Flat Earth Proofs?
- Thread starter PoxEclipse
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I have flown from Perth to Johannesburg direct and it takes about 11 hours and it does go south into the Southern Ocean before heading north again just as would be predicted if the earth were a sphere!
Duh.
The examples given of going to Dubai or Singapore or Kuala Lumpur make perfect sense when the airlines involved are Emirates, Singapore Airlines, or Malaysia Airlines (I have also flown these routes to Johannesburg).
What this dumbbell doesn't realize is that South African Airways does fly direct from Perth to Johannesburg and Qantas flies direct from Sydney to Johannesburg as well (this flight goes even further south into the Southern Ocean given its much longer route).
These videos only impress fools!
Duh.
The examples given of going to Dubai or Singapore or Kuala Lumpur make perfect sense when the airlines involved are Emirates, Singapore Airlines, or Malaysia Airlines (I have also flown these routes to Johannesburg).
What this dumbbell doesn't realize is that South African Airways does fly direct from Perth to Johannesburg and Qantas flies direct from Sydney to Johannesburg as well (this flight goes even further south into the Southern Ocean given its much longer route).
These videos only impress fools!
Re: An Answer?
Hi Pox..Could you be a sweet heart, and equip yourself with needed equipment (Visa,GPS,video camera, compass, plane, boat, etc)..and take a trip to see if this is true. I will be more than happy to see what you have presented, when you get back from the journey. The picture in links, do not confirm for me. As being mere atoms, in size to the earth..It would make it appear flat! Thank you
Hi Pox..Could you be a sweet heart, and equip yourself with needed equipment (Visa,GPS,video camera, compass, plane, boat, etc)..and take a trip to see if this is true. I will be more than happy to see what you have presented, when you get back from the journey. The picture in links, do not confirm for me. As being mere atoms, in size to the earth..It would make it appear flat! Thank you
P
What about the flat earth premise don't you agree with? Premise including NASA lying and selling CGI off as reality.
The psy-op may be an attempt at controlled opposition. Eric Dubey is to flat earth as Michael Moore is to 9/11. Someone challenging the official story with more absurdity so disinformation gets in the way of productive truth.
The psy-op may be an attempt at controlled opposition. Eric Dubey is to flat earth as Michael Moore is to 9/11. Someone challenging the official story with more absurdity so disinformation gets in the way of productive truth.
The key word you used is footage, 2D footage isn't in true 3D form unless the footage uses 3D technology and the viewer needs a pair of 3D spectacles, so your mind can't view a 3D object from a 2D image or 2D footage.
there is away artist can make things to appear in 3D but that is a illusion.
there is away artist can make things to appear in 3D but that is a illusion.
Last edited:
having spent several years looking into flat earth the conclusion I have came to is that flat earth is a psy-op designed to split and discredit the truth movement.
the purpose is the slight of hand to keep a % of awake preoccuped from the new world order the flat earthers can marvel at the earth when they are in the fema camps because they took their eye off totalitarian governments.
In short the priority is the new world order not flat earth. the is no danger with a flat/globe earth the danger is with the new world order. Once the new world order is dealt with the reward is to go into space and observe the earth (after all nasa is part of the new world order) How the psy-op works it keeps awake flat / globe earthers pre-occuped in arguements instead of focusing on the new world order and the media can use flat earthers to ridicule to keep the zzzz from ever waking up.
thats the thing with flat earthers its full off thinkers but not 1 tactician amongst them.
the purpose is the slight of hand to keep a % of awake preoccuped from the new world order the flat earthers can marvel at the earth when they are in the fema camps because they took their eye off totalitarian governments.
In short the priority is the new world order not flat earth. the is no danger with a flat/globe earth the danger is with the new world order. Once the new world order is dealt with the reward is to go into space and observe the earth (after all nasa is part of the new world order) How the psy-op works it keeps awake flat / globe earthers pre-occuped in arguements instead of focusing on the new world order and the media can use flat earthers to ridicule to keep the zzzz from ever waking up.
thats the thing with flat earthers its full off thinkers but not 1 tactician amongst them.
