Sorry man, but if Flat earthers understood anything about math/physics, we wouldn't have Flat earthers...

Meanwhile, I can't see the horizon curving downwards so the earth is flat. La la la la la la la!

Gravity doesn't prove the earth is a spinning ball

You're right, commonsense does

ROFL.......holy fuck,you think the flat earthers portray this sub in a negative light?...really?

Flat earth falls down when distance comes into it,using gravity can fail to get through because we only know the effects of gravity not exactly what it is.

If you silence FE people then you lose your right to be heard all so.

Do you talk to people who are not even aware they're slaves to a banking system that enslaves them?...Ever get the eye rolls & angry "bullshit" comments?...well if you do it to flat earthers then you deserve it in response elsewhere;no?

Except flat earth is a demonstrable psy op that is being purposefully propagated and pushed here, to make the "conspiracy culture" look retarded.

Welcome to the interent.....seriously,been writing messages into google search directed at the fbi & cia since i first got access to the net,even direct threats as a joke.

I'm not defending the flat earth model but the peoples right to express their beliefs.

If you herd all the naive into the flat earth domain & shun them;well you just helped the enemy & made it very hard to get them back.

Remember the past & how democracy (herd think) gave use flat earth for a few thousand years?....if you silence them or refuse to here them they go under ground were controlled revolutions happen.......to beat this system & game all must be left to talk & debated in public regardless of your own personal views!

Schools are already indoctrinating kids to believe the controls systems version of events(more so where i live) & until the education system teaches kids to think & not be told,then your worries about flat earth are on a pretty large list.

Now you bring in the moon landings....they have some serious anomalies that a thinking person should seriously look at.

Look at it like this.....just because a flat earth researcher uses the banking control system in their video or post,does that mean the system is now bunk?

But i hear you about the schools man,they always aim all their shit at the kids because they are the future!If your really worried about that then get active with your local school & stop it at the root.

'There's a sign on the wall but she wants to be sure 'Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings In a tree by the brook, there's a songbird who sings Sometimes all of our thoughts are misgiven'

They we saying 'we don't need no thought control' - brainwashing.

'No dark sarcasm in the classroom' What were they teaching us that is dark, and sarcastic? Could it be 666 is encoded into our Globular, Heliocentric model a few times?

http://imgur.com/a/lgSxi

I know you've deceived me, now here's a surprise I know that you have 'cause there's magic in my eyes

If you think that I don't know about the little tricks you've played And never see you when deliberately you put things in my way

You took advantage of my trust in you when I was so far away I saw you holding lots of other guys

The Eiffel Tower and the Taj Mahal are mine to see on clear days You thought that I would need a crystal ball to see right through the haze

Well, here's a poke at you You're gonna choke on it too You're gonna lose that smile Beacuse all the while

I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles and miles and miles and miles and miles

Actually from London to Taj Mahal is 4,270+ miles.

What inspired The Who to write such a song?

The moon landing has a lot of aspects that were faked

'Space may be the final frontier But it's made in a Hollywood basement Cobain can you hear 'The Spheres' Singing songs off Station to Station And Alderaan's not far away It's Californication'

They still can't fake it, and they aren't even trying anymore.

http://i.imgur.com/ImlAXeA.gifv http://i.imgur.com/9ggilVp.gifv http://i.imgur.com/EPH9Afh.gifv http://i.imgur.com/Sw6w9QW.gifv http://i.imgur.com/BDPA2bp.gifv http://i.imgur.com/2dEJo3f.gifv http://i.imgur.com/hqJVulQ.gifv

Thanks for posting, I was just going to call that guy an idiot.

I'm overcoming gravity I'm overcoming gravity It's easy when you're sad to be It's easy when you're sad, sad like me.

Steal from yourselves It never felt so good And feed from their hand’s Confuse by opposites

Feeling manic for a day. Depends on the trends. Depends on the surface If the. Sun never sets.

We can’t both become the same pawn That's made to fall.

'Ad hominem - is now usually understood as a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself'

you think the gouverment is controlling everything, and then they let the music industry tell the world about them

Nope, just saying something inspired someone to write something. And all you can do is insult me.

Not two days ago I was having a look in a book, and I saw a picture of a guy fried up above his knees. I said, 'I can relate?' Cause lately I've been thinking of combustication as a welcomed vacation. From the burdens of the planet Earth like gravity, hypocrisy, and the perils of being in 3-D And thinking so much differently So pardon me while I burst into flames I've had enough of the world and it's people's mindless games. So pardon me while I burn and rise above the flame Pardon me, pardon me, I'll never be the same.

