Mega Thread The Flat Earth Mega thread.

[Duritz]

Guys, please, as GG.exe has intimated, can we keep this on topic?

Mods, I think this thread is slipping quite a bit, it's getting off the very real topic of Flat Earth, and being derailed into all sorts of bullshit. Personally, I think this is the ball lovers trying to derail it, but that's not important. The blame game does not need to be played. The important thing is that the thread is kept on track.

So, can I appeal to everyone's better natures please, and ask that we keep on point with the discussion? This is far too important to turn into a shitfight.

 

[Tuco]

Regardless of the fact we've now been informed by a guy shouting abuse about ball lovers and cowards that there is no working model for flat earth, I'll persist to discuss the one FES talks about.

FES explains day and night with the Sun 32 miles wide and spinning in a sort of strange loop like a hanging spotlight:



The problem with this model is that is doesn't correctly explain even a basic concept such as sunrise and sunset.

This model predicts two things 1) that the Sun would in fact never sink beneath the horizon (in fact the Sun would be visible from all points of the flat esrth all day), and 2) that it would also appear much larger in the middle of the day when it is its highest in the sky, and drastically smaller when it's low in sky.

It predicts the size changes because it's supposedly moving closer and further away as it does its supposed loop. So it gets bigger and smaller due to perspective.

Neither of these predictions match what we can observe just with our own eyes.

1) the Sun sinks below the horizon (and light from the Sun can be seen coming up from beyond the horizon as darkness falls)

And

2)

We can easily see the Sun is almost the exact same size at all times of the day.

Conventional science explains why the Sun stays the same size. The relative sizes of both the Earth and the Sun, and the distance between the Earth and the Sun are both known, and the variance in perspective is quite minimal, which is why our perspctive as observers never changes.

FET cannot explain why the Sun doesn't vanish in size dramatically as it loops away from us in their model. It has no answer to this.

I think this is what shouty ball lover coward screaming guy means when he says FES has no model.

 

[NEGAN]

Regardless of the fact we've now been informed by a guy shouting abuse about ball lovers and cowards that there is no working model for flat earth, I'll persist to discuss the one FES talks about.

FES explains day and night with the Sun 32 miles wide and spinning in a sort of strange loop like a hanging spotlight:

View attachment 534559

The problem with this model is that is doesn't correctly explain even a basic concept such as sunrise and sunset.

This model predicts two things 1) that the Sun would in fact never sink beneath the horizon (in fact the Sun would be visible from all points of the flat esrth all day), and 2) that it would also appear much larger in the middle of the day when it is its highest in the sky, and drastically smaller when it's low in sky.

It predicts the size changes because it's supposedly moving closer and further away as it does its supposed loop. So it gets bigger and smaller due to perspective.

Neither of these predictions match what we can observe just with our own eyes.

1) the Sun sinks below the horizon (and light from the Sun can be seen coming up from beyond the horizon as darkness falls)

And

2)

We can easily see the Sun is almost the exact same size at all times of the day.

Conventional science explains why the Sun stays the same size. The relative sizes of both the Earth and the Sun, and the distance between the Earth and the Sun are both known, and the variance in perspective is quite minimal, which is why our perspctive as observers never changes.

FET cannot explain why the Sun doesn't vanish in size dramatically as it loops away from us in their model. It has no answer to this.

I think this is what shouty ball lover coward screaming guy means when he says FES has no model.

There is a concept that does make the sunset and rise on a flat horizon..it's something they are working on. Is it complete? nope.. is it absolute? ....Nah but its a start.

 

[iBeng]

There is a concept that does make the sunset and rise on a flat horizon..it's something they are working on. Is it complete? nope.. is it absolute? ....Nah but its a start.

I have a concept where I can spontaneously fly. Its something Im working on. Is it complete? Nope. Is it absolute? ...Nah, but its a start!

 

[NEGAN]

I have a concept where I can spontaneously fly. Its something Im working on. Is it complete? Nope. Is it absolute? ...Nah, but its a start!

I already posted the concept here.

Its has to start from somewhere doesn't it
Beng.

Btw where is your model Beng?

 

[iBeng]

I already posted the concept here.

Its has to start from somewhere doesn't it
Beng.

Btw where is your model Beng?

I believe I can flllly, I believe a flat earth cannot be a lieeeee! All you round earth believers are sheep to the liars, open your eyes, there is nooooo horizon!

 

[NEGAN]

I believe I can flllly, I believe a flat earth cannot be a lieeeee! All you round earth believers are sheep to the liars, open your eyes, there is nooooo horizon!

It's funny

You come here asking FE to demonstrate the cosmos, but when the question is put back on you for a model with every advantage you either reply as you did or meme your way out of it.

 

[iBeng]

It's funny

You come here asking FE to demonstrate the cosmos, but when the question is put back on you for a model with every advantage you either reply as you did or meme your way out of it.

Ive shown you models. Several in fact. Your only response is "Show me one to scale" which would require you having a monitor several MILLION miles wide.

 

[NEGAN]

Ive shown you models. Several in fact. Your only response is "Show me one to scale" which would require you having a monitor several MILLION miles wide.

