The vertical datums we use to model an equipotential surface for leveling are directly built off of gravity measurements. If it is hollow then there is a super dense layer between the center and the crust.
This is interesting to me, not because of flat earth, but because I thought that the real gravity changed depending on where you are on the planet. I thought it was weaker towards the poles? Could be wrong. I think there are areas of the earth with slightly lower / higher values even away from the poles.
I just wonder if it were true, would it affect your measurements?
There are slight variations dependent on distance from the center mass (I'm sure of that one) as well as pockets of stronger or weaker gravity dependent on the density of material below you. (not certain that that is true) All of theses variations are extremely slight.
Yes. Gravity varries around the earth. It mostly has to do with the composition of the crust at these points. Dense materials in this area? More gravity. And yes they affect our measurements.
If it is hollow then there is a super dense layer between the center and the crust.
Which seismic studies would have noticed: we've literally determined the density profile of Earth's interior by measuring the speed at which vibrations from earthquakes travel through it.
Thank you - im a civil engineer and work with land surveyors regularly. Would be happy to reinforce this in any way possible so we can get past this bogus distraction conspiracy.
Because we live in a society where we are being lied to CONSTANTLY, day in and day out,, with the obvious intention to limit the competency of the general public - so naturally, people are trying to question everything, and only believe things with verifiable proof - the problem with flat earth theorists is that there is tons of verifiable proof but people are ignoring it or not taking the time to scientifically prove it for themselves
I think that is a question that can only be answered on an individual basis - there is always the chance that some people who over-question things can still stumble into eureka moments.
Thats why competency and a desire to learn/question are both very important - if you are only going to ask questions and not do any scientific problem solving, then you will find yourself more confused than how you started
Exactly, my Mother doesn't do her research, so she believes that the Earth is truly flat, which I argue with her about on a weekly basis. I think these people believe they are red pilled, but in actuality they are pawns of some CIA ( or whatever ) operation to spread false information, to make people think they are red pilled when they actually aren't.
I understand their perspective, and i sympathize - but at some point, you have to realize that you are King among Kings - you have the mentality capacity to go out and prove or disprove aspects of the physical world to yourself if you wish to disbelieve your education - the worst thing you can do is try to indoctrinate other people into believe your false theory that you havent even taken the time to whole-fully verify
I fell like I just learned something important here, thank you for explaining this too me. I have a hard time stepping into other people's shoes so I couldn't understand why someone would even believe in such a theory. Thank you.
I'd say that her belief in the conspiracy that surrounds what you happen to believe is just as genuine and rests on a better foundation and observable evidence in more ways than one than the one you suspect about what she happens to believe about that.
She obviously mistrusts and is suspicions about the motives of all the so called "authorities" that you don't ever dare to question because you've been thoroughly educated not to, nor do you want to face the possibility that what they taught you and what you've subsequently come to believe as a result of it, is precisely why the world is in the present state and predicament that's it's in.
Nothing has played as big a role in the making of wars, the spreading of violence, and the ruthless exploitation of other human beings and the environment itself in the past century as science itself has with the pre-eminent status and general authority it has been given over very nearly every aspect human life.
It clearly isn't a discipline that has managed control what information it seeks out and applies strictly for any greater good, nor was it ever.
It began and still is a tool of the rich and wealthy who have always funded and directed it towards improving the advantages they enjoy over the masses and supressing and repressing the discovery of any information that might ever upset that balance.
It is a science in the pursuit of private monetary profits and material wealth strictly for a few and there are no benefits that it has ever brought or bestowed on mankind that didn't always have that motive behind them.
There is also more than ample evidence that any who pursue science out of any purely altruistic motives will either have their minds very quickly changed about that or else be forced out of the field altogether and prevented in whatever ways are necessary from pursuing that goal depending on what kind of threat it represents to the existing order.
It's not a problem of them questioning too much, it's a problem of their competency. I think many may of the 'flat-earth' types actually be mentally ill, which obviously hinders their ability to be a reasonable skeptic.
FE is not a mental illness.
It is a dis/misinformation campaign the goal of which is to discredit those who see thru the bullshit by creating the appearance that such people are crazy.
Not all conspiracies are created equal, and while I do think it's certainly interesting how 'mass-surveilance' was treated for years as a conspiracy theory on the same level as chem-trails and lizard people. Don't think that insane chemtrail and flat-earth people don't exist though, they're certainly out there. They might be used as bludgeons to attack & cast aspersions on actual conspiracies, but they do exist.
I don't think the problem is questioning too much (pondering even the obvious can give deeper insight, and pausing to think about someone's motivations even when they are speaking the truth can be helpful). It's that questioning can become synonymous with only believing answers that contradict mainstream opinions (I've seen some theories that assert that the way to find the truth of some event is to take the literal opposite of even throwaway details in the official narrative). That's not how you get to the truth; it just makes you a different brand of wrong.
I think you hit the nail on the head with this one, but you didn't mention that this is also the land of alternative facts, and biased study.
There are plenty of "legitimate" and "scientific" organizations who are not obeying the scientific model for corporate reasons. Regardless of their motivation this definitely biases the peasant who does her/his own research.
For example, if the peasant with google wanted to know "can mercury in vaccines pass the blood-brain barrier" she/he would come up with plenty of well documented "evidence" to prove both that mercury in vaccines is harmless or harmful depending on which source is referenced.
For example, if the peasant with google wanted to know "can mercury in vaccines pass the blood-brain barrier" she/he would come up with plenty of well documented "evidence" to prove both that mercury in vaccines is harmless or harmful depending on which source is referenced.
This is the real failing of most claims about the government trying to "suppress the truth" about this or that, why bother when so many people are screaming so many things at the tops of their voices. It'll just get lost in the roar, anyway. Hell, that is a big part of Russia's domestic propaganda strategy. Generate so much chatter that no one really knows what is going on, so that anything might seem believable or might be fiction. Dismiss scandals or create them on a whim. It's pretty interesting.
the problem with flat earth theorists is that there is tons of verifiable proof but people are ignoring it or not taking the time to scientifically prove it for themselves
That's a problem with conspiracy theorists in general. When we discover something that we think was hidden from us it confirms our beliefs and we fight "tooth and nail" to "get the truth out".
The problem is once we latch onto something it takes a hell of a lot more evidence to change our minds than it did to convince us in the first place.
All humans suffer from this problem. It's called "confirmation bias".
It can be much worse when it happens to a conspiracy theorist because when other people show contrary evidence, the conspiracy theorist has a preconceived idea that other people are trying to "suppress the truth" and the contrary evidence becomes more evidence of this suppression. This has the unintended consequence of reinforcing the false belief.
The more you try to prove to a flat earther that the earth is spherical, the more you confirm their belief that there is a conspiracy to "hide the reality" of a flat earth.
The best you can do is provide the evidence that contradicts their belief so that if they do start to question it, they have an alternative to consider. It also helps to prevent the false belief from spreading to others.
While your not wrong with your statement about confirmation bias, with the way you described it, it would be more accurate to call it belief perseverance instead!
It's used as an insult whenever you cross a boundary here in our limited hangout. Pizzagate and questioning Assange's whereabouts are very touchy subjects. I was called a flat earther yesterday for simply bringing up some facts about what happened to wikileaks back in October.
Funny you'd mention 2 other things that are obvious disinfo/distraction campaigns. They gave up on WhereIsAssange though since PG caught enough traction.
I believe that person was trying to cast doubt in your mind. IMO PG and FE are distractions. PG has some substance, but is a dead end without any solid evidence. FE is bogus but hard to disprove because you can't just blast all the Flat Earthers into space so you have to use logic to show them first gravity exists and show them the effect it has on things like bubbles.
There are a lot of bullshit conspiracies out there, it's how counterintelligence works. Just like the sovereign citizen movement, slivers of truth shrouded in a ton of shit that will result in the loss of what few freedoms you have left.
There was some question over at /r/WhereIsAssange as to whether the sub was being actively used to discredit wikileaks' credibility. At one point, the mods even decided to ban questioning whether he was still alive and referred said inquires back over here to /r/conspiracy. That rule didn't last long, but the concerns about dinging wikileaks' cred remain. The sub is minimally active nowadays.
It was a reasonable question when his internet was cut but peoples PoL demands got ridiculous and it quickly grew into a concern trolling disinfo effort to distract from the leaks. At this point I'd believe he was a Russian spy before I believed he was abducted from the embassy and killed.
The only time I've seen it mentioned is a post or two on threads where he's brought up, and the same PGL key he'd been using for the longest time isn't a rediculous request, it's just asking him to continue what he always did if he's capable.
Thus far no one has proven he's incapable, or given a reason why he's not able to supply it, to my knowledge. So the question still remains perfectly valid. What happened while his Internet was cut?
They created a WhereIsAssange sub and were trying to push the narrative that, without satisfying their PoL demands, nothing WL said or leaked could be trusted because they were 100% compromised. The whole sub eventually did a 180 and died.
The timeline is admittedly weird but the theory is full of holes. For one, that embassy is right next to Harrods, one of if not the biggest toy store in the world, in a very busy district of London. Everyone would see shit going down. For two, it makes zero sense to lock down one of the worlds busiest airports to fly the guy out of when they could easily go to a private airstrip and never be seen by anyone.
It's the middle Knightsbridge so there's not too many airstrips nearby other than the actual airports. I used to live in London and we walk past all manner of kerfuffles every day. You don't even look round at an emergency vehicle most of the time as it just doesn't concern you and it's one of a good few you'll probably see that day. There wouldn't be any shit going down anyway. In fact, had he had his lunch spiked for example, he may have just been a lump of meat to be moved.
Me either. The whole thing stinks. We knew there were more leaks coming and there were rumours that they concerned something treasonous concerning Obama and Clinton.* What we'd seen already was bad enough (although you might not think so from the medias coverage). Assange plays the Bond Villain and with the drip feeding in order to maximise damage to the Dems chances, gives them all enough time to move before it's out. Pamela Anderson suddenly appears at the embassy with some food (I swear when I read this in the paper at work I looked up and said 'something is not right here.') then London City airport is evacuated for a very short period of time, RT is threatened with having it's UK bank accounts frozen (thus placing Russia as something negative or naughty in the publics eye but also no doubt giving them someting to do for the day) and wikileaks starts to 'change' a little, throwing us useless scraps of old news and being evasive about the simple question of Assanges safety for days and days on end. Oh and the internet went down as well at the same time. Due to the face2face software, unless you see him in person or really trust somebody else that has then it's perfectly rational to wonder whether they've used this in any vids you see. The intelligence agencies obviously have this stuff and this is the kind of shit it's for. Unless the CIA/NSA would use it for entertainment purposes.
It's a psyop. The ideas were planted on the internet and a few random, low-level celebrities were sacrificed to push the idea and fool as many idiots as they can and it somehow worked. I think they were doing their yearly intelligence test.
Anyone care to make the point that any amount of trust that the mainstream is not a huge conspiracy would result in no one buying the flat earth thing?
I'm not a flat earth person, and not interested in ad hominem attacks. Mainstream souces will support mainstream narratives, are not trustworthy, and anyone on a conspiracy theory subreddit should know this.
Truth is not based on majority rule, and mobs of people can certainly be wrong. If anything, truth is popularly ridiculed and then attacked by the masses before it is accepted. No doubt if mainstream science changes its tune and accepts flat earth, and if Popular Science says the earth is flat, you'd agree instantly and without question. Give it time.
Yes, since if mainstream science accepts flat earth, it would be because of major breakthroughs bringing to light how human perception was so wrong about so many things. Not because some cabal decided that the world should think that the world is flat.
Questions should always remain open ended for a conspiracy theorist. IMO flat earth hasn't been concretely disproven, and the more you look into history of science, nasa, the Cia, etc the more you'll see has been hidden from us. At the end of the day, I can go out on the beach, see another beach 15- 20 miles away(defies the formula for curvature, it should be well below the horizon). That's my personal proof. I can see how there is stretchs of land that defy the curvature and let you see further then you should be able to, but oceans should follow the curvature and they don't from my person observations. You can find many youtube videos of people zooming in on distant coasts which should be even further below the horizon.
Are you serious right now? You really think because you can see things far away, that the earth must be flat? You realize all you have to do is look into a telescope to see the planets around us are spheres right? So you think there are several spherical planets orbiting the sun but somewhere in the middle there is a flat chunk of rock?
No, I'm saying that seeing a coast over a body of water which should be well below the horizon according to the formula for the curvature of earth raises more questions.
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
You got me there, but all the proof I need is a picture of the Earth, that's why it's outlandish to me, because for me, the Earth has only ever been round.
but you said all you need is a picture of earth, which helps you say flat earth is outlandish.. but i dont understand if thats all you need when they are doctored? can you explain?
First off, what proves that pictures of the earth are doctored? What this thread has taught me already is that both sides, the flat earth people and the round earth people, both don't have any hard proof. There's too many questions on both sides and I know what side I'm on.
I believe the earth is round because I believe that pictures of the earth are real and not Doctored. I can't prove that the earth is round because I've never been to space, I can't prove the earth is round because I didn't take or make the photos. Asking someone if pictures of the earth are fake is a incredibly dumb question, because no one could prove such a thing.
That same goes for the flat earth people. No one can prove the earth is flat. You can't say "I can't see the curvature" is like saying "I can't see God", you can't see either. Anyone claiming to have proof the earth is flat couldn't possibly without leaving the earth to take pictures.
So some people question the validity of pictures of the Earth, which makes it seem like any proof of the Earth being round is a lie. But no one has real proof of the Earth being flat. So you've basically asked a question no one can answer. Neither side has clear proof since you asked your question.
If you are going to ask for proof of the earth being round from me you aren't going to get it. I don't understand how the science of a flat earth would work and I'm not going to wrap my head around it. I have no proof, I already said you guys won because I can't answer I question without a answer.
i agree with you, no one can answer it. the problem is you calling it "outlandish" when no one can answer it..
as for the doctored, thats just what ive read.. but good talk. i hope we can both keep an open mind on subjects like this that are theories and not 100% facts
I'll keep a open mind, because I really don't have the answers. I think it's outlandish because that's how I was raised, and I had no reason to question if the pictures were fake, good talk.
But what about pilots that have flown over 10,000 meters up and say the earth is round?
If expert testimony and video/picture evidence isn't enough then what is?
All experts are bought off. All photographic evidence is altered. What other evidence is there?
And then where's the proof of a massive conspiracy? People have been travelling the world since we knew there was something more than our local tribe, so why is it that there aren't consistent reports and evidence about the truth?
There's more credence to just about any other major conspiracy and it's why this thread even exists.
You can get on a plane yourself and travel to your local antipode. Millions of people do this every year.
There is literally a live stream from the ISS that shows it regularly orbiting the earth. The ISS is an open, publicly funded and massively documented international project that you can actually look at through a telescope if you want:
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
Your evidence for their being credence to an argument is that the argument is old?
If that's all it takes to convince you of anything then you're a sheep. Just a conspiracy sheep instead of the average citizen sheep. I can practically feel the scheisters and scam artists getting hard thinking about what they can sell you. You're like the perfect guy to sell religion to.
these theories are just that: theories. They stick around after being disproved, and they work extremely poorly at explaining material phenomena we see in the natural world. We already have proofs of the Earth's shape going all the way back to Eratosthenes.
The Eratosthenes measurements are not proof. They yield an equation with 2 unknowns: The curve of the Earth and the distance to the Sun. You cannot solve an equation with 2 unknowns.
Ok, so the sun is 3000 miles away? I'll wait for a holistic theory that resolves all the contradictions THAT little wrinkle creates. Anyways, we have lots of contemporary evidence that is a lot more compelling.
They don't. It's not really an organic 'conspiracy theory' but rather something that certain folks specifically picked to start spamming CT type forums/subs with because it's a very well known 'stupid' idea from hundreds of years ago. The idea will be to dillute all the good useful information here with shit in order to maybe put people off fom hanging around and learning something but also to create the impression that the users of the sub are people who believe any old shit. It's scientifically provable that the Earth is round (you can do this yourself) and on that basis alone posts claiming that the World is flat should be removed by the mods immediately in my opinion due to the ratio of benefit and damage of having them here.
My whole problem with the flat earth theory is
1. You can walk around the world, there is no drop off point, there is no limit or cut off. If you can walk around the world that implies that it is round, because you can go around it forever.
2. Others tried to tell me that pictures of the earth are CGI or falsely made, which isn't conspiracy it's stupidity. Yeah, the CIA has done some fucked up shit, but people have known the earth is round since before the CIA
3. The whole "I can't see the curves" thing is stupid, you can't see the curves and shape of the earth in till you leave it, which would require going to space.
They use benchmarks - you have a known point on the ground (x/y/z) - you set up your total station and that point is your reference. Your surveying crew lays out the site based on that point and then the contractor comes and builds it. As you get further from that point, your elevations get more and more inaccurate (because of the curvature of the earth) - so when you are laying out a road / railroad, you have to keep moving your survey along and update your reference point.
In theory, If it wasn't for the curvature of the earth (or sight obstructions), you could probably just use one benchmark and survey based totally off of that.
My soil version driver yesterday was trying to convince me that the earth was flat. It's insane. It's so easily disprovable. It's the worlds weakest conspiracy theory.
Probably because anyone who cares to measure it themselves can prove this basic fact. Seriously this requires a negative IQ to believe, I can't believe people think the earth is flat in 2017.
I can't believe people think the earth is flat in 2017.
There have been lots of times in history where the vast majority of people were extremely "wrong" about cosmology from our perspective. We surely are the exception.
But there is literally no way the world could be flat. It would involve a global conspiracy involving trillions of people over the course of thousands of years to cover it up.
Its not so much that my job depends on me to 'agree' the earth is round - the shape of the earth is an obstacle in my line of work that I have to work against - engineers and surveyors basically prove on a daily basis that it is round, simply through the rigors of our work.
Nobody made us sign a contract stating "by signing this, you agree that the world is round".
Download an autocad map trial or arcgis - there is a whole ribbon devoted to coordinate systems and transforming coordinate systems, all of which is due to the shape of the earth.
Go on your state or local city website - download GIS data. Go to neighboring states websites, download their data. Load this data into autocad/arcmap, mainting the correct coordinate systems. Pick specific coordinates, download them onto a gps unit, and go locate them in real life with this gis unit and you will see that it takes you to the right place in different states.
Now, repeat the process, but use incorrect coordinate systems per state - you will bot be taken to the right place anymore. If the world was flat, this wouldn't be a problem
And it's not being pushed here. Every post that's for it is buried. Anything refuting it is propped up. Including this post. And most of the comments are ridiculing the idea. So maybe you're right.
im pretty sure the whole flat earth thing is used as a means to discredit the conspiracy community and make us look like loonies so when we Do uncover something big nobody believes us. im sorry if you have been swept up in the flat earf bullshit.
FLAT EARTHERS: fi you truly believe the earth is flat, take a step back. consider the sources. i know its easy to believe because we have been lied to about everything else in this world. think critically. train yourself. and dont be so easily led. 'da earf is not flat.
its really not about proving thats it not real to them. none of them will accept your proof. see, they will either think youre a disinfo agent or youre just using science that you were taught and that we are taught a flawed version of science or you just dont understand (regardless of the fact that measuring the earth is how you make your living) etc etc.
we have been lied to so much that we question everything. we question everyone. flat earthers are people that went down the rabbit hole and never came out the other side. no amount of proof with deter them. what they need is to be shown how to think like a true conspiracy theorist. how to think critically. how to find reputable sources. how to discern what is a good source and what is not. what is junk science and what is not.
the problem really isnt that they think the earth is flat. the problem is the way they think is flawed. deeply, deeply flawed. somewhere along the way they lost themselves and we need to get them back on track because the more of us actual true conspiracy theorists there are, the strong we become and the more credibility we have.
the conspiracy community is having its credibility ruined by people gravitating to these outlandish theories like pizzagate, flat earth, no planes on 9/11, illuminati bullshit etc. i mean, bigfoot is more believable that these theories.
Questions should always remain open ended for a conspiracy theorist. IMO flat earth hasn't been concretely disproven, and the more you look into history of science, nasa, the Cia, etc the more you'll see has been hidden from us. At the end of the day, I can go out on the beach, see another beach 15- 20 miles away(defies the formula for curvature, it should be well below the horizon). That's my personal proof. I can see how there is stretchs of land that defy the curvature and let you see further then you should be able to, but oceans should follow the curvature and they don't from my person observations. You can find many youtube videos of people zooming in on distant coasts which should be even further below the horizon.
Why does anyone hide anything? Many times its for power, other times to hide crime, hide techniques from rival countries , etc...They may have nothing to gain from hiding the data. Who knows? I know i dont , because their hiding it. Have you looked through any of the 12 million docs the CIA released? Many of them are mundane day to day things, but there's absolute bombshells in there too. That data was held back for 30 -40- 50 years. ... I guess my question back to you is why couldn't you come to this conclusion on your own? You really couldn't logic out a reason for people to hide stuff?
The burden isn't on me to know why the US government would spend vast amounts of money simply to keep the public thinking the earth is a different shape by hiding all this information, it's on you. You made that claim. If the reasoning behind the claim is "who knows why? Could be anything", then that claim doesn't hold much weight.
All one can do is speculate on where the trillions of dollars the us defense sector vaporizes because a shrug and a "who the fuck knows why they do what they do" is the best that can be come up with even by the individual departments themselves. Obviously your ok with that and don't want to question anything. Fact is the gov has been systemically hiding information from us for years. That's an established fact in this community. If you 100% trust the government then perhaps your in the right place to start tearing a few of those percentage points off.
We know this from the ground breaking research on underworld access tubes by the Mario brothers. They describe the great leader of the lizards, King Cuba. I have a pdf on it lying around somewhere.
Can you tell more about how you prove it's not flat? From equations and stuff like that. Maybe is there a home experiment that people can easily do to show it's not flat.
When we look north and spin 90 degrees we look east. As we travel further east in a straight line, we deviate from that line of latitude and no longer measure a bearing of east.
Almost his whole argument is based on GPS, a government created and controlled system. Does he expect we'd trust the government on a conspiracy theory sub? The government says it's a globe, so therefore it's a globe? His answers are no better than Bill Nye pointing to the fact that schools have globes in every classroom as "proof" of a spherical earth.
I have questions for both theories, and don't mind debating, but it would be nice if someone who claimed to be able to "prove" the earth wasn't flat to at least be able to begin to understand the basics of the flat earth theory. People merely claiming that the earth is a globe because they were taught that in school, their job depends on them thinking that, or that the government claims it to be true, are not proving anything.
Nobody has the desire to understand an idea that's contrary to reality itself. Show me a credible literature that refers to "ellipsoidal earth theory". You won't find one because it's not a theory, it's reality. I'm also a land surveyor and you're going to tell me I've spent 4 years doing calculations on the earth that not only check out mathematically every time, but can be ground truthed? There's no debate to be had here. If someone took you into orbit around the earth, what would be your reasoning for a flat earth then?
work in Hydrographic survey world and am a sailor. Best not to try and convince these people that the earth isn't flat! I'd suggest sit down have a drink and hope they are good at infecting people with the dumb dumbs... the more flat earth people out there the more employable we are!
If someone took you into orbit around the earth, what would be your reasoning for a flat earth then?
I'd ask you the same for reasoning against it if you saw that it appeared flat from a high altititude flight or balloon. The first person to go to the stratosphere (misnomer?) Auguste Piccard, described earth as a flat disk, with the horizon always rising to sight. Not long after, the "credible" literature (dogma) published new theories to explain ball earth/heliocentrism in complex, confusing ways. Like today, people accept those dogmatic theories as facts, end of story. They remain theories.
Earth's curvature is observable to the human eye at 8 miles. This guy is surveying the land, entirely different than observing the land with the naked land.
What's it matter? His projects are small enough where you wouldn't need to account for earth's curvature, the Romans built sewer systems many times longer without the aid of GPS...at the end of the day as long as the shit flows down to its destination your good to go.
How the hell can we? Flat Earther's have about 98 different theories for every fact that blows holes in the flat Earth model. I've yet to hear what moves the sun in the FE model or why you can't see Miami from Bimini at night when it's only 40 miles away and Miami is bright as all fuck at night. Don't blame us just because you guys have a cluster fuck potpourri of pseudo science bullshit.
I'm not a flat earther just yet, but I'm asking questions which so far have not been answered satisfactorily. There are problems with flat earth, but there are more problems with ball earth. As far as I'm concerned much of modern science is a cluster fuck potpourri of pseudo science bullshit. Some of you people don't realize modern science is followed like a religion but you are just so blinded by your religiosity to know it.
What moves the sun if it's moving closeby? I'm not sure. There are things in both theories that are unknown. Coastlines across water from over 100 miles away are visible, not the tips of mountains but the beach, which should not be possible on a ball earth. Ships that "disappeared" over the horizon can be brought back by telexcope. Lighthouses are "bright as all fuck at night" but can be seen by ships hundreds of miles out. How much of the cluster fuck science has been invented out of thin air to try to explain the problems of heliocentrism? 98 theories? Or just 2 so complex 98% of the populace won't understand it?
Have you ever sailed? I'm guessing you heard the bullshit about ships being seen with a telescope once they go over the horizon on YouTube. I've never met a single competent navigator who believes that shit. I cut my teeth on the North Atlantic in multi hills and a few monos. I spent twelve years sailing the gulf of Mexico and the waters between the Bahamas and Florida. You can't see Miami from Bimini and it's only 40 miles. Tonight, call somebody in Bimini and ask them to look west. Have you seen Miami? At night it's bright as fuck. I'll tell you what, the British Navy has a dock patrol launch right on the Western edge of Bimini. Give them a ring tonight. They are good guys, they'll talk to you. I usually bullshit with them for a half hour about the states when I enter Bahamian waters. Tell them you're unsure about the shape of the Earth and you need them to look for Miami for you. Oh god please record that conversation.....
Why is it that questioning the shape of the earth means never having never sailed or flown before? People ask that as if I would know for sure the earth is rounded if they only did. Yes, I've flown over oceans, I've sailed in the Caribbean and they even let you fly co-pilot seat in the little island-hopping Cessna planes when you fly in. So I've sailed and flown (at the controls!). I've flown in helicopters, been in aircraft carriers at sea, too. I'm not sure your point.
I've never met a single competent navigator
Tell your competent navigators to watch as a ship disappears, and then tell them to zoom in. Scientists will tell you it's a mirage or light magically bending, when common sense and simplicity tells you that it is a flat or only slightly rounded surface and perspective has made the distant object vanish from sight. As for whatever locale you're in, I can't tell you what you see. If you have a good zoom, then zoom in, I'm sure you'd see the distant lights come into view, unless the atmosphere is too thick, or the dirty Miami air blocks the view. Elsewhere, on clear days much further distances have been seen. The earth may not be flat, but at the least, the 8 inches squared per mile of curvature is verifiably not correct.
You're right. Whether or not you've ever personally observed any of the phenomena is irrelevant. That's why you have YouTube. So, you gonna call Bimini tonight? That should settle this beyond a doubt.
I've personally observed the horizon to be flat and I've seen pictures and video. I have never had any logical reason to believe I'm on a spinning ball speeding 600 million miles per hour through vacuum created with a bang from nothing, and neither do you.
So, you gonna call
I'm sorry I don't have time to call you and be your friend tonight. Why don't you try a bar in Miami to find someone to talk to? It's Miami, but any port in a storm, right? Tell them how you're certain earth is a spinning ball. Do your best to prove it.
You're right.
Thank you. And with that, I have to say good night and good luck.
There's no shame in being afraid.....Since I have no doubt the world is round and therefore don't suffer the same phobia that my world view will be shattered, I went ahead and called the RBDF (the number is 1-242-362-1818 if you'd like to check for yourself) and spoke with Midshipman Clark. After explaining the purpose of my call and him having a bit of a chuckle at my expense, he gladly took a moment from his otherwise tedious duties to throw a quick line, look outside and confirm that he could absolutely NOT see Miami.
So, just for shits and giggles, do you believe the entire Bahamian Naval Force is in on your tinfoil hatness? If, as you claim, you can see beaches from hundreds of miles away, why can't he see Miami which is a bare 40 miles? He also made another excellent point that the world has been navigating by the stars for time immemorial which would be impossible on flat plane. I asked him if he ever saw a boat come back into view once it went over the horizon through the use of optics and he laughed and said no, that in fact, when actually chasing drug smugglers (their main duty apparently) they use binoculars all the time, but once the boat goes over the horizon, it's simply gone. I can understand why you'd not want to call. He was barely suppressing his laughter the entire time. I'm dying to hear your explanation....
If the administrator of NASA told me the earth was a sphere, do you think I would believe him? Do you think I consider a midshipman (a rank below Ensign Wesley Crusher!) any more trustworthy?
I will not call Mr Clark, because I have better things to do with my Sunday night. But you can show him this video or countless videos, or wipe off his high power telescope, not some deck binoculars, to see ships come back in view which had disappeared from the naked eye. He will see the earth is either flat or a much different curvature than science says. At the least he will know ships do not go over a curve when they disappear. But tell him if he learns the truth, he had better keep it to himself if he ever wants to rise in the ranks.
And THIS is what causes ignorance; refusing to examine any information that confronts your beliefs. I have no beliefs. I have observations. We'll observe together. Let's start with something simple. You can see the moon, right? I can see the moon. The moon is a sphere, right? You can see this with your own eyes. Now, please tell me YOUR theory of how the perfect circle shadow is cast on the moon by a flat earth. This requires NO outside informations. This is simply two guys looking at the moon.
Oh man dude, I think your post got lost. I was on the ropes of common sense and you let up....Please, crush me in the jaws of your logic...I'm asking...I'm BEGGING....Why is the shadow cast upon the moon a perfect radius? How does a flat earth cast a perfect radius? I'm gasping....I'm clawing at the ropes with my gloved hands....Finish me.....
Do you know what literally doesn't hold water? A sphere. If you think flat earth theories are a psyop, which doesn't begin to make sense, then you simply don't understand the theories and evidence.
I'm not sure which of those three things you are, but I could take my pick and be certain you couldn't explain where gravity comes from, or relativity, two things necessary in a ball earth model. When you realize that gravity may be an invented theory made solely to explain balls whizzing in space and people not flying off of earth, then you can move forward in your education. Only you can take your red pills.
I took red pills. but im not a retard or a shill or a troll or an useful idiot that beleives the flat earth bullshit. Why dont you post you best evidence that isnt retarded for the rediculous flat earth theory.
Hey... if I buy a tape measure from Canada and take it to South Australia, does it grow longer during the flight, or does it just suddenly expand once I get to Australia?
Have a look at the lines of longitude on your map. They are obviously further apart in Australia than Canada, so the physical distance between them must grow the further away you get from the north pole.
But when we measure those distances they haven't grown. The only way this could be possible is if our tape measures are growing too.
Or maybe this map is complete bullshit and doesn't accurately reflect physical reality.
I just grabbed the first model the popped up on Google. I haven't verified the latitude/longitudes on it compared to the globe model but it shouldn't matter. Just move the lines around to fit the measurements. /Shrug
I mean, given all the experiemental data that proves general relativity to be true, I'll certainly go with Tesla's comment. I mean, everyone knows he knew literally everything about gravitation and particle physics, and the electromagnetic spectrum. Naturally, he had his own theory, but shucky darns, never wrote it down, because why would you want to write something down? That's crazy talk!
Where do the ships go when they sail towards the horizon? Is every ship in history in on the conspiracy and they all transform into submarines as they sail away?
The water you have is "kool aid." One has to wonder what gratification you get when you indulge in the fruits of science that is modernity, but then willingly turn a blind eye to the long obvious fact or a round Earth.
How does water not fall off the earth?
Same way nothing falls off the earth... Their is a force that pulls us towards the centre, any object you drop will accelerate at 9.81 m s2 towards the earth. The mass of water on earth accounts for just 0.02% of earth's mass. Imagine how little a cargo ship weighs compared to all the water... And look to the left of that ship tipping over, it's run aground. This guy has no idea how large the earth is...
Gravity is just a theory?
This shows a huge lack of understanding. Our theories of gravity, the equations we have constructed to describe the phenomenon of every object being attracted to the earth, are theories yes, but, that doesn't make the phenomena fake.... Everything on earth is attracted to the surface and accelerates at the same rate. Go look at the sky with a telescope, you see everything large is round?
Those zoom out clips are so dumb - the objects just get smaller than the size of the cameras pixels. Aka they are below the resolution of the camera. This doesn't happen with your eye. Go look for yourself. You've been lied to.
Take the longest ruler that you can find. Use that ruler to draw a straight line. Now spin the ruler through 180 degrees and check the line you've just drawn with the same edge that you used to draw it. This is a standard comparison technique for adjusting out errors in survey equipment. If the line is still matching the ruler, the ruler is straight.
Now take that straight ruler to the beach and hold it up to the horizon. The horizon will noticeably fall away at either end of the ruler.
But if everything was on a single plane, that wouldn't matter. The line passing through your eye and the edge of the ruler would meet the horizon no matter what point on the ruler you were looking through.
The test at the start proves the ruler is straight. Your eye is a fixed point. The only thing that can be different is the horizon.
yeah. im just a terrible person for wanting a sub section of the population to to uncover the real truth, not the truth as they want it to be. im sure the devil is just licking his chops thinking about the terrible evil i do./s
pretty sure the whole flat earth thing is used as a means to discredit the conspiracy community and make us look like loonies so when we Do uncover something big nobody believes us. im sorry if you have been swept up in the flat earf bullshit.
Why can't you acknowledge that the conspiracy community attracts a lot of weird/mentally ill people?
Do I believe there are lots of shady things that our governments and media do? Yes. I believe.
Do I believe 9/11 was done by Bush? No.
Do I believe we know everything about 9/11? No.
Do I believe Diana was killed? Yes.
Do I think the earth is flat? No.
My point is that because you beleive in some moderate theories doesn't mean you're mentally ill or by believing that 9/11 was done by Bush means that you also think the Queen is a lizard.
You completely misconstrued my point. My point was about how conspiracy users completely dismiss Flat Earth (as they should) but because its "totes government agents trying to discredit us" instead of acknowledging that they attract fucking weirdo's that may or may not have some form of mental illness.
My point is that because you beleive in some moderate theories doesn't mean you're mentally ill
My point was about how conspiracy users completely dismiss Flat Earth (as they should) but because its "totes government agents trying to discredit us" instead of acknowledging that they attract fucking weirdo's that may or may not have some form of mental illness.
I'm not the person you replied to, but I personally think it's a little bit from column A, a little from column B. Given shady stuff government agencies have done in the past with regards to mass disinformation campaigns I wouldn't put it past them to manufacture outlandish false conspiracies. On the other hand, I think that ignorant or mentally ill people then take those conspiracies and run with it.
absolutely it does attract the mentally ill. its up to those of us who are not mentally unstable to help those who are. and to do that we need to know how to separate fiction from truth. and to learn not to advocate for something just because it conforms to our worldview.
Its particularly the american conspiracy community i.e. most of this sub is really bad due to the fact your government has actually gotten up to some seriously insane shit (MK ULTRA jerking off dolphins etc) that it just creates a massive cultural bias towards conspiracies.
Everybodys government does fucked up shit. Spain js respobsible for kidnapping babies from mothers after childbirth saying they died only to sell them to other families. The UK is literally just americas older brother, obviously russia and china are sketch in infinite ways.
If you go with subjective things like "why would they do lie?" He says the gov lie. When there are facts, they are from "scientists that have been paid off by the government."
I.e they are not looking to be disproved. They have no intention to seek the truth. They just want to confirm what they believe.
You seem to think we can trust our government. I'm merely pointing out how we have a premium example of how a government can indoctrinate their people to believe pretty much anything.
Hey, if you truly believe the earth is real, take a step back. Consider the sources. I know it's easy to believe because we have been lied to about everything else in this world. think critically. train yourself. and don't be so easily led. 'da earf is not fake'.
You should know you sound like an asshole. Same bullshit people say when conspiracy theorist warned about mass spying, same things people said when pick your conspiracy that turned out to be truth
I mean NASA could just just a picture of the earth and settle it once and for all, but nah, we keep getting CGI photos that were created by 'artists'. but sure, it's all really real.
But I could make up any crazy theory, right this second, and say the rebuttals of any dissenters are the "same bullshit people said when". That doesn't make it true, y'know? That's just not a logical conclusion to me.
Could you provide proof that NASA has created CGI photos?
I'm not trying to be an asshole, I'm trying to think critically here and encourage you to do the same. We must learn to recognize our unconscious biases or we will never uncover any truth. I recognize that to some degree, I want the globe model to stay true, but that doesn't confirm that it's flat by any means.
I could provide proof, but it's readily available and easily so, I am not gonna spend my saturday researching for you.
Also, you can make up any theory you want, that's how theories are started in fact, sure some are based on indicators based on perhaps experiments or observations, but at the end of the day, theories are really just made up in the mind of the person who created it based solely on the VERY limited information they have.
I don't believe the earth is flat, I don't believe it's round either, I think whatever is going on here, is nothing at all of what anyone of us can imagine in our wildest dreams. This could all be a simulation, which would mean we are not on a flat or ball earth, but pixels being generated by the 'system'.
Looks like we're on the same page. My only gripe with that is that anyone can look out with a telescope and see other planets. Round planets. Am I wrong?
I don't trust anything I've been told at the end of the day. But I refuse to cling to the Flat-Earth theory because if this is some artificially constructed reality, I highly doubt it's a convenient flat disc just chillin' out in space. I'd be much more inclined to believe it's a hologram being projected than that.
Cause they work for NASA and sign NDA's that exist for their lifetime? Also they don't think what they're doing is wrong, they're just making pictures for us all.
This right here. This is what flat earfers do when given hard proof to the contrary. This dismissing of evidence hurts us as researchers we need to learn how to cope with verifiable evidence that contradicts our worldview.
So if the earth is flat, where the fuck did they get the other pictures to make the composite?!?!?! Did they just take a bunch of pics of the flat earth and wad them up into a ball?!?!
This goes back to an earlier point I made about how flat earthers cherry pick what they want to be true. You even cherry picked parts of a sentence from an article and ignored the rest of the sentence as well as the rest of the atricle!!
And they look soooo different from one picture to the next (wildly different proportions, color, cloud cover, shape, clouds repeating in perfect photoshopped patterns, the word sex spelled in the clouds, etc), which is just one reason among many that conspiracy theorists distrust NASA and the government.
(wildly different proportions, color, cloud cover, shape, clouds repeating in perfect photoshopped patterns, the word sex spelled in the clouds, etc)
Because the pictures are largely photoshopped so you can actually see the fucking earth. Believe it or not there are a lot of clouds which tend to block out the ground (When viewing from space) so NASA will take a bunch of photos and stitch them together to give a clear photo of what the earth looks like from space
Hmm, the government fakes something and tells you to trust them that it is whatever they tell you it is. And they're just so fucking trustworthy, amirite?
I mean NASA could just just a picture of the earth and settle it once and for all, but nah, we keep getting CGI photos that were created by 'artists'. but sure, it's all really real.
Upon being told that NASA has done this:
"Those are all CGI composited together by an 'Artist'."
So: Says NASA could provide proof that proves the earth is round, and claims that all proof provided by NASA is fake. D you see what's wrong with your position?
Lemme guess, china's in on it too. They've always worked with the US on every project the US has had, because, as we know, China and the US are friends, and just pretend to be rivals to keep the globe earth hoax going.
That's the nile. Where's the rest of the goddamn continents. Also, lemme guess, fish eye lens. I need to buy stock in companies that make fish eye lenses. They must get huge pay offs to keep the flat earth a secret.
I just don't understand why stuff in the foreground isn't effected by the fish eye lens that literally has to be there to force the earth into a globe.
This is exactly what I mean. You say "Release some photos, and clear it up, NASA" I post photos, you go "Eh, not good enough, here's video that's not taken at any angle, with a small field of view that "proves" the earth is flat. One video, versus almost every photo of the earth taken from space." It's like, you didn't even bother to discuss any of the links I posted. This is why arguing with people on reddit is pointless. No one wants a valid arguement, they just want to shit post. I'm done with you.
This is why arguing with people on reddit is pointless. No one wants a valid arguement, they just want to shit post. I'm done with you.
There's a vast difference in several photos and live video and a single video. He also made a point about the physics involved in your model that were left unanswered. I believe this to be ridiculous discussion in the first place, but if you intend to convince anyone; You're going to need explanations about physics.
We can use mathematics and science to explain our planet. It's easy to understand and can be observed. If this were truly something important to you, then I'm sure you've taken the time to set up an experiment that can prove or disprove the curvature of the earth, right? Simply hand waving science in favor of believing... whatever this model is. In short, can you prove it? With your model, can you provide explanations to the functions of gravity or lack thereof?
My point is, I could have provided 100 different pictures, videos, 'math' whatever, the chances it changes anyones opinions on the matter? very little. And that is the exact same problem people are missing when it comes to people who believe in flat earth, you may provide ten different links all 'proof' but from the FE's perspective, you're just pushing the narrative with the very pieces of propaganda that FE's don't believe in.
Likewise the video I link, person I was responding to probably didn't even watch it for more than a minute, but they're convinced without a doubt it shows a ball earth, doesn't matter all those who have seen it and see a flat earth, their perspective is just fucked, right?
The "blue marble" collection of earth photo's are all fake. Most images by NASA are made in the same way this guy describes. Sattelites orbiting the earth collect data. And it's not some kind of analog image. If you listen to the interview of his floating around somewhere he describes how they measure the water to color its depth. They measure it by analyzing the levels of photoplankton in the ocean.
