How big is the conspiracy?
« on: April 29, 2017, 01:37:31 PM »
I hear a lot of people who believe in a flat earth say that is should be "easy" to convince them of a round earth.  Then no matter what evidence they are presented with they claim its fake and part of a conspiracy.  Every photo taken from space: fake.  Every video from the International Space Station: fake.  Every single GPS, military and telecommunications satellite: fake. The stars rotating the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere: fake.  Ships shown disappearing hull up over the horizon: fake.  Airline flights taking just as long to travel similar longitudes in the northern hemisphere as the southern hemisphere: fake.  Snipers taking into account the Coriolis effect of the earth for long range shots: fake.

Apparently the conspiracy is so widespread that it includes:
All space agencies across the world
All private space companies in the world
All military intelligence agencies
All telecommunications companies
Anyone who has taken photos/video of the night sky in the southern hemisphere
Compass manufacturers
Anyone who has spent a lot of time sailing around the world (to include members of the Navy and all shipping companies)
All airline companies
All airline pilots
Military snipers and professional Marksmen
99% of the scientific community

So who exactly isn't in on this conspiracy?  Doesn't it seem far more likely that the earth is really round and all of these organizations are actually telling the truth?
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 12:57:54 AM by Silent Service »

*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2017, 02:57:12 PM »
I hear a lot of people who believe in a flat earth say that is should be "easy" to convince them of a flat earth.
Convincing people of things they already believe in tends to be easy.

Then no matter what evidence they are presented with they claim its fake and part of a conspiracy.
This is simply untrue. You lot just insist on presenting near-identical evidence over and over. It's very unsurprising that attempting the same thing multiple times yields fairly consistent results.

The stars rotating the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere: fake.
Have you actually found a person here who claims that the rotation of the stars is, uh, "fake"? That doesn't even convey a coherent thought.

Ships shown disappearing hull up over the horizon: fake.
Actually, ships disappearing over the horizon and one's ability to recover them with a telescope is one of the strongest pieces of evidence for a Flat Earth. Again, I doubt that anyone here would call it "fake"

Airline flights taking just as long to travel similar longitudes in the northern hemisphere as the southern hemisphere: fake.
Again, that's not even a coherent thought. You lot get confused because you insist on interpreting the Flat Earth map as if it were a Cartesian plane. Can't help you with that one.

Snipers taking into account the Coriolis effect of the earth for long range shots: fake.
Y'know, the longer you list these, the longer I think that you haven't spoken to many people here.
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2017, 12:57:33 AM »
Convincing people of things they already believe in tends to be easy. 

I'll give you that one, simple typo.

This is simply untrue. You lot just insist on presenting near-identical evidence over and over. It's very unsurprising that attempting the same thing multiple times yields fairly consistent results.

And yet that evidence is never refuted.  Furthermore, most of the time the evidence is just ignored.  Take for example these posts, not a single person has provided any counter arguments to either:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6133.0
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6120.0

Have you actually found a person here who claims that the rotation of the stars is, uh, "fake"? That doesn't even convey a coherent thought.

You missed the key word in that sentence.  What I said was "The stars rotating the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere: fake."  If you talk to many flat earthers about stars rotating clockwise in the southern hemisphere (as opposed to counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere) the two most common responses are either 1) those videos are fake or 2) There's a conspiracy among compass manufacturers and people in the southern hemisphere are actually facing north when they see the rotation of the stars rather than south.  And this isn't just some random crackpots saying this, we're talking people like Eric Dubay making these kind of claims.

Actually, ships disappearing over the horizon and one's ability to recover them with a telescope is one of the strongest pieces of evidence for a Flat Earth. Again, I doubt that anyone here would call it "fake"

And that's how I know you flat earthers have never been at sea.  I've been in the Navy for 9 years with telescopes far more powerful than anyone has in the civilian sector and I can assure you that once a ship goes over the horizon there is no magnification that can bring it back.  I have literally observed thousands of ships come over the horizon or go over the horizon.  Ships always disappear hull up and the first thing that appears when a ship comes over the horizon is the mast.  We actually can calculate the distance to a ship based on how much of the ship is over the horizon and it matches up perfectly with radar, sonar and AIS.  Hell, you can even prove the earth is Round just by changing the location of your radar on a ship.  If you place the radar near the waterline then your effective range of the radar is much shorter than if you place it at the top of the ship.  That's why every ship ever build always places their radars as high as possible.  If that is one of your strongest pieces of evidence for a flat earth then I feel very sorry for you indeed.  If you look closely at every video of flat earthers performing this "experiment" you will notice that none of the ships are actually over the horizon nor do they ever appear to be over the horizon at any point during the zooming.

Again, that's not even a coherent thought. You lot get confused because you insist on interpreting the Flat Earth map as if it were a Cartesian plane. Can't help you with that one.

And you act like what you're saying is a coherent thought.  Its like people claiming that "perspective" accounts for the massive difference between actual angles to polaris and the angles that the flat earth model predicts.  In theory it sounds great but when you actually crunch the numbers its a load of rubbish.  The truth is that it is physically impossible for a flat earth to exist if it takes equal amounts of time to circumscribe the planet in the northern hemisphere as the southern hemisphere. I explained this pretty clearly in this post and I've yet to get a response:
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6133.0

Y'know, the longer you list these, the longer I think that you haven't spoken to many people here.

I've seen some posts on the issue.  None that actually explain why snipers need to account for additional drift in their shot depending on what cardinal direction they face.  In fact, the only answer I've heard is "wind."  Yes, I'm sure that professional snipers forgot to account for wind and they are confusing that with the rotation of the earth (end sarcasm.)


That's literally all you people do here.  Instead of answering the question with some actual proof you just attack the person and call them stupid.  That's not debating and it shows how flimsy your arguments are.  If you want to disprove something then attack my arguments, don't attack me.

