The flat earth conspiracy

originally posted by: AstralAvenger
a reply to: Mordekaiser

Now it is about semantics.

First they say, "you know that 2d visualisation that science is using is not actually correct, it is actually 4d bla bla.......it is not a "dip" in spacetime, it is actually being "warped"...........making it look like a dip, well or depression........

Sorry the answer wasn't as simple as "Four" or "Yes". For some, this is considered incredibly simple, to a profound level.

If you merely imagine a second layer of spandex being interacted on vertically this gives good representation of the spacetime 'net' effect. This is mentioned in the video itself I posted by the professor. You're supposed to be imagining at least 2 axis of spandex, and the observation of how it interacts on 1 axis, applied to both. It's not a literal model, it's a visual demonstration.

a reply to: Mordekaiser

Your spandex example works here on Earth. The objects "warps" the spandex because it wants to accelerate towards center of the Earth, remember?

What is causing an object of mass to do the same to the spacetime field. Is there a source of gravity below the field like there is one below the spandex in your example?

a reply to: AstralAvenger



Nothing. Only mass interacting with the spacetime moves mass, towards mass.

If you notice, with 1 object in the spandex, nothing moves. It would be at rest.

a reply to: AstralAvenger

Are you ever going to answer the question about the southern cross?

Dodging and deflecting isn't answering.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I perosnalyl think its a bunch of nonsense the FET. how we have de-evolved by thinking this as a species.

I have x2 simple questions to answer that none has given me any feedback on as of yet. if someone can help I would be appreciative.

1) if the world is flat - how come when you look out of a telescope the planets and everything else is spherical? are we saying earth is flat but clearly everything else is not?

2) if you tie a camera to a weather balloon and watch it rise. What do you see? that's right a spherical earth.

any suggestions to debunk these would be great, or if you can change my mind as i feel these 2 statements clearly determine that earth is pretty much spherical.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I think you are the one that is lost for words here. If we want to discuss your question further you need to answer my question first.

Is it visible the whole time, in the same timeframe from all the locations from which it is visible at all?

You cannot answer this?

Because , again, if it is not, your whole argument falls apart; there would be no need for "multiple" Southern Crosses "because it is visible due South from multiple locations at the same time".

I am a bit dissapointed that you simply keep repeating your question and act like I am deflecting. We are discussing this right now so why not cooperate?

So,

Is it visible the whole time, in the same timeframe from all the locations from which it is visible at all?

a reply to: AstralAvenger

If you're in the Southern Hemisphere, the southern cross is always visible.

This is typical of flat earthers. Ask a question that shatters the very idea of a flat earth and they don't answer it.

Not like I was expecting an answer tbh. Flat earthers can't answer questions.

a reply to: lSkrewloosel

2) if you tie a camera to a weather balloon and watch it rise. What do you see? that's right a spherical earth.

Only with a fish eye lens.....

Try this,

www.youtube.com...

Just one of the many vids, showing nothing but flat.

a reply to: TerryDon79

If you're in the Southern Hemisphere, the southern cross is always visible.

What you are saying is that it is visible ffrom any location in the SH at the same time, all the time?

This is typical of flat earthers. Ask a question that shatters the very idea of a flat earth and they don't answer it.

We are discussing it right now. Don't worry, we are going to the bottom of this.

a reply to: AstralAvenger

You obviously don't know how lenses work either.

Another flat earth delusion.

a reply to: AstralAvenger

Still not answering the question as usual. I guess you haven't found the YouTube video to explain it.

Try again.

a reply to: TerryDon79

What don't I get then?

a reply to: AstralAvenger

Yes. You don't get them.

You also don't seem to get English.

Try again.

a reply to: TerryDon79

What you are saying is that it is visible from any location in the SH at the same time, all the time?

Can you confirm this or not, before I go on?

a reply to: TerryDon79

I asked you what I don't get about lenses. What is there to get? There only is a curvature when filmed with a fish eye lens. What don't I get?

a reply to: AstralAvenger

I already answered that question.

Try again.

a reply to: AstralAvenger

I couldn't care less.

So, how's the explanation for the southern cross coming? I haven't seen you give one yet.

a reply to: TerryDon79

Ok, then you are wrong, it is not visible from any location in the SH, and it is not visible all the time, in the same timeframe, from the locations it is actually visible, so your argument falls apart there.

a reply to: AstralAvenger

Yes it is. Now you're just dismissing it because you can't answer it.

Typical flat earth delusionist.

Try again.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I couldn't care less.

You cared about it 5 mins ago. So tell me, what don't I get about lenses that explains why those vids show nothing but flat?