People ask themselves why do they go all through that when they send so much shit into space and why they just cannot attach a small camera of some sort to take a full sized picture every once in awhile. Wouldn't it be useful to have a whole shot for data analysis? They even say themselves using the sattelites isn't ideal because there are gaps between orbits and they have to guess and blend in the blanks.
That's why I said some pictures are CGI. I wasn't saying they all were but that method is a common way they make the photo's and providing an artist that admits it like you were asking for. Beside's those earlier photo's non of their released photo's are claimed to be a full picture of the earth. And even that chinese picture is just a large scan of the earth in the same satellite method of gathering data.
To the best of my knowledge most photo's of the earth are taken in the pan-chromatic form. Where it measures 15 wavelengths compiles that data and then they build a photo of earth from that. That is how they can say it is a "picture" of the earth because it is made in that way. I can't find out what kind of camera is attached to Chang'e 5 T1 that took that picture so unfortunately we can't discuss the matter any futher towards credibility.
All the pictures from the hubble space telescope are made in the same way. They take all the data from analyzing the light spectrum and the "color" is added according to the data. It's not providing some kind of analog image.
However I am not a true believer 100% on either side of the argument but I don't think the earth is flat. But I believe the question of them lying is interesting and leads to something. I don't think we are getting the whole picture and I don't believe they would tell us even if they found something extraordinary up there. But you know there is video of them faking the earth photo's from the apollo capsule. It shows them putting a curved piece of material in the window and taking a shot of the earth. It gives it the shape of a globe. I believe personally it was taken in low orbit and they never made it to the moon. Whether you believe it or not is up to you.
I'm not saying we can't take photo's of the earth. But I believe no one has devoloped technology to get past the radiation belt. So they take satellite data and make composite photo's. And these photos they claim are full sized earth shots. They obviously are not analog. There are not even stars in the background. It has to be taken on a pan-chromatic camera so they can claim it is a "full shot" of the Earth. But there shouldn't be a need to hide the stars from the picture at all. You can't tell me we can see stars from Earth but they are somehow invisible in a picture from space.
Actually, none of the pictures are CGI. CGI means that they're entirely created in a computer. You seem to be suggesting that the images are composites of many different images. They obviously are, which is why I showed a bunch of photos showing a small part of the earth, but still showing the globe, and jesus fuck, you're actually trying to claim that they used a fucking fish eye lens for a goddamn window so they could show the earth as a globe? What's the proof? the "The earth is flat, so that's the only possible explanation!" "What about the earth is actually a globe?" "That doesn't make any goddamn sense. now, the sun being 32 miles in diameter, 2000 miles away, light not being able to make it across the plane of the earth, the earth being flat, and moving up at a speed of 9 m/s to simulate gravity, that makes sense!"
There's the lunar lander from apollo 11, there's the goddamn moon, there's the earth. Lemme guess, special fish eye lens that only works on earth and the moon, but not the lunar lander. I mean, what does it take to prove to you that you can take a picture of the earth with a normal camera, it's just that at most distances we travel to these days, it's till just too goddamn big to take a picture of with just one camera?
And jesus fucking christ, you have to know what camera it is before you can talk about whether the photo is authentic? Your entire argument is based on "they're all faked by NASA" then when asked why the Chinese would use an image faked by NASA you say "you don't know what camera it is. Sorry, I need to know that before I can completely disregard it."
You COMPLETELY disregard the video of the earth from the ISS, despite the fact that it CLEARLY shows a globular earth, without fish eyeing objects in the foreground.
You claim that chinese picture is a scan of the earth from sattelite data, but then claim you need to know the exact model of camera they used, because reasons.
I show you pictures, you claim they don't count because they're from NASA. I show you a picture from China, you claim you need to know what camera took the picture of the large scan of sattelite data, so why the fuck do you need a camera to take a picture of that anyways. I show you a video, and you completely ignore it. I'm kidn of getting the idea that you don't want to argue in good faith, just say "No" and expect me to keep tryin.
You seem to think I am arguing the earth is flat but I'm not. I am only commenting and saying I believe NASA is lying. Please reread my comments. Especially the part about the photo's being taken from pan-chromatic camera's and how that isn't an actual analog photo of the earth. Then read again how pan-chromatic camera images are made. It is exactly 100% CGI. I already said I cannot comment on the authenticity of the old apollo 11 photo's and I only stated my personal belief. Again I believe the earth is circular but in my opinion we haven't been able to get past the van allen radiation belt.
Where did I say anything about fish eye lens or any shit like that. I am not saying those are NOT pictures of the earth. But that the full color versions are stitched together CGI. Which is 100% true in relation to the photo's in the blue marble collection and any photo made from satellite data gathered from the pan-chromatic camera's they use. It's not that difficult to comprehend. I personally believe the whole moon landing was faked so I believe those photo's were taken from low orbit and a trick using a crescent cut-out in the lunar window. But still with all that I do not believe the earth is flat. Just that NASA isn't able to get past the van allen radiation belt and that is why they are lying. I mean, come on, how do the lunar rovers on mars "magically" clean themselves.
I believe all that stuff is staged but no amount of showing me pictures and saying "see this was taken from space." When it is clearly a photo that is not far enough away to get a full shot. I do not think they are able to get far enough into space to take a full shot.
They wouldn't need to be in on anything, especially considering they either fly based on a compass or in most cases, rely on GPS. Actual flight paths make more sense on a flat earth.
First, compass data cannot be faked. A compass is just a magnetized needle on a low friction bearing. The needles south pole points to earths magnetic north, and the north pole to earth magnetic south. You can build one yourself. And indeed, ships, planes and other vehicles which can circumnavigate the globe had relied on these instruments for many hundreds of years. If these readings were "fake" every single navigator would need to be in on it.
As for actual flight paths making "more sense" on a flat earth: no they dont. Actual flight paths follow "great circles" around the sphere. A flat earth would have to be laid out in such a way so as to preserve great circles along which planes travel. Such a flat earth would necessarily have distortions in its surface that differ from what is actually observed, as an undistorted projection of a sphere onto a plain isnt possible.
The compass would point north in both models, just replace magnetic north with magnetic "center" if the earth was flat.
no they dont.
Yes they do, look at a flat earth flight maps. 2 stop flights which shoot wildly off course north to make absurd connections actually make sense on a flat earth map, where the top of the triangle shape on a globe is actually the middle point of a straight line between the origin and the destination on a flat map. The emergency landing in Alaska from Bali to LA makes sense only if Alaska is on the way to LA from Bali, which it is, on the flat earth map, but not the globe. There are no real flights that you'd be able to take over Antarctica.
I have no idea what obscure reference you are making. Likely there was a connection in Japan or Hong Kong, in which case you do indeed go close to Alaska. Go look at a flight path, then get a piece of string and a globe and confirm that indeed they are the shortest paths available.
They had stopped in Taiwan from Bali to LAX, and it still would make more sense if Alaska was along the way, as it is on a flat earth map. Take that string and put it on a flat earth map from Taiwan to LA, and you'll find the string goes over Alaska. This article has the supposed flight path of the flight where thry had to land after a woman gave birth, shortest distance on a globe.
I know which map you are talking of, look at it, the latitude and longitude lines on it are completely distorted. Hundreds of thousands of square miles of extra land is added to make it project correctly. the map ads problems without explaining anything better than a globe.
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
it could be because it just seems ridiculous to do this to disprove something like flat earth. and even if you did, they would find SOMETHING that, in their eyes, would disprove the whole thing. even if it was just something small and insignificant like the planes altitude not quite matching what they think the ground would look like at that height. form there it would go into "look at that hill. its an obvious poor photoshop" or "that cloud is the worst CGI ive ever seen!"
Its not a "lame excuse". Flatearthers routinely dismiss gps itself, video feed from the orbiting ISS, all scientific theory pertaining to magnetism, gravity, conservation of momentum, etc, every account of travel to the south pole, every measurement of longitude and latitude ever made, etc etc. They will just say the video feed of the plane is faked or "doesnt prove anything" because it "traveled in a flat circle".
Why would you believe this if you don't already believe air craft, satellites, space craft, and ships are circling the globe every day?
I mean, you're going to believe GPS, which is an array of satellites orbiting the Earth, put there by the government?
And to do the "experiment" you ask for would take the governments help, since no air craft has the range to do that in one go and you'd have to get permission from multiple governments to do East to West.
And then, who's going to pay for it? No one cares about the flat earth conspiracy because it's long been so completely obvious it isn't, so unless flat earthers are going to pony up the money, you'll just have to be content with all the fucking evidence that exists to show the Earth is round.
The Earth as a round was obvious as soon as the people were traveling distances fairly routinely, especially once they were sailing open water. Astronomy is as old as dirt and once they were comparing notes, they could see that stars were at different points from the horizon depending on the distance north and south. It also explained to seafarers why ships and shores "sunk" as the distance grew.
Here, says the Greeks were convinced of a round Earth by the 5th century BC, and they thought it was known for several centuries before that.
The thing is with theories like flat Earth and Creationism is that their hypotheses are are not coherent. That is to say, they do not consider their explanations for one observation will impact other observations. They're always one off what ifs.
And they believe no one has ever taken their theory seriously. That no one has actually and honestly considered the theories and concluded that they are wrong. And not just a person, but a history or people actually studying and arguing the two sides until until their theories were completely dismissed as false.
That's where the conspiracy has to be introduced. That so many people have spend so much money to keep the lid on a fact that was deduced two thousand years ago or more, and to what purpose? Moreover, consider the CIA leaks. The CIA, an actual government entity whose job it is is conspiracy and that's known to everyone, couldn't keep their secrets. How the hell would global scientists everywhere all fail or be part of the round earth conspiracy?
Of course all the pictures are CGI, if they weren't then there would be no conspiracy and no one could believe a flat Earth.
Are the space agencies of the Soviet Union, Europe, Japan, etc all arms of NASA? Red Bull too? Go watch Felix Baumgartner's jump from a balloon from the edge of space. You can see the curvature of the Earth from a balloon. Amateurs can do this (the camera on the balloon part, not the jump.)
And why would the Earth behave differently in shape than other celestial bodies, or is that all illusions and conspiracy too?
Not a single flat earther has a reasonable explanation of why a boat would disappear bottom first when going over the horizon. That, along with observing the stars, is ample evidence proving the Earth is round.
The boat question has been answered numerous rime. Plenty of youtube videos where they zoom in on the "disappearing" boat and the entire boat comes back into view. Nothing is behind the curvature.
It is due to the nature of perspective that the bottoms of faraway objects seem to disappear first. This is what the flat earthers say, at any rate.
The boat question has been answered numerous times. Plenty of youtube videos where they zoom in on the "disappearing" boat and the entire boat comes back into view. Nothing is behind the curvature.
No, that is not true. You anywhere near the coast? Go check it out for yourself. In those videos, it's just the camera doesn't have adequate resolution to see the boat when it's zoomed out.
Gravity is pretty elegant, but it has its problems, most notably that we struggle to integrate it with Quantum Theory. Additional problems arise when predicting the behavior of galaxies based on gravity alone, leading scientists to hypothesize the existence of Dark Energy, as well as Dark Matter.
It's not unthinkable that another paradigm, such as the Electric Universe Theory could manage to explain and unify these discrepancies between scales and theories. The Holo-Fractal paradigm is another interesting candidate for a theory that may bridge that gap.
Point is, gravity may not be the best explanation for why things attract.
We have yet to observe the graviton, but that doesn't mean a whole lot. All the magnetic-gravy and electric-gravity theories are considered pseudoscience for some pretty good reasons. Consider, we have a pretty potent ability to manipulate electromagnetic fields. We can build large zero gauss chambers and the like - which make faraday cages look like nothing - to cut out the electric and magnetic field interference of the Earth. If an object or persons weight were dependent on the interaction of that objects charge with the Earth's field, in some way, what do you suppose the result of reducing that to near zero would be? Venus doesn't even have a magnetic field, yet it certainly has gravity, etc. There is too much observable evidence that flies in the face of these various theories and no experiments supporting them. Too many simple experiments which can be perform to debunk them, given that not all matter is magnetic and not everything has an electric charge, that sort of thing.
Dealing with theoretical physics results in a lot more questions than answers until we figure out how to observe whatever we're after, but general relativity definitely stands up to the test whereas electric gravity and magnetic gravity just fall apart.
By the way, dark matter and energy isn't just some bullshit knocked up to explain the unusual rotation of galaxies.
It has directly been calculated through the density of the universe, where we see that baryonic mass-energy and photonic energy can only occupy about 21% of the energy in the universe. The calculations are quite fascinating, but a little complex
We haven't been able to integrate it because current equations already combine or integrate them without knowing it. Miles Mathis has unlocked the key, revealing the secrets of gravity, E/M, and dark matter/energy:
When I measure GPS coordinates, they are wrong. The further away they are, the larger the error. This is because the measurement passes through the curve of the earth. I have to correct these measurements using the the radius of the earth to reflect a surface measurement.
I was a civil engineering drafter and designer for over a decade. Just wanted to corroborate this answer. It's true and AutoCAD Civil 3D, ArcGIS and other programs used to crunch survey data have automated this process.
Great example - people here can rent a Trimble unit themselves and experiment with the correction parameters and read up on how it works if they don't believe it
Like comparing the chances that we are on a ball hurling and spinning thousands of miles through space without any physical effects vs the earth being stationary?
Sorry, that was a bad word to use. You're different. Once again man, I really hope you find the strength to reach out to someone and get mental help. Have a good day!
As a prospective aerospace engineer, all I can say is you should tell that to my professors. It'd make my physics homework a hell of a lot easier if satellites were a myth.
Also, you should tell that to my colleagues who worked on this too. It'll make their Graduate dissertations easier since all the data they got back is a farce
His arguments are the kind of context-less arguments my 5 year old makes. The only difference these people make is the paranoid addition of the ever-present "they" when things get too "sciency".
I just can't imagine how awful it would be to live every day of your life thinking that every scientist is an evil corporate sellout, and that every politician wants nothing but the worst for him, and that every person that denies anything he says is paid/being malicious in doing so. I really hope he seeks help one day.
No, I'm not saying that. I just hope you deal with your paranoid tendencies in a healthy way, and that it doesn't culminate in anything larger than you believing some far-out theories.
You literally cannot physically feel constant velocity. One reason is because velocity is relative, so there's a reference point in which you are stationary. That's basic logic, not even (((science))).
Secondly, the way your body senses motion is the fluid in your ears applying a force against your inner ear. When you are vertical, it's pulling downwards because of gravity and the brain sets that force as 0 force for benchmarking. When you move at a constant velocity, the fluid does not move and your body only feels acceleration downwards due to gravity.
But when you accelerate forwards, the fluid flows backwards due to psuedoforce and the brain feels a difference in pressure, resulting in a feeling of motion. That's why going on a loop in a roller coaster doesn't have the same feeling of flying forwards since your acceleration is all downwards.
You only feel the effects when taking off, accelerating, and the descent/braking/landing. You do not feel the motion at cruising speed. Same for a car, you do not feel yourself going 50mph, you feel acceleration and braking. A hard brake, and you'll definitely feel the laws of inertia.
The horizon shouldn't be at eye level if the earth is a sphere when at airline cruising altitude? Using my imagination, the horizon on an infinite plane always remains at eye level, but not on a sphere. But I must be missing something in my imagination.
Density/bouyancy explains why stuff sticks to earth.
Density and buoyancy are properties of objects that only make sense in reference to some force that acts like gravity. What is the force that causes denser and less buoyant things to move towards the earth?
Buoyancy refers to the way things of different density behave in the presence of gravity. Without gravity there is no 'down' to sink to or 'up' to float to.
Imagine a sphere of water. Now put something buoyant in the exact center of that sphere. Which direction does it travel without gravity?
Remember, if we're scaling down the earth to the size of a ball, then the thickness of water on the ball would also have to be scaled down.
The diameter of earth is 12,742 km. The deepest part of the ocean is 10.994 km.
If we divide 12,742 km by 12,742,000 we get 0.001 km or 1 metre.
If we divide 10.994 km by 12,742,000 we get 0.00000086 km or 0.86 mm.
So on our 1 metre diameter model of the earth, the water in the deepest part of the ocean would only be 0.86mm deep.
The average depth of the ocean is 3.69 km.
If we divide 3.69 km by 12,742,000 we get 0.00000031 km or 0.31mm.
So for our experiment, we could use a 1 metre diameter ball with a layer of water on it that is 0.31mm deep.
Then we spin that ball at 1 revolution per day (0.00069 revolutions per minute or 0.2484 degrees per minute.)
Even without taking account of gravity, it seems to me that the water will not be flung off the surface at such a slow rotational speed. The surface tension alone will probably be enough to hold it in place.
For the experiment to be more realistic, it would have to be carried out in a lab that is not feeling the effect of earth's gravity. So it could be done in a lab in orbit.
OK, I'm not a /r/conspiracy regular, but I may be able to help you out.
Are you trying to say that we (assuming we live on a giant spinning rock) should be able to feel the force or angular momentum due to the earth's rotation? Well good news is we do.
The formula from angular acceleration is ac = v2 / r, v = 2πr*ω, so ac = 4π2 * r * ω2 , where ω = 1/(one day).
So ac = (4π2 * 6,371,000)/(24 * 60 * 60)2 = 0.03 ms2
Gravity = 9.81 ms2
So it's not really worth factoring in the difference considering variation in the earth's density and the fact that it's not perfectly spherical anyway.
But you say the experiment in that video was flawed. That's fine by me. I wasn't suggesting you believe that video, I was giving you an example of how you can test it for yourself.
It would be easy to do, and if you can show that the coriolis effect is bullshit by doing the experiment properly, I'm sure you'll become famous enough to recoup any costs you will incur.
Again, ask any sniper you fucking idiot. There's dozens of tests you could do to see that the Earth isn't flat yet you point to shitty youtube video's of some dude breathing into a mic and say "nuh uh".
This is a better video. That "experiment" in your video is a scam, but the idea behind it is solid and the experiment is performed correctly in the video I posted.
Well how the fuck would satellites exist without gravity and the earth being round? The earth being round is kinda fucking import for space flight and geostationary orbit
The satellite signal only tells us how far away the satellite is from our receiver. You need at least 4 satellites to determine a precise position. We also use satellites from countries such as Russia. Do you really think Russia is cooperating with the US to deceive the world about flat earth?
So, just to clarify (since this is kind of an imprecise answer), you mean that when you take a straight-line measurement (using a laser?) you have to correct that measurement for the curve of the Earth in order to get it to match up with what the GPS satellites tell you?
I mean, obviously you're not saying that the 'GPS coordinates' are wrong.
If you're near the coast, it's pretty simple. I can walk them through the test process for a long straight edge (ruler) and then get them to hold the straight edge up to the horizon. The horizon will noticeably curve down at the edges.
Fun? Do you think you'll be a sole survivor running around dispensing justice in a post apocalyptic wasteland that strangely resembles your favorite video game or movie setting?
A surveyor and engineer of thirty years published in the Birmingham Weekly Mercury stated, “I am thoroughly acquainted with the theory and practice of civil engineering. However bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst us that such theoretical measurements are INCAPABLE OF ANY PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION. All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as TRUE LEVELS or FLATS. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here and there, but they are always accurately defined and must be carefully traversed. But anything approaching to eight inches in the mile, increasing as the square of the distance, COULD NOT BE WORKED BY ANY ENGINE THAT WAS EVER YET CONSTRUCTED. Taking one station with another all over England and Scotland, it may be stated that all the platforms are ON THE SAME RELATIVE LEVEL. The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities. If such was the case there is not a driver or stoker within the Kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train. We can only laugh at those of your readers who seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains round spherical curves. Horizontal curves on levels are dangerous enough, vertical curves would be a thousand times worse, and with our rolling stock constructed as at present physically impossible.”
It doesn't really make sense. Surveying actually does assume the world is flat for small projects and it works perfectly fine because the curvature is not drastic locally. Once you get into big projects you have to factor the curvature of the earth in otherwise you will not be able to make the measurements close on themselves.
300 miles is a large project. That would take account of earths curvature by using procedures that cancel out that error. You can't see 300 miles away directly. You have to set the level up many times in between. Each time you set up, you create a new level line that is perpendicular to gravity. You must keep the distance between these setups small. So if you map out all these level lines, it follows the curvature of the earth.
While I admire what you're doing, it seems to be in vain. These people don't want to be disproved, and that mindset is the true problem here. If you unconsciously cling to an idea like this, you start feeling like you've been enlightened with "The Truth™". And if you can't learn to recognize these tendencies of our human nature before it's too late, you will fall down the rabbit-hole of quackery. THAT is what's discrediting conspiracy theorists, that is the psychological complex that is hurting us.
This. A quick cursory search into the curvature of the earth combine with a basic knowledge of working on a construction site, one can safely assume you wouldn't just level with a laser one time in 300 miles. Literally every time a new section was installed you would check it for being level and move it if needed, this will cancel out the gradual curve of the earth, making it a non factor.
A distinguishing feature of the CSX portion is a 79-mile straight track from a point near East Arcadia west of Wilmington to a point near Laurel Hill in Scotland County. It is the longest stretch of main-line railroad without a curve in the United States.
I've no idea what the elevations are as this track goes from point 'A' to point 'B' or the elevation markers in between but according to your remark above how much curvature is at play here?
The curvature is only important for determining distance. It does not affect straightness. Here's a video explaining the calculation. if you wish to run through the numbers.
No. But we are still laying out massive stretches of highways. What the guy in the article is saying about trains running out of control would also apply to trucks and cars.
Gravity. As the earth moves, you aren't going over a hill per-say, as the gravity is always pulling toward the center of the earth.
But honestly, if you are going to believe the earth is flat, there's not much a rational person can tell you to change your mind. I hope you find the help you need one day.
Actually, you may try explaining that. What you've done is copy and paste something another person has wrote, but I have significant doubts that you are able to comprehend any of this. You could've just stated it in your own words and cite the sources accordingly, but in this, you have demonstrated the true heart of the Flat-Earth Conspiracy: "We don't know what any of the data means, but ______ does! Here's one of his videos/quotes."
Yes, they do. They account for the curved earth by being level. If they did not account for the curved earth, they would not be level and one end would eventually be out in space.
The word "level" means "perpendicular to the force of gravity". On a spherical planet, a "level" line that is long enough will not be a "straight" line as it would follow the curving surface while staying perpendicular to the force of gravity.
but the locomotives that run on them wouldn't even function.
Yes, they would. The direction of gravity points at the center of mass. On a spherical planet that center is at the center of the sphere. On opposite sides of the sphere, gravity is pointing in opposite directions.
The affect of this is that if you move further away from the center, you are climbing, and if you move closer to the center you are falling.
If you pick a point in space and call it the center, then try to draw a surface around that center that is always the same distance away from it, the surface you draw will be a sphere.
If you move around on that surface you will neither be getting further away nor closer to the center. That is, you will not be climbing or descending.
This "engineer" you place so much faith in seems to have no understanding of how gravity works, or even basic geometry.
The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities.
Nope.
This person is actually rather ignorant of some basic physical realities. His claim is that the first half of the journey would be ascending against gravity, while the second half of the journey would be descending, as if the train were climbing over an enormous hill.
At the top we see the curved earth. The red line is the path of a train travelling from one side to the other. The yellow lines indicate the direction of gravity on such a world. These lines run parallel to each other with only the center line passing through the center of the earth, while the lines to either side miss the center. On this world, travelling across the world involves climbing up against gravity on one side then descending down on the other.
But what happens if we take that curved surface and flatten it out? The bottom diagram shows what happens. We now see the gravity is not pointing straight down everywhere, but is angling out from the center, becoming less perpendicular to the surface the further from the center you go. At the beginning of the journey, gravity is pushing back against the train, while at the end of the journey it is pushing the train forward.
We all know that's not how gravity works... right? It's always pointing straight down... right?
Now we can see at the top that the lines of gravity are not parallel, but instead radiate out from the center of the earth so that they are always perpendicular to the surface. As the train travels along the red line, the gravity lines behind it are "pushing" it forwards as much as the gravity lines in front of it are "pushing" it backwards. This effect cancels out so that the train is neither climbing nor descending at any point of its journey.
When we flatten out that world, we see the lines of gravity converge, becoming more parallel the flatter the surface gets. This shows that the gravity is pulling the train down on to the surface but not horizontally as in the first image.
That is how the real world works. Travelling from one side of the curved surface to another does not involve climbing or descending as long as that surface is always the same distance from the center of the earth. Even though the train is actually travelling in a shallow arc, because the gravity is always perpendicular to the surface wherever it is, the train will not be climbing or descending and is able to move exactly the same as if it was on a flat surface with gravity pointing straight down perpendicular to the surface.
Why is this so? It is because gravity is not a force traveling in one direction. It is a force that pulls towards the center of mass. On opposite sides of the world, gravity is pulling in opposite directions.
The fact this "engineer" does not understand such basic principles calls into question whether he is an engineer at all.
He claimed that moving over the surface of earth would be like climbing a giant hill, which is completely contrary to how gravity works, as my diagrams illustrate.
Aren't you guys the ones that claim listening to "experts" is stupid and that we should think for ourselves?
Well, I thought for myself and demonstrated that this particular "expert" hasn't got a clue what he's talking about.
If you desperately need to keep the lie going? Yes. This whole thread is ridiculous. It's not even flat earthers bringing this shit up. Why not just let them be?
I'm not a government surveyor so I stick to work in my region of business. Largest I've personally been involved with is about 3 miles. Of sewer surveying after sandy.
Okay. so If the curvature of the earth is supposedly detectable at 8+ miles.. how can you say that you can prove flat earth is fake? I mean, can you even survey lets say 10 miles. point a to b and see if there is a detectable curve?
My point is, there can and probably are deviations in a 3 mile wide area, ups, downs, hills, all that, but even if you did detect or have to correct for 'curvature', which also again doesn't make sense if you're not doing anything past 8 miles you shouldn't even have to worry about it right? so.. I don't get it.
Here you say this : " When I measure GPS coordinates, they are wrong. The further away they are, the larger the error. This is because the measurement passes through the curve of the earth. I have to correct these measurements using the the radius of the earth to reflect a surface measurement"
But you also just admitted that the largest area you've ever worked on was maybe 3 miles. How, in your mind, that the GPS system is not being accurate, translate in an absolute that there is not a flat earth. Keeping in mind that the GPS is suspect as well in the flat earth theory.
How does that work? Again, the curvature supposedly only matters at a distance beyond 8 miles, so even if the GPS was off, why would you have to use the supposed radius of the earth?
Curvature matters at any distance, it's a sphere. This 8 mile figure you got somewhere may just be about the point it starts becoming visible or easily distinguishable from elevation differences.
Keeping in mind that the GPS is suspect as well in the flat earth theory.
How does that work? Again, the curvature supposedly only matters at a distance beyond 8 miles, so even if the GPS was off, why would you have to use the supposed radius of the earth?
GPS is fake?
And this 8+ miles stuff is an absolute pile of garbage; long bridges have to account for the curvature of the earth e.g. Verrazano–Narrows Bridge at 2.6 mi, and Humber Bridge at 1.4 mi.
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
For surveying imperial is actually way better.
The only unit we use is decimal feet so there is never any unit conversion, the main disadvantage of imperial.
The Manchester Ship Canal Company published in the Earth Review stated, “It is customary in Railway and Canal constructions for all levels to be referred to a datum which is nominally horizontal and is so shown on all sections. It is not the practice in laying out Public Works to make allowances for the curvature of the earth.
Misleading The datum is nominally horizontal in your local area. Modern vertical datums are based on what is called the geoid which is a roughly earth shaped surface modeled on earths gravity. These datums were created to allow GPS technology to be incorporated more fluently into the profession. As you level across the surface the level line is always perpendicular to gravity. To avoid error, you have to keep your back measurements and forward measurements the same. This cancels out the effect of the curved earth. If we didn't do this then error would occur. So yes for simplicity of math we level as though the world was flat, but we have to measure in a certain WAY to still produce the correct result. GPS has totally changed the game though and is wholly dependent on a curved model called the geoid to produce correct results.
It would be stronger because it chips away one piece of evidence but still wrong. If a traverse a large distance and return to my starting point, I will have new coordinates at my starting point due to the earths curvature. Same can be said if I run a large level loop and return to my starting point if I intentionally made my back and forward measurements different lengths.
I'm not a professional earth measured, can you expand on your examples.
By definition if you return to your starting point you would have the same coordinates in either scenario, and intentionally making your back and forward measures different and ending up in a different location seems like a no brainer.
I'm not suggesting you are wrong but your video is demonstrating on a spherical earth. What I was asking was for an example of something that doesn't work on a flat earth, not something that would work on a sphere (I can't verify if what you drew is ACTUALLY possible )
Not trying to be a dick, but I encourage you to take a step back and look at yourself. /u/TellMeTrue22 has just provided very solid evidence against the Flat Earth Theory. Why not do your own research to find a rebuttal rather than, "Government owns GPS!" That is the conspiracy cop-out right there.
If you really cared about uncovering an objective truth, you would do your own homework and look at the data for yourself.
I'm not even arguing against a Flat Earth, I'm simply encouraging you to recognize your own biases. Conspiracy Theorists should hold an attitude of the utmost skepticism, but what you've demonstrated is anything but that; it's an almost fervent hope that the world actually is flat.
You've completely dodged the point because it's something you don't want to hear. It may be evidence for something, but you drawing correlations between the two further prove that you're operating on confirmation bias.
What sort of answer would satisfy you? Does he need to visit you personally and walk you through the whole thing?
I could say the same thing in opposition to any evidence-based argument you make. "Oh, well if it's based on THAT evidence, it couldn't possibly be true!"
Just because the government has lied about things does not imply they lie about everything.
You DO give a known criminal the benefit of the doubt in a court of law.
The government isn't some singular entity. It is made up of disparate elements who work most independently of each other. If you ever worked in government you would know how disorganized most things are.
Yes, there are and have been proven high-level conspiracies within government. There is not, however, a need for the earth to be round for the elite to control the populace. Stop being silly!
I can't speak for high levels of regular government, but the IC is plenty disorganized. Even SAPs are only available to relatively small groups of people and most of the conspiracies you hear about are rogue elements because there are oversight policies in place all the way to the top which prevent misuse of power.
You are speaking from a place of pure ignorance. Stop it.
It's a simple way to check if you are full of shit, and you are. Don't try to misrepresent yourself. Even someone at the lowest levels knows their caveats. I had (not working and out of scope now) the basic set SI, TK, H, GCS plus one SAP.
It's fine to believe conspiracies, but stop trying to misrepresent yourself as a secret squirrel as some kind of subtle appeal to authority.
Second-guessing the establishment is healthy, but you need to learn to second-guess yourself and your beliefs as well.
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
extremely expensive how? a plane ride from cali to NY is like 500... cant be more than 50k to do this lol. .... and yea satisfy a THEORY to the shape of the earth thats been argued for millenia is not important? yea ok bro roll eyes
Are you telling me you think the price you pay for a ticket from NY to Cali is what it costs the airline to do the flight? You people are dumber than I thought.
It's only argued by a few fringe weirdos. Everybody else is satisfied. If you think it's going to be so cheap and easy to do this flight that you seem to think is going to staisfy flat earthers, why don't you and your buddies get together and crowd fund it? Why do you expect sane people who already know the earth is round to do it for you?
It's like if I said I believed there's a teapot orbiting the sun and the proof that it's real is that the government refuses to fund a mission to prove otherwise.
Modern practices is a misleading distraction piece. We have statements from a century ago (i.e. before the advent of GPS or anyone technological crutch you'd like to invoke) stating that railway stretching from Manchester to London assumes a flat surface. Datum lines prior to your GPS voodoo could not magically assume a curve. A datum line is a fixed horizontal line, not a relatively horizontal line. GPS is fucking great but I doubt it has the power bend facts.
OP will answer this better than I, but i think it has to do with using benchmarks when you survey - they are basically just points of reference when you start taking spot shots across a project site.
If you are working on a vertical construction project, like a building, the extents of your site footprint are fairly small horizontally - you can use one benchmark and the curvature of earth will have a very minor effect over such a small area - but horizontal construction, something like a railroad that extends distant lengths, the curvature really begins to play a role in the topography, and it becomes a little complicated to weigh rolling topography and the drop off due to curvature.
Long story short - If anything, the example you provided actually supports an ellipsoid earth model, not a flat one
civil designer here. we do not make allowances for curvature of the earth for the simple fact that it is irrelevant for the distances which we are generally concerned.
I suppose that, and other arguments ITT would neither prove or disprove a flat earth, if the measurements and design considerations work perfectly fine on flat or ball earth.
Most project site coordinates are on a State Plane coordinate system. They are usually converted from grid to a ground datum via a couple established gps points. The Grid to Ground conversion is done with an Adjustment factor.
On small sites you generally just take 2 established GPS points and use the mid point as the base point of adjustment.
With it converted to ground coordinates you might as well consider it as an assumed coordinate relating only to that localized site. If you want to relate it with other projects you need to apply the adjustment factor and use the Base point of adjustment to convert your coordinates back to grid. The elevation does not change in the conversion, only Horizontally.
Go rent a Trimble handheld gps unit and start walking along train tracks and taking elevation shots as you walk. Learn about how the satellite post-corrections work. Then compare this with just taking some survey shots around your property.
Do a little survey work yourself - if you aren't going to believe other people explaining the process to you, then the best thing you can do is just try it yourself - its easy and fun. And its available for you to solve.
Or pay a surveyor a days work to walk around with you and show you how it works - theres a million ways you can solve this problem on your own
Ok, here's a good one. I'll go get the maths if you're still not satisfied.
I work in mining, and we sink vertical shafts. The place I used to work at has a bit over 2km between two of these vertical shafts and they both drop to about 1200m deep. At the bottom they both branch off into the mining levels which have been connected. We surveyed between the two shafts to confirm we'd done our job properly.
The distance between the two shafts at 1200m deep is less then the distance between them on the surface.
in name only; officially though perhaps not in reality.
Put simply, saying a datum is "nominally horizontal" is another way of saying "the difference between the datum and a true horizontal line is small enough to be ignored for our purposes".
The curvature of the earth is relatively small and because of how gravity works, a railway line that follows the curvature will be "level" at each part of the track, even though it is not truly horizontal.
In this case, a long "level" track can be called "nominally horizontal" for the purposes of designing the track.
Definition:
A datum is theoretical exact plane, axis or point location that GD&T or dimensional tolerances are referenced to. You can think of them as an anchor for the entire part; where the other features are referenced from. A datum feature is usually an important functional feature that needs to be controlled during measurement as well.
All GD&T symbols except for the form tolerances (straightness, flatness, circularity and cylindricity) can use datums to help specify what geometrical control is needed on the part. When it comes to GD&T, datum symbols are your starting points where all other features are referenced from.
Go to the north pole. Look at Sirius how bright it looks. Then go south to the equator. You can see Sirius. It is as bright as before. The go south. At some point Sirius will vanish. Go back a few miles then observe Sirius again. Keep staring until you're eaten by a large cat.
Who knows, start trying to do some cosmology research and see how many goddamn roadblocks you run into, how many censored docs you have to go through.. you have to question everything. Nasa has thousands of satelites up there, very few of them provide publicly accessible data...but why is it so hard to find detailed images of Antarctica? North pole? It goes on and on man. nasa = Never A Straight Answer
Well, if the earth was flat that would imply a radically different cosmology. Would you be open to a radically different cosmology if we said the world was round but changed everything else you know as we have done repeatedly through human history?
So what's your view on Bill Nye and Neil Grasse Tyson? Seems like there has been some push back to who they are and what they preach, mostly from the right.
Also not a question but... I don't believe the world is flat.
Yeah but even actors can come equipped with facts and a degree from a university. Maybe they are a bit skewed but their biggest fight right now is climate change. It's not just the polar icecaps melting, it's the effects of large amounts of carbon and methane and their effect on agricultural production. Imagine if randomly the rural farm states became a desert.
Hey, it's possible it could happen naturally but there is usually a cause.
What's underneath the bottom of the ocean? Are there people living on the opposite side of us like a rectangle? Are there people on our sides? Or does gravity not work like that?
How can you sail around the world? Is there a portal in the pacific that zaps you back to the California coast?
There are very few maps that are, check out the map porn subreddit, even science doesn't agree on which map is most accurate, and we mostly just default to one works for general navigation...
Dude, look up Euler's theorema egregium. It's a mathematical proof that the curvature of a sphere cannot be projected onto a flat surface without sacrificing one or more of the geometric properties: accurate angles, lengths, areas, etc...
Take it up with Zermelo and Fraenkel (or maybe shoot an email to Jacob Laurie to see if higher topos theory is more to your liking) if you don't like the laws of mathematics but that is the only reason an "ideal" map doesn't exist.
I can get on board with that, but why are there no globes available for purchase which are closer to reality? They still depict everything more or less the same as a flat map
Globes do accurately represent the round earth, I don't know what you mean by that. Read this article to see why most of the modern photos of the earth were panormas stiched together. As to why the UN uses the flat earth map? The flat earth map is one of dozens of projections of the earth onto a flat surface so maybe they picked it in an effort to an choose a map that may minimize favoring certain regions over another (I.e. a pictorial representation of the globalist agenda). Think about it that map is unique in that it depicts Antartica (and really only Antarctica) as unnaturally distorted which is a non issue since Antarctica has no cultural relevance.
No that's not it's actual shape. If you actually read an article it's a diagram displaying the varying gravitational constant based on how the matter is distributed relative to your location.
I'll agree to disagree, because this is just one of thousands of models of earth's shape. I suggest reading up on the grace /goce satelites a bit more though because that was not my interpretation of the data these satelites produce. I've read the article you provided and it doesn't really back up your claim.
It's not a model of it's shape! Good Lord it's a fancy diagram. Reading up on the sattelites in the article isn't going to help if you couldn't gather from the article that the image isn't the shape of the earth.
I agree, if I hadn't already seen it in the correct context I could see coming away with that impression. The problem to me as that any massive 1000 miles bubble rising out of the earth would have been a feature discovered by the people who live around it hundreds if not thousands of years ago. Any Journalist is gonna want to spice up their work with all sorts of wacky incorrect claims. All in all though I agree with you, journalism shouldn't be setting out to confuse the shit out of people but that seems to be their Modus Operandi these days.
Let me just say I don't believe the earth is flat, but I do believe the earth might be bigger than we think. I think that may explain some of the points flat earthers have. Like we have never been shown any real pictures of earth.
You don't think they'd employ easily gullible land surveyors, give them equipment that would make it seem like the earth is round, just to have them say that the earth is round?
It's flat man, one time a guy said that there are special devices on boats that are tuned to the curvature of the earth. He said that as they got farther away they'd pick up on higher areas of the boat, meaning that the earth is curved.
I clued him into the fact that they could just angle it up 1 degree and claim that. I got some laughs, lol.
Ok, why did colonial surveyors use methods to account for earths curvature when the lands outside of the 13 colonies? Is Thomas Jefferson "in on it" too?
So you do an AMA but provide zero evidence for your claim? Lol seems legit. The desperation to suppress this subject is getting more and more blatant everyday.
Ok, well what proof do you have that there really is a curve of 8" per mile squared? You made this AMA but you have provided no explanation of your claim.
Still nothing? I'm not asking for a scholarly article just any evidence of your claim. Why do an AMA if you are not even going to provide any evidence whatsoever?
Dont even bother, Ive been downvoted into negatives by these guys just for pointing out every magnet has a north and south. They deny there is any southern magnetic pole on the earth at all.
Polaris, as in the north star? How do you explain the precession of the Earth's rotational axis? Polaris won't always be the "north star" due to this precession. Does this not occur in your model?
Sorry to butt in, but I'm curious how the FE model accounts these things.
It will. People just assume since they notice stuff moving that it will always be/always has. As it's moving closer to the center point of our "rotation" it's effectively charging the sun causing "global warming".
It doesn't account for those things. Flat earthers just ignore, deny, and misinterpret all legitimate evidence. They rely on people on the internet who have layman's understandings of physics and astronomy to fuel their beliefs.
Like the position of Polaris, as you said, and long-exposure photographs of stars. Compare images from the northern hemisphere, southern hemisphere, and equator. At the equator, long exposure images will show the stars taking a straight path across the sky. Further north/south, the stars appear to take a curved path.
That apparent movement makes perfect sense in a round earth model. There's 0 explanation for those on a flat Earth model. That's one of the easiest proofs against a flat Earth. Others include Earth's shadow on the moon, measurements of gravity, a Foucalt pendulum... I could go on. I just think flat earthers fall into a a category of people who are just dangerously stupid, because they are able to believe nonsense in the face of all contradicting evidence. It shows they are unwilling to accept facts once they find an opinion that they like best. There's a reason most flat earthers believe the exact same set of conspiracies.
I just think flat earthers fall into a a category of people who are just dangerously stupid, because they are able to believe nonsense in the face of all contradicting evidence. It shows they are unwilling to accept facts once they find an opinion that they like best. There's a reason most flat earthers believe the exact same set of conspiracies.
/end rant
It's extremely frustrating. I feel bad and I just ask question after question so that maybe it will spark something in their brains, but... nothing. Looking at his reply to is unbelievably disheartening.
Sorry but this is totally wrong. Magnetism is a problem that is being misrepresented in academia so you wouldn't know. Frankly whatever science you think you understand should be triple checked and somehow I don't think that is happening. Stating creditials upfront makes you sound pretentious. If you think scatter gun labelling people crazy is going convince anyone with a brain, you're fucking nuts. Don't overestimate yourself lest you come across as a zealot protecting a dying religion.
I'm sorry but was I talking to you? It doesn't take genius to merely step outside the box and ask a few tough questions of the church of science. But you wouldn't know anything about that would you? Probably because you're a just another fucking cow in the herd. Don't think your copy and paste bullets make you sound clever or articulate. Your too fucking stupid to have a conversation with. Go back to your fucking feed lot.
