Meanwhile back here on terraferma, I have a couple dudes calculating the makeup of the dome ...
"Okay, so it's not flour and water. It's ...
FUCK YOU, SHELDON! Math always made my periods come early."
Topic: Flat Earth - page 255. (Read 1095196 times)
Okay, I'm hear to debunk the conspiracy theory as to why there's no rear-view mirror in the Spaceman's Tesla. Because there's no other auto traffic up there in space for him to concern himself with, albeit having one and filling the tank with gas would've increased the payload which was one thing they wanted in the first place - weight.
Meanwhile back here on terraferma, I have a couple dudes calculating the makeup of the dome ...
"Okay, so it's not flour and water. It's ...
FUCK YOU, SHELDON! Math always made my periods come early."
Meanwhile back here on terraferma, I have a couple dudes calculating the makeup of the dome ...
"Okay, so it's not flour and water. It's ...
FUCK YOU, SHELDON! Math always made my periods come early."
@Astargath
First of all, you can explain what property do the shadows cast in three holes vs. the shadows cast by three sticks have that requires that holes are used in this experiment?
edit:
Your whole argument is based on appeal to authority of a greasy Hollywood actor, you neither understand the experiment nor can you explain or articulate any part of it. You're a cocksucker and you should feel bad.
First of all, you can explain what property do the shadows cast in three holes vs. the shadows cast by three sticks have that requires that holes are used in this experiment?
edit:
Your whole argument is based on appeal to authority of a greasy Hollywood actor, you neither understand the experiment nor can you explain or articulate any part of it. You're a cocksucker and you should feel bad.
The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you, the globe has no scientific backing.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.39459423
Ignoring the simple proof only makes you look like the liar you are. 3 holes, shadows and angles, it proves the sun is far away, it's simple.
Explain to me how this experiment shows a small close sun can't explain the shadows, because the greasy Hollywood actor in this video doesn't elaborate on that part. You claim this is proof then explain how's it's proof, that or go fuck yourself.
Who's the fucking liar you piece of shit!
I think they’re so much scientific information that proves that the earth is round and not flat and it’s a really awkward discussion with the fact say one thing but the person thinks they know better
The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you, the globe has no scientific backing.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.39459423
Ignoring the simple proof only makes you look like the liar you are. 3 holes, shadows and angles, it proves the sun is far away, it's simple.
^^^ Arguments that are not even wrong.
"Not even wrong refers to any statement, argument or explanation that can be neither correct nor incorrect, because it fails to meet the criteria by which correctness and incorrectness are determined. As a more formal fallacy, it refers to the fine art of generating an ostensibly "correct" conclusion, but from premises known to be wrong or inapplicable.' -- https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
"Not even wrong refers to any statement, argument or explanation that can be neither correct nor incorrect, because it fails to meet the criteria by which correctness and incorrectness are determined. As a more formal fallacy, it refers to the fine art of generating an ostensibly "correct" conclusion, but from premises known to be wrong or inapplicable.' -- https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong
I don’t understand how people don’t question this more . The fact that there has been so many tests measuring the curvature of the earth and it always comes back flat or not even close to what it would be if we were on a ball.
If the world is flat, please explain something, if you fly around the world as follows:UK > Singapore > Perth > Sydney > Auckland > LA > New York > UK
Now it it was flat (assuming US it on one side and Australia is on the opposite) the only way to get to LA would be to fly from Auckland via the north or south poles or right across the planet. That would be way further than the plane could fly and take more than the 14 hours it takes
I once put forth that argument to a 'flat earther'; and she said, "okay, the Earth is bowl shaped, so you can go around it, but all of human cities are on that flat upper side of the bowl."
Try reasoning around that!
I don’t understand how people don’t question this more . The fact that there has been so many tests measuring the curvature of the earth and it always comes back flat or not even close to what it would be if we were on a ball.
If the world is flat, please explain something, if you fly around the world as follows:UK > Singapore > Perth > Sydney > Auckland > LA > New York > UK
Now it it was flat (assuming US it on one side and Australia is on the opposite) the only way to get to LA would be to fly from Auckland via the north or south poles or right across the planet. That would be way further than the plane could fly and take more than the 14 hours it takes
The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you, the globe has no scientific backing.
