Show Posts

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.


Messages - Obviously

Pages: [1] 2 3  Next >
1
If I may, allow me politely disagree: my comment was to help others see the lack of credibility of the op, which is important when discussing pretty much anything, and thus is very relevant. Plus there’s no way to further derail this topic: the question has been answered and flat-heads have nothing to respond (as usual).

Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

So, I will give you one last warning to refrain from off-topic posting, derailing threads, etc. You are on 3 bans already, next one is permanent.

2
Hmm, the OP is a Holocaust denier... As I’ve pointed out before, it seems to be a trend among flat-heads (not all, I know, but a bit too many for it not to be a sign). Just sayin’...

3
Found a wonderful experiment with photos and all to once again confirm everything I posted, check it out: https://www.metabunk.org/stand-up-to-detect-the-curve-of-the-earth.t8364/

Flat-heads: there’s no point in debating anything else here. This alone completely destroys the FE hypothesis. Admit it, you bastards :)

With love,

Obviously

4
Probably just when it’s convenient for him

5
-- PROOF?
The "Evidence for the Conspiracy" section follows shortly afterwards.

It sure does, except pretty much none of that nonsense qualifies as "evidence". And I was asking specifically for proof that "it was decided to fake the space program" -- where is the evidence for that decision? Who made it and when? Do you have it in writing or perhaps an audio recording of someone saying it?

6
This was aimed at Obviously, specifically. I'd say his recent posts show a pretty clear distaste, mixed with some latent anger.

Of course they do, because these are the only emotions the FE hoax and its followers are worthy of, and this very forum shows why. And this isn't just me, if you haven't noticed: people who pay any attention to you (which is a very small percentage of the population, thank god) are pretty angry at how deaf & dumb you guys are. Given your lack of logic and understanding of basic physics, your comments and this entire website are distasteful indeed.

7
Stay awhile and listen. When the peanut gallery calms down a bit, we should be able to go back to having relatively reasoned discussions.

Have you read through the forum posts here? Pretty sure every post ends about the same, as I described earlier, and the point of this thread is to point that out. I don't think flatheads are capable of "reasoned discussions". You, for example, never contribute any counter-arguments, just snide remarks that try to show how clever you supposedly are :)

8
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: NASA Live Stream
« on: April 23, 2018, 05:36:56 PM »
Yes, thank you, you have successfully identified the not-live-stream that's already linked in the OP, and which is accurately debunked in the BBC article. It is not the feed that you could on occasion correlate with a speck in the sky, which I also already provided.

Hmm, it seems that the BBC article is talking about the "live feed" that was posted on Facebook, not the one on Youtube. I didn't notice it was the same link that the OP posted, but I still don't see any indication of it not being actually live...

9
Flat Earth Investigations / Re: NASA Live Stream
« on: April 23, 2018, 04:20:49 PM »
Here's the live stream you're looking for:

Unfortunately for flattards and their sham theory, the ISS live feed perfectly correlates with its position on the satellite tracker, the landscape seen down below, as well as cloud formations as seen from above and from below (can someone post that metabunk link here?). So yes, it's not that hard to "tell the difference" and there is no way this live feed could be faked. But nice try Pete.

10
https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy

From your amazing (*sarcasm*) wiki: "At some point, perhaps after the Apollo 1 disaster, it was decided to fake the space program outright and use rockets which only needed to fly into the air until they disappeared from sight." -- PROOF?

11
Yes, and also notice that there isn't a single RE-defender that after reading the wiki, the forums, or watching any of their highly-coveted bullshit youtube videos became convinced that the Earth is flat. Hmmm...

12
..and why isn't the FE side "winning" a single thread in the Debate forum?

Scrolling through pages after pages of the forum, I see the remains of many great threads that utterly destroy the FE myth. In most of them all the FE questions, misunderstandings, and objections have been addressed. I get that there are only a few flat-heads left here to reply to forum posts, and we're all very grateful for your efforts, but you'd at least hope to see some threads where the RE side is losing...

13
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Question from a physicist
« on: April 23, 2018, 06:27:08 AM »
Given that the two are entirely separate, I don't see why you would necessarily expect anyone to either accept or reject both. It's like saying that all vegetarians must be left-wingers.