P
So you think it's a psy-op primarily because it's detracts from meaningful anti-nwo operations?
That may be true, but that will never make the moon landing, ISS, satellites, curvature, or outer space real and not CGI and special effects. It also won't change the fact that occultist introduced the globe and prior to it's arrival the world thought earth was flat.
They must ridicule flat earth in the media to develop a culture of dismissing the idea. They ridicule 9/11 truthers among other truthers in the media as well. Flat earthers have existed before spy-ops and youtube, they are being acknowledged now by the matrix because they have become a threat.
That may be true, but that will never make the moon landing, ISS, satellites, curvature, or outer space real and not CGI and special effects. It also won't change the fact that occultist introduced the globe and prior to it's arrival the world thought earth was flat.
They must ridicule flat earth in the media to develop a culture of dismissing the idea. They ridicule 9/11 truthers among other truthers in the media as well. Flat earthers have existed before spy-ops and youtube, they are being acknowledged now by the matrix because they have become a threat.
Polaris!
In my quest for truth, I've been researching Polaris the last week. There are a few FE Polaris videos I've seen, however, I came across a new video today. If anyone has any data on Polaris I would love to view it.
I am an amateur astronomer and in setting up my equatorial mount, I often align my telescope with Polaris before doing my evening viewing. It just so happens that Polaris is at approximately 45 degrees for my location. In looking to verify the angles of this video, I went looking for equatorial Polaris photographs.
This photographic evidence is highly disturbing as I've seen many FE videos that show flatness across lakes, etc.
Either the FE'ers are lying, or Polaris photographers are lying...or both?
Eric Dubay claims Polaris can be seen from the southern hemisphere (according to historical navigational records which I still have yet to see).
*** WARNING *** Fecal reference.
"Orphan Red's - Distance to the Sun" video was rather interesting, however, how could her data work on a globe?
I don't know anything yet...I'm still truthering, but the following video does make sense to me,
*** WARNING *** There is mention of a donkey suffering from pain.
[video=youtube;XL5v4w3KiSc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL5v4w3KiSc[/video]
A FES forum with various readables.
*** WARNING *** The following forum may contain certain linquistic unpleasantries.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64276.0
Peace.
In my quest for truth, I've been researching Polaris the last week. There are a few FE Polaris videos I've seen, however, I came across a new video today. If anyone has any data on Polaris I would love to view it.
I am an amateur astronomer and in setting up my equatorial mount, I often align my telescope with Polaris before doing my evening viewing. It just so happens that Polaris is at approximately 45 degrees for my location. In looking to verify the angles of this video, I went looking for equatorial Polaris photographs.
This photographic evidence is highly disturbing as I've seen many FE videos that show flatness across lakes, etc.
Either the FE'ers are lying, or Polaris photographers are lying...or both?
Eric Dubay claims Polaris can be seen from the southern hemisphere (according to historical navigational records which I still have yet to see).
*** WARNING *** Fecal reference.
"Orphan Red's - Distance to the Sun" video was rather interesting, however, how could her data work on a globe?
I don't know anything yet...I'm still truthering, but the following video does make sense to me,
*** WARNING *** There is mention of a donkey suffering from pain.
[video=youtube;XL5v4w3KiSc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL5v4w3KiSc[/video]
A FES forum with various readables.
*** WARNING *** The following forum may contain certain linquistic unpleasantries.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=64276.0
Peace.
Objects Hidden Behind Curvature
Posthuman...
The main reason I entertained a Flat Earth is because light houses, islands, mountains, and various other objects being visible when they should be below the horizon. So, either these photos are real or they aren't. I'm just looking for the truth of the matter.
The other reason I questioned a globe model is because of flight path data.
Either the flight path data is faulty or it's accurate. At this point I QUESTION EVERYTHING!