You flat earthers have really proven nothing. Your models cannot predict any stellar phenomena or explain literally anything about our physical world which proves how horrible of a model you have.  I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and let you know where your arguments are weak and instead of bolstering your arguments with actual facts, logic and reasoning you just resort to insults.  Its really quite hilarious, pathetic and ironic in a way.

Also, I love how you COMPLETELY avoided the question.  How big is the conspiracy?  Really, please tell me.  Because I'm doing the math and it looks like hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of people have to be involved in this conspiracy to fake everything that you claim is fake.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 01:01:21 AM by Silent Service »

*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2017, 12:14:39 PM »
Take for example these posts, not a single person has provided any counter arguments to either
The culture of this community (in which you are a guest) is fairly harsh. If you haven't bothered to research the basics of FET, we're not going to rush through your aid and tutor you through it. The two threads you've presented are extremely old and tired tropes, and you decided to talk about them at great length. Honestly, I'd be surprised if anyone had the patience to entertain you there.

You missed the key word in that sentence.  What I said was "The stars rotating the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere: fake."
I didn't miss it, I just shortened my response for brevity. I've quoted the sentence I'm responding to, so I would hope this is fairly clear.

If you talk to many flat earthers about stars rotating clockwise in the southern hemisphere (as opposed to counter-clockwise in the northern hemisphere) the two most common responses are either 1) those videos are fake or 2) There's a conspiracy among compass manufacturers and people in the southern hemisphere are actually facing north when they see the rotation of the stars rather than south.  And this isn't just some random crackpots saying this, we're talking people like Eric Dubay making these kind of claims.
Eric Dubay is quite disrespected around here, and I believe the feeling is mutual. As far as we're concerned, he's much worse than a random crackpot. If you have any questions about Dubay's crackpottery, I suggest you take it up with him, not us.

And that's how I know you flat earthers have never been at sea.
That's nice, dear. Unfortunately, your fantasies about who has and hasn't been at sea do very little to affect reality.

I've been in the Navy for 9 years with telescopes far more powerful than anyone has in the civilian sector and I can assure you that once a ship goes over the horizon there is no magnification that can bring it back.  I have literally observed thousands of ships come over the horizon or go over the horizon.  Ships always disappear hull up and the first thing that appears when a ship comes over the horizon is the mast.  We actually can calculate the distance to a ship based on how much of the ship is over the horizon and it matches up perfectly with radar, sonar and AIS.  Hell, you can even prove the earth is Round just by changing the location of your radar on a ship.  If you place the radar near the waterline then your effective range of the radar is much shorter than if you place it at the top of the ship.  That's why every ship ever build always places their radars as high as possible.
I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills.

If that is one of your strongest pieces of evidence for a flat earth then I feel very sorry for you indeed.  If you look closely at every video of flat earthers performing this "experiment" you will notice that none of the ships are actually over the horizon nor do they ever appear to be over the horizon at any point during the zooming.
Can't say I've ever seen a video of this being performed. I prefer doing my own experiments.

And you act like what you're saying is a coherent thought.
For the first time in forever, you managed to make an accurate observation.

Its like people claiming that "perspective" accounts for the massive difference between actual angles to polaris and the angles that the flat earth model predicts.  In theory it sounds great but when you actually crunch the numbers its a load of rubbish.
I agree with you. Once again, you seem to be quoting random crackpots (or, worse, Dubay and his sycophants). I can't help you when it comes to arguing against these people, because I, too, think they're wrong.

I've seen some posts on the issue.  None that actually explain why snipers need to account for additional drift in their shot depending on what cardinal direction they face.  In fact, the only answer I've heard is "wind."  Yes, I'm sure that professional snipers forgot to account for wind and they are confusing that with the rotation of the earth (end sarcasm.)
Well, if you're not willing to read our resources, there's not much we can do for you.

That's literally all you people do here.  Instead of answering the question with some actual proof you just attack the person and call them stupid.  That's not debating and it shows how flimsy your arguments are.  If you want to disprove something then attack my arguments, don't attack me.
I'd love to attack your arguments, but you have yet to make any. Your debating strategy is to loudly announce that you haven't studied FET but that you think it's wrong. My best response to that is "that's nice, dear". We simply have better things to do.

You flat earthers have really proven nothing. Your models cannot predict any stellar phenomena or explain literally anything about our physical world which proves how horrible of a model you have.  I am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt and let you know where your arguments are weak and instead of bolstering your arguments with actual facts, logic and reasoning you just resort to insults.  Its really quite hilarious, pathetic and ironic in a way.
"Don't attack the person, attack the argument. ALSO YOU'RE STUPID AND WEAK HAHA - Silent Service, 2017.

Also, I love how you COMPLETELY avoided the question.  How big is the conspiracy?  Really, please tell me.  Because I'm doing the math and it looks like hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of people have to be involved in this conspiracy to fake everything that you claim is fake.
For this question to be answerable, you must first define what you mean by "the conspiracy". For this definition to be agreeable, we must first agree on which of your premises are true, and which are not. In order to establish this, I asked you some questions on the premises which are most glaringly false. I'm being patient with you, but you're making it very difficult.

If you'd like me to answer your question while assuming your false premises, then logically speaking any number will be correct. If P is false,then P−>Q is true for any Q.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 12:19:45 PM by SexWarrior »
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2017, 02:33:38 PM »
The culture of this community (in which you are a guest) is fairly harsh. If you haven't bothered to research the basics of FET, we're not going to rush through your aid and tutor you through it. The two threads you've presented are extremely old and tired tropes, and you decided to talk about them at great length. Honestly, I'd be surprised if anyone had the patience to entertain you there.

Then link me to where your community disproves my claims.  Should take you less time that it took you to make this response.

I didn't miss it, I just shortened my response for brevity. I've quoted the sentence I'm responding to, so I would hope this is fairly clear.

You said "Have you actually found a person here who claims that the rotation of the stars is, uh, "fake"? That doesn't even convey a coherent thought."  Obviously no one believe the rotation of the stars is fake but there are plenty of people who believe the stars rotating in the opposite direction is fake because it would be impossible for stars to rotate in the opposite direction if the earth was flat.

