn't real is an example of scientism in action. The claim that male-to-female transgenders are women is another.
They're also completely irrelevant to the discussion we're having about space or the flat earth.

The current religion of the west is equality and tolerance, this is why this progressive shit is pushed onto people at every turn.
The rushed Covid vaccines being hyped as safe and effective are nothing new either, the for profit healthcare model incentivises corporations to do this shit, same with Thalidomide back in the day.
When profit motives or political ideology takes precedence over facts and integrity you get this clownworld insanity, but it doesn't mean absolutely every single field of science is tainted.
>>
>>4672273

>I didn't fall far from the tree

You got lunged into the fucking stratosphere instead. I feel bad for your father
>>
>>4672278

everyone else is happy and having children and living a normal life while you see everything through schizo goggles
>>
>>4672273
>btw my dad is genius level IQ and I didn't fall far from the tree

bro you talk like an angsty manchild. Stop being such a faggot lmao
>>
>>4672282
How much clearer can I make it? I am talking in principle, not specifically about the sun. Several anons disagreed that someone could know something when they are contradicted by scientists, doctors, and journalists.
Anyway, as an ordinary human you don't need a full understanding to be able to live your life or draw conclusions that work well enough.
If by the size of the sun and the way its rays fall I perceive it as being nearby, and I cannot independently verify and know for sure that globe earth and space claims are true, and there are tons of questionable things about them like satellites and space travel and the moon landing, then why should I default to believing it? Could my perception be wrong or incomplete? Yes, but I don't need a scientist to tell me everything. I trust my senses and instincts enough.

>>4672287
>They're also completely irrelevant to the discussion we're having about space or the flat earth.
I initially gave a vague example of why it's sensible to distrust scientific authority and it spiralled from there

>but it doesn't mean absolutely every single field of science is tainted
Almost all are. It's a problem with the structure of the system. Governments, universities and labs and how, why and from whom they receive funding. Journals and NGOs controlling the narrative by controlling who gets published. Scientists are cancelled and passed over for grants all the time. The establishment hides or suppresses information it doesn't like.

>>4672318
My IQ is likely much higher than yours. You can't understand nuance.

>>4672325
I'll talk however I want on 4chan. I'm an obnoxious shitposter but most of what I say is actually correct.

>>4672319
Observably incorrect.
I am more mentally healthy than you. Seeking vengeance is how a human naturally is. Looking at reality rather than being a brainwashed slave is how a human naturally is. We are killers and carnivores by nature. You are a domesticated dog, much lower than a human.
>>
Globetards, how do you explain how no matter how you go the horizon stays at eye level which is only possible on a flat Earth?
>>
>>4672050
>>4672055
>>4672058
>>4672060
>>4672062
>>4672063
>>4672069
>>4672072
>>4672073
>>4672074
>>4672078
>>4672083
>>4672084
>>4672088
>>4672093
>>4672095
>>4672101
Post the one where he talks about the "we saw no stars" interview. That's the funniest one
>>
>>4672337
>the horizon stays at eye level
It doesn't.
Do you really think you can tell if something is a couple of arcminutes bellow eye-level with your naked eyes?
>>
>>4672329

Holy shit you are a textbook definition of Dunning-Kruger. You must be trolling, man. There is no way you are a real person
>>
>>4672356
>“A time is coming when men will become retarded, and when they see someone who is not retarded, they will attack him, saying, 'You are retarded; you are not like us.”
>>
>>4672329

Then don't talk about the shit you don't understand at all, you chimp. You can independelty verify that the Earth is a globe. Many proof has been given to you, but you ignored it. You love being a victim and thinking everyone is out to get you.
>>
>>4672360
>You can independelty verify that the Earth is a globe.
Incorrect
>Many proof has been given to you, but you ignored it.
Where?
>You love being a victim and thinking everyone is out to get you.
Accepting reality =/= having a victim complex
>>
>>4672359

>I am so smart you normies just don't get it xD look at how smart I am brooo did you know my father is a genius lmao?

I too was 15 once, anon. You'll grow up You're really not as smart as you'd like to believe. You sound like a pain in the ass to be around.
>>
>>4672359

woah deep quote anon. Did your genius father think it up?
>>
>>4672362
>I am so smart you normies just don't get it
Yes.
>>
>>4670538
> a hole in the Georgia guide stones remains permanently fixed on Polaris.

Not any more lmao.
>>
File: 1652836487369.webm (2.88 MB, 1280x720)
2.88 MB
2.88 MB WEBM
ITT: globetards that pretends to not understand the difference between illumination of the sun and hollywood light effects.
>>
>>4672365
IQ doesn't matter that much, but I certainly am smarter than the vast majority of blacks. You are just jelly that your father wasn't a handsome 165 iq chad. 13 year old girls crush on me. You mad bro?
>>
>>4672370
and yet flat earthers avoid math and refuse to accept its prediction powers.
>>
>>4672361

>incorrect
>Where?

>>4667997
>>4668033
>>4668118

I linked these to you like 3 times and you never mentioned them. Strange. Here is proof of curvature too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8MboQzXO1o

and here are atleast 50 proofs that the Earth is a globe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC5RalYWZ5Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQl8h7Aa75s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bHqBy92iGM

He has more, but I can't be assed to link every single one

>B-but he's a satanist conspiracy shill

Not an argument

>H-heh I'll just ignore the evidence h-heh

Not an argument

>B-but those don't count

kys so your bloodline gets cleansed
>>
>>4672374

Are you gonna start rambling about the age of consent too now?
>>
File: 1645992369773.webm (3.83 MB, 900x506)
3.83 MB
3.83 MB WEBM
>>4672376
And you can't spot the difference between filmtricks and reality? Cognitive dissonance mixed with a religious belief.
>>
>>4672374

I feel bad that your chad father has to deal with such a huge disappointment
>>
>>4672350
When I look out on the ocean the horizon is straight at my eye level, not "below". Where is your sphere’s physical horizon?
>>
>>4672379
Okay, well, I'll look into it. I never claimed to know either way. I still think the moon landing is a hoax though.

>>4672380
>age of consent
What's that?
>>
How do lunar phases and eclipses work on a flat earth again? I've been told a part of the moon becomes invisible for the phases, but many times I saw an obvious shadow that is slightly darker than the rest of the sky
>>
>>4672384
My dad is a follower of scientism and believes in Jesus too. So his perception is off. If he feels that he failed to raise me properly or instill his values and I turned out to be a "huge disappointment", then that's on him, and it's his opinion rather than an objective truth, so don't feel too bad for him.
I bet you feel really proud of yourself for going along with society's narrative. You're not a failure, because you do all the things that make humans slaves to the system.
>>
File: 1653511945711.webm (2.31 MB, 640x360)
2.31 MB
2.31 MB WEBM
>>
>>4672400

>brags about the IQ of his father
>His father believes the exact opposite stuff he does

lmao
>>
>>4672404
refer to
>>4670632
>>
>>4672407
High IQ doesn't make you correct. Are you gonna claim Jesus is Lord, too? I'm far more practical than my idealist father. It's like Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker but in reverse. I love my heckin space filmerinos.
>>
>>4672404

In making mathematical models, physicists often remove real-world details that have little influence over the final results for simplifications. In flight-dynamics, it is often perfectly adequate to assume Earth is flat & non-rotating.

Flat-Earthers claimed to have exposed ‘a secret document’ from NASA, saying that Earth is flat & non-rotating. In reality, the document is simply a derivation of a flight dynamics problem, assuming flat and non-rotating Earth, which is a common assumption made to simplify flight models. It does not imply the Earth is flat and non-rotating.

Solving problems in physics involves some simplification. As an example, a thrown ball is affected by many factors, including air resistance, Earth’s curvature, wind speed and direction, Earth’s rotation, Earth’s motion around the sun, the sun’s orbit around the galaxy, etc. If we want to calculate the path taken by the ball, a lot of these things can be left out, and the results will still be practically correct.

In the paper “Tensor Flight Dynamics”, Prof. Peter Zipfel listed the various flight models he has created. He used the flat model for simpler problems like fighter aircraft and air-to-air missile. For other models like a cruise missile, he used the spherical model. And for more complex problems like rocket booster & hypersonic cruise missile, he used the WGS84 model.

the shape and motion of Earth exert too little influence over the problem, and we can afford to leave them out without affecting the final results. More complex and more accurate models are available if the problem warrants them.

Flat-Earthers fished for the keyword “flat earth” over NASA’s site and cherry-picked the documents where it can be presented as if NASA tells us the Earth is flat. In reality, they have many more documents containing the keyword “spherical earth,” too. But flat-Earthers are not as interested.
>>
>>4672385
no it's not, it's a fraction of an arc-second below eye-level and the higher you go the more it dips down, it's just so small that you can't tell the difference.
>>
>>4672400
if you're trying for the angsty arrogant tone of a teenager i'd say you just about nailed it.
>>
>>4672418
theres a whole bunch of these kinds of papers listed here https://mctoon.net/govdocs/
They often assume other things, such as constant weight etc, even though that's not possible for a real aircraft. flat earthers just cant into idealized models.
>>
>>4672426
Find anything wrong about any of my posts
>>
File: polaris.angle_copy.gif (134 KB, 1021x568)
134 KB
134 KB GIF
>>4672430
i just told you. but anyway, guess its better to keep away from personal insults if possible. Take a look at picrel and see what you think. A flat plane earth would predict Polaris being visible way above the horizon all the way to the edge/icewall etc. But in reality it can't be seen once you cross the equator. doesn't that lend support to the earth being a globe?
>>
>>4672422
What is your verifiable evidence for surface curvature measurement that validates the claimed radius?
>>
>>4672445
AE map has been debunked already, even by other flat earthers.
>>
>>4672379
>Here is proof of curvature
Give me the time stamp where a 3959 mile radius sphere’s surface curvature rate is acknowledged. The video is not proof of curvature. That is perspective.
The globe – a sphere with a 3959 mile radius -- has fixed geometry with a fixed curvature rate, so the horizon would be geometric and at a fixed location. Comparative measurements and repeatable long distance observations show that the claimed geometry is not observed in reality.
>>
>>4672445
Idc if I sound like a teenager because I don't see the value of being the kind of grown-up society wants me to be. It's stifling. I'd rather keep some of my childishness

>>4672445
To elaborate on >>4672450
Yes that argument, as well as the sun and many others, debunk the AE map.
>>
So how does a boat with a flag in it completely disappear from 500 ft away????? there should not even be an inch of curve in 500 ft.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdDkhZx1oe4
>>
>>4672443
>>4672448
None of your business
>>
>>4672465
So how do you expect me to believe you when you don't have verifiable proof?
>>
File: curvature.gif (2 MB, 360x202)
2 MB
2 MB GIF
No curvature has ever been verified regardless of how high a civilian or an amateur balloon with a camera has gone.
>>
>>4672460

If a distant boat is not visible, then it is because of at least one of these reasons:

Our eyes have limited angular resolution and are unable to resolve the ship at that distance.
The atmospheric condition is limiting our visibility.
The curvature of the Earth obscures the ship.
Flat-Earthers like to demonstrate that a previously invisible ship at a distance can be made visible by zooming in. They would use it to disprove Earth’s curvature. They are wrong. There are reasons other than Earth’s curvature that can obscure a distant boat.


Our eyesight does not have sufficient angular resolution to recognize the distant boat. Zooming in improves angular resolution, and reveals the boat.

