The flat earth conspiracy

a reply to: RippedVanWinkle
Yes it 100% answers the question. When the airplane stands still on the ground it have the same rotational speed as the earth, and dont lose that speed when taking of, so when in the air it fly relative to the earth.
If you change the car with an airplane going 600mph there is no difference, the ball still land back in your hand .

a reply to: dfnj2015

Flat earthers deserve no time or respect. The earth has never been flat. The only thing flat with flat earthers are their low iq's, all pretty flat around 60 around the mentally handicapped plateau.

Instruments measure Earth as flat, so that's valid proof, for sure. I don't think imaginary forces making false readings on instruments are anything more than a desperate excuse.

That's crazy, no doubt.

a reply to: turbonium1

and the blatant lies of flat earth proponents - are regurgitated again :

Instruments measure Earth as flat,

so wrong its painful

the most widley used instrument[s] that demostates the spheroid model to anyone with an IQ higher than thier shoe size is :

the extant [ for measurig latitude ]

and the sextant // naval chronometer // almanac [ for measuring longitude ]

cue insane babblings from turbo troll

a reply to: turbonium1

Says the king of desperate FE excuses!

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

and the blatant lies of flat earth proponents - are regurgitated again :

Instruments measure Earth as flat,

so wrong its painful

the most widley used instrument[s] that demostates the spheroid model to anyone with an IQ higher than thier shoe size is :

the extant [ for measurig latitude ]

and the sextant // naval chronometer // almanac [ for measuring longitude ]

cue insane babblings from turbo troll

What is an 'extant'?....

Definition of extant
1 a: currently or actually existing

b: still existing : not destroyed or lost
extant manuscripts

2 archaic : standing out or above

www.merriam-webster.com...


Ironic to call my arguments 'insane babblings', spew about me being a troll, when you display such unheard of levels of stupidity over and over again...

When you know what your argument is supposed to be, it's a good idea to cite sources, and maybe you won't look as foolish next time.

If you can't properly address the problems with your argument, then you don't have much of an argument to begin with...

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: turbonium1

Says the king of desperate FE excuses!

Maybe if you say nothing but crap, over and over, nobody will remember the proof I've pointed out??

I can't think of any other reason you keep spewing out this crap, all the time....

a reply to: turbonium1

this is precisely what i mean :

any rational person would understand that " extant " - is a typo - and i meant sextant - its spelt corrrect in the next line

but no - thats beyond you

so

sextant - measures latitude

sextant // chronometer // almanac - derives longitude

both calculations are congruent with the spheriod model - and no other

as demonstrated by the circumferance of the tropic of cancer // tropic of capricorn

cue insane turbo troll babbling

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

this is precisely what i mean :

any rational person would understand that " extant " - is a typo - and i meant sextant - its spelt corrrect in the next line

but no - thats beyond you

so

sextant - measures latitude

sextant // chronometer // almanac - derives longitude

both calculations are congruent with the spheriod model - and no other

as demonstrated by the circumferance of the tropic of cancer // tropic of capricorn

cue insane turbo troll babbling

You'd call me a liar, who got caught, for the same thing, but I'm not a weasel who twists people's words around, like someone else here.

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

Cite actual sources for this, not spew about things, like you always do. At this point, you don't have anything but vague claims without any validity.

originally posted by: turbonium1

When you know what your argument is supposed to be, it's a good idea to cite sources, and maybe you won't look as foolish next time.

You planning on doing that any time soon?

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

this is precisely what i mean :

any rational person would understand that " extant " - is a typo - and i meant sextant - its spelt corrrect in the next line

but no - thats beyond you

so

sextant - measures latitude

sextant // chronometer // almanac - derives longitude

both calculations are congruent with the spheriod model - and no other

as demonstrated by the circumferance of the tropic of cancer // tropic of capricorn

cue insane turbo troll babbling

You'd call me a liar, who got caught, for the same thing, but I'm not a weasel who twists people's words around, like someone else here.

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

Cite actual sources for this, not spew about things, like you always do. At this point, you don't have anything but vague claims without any validity.