Like gravity, hypocrisy, and the perils of being in 3-D And thinking so much differently..

Cobain can you hear 'The Spheres' Singing songs off Station to Station?

They are referencing Kurt Cobain, asking him if he can hear 'The Spheres' singing songs off Station to Station (which is a David Bowie album), Nirvana also covered Bowie ('Man Who Sold the World', probably being their most popular Bowie cover).

'The Spheres' are actually 'The Foo Fighters' who also covered Bowie frequently, and even played with him live on a few occasions. (Feel free to Google all of this).

Foo is a variable term (frequently used in programming), Foo, Foobar (essentially a placeholder name).

Also in 1944, during WWII pilots reported seeing fast-moving round glowing objects (spheres) following their aircraft. These burning spheres were eventually dubbed 'Foo Fighters'

'The Spheres' = 'The Sphere Fighters' = 'The Foo Fighters'

I thought I knew, all it took to bother you every word I said was true, and that you'll see. How could it be I'm the only one who sees your rehearsed insanity? I still refused all the methods you abused it's alright if you're confused let me be. I've been around all the pawns you've gagged and bound they'll come back and knock you down, and I'll be free.

And that's why you can see 'bubbles' in 'space' footage. And that's why you KNOW Earth is sphere.

"bubbles" can be explained.

Do you think that the universe is a total shithole with nothing at all in it? There is oxygen nitrogen and all other sorts of chemicals

Stop there.

Look here.

http://i.imgur.com/ImlAXeA.gifv

http://i.imgur.com/9ggilVp.gifv

http://i.imgur.com/EPH9Afh.gifv

http://i.imgur.com/Sw6w9QW.gifv

http://i.imgur.com/BDPA2bp.gifv

http://i.imgur.com/2dEJo3f.gifv

http://i.imgur.com/hqJVulQ.gifv

Now watch how the bubbles react to 'gravity' or lack thereof.

I can't complain

I'm on a plane

Somewhere I have heard this before In a dream my memory has stored As a defense I'm neutered and spayed What the hell am I trying to say?

It is now time to make it unclear To write off lines that don't make sense

I love myself better than you I know it's wrong so what should I do?

And one more special message to go And then I'm done, then I can go home

Living in a fish eye lens caught in the camera eye. I have no heart to lie. I can't pretend a stranger Is a long-awaited friend.

All the world's indeed a stage, and we are merely players performers, and portrayers. Each another's audience outside the gilded cage

Coriolis effect tho

I wonder why flat earth belivers haven't jumped on a plane, and flown to the underside of the flat earth. You could prove us pesky "ball-earthers" wrong with some nice video footage of the disk/underside.

So going by your logic:

I stretch my arm holding an apple. I drop the apple. The apple falls to the ground, thus the Earth must be round because I read somewhere flat earthers claim gravity doesn't exist.

Ya...

According to 'flat earth logic' NASA lies and ancient cultures believed in flat earth therefore the Earth is flat. It's a fucking religious theory and thought that is being pushed on all of us.

NASA does lie, and ancient cultures did believe the Earth was flat.

Those facts are easily verifiable, you don't need "flat earth logic" for that.

'Therefore 'flat earth' exists'.'

What a silly logic. That means god, angels, demons all exists. There is no atmosphere, it is the gods of rain, wind, lightening, thunder and the sun.

The whole flat earth argument dismisses science in the name of The Bible. It's not a clever idea.

Not really. You claimed:

According to 'flat earth logic' NASA lies and ancient cultures believed in flat earth therefore the Earth is flat.

To which I said:

NASA does lie, and ancient cultures did believe the Earth was flat.

And nothing more. I don't know if God, angels and demons exists, though compared to year ago (when I was still a baller!) I'm starting concider they actually might.

There is no atmosphere, it is the gods of rain, wind, lightening, thunder and the sun.

That's just you making random claims. The atmosphere, obviously, exists, with all it's known mechanics and phenomena.

The whole flat earth argument dismisses science in the name of The Bible.

It dismisses scientism, not the scientific method. A fair part of flat earthers (dare I say the large majority) are looking for physical (scientific) ways to measure the shape of the Earth.

As opposed to the ball-earthers who just stick to text-book definition they've learned in highschool/uni, regardless if there's any actual science (experiments, measurements) to back it up.

The Earth is a sphere because I read so in my textbook, and scientists tell me it is.

vs

The Earth isn't a sphere because there's no experiments to conclusively proof it is. Yet there are -plenty- of experiments to prove it isn't a spinning sphere.