Whether or not the horizon appears flat makes little difference to me.
The Atlantean Conspiracy: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball
FE Proof 68 "The Philadelphia skyline is clearly visible from Apple Pie Hill in the New Jersey Pine Barrens 40 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, factoring in the 205 foot elevation of Apple Pie Hill, the Philly skyline should remain well-hidden beyond 335 feet of curvature."
[video=youtube;ZCbdneAe2gk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCbdneAe2gk[/video]
I'm still curious to know your thoughts on the 'thermos effect' of being in a vacuum...it seems to me that any geosynchronous orbit satellites that are constantly in the Sun's light would continue to heat to infinity. I know the Sun is hot because within 15 minutes of being in sunlight, my skin begins to burn, I can use a magnifying glass and start fires, etc...and that is through 20-30 miles (?) of atmosphere. With no atmosphere to buffer the Sun's heat, then the solar radiation heating effect should be amplified...yes? Another potential flaw in spacesuit theory, astronauts claim cooling water circulating in their suits, yet where is the radiator to expel the heat? Without atmosphere it would seem impossible to expel or convect any heat away from the water.
One can claim that the vacuum of space is cold, but is it really?
If you took a thermos bottle with a vacuum and put that object in a dark place with absolutely no sunlight, how cold do you think the inside container would get?
"The Earth's atmosphere is about 300 miles (480 km) thick, but most of the atmosphere (about 80%) is within 10 miles (16 km) of the surface of the Earth. There is no exact place where the atmosphere ends; it just gets thinner and thinner, until it merges with outer space."
Also, concerning Frantz's video, I'm curious if the color TV broadcast wattage requirements for beaming a signal from the Moon to Earth are in the ballpark of being accurate. I would think that any molecules of whatever would absorb or block radio transmissions, some more than others, so the atmosphere is definitely a factor.
Posthuman...
The main reason I entertained a Flat Earth is because light houses, islands, mountains, and various other objects being visible when they should be below the horizon. So, either these photos are real or they aren't. I'm just looking for the truth of the matter.
The other reason I questioned a globe model is because of flight path data.
Either the flight path data is faulty or it's accurate. At this point I QUESTION EVERYTHING!
Whether or not the horizon appears flat makes little difference to me.
The Atlantean Conspiracy: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball
FE Proof 68 "The Philadelphia skyline is clearly visible from Apple Pie Hill in the New Jersey Pine Barrens 40 miles away. If Earth were a ball 25,000 miles in circumference, factoring in the 205 foot elevation of Apple Pie Hill, the Philly skyline should remain well-hidden beyond 335 feet of curvature."
[video=youtube;ZCbdneAe2gk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCbdneAe2gk[/video]
I'm still curious to know your thoughts on the 'thermos effect' of being in a vacuum...it seems to me that any geosynchronous orbit satellites that are constantly in the Sun's light would continue to heat to infinity. I know the Sun is hot because within 15 minutes of being in sunlight, my skin begins to burn, I can use a magnifying glass and start fires, etc...and that is through 20-30 miles (?) of atmosphere. With no atmosphere to buffer the Sun's heat, then the solar radiation heating effect should be amplified...yes? Another potential flaw in spacesuit theory, astronauts claim cooling water circulating in their suits, yet where is the radiator to expel the heat? Without atmosphere it would seem impossible to expel or convect any heat away from the water.
One can claim that the vacuum of space is cold, but is it really?
If you took a thermos bottle with a vacuum and put that object in a dark place with absolutely no sunlight, how cold do you think the inside container would get?
"The Earth's atmosphere is about 300 miles (480 km) thick, but most of the atmosphere (about 80%) is within 10 miles (16 km) of the surface of the Earth. There is no exact place where the atmosphere ends; it just gets thinner and thinner, until it merges with outer space."