The only geometric solid which looks like a circle from any direction is a sphere. The Earth always looks like a circle from space. Ergo, the Earth is a sphere.
What scientific evidence do you have for outer space?
A telescope
How is a telescope used prove an infinite expanse that's claimed to be a hard vacuum exists outside the earth atmosphere? Also the fact outer space requires a hard vacuum to exist next to a pressurized atmosphere with no barrier is absurd.
Where's the science that proves this absurdity?
The only geometric solid which looks like a circle from any direction is a sphere. The Earth always looks like a circle from space. Ergo, the Earth is a sphere.
What scientific evidence do you have for outer space?
A telescope
The only geometric solid which looks like a circle from any direction is a sphere. The Earth always looks like a circle from space. Ergo, the Earth is a sphere.
What scientific evidence do you have for outer space?
The only geometric solid which looks like a circle from any direction is a sphere. The Earth always looks like a circle from space. Ergo, the Earth is a sphere.
@ notbatman
Don't waste your precious time and energy arguing these three probably top idiots - void, ape newbie and astargoth - the haters of our God, the unholy trinity.
Don't waste your precious time and energy arguing these three probably top idiots - void, ape newbie and astargoth - the haters of our God, the unholy trinity.
It only makes sense that if you believe in a flat earth, you believe in other lies as well.
It must suck to be so gullible and be scammed all the time.
@ notbatman
Don't waste your precious time and energy arguing these three probably top idiots - void, ape newbie and astargoth - the haters of our God, the unholy trinity.
And for all others: research Flat Earth
Don't waste your precious time and energy arguing these three probably top idiots - void, ape newbie and astargoth - the haters of our God, the unholy trinity.
And for all others: research Flat Earth
...
The article then goes on to make assumptions like "outer space" that has no scientific evidence for its existance, gravity that's an unproven theory and the motion of the Earth that's proven not to exist beyond a reasonable doubt (M&M, Sagnac, Airy & D&P). This isn't science it's bullshit of the highest order.
...
The article then goes on to make assumptions like "outer space" that has no scientific evidence for its existance, gravity that's an unproven theory and the motion of the Earth that's proven not to exist beyond a reasonable doubt (M&M, Sagnac, Airy & D&P). This isn't science it's bullshit of the highest order.
...
You want to prove gravity? Take any 1 kg object and measure its weight around the world. 1 kg mass weighs 1 kg anywhere in the world, including your precious Antarctica.
Your atmospheric pressure+electric field bullshit varies like the weather. 1 kg mass would weigh from 0.2 to 20+ kg using your model, depending on the time of day and the prevailing weather conditions.
That Bible bullshit model you dreamed up is the bullshit of the highest order, like the rest of the Bible.
No this bullshit model you're knocking over is something you dreamed up, local variations in field strength are a drop in the bucket when pitted against the entire atmosphere pushing you down.
Also I never referenced the Bible in regards to any of this, you must be a real degenerate PoS to fight so hard against a book that for the most part is a set of moral codes.
I believe in science, and not to a false science like flat earthers.
If you believe we're stuck to a spinning ball in a vacuum then it's not science that you believe in. Science is observable, testable, measurable and repeatable and the globe fails all of that.
Observable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG0fTKAqZ5g
Testable: https://youtu.be/hLPPE3_DVCw?t=4m24s
Measurable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesy
Repeatable: You can repeat those tests as many times as you want with the same results.
Thanks for proving the earth is round!
1. Do you really think an obvious CGI animation such as presented in the first link counts as scientific observation?
2. Your second link has a Hollywood actor describing an experiment that a assumes that the Sun is millions of miles away. Science is not about making claims based on assumptions.
3. Your third link is a wiki article that doesn't even meet their basic standards:
"This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations."
The article then goes on to make assumptions like "outer space" that has no scientific evidence for its existence, gravity that's an unproven theory and the motion of the Earth that's proven not to exist beyond a reasonable doubt (M&M, Sagnac, Airy & D&P). This isn't science it's bullshit of the highest order.
