[Realestfake]

FE - uniquely to other theories such as chem trails - gets a large portion of its new believers due to intuitive misunderstanding of the world and our collective “mental models” of physics.

For example: you are a full grown adult and get a job where you don’t really need to think about the effects of fluid dynamics on aircraft. You scroll on Facebook and see someone posing a question you’ve never seen before - “how do airplanes stay horizontal with the curve of the earth and not go to space!” You’ve never thought of this before and get curious, throw in some mild distrust of authority and congratulations, you are now a flat earther.

It’s a trap many beginner flat earthers make, trying to “break” the globe model. More knowledgeable ones know that breaking the globe model is a losing gambit and will end up like tfes (refining the FE model with phenomena such as EA rather than breaking the RE model)

I will absolutely put people that join FE out of misunderstanding in the same camp as people who have their minds blown about “how does the mirror know what’s behind the paper”.

It doesn’t help that a lot of the RE “community” can be quite rude to FE in debates, when often it’s people that simply misunderstood. I’ve gotten plenty of people to become round earthers again through calm logical discussion, and continue to do so.

[Dual1ty]

LOL "our collective mental models of physics" says it all.

What a noobish rant. This shows that you know nothing about the subject of FE. No one claims that if the Earth was a globe planes would go to space except people who equally know nothing about the subject. But I already know that globe believers love strawmanning flat-earthers. "How does the mirror know what’s behind the paper” = flat-earther - That's a new one. Now you're getting desperate, son.

[Pete Svarrior]

secretagent10, I appreciate you're relatively new to the FE debate, and I would strongly encourage you to observe it for a while before making such far-reaching conclusions. I worry that you might be a victim of the very same "intuitive understanding" you so happily assign to others.

In my experience (which is likely mirrorred by many here), there are plenty of RE'ers who create their own "mental model" of FE, and conclude that it must be false based on that imagination. That "model" is usually a 1-to-1 replica of the RE universe, except the Earth has been inexplicably flattened and stretched. Of course, it doesn't take much effort to start poking holes in that vision of the world. It's also a vision that exists only in the mind of RE'ers. Your recent flippant comments throughout this forum are great examples of this kind of thinking. You've already decided FE is wrong (and, though you try your gosh darndest not to say it, you've also decided that it's stupid) - even though you basically know nothing about it. You just have your imagination to work with.

Although there are notable exceptions (you're talking about people here), it's usually the case that your average FE'er has a much better understanding of RE than your average RE'er. Again, I encourage you to read some of the nonsense RE'ers say during debates before deciding that "whoa how do mirrors work?!?!!" is a FE quality. Some of my favourite examples of RE confusion include:

• A somewhat chronic inability to tell the difference between velocity and acceleration. I have no idea why this comes up so often, but it does.
• Thinking that spirit levels operate due to the difference in gravitational forces applied to each end of the tube.
• Mixing and matching inertial and non-inertial frames of reference without appropriately adjusting the forces/motion at play.
• Fundamental misunderstandings of optics, orbital mechanics, and Newton's laws.

Note that I am specifically selecting "nonsense" that doesn't boil down to RE'ers not understanding FE. You'd reject any such example and "politely" make derogatory comments about me. So, I'm focusing on RE'ers not knowing the first thing about their own model.

I’ve gotten plenty of people to become round earthers again through calm logical discussion, and continue to do so.

To be blunt, I doubt that. It sounds like you found a few trolls who eventually gave up on trying to make you angry.

[Dual1ty]

I’ve gotten plenty of people to become round earthers again through calm logical discussion, and continue to do so.

To be blunt, I doubt that. It sounds like you found a few trolls who eventually gave up on trying to make you angry.

If I had to guess, I would say that a couple of his uni friends (he said he's a uni student) saw some FE material on TikTok and it made them question a couple of things for like 5 minutes before Realestfake, being the FE debunker that he thinks he is, linked them to flatearth.ws (one of the favorite resources of FE debunkers) explanations and they were convinved. In other words, he converted a total of 0 flat-earthers back to the globe religion.

Sound about right, Realestfake?

[Tom Bishop]

It’s a trap many beginner flat earthers make, trying to “break” the globe model. More knowledgeable ones know that breaking the globe model is a losing gambit and will end up like tfes (refining the FE model with phenomena such as EA rather than breaking the RE model)

It appears that you didn't bother to look at the content at all. The EA page and associated Moon Tilt pages do show that the RE model is broken.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration

[AATW]

It’s a trap many beginner flat earthers make, trying to “break” the globe model. More knowledgeable ones know that breaking the globe model is a losing gambit and will end up like tfes (refining the FE model with phenomena such as EA rather than breaking the RE model)

It appears that you didn't bother to look at the content at all. The EA page and associated Moon Tilt pages do show that the RE model is broken.

https://wiki.tfes.org/Electromagnetic_Acceleration

Why does that diagram show the light bending downwards when the theory of EA says

The theory of the Electromagnetic Accelerator (EA) states that there is a mechanism to the universe that pulls, pushes, or deflects light upwards

(my emphasis)

[Tom Bishop]

When light bends "down" in relation to the eye and the source, the source appears to bend "up", and vice-versa.

See this diagram with refraction and straws, for instance:

https://mammothmemory.net/physics/refraction/refraction-and-straws/refraction-and-straws.html



Or sideways, for a better view that the light is bending "down" in relation to the eye.



In EA as a body recedes in distance from an observer, the light curves upwards and causes it the body to appear to descend and drop in altitude, as what occurs with the Sun in the EA Sunset. With greater distance from the observer, a body drops. So it is clear that in EA a celestial line suspended in front of and over an observer would appear as a convex arc across the sky.