Also, concerning Frantz's video, I'm curious if the color TV broadcast wattage requirements for beaming a signal from the Moon to Earth are in the ballpark of being accurate. I would think that any molecules of whatever would absorb or block radio transmissions, some more than others, so the atmosphere is definitely a factor.
Attachments
Re: Objects Hidden Behind Curvature
you say you "question everything" but do you ever question things like this?
you seem to take all that kind of thing as gospel. you've posted several times in the past that you don't even want to talk to anyone who doesn't buy such nonsense wholesale - because you're not interested in questioning any of it.
however:
((quoted from: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-time/Franklin-Institute-Chief-Astronomer-debunks-BoBs-flat-Earth-claims.html))
the same article ((and this info is available from many sites; i just picked one)) also points out that the photo used in that video and proliferated all over the internet attached to this claim was actually taken from a helicopter, not from Apple Pie Hill.
got it?
this one -- from a helicopter, 75 miles away, but is deceptively spread around by FE people, including yourself, as something that it's not, along with obviously false math:
and this one, the actual view from Apple Pie Hill firetower:
what if it turns out that it's the pancake planet people who are deceivers and liars?
every one of these threads shows that to you, but you ignore it. how can you say it's truth you love if you just cling to lies when the truth presents itself?
you've said in the past you're not willing to even entertain that idea - how can you say you question everything? you keep making claims that have been thoroughly discredited, and repeating things that are clearly shown to be false. you've clearly stated that you don't want to be convinced otherwise. how does that jive with how you self-describe?
you say you "question everything" but do you ever question things like this?
you seem to take all that kind of thing as gospel. you've posted several times in the past that you don't even want to talk to anyone who doesn't buy such nonsense wholesale - because you're not interested in questioning any of it.
however:
The Earth’s surface curves about 8 inches in one mile, meaning that the purported “335 feet of curvature” over the 40-mile distance between Apple Pie Hill and Philadelphia touted in the tweet is actually somewhat underestimated. The overall curvature is about 1,067 feet:
8 inches per mile x 40 miles^2 = 12,800 inches/12 inches per foot = 1066.67 feet
The target hidden height, or the height hidden by the horizon, stands at about 336.6 feet using the numbers provided, including Apple Pie Hill's elevation. Couple that with the makeup of Philadelphia’s skyline — which includes about 30 buildings standing taller than 400 feet, including the 975-foot Comcast Center and 945-foot One Liberty Place — and it becomes a little more clear why Philadelphia is visible from the New Jersey Pine Barrens.
8 inches per mile x 40 miles^2 = 12,800 inches/12 inches per foot = 1066.67 feet
The target hidden height, or the height hidden by the horizon, stands at about 336.6 feet using the numbers provided, including Apple Pie Hill's elevation. Couple that with the makeup of Philadelphia’s skyline — which includes about 30 buildings standing taller than 400 feet, including the 975-foot Comcast Center and 945-foot One Liberty Place — and it becomes a little more clear why Philadelphia is visible from the New Jersey Pine Barrens.
((quoted from: http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/real-time/Franklin-Institute-Chief-Astronomer-debunks-BoBs-flat-Earth-claims.html))
the same article ((and this info is available from many sites; i just picked one)) also points out that the photo used in that video and proliferated all over the internet attached to this claim was actually taken from a helicopter, not from Apple Pie Hill.
But, Bradley Maule, who took the picture, disputes that it was taken from the hill.
“The photo he used is from a helicopter ride I took over North Jerseey and NYC,” says Maule, owner of Phillyskyline.com, where the photo originated. “It’s a little blurry because we were flying pretty fast and we’d closed the hatch, which is curved, which is hard to shoot through.”