Eric Dubay is quite disrespected around here, and I believe the feeling is mutual. As far as we're concerned, he's much worse than a random crackpot. If you have any questions about Dubay's crackpottery, I suggest you take it up with him, not us.

Glad we agree on something.  However, a lot of the logic I've seen from people on this site lines up perfectly with what Dubay says so you can understand my confusion.  Its hard to separate one conspiracy theorist from another.

That's nice, dear. Unfortunately, your fantasies about who has and hasn't been at sea do very little to affect reality.

My point was that if you've been to see then you actually would have some concrete evidence that the earth was round.  I hope you guys know that your community has been become a running gag in the military, especially the Navy.  Anyone who has been to see has seen ships go over the horizon hull up.  Anyone who has been to see has seen ships appear mast first over the horizon.

I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills.

Really, you're resorting to internet memes now?  Not only is that extremely disrespectful to the people who have served in the military but it also shows how little of an argument you have.  I gave you some pretty concrete information and your response is a meme.  Hilarious.

Can't say I've ever seen a video of this being performed. I prefer doing my own experiments.

I'd love to see what experiments you've done.  Please provide me with some links to your esteemed journal articles.

For the first time in forever, you managed to make an accurate observation.

So you basically admit that your responses are just complete rubbish that are never actually designed to debate the point.  Glad we're getting somewhere.

I agree with you. Once again, you seem to be quoting random crackpots (or, worse, Dubay and his sycophants). I can't help you when it comes to arguing against these people, because I, too, think they're wrong.

Link me to the correct explanations then.  I am honestly trying to understand your point of view but its extremely hard when you all believe different things.

Well, if you're not willing to read our resources, there's not much we can do for you.

Links instead snide comments would be great.  Thanks.

I'd love to attack your arguments, but you have yet to make any. Your debating strategy is to loudly announce that you haven't studied FET but that you think it's wrong. My best response to that is "that's nice, dear". We simply have better things to do.

Actually, the whole reason why I made this post is I actually have been studying flat earth and the more I study the larger the conspiracy has to be in order for it to work.  I'm just looking for an explanation for all of it.  Once again, you flat earthers provide me with nothing.  Its quite hilarious actually.  I ask for an explanation and you respond with insults.  Why so defensive?

"Don't attack the person, attack the argument. ALSO YOU'RE STUPID AND WEAK HAHA - Silent Service, 2017.

Did I ever say that you are stupid and weak?  No, I didn't.  I said your arguments are weak.  Furthermore, I said that resorting to insults was hilarious, pathetic and ironic.  So yeah, thanks for misquoting me yet again.  Honestly, if you struggle this much with reading comprehension then I'm not exactly sure how much I can trust your experiments.  I'd still be happy to check them out though if you want to provide a link.

For this question to be answerable, you must first define what you mean by "the conspiracy". For this definition to be agreeable, we must first agree on which of your premises are true, and which are not. In order to establish this, I asked you some questions on the premises which are most glaringly false. I'm being patient with you, but you're making it very difficult.

If you'd like me to answer your question while assuming your false premises, then logically speaking any number will be correct. If P is false,then P−>Q is true for any Q.

Another diversion, how quaint.  See, if the positions were reversed by this point in the conversation I would have provided you with multiple links and arguments for every sentence of your original post explaining how you were wrong.  Furthermore, if any of your points were unclear I would have asked for amplification on your points to better explain yourself.  Instead, all your respond with is just misdirection and insults.  It speaks volumes on how concrete your evidence actually is.

*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2017, 02:46:47 PM »
Then link me to where your community disproves my claims.  Should take you less time that it took you to make this response.
Sorry, I will not be doing that. I'm also much better at managing my own time than you are, so keep your assessments of what will and won't take me time to yourself.

But, once you're done amending your question, rendering it coherent and answerable, I'll do my best to help you.

Obviously no one believe the rotation of the stars is fake but there are plenty of people who believe the stars rotating in the opposite direction is fake because it would be impossible for stars to rotate in the opposite direction if the earth was flat.
Thinking about those "plenty of people", have you met any of them here? What was their relation to the Flat Earth Society?

However, a lot of the logic I've seen from people on this site lines up perfectly with what Dubay says so you can understand my confusion.  Its hard to separate one conspiracy theorist from another.
I respectfully disagree, but given the depth of your research thus far, I am not surprised.

My point was that if you've been to see then you actually would have some concrete evidence that the earth was round.
As a Round Earther, I'm sure you'd think that. It does not affect what actually happens, however.

I hope you guys know that your community has been become a running gag in the military, especially the Navy.
;_; mummy, the mean armed forces told me i was stupid

Really, you're resorting to internet memes now?  Not only is that extremely disrespectful to the people who have served in the military but it also shows how little of an argument you have.  I gave you some pretty concrete information and your response is a meme.  Hilarious.
I have no counter-argument to your long paragraph about how you were totally in the Navy. Perhaps you were, perhaps you weren't. Frankly, it's of little significance either way. But, of course, you did think it is of significance, and you took your time to brag about it. Does it really surprise you that you got mocked for it?

I'd love to see what experiments you've done.  Please provide me with some links to your esteemed journal articles.
Give me a few more years, I've only started my PhD a few months ago ;)

So you basically admit that your responses are just complete rubbish that are never actually designed to debate the point.
No.

Link me to the correct explanations then.  I am honestly trying to understand your point of view but its extremely hard when you all believe different things.
Start with the FAQ: https://faq.tfes.org/
The Wiki is a decent starting point after that: https://wiki.tfes.org/

Links instead snide comments would be great.  Thanks.
Perhaps if, instead of rushing head first into the forum, you took your time to look around our homepage and the resources linked therein, you wouldn't be getting the snide treatment. Then again, that's unlikely.

Did I ever say that you are stupid and weak?  No, I didn't.
Ah, excellent. So, since I never directly called you anything mean, I understand you will be withdrawing your complaint now?