Special Relativity is a subset of General Relativity, so this is not at all like all vegetarians being left-wingers (although there does seem to be a pattern there...), but nice try )

14
The sun and stars are at such an altitude that they max out their downward perspective line angles into the earth, are moving consistently, or nearly so.
Since you seem to consider yourself to be an educator of sorts, could you explain this please? I read the wiki and still cannot imagine how the idea of perspective works in your head, and I cannot understand anything that article says... some diagrams would be very helpful.

Quote
This would also cause the spinning of the celestial disk to appear circular instead of an oval.


Supposing this is true (although again, I don’t really see how), at what altitude do you think circles that should appear as ovals (by all logic and day-to-day observation) actually begin to appear as circles again? In other words, how high does, say, a plane need to fly in circles for it to look like circles from a distance (not directly underneath the center of the circle) and not ovals as we would expect? And is the moon currently at that altitude or not?

Quote
I do think that we need a rewrite of this page to make the idea a little more clear, but it is a start.

Yes, I suppose you should, since your whole (already very flimsy) "theory" rests on this completely unfounded assertion and maybe like one or two more just as unfounded assertions, tops...

15
Tom, do you realize that if something is moving in circles above your head, it looks like its trajectory actually follows more of an oval shape when seen from a distance?

16
Flat Earth Community / Re: When did you start?
« on: April 19, 2018, 02:56:14 AM »
the inconsistencies just kept piling on.

Care to tell us more about these inconsistencies? What were the most convincing ones for you?

18
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Speed of The Sun
« on: April 18, 2018, 01:50:52 AM »
I just stay here as an act of education
-- I'd say more it's more of an act of misinformation and basically a war on education, what you & your 2 friends are doing... 

Their content is based on our Flat Earth Society discussions and efforts starting in 2007
-- glad you noticed this. It's a clear sign that nothing new has been found or discovered, despite the 11+ years that have passed, not to mention 150 or so years since the Rowbowcop (sp?). Y'all just keep regurgitating the same nonsense, that has been debunked countless times.

"I'm going to help research to see what the truth actually is," which is a tall order for most.
-- hmm, why isn't this your mindset then? Seems like all you wanna do is deny facts and discard evidence, then make claims w/o supporting them. Notice, 4 pages of "blah blah blah" and you still haven't even tried answering the OP question.

19
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Using airline flight data.
« on: April 17, 2018, 10:36:18 PM »
I don't get why everyone's supposed to be running around finding proofs and data to please Tom, especially since he himself pretty much never backs up any of his statements (aside from an occasional moronic youtube videoclip or a reference to Rowrowrowyourbowthom, who also never provided any proof). All he tries to do is find some weird detail in your argument that seems like a discrepancy (usually something he simply doesn't understand) and then derail the thread to focus on that, instead of the real issue (FE "theory" not having any proof or explanations for anything). Yeah yeah, I know, the FES is so gracious in providing us the forum to discuss these "important" matters, and we should all be very thankful and try our best to be sensitive to every flerfer's needs and feelings, blah blah blah. But you got it backwards: you should be honored that people show up here to help you and others who are lost see where you went wrong.

Tom/flerfers: when it comes to GPS, it's real simple -- it just works! There is no need to verify this because billions of people use it daily and it's very consistent. You can track the satellites too using something like this http://www.n2yo.com/ and actually point your telescope in the right direction and see them if you wish. Why is it that the live feed from ISS is always consistent with its location using a tracker and can be verified further by actually looking at it? It is on you to show evidence that something is off. If you don't believe satellites exist, or you think they're not what/where they actually are, or any other nonsense like that, it's your job to try to prove it.

On the other hand, care to show us just how GPS navigation would even work over a flat earth? What would keep the satellites flying over us for so long?

20
Flat Earth Theory / Re: The ultimate proof that the Earth is ROUND...
« on: April 16, 2018, 11:56:24 PM »
Yea, I lol’ed at the "waste of time"! The FE hypothesis is the biggest waste of time imaginable. The only reason I’m participating in this debate is to find simple and indisputable arguments that would make it easier for others to see this silly "theory" for what it is.

Here’s another picture of the Chicago skyline:

https://i.imgur.com/JYrQ3OB_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium

I live in this city by the way, and drove by all the buildings hidden from view by Earth’s curvature in this photo just this morning. I assure, they’re still standing. Why are they missing from this picture, Tom?

Pages: [1] 2 3  Next >