The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Community => Topic started by: asdfghjkl on January 13, 2016, 08:46:22 PM
-
Where's the proof for your quack theories? You talk big, but all I see here is psychobabble and photoshop.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao&list=PLcjQVpaEjyM3gxnx7DZ8fS7nRES0icKyP&index=1
Watch this video.
I literally only stumpled upon this theory a couple of days ago, I am now thoroughly convinced.
I ridiculed the concept like you, only clicking on other Youtube videos out of baked curiosity.
This is the best one I found to fully flesh out the concept.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao&list=PLcjQVpaEjyM3gxnx7DZ8fS7nRES0icKyP&index=1
Watch this video.
I literally only stumpled upon this theory a couple of days ago, I am now thoroughly convinced.
I ridiculed the concept like you, only clicking on other Youtube videos out of baked curiosity.
This is the best one I found to fully flesh out the concept.
Got any summary? I don't have time for a two hour documentary.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao&list=PLcjQVpaEjyM3gxnx7DZ8fS7nRES0icKyP&index=1
Watch this video.
I literally only stumpled upon this theory a couple of days ago, I am now thoroughly convinced.
I ridiculed the concept like you, only clicking on other Youtube videos out of baked curiosity.
This is the best one I found to fully flesh out the concept.
Got any summary? I don't have time for a two hour documentary.
The Earth is flat and under a dome.
-
Hi asdfghjkl, nice name.
Please consider going through our wiki. There's a whole section on experimental evidence.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao&list=PLcjQVpaEjyM3gxnx7DZ8fS7nRES0icKyP&index=1
Watch this video.
I literally only stumpled upon this theory a couple of days ago, I am now thoroughly convinced.
I ridiculed the concept like you, only clicking on other Youtube videos out of baked curiosity.
This is the best one I found to fully flesh out the concept.
Got any summary? I don't have time for a two hour documentary.
Heres a comment I just posted on the video, you can try this yourself using Google Earth and see how ridiculous the flight path is. It makes no logical sense unless the globe is not real.
To the many sceptics ridiculing this theory, I was the same as you until a few days ago. However I just tried searching for flights (like he said in the video) between Buenos Aires and Wellington. The distance is said to be 6000 miles, and the range of the best commercial jets is now around 9000 miles according to Google. So why are all the quoted flights at least 22 hours long and have to fly north through the USA? I used Google Earth to visualise how ridiculous this would look. Makes no economic sense for the airlines.
https://www.expedia.co.nz/Flights-Search?trip=roundtrip&leg1=from:Wellington,%20New%20Zealand%20(WLG-Wellington%20Intl.),to:Buenos%20Aires,%20Argentina%20(EZE-Ministro%20Pistarini%20Intl.),departure:27/1/2016TANYT&leg2=from:Buenos%20Aires,%20Argentina%20(EZE-Ministro%20Pistarini%20Intl.),to:Wellington,%20New%20Zealand%20(WLG-Wellington%20Intl.),departure:3/2/2016TANYT&passengers=children:0,adults:1,seniors:0,infantinlap:N&options=cabinclass:economy,sortby:price&mode=search&paandi=true
Thats the link to the air bookings site I used (hopefully it works). Seriously you need to watch the whole video and try this yourself.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao&list=PLcjQVpaEjyM3gxnx7DZ8fS7nRES0icKyP&index=1
Watch this video.
I literally only stumpled upon this theory a couple of days ago, I am now thoroughly convinced.
I ridiculed the concept like you, only clicking on other Youtube videos out of baked curiosity.
This is the best one I found to fully flesh out the concept.
Got any summary? I don't have time for a two hour documentary.
Heres a comment I just posted on the video, you can try this yourself using Google Earth and see how ridiculous the flight path is. It makes no logical sense unless the globe is not real.