You haven't shown me models, you shown me drawings..which I know you have absolute no idea about.... which have no bearing on what happens in real time.

 

[iBeng]

You haven't shown me models, you shown me drawings..which I know you have absolute no idea about.... which have no bearing on what happens in real time.

Real time? Why are you talking about time? Are you saying, until we go really really REALLY far out into space and get a captured image that we can then present to you, of an outside look to the solar system, you will refuse to believe what the universally agreed model is?

 

[NEGAN]

Real time? Why are you talking about time? Are you saying, until we go really really REALLY far out into space and get a captured image that we can then present to you, of an outside look to the solar system, you will refuse to believe what the universally agreed model is?

And yet here you are asking the fe to give the keys to the cosmos with a complimentary photo of the edge.

 

[iBeng]

And yet here you are asking the fe to give the keys to the cosmos with a complimentary photo of the edge.

Because this so called edge would be FAR easier to get to, and visually display, than an image from outside a solar system?

 

[NEGAN]

Because this so called edge would be FAR easier to get to, and visually display, than an image from outside a solar system?

Well yes and no..

If fe had a 55 million a day budget complete access to the south pole a few thousand "supposed" satellites probes floating around then yeah no shit I think we can ask those questions.

But within the scope of fe eg. 8 inches per mile squared and is the earth moving yeah its not looking to pretty for you.

 

[iBeng]

Well yes and no..

If fe had a 55 million a day budget complete access to the south pole a few thousand "supposed" satellites probes floating around then yeah no shit I think we can ask those questions.

But within the scope of fe eg. 8 inches per mile squared and is the earth moving yeah its not looking to pretty for you.

Wait, the south pole exists in the FE theory? Technically, there would be NO poles, because its just a flat round...plate...so poles wouldnt work, as they indicate the top and bottom of an axis, something a globe would have but a flat disc of rock would not.

So really, the FE movement, which themselves say is getting large, should be able to crowdfund some sort of expedition to prove to the world you cant just fly in one direction and end up back where you started. THAT there is 100% proof the world isnt round, because if it wasnt, you'd fly and fly and fly and either end up out in space or, if the flat plane is a permanent expanse, you'd find whole new continents and land masses.

 

[exe ex machina]

Wait, the south pole exists in the FE theory? Technically, there would be NO poles, because its just a flat round...plate...so poles wouldnt work, as they indicate the top and bottom of an axis, something a globe would have but a flat disc of rock would not.

So really, the FE movement, which themselves say is getting large, should be able to crowdfund some sort of expedition to prove to the world you cant just fly in one direction and end up back where you started. THAT there is 100% proof the world isnt round, because if it wasnt, you'd fly and fly and fly and either end up out in space or, if the flat plane is a permanent expanse, you'd find whole new continents and land masses.

lol

 

[NEGAN]

lol

Lmao this guy...this guy right here

I am done.

 

[exe ex machina]

Lmao this guy...this guy right here

I am done.

It showed too he came into this thread like a bull in a china shop, sprouting, and didn't even know anything about the subject matter, no genuine interest taken to even understand the FE model/theory.

 

[Catfish Alley]

Following any theory in any discipline blindly is foolish.

 

[iBeng]

Oh Ive shown interest in trying to understand this apparent "theory". But it has so many holes it the model would look like Swiss cheese...

The fact remains, with all we know about the physical world, a planet that was flat would be a universal impossibility.

 

[exe ex machina]

Oh Ive shown interest in trying to understand this apparent "theory". But it has so many holes it the model would look like Swiss cheese...

The fact remains, with all we know about the physical world, a planet that was flat would be a universal impossibility.

One minute video for you

 

[iBeng]

One minute video for you

THATS considered proof of a flat earth?


Compasses follow Magnetic North, its literally been known for hundreds of years what they are doing.

 

[NEGAN]

It showed too he came into this thread like a bull in a china shop, sprouting, and didn't even know anything about the subject matter, no genuine interest taken to even understand the FE model/theory.

What I find frustrating...is beng who clearly shown he has no freaking idea about his own model comes in and tries to big note....

I am think I finally done with this thread here I will link you to better discussions.

 

[JackOutback]

What I find frustrating...is beng who clearly shown he has no freaking idea about his own model comes in and tries to big note....

I am think I finally done with this thread here I will link you to better discussions.

When you ask about 'Beng's model', do you mean the scientifically accepted model of a round earth? Because he doesn't really need to provide the details, it's in all the science books. It's up to flat earthers to show the alternative.

 

[iBeng]

When you ask about 'Beng's model', do you mean the scientifically accepted model of a round earth? Because he doesn't really need to provide the details, it's in all the science books. It's up to flat earthers to show the alternative.

He wants a physical image depicting the Earth rotating around the Sun. He wants physical evidence of the Earth being round, with anything you provide him being declared "Photoshopped and fake".

But he also wants us to blindly accept his version is equally viable as an option compared to a globe.

 

[NEGAN]

When you ask about 'Beng's model', do you mean the scientifically accepted model of a round earth? Because he doesn't really need to provide the details, it's in all the science books. It's up to flat earthers to show the alternative.

It's all science books he says....lmao

It's just all in there..

No its not all in there.

Only 3% is in there you still have another 97% to go.