It doesn't take genius to merely step outside the box and ask a few tough questions of the church of science
Lol "church of science", this is going to be good.
But you wouldn't know anything about that would you?
Naw, I question science a lot.
Probably because you're a just another fucking cow in the herd.
omg lol. The faithful conspiracy nut is calling me a cow in a herd because I believe in the scientific method.
You sir, are the cow here.
Don't think your copy and paste bullets make you sound clever or articulate.
I wasn't trying to sound clever or articulate, I was just poking at you for giggles.
Your too fucking stupid to have a conversation with
Says the stupid man.
Go back to your fucking feed lot.
I bet you thought that this would sound badass right? To bad it doesn't. It sounds like you have nothing to back up your crazy bullshit so you called me a sheeple.
I will answer this the best I can. To address his answer simply a flat disk shaped magnet will have one point for north and the ring around the edge will display south.
More broadly speaking, re. magnetism and science, watch this video, watch the whole channel:
Flat Earthers claim that surveyors, engineers and architects are never required to factor the supposed curvature of the Earth into their projects, providing proof that the world is a plane, not a planet. Canals and railways, for example, are always cut and laid horizontally, often over hundreds of miles, without any allowance for curvature.
The green circle is earth, the black lines are gravitational directions of force. As you can see both black lines meet at the center of the green circle but are perpendicular to the circle where they cross it. That's how gravity works on a sphere.
The red lines are drawn perpendicular to the lines of gravity. They are "level", but they are not flat. In fact they form a 90o angle to each other.
If you continue drawing black lines between these two, meeting at the center of the circle but remaining perpendicular to the surface you will start building a curve. With enough black lines, the red lines would form a perfect circle, but they'd still be level.
If the Earth is not flat, then prove to me why air lines fly slower going east to west, and faster west to east? It is to simulate the rotation they try and tell us is real.
The reason planes go slower heading west is because they are flying into head winds. Head winds caused by coreollis effect from the rotation of the earth.
A Surveyor and Engineer of thirty years wrote to the Birmingham Weekly Mercury, Feb. 15th, 1890 stating, “I am thoroughly acquainted with the theory and practice of civil engineering. However bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst us that such theoretical measurements are INCAPABLE OF ANY PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION. All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as TRUE LEVELS or FLATS. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here and there, but they are always accurately defined and must be carefully traversed. But anything approaching to eight inches in the mile, increasing as the square of the distance, COULD NOT BE WORKED BY ANY ENGINE THAT WAS EVER YET CONSTRUCTED. Taking one station with another all over England and Scotland, it may be stated that all the platforms are ON THE SAME RELATIVE LEVEL. The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities. If such was the case there is not a driver or stoker within the Kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train. We can only laugh at those of your readers who seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains round spherical curves. Horizontal curves on levels are dangerous enough, vertical curves would be a thousand times worse, and with our rolling stock constructed as at present physically impossible.”
300 miles is a large project. That would take account of earths curvature by using procedures that cancel out that error. You can't see 300 miles away directly. You have to set the level up many times in between. Each time you set up, you create a new level line that is perpendicular to gravity. You must keep the distance between these setups small. So if you map out all these level lines, it follows the curvature of the earth.
Why do you push the lies of Globe making cartels that just want us all to move into FEMA camps where the Bilderberg Vampire/Reptile elites get to rape socialism into us and gay marry frogs to donkeys and mailboxes? Everyone knows the Earth is an isosceles triangle that spins in a giant hamster ball and if you get outside the ball by taking enough meth, you get super powers and join the Avengers! Stop trying to keep me off the Avengers buddy!
Dude I heard you can even get to the outer sanctum if you take enough Datura and then snort a 200mg 1:10 mixture of 3-MeO-PCP and meth and make sure to hit a point of salvia 120x extract while inhaling an extra large nitrous balloon for good measure.
Hahahaha. This is hilarious. Thanks, random dude on the Internet. I'll surely take your word for it. This is hella suspicious. Why is the flat earth getting this much attention now? You're only going to stoke the flames of curiosity so people will have to do their research. And once they do that...
Flat earth is the most fun conspiracy I follow.. I believe he earth is a globe, don't think I've really ever questioned it, but there's something about watching flat earth videos or reading papers that interests the shit out of me haha. I'd say the truest part of that conspiracy is the fact that NASA does get into some shady things and are controlled by the government.. beyond that I don't think they're trying, or even can, hide the fact that the Earth is flat. People use the excuse that you can't keep a secret that big for 9/11 defenses, but I'd argue this is a secret WAY to be big to keep hidden for all these years... it'd be funny as fuck if it turned out to be true lol
Feelings are mutual. The anger and similarities I see in each and everyone of these posts only convinces me more. As does the sheer simplicity of the FE model.
I'm a former civil engineer. You don't need complex explanations about gravity and curvature to know the flat earth models are wrong... you can't have the sun rise due east everywhere on a flat earth twice per year.
So how come when I leave my moms basement to walk to the 7 eleven to buy more cool ranch Doritos and a slushee it feels like I'm walking on a flat surface. Boom. Face.
Basically these kinds of objections have gone unanswered, and I'm sure there are a bunch more, and this is why flat earth theorizing persists and has grown
They have been answered only to fall on deaf ears. I'm sure you're aware a large portion of your growing body of "believers" are most likely trolls trying to see how fucking stupid they can make the "theory" get. If you would like I'll link you to an accurate mathematical model of an observer on the surface of the earth so you'll see that the lynch pin of round earth (you know the tangent line on the circle can only see so far) is just bunk, it's assuming our eyes are somehow fixed to the surface of the earth and that we are always at elevation 0.00000...
It's largely the same claim over and over again with minor changes. Best example to disprove would be the Statue of Liberty one because there are like four dozen of that claim over and over again.
First problem: there's no proofs given, it's just empty claims. All he's doing is claiming that you can see the Statue of Liberty, he doesn't give you a reason to believe him at all. Not even a measly picture.
Second problem: he doesn't give you any information to recreate his "experiment" (not to imply that I think he's ever done this experiment). Where was he when he supposedly saw the Statue? "60 miles away" is a circle with a circumference of nearly 400 miles in three states - no one could follow up if they wanted to because of this.
Third problem: this claim isn't true. I'm about 60 miles away from the Statue of Liberty and I can't see it right now. Of course, flat earthers will claim that my vision is being blocked by trees and hills and buildings - and I would agree! Therefore, the location the author must have been in to truthfully make this claim has to be somewhere on this circle that is not being blocked by hills, trees, buildings, etc. It should be really obvious that this isn't possible because New York Harbor is surrounded by buildings, trees, and hills.
I actually just made this to demonstrate what I was trying to say. The scale is really fucked (x:y is 2000:1) so this great circle of the earth looks more like a parabola but it's the only way to get all the points in one view (the units are in feet so we're looking at a 21 million foot radius circle here so hopefully that's not too upsetting). The flat red line is the standard flat earther perspective whereas the point G and the intersecting horizon line represents someone only one foot above sea level and the value is the distance in feet from the observer (So a little over a mile is now the horizon line only one foot off the ground which means you can see things that are over a foot tall from this perspective from 2 miles away). The lowest point J is the point of horizon for someone 15 feet above sea level and is about 5 miles away (15 feet above sea level gives you a 10 mile line of sight for things just over 15 feet tall). Now hopefully you see in any other demo like this they forget your line of sight can drop below a perfect horizontal gaze at 0 feet above sea level (probably because they believe in the fictitious "law of perspective"). Hopefully that satisfies your debunking need because I ain't makin' no YouTube video.
Why do humans only observe 1 half of the lunar phase?
Because the moon spins at the same rate it rotates around the earth.
How can the earth be round with Mount Everest and Ocean floors.
Everest is 5.5 miles above sea level, the earth's diameter is 8,000 miles. If you were Atlas holding up the earth the himalayas would feel slightly courser than sandpaper, and the oceans' floor would feel like a wet rag.
So some random internet user says he is a land surveyor and tells everyone the earth is not flat... And that is the end of the debate eh?
There is evidence that the earth is not a globe and that TPTB have been pushing a false narrative about the nature of earth for generations.
I get that its hard for people to see, cuz it was hard for me at first. But when you get past the brainwashing and overbearing shilling dealing with this particular conspiracy, it really is as clear as day.
This video is the fairest, most level headed summary of the "Flat" earth conspiracy I have seen yet. Watch it at least twice with an open mind before you give into the blatantly desperate peer pressure to laugh at the idea that the earth is not a globe.
And remember some key points....
TPTB have the motive, means and opportunity to lie about the nature of the earth.
"Gravity" can not be proven or reproduced with the scientific method.
"Gravitational" effects can be explained by the laws of density, motion and there being a natural up and down.
The "setting" and "rising" sun can be explained by the laws of perspective.
The deepest dig on record is ~8 miles.
Multiple advanced civilizations of the past recorded that the earth was "flat" and the idea of a globe earth has continuously been contested since its inception.
There is a LOT of mis/disinfo about the "flat" earth. A lot...
MOST of the "science" that "proves" the globe earth is theoretical conjecture.
You're right and I want to fully apologise for that, but we've had a nice chat in the past and I do wish you would learn to argue effectively, instead of calling CGI on everything that doesn't fit your narrative without any evidence.
Ahahaha. Okay I'll bite. It's two fucking hours so forgive me for not watching the whole thing.
Not true. I've been in an aircraft before and have observed slight curvature, though it's only really noticable at high altitudes such as concord flights. It's also possible to take a picture at sea level, with a normal rectilinear lens (no fisheye) if you line the camera up perfectly with the horizon. You can also use a mountain as a visual reference, you will notice it will shrink faster than perspective. Here's an iphone getting up high. No fisheye on an iphone mate, made by some total randomers, you could even do this yourself without too much hassle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz1ipDYpAgQ Of course... it's all CGI, right?
Makes almost no sense. There's no maths here, so I can't really deduce wtf he's on about. Again, if I'm in an aircraft, I DO have to look down slightly to see the horizon.
For the same reason we can't perceive the spin ourselves - we are all spinning with it. Relative to us, the spinning is zero. Like when you're driving at 70mph on the highway, the car ahead of you appears to be still, because you're both going the same speed.
Ok that's just retarded. Firstly, elevation can trump curvature. More importantly, it's incorrect to say that if you move between two points on a sphere you go uphill then downhill. Get a football (soccer ball). Hold it in one hand. Put your finger on it. Don't move your finger, spin (but don't move) the ball with your other hand 45 degrees or any amount. Did your finger move up and down to get there? Nope.
Last one, really can't be fucked anymore. LMAO this is literally the same "proof" as #4, holy shit, even the title of the video is a lie, 200 proofs my arse. Even if he doesn't repeat any others it's still 199.
Here's the deal: If you can refute every one of my five points I will watch the two hour video and probably spend a whole working day to debunk every single "proof".
The curvature of the windows on the plane give the illusion of curvature
see #1
stand in the bed of a truck thats moving... say...20 mph...now jump up...what happens?
4.you just said don't move your finger, so if you didn't move your finger, why would it have moved?
I dont know what you are referring to in #5
watch the video...pr dont...i really dont care right now :) Not as into it as i was yesterday...
Ok. Do this experiment yourself. All you need is an old second hand iphone and a $20 weather balloon. Go and perform this experiment and report back with your results and I promise to believe your theory.
You can see how there is little curvature at ground level and then it gets more curved over time. Must be THE CGI DAEMONS or a lizard camera that gets more fisheye over time or something.
i dont see curvature in that one...and for the record, the creator of this video is of the opinion that the earth is not a globe....and i think this video does a pretty good job of showing that...
after looking at it again...you can see some minor curve at certain points while camera is moving...and apparently he used a 4.35mm lens, which has less of the "fish eye" effect. So it makes sense that there is much less distortion. Using a better lens should remove the effect completely.
well the ones that fit your narrative are obviously fake or distorted to fit your narrative....the ones that fit the flat earth narrative seem legit...
and again, there are other ways to prove the flat earth...if you watched that ENTIRE video with an open mind you would see that ;)
i get that...but come on man...we cant both be right, and so far i have seen a ton of shady "evidence" for globe earth...it is one of the main reasons why i changed my view. Remember, i wasnt always a "flat earther"
So you're a flat earther because you think that thousands of years of science is wrong, but a few youtube videos on the internet and you're fucking sold. Nothing shady about those youtube videos of random dudes on the internet.
Much less shady than the fact that we have fucking GPS, satellite phones and TV, equinoxes, different stars on each hemisphere, the ability to travel east from Europe to Asia, east from Asia to America, and east again back to Europe. For sure there is no ISS that you can see for yourself with a telescope, that, with a radio you can even use the ham frequencies to talk to the astronauts on that station as they pass overhead (https://amsat-uk.org/beginners/how-to-hear-the-iss/) , and use radio direction finding to ascertain that they are indeed coming from above you -
and presumably at the correct altitude if you can measure the round trip time accurately enough.
There's a whole fucking body of credible evidence out there but do you choose to believe that? Nah, some faceless dude on youtube will do just fine for me!
I'm not parroting the video, I'm recommending it because it does a good job of summing it up. What is said in the video makes perfect sense to me...maybe because I had been questioning the official narrative for years before i first saw it and already had a healthy distrust of the education and scientific establishment for years for a number of reasons. I was really into spending a lot of time explaining everything point by point to try and help people understand, but it got to the point were peoples willful ignorance got overbearing and took up too much of my time and energy. Now i throw that video up and say "HERE...watch this, cuz I cant explain it much simpler." I want people to understand and see, but in the end, they got to make the choice to do so. And to do that, they have to let go. And to quote the Matrix...and I'm tired man....I simply had more energy to join the conversation today.
The nitty gritty of it imo is that TPTB want us to turn away from the truth. That we are created beings with purpose, living on a created habitat, in a created reality. TPTB want to be God...but they cant be God...the only thing they can create is a lie...
I was hoping for more than that. As far as NASA tax dollars, that only accounts for 7 decades. The lie would to have been going on for centuries. How would the elites of the past even know whether the earth was round or flat with no technology?
Well Its not just NASA collecting the money...and we are talking about more wealth in 70ish years than most of history before that ever had in total.
TPTB have been playing the long con for generations. As I said, I believe their primary goal is to turn man away from God and the true nature of our existence. To live in a false reality and serve a false god.
So are all the scientists either viewing, probing or postulating about the cosmos in the last 400 years really just superfans of the billion year movie God is projecting over our head?
Number 1 on that video is already hideously incorect (you would have to look down no matter how large the ball is
what he forgot to say was that the angle you have to look down is proportional to the observer's height and the radius of the sphere: hence hundredths of an arcsecond for a height to radius ratio of something like 6 parts in 21 million feet...
and on a side note, those "proofs" where they draw tangent lines on a circle like our eyes exist glued flat to the local curvature of the earth is bullshit too, try making a model where the observer is not on the circle but maybe 5 or 10 feet above, and allow their perspective to drop to the horizon and just like that round earth makes sense again, it wasn't the roundness that was the problem it was the impact of a stupid person making a stupid "proof" for gullible non-mathematically minded people.
Just because you don't understand the Levi Civita connection and local intrinsic curvature on a riemannian manifold doesn't mean the universe doesn't conform highly to a model that crucially relies on these concepts. Don't get me wrong, modern physics is absolutely not the final answer, only the newest version of a mathematical toy that happens to behave to a spooky degree like the universe, that's it. The circle and tangent line thing is just like the pre-babylonian alpha version of that machine.
Even Eratosthenes had figured the earth had curvature more than 2000 years ago which leads me to believe this flat earth thing is a culturally hip phenomenon, it's been out of style for so long that people naturally want to cling to it.
But I'll keep watching, I imagine by the second time I'll have lost so many neurons I'll stop being able to do my job so I can ride the flat earth bandwagon straight to the Nazi guarded icewall and become a true truth warrior!
"Gravity" can not be proven or reproduced with the scientific method.
Yes it can - see the Cavendish Experiment.
"Gravitational" effects can be explained by the laws of density, motion and there being a natural up and down.
There is no "law of density" and since the Cavendish Experiment works horizontally, an idea of "natural up and down" doesn't play into the explanation at all.
The "setting" and "rising" sun can be explained by the laws of perspective.
No it can't. The Sun's size doesn't change throughout the day, much less converge to a single point (which would still be visible anyway because it's a shining light).
Im familiar with it. The Cavendish Experiment is one of the very best examples of pseudo science. It basically explains gravity as "mass attracting mass" which is beyond ridiculous. His experiment is impossible to do in a controlled environment because mass is nearly EVERYWHERE. He did it in a barn...on the earth....smh. It was a piece of tripe that TPTB gobbled up and has been regurgitating to naive "students" for years. Gravity has not been proven or reproduced. Because it doesn't exist.
There is no "law of density" and since the Cavendish Experiment works horizontally, an idea of "natural up and down" doesn't play into the explanation at all.
The Cavendish Experiment doesn't work...period. And you are aware that there is this thing called density, and that there are basic rules/definitions that determines how dense something is correct? I know the "laws of density" isn't as common of a term as the "Laws of motion" but there are is in fact variables that determine if one thing is more dense or less dense than another thing...
No it can't. The Sun's size doesn't change throughout the day, much less converge to a single point (which would still be visible anyway because it's a shining light).
I never suggested that the size of the sun fluctuates at all. But our perception of its size certainly changes Our relative position to it, the time of day/year, our line of sight....
all this is in the video I linked earlier. You should save me the time it takes to type all this and just watch it till it clicks for you. But of course for that to happen, you would first have to open your mind to the possibility, and let go of your faith in TPTB who taught you all the bullshit running around in your noggin...
Obviously you're not. The Cavendish Experiment measures a gravitational force orthogonal to the Earth's gravity, therefore the Earth doesn't affect it. There's not much mass on that plane except the lead balls used in the experiment.
The Cavendish Experiment doesn't work...period.
Yes it does.
And you are aware that there is this thing called density, and that there are basic rules/definitions that determines how dense something is correct? I know the "laws of density" isn't as common of a term as the "Laws of motion" but there are is in fact variables that determine if one thing is more dense or less dense than another thing...
Yes, I know you made up this thing called the "law of density" and I called you out on it. Now that you've been called out, you're now trying to put words in my mouth, claiming that I said density doesn't exist. Thanks.
But our perception of its size certainly changes.
No it doesn't! But I'd love know how much you think it appears to change size throughout the day. Does it change continuously from a point at dawn to a circle at noon to a point again at dusk? How much does the angular size change over the course of a day?
You should save me the time it takes to type all this and just watch it till it clicks for you.
At 48:30 in the video, he claims that you can see the Statue of Liberty from sea level 60 miles away. Can you give me coordinates to that place? Maybe a picture from that location? Thanks!
Obviously you're not. The Cavendish Experiment measures a gravitational force orthogonal to the Earth's gravity, therefore the Earth doesn't affect it. There's not much mass on that plane except the lead balls used in the experiment.
I am actually...and as you said, "There's not much mass except"..not much being the key words there. And of of course the earths mass is going to effect it....as i said, at its core, the experiment is mass attracting mass....are you suggesting that you can do an experiment of mass attracting mass and expect the mass of your surrounds, which include the earth, to not effect the result of said experiment? Not to mention that the experiment ignores variables such as temperature and God knows whatever else was going on in that barn 200+ years ago. And that is the best explanation anyone can give for gravity? Gimme a break man...
Yes it does.
lol..nope.
Yes, I know you made up this thing called the "law of density" and I called you out on it. Now that you've been called out, you're now trying to put words in my mouth, claiming that I said density doesn't exist. Thanks.
come on man...I obviously, at least to me, just wrote out "laws of density" to save me the time of writing the definition and density of all known substances. I'm sure I'm not the first to use the phrase and wont be the last.
No it doesn't! But I'd love know how much you think it appears to change size throughout the day. Does it change continuously from a point at dawn to a circle at noon to a point again at dusk? How much does the angular size change over the course of a day?
Are you seriously telling me that you have always visually perceived the sun as the same size? It has never looked bigger or smaller, closer or farther away from you?
At 48:30 in the video, he claims that you can see the Statue of Liberty from sea level 60 miles away. Can you give me coordinates to that place? Maybe a picture from that location? Thanks!
Well i don't know if i could or not, as I have never been to NY or seen the Statue of liberty in person. But what i can do is repeat the experiment somewhere that i readily have access to. And so can you...and so can anyone. And in case you missed it, the idea is to see if you can see something at a distance that the supposed curvature of the earth would otherwise block from your view...
No, you're so obviously not familiar with it. Cavendish went to extreme lengths to limit sources of error in his experiment - the fact that you think he didn't think of temperature betrays just how ignorant you are.
are you suggesting that you can do an experiment of mass attracting mass and expect the mass of your surrounds, which include the earth, to not effect the result of said experiment?
The mass of the Earth does not affect the experiment because the experiment is not sensitive to vertical gravitational forces. The experiment is essentially measuring the twisting of a hanging wire - the twist comes from horizontal forces, not vertical forces. Therefore, the mass of the Earth doesn't affect the experiment. The only mass that affects the experiment is mass that is on the horizontal plane.
Other mass on that plane will technically have an effect, but since the masses are so small and so far away the uncertainty is really small. This is a dumb argument for you to make, because you're not disputing the strength of gravity, you're disputing the existence. Whether or not it is a fraction of a percent stronger or weaker is not helping your denial.
I obviously, at least to me, just wrote out "laws of density" to save me the time of writing the definition and density of all known substances
Yeah, the density of Osmium was real important for this conversation. We were all eagerly awaiting that part. Bullshit.
Are you seriously telling me that you have always visually perceived the sun as the same size? It has never looked bigger or smaller, closer or farther away from you?
I was hoping for a measurement you made, something scientific. Should I spend more time staring at the Sun, like you?
Well i don't know if i could or not, as I have never been to NY or seen the Statue of liberty in person. But what i can do is repeat the experiment somewhere that i readily have access to. And so can you...and so can anyone. And in case you missed it, the idea is to see if you can see something at a distance that the supposed curvature of the earth would otherwise block from your view...
I live about 60 miles from New York City, so I was hoping I could do this experiment myself. It's always seemed odd to me that you guys constantly claim that this is possible, but no one has ever posted a picture of the Statue of Liberty from 60 miles away or a location so that I can do the experiment myself. Is proof really too much to ask of a "proof"?
No, you're so obviously not familiar with it. Cavendish went to extreme lengths to limit sources of error in his experiment - the fact that you think he didn't think of temperature betrays just how ignorant you are.
So Cav was able to control the temperature down to the degree in his barn 200+ years ago? Interesting....
And if you could direct me to where i can view the actual datalog he used during this "experiment" that would be great....
The mass of the Earth does not affect the experiment because the experiment is not sensitive to vertical gravitational forces. The experiment is essentially measuring the twisting of a hanging wire - the twist comes from horizontal forces, not vertical forces. Therefore, the mass of the Earth doesn't affect the experiment. The only mass that affects the experiment is mass that is on the horizontal plane.
Other mass on that plane will technically have an effect, but since the masses are so small and so far away the uncertainty is really small. This is a dumb argument for you to make, because you're not disputing the strength of gravity, you're disputing the existence. Whether or not it is a fraction of a percent stronger or weaker is not helping your denial.
If gravity is real, why on earth do you believe that any experiment would not be sensitive to "vertical gravitational forces"?
If earths gravity supposedly pulls everything on earths surface, in its atmosphere, and even in the surrounding outer space, to the center of the earth, how can you say with a straight face that an experiment conducted on the surface of the earth is not effected by that gravity? I mean, that really makes no sense to me at all...
Yeah, the density of Osmium was real important for this conversation. We were all eagerly awaiting that part. Bullshit.
lol..ok...me trying to save time writing a reddit post is just too far out there to believe...whatever you say.
I live about 60 miles from New York City, so I was hoping I could do this experiment myself. It's always seemed odd to me that you guys constantly claim that this is possible, but no one has ever posted a picture of the Statue of Liberty from 60 miles away or a location so that I can do the experiment myself. Is proof really too much to ask of a "proof"?
There are a number of examples where they give you locations to conduct the "distance vs earthcurve experiment" proof#70 @ 41:12 for example...if you really want to use the SoL for yours, get on a boat, go out far enough to conduct the experiment, and do so.....
So Cav was able to control the temperature down to the degree in his barn 200+ years ago? Interesting....
Temperature differentials is literally the first source of error he talks about. It's literally discussed while he describes the experimental set-up and how he dealt with it.
And if you could direct me to where i can view the actual datalog he used during this "experiment" that would be great....
His paper is publish on the Royal Society of London's website. You should know this since you're so familiar with the experiment.
If earths gravity supposedly pulls everything on earths surface, in its atmosphere, and even in the surrounding outer space, to the center of the earth, how can you say with a straight face that an experiment conducted on the surface of the earth is not effected by that gravity?
Find the nearest door and open it about half-way. Find a stool and place it next to the door.
Stand on top of the stool and push straight down on the top of the door. Notice how it doesn't move?
Now lay down on the ground and push directly up on the bottom of the door. Notice how it doesn't move?
Now go on either side of the door and push in a horizontal direction. Notice how it moves quite easily?
This is because doors have hinges that can only twist around one axis. Likewise, the Cavendish Experiment has a wire that can only twist around one axis.
if you really want to use the SoL for yours, get on a boat, go out far enough to conduct the experiment, and do so.....
Where, though? I know you're not familiar with New York City or the Harbor, which is why you believe that idiot's claims, but there is no straight line path from the Statue of Liberty out into the Atlantic.
His paper is publish on the Royal Society of London's website. You should know this since you're so familiar with the experiment.
I asked for his datalogs...as in notes...journals...written logs of the when wheres whats etc etc...assuming they even exist. You seem to have a a lot of faith in 18th century science/aristocrats and modern historians...
Find the nearest door and open it about half-way. Find a stool and place it next to the door.
Stand on top of the stool and push straight down on the top of the door. Notice how it doesn't move?
Now lay down on the ground and push directly up on the bottom of the door. Notice how it doesn't move?
Now go on either side of the door and push in a horizontal direction. Notice how it moves quite easily?
This is because doors have hinges that can only twist around the vertical axis. Likewise, the Cavendish Experiment has a wire that can only twist around the vertical axis.
With enough force it certainly would move, regardless of the axis of the hinge...and here in lies my point....gravitational force is supposedly too weak to rip my door right off its hinges, and at the exact same time its strong enough to keep the oceans and ginormous boulders, among other things, from flying off the surface of a supposedly spinning earth....so how can that be?
Where, though? I know you're not familiar with New York City or the Harbor, which is why you believe that idiot's claims, but there is no straight line path from the Statue of Liberty out into the Atlantic.
You are right, im not personally familiar with that area, but according to the interwebs....the top of the SoL torch is roughly 315 ft above sea level and from the looks of this nothing in the red circle is anywhere near that high, so you should have line of sight....if there is no earth curve and its a clear day. Bring some good binoculars or a telescope of course....I personally would just take a vacation to the mid and or southwestern US if I were you....a lot more open spaces for miles and miles, which makes the experiment easier to do...the ocean is pretty terrifying ;)
I asked for his datalogs...as in notes...journals...written logs of the when wheres whats etc etc...assuming they even exist. You seem to have a a lot of faith in 18th century science/aristocrats and modern historians...
It's literally a scanned copy of the papers. Without mailing the original documents to you, you're not going to get any better than that.
With enough force it certainly would move, regardless of the axis of the hinge...
If you broke the hinge, but as long as the hinge holds there's only horizontal movement allowed. Since Cavendish's apparatus didn't break, it only had movement around one axis.
You are right, im not personally familiar with that area, but according to the interwebs....the top of the SoL torch is roughly 315 ft above sea level and from the looks of this nothing in the red circle and on the sight line is anywhere near that high, so you should have line of sight....if there is no earth curve and its a clear day.
Ah, by that same logic I should be able to see the Sun at all times on a flat earth, because nothing is 3000 miles tall to obscure it. This is the problem with flat earthers - all ad hoc solutions, no cohesiveness.
It's literally a scanned copy of the papers. Without mailing the original documents to you, you're not going to get any better than that.
Well feel free to link that webpage to me.
If you broke the hinge, but as long as the hinge holds there's only horizontal movement allowed. Since Cavendish's apparatus didn't break, it only had movement around one axis.
So again...why doent the awseome force of gravity rip the door off the hinges? You sort of ignored the rest of my comment here...how can gravity be simultaneously weak enough not to rip my door of the hinges and strong enough to hold oceans and mountains to the surface of the earth?
Ah, by that same logic I should be able to see the Sun at all times on a flat earth, because nothing is 3000 miles tall to obscure it. This is the problem with flat earthers - all ad hoc solutions, no cohesiveness.
That's unfair....you forget about raw distance( there is a big difference from 60 miles and 1000 miles, let alone 10,000 + miles)...atmospheric conditions...relative angles....elevation....and again, the earth is not perfectly "flat"... Mountains and valleys etc etc.
clouds can blot out the sun at noon in the right whether conditions...
and people can't see infinitely far....
I would bet though, at a high enough altitude, and with the right weather conditions and equipment....i bet you could see the sun continuously from the same point, for 24 continuous hours. Maybe wealthier men than us will attempt this someday....
So again...why doent the awseome force of gravity rip the door off the hinges? You sort of ignored the rest of my comment here...how can gravity be simultaneously weak enough not to rip my door of the hinges and strong enough to hold oceans and mountains to the surface of the earth?
You're trying to compare fundamentally incomparable things. A door falls to the ground due to gravity, and water falls to the ground gravity. The door is held off the ground by a hinge, but the water is not held off the ground by anything. The question you're asking has very little to do with the strength of gravity because it's the same for both oceans and doors - the difference is in the hinge's electromagnetic forces.
Thanks, but if you believe that is a scanned 200 year old document, you are high as fuck.
but the water is not held off the ground by anything.
Well if the world was spinning as fast as they say it is....the oceans would fly off of it...tptb say the awesome force of gravity prevents this....so again....if gravity is so strong as to not allow the OCEANS to fly off the face of the earth due to its spin. How can said force also be so weak as to not allow my door to be ripped off its hinges at the exact same time?
Thanks, but if you believe that is a scanned 200 year old document, you are high as fuck.
Right.
Well if the world was spinning as fast as they say it is....the oceans would fly off of it...
No. How much centrifugal acceleration is there? That answer would need to be greater than 9.8 m/s2 for what you said to be true. There is no calculation you can do to support this. You can pull a number out of a hat and claim it to be true, but no actual calculation would support this.
No. How much centrifugal acceleration is there? That answer would need to be greater than 9.8 m/s2 for what you said to be true. There is no calculation you can do to support this. You can pull a number out of a hat and claim it to be true, but no actual calculation would support this.
ok...lets forget about the spin...how does the force of gravity hold oceans to the face of the earth and not have the force to rip off my door from its hinges?
Cuz "science" says the reason why the oceans are able to stay on the face of a sphere is because of gravity....so how can a force be strong enough to hold oceans to the face of the earth and weak enough not to rip my door from its hinges?
Are you admitting that the centrifugal force is not larger than the gravitational force?
Cuz "science" says the reason why the oceans are able to stay on the face of a sphere is because of gravity....
This much is largely true - the oceans are held to Earth due to gravity.
so how can a force be strong enough to hold oceans to the face of the earth and weak enough to not rip my door from its hinges?
This kind of statement doesn't make sense.
It's trivially true that the gravitational force on a door is weaker than the gravitational force on an ocean because the force of gravity is a product of mass - oceans have larger masses than doors, and therefore oceans experience larger gravitational forces than doors.
I suppose what you're actually asking is why is the electromagnetic force of the hinge stronger than the gravitational force of the Earth?
Are you admitting that the centrifugal force is not larger than the gravitational force?
i don't believe that there is a centrifugal force or gravitational force because i don't believe in gravity or that the earth is spinning ball!
because the force of gravity is a product of mass...
you really buy that shit eh? lol.....why in that case has the earth and moon not collided?....they both supposedly have more mass than the oceans, and if what you say is true, their masses should bring them together....every explanation that "science" gives for these questions disproves some other claim they make...and they keep running the conversation around in circles....the "science" of a globe earth and gravity has no basis in REALITY. It's all theoretical nonsense that ignores real restrictions and truths.
Well if the world was spinning as fast as they say it is....the oceans would fly off of it...
You said this. How large do "they" say the centrifugal force is?
.why in that case has the earth and moon not collided?....they both supposedly have more mass than the oceans, and if what you say is true, their masses should bring them together....
See, this is why I said you knew nothing about momentum.
every explanation that "science" gives for these questions disproves some other claim they make...and they keep running the conversation around in circles....
They most common theory I have seen is that there is no edge, but rather antartica is a giant "ice wall" that no one has ever actually crossed. There are about a million other arguments against a flat earth, but theyll always just say actual evidence for a globe is elaborately manufactured.
You'd think that one of them would gather up enough wealth, and just sail to the South Pole and prove themselves right. Or get a pilot's license/charter a jet and prove themselves right. Or get some equipment and prove themselves right. Or get a degree in physics or astronomy or aerospace engineering, get a job at a government aerospace department and prove themselves right.
It's pretty funny. Any method they could use to prove their conspiracy that involves anything other than sitting at their computers all day never happens. You'd think a pilot, or aerospace engineer, or a worker from NASA, or a worker from SpaceX, or a worker from [insert 1 of the 1000+ aerospace firms that helps put shit into space here] would come forward and explain specifically how people are faking a round earth. Oh well. I'm sure they'll have arguments that don't involve misunderstanding science one day...
Eh, I wouldn't go that far. I've met some well-off flat earthers. They're just idiots and/or dangerously ignorant.
Funny thing is, I never meet them where I live (central Florida) where the aerospace industry is a big part of people's lives and, provides lots of jobs, helps our economy. It's like flat earthers are isolated from reality or something
In real life, I've met 5 or 6. Most of my friends are Earth/space science nerds, and many have careers or degrees relevant to those areas. When we all meet up, sometimes we run into interesting people.
This means if your feet ever leave the ground on a flying airplane you would suddenly find yourself flying 600mph into the back... Are you ok with that or are airplanes just reality simulation devices?
You absolutely will end up farther in the rear of the cabin if you jump straight up in a moving plane.
While you are in contact with the plane...sitting in a seat, or even standing still in the isle, you are moving at the speed the plane is moving. As soon as you jump up and stop making contact with the plane, momentum will still be moving you forward but at a decreasing rate (slower and slower than the plane is moving forward until you stop or until another force continues your movement), and you will land further back in the planes cabin. If you were able to discontinue contact with the plane long enough, the rear of the plane, which is moving forward faster than your forward motion, will catch up to your position in space.
A very easy way to test this (and its movement/momentum that you are testing) is to go into an elevator, the faster and taller the better, and jump while its in full motion. If the elevator is going up, your jump will be shortened because the elevator will catch up to your feet. If the elevator is going down your jump will be extended, giving you more of the falling feeling, because it will take longer for you to catch up to the floor( unless the elevator is moving at free fall speed...but i wouldn't want to be in an elevator going down that fast).
And another great way to test it is if you can get onto one of those moving floor type things they have at some airports. Get on one and mark your position on the moving floor (which can represent the supposed moving earth beneath us) jump straight up....you will land behind the mark, and the faster the floor is moving, the farther behind the mark you made you will end up.
If the earth beneath our feet, and this point is made very clear in the video i linked earlier, was really moving as fast as "science" claims or at all for that matter, that motion would be detectable by our senses and observations....but it is not detectable...cuz its not moving. They claim the visual movement of the heavens is proof that the earth is in motion, but for that to be true, you have to ignore the laws of motion and your physical senses. The heavens appear to be moving above us because they are in fact moving above us....not because we are moving below....and if we were moving we would be able to verify that motion by observing things other than the heavens above us, and we would be able to physically feel that motion, just as we see and feel our motion when we move, fall etc etc...
I respectfully disagree, but if you have been indoctrinated as most people have, i can see why you think it is. As i said, everything I described can be easily tested yourself...so feel free to do so. If you do the experiments honestly, you will come to the same results.
Aristotle's ideas of motion have been discredited for centuries, and they pre-date the concept of momentum. You can't claim that something that is not momentum is momentum. You have a severe misunderstanding of how motion and momentum works. Momentum is never destroyed like you claim. Your claims are nonsensical.
You would not be able to feel it. If you are driving and accelerate up to 60mph you can feel the acceleration, but once you are at speed, theres is no sense of movement that you would have besides the visual aspect, which is like what? Oh the heavens moving in the sky.
Are you honestly telling me the only way you can tell you are moving in a car traveling 60mph is by looking out a window? I mean i know some people are more sensitive to movement than others, but come man....feel the force....
One can feel their skin move through the atmosphere (roll down a window and put your arm out) hear the tires move along the road...and some people are so sensitive to movement that they can physically sick...even when they shut their eyes.
You don't feel, hear, smell, or taste the supposed movement of the earth because its not moving....they tell you you can see it, but if the earth was really moving, you would be able to sense it with more than your eyes.
You can feel the wind with the windows down because youre moving at a different speed than everything else, if everything else were also moving that 60 mph as well it would feel like you were standing still. Motion sickness is caused by rocking motions not the actual act of moving forward.
Yeah if the earth is moving at 100 mph hypothetically, then i accelerate myself too 60 mph, i will be going 60 mph faster than everything else its the most basic shit in the world.
"Conflicting signals can cause motion sickness. For example, when you’re on an airplane you can’t see turbulence, but your body can feel it. The resulting confusion can cause nausea or even vomiting."
I'm very suspicious of most events, but I too am starting to believe that it's just misinformation. I am a follower of space weather and it's effects on our planet. This is one area where I believe the flat earth model doesn't fit. I will still look into it more and entertain ideas, but I'm leaning towards it being a globe.
I find you guys far more annoying than the 'constant' flat earth theorums that i almost never see. The earth is round correct, but perhaps maybe its you guys who should be the ones getting over that fact lol?
you are right it's not "flat" flat is a misnomer. A term used to simplify a complex topic. Obviously we have mountains and canyons not many areas are truly flat. However, we do not live on a globe, a sphere, a oblate spheroid, etc. It's not spinning either, or moving in anyway. We are stationary. not a ball.
Right, sure. So where's the edge of the fucking pie plate we're all supposedly floating on? What's on the dark side? I guess the sun orbits the earth, the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause are actually real, and all those years of science, images, and people claiming the earth is spherical are just bullshit.
Have any proof or scientific evidence, other than some crackpot YouTube videos?
why is it always crack-pot youtube videos? you can't post intelligent videos on youtube? i didn't know that. Nasa and History channel post on youtube all the time are they crackpots?
thanks for another post where someone tries to discredit flat earth and does not provide any evidence the earth is a globe whatsoever.
also thanks for keeping flat earth on the front page of conspiracy. It's been there everyday for months now. I fucking wonder WHY!? LMAO obviously earth is not a globe. real talk
Flat earthers will never change their minds. No level of proof is good enough for them. Anything disproving flat earth is dismissed as fake news to them.
If I really was lied to about the shape of the Earth, then I'd absolutely accept flat Earth as real Earth, but flat Earth has no evidence in its favour.
Flat Earthers, by 'evidence' I mean actual irrefutable proof. All the supposed evidence for the flat earth is a theory based on ignorance of how the round-Earth model really works.
Gravity acts from every object. Put a ball on a string near a brick wall and the ball will be attracted to the wall.
In this experiment, were the earth flat, then the canal would be flat, and could be measured as such, by putting a laser on a boat and measuring its height on a wall on the other end, then moving the boat closer to the wall, and looking for any height change.
If the earth is really a globe after all, this whole push for a flat earth conspiracy could just be an agenda for the TPTB to discredit conspiracy theorists. They're getting exposed on just about every false flag out there. This to me is a realistic motive on their part to take the steam out of the truth movement.
What are the easiest proofs to list that irrefutably demonstrate a round earth? Do you have a few points that can be used in debate with a professed Flat Earther?
it's gotta be the live feed from the ISS right? Or the fact that stars are different in Australia.
Or just ask who benefits From a flat earth? In most legitimate conspiracies it's because somebody in a position of power benefits from the disguised actions. A conspiracy that big has to have some serious benefits for somebody. If you ask who benefits, you'll probably at least get to the heart of their belief.
Usually it comes down to a belief that science itself is a conspiracy. If they think that, then there wouldn't be an easy and irrefutable proof.
Bounced this off of my FE believer.
ISS feed is faked. "They" just don't know much about stars yet. No answer on who benefits. Yep, seeming like a lost cause for me to convince my friend that the FE theory is a distraction/disinformation, which is what I believe. Thanks for your reply, tho
What are your thoughts about Surveyors who refuse to learn the office side of things. I have met many Surveyors who want nothing to do with the office, but for me I love Field to Finish.
There is nothing more satisfying than performing a complete topo and bring it into auto cad and mapping it up. I even create legals and Right of Way plans now.
I spent years self teaching myself Land desktop and Civil3d, but I never desired to go get my PS. Do you have a PS or desire to get one if do not have one already?
I love the soup to nuts process but prefer office over field if I had to pick one due to winter. I passed parts 1&2 and just finished part 3 on Friday. They said it will take 3 months to send my results to me but I'm pretty confident I passed. It's well worth obtaining because the supply of surveyors is so much lower than demand (At least in my area) Definitely a tight community especially considering how many father son businesses there are. My dad is a PLS and I always hit it off well with other surveyors' sons.