Again, I'm not a flat earther myself, more a globe-sceptic, but blind adherence to the globe-earth shows lack of research.

Read more about space and you might find out the truth. Listening to propaganda is never the right way to determine what is correct and what is wrong.

I've been reading about space for well over 10 years now.

I can throw the same sentiment right back at ya. Read more about the actual flat Earth theory (not the payed shills to descredit the theory, which seemingly have you fooled).

Maybe then you can understand the finer claims and intricacies flat Earthers point out which show there's several severe issues with our ball Earth model.

I've been reading about space for 25+ years. I'm not for 'researching' a known old and false theory. FE is a distraction technique and I'm not falling for it. There is so much that FE can't explain yet globular Earth can. Hemisphere's and star constellations is one at the top of my list.

< I'm not for 'researching' a known old and false theory.

That's your choice, but don't claim you have any authority over flat earth claims, because you, yourself, admit you don't do any research on it.

The Earth is not flat...

Could be. I don't know if it's flat, concave or perhaps doesn't even have a physical shape at all (We're all just a hologram man, life's an illusion #newage).

It's definitely not round though. I can back that claim by pointing to al the flat earth evidence that is presented. But you don't look at that, so nevermind.

It isn't perfectly round but it is spherical and 'bulges out' at the equator. Seriously, read about the creation of stars and planets. The evidence of the earth having a curviture is all around us. Go meteorite hunting. The ones coming into the atmosphere curves. Watch the stars throughout the years, you can literally tell where abouts we are in the universe because the Earth is a globe, so southern and northern hemispheres star viewability alters throughout the year. It can all be seen through your own eyes. The Earth is not flipping flat lol

It might be ?

It might be round, but that would require me to ignore quite substantial claims by the flat Earth.

It's also why I try to refrain myself from saying it's flat, without a shred of doubt. I don't know the shape of the Earth, but after investigating for over year and having a well-above understanding of mainstream physics (6 years of physics in high-school, 2 years at university) I know there's several glaring issues with our ball Earth which aren't proporly being adressed.

Instead, these issues (the legitimate flat earth claims) are getting drowned out by shilling and disinformation.

I had to pass a LOT of fallacious arguments to get to this core of truth... we really don't know but there are a lo of people who are SO sure and it makes me wonder... why are they holding on so tightly to this idea of a spinning ball earth? Why can't they see the problems?

Because they get payed for it.

There's alot more people in the same boat as us (true sceptics, not globe believers), and that's exactly what they (the illoeminaties) don't want the general population to see.

That's where shilling on every conspiracy comes in, it's the establishment muddying the waters. Normal people who don't usually look into this stuff will just qo the quick scan on reddit or youtube comments to see what the general impression (made by comments) is.

You only need a vocal (payed) minority to sway a majority away from a conspiracy. The heavy shilling in flat Earth tells us they really don't want us looking there. My take-away from this is that out of all conspiracies, this is one they're especially affraid off.

There's obviously also alot of people too indoctrinated (collectively, most of our "parents" -Read: generations older than 35-40 years old, raised before the internetz were around) too give FE a chance, it just can't be flat.

Gravity pulls everything to the middle according to globe Earth theory.

There's no physical experiments to prove any of this (because the scale is so large), and thus it's all theory, as admitted by science itself when you read the small letters.

So to base the assumption it can't be flat the current theorical, unproven (and incorrect) model of our universe seems a bit naive. You're essentially saying it can't be flat because science says so.

U can't back it up with anything other than that, because like I said earlier your entire arguement is based on theory.

Confusing facts with theory, again.

You're taking the current mainstream theories, presenting them as fact, and claiming the Earth couldn't be flat because of it.

But that's your choice.

I suppose we disagree on that.

This is the thing that always gets me that people have trouble grasping. They'll go on about gravity when gravity has never been proven as a property of mass. They'll say we can measure distances to planets and stars using parallax when parallax is wholly dependent on the Copernican model. They don't grasp that the mathematics can be correct while the underlying presumptions are false. The whole model is unproven theories built upon unproven theories.

The observations of objects falling towards earth and the movements of celestial bodies have always been known, it's only the "why" or "how" that's been unanswered. The modern theories were developed over centuries of people inventing answers to these to make their model fit the mathematics and patterns that were well known. Flat earth theory fits the observations just as well but people are too married to the model to accept it as circumstantial.

Eventually it always comes down to "we have pictures" because there is no other hard evidence they can give for the globe. Even then, the pictures cannot be above scrutiny and how can we really determine whether they're real? It all boils down to whether you place your faith in NASA and the other space agencies.

