@Lex Luthor Please do what no other flat earther has done and fly across the end of the world to prove its flat. Until someone does it and provides evidence, then the flat earth theory is completely dismissible as pure nonsense.
Also, please explain sunsets. The Flat Earth Society fails to do so and they are supposedly the experts. Maybe you could do a better job of it.
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Post again when you reach the edge of the world.
Yes, water follows the curvature of the earth. This is why, at large distances over water you will see ships disappear over the horizon or only see a portion of very distant tall structures, wind farms, etc. This is something you can see yourself on a clear day on the beach. It's not "mirages" or "dense air".
Earth's curvature from high altitude
This photo was taken at 23 km high from a weather balloon. Flat-earthers will attempt to explain this away as a "lens distortion", or "fish eye view" or photoshop or whatever. The below was taken by a guy on Concorde at 58,000 feet.
The reason I am posting these is because it's possible to send up a camera and a weather balloon for as cheap as 150 quid and some approval. Flat-earthers can do this themselves.
The distance to the horizon is just over 3 miles
At 3 miles (5km) the curvature is 1.96 meters, yeah you aren't going to see much difference.
On any "flat earth model" Australia and South America are as far away as you can get. You would have to fly an absurd distance (over land) to get to the two.
But the world isn't flat, which is why you can fly between South America and Australia, over water, and prove it to yourself.
As a flat-earther, you are going to demand people "prove it to you". You are surrounded by proof, satellites, GPS, images/footage, science, basic common sense, etc, if you are going to reject all that, then you will reject anything posted here that's for sure.
My point is that you can prove it to yourself. You can watch ships disappear over the horizon on a sunny day at the beach, you can do the canal experiment with a friend, you could even catch a plane from Chile to Sydney. Entirely up to you.
Now notice how Lex's arguments, genuine or facetious, are indistinguishable from the typical ones we see with other "plausible" conspiracy theories.
It's always "here's some factoid I found on the internet, Explain that! Ha you can't therefore: conspiracy!"
The fact that people can and have gone to great lengths to explain these factoids isn't important. Those explanations can always be dismissed or ignored and a new factoid can alway be spewed out.
It also isn't important that the conspiracy theory cannot explain a great many things, including basic foundational facts about itself. Doesn't matter how many contradictions in the theory are pointed out or are blatantly obvious. These rules only apply to the world view a conspiracy theorist wants to reject. Critical thinking must never be applied to a conspiracy theory.
What's interesting to me is how conspiracy theorists must be aware of this on some level. They have to be able to see that their own arguments are being applied to nonsense they don't buy into. Otherwise, why else are they so reluctant to ever question or challenge other conspiracy theorists?
I think that if I genuinely believed that there were these conspiracies going on, and wanted to learn about them, I'd 1. want to find out more about them and if they are actually true and 2. make sure that people aren't being suckered in by false conspiracy theories.
Yet when we see conspiracy theories like Flat Eartherism, we never see any conspiracy theorists disagreeing with the proponents. (Though they do not like it whenever fair parallels are drawn.)
I think it's a combination of most theorists aren't actually interested in conspiracy theories beyond the few they already buy into, and a discomfort with thinking that might cause them to doubt or question their pet theories.
My father in law has been on Concorde and confirmed he saw the curvature.
I work with wood as a hobby. On a piece of wood which is 1mm out over 1m you wouldn't have a hope in hell of spotting that from side on. You'd need to sight along it to see. And that's a much greater curvature than on the surface of the earth.
You don't think the flat earthers actually care about evidence, do you?
so where is this container you are referring to in relation to the capillary action of the oceans?
You are now stating the oceans are bending around the big rock due to capillary action? Is this your argument? Do explain more this phenomenon
And you are also claiming that "gravity" is holding all the oceans onto a big rock in a vacuum? This is also your argument and please explain to me how gravity works for this phenomenon? If gravity is that strong holding all the oceans, lakes & canals to its surface, how does a tiny may fly defeat this gravity and float to the top and manage to escape the grasp of the water being sucked to the ground?
You also claim nothing can float out into space, however if I fill a helium balloon and let it go it will travel as high as it can defeating gravity until the balloon eventually deflates
I'll wait for your answer
you still havent addressed why kish bank lighthouse has the bottom 1/3 of its structure visible from Poolbeg?
According to your maths of your global priests it should be hidden behind curvature
so where is the end of the world?
if you try to fly towards Antartica you will be stopped
You are stating the flat earth theory is completely dismissable and pure nonsense when not a single one of you yet has explained why there are structures that are visible when they should be hidden behind curvature
If they can be seen then there is no curve, if there is no curve then its not a ball........
The FE Society is a controlled opposition society...
I addressed several of your points. You addressed none of mine. If this was a competition, I'm in the lead.
from his seat of the cockpit?
Meniscus and capillary action are caused by the phenomena known as adhesion and cohesion tension and only happens on a very small scale. It simply cannot be used to explain sea curvature.
Get your facts straight before posting condescending remarks
You refer to wind farms.........ok explain the results of this experiment on this wind farm off the south coast of England
and I'll leave this little physics lesson for you here aswell to help you understand how water works...
If it were linear wouldn't disappear. You would be 100s of KM to the horizon. The horizon alone proves flat earther are retarded.