In regards to any measurements I have to trust the GPS system that's run by the Department of Defense and these liars claims of satellites in orbit are bullshit; GPS uses triangulation from ground based cell towers. Before GPS the data came from NASA (DoD propaganda) and the Apollo program and it's all classified and requires trusting some "scientist" with a Jewish last name who has access.
Science isn't about trusting data and measurements from authority figures like the DoD a Jews who are proven liars that lie about absolutely everything. Science uses actual measurements that can be replicated.
1. Claiming something without proof doesn't make it true
2. If you watched the video he clearly explains how with 2 holes both explanations can work, a close small sun and a far away big sun, however with 3 holes, only a far away sun can explain the shadows, a close small sun wouldn't. Did you watch the video? Rip in pepperonis your ''theory'' Disproved with 3 holes and some math, R.I.P. bro.
1. You're claiming something is a scientific observation when it's not. You need to understand the difference between observation under strictly controlled conditions and watching cartoons on TV. You can argue all day that the cartoons are real and that I can't prove they're CGI but that's not science.
2. The video doesn't explain why a close Sun is not possible, Tyson just makes that claim without backing it up. Again animation is used to try and prove his point but it doesn't explain anything and certainly isn't scientific. There's no numbers, there's no models presented, there's no practical experiments involved, there's nothing but a greasy Hollywood actor making unsubstantiated claims.
1. Again, the millions of pictures and videos/livestreams serve as very solid proof of the round earth and you just claim out of your ass it's all fake.
2. Yes it does. It explains how it's possible with 2 but not 3. ''No flat earth model can explain the angles of the 3 shadows
I don’t understand how people don’t question this more . The fact that there has been so many tests measuring the curvature of the earth and it always comes back flat or not even close to what it would be if we were on a ball.
Are you lying, or just stupid? (Serious question)
I believe in science, and not to a false science like flat earthers.
If you believe we're stuck to a spinning ball in a vacuum then it's not science that you believe in. Science is observable, testable, measurable and repeatable and the globe fails all of that.
Observable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG0fTKAqZ5g
Testable: https://youtu.be/hLPPE3_DVCw?t=4m24s
Measurable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geodesy
Repeatable: You can repeat those tests as many times as you want with the same results.
Thanks for proving the earth is round!
1. Do you really think an obvious CGI animation such as presented in the first link counts as scientific observation?
2. Your second link has a Hollywood actor describing an experiment that a assumes that the Sun is millions of miles away. Science is not about making claims based on assumptions.
3. Your third link is a wiki article that doesn't even meet their basic standards:
"This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations."
The article then goes on to make assumptions like "outer space" that has no scientific evidence for its existence, gravity that's an unproven theory and the motion of the Earth that's proven not to exist beyond a reasonable doubt (M&M, Sagnac, Airy & D&P). This isn't science it's bullshit of the highest order.
In regards to any measurements I have to trust the GPS system that's run by the Department of Defense and these liars claims of satellites in orbit are bullshit; GPS uses triangulation from ground based cell towers. Before GPS the data came from NASA (DoD propaganda) and the Apollo program and it's all classified and requires trusting some "scientist" with a Jewish last name who has access.
Science isn't about trusting data and measurements from authority figures like the DoD a Jews who are proven liars that lie about absolutely everything. Science uses actual measurements that can be replicated.
1. Claiming something without proof doesn't make it true
2. If you watched the video he clearly explains how with 2 holes both explanations can work, a close small sun and a far away big sun, however with 3 holes, only a far away sun can explain the shadows, a close small sun wouldn't. Did you watch the video? Rip in pepperonis your ''theory'' Disproved with 3 holes and some math, R.I.P. bro.
1. You're claiming something is a scientific observation when it's not. You need to understand the difference between observation under strictly controlled conditions and watching cartoons on TV. You can argue all day that the cartoons are real and that I can't prove they're CGI but that's not science.
2. The video doesn't explain why a close Sun is not possible, Tyson just makes that claim without backing it up. Again animation is used to try and prove his point but it doesn't explain anything and certainly isn't scientific. There's no numbers, there's no models presented, there's no practical experiments involved, there's nothing but a greasy Hollywood actor making unsubstantiated claims.
Jump to: