Flat Earthers

i know you really like truth, so two points of correction:

1. the Greek of Revelation 13:18 doesn't specify a decimal; it's specifically and literally "six hundred, sixty, and six"
2. the earth's axial tilt is 23.439281° from vertical. 'from vertical' is the standard way to measure an axial tilt because it's relative to the axis of rotation ((get it? 'axial' ?)). the reciprocal of that is 66.560719°

have a nice time watching the sky for the next 24 hours
i mean, you are going to do it, aren't you?

and you have a better way to account for gravity if you think you live on a stationary pancake?

it is whacko, tho. yes. somewhere in one of these dumb threads i did the calculation for a 6,000yr old earth in that scenario to show how fast the frisbee would be travelling at this point, in very large multiples of light speed.

never really got a response the guy i was talking to just quit the forum instead. presumably to find someone more naive to talk to.

I'll tell you when rapture happens

When flat earth people believe in sound science

A logical approach to the scientific evidence actually rules out the requirement to believe the Earth is a ball. It also rules out the requirement to believe in evolutionism.

If the Earth were a ball, one would be able to measure the curve on the surface, not have to resort to invoking the mysteries of the Heavens. There are mysteries in the Heavens not properly explained by either a Flat Earth theory or a Ball Earth theory. But this doesn't change the fact that no curve is measurable.

If there were curvature proving Earth is a ball, which there is not, how would one see it? The objects over the horizon would be obscured by the horizon itself.

The theory of gravity is inconsistent. The 9.81ms-2 acceleration is just a phenomena we observe. Some flat Earthers put it (gravity) down to buoyancy. I'm not sure either way, but am sure the theory of gravity doesn't make sense.

The movement of the starry canopy and the sun and moon are fully explained by the standard model. Don't spread lies.

Did you watch the sun and moon and stars or is this post your version of an excuse for willfully ignoring evidence and opportunity?

LOL

Please recite for us the definition of buoyancy.

I think we've already been here. Selenelion. Where the sun and moon appear in the same sky, but during a lunar eclipse, which is supposed to be explained by the moon being behind the Earth, which is impossible (i.e. contradictory to the theory) as both sun and moon are visible in the same sky.

See above for one example of heliocentric theory being wrong. There are many others, but only one disproof is needed.

Yes we've already been there. I forgot, you willfully choose ignorance and lie about facts and pretend things are inexplicable that really aren't.

Probably it's a waste of my time here.

Have a nice day, carefully watch the sunset tonight.

That's quite insulting. I simply reject poor excuses as valid scientific explanations, irrespective of their source.

I will say one thing about you and that is you're very articulate in your writing and presentation.

You are very kind, Tourist. Probably kinder than I deserve.

Now why don’t you start providing some valid scientific explanations yourself? Sprinkle them with valid sources as well, instead of using the conspiracy-theorist-mother-of-all-evidence, the word “hoax”?😜😁

no pun intended,,, but anyone who wanted to know for sure or not could just go to a travel agent and book an "around the world flight"(about 1,200 dollars),, join the military or several other options and see for their own selves it's round. On the other hand just to be fair to the ones who cant aford a plane trip or decide not to join the military I can see why they might doubt it,,,but to those of us who have the worlds round lol...

seriously all you have to do is watch the sky.

some people don't want to look up, smh

i meant for it to be; IMO you are insulting the truth.
to me it seems that you provide poor excuses for rejecting valid explanations, regardless of their source.

can i point out your inconsistency for a sec?

look:


i have already given you a dozen disproofs of pancake-planet.
you have provided zero disproofs of the standard earth model.

this is par for course with every single person i have ever talked to about flat-world over the last 25 years.

What's the matter? Don't you like the fact that I counter-act the CIA created phrase "conspiracy theorist" to silence those with open minds?

Flat Earthers don't necessarily argue against a round Earth. Indeed, the bible talks about Earth being round like a circle. What flat-Earthers oppose is the belief that Earth is spherical like a ball. Note that a plate can be circumnavigated as easily as a ball can.

We have already confirmed that neither theory accurately explains the motions of the Heavenly bodies. If Earth is a ball, there should be evidence of curvature here on the ground, where we can measure it. There's not.

I just don't accept excuses. If globalists want their excuses to be treated as a valid theories, they should prove them, instead of just making things up. Flat Earthers could make additional excuses up, but they (generally) don't. The honest ones simply say "we don't have the data to explain that yet".

And I likewise have countered your disproofs with disproofs of ball-Earth. We are at an impasse, it would seem. The only thing we can seem to agree on is that the curvature of the Earth has never been measured on Earth.

What about a flight plan? If you were to, say, make a flight plan for a flight from Los Angeles to the Persian gulf, what would that flight plan be like.

For a flat earther like yourself one should think that would be a straight line on a map from Los Angeles to Dubai.

Then why does a flight plan for a jump from Los Angeles to Dubai make the aircraft cross Greenland and Scandinavia to get to Dubai?

It’s a shorter distance because the earth is spherical 😁.

This argument requires a logical fallacy - that the flight plan always uses the shortest path. There is no requirement for flight plans ever to use the shortest path, so just because a trip from Los Angeles to Dubai makes the aircraft cross Greenland and Scandinavia, doesn't necessarily mean this path is the shortest.