To the many sceptics ridiculing this theory, I was the same as you until a few days ago. However I just tried searching for flights (like he said in the video) between Buenos Aires and Wellington. The distance is said to be 6000 miles, and the range of the best commercial jets is now around 9000 miles according to Google. So why are all the quoted flights at least 22 hours long and have to fly north through the USA? I used Google Earth to visualise how ridiculous this would look. Makes no economic sense for the airlines.
https://www.expedia.co.nz/Flights-Search?trip=roundtrip&leg1=from:Wellington,%20New%20Zealand%20(WLG-Wellington%20Intl.),to:Buenos%20Aires,%20Argentina%20(EZE-Ministro%20Pistarini%20Intl.),departure:27/1/2016TANYT&leg2=from:Buenos%20Aires,%20Argentina%20(EZE-Ministro%20Pistarini%20Intl.),to:Wellington,%20New%20Zealand%20(WLG-Wellington%20Intl.),departure:3/2/2016TANYT&passengers=children:0,adults:1,seniors:0,infantinlap:N&options=cabinclass:economy,sortby:price&mode=search&paandi=true
Thats the link to the air bookings site I used (hopefully it works). Seriously you need to watch the whole video and try this yourself.
You do know that airlines schedule highly irregular routes to avoid going over large amounts of open ocean, right?
-
You do know that airlines schedule highly irregular routes to avoid going over large amounts of open ocean, right?
Wow, what a convenient excuse!
"The Earth is round and flight times prove it... except when they don't... b-but there's a good reason for that, I-i swear!"
Absolutely fabulous.
-
You do know that airlines schedule highly irregular routes to avoid going over large amounts of open ocean, right?
Wow, what a convenient excuse!
"The Earth is round and flight times prove it... except when they don't... b-but there's a good reason for that, I-i swear!"
Absolutely fabulous.
I never claimed flight plans prove the Earth is round. I simply pointed out that using the occasional odd flight plans to justify a ridiculous claim is preposterous.
-
Assuming a claim is "ridiculous" before evaluating it puts you at a risk of drawing conclusions from falsity. You may want to brush up on your logic, good sir.
-
Assuming a claim is "ridiculous" before evaluating it puts you at a risk of drawing conclusions from falsity. You may want to brush up on your logic, good sir.
Oh believe me, I've evaluated it. Who hasn't. You know, little two year old, with some dinky ideas running through their head. "Hmm, what if the earth is flat? Nah, that's ridiculous." And don't call me good sir. We both know I'm not.
-
Oh believe me, I've evaluated it. Who hasn't. You know, little two year old, with some dinky ideas running through their head. "Hmm, what if the earth is flat? Nah, that's ridiculous."
Ah, a wonderful piece of introspection! I'm glad you admitted your closed-mindedness so readily. You truly are on a path to elementary self-awareness! Keep it up!
And don't call me good sir. We both know I'm not.
Welp, you said it, not me.
-
Oh believe me, I've evaluated it. Who hasn't. You know, little two year old, with some dinky ideas running through their head. "Hmm, what if the earth is flat? Nah, that's ridiculous."
Ah, a wonderful piece of introspection! I'm glad you admitted your closed-mindedness so readily. You truly are on a path to elementary self-awareness! Keep it up!
And don't call me good sir. We both know I'm not.
Welp, you said it, not me.
Now, now. I was only kidding. As soon as I found this website I considered the idea. However I dismissed it as it is patently ridiculous and requires a counterculture-ist, conspiracy theorist (-ist) suspension of basic teachings in lieu of a cockamammie theory which has at best some circumstantial evidence.
-
Right. So your reasoning seems to be "it's unintuitive to me, therefore I will dismiss it without even reading up on the basics."
I can't say I have much respect for that mindset.
-
Right. So your reasoning seems to be "it's unintuitive to me, therefore I will dismiss it without even reading up on the basics."
I can't say I have much respect for that mindset.
Clearly we are unable to effectively communicate. Send someone who reads what I say.
-
Sweetheart, you're the one who's failed to read here. That's why you made a thread to ask a question already addressed in the FAQ.
-
Sweetheart, you're the one who's failed to read here. That's why you made a thread to ask a question already addressed in the FAQ.
I didn't fail to read the FAQs, I failed to give a shit about the FAQs.
-
I didn't fail to read the FAQs, I failed to give a shit about the FAQs.
