1

Flat Earth Projects / Obvious Truth III

« on: May 14, 2018, 04:38:24 PM »

As has been established, for those who did not read up on the previous two, the wiki page "The Place of the Conspiracy" that goes as such:
-The flat earth is an obvious truth
-Any evidence against an obvious truth is fabricated
-Any evidence against the flat earth is fabricated
had peaked my interest. I queried about what lead one to believe it is an 'obvious truth', and Pete informed moi that it was indeed stolen from the other FE wiki.
If this is not what one believes, might I ask, what is the Flat Earth belief based on?
What is the base fact that all flat earthers agree on that makes it seem real? (or at least real-er than the round earth)
A distrust of the government?
An eye for photoshop and seeing discrepancies most of us miss?
Blind faith in Rowbotham?
It looking flat?
I'm stumped.

2

Flat Earth Theory / The Cost of the Conspiracy

« on: May 11, 2018, 09:50:17 PM »

This came to mind recently. How can a space travel conspiracy make profits off of faked space travel (funded by the government, presumably) when the cost in men and money are staggering for such an 'obvious' lie.
There's an endpoint to how much the government can afford, even if they all are working together. (Sidenote: if they are all secretly together, why is America 3 trillion in debt? hey can't balance a damn budget, do you really think they're capable of pulling everything else off? Plus 21 billion of that is to china, if they're in cahoots, it makes no sense.)
Firstly, manpower. A lot have people have died, namely during the space race, and the 'height of the conspiracy'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents
Surely with several witnesses and detailed descriptions of most of those pertaining to launch failure, (and records of those in the cosmos, whether or not you'll accept them) they couldn't all be faked for the conspiracy, surely. if they wanted to seem successful, wouldn't they want to, you know, not kill their people doing the thing that they said they can do well?
Also, money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_program
The space shuttle program alone cost 209 billion, and our toys have only gotten fancier and more expensive.
If the government is swindling taxpayers out of that much money, you've got to wonder, how? And more importantly why?
From what I've heard so far, the motivators were greed and looking powerful.
That's a hefty pricetag for illusions.
Edit: Also, how exactly does one keep all that flagrant spending under wraps in a company of NASA's size, not to mention every space program everywhere?

3

Flat Earth Theory / Obvious Truth Part 2

« on: May 07, 2018, 04:52:11 PM »

So, this sunk, unanswered in the debate thread, and I realized it's more a singular question, so it belongs here anyway.

In the flat earth wiki, the earth's flatness is regarded as an obvious truth and any evidence against it is fabricated.
On what is this based?
If the truth is so obvious, what revelatory evidence is behind it?
Being a cornerstone of FE belief, it must be very convincing.
Care to enlighten me on this subject?

4

Flat Earth Theory / Obvious Truth...?

« on: May 03, 2018, 03:24:30 PM »

In the flat earth wiki, the earth's flatness is regarded as an obvious truth and any evidence against it is fabricated.
On what is this based?
If the truth is so obvious, what revelatory evidence is behind it?
Being a cornerstone of FE belief, it must be very convincing.
Care to enlighten me on this subject?

5

Flat Earth Theory / Map Mysteries

« on: April 11, 2018, 05:28:41 PM »

Navigation as been brought up before. It's amazing how people navigated for centries with charts and maps of the 'wrong' earth.
Wrong being round in this context of course.
But what did they use to navigate? Maps. What did those maps show? The globe. Did they do it well? No, they were all innacurate, and would bend distances, because there is no way to accurately put a 3d surface on to a 2d surface and vice versa. There will always be some distortion.
Why are they all distorted if the earth is flat and can be represented on a 2d map without distortion?
Why are they successful at navigating despite being about the round earth?
Why is there no flat earth map? Certainly someone would have manfactured one at some point.
Why can the flat earth models not correctly show the southern hemisphere without distortion?
Why, despite the whole planet being mapped, has no one found/photographed/explored the ice wall?
Fun fact: NASA was founded in 1958, while nautical charts go back as far as 1339 with the Portolan Chart, so no conspiracy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portolan_chart
Excited for a response.

6

Flat Earth Investigations / Chemtrails and Toothpaste

« on: April 06, 2018, 01:43:56 PM »

So a common theory around these parts, that happens to coincide with the flat earth is Chemtrails and Geo-engineering.
The governments are seeding the skies with mind-warping chemicals that trick us into believing things, and they're polluting the water with them too.
Yeah, no.
I've heard cases for flouride, flourine, and flourite, though that could easily be some unfortunate typos.
They have a point, the governments are tainting our water supply with flouride in a dastardly plot to reduce tooth decay.
That's what it does. It's a teeth cleaner.
Also, in the actual conspiracy theory, if they did poison the air with this, don't they breathe the same air as us? If anything they'd be poisoning themselves too.
And how does a chemical make you brainwashed? Oxygen isn't whispering dark secrets in your ear. You aren't going to go mad from the Silicon in your computers, and whatever flourine/flourite/baking flour they're putting in the skies doesn't make the earth any flatter.

As for the cloud lines, you're thinking of contrails. It's water condensing behind the wings as the air on top of them collides with the air below.
Clouds form around them, since water droplets in the air want to come together into clouds, and there's already a perfectly good cloud nearby to join.
If you've owned a plane you would know this. It happens to all of them, given the right humidity. Your backyard puddle jumper isn't warping the minds of the misled masses, it's just flying.