Are you from the states? Here in Ohio you need a 4 year degree to get your PS. This is what is discouraging me from pursuing it. I know you used to be able to just take the test around here back in the 90's
I'm in New York. They still let you take the test with experience but they're a lot stricter with those applicants. I got the degree though because my dad was a surveyor and I knew I wanted to do that.
does your company insist on taking adavantage of the one call system and call in free locates simply to turn around and resell the information gained from the locates whilst knowing the usual size of the locate you call in takes several hours for the locators to mark out with no profit for the companies who are responsible for preforming the locates when you could easily get the information you need from submitting a boundary survey and requesting prints... and do you ever wonder why those locates are shitty when your average utility locator does over 50+ locates a day.
that sucks, in MN we can give you prints the important stuff like phone lines to banks and police stations arent on them to begin with. Surveryors should be able to have access to basic prints otherwise the locating companies lose hundreds of dollars an hour painting out large surveys, every locate is paid out by utility per locate not per time. So if I spend 5 hours marking 4 utilities my company gets paid the same as if I spend 5 minutes at your house marking your electric phone water sewer and gas line.
My god this thread. Thanks for making this OP it's really opened my eyes that no matter how stupid you think people are there are always people way, way more stupid than that. The scientific literacy by the flat earthers is astonishingly low and I really didn't think there were that many ardent believers.
When dealing with an idea this weird you gotta think outside the box. I've talked with flat earthers who would show you some pretty remarkable systems that could produce much of what we observe in the night sky.
Obviously in the end, flat earth is fully ridiculous, but whenever I stumble on a new conspiracy theory, I don't just take an easy answer and call it a day.
Thank you, I'm glad you're putting an end to this nonsense. Never saw a flat-earth post until pizzagate started up and I think it's pretty obvious we hit a nerve and these bullshit posts are to make this like a bunch of idiots.
I have a good reason for most people to look into why the earth is round. It has to do with wave propagation. So if we lived on a flat earth there wound be seemingly no horizon to interfere with radio signals and long distance communication would be very easy to transmit even with low frequency signals. Now with communication, there are ground waves or sky waves. Ground waves use line of sight to transfer information, sky waves use the ionosphere to bounce off of to avoid obstacles in the way, the issue with a flat earth means there would never truly be a reason to bounce off of the sky, and if you did the angle of incidence would be too great losing the data. Now with sky waves if you want to communicate with radio waves over the horizon you use a high frequency signal bounced off of the sky to reach where you are trying to communicate with, high frequency is better as there is more information that can be encoded in the wave as well as it isn't as disturbed by atmospheric conditions, it has the right velocity to actually utilize the curvature of the earth to its benefit and it's packet loss and clarity is much higher.
Let's say I'm on the shore of an imaginary perfectly calm Pacific in California and I had a billion pieces of perfectly level railroad track, and kept adding a section of track, always maintaining perfect level for the ever-lengthening creation---totally stiff--the leading end moving out across the calm ocean. Let's say starting out at 5 feet above the water. Would the leading end of track eventually start moving away from the earth and into space? Or, since level is always being maintained, would the track remain at 5 feet above the water and curve with the earth?
You would have to run this with multiple setups of the level. Each setup would be perpendicular to gravity. So each level setup would have an ever so slightly different plane than the preceding setup. The succession of these setups follows the shape of the earth. So it would maintain 5 feet above the water. If it was possible to lay the whole thing out from a single level setup, then it would move off the water.
In this meager thought experiment, when the steel is connected, each section fits in place with no bend in the connection. It essentially makes the rail one flush continued line.
So the extended rail would curve? It wouldn't be a straight line into space? How would the stiff steel curve?
I hope you understand what I'm getting at. Imagine a ball with a straight line on top of it. The line would be the steel rail, and the ball the earth. The line moves into space on either end. If someone created a line and it was perfectly level between two points on that "micro" shore, would the line of steel go into space, or would it somehow bend around the earth (gravity, warping of space-time), in essence creating a circle as it comes back to meet itself?
(this might take a little back and forth for me to communicate this clearly, as I'm no physicist).
But when the piece is connected it locks in perfectly and not at an angle. Let's say there aren't many pieces, but one long 24,901 mile piece of straight track that comes out of theoretical "track-maker" that is perfectly level at the source (like a laser beam coming out that is perfectly level--I'm using steel instead of a laser, because I imagine the atmosphere can affect a laser beam). Would the seemingly inflexible steel rail end up in space, or bend around the earth making a complete circle?
I can't believe some of these supposed truth seekers. Government or in Latin Governale + Mente literally means mind control. You Roman citizens love your Cesar more than you love yourself.
Currently a HSO in the Australian Navy... well until June I'm discharging. So anywhere between Antarctica and Singapore. We don't do a lot of terrestrial work only on the beaches when we are putting in tidal infrastructure or for amphibious landings.
Because we live in a society where we are being lied to CONSTANTLY, day in and day out,, with the obvious intention to limit the competency of the general public - so naturally, people are trying to question everything, and only believe things with verifiable proof - the problem with flat earth theorists is that there is tons of verifiable proof but people are ignoring it or not taking the time to scientifically prove it for themselves
It's used as an insult whenever you cross a boundary here in our limited hangout. Pizzagate and questioning Assange's whereabouts are very touchy subjects. I was called a flat earther yesterday for simply bringing up some facts about what happened to wikileaks back in October.
It's a psyop. The ideas were planted on the internet and a few random, low-level celebrities were sacrificed to push the idea and fool as many idiots as they can and it somehow worked. I think they were doing their yearly intelligence test.
I was a civil engineering drafter and designer for over a decade. Just wanted to corroborate this answer. It's true and AutoCAD Civil 3D, ArcGIS and other programs used to crunch survey data have automated this process.
Great example - people here can rent a Trimble unit themselves and experiment with the correction parameters and read up on how it works if they don't believe it
Yeah but even actors can come equipped with facts and a degree from a university. Maybe they are a bit skewed but their biggest fight right now is climate change. It's not just the polar icecaps melting, it's the effects of large amounts of carbon and methane and their effect on agricultural production. Imagine if randomly the rural farm states became a desert.
Hey, it's possible it could happen naturally but there is usually a cause.
Not trying to be a dick, but I encourage you to take a step back and look at yourself. /u/TellMeTrue22 has just provided very solid evidence against the Flat Earth Theory. Why not do your own research to find a rebuttal rather than, "Government owns GPS!" That is the conspiracy cop-out right there.
If you really cared about uncovering an objective truth, you would do your own homework and look at the data for yourself.
I'm not even arguing against a Flat Earth, I'm simply encouraging you to recognize your own biases. Conspiracy Theorists should hold an attitude of the utmost skepticism, but what you've demonstrated is anything but that; it's an almost fervent hope that the world actually is flat.
Questions should always remain open ended for a conspiracy theorist. IMO flat earth hasn't been concretely disproven, and the more you look into history of science, nasa, the Cia, etc the more you'll see has been hidden from us. At the end of the day, I can go out on the beach, see another beach 15- 20 miles away(defies the formula for curvature, it should be well below the horizon). That's my personal proof. I can see how there is stretchs of land that defy the curvature and let you see further then you should be able to, but oceans should follow the curvature and they don't from my person observations. You can find many youtube videos of people zooming in on distant coasts which should be even further below the horizon.
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
There are very few maps that are, check out the map porn subreddit, even science doesn't agree on which map is most accurate, and we mostly just default to one works for general navigation...
They don't. It's not really an organic 'conspiracy theory' but rather something that certain folks specifically picked to start spamming CT type forums/subs with because it's a very well known 'stupid' idea from hundreds of years ago. The idea will be to dillute all the good useful information here with shit in order to maybe put people off fom hanging around and learning something but also to create the impression that the users of the sub are people who believe any old shit. It's scientifically provable that the Earth is round (you can do this yourself) and on that basis alone posts claiming that the World is flat should be removed by the mods immediately in my opinion due to the ratio of benefit and damage of having them here.
The compass would point north in both models, just replace magnetic north with magnetic "center" if the earth was flat.
no they dont.
Yes they do, look at a flat earth flight maps. 2 stop flights which shoot wildly off course north to make absurd connections actually make sense on a flat earth map, where the top of the triangle shape on a globe is actually the middle point of a straight line between the origin and the destination on a flat map. The emergency landing in Alaska from Bali to LA makes sense only if Alaska is on the way to LA from Bali, which it is, on the flat earth map, but not the globe. There are no real flights that you'd be able to take over Antarctica.
It's the middle Knightsbridge so there's not too many airstrips nearby other than the actual airports. I used to live in London and we walk past all manner of kerfuffles every day. You don't even look round at an emergency vehicle most of the time as it just doesn't concern you and it's one of a good few you'll probably see that day. There wouldn't be any shit going down anyway. In fact, had he had his lunch spiked for example, he may have just been a lump of meat to be moved.
This means if your feet ever leave the ground on a flying airplane you would suddenly find yourself flying 600mph into the back... Are you ok with that or are airplanes just reality simulation devices?
As a prospective aerospace engineer, all I can say is you should tell that to my professors. It'd make my physics homework a hell of a lot easier if satellites were a myth.
Also, you should tell that to my colleagues who worked on this too. It'll make their Graduate dissertations easier since all the data they got back is a farce
So if the earth is flat, where the fuck did they get the other pictures to make the composite?!?!?! Did they just take a bunch of pics of the flat earth and wad them up into a ball?!?!
This goes back to an earlier point I made about how flat earthers cherry pick what they want to be true. You even cherry picked parts of a sentence from an article and ignored the rest of the sentence as well as the rest of the atricle!!
So, just to clarify (since this is kind of an imprecise answer), you mean that when you take a straight-line measurement (using a laser?) you have to correct that measurement for the curve of the Earth in order to get it to match up with what the GPS satellites tell you?
I mean, obviously you're not saying that the 'GPS coordinates' are wrong.
It's largely the same claim over and over again with minor changes. Best example to disprove would be the Statue of Liberty one because there are like four dozen of that claim over and over again.
First problem: there's no proofs given, it's just empty claims. All he's doing is claiming that you can see the Statue of Liberty, he doesn't give you a reason to believe him at all. Not even a measly picture.
Second problem: he doesn't give you any information to recreate his "experiment" (not to imply that I think he's ever done this experiment). Where was he when he supposedly saw the Statue? "60 miles away" is a circle with a circumference of nearly 400 miles in three states - no one could follow up if they wanted to because of this.
Third problem: this claim isn't true. I'm about 60 miles away from the Statue of Liberty and I can't see it right now. Of course, flat earthers will claim that my vision is being blocked by trees and hills and buildings - and I would agree! Therefore, the location the author must have been in to truthfully make this claim has to be somewhere on this circle that is not being blocked by hills, trees, buildings, etc. It should be really obvious that this isn't possible because New York Harbor is surrounded by buildings, trees, and hills.
But if everything was on a single plane, that wouldn't matter. The line passing through your eye and the edge of the ruler would meet the horizon no matter what point on the ruler you were looking through.
The test at the start proves the ruler is straight. Your eye is a fixed point. The only thing that can be different is the horizon.
I actually just made this to demonstrate what I was trying to say. The scale is really fucked (x:y is 2000:1) so this great circle of the earth looks more like a parabola but it's the only way to get all the points in one view (the units are in feet so we're looking at a 21 million foot radius circle here so hopefully that's not too upsetting). The flat red line is the standard flat earther perspective whereas the point G and the intersecting horizon line represents someone only one foot above sea level and the value is the distance in feet from the observer (So a little over a mile is now the horizon line only one foot off the ground which means you can see things that are over a foot tall from this perspective from 2 miles away). The lowest point J is the point of horizon for someone 15 feet above sea level and is about 5 miles away (15 feet above sea level gives you a 10 mile line of sight for things just over 15 feet tall). Now hopefully you see in any other demo like this they forget your line of sight can drop below a perfect horizontal gaze at 0 feet above sea level (probably because they believe in the fictitious "law of perspective"). Hopefully that satisfies your debunking need because I ain't makin' no YouTube video.
But when the piece is connected it locks in perfectly and not at an angle. Let's say there aren't many pieces, but one long 24,901 mile piece of straight track that comes out of theoretical "track-maker" that is perfectly level at the source (like a laser beam coming out that is perfectly level--I'm using steel instead of a laser, because I imagine the atmosphere can affect a laser beam). Would the seemingly inflexible steel rail end up in space, or bend around the earth making a complete circle?
When dealing with an idea this weird you gotta think outside the box. I've talked with flat earthers who would show you some pretty remarkable systems that could produce much of what we observe in the night sky.
Obviously in the end, flat earth is fully ridiculous, but whenever I stumble on a new conspiracy theory, I don't just take an easy answer and call it a day.
It's literally a scanned copy of the papers. Without mailing the original documents to you, you're not going to get any better than that.
Well feel free to link that webpage to me.
If you broke the hinge, but as long as the hinge holds there's only horizontal movement allowed. Since Cavendish's apparatus didn't break, it only had movement around one axis.
So again...why doent the awseome force of gravity rip the door off the hinges? You sort of ignored the rest of my comment here...how can gravity be simultaneously weak enough not to rip my door of the hinges and strong enough to hold oceans and mountains to the surface of the earth?
Ah, by that same logic I should be able to see the Sun at all times on a flat earth, because nothing is 3000 miles tall to obscure it. This is the problem with flat earthers - all ad hoc solutions, no cohesiveness.
That's unfair....you forget about raw distance( there is a big difference from 60 miles and 1000 miles, let alone 10,000 + miles)...atmospheric conditions...relative angles....elevation....and again, the earth is not perfectly "flat"... Mountains and valleys etc etc.
clouds can blot out the sun at noon in the right whether conditions...
and people can't see infinitely far....
I would bet though, at a high enough altitude, and with the right weather conditions and equipment....i bet you could see the sun continuously from the same point, for 24 continuous hours. Maybe wealthier men than us will attempt this someday....
It will. People just assume since they notice stuff moving that it will always be/always has. As it's moving closer to the center point of our "rotation" it's effectively charging the sun causing "global warming".
Gravity acts from every object. Put a ball on a string near a brick wall and the ball will be attracted to the wall.
In this experiment, were the earth flat, then the canal would be flat, and could be measured as such, by putting a laser on a boat and measuring its height on a wall on the other end, then moving the boat closer to the wall, and looking for any height change.
It doesn't account for those things. Flat earthers just ignore, deny, and misinterpret all legitimate evidence. They rely on people on the internet who have layman's understandings of physics and astronomy to fuel their beliefs.
Like the position of Polaris, as you said, and long-exposure photographs of stars. Compare images from the northern hemisphere, southern hemisphere, and equator. At the equator, long exposure images will show the stars taking a straight path across the sky. Further north/south, the stars appear to take a curved path.
That apparent movement makes perfect sense in a round earth model. There's 0 explanation for those on a flat Earth model. That's one of the easiest proofs against a flat Earth. Others include Earth's shadow on the moon, measurements of gravity, a Foucalt pendulum... I could go on. I just think flat earthers fall into a a category of people who are just dangerously stupid, because they are able to believe nonsense in the face of all contradicting evidence. It shows they are unwilling to accept facts once they find an opinion that they like best. There's a reason most flat earthers believe the exact same set of conspiracies.
855 comments
n/a BrazenBull 2017-04-22
But is it hollow?
n/a Rancorx 2017-04-22
Asking the real questions
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Can't honestly debate that lol. I'm more an expert on the surface.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
My experience is limited to the surface of the earth.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
The vertical datums we use to model an equipotential surface for leveling are directly built off of gravity measurements. If it is hollow then there is a super dense layer between the center and the crust.
n/a snowmandan 2017-04-22
Dude thank you
n/a shockaDee 2017-04-22
This is interesting to me, not because of flat earth, but because I thought that the real gravity changed depending on where you are on the planet. I thought it was weaker towards the poles? Could be wrong. I think there are areas of the earth with slightly lower / higher values even away from the poles.
I just wonder if it were true, would it affect your measurements?
n/a neverthatone 2017-04-22
There are slight variations dependent on distance from the center mass (I'm sure of that one) as well as pockets of stronger or weaker gravity dependent on the density of material below you. (not certain that that is true) All of theses variations are extremely slight.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
here is what the earth would look like if gravity was equal everywhere. it's the basis for our level datum.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Yes. Gravity varries around the earth. It mostly has to do with the composition of the crust at these points. Dense materials in this area? More gravity. And yes they affect our measurements.
n/a ruleten 2017-04-22
Don't forget all of the leaps in logic and unfinished equations required to come to "gravitational theory" to begin with.
Black matter for the win.
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
Sorry, do you mean dark matter?
At least get the name of the hypothesis right lol
n/a thegoodmourning 2017-04-22
You did not destroy my dreams of Agartha and I feel the need to thank you for that.
n/a skeeter1234 2017-04-22
Well, now I know what to name my next album.
n/a thegoodmourning 2017-04-22
Track 3 can be called Good Mourning. Alkaline Trio will get over it eventually.
n/a mexicaaaan 2017-04-22
Miles Davis already beat you to it
n/a IntellisaurDinoAlien 2017-04-22
That was just Agartha wasn't it?
n/a Kataphractos 2017-04-22
Miles Davis already beat you to it).
n/a cb3cacabf 2017-04-22
https://www.agarthaworldsymposium.com
Only a few more months!
n/a euleausberlin 2017-04-22
What do you think about the gravity anomalies in the Antarctica?
n/a ruleten 2017-04-22
Won't get much of an answer because round earth theory doesn't account for this.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
It's accounted for right there in the links.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
couldn't it also just really be what they say it is?
n/a probablyuntrue 2017-04-22
It's obviously written by shills of Big Gravity
n/a kiplightbringer 2017-04-22
I know you are probably a shill trying to make the shill thing seem like a joke. But that was funny.
n/a euleausberlin 2017-04-22
Sure, that's why I linked to the Wiki article too.
n/a qualityproduct 2017-04-22
Unless gravity has to do with the speed the earth rotates, and less it's mass density.
n/a HotDealsInTexas 2017-04-22
Which seismic studies would have noticed: we've literally determined the density profile of Earth's interior by measuring the speed at which vibrations from earthquakes travel through it.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Didn't want to answer beyond my expertise.
n/a LightBringerFlex 2017-04-22
It can't be hallow because gravity pulls everything to the center.
n/a Gold_is_Monies 2017-04-22
Supposed to be a "star" at the center.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Thank you - im a civil engineer and work with land surveyors regularly. Would be happy to reinforce this in any way possible so we can get past this bogus distraction conspiracy.
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
How could anyone believe such a outlandish conspiracy? It saddens me.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Because we live in a society where we are being lied to CONSTANTLY, day in and day out,, with the obvious intention to limit the competency of the general public - so naturally, people are trying to question everything, and only believe things with verifiable proof - the problem with flat earth theorists is that there is tons of verifiable proof but people are ignoring it or not taking the time to scientifically prove it for themselves
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
Yeah but when do people cross the line and question too much? There's nothing wrong with asking questions but not everything we were taught is a lie.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
I think that is a question that can only be answered on an individual basis - there is always the chance that some people who over-question things can still stumble into eureka moments.
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
True, I agree with that 100%. But sometimes people over question and they start see patterns where none exist.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Thats why competency and a desire to learn/question are both very important - if you are only going to ask questions and not do any scientific problem solving, then you will find yourself more confused than how you started
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
Exactly, my Mother doesn't do her research, so she believes that the Earth is truly flat, which I argue with her about on a weekly basis. I think these people believe they are red pilled, but in actuality they are pawns of some CIA ( or whatever ) operation to spread false information, to make people think they are red pilled when they actually aren't.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
I understand their perspective, and i sympathize - but at some point, you have to realize that you are King among Kings - you have the mentality capacity to go out and prove or disprove aspects of the physical world to yourself if you wish to disbelieve your education - the worst thing you can do is try to indoctrinate other people into believe your false theory that you havent even taken the time to whole-fully verify
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
I fell like I just learned something important here, thank you for explaining this too me. I have a hard time stepping into other people's shoes so I couldn't understand why someone would even believe in such a theory. Thank you.
n/a Loose-ends 2017-04-22
I'd say that her belief in the conspiracy that surrounds what you happen to believe is just as genuine and rests on a better foundation and observable evidence in more ways than one than the one you suspect about what she happens to believe about that.
She obviously mistrusts and is suspicions about the motives of all the so called "authorities" that you don't ever dare to question because you've been thoroughly educated not to, nor do you want to face the possibility that what they taught you and what you've subsequently come to believe as a result of it, is precisely why the world is in the present state and predicament that's it's in.
Nothing has played as big a role in the making of wars, the spreading of violence, and the ruthless exploitation of other human beings and the environment itself in the past century as science itself has with the pre-eminent status and general authority it has been given over very nearly every aspect human life.
It clearly isn't a discipline that has managed control what information it seeks out and applies strictly for any greater good, nor was it ever.
It began and still is a tool of the rich and wealthy who have always funded and directed it towards improving the advantages they enjoy over the masses and supressing and repressing the discovery of any information that might ever upset that balance.
It is a science in the pursuit of private monetary profits and material wealth strictly for a few and there are no benefits that it has ever brought or bestowed on mankind that didn't always have that motive behind them.
There is also more than ample evidence that any who pursue science out of any purely altruistic motives will either have their minds very quickly changed about that or else be forced out of the field altogether and prevented in whatever ways are necessary from pursuing that goal depending on what kind of threat it represents to the existing order.
n/a DankMemeMagician 2017-04-22
It's not a problem of them questioning too much, it's a problem of their competency. I think many may of the 'flat-earth' types actually be mentally ill, which obviously hinders their ability to be a reasonable skeptic.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
FE is not a mental illness.
It is a dis/misinformation campaign the goal of which is to discredit those who see thru the bullshit by creating the appearance that such people are crazy.
n/a DankMemeMagician 2017-04-22
Not all conspiracies are created equal, and while I do think it's certainly interesting how 'mass-surveilance' was treated for years as a conspiracy theory on the same level as chem-trails and lizard people. Don't think that insane chemtrail and flat-earth people don't exist though, they're certainly out there. They might be used as bludgeons to attack & cast aspersions on actual conspiracies, but they do exist.
n/a irondumbell 2017-04-22
Is it really possible to ask too much? Isn't that the goal of understanding?
n/a KrayzieBoneE99 2017-04-22
The line is pretty much Eddie Bravo. If you find yourself sounding like Eddie Bravo...you've gone too far.
n/a stordoff 2017-04-22
I don't think the problem is questioning too much (pondering even the obvious can give deeper insight, and pausing to think about someone's motivations even when they are speaking the truth can be helpful). It's that questioning can become synonymous with only believing answers that contradict mainstream opinions (I've seen some theories that assert that the way to find the truth of some event is to take the literal opposite of even throwaway details in the official narrative). That's not how you get to the truth; it just makes you a different brand of wrong.
n/a neverthatone 2017-04-22
I think it maybe a mental illness akin to believe yourself to be Napoleon.
n/a LewdRudeJude 2017-04-22
I think you hit the nail on the head with this one, but you didn't mention that this is also the land of alternative facts, and biased study.
There are plenty of "legitimate" and "scientific" organizations who are not obeying the scientific model for corporate reasons. Regardless of their motivation this definitely biases the peasant who does her/his own research.
For example, if the peasant with google wanted to know "can mercury in vaccines pass the blood-brain barrier" she/he would come up with plenty of well documented "evidence" to prove both that mercury in vaccines is harmless or harmful depending on which source is referenced.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Gullian Barre Syndrome and swine flu vaccinations is another area where there are a shit ton of fake studies disproving any link.
n/a WordSaladMan 2017-04-22
This is the real failing of most claims about the government trying to "suppress the truth" about this or that, why bother when so many people are screaming so many things at the tops of their voices. It'll just get lost in the roar, anyway. Hell, that is a big part of Russia's domestic propaganda strategy. Generate so much chatter that no one really knows what is going on, so that anything might seem believable or might be fiction. Dismiss scandals or create them on a whim. It's pretty interesting.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
That's a problem with conspiracy theorists in general. When we discover something that we think was hidden from us it confirms our beliefs and we fight "tooth and nail" to "get the truth out".
The problem is once we latch onto something it takes a hell of a lot more evidence to change our minds than it did to convince us in the first place.
All humans suffer from this problem. It's called "confirmation bias".
It can be much worse when it happens to a conspiracy theorist because when other people show contrary evidence, the conspiracy theorist has a preconceived idea that other people are trying to "suppress the truth" and the contrary evidence becomes more evidence of this suppression. This has the unintended consequence of reinforcing the false belief.
The more you try to prove to a flat earther that the earth is spherical, the more you confirm their belief that there is a conspiracy to "hide the reality" of a flat earth.
The best you can do is provide the evidence that contradicts their belief so that if they do start to question it, they have an alternative to consider. It also helps to prevent the false belief from spreading to others.
n/a wiltedunicorn 2017-04-22
While your not wrong with your statement about confirmation bias, with the way you described it, it would be more accurate to call it belief perseverance instead!
n/a alltheword 2017-04-22
It is societies fault. It isn't just that some people are morons.
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
Isn't it that the public has been always been, but now with the Internet we see it
n/a snowmandan 2017-04-22
It's used as an insult whenever you cross a boundary here in our limited hangout. Pizzagate and questioning Assange's whereabouts are very touchy subjects. I was called a flat earther yesterday for simply bringing up some facts about what happened to wikileaks back in October.
n/a dfu3568ete6 2017-04-22
Funny you'd mention 2 other things that are obvious disinfo/distraction campaigns. They gave up on WhereIsAssange though since PG caught enough traction.
n/a jakemasterj 2017-04-22
Wait, questioning where Assange is and wether he's alive or not is a disinfo campaign?
That's a goddamn shame cause I'm still not convinced he's alive, let alone in the embassy.
n/a ItsAJackOff 2017-04-22
I believe that person was trying to cast doubt in your mind. IMO PG and FE are distractions. PG has some substance, but is a dead end without any solid evidence. FE is bogus but hard to disprove because you can't just blast all the Flat Earthers into space so you have to use logic to show them first gravity exists and show them the effect it has on things like bubbles.
There are a lot of bullshit conspiracies out there, it's how counterintelligence works. Just like the sovereign citizen movement, slivers of truth shrouded in a ton of shit that will result in the loss of what few freedoms you have left.
n/a jakemasterj 2017-04-22
I agree 100% on FE and PG. PG is going to nearly impossible to ever actually prove, and FE people make my brain hurt.
n/a Dippy_Egg 2017-04-22
There was some question over at /r/WhereIsAssange as to whether the sub was being actively used to discredit wikileaks' credibility. At one point, the mods even decided to ban questioning whether he was still alive and referred said inquires back over here to /r/conspiracy. That rule didn't last long, but the concerns about dinging wikileaks' cred remain. The sub is minimally active nowadays.
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-04-22
Sub's called 'where is Assange' but really, if he isn't in the embassay or Gitmo then he's probabaly fricken dead really isn't he?
n/a dfu3568ete6 2017-04-22
It was a reasonable question when his internet was cut but peoples PoL demands got ridiculous and it quickly grew into a concern trolling disinfo effort to distract from the leaks. At this point I'd believe he was a Russian spy before I believed he was abducted from the embassy and killed.
n/a jakemasterj 2017-04-22
The only time I've seen it mentioned is a post or two on threads where he's brought up, and the same PGL key he'd been using for the longest time isn't a rediculous request, it's just asking him to continue what he always did if he's capable.
Thus far no one has proven he's incapable, or given a reason why he's not able to supply it, to my knowledge. So the question still remains perfectly valid. What happened while his Internet was cut?
n/a dfu3568ete6 2017-04-22
They created a WhereIsAssange sub and were trying to push the narrative that, without satisfying their PoL demands, nothing WL said or leaked could be trusted because they were 100% compromised. The whole sub eventually did a 180 and died.
The timeline is admittedly weird but the theory is full of holes. For one, that embassy is right next to Harrods, one of if not the biggest toy store in the world, in a very busy district of London. Everyone would see shit going down. For two, it makes zero sense to lock down one of the worlds busiest airports to fly the guy out of when they could easily go to a private airstrip and never be seen by anyone.
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-04-22
It's the middle Knightsbridge so there's not too many airstrips nearby other than the actual airports. I used to live in London and we walk past all manner of kerfuffles every day. You don't even look round at an emergency vehicle most of the time as it just doesn't concern you and it's one of a good few you'll probably see that day. There wouldn't be any shit going down anyway. In fact, had he had his lunch spiked for example, he may have just been a lump of meat to be moved.
n/a utu_ 2017-04-22
wasn't the PoL demand that he show his face on the balcony? not like it was some outrageous demand..
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-04-22
Me either. The whole thing stinks. We knew there were more leaks coming and there were rumours that they concerned something treasonous concerning Obama and Clinton.* What we'd seen already was bad enough (although you might not think so from the medias coverage). Assange plays the Bond Villain and with the drip feeding in order to maximise damage to the Dems chances, gives them all enough time to move before it's out. Pamela Anderson suddenly appears at the embassy with some food (I swear when I read this in the paper at work I looked up and said 'something is not right here.') then London City airport is evacuated for a very short period of time, RT is threatened with having it's UK bank accounts frozen (thus placing Russia as something negative or naughty in the publics eye but also no doubt giving them someting to do for the day) and wikileaks starts to 'change' a little, throwing us useless scraps of old news and being evasive about the simple question of Assanges safety for days and days on end. Oh and the internet went down as well at the same time. Due to the face2face software, unless you see him in person or really trust somebody else that has then it's perfectly rational to wonder whether they've used this in any vids you see. The intelligence agencies obviously have this stuff and this is the kind of shit it's for. Unless the CIA/NSA would use it for entertainment purposes.
n/a thegoodmourning 2017-04-22
It's a psyop. The ideas were planted on the internet and a few random, low-level celebrities were sacrificed to push the idea and fool as many idiots as they can and it somehow worked. I think they were doing their yearly intelligence test.
n/a unruly_mattress 2017-04-22
Not enough trust put in mainstream sources, too much trust in random people's YouTube ramblings.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Good one.
n/a unruly_mattress 2017-04-22
Anyone care to make the point that any amount of trust that the mainstream is not a huge conspiracy would result in no one buying the flat earth thing?
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I'm not a flat earth person, and not interested in ad hominem attacks. Mainstream souces will support mainstream narratives, are not trustworthy, and anyone on a conspiracy theory subreddit should know this.
n/a unruly_mattress 2017-04-22
The question was about people. It was "why do people believe flat earth theory".
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Truth is not based on majority rule, and mobs of people can certainly be wrong. If anything, truth is popularly ridiculed and then attacked by the masses before it is accepted. No doubt if mainstream science changes its tune and accepts flat earth, and if Popular Science says the earth is flat, you'd agree instantly and without question. Give it time.
n/a unruly_mattress 2017-04-22
Yes, since if mainstream science accepts flat earth, it would be because of major breakthroughs bringing to light how human perception was so wrong about so many things. Not because some cabal decided that the world should think that the world is flat.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
You cannot awaken a man who is pretending to be asleep.
Most of the people who are pushing this are doing so because they are being paid to spread bullshit.
FE is, imo, classic Mockingbird. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
n/a HelperBot_ 2017-04-22
Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 59397
n/a ItsAJackOff 2017-04-22
In the words of Chris Farley...
That Is Correct
n/a tazcatlipoca 2017-04-22
This.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Questions should always remain open ended for a conspiracy theorist. IMO flat earth hasn't been concretely disproven, and the more you look into history of science, nasa, the Cia, etc the more you'll see has been hidden from us. At the end of the day, I can go out on the beach, see another beach 15- 20 miles away(defies the formula for curvature, it should be well below the horizon). That's my personal proof. I can see how there is stretchs of land that defy the curvature and let you see further then you should be able to, but oceans should follow the curvature and they don't from my person observations. You can find many youtube videos of people zooming in on distant coasts which should be even further below the horizon.
n/a throwawayblue69 2017-04-22
Are you serious right now? You really think because you can see things far away, that the earth must be flat? You realize all you have to do is look into a telescope to see the planets around us are spheres right? So you think there are several spherical planets orbiting the sun but somewhere in the middle there is a flat chunk of rock?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
No, I'm saying that seeing a coast over a body of water which should be well below the horizon according to the formula for the curvature of earth raises more questions.
n/a mexicaaaan 2017-04-22
Show us the math
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
I use this calculator, I used eye height of 6 feet and target distance of 15 miles. https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/?d0=15&h0=6&unit=imperial
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
We can do this, but that would make too much sense and I have a felling someone is benefiting from the flat earth theory, I doubt anyone will do it.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
so why is it outlandish if a simple way to prove it hasnt been done?
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
You got me there, but all the proof I need is a picture of the Earth, that's why it's outlandish to me, because for me, the Earth has only ever been round.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
i keep reading every picture of earth is CGI and photoshopped...
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
Dude, I'm not going to try to come back after you brought up the CGI, you win
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
but you said all you need is a picture of earth, which helps you say flat earth is outlandish.. but i dont understand if thats all you need when they are doctored? can you explain?
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
First off, what proves that pictures of the earth are doctored? What this thread has taught me already is that both sides, the flat earth people and the round earth people, both don't have any hard proof. There's too many questions on both sides and I know what side I'm on.
I believe the earth is round because I believe that pictures of the earth are real and not Doctored. I can't prove that the earth is round because I've never been to space, I can't prove the earth is round because I didn't take or make the photos. Asking someone if pictures of the earth are fake is a incredibly dumb question, because no one could prove such a thing.
That same goes for the flat earth people. No one can prove the earth is flat. You can't say "I can't see the curvature" is like saying "I can't see God", you can't see either. Anyone claiming to have proof the earth is flat couldn't possibly without leaving the earth to take pictures.
So some people question the validity of pictures of the Earth, which makes it seem like any proof of the Earth being round is a lie. But no one has real proof of the Earth being flat. So you've basically asked a question no one can answer. Neither side has clear proof since you asked your question.
If you are going to ask for proof of the earth being round from me you aren't going to get it. I don't understand how the science of a flat earth would work and I'm not going to wrap my head around it. I have no proof, I already said you guys won because I can't answer I question without a answer.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
i agree with you, no one can answer it. the problem is you calling it "outlandish" when no one can answer it..
as for the doctored, thats just what ive read.. but good talk. i hope we can both keep an open mind on subjects like this that are theories and not 100% facts
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
I'll keep a open mind, because I really don't have the answers. I think it's outlandish because that's how I was raised, and I had no reason to question if the pictures were fake, good talk.
n/a raxus25 2017-04-22
I read it on the internet, it must be true...
n/a Wrobrox 2017-04-22
But what about pilots that have flown over 10,000 meters up and say the earth is round?
If expert testimony and video/picture evidence isn't enough then what is?
All experts are bought off. All photographic evidence is altered. What other evidence is there?
And then where's the proof of a massive conspiracy? People have been travelling the world since we knew there was something more than our local tribe, so why is it that there aren't consistent reports and evidence about the truth?
There's more credence to just about any other major conspiracy and it's why this thread even exists.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Maybe someday we'll have a real one.
n/a mexicaaaan 2017-04-22
how can you believe in GPS if you think the earth is flat?
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
first off i dont think the earth is flat, i dont think anything because they are all THEORIES
second, thats why i said open sourced and video feed as well.. basically as much proof as we can that the flight is real. whats the problem with that?
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
You can get on a plane yourself and travel to your local antipode. Millions of people do this every year.
There is literally a live stream from the ISS that shows it regularly orbiting the earth. The ISS is an open, publicly funded and massively documented international project that you can actually look at through a telescope if you want:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsc80evqJ88 https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/3ko3lt/my_first_attempt_at_capturing_the_iss_thru_a/ https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/3f9bgq/the_international_space_station_taken_from_my/ https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/3fm65y/the_iss_transiting_the_moon_at_roughly_five_miles/
All of this is simply dismissed as "fake" by flat earthers.
n/a AutoModerator 2017-04-22
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
n/a mexicaaaan 2017-04-22
I mean I just dont understand how you can trust GPS if you doubt the earth is round
n/a crielan 2017-04-22
Do you believe In gravity ?
n/a Wrobrox 2017-04-22
Except conspiracy theorists have decried live footage as faked or altered in the past.
These are the same people you respect equally as scientists and pilots because you're so "enlightened and open minded".
n/a Project_Conscious 2017-04-22
You can prove the earth is round by doing less than that - you don't need an airplane
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
if its been proven then we wouldnt have theories dating back thousands of years bruh
n/a Project_Conscious 2017-04-22
More like an aristocracy lying to a lower class throughout the course of history so they can maintain an edge on navigation / astronomy.
n/a Wrobrox 2017-04-22
Your evidence for their being credence to an argument is that the argument is old?
If that's all it takes to convince you of anything then you're a sheep. Just a conspiracy sheep instead of the average citizen sheep. I can practically feel the scheisters and scam artists getting hard thinking about what they can sell you. You're like the perfect guy to sell religion to.
n/a wiibiiz 2017-04-22
these theories are just that: theories. They stick around after being disproved, and they work extremely poorly at explaining material phenomena we see in the natural world. We already have proofs of the Earth's shape going all the way back to Eratosthenes.
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
The Eratosthenes measurements are not proof. They yield an equation with 2 unknowns: The curve of the Earth and the distance to the Sun. You cannot solve an equation with 2 unknowns.
n/a wiibiiz 2017-04-22
Ok, so the sun is 3000 miles away? I'll wait for a holistic theory that resolves all the contradictions THAT little wrinkle creates. Anyways, we have lots of contemporary evidence that is a lot more compelling.
n/a Spartan1117 2017-04-22
But theories of round earth also go back thousands of years.....
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
No idea. Has nothing to do with my professional experience.
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Because not everyone believes every 5 month old account that tells them they are stupid for discussing a topic they're allowed to freely discuss.
n/a Reality_is_a_scam 2017-04-22
Dont be sad. Do somthing to help debunk it or prove it
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-04-22
They don't. It's not really an organic 'conspiracy theory' but rather something that certain folks specifically picked to start spamming CT type forums/subs with because it's a very well known 'stupid' idea from hundreds of years ago. The idea will be to dillute all the good useful information here with shit in order to maybe put people off fom hanging around and learning something but also to create the impression that the users of the sub are people who believe any old shit. It's scientifically provable that the Earth is round (you can do this yourself) and on that basis alone posts claiming that the World is flat should be removed by the mods immediately in my opinion due to the ratio of benefit and damage of having them here.
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
My whole problem with the flat earth theory is 1. You can walk around the world, there is no drop off point, there is no limit or cut off. If you can walk around the world that implies that it is round, because you can go around it forever. 2. Others tried to tell me that pictures of the earth are CGI or falsely made, which isn't conspiracy it's stupidity. Yeah, the CIA has done some fucked up shit, but people have known the earth is round since before the CIA 3. The whole "I can't see the curves" thing is stupid, you can't see the curves and shape of the earth in till you leave it, which would require going to space.
n/a nanonan 2017-04-22
A better question is why are there some very intelligent very convincing people who know better pushing this?
n/a TheFapp3ning 2017-04-22
Like who?
n/a TheMagicMarkerMan 2017-04-22
Because people have never seen the moon, or any other planets. Also, they've never been in an airplane.
n/a ruleten 2017-04-22
Why is it that people building railroads and skyscrapers don't account for the curvature of the earth in their work?
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
They use benchmarks - you have a known point on the ground (x/y/z) - you set up your total station and that point is your reference. Your surveying crew lays out the site based on that point and then the contractor comes and builds it. As you get further from that point, your elevations get more and more inaccurate (because of the curvature of the earth) - so when you are laying out a road / railroad, you have to keep moving your survey along and update your reference point.
In theory, If it wasn't for the curvature of the earth (or sight obstructions), you could probably just use one benchmark and survey based totally off of that.
n/a SoTiredOfWinning 2017-04-22
My soil version driver yesterday was trying to convince me that the earth was flat. It's insane. It's so easily disprovable. It's the worlds weakest conspiracy theory.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
The more you study it the less crazy it sounds.
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
Who admits they're the crazy one in this video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X9pszVRucs
Just checking.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
If they have technology to send a satellite into space secretly why wouldn't they have the tech to make CGI of it and fake it?
n/a SoTiredOfWinning 2017-04-22
Probably because anyone who cares to measure it themselves can prove this basic fact. Seriously this requires a negative IQ to believe, I can't believe people think the earth is flat in 2017.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
There have been lots of times in history where the vast majority of people were extremely "wrong" about cosmology from our perspective. We surely are the exception.
n/a SoTiredOfWinning 2017-04-22
But there is literally no way the world could be flat. It would involve a global conspiracy involving trillions of people over the course of thousands of years to cover it up.
Seriously wtf.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
How does it explain circumpolar stars?
Do you have a map?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
The UN flag uses the most common flat earth map.
The stars are not what you think, if the world is flat.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
What do you think is the distance between Australia and South America?
How do you explain circumpolar stars?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Radically altered cosmology.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
Elaborate, please.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
If the earth were flat that would imply the stars aren't giant balls of gas billions of light years away, that space was only above us, etc
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
How does that explain all the observations that are consistent with the accepted model?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Is it necessary to have a fully fleshed out alternate theory to reject another one?
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
No. You can also falsify the existing one.
Can you?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
It's the mark of an educated mind to be able to hold a belief without accepting it.
n/a SoTiredOfWinning 2017-04-22
The more I studied it the more I realized how insanely disprovable it was and how easily manipulated some people are.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
I too am a knowledgeable human with an extensive amount of education employed in a field where my job depends on me agreeing that the earth is round.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or vague?
Its not so much that my job depends on me to 'agree' the earth is round - the shape of the earth is an obstacle in my line of work that I have to work against - engineers and surveyors basically prove on a daily basis that it is round, simply through the rigors of our work.
Nobody made us sign a contract stating "by signing this, you agree that the world is round".
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
You mentioned you compensate GPS for curvature but what else?
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Download an autocad map trial or arcgis - there is a whole ribbon devoted to coordinate systems and transforming coordinate systems, all of which is due to the shape of the earth.