Another diversion, how quaint.
Yeah, yeah, a "diversion". I'm very impressed by your ability to obstruct your own question. No, seriously, we never get your kind around here.

Look, your question is unanswerable until you've amended it. Get on with it or stop wasting my time.

See, if the positions were reversed by this point in the conversation I would have provided you with multiple links and arguments for every sentence of your original post explaining how you were wrong.
Okay, so do that. Answer my original questions and the follow-ups.

Furthermore, if any of your points were unclear I would have asked for amplification on your points to better explain yourself.  Instead, all your respond with is just misdirection and insults.  It speaks volumes on how concrete your evidence actually is.
Hold on, I thought you were against conflating personalities/persons and arguments? You keep changing your mind on that one, it's so hard to keep up with which position suits you at which time ???
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 07:14:12 PM by SexWarrior »
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2017, 10:21:53 PM »
Sorry, I will not be doing that. I'm also much better at managing my own time than you are, so keep your assessments of what will and won't take me time to yourself.

But, once you're done amending your question, rendering it coherent and answerable, I'll do my best to help you.

If you aren't willing to provide any type of evidence to back up your claims then the only conclusion I can make is that your claims are false considering the magnitude of scientific evidence against you.  All of my questions are coherent and answerable, hence why we are having this conversation.

Thinking about those "plenty of people", have you met any of them here? What was their relation to the Flat Earth Society?

How do you think I found this place?  I'm still looking for a decent explanation for how the stars can rotate the opposite direction in the southern hemisphere.  So far the only ones I've heard is "the videos are fake" and "people are facing the wrong direction."  I wasn't able to find anything on your wiki or anywhere else that adequately explained the issue.

I respectfully disagree, but given the depth of your research thus far, I am not surprised.

well, to be fair it only takes a couple hours to read most of your "scientific" contributions.  You can't blame me that you don't have much material out there.  I did as much research as I could and I still have a lot of questions.

As a Round Earther, I'm sure you'd think that. It does not affect what actually happens, however.

You don't think going to sea and seeing ships going over the horizon would change your perspective?  I find that rather odd to say the least.

;_; mummy, the mean armed forces told me i was stupid

Not stupid, humorous.  You'd think if the earth was flat the Navy would be your greatest supporters.  You'd think if the round earth model didn't work that the people who travel thousands of miles at sea would be the first people to point it out.  If the earth was flat then traveling along great circle routes would actually waste fuel rather than save it.  I'd love it if I could see ships from hundreds of miles away or if my radar wasn't limited by the curvature of the earth.  I'd love it if I didn't have to put the bridge or my lookouts at the highest points in the ship (since the higher you go the worse the swaying motion gets in a storm.)  But sadly the earth is curved and I do have to do all of these things.

I have no counter-argument to your long paragraph about how you were totally in the Navy. Perhaps you were, perhaps you weren't. Frankly, it's of little significance either way. But, of course, you did think it is of significance, and you took your time to brag about it. Does it really surprise you that you got mocked for it? 

I talked about my Navy experience because it has relevance in this debate.  I have literally seen proof of a curved earth with my own eyes.  If you talk to anyone who has ever served in the Navy they'll tell you the same thing.

I'd never mock someone for their service to their country.  That's disgusting.  You really should be ashamed of yourself.

Give me a few more years, I've only started my PhD a few months ago ;)

Then I'm sure you've already published a master's thesis.  I'll read that instead.

Start with the FAQ: https://faq.tfes.org/
The Wiki is a decent starting point after that: https://wiki.tfes.org/

I've already read all this stuff.  It didn't answer my questions.  Do you have any more resources?

Ah, excellent. So, since I never directly called you anything mean, I understand you will be withdrawing your complaint now?

Do you also suffer from short term memory loss?  Your response "doesn't even convey a coherent thought."  Unfortunately, "your fantasies...do very little to affect reality."  I hope that one day I can say "for the first time in forever, you managed to make an accurate observation."  I've been craving a debate and "I'd love to attack your arguments, but you have yet to make any."

Yeah, yeah, a "diversion". I'm very impressed by your ability to obstruct your own question. No, seriously, we never get your kind around here.

Look, your question is unanswerable until you've amended it. Get on with it or stop wasting my time.

Yes, its a diversion.  Instead of answering the question you just resort to character attacks and insults.  All you do is ad hominem arguments.

Its a pretty simple question, I have no idea why it is unanswerable.  Who is lying about the earth being flat?  Who knows that it is flat and yet continues to provide false evidence that it is round?  Based on the evidence you reject it seems like a lot of people are involved in the conspiracy.

Okay, so do that. Answer my original questions and the follow-ups.

I already did......are you sure you don't have short term memory loss?  Scroll up and you'll see the responses.  The problem is that you've yet to answer my questions from the original post.

Hold on, I thought you were against conflating personalities/persons and arguments? You keep changing your mind on that one, it's so hard to keep up with which position suits you at which time ???

How am attacking you or your personality?  I am merely pointing out that when a person does not have any concrete evidence to support their claims it is very common for them to resort to misdirection or insults.  Someone who is sure in their beliefs or has concrete evidence to support their claims does not have an issue presenting their facts and letting the facts speak for themselves.  Since all you do is change the subject and insult me then the only thing I can logically assume is that you have no concrete evidence.  If you had concrete evidence then you would have already presented it to me and this discussion would have been over several posts ago.

*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2017, 10:49:32 PM »
All of my questions are coherent and answerable, hence why we are having this conversation.
Okay. Well, since your core question relies on a number of false premises, I am unable to answer it meaningfully. Make of that what you will.

How do you think I found this place?
Our main acquisition channels are search engines and social media services, so I'd my guess would be one of those.

However, this does not answer my question. If you did meet someone like that here, could you quote them? It would be interesting to see.

So far the only ones I've heard is "the videos are fake" and "people are facing the wrong direction."
Quotes, please. Who on this forum said that?

