Knowing the globe is false doesn't mean I know everything. I'm fighting against a huge system that is far greater than myself.
However, with your 500 years of indoctrination maybe you could explain why no aircraft has ever crossed antarctica on a commercial flight. Maybe you could explain why all travel in the 'southern hemisphere' requires crossing the equator.
Go on, you have 500 years of 'truth and facts' on your side.
If there were direct flights from New Zealand to South Africa they would fly over Antarctica but alas, even though they both sound funny, there isn’t enough traffic to make a route viable!
That ones even got a YouTube in it(I didn’t watch it)
There are theories that seem to make sense if you ignore math.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeCrazyGuy
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeOtherCrazyGuy
It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled
My entries that relate to FE are just that, things that relate to FE. I do not think these things are definitive proof of the flat earth, just interesting parts of the movement to bring the concept of FE to the public. Did you know that this FE theory/debate/concept is by no means "new' and has been around for hundreds of years?
I'm curious, have you taken the time to look into these claims/assertions of FEarthers with any seriousness or are you inclined to dismiss them in short order for whatev reason?
Have you looked at the "maths" related to flat earth based on the 'oblate spheriods' scientifically measured/confirmed circumference and figured out why we cant see curvature even tho the scientist have forever said you can see curvature for yourself at the shore ?
Have you looked with any seriousness into Mr Byrds assertions of land that he discovered beyond Antarctica and why, soon after, there was the only treaty ever signed by every country of this world to keep peeps away from venturing too far in to the icey south was invoked?
Do you believe things called Black Operations or programs similar in scope are reals?
Do you believe The Manhatten Project was a real thing? How about The Gulph Of Tonkin thingy?
i'm shocked; dumb people have existed longer than 100 years.
we can't see curve is simple; earth is huge and you can't see a curve on something that curves so little over the distance we are used to. 100 miles in space is still not very much compared to 4000 mile radius earth. would you expect to see if you were really, really close to a something spherical? do you think it would look curved or flat over the space in question?
LOL if I soak the kitchen floor with a mister, you will claim it's because of the glass in the windows. If I open a window, you will claim it's due to the glass in the dome.
Why wouldn't you be able to make a rainbow indoors without glass if the whole world is covered in glass?
Go into a windowless storage room with your mister. Use a flashlight with an LED bulb and remove the glass lens. If the LED bulb has glass, then go to Radio Shack and buy an LED without a lens, so no glass.
Obv.
Of course, you can't take a picture, because glass.
Have you looked with any seriousness into Mr Byrds assertions of land that he discovered beyond Antarctica and why, soon after, there was the only treaty ever signed by every country of this world to keep peeps away from venturing too far in to the icey south was invoked?
Have you looked it with any seriousness? Specifically his claims about an advanced civilization living inside a hollow earth. He actually says "bottom of the earth" in the same interview flat earthers like to cherry pick that line from. Byrd theories have been around for longer than you and I have been alive.
It doesn't seem like you know anything about the treaty either. "Every county of this world" didn't sign, 53 countries agree to it but only 12 signed. In case you didn't know, there are more than 53 countries in the world and most don't recognize the treaty at all. It also doesn't keep anyone away from anything in Antarctica, it's main purpose was to keep the area free from dumping and military use. Anyone can go and explore Antartica and people do it every year. There are many blogs and videos about people doing it but I'm guessing they're fake just like everything else.
yes I watched the byrd video. seemed extremely ordinary. he was not talking about land beyond antarctica or hollow earth people. watch the video and his context is clear.
yes I believe in the manhattan project. not sure how that factors into flat earth. likewise the gulf of tonkin. or black operations.
Quote:
I'm curious, have you taken the time to look into these claims/assertions of FEarthers with any seriousness or are you inclined to dismiss them in short order for whatev reason?
I have looked at the various pictures, anecdotes, and explanations provided by moo and b1 itt. they are laughable.
Quote:
Have you looked at the "maths" related to flat earth based on the 'oblate spheriods' scientifically measured/confirmed circumference and figured out why we cant see curvature even tho the scientist have forever said you can see curvature for yourself at the shore ?
If there were direct flights from New Zealand to South Africa they would fly over Antarctica but alas, even though they both sound funny, there isn’t enough traffic to make a route viable!