Go on your state or local city website - download GIS data. Go to neighboring states websites, download their data. Load this data into autocad/arcmap, mainting the correct coordinate systems. Pick specific coordinates, download them onto a gps unit, and go locate them in real life with this gis unit and you will see that it takes you to the right place in different states.
Now, repeat the process, but use incorrect coordinate systems per state - you will bot be taken to the right place anymore. If the world was flat, this wouldn't be a problem
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
You mean download the data from the government?
n/a mconeone 2017-04-22
What do you know about flat earth being a psyop to discredit conspiracy theorists?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Nothing. I simply know my field. It's either a psyop or a conspiracy theory that is not true.
n/a tadm123 2017-04-22
Are you yourself a conspiracy guy or do you think they are all silly?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I'm a conspiracy guy.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Google Operation Mockingbird sometime.
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
If this was true, wouldn't the MSM be pushing the flat earth?
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Reddit is msm.
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
And it's not being pushed here. Every post that's for it is buried. Anything refuting it is propped up. Including this post. And most of the comments are ridiculing the idea. So maybe you're right.
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
Well duh.
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
im pretty sure the whole flat earth thing is used as a means to discredit the conspiracy community and make us look like loonies so when we Do uncover something big nobody believes us. im sorry if you have been swept up in the flat earf bullshit.
FLAT EARTHERS: fi you truly believe the earth is flat, take a step back. consider the sources. i know its easy to believe because we have been lied to about everything else in this world. think critically. train yourself. and dont be so easily led. 'da earf is not flat.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Well let's let them air it out. I can prove it's not real and everybody can focus on things that matter.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Prove it then...
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
its really not about proving thats it not real to them. none of them will accept your proof. see, they will either think youre a disinfo agent or youre just using science that you were taught and that we are taught a flawed version of science or you just dont understand (regardless of the fact that measuring the earth is how you make your living) etc etc.
we have been lied to so much that we question everything. we question everyone. flat earthers are people that went down the rabbit hole and never came out the other side. no amount of proof with deter them. what they need is to be shown how to think like a true conspiracy theorist. how to think critically. how to find reputable sources. how to discern what is a good source and what is not. what is junk science and what is not.
the problem really isnt that they think the earth is flat. the problem is the way they think is flawed. deeply, deeply flawed. somewhere along the way they lost themselves and we need to get them back on track because the more of us actual true conspiracy theorists there are, the strong we become and the more credibility we have.
the conspiracy community is having its credibility ruined by people gravitating to these outlandish theories like pizzagate, flat earth, no planes on 9/11, illuminati bullshit etc. i mean, bigfoot is more believable that these theories.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Oh fuck off mate
n/a KIDDizCUDI 2017-04-22
He went too far at the end.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
No, he's totally right.
n/a SoloAgentOwl 2017-04-22
Was about to give a like, until I saw that last paragraph
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
yeah. i get that a lot from the shitty pizzagate community. it really doesnt matter.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Questions should always remain open ended for a conspiracy theorist. IMO flat earth hasn't been concretely disproven, and the more you look into history of science, nasa, the Cia, etc the more you'll see has been hidden from us. At the end of the day, I can go out on the beach, see another beach 15- 20 miles away(defies the formula for curvature, it should be well below the horizon). That's my personal proof. I can see how there is stretchs of land that defy the curvature and let you see further then you should be able to, but oceans should follow the curvature and they don't from my person observations. You can find many youtube videos of people zooming in on distant coasts which should be even further below the horizon.
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
i think OP would like a word with you then.
n/a Colonel_of_Corn 2017-04-22
I just have one question. What do any of the people you say are "hiding" information have to gain from that?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Why does anyone hide anything? Many times its for power, other times to hide crime, hide techniques from rival countries , etc...They may have nothing to gain from hiding the data. Who knows? I know i dont , because their hiding it. Have you looked through any of the 12 million docs the CIA released? Many of them are mundane day to day things, but there's absolute bombshells in there too. That data was held back for 30 -40- 50 years. ... I guess my question back to you is why couldn't you come to this conclusion on your own? You really couldn't logic out a reason for people to hide stuff?
n/a Colonel_of_Corn 2017-04-22
The burden isn't on me to know why the US government would spend vast amounts of money simply to keep the public thinking the earth is a different shape by hiding all this information, it's on you. You made that claim. If the reasoning behind the claim is "who knows why? Could be anything", then that claim doesn't hold much weight.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
All one can do is speculate on where the trillions of dollars the us defense sector vaporizes because a shrug and a "who the fuck knows why they do what they do" is the best that can be come up with even by the individual departments themselves. Obviously your ok with that and don't want to question anything. Fact is the gov has been systemically hiding information from us for years. That's an established fact in this community. If you 100% trust the government then perhaps your in the right place to start tearing a few of those percentage points off.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Now I'm wondering if rabbit holes are what inspired the hollow earth bullshit.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Lizard holes
n/a dks42 2017-04-22
We know this from the ground breaking research on underworld access tubes by the Mario brothers. They describe the great leader of the lizards, King Cuba. I have a pdf on it lying around somewhere.
n/a AFuckYou 2017-04-22
Can you tell more about how you prove it's not flat? From equations and stuff like that. Maybe is there a home experiment that people can easily do to show it's not flat.
n/a Gkender 2017-04-22
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/66wozm/im_a_land_surveyor_i_measure_the_earth_for_a/dglv3l1/
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
When we look north and spin 90 degrees we look east. As we travel further east in a straight line, we deviate from that line of latitude and no longer measure a bearing of east.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Have you even looked at a flat Earth map? This is entirely consistent with the flat Earth model...
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Your map has no north
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
It's the center. Compasses point North. All other directions are just relative to the center of the flat Earth model.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I've found that most people who adamantly claim flat earth theories to be false know little to nothing about the actual theories.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
This x 100... . He's hasn't even worked on a project bigger that 3 miles.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Almost his whole argument is based on GPS, a government created and controlled system. Does he expect we'd trust the government on a conspiracy theory sub? The government says it's a globe, so therefore it's a globe? His answers are no better than Bill Nye pointing to the fact that schools have globes in every classroom as "proof" of a spherical earth.
I have questions for both theories, and don't mind debating, but it would be nice if someone who claimed to be able to "prove" the earth wasn't flat to at least be able to begin to understand the basics of the flat earth theory. People merely claiming that the earth is a globe because they were taught that in school, their job depends on them thinking that, or that the government claims it to be true, are not proving anything.
n/a Colonel_of_Corn 2017-04-22
Nobody has the desire to understand an idea that's contrary to reality itself. Show me a credible literature that refers to "ellipsoidal earth theory". You won't find one because it's not a theory, it's reality. I'm also a land surveyor and you're going to tell me I've spent 4 years doing calculations on the earth that not only check out mathematically every time, but can be ground truthed? There's no debate to be had here. If someone took you into orbit around the earth, what would be your reasoning for a flat earth then?
n/a jimmyspear 2017-04-22
work in Hydrographic survey world and am a sailor. Best not to try and convince these people that the earth isn't flat! I'd suggest sit down have a drink and hope they are good at infecting people with the dumb dumbs... the more flat earth people out there the more employable we are!
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
Where did you said dude? I spent most of my time in the gulf of Mexico.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I'd ask you the same for reasoning against it if you saw that it appeared flat from a high altititude flight or balloon. The first person to go to the stratosphere (misnomer?) Auguste Piccard, described earth as a flat disk, with the horizon always rising to sight. Not long after, the "credible" literature (dogma) published new theories to explain ball earth/heliocentrism in complex, confusing ways. Like today, people accept those dogmatic theories as facts, end of story. They remain theories.
n/a Nyx666 2017-04-22
Earth's curvature is observable to the human eye at 8 miles. This guy is surveying the land, entirely different than observing the land with the naked land.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
What's it matter? His projects are small enough where you wouldn't need to account for earth's curvature, the Romans built sewer systems many times longer without the aid of GPS...at the end of the day as long as the shit flows down to its destination your good to go.
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
How the hell can we? Flat Earther's have about 98 different theories for every fact that blows holes in the flat Earth model. I've yet to hear what moves the sun in the FE model or why you can't see Miami from Bimini at night when it's only 40 miles away and Miami is bright as all fuck at night. Don't blame us just because you guys have a cluster fuck potpourri of pseudo science bullshit.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I'm not a flat earther just yet, but I'm asking questions which so far have not been answered satisfactorily. There are problems with flat earth, but there are more problems with ball earth. As far as I'm concerned much of modern science is a cluster fuck potpourri of pseudo science bullshit. Some of you people don't realize modern science is followed like a religion but you are just so blinded by your religiosity to know it.
What moves the sun if it's moving closeby? I'm not sure. There are things in both theories that are unknown. Coastlines across water from over 100 miles away are visible, not the tips of mountains but the beach, which should not be possible on a ball earth. Ships that "disappeared" over the horizon can be brought back by telexcope. Lighthouses are "bright as all fuck at night" but can be seen by ships hundreds of miles out. How much of the cluster fuck science has been invented out of thin air to try to explain the problems of heliocentrism? 98 theories? Or just 2 so complex 98% of the populace won't understand it?
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
Have you ever sailed? I'm guessing you heard the bullshit about ships being seen with a telescope once they go over the horizon on YouTube. I've never met a single competent navigator who believes that shit. I cut my teeth on the North Atlantic in multi hills and a few monos. I spent twelve years sailing the gulf of Mexico and the waters between the Bahamas and Florida. You can't see Miami from Bimini and it's only 40 miles. Tonight, call somebody in Bimini and ask them to look west. Have you seen Miami? At night it's bright as fuck. I'll tell you what, the British Navy has a dock patrol launch right on the Western edge of Bimini. Give them a ring tonight. They are good guys, they'll talk to you. I usually bullshit with them for a half hour about the states when I enter Bahamian waters. Tell them you're unsure about the shape of the Earth and you need them to look for Miami for you. Oh god please record that conversation.....
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Why is it that questioning the shape of the earth means never having never sailed or flown before? People ask that as if I would know for sure the earth is rounded if they only did. Yes, I've flown over oceans, I've sailed in the Caribbean and they even let you fly co-pilot seat in the little island-hopping Cessna planes when you fly in. So I've sailed and flown (at the controls!). I've flown in helicopters, been in aircraft carriers at sea, too. I'm not sure your point.
Tell your competent navigators to watch as a ship disappears, and then tell them to zoom in. Scientists will tell you it's a mirage or light magically bending, when common sense and simplicity tells you that it is a flat or only slightly rounded surface and perspective has made the distant object vanish from sight. As for whatever locale you're in, I can't tell you what you see. If you have a good zoom, then zoom in, I'm sure you'd see the distant lights come into view, unless the atmosphere is too thick, or the dirty Miami air blocks the view. Elsewhere, on clear days much further distances have been seen. The earth may not be flat, but at the least, the 8 inches squared per mile of curvature is verifiably not correct.
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
You're right. Whether or not you've ever personally observed any of the phenomena is irrelevant. That's why you have YouTube. So, you gonna call Bimini tonight? That should settle this beyond a doubt.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I've personally observed the horizon to be flat and I've seen pictures and video. I have never had any logical reason to believe I'm on a spinning ball speeding 600 million miles per hour through vacuum created with a bang from nothing, and neither do you.
I'm sorry I don't have time to call you and be your friend tonight. Why don't you try a bar in Miami to find someone to talk to? It's Miami, but any port in a storm, right? Tell them how you're certain earth is a spinning ball. Do your best to prove it.
Thank you. And with that, I have to say good night and good luck.
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
There's no shame in being afraid.....Since I have no doubt the world is round and therefore don't suffer the same phobia that my world view will be shattered, I went ahead and called the RBDF (the number is 1-242-362-1818 if you'd like to check for yourself) and spoke with Midshipman Clark. After explaining the purpose of my call and him having a bit of a chuckle at my expense, he gladly took a moment from his otherwise tedious duties to throw a quick line, look outside and confirm that he could absolutely NOT see Miami. So, just for shits and giggles, do you believe the entire Bahamian Naval Force is in on your tinfoil hatness? If, as you claim, you can see beaches from hundreds of miles away, why can't he see Miami which is a bare 40 miles? He also made another excellent point that the world has been navigating by the stars for time immemorial which would be impossible on flat plane. I asked him if he ever saw a boat come back into view once it went over the horizon through the use of optics and he laughed and said no, that in fact, when actually chasing drug smugglers (their main duty apparently) they use binoculars all the time, but once the boat goes over the horizon, it's simply gone. I can understand why you'd not want to call. He was barely suppressing his laughter the entire time. I'm dying to hear your explanation....
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
If the administrator of NASA told me the earth was a sphere, do you think I would believe him? Do you think I consider a midshipman (a rank below Ensign Wesley Crusher!) any more trustworthy?
I will not call Mr Clark, because I have better things to do with my Sunday night. But you can show him this video or countless videos, or wipe off his high power telescope, not some deck binoculars, to see ships come back in view which had disappeared from the naked eye. He will see the earth is either flat or a much different curvature than science says. At the least he will know ships do not go over a curve when they disappear. But tell him if he learns the truth, he had better keep it to himself if he ever wants to rise in the ranks.
https://youtu.be/EBYg3u5c7og?t=8m25s
n/a _m1k3anat0r_ 2017-04-22
Hey you still haven't replied to my questions
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6713i0/space_may_be_the_final_frontier_but_its_made_in_a/dgnzter/
You do realize you're pathetic when even Scientologists laugh at you right?
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
And THIS is what causes ignorance; refusing to examine any information that confronts your beliefs. I have no beliefs. I have observations. We'll observe together. Let's start with something simple. You can see the moon, right? I can see the moon. The moon is a sphere, right? You can see this with your own eyes. Now, please tell me YOUR theory of how the perfect circle shadow is cast on the moon by a flat earth. This requires NO outside informations. This is simply two guys looking at the moon.
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
Oh man dude, I think your post got lost. I was on the ropes of common sense and you let up....Please, crush me in the jaws of your logic...I'm asking...I'm BEGGING....Why is the shadow cast upon the moon a perfect radius? How does a flat earth cast a perfect radius? I'm gasping....I'm clawing at the ropes with my gloved hands....Finish me.....
n/a TheFapp3ning 2017-04-22
Is this sarcasm? I can't tell anymore.
n/a TheGawdDamnBatman 2017-04-22
I've never seen any flat earth theory that holds water... Flateaech is a psy-op to discredit legitimate conspiracy theories.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Do you know what literally doesn't hold water? A sphere. If you think flat earth theories are a psyop, which doesn't begin to make sense, then you simply don't understand the theories and evidence.
n/a TheGawdDamnBatman 2017-04-22
Have you heard of gravity?
Not sure if troll or shill or useful idiot...
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I'm not sure which of those three things you are, but I could take my pick and be certain you couldn't explain where gravity comes from, or relativity, two things necessary in a ball earth model. When you realize that gravity may be an invented theory made solely to explain balls whizzing in space and people not flying off of earth, then you can move forward in your education. Only you can take your red pills.
n/a TheGawdDamnBatman 2017-04-22
I took red pills. but im not a retard or a shill or a troll or an useful idiot that beleives the flat earth bullshit. Why dont you post you best evidence that isnt retarded for the rediculous flat earth theory.
n/a TheGawdDamnBatman 2017-04-22
gravity comes from mass.
n/a TheGawdDamnBatman 2017-04-22
I cant beleive i wasted time with you debating this.... You cant be that stupid...
n/a ZapRapTap 2017-04-22
The AE map, a distorted projection, is supposed to be the flat earth model?
Can you give me an example of someone using this map for navigation in, say, the southern hemisphere?
n/a mesqueunclubsandwich 2017-04-22
inb4 there is no southern hemisphere, Australia is British MI6 CGI
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Pilots do it all the time. They just move the lines around until they fit the measurements
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
What does this mean?
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Its snark.
Sub7 apparently thinks moving around lines on a map is an acceptable method of making facts fit his narrative.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
Ah, in this thread it is legitimately hard to tell whats snark and whats guys like Sub7.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Hey... if I buy a tape measure from Canada and take it to South Australia, does it grow longer during the flight, or does it just suddenly expand once I get to Australia?
Have a look at the lines of longitude on your map. They are obviously further apart in Australia than Canada, so the physical distance between them must grow the further away you get from the north pole.
But when we measure those distances they haven't grown. The only way this could be possible is if our tape measures are growing too.
Or maybe this map is complete bullshit and doesn't accurately reflect physical reality.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I just grabbed the first model the popped up on Google. I haven't verified the latitude/longitudes on it compared to the globe model but it shouldn't matter. Just move the lines around to fit the measurements. /Shrug
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
'Just move the lines around to fit the measurements'
Unfucking real.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
That's what "scientists" do.
Look at Einstein.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
That is not at all what scientists do.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Not all of them no.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/ASbMH7eACIs/hqdefault.jpg
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
I mean, given all the experiemental data that proves general relativity to be true, I'll certainly go with Tesla's comment. I mean, everyone knows he knew literally everything about gravitation and particle physics, and the electromagnetic spectrum. Naturally, he had his own theory, but shucky darns, never wrote it down, because why would you want to write something down? That's crazy talk!
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Funny... when I adjust the lines/ratios to fit the measurements... I get a globe?
WTF? You mean the earth isn't really flat?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Lol I'd like to see that.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
So if I'd take plane from Australia to South America, I'd flow over the North pole?
What would be the distance?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
That would depend entirely on the flight paths etc..
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
Shortest path
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
Where do the ships go when they sail towards the horizon? Is every ship in history in on the conspiracy and they all transform into submarines as they sail away?
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
You can see them again with a zoom lens.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
No you can't. Not after they pass the horizon far enough that they aren't reflected by the atmosphere
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
False. You have to move upwards, known by sailors since Homer at least, and which is why the crows nest of ships are atop the tallest mast.
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
No you don't.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
No I don't what?
Sorry, you've never been to the sea, and you've been lied to, about shit that's been figured out for over 2000 years.
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLM1fuvnPmY
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
Yes, there's and example of some nutter lying to you.
NASA's youtube production quality is far better...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKk_7NIKY3Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7OO3qCfH9Y
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
I can lead you to water, but I cannot make you drink.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
The water you have is "kool aid." One has to wonder what gratification you get when you indulge in the fruits of science that is modernity, but then willingly turn a blind eye to the long obvious fact or a round Earth.
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
Have you watched that video?
How does water not fall off the earth? Same way nothing falls off the earth... Their is a force that pulls us towards the centre, any object you drop will accelerate at 9.81 m s2 towards the earth. The mass of water on earth accounts for just 0.02% of earth's mass. Imagine how little a cargo ship weighs compared to all the water... And look to the left of that ship tipping over, it's run aground. This guy has no idea how large the earth is...
Gravity is just a theory? This shows a huge lack of understanding. Our theories of gravity, the equations we have constructed to describe the phenomenon of every object being attracted to the earth, are theories yes, but, that doesn't make the phenomena fake.... Everything on earth is attracted to the surface and accelerates at the same rate. Go look at the sky with a telescope, you see everything large is round?
Those zoom out clips are so dumb - the objects just get smaller than the size of the cameras pixels. Aka they are below the resolution of the camera. This doesn't happen with your eye. Go look for yourself. You've been lied to.
n/a Rowenstin 2017-04-22
Wait for the next equinox. The sun will rise due east and set west, no matter the latitude where you are. Try to reconcile that with the flat earth.
n/a Maldevinine 2017-04-22
Take the longest ruler that you can find. Use that ruler to draw a straight line. Now spin the ruler through 180 degrees and check the line you've just drawn with the same edge that you used to draw it. This is a standard comparison technique for adjusting out errors in survey equipment. If the line is still matching the ruler, the ruler is straight.
Now take that straight ruler to the beach and hold it up to the horizon. The horizon will noticeably fall away at either end of the ruler.
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
The ends of the ruler are farther away from you than the center.
n/a Maldevinine 2017-04-22
But if everything was on a single plane, that wouldn't matter. The line passing through your eye and the edge of the ruler would meet the horizon no matter what point on the ruler you were looking through.
The test at the start proves the ruler is straight. Your eye is a fixed point. The only thing that can be different is the horizon.
n/a Tugger 2017-04-22
Can you explain how you can see islands 31.63 miles away in this video? Even at sea level they are visible. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4oT2EbDONs
Thanks.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
This calculation ignores the effects of refraction. Here's a good primer
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
Yoire a dcum and ylu will pay for your lies with them.
n/a grantistheman 2017-04-22
Woah wtf is this comment about
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
It's about the truth and what's going to happen.
n/a grantistheman 2017-04-22
What's going to happen?
n/a Gkender 2017-04-22
Oh, will he? What's next, are you gonna post the Navy Seal Copypasta to really put the fear of God in our hearts?
If you can't refute evidence, then you have none of your own.
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
No need to put it there.
n/a Gkender 2017-04-22
Oh, good. I dunno if I could deal with that compounding the fear you've struck in me already.
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
yeah. im just a terrible person for wanting a sub section of the population to to uncover the real truth, not the truth as they want it to be. im sure the devil is just licking his chops thinking about the terrible evil i do./s
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
Why can't you acknowledge that the conspiracy community attracts a lot of weird/mentally ill people?
n/a Ducttapehamster 2017-04-22
The only person I've met in real life who believes in pizzagate was a crazy homeless person.
n/a KIDDizCUDI 2017-04-22
Maybe because he sees the world differently
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
Mental illness will do that to you.
n/a KIDDizCUDI 2017-04-22
What is "mental illness"?
n/a SANICTHEGOTTAGOFAST 2017-04-22
http://templeos.org/
n/a cwmoo740 2017-04-22
don't you talk shit about terry
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/mental_illness
n/a lookupPinealGlandDMT 2017-04-22
Another phrase society came up with to shun those who do not conform to "the rest of us."
Another form of division if you will.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Oh suck a dick. I'm not mentally ill because i "do not conform to "the rest of us."" I'm mentally ill because a chemical imbalance in my brain.
n/a unruly_mattress 2017-04-22
What is illness, anyway? Who said a headache was a bad thing?
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
He said homeless.
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
Mental illness and homelessness is intrinsically linked.
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Link for the claims?
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050225
https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/blog/homelessness-and-mental-health
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/tre.445/asset/tre445.pdf;jsessionid=9B387599D9673DF4FCA657235CBB6758.f04t03?v=1&t=j1tq6ihi&s=4cdff281e23b9a842a3b7df26a1570c60c90f816
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Thank you! Going to read through them now!
n/a Tacofangirl 2017-04-22
I'm not crazy or homeless. We should meet!
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
Crazy people generally don't describe themselves as such.
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
The only person I've met in real life who believes in Pizzagate is my 92 year old grandfather. But he hates homeless people, so
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
You seen this? https://archive.org/details/youtube-ZEM45uexHRE
Good summary of the weirdness surrounding it
n/a 10CPFC 2017-04-22
I disagree. There are levels to all things.
Do I believe there are lots of shady things that our governments and media do? Yes. I believe.
Do I believe 9/11 was done by Bush? No.
Do I believe we know everything about 9/11? No.
Do I believe Diana was killed? Yes.
Do I think the earth is flat? No.
My point is that because you beleive in some moderate theories doesn't mean you're mentally ill or by believing that 9/11 was done by Bush means that you also think the Queen is a lizard.
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
You completely misconstrued my point. My point was about how conspiracy users completely dismiss Flat Earth (as they should) but because its "totes government agents trying to discredit us" instead of acknowledging that they attract fucking weirdo's that may or may not have some form of mental illness.
Where did I say this?
n/a PostNuclearTaco 2017-04-22
I'm not the person you replied to, but I personally think it's a little bit from column A, a little from column B. Given shady stuff government agencies have done in the past with regards to mass disinformation campaigns I wouldn't put it past them to manufacture outlandish false conspiracies. On the other hand, I think that ignorant or mentally ill people then take those conspiracies and run with it.
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
I agree, but the thing with /r/conspiracy is that its ALWAYS 'da government shillz'.
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
absolutely it does attract the mentally ill. its up to those of us who are not mentally unstable to help those who are. and to do that we need to know how to separate fiction from truth. and to learn not to advocate for something just because it conforms to our worldview.
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
The same reason some people can't admit that they don't actually know as much as they think.
n/a allendrio 2017-04-22
Its particularly the american conspiracy community i.e. most of this sub is really bad due to the fact your government has actually gotten up to some seriously insane shit (MK ULTRA jerking off dolphins etc) that it just creates a massive cultural bias towards conspiracies.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
Everybodys government does fucked up shit. Spain js respobsible for kidnapping babies from mothers after childbirth saying they died only to sell them to other families. The UK is literally just americas older brother, obviously russia and china are sketch in infinite ways.
n/a allendrio 2017-04-22
Oh yeah but american conspiracies are by far the furthest crazy out there because the US govt did some pretty out there crazy shit.
n/a 10CPFC 2017-04-22
You look at Eddie Bravo. You can't win with him.
If you go with subjective things like "why would they do lie?" He says the gov lie. When there are facts, they are from "scientists that have been paid off by the government."
I.e they are not looking to be disproved. They have no intention to seek the truth. They just want to confirm what they believe.
Here is Eddie at work: https://youtu.be/zNAo6oGH0XY
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Just replace all instances of "US" with "North Korea" and see the flaws in your logic.
n/a 10CPFC 2017-04-22
Me or Eddie?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
You seem to think we can trust our government. I'm merely pointing out how we have a premium example of how a government can indoctrinate their people to believe pretty much anything.
n/a 10CPFC 2017-04-22
No. I am not the type to accept everything. Please see my post here:
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
thats a pandemic with flat earfers.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
It's LAUGHABLE, when people say this.
Hey, if you truly believe the earth is real, take a step back. Consider the sources. I know it's easy to believe because we have been lied to about everything else in this world. think critically. train yourself. and don't be so easily led. 'da earf is not fake'.
You should know you sound like an asshole. Same bullshit people say when conspiracy theorist warned about mass spying, same things people said when pick your conspiracy that turned out to be truth
I mean NASA could just just a picture of the earth and settle it once and for all, but nah, we keep getting CGI photos that were created by 'artists'. but sure, it's all really real.
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
But I could make up any crazy theory, right this second, and say the rebuttals of any dissenters are the "same bullshit people said when". That doesn't make it true, y'know? That's just not a logical conclusion to me.
Could you provide proof that NASA has created CGI photos?
I'm not trying to be an asshole, I'm trying to think critically here and encourage you to do the same. We must learn to recognize our unconscious biases or we will never uncover any truth. I recognize that to some degree, I want the globe model to stay true, but that doesn't confirm that it's flat by any means.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
I could provide proof, but it's readily available and easily so, I am not gonna spend my saturday researching for you.
Also, you can make up any theory you want, that's how theories are started in fact, sure some are based on indicators based on perhaps experiments or observations, but at the end of the day, theories are really just made up in the mind of the person who created it based solely on the VERY limited information they have.
I don't believe the earth is flat, I don't believe it's round either, I think whatever is going on here, is nothing at all of what anyone of us can imagine in our wildest dreams. This could all be a simulation, which would mean we are not on a flat or ball earth, but pixels being generated by the 'system'.
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
Looks like we're on the same page. My only gripe with that is that anyone can look out with a telescope and see other planets. Round planets. Am I wrong?
I don't trust anything I've been told at the end of the day. But I refuse to cling to the Flat-Earth theory because if this is some artificially constructed reality, I highly doubt it's a convenient flat disc just chillin' out in space. I'd be much more inclined to believe it's a hologram being projected than that.
n/a bad_argument_police 2017-04-22
K.
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
His name is Matt Boylan or goes by Matthew Powerland. He has some very interesting stories about his time as a freelance artist for NASA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QciLVJZNq4c
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
His name is Matt Boylan or goes by Matthew Powerland. He has some very interesting stories about his time as a freelance artist for NASA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QciLVJZNq4c
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
they have. many times. soooooooo many times.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
Those are all CGI composited together by an 'Artist'.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
Why hasnt any artist ever come forward?
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
Cause they work for NASA and sign NDA's that exist for their lifetime? Also they don't think what they're doing is wrong, they're just making pictures for us all.
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
They have. It's not a secret.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
That should be easy to link to then.
n/a ObserverOfTruth 2017-04-22
It is.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
Do it
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
His name is Matt Boylan or goes by Matthew Powerland. He has some very interesting stories about his time as a freelance artist for NASA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QciLVJZNq4c
n/a sbash7 2017-04-22
Found the crazy homeless man
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
Very enlightened comment.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Nope. All CGI
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
This right here. This is what flat earfers do when given hard proof to the contrary. This dismissing of evidence hurts us as researchers we need to learn how to cope with verifiable evidence that contradicts our worldview.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
NASA admits it...
n/a HernkWerlyerms 2017-04-22
Ever taken a panorama photo?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Yes it's a panorama with the edges cut to look like a globe...
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
So if the earth is flat, where the fuck did they get the other pictures to make the composite?!?!?! Did they just take a bunch of pics of the flat earth and wad them up into a ball?!?!
This goes back to an earlier point I made about how flat earthers cherry pick what they want to be true. You even cherry picked parts of a sentence from an article and ignored the rest of the sentence as well as the rest of the atricle!!
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Did they just take a bunch of pics of the flat earth and wad them up into a ball?!?!
Bingo
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
His name is Matt Boylan or goes by Matthew Powerland. He has some very interesting stories about his time as a freelance artist for NASA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QciLVJZNq4c
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
His name is Matt Boylan or goes by Matthew Powerland. He has some very interesting stories about his time as a freelance artist for NASA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QciLVJZNq4c
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
And they look soooo different from one picture to the next (wildly different proportions, color, cloud cover, shape, clouds repeating in perfect photoshopped patterns, the word sex spelled in the clouds, etc), which is just one reason among many that conspiracy theorists distrust NASA and the government.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Because the pictures are largely photoshopped so you can actually see the fucking earth. Believe it or not there are a lot of clouds which tend to block out the ground (When viewing from space) so NASA will take a bunch of photos and stitch them together to give a clear photo of what the earth looks like from space
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Hmm, the government fakes something and tells you to trust them that it is whatever they tell you it is. And they're just so fucking trustworthy, amirite?
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
No. The pictures are real but they are touched up in photo shop, because otherwise they look like shit.
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
Upon being told that NASA has done this:
"Those are all CGI composited together by an 'Artist'."
So: Says NASA could provide proof that proves the earth is round, and claims that all proof provided by NASA is fake. D you see what's wrong with your position?
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
How is it proof when NASA admits they're composite images created by an artist with CGI?
All those colored pictures?
They put those colors in.
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
So, you'd accept proof from them that the earth is a globe, but disregard all the proof that the earth is a globe?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/18/16/2F7C911200000578-0-image-a-2_1450456758819.jpg
Lemme guess, cgi?
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/12/18/17/2F7CFA3900000578-3366097-image-a-21_1450458133934.jpg
Lemme guess, cgi? no, wait, that was taken in 1968. It must just be a completely fabricated painting.
https://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/CE5T024.jpg
Lemme guess, china's in on it too. They've always worked with the US on every project the US has had, because, as we know, China and the US are friends, and just pretend to be rivals to keep the globe earth hoax going.
https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/5338733_f1024.jpg
Lemme guess, fish eye lens, right? Strange how the moon and the ISS aren't affect by that crafty old fish eye lens! NASA's getting smarter!
http://spacefellowship.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/iss025e009858.jpg
That's the nile. Where's the rest of the goddamn continents. Also, lemme guess, fish eye lens. I need to buy stock in companies that make fish eye lenses. They must get huge pay offs to keep the flat earth a secret.
http://resizeme.club/openphoto.php?img=http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/science/7361970296_5644c62baa_z.jpg
There's the nile again. Again you can see the curve of the globe. Funny how everything in the foreground isn't effected by that crafty fish eye lens!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/34029640132/
I just don't understand why stuff in the foreground isn't effected by the fish eye lens that literally has to be there to force the earth into a globe.
https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/19-night_image-1.jpg
That's the gulf of mexico, again showing me the curvature of a globe you INSIST the earth can't be. Damn fish eye lens.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
pictures are neat, but what about video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4l-mPuEIjho&feature=youtu.be&t=133
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
This is exactly what I mean. You say "Release some photos, and clear it up, NASA" I post photos, you go "Eh, not good enough, here's video that's not taken at any angle, with a small field of view that "proves" the earth is flat. One video, versus almost every photo of the earth taken from space." It's like, you didn't even bother to discuss any of the links I posted. This is why arguing with people on reddit is pointless. No one wants a valid arguement, they just want to shit post. I'm done with you.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
wait.. so your pictures are proof.. but my video .. isn't good enough?
Lol.
n/a Ozcolllo 2017-04-22
There's a vast difference in several photos and live video and a single video. He also made a point about the physics involved in your model that were left unanswered. I believe this to be ridiculous discussion in the first place, but if you intend to convince anyone; You're going to need explanations about physics.
We can use mathematics and science to explain our planet. It's easy to understand and can be observed. If this were truly something important to you, then I'm sure you've taken the time to set up an experiment that can prove or disprove the curvature of the earth, right? Simply hand waving science in favor of believing... whatever this model is. In short, can you prove it? With your model, can you provide explanations to the functions of gravity or lack thereof?
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
My point is, I could have provided 100 different pictures, videos, 'math' whatever, the chances it changes anyones opinions on the matter? very little. And that is the exact same problem people are missing when it comes to people who believe in flat earth, you may provide ten different links all 'proof' but from the FE's perspective, you're just pushing the narrative with the very pieces of propaganda that FE's don't believe in.
Likewise the video I link, person I was responding to probably didn't even watch it for more than a minute, but they're convinced without a doubt it shows a ball earth, doesn't matter all those who have seen it and see a flat earth, their perspective is just fucked, right?
n/a TheMadBonger 2017-04-22
https://qz.com/192700/the-guy-who-created-iphones-earth-image-explains-why-he-needed-to-fake-it/
The "blue marble" collection of earth photo's are all fake. Most images by NASA are made in the same way this guy describes. Sattelites orbiting the earth collect data. And it's not some kind of analog image. If you listen to the interview of his floating around somewhere he describes how they measure the water to color its depth. They measure it by analyzing the levels of photoplankton in the ocean.
People ask themselves why do they go all through that when they send so much shit into space and why they just cannot attach a small camera of some sort to take a full sized picture every once in awhile. Wouldn't it be useful to have a whole shot for data analysis? They even say themselves using the sattelites isn't ideal because there are gaps between orbits and they have to guess and blend in the blanks.
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
Why did the chinese space agency release a photo that was completely fabricated by NASA?
n/a TheMadBonger 2017-04-22
That's why I said some pictures are CGI. I wasn't saying they all were but that method is a common way they make the photo's and providing an artist that admits it like you were asking for. Beside's those earlier photo's non of their released photo's are claimed to be a full picture of the earth. And even that chinese picture is just a large scan of the earth in the same satellite method of gathering data.
To the best of my knowledge most photo's of the earth are taken in the pan-chromatic form. Where it measures 15 wavelengths compiles that data and then they build a photo of earth from that. That is how they can say it is a "picture" of the earth because it is made in that way. I can't find out what kind of camera is attached to Chang'e 5 T1 that took that picture so unfortunately we can't discuss the matter any futher towards credibility.
All the pictures from the hubble space telescope are made in the same way. They take all the data from analyzing the light spectrum and the "color" is added according to the data. It's not providing some kind of analog image.
However I am not a true believer 100% on either side of the argument but I don't think the earth is flat. But I believe the question of them lying is interesting and leads to something. I don't think we are getting the whole picture and I don't believe they would tell us even if they found something extraordinary up there. But you know there is video of them faking the earth photo's from the apollo capsule. It shows them putting a curved piece of material in the window and taking a shot of the earth. It gives it the shape of a globe. I believe personally it was taken in low orbit and they never made it to the moon. Whether you believe it or not is up to you.
I'm not saying we can't take photo's of the earth. But I believe no one has devoloped technology to get past the radiation belt. So they take satellite data and make composite photo's. And these photos they claim are full sized earth shots. They obviously are not analog. There are not even stars in the background. It has to be taken on a pan-chromatic camera so they can claim it is a "full shot" of the Earth. But there shouldn't be a need to hide the stars from the picture at all. You can't tell me we can see stars from Earth but they are somehow invisible in a picture from space.
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
Actually, none of the pictures are CGI. CGI means that they're entirely created in a computer. You seem to be suggesting that the images are composites of many different images. They obviously are, which is why I showed a bunch of photos showing a small part of the earth, but still showing the globe, and jesus fuck, you're actually trying to claim that they used a fucking fish eye lens for a goddamn window so they could show the earth as a globe? What's the proof? the "The earth is flat, so that's the only possible explanation!" "What about the earth is actually a globe?" "That doesn't make any goddamn sense. now, the sun being 32 miles in diameter, 2000 miles away, light not being able to make it across the plane of the earth, the earth being flat, and moving up at a speed of 9 m/s to simulate gravity, that makes sense!"
What about this picture?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-iKR94Zus-CA/U5JUmd3zELI/AAAAAAAAJMc/7d2knA19BhY/s1600/Michael+Collins,+the+astronaut+who+took+this+photo,+is+the+only+human,+alive+or+dead+that+isn%27t+in+the+frame+of+this+picture,+1969.jpg
There's the lunar lander from apollo 11, there's the goddamn moon, there's the earth. Lemme guess, special fish eye lens that only works on earth and the moon, but not the lunar lander. I mean, what does it take to prove to you that you can take a picture of the earth with a normal camera, it's just that at most distances we travel to these days, it's till just too goddamn big to take a picture of with just one camera?
And jesus fucking christ, you have to know what camera it is before you can talk about whether the photo is authentic? Your entire argument is based on "they're all faked by NASA" then when asked why the Chinese would use an image faked by NASA you say "you don't know what camera it is. Sorry, I need to know that before I can completely disregard it."
You COMPLETELY disregard the video of the earth from the ISS, despite the fact that it CLEARLY shows a globular earth, without fish eyeing objects in the foreground.
You claim that chinese picture is a scan of the earth from sattelite data, but then claim you need to know the exact model of camera they used, because reasons.
I show you pictures, you claim they don't count because they're from NASA. I show you a picture from China, you claim you need to know what camera took the picture of the large scan of sattelite data, so why the fuck do you need a camera to take a picture of that anyways. I show you a video, and you completely ignore it. I'm kidn of getting the idea that you don't want to argue in good faith, just say "No" and expect me to keep tryin.
n/a TheMadBonger 2017-04-22
You seem to think I am arguing the earth is flat but I'm not. I am only commenting and saying I believe NASA is lying. Please reread my comments. Especially the part about the photo's being taken from pan-chromatic camera's and how that isn't an actual analog photo of the earth. Then read again how pan-chromatic camera images are made. It is exactly 100% CGI. I already said I cannot comment on the authenticity of the old apollo 11 photo's and I only stated my personal belief. Again I believe the earth is circular but in my opinion we haven't been able to get past the van allen radiation belt.
Where did I say anything about fish eye lens or any shit like that. I am not saying those are NOT pictures of the earth. But that the full color versions are stitched together CGI. Which is 100% true in relation to the photo's in the blue marble collection and any photo made from satellite data gathered from the pan-chromatic camera's they use. It's not that difficult to comprehend. I personally believe the whole moon landing was faked so I believe those photo's were taken from low orbit and a trick using a crescent cut-out in the lunar window. But still with all that I do not believe the earth is flat. Just that NASA isn't able to get past the van allen radiation belt and that is why they are lying. I mean, come on, how do the lunar rovers on mars "magically" clean themselves.
I believe all that stuff is staged but no amount of showing me pictures and saying "see this was taken from space." When it is clearly a photo that is not far enough away to get a full shot. I do not think they are able to get far enough into space to take a full shot.
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
Voyager isn't past the van allen radation belt?
https://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/voyager_1_earthmoon-577x580.jpg
n/a Xerede 2017-04-22
You love this world. You're a great Roman citizen.
n/a snowbonghits 2017-04-22
Literally dozens of photos
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html
n/a autopornbot 2017-04-22
Or simply get on an airplane and fly around the world.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I don't understand this argument. If flat, the earth would be a round disc, around which you could fly or circumnavigate just fine.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
But that would require every single pilot to be in on it, as a flat disk has different shortest paths between points than a sphere.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
They wouldn't need to be in on anything, especially considering they either fly based on a compass or in most cases, rely on GPS. Actual flight paths make more sense on a flat earth.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
First, compass data cannot be faked. A compass is just a magnetized needle on a low friction bearing. The needles south pole points to earths magnetic north, and the north pole to earth magnetic south. You can build one yourself. And indeed, ships, planes and other vehicles which can circumnavigate the globe had relied on these instruments for many hundreds of years. If these readings were "fake" every single navigator would need to be in on it.
As for actual flight paths making "more sense" on a flat earth: no they dont. Actual flight paths follow "great circles" around the sphere. A flat earth would have to be laid out in such a way so as to preserve great circles along which planes travel. Such a flat earth would necessarily have distortions in its surface that differ from what is actually observed, as an undistorted projection of a sphere onto a plain isnt possible.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
The compass would point north in both models, just replace magnetic north with magnetic "center" if the earth was flat.