You can't blame me that you don't have much material out there.  I did as much research as I could and I still have a lot of questions.
I can blame you for not bothering to read the basics, and I will do so.

You don't think going to sea and seeing ships going over the horizon would change your perspective?  I find that rather odd to say the least.
That's because you operate under the incorrect assumption that I haven't done it before. Much like with the core question of this thread, as soon as you accept a false premise, all logic goes out the window.

You'd think if the earth was flat the Navy would be your greatest supporters.  You'd think if the round earth model didn't work that the people who travel thousands of miles at sea would be the first people to point it out.  If the earth was flat then traveling along great circle routes would actually waste fuel rather than save it.  I'd love it if I could see ships from hundreds of miles away or if my radar wasn't limited by the curvature of the earth.  I'd love it if I didn't have to put the bridge or my lookouts at the highest points in the ship (since the higher you go the worse the swaying motion gets in a storm.)  But sadly the earth is curved and I do have to do all of these things.
Your image of the FE model is extremely inaccurate. It's almost difficult to figure out what you mean, because you focus so hard on ripping into a hypothetical FE model nobody here supports.

I'd never mock someone for their service to their country.  That's disgusting.  You really should be ashamed of yourself.
lol, this brand of "patriotism" will never cease to amuse me. But, for the sake of avoidance of doubt: I never mocked you for your service to your country. I mocked your insistence on showing off. This was clearly indicated in the original statement: "you took your time to brag about it"

Then I'm sure you've already published a master's thesis.
You would be wrong. Once again, you operate on a false assumption. I'm not American, and my Master's degree is not an MSc nor an MA. You also seem to be under the impression that I'd reveal my identity to a random person on the Internet.

I've already read all this stuff.  It didn't answer my questions.
Most of the glaring holes in your understanding of FET are covered there. Once you've read through these, you can start amending your questions.

Do you also suffer from short term memory loss?  Your response "doesn't even convey a coherent thought."  Unfortunately, "your fantasies...do very little to affect reality."  I hope that one day I can say "for the first time in forever, you managed to make an accurate observation."  I've been craving a debate and "I'd love to attack your arguments, but you have yet to make any."
All of these things relate to the things you said, not to your person. The key phrases there are "that" [the sentence quoted above], "your fantasies", "your arguments" [or lack thereof].

Yes, its a diversion.  Instead of answering the question you just resort to character attacks and insults.  All you do is ad hominem arguments.
Your question cannot be meaningfully answered, and your character has yet to be attacked.

Its a pretty simple question, I have no idea why it is unanswerable.
That would be due to your reliance on false premises and your unwillingness to review or explain them. 

Who is lying about the earth being flat?  Who knows that it is flat and yet continues to provide false evidence that it is round?
Finally, a question that's both coherent and which doesn't rely on a laundry list of assumptions. I can answer that one for you. Strictly speaking: probably nobody.

I already did......are you sure you don't have short term memory loss?
Yes, I am sure your personal attack doesn't hold much water. For example: I asked, multiple times, whether the people who you claim dismiss the apparent motions of stars as "fake" were from the Flat Earth Society. The closest you've come to answering this question is "How do you think I found this place?".

How am attacking you or your personality?
For one, you keep suggesting that I suffer from at least two mental deficiencies: a short-term memory loss and poor reading comprehension. You also said I should be ashamed of myself.

I am merely pointing out that when a person does not have any concrete evidence to support their claims it is very common for them to resort to misdirection or insults.
I agree, your "memory loss" schtick is very telling. 

If you had concrete evidence then you would have already presented it to me and this discussion would have been over several posts ago.
An interesting assumption, but there are many other reasons for which I might not want to waste my time on educating you.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 11:18:29 PM by SexWarrior »
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #8 on: May 01, 2017, 02:26:48 AM »
All of my questions are coherent and answerable, hence why we are having this conversation.
Okay. Well, since your core question relies on a number of false premises, I am unable to answer it meaningfully. Make of that what you will.

How do you think I found this place?
Our main acquisition channels are search engines and social media services, so I'd my guess would be one of those.

However, this does not answer my question. If you did meet someone like that here, could you quote them? It would be interesting to see.

So far the only ones I've heard is "the videos are fake" and "people are facing the wrong direction."
Quotes, please. Who on this forum said that?

You can't blame me that you don't have much material out there.  I did as much research as I could and I still have a lot of questions.
I can blame you for not bothering to read the basics, and I will do so.

You don't think going to sea and seeing ships going over the horizon would change your perspective?  I find that rather odd to say the least.
That's because you operate under the incorrect assumption that I haven't done it before. Much like with the core question of this thread, as soon as you accept a false premise, all logic goes out the window.

You'd think if the earth was flat the Navy would be your greatest supporters.  You'd think if the round earth model didn't work that the people who travel thousands of miles at sea would be the first people to point it out.  If the earth was flat then traveling along great circle routes would actually waste fuel rather than save it.  I'd love it if I could see ships from hundreds of miles away or if my radar wasn't limited by the curvature of the earth.  I'd love it if I didn't have to put the bridge or my lookouts at the highest points in the ship (since the higher you go the worse the swaying motion gets in a storm.)  But sadly the earth is curved and I do have to do all of these things.
Your image of the FE model is extremely inaccurate. It's almost difficult to figure out what you mean, because you focus so hard on ripping into a hypothetical FE model nobody here supports.

I'd never mock someone for their service to their country.  That's disgusting.  You really should be ashamed of yourself.
lol, this brand of "patriotism" will never cease to amuse me. But, for the sake of avoidance of doubt: I never mocked you for your service to your country. I mocked your insistence on showing off. This was clearly indicated in the original statement: "you took your time to brag about it"

Then I'm sure you've already published a master's thesis.
You would be wrong. Once again, you operate on a false assumption. I'm not American, and my Master's degree is not an MSc nor an MA. You also seem to be under the impression that I'd reveal my identity to a random person on the Internet.