Is this some kind of joke? Every time proof of a round Earth has been presented to you, you deny/ignore/misrepresent/downright lie about it. Every. Single. Time.

a reply to: turbonium1

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

A sextant demonstrates, using trigonometry, that the elevation of Polaris above the horizon corresponds to one's latitude. This can only occur on a round world.

Of course that doesn't matter because, like gravity, trigonometry doesn't exist and the world is "variable." Right?

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

this is precisely what i mean :

any rational person would understand that " extant " - is a typo - and i meant sextant - its spelt corrrect in the next line

but no - thats beyond you

so

sextant - measures latitude

sextant // chronometer // almanac - derives longitude

both calculations are congruent with the spheriod model - and no other

as demonstrated by the circumferance of the tropic of cancer // tropic of capricorn

cue insane turbo troll babbling

You'd call me a liar, who got caught, for the same thing, but I'm not a weasel who twists people's words around, like someone else here.

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

Cite actual sources for this, not spew about things, like you always do. At this point, you don't have anything but vague claims without any validity.

What? Sextants don't work?
Mariners who have used these since year dot are in on your crazy sillyness?
I see........

I can always come back to this thread for cheering up from the doom and gloom

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

Maybe there should be a test people have to pass before they are allowed to use the internet.

originally posted by: samkent

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

Maybe there should be a test people have to pass before they are allowed to use the internet.

That and breeding!

originally posted by: oldcarpy

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: turbonium1

this is precisely what i mean :

any rational person would understand that " extant " - is a typo - and i meant sextant - its spelt corrrect in the next line

but no - thats beyond you

so

sextant - measures latitude

sextant // chronometer // almanac - derives longitude

both calculations are congruent with the spheriod model - and no other

as demonstrated by the circumferance of the tropic of cancer // tropic of capricorn

cue insane turbo troll babbling

You'd call me a liar, who got caught, for the same thing, but I'm not a weasel who twists people's words around, like someone else here.

Show me proof that sextants, etc. actually measure the Earth as round, because you haven't shown anything at all yet.

Cite actual sources for this, not spew about things, like you always do. At this point, you don't have anything but vague claims without any validity.

What? Sextants don't work?
Mariners who have used these since year dot are in on your crazy sillyness?
I see........

Again, you haven't shown any proof to support your claim. Saying that sextants "work", can be said for the flat Earth, just as easily as for the round Earth. They don't prove either one, because you can make them "work" for both arguments.

I've proven the Earth is flat with airplane instruments MEASURING it as flat, and you cannot make a case for these instruments measuring the Earth as round. That's because it is NOT round, it is flat.

a reply to: turbonium1

You haven't proven it, just insisted that it is true when it is not. Sextants can be used to measure the size of the sun and the distance to it. Those measurements do not conform in any way to ludicrous flat earth nonsense.

www.eso.org...

a reply to: turbonium1

if you wish to claim that a sextant " works " on an aledged flat earth

demonstrate it :

1 - show the distance from the true north pole - to polaris

2 - show the " over ground distance" of one degree of latitude

come on - lets see your evidence

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: turbonium1

You haven't proven it, just insisted that it is true when it is not. Sextants can be used to measure the size of the sun and the distance to it. Those measurements do not conform in any way to ludicrous flat earth nonsense.

www.eso.org...

No, they assume Earth is round, the Sun is 93 million miles away from Earth, and 'gravity' exists, so just use this crap, and it will support even more crap!

Anyone can assume things and move from that point, it's absolutely worthless.

They assume things, and then make all their claims afterwards, which is a complete joke!


Making measurements with instruments on airplanes does NOT use stupid assumptions, it's utterly ridiculous. The very idea of an instrument is to properly use and apply it, period. Twisting an instrument into measuring from assumptions is crap.

Whenever someone tries to make a claim where 'gravity' seeps in, that shows it is complete rubbish.

A non-existent, non-proven force called 'gravity' is so popular with their claims, since it can do anything you wish for. And nobody can prove you wrong, either! So you can call it 'proof' of your claims, and hope nobody notices that it's pure crap!