1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How Clouds Once Again Prove Flat-Earth Theory

« on: April 18, 2016, 04:42:22 PM »

Or, perhaps, I haven't been swayed by anyone's rebuttals.

Which would indicate a rather alarming lack of flexibility in your beliefs, since you apparently also cannot actually adress any of their points.

How does that in anyway show an inability to address their points? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Umm.... yeah.... about that. You're wrong on so many levels. Absence of evidence is the only evidence of absence. How else would one prove an absence of something?

How can you prove that unicorns don't exist? Because no one has ever seen one. If someone told you that unicorns exist you would probably think they were a young child or you would probably laugh at them.

So, when you insinuate that your rebuttals are just too good for this debate; everyone laughs at you, like a little child.

2

Flat Earth Community / Re: 3D engines fails to reproduce round earth as we experience it

« on: April 18, 2016, 04:24:13 PM »

If the real world were anything like a video game, I would put in the 'all guns' cheat code and blow you away right now.

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Simple Experiment for Simple Minds

« on: April 07, 2016, 03:16:49 PM »

SexWarrior needs to stop being such an internet warrior and start having sex. What's new?

If you're offering... your place or mine?   

Nah man I don't swing that way. To each their own. Also, if you want to get laid, it's best not to ask for handouts. And using more than one of the same emoji comes across as desperate. Play it cool, bro.

Anyway, I'm letting you speak now aren't I? As if I could block you out of the forum entirely. Just remember that even though you have a right to speak, it doesn't mean everyone is going to listen. In fact, the more bullshit you spew, the less people will listen.

4

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Simple Experiment for Simple Minds

« on: April 06, 2016, 09:25:48 PM »

OP needs to read the FAQ and parts of the wiki. Rabinoz needs to stop abusing the table BBCode. What's new?

SexWarrior needs to stop being such an internet warrior and start having sex. What's new?

I concur with rabinoz. The things stated in the wiki and FAQ do not reflect observations of everyday events. OBSERVATIONS. OF EVERYDAY EVENTS. If you cannot understand this, then your credibility as a sentient being is hereby revoked. SexWarrior, you are the first.

5

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why should anyone believe the earth is flat?

« on: April 06, 2016, 06:32:13 PM »

Ah the smug nature of the rounders comments... Can you feel it?

You guys talk a big game but yet still NONE of you have your own evidence the earth is round.

All any Ball Earth believers do is post links from "science" websites and use that as their evidence.

That is another man's work, not yours.

If round earth is so easy to prove, then  why don't any of you have your own evidence?

The fact that and the way that rounders even attempt to defend round earth tells me a lot about this so called science you all spew.

Most rounders have never even left their own country, state, home town, yet you all are so certain of the shape of the earth.

Rounders go through their entire life believing all they read about science. Never once having an original thought, experiment, or ground breaking discovery.

Space is nothing more than a mathematical theory, never proven, never explored, never conquered by man, ever.

The science you know is nothing more than complicated math to complete a puzzle of illusion for the weak to snack on.

Jokes on you. Go back to your History Channel and Discovery Channel for your daily brainwashing. Then, please, come back and "educate" the less fortunate and under studied some more...

Yes, I do know that I did not read the entire thread.

Your post is a laugh indeed. Where's your evidence? You came to a thread asking FE'ers for evidence of 'flat Earth', and then said WE ('rounders') had to supply YOU with evidence! Well, here's my evidence:
1. Tides
2. Weather
3. Magnetic poles on either side of the GLOBE
4. Phases in the Moon
5. Lack of evidence for 'flat Earth theory'
6. 'FET' rewrites half (I'm exaggerating here) of the existing apparent laws of physics.
7. The Earth looks curved
I could keep going. All of these instances of plain observation are incongruent with 'FET'. Now, since I have provided my proofs for 'RET', would you be so kind as to supply us with some 'proofs' of your own?

6

Flat Earth Community / Re: Reversal of Burden of Proof

« on: April 06, 2016, 04:20:02 PM »

I don't know if this has been said already, but if you believe the Earth is flat, then the "burden of ignorance" is on you; regardless of who has the "burden of proof". To me, that is as simple as it needs to be. We all have the same amount of resources. We all have eyes and brains (well SOME of us don't have those but...). The "burden of proof" rests on no one. I think someone is trying to make up a new 'moral law' that really isn't there in order to spur more conversation and responsibility from the 'RET' side of the debate. As I'm sure all the 'Roundies' are aware: There is an abundance of information proving that the Earth is round, and if you are unable to see that, then it isn't my problem. In fact, people believing the Earth is flat is probably an evolutionary disadvantage, and you're doing us all a favor by believing what you believe.

To all 'Roundies': 'FE'ers' don't abide by their own rules. Why should you have to?

7

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is the Earth really flat?

« on: April 05, 2016, 10:33:22 PM »

This cannot occur on a flat earth. To lose visibility of the Sun on a FE model it must become obscured by either
1) Sinking below the flat plane
2) Switching off
Either of these would result in the entire earth becoming shrouded in darkness simultaneously.

False. Please review the FAQ. Thanks!

Please watch the low-content posting.

False. Please adjust the FAQ to reflect facts. Thanks!

Does that go for me AND Junker? Or are you discriminating against me because I know the Earth is not flat?

Edit: REALLY?? HAHA! You sent me a warning message for 'low content posting' after you JUST POSTED a reply with 2/3 the amount of words that I used!! What is the definition of 'low content posting'? And who is your superior?