I've already read all this stuff.  It didn't answer my questions.
Most of the glaring holes in your understanding of FET are covered there. Once you've read through these, you can start amending your questions.

Do you also suffer from short term memory loss?  Your response "doesn't even convey a coherent thought."  Unfortunately, "your fantasies...do very little to affect reality."  I hope that one day I can say "for the first time in forever, you managed to make an accurate observation."  I've been craving a debate and "I'd love to attack your arguments, but you have yet to make any."
All of these things relate to the things you said, not to your person. The key phrases there are "that" [the sentence quoted above], "your fantasies", "your arguments" [or lack thereof].

Yes, its a diversion.  Instead of answering the question you just resort to character attacks and insults.  All you do is ad hominem arguments.
Your question cannot be meaningfully answered, and your character has yet to be attacked.

Its a pretty simple question, I have no idea why it is unanswerable.
That would be due to your reliance on false premises and your unwillingness to review or explain them. 

Who is lying about the earth being flat?  Who knows that it is flat and yet continues to provide false evidence that it is round?
Finally, a question that's both coherent and which doesn't rely on a laundry list of assumptions. I can answer that one for you. Strictly speaking: probably nobody.

I already did......are you sure you don't have short term memory loss?
Yes, I am sure your personal attack doesn't hold much water. For example: I asked, multiple times, whether the people who you claim dismiss the apparent motions of stars as "fake" were from the Flat Earth Society. The closest you've come to answering this question is "How do you think I found this place?".

How am attacking you or your personality?
For one, you keep suggesting that I suffer from at least two mental deficiencies: a short-term memory loss and poor reading comprehension. You also said I should be ashamed of myself.

I am merely pointing out that when a person does not have any concrete evidence to support their claims it is very common for them to resort to misdirection or insults.
I agree, your "memory loss" schtick is very telling. 

If you had concrete evidence then you would have already presented it to me and this discussion would have been over several posts ago.
An interesting assumption, but there are many other reasons for which I might not want to waste my time on educating you.

I feel like we're going in circles.  You keep telling me that all of my comments are under false pretenses and false assumptions but you will never say how they are false.  You also insist that I don't answer your questions and yet also refuse to answer all of mine.  The only links and evidence you have provided me do nothing to disprove my arguments.  I can't have a logical debate with you if you don't provide examples of how or why I am wrong.  So either prove to me how I'm wrong or this is essentially a waste of our time.  I'm sitting here telling you 2 + 2 = 4 and you're telling me I'm wrong and not only will you not say what the "correct" answer is but you also wont' provide me with any mathematical proof to show that 2 + 2 equals any other number but 4.

*

Offline SexWarrior

  • e
  • *
  • Posts: 5543
  • (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #9 on: May 03, 2017, 03:23:00 PM »
I feel like we're going in circles.
Yes. Repeatedly accusing your conversation partner of having mental disabilities while virtue-signalling about just how opposed you are to personal attacks will usually lead to an unproductive conversation.

You keep telling me that all of my comments are under false pretenses and false assumptions but you will never say how they are false.
Actually, I stated them outright in my first response. A bunch of the things you say "Flat Earthers" claim simply do not apply to this community. You can either acknowledge that and asks questions that someone here will be able to answer, or insist that you know our positions better than we do and... well, you can probably infer from our conversations how far that will get you.

You also insist that I don't answer your questions and yet also refuse to answer all of mine.
Yes, so long as your questions remain unanswerable, I will be unable to do much more than point this out. If you want to know about Dubay and his friends, ask Dubay and his friends.

I'm sitting here telling you 2 + 2 = 4 and you're telling me I'm wrong and not only will you not say what the "correct" answer is but you also wont' provide me with any mathematical proof to show that 2 + 2 equals any other number but 4.
No, you're not. What you're doing is saying something along the lines of "Flat Earthers claim that 2+2=5 and that is wrong. Why would you believe something so wrong? I'd like to see some proof of 2+2=5". I'm simply pointing out that this community doesn't have anyone who claims that 2+2=5 and am asking who told you otherwise. You, in return, continue to complain that I'm doing little to defend the notion of 2+2=5. Well, buddy, that's because I have no interest in defending something that's blatantly wrong. You'll have to direct your question to the people who made the claims you're opposed to (but, frankly, I doubt they actually exist, as you're very defensive about providing quotes)
<Parsifal> Jesus Christ
<Parsifal> Do I really have to write 6000-word sentences just to remove all ambiguity from everything I'm saying?

Where live, do the offer adult reading classes?

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2017, 09:44:30 PM »

Snipers taking into account the Coriolis effect of the earth for long range shots: fake.
Y'know, the longer you list these, the longer I think that you haven't spoken to many people here.

My best friend is a multi-time world record holder and world champion in 1,000-yard shooting.  The Coriolis effect is quite real and I have seen it in action.

Also, the FAQ says planes are not allowed to fly over 40,000 ft.  Pure bunk.  A Cessna Citation X flys at 51,000 and the same for a Gulfstream g650.  The concord flew at 60,000 and passengers reported seeing the curvature. 

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5156
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2017, 10:15:02 PM »

Also, the FAQ says planes are not allowed to fly over 40,000 ft.  Pure bunk.  A Cessna Citation X flys at 51,000 and the same for a Gulfstream g650.  The concord flew at 60,000 and passengers reported seeing the curvature.

The FAQ actually says:
" It is widely stated you would need to be at a height of at least 40,000 ft to get even a hint of curvature if earth were round. Commercial aircraft are not allowed to fly this high."

Neither the Cessna, nor the Gulfstream you cited are commercial aircraft. Your anecdote about the Concorde is fantastic, however there is no empirical evidence supporting this claim (unless you have some you would like to share).
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #12 on: May 17, 2017, 10:39:40 PM »
All of my questions are coherent and answerable, hence why we are having this conversation.
Okay. Well, since your core question relies on a number of false premises, I am unable to answer it meaningfully. Make of that what you will.

