I am in utter disbelief that this 'Flat-Earth' nonsense has gained some attention

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Ok, why don't you go work on an answer debunking the evidence for FE based on direct observations, and I'll work towards an answer for all the circumstantial evidence supporting ball Earth.

You do know that there are also a lot of flight paths that make no sense on BE, but do on FE?

Actually there are none that don't make sense. I have flown all over the world, every flight I ever took made perfect sense.

I do not need to work on anything, I gave you absolute proof FE is impossible based on flights that happen regularly. So unless you can explain Sydney to Santiago and Santiago to Sydney and how the distance required on a FE is possible .. FE is impossible.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Actually there are none that don't make sense. I have flown all over the world, every flight I ever took made perfect sense.

Nice anecdote and logical fallacy, bro.

I gave you absolute proof FE is impossible based on flights that happen regularly. So unless you can explain Sydney to Santiago and Santiago to Sydney and how the distance required on a FE is possible .. FE is impossible.

Impossible, or simply unexplained at this time, well I see some explanations, but it is a bit too early.

But, unless you can explain the consistent proof of no curvature with direct observations of the surface, Earth is flat.

a reply to: FlatBastard

Um, no. That's not how it works.

See, YOU have to PROVE the Earth is flat. That involves EVIDENCE. So far all you FE'rs have is "it looks flat, so it is".

We have EVIDENCE of a spheroid Earth (photos, physics, science). Ignoring it doesn't make it wrong.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Um, no. That's not how it works.

If it works for him it works for me. Direct observations prove that there is no curvature. None of you ballers even came close to touching it.

I just showed in another thread how NASA pics are all faked, by their own admittal.

a reply to: FlatBastard

That's your OPINION. Opinions mean squat.

You still haven't explained Polaris. That's the easiest thing to debunk you flat earth fantasy.

a reply to: TerryDon79

That's your OPINION. Opinions mean squat.

Consistent observations are not opinion. Where was your debunk of those videos?

Rome wasn't built in one day, little Terry.

a reply to: FlatBastard

I haven't seen Cambodia. By my personal observation, it doesn't exist.

See the problem?

Actually, you probably don't. You ARE a FE'r after all.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Wow, nice strawman argument, no such point has been made.

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: TerryDon79

Wow, nice strawman argument, no such point has been made.

It's not a strawman.

Your WHOLE argument is "it looks flat, so it must be". That's your personal observations and completely ignoring science.

I've never seen Germany. Must mean Germany doesn't exist either.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Your WHOLE argument is "it looks flat, so it must be"

No Terry, that is a strawman, the argument is that there is no curvature, because there is no curvature blocking things where it is supposed to be. At least that was the argument I was refering to. It has nothing to do with looking flat.

I've never seen Germany. Must mean Germany doesn't exist either

Again, Terry, this is a pathetic straw man argument, no such point was made.

a reply to: FlatBastard

There's no curvature because you haven't been high enough. Again, it's nothing more than "it looks flat, so it must be".

I've never seen Austrailia. Guess that doesn't exist either.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I wasn't refering to high altitude observations Terry, and you know it. How high do you have to be to see teh curvature, btw?

...i'm not interfering with you guys -
im just telling what the ancient texts say ---

that our earth is "within folded dimensions [they created]"
as a kind of matrix-ourobouros-Prison

Implying, that as far our sense of reality goes, earth is indeed "round"
- compare it to a type Lense, which always will return to it's same point

But if óther worlds are not 'flat' [or perhaps even the original, we come from]
..... i definately wouldnt bet on that....

originally posted by: FlatBastard
a reply to: TerryDon79

I wasn't refering to high altitude observations Terry, and you know it. How high do you have to be to see teh curvature, btw?

EXACTLY!

All the "information" you get from your FE sites are based on observations from the ground. Try climbing Mount Everest and having a look.

But it doesn't matter. I've never seen Mount Everest, so that doesn't exist.

originally posted by: FlatBastard

Nice anecdote and logical fallacy, bro.

There was no logical fallacy since I asked you to name the flights. You can't. again I say, name these flights that are impossible on a Sphere Earth.

Impossible, or simply unexplained at this time, well I see some explanations, but it is a bit too early.

But, unless you can explain the consistent proof of no curvature with direct observations of the surface, Earth is flat.

There is no proof of no curvature. Go on top a mountain, take an extremely powerful telescope, look at China from the US .. oh wait you can't ... because curvature prevents it.

I gave you flights that are 100% impossible on a FE. You retort with lies. People would be seeing 10x, 100x, 1000x longer than should be possible if the Earth was flat .. it's not.

Again I ask, tell me the flights that are impossible on a sphere Earth, but occur.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I find the ignorance of FE'rs amusing. I find it more amusing to see them get worked up because they can't explain things such as Polaris or certain flights.

Really, FE threads should be in jokes because I get such a good giggle at the FE'rs denial.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

There was no logical fallacy since I asked you to name the flights. You can't. again I say, name these flights that are impossible on a Sphere Earth.

I said, make no sense on ball Earth. The logical fallacy was that your experience represents all possibilities. and I will show you examples.

There is no proof of no curvature. Go on top a mountain, take an extremely powerful telescope, look at China from the US .. oh wait you can't ... because curvature prevents it.

The atmosphere alone would prevent it, and we would deal with perspective and viewing angle. Curvature would not be needed.

Did you even think that through.

I gave you flights that are 100% impossible on a FE. You retort with lies. People would be seeing 10x, 100x, 1000x longer than should be possible if the Earth was flat .. it's not.

Says who, this has already been explained, and proven. The perspective horizon is further away than where the curvature horizon should actually be. Conclusion, there is no curvature.

I did not lie about anything. Some flights don't make sense on ball Earth.

Perhaps this can be explained another way...we are the third rock from the sun, last I checked rocks are not flat.

Case closed.

Funny how flat earth theory is gaining more traction in the wake of resurgence from right wing popularity, or maybe there is no connection, either way I don't care, just making an observation....we are travelling backwards!

People do know the earth isn't a perfect spheroid right?

a reply to: FlatBastard

All flights make sense on a spheroid earth. Care to show the ones that don't instead of just saying they don't?

While you're at it, can you explain the flat earth busting Polaris?

a reply to: TerryDon79

I find it more amusing to see them get worked up because they can't explain things such as Polaris or certain flights

You mean how you throw insults my way but I am not allowed to return the favor?