Depends on why you're being called a crazy nut in the first place.

If you go around saying the Earth is flat and post that list, you're still a crazy nut and that list isn't going to help.

[deleted]

Well it would be out of character for me to not say that that's not true :P

Even though it's the truth, what you've said isn't true. There's plenty of stuff I agree with on this sub, just that if I agree with something I typically upvote and move on. If I disagree I like to say why. Unfortunately it gives the impression that I hate everything based on my comment history.

[deleted]

Still waiting on interesting thread user1800gofuckyourself. You'll have to link me if you make it later on.

Considering I tend to comment on things I disagree with, it might be a bit short.

But if you think it'd be interesting, why not submit it right now?

If you go around saying the Earth is flat and post that list, you're still a crazy nut and that list isn't going to help.

You're assuming that people pushing flat earth actually believe their claims. IMHO, they are simply using classic well-poisoning tactics.

I don't think it's that surprising that stupid people exist.

The evidence that earth is round does not stand up to scrutiny.

Such as?

Such as the fabricated images NASA shows us of the perfectly round earth (blue marble) and tells us that the originals are far too boring and unclear. Fake images FTW.

If you use a cameras panorama function and take a super wide photo, is that now a fake image?

And then you use Photoshop and all kinds of processing that the final image is vastly different from the original. Then that is a fake image!

All modern panoramic images use digital processing to stitch it together. So I guess they're all fake then?

Wait till you realise that all digital cameras, unless shot in RAW, add colour processing to it.

We aren't talking just about panaromic images buddy. But still, nothing will convince you because you are part of the problem.

The hypocrisy is astonishing.

You bet.

The atmosphere apparently sticks to the earth due to gravity. Yet we know experimentally that gravity is not strong enough to resist a vacuum.

If gravity can't resist a vacuum, how do you think planetary orbits work?

It seems strong enough to keep the moon hanging around.

I guess changing the subject wihout even attempting a response is sign of defeat.

That was a response.

You said the force of gravity is too weak, I said it's not. It's still on the same topic.

Perfect.

Are you going to address it or just dismiss it?

Dismissing is a sign of defeat.

Oh you win buddy.

Rockran believes NASA went to the moon 6 times in the span of four years with 1970s tech in a papermache art project lunar lander. No way in hell we would look constructively at the weak evidence presented about the Gravity theory, Heliocentrism and and look at key experiments like Airy's failure experiment etc or What Tesla's dynamic theory of Gravity really meant.

So easy to regurgitate dogma you learned but can you be brave enough to challenge its authenticity?

..i like that that Rockran is here though...respect man.

Rockran can't stand flat earthers. Everytime one of them makes a comment online, he's gotta drop whatever it is that he may be doing, because no job is of higher importance than to defend the globe earth.

Thank God for those crazy flat earthers, if wasn't for them, I would not have realized heliocentrism and it's case theories are about as much based on sound scientific evidence as 911 kerosene collapse science. Both are accepted by billions of people but don't hold up to simple single experimental evidence. I have nothing to support heliocentrism, and I am really trying to find solid evidence.

The question of earth being round or flat is really subjective right now. How do flat earthers know it's not round? They don't know! How could they know the shape? Shouldnt they wait until they have proof? I agree that NASA is lying though and that we civilians can't trust what they say either. Globe or flat or round? Who knows?

Are you serious or parodying the overwhelming majority that post in this sub?

When did proving science become a joke?

Cite one source to support your claim and I won't insult your mother.

"Sources" aren't reliable enough.

New list sent to home screen for easier dissemination to the masses/ the masses / them asses Hattip to the assembler!

No because people who say that are just trolls.

Submit it again...

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/duplicates/4jyneq/wiki_list_of_conspiracies_updated_with_more/

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/duplicates/4g7jay/updated_compilation_of_confirmed_conspiracy/

You can also copy and paste this list easily into emails as well as resubmitting it to numerous and various subreddits. Even posting the links to individual conspiracies from the list to different subreddits from time to time makes sense to spread this information and educate more people.

Its not going to help. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing. No amount of proof will make people who are programmed to look the other way, believe.

Considering I tend to comment on things I disagree with, it might be a bit short.

But if you think it'd be interesting, why not submit it right now?

Still waiting on interesting thread user1800gofuckyourself. You'll have to link me if you make it later on.

When did proving science become a joke?

We aren't talking just about panaromic images buddy. But still, nothing will convince you because you are part of the problem.