“The photo he used is from a helicopter ride I took over North Jerseey and NYC,” says Maule, owner of Phillyskyline.com, where the photo originated. “It’s a little blurry because we were flying pretty fast and we’d closed the hatch, which is curved, which is hard to shoot through.”
got it?
this one -- from a helicopter, 75 miles away, but is deceptively spread around by FE people, including yourself, as something that it's not, along with obviously false math:
and this one, the actual view from Apple Pie Hill firetower:
what if it turns out that it's the pancake planet people who are deceivers and liars?
every one of these threads shows that to you, but you ignore it. how can you say it's truth you love if you just cling to lies when the truth presents itself?
you've said in the past you're not willing to even entertain that idea - how can you say you question everything? you keep making claims that have been thoroughly discredited, and repeating things that are clearly shown to be false. you've clearly stated that you don't want to be convinced otherwise. how does that jive with how you self-describe?
Last edited:
Re: Objects Hidden Behind Curvature
first of all, geosynchronous satellites would only be in constant sunlight if the part of the earth they are orbiting over is itself in constant sunlight. so you got a big obvious flaw in your understanding right there, and the right understanding of it erases your objection immediately.
there are two ways to shed heat: convection ((more efficient)) and radiation. where there is little or no atmosphere, there is little or no substance to convect away heat, but radiative heat transfer still occurs. the surfaces of materials in thin atmosphere and outside of atmosphere do heat rapidly and to a very high degree, but not to infinity. it is a problem that has to be seriously engineered, but it doesn't make impossibilities. craft can be spun to even out heat transfer, since in shadow, they cool very rapidly too, and materials with very high specific heat capacity are used, for example.
why does ice exist in the upper atmosphere? clouds for example? why is it colder with elevation instead of hotter? why doesn't the moon have infinite temperature? why is it still cold at the poles even during the months that they have constant day? how does light travel through vacuum or near-vacuum? these kinds of questions, you should also ask, and they might expose your misconceptions.
first of all, geosynchronous satellites would only be in constant sunlight if the part of the earth they are orbiting over is itself in constant sunlight. so you got a big obvious flaw in your understanding right there, and the right understanding of it erases your objection immediately.
there are two ways to shed heat: convection ((more efficient)) and radiation. where there is little or no atmosphere, there is little or no substance to convect away heat, but radiative heat transfer still occurs. the surfaces of materials in thin atmosphere and outside of atmosphere do heat rapidly and to a very high degree, but not to infinity. it is a problem that has to be seriously engineered, but it doesn't make impossibilities. craft can be spun to even out heat transfer, since in shadow, they cool very rapidly too, and materials with very high specific heat capacity are used, for example.
why does ice exist in the upper atmosphere? clouds for example? why is it colder with elevation instead of hotter? why doesn't the moon have infinite temperature? why is it still cold at the poles even during the months that they have constant day? how does light travel through vacuum or near-vacuum? these kinds of questions, you should also ask, and they might expose your misconceptions.
Last edited:
Psy-Op?
For the record, I am of the same opinion as Max Igan...in other words, "the jury is still out."
Max also states that the FE is a psy-op used to divide FE'ers and Globe'rs, (divide and conquer) and this theory may very well be true.
Like Max...there are things I cannot explain on both sides of the fence.
*** WARNING *** The following videos may contain offensive language/content.
[video=youtube;DEYcOwOFZHE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEYcOwOFZHE[/video]
Here is a link to a video I saw earlier today. A psy-op? A video editing, money-making venture for YouTube advertising? A mirage refracting light? A truth? I don't know.
Rogers Center from 6ft above Lake Ontario 30.84 miles away
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__liPsAYnJs
"Taken from 30.84 Miles away at Fort Niagara, NY. The Rogers Center dome is only 282' high. Lake Ontario elevation is 243'.The base elevation of the Rogers Center is 267', making the total height of the Rogers Center above the lake 306' . My elevation was 6' above the lake. Expected curvature is 516.85' of drop. Rogers Center should not have been visible. The temperature of Toronto, Fort Niagara, and Lake Ontario were all within 5 degrees difference from each other and the humidity of the air in between did not exceed 40%."