It is the same reason germs on our hands are not visible although they are right in front of our eyes. A microscope improves angular resolution and can reveal them.

Zooming in cannot overcome the limited visibility imposed by Earth’s atmosphere, and will never see through the completely opaque barrier in the form of the curvature of the Earth.

If the ship is already behind the curvature of the Earth, then no amount of zoom can make the vessel reappear.
>>
File: flatrth.webm (929 KB, 1062x804)
929 KB
929 KB WEBM
Is this another episode of flatties not understanding scale?
>>
File: 1658780908162938.webm (5.65 MB, 1080x1080)
5.65 MB
5.65 MB WEBM
>>4672479

stretching your image out literally shows a visible curvature lmao. Do you guys never bother to actually check this shit?

Here's a video of curvature from SpaceX

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbSwFU6tY1c
SpaceX does not use fisheye lens

>B-but that doesn't count
>B-but that is fake

I accept your concession
>>
>>4672450
so whats another map to use?
>>
>>4672479

You can literally see a slight curvature in the gif
>>
>>4672495
Idk, I never claimed to know anything about flat earth
>>
>>4672503
how do you know the AE map is debunked then?
>>
>>4672482
We will never see the form of the curvature of the earth. So, you admit you’re not starting with any direct observation. But an assumption you believe in, and work backwards to confirm. That’s how you theorize, not provide demonstrable proof. Yet you’re treating this backwards method as a substitute for demonstrable proof. One of many things it can be called other than fraud, is forcing your beliefs on others.
>>
>>4672494
Do you know what the radius of your globe is supposed to be?
>>
File: Fish-Eye_Lense_3.gif (4.79 MB, 640x360)
4.79 MB
4.79 MB GIF
>>4672494
Gotta love how the earth curves in the opposite direction, when an existing curve can’t be curved in the opposite direction. Meaning there is no curve there in the first place.
>>
>>4672512
Well I know that, but that's about it.
>>
>>4672529

In images taken using a fisheye lens, a straight line will remain straight if it crosses the center of the image. We can use this attribute to determine if a line is straight in reality.

In any fisheye videos taken from a high altitude, there should be plenty of moments where the horizon crosses the center of the image, and we can use those to determine that the horizon line is curved in the real world.


If the horizon is above the center point, the fisheye distortion will exaggerate the curvature. The horizon will look curved more than in reality. On the other hand, if the horizon is below the center point, the fisheye distortion will bend lines in the other direction, and at some point, Earth’s curvature will appear concave as a result.

Only when the line crosses the center point of the image, we can determine if a line is straight in the real world. A straight line crossing the center of the image will appear straight, and if a line crossing the center of the image appears curved, then it must be curved in reality. It is how we can determine the horizon is curved even if the video was taken using a fisheye lens.

Flat-Earthers often focus themselves on the edges of the frame where fisheye distortion will exaggerate the curvature or turn the curve to look concave and then dismiss the video entirely. Others will cherry-pick moments where the distortion will turn the curve to appear flat and present them as “proof” of a supposed flat Earth. By understanding the characteristics of the distortion, we can use the fisheye videos to prove Earth’s curvature and avoid their deception.
>>
>>4672530
how do you know that? i've been talking to flat earthers for ages and ive never had anyone say that. they might deny having a map at all of course, but thats different.
>>
>>4672523

>If I ignore all evidence, it doesn't exist
>la la la I can't hear you
>If I call everything fake, maybe I will be able to groom some young people into believing the flat earth

So, which con man flat earth guru do you subscribe to on Youtube?
>>
>bump limit reached
>No flat earther has explained to me how lunar eclipses and phases work on a flat earth

what a shame :/

Maybe you guys will make something up by the next thread?
>>
>>4672525

I accept your concession. Atleast post a picture next time that actually does not show a curvature lmao
>>
>>4672577

Flat earthers believe that a moon on which you can observe mountains, valleys (and their shadows) is a see-through hologram of some sort that creates its own light, and that a magical invisible object creates the lunar eclipse

that or they just ignore the question altogether or say the truth will come eventually (it never will)

flat earthers can nitpick curvature a lot (unsuccessfully), but things like a lunar eclipse will never make sense on a flat model, while they do on a globe one.
>>
>>4672565
Look up ae flat earth map debunked. You can find flat earthers who talk about it. I watched a video where they explained the problems with it. The flat earth society is controlled opposition and that's the map they use.
>>
>>4672562
how high do you need to get to be able to see water bend with your own eyes like you see on a globe model?
>>
>>4672562
You can’t take an existing curve, and make it bend in the opposite direction even with a fisheye lens.
The only consolation, is that you admit there is no existing curve.
>>
>>4672603
400 km seems to do the trick, probably could go a little lower than that
>>
>>4672562
If the earth is a sphere as you claim, please provide a measurement of curvature that validates the claimed geometry.
>>
>>4672562
>Flat-Earthers often focus themselves on the edges
What do you mean edges? It’s curved in the opposite direction in entirety. Meaning it’s looking at a flat surface.
>>
>>4672584
No matter how high you go the horizon always rises to eye-level. That would not happen on a sphere.
>>
>>4672608
Do you know what the radius of your spherical earth is supposed to be?
>>
>>4672626

now try stretching the images out. Post the results later, please

also, refer to:

>>4672483
>>
Woah flat earthers are still ignoring my question about lunar eclipses :/

Guess I will not get my answer afterall :(
>>
>>4672630
6,357 to 6,378 km why you asking?
>>
File: fe.gif (175 KB, 1000x750)
175 KB
175 KB GIF
Why do you faggots even argue with these people? They can't be reasoned with. They just yell and bitch and moan about everything being fake and cgi. How do you guys enjoy this shit? You won't change their schizo worldview. You wouldn't even if you took them on a trip to space. They're helpless egoistic manchildren.
>>
>>4672668
Nice cope. Now show verifiable evidence for surface curvature measurement that validates the claimed radius of the Earth.
>>
>>4672668
I just hop in every few month to see if they've come up with any new talking points.
>>
>>4672680
Nope. You're here because you're a shill.
>>
>>4672685
a shill for what, lmao?
>>
>>4672692
The globe Earth. Don't play dumb.
>>
>>4672698

How can you be a shill for something that is the objective truth?
>>
>>4672706
I know you get paid to do this. It's beyond obvious at this point. If you really believe the Earth is a sphere then provide verifiable evidence for surface curvature measurement that validates the claimed radius of the Earth.
>>
>>4672632
Stretching images out isn’t how direct observation works. Without direct observation, you’re still projecting assumptions onto observations.
>>
>>4672639
You are told you are on a 3959 mile radius sphere. Do you know what the surface curvature drop rate of a 3959 mile radius sphere would be?
>>
File: consistent.gif (79 KB, 602x684)
79 KB
79 KB GIF
>>4672675

It absolutely can and has been millions of times. It's a very simple experiment that can be done by anyone. The accuracy of the measurement depends on the tools used. Flat Earthers themselves have actually done these experiments many times and each time came up with the correct measurement that confirms curvature and then dismissed it as “we must have done something wrong" because of that. One of those attempts was recorded near the end of the Netflix documentary called Behind the Curve.

Therein lies the rub. Flat Earthers SAY they want to do certain experiments to prove their view, but when any of them actually do it one of two things results. 1) The results show curvature/rotation/etc. and they dismissed the results as flawed. 2) The results show the same and when the experimenter shares the results other Flat Earthers shun him/her as lying and having been brainwashed

If you want more information, consult site below
http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+Curvature+of+the+Earth


While we're at this, can you provide an explanation for how Lunar eclipses happen on a flat model? I have been dying to hear it.
>>
>>4672718

I'm not sure you are getting the point, so I'll help you out

You claim no curvature is visible in those photos, which is proven false by stretching those photos and seeing a clear curvature. If it was flat, stretching the photos wouldn't do shit. Even better when a curvature is clearly visible in the pics where you claim there is none lmao
>>
>>4672714

Paid to do what? I'd love to get paid to talk about shit literal 5 year-olds know lmao. Don't you have a flat earth guru on youtube to subscribe to? Hibbeler productions is a great comedy channel
>>
>>4671755

anon was a prophet
>>
>>4672751
yes or no: do you know what the surface curvature drop rate of a 3959 mile radius sphere would be?
>>
>>4672751
if lunar eclipses "prove the globe" then explain the Selenelion Eclipse.
>>
>>4672778

A selenelion occurs during a lunar eclipse when the sun and moon are observed above the horizon. Atmospheric refraction bends light rays and lifts the image of the sun, and the moon typically up to 0.6°, so both can appear above the horizon.

Flat-Earthers assert that a selenelion should not be possible if Earth is a sphere due to the fact during a lunar eclipse, the sun and moon are 180° apart. In reality, a selenelion is possible because Earth’s atmosphere refracts light.


During a total lunar eclipse, the position of the Sun, Earth, and Moon is in a straight line. In such a configuration, both the Sun and Moon should not be visible at the same time during a lunar eclipse from an observer on Earth.

However, Earth’s atmosphere refracts light. As a result, the actual position of the moon is up to about 0.5° lower than where it appears. And the same thing happens with the sun at the opposite point in the sky. It is the reason that observing both objects in the sky at the same time during a total lunar eclipse is possible.

This phenomenon is called ‘selenelion’ or ‘selenehelion.’ While not impossible, it is a rare phenomenon, and can only happen at a specific place and time during the progression of a total lunar eclipse.

You still have not explained how a lunar eclipse works on a flat model though.
>>
>>4672775

>Gets an explanation
>Gets a link
>Gets an image
>NOOOOOOOO THOSE DON'T COUNT

Every. Single. Time. Are you guys genuinely mentally ill?
>>
>>4672698
being a shill implies being paid for something, doesn't it? I'd love to get money for laughing at you clowns
>>
>>4672740
>Do you know what the surface curvature drop rate of a 3959 mile radius sphere would be?
No, but I could could look it up quite easily if I had to. What's your point? The image in >>4672751 looks about right on first glance.
>>
With these threads I always get the impression that both models have flaws. Maybe I'm a brainlet. Idk. The curvature stuff seems kinda sus, but shit like eclipses and phases make no sense to me on a flat earth

Anyone willing to give me the final redpill?
>>
>>4670334
From first principles:
1) Archimedes' Principle - let the force applied by a fluid to some volume equal the weight of the fluid it displaces:
F = -m g = -ρ g V = -ρ g A Δz
2) Definition of Pressure - Let the force applied by a fluid to some area be equal to the pressure difference times the area
F = ΔP A
3) Equation of State - Let the pressure of a gas be proportional to its mass density.
P = C ρ

Equation equations (1) and (2):
ΔP A = -ρ g A Δz
ΔP = -ρ g Δz
ΔP / Δz = -ρ g

Take the differential limit of the above:
dP/dz = P' = -ρ g

Substitute (3) for the density:
P' = -P g / C

Let (C / g) be some length, H
P' = -P/H
P'/P = -1/H

If the pressure at z = 0 is defined to be Po, then the above differential equation has the solution:
P(z) = Po Exp(-z/H)

If you accept Archimedes' Principle, then it inherently applies that for any large enough system, you can have a gradient from pressure to vacuum. The system scale just needs to be large compared to whatever H works out to be.
>>
>>4672755
You don’t establish curve is visible by manipulating the image. That’s how you show it isn’t visible.
>>
Stand on the southern tip of South Africa, face due south and look into the night sky. The Southern Cross will be in front of you.