How do you think I found this place?
Our main acquisition channels are search engines and social media services, so I'd my guess would be one of those.

However, this does not answer my question. If you did meet someone like that here, could you quote them? It would be interesting to see.

So far the only ones I've heard is "the videos are fake" and "people are facing the wrong direction."
Quotes, please. Who on this forum said that?

You can't blame me that you don't have much material out there.  I did as much research as I could and I still have a lot of questions.
I can blame you for not bothering to read the basics, and I will do so.

You don't think going to sea and seeing ships going over the horizon would change your perspective?  I find that rather odd to say the least.
That's because you operate under the incorrect assumption that I haven't done it before. Much like with the core question of this thread, as soon as you accept a false premise, all logic goes out the window.

You'd think if the earth was flat the Navy would be your greatest supporters.  You'd think if the round earth model didn't work that the people who travel thousands of miles at sea would be the first people to point it out.  If the earth was flat then traveling along great circle routes would actually waste fuel rather than save it.  I'd love it if I could see ships from hundreds of miles away or if my radar wasn't limited by the curvature of the earth.  I'd love it if I didn't have to put the bridge or my lookouts at the highest points in the ship (since the higher you go the worse the swaying motion gets in a storm.)  But sadly the earth is curved and I do have to do all of these things.
Your image of the FE model is extremely inaccurate. It's almost difficult to figure out what you mean, because you focus so hard on ripping into a hypothetical FE model nobody here supports.

I'd never mock someone for their service to their country.  That's disgusting.  You really should be ashamed of yourself.
lol, this brand of "patriotism" will never cease to amuse me. But, for the sake of avoidance of doubt: I never mocked you for your service to your country. I mocked your insistence on showing off. This was clearly indicated in the original statement: "you took your time to brag about it"

Then I'm sure you've already published a master's thesis.
You would be wrong. Once again, you operate on a false assumption. I'm not American, and my Master's degree is not an MSc nor an MA. You also seem to be under the impression that I'd reveal my identity to a random person on the Internet.

I've already read all this stuff.  It didn't answer my questions.
Most of the glaring holes in your understanding of FET are covered there. Once you've read through these, you can start amending your questions.

Do you also suffer from short term memory loss?  Your response "doesn't even convey a coherent thought."  Unfortunately, "your fantasies...do very little to affect reality."  I hope that one day I can say "for the first time in forever, you managed to make an accurate observation."  I've been craving a debate and "I'd love to attack your arguments, but you have yet to make any."
All of these things relate to the things you said, not to your person. The key phrases there are "that" [the sentence quoted above], "your fantasies", "your arguments" [or lack thereof].

Yes, its a diversion.  Instead of answering the question you just resort to character attacks and insults.  All you do is ad hominem arguments.
Your question cannot be meaningfully answered, and your character has yet to be attacked.

Its a pretty simple question, I have no idea why it is unanswerable.
That would be due to your reliance on false premises and your unwillingness to review or explain them. 

Who is lying about the earth being flat?  Who knows that it is flat and yet continues to provide false evidence that it is round?
Finally, a question that's both coherent and which doesn't rely on a laundry list of assumptions. I can answer that one for you. Strictly speaking: probably nobody.

I already did......are you sure you don't have short term memory loss?
Yes, I am sure your personal attack doesn't hold much water. For example: I asked, multiple times, whether the people who you claim dismiss the apparent motions of stars as "fake" were from the Flat Earth Society. The closest you've come to answering this question is "How do you think I found this place?".

How am attacking you or your personality?
For one, you keep suggesting that I suffer from at least two mental deficiencies: a short-term memory loss and poor reading comprehension. You also said I should be ashamed of myself.

I am merely pointing out that when a person does not have any concrete evidence to support their claims it is very common for them to resort to misdirection or insults.
I agree, your "memory loss" schtick is very telling. 

If you had concrete evidence then you would have already presented it to me and this discussion would have been over several posts ago.
An interesting assumption, but there are many other reasons for which I might not want to waste my time on educating you.

I feel like we're going in circles.  You keep telling me that all of my comments are under false pretenses and false assumptions but you will never say how they are false.  You also insist that I don't answer your questions and yet also refuse to answer all of mine.  The only links and evidence you have provided me do nothing to disprove my arguments.  I can't have a logical debate with you if you don't provide examples of how or why I am wrong.  So either prove to me how I'm wrong or this is essentially a waste of our time.  I'm sitting here telling you 2 + 2 = 4 and you're telling me I'm wrong and not only will you not say what the "correct" answer is but you also wont' provide me with any mathematical proof to show that 2 + 2 equals any other number but 4.

Silent Service......You and I have both been in the Navy.
We've just been "brainwashed and idoctrinated" by the Navy into thinking what we saw !
Like the  "sinking ship", "the round earth", et cetera, et cetera, and so forth. LOL.
Stick close to your P.C's and never go to sea
And You All may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Yes, Never, Never, Never go to sea
Just look out your windows,
Flat ! Flat ! Flat !
Is all that you shall see !

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #13 on: May 17, 2017, 11:30:36 PM »

Also, the FAQ says planes are not allowed to fly over 40,000 ft.  Pure bunk.  A Cessna Citation X flys at 51,000 and the same for a Gulfstream g650.  The concord flew at 60,000 and passengers reported seeing the curvature.

The FAQ actually says:
" It is widely stated you would need to be at a height of at least 40,000 ft to get even a hint of curvature if earth were round. Commercial aircraft are not allowed to fly this high."

Neither the Cessna, nor the Gulfstream you cited are commercial aircraft. Your anecdote about the Concorde is fantastic, however there is no empirical evidence supporting this claim (unless you have some you would like to share).

Again, bunk, most domestic small jets in service in the US are commercial aircraft operated under FAA part 135.  They are allowed to fly as high as they are certified for.

Airliner altitude is not limited by regulation but by certification. Most current airliners certify at 42,000.  It is a cost issue. It's much more expensive to build aircraft that will certify for greater altitude and there is no gain when using a standard fan jet and wing design.  The 787 only gained 1000 feet with its new wing design.