Of course, if I'm mistaken, there's a perfectly good reply button to tell me how wrong and stupid I am.

7

Flat Earth Theory / Lunar Light Lunacy

« on: April 06, 2018, 01:28:24 PM »

I have recently brought special attention to the concept of lunar light in the Flat Earth model. The moon emits its own light, which cools objects.
How?
Light contains energy, in photons.
Photons are little packets of energy that heat things up.
Heat is energy, after all. It's the movement of atoms.
Leave something out in the summer sun all day and it will get hot from the energy transfer.
That's how photo-voltaic solar panels work. They absorb that energy, and convert it to electricity.
In the round earth reality, the moon does not heat things because it only reflects to earth, about 17% of the sun's illumination.
It's why there's no such thing as 'lunar panels'. It's pitifully inefficient.
The sun is far more powerful, making the moon seem colder.
So the question stands, how does the moon's light remove energy?
Antimatter photons?
Magic?
Nanomachines?
Some undiscovered subatomic particle that sucks away energy?
Could we make a light that does the same thing?
Please enlighten me on the subject.

8

Flat Earth Theory / Universal-ish Acceleration

« on: April 04, 2018, 03:51:30 PM »

From what I understand of the FET, the reason we aren't held on by gravity is because actually, the world is being pushed up by the Universal Accelerator, the power of which manages to accelerate the world at near light-speed forever. Despite constantly rising at 9.8m/s requiring nearly infinite energy, that's not what I am posting to dispute. The planets above are also pushed up by this force/mechanism/whatever at an equal speed, correct? How does the Universal Accelerator decide what to push and what not to? The reason we feel gravity is because the earth is accelerating and we are not, along with everything else on the earth, so why? It can't be just because they aren't connected to the ground, as the planets accelerate too, so what does it? Excited for a response.

9

Flat Earth Theory / Flat weather

« on: March 29, 2018, 01:49:10 PM »

On a flat earth, since the sun spins over it, allegedly, one part is heated at a time.
Since the moon is supposedly cooling, the other half gets colder, correct?
On a globe, weather and wind are complex because the earth's movements are on an axis, and orbiting while also rotating.
There's tilting, turning, twisting, etc. Enough variation to change  pretty frequently where it is hot and cold.
Since hot air rises and expands, and cold air sinks and rushes in to replace it, we get wind and weather.
Since the hot and cold are so varied, where the wind blows is varied. We get all sorts of weird weather.
On a flat plane with only an orbiting sun and moon above it, hot and cold would be relatively simple, daylight side is hot, moonlit side is cold.
Wind would travel to the hot side.
However, the wind isn't this predictable.
Care to explain?

10

Flat Earth Theory / FE Popularity

« on: March 29, 2018, 02:57:42 AM »

We've had the knowledge that the earth is a globe for the longest time, but recently there has been a mass reverting. The flat earth society has had a meteoric rise in members. Any ideas why?
How could so many possibly change their minds at the same time?
Is this a problem? Could the rise in flat earth minded people impede future scientific progress?
How can we explore the stars if we're all convinced they're a whole colossal indestructible dome away?
Excited to get some answers.

11

Flat Earth Theory / Tides and Tectonics

« on: March 27, 2018, 04:50:13 PM »

This came to mind recently. How does the flat earth cover tides and plate tectonics? In the RE world it is all nice and neat. The moon exerts a weak gravitational pull (like everything does) that pulls the water on earth as it orbits. It doesn't pull the land because it's too rigid to noticeably bend. The plates move from internal convection currents and magma coming up at plate boundaries to harden into more crust, to be pushed to a continent and go back down to melt. The continents are moved on the ocean floor on these conveyor belts. In flat earth, though, isn't the moon suspended opposite the sun? The pull (if any) would only cause one tide. How do tectonics work on a flat earth? Core heat relies on mass compressing it down and a spin to churn it. There's no spin and considerably less mass. While we're at it, how does the Coriolis effect work on a flat, stationary earth? Excited to hear a response...

12

Flat Earth Theory / Planar Warming

« on: March 06, 2018, 02:39:25 PM »

So, humans are pumping CO₂, methane, etc. into the atmosphere at an increasing rate. That much is indisputable. 98% of scientists agree, we've known since the 1880s, it's raising our temperature. But how would this work on a flat domed earth? Would it? Since oxygen-rich air is less dense than carbon dioxide, would we not push our own atmosphere into the above area where the sun and moon are? Also, the warming is much more severe in the northern hemisphere as opposed to the southern. Not to mention, if the Ice Wall is colossal and thick and monstrous, then how is Antarctica melting and shrinking? In the RE model, we expect a large sea rise from the lost ice, but if the flat earth's wall is true, then surely there would be enough frozen water to drown the whole world. Excited to hear about what the FErs think.

13

Flat Earth Theory / Problem with Empiricism

« on: March 06, 2018, 03:21:35 AM »

So, i have been reading through these forums for quite a while, it was fascinating, keep up the good work. However, I have noticed a little discrepancy, particularly with the reliance on empiricism. Its based on what one observes with ones senses, correct? One teeny tiny little problem. Our senses can lie. Optical illusions exist. Nose blindness, hallucinations, you get the idea. Compounding this, several Flat Earth Theory astronomical phenomena are explained away with said illusions and incorrect observations. Tom Bishop's wonderful, magical, all-purpose-theory-hole-sealant, 'perspective' for example. Anyone care to explain?