Now stand on the southern tip of Argentina, face due south and look into the night sky. The southern cross will be in front of you.

On a flat earth this is impossible because Africa and South America point in different directions and an observer facing south from either of them would see an entirely different sky.

Flat earth disproved. You're welcome. Anything else is irrelevant
>>
>>4672816

Why not? Stretching it out is not faking it lmao. You just make the curvature more visible. Do you think stretching a flat surface makes it magically curve?
>>
File: Lunar_Eclipse_3.webm (1.55 MB, 977x991)
1.55 MB
1.55 MB WEBM
>>4672788
The selenelion eclipse debunks the heliocentric globe model explanation.
>>
Since no country owns Antarctica, no visa is required to travel there. If you are a citizen of a country that is a signatory of the Antarctic Treaty, you do need to get permission to travel to Antarctica. This is nearly always done through tour operators. If you are going on your own, you will most likely be asked to register your intended visit, list your travel plans and possible environmental impact, and agree to follow the regulations of the Treaty. If you come from a country that is not a signatory, you are not required to get a permit, but the ports that you leave from may insist that you have some sort of permission before you go.
>>
>>4672798
>What's your point?
It's your claim.
>>
File: giffed.gif (210 KB, 1080x1080)
210 KB
210 KB GIF
>>4672827
>>
>>4672827

>gets told why he is wrong
>U-UHM IT DEBUNKS IT ANYWAY LMAO

Why are you guys like this
>>
>>4672788
That's assuming you're on a sphere and it's casting a spherical shadow on another alleged sphere that’s allegedly far away… because of the light of yet another alleged sphere… that’s allegedly farther away. None of this is verifiable or verified. You’ve been fed assumptions and told stories about them.
>>
>>4672859
Okay, what's the flat earth explanation?
>>
Y'know, flat earth debunk pics would hold much more weight if you guys learned how to make simple visually pleasing info pics instead of those low res abominations with "LE EPIC GLOBETARD REKT XD" written out on the bottom.

Please just learn how to do this. It will make you look much better. Flatearth ws has a great style for this.
>>
>>4672859

>gets explained how eclipses work on a globe
>N-NUH UH BUT THE EARTH IS NOT A SPHERE ACCORDING TO ME

Mentally deficient
>>
>>4672863
no curvature = flat
What causes a lunar eclipse? We don't know.
>>
>>4672871
refer to:
>>4668118
>>4667997
>>
>>4672870
no curvature = flat
>>
>>4672871

Explain how the southern cross works on a flat earth
>>
>>4672863
The moon is transparent bro, it also shines its own light (that cools down anything it shines upon), there also may or may not be an Antimoon we don't see, it's all logical and makes perfect sense without any ridiculous assumptions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBbyDye4bS4

>>4672871
No retard, we know, you don't. You don't want to post any sort of an explanation because they're all so ridiculous and ad-hoc it makes exposes you for the hacks that you are.
>>
I advise every FE fag to check out this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyD8VIK032o

Literally just fucking watch it. Don't go "NUH UH I DONT LIKE THAT GUY"
>>
>>4672878

People who think the earth is transparent and shines its own light are genuinely mentally ill. Anybody with a decent telescope can observe its mountains, valleys and the shadows they cast
>>
>>4672882
Quit trying to make us give views to that retard who thinks trannyism is normal.
https://youtu.be/fpGqFUStcxc
>>
>>4672877
How would seeing different star trails in the Southern Hemisphere prove curvature? It’s literally a heliocentric belief that celestial phenomenon can be terrestrially explained.
>>
>>4672886

>Literally just fucking watch it. Don't go "NUH UH I DONT LIKE THAT GUY"
>Goes "NUH UH I DONT LIKE THAT GUY"

lmao like clockwork
>>
>>4672885
I agree but we're talking about people who can't be bothered to look at a sunset with sunglasses.
Assuming you can observe the sun setting over a body of water its obvious that it sinks below the horizon rather than fuck off into the distance and shrink, and the optical refraction squishes it so it no longer looks round i.e. exactly what you would expect on a round Earth.

>>4672888
>can't explain a lunar eclipse
>can't explain constellations
>can't explain anything with one coherent model
So the only thing you can explain is that to your naked eye the Earth looks flat
wew lad
>>
>>4672888

I'm not sure you understand what I am saying. A person ANYWHERE in the southern hemisphere will see the same southern cross. We can use Argentina and south africa as an example. This cannot work on a flat model.
>>
>>4672878
We're not on a "ball in space"
>>
>>4672894
>So the only thing you can explain is that to your naked eye the Earth looks flat
Not just looks but is measurable as flat. laser tests and long distance observations measure no curvature. The most fundamental requirement of a sphere is curvature. It can't be found.
>>
>>4672895
What "flat model"?
>>
>>4672905

Flat-Earthers’ laser tests are misleading. They pointed the laser from near the surface toward a distant observer. If the observer sees the beam, they conclude Earth is flat. It was a misunderstanding about laser & how atmospheric refraction affects it.


A laser beam diverges and will not stay focused forever. With a beam divergence of 1 mRad, the laser will have a beam width of 10 m over 10 km. It means the observer at 10 km away in the middle of the beam can change their height by 5 m and still be able to see the direct laser beam.

Lasers are just a form of light. Atmospheric refraction can bend it following Earth’s curvature, like any other form of light. By pointing the laser parallel to the surface, some beams will skirt just above the surface where atmospheric refraction is the highest, deflecting the beam to be visible beyond the curvature.

To the observer, the area very close above the horizon will appear distorted, fuzzy & compressed. It can be difficult to recognize the shape of an object. But a bright, nondescript laser beam can stand out against a dark background.

Therefore, just because a laser beam is visible over a considerable distance, it does not mean Earth is flat. The aforementioned characteristics of laser beams and Earth’s atmosphere cause the beam to be visible.
>>
>>4672905

>it can't be found

every. single. time.

You guys are beyond help. Just repeat the same shit over and over as if you are reciting the flat earth bible. Whenever someone provides evidence you go "NOOOO THAT'S NOT REAL EVIDENCE". When someone asks you how something works on your model, you cannot give an answer. Incredible. Dunning-Kruger.
>>
>>4672882
Here are all 10 challenges addressed in detail, and as i'm sure all Flat Earthers already know, every single one of the 10 challenges presented by Professor Shill actually leads to even more Flat Earth proofs. Enjoy:

https://youtu.be/wmbSqgzpyqo
https://youtu.be/dLBMxnwrkC8
https://youtu.be/nhtzhWZiLrU
https://youtu.be/bMAoJqMAN8A
https://youtu.be/erUKDM7Cmxo
https://youtu.be/Mb_aib2SxFc
https://youtu.be/MPH9QXLkJsU
https://youtu.be/htkuWUOqI4I
>>
File: behind-the-curve-2.webm (4.05 MB, 1080x1080)
4.05 MB
4.05 MB WEBM
>>4672905

LMAO
>>
>>4672897
Every aspect of reality would be completely different from what we observe if your model was actually true.
You either never gave it any deep thought or are too ignorant/stupid to realize the ramifications of what it would mean if the Earth was actually flat.
For example the Earth's magnetic field and the fact that we see auroras close to both the Northern and Southern magnetic poles.
How would any of that shit work if the Sun was small and local i.e. no solar winds, and the Earth was a disc with no core i.e. no magnetic field.

>>4672905
Did you not see this webm >>4668035
Or does that not count because.... reasons?
>>
File: 1628744543090.webm (4.38 MB, 1080x1080)
4.38 MB
4.38 MB WEBM
>>4672529
>>
>>4670361
And contrary to your belief, you don’t have a physical model that duplicates a heliocentric sphere hurling through fictitious space, that maintains level water due to yet another fictional belief in gravity.
>>
>>4672946
>it's just buoyancy bro
>no I'm not telling you what force is pulling things towards the ground in the first place, or why a feather and a hammer fall at the same rate in vacuum :^)
>>
>>4672910
Refraction does not allow you to see around a curve and the laser test in these videos tested for refraction at the same time:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk64OgAx5QU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJ3TLdcVNfA&feature=youtu.be
>>
>>4672930

Jesus man, just link the sources instead. This shit is painful to watch. The guy throws in so many fucking le maymay globetard owned meme clips that it's impossible to fucking watch.

I had to stop watching after the guy tried claiming that globes having "Use for decorative purposes only" stickers on them is proof that the globe model is not used to measure stuff

Also curious that the video has 300 likes, 270 dislikes, but magically no negative comments. Curious that the people that bitch and moan about censorship do the same when someone attempts to explain why they're wrong.
>>
>>4669014
Now I believe that mountains are actually flat as pancakes.
>>
>>4672915
I know. It's upsetting that you don't have proof of the curvature of your ball. Hopefully you get pass the cognitive dissonance and accept that the Earth is flat.
>>
File: 1539995258053.gif (702 KB, 320x240)
702 KB
702 KB GIF
holy fucking shit I beg you flat earthers for ONCE hire a graphic designer. I can't fucking take this shit. Everything you guys shit out is so ugly and low quality. Do you guys outsource these videos to pajeets in editing factories or fucking what? How fucking hard is it to make videos and images that are pleasing on the eye

Unironically the main reason why people are turned away from you schizos is that your images and videos look like fucking schizo vomit with visible .jpg artifacts
>>
>>4672938
Nice controlled oppostion debunking you got there, lmao.
>>
>>4672980

>If someone from my faction turns out to be a retard that accidentally proved my entire delusion wrong, he's a controlled opposition government nasa shill

lmao
>>
>>4672939
>if your model
Why do keep claiming we have a model?
>>
>>4672415
But yet you brought up your own high IQ before?
Does it matter or not?
>>
File: 1646523242444.webm (4.12 MB, 1080x1080)
4.12 MB
4.12 MB WEBM
>>4672930
>first video
>1 Hour video of just stuff, when the guy just asks for a map with a scale
>Have an entire section on VIDEO GAME MAPS for some reason
>Entire video could be condensed to a minute, if they just gave what he wanted, a map with a scale
Guys, I don't think they're gonna give a map. I think the real purpose is to seize the opportunity to shove down as much shit as they believe.
"Hey viewer, you probably don't believe the flat earth and clicked the video to see our answer to Dave's challenge. We'll answer it, BUT FIRST, let me go on a 2-hour long TedTalk on things that are semi-related to the challenge, but doesn't intimately answer it."
>>
>>4672989

>>Have an entire section on VIDEO GAME MAPS for some reason

LMAO I just fucking fast forwarded a bit and he uses the fucking minecraft world map. I'm fucking done
>>
>>4672969
I know the based memes are too much for you but trt to watch the video entirely.
Bots and trolls dislike flat Earth videos and make negative to try to persuade people's opinions so the amount of dislikes that the video has doesn't matter.
>>
>>4672930

Holy shit 20 minutes in and I already can't stand this guy. He talks like he's trying to do an autistic impression of the Joker. Genuinely off his meds
>>
>>4672668
I don't bother arguing since I know they will ignore and misconstrue anything they don't like. I'm just here to see what retarded things they say next.
I have never heard about the anti moon before this, which is pretty funny.
>>
>>4672997

>based memes

the problem is that they're too fucking frequent and cringe as fuck. You're either a facebook faggot or mentally ill if you even remotely chuckled at them. Yet the guy just continues fucking shoving them in. You don't need an hour long video to provide a fucking map
>>
>>4672959
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9Zb3xAgIoY
>>
>>4672986
I only brought it up because he said my IQ was near black IQ. My IQ is nowhere near 85. But plenty of dumb primitive people have lived good lives, so it's not terribly important. It doesn't matter much.
Now look, all I'm saying is that everyone that doesn't think like me should die. Then the few of us who are left can repopulate the world with our incest babies.
They'll be sons of motherfuckers. Daughters of daddy-dicked dolls.
>>
>>4673010
No, it sounds better as daughters of dolls dicked by daddies. Otherwise it sounds like femboys which is not cool.
>>
>>4673002
I know they trigger you lol
>>
>>4672982
It's the same shit that happened with the 9/11 truthers a few years ago. There was a physics prof from Cambridge who was one of those guys who thought the Pentagon was hit with a missile and the towers were brought down by micronukes or whatever the theory was. He spent a year investigating it on his own, interviewing eyewitnesses, running the numbers and shit and came to the conclusion that the NIST description of the attacks on the towers and the Pentagon was mostly sound and that while there was still a lot of hinky shit around the attacks indicative of people on the inside having foreknowledge or being involved in helping the attacks be carried out (which, hell, even I'll admit is almost certainly true), that the community needed to accept the science-side of the attacks.

He was promptly accused of being a government agent and expelled from the community, removed from their little online journals and shit, and so on.
>>
>>4673016

They offend me by their sheer ugliness
>>
>>4673023
You're mad because you can't meme
>>
>>4673024

If you think the memes used in the video are funny, I recommend testing out the theory of gravity asap. Ideally from a tall building.
>>
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/earth-spinning-faster-than-usual-shortest-day-ever/
hahahaha but you didnt feel the acceleration
>>
>>4673027
>I recommend testing out the theory of magic asap
No thanks. It's not even a good theory.
>>
>>4672930

>watch part 3
>not even 2 minutes in
>Talking about how stars are too far away to change in a short amount of time
>Calls it "a bunch of nonsense"
>WOAHHH DUDE LE HECKIN SCARY BIG NUMBERS
>Doesn't elaborate

Stopped watching there. How you lads can sit through like 7 hours of this is truly beyond me
>>
>>4672969
I lost it at this point, this is so wrong compared to what we actually see in terms of day/night distribution, and only creates more problems for FE.
It's completely incompatible with their explanation of seasons that requires the sun to move, because as seen even a slight movement throws the distribution of light completely off.
It's all ad-hoc explanations that kind of sort of look like the real thing, but not really and are mutually incompatible.
In any case I'm not watching 16 hours of schizo ramblings.

>>4672984
Alright then, what do you actually have?

>>4673003
Yeah they fall at the same speed in vacuum

>>4673030
>1.59 milliseconds faster than your average day
lmao
>>
>>4673033

Ironic considering that the FE model requires literal magic for pretty much everything. Density does not explain why things fall down lmao

>It's not even a good theory

Dunning-Kruger
>>
File: psyop.gif (59 KB, 1177x647)
59 KB
59 KB GIF
>>4673037

LMAO this shit is a gem that keeps on giving
>>
>>4673037
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hBDTh1PUK0
>>
>>4673037
Speed acceleration measurement is not force measurement
lmao
>>
>>4673050

Simple answer to this. In the vid brian says "which creates a NEAR perfect vacuum." That is why some feathers move because it is not absolutely perfect and there is a minuscule amount of air resistance.
Also, it doesnt matter which is dropped first. The experiment is to see the behaviors mid flight and how the fall at the same speed. It is not a race.
>>
Any globe proof yet?
>>
https://youtu.be/u9YS3CIcRS8?t=1186
No refraction there.
>>
Claiming that gravity is fake is truly the most brave claim flat earthers make. Why not just make up some magical gravity point under the disk that pulls everything down instead of just pretending it doesn't exist? Density and buoyancy do not explain why things fall down. Such a strange thing to deny.
>>
>>4673055
The feather has no air resistance in a vacuum chamber.
>>
>>4673058

>David Weiss

Post the schizo document that claims he is paid controlled opposition

>>4668121
>>
>>4673049
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>4673050
The feather is elastic not a solid object, a better experiment that will remove this as a factor entirely would be a ping pong ball vs a solid steel ball.
Did you not see the video of them falling in real time? How do you gel that with density/buoyancy?

>>4673053
What causes them to accelerate towards the Earth at the same speed?

>>4673060
If there's no gravity they need to propose an alternative explanation, buoyancy and electromagnetism are laughably wrong.
It would also imply that the earth itself is subject to this alternative force since there's a universal direction in their universe.
So something must also support the Earth in that case, what that would be who knows, magic I guess.
>>
>>4673056
Yea.
Here: >>4672940
>>
>>4673055
Prove that “gravity” is the cause of the claimed effect.
>>
>>4673069

Gravity make object fall down

object fall down success

gravity exist

gravity work even in vacuum

density not

therefore density not reason

thanks for listen
>>
>>4672930

>the part 4 intro

holy fucking shit I can't stand this guy. How do you people enjoy this schizo vomit for 10 hours straight? How hard is it to make a normal fucking 15 minute long video that concisely proves your points and leaving all your epic maymays on your facebook schizo page or something
>>
>>4673069
>>4673081
It also matches perfectly if you test it with a calibrated weight on the poles and the equator.
Funny how you can make predictions and confirm them experimentally.
>>
>>4673067
>What causes them to accelerate towards the Earth at the same speed?
The apple sinks towards its density equilibrium. A helium balloon rises towards its density equilibrium.
>>
Worldwide genocide and a new Adam and Eve
>>
>>4673081
There's no such thing as a vacuum , just a very light medium with almost zero resistance.
>>
God's new children kept safe under the firmament.
>>
Why do balloons burst if they go too far up if the earth is surrounded by a dome? Why would it burst?
>>
>>4673112
God doesn't want things to approach the dome.
>>
>>4673081
Define "gravity" then cite verifiable scientific method proven evidence for its existence.
>>4673092
>It also matches perfectly if you test it with a calibrated weight on the poles and the equator
There's no "south pole" and, the equator is the path of the sun in the sky. It's not on Earth. If you think it is, show me the equator on Earth. All I hear is your belief makes objects fall down, therefore your belief exists.
>>
>>4673117

Flat-Earthers reject gravity because it does not support the flat Earth model. To explain the various phenomena explained by gravity, they invented many different ‘alternative facts’ in place of gravity.

Flat-Earthers agree only on a single thing that the Earth is flat. However, as flat Earth is not fact-based, flat-Earthers cannot agree on practically everything else. Different flat-Earth denominations have their alternative explanations for gravity, all of which lacks predictive power and cannot adequately explain real-world facts.


Some of the “alternative facts” for gravity we can find in various flat-Earth denominations:

Magnetism: objects fall due to Earth’s magnetic field.
Density: objects fall because they are denser.
Dielectric acceleration: objects fall due to the difference of electrical charges between Earth & heavens.
Universal acceleration: objects fall because Earth is accelerated upward by 9.8 m/s2
Atomic model: objects fall just like protons & neutrons in an atom, and the sun floats just like electrons.
Because flat-Earth is not fact-based, but rather about what they think is plausible, we can find many more fringe explanations invented by “creative” individuals in various flat-Earth communities.

We can describe gravity. We can say what it does to other things. We can measure it, predict with it. But we do not know exactly what it is. We only know it is there.
>>
>>4673112
There is no verifiable demonstration for gas pressure without a container. The globe model claims an open system. We wouldn't have any pressure with the available space of outer space.
>>
>>4673129
Who are you talking to?
>>
>>4673130

Atmospheric pressure decreases as altitude increases. A pressure difference can occur without a barrier. Other factors, like gravity, can cause a pressure difference.

Flat-Earthers claim a pressure difference cannot possibly occur without a barrier, like Earth’s atmosphere next to the vacuum of space. In reality, it is not difficult to demonstrate that a pressure difference can exist without a barrier.


Many smartphones and smartwatches are equipped with a pressure sensor that we can use to measure the pressure difference. These devices can easily measure the pressure difference between upstairs and downstairs in a two-story house. Some can even tell the pressure difference when we put it on a table and the floor. There is no barrier involved, yet there is a pressure difference, proving that a pressure difference can exist without a barrier.

The pressure gradient of Earth’s atmosphere is well known. We use it to measure altitude. Our smartphones & smartwatches use it to measure our vertical movements for health monitoring purposes.

Atmospheric pressure decreases as altitude increases. There is no visible boundary between Earth’s atmosphere and space in terms of pressure. There is no abrupt drop in pressure where space begins.

FE assert that it is impossible for the pressurized atmosphere to meet the vacuum of space without any barrier. In reality, the pressure changes gradually. There is no sudden pressure drop between the atmosphere and space.

The Earth retains an atmosphere because gravity pulls air particles toward the center of the Earth. Without something affecting the air —like gravity— air particles would move toward lower pressure, and Earth would lose its atmosphere.
Flat-Earthers claim that Earth should not be able to have an atmosphere because without any barrier separating Earth’s atmosphere and space, it would have been sucked by the vacuum in space. They are wrong. Gravity pulls air and allows Earth to retain an atmosphere.
>>
>>4673129
Flat Earth doesn’t have a model and neither does a sphere Earth.
>>
I have spent 10 hours of my day arguing in this thread
>>
>>4673123
One of the four fundamental forces, people have tested gravitational attraction in a laboratory all the way back in 1797

>>4673130
So you agree that atmospheric pressure decreases as you go higher, but this couldn't possibly be a continuous gradation until you reach vacuum, cool.
>>
>>4673138
You could have spent those 10 hours watching 60% of that schizo's ramblings.
Honestly I come to such discussions hoping to hear something new, but these faggots just deny everything and don't even propose alternative explanations, I'm not even getting any entertainment value out of this.
>>
Will god send me to hell if I turn out to be wrong about the shape of the Earth? Bros im scared what if the flat earthers turn out to be right
>>
>>4673135
You are TOLD that “the vacuum of space is incredibly powerful”:
https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/29832/vacuum-of-space
google “gas pressure in space”
you are told “in ‘outer space ‘the pressure is 1.322 × 10-11 Pa – essentially zero”
so, if you claim "space" then you are, by default, claiming a solid barrier between us and it. Demonstrate gas pressure without physical containment.
>>
>>4673145

The best you can do is just ignore all FE discourse. You will never change these people's minds. Theyre beyond help. Every single time they bring up the same exact retarded points, get debunked and cry about shills and cgi. Every single fucking time. It's like talking to children.

They ignore all evidence and spam the discussion with a billion videos and images, and when ONE of them is left unanswered for longer than 10 minutes, they do a little victory dance and claim the globetards are defeated.

When asked to provide a model, they link a schizo vomit 10 hour long video that dodges the question through filler and gems such as talking about videogame maps.