That's not what he's saying.

The motion of gravity described by an incredibly simple formula accurately describes how the apple will fall down to any precision you can measure. That formula requires Earth to be an oblate spheroid.

If an FE theory had a formula that was at least as accurate, they'd have an argument. If they had a formula that was better (predicted some measurement better than the ones we accept) then they'd have an actual scientific theory.

So far, I've seen nothing. Most crackpot science theories go overboard with convoluted math that takes ages to unravel and debunk. Flat Earthers, as far as I've seen, completely reject the idea behind math and physics in favor of magic and religion.

Actually, that formula (F=m.g) doesn't require the Earth to be an oblate spheroid. There's simply a downward force (to the surface of the Earth) of 9/81 m/s^2, on both flat and spherical Earth.

It's also wrong for the spherical Earth, because our current understanding of gravity has severe issues on larger scales. Einstein, and pretty much every well-bred scientists, will agree on this.

I'm pretty sure even Neil Degrasse Thyson himself said somewhere we've got no fucking clue what gravity is. The reason why is because we can explain what gravity does here on Earth using simply formulas, yet we can't explain jack shit when it comes to deep-space. (motion of galaxies etc)

That's why scientism has to invent shit like dark matter, energy and other exotic stuff. Just to make the model work.

F=mg is a specific case of the general gravity formula. On a flat earth, that formula would lead to very different results the further away you were from the center. Results that don't match our experience.

That we don't know what gravity is is an oversimplification of our understanding. We don't know what anything is, but our theories explain observation to a degree greater than anything else.

Dark matter and dark energy aren't marks against General Relativity but rather evidence of how well the scientific method works. When experiment doesn't match the models, we look deeper and gain a truer understanding of the universe. Most times we find that the underlying truth is even more elegant than we imagined before, but other times it's more complex.

One of the Crown Jewels of General Relativity is explaining the precession of Mercury's perihelion.

Here we have a formula that models the universe as a curved space-time- a geometrical construct that consists of extremely simple formulae and yet it mathematically describes a tiny anomaly that Newton's equations can't.

If GR isn't correct (or an approximation of correct - like Newton's equations are to GR) it would be like fitting a line to a set of random points and then finding out that fit described the birth dates, ages and weights of all 19 9/11 hijackers.

And that's just one of dozens of things that GR predicts to perfect precision. And GR does absolutely require Earth to be round.

That we don't know what gravity is is an oversimplification of our understanding. We don't know what anything is, but our theories explain observation to a degree greater than anything else.

That's a lie. Observations don't match the theories (not by a long shot), which is why they have to invent all this exotic matter to acount for deep-space discrepancies.

Everything else you typed is just the textbook run-of-mill to convince us it's all read. We haven't done hack shit with relativity and special relativity. Those things only matter on the extremely large and extremely small scales.

Neither of those things are accessable to the general public, and neither of those things can be tested. You, again, have to take their (scientists at space agencies/cern) word for it.

You're talking about measurements at a scale that didn't exist when GR was formulated. Those are requiring us to examine the theory and expand it - or toss it and replace with something better, that's how science works. But it can only be replaced by something that explains everything that GR already explains.

But there are measurements at our scale that you can measure that have only ever been explained by GR. How do you explain the precession of Mercury's perihelion? It's measurable, it's not at some cosmic or atomic scale out of your reach. All you need is a telescope and some patience. Only GR has ever been able to explain it.

Quantum Mechanics can also be observed and tested at our scale. The thing you're typing on right now... that couldn't work if QM was wrong. The very concept of solid-state transistors (and thus microchips) is QM dependent.

You're pointing to the things it gets right, but ignoring all the things it gets wrong.

I also wouldn't say computers (electronics) require quantum mechanics to work, they don't. Solid state (including ram) devices do, due to the dualistic nature of electrons (wave/matter), but it's on the edge between classical science and quantum mechanics.

A quantum computer would require actual quantum mechanics, and it's also why they call current computers "classical" computers.

I also never said QM wasn't real, I said it's a theory. I believe you can "keep zooming" into things to get to a smaller and smaller scale, with the hypothised Planck length being the smallest unit.

Clearly, electricity exists, and I see little reason to dismiss everything I know about electrons (their flow, ...) because it's not related to the flat/round earth debate.

Not all of science is wrong, just certain parts. (Astronomy being the prime example) Most things related to the extremely small scales (QM) are compabitable with the flat earth. As a matter of fact, they make more sense on a flat Earth than they do on a round Earth.

You're pointing to the things it gets right, but ignoring all the things it gets wrong.