Yes they do, look at a flat earth flight maps. 2 stop flights which shoot wildly off course north to make absurd connections actually make sense on a flat earth map, where the top of the triangle shape on a globe is actually the middle point of a straight line between the origin and the destination on a flat map. The emergency landing in Alaska from Bali to LA makes sense only if Alaska is on the way to LA from Bali, which it is, on the flat earth map, but not the globe. There are no real flights that you'd be able to take over Antarctica.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
There is no direct flight from LA to Bali,
https://www.kayak.com/flights/LAX-DPS/2017-05-22/2017-05-29
I have no idea what obscure reference you are making. Likely there was a connection in Japan or Hong Kong, in which case you do indeed go close to Alaska. Go look at a flight path, then get a piece of string and a globe and confirm that indeed they are the shortest paths available.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
They had stopped in Taiwan from Bali to LAX, and it still would make more sense if Alaska was along the way, as it is on a flat earth map. Take that string and put it on a flat earth map from Taiwan to LA, and you'll find the string goes over Alaska. This article has the supposed flight path of the flight where thry had to land after a woman gave birth, shortest distance on a globe.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
The way it "looks to you" is irrelevant if you arent willing to do even the simplest experiment.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Print out the flat earth map and put your string on it. The flight paths make sense on that map. The earth may, in fact, be how it looks.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
I know which map you are talking of, look at it, the latitude and longitude lines on it are completely distorted. Hundreds of thousands of square miles of extra land is added to make it project correctly. the map ads problems without explaining anything better than a globe.
n/a p3dsimmer 2017-04-22
You can't circumnavigate something that is flat
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Circumnavigate as in sail around. Circum (around, like a circle) navigate (sail). If the earth is flat, it is a round disc and can be sailed around.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
it could be because it just seems ridiculous to do this to disprove something like flat earth. and even if you did, they would find SOMETHING that, in their eyes, would disprove the whole thing. even if it was just something small and insignificant like the planes altitude not quite matching what they think the ground would look like at that height. form there it would go into "look at that hill. its an obvious poor photoshop" or "that cloud is the worst CGI ive ever seen!"
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
that is the lamest excuse ive ever read bro. thanks for not having a solution to a THEORY that hasnt been PROVEN
n/a raxus25 2017-04-22
I don't think you understand what a scientific theory is
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
Its not a "lame excuse". Flatearthers routinely dismiss gps itself, video feed from the orbiting ISS, all scientific theory pertaining to magnetism, gravity, conservation of momentum, etc, every account of travel to the south pole, every measurement of longitude and latitude ever made, etc etc. They will just say the video feed of the plane is faked or "doesnt prove anything" because it "traveled in a flat circle".
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
And you've outed you're self as not understanding what a theory is.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
Why would you believe this if you don't already believe air craft, satellites, space craft, and ships are circling the globe every day?
I mean, you're going to believe GPS, which is an array of satellites orbiting the Earth, put there by the government?
And to do the "experiment" you ask for would take the governments help, since no air craft has the range to do that in one go and you'd have to get permission from multiple governments to do East to West.
And then, who's going to pay for it? No one cares about the flat earth conspiracy because it's long been so completely obvious it isn't, so unless flat earthers are going to pony up the money, you'll just have to be content with all the fucking evidence that exists to show the Earth is round.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAlDMYyWPis
Mute this one, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tOuO5f8qh0
God, why do they use such awful music?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmaOcPYCGMA
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
what do you mean long been so completely obvious? im pretty sure people have had theories of the earth shape for thousands of years...
you make a good point with the GPS, but i was trying to counteract that with open sourced and video feed.. but i see your point.
as for evidence, theres plenty for both sides. but who has the most unanswered questions? it seems like fe does
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
There is no evidence on the flat earth side.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
The Earth as a round was obvious as soon as the people were traveling distances fairly routinely, especially once they were sailing open water. Astronomy is as old as dirt and once they were comparing notes, they could see that stars were at different points from the horizon depending on the distance north and south. It also explained to seafarers why ships and shores "sunk" as the distance grew.
Here, says the Greeks were convinced of a round Earth by the 5th century BC, and they thought it was known for several centuries before that.
The thing is with theories like flat Earth and Creationism is that their hypotheses are are not coherent. That is to say, they do not consider their explanations for one observation will impact other observations. They're always one off what ifs.
And they believe no one has ever taken their theory seriously. That no one has actually and honestly considered the theories and concluded that they are wrong. And not just a person, but a history or people actually studying and arguing the two sides until until their theories were completely dismissed as false.
That's where the conspiracy has to be introduced. That so many people have spend so much money to keep the lid on a fact that was deduced two thousand years ago or more, and to what purpose? Moreover, consider the CIA leaks. The CIA, an actual government entity whose job it is is conspiracy and that's known to everyone, couldn't keep their secrets. How the hell would global scientists everywhere all fail or be part of the round earth conspiracy?
Of course all the pictures are CGI, if they weren't then there would be no conspiracy and no one could believe a flat Earth.
Are the space agencies of the Soviet Union, Europe, Japan, etc all arms of NASA? Red Bull too? Go watch Felix Baumgartner's jump from a balloon from the edge of space. You can see the curvature of the Earth from a balloon. Amateurs can do this (the camera on the balloon part, not the jump.)
And why would the Earth behave differently in shape than other celestial bodies, or is that all illusions and conspiracy too?
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
Not a single flat earther has a reasonable explanation of why a boat would disappear bottom first when going over the horizon. That, along with observing the stars, is ample evidence proving the Earth is round.
n/a Crynth 2017-04-22
The boat question has been answered numerous rime. Plenty of youtube videos where they zoom in on the "disappearing" boat and the entire boat comes back into view. Nothing is behind the curvature.
It is due to the nature of perspective that the bottoms of faraway objects seem to disappear first. This is what the flat earthers say, at any rate.
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
No, that is not true. You anywhere near the coast? Go check it out for yourself. In those videos, it's just the camera doesn't have adequate resolution to see the boat when it's zoomed out.
https://youtu.be/yfbvwqjITLg
Like that, awful camera, that boat would clearly be visible to the eye (it doesn't move down at all when zooming out).
Nature of perspective? I'm stood still on a beach, my perspective doesn't change. That's not an explanation.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
That is a baseless and nonsensical explanation.
n/a ufukinwanker 2017-04-22
What's your thoughts on the elctric universe theory
n/a shockaDee 2017-04-22
I think it's an elegant and simple explanation for much of the anomalies that we observe in the universe.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
So like gravity?
n/a haveyouseenmymarble 2017-04-22
Gravity is pretty elegant, but it has its problems, most notably that we struggle to integrate it with Quantum Theory. Additional problems arise when predicting the behavior of galaxies based on gravity alone, leading scientists to hypothesize the existence of Dark Energy, as well as Dark Matter.
It's not unthinkable that another paradigm, such as the Electric Universe Theory could manage to explain and unify these discrepancies between scales and theories. The Holo-Fractal paradigm is another interesting candidate for a theory that may bridge that gap.
Point is, gravity may not be the best explanation for why things attract.
n/a WordSaladMan 2017-04-22
We have yet to observe the graviton, but that doesn't mean a whole lot. All the magnetic-gravy and electric-gravity theories are considered pseudoscience for some pretty good reasons. Consider, we have a pretty potent ability to manipulate electromagnetic fields. We can build large zero gauss chambers and the like - which make faraday cages look like nothing - to cut out the electric and magnetic field interference of the Earth. If an object or persons weight were dependent on the interaction of that objects charge with the Earth's field, in some way, what do you suppose the result of reducing that to near zero would be? Venus doesn't even have a magnetic field, yet it certainly has gravity, etc. There is too much observable evidence that flies in the face of these various theories and no experiments supporting them. Too many simple experiments which can be perform to debunk them, given that not all matter is magnetic and not everything has an electric charge, that sort of thing.
Dealing with theoretical physics results in a lot more questions than answers until we figure out how to observe whatever we're after, but general relativity definitely stands up to the test whereas electric gravity and magnetic gravity just fall apart.
n/a ufukinwanker 2017-04-22
https://youtu.be/8TbrGaQ9Zc0
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
By the way, dark matter and energy isn't just some bullshit knocked up to explain the unusual rotation of galaxies.
It has directly been calculated through the density of the universe, where we see that baryonic mass-energy and photonic energy can only occupy about 21% of the energy in the universe. The calculations are quite fascinating, but a little complex
n/a daddie_o 2017-04-22
We haven't been able to integrate it because current equations already combine or integrate them without knowing it. Miles Mathis has unlocked the key, revealing the secrets of gravity, E/M, and dark matter/energy:
http://milesmathis.com/uft2.html
http://milesmathis.com/third.html
http://milesmathis.com/mond.html
n/a facereplacer3 2017-04-22
If you could say anything to persuade a true flat earth believer (and I know some), what would it be?
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
I would live to see this too. How about proof it's not flat. That should 've easy to provide
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
When I measure GPS coordinates, they are wrong. The further away they are, the larger the error. This is because the measurement passes through the curve of the earth. I have to correct these measurements using the the radius of the earth to reflect a surface measurement.
n/a Dippy_Egg 2017-04-22
I was a civil engineering drafter and designer for over a decade. Just wanted to corroborate this answer. It's true and AutoCAD Civil 3D, ArcGIS and other programs used to crunch survey data have automated this process.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Great example - people here can rent a Trimble unit themselves and experiment with the correction parameters and read up on how it works if they don't believe it
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Probably because GPS coordinates are already based on a globe model and need to be corrected to the true flat earth model.
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
Occam had a brother, but he was a moron and did things the hardest possible way
They both made razors
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Explain horizons then. If the earth is flat then nothing should ever disappear over the horizon
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
It's a limitation of our convex vision. The same way the roof, walls and floor of a hall appears to fall towards the center point
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
How do you know the satellites aren't simulating a round earth and sending you incorrect signals on purpose?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Exactly.
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
Ah yes, the most complicated answer is most likely the correct one. Retard's Razor, I believe they call it
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Like comparing the chances that we are on a ball hurling and spinning thousands of miles through space without any physical effects vs the earth being stationary?
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
Where the would the satellites be if there wasn't space?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Satellites are a myth. It's only weather balloons.
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
Ah. So you're just nonsense crazy then.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Oh, I'm CRAZYYY
https://youtu.be/WH5QkBNzEtY
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
Sorry, that was a bad word to use. You're different. Once again man, I really hope you find the strength to reach out to someone and get mental help. Have a good day!
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Lol I literally linked you a video of a "satellite" being launched via a weather balloon...
n/a silverminers 2017-04-22
The projection is real.
n/a OniExpress 2017-04-22
I prefer "pants on head".
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-04-22
Removed. Rule 4.
n/a No8145 2017-04-22
Weather balloons that travel at over 10,000km per hour?
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
As a prospective aerospace engineer, all I can say is you should tell that to my professors. It'd make my physics homework a hell of a lot easier if satellites were a myth.
Also, you should tell that to my colleagues who worked on this too. It'll make their Graduate dissertations easier since all the data they got back is a farce
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
Have you ever been on an airplane at speed? You don't feel any effects because you aren't accelerating, silly!
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
I don't think he believes planes exists, check his other comments
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
His arguments are the kind of context-less arguments my 5 year old makes. The only difference these people make is the paranoid addition of the ever-present "they" when things get too "sciency".
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
I just can't imagine how awful it would be to live every day of your life thinking that every scientist is an evil corporate sellout, and that every politician wants nothing but the worst for him, and that every person that denies anything he says is paid/being malicious in doing so. I really hope he seeks help one day.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
So I need to go in for reprogramming? Lol
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
No, I'm not saying that. I just hope you deal with your paranoid tendencies in a healthy way, and that it doesn't culminate in anything larger than you believing some far-out theories.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Ok, Dad..
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I definitely feel the effects of moving while flying...
I also see that the horizon rises to eye level and remains relatively flat...
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
So you are telling me you can feel yourself moving without accelerating? Seriously?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I've moving, yes.
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
So the laws of motion are incorrect?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I guess. Maybe I just have super perceptive senses.
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
Well you are claiming superiority to Isaac Newton, so...
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
You don't think people understood that stuff fell to earth before Newton came along with his Gravity nonsense?
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
He went a little further than things falling.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Yea he reverse engineered some equations as well.
n/a raxus25 2017-04-22
He reverse engineered some equations from fucking what? Alien spacecraft that happened to have equations and symbols he could understand?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
From the results/inputs.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
That's not reverse engineering.
n/a dks42 2017-04-22
You're surely joking.
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
Go read his work....
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
You're moving right now. Like a motherfucker. You're on a giant ball that is endlessly moving
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Haha oh ok
n/a ZapRapTap 2017-04-22
The horizon rising to eye level is a claim that I commonly see, yet don't see any actual measurable proof of it.
You can actually measure the drop of the horizon using a theodolite. An example being here. Another one being from a plane like here.
If you, for some reason, don't trust theodolites then there are other proofs. Such as both the Moon and the horizon being below the eye level of an obersver in a plane. Here's another one.
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
You literally cannot physically feel constant velocity. One reason is because velocity is relative, so there's a reference point in which you are stationary. That's basic logic, not even (((science))).
Secondly, the way your body senses motion is the fluid in your ears applying a force against your inner ear. When you are vertical, it's pulling downwards because of gravity and the brain sets that force as 0 force for benchmarking. When you move at a constant velocity, the fluid does not move and your body only feels acceleration downwards due to gravity.
But when you accelerate forwards, the fluid flows backwards due to psuedoforce and the brain feels a difference in pressure, resulting in a feeling of motion. That's why going on a loop in a roller coaster doesn't have the same feeling of flying forwards since your acceleration is all downwards.
n/a Nyx666 2017-04-22
You only feel the effects when taking off, accelerating, and the descent/braking/landing. You do not feel the motion at cruising speed. Same for a car, you do not feel yourself going 50mph, you feel acceleration and braking. A hard brake, and you'll definitely feel the laws of inertia.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I'm not talking about g-forces, I'm talking about the inner magnetic sense of knowing where you are in the world in relation to the north pole.
n/a Nyx666 2017-04-22
"Inner magnetic sense" okay dude!!
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11976892
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Nope, you just think you do.
n/a p3dsimmer 2017-04-22
You would make a terrible pilot
Source: I'm a pilot
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Explain how your attitude indicators work off gyroscopes on a globe earth then.
n/a p3dsimmer 2017-04-22
The same way they work in space. http://science.howstuffworks.com/gyroscope.htm
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I mean why don't they show your horizon rising/falling as you move since they are not subjected to gravitational forces.
n/a p3dsimmer 2017-04-22
The horizon when flying only moves if you change the aircraft's attitude
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Exactly.
n/a p3dsimmer 2017-04-22
Lol k
n/a half-monty99 2017-04-22
The horizon shouldn't be at eye level if the earth is a sphere when at airline cruising altitude? Using my imagination, the horizon on an infinite plane always remains at eye level, but not on a sphere. But I must be missing something in my imagination.
n/a mesqueunclubsandwich 2017-04-22
Yeah because you totally feel an acceleration the entire time when you're going 1000 km/h on a transatlantic flight amirite
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Yes you are right.
n/a bad_argument_police 2017-04-22
How is the round earth model "against the laws of physics"?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Show me water sticking to a ball that's spinning in a lab.
n/a bad_argument_police 2017-04-22
Do you think that gravity is just... not a thing?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Correct. Just pseudoscience to explain electromagnetism.
n/a bad_argument_police 2017-04-22
You think electromagnetism is what calls things to fall towards the earth?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
No I think electromagnetism explains gravitational orbits and the movement of celestial bodies.
Density/bouyancy explains why stuff sticks to earth.
n/a bad_argument_police 2017-04-22
Density and buoyancy are properties of objects that only make sense in reference to some force that acts like gravity. What is the force that causes denser and less buoyant things to move towards the earth?
n/a Ikonovich 2017-04-22
I just want to reiterate this.
Buoyancy refers to the way things of different density behave in the presence of gravity. Without gravity there is no 'down' to sink to or 'up' to float to.
Imagine a sphere of water. Now put something buoyant in the exact center of that sphere. Which direction does it travel without gravity?
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
That would actually be pretty interesting.
Remember, if we're scaling down the earth to the size of a ball, then the thickness of water on the ball would also have to be scaled down.
The diameter of earth is 12,742 km. The deepest part of the ocean is 10.994 km.
If we divide 12,742 km by 12,742,000 we get 0.001 km or 1 metre.
If we divide 10.994 km by 12,742,000 we get 0.00000086 km or 0.86 mm.
So on our 1 metre diameter model of the earth, the water in the deepest part of the ocean would only be 0.86mm deep.
The average depth of the ocean is 3.69 km.
If we divide 3.69 km by 12,742,000 we get 0.00000031 km or 0.31mm.
So for our experiment, we could use a 1 metre diameter ball with a layer of water on it that is 0.31mm deep.
Then we spin that ball at 1 revolution per day (0.00069 revolutions per minute or 0.2484 degrees per minute.)
Even without taking account of gravity, it seems to me that the water will not be flung off the surface at such a slow rotational speed. The surface tension alone will probably be enough to hold it in place.
For the experiment to be more realistic, it would have to be carried out in a lab that is not feeling the effect of earth's gravity. So it could be done in a lab in orbit.
It's not going to be cheap, but it could be done.
n/a therearesomewhocallm 2017-04-22
OK, I'm not a /r/conspiracy regular, but I may be able to help you out.
Are you trying to say that we (assuming we live on a giant spinning rock) should be able to feel the force or angular momentum due to the earth's rotation? Well good news is we do.
The formula from angular acceleration is ac = v2 / r, v = 2πr*ω, so ac = 4π2 * r * ω2 , where ω = 1/(one day).
So ac = (4π2 * 6,371,000)/(24 * 60 * 60)2 = 0.03 ms2
Gravity = 9.81 ms2
So it's not really worth factoring in the difference considering variation in the earth's density and the fact that it's not perfectly spherical anyway.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Dude the coriolis effect is known to be BS...
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Bullshit.
But you say the experiment in that video was flawed. That's fine by me. I wasn't suggesting you believe that video, I was giving you an example of how you can test it for yourself.
It would be easy to do, and if you can show that the coriolis effect is bullshit by doing the experiment properly, I'm sure you'll become famous enough to recoup any costs you will incur.
Show us it's bullshit. You can do it.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I doubt it. There's plenty of YouTube videos disproving it alrwady.
n/a Nyx666 2017-04-22
Ask any sniper, or anyone who has fired a long range projectile. Then try to tell them it's bullshit. Let me know where that gets you.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
How much of an adjustment do you think they would even be making? Placebo effect.
n/a _m1k3anat0r_ 2017-04-22
Again, ask any sniper you fucking idiot. There's dozens of tests you could do to see that the Earth isn't flat yet you point to shitty youtube video's of some dude breathing into a mic and say "nuh uh".
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
You think a bullet traveling at 1200 fps is effected by the Earth's rotation yet planes, helicopters, smoke, etc are not? Lol
n/a _m1k3anat0r_ 2017-04-22
You didn't respond to anything in that post. So glad you'll have no effect on the world whatsoever.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
You think some fucking Jarhead is the best source for scientific phenomenon?
n/a _m1k3anat0r_ 2017-04-22
Surpised you aren't considering 90% of the people backing your theory are religious nuts who think the Earth is the center of the universe.
n/a miasmic 2017-04-22
That coriolis effect is obviously real but that experiment is a scam for tourists
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/03/27/flushing-out-an-equatorial-fraud/
Pay attention to the next sink or bath you see draining, there's a 50% chance its draining in the opposite direction to what you'd expect.
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXaad0rsV38
This is a better video. That "experiment" in your video is a scam, but the idea behind it is solid and the experiment is performed correctly in the video I posted.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
Hundreds of millions mph, according to them actually. You might say, ludicrous speed!
n/a MechaSandstar 2017-04-22
His ideas in this thread are certainly ludicrous.
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
That's like going plaid;
n/a MarioKart-Ultra 2017-04-22
LOL exactly. I love when people try and use occams razor on this subject.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Launching real satellites is more complicated than simulating fake ones.
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
And simulating stars, and simulating space, and phones would have to have another mechanism for use, etc. shall I go on?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Wel obviously if the earth were flat there would be different physics.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Have you played Elite Dangerous?
n/a daddie_o 2017-04-22
"Retard's Razor" Oh shit man that's funny. I'm gonna use that.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Well how the fuck would satellites exist without gravity and the earth being round? The earth being round is kinda fucking import for space flight and geostationary orbit
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
The satellite signal only tells us how far away the satellite is from our receiver. You need at least 4 satellites to determine a precise position. We also use satellites from countries such as Russia. Do you really think Russia is cooperating with the US to deceive the world about flat earth?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Yes, they cooperated with the US to deceive and nuke Japan, and there's good reason to believe the Cold War was Kayfabe too.
Some have even suggested that the Russians have infiltrated the Presidency.
n/a benjamindees 2017-04-22
So, just to clarify (since this is kind of an imprecise answer), you mean that when you take a straight-line measurement (using a laser?) you have to correct that measurement for the curve of the Earth in order to get it to match up with what the GPS satellites tell you?
I mean, obviously you're not saying that the 'GPS coordinates' are wrong.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Yes. One single measurement is negligible but when you add those measurements in a line over a long distance it becomes more important. (Highways)
n/a benjamindees 2017-04-22
So, you basically came here to tell us that the Earth is round, because the GPS satellites tell you so, and you believe them.
I'm not a flat-earther, but this is a bit of a weak argument.
n/a HeDoesntAfraid 2017-04-22
Not sure what you are talking about. Is this an OPUS solution?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Sure
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Your fired.
Seriously. Getting fired or laid off by whoever is paying them will usually get them to change their minds.
Of course, they won't ever admit to having believed it in the first place.
n/a FartOnToast 2017-04-22
If you're gonna fire somebody, do it right.
n/a Maldevinine 2017-04-22
If you're near the coast, it's pretty simple. I can walk them through the test process for a long straight edge (ruler) and then get them to hold the straight edge up to the horizon. The horizon will noticeably curve down at the edges.
n/a Uoop 2017-04-22
How much are "they" paying you for this?
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
Not enough.
n/a Uoop 2017-04-22
Typical government
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
If your boss use merit based pay scales you are way overpaid.
n/a CelineHagbard 2017-04-22
Removed. Rule 10.
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
Youre full of shit.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Buzz off kayla - go dig a hole and lie down in it
n/a Kayla_K 2017-04-22
You will too. it's what's after that will be fun.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
My anus is ready bitch
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
kinky
n/a Implicit_Brag 2017-04-22
Fun? Do you think you'll be a sole survivor running around dispensing justice in a post apocalyptic wasteland that strangely resembles your favorite video game or movie setting?
n/a just_play_one_on_tv 2017-04-22
Pay for it how?
n/a nanonan 2017-04-22
Flat notes only, none of these round coins.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
A surveyor and engineer of thirty years published in the Birmingham Weekly Mercury stated, “I am thoroughly acquainted with the theory and practice of civil engineering. However bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst us that such theoretical measurements are INCAPABLE OF ANY PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION. All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as TRUE LEVELS or FLATS. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here and there, but they are always accurately defined and must be carefully traversed. But anything approaching to eight inches in the mile, increasing as the square of the distance, COULD NOT BE WORKED BY ANY ENGINE THAT WAS EVER YET CONSTRUCTED. Taking one station with another all over England and Scotland, it may be stated that all the platforms are ON THE SAME RELATIVE LEVEL. The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities. If such was the case there is not a driver or stoker within the Kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train. We can only laugh at those of your readers who seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains round spherical curves. Horizontal curves on levels are dangerous enough, vertical curves would be a thousand times worse, and with our rolling stock constructed as at present physically impossible.”
Explain that.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
It doesn't really make sense. Surveying actually does assume the world is flat for small projects and it works perfectly fine because the curvature is not drastic locally. Once you get into big projects you have to factor the curvature of the earth in otherwise you will not be able to make the measurements close on themselves.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
300 miles is a small project?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
300 miles is a large project. That would take account of earths curvature by using procedures that cancel out that error. You can't see 300 miles away directly. You have to set the level up many times in between. Each time you set up, you create a new level line that is perpendicular to gravity. You must keep the distance between these setups small. So if you map out all these level lines, it follows the curvature of the earth.
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
While I admire what you're doing, it seems to be in vain. These people don't want to be disproved, and that mindset is the true problem here. If you unconsciously cling to an idea like this, you start feeling like you've been enlightened with "The Truth™". And if you can't learn to recognize these tendencies of our human nature before it's too late, you will fall down the rabbit-hole of quackery. THAT is what's discrediting conspiracy theorists, that is the psychological complex that is hurting us.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
How do you know you aren't the one doing that?
n/a ItsAJackOff 2017-04-22
This. A quick cursory search into the curvature of the earth combine with a basic knowledge of working on a construction site, one can safely assume you wouldn't just level with a laser one time in 300 miles. Literally every time a new section was installed you would check it for being level and move it if needed, this will cancel out the gradual curve of the earth, making it a non factor.
n/a Tecumsehs_Revenge 2017-04-22
Teslas Gigafactory
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Weird I was literally just watching a documentary about it.
n/a Gkender 2017-04-22
BOOM goes the dynamite.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
How many inches of curvature do you expect per mile? The Quote suggested 8.
n/a malaihi 2017-04-22
" Surveying actually does assume the world is flat for small projects and it works perfectly fine because the curvature is not drastic locally. "
Well how far are we talking about locally?
Because you said in another comment that the curvature becomes important at 1/2 a mile. These guys are talking 300 miles.
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
I've no idea what the elevations are as this track goes from point 'A' to point 'B' or the elevation markers in between but according to your remark above how much curvature is at play here?
http://www.ncpedia.org/carolina-central-railway
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
The curvature is only important for determining distance. It does not affect straightness. Here's a video explaining the calculation. if you wish to run through the numbers.
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
Thank you for the math link.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
An article from a nineteenth century newspaper is your proof?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
We aren't exactly still laying down railways...
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
No. But we are still laying out massive stretches of highways. What the guy in the article is saying about trains running out of control would also apply to trucks and cars.
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
Gravity. As the earth moves, you aren't going over a hill per-say, as the gravity is always pulling toward the center of the earth.
But honestly, if you are going to believe the earth is flat, there's not much a rational person can tell you to change your mind. I hope you find the help you need one day.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Lol is there anything that Gravity can't explain?
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
It can't explain how the earth can be flat yet people at the edges are not pulled towards the center as if sliding down a giant slope.
It can explain all the observations of the real universe that we make, but it can't explain the flat earth model.
Funnily enough, nothing in the flat earth model can explain all the observations of the real universe that we make.
It's almost like the flat earth and the real universe are two different things... one could say the flat earth isn't real...
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Lol I know the exact disinformation "flat Earth debunked" video you are referring to. It has a very inaccurate flat earth model...
It's not needed in the flat Earth model...
Just because a theory explains something doesn't mean it's correct (yes I know that sounds hypocritical).
Electromagnetism seems to explain most of it, however.
The issue is we really don't know shit about the "universe"...
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
Actually, you may try explaining that. What you've done is copy and paste something another person has wrote, but I have significant doubts that you are able to comprehend any of this. You could've just stated it in your own words and cite the sources accordingly, but in this, you have demonstrated the true heart of the Flat-Earth Conspiracy: "We don't know what any of the data means, but ______ does! Here's one of his videos/quotes."
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Long distance railways not only don't account for the Earth's curvature but the locomotives that run on them wouldn't even function.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Yes, they do. They account for the curved earth by being level. If they did not account for the curved earth, they would not be level and one end would eventually be out in space.
The word "level" means "perpendicular to the force of gravity". On a spherical planet, a "level" line that is long enough will not be a "straight" line as it would follow the curving surface while staying perpendicular to the force of gravity.
Yes, they would. The direction of gravity points at the center of mass. On a spherical planet that center is at the center of the sphere. On opposite sides of the sphere, gravity is pointing in opposite directions.
The affect of this is that if you move further away from the center, you are climbing, and if you move closer to the center you are falling.
If you pick a point in space and call it the center, then try to draw a surface around that center that is always the same distance away from it, the surface you draw will be a sphere.
If you move around on that surface you will neither be getting further away nor closer to the center. That is, you will not be climbing or descending.
This "engineer" you place so much faith in seems to have no understanding of how gravity works, or even basic geometry.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Nope.
This person is actually rather ignorant of some basic physical realities. His claim is that the first half of the journey would be ascending against gravity, while the second half of the journey would be descending, as if the train were climbing over an enormous hill.
Here is a diagram of what this "engineer" is talking about
At the top we see the curved earth. The red line is the path of a train travelling from one side to the other. The yellow lines indicate the direction of gravity on such a world. These lines run parallel to each other with only the center line passing through the center of the earth, while the lines to either side miss the center. On this world, travelling across the world involves climbing up against gravity on one side then descending down on the other.
But what happens if we take that curved surface and flatten it out? The bottom diagram shows what happens. We now see the gravity is not pointing straight down everywhere, but is angling out from the center, becoming less perpendicular to the surface the further from the center you go. At the beginning of the journey, gravity is pushing back against the train, while at the end of the journey it is pushing the train forward.
We all know that's not how gravity works... right? It's always pointing straight down... right?
Here is the same image with the lines of gravity corrected so that they always point to the center of earth
Now we can see at the top that the lines of gravity are not parallel, but instead radiate out from the center of the earth so that they are always perpendicular to the surface. As the train travels along the red line, the gravity lines behind it are "pushing" it forwards as much as the gravity lines in front of it are "pushing" it backwards. This effect cancels out so that the train is neither climbing nor descending at any point of its journey.
When we flatten out that world, we see the lines of gravity converge, becoming more parallel the flatter the surface gets. This shows that the gravity is pulling the train down on to the surface but not horizontally as in the first image.
That is how the real world works. Travelling from one side of the curved surface to another does not involve climbing or descending as long as that surface is always the same distance from the center of the earth. Even though the train is actually travelling in a shallow arc, because the gravity is always perpendicular to the surface wherever it is, the train will not be climbing or descending and is able to move exactly the same as if it was on a flat surface with gravity pointing straight down perpendicular to the surface.
Why is this so? It is because gravity is not a force traveling in one direction. It is a force that pulls towards the center of mass. On opposite sides of the world, gravity is pulling in opposite directions.
The fact this "engineer" does not understand such basic principles calls into question whether he is an engineer at all.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I like how you assume the engineer doesn't understand the basic principles of gravity.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
I didn't assume it, he demonstrated it.
He claimed that moving over the surface of earth would be like climbing a giant hill, which is completely contrary to how gravity works, as my diagrams illustrate.
Aren't you guys the ones that claim listening to "experts" is stupid and that we should think for ourselves?
Well, I thought for myself and demonstrated that this particular "expert" hasn't got a clue what he's talking about.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I mean if that's what he wants actually referring to - I agree.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
He very clearly doesnt. I like how you assume one random 19th century engineer is correct and everyone else is wrong.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I just don't see how anyone could think gravity worked that way on a globe earth. We would literally just fall off...
n/a throwawayblue69 2017-04-22
No reply from the flat-earthers here...I guess they haven't seen it yet /s
n/a Loud_Volume 2017-04-22
/u/billnyesciencelies
n/a FlappyChapcranter 2017-04-22
Does this really need to be said?
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
If you desperately need to keep the lie going? Yes. This whole thread is ridiculous. It's not even flat earthers bringing this shit up. Why not just let them be?
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
What is the largest area you have surveyed in regards to level/flatness of the area?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I'm not a government surveyor so I stick to work in my region of business. Largest I've personally been involved with is about 3 miles. Of sewer surveying after sandy.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
Okay. so If the curvature of the earth is supposedly detectable at 8+ miles.. how can you say that you can prove flat earth is fake? I mean, can you even survey lets say 10 miles. point a to b and see if there is a detectable curve?
My point is, there can and probably are deviations in a 3 mile wide area, ups, downs, hills, all that, but even if you did detect or have to correct for 'curvature', which also again doesn't make sense if you're not doing anything past 8 miles you shouldn't even have to worry about it right? so.. I don't get it.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Your using detectable in a loose manor. For me it becomes important in about 1/2 mile. We report our measurements in 1/100th of a foot
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
well, can you 'detect' the curve of the earth in a half a mile? because ball earth theory says it's only 'observable' at 8+ miles..
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Define "observable". It's obviously not a large correction at that distance.
n/a Glassclose 2017-04-22
Here you say this : " When I measure GPS coordinates, they are wrong. The further away they are, the larger the error. This is because the measurement passes through the curve of the earth. I have to correct these measurements using the the radius of the earth to reflect a surface measurement"
But you also just admitted that the largest area you've ever worked on was maybe 3 miles. How, in your mind, that the GPS system is not being accurate, translate in an absolute that there is not a flat earth. Keeping in mind that the GPS is suspect as well in the flat earth theory.
How does that work? Again, the curvature supposedly only matters at a distance beyond 8 miles, so even if the GPS was off, why would you have to use the supposed radius of the earth?
n/a FliesMoreCeilings 2017-04-22
Curvature matters at any distance, it's a sphere. This 8 mile figure you got somewhere may just be about the point it starts becoming visible or easily distinguishable from elevation differences.
n/a psyboar 2017-04-22
GPS is fake?
And this 8+ miles stuff is an absolute pile of garbage; long bridges have to account for the curvature of the earth e.g. Verrazano–Narrows Bridge at 2.6 mi, and Humber Bridge at 1.4 mi.
Long distance marksmen have to account for the rotation of the Earth - https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/18e8pa/why_would_a_sniper_need_to_account_for_the/?sort=confidence
n/a AutoModerator 2017-04-22
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
n/a annieareyouokayannie 2017-04-22
I feel so bad for people doing surveying work in imperial measurements!
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Haha. It's just what your used to. I consider SI the devil for surveying.
n/a Errror1 2017-04-22
For surveying imperial is actually way better.
The only unit we use is decimal feet so there is never any unit conversion, the main disadvantage of imperial.
n/a bitcoin_noob 2017-04-22
Jesus fuck, the curvature is 'observable' at 8 miles, ie, to the eye.
Obviously that doesnt mean its flat for 7.9 miles and then suddenly a curve. When you're surveying, millimeters matter.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
3 miles.... You were just calling a 300 mile railway a small project.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I didn't. You did.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Curvature of the Earth isn't relevant until 12...
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
The Manchester Ship Canal Company published in the Earth Review stated, “It is customary in Railway and Canal constructions for all levels to be referred to a datum which is nominally horizontal and is so shown on all sections. It is not the practice in laying out Public Works to make allowances for the curvature of the earth.
Explain that.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Misleading The datum is nominally horizontal in your local area. Modern vertical datums are based on what is called the geoid which is a roughly earth shaped surface modeled on earths gravity. These datums were created to allow GPS technology to be incorporated more fluently into the profession. As you level across the surface the level line is always perpendicular to gravity. To avoid error, you have to keep your back measurements and forward measurements the same. This cancels out the effect of the curved earth. If we didn't do this then error would occur. So yes for simplicity of math we level as though the world was flat, but we have to measure in a certain WAY to still produce the correct result. GPS has totally changed the game though and is wholly dependent on a curved model called the geoid to produce correct results.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Does that imply that the case for a flat earth would be stronger without GPS? Some people believe NASA is fake you know (especially Flat Earthers).
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
It would be stronger because it chips away one piece of evidence but still wrong. If a traverse a large distance and return to my starting point, I will have new coordinates at my starting point due to the earths curvature. Same can be said if I run a large level loop and return to my starting point if I intentionally made my back and forward measurements different lengths.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
I'm not a professional earth measured, can you expand on your examples.
By definition if you return to your starting point you would have the same coordinates in either scenario, and intentionally making your back and forward measures different and ending up in a different location seems like a no brainer.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
You will have different coordinates if you do not account for spherical trigonometry over long distances. The angles measured on a flat earth would not have that problem. here is a video showing a spherical triangle that has 3 90 degree corners which is not possible in 2d earth Making your back sights different lengths avoid canceling out the earth curving "down" as you level along.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
I'm not suggesting you are wrong but your video is demonstrating on a spherical earth. What I was asking was for an example of something that doesn't work on a flat earth, not something that would work on a sphere (I can't verify if what you drew is ACTUALLY possible )
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Try this. Polaris would always be directly over your head in a 2D world no matter where you are on the planet.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Not if the stars are a simulation.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
If your only proof the Earth isn't flat is based on technology designed by the government (GPS), you're "proof" is quite lacking.
n/a just_play_one_on_tv 2017-04-22
It isn't. He said it's based off of the geoid, which is based off of science.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
SCIENCE!
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
Not trying to be a dick, but I encourage you to take a step back and look at yourself. /u/TellMeTrue22 has just provided very solid evidence against the Flat Earth Theory. Why not do your own research to find a rebuttal rather than, "Government owns GPS!" That is the conspiracy cop-out right there.
If you really cared about uncovering an objective truth, you would do your own homework and look at the data for yourself.
I'm not even arguing against a Flat Earth, I'm simply encouraging you to recognize your own biases. Conspiracy Theorists should hold an attitude of the utmost skepticism, but what you've demonstrated is anything but that; it's an almost fervent hope that the world actually is flat.
Hope this helps.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
It's not a cop-out. If anything it's more evidence that the Earth is flat and the government(s) is covering it up.
You believe it's just a coincidence, lol.
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
You've completely dodged the point because it's something you don't want to hear. It may be evidence for something, but you drawing correlations between the two further prove that you're operating on confirmation bias.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
My hypothesis is the government is lying to us bout Flat Earth.
Your "proof" is from the government...
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
What sort of answer would satisfy you? Does he need to visit you personally and walk you through the whole thing?
I could say the same thing in opposition to any evidence-based argument you make. "Oh, well if it's based on THAT evidence, it couldn't possibly be true!"
Just because the government has lied about things does not imply they lie about everything.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
You don't give a known criminal the benefit of the doubt.
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
You DO give a known criminal the benefit of the doubt in a court of law.
The government isn't some singular entity. It is made up of disparate elements who work most independently of each other. If you ever worked in government you would know how disorganized most things are.
Yes, there are and have been proven high-level conspiracies within government. There is not, however, a need for the earth to be round for the elite to control the populace. Stop being silly!
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Sure it's compartmentalized at the lower levels but the upper levels and intelligence organizations are a different story.
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
I can't speak for high levels of regular government, but the IC is plenty disorganized. Even SAPs are only available to relatively small groups of people and most of the conspiracies you hear about are rogue elements because there are oversight policies in place all the way to the top which prevent misuse of power.
You are speaking from a place of pure ignorance. Stop it.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I work with them as well dude.
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
No you don't.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Lol oh ok then...
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
Well you don't work with/for DIA or NRO for obvious reasons.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
I just meant with a government intelligence agency.
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
State caveats or you do nothing more than check IDs.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
IT security for telecommunications
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
state caveats, pleb.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Haha ok neckbeard
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
It's a simple way to check if you are full of shit, and you are. Don't try to misrepresent yourself. Even someone at the lowest levels knows their caveats. I had (not working and out of scope now) the basic set SI, TK, H, GCS plus one SAP.
It's fine to believe conspiracies, but stop trying to misrepresent yourself as a secret squirrel as some kind of subtle appeal to authority.
Second-guessing the establishment is healthy, but you need to learn to second-guess yourself and your beliefs as well.
Good day.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
It's the easiest proof. The same can be shown with more dated measurement technology. Geodesy is the field dedicated to this.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Ok how does flat earth explain this. Ancient navigators used the angle of the sun above the horizon to determine their position on the earth.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
You're doing a great job bolstering the flat earth argument in this thread.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
n/a bitcoin_noob 2017-04-22
Sure if you have the money to fund an extremely expensive project whos only goal is to (potentially) satisfy a handful of weirdos.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
extremely expensive how? a plane ride from cali to NY is like 500... cant be more than 50k to do this lol. .... and yea satisfy a THEORY to the shape of the earth thats been argued for millenia is not important? yea ok bro roll eyes
n/a ZapRapTap 2017-04-22
Would something like this satisfy you?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
What is that supposed to show/prove that wouldn't work on a flat Earth model?
n/a bitcoin_noob 2017-04-22
Are you telling me you think the price you pay for a ticket from NY to Cali is what it costs the airline to do the flight? You people are dumber than I thought.
It's only argued by a few fringe weirdos. Everybody else is satisfied. If you think it's going to be so cheap and easy to do this flight that you seem to think is going to staisfy flat earthers, why don't you and your buddies get together and crowd fund it? Why do you expect sane people who already know the earth is round to do it for you?
It's like if I said I believed there's a teapot orbiting the sun and the proof that it's real is that the government refuses to fund a mission to prove otherwise.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
How come you havent done it yet?
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
Psst, use a double enter between paragraphs otherwise it just becomes a long block
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
Modern practices is a misleading distraction piece. We have statements from a century ago (i.e. before the advent of GPS or anyone technological crutch you'd like to invoke) stating that railway stretching from Manchester to London assumes a flat surface. Datum lines prior to your GPS voodoo could not magically assume a curve. A datum line is a fixed horizontal line, not a relatively horizontal line. GPS is fucking great but I doubt it has the power bend facts.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
OP will answer this better than I, but i think it has to do with using benchmarks when you survey - they are basically just points of reference when you start taking spot shots across a project site.
If you are working on a vertical construction project, like a building, the extents of your site footprint are fairly small horizontally - you can use one benchmark and the curvature of earth will have a very minor effect over such a small area - but horizontal construction, something like a railroad that extends distant lengths, the curvature really begins to play a role in the topography, and it becomes a little complicated to weigh rolling topography and the drop off due to curvature.
Long story short - If anything, the example you provided actually supports an ellipsoid earth model, not a flat one
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Going to need the long story in order to follow along with that conclusion...
n/a coldoll514 2017-04-22
this
civil designer here. we do not make allowances for curvature of the earth for the simple fact that it is irrelevant for the distances which we are generally concerned.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
I suppose that, and other arguments ITT would neither prove or disprove a flat earth, if the measurements and design considerations work perfectly fine on flat or ball earth.
n/a robert9712000 2017-04-22
Most project site coordinates are on a State Plane coordinate system. They are usually converted from grid to a ground datum via a couple established gps points. The Grid to Ground conversion is done with an Adjustment factor.
On small sites you generally just take 2 established GPS points and use the mid point as the base point of adjustment.