Truly a sad group of individuals.
>>
>>4673141
>One of the four fundamental forces
Prove this force, then prove how it is caused. What is this "force"? Where does it come from?
>>
>>4673150

How about you literally check the first comment of the post you linked you actual autist
>>
>>4673157

We do not know. We know what it does, though. Enough to know it exists lol. We can make accurate predictions with it. It very much exists.
>>
>>4673141
>people have tested gravitational attraction in a laboratory all the way back in 1797
This is the criteria or it isn't an experiment:
What is the observed natural phenomena in nature?
What is the viable hypothesis?
What is the null hypothesis?
Independent variable?
Dependent variable?
Controlled variable?
>>
>>4673150
>you are, by default, claiming a solid barrier between us and it
No you retard, it's you guys claim should be the case, hence the need for a firmament because you can't imagine another solution.
Are you denying that atmospheric pressure decreases with altitude or not?
Are you gonna deny that you, yes you yourself can go out and buy a telescope and look at other (spherical I might add) planets with atmospheres?
>>
>>4673141
The necessary antecedent for a pressure gradient is pressure, and the necessary antecedent for pressure is a container. If the sky was an infinite volume for gas to fill then the gas we breathe would fill it.
>>
>>4673164

Planets look like balls of plasma when observed. Theyre just fancy stars. Theyre not other worlds
>>
>>4673161
A "pulling force"? how can you manipulate "gravity" to prove it's causing the effect you're claiming it's causing?
>>
>episode 933874 of flat earthers denying gravity

I feel like these threads are a fucking time loop
>>
>>4673173
>Planets look like balls of plasma when observed
No they don't, stop denying reality
>>
I have to confess something anons

I spent several hours arguing with myself in this thread. I have 2 separate folder for flat earth proofs and debunks that I replied to myself with over and over again. See you guys in the next thread
>>
>>4673184
lmao you're probably the only person who enjoyed this thread
>>
>>4673141
>people have tested gravitational attraction in a laboratory
In a scientific experiment what you think is the cause of the effect you observe is the value you need to change and see a change. Show me a scientific experiment that takes “gravity force” out of the equation so we can tell that it’s “gravity force” that “makes things fall”.
>>
>>4673164
We can imagine a gravity-based Earth just fine. It’s simply not feasible.
>>
>>4673056
>closing your eyes don't make the reality less impactful.
Let me ask the counterquestion:
Any flat proof yet that isnt cherry picked nasa hearsay or NWO bullshit?
Bonuspoints if math is added.
>>
>>4673191
Substitute gravity for electromagnetism.
I guess electromagnetism is also not real.
>>
>>4673150
vacuum doesn't suck bro, and the heavier gases down here don't have enough energy to get up there. its that simple.
>>
>>4673161
Then by that logic... why aren't Millions Of Tiny Invisible 3-Toed Gnomes Pulling Things Down?
>>
>>4673201

If you want to think that, nobody is stopping you lmao
>>
No "gravity force" (a pull produced by mass by virtue of mass) has ever been scientifically proven.
>>
>>4673200
“vacuum” meaning a “near 0 pressure, or pressureless environment." Not a “vacuum cleaner”
>>4673207
Why do you believe "pulling force caused by mass"?
>>
>>4673210
g=9.81m/s^2 can only be explained by gravity
if you of couse have a better idea that isnt just a renaming of gravity or a pledge to magic/god... be our guest
>>
File: 1638099819941.webm (5.26 MB, 1080x1080)
5.26 MB
5.26 MB WEBM
>>4673210
>>
>>4673150
>Demonstrate gas pressure without physical containment.
see >>4672814

If you accept Archimedes' Principle of buoyancy, you accept that it inherently implies that you can have a smooth transition from pressure to vacuum provided your system is sufficiently large.
>>
>>4673217
Your idea isn’t worth anything when you’re claiming it as scientific, and cannot prove it scientifically.
>>
Flat earthers will never appreciate the great achievements of humanity. They will instead believe we are in god's tiny cradle that we can never leave and only eternal heaven or hell awaits us after 80 years of existence. What a depressing view of the world. To think that THIS is all there is to our reality.
>>
>>4673221
Based on a belief? Let’s see that in a demonstrable experiment.
>>
>>4672814
Prove "g"
>>
File: baby.gif (4.22 MB, 250x444)
4.22 MB
4.22 MB GIF
>>4673227
When you boil it down this gif is the universe according to flat Earthers.
The firmament is just a big mobile put up there by God to entertain us at night, it's not real worlds just twinkling plasma lights projected on the dome.
>>
No matter how high you go it’s flat
>>
>>4673246

You can very slightly see the curvature though lmao. If you stretch the image in some editing software, it will very nicely show the curvature
>>
>>4673238
>lets mike drop with an acceleration of 9.81m/s^2 that is currently only explained by gravity (in short g)
Your turn.
>>
>>4673246

Woah where did the firmament go?
>>
>>4673231
>Based on a belief?
Based on a fundamentally observable and experimentally validated law of physics that's been understood for ~2200 years. The buoyant force (pressure difference times area) a fluid exerts on an object is equal to the weight of fluid the object displaces. Everything else is just applying definitions of what pressure, force, volume, etc. are and throwing in a dash of calculus at the end.

If you accept the same principal which explains why boats float in water or balloons float in air, you must accept any other implications that arise naturally out of that principal.
>>
>>4673238
You can get the same solution substituting weight and weight density for mass and mass density. What else you got?
>>
>>4673265
Define "g"
>>
>>4673261
Do you know what the curvature rate of a 3959 mile radius sphere would be?
>>
>>4673253
When it comes to the best direct observation, which is the first step of the scientific method, manipulating observation is a breach of direct observation. It’s not unlike playing a pigeon in chess where it knocks the pieces over. You can’t just remake proof to make your beliefs sound like they pass the scientific method.
>>
>>4673281
aswell you cant decline any proof that counters your view.
Are we ready to talk or yell at each other?
>>
>>4673269
I don't have to define g. I can take g out of the entire fucking equation and it still works out the same way - if you accept that there is a concept called "weight" (regardless of what you think causes weight) and if you accept the principle on which boats float, then you must accept what that principle implies.

>>4673273
I don't care what the curvature is - I'm not arguing every single fucking retarded as flat earth argument. I'm only interesting in arguing one point and one point only - that you do not need a hard barrier/container for an atmospheric pressure to exist adjacent to a vacuum - you only need a large enough system scale. The Earth could be shaped like a disk, sphere, cube, or your mom's gaping cunt - NONE of it changes the fact that the firmament argument about pressure and vacuum doesn't fucking work unless you disregard basic observable facts like boats floating in water.
>>
>>4673290
We already established you don’t operate by proof. You operate by substituting theory in place of proof where you don’t acknowledge the difference.
>>4673297
what do you claim "g" is and how have you proven it?
https://www.dropbox.com/s/xxom60j5qyby538/Why%20Things%20Rise%20and%20Fall.pdf?dl=0#
density is the only constant prove me wrong.
why does a small pebble which has less mass sink in water, but a large boat that has more mass float?
10000 helium molecules or 1000000 they still rise but the mass is not the same but their DENSITY IS. this defeats mass attracting mass again.
>>
>>4673318
We never talked bevor i posted >>4673290
so pardon me if you get confused on a anonymous image board.
And how do you end up thinking a theory isnt a result of proof and cant create or lead to more proof in the first place?
>>
>>4673318
>this defeats mass attracting mass again.
Gravity also depends on the distance between the objects density does not, you can measure this shit and prove it.
Distance is not mentioned once in this pdf it's worthless
>>
>>4673318
>DENSITY
p=m/V
Density equals mass divided by volume

volume is X Y and Z axis in meters
now big man... tell us what mass is without using g.
we will wait.
>>
>>4673332
you need to manipulate mass and see a change in the rate of fall because mass is why you claim things fall.
if you cannot do this then your theory does not hold any scientific proof of your claim.
Theory: “a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation; an unproved assumption : conjecture” as opposed to a direct, verifiable, conclusive observation.” -- merriam-webster
>>4673336
cite where/when your g has been measured.
>>
Theories are called theories because they aren’t proven. You silly globeshills. Cite where your "gravity" has been proven via the scientific method.
>>
>>4673352
Fuck you
https://physicsworld.com/a/testing-the-gravitational-inverse-square-law/
>>
>>4673352
i will point you at >>4673340
please explain mass without using gravity.
>>
>>4673363
show me where “Earth’s ‘gravity’” has been measured here on earth. Who did it? When? Where? and How?
>>
>>4673380
expain my question first.
What is mass and how do you know it!
You try to dodge the question becouse you cant explain mass without gravity.
>>
File: 1635090919547.gif (538 KB, 1080x1080)
538 KB
538 KB GIF
>>4673356
There has been proof posted, you're just going "nuh uh".
Photons haven't been observed until 1927, did you think people had no concept of light and electromagnetism before that?
>>
>>4673361
where in your link was your "pull because mass" proven via the scientific method?
>>
>>4673388
Can you read? all of the equations are in here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/xxom60j5qyby538/Why%20Things%20Rise%20and%20Fall.pdf?dl=0#
>>
>>4673403
The article outlines the experiments done to test the inverse square law for gravitational attraction on both a microscopic and an astronomical scale and the results.
If you try to explain everything with density alone then distance would be irrelevant.
Imagine applying the same "logic" to electromagnetism, do you realize how stupid you are?
>>
>>4673447
>mass attracts mass
what is the naturally observed phenomena?
what is the viable hypothesis?
what is the null hypothesis?
independent variable?
dependent variable?
controlled variable?
show how each step was fulfilled in your source.
>>
>>4673162
>Mass is attracted to the earth with a force dependent on their mass and their distance from the center of the earth
>Masses suspended on a torsion bar will be attracted to large masses placed nearby, which will cause the torsion bar to twist at a rate predicted by Newton's law of universal gravitation.
>The amount of torsion bar twist won't depend on the distance between the masses
>The distance between the masses
>The distance the torsion bar moves
>Mass.
>>
>>4673460
>>Mass is attracted to the earth with a force dependent on their mass and their distance from the center of the earth
Proof?
>>
>>4673460
The "center of the earth" is a sphere you have not yet proven.
>>
>>4673460
>>Masses suspended on a torsion bar will be attracted to large masses placed nearby, which will cause the torsion bar to twist at a rate predicted by Newton's law of universal gravitation.
trials with lead balls and highly sensitive scales, multiple torsion bar twist attempts, and other such use of man-made contraptions are not “evidence of gravity.”
>The distance between the masses
how has this alleged “gravity force” been varied in order to prove it?
>>4673460
>Mass.
prove it causes a pull
>>
>>4673474
>>4673480
You guys are talking about the "naturally observed phenomena", which is not actually something that's part of an experiment.
You can do an experiment testing whether X and Y chemical react without having ever seen those two chemicals interact in nature.
>>
>>4673458
Alright then, read one of the papers mentioned:
Current Short–Range Tests of the Gravitational Inverse Square Law Joshua C. Long
>>
>>4673491
is your gravity a naturally occurring phenomena?
where have you observed “gravity force” in nature?
>>4673496
give me the page number where "mass attracts mass" was proven scientifically
>>
>>4673504
>is your gravity a naturally occurring phenomena?
That's what's being tested you retard.
>>
>>4673488
>prove it causes a pull
please see this >>4673218

We have this thread alone full with proof but you keep dodging looking into it. You also fail to give anything for the flat earth model.
How about you stop asking questions you dont want to hear the answers and start giving us some answer.