How am I ignoring them? I've said they're a great example of science at work. Finding data that doesn't fit a theory doesn't make a theory garbage. Especially when there are no other theories that explain what it does explain.

It'd be one thing if Einstein formulated GR specifically to explain Mercury's motion. But he didn't - it's nowhere near the focus of his math or logic. And yet, there it is. How could it have possibly accidentally explained this anomaly perfectly? Name one discredited or fringe theory that has ever accidentally explained or predicted something that it wasn't designed to do.

I also wouldn't say computers (electronics) require quantum mechanics to work, they don't.

Every bit of the foundations of QM are required for solid state electronics to work - Wave/particle duality, Pauli exclusion, Fermi states... if any one of those things was even a different from the formulations we know, those chips working would be the greatest coincidental accident of human history. You'd have a greater chance of throwing some mud and sticks in a blender and having a human baby come out than you would of molding some silicon based on an incorrect theory and ending up with a working microprocessor.

Loving these replies Vechthaan. Keep it up!

They still refuse to believe you even with such evidence to back you in your findings. Kinda sounds like a religion to me.

Thanks :)

For the record:

I don't expect anyone to believe me, or the flat earth. You can verify all this yourself, I do myself most of the time. I've seen so much shit over the years, it's hard to keep track of what is reliable information and what isn't. -to use in my hypothesis-

If you currently hold the belief we must live on a ball and it absolutely can't be flat because satelites and pilots and surveyors and architects and spacy agencies and science and guardians of the galaxy and shit, all that stuff has satisfiable anwsers within the theory (to me anyways).

This should be on everyone's mind, just so the ball gets rolling. Call out NASA (and the other agencies) for the bullshit they pulled (A genuine roast, full disclosure moon landings, operation fishbowl, etc). After that we can start officially investigate what the shape of the Earth is, though I have a hunch as to what the anwser is going to be.

It would also be cool if we could raise funds to globally build and test rectilineators. Use current-day technology (and technique) to try and perfect the level, and see the results. Shit like that woud be kinda awesome.

See I'm with you on the fact that you have no idea what the Earth actually is.

Im not sure I can believe earth is Flat either. The idea of like a disc spinning in what's suppose to be outer space just looks weird to me based on what I've been taught and shown in school.

However, evidence given by people who believe in Flat Earth and support it, are hard to ignore. What I can see for myself and others as well is also hard to ignore. Watching videos of weather balloons reaching the sky and still seeing the horizon be flat is not something I can just pretend is something that's suppose to be a ball.

My thought process is, both sides have some form of truth. But both sides have people that are totally ignorant and just keep spouting nonsense about how the other side is lying and ignorant and they need to go read a book or do more research, without providing their own findings, evidence, and questions that have yet to be answered.

A few of my questions are findings from my boyfriend. Like when you take a time-lapse of the night sky, why are the stars spinning in what looks to be a perfect circle if we are spinning around the sun, which happens to be hurtling through space a several thousand miles per hour?

Or why is it that the same math used to prove the earth is round and so many miles large, also proves that the earth is NOT round. Based on how many miles long a horizon is, there should be a certain percentage of a curvature that people have yet to see.

Thanks for sharing all your knowledge and findings though. Really appreciate it!

Flat Earth is a simple psyop to waste our time and attention. Just ignore them.

According to 'flat earth logic' NASA lies and ancient cultures believed in flat earth therefore the Earth is flat. It's a fucking religious theory and thought that is being pushed on all of us.

Except flat earth is a demonstrable psy op that is being purposefully propagated and pushed here, to make the "conspiracy culture" look retarded.

That's not what he's saying.

The motion of gravity described by an incredibly simple formula accurately describes how the apple will fall down to any precision you can measure. That formula requires Earth to be an oblate spheroid.

If an FE theory had a formula that was at least as accurate, they'd have an argument. If they had a formula that was better (predicted some measurement better than the ones we accept) then they'd have an actual scientific theory.

So far, I've seen nothing. Most crackpot science theories go overboard with convoluted math that takes ages to unravel and debunk. Flat Earthers, as far as I've seen, completely reject the idea behind math and physics in favor of magic and religion.

Loving these replies Vechthaan. Keep it up!

They still refuse to believe you even with such evidence to back you in your findings. Kinda sounds like a religion to me.

Living in a fish eye lens caught in the camera eye. I have no heart to lie. I can't pretend a stranger Is a long-awaited friend.

All the world's indeed a stage, and we are merely players performers, and portrayers. Each another's audience outside the gilded cage