Flat earth theory?

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: turbonium1

The weather is very extreme, apparently, all of the time, flight is not possible. Other means of travel don't work, either.

Not according to the flat earth society.

You can actually go to a point in Newfoundland and see the edge at the horizon, no wall to be seen and sometimes very clear skies above the horizon where the edge is said to be.

Many have sailed out there and none have died falling off the edge or hitting any walls.

They only mapped the massive ice walls surrounding Earth, back then! Not a big deal, right?

LoL

They always mention where to see things fly in 'orbit', but for some reason, have never once mentioned where to see them going upward, towards 'orbit'!

LOL, indeed!

a reply to: turbonium1

What you cannot grasp here is the size of Earth's surface, with low altitudes, of the Sun, Moon, etc...

What does that have to do with set measurements of distance between cites for example. So yes, I can grasp the size of the earth.

What we are discussing here is the sun and moon actually set below the horizon, and rise from behind the horizon.
They don’t get smaller and smaller from prospective, then wink out of view.

The flat earth model has no explanation why the sun and moon actually rise and set from the horizon. The moon and sun in the flat earth model stay above the earth. The sun and moon in the flat earth model should always be visible from a jet at altitude.

You are so full of crap.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: turbonium1

The weather is very extreme, apparently, all of the time, flight is not possible. Other means of travel don't work, either.

Not according to the flat earth society.

You can actually go to a point in Newfoundland and see the edge at the horizon, no wall to be seen and sometimes very clear skies above the horizon where the edge is said to be.

Many have sailed out there and none have died falling off the edge or hitting any walls.

They only mapped the massive ice walls surrounding Earth, back then! Not a big deal, right?

There is no ice wall to map. Please provide photos and radar imaging of the ice wall.

originally posted by: turbonium1
They always mention where to see things fly in 'orbit', but for some reason, have never once mentioned where to see them going upward, towards 'orbit'!

LOL, indeed!

False argument by you....


Again..

a reply to: turbonium1

You

I've never even seen a rocket fly up to airplane altitudes, and neither have you, or anyone else, seen it.

What is it with you and blatant lies?

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Akragon

I was gonna post that one !

here are JAXA rockets launching 7 satellites

funny thing about this whole flat earth , we can lead a horse to water
but it will only drink when its ready!

A launch that placed these items into space.

Japan’s Epsilon rocket launches seven tech demo satellites

spaceflightnow.com...

Seven small satellites launched aboard a Japanese Epsilon rocket Friday, including a diverse suite of tech demo payloads and a spacecraft designed to create an artificial meteor shower next year that developers say should be visible with the naked eye.

We are placing so much junk in space, it might “ruin” the night sky.

SpaceX's Starlink Could Change The Night Sky Forever, And Astronomers Are Not Happy

www.forbes.com... 59b6

“The potential tragedy of a mega-constellation like Starlink is that for the rest of humanity it changes how the night sky looks,” says Ronald Drimmel from the Turin Astrophysical Observatory in Italy. “Starlink, and other mega constellations, would ruin the sky for everyone on the planet.”

a reply to: neutronflux

After 129 pages (and counting) I really don't think that the FE blatant lies and general nonsense claims are ever going to stop.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I could not possibly condone violence. Mostly.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: ignorant_ape

I could not possibly condone violence. Mostly.

“Debating” with Turbo is like knocking your head against an Ice Wall? Maybe the ice wall is the flat earther’s own metaphor for blocking actual fact and observable science from their own consciousness.

a reply to: neutronflux

“The potential tragedy of a mega-constellation like Starlink is that for the rest of humanity it changes how the night sky looks,” says Ronald Drimmel from the Turin Astrophysical Observatory in Italy. “Starlink, and other mega constellations, would ruin the sky for everyone on the planet.”

But only just 1-2 hours after and before sunset, not in the middle of the night, right?

a reply to: neutronflux

You can't expect any great sense from someone who does not believe in gravity, can you?

a reply to: neutronflux

Why can’t you see the Rocky Mountains from the top of mount Washington in New Hampshire, or the top of Mount Mitchell in North Carolina? Or why can Mount Mitchell not be seen from mount Washington?

Just out of curiousity, do you think that 3000 km of atmosphere is supposed to be transparant? Or do you think that light has infinite range through the atmosphere?

a reply to: UpForGrabs

given that moon rise // moon set is observed - yes acourding to flat earth proponents - the atmosphere is utterly transparent

take all the time you need to think about this

and use the flat earthers own claims

isnt it amazing how they manage to special plead EVERYTHING

originally posted by: UpForGrabs
a reply to: neutronflux

Why can’t you see the Rocky Mountains from the top of mount Washington in New Hampshire, or the top of Mount Mitchell in North Carolina? Or why can Mount Mitchell not be seen from mount Washington?

Just out of curiousity, do you think that 3000 km of atmosphere is supposed to be transparant? Or do you think that light has infinite range through the atmosphere?

I know it’s only sixty miles “thick” for a spy satellite. However, if a spy satellite can read a license plate from space. Surely, if the earth was flat, you could make out one outline of a mountain range from the other with a spotting scope.

a reply to: UpForGrabs

If anything, the mountains would be detectable during a moon rise. But since flat earth doesn’t explain why the moon rises or sets....

a reply to: neutronflux

If you look at the world record distance pic you can