8

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Simple Experiment for Simple Minds

« on: April 05, 2016, 10:29:12 PM »

Pretty sure that photo is edited.  The reflection of the moon shouldn't be brighter than the moon itself.  The moon shouldn't have a white ring around the edge like that either.  Conclusion: the moon was superimposed there by a non-professional, and doesn't belong in this image at all.  Second conclusion: the sun should be up even with the main cloud frill.  That's where the crepuscular rays point, right in the middle of the artificially darkened area.

Are you saying that it's impossible for the moon to dip down below the horizon?

9

Flat Earth Theory / Re: How Clouds Once Again Prove Flat-Earth Theory

« on: April 05, 2016, 07:11:25 PM »

Have you ever seen rays of light shining down through the clouds?  Something like this?





If you trace the rays back to an origin, you'll find that the sun must be very, very close to the earth which is consistent with flat-earth theory.  The sun is certainly not ~8.5 light minutes away like round-earth theory states. 

To prove flat-earth theory, sometimes it really is as simple as looking out your window.

Whether the Earth is flat or round, or whether the sun is 300 miles or 93 million miles away cannot be determined from this image. Well, it can, but not with the point you're trying to make.

10

Flat Earth Theory / Re: A Simple Experiment for Simple Minds

« on: April 05, 2016, 06:51:40 PM »

We get sunsets at a very predictable times, with the sun certainly appearing to set behind the horizon.

Please explain how you explanation "Light decays. Also it would be affected by the atmosphere to some degree -- the reason we see reds and purples in the sky at sunset" can possibly explain that. True it does explain the "reds and purples in the sky at sunset".

You claim "Light decays"! No, light travelling through a vacuum does not decay!
Travelling through a clear atmosphere the limit is about 340 km - the Rayleigh Limit due to scattering from Oxygen and Nitrogen molecules. The actual limit varies from only a few kilometres up to this figure, depending on the clarity of the air.

With the Flat Earth model at sunset the sun is (supposedly) around 5000 km high and on the equator at an equinox around 14,400 km away (horizontally). With this geometry, and the effective top of the atmosphere is at about 10 km high.

With these distances the effective path length for sunlight at sunset is only about 30 km! Unless you come up with some very "bendy light".
And while we are at it, the sun certainly appears to stay the same size as it appears to move over the sky, yet its distance from the observer varies from 5,000 km when overhead to roughly 15,000 km at sunset - why does perspective cause it to reduce it size to less than 1/3 the size it is when overhead? The explanation we are given is "atmospheric magnification" - sure, must be a big magnifying glass up there!

That model of the sun has so holes it it's a wonder all the "phlogiston[1]" doesn't leak out.

[1] Stop laughing! Someone DID suggest that (not on this site though).

Why do you feel an incessant need to speak for others? My post was clearly intended for the OP, as an invitation to elaborate his point of view, with less arrogance and more precision.

If you think the Sun looks the same at noon as it does prior to sunset, then you are lying to yourself. To me, when I see it at sunset, it clearly looks blurrier, hazier, with a large amount of flare going on.

Quick question: When you see an airplane going away into the distance, does it or does it not sink into the horizon, regardless of altitude?

• I did not say "the Sun looks the same at noon as it does prior to sunset", I said "sun certainly appears to stay the same size as it appears to move over the sky". So I am NOT lying to myself or anyone else.
  Of course the sun looks redder and sometimes distorted and shimmery at sunset!
  But, it is absolutely true that (apart from a bit of distortion sunrise and sunset) the sun does stay the SAME SIZE as it moves across the sku!
• Yes, an aeroplane dose sink towards the horizon, it DOES NOT appear to sink BELOW the horizon.
  And their is a massive difference here the plane maybe at 10,000 m altitude and if the air is perfectly clear be visible (would need a telescope!) for up to hundreds of kilometres. At this distance it would be within a couple of degrees of the horizon.
  On the other hand, the FE sun is supposedly at 5,000 km altitude, and at sunset would be roughly (varies a lot depending on season and location) 14,400 km away. At this distance is is still at an elevation from the horizon of about 19°. BIG, BIG difference.
  So, YOU tell me how this magic FE sun of YOURS ever could appear to SET BEHIND THE HORIZON or even sink into the horizon?

The moon does essentially the same thing and is easier to observe because it is not so glaringly bright. So, please explain in words simple enough for an apparent dunder-head like me to understand just how this is possible!

Moonset

E&OE(xpected)

That's really weird. My brain is starting to hurt now. The FE model does not allow for this. Your photo is edited!

11

Flat Earth Community / Re: Is the Earth really flat?

« on: April 05, 2016, 06:36:39 PM »

This cannot occur on a flat earth. To lose visibility of the Sun on a FE model it must become obscured by either
1) Sinking below the flat plane
2) Switching off
Either of these would result in the entire earth becoming shrouded in darkness simultaneously.

False. Please review the FAQ. Thanks!

False. Please adjust the FAQ to reflect facts. Thanks!

12

Flat Earth Community / Re: Flat Earth? Or Round Earth?

« on: April 05, 2016, 06:13:19 PM »

Ok heres the point, I would like to know why the Earth is flat and some proof.

It looks flat.  If you feel it has been proven otherwise feel free to present your evidence and we might explain to you why you're wrong if we feel like it.

The Earth looks curved. If you feel it has been proven otherwise feel free to present your evidence and we might explain to you why you're wrong if we feel like it.

13

Flat Earth Community / Re: Friendly Debate

« on: April 05, 2016, 04:50:35 PM »

Once again. Same old thing. Ask a flat earther a question. It's been 5 days now and no reply.

More likely no one answered you because the formatting of your question was garbage.

While we're on the subject of formatting for debate; I'd like to point out the reason no one believes 'FET'.