There are thousands of witnesses to the curvature of the earth on the concord and modern small jets.  Are they all duped?

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5156
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #14 on: May 18, 2017, 12:25:32 AM »
There are thousands of witnesses to the curvature of the earth on the concord and modern small jets.

Citation needed...
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #15 on: May 18, 2017, 02:23:04 AM »
There are thousands of witnesses to the curvature of the earth on the concord and modern small jets.

Citation needed...

Are you really a moderator?  I ask because you seem like more of a troll?

*

Offline junker

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5156
  • Boom
    • View Profile
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #16 on: May 18, 2017, 03:15:37 AM »
There are thousands of witnesses to the curvature of the earth on the concord and modern small jets.

Citation needed...

Are you really a moderator?  I ask because you seem like more of a troll?
Seeing as how you are the one making unfounded claims and now deflecting, it would seem you are actually the troll.

If you have no evidence to support your claims then just say so and move on. If you aren't going to stay on topic then refrain from posting. If you want to actually discuss the topic, then maybe support your claims.
Please make sure to check out these resources to ensure that your time at tfes.org is enjoyable and productive.

1. The Rules

2. The FAQ

3. The Wiki

You're doing God's work, junker.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 1264
    • View Profile
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #17 on: May 18, 2017, 05:16:02 AM »
There are thousands of witnesses to the curvature of the earth on the concord and modern small jets.

Citation needed...

Are you really a moderator?  I ask because you seem like more of a troll?

Welcome to TFES!  :)

Obviously the Conspiracy is vast. So vast you are likely a part of it, whether you realize it or not!
Electro-Theologist, Poet, Philosopher, Musician, Etymologist, Egyptologist, Astro-Theologist, Geocentrist, Flat Earther, and Collector of Rare Books.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 44
    • View Profile
Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #18 on: May 18, 2017, 01:36:32 PM »
I see a lot of complaints from FE'ers that repeating the explanations over and over is tiresome - and I certainly get that.   You guys have been in the trenches fighting this battle for decades at least.

The trouble is that for a newbie, all there seems to be in the way of solid explanation is in the Wiki.

But then I hear from many FE'ers here in the forums that the information in the Wiki doesn't represent what is widely believed to be the case...OK - so maybe the Wiki is outdated...I get that.

So for a newbie (like myself) - I read the Wiki (quite carefully) - and it doesn't answer my questions.  (eg Why are there two tides each day, roughly 12 hours apart).

All I can do to try to resolve this is to ask a question here.   In that case, (at time of writing) it has gotten 3 views but no responses.

Where does that leave me?   The obvious assumption (which is hopefully wrong) is that nobody in the FE community has an explanation for this phenomenon.  The Wiki is wrong (or at least inadequate) - and the people who know are not explaining it.

I could believe that the people who've been defending FE for a long time are sick of explaining the two-tides phenomenon.   But perhaps if they took the time to add their explanation into the Wiki - they'd get fewer people asking about it...and when they do - they can simply say "Check the Wiki!" and all will be well.

Failing that - you do seem to be getting new FE believers all the time - and surely they cannot be suffering from this "explanation exhaustion" problem - so perhaps the old-timers could apply a little pressure to their newer followers to seek out and explain these things.

If you don't/can't/won't do this then whatever corpus of FE knowledge covers things that are incorrect - or not covered - in the Wiki will die with the present generation of experts...and the only remaining FE'ers will be people who have not thought things through or who are following blind religious doctrine.   That would be a shame because it's clear that a large amount of effort has gone into explaining the FE phenomenon with care and attention to detail.

So it seems like the old-school FE adherents need to either:

* update the Wiki as needed to cover genuinely new questions ("new" defined as "not explained in the Wiki")...or...
* keep responding to questions that are truly not covered by the Wiki...or...
* face up to the fact that people who seek knowledge here will find huge gaping holes in FE theory...debunk whatever (outdated) information is present in the Wiki...which will hand victory to the RE'ers.

A good example of this is the question of which direction the stars move in the Southern Hemisphere.

This is not covered in the Wiki (at least my careful search didn't find it).

Simply saying that 100% of all Australians, South Africans, Brazilians and New Zealanders are either lying or facing the wrong way when they make their observations isn't tremendously convincing.  That's a LOT of people - observing the skies for at least 150 years.  Just dismissing those observations doesn't add to the credibility of FE.

If that has been successfully explained here - then please take a moment to copy-paste the definitive answer into the Wiki - and newcomers will get the facts.

The truth is out there (be it FE or RE) - but without reasoned debate, we'll never get to the bottom of it.

Re: How big is the conspiracy?
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2017, 06:12:10 PM »
There are thousands of witnesses to the curvature of the earth on the concord and modern small jets.

Citation needed...

Are you really a moderator?  I ask because you seem like more of a troll?
Seeing as how you are the one making unfounded claims and now deflecting, it would seem you are actually the troll.

If you have no evidence to support your claims then just say so and move on. If you aren't going to stay on topic then refrain from posting. If you want to actually discuss the topic, then maybe support your claims.


First off, I presented facts about airliners and private jets that you conveniently ignored.   This is on topic because the size of the crowd keeping the secret would be huge and getting bigger every day.  Everyone that ever flew from Sydney to South Africa would know if they own a watch or looked out the window.

Second, it is a widely accepted fact that people flying Concord saw the curvature.  A simple google search would let you know that.  Are we to assume every passenger of Concorde is part of the coverup? 

https://www.google.com/search?q=view+from+concorde+window&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiBn9Cbg_rTAhUC1mMKHbhjBCkQ_AUIBigB&biw=1920&bih=950

Since you are a mod here, will you answer the question of the OP or a modified version of it?  Your best guess, not an exact number, how big is the number of people hiding the flat earth from all of us?     Furthermore, off topic to some extent but why are they hiding it, who stands to gain?