1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Found a fully working flat earth model?
« on: June 07, 2022, 12:04:17 AM »
For the sake of clarity: Do you think the OP is suggesting they are showing us a Euclidean space FE in this thread?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
In another thread, Troolon explained to me that measurement is broken. His attitude towards the same question was that when real world measurements do not match FE, one concludes that measurement is broken. Most would conclude that real world measurements confirm RE. If you wish to believe FE, something has to give, so measurement is broken. Result you don't like? Declare it wrong. No idea what forces or equations account for broken measurement? No problem. Only RE explains measurement? Just ignore the problem, i.e., don't reply.You continue to demonstrate that you haven't understood a single thing Troolon wrote. Across 2 threads, simultaneously. Telling you that you are misinterpreting what he presented is not the same as telling you that measurement is broken.
Remember when Democrats negotiated on Obamacare in good faith, caving to Republican demands even though they had the votes to put through something truly differentiating like Universal Health Care if they wanted to, only to find that not a single Republican voted in favor of it despite the fact that it was a near-replication of Romneycare? So they can say what you are saying they will say, but they would be wrong. Democrats have been much better about negotiating in good faith than Republicans for most of my adult life. They are just shit at actually enacting anything of substance, usually because they campaign on the lofty goals, then whittle away at those to appease Republican legislators when courting votes, then don't get a single Republican to actually side with them (or sometimes, a single-digit number of Republicans might side with them), then lose power because they didn't accomplish what they set out to do.They're rational, but they're cynical to the core and have long since abandoned their principles in favor of grasping at power wherever they can at the expense of our democracy. They can't be trusted, and making any sort of plan that relies on their help or cooperation is guaranteed to backfire.
And they say the same about Democrats.
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?
I dare to say that despite pretending to know so much about the moon and the hoaxes surrounding it, flat Earthers cannot make a single prediction about the moon. Am I wrong?You think a group of people could keep track of the behavior of the moon over a period of months or years and not be able to make a single prediction about its behavior? I dare to say I don't think you are actually using your head at all if you'd suggest such a thing. Anyone can take notes on the cycles of waxing and waning and look for patterns that repeat.
Oh I agree.Society has to get better at teaching guys not to sexually assault people. If you lie about being on birth control and subsequently impregnate someone, I'm pretty sure that checks the sexual assault boxes.
But if a guy says "It's ok, I'm on the pill" would you really wanna trust him? I sure as hell wouldn't.
Sure. I mean, I felt like that went without saying, but I guess it's worth pointing out. I was speaking from a Northern Hemisphere Supremacist perspective and that's probably not ideal.Ships sailing north from different lines of latitude converge toward each other. They don't get further away from each other. That is the reality modern navigation has revealed to us. Leaving the discussion of rotated constellations behind (because it is definitely unresolved), you don't account for converging paths as people move north from various longitudes.The courses of two ships would converge on a Northbound voyage assuming that they are both North of the equator. If they were South of the equator the courses would continue to diverge until they reached the equator.
Yes. Yes, he did.Looks like neither of you read what OP has been writing. If you spend a few minutes actually reading, instead of knee-jerk reacting to yell "NO, FE BAD", you may just discover that the model is quite literally still the same model as the globe. Because it is still the globe model. OP spent a lot of time responding very clearly, and was very patient, and it's clear the folks that have had the most vocal opposition aren't even showing the slightest bit of respect by reading what they have written.
OP did not contend with the divergence of longitude
My argument is a little more sophisticated than "NO, FE BAD" thank you very much.It might have been, had you actually read what OP was proposing. This is still a globe, and those lines converge using the correct distance metric.
Don't you dare change the CN theme you cultureless heathens.