That ones even got a YouTube in it(I didn’t watch it)
There's a relative lack of inhabited land mass in the Southern Hemisphere, so I think the only major intercontinental flights are Sydney-Jo'burg (Qantas 63 and 64) and Sydney-Santiago (Qantas 27 and 28). Both cross part of Antarctica, some days, depending on the wind, but they don't go right across the whole continent because it's not geographically necessary. Videos taken over Antarctica on the Jo'burg route were previously posted. These flights would not be physically possible on the flat-earth model for reasons of fuel endurance. Even on the actual existing globe, Sydney-Santiago requires the 747 to stay up for 14 hours.
As previously posted, Qantas do do (rather expensive) 12-hour sightseeing charter flights over Antarctica on a regular basis.
... he was not talking about land beyond antarctica...
1954 interview...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Byrd
Strangely enough, there is left in the world today, an area as big as the United States thats never been seen by a human being. And thats beyond the pole on the other side of the south pole, from middle America, and I think its quite estonishing that there should be an area as big as that unexplored.
The real quote is "Strangely enough, there is left in the world today, an area as big as the United States, that's never been seen by a human being. And that's beyond the pole, on the other side of the south pole from Little America, and I think its quite astonishing that there should be an area as big as that unexplored so there's a lot of adventure left down at the bottom of the world."
Little America is the name of the base in Antarctica and beyond that hadn't been explored at the time. There's really nothing more to it than that. It's just a simple quote people have taken way out of context. I love how flat earthers always leave out the end of his quote about the bottom of the world though.
Here is the full interview. The quote starts at 1:38. If you watch the full thing then there's nothing strange about it at all. People have been making up dumb theories about Byrd for a long time. Before flat earth it was hollow earth, before hollow earth it was secret Nazi bases and UFOs. I'm sure flat earth won't be the last one.
my "not" is confusing. I meant that it seemed he is talking about antarctica itself, and the land beyond the part that he himself explored which was up to the south pole.
and I thought he said little america too, which I had to look up, and was the name of his base camp on antarctica.
The scientifically illiterate are the ones who should stay the hell away from bill nye indoctrinates the world. He's pushing the transgender agenda which is pure satanism.
Since you mention it, samuri, holocaust is 33 in pythagorean numerology, along with astronaut, big bang, gas giant, clinton, kennedy, pizza... the list goes on.
Let's try "moo buckets"
M = 4
O = 6
O = 6
B = 2
That's already 666. Coincidence? I think not.
U = 3
C = 3
33! Don't you dare think I do not recognize you when I see you, Satan!
K = 2
E = 5
T = 2
That's a 9, and that's what? Exactly 3 * 3 or 33.
But there is even greater deception at play here. The devil really stops at nothing to deceive the devout Christian into thinking nothing harmful is at play. But you cannot deceive me, Satan!
We already figured out that moo was elite in disguise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Diablo
Moo,
Moo bucket = 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by mullen
Moo Bucket is a 33 name, GTFO you fraud.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rakemeplz
moo bucket (33)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mullen
Btw moo buckets, don't think I don't notice moo bucket is also 33. You think you can fool us by pluralizing your name? If ASTRONAUT, BIG BANG, and PIZZA is 33 without being plural, then MOO BUCKET being 33 is not a coincidence. How long have the lizard people been living amongst us?
if the earth was curving in all directions, the horizon would drop as you increase altitude. Only problem is: it doesn't. It rises with the observer.
FE 101.
Read the thread. Lurk more, post less.
If the Earth was flat and a person looks straight out (i.e. parallel to the ground), the horizon line will remain at the same height as the person's eye-level. The ground would not be the horizon line, but below the horizon line according to the observer's height.
e.g.
Also, the horizon doesdrop when the observer is at higher altitudes. For someone that proclaims "read the thread", you should take your own advice. I've posted this TWICE before (here and here) and even suggested you try it yourself:
For someone with such a disdain for science, you do like to use sciencey-words. How about you define these terms, since they are already defined in physics in ways that do not preclude gravity, which is your claim. So we'd need to know your personal definitions.
Can you start with density?
In physics, it would be something like a measure of mass by volume. What is it in moo?
Also, the horizon doesdrop when the observer is at higher altitudes. For someone that proclaims "read the thread", you should take your own advice. I've posted this TWICE before (here and here) and even suggested you try it yourself:
Damn fancy CGI you've got there. Or the guy in the video superimposed the level over other footage. Or Moo will just completely ignore you again. Or you're satan. Pick one.