Yes, I said that rather early on. Why are you fighting for my side of the argument here?
-
I didn't fail to read the FAQs, I failed to give a shit about the FAQs.
Yes, I said that rather early on. Why are you fighting for my side of the argument here?
If your side of the argument is that I don't give a flying fuck about the FAQs then fine by me, you win. But that's not my argument.
-
Clearly we are unable to effectively communicate. Send someone who reads what I say.
Who would that be?
If you do not give a shit, what are you doing here? Are you trapped in a cell with nothing but a computer that can ONLY access this website?
-
But that's not my argument.
You don't have an argument, sweetheart. Allow me to summarise:
-Where's your proof?
-On our wiki. Try starting with the FAQ.
-LOL I DON'T CARE! :D
Good one.
-
Assuming a claim is "ridiculous" before evaluating it puts you at a risk of drawing conclusions from falsity. You may want to brush up on your logic, good sir.
Except through the year ive been active here, you still keep ignoring the fact that all the flightpaths you use as examples of "shorter routes on a globe" to mystify globe earth actually exist. Its just more convenient to "forget" that defending your flat earth religion.
Flightpaths are STILL not a good argument for flat earth.
-
Assuming a claim is "ridiculous" before evaluating it puts you at a risk of drawing conclusions from falsity. You may want to brush up on your logic, good sir.
Except through the year ive been active here, you still keep ignoring the fact that all the flightpaths you use as examples of "shorter routes on a globe" to mystify globe earth actually exist. Its just more convenient to "forget" that defending your flat earth religion.
Flightpaths are STILL not a good argument for flat earth.
As I pointed out.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk4YqPtvJao&list=PLcjQVpaEjyM3gxnx7DZ8fS7nRES0icKyP&index=1
Watch this video.
I literally only stumpled upon this theory a couple of days ago, I am now thoroughly convinced.
I ridiculed the concept like you, only clicking on other Youtube videos out of baked curiosity.
This is the best one I found to fully flesh out the concept.
Got any summary? I don't have time for a two hour documentary.
Heres a comment I just posted on the video, you can try this yourself using Google Earth and see how ridiculous the flight path is. It makes no logical sense unless the globe is not real.
To the many sceptics ridiculing this theory, I was the same as you until a few days ago. However I just tried searching for flights (like he said in the video) between Buenos Aires and Wellington. The distance is said to be 6000 miles, and the range of the best commercial jets is now around 9000 miles according to Google. So why are all the quoted flights at least 22 hours long and have to fly north through the USA? I used Google Earth to visualise how ridiculous this would look. Makes no economic sense for the airlines.
https://www.expedia.co.nz/Flights-Search?trip=roundtrip&leg1=from:Wellington,%20New%20Zealand%20(WLG-Wellington%20Intl.),to:Buenos%20Aires,%20Argentina%20(EZE-Ministro%20Pistarini%20Intl.),departure:27/1/2016TANYT&leg2=from:Buenos%20Aires,%20Argentina%20(EZE-Ministro%20Pistarini%20Intl.),to:Wellington,%20New%20Zealand%20(WLG-Wellington%20Intl.),departure:3/2/2016TANYT&passengers=children:0,adults:1,seniors:0,infantinlap:N&options=cabinclass:economy,sortby:price&mode=search&paandi=true
Thats the link to the air bookings site I used (hopefully it works). Seriously you need to watch the whole video and try this yourself.
You do know that airlines schedule highly irregular routes to avoid going over large amounts of open ocean, right?
And what is the justification for this? Surely GPS can easily track their movements with 3000 satellites overhead?
I think cost-conscious airlines would happily take a route that is two thirds shorter than their alternatives, with the only barrier being a tenuous fear of open water.
Like I say, I did not believe in the flat earth theory until two days ago. But nothing I can find disproves it to a satisfactory degree, in my eyes.
-
all the flightpaths you use as examples of "shorter routes on a globe" to mystify globe earth actually exist
Please substantiate this outlandish claim.
-
all the flightpaths you use as examples of "shorter routes on a globe" to mystify globe earth actually exist
Please substantiate this outlandish claim.
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64818.0