With it converted to ground coordinates you might as well consider it as an assumed coordinate relating only to that localized site. If you want to relate it with other projects you need to apply the adjustment factor and use the Base point of adjustment to convert your coordinates back to grid. The elevation does not change in the conversion, only Horizontally.
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Also, look here. OP answered somebody else's question, but this is the same general explanation that i was trying to explain to you: https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/66wozm/comment/dglvhyn?st=J1TIV8E1&sh=406883f8
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Was a reply to another of my comments.
Still just empty words without any examples of accounting for the Earth's curvature...
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Go rent a Trimble handheld gps unit and start walking along train tracks and taking elevation shots as you walk. Learn about how the satellite post-corrections work. Then compare this with just taking some survey shots around your property.
Do a little survey work yourself - if you aren't going to believe other people explaining the process to you, then the best thing you can do is just try it yourself - its easy and fun. And its available for you to solve.
Or pay a surveyor a days work to walk around with you and show you how it works - theres a million ways you can solve this problem on your own
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
But that would be a scientific evidence-based solution, and we wouldn't want any of that!
n/a mesqueunclubsandwich 2017-04-22
Or... that poster doesn't want to find out; he will claim it's false because #The Law of Perspective
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
Stop it. Stop it right now. You know that every surveyor is in on this. Next you'll be telling us geometry isn't the Devil's Math.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
grid vs ground
n/a Maldevinine 2017-04-22
Ok, here's a good one. I'll go get the maths if you're still not satisfied.
I work in mining, and we sink vertical shafts. The place I used to work at has a bit over 2km between two of these vertical shafts and they both drop to about 1200m deep. At the bottom they both branch off into the mining levels which have been connected. We surveyed between the two shafts to confirm we'd done our job properly.
The distance between the two shafts at 1200m deep is less then the distance between them on the surface.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
This would actually be a good example.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Here is the definition of "nominally".
Put simply, saying a datum is "nominally horizontal" is another way of saying "the difference between the datum and a true horizontal line is small enough to be ignored for our purposes".
The curvature of the earth is relatively small and because of how gravity works, a railway line that follows the curvature will be "level" at each part of the track, even though it is not truly horizontal.
In this case, a long "level" track can be called "nominally horizontal" for the purposes of designing the track.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Perfectly stated.
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
Or is it?
Definition: A datum is theoretical exact plane, axis or point location that GD&T or dimensional tolerances are referenced to. You can think of them as an anchor for the entire part; where the other features are referenced from. A datum feature is usually an important functional feature that needs to be controlled during measurement as well.
All GD&T symbols except for the form tolerances (straightness, flatness, circularity and cylindricity) can use datums to help specify what geometrical control is needed on the part. When it comes to GD&T, datum symbols are your starting points where all other features are referenced from.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Your definition includes the words straightness, flatness, circularity, and cylindricity
n/a qoloku 2017-04-22
But but but when IIIII look at the horizon between the sky and the ocean, it's completely flat! /s
n/a DANNNY_SCO 2017-04-22
I have a set of eyes. I've visited Australia and tried to look for the North star and it was not possible to see. it's not flat.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
It's just beyond the vanishing point from that far away
n/a VonsFavoriteChicken 2017-04-22
That star is trillions of miles away. You're telling me the vanishing point just happens to be between OPs house and Australia?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Proof?
n/a VonsFavoriteChicken 2017-04-22
Your definition of proof doesn't exist for anything
n/a Muslerra 2017-04-22
a telescope
n/a dks42 2017-04-22
Go to the north pole. Look at Sirius how bright it looks. Then go south to the equator. You can see Sirius. It is as bright as before. The go south. At some point Sirius will vanish. Go back a few miles then observe Sirius again. Keep staring until you're eaten by a large cat.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
Try using a telescope.
Or are those another goverment lie?
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
So the whole of cosmology is bunk, is that it? What are the starts, windows in the veil of heaven?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Who knows, start trying to do some cosmology research and see how many goddamn roadblocks you run into, how many censored docs you have to go through.. you have to question everything. Nasa has thousands of satelites up there, very few of them provide publicly accessible data...but why is it so hard to find detailed images of Antarctica? North pole? It goes on and on man. nasa = Never A Straight Answer
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Who knows?
n/a ZapRapTap 2017-04-22
These aren't genuine pictures/videos of stars. They are more than likely taken by people who can't properly focus a camera. Learn how to focus one.
n/a Jawzper 2017-04-22
You are hilarious. Never change.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Well, if the earth was flat that would imply a radically different cosmology. Would you be open to a radically different cosmology if we said the world was round but changed everything else you know as we have done repeatedly through human history?
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
I'm open to whatever cosmology you'd like, it just has to jive with all the evidence without relying on conspiracies to discount evidence.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Why?
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
Because I am not open to fetishisticly believing in falsehoods?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Your loss.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
Not at all.
n/a XDiabolusExMachinaX 2017-04-22
So what's your view on Bill Nye and Neil Grasse Tyson? Seems like there has been some push back to who they are and what they preach, mostly from the right.
Also not a question but... I don't believe the world is flat.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
They're actors.
n/a XDiabolusExMachinaX 2017-04-22
Yeah but even actors can come equipped with facts and a degree from a university. Maybe they are a bit skewed but their biggest fight right now is climate change. It's not just the polar icecaps melting, it's the effects of large amounts of carbon and methane and their effect on agricultural production. Imagine if randomly the rural farm states became a desert.
Hey, it's possible it could happen naturally but there is usually a cause.
Btw they are basically interviewed by actors.
n/a qoloku 2017-04-22
What's underneath the bottom of the ocean? Are there people living on the opposite side of us like a rectangle? Are there people on our sides? Or does gravity not work like that?
How can you sail around the world? Is there a portal in the pacific that zaps you back to the California coast?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Have you not looked at a flat earth map? Obviously not..
n/a qoloku 2017-04-22
No, why would I?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
There are very few maps that are, check out the map porn subreddit, even science doesn't agree on which map is most accurate, and we mostly just default to one works for general navigation...
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Dude, look up Euler's theorema egregium. It's a mathematical proof that the curvature of a sphere cannot be projected onto a flat surface without sacrificing one or more of the geometric properties: accurate angles, lengths, areas, etc...
Take it up with Zermelo and Fraenkel (or maybe shoot an email to Jacob Laurie to see if higher topos theory is more to your liking) if you don't like the laws of mathematics but that is the only reason an "ideal" map doesn't exist.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
I can get on board with that, but why are there no globes available for purchase which are closer to reality? They still depict everything more or less the same as a flat map
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Globes do accurately represent the round earth, I don't know what you mean by that. Read this article to see why most of the modern photos of the earth were panormas stiched together. As to why the UN uses the flat earth map? The flat earth map is one of dozens of projections of the earth onto a flat surface so maybe they picked it in an effort to an choose a map that may minimize favoring certain regions over another (I.e. a pictorial representation of the globalist agenda). Think about it that map is unique in that it depicts Antartica (and really only Antarctica) as unnaturally distorted which is a non issue since Antarctica has no cultural relevance.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Globes don't accurately depict the earth... here's one of nasas models of earth's apparently actual shape... https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1412/geoid2005_champgrace_2362.jpg
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
No that's not it's actual shape. If you actually read an article it's a diagram displaying the varying gravitational constant based on how the matter is distributed relative to your location.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
I'll agree to disagree, because this is just one of thousands of models of earth's shape. I suggest reading up on the grace /goce satelites a bit more though because that was not my interpretation of the data these satelites produce. I've read the article you provided and it doesn't really back up your claim.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
It's not a model of it's shape! Good Lord it's a fancy diagram. Reading up on the sattelites in the article isn't going to help if you couldn't gather from the article that the image isn't the shape of the earth.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Funny because this article seems to indicate that elevation and leveling are precisely what this model is used for. http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/03/goce_mission_reveals_the_true.html
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Do you only read the headlines?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Thanks for the healthy debate. Can only be as sharp as your toughest whetstone.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Ok so further research lead me here https://www.sciencealert.com/don-t-be-fooled-by-a-viral-gif-that-claims-earth-is-actually-lumpy-not-round , that explanation works for me it's just too bad I had to go through 3 pages of Google results for this explanation. Every popular science website talking about this model implys this is earth's shape minus oceans
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
I agree, if I hadn't already seen it in the correct context I could see coming away with that impression. The problem to me as that any massive 1000 miles bubble rising out of the earth would have been a feature discovered by the people who live around it hundreds if not thousands of years ago. Any Journalist is gonna want to spice up their work with all sorts of wacky incorrect claims. All in all though I agree with you, journalism shouldn't be setting out to confuse the shit out of people but that seems to be their Modus Operandi these days.
n/a DrDejavu 2017-04-22
The Earth appears round only when you measure it, otherwise it's perfectly flat.
n/a benjamindees 2017-04-22
I think... yeah. I think you pretty much broke physics with this. Good job.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Ever hear of Schrödinger's cat？
n/a drwooo 2017-04-22
Shrodingers Earth?
n/a teefymcteephteeth 2017-04-22
Let me just say I don't believe the earth is flat, but I do believe the earth might be bigger than we think. I think that may explain some of the points flat earthers have. Like we have never been shown any real pictures of earth.
n/a mesqueunclubsandwich 2017-04-22
How big do you think the earth really is?
n/a teefymcteephteeth 2017-04-22
I don't know.
n/a mesqueunclubsandwich 2017-04-22
Eh okay, what makes you think it's bigger than what "we think"? (Diameter of around 12700km)
n/a TheFapp3ning 2017-04-22
crickets
n/a Flat_Earth-Fat_Girth 2017-04-22
You don't think they'd employ easily gullible land surveyors, give them equipment that would make it seem like the earth is round, just to have them say that the earth is round?
It's flat man, one time a guy said that there are special devices on boats that are tuned to the curvature of the earth. He said that as they got farther away they'd pick up on higher areas of the boat, meaning that the earth is curved.
I clued him into the fact that they could just angle it up 1 degree and claim that. I got some laughs, lol.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Ok, why did colonial surveyors use methods to account for earths curvature when the lands outside of the 13 colonies? Is Thomas Jefferson "in on it" too?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Because they were idiots who thought North America was India?
n/a MaskedEngineer 2017-04-22
This. Show him what townships look like.
n/a Flat_Earth-Fat_Girth 2017-04-22
Everyone is in on it. Sphere earth started getting pushed 500 years ago.
Everyone is in on it for fame and riches.
n/a eschaton777 2017-04-22
So you do an AMA but provide zero evidence for your claim? Lol seems legit. The desperation to suppress this subject is getting more and more blatant everyday.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I'm not writing a scholarly article. I said AMA.
n/a eschaton777 2017-04-22
Ok, well what proof do you have that there really is a curve of 8" per mile squared? You made this AMA but you have provided no explanation of your claim.
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
Please just provide proof that this is your occupation so these fools shut up.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
How do I post a picture?
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
Linking from http://www.imgur.com is a common method.
n/a eschaton777 2017-04-22
Still nothing? I'm not asking for a scholarly article just any evidence of your claim. Why do an AMA if you are not even going to provide any evidence whatsoever?
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
hahaha. Yes! If you know the truth, this whole shit looks so desperate. smh. Just leave it alone and believe what you will.
n/a natavism 2017-04-22
lol check out /r/theworldisflat for earnest flat earth discussion
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
>earnest flat earth discussion >bans people that try to explain to him that the earth isn't flat
🤔
n/a natavism 2017-04-22
It's for discussing flat earth ideas, not how trolls and some users persistently refuse to understand or study them :)
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
Or refuse to subscribe to your dumb ideas.
Btw, what is your favourite brand of paint to huff?
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
I bet he's more of a gasoline type of guy.
n/a Nyx666 2017-04-22
They don't like science on that sub. Only fantasy!
n/a brotherlymoses 2017-04-22
Look into it
n/a DEEP_SEA_MAX 2017-04-22
Found eddy bravo's account
n/a KigurumiMajin 2017-04-22
Relax, he's just having fun with it. He's CRAZY, remember?
n/a perladdict 2017-04-22
Alright but what if it is? Checkmark RoundWorlders lol
n/a joe_jaywalker 2017-04-22
I thought this thread would be more.... convincing. Conclusive. Substantial.
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
When anything that would convince anyone who's not a moron is shown the reply given is that's just misinformation from a shill.
If all evidence is misinformation from a shill. How does one demonstrate one is wrong, exactly?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Your compass would spin out of control if south was in every direction.
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
Dont even bother, Ive been downvoted into negatives by these guys just for pointing out every magnet has a north and south. They deny there is any southern magnetic pole on the earth at all.
n/a errihu 2017-04-22
apparently they never paid attention to all the Mormon explanations on how magnets work...
n/a Shished 2017-04-22
Fucking magnets.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Directional South. Not magnetic south.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Look at a compass. It points north and south.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Yes. The flat earth is ringed in by strong magnetic fields.
n/a BecauseImNightwing 2017-04-22
Proof?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Magnets always point towards the center and outer circle.
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
You can't have something point to only North, there will be another torque on the compass needle by the south pole. T = PxB iirc.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
What makes compasses point North then?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
The electromagnetic North Pole in the center of the Flat Earth that the sun and moon revolve around.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
Where does the magnetism come from? Is there a giant magnet at the north pole?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Polaris
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
Compass needles don't point towards polaris.
Is polaris a giant magnet?
n/a Ozcolllo 2017-04-22
Polaris, as in the north star? How do you explain the precession of the Earth's rotational axis? Polaris won't always be the "north star" due to this precession. Does this not occur in your model?
Sorry to butt in, but I'm curious how the FE model accounts these things.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
It will. People just assume since they notice stuff moving that it will always be/always has. As it's moving closer to the center point of our "rotation" it's effectively charging the sun causing "global warming".
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
It doesn't account for those things. Flat earthers just ignore, deny, and misinterpret all legitimate evidence. They rely on people on the internet who have layman's understandings of physics and astronomy to fuel their beliefs.
Like the position of Polaris, as you said, and long-exposure photographs of stars. Compare images from the northern hemisphere, southern hemisphere, and equator. At the equator, long exposure images will show the stars taking a straight path across the sky. Further north/south, the stars appear to take a curved path.
That apparent movement makes perfect sense in a round earth model. There's 0 explanation for those on a flat Earth model. That's one of the easiest proofs against a flat Earth. Others include Earth's shadow on the moon, measurements of gravity, a Foucalt pendulum... I could go on. I just think flat earthers fall into a a category of people who are just dangerously stupid, because they are able to believe nonsense in the face of all contradicting evidence. It shows they are unwilling to accept facts once they find an opinion that they like best. There's a reason most flat earthers believe the exact same set of conspiracies.
/end rant
n/a Ozcolllo 2017-04-22
It's extremely frustrating. I feel bad and I just ask question after question so that maybe it will spark something in their brains, but... nothing. Looking at his reply to is unbelievably disheartening.
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
Sorry but this is totally wrong. Magnetism is a problem that is being misrepresented in academia so you wouldn't know. Frankly whatever science you think you understand should be triple checked and somehow I don't think that is happening. Stating creditials upfront makes you sound pretentious. If you think scatter gun labelling people crazy is going convince anyone with a brain, you're fucking nuts. Don't overestimate yourself lest you come across as a zealot protecting a dying religion.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
But somehow you do?
So because we haven't tripled check our science we're wrong?
Unless they are crazy. Like flat earthers. Or people who think that vampires run the world and chemtrails are to block out the sun
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
I'm sorry but was I talking to you? It doesn't take genius to merely step outside the box and ask a few tough questions of the church of science. But you wouldn't know anything about that would you? Probably because you're a just another fucking cow in the herd. Don't think your copy and paste bullets make you sound clever or articulate. Your too fucking stupid to have a conversation with. Go back to your fucking feed lot.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Nope, but you were talking in a public forum.
Lol "church of science", this is going to be good.
Naw, I question science a lot.
omg lol. The faithful conspiracy nut is calling me a cow in a herd because I believe in the scientific method.
You sir, are the cow here.
I wasn't trying to sound clever or articulate, I was just poking at you for giggles.
Says the stupid man.
I bet you thought that this would sound badass right? To bad it doesn't. It sounds like you have nothing to back up your crazy bullshit so you called me a sheeple.
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
Moooooooo.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
REEEeeeeeeeeeeeee
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
How does magnetism work?
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
I will answer this the best I can. To address his answer simply a flat disk shaped magnet will have one point for north and the ring around the edge will display south.
More broadly speaking, re. magnetism and science, watch this video, watch the whole channel:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLL1moBHAcL7ebH4PVwFsH1kEXwkJT90Rl&params=OAFIAVgt&v=06WrC-rvlIo&mode=NORMAL
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
I'm not going to watch a playlist.
How does this work? Please explain. Can you explain in your own words or is there any documentation?
Flat magnets don't have a pole in the middle. That goes against anything Imever learned about mqgnetism.
n/a Outofmany 2017-04-22
I shared the relevant information. Respect it.
n/a Vienna1683 2017-04-22
You posted a playlist. Which video explains my question?
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-04-22
Flat Earthers claim that surveyors, engineers and architects are never required to factor the supposed curvature of the Earth into their projects, providing proof that the world is a plane, not a planet. Canals and railways, for example, are always cut and laid horizontally, often over hundreds of miles, without any allowance for curvature.
Do you factor in the Earth's curvature?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
go to about 12:00
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
Did you notice the use of the word "level" in that statement? Do you know that "level" and "flat" do not mean the same thing?
A line can be totally level, and yet form a complete circle.
How? Because level is defined as a line that is perpendicular to the force of gravity, and gravity is a force that points towards the center of mass.
Here is a simplified diagram of earth and its gravity
The green circle is earth, the black lines are gravitational directions of force. As you can see both black lines meet at the center of the green circle but are perpendicular to the circle where they cross it. That's how gravity works on a sphere.
The red lines are drawn perpendicular to the lines of gravity. They are "level", but they are not flat. In fact they form a 90o angle to each other.
If you continue drawing black lines between these two, meeting at the center of the circle but remaining perpendicular to the surface you will start building a curve. With enough black lines, the red lines would form a perfect circle, but they'd still be level.
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-04-22
Ok. I see where you are coming from. Thanks for the reply. This would also explain the so called curvature of the ocean's water.
n/a finna_keef 2017-04-22
If the Earth is not flat, then prove to me why air lines fly slower going east to west, and faster west to east? It is to simulate the rotation they try and tell us is real.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
The reason planes go slower heading west is because they are flying into head winds. Head winds caused by coreollis effect from the rotation of the earth.
n/a paligror 2017-04-22
Are you fucking 12? Jet streams, google it
n/a silverminers 2017-04-22
12? You're giving it way too much credit.
n/a AfrikaCorps 2017-04-22
lol every pilot is in the conspiracy hahaha I wonder how it feels to have this much paranoia
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-04-22
A Surveyor and Engineer of thirty years wrote to the Birmingham Weekly Mercury, Feb. 15th, 1890 stating, “I am thoroughly acquainted with the theory and practice of civil engineering. However bigoted some of our professors may be in the theory of surveying according to the prescribed rules, yet it is well known amongst us that such theoretical measurements are INCAPABLE OF ANY PRACTICAL ILLUSTRATION. All our locomotives are designed to run on what may be regarded as TRUE LEVELS or FLATS. There are, of course, partial inclines or gradients here and there, but they are always accurately defined and must be carefully traversed. But anything approaching to eight inches in the mile, increasing as the square of the distance, COULD NOT BE WORKED BY ANY ENGINE THAT WAS EVER YET CONSTRUCTED. Taking one station with another all over England and Scotland, it may be stated that all the platforms are ON THE SAME RELATIVE LEVEL. The distance between Eastern and Western coasts of England may be set down as 300 miles. If the prescribed curvature was indeed as represented, the central stations at Rugby or Warwick ought to be close upon three miles higher than a chord drawn from the two extremities. If such was the case there is not a driver or stoker within the Kingdom that would be found to take charge of the train. We can only laugh at those of your readers who seriously give us credit for such venturesome exploits, as running trains round spherical curves. Horizontal curves on levels are dangerous enough, vertical curves would be a thousand times worse, and with our rolling stock constructed as at present physically impossible.”
How would you respond?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
From a previous reply quoting same article
300 miles is a large project. That would take account of earths curvature by using procedures that cancel out that error. You can't see 300 miles away directly. You have to set the level up many times in between. Each time you set up, you create a new level line that is perpendicular to gravity. You must keep the distance between these setups small. So if you map out all these level lines, it follows the curvature of the earth.
n/a throwawayblue69 2017-04-22
This was already answered
n/a yoda_fett 2017-04-22
Why do you push the lies of Globe making cartels that just want us all to move into FEMA camps where the Bilderberg Vampire/Reptile elites get to rape socialism into us and gay marry frogs to donkeys and mailboxes? Everyone knows the Earth is an isosceles triangle that spins in a giant hamster ball and if you get outside the ball by taking enough meth, you get super powers and join the Avengers! Stop trying to keep me off the Avengers buddy!
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Dude I heard you can even get to the outer sanctum if you take enough Datura and then snort a 200mg 1:10 mixture of 3-MeO-PCP and meth and make sure to hit a point of salvia 120x extract while inhaling an extra large nitrous balloon for good measure.
n/a yoda_fett 2017-04-22
Nope, you end up in Nebraska with herpes and 1 less kidney.
n/a Dexter_Thiuf 2017-04-22
Somebody get this fucker some Reddit gold fucking stat.
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
Hahahaha. This is hilarious. Thanks, random dude on the Internet. I'll surely take your word for it. This is hella suspicious. Why is the flat earth getting this much attention now? You're only going to stoke the flames of curiosity so people will have to do their research. And once they do that...
n/a Salamander7645 2017-04-22
They'll come to the conclusion that flat Earthers are mentally ill?
n/a chickenshitmchammers 2017-04-22
yup
n/a notglobalism 2017-04-22
I agree. I set out to understand flat earth positions. There are a ton of interesting points they make.
Then I asked, "what should be there, but isn't?"
Equinoxes
You can't have the sun rise due east everywhere on a flat earth twice per year.
It doesn't work - ever.
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
It's not. Not really. People have been making fun of flat earthers on and off for years.
They'll see the earth is round
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
The entire flat-earth theory summed up in one word: "they"
n/a moco94 2017-04-22
Flat earth is the most fun conspiracy I follow.. I believe he earth is a globe, don't think I've really ever questioned it, but there's something about watching flat earth videos or reading papers that interests the shit out of me haha. I'd say the truest part of that conspiracy is the fact that NASA does get into some shady things and are controlled by the government.. beyond that I don't think they're trying, or even can, hide the fact that the Earth is flat. People use the excuse that you can't keep a secret that big for 9/11 defenses, but I'd argue this is a secret WAY to be big to keep hidden for all these years... it'd be funny as fuck if it turned out to be true lol
n/a MarioKart-Ultra 2017-04-22
Feelings are mutual. The anger and similarities I see in each and everyone of these posts only convinces me more. As does the sheer simplicity of the FE model.
n/a Prgjdsaewweoidsm 2017-04-22
Mods, please sticky.
n/a notglobalism 2017-04-22
I'm a former civil engineer. You don't need complex explanations about gravity and curvature to know the flat earth models are wrong... you can't have the sun rise due east everywhere on a flat earth twice per year.
Done.
n/a Clivepwnens 2017-04-22
So how come when I leave my moms basement to walk to the 7 eleven to buy more cool ranch Doritos and a slushee it feels like I'm walking on a flat surface. Boom. Face.
n/a loveforeternity 2017-04-22
OP there are about 200 "proofs" and not much debunking if you want something to work on: The Atlantean Conspiracy: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html
Basically these kinds of objections have gone unanswered, and I'm sure there are a bunch more, and this is why flat earth theorizing persists and has grown
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
They have been answered only to fall on deaf ears. I'm sure you're aware a large portion of your growing body of "believers" are most likely trolls trying to see how fucking stupid they can make the "theory" get. If you would like I'll link you to an accurate mathematical model of an observer on the surface of the earth so you'll see that the lynch pin of round earth (you know the tangent line on the circle can only see so far) is just bunk, it's assuming our eyes are somehow fixed to the surface of the earth and that we are always at elevation 0.00000...
n/a loveforeternity 2017-04-22
I would like to see the posted link and others debunked in an organized way, which does not currently exist
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
It's largely the same claim over and over again with minor changes. Best example to disprove would be the Statue of Liberty one because there are like four dozen of that claim over and over again.
First problem: there's no proofs given, it's just empty claims. All he's doing is claiming that you can see the Statue of Liberty, he doesn't give you a reason to believe him at all. Not even a measly picture.
Second problem: he doesn't give you any information to recreate his "experiment" (not to imply that I think he's ever done this experiment). Where was he when he supposedly saw the Statue? "60 miles away" is a circle with a circumference of nearly 400 miles in three states - no one could follow up if they wanted to because of this.
Third problem: this claim isn't true. I'm about 60 miles away from the Statue of Liberty and I can't see it right now. Of course, flat earthers will claim that my vision is being blocked by trees and hills and buildings - and I would agree! Therefore, the location the author must have been in to truthfully make this claim has to be somewhere on this circle that is not being blocked by hills, trees, buildings, etc. It should be really obvious that this isn't possible because New York Harbor is surrounded by buildings, trees, and hills.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
I actually just made this to demonstrate what I was trying to say. The scale is really fucked (x:y is 2000:1) so this great circle of the earth looks more like a parabola but it's the only way to get all the points in one view (the units are in feet so we're looking at a 21 million foot radius circle here so hopefully that's not too upsetting). The flat red line is the standard flat earther perspective whereas the point G and the intersecting horizon line represents someone only one foot above sea level and the value is the distance in feet from the observer (So a little over a mile is now the horizon line only one foot off the ground which means you can see things that are over a foot tall from this perspective from 2 miles away). The lowest point J is the point of horizon for someone 15 feet above sea level and is about 5 miles away (15 feet above sea level gives you a 10 mile line of sight for things just over 15 feet tall). Now hopefully you see in any other demo like this they forget your line of sight can drop below a perfect horizontal gaze at 0 feet above sea level (probably because they believe in the fictitious "law of perspective"). Hopefully that satisfies your debunking need because I ain't makin' no YouTube video.
n/a ruleten 2017-04-22
What is at the edge of Antarctica and why has no man ever crossed it?
Why do humans only observe 1 half of the lunar phase?
How can the earth be round with Mount Everest and Ocean floors.
Why do people disappear in the Bermuda triangle?
n/a plethora-of-pinatas 2017-04-22
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Antarctic_expeditions
Because the moon spins at the same rate it rotates around the earth.
Everest is 5.5 miles above sea level, the earth's diameter is 8,000 miles. If you were Atlas holding up the earth the himalayas would feel slightly courser than sandpaper, and the oceans' floor would feel like a wet rag.
People disappear all over the place.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
So some random internet user says he is a land surveyor and tells everyone the earth is not flat... And that is the end of the debate eh?
There is evidence that the earth is not a globe and that TPTB have been pushing a false narrative about the nature of earth for generations.
I get that its hard for people to see, cuz it was hard for me at first. But when you get past the brainwashing and overbearing shilling dealing with this particular conspiracy, it really is as clear as day.
This video is the fairest, most level headed summary of the "Flat" earth conspiracy I have seen yet. Watch it at least twice with an open mind before you give into the blatantly desperate peer pressure to laugh at the idea that the earth is not a globe.
And remember some key points....
TPTB have the motive, means and opportunity to lie about the nature of the earth.
"Gravity" can not be proven or reproduced with the scientific method.
"Gravitational" effects can be explained by the laws of density, motion and there being a natural up and down.
The "setting" and "rising" sun can be explained by the laws of perspective.
The deepest dig on record is ~8 miles.
Multiple advanced civilizations of the past recorded that the earth was "flat" and the idea of a globe earth has continuously been contested since its inception.
There is a LOT of mis/disinfo about the "flat" earth. A lot...
MOST of the "science" that "proves" the globe earth is theoretical conjecture.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-04-22
And yet it is full of complete bullshit that is easily debunked.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
says you....
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Wow sick argument
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
LOL...its not as if your comment was articulate or supplied any evidence of your assertions.
"says you...." is all your comment deserved.
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
It wasn't my comment you retard...
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
that was a bit harsh for a simple/honest mistake....which is now fixed....but thanks for pointing it out :)
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
You're right and I want to fully apologise for that, but we've had a nice chat in the past and I do wish you would learn to argue effectively, instead of calling CGI on everything that doesn't fit your narrative without any evidence.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
watch the video i linked and conduct the experiments yourself. Should be all the evidence you need.
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Ahahaha. Okay I'll bite. It's two fucking hours so forgive me for not watching the whole thing.
Not true. I've been in an aircraft before and have observed slight curvature, though it's only really noticable at high altitudes such as concord flights. It's also possible to take a picture at sea level, with a normal rectilinear lens (no fisheye) if you line the camera up perfectly with the horizon. You can also use a mountain as a visual reference, you will notice it will shrink faster than perspective. Here's an iphone getting up high. No fisheye on an iphone mate, made by some total randomers, you could even do this yourself without too much hassle: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz1ipDYpAgQ Of course... it's all CGI, right?
Makes almost no sense. There's no maths here, so I can't really deduce wtf he's on about. Again, if I'm in an aircraft, I DO have to look down slightly to see the horizon.
For the same reason we can't perceive the spin ourselves - we are all spinning with it. Relative to us, the spinning is zero. Like when you're driving at 70mph on the highway, the car ahead of you appears to be still, because you're both going the same speed.
Ok that's just retarded. Firstly, elevation can trump curvature. More importantly, it's incorrect to say that if you move between two points on a sphere you go uphill then downhill. Get a football (soccer ball). Hold it in one hand. Put your finger on it. Don't move your finger, spin (but don't move) the ball with your other hand 45 degrees or any amount. Did your finger move up and down to get there? Nope.
Last one, really can't be fucked anymore. LMAO this is literally the same "proof" as #4, holy shit, even the title of the video is a lie, 200 proofs my arse. Even if he doesn't repeat any others it's still 199.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
well if you aren't gonna watch the whole thing...whats the point?
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Here's the deal: If you can refute every one of my five points I will watch the two hour video and probably spend a whole working day to debunk every single "proof".
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
4.you just said don't move your finger, so if you didn't move your finger, why would it have moved?
watch the video...pr dont...i really dont care right now :) Not as into it as i was yesterday...
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Oh, yeah, not really into it now because I realise it's bullshit... derp.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Im not really into it now because im tired of going back and forth with people who obviously don't want to understand what is being said to them...
You don't wanna believe earth is not a globe...fine...but don't delude yourself into believing that you are actually considering the possibility.
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Like I said. Do the weather balloon experiment yourself. Report back with the video. Then I'll believe you. This is me considering the possibility.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
and that first video you linked obviously has a fisheye lens...the horizon curves up as well as down multiple times...obvious sign of fish eye lens
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Ok. Do this experiment yourself. All you need is an old second hand iphone and a $20 weather balloon. Go and perform this experiment and report back with your results and I promise to believe your theory.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
its also worth mentioning the number of cuts in that video...
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Cool here's an uncut one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pv4Hwk17F8Y
You can see how there is little curvature at ground level and then it gets more curved over time. Must be THE CGI DAEMONS or a lizard camera that gets more fisheye over time or something.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
i dont see curvature in that one...and for the record, the creator of this video is of the opinion that the earth is not a globe....and i think this video does a pretty good job of showing that...
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
after looking at it again...you can see some minor curve at certain points while camera is moving...and apparently he used a 4.35mm lens, which has less of the "fish eye" effect. So it makes sense that there is much less distortion. Using a better lens should remove the effect completely.
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Ok. Now do the experiment and report back.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
lol...im broke man ;)
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Well, that explains a lot. No problem then if you can't prove it. I'll go on believing in my spinning ball.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
well to be fair, plenty of pher people are sending up cameras and showing that the earth is not a ball...but whatever ;)
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
So the videos that fit your narrative are good, the ones that don't are bad?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
well the ones that fit your narrative are obviously fake or distorted to fit your narrative....the ones that fit the flat earth narrative seem legit...
and again, there are other ways to prove the flat earth...if you watched that ENTIRE video with an open mind you would see that ;)
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
Wow... I don't even... I hope you're trolling, I really do.
Do you know what confirmation bias is?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
i get that...but come on man...we cant both be right, and so far i have seen a ton of shady "evidence" for globe earth...it is one of the main reasons why i changed my view. Remember, i wasnt always a "flat earther"
n/a knyghty 2017-04-22
So you're a flat earther because you think that thousands of years of science is wrong, but a few youtube videos on the internet and you're fucking sold. Nothing shady about those youtube videos of random dudes on the internet.
Much less shady than the fact that we have fucking GPS, satellite phones and TV, equinoxes, different stars on each hemisphere, the ability to travel east from Europe to Asia, east from Asia to America, and east again back to Europe. For sure there is no ISS that you can see for yourself with a telescope, that, with a radio you can even use the ham frequencies to talk to the astronauts on that station as they pass overhead (https://amsat-uk.org/beginners/how-to-hear-the-iss/) , and use radio direction finding to ascertain that they are indeed coming from above you - and presumably at the correct altitude if you can measure the round trip time accurately enough.
There's a whole fucking body of credible evidence out there but do you choose to believe that? Nah, some faceless dude on youtube will do just fine for me!
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
omg...just watch the video lol...:P im dunwichu ;)
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
and here is the creators channel, if you are interested.
n/a betweentrees 2017-04-22
To be fair yours didn't either, you're parrotting eric dubay
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
I'm not parroting the video, I'm recommending it because it does a good job of summing it up. What is said in the video makes perfect sense to me...maybe because I had been questioning the official narrative for years before i first saw it and already had a healthy distrust of the education and scientific establishment for years for a number of reasons. I was really into spending a lot of time explaining everything point by point to try and help people understand, but it got to the point were peoples willful ignorance got overbearing and took up too much of my time and energy. Now i throw that video up and say "HERE...watch this, cuz I cant explain it much simpler." I want people to understand and see, but in the end, they got to make the choice to do so. And to do that, they have to let go. And to quote the Matrix...and I'm tired man....I simply had more energy to join the conversation today.
n/a alienrefugee51 2017-04-22
What would be the motive(s) for TPTB to lie about it for centuries?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
The nitty gritty of it imo is that TPTB want us to turn away from the truth. That we are created beings with purpose, living on a created habitat, in a created reality. TPTB want to be God...but they cant be God...the only thing they can create is a lie...
n/a alienrefugee51 2017-04-22
I was hoping for more than that. As far as NASA tax dollars, that only accounts for 7 decades. The lie would to have been going on for centuries. How would the elites of the past even know whether the earth was round or flat with no technology?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Well Its not just NASA collecting the money...and we are talking about more wealth in 70ish years than most of history before that ever had in total.
TPTB have been playing the long con for generations. As I said, I believe their primary goal is to turn man away from God and the true nature of our existence. To live in a false reality and serve a false god.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
So are all the scientists either viewing, probing or postulating about the cosmos in the last 400 years really just superfans of the billion year movie God is projecting over our head?
Number 1 on that video is already hideously incorect (you would have to look down no matter how large the ball is
what he forgot to say was that the angle you have to look down is proportional to the observer's height and the radius of the sphere: hence hundredths of an arcsecond for a height to radius ratio of something like 6 parts in 21 million feet...
and on a side note, those "proofs" where they draw tangent lines on a circle like our eyes exist glued flat to the local curvature of the earth is bullshit too, try making a model where the observer is not on the circle but maybe 5 or 10 feet above, and allow their perspective to drop to the horizon and just like that round earth makes sense again, it wasn't the roundness that was the problem it was the impact of a stupid person making a stupid "proof" for gullible non-mathematically minded people.
Just because you don't understand the Levi Civita connection and local intrinsic curvature on a riemannian manifold doesn't mean the universe doesn't conform highly to a model that crucially relies on these concepts. Don't get me wrong, modern physics is absolutely not the final answer, only the newest version of a mathematical toy that happens to behave to a spooky degree like the universe, that's it. The circle and tangent line thing is just like the pre-babylonian alpha version of that machine.
Even Eratosthenes had figured the earth had curvature more than 2000 years ago which leads me to believe this flat earth thing is a culturally hip phenomenon, it's been out of style for so long that people naturally want to cling to it.
But I'll keep watching, I imagine by the second time I'll have lost so many neurons I'll stop being able to do my job so I can ride the flat earth bandwagon straight to the Nazi guarded icewall and become a true truth warrior!
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
Yes it can - see the Cavendish Experiment.
There is no "law of density" and since the Cavendish Experiment works horizontally, an idea of "natural up and down" doesn't play into the explanation at all.
No it can't. The Sun's size doesn't change throughout the day, much less converge to a single point (which would still be visible anyway because it's a shining light).
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Im familiar with it. The Cavendish Experiment is one of the very best examples of pseudo science. It basically explains gravity as "mass attracting mass" which is beyond ridiculous. His experiment is impossible to do in a controlled environment because mass is nearly EVERYWHERE. He did it in a barn...on the earth....smh. It was a piece of tripe that TPTB gobbled up and has been regurgitating to naive "students" for years. Gravity has not been proven or reproduced. Because it doesn't exist.
The Cavendish Experiment doesn't work...period. And you are aware that there is this thing called density, and that there are basic rules/definitions that determines how dense something is correct? I know the "laws of density" isn't as common of a term as the "Laws of motion" but there are is in fact variables that determine if one thing is more dense or less dense than another thing...
I never suggested that the size of the sun fluctuates at all. But our perception of its size certainly changes Our relative position to it, the time of day/year, our line of sight....
all this is in the video I linked earlier. You should save me the time it takes to type all this and just watch it till it clicks for you. But of course for that to happen, you would first have to open your mind to the possibility, and let go of your faith in TPTB who taught you all the bullshit running around in your noggin...
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
Obviously you're not. The Cavendish Experiment measures a gravitational force orthogonal to the Earth's gravity, therefore the Earth doesn't affect it. There's not much mass on that plane except the lead balls used in the experiment.
Yes it does.
Yes, I know you made up this thing called the "law of density" and I called you out on it. Now that you've been called out, you're now trying to put words in my mouth, claiming that I said density doesn't exist. Thanks.
No it doesn't! But I'd love know how much you think it appears to change size throughout the day. Does it change continuously from a point at dawn to a circle at noon to a point again at dusk? How much does the angular size change over the course of a day?
At 48:30 in the video, he claims that you can see the Statue of Liberty from sea level 60 miles away. Can you give me coordinates to that place? Maybe a picture from that location? Thanks!
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
I am actually...and as you said, "There's not much mass except"..not much being the key words there. And of of course the earths mass is going to effect it....as i said, at its core, the experiment is mass attracting mass....are you suggesting that you can do an experiment of mass attracting mass and expect the mass of your surrounds, which include the earth, to not effect the result of said experiment? Not to mention that the experiment ignores variables such as temperature and God knows whatever else was going on in that barn 200+ years ago. And that is the best explanation anyone can give for gravity? Gimme a break man...
lol..nope.
come on man...I obviously, at least to me, just wrote out "laws of density" to save me the time of writing the definition and density of all known substances. I'm sure I'm not the first to use the phrase and wont be the last.
Are you seriously telling me that you have always visually perceived the sun as the same size? It has never looked bigger or smaller, closer or farther away from you?
Well i don't know if i could or not, as I have never been to NY or seen the Statue of liberty in person. But what i can do is repeat the experiment somewhere that i readily have access to. And so can you...and so can anyone. And in case you missed it, the idea is to see if you can see something at a distance that the supposed curvature of the earth would otherwise block from your view...
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
No, you're so obviously not familiar with it. Cavendish went to extreme lengths to limit sources of error in his experiment - the fact that you think he didn't think of temperature betrays just how ignorant you are.
The mass of the Earth does not affect the experiment because the experiment is not sensitive to vertical gravitational forces. The experiment is essentially measuring the twisting of a hanging wire - the twist comes from horizontal forces, not vertical forces. Therefore, the mass of the Earth doesn't affect the experiment. The only mass that affects the experiment is mass that is on the horizontal plane.
Other mass on that plane will technically have an effect, but since the masses are so small and so far away the uncertainty is really small. This is a dumb argument for you to make, because you're not disputing the strength of gravity, you're disputing the existence. Whether or not it is a fraction of a percent stronger or weaker is not helping your denial.
Yeah, the density of Osmium was real important for this conversation. We were all eagerly awaiting that part. Bullshit.
I was hoping for a measurement you made, something scientific. Should I spend more time staring at the Sun, like you?
I live about 60 miles from New York City, so I was hoping I could do this experiment myself. It's always seemed odd to me that you guys constantly claim that this is possible, but no one has ever posted a picture of the Statue of Liberty from 60 miles away or a location so that I can do the experiment myself. Is proof really too much to ask of a "proof"?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
So Cav was able to control the temperature down to the degree in his barn 200+ years ago? Interesting....
And if you could direct me to where i can view the actual datalog he used during this "experiment" that would be great....
If gravity is real, why on earth do you believe that any experiment would not be sensitive to "vertical gravitational forces"?
If earths gravity supposedly pulls everything on earths surface, in its atmosphere, and even in the surrounding outer space, to the center of the earth, how can you say with a straight face that an experiment conducted on the surface of the earth is not effected by that gravity? I mean, that really makes no sense to me at all...
lol..ok...me trying to save time writing a reddit post is just too far out there to believe...whatever you say.
There are a number of examples where they give you locations to conduct the "distance vs earthcurve experiment" proof#70 @ 41:12 for example...if you really want to use the SoL for yours, get on a boat, go out far enough to conduct the experiment, and do so.....
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
Temperature differentials is literally the first source of error he talks about. It's literally discussed while he describes the experimental set-up and how he dealt with it.