To correct you its actually 8" per mile squared
That incorrect. The drop 1km past the horizon is 8cm. The rate of drop increases with distance, as well its a curve. FYI mile squared is a unit of area not distance.
Focus on Kish Bank lighthouse and you should see curvature to the left & right
You can see it. It's incredibaby subtle, you'd need precise equipment to measure it. The higher you go the more pronounced it gets.
Here's a still from a weather balloon at over 114k feet. You can see the curve.
More damning is that Kish Bank lighthouse is approx 7 miles from Dublin Bay and according to the earth curve calculator should be approx 1/3 hidden by the curve
You can see to the horizon. So the obscured parts are based on distance past the horizon. At sea level, the bottom 2.8m is obscured not 1/3 of it (10m). Here's a calculator, as you'l no doubt insist on proof. https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature
Of course, if you looking at if from lad, you're probably not at sea level. If you sat 10m+ above sea level you can see all the way to the lighthouse. This is primary school stuff.
you can all keep repeating it between yourselves that, because we see ships disappearing over the horizon proves there is curvature all you like, but the simple fact remains that the maths that is used to calculate the earth curvature has been debunked so many times that just proves that the curvature they claim exists, actually doesn't exist
and if the curvature they claim exists doesn't exist, then what is the actual curvature if there is even one?
Your model is totally flawed on its basic fundamental principle and you are clutching at straws and throwing distractions because you all know you cannot back it up or stand over the numbers
Walk away now before I embarrass you all again, I was right before about what I said that masks were useless and never did anything but you claimed they did, that the vaccines were unsafe and totally ineffective when you all claimed they were and I'm right here again and you just cant face it that you are wrong again...
Simple fact, you can see objects further in the distance than the curvature says you shouldn't, even a 5yr old would get that its not a curve
Its actually sad that we have grown men believing water bends around a rock and sticks to it while it spins at 1000mph in a vacuum moving around a fiery ball at 67,000mph and yet no water ever leaves the surface 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
-‐-----
Warning applied for breach of charter - as per the Charter the forum is for discussion not derision and ridicule of contributors this post falls short of that.
then dont try to use it as a diversion tool to explain your ideals that its related to water curving
your original statement has no relevance to your idea of oceans bending
Neil degrass Tyson said curvature is not visible at 128k feet
So you have no answer to the sunset issue then. Right.
Also, if there was no curve you should be able to stand in the west coast and see the USA with a strong enough telescope. Are you saying that you can?
You should probably improve your reading comprehension before you could out with the "Get your facts straight" 90s catch phrase.
Meniscus and caplillary action where posts of evidence that water can curve. Lex claimed it could not. Nobody claimed the earths surface was due to either. A bit of common sense would help most conspiracy theorist.
No you claim that gravity is also a hoax? It' only a theory after all.
Come on Lex, nobody actually believes are serious. You couldn't be. But good troll work
Haha good girl Markus.
The poster claimed water can't curve.
I showed how it can
Go back to bed there lickspittle
"How does gravity work?"
Lolllll 😆😆😆
Google is your friend here lexy baby, though I doubt you have the capacity to understand it
---------
As mentioned you can demonstrate all this stuff to yourself.
If you don't believe anyone or anything else but yourself, them prove it to yourself. Relatively straight forward. Plenty of clear days coming up.
Is the moon a flat disc as well?
If so then how come the light and darkness occurs in the way it does through the various moon phases?
If you stick a football, which we can all surely agree is genuinely a sphere, in a dark room and then shine a torch at it and move the torch around the room then what do you notice about how the light and dark shadows appear on the football? Is that the same as can be seen with the moon?
So if that shows that the moon is a sphere, then all other planets and the sun itself are also spherical... Why is the earth unique in being a flat disc?
it'd actually be kinda cool if someone rigged up a portal which showed what sightlines would be like if the earth was flat.
there'd be no such thing as a horizon looking across a flat ocean - technically you'd be able to see all the way (assuming clear air) to a beach in wales, for example. and all the clutter of ships and boats, etc. in the way,
I think a lot more of it has to do with flat earthers being convinced that they have this secret information that makes them special more than being intimidated by actual science. The conspiracy claims are more just permission for them to reject any reality that they don't understand that might threaten their illusion. And also lets them pretend to be smarter than any of those scientists.
A lot are also extreme Christians who believe in a very literal version of the bible.
For flat-earthers, the earth is a pizza. And the sun somehow shines perfectly on one half, e.g. the below
the gas thing is the supposed flat earthers have repeatedly talked about the horizon.
on a flat earth, the horizon cannot exist, except where the earth comes to an end. admitting the basic existence of a horizon is admitting the earth is curved.
good old Neil, he at least got something right 😂😂😂😂😂
still diverting with questions....you cannot explain why you see objects that should be behind a curve and then try go for the old chestnut of "explain the sunset"
Closing thread while I go through the reports and catch up.
------------
Off topic posts deleted and warnings issued.
All posters are reminded to discuss the topic (and not other posters) in line with the Charter remembering that derision and ridicule of contributors is strictly against the Charter. If you cannot post in line with the Charter and engage in a proper discussion, do not post.
Thread reopened
HS
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/867a9f20e705add43a3ada2e4f4480cc.svg)