here is one:
If gravity is not real why things fall with 9.81m/s^2?
>but i explain its mass, density and buoyancy.
then put this in numbers without gravity... we will wait (yet again)
>>
>>4673198
>>
>>4673510
A naturally observed phenomena is what’s being asked. Not a hypothetical being superimposed onto what is never observed.
>>
>>4673516
>video shows magnetism canceling gravity.
You know the theory of electro-magnetism is explained and coexist well with the theory of gravity.
Also what happen to non magnetic objects? How they fall and where is on the flat earth the + or - pole?
>>
>>4673522
Your circular reasoning is retarded
>that's not a naturally observed phenomenon, you haven't proved it
>You can't do an experiment to prove it until you have a naturally observed phenomenon
>>
>>4673515
are you claiming "mass attracts mass" or "bending of space time"?
>>4673515
>If gravity is not real why things fall with 9.81m/s^2?
reciting a measurement of speed is not “proving a force” BTW, Newton's “gravity” theory was replaced and superseded by Einstein's in 1915 and Einstein’s theory has never been proven scientifically either.
>>
>>4673522
Also "naturally observed phenomena" is a goalpost you made up yourself.
>>
>>4673515
That equation is the same rate things fall on a flat stationary earth, versus a hypothetical sphere earth that needs to pull mass to it’s center. The only difference is that mainstream pseudoscience substitutes that rate with a space based scenario that is unprovable by any real scientific experiment.
>>
>>4673531
>measurement of speed
lol. Flat earther intelligence on full display.
>>
File: 1631811603510.webm (3.04 MB, 854x480)
3.04 MB
3.04 MB WEBM
>>4673504
>where have you observed “gravity force” in nature?
Ocean tides, they're found in nature and are cause because of the gravitational force of the sun and moon.
>>
>>4673529
prove "gravity" Newtonian or Einsteinian? are you claiming "mass attracts mass" or "bending of space time"? Answer.
>>4673530
where have you observed “gravity force” in nature? I didn’t make the rules for scientific proof. Though globe believers do want to redefine those rules.
>>
>>4673522
>metal moves to coppercoil
everyone: electro-magnetism can explain it.
>observe falling object
round: gravity can exolain it.
flat: gravity but with a diverent name with many extra steps maybe is able but not realy clear to explain it.

if i am wrong please post your "flat earth downforce" without NWO bullshit or any other diversion ok?
>>
>>4673531
>BTW, Newton's “gravity” theory was replaced and superseded by Einstein's in 1915
https://mctoon.net/einstein/
No it wasn't. Einstein's field equations reduce to Newton's gravitation.
>>
>>4673531
>>4673543
>Newton's “gravity” theory was replaced and superseded by Einstein
>Newtonian or Einsteinian
You treat the existence of the two theories as a supposed conflict, and they use it as “evidence” of wrongdoing. In reality, these are two separate theories that explain the phenomenon of gravity. Einstein’s is more accurate yet more complex. In contrast, Newton’s is simpler but less accurate. Despite having been superseded, Newton’s gravity continues to be used as an excellent approximation of the effect of gravity in most applications.

“Gravity” is the name of the phenomenon. Newton’s law of universal gravitation and Einstein’s general relativity attempt to explain the phenomenon. Newton’s law of universal gravitation describes gravity as a force, while Einstein’s general relativity describes it as a result of space-time curvature.

Newton’s law of universal gravitation is more straightforward and gives sufficiently accurate results for most everyday usage. General relativity is far more accurate but also much more complicated. General relativity can explain phenomena that cannot be explained using Newton’s law and addresses other phenomena not related to gravity.

There are very few cases involving gravity in our everyday lives on Earth that Newton’s law of universal gravitation gives an inaccurate result. It is why Newton’s law of gravity is still used in most situations in our lives.
>>
>>4673543
>where have you observed “gravity force” in nature?
The behavior of the planets and their moons.

>I didn’t make the rules for scientific proof
Yes you did, "scientific proof" doesn't even exist as a concept in science.
>>
>>4673534
if it's man-made then we know the cause.
>>4673545
Newton’s "gravity" -- an alleged force produced by a mass by virtue of it having mass -- has never been measured, never been proven via the scientific method AND, Newtonian ‘gravity’ is supposed to be a single vector of ‘down towards center of mass’ -- you still haven't proven your sphere yet.
>>
>>4673318
>what do you claim "g" is and how have you proven it?
I don't have to prove g, I just told you you dumb faggot - you can replace the entire concept of mass with weight without any reference to mass or 'g' and get the same result.

Let "W" be a weight of a fluid, and "w" be a weight of the fluid per volume (it doesn't matter what causes 'weight', if you accept that 'weight' as a physically measurable and observable property exists, we can describe a weight per volume without invoking any additional physics

Archimedes' Principle
F = -W = -w V = -w A Δz
Pressure
F = ΔP A
Equation of State
P = H w

ΔP A = -w A Δz
ΔP = -w Δz
ΔP / Δz = -w
dP/dz = P' = -w = -P/H
P'/P = -1/H
P(z) = Po Exp(-z/H)

Even if you don't accept the concepts of math and gravity, you come to the same conclusion: If you accept Archimedes' Principle, then a pressure can, stably, exist adjacent to a vacuum if the system is of sufficient size. If you're throwing out Archimedes then you're throwing out all science, math, and philosophy from the Hellenistic Era to the present.
>>
>>4673560
*the concepts of mass and gravity
>>
File: 1512355365280.webm (2.15 MB, 718x404)
2.15 MB
2.15 MB WEBM
>>4667976
Excellent thread OP.
>>
>>4673554
It has been proven in this thread, you're just saying "nuh uh".
You're only responses have just been "nuh uh".
See >>4673218
>>
>>4673531
>>4673543
>"mass attracts mass" or "bending of space time"
i am not Albert Einstein but so far i understand the answer is both... in a scale your brain cant understand (but if you ask nicely i try to explain it even to you little nutjob)
>measurement of speed
what you smoking?
Do you even on the same page of the debate we having here?
You know things fall down with this "speed" of 9.81m/s^2? Are you even over 18 years old? You know this page is not for minors right?
>>
>>4673554
This pilpul is disgusting.

>if it's man-made then we know the cause.
Oooooh ok, you're saying "man" causes mass to attract mass in every experiment confirming gravity.

>has never been measured
except all the times it has
>never been proven via the scientific method
except all the times it has
>you still haven't proven your sphere yet
except all the times IN THIS VERY THREAD that it's been proven
>>
>>4673548
Newton's “gravity” was needed to make sense of the claim of a spinning water ball, which was never scientifically proven. “gravity” in astronomy/cosmology and astrophysics is simply an ad hoc explanation for the motion of the luminaries. It isn't proven real, it's just a story. "gravity" is a lie used as a pseudo-explanation for heliocentric belief. Without "Gravity" the deception falls apart.
>>4673553
>Yes you did, "scientific proof" doesn't even exist as a concept in science.
A result that is testable and repeatable
>>4673553
>The behavior of the planets and their moons.
For goodness sake, you can’t even duplicate seeing dirt on Mars as NASA claims, where they cannot prove it to anyone else. They require faith. I don’t know what you’ve been taught at school, but it sure as shit isn’t provable science. Proof, and science, regardless of your unawareness, never require belief. Yet that is exactly what a heliocentric earth needs. Where they abandon the scientific method in place of beliefs that sound scientific. Aka, pseudoscience. Proof and science in all honesty have no business ever leaving your mouth.
>>
https://mctoon.net/g/
Gravity proven
https://mctoon.net/r/
Earth curvature proven

Flat earthers kill yourselves.
>>
>>4673582
>HURR observing the movements of planets and their moons through a telescope requires faith in NASA DURRRRR
>>
>>4673569
Einstein made many claims, and presented many calculations, all based on assumed values, and he presented zero empirical evidence.
>>
>>4673584
Stop saying proven, when you substitute cartoons in place of demonstrable experiment.
>>
>>4673584
>Gravity proven
how? use your words
>>4673584
>Earth curvature proven
Cite verifiable evidence of a measurement of curvature that validates the claimed radius
>>
>>4673605
>links to 16 measurements of gravity
>links to 6 measurements of earth curvature
>m-muh cartoons
What "cartoons" you fucking spastic?
>>
>>4673608
>how? use your words
https://mctoon.net/g/
You have to read the words.
>Cite verifiable evidence of a measurement of curvature that validates the claimed radius
OK https://mctoon.net/r/
>>
>>4673605
Again with the "nuh-uh".
>>
>>4673566
1. define the scientific method. What are the steps?
2. delineate how Cavendish employed the steps of the scientific method
>>
>>4673614
https://youtu.be/GytU8cZ1EgM
https://youtu.be/ezi38-ZjRgQ
this fool you trust? lol
HAHAHAHAHAHA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbFs1fg1lUg
Witsit destroys him pretty funny
>>
>>4673608
>Gravity proven
cite scientific method proven proof for a force produced by mass by virtue of mass:
What is the name of the experiment?
What is the naturally observed phenomena? – not man-made contraptions or speculations about intangible lights in the sky.
What is the viable hypothesis?
What is the null hypothesis?
Independent variable?
Dependent variable?
Controlled variable?
1. define the scientific method. What are the steps?
2. delineate how Cavendish employed the steps of the scientific method
>>
>>
>>4673614
if you can not explain it yourself then it is a belief for you
>>
>>4673626
I meant to reply to >>4673584
>>
>>4673614
nswer each question
1. What is the name of the experiment?
2. What is the naturally observed phenomena? not man-made contraptions or speculations about intangible lights in the sky.
3. What is the viable hypothesis?
4. What is the null hypothesis?
Independent variable?
Dependent variable?
Controlled variable?
GO!
>>
>>4673625
>>4673626
I can't post the direct links because 4chan considers it spam. They're trying to censor my proof of globe earth. You have to click the links I've already posted, and on those pages there are many many links to measurements of gravity and measurements of earth curvature.

I don't care that you don't like the guy who collected the links onto one web page.
>>
>>4673642
>or speculations about intangible lights in the sky.
Moving the goalposts again. Fucking kikes.
>>
>>4673650
1. Show how your "proof for gravity" fulfilled each step of the scientific method. 2. Cite verifiable evidence of a measurement of surface curvature drop that validates the claimed radius.
>>
>>4673646
Lead me to specific links.
>>
File: 1659715841246.gif (426 KB, 1080x1080)
426 KB
426 KB GIF
>>4673626
>>4673620
>>4673654
>Do masses attract? (Formulation of a question)
>Dense matter is said to give more higher gravitational forces (Research)
>If two dense objects are close together, will they attract to each other? (Hypothesis)
>Here's an experiment: a tube, four dense balls, and a string. (Experiment)
>Will this experiment lead to the expected result? (Prediction)
>Let's find out. (Testing)
>After some time, the test results show that they do attract (Results)
>To conclude, mass does cause things to attract to each other. (Report conclusion)
>Review the data for future experiments (Analyses results for future)
>>
>>4673654
>Show how your "proof for gravity" fulfilled each step of my made up definition of the scientific method
No.
How about you actually address the merits of the Cavendish experiment and its replications instead of using a made up list of criteria to "invalidate" it.