His paper is publish on the Royal Society of London's website. You should know this since you're so familiar with the experiment.
Find the nearest door and open it about half-way. Find a stool and place it next to the door.
Stand on top of the stool and push straight down on the top of the door. Notice how it doesn't move?
Now lay down on the ground and push directly up on the bottom of the door. Notice how it doesn't move?
Now go on either side of the door and push in a horizontal direction. Notice how it moves quite easily?
This is because doors have hinges that can only twist around one axis. Likewise, the Cavendish Experiment has a wire that can only twist around one axis.
Where, though? I know you're not familiar with New York City or the Harbor, which is why you believe that idiot's claims, but there is no straight line path from the Statue of Liberty out into the Atlantic.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
I asked for his datalogs...as in notes...journals...written logs of the when wheres whats etc etc...assuming they even exist. You seem to have a a lot of faith in 18th century science/aristocrats and modern historians...
With enough force it certainly would move, regardless of the axis of the hinge...and here in lies my point....gravitational force is supposedly too weak to rip my door right off its hinges, and at the exact same time its strong enough to keep the oceans and ginormous boulders, among other things, from flying off the surface of a supposedly spinning earth....so how can that be?
You are right, im not personally familiar with that area, but according to the interwebs....the top of the SoL torch is roughly 315 ft above sea level and from the looks of this nothing in the red circle is anywhere near that high, so you should have line of sight....if there is no earth curve and its a clear day. Bring some good binoculars or a telescope of course....I personally would just take a vacation to the mid and or southwestern US if I were you....a lot more open spaces for miles and miles, which makes the experiment easier to do...the ocean is pretty terrifying ;)
I'm going to bed...goodnight :)
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
It's literally a scanned copy of the papers. Without mailing the original documents to you, you're not going to get any better than that.
If you broke the hinge, but as long as the hinge holds there's only horizontal movement allowed. Since Cavendish's apparatus didn't break, it only had movement around one axis.
Ah, by that same logic I should be able to see the Sun at all times on a flat earth, because nothing is 3000 miles tall to obscure it. This is the problem with flat earthers - all ad hoc solutions, no cohesiveness.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Well feel free to link that webpage to me.
So again...why doent the awseome force of gravity rip the door off the hinges? You sort of ignored the rest of my comment here...how can gravity be simultaneously weak enough not to rip my door of the hinges and strong enough to hold oceans and mountains to the surface of the earth?
That's unfair....you forget about raw distance( there is a big difference from 60 miles and 1000 miles, let alone 10,000 + miles)...atmospheric conditions...relative angles....elevation....and again, the earth is not perfectly "flat"... Mountains and valleys etc etc.
clouds can blot out the sun at noon in the right whether conditions...
and people can't see infinitely far....
I would bet though, at a high enough altitude, and with the right weather conditions and equipment....i bet you could see the sun continuously from the same point, for 24 continuous hours. Maybe wealthier men than us will attempt this someday....
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
http://rstl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/88/469.full.pdf+html
You're trying to compare fundamentally incomparable things. A door falls to the ground due to gravity, and water falls to the ground gravity. The door is held off the ground by a hinge, but the water is not held off the ground by anything. The question you're asking has very little to do with the strength of gravity because it's the same for both oceans and doors - the difference is in the hinge's electromagnetic forces.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Thanks, but if you believe that is a scanned 200 year old document, you are high as fuck.
Well if the world was spinning as fast as they say it is....the oceans would fly off of it...tptb say the awesome force of gravity prevents this....so again....if gravity is so strong as to not allow the OCEANS to fly off the face of the earth due to its spin. How can said force also be so weak as to not allow my door to be ripped off its hinges at the exact same time?
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
Right.
No. How much centrifugal acceleration is there? That answer would need to be greater than 9.8 m/s2 for what you said to be true. There is no calculation you can do to support this. You can pull a number out of a hat and claim it to be true, but no actual calculation would support this.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
ok...lets forget about the spin...how does the force of gravity hold oceans to the face of the earth and not have the force to rip off my door from its hinges?
Cuz "science" says the reason why the oceans are able to stay on the face of a sphere is because of gravity....so how can a force be strong enough to hold oceans to the face of the earth and weak enough not to rip my door from its hinges?
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
Are you admitting that the centrifugal force is not larger than the gravitational force?
This much is largely true - the oceans are held to Earth due to gravity.
This kind of statement doesn't make sense.
It's trivially true that the gravitational force on a door is weaker than the gravitational force on an ocean because the force of gravity is a product of mass - oceans have larger masses than doors, and therefore oceans experience larger gravitational forces than doors.
I suppose what you're actually asking is why is the electromagnetic force of the hinge stronger than the gravitational force of the Earth?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
i don't believe that there is a centrifugal force or gravitational force because i don't believe in gravity or that the earth is spinning ball!
you really buy that shit eh? lol.....why in that case has the earth and moon not collided?....they both supposedly have more mass than the oceans, and if what you say is true, their masses should bring them together....every explanation that "science" gives for these questions disproves some other claim they make...and they keep running the conversation around in circles....the "science" of a globe earth and gravity has no basis in REALITY. It's all theoretical nonsense that ignores real restrictions and truths.
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
You said this. How large do "they" say the centrifugal force is?
See, this is why I said you knew nothing about momentum.
lol
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
proof#53 see how the visual perception of the size of the sun changes?
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
That's glare, not the image of the Sun.
n/a comboVerb 2017-04-22
Fuck off OP and everyone who's astroturfing this bullshit.
n/a polkadotgirl 2017-04-22
I am not a flat earther, but he did not really provide any proof.
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Have you seen the earth from space?
n/a HairyJo 2017-04-22
Those photos are perfectly flat. What are you trying to say?
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
I'm saying how can anyone know what the shape of the earth is without having been to space? So what's the harm in discussing something?
n/a alienrefugee51 2017-04-22
True, if NASA would just give us some legit pictures of the earth from space, it could put an end to the debate once and for all.
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Would be nice. Hard to take a picture of a spinning ball of chaos though hence the cgi renders
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
There's hundreds of thousands for you to choose from, no idea what you're talking about.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Have you ever seen the boot up sequence on a Windows PC down to the flow of every electron? Fuck computers might be flat inside too!
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Could be. I've been taught for my short life that computers look a certain way. I'm no expert though.
n/a Doomdoomkittydoom 2017-04-22
ITT: A sea of Poe, surely.
n/a ginobilly 2017-04-22
Flat earth is a distraction.
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
For fuck-tards, it may be.
n/a PM_UR_VULVAS 2017-04-22
What do people have to gain by proving earth is flat.
The major flaw in their theory is that if the earth is flat, it would have edges or drop offs into space. Where are these edges?
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
They most common theory I have seen is that there is no edge, but rather antartica is a giant "ice wall" that no one has ever actually crossed. There are about a million other arguments against a flat earth, but theyll always just say actual evidence for a globe is elaborately manufactured.
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
Can you show a picture of this ice wall?
One that's not cgi?
n/a Clivepwnens 2017-04-22
Ice wall. Guardians.
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
You'd think that one of them would gather up enough wealth, and just sail to the South Pole and prove themselves right. Or get a pilot's license/charter a jet and prove themselves right. Or get some equipment and prove themselves right. Or get a degree in physics or astronomy or aerospace engineering, get a job at a government aerospace department and prove themselves right.
It's pretty funny. Any method they could use to prove their conspiracy that involves anything other than sitting at their computers all day never happens. You'd think a pilot, or aerospace engineer, or a worker from NASA, or a worker from SpaceX, or a worker from [insert 1 of the 1000+ aerospace firms that helps put shit into space here] would come forward and explain specifically how people are faking a round earth. Oh well. I'm sure they'll have arguments that don't involve misunderstanding science one day...
n/a TheFapp3ning 2017-04-22
Most of them are poor trailer park trash.
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
Eh, I wouldn't go that far. I've met some well-off flat earthers. They're just idiots and/or dangerously ignorant.
Funny thing is, I never meet them where I live (central Florida) where the aerospace industry is a big part of people's lives and, provides lots of jobs, helps our economy. It's like flat earthers are isolated from reality or something
n/a TheFapp3ning 2017-04-22
How many flat earthers do you know in real life?
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
In real life, I've met 5 or 6. Most of my friends are Earth/space science nerds, and many have careers or degrees relevant to those areas. When we all meet up, sometimes we run into interesting people.
n/a TheFapp3ning 2017-04-22
All of my friends are engineers, including me. Never run into a single flat earther in my life. But I guess we don't hang out with retards.
n/a JedYorks 2017-04-22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0aABjN60168
this very short video nullifies of your claims.
n/a silverminers 2017-04-22
yeah, if you have the intelligence of a rock.
n/a JedYorks 2017-04-22
a flat rock.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
This means if your feet ever leave the ground on a flying airplane you would suddenly find yourself flying 600mph into the back... Are you ok with that or are airplanes just reality simulation devices?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
You absolutely will end up farther in the rear of the cabin if you jump straight up in a moving plane.
While you are in contact with the plane...sitting in a seat, or even standing still in the isle, you are moving at the speed the plane is moving. As soon as you jump up and stop making contact with the plane, momentum will still be moving you forward but at a decreasing rate (slower and slower than the plane is moving forward until you stop or until another force continues your movement), and you will land further back in the planes cabin. If you were able to discontinue contact with the plane long enough, the rear of the plane, which is moving forward faster than your forward motion, will catch up to your position in space.
A very easy way to test this (and its movement/momentum that you are testing) is to go into an elevator, the faster and taller the better, and jump while its in full motion. If the elevator is going up, your jump will be shortened because the elevator will catch up to your feet. If the elevator is going down your jump will be extended, giving you more of the falling feeling, because it will take longer for you to catch up to the floor( unless the elevator is moving at free fall speed...but i wouldn't want to be in an elevator going down that fast).
And another great way to test it is if you can get onto one of those moving floor type things they have at some airports. Get on one and mark your position on the moving floor (which can represent the supposed moving earth beneath us) jump straight up....you will land behind the mark, and the faster the floor is moving, the farther behind the mark you made you will end up.
If the earth beneath our feet, and this point is made very clear in the video i linked earlier, was really moving as fast as "science" claims or at all for that matter, that motion would be detectable by our senses and observations....but it is not detectable...cuz its not moving. They claim the visual movement of the heavens is proof that the earth is in motion, but for that to be true, you have to ignore the laws of motion and your physical senses. The heavens appear to be moving above us because they are in fact moving above us....not because we are moving below....and if we were moving we would be able to verify that motion by observing things other than the heavens above us, and we would be able to physically feel that motion, just as we see and feel our motion when we move, fall etc etc...
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
This entire comment is wrong.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
I respectfully disagree, but if you have been indoctrinated as most people have, i can see why you think it is. As i said, everything I described can be easily tested yourself...so feel free to do so. If you do the experiments honestly, you will come to the same results.
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
Aristotle's ideas of motion have been discredited for centuries, and they pre-date the concept of momentum. You can't claim that something that is not momentum is momentum. You have a severe misunderstanding of how motion and momentum works. Momentum is never destroyed like you claim. Your claims are nonsensical.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
You would not be able to feel it. If you are driving and accelerate up to 60mph you can feel the acceleration, but once you are at speed, theres is no sense of movement that you would have besides the visual aspect, which is like what? Oh the heavens moving in the sky.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
what? lol...of course there is....maybe you should pay closer attention to your other senses.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
Like what? The only reason you can tell your moving is because you can see yourself passing things. Please tell me what you feel?
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Are you honestly telling me the only way you can tell you are moving in a car traveling 60mph is by looking out a window? I mean i know some people are more sensitive to movement than others, but come man....feel the force....
One can feel their skin move through the atmosphere (roll down a window and put your arm out) hear the tires move along the road...and some people are so sensitive to movement that they can physically sick...even when they shut their eyes.
You don't feel, hear, smell, or taste the supposed movement of the earth because its not moving....they tell you you can see it, but if the earth was really moving, you would be able to sense it with more than your eyes.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
You can feel the wind with the windows down because youre moving at a different speed than everything else, if everything else were also moving that 60 mph as well it would feel like you were standing still. Motion sickness is caused by rocking motions not the actual act of moving forward.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
yeah, you are moving 60 mph faster than the earth, and everything stationary on it is....cuz they are not moving at all.
mo·tion sick·ness ˈmōSHən ˌsiknis/ noun noun: motion sickness; noun: motionsickness nausea caused by motion, especially by traveling in a vehicle.
n/a yourepenis 2017-04-22
Yeah if the earth is moving at 100 mph hypothetically, then i accelerate myself too 60 mph, i will be going 60 mph faster than everything else its the most basic shit in the world.
http://www.healthline.com/health/motion-sickness#causes4
"Conflicting signals can cause motion sickness. For example, when you’re on an airplane you can’t see turbulence, but your body can feel it. The resulting confusion can cause nausea or even vomiting."
n/a DeyH8UsCuzDeyAnus 2017-04-22
Just wanted to say - Fucking A.
Flat Earth = False Flag.
n/a alienrefugee51 2017-04-22
I'm very suspicious of most events, but I too am starting to believe that it's just misinformation. I am a follower of space weather and it's effects on our planet. This is one area where I believe the flat earth model doesn't fit. I will still look into it more and entertain ideas, but I'm leaning towards it being a globe.
n/a zachij 2017-04-22
I find you guys far more annoying than the 'constant' flat earth theorums that i almost never see. The earth is round correct, but perhaps maybe its you guys who should be the ones getting over that fact lol?
n/a d3rr 2017-04-22
When we talk about flat earth, we aren't talking about the Khazarian Mafia.
n/a flat-reality 2017-04-22
you are right it's not "flat" flat is a misnomer. A term used to simplify a complex topic. Obviously we have mountains and canyons not many areas are truly flat. However, we do not live on a globe, a sphere, a oblate spheroid, etc. It's not spinning either, or moving in anyway. We are stationary. not a ball.
n/a wtfburritoo 2017-04-22
Right, sure. So where's the edge of the fucking pie plate we're all supposedly floating on? What's on the dark side? I guess the sun orbits the earth, the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause are actually real, and all those years of science, images, and people claiming the earth is spherical are just bullshit.
Have any proof or scientific evidence, other than some crackpot YouTube videos?
n/a flat-reality 2017-04-22
why is it always crack-pot youtube videos? you can't post intelligent videos on youtube? i didn't know that. Nasa and History channel post on youtube all the time are they crackpots?
n/a deportation33 2017-04-22
thanks for another post where someone tries to discredit flat earth and does not provide any evidence the earth is a globe whatsoever. also thanks for keeping flat earth on the front page of conspiracy. It's been there everyday for months now. I fucking wonder WHY!? LMAO obviously earth is not a globe. real talk
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
Weather balloons are cheap to make (around 150$). Have you thought about putting a camera with no lens on one to prove the earth is round?
Have you measured the earths curvature using a canal?
I think the earth is round btw.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Have you ever taken a picture with a camera with no lens? Try ripping your eyeball lens out and see how in focus it is.
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
Google pinhole camera.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
Neither of those make sense to me.
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
you take a photo at high altitude. Pinhole camera is so the flat earthers can't say "the lens distorted the image"
A land surveyor said he did this on a barge and a canal. I'm not sure of the details but I assume water in a canal is flat as opposed to land.
n/a PM_ME_ORCA_PODS 2017-04-22
Flat earthers will never change their minds. No level of proof is good enough for them. Anything disproving flat earth is dismissed as fake news to them.
If I really was lied to about the shape of the Earth, then I'd absolutely accept flat Earth as real Earth, but flat Earth has no evidence in its favour.
Flat Earthers, by 'evidence' I mean actual irrefutable proof. All the supposed evidence for the flat earth is a theory based on ignorance of how the round-Earth model really works.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
No, everything is round because the gravity is at the middle of the earth.
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
Gravity acts from every object. Put a ball on a string near a brick wall and the ball will be attracted to the wall.
In this experiment, were the earth flat, then the canal would be flat, and could be measured as such, by putting a laser on a boat and measuring its height on a wall on the other end, then moving the boat closer to the wall, and looking for any height change.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Okay. Can you link a video of that experiment?
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
No.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
That's the problem; lots of theoretical experiments or videos of a spherical earth.
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
I'm not trying to pursuade anyone the earth is flat, I think it's round, satellites etc.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Flat earthers believe cosmology is a hoax
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
So you should be able to show an experiment disproving that it's flat then.... assume satellites are fraud like a flat earther
n/a zarathustra3000 2017-04-22
yeah but how do you know?
n/a cspan1 2017-04-22
has anyone been on a boat when the land is beneat the horizon and then comes into view? this flat earth shit has to stop...
n/a alienrefugee51 2017-04-22
If the earth is really a globe after all, this whole push for a flat earth conspiracy could just be an agenda for the TPTB to discredit conspiracy theorists. They're getting exposed on just about every false flag out there. This to me is a realistic motive on their part to take the steam out of the truth movement.
n/a bri9and 2017-04-22
But all of the morons say it is flat. I'm looking out my window and it's flat. Convince me otherwise!
n/a rbsams72888 2017-04-22
thank god for you
n/a Joltsx 2017-04-22
What are the easiest proofs to list that irrefutably demonstrate a round earth? Do you have a few points that can be used in debate with a professed Flat Earther?
n/a Is_Gilgamesh 2017-04-22
it's gotta be the live feed from the ISS right? Or the fact that stars are different in Australia.
Or just ask who benefits From a flat earth? In most legitimate conspiracies it's because somebody in a position of power benefits from the disguised actions. A conspiracy that big has to have some serious benefits for somebody. If you ask who benefits, you'll probably at least get to the heart of their belief.
Usually it comes down to a belief that science itself is a conspiracy. If they think that, then there wouldn't be an easy and irrefutable proof.
n/a Joltsx 2017-04-22
Bounced this off of my FE believer. ISS feed is faked. "They" just don't know much about stars yet. No answer on who benefits. Yep, seeming like a lost cause for me to convince my friend that the FE theory is a distraction/disinformation, which is what I believe. Thanks for your reply, tho
n/a ragegenx 2017-04-22
Thank you. This is insane that time has to be wasted on this.
n/a robert9712000 2017-04-22
A fellow Land Surveyor here.
What are your thoughts about Surveyors who refuse to learn the office side of things. I have met many Surveyors who want nothing to do with the office, but for me I love Field to Finish.
There is nothing more satisfying than performing a complete topo and bring it into auto cad and mapping it up. I even create legals and Right of Way plans now.
I spent years self teaching myself Land desktop and Civil3d, but I never desired to go get my PS. Do you have a PS or desire to get one if do not have one already?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I love the soup to nuts process but prefer office over field if I had to pick one due to winter. I passed parts 1&2 and just finished part 3 on Friday. They said it will take 3 months to send my results to me but I'm pretty confident I passed. It's well worth obtaining because the supply of surveyors is so much lower than demand (At least in my area) Definitely a tight community especially considering how many father son businesses there are. My dad is a PLS and I always hit it off well with other surveyors' sons.
n/a robert9712000 2017-04-22
Are you from the states? Here in Ohio you need a 4 year degree to get your PS. This is what is discouraging me from pursuing it. I know you used to be able to just take the test around here back in the 90's
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I'm in New York. They still let you take the test with experience but they're a lot stricter with those applicants. I got the degree though because my dad was a surveyor and I knew I wanted to do that.
n/a Xerede 2017-04-22
The throne of God is Polaris. That is all.
n/a KigurumiMajin 2017-04-22
But do you think Pizzagate is real?
n/a 34mississippi 2017-04-22
does your company insist on taking adavantage of the one call system and call in free locates simply to turn around and resell the information gained from the locates whilst knowing the usual size of the locate you call in takes several hours for the locators to mark out with no profit for the companies who are responsible for preforming the locates when you could easily get the information you need from submitting a boundary survey and requesting prints... and do you ever wonder why those locates are shitty when your average utility locator does over 50+ locates a day.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
In NYC it's the only way to get the information. Con Ed and Nat Grid stopped giving utility plates after 9/11 to non government surveyors.
n/a 34mississippi 2017-04-22
that sucks, in MN we can give you prints the important stuff like phone lines to banks and police stations arent on them to begin with. Surveryors should be able to have access to basic prints otherwise the locating companies lose hundreds of dollars an hour painting out large surveys, every locate is paid out by utility per locate not per time. So if I spend 5 hours marking 4 utilities my company gets paid the same as if I spend 5 minutes at your house marking your electric phone water sewer and gas line.
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
The union guys are pretty happy with the situation here. I've had them threaten a private company we hired to do gpr for being on their "turf"
n/a verello 2017-04-22
My god this thread. Thanks for making this OP it's really opened my eyes that no matter how stupid you think people are there are always people way, way more stupid than that. The scientific literacy by the flat earthers is astonishingly low and I really didn't think there were that many ardent believers.
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
The stupidity in this thread is terrifying. I'm starting to understand how so many people voted for Trump.
Stupidity is a disease and there's a lot of infected in here.
n/a Chardonneh 2017-04-22
The earth's shadow on the moon is all the proof I need.
n/a Is_Gilgamesh 2017-04-22
Couldn't the earth be disc shaped and cast the same shadow?
Now there's a ton of other reasons to thing the earth is a sphere, but This one doesn't strike me as quite enough.
n/a Chardonneh 2017-04-22
wow
n/a Is_Gilgamesh 2017-04-22
When dealing with an idea this weird you gotta think outside the box. I've talked with flat earthers who would show you some pretty remarkable systems that could produce much of what we observe in the night sky.
Obviously in the end, flat earth is fully ridiculous, but whenever I stumble on a new conspiracy theory, I don't just take an easy answer and call it a day.
n/a HeDoesntAfraid 2017-04-22
So when I do a level run for miles and it doesn't add up, it isn't because I just suck?!
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
That too lmao
n/a Tecumsehs_Revenge 2017-04-22
I would imagine Tesla's Gigafactory took curvature of earth in consideration?
A good example for general vs extreme. It is said you can see the curvature of the earth over it now.
*great AMA thanks!
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
I've offered several explanations. I answered the one you asked me.
n/a medic30420 2017-04-22
Flat earthers BTFO
kek
n/a rareiamgery 2017-04-22
Thank you, I'm glad you're putting an end to this nonsense. Never saw a flat-earth post until pizzagate started up and I think it's pretty obvious we hit a nerve and these bullshit posts are to make this like a bunch of idiots.
n/a KizziV 2017-04-22
I have a good reason for most people to look into why the earth is round. It has to do with wave propagation. So if we lived on a flat earth there wound be seemingly no horizon to interfere with radio signals and long distance communication would be very easy to transmit even with low frequency signals. Now with communication, there are ground waves or sky waves. Ground waves use line of sight to transfer information, sky waves use the ionosphere to bounce off of to avoid obstacles in the way, the issue with a flat earth means there would never truly be a reason to bounce off of the sky, and if you did the angle of incidence would be too great losing the data. Now with sky waves if you want to communicate with radio waves over the horizon you use a high frequency signal bounced off of the sky to reach where you are trying to communicate with, high frequency is better as there is more information that can be encoded in the wave as well as it isn't as disturbed by atmospheric conditions, it has the right velocity to actually utilize the curvature of the earth to its benefit and it's packet loss and clarity is much higher.
n/a kartana 2017-04-22
Nice try.
n/a swordofdamocles42 2017-04-22
With hundreds of satellites in space why are there no credible pictures of the earth as a globe?
n/a Jawzper 2017-04-22
Thanks OP, this has been a great opportunity for me to tag a lot of real idiots so that I can entirely disregard their opinions in future.
n/a horrorsystem 2017-04-22
Seriously I wonder... who's spread this theory? And just wondered why some people still believe it in this era .
n/a staulgpaulg 2017-04-22
does the earth look flat to a 4th dimensional entity?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
The fourth dimension is the dark side of the 1st dimension.
n/a dragnar1212 2017-04-22
its retarded that this needs an ama .....
n/a half-monty99 2017-04-22
Let's say I'm on the shore of an imaginary perfectly calm Pacific in California and I had a billion pieces of perfectly level railroad track, and kept adding a section of track, always maintaining perfect level for the ever-lengthening creation---totally stiff--the leading end moving out across the calm ocean. Let's say starting out at 5 feet above the water. Would the leading end of track eventually start moving away from the earth and into space? Or, since level is always being maintained, would the track remain at 5 feet above the water and curve with the earth?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
You would have to run this with multiple setups of the level. Each setup would be perpendicular to gravity. So each level setup would have an ever so slightly different plane than the preceding setup. The succession of these setups follows the shape of the earth. So it would maintain 5 feet above the water. If it was possible to lay the whole thing out from a single level setup, then it would move off the water.
n/a half-monty99 2017-04-22
In this meager thought experiment, when the steel is connected, each section fits in place with no bend in the connection. It essentially makes the rail one flush continued line.
So the extended rail would curve? It wouldn't be a straight line into space? How would the stiff steel curve?
I hope you understand what I'm getting at. Imagine a ball with a straight line on top of it. The line would be the steel rail, and the ball the earth. The line moves into space on either end. If someone created a line and it was perfectly level between two points on that "micro" shore, would the line of steel go into space, or would it somehow bend around the earth (gravity, warping of space-time), in essence creating a circle as it comes back to meet itself?
(this might take a little back and forth for me to communicate this clearly, as I'm no physicist).
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
It bends the whole way. Each section of track is laid at an imperceptibly small angle to the previous track.
n/a half-monty99 2017-04-22
But when the piece is connected it locks in perfectly and not at an angle. Let's say there aren't many pieces, but one long 24,901 mile piece of straight track that comes out of theoretical "track-maker" that is perfectly level at the source (like a laser beam coming out that is perfectly level--I'm using steel instead of a laser, because I imagine the atmosphere can affect a laser beam). Would the seemingly inflexible steel rail end up in space, or bend around the earth making a complete circle?
n/a PacoRamirez1966 2017-04-22
No one thinks it is flat...... it's just trolling. God damn.
n/a KDRBTKD 2017-04-22
Measuring Earth's Radius With A Telescope!? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZBcm3iYo1U
The first two minutes of this video is great for debunking flat-earth nonsense.
n/a Xerede 2017-04-22
I can't believe some of these supposed truth seekers. Government or in Latin Governale + Mente literally means mind control. You Roman citizens love your Cesar more than you love yourself.
n/a ring-ring-ring 2017-04-22
They say it is round and flat at the same time, like-a the pizzy pie you can have and eat too.
n/a jimmyspear 2017-04-22
Currently a HSO in the Australian Navy... well until June I'm discharging. So anywhere between Antarctica and Singapore. We don't do a lot of terrestrial work only on the beaches when we are putting in tidal infrastructure or for amphibious landings.
n/a Drayton99 2017-04-22
y'all are foolish if you think the earth isn't round
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Because we live in a society where we are being lied to CONSTANTLY, day in and day out,, with the obvious intention to limit the competency of the general public - so naturally, people are trying to question everything, and only believe things with verifiable proof - the problem with flat earth theorists is that there is tons of verifiable proof but people are ignoring it or not taking the time to scientifically prove it for themselves
n/a snowmandan 2017-04-22
It's used as an insult whenever you cross a boundary here in our limited hangout. Pizzagate and questioning Assange's whereabouts are very touchy subjects. I was called a flat earther yesterday for simply bringing up some facts about what happened to wikileaks back in October.
n/a thegoodmourning 2017-04-22
It's a psyop. The ideas were planted on the internet and a few random, low-level celebrities were sacrificed to push the idea and fool as many idiots as they can and it somehow worked. I think they were doing their yearly intelligence test.
n/a unruly_mattress 2017-04-22
Not enough trust put in mainstream sources, too much trust in random people's YouTube ramblings.
n/a Dippy_Egg 2017-04-22
I was a civil engineering drafter and designer for over a decade. Just wanted to corroborate this answer. It's true and AutoCAD Civil 3D, ArcGIS and other programs used to crunch survey data have automated this process.
n/a Dotlinefever2 2017-04-22
You cannot awaken a man who is pretending to be asleep.
Most of the people who are pushing this are doing so because they are being paid to spread bullshit.
FE is, imo, classic Mockingbird. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
n/a The_Watterboy 2017-04-22
Great example - people here can rent a Trimble unit themselves and experiment with the correction parameters and read up on how it works if they don't believe it
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Probably because GPS coordinates are already based on a globe model and need to be corrected to the true flat earth model.
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
How do you know the satellites aren't simulating a round earth and sending you incorrect signals on purpose?
n/a XDiabolusExMachinaX 2017-04-22
Yeah but even actors can come equipped with facts and a degree from a university. Maybe they are a bit skewed but their biggest fight right now is climate change. It's not just the polar icecaps melting, it's the effects of large amounts of carbon and methane and their effect on agricultural production. Imagine if randomly the rural farm states became a desert.
Hey, it's possible it could happen naturally but there is usually a cause.
Btw they are basically interviewed by actors.
n/a PrinceKelso 2017-04-22
Not trying to be a dick, but I encourage you to take a step back and look at yourself. /u/TellMeTrue22 has just provided very solid evidence against the Flat Earth Theory. Why not do your own research to find a rebuttal rather than, "Government owns GPS!" That is the conspiracy cop-out right there.
If you really cared about uncovering an objective truth, you would do your own homework and look at the data for yourself.
I'm not even arguing against a Flat Earth, I'm simply encouraging you to recognize your own biases. Conspiracy Theorists should hold an attitude of the utmost skepticism, but what you've demonstrated is anything but that; it's an almost fervent hope that the world actually is flat.
Hope this helps.
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
Questions should always remain open ended for a conspiracy theorist. IMO flat earth hasn't been concretely disproven, and the more you look into history of science, nasa, the Cia, etc the more you'll see has been hidden from us. At the end of the day, I can go out on the beach, see another beach 15- 20 miles away(defies the formula for curvature, it should be well below the horizon). That's my personal proof. I can see how there is stretchs of land that defy the curvature and let you see further then you should be able to, but oceans should follow the curvature and they don't from my person observations. You can find many youtube videos of people zooming in on distant coasts which should be even further below the horizon.
n/a I_am_ur_daddy 2017-04-22
Ah. So you're just nonsense crazy then.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
You don't give a known criminal the benefit of the doubt.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
how come no ones done an open sourced, gps tracked, video feed of a plane traveling around the earth? from east to west and north to south.. its 2017.. cant we do this?
n/a truuuuDSfr01 2017-04-22
We can do this, but that would make too much sense and I have a felling someone is benefiting from the flat earth theory, I doubt anyone will do it.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Yes you are right.
n/a cheshire_ranch 2017-04-22
that is the lamest excuse ive ever read bro. thanks for not having a solution to a THEORY that hasnt been PROVEN
n/a zenistthrowaway 2017-04-22
So the laws of motion are incorrect?
n/a Findingthedot 2017-04-22
There are very few maps that are, check out the map porn subreddit, even science doesn't agree on which map is most accurate, and we mostly just default to one works for general navigation...
n/a mexicaaaan 2017-04-22
how can you believe in GPS if you think the earth is flat?
n/a Iamamansass 2017-04-22
Because not everyone believes every 5 month old account that tells them they are stupid for discussing a topic they're allowed to freely discuss.
n/a Project_Conscious 2017-04-22
You can prove the earth is round by doing less than that - you don't need an airplane
n/a DEEP_SEA_MAX 2017-04-22
Found eddy bravo's account
n/a rmwe 2017-04-22
That is not at all what scientists do.
n/a silverminers 2017-04-22
yeah, if you have the intelligence of a rock.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
says you....
n/a Reality_is_a_scam 2017-04-22
Dont be sad. Do somthing to help debunk it or prove it
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-04-22
They don't. It's not really an organic 'conspiracy theory' but rather something that certain folks specifically picked to start spamming CT type forums/subs with because it's a very well known 'stupid' idea from hundreds of years ago. The idea will be to dillute all the good useful information here with shit in order to maybe put people off fom hanging around and learning something but also to create the impression that the users of the sub are people who believe any old shit. It's scientifically provable that the Earth is round (you can do this yourself) and on that basis alone posts claiming that the World is flat should be removed by the mods immediately in my opinion due to the ratio of benefit and damage of having them here.
n/a dandroid1_0 2017-04-22
The compass would point north in both models, just replace magnetic north with magnetic "center" if the earth was flat.
Yes they do, look at a flat earth flight maps. 2 stop flights which shoot wildly off course north to make absurd connections actually make sense on a flat earth map, where the top of the triangle shape on a globe is actually the middle point of a straight line between the origin and the destination on a flat map. The emergency landing in Alaska from Bali to LA makes sense only if Alaska is on the way to LA from Bali, which it is, on the flat earth map, but not the globe. There are no real flights that you'd be able to take over Antarctica.
n/a MollyNostrils23 2017-04-22
It's the middle Knightsbridge so there's not too many airstrips nearby other than the actual airports. I used to live in London and we walk past all manner of kerfuffles every day. You don't even look round at an emergency vehicle most of the time as it just doesn't concern you and it's one of a good few you'll probably see that day. There wouldn't be any shit going down anyway. In fact, had he had his lunch spiked for example, he may have just been a lump of meat to be moved.
n/a alienrefugee51 2017-04-22
True, if NASA would just give us some legit pictures of the earth from space, it could put an end to the debate once and for all.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
This means if your feet ever leave the ground on a flying airplane you would suddenly find yourself flying 600mph into the back... Are you ok with that or are airplanes just reality simulation devices?
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
Have you ever seen the boot up sequence on a Windows PC down to the flow of every electron? Fuck computers might be flat inside too!
n/a No8145 2017-04-22
Weather balloons that travel at over 10,000km per hour?
n/a TellMeTrue22 2017-04-22
No idea. Has nothing to do with my professional experience.
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
As a prospective aerospace engineer, all I can say is you should tell that to my professors. It'd make my physics homework a hell of a lot easier if satellites were a myth.
Also, you should tell that to my colleagues who worked on this too. It'll make their Graduate dissertations easier since all the data they got back is a farce
n/a HernkWerlyerms 2017-04-22
Ever taken a panorama photo?
n/a nanonan 2017-04-22
A better question is why are there some very intelligent very convincing people who know better pushing this?
n/a 6Dollarcoffee 2017-04-22
So if the earth is flat, where the fuck did they get the other pictures to make the composite?!?!?! Did they just take a bunch of pics of the flat earth and wad them up into a ball?!?!
This goes back to an earlier point I made about how flat earthers cherry pick what they want to be true. You even cherry picked parts of a sentence from an article and ignored the rest of the sentence as well as the rest of the atricle!!
n/a benjamindees 2017-04-22
So, just to clarify (since this is kind of an imprecise answer), you mean that when you take a straight-line measurement (using a laser?) you have to correct that measurement for the curve of the Earth in order to get it to match up with what the GPS satellites tell you?
I mean, obviously you're not saying that the 'GPS coordinates' are wrong.
n/a utu_ 2017-04-22
wasn't the PoL demand that he show his face on the balcony? not like it was some outrageous demand..
n/a dinodares99 2017-04-22
Occam had a brother, but he was a moron and did things the hardest possible way
They both made razors
n/a polkadotgirl 2017-04-22
I am not a flat earther, but he did not really provide any proof.
n/a HeDoesntAfraid 2017-04-22
Not sure what you are talking about. Is this an OPUS solution?
n/a 14N4D19S3C10J 2017-04-22
It's largely the same claim over and over again with minor changes. Best example to disprove would be the Statue of Liberty one because there are like four dozen of that claim over and over again.
First problem: there's no proofs given, it's just empty claims. All he's doing is claiming that you can see the Statue of Liberty, he doesn't give you a reason to believe him at all. Not even a measly picture.
Second problem: he doesn't give you any information to recreate his "experiment" (not to imply that I think he's ever done this experiment). Where was he when he supposedly saw the Statue? "60 miles away" is a circle with a circumference of nearly 400 miles in three states - no one could follow up if they wanted to because of this.
Third problem: this claim isn't true. I'm about 60 miles away from the Statue of Liberty and I can't see it right now. Of course, flat earthers will claim that my vision is being blocked by trees and hills and buildings - and I would agree! Therefore, the location the author must have been in to truthfully make this claim has to be somewhere on this circle that is not being blocked by hills, trees, buildings, etc. It should be really obvious that this isn't possible because New York Harbor is surrounded by buildings, trees, and hills.
n/a TheMagicMarkerMan 2017-04-22
Because people have never seen the moon, or any other planets. Also, they've never been in an airplane.
n/a Maldevinine 2017-04-22
But if everything was on a single plane, that wouldn't matter. The line passing through your eye and the edge of the ruler would meet the horizon no matter what point on the ruler you were looking through.
The test at the start proves the ruler is straight. Your eye is a fixed point. The only thing that can be different is the horizon.
n/a trumpetspieler 2017-04-22
I actually just made this to demonstrate what I was trying to say. The scale is really fucked (x:y is 2000:1) so this great circle of the earth looks more like a parabola but it's the only way to get all the points in one view (the units are in feet so we're looking at a 21 million foot radius circle here so hopefully that's not too upsetting). The flat red line is the standard flat earther perspective whereas the point G and the intersecting horizon line represents someone only one foot above sea level and the value is the distance in feet from the observer (So a little over a mile is now the horizon line only one foot off the ground which means you can see things that are over a foot tall from this perspective from 2 miles away). The lowest point J is the point of horizon for someone 15 feet above sea level and is about 5 miles away (15 feet above sea level gives you a 10 mile line of sight for things just over 15 feet tall). Now hopefully you see in any other demo like this they forget your line of sight can drop below a perfect horizontal gaze at 0 feet above sea level (probably because they believe in the fictitious "law of perspective"). Hopefully that satisfies your debunking need because I ain't makin' no YouTube video.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Weird I was literally just watching a documentary about it.
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
Did they just take a bunch of pics of the flat earth and wad them up into a ball?!?!
Bingo
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
You're moving right now. Like a motherfucker. You're on a giant ball that is endlessly moving
n/a ineedmorealts 2017-04-22
Explain horizons then. If the earth is flat then nothing should ever disappear over the horizon
n/a ridestraight 2017-04-22
His name is Matt Boylan or goes by Matthew Powerland. He has some very interesting stories about his time as a freelance artist for NASA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QciLVJZNq4c
n/a DontBanMeForAsking 2017-04-22
When anything that would convince anyone who's not a moron is shown the reply given is that's just misinformation from a shill.
If all evidence is misinformation from a shill. How does one demonstrate one is wrong, exactly?
n/a TrumpSucksHillsBalls 2017-04-22
Yes. The flat earth is ringed in by strong magnetic fields.
n/a half-monty99 2017-04-22
But when the piece is connected it locks in perfectly and not at an angle. Let's say there aren't many pieces, but one long 24,901 mile piece of straight track that comes out of theoretical "track-maker" that is perfectly level at the source (like a laser beam coming out that is perfectly level--I'm using steel instead of a laser, because I imagine the atmosphere can affect a laser beam). Would the seemingly inflexible steel rail end up in space, or bend around the earth making a complete circle?
n/a Is_Gilgamesh 2017-04-22
When dealing with an idea this weird you gotta think outside the box. I've talked with flat earthers who would show you some pretty remarkable systems that could produce much of what we observe in the night sky.
Obviously in the end, flat earth is fully ridiculous, but whenever I stumble on a new conspiracy theory, I don't just take an easy answer and call it a day.
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
Well feel free to link that webpage to me.
So again...why doent the awseome force of gravity rip the door off the hinges? You sort of ignored the rest of my comment here...how can gravity be simultaneously weak enough not to rip my door of the hinges and strong enough to hold oceans and mountains to the surface of the earth?
That's unfair....you forget about raw distance( there is a big difference from 60 miles and 1000 miles, let alone 10,000 + miles)...atmospheric conditions...relative angles....elevation....and again, the earth is not perfectly "flat"... Mountains and valleys etc etc.
clouds can blot out the sun at noon in the right whether conditions...
and people can't see infinitely far....
I would bet though, at a high enough altitude, and with the right weather conditions and equipment....i bet you could see the sun continuously from the same point, for 24 continuous hours. Maybe wealthier men than us will attempt this someday....
n/a Longtimelurker859 2017-04-22
proof#53 see how the visual perception of the size of the sun changes?
n/a Sub7Agent 2017-04-22
It will. People just assume since they notice stuff moving that it will always be/always has. As it's moving closer to the center point of our "rotation" it's effectively charging the sun causing "global warming".
n/a zenmasterzen3 2017-04-22
Gravity acts from every object. Put a ball on a string near a brick wall and the ball will be attracted to the wall.
In this experiment, were the earth flat, then the canal would be flat, and could be measured as such, by putting a laser on a boat and measuring its height on a wall on the other end, then moving the boat closer to the wall, and looking for any height change.
n/a _m1k3anat0r_ 2017-04-22
You didn't respond to anything in that post. So glad you'll have no effect on the world whatsoever.
n/a AFriendlyCivilian 2017-04-22
It doesn't account for those things. Flat earthers just ignore, deny, and misinterpret all legitimate evidence. They rely on people on the internet who have layman's understandings of physics and astronomy to fuel their beliefs.
Like the position of Polaris, as you said, and long-exposure photographs of stars. Compare images from the northern hemisphere, southern hemisphere, and equator. At the equator, long exposure images will show the stars taking a straight path across the sky. Further north/south, the stars appear to take a curved path.
That apparent movement makes perfect sense in a round earth model. There's 0 explanation for those on a flat Earth model. That's one of the easiest proofs against a flat Earth. Others include Earth's shadow on the moon, measurements of gravity, a Foucalt pendulum... I could go on. I just think flat earthers fall into a a category of people who are just dangerously stupid, because they are able to believe nonsense in the face of all contradicting evidence. It shows they are unwilling to accept facts once they find an opinion that they like best. There's a reason most flat earthers believe the exact same set of conspiracies.
/end rant