It seems to me that some of the bottom of the buildings are hidden behind a curvature or atmospheric distortion...however, if the above quote is true, then none of the Rogers Center should have been visible.
Earth curve doesn't explain this video properly. Atmospheric refraction could be a possibility, or video editing/deception, or something I've been speculating lately...that the Earth is a globe, but larger than is believed to be?
And in other Antarctica related news...I came across this video posted last year. I still find it hard to believe that any government cares about preserving wildlife habitats...and even more unbelievable...a collaboration of governments?
It's probably more disinformation/psy-op material, but I found it interesting.
I am NOT labeling these videos as a proof of anything, just an interesting news clip/commentary.
Why the sudden interest in Antarctica for politicians? To promote a psy-op? It seems unlikely that a psy-op is their only motivation.
My speculation...they are carving up Antarctica for the corporations (Black Nobility) that contribute to their campaigns and keep them in power, and/or possibly setting up a place to escape to when the system collapses and their citizens want to lynch them.
NEW Antarctica Travel Ban ENFORCED to Hide Flat Earth's Dome Firmament!! (John Kerry) | FE Proof 5.2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsnvrCoE2JA
World Leaders FLOCK to Flat Earth's Dome Firmament in Antarctica!?! | FLAT EARTH PROOF 4 pt4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDIaoxNLEvc
This is probably fake news, but who knows?
Again...draw your own conclusions.
Peace.
For the record, I am of the same opinion as Max Igan...in other words, "the jury is still out."
Max also states that the FE is a psy-op used to divide FE'ers and Globe'rs, (divide and conquer) and this theory may very well be true.
Like Max...there are things I cannot explain on both sides of the fence.
*** WARNING *** The following videos may contain offensive language/content.
[video=youtube;DEYcOwOFZHE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEYcOwOFZHE[/video]
Here is a link to a video I saw earlier today. A psy-op? A video editing, money-making venture for YouTube advertising? A mirage refracting light? A truth? I don't know.
Rogers Center from 6ft above Lake Ontario 30.84 miles away
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__liPsAYnJs
"Taken from 30.84 Miles away at Fort Niagara, NY. The Rogers Center dome is only 282' high. Lake Ontario elevation is 243'.The base elevation of the Rogers Center is 267', making the total height of the Rogers Center above the lake 306' . My elevation was 6' above the lake. Expected curvature is 516.85' of drop. Rogers Center should not have been visible. The temperature of Toronto, Fort Niagara, and Lake Ontario were all within 5 degrees difference from each other and the humidity of the air in between did not exceed 40%."
It seems to me that some of the bottom of the buildings are hidden behind a curvature or atmospheric distortion...however, if the above quote is true, then none of the Rogers Center should have been visible.
Earth curve doesn't explain this video properly. Atmospheric refraction could be a possibility, or video editing/deception, or something I've been speculating lately...that the Earth is a globe, but larger than is believed to be?
And in other Antarctica related news...I came across this video posted last year. I still find it hard to believe that any government cares about preserving wildlife habitats...and even more unbelievable...a collaboration of governments?
It's probably more disinformation/psy-op material, but I found it interesting.
I am NOT labeling these videos as a proof of anything, just an interesting news clip/commentary.
Why the sudden interest in Antarctica for politicians? To promote a psy-op? It seems unlikely that a psy-op is their only motivation.
My speculation...they are carving up Antarctica for the corporations (Black Nobility) that contribute to their campaigns and keep them in power, and/or possibly setting up a place to escape to when the system collapses and their citizens want to lynch them.
NEW Antarctica Travel Ban ENFORCED to Hide Flat Earth's Dome Firmament!! (John Kerry) | FE Proof 5.2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsnvrCoE2JA
World Leaders FLOCK to Flat Earth's Dome Firmament in Antarctica!?! | FLAT EARTH PROOF 4 pt4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDIaoxNLEvc
This is probably fake news, but who knows?
Again...draw your own conclusions.
Peace.