>Cite verifiable evidence of a measurement of surface curvature drop that validates the claimed radius.
Oh, easy. https://jessekozlowski.wordpress.com/2016/10/27/flat-level-lake-measurments/
>>
>>4673657
>I can't post the direct links because 4chan considers it spam
Illiterate or just retarded?
>>
>>4673663
There links other many categories.
>>
>>4673668
Illiterate it is.
>>
>>4673659
prove "gravitational forces" If two dense objects are close together, DO they attract to each other? If two dense objects are close together, DO they attract to each other?
>>4673659
>four dense balls, and a string.
proving?
>>4673659
>the test results show that they do attrac
citation?
>>
>>4673668
>other
*under
>>
>>4673684
>prove "gravitational forces" If two dense objects are close together, DO they attract to each other? If two dense objects are close together, DO they attract to each other?
That's precisely the purpose of the experiment you tard.
>citation?
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/106988.pdf
>>
>>4673691
page number where all steps of the scientific method were shown to be fulfilled?
>>
>>4673697
Scientific papers don't do that.
>>
>>4673700
It's exactly what they do. What is the observed natural phenomena in nature?
>>
>>4673620
Different anon here
>define the scientific method. What are the steps?
In its loosest definition
1) Make observation
2) Develop testable explanation for observation. The explanation must be falsifiable (there must exist a condition or circumstance which would allow the explanation to be demonstrated as false).
3) Develop and perform an experiment to test explanation
4) Analyze results, determine if they support (a) or falsify (b) the explanation.
5a) Repeat experiment and develop follow-up experiments to verify the results.
6a) If explanation is still supported, determine what new observations or questions that explanation implies.
5b) Determine if the problem lies in the design, execution, or analysis of the experiment. If so, return to step (3) and refine the experiment.
6b) If not, return to step (2) and refine your hypothesis.

>delineate how Cavendish employed the steps of the scientific method
Observation - Orbital bodies appear to attract each other
Hypothesis - Some property of the two bodies (mass/inertia/weight/etc) creates an attractive force
Experiment - Create a torsion balance (two objects on either side of a thin rod of length, L, suspended by a thin wire with a torsion coefficient C) using two objects of equal size and composition. Call these a and b. Place two more objects outside of the torsion balance's diameter, call these A and B. If there is no attractive force between a/b and A/B, then the torsion balance will remain at its unperturbed equilibrium. If the bodies are attracted to each other they will exert a torque, τ = FL, which will be counteracted by the torque from the wire's torsion, τ = Cθ, and the torsion balance will rotate to a new angle. If there is an attraction, its dependence on the properties of the object's weight/mass and separation distance can be found by varying the properties and separations of the objects.
Results - The torsion balance is perturbed.
>>
>>4673704
Scientific papers don't do that lmao
You've never actually read one in your entire 16 years of life. You're probably just parroting something you were taught at your American middle school where creationism was taught in science class.
>>
>>4673705
What is the observed natural phenomena in nature?
just answer that and then we'll move on
>>
>>4673707
your claim: "mass attracts mass" --- now let's go through the steps of the scientific method to see how this was proven (if it was) What is the observed natural phenomena in nature?
>>
>>4673709
Obvious bot.
>>
>>4673713
Obvious shill
>>
>>4673712
Objects with mass are attracted to the earth.
>>
>>4673707
actual scientific papers deal with actual science, the scientific method, --- the pursuance of “how?/why?” questions regarding observed, tangible, measurable, natural phenomena. That’s what “science” is. The tool used is the scientific method
>>
>>4673717
where?
>>
>>4673717
does a helium balloon have mass?
>>
>>4673709
Already answered.
Tides are a natural phenomena in nature, whose existences are from gravity. The gravity due to the subtle pull from the Sun and Moon.
>>
>>4673716
You asked for a definition of the scientific method, he gave you one that didn't include "observed natural phenomena", a phrase you literally made up, and then you ask him what's the observed natural phenomenon as if that has any relevance to his post whatsoever.

It's bot behavior.
>>
>>4673717
Feel the pull on the string of a new, freshly inflated helium balloon. It’s significant. Where’s your “attraction to the earth”?
>>
>>4673717
What is the viable hypothesis?
>>
>>4673723
You're presupposing "gravity" again. What is the viable hypothesis?
>>
>>4667976
There any good esoteric flat earth movies or something fun to watch?
>>
>>4673726
A balloon rises because it has buoyancy. Buoyancy is the upward force that is exerted on the trapped hot air because its density is lower than the surrounding air. If buoyancy is greater than the force of gravity — or the weight of the balloon—, then the balloon will rise.

You can't grasp basic physics. To you, the fact that a balloon rises is an ‘evidence’ that gravity does not exist. You believe things go up or down because of density. You are wrong.

More than one force can work with an object at the same time. These forces can have different direction and magnitude. We can sum all the forces to find its resultant force, and the object will accelerate to the same the direction of this resultant force.

In the case of a hot-air balloon, there are at least two forces at work:

>Buoyancy. It has upward direction. It is caused by the hot air inside the balloon having less density than the air surrounding it.
>Force of gravity. It has downward direction. It is caused by the gravitational acceleration exerted by the Earth.

If buoyancy is greater than the force of gravity, then the balloon will rise. Conversely, if the force of gravity is greater than its buoyancy, the balloon will descend.

Just because the balloon rises upwards, it doesn’t mean there is no force of gravity acting on it. The force of gravity still exists, only smaller than the buoyant force exerted on the hot air inside the balloon.

The physics of a hot air balloon is very well understood. A hot air balloon is never an ‘evidence’ of the non-existence of gravity.
>>
>>4673709
>What is the observed natural phenomena in nature?
The observed motion of planets orbiting the Sun, the Moon orbiting Earth, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn orbiting their respective planets, etc.
>inb4 "Ha! Gotcha! Prove that those things are really there."
I can see and observe these things with the naked eye or a moderate telescope.

Where are the observed natural phenomena and extensive scientific methodology for Flat Earth? Or are you just playing for time until we hit page 10 and you can post the same thread again?
>>
>>4673720
Everywhere on earth.
>>4673722
Yes, and in a vacuum, where there is no buoyant force, it falls.
>>4673726
That would have to be accounted for in the hypothesis for why everything else falls, and it is. Fb = ρ V g
And is a helium balloon an observed natural phenomenon? Not asking that as a gotcha, just want to see what you think that actually means.

>>4673728
That there is a force between any two masses that is described by the equation F = GMm/r^2
>>
>>4673738
>A balloon rises because it has buoyancy.
prove that. Prove your "gravity" before you claim it. buoyancy is an object’s ability to rise, which is determined by whether or not it is less or more dense than the matter surrounding it. if I drop an egg in water it sinks. If I add salt to the water the egg floats. I changed the density of the water causing the egg to move. No “pulling force” needed.
>>
>>4673741
viable hypothesis?
>>
>>4673741
A hypothesis is a tentative answer to a scientific question
A testable hypothesis is a hypothesis that can be PROVED or DISPROVED as a result of testing, data collection, or experience.
what is your viable hypothesis for this?
>>
File: Riley%27sEgg.gif (133 KB, 1000x563)
133 KB
133 KB GIF
>>4673744
You're skipping ahead. We were discussing observed natural phenomenon, one of the stages BEFORE we prove anything, but you want the explanation for the phenomenon to be proven before you'll accept that the phenomenon actually happens. You're desperate.
>>
>>4673755
no, you are stepping ahead. You're presupposing gravity in a claim before proving "gravity"
>>
File: 1633918524040.webm (2.03 MB, 1080x1080)
2.03 MB
2.03 MB WEBM
>>4673741
Let me assist you by providing proof of the motions, using the moons of Jupiter.
>>
>>4673759
lol a cartoon
>>
>>4673755
why is there zero tidal amplitude at amphidromic points? If the moon is pulling the oceans wouldnt it all pull together? Anyways. Gravity is a belief system and you are promoting the belief because you're part of a cult.
>>
>>4673750
>>4673752
>what is your viable hypothesis for this?
If you're referring to the viable hypothesis for an attractive force, see >>4673705
>Observation - Orbital bodies appear to attract each other
>Hypothesis - Some property of the two bodies (mass/inertia/weight/etc) creates an attractive force

If you're referring to a viable hypothesis to explain that I can look at shit and see it, then I rest my case that you're just arguing in bad faith and just biding time until we hit page 10.
>>
>>4673766
I've given you the hypothesis. Do you want to test the hypothesis or do you want to keep dogmatically insisting that it's a religious belief.
>>
>>4673767
>>Observation - Orbital bodies appear to attract each other
in nature?
>>
>>4673768
a scientific hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon that is testable
>>
>>4673760
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKwcvPGZPPA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRkXGbiMyqk
Amateur videos of the same thing.
>>
>>4673246
All pictures are taken through a round lens and then manipulated to remove the lens rounding
Trying to use pictures to prove or disprove the roundness of the planet is pants on head retarded
>>
>>4673770
Yes. >>4673743
I've given you the testable hypothesis. Are you going to ask for the next step or are you going to continue ignoring it?
>>
>>4673767
>>Observation - Orbital bodies appear to attract each other
where do you see this in nature? not man-made contraptions. actual science is interested in how and why questions regarding observed phenomena the natural physical world, not man-made devices.
>>
>>4673760
He did it. He did the 'nuh-uh' card again.
>>
>>4673780
Jupiter and its moons.
Or... are those man-made?

Humans are natural FYI, and everything we do is part of nature.
>>
>>4673780
Don't they don't. If they do, they'll throw away all telescope and microscopes in the world.
>>
>>4670299
Someone tracked shill IPs and found they're all bots

>>4670334
>>4670335
>>4670467
This can't be a real person intelligent enough to post on the internet
>>
>>4673786
astronomy is not scientific. there is no viable independent variable for astronomy. we see lights in the sky moving. no way to go and test what's causing it. again with the presupposition. telescope and microscopes are tools.
>>4673785
>Humans are natural FYI, and everything we do is part of nature.
again, actual science is interested in how and why questions regarding observed phenomena in the natural physical world, not man-made devices. if it's man-made then we know the cause.
>>
>>4673802
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/natural#:~:text=Within%20science%2C%20the%20term%20natural,the%20products%20of%20that%20society.
>>
>>4673767
>Observation - Orbital bodies appear to attract each other
what is your viable hypothesis for this? Anything other than a direct answer and I'll ignore your reply.
>>
>>4673808
That there is a force between any two masses that is described by the equation F = GMm/r^2
>>
>>4673802
So if I use a microscope to look at some bacteria, the microscope was the one that 'placed' the bacteria there?
>>
>>4673812
Pre-assuming "G" yet again.
>>
>>4673817
It's a hypothesis. We GUESS G, and then we TEST the hypothesis. We pre-assume nothing.
Do you seriously not even know what a hypothesis is?
>>
>>4673808
>Anything other than a direct answer and I'll ignore your reply.
What is your viable hypothesis for you existing. Anything other than a direct answer and I'll ignore your reply.
>>
>>4673822
A testable hypothesis is an hyphothesis that can be PROVEN or DISPROVEN as a result of testing. Not pre-assuming what you're claiming you're proving.
>>
>>4673825
Yes, and that hypothesis can be proven or disproven as a result of testing. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/106988.pdf
If the masses attract at the rate predicted by the hypothesis, it's confirmed, if the masses don't then it's disproven. This is very simple stuff my dimwitted friend.
>>
>>4673835
Nope.
>>
File: 1656841237874.webm (3.95 MB, 1080x1080)
3.95 MB
3.95 MB WEBM
>>4673825
For someone who's done nothing but talk about how science is done, you really don't acknowledge the actual science that HAS been done.
You disregard Cavendish, but you'll probably think every experiment is this webm is some masterwork against mainstream science.
>>
>>4673848
>Nuh-uh
>>
>>4673848
lol
>>
I waated enough time with you shills, I got to go.
>>
>>4673812
the equation F = GMm/r^2 = "there is a force"
this is an example of a begging-the-question fallacy and math does not create reality. 1 flying elephant + 1 flying elephant = 2 flying elephants
but that does not prove flying elephants exist.
>>
>>4673907
It's a hypothesis. You TEST the hypothesis to find out if it's true in reality or not. You do NOT assume that the hypothesis is true before you do the experiment. There is no begging the fucking question.
>>
>>4673914
the equation F = GMm/r^2 = "there is a force"
this is an example of a begging-the-question fallacy and math does not create reality. 1 flying elephant + 1 flying elephant = 2 flying elephants
but that does not prove flying elephants exist.
>>
>>4673918
Beep boop
>>
>>4673914
Requirements for a Testable Hypothesis-
In order to be considered testable, two criteria MUST BE met:
It must be possible to PROVE that the hypothesis is true.
It must be possible to PROVE that the hypothesis is false.
It must be possible to reproduce the results of the hypothesis."
Anne Marie Helmenstine; Ph.D. Biomedical Sciences, B.A. Physics and Mathematics
https://www.thoughtco.com/testable-hypothesis-explanation-and-examples-609100
"Once the hypothesis has been established, it is time to TEST IT. The process of experimentation is what sets science apart from other disciplines, and it leads to discoveries every day. An EXPERIMENT is designed to PROVE or DISPROVE the Hypothesis. If your prediction is correct, you will not be able to reject the hypothesis."
McLelland, Christine V: The Nature of Science and The Scientific Method; The Geological Society of America
https://www.geosociety.org/documents/gsa/geoteachers/NatureScience.pdf
>>
>>4673925
Yes.
The hypothesis is that there is a force between any two masses that is described by the equation F = GMm/r^2
It is possible to prove the hypothesis
It is possible to disprove the hypothesis
It is possible to reproduce the results of the hypothesis
>>
>>4673934
No. Learn about actual science.
>>
>>4673934
An hypothesis is not "that there is a force"
show me a scientific experiment that takes “gravity force” out of the equation so we can tell that it’s “gravity force” that “makes things fall”
>>
>>4674001
kek
>>
>>4673934
you're trying to prove "the force" focus
>>
Looks like the globetards are blasting off again!
>>
>>4674004
You provide a set of criteria a hypothesis must meet to qualify as a testable hypothesis
I tell you that my hypothesis meets the criteria
You cannot explain how it fails to meet the criteria so you ignore them

It's pretty funny.
>>
>>4674008
a hypothesis is not "that there is a force"
you're trying to prove "the force"
>>
>>4674008
A hypothesis is a scientific prediction, a cause-and-effect reasoning based on observed natural phenomena; a proposed explanation for a phenomenon that is testable. What's that natural phenomena again?
>>
>>4674009
Again, failing to explain how it doesn't meet the criteria.
>>
>>4674014
what's that natural phenomena again?
>>
>>4674014
what's that natural phenomena we need a testable prediction for again?
>>
>>4674004
>show me a scientific experiment that takes “gravity force” out of the equation so we can tell that it’s “gravity force” that “makes things fall”
in other words, you will only accept that a gravitational force exists if someone creates a universe where gravity doesn't exist to demonstrate that matter behaves differently there
>>
>>4674019
>>4674020
samefag

answered 3 fucking hours ago
>>4673717
round and round we go! Already been asked and answered and then you moved onto the next question >>4673728
Are we ever going to move onto the next step or is your short term memory too poor to allow that?
>>
>>4673717
where do you see this in nature?
>>
>>4674026
>Where do you see [things falling down] in nature
I honestly have no idea. That's a really good fucking question that has me completely questioning my world view right now.

I'm totally stumped.
>>
>>4674029
What about nitrogen and helium? where's your "attraction" in nature?
>>
>>4674044
Nitrogen and helium both have weight.

Is magnetism an observed natural phenomenon? The electrostatic force?
>>
>>4674026
>The smartest flat earther
>>
>flerf: prove gravity exists
>normal person: ok, we start with the hypothesis that gravity exists. To test this hypothesis we-
>flerf: NO THAT'S NOT A HYPOTHESIS, YOU HAVE TO PROVE GRAVITY WITHOUT HYPOTHESIZING GRAVITY
>normal person: a scientific experiment proves or disproves a hypothesis. How do we prove or disprove gravity without having gravity as our hypothesis
>flerf: >:)
>>
literally every one of these threads is exactly the same - cunts dump a bunch of shitty gifs and youtube videos, the pissed of /sci/fags get triggered and argue with a bunch of larpers for a day, and then when the larpers run out of material they wheelspin until the thread dies
>>
>>4672448
people did it in ancient times using nothing but simple geometry
i forget the name of the guy but he did measure how far below eye level was the horizon/some distant point when he stood near the foot of a mountain, and when he stood atop it. then he used those measurements, plus the curve of the earth, plus maybe distance to the distant point i dont remember, and he got within 70% of the actual radius of Earth by using primitive tools and basic maths.
>>
>>4672626
>the horizon always rises to eye-level
incorrect
take a plastic bottle, fill it to like half with water, bring it to your eye and use the water as a level. you'll see the horizon is below eye level, as it is below where the water line would point.
simple as.
>>
>>4672909
exactly
flat earth has no model, so it's not even a belief, it's a delusion
>>
>>4673123
>Define "gravity" then cite verifiable scientific method proven evidence for its existence.
gravity is attraction between two body masses, directly proportional to their weights, and inverse proportional to the distance between them
you can experimentally verify gravity with these simple tests >>4670657
>>
>>4674141
inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them
>>
>>4673632
nice scale you got there, shame it's completely wrong
>>
>>4674148
good catch, but i wanted to keep it simple so the flatties can cram it in their flat heads
>>
I see that my thread attracted alot of FE schizos lmao. I love making these threads they always give me a good laugh
>>
>prove x but you can't use any "man made tools" because you just can't OK, tools are evil, only things you can see with your own eyes are to be trusted, except celestial objects the Moon is actually a hologram
>also you've got to create a universe without one of the fundamental interactions present in it, otherwise you're just presupposing gravity exists :^)
>>
So is there actually an FE model or is it still in the making in the highly advanced flat earth guru hideout lab? I watched a profesor Dave debunk video itt and it's just over an hour of dodging the question. Why do you need an hour long video to provide a working model? Globe tards can do it in a few seconds and it works with everything, while flat earthers can't even explain eclipses on their own model. They can only cherrypick images of the curvature and show off how they do not understand how physics work
>>
>>4673281

>NOO YOU CAN'T JUST PROVE THAT THERE IS ACTUALLY A CURVATURE IN MY PHOTOS THAT SUPPOSEDLY DON'T SHOW ANYYYY

Midwit
>>
>>4673599
Are you shure?
Becouse i am shure he has predicted many things with his calculations.
And keep in mind: we remeber him and many other gread mind not for there errrors but for there successes.
We have send out clocks that for some reason run faster the higher up they are.
Something Einstein predicted/explained and you flatearthers dont even consider to be real.
>>
I don't think flat earthers realize how many sudden problems with reality would arise if the earth actually was flat. Every logical explanation for shit gets thrown out the window and you have to introduce literal magic and glue everything together with it
>>
I dont get the flat earth discourse when the southern cross literally kills the FE model entirely. It cannot work on a flat earth. Only on a globe. Doesnt matter for how long you debate about curvature. The southern cross stars cant and dont work on a flat earth model, therefore the earth is not flat
>>
>>4674184
literally 2 turbo retards that has been posting 400 of the posts in this thread
>>
>>4672930

Professor Dave responded pretty accurately though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su-fmoZUkF8

>90 minutes in and no map. Doesn't answer the questions at all
>>
>>4674232
They don't I already made the same argument here with one simple example >>4672939
The FE universe is a Rube Goldberg machine of cobbled together explanations, a lot of times mutually exclusive.
>>
>>4674235
They come up with shitty excuses like "muh magnetic declination, how can you be sure you're looking south" and "you see the southern cross at different times from South Africa and Argentina, so how do you know it always stays in the same place? It's insanity
The best one is personal domes, the idea that every person sees their own personal night sky, fucking delusional.
>>
>>4674306
>The best one is personal domes, the idea that every person sees their own personal night sky, fucking delusional.
There's no way anyone actually suggests that in good faith right? This is even more insane than the Antimoon.
>>
>>4674185
It's insane, if the world worked how they want it to work, we'd still be in the stone age, because everyone who wanted to make some food would have to reinvent the fire from scratch.
Also it's funny how they don't seem to realize that schools and especially universities aren't temples where some guy preaches the laws of nature to you, but students actually perform experiments to verify the formulas they are taught and get some experience on how to properly perform an experiment, something flat earthers would benefit from greatly
>>
>>4674310
I have no clue at this point. I'm sure the people at the "top" who makes some pocket change from streams and whatnot have to be aware they're lying, at least to some degree.
I'm not sure how far the rabbit hole goes for people who genuinely believe it though.
>>
>>4674313

It's insane. In our middle school physics classes, we had papers that in detail explained all the physical topics and laws of nature. We had separate papers for experiments that we conducted for pretty much everything we studied. We had to time it, measure it, write it down, and got graded depending on the accuracy. Our physics and maths teacher was pretty religious and believed in an intelligently designed universe too. He already taught maths and physics for like 30 years when I got the chance to be taught by him. This was all in fucking middle school of all places

Does this just not happen in US schools? We went pretty in-depth. Much more so in high school
>>
>>4674316

The people at the top are 50/50. Some are obvious con men, and some are genuinely delusional. Con men don't really bother making 12 hours of schizo vomit like:
>>4672930

Flat earthers always spam the discussion with as much filler garbage as possible to avoid answering any questions. They EVERY SINGLE TIME ask the exact same questions that boil down to them not understanding physics, then spam the discussion with le nasa faked space videos and proofs of no curvature, and then do a victory dance when one out of hundred of those are not proven wrong in a time limit. Then they proceed to ignore all the impossibilities of a flat earth.
>>
>>4674343
Now that you are grown up you are able to go measure the curvature all by yourself, no authority figure who tell you your opinion.
Bring a telescope or binoculars and find a body of water with some distance. 50k-200km km, It makes no difference the curve is missing from the equation.
>>
>>4674349
It boils down to informative webms from the flatties vs science cucks why seems deathly afraid of the implication of living in gods domain.
The NealDegrasse Tyson fanboys seem to have more blind faith than the average muslim. It's a deeply religious belief but they will never admit it.
>>
>>4674350

>no authority figure who tell you your opinion

Very ironic considering that flat earthers repeat everything they heard from flat earth youtube charlatans without ever actually confirming it themselves. They see "FLAT EARTH DESTROYED" in the title, and blindly believe it without even thinking about its contents. This is because flat earthers are allergic to thinking. They have to invent explanations for the most basic shit, and ignore things like stars, because those do not make sense on a flat world without literal fucking magic.

Do you believe that a physics teacher telling YOU to literally do an experiment and confirm something by yourself is an authority that tells you your opinion? You test it out yourself. That's the whole fucking point.
>>
>>4674362
So you're not even gonna bother go do the experiment yourself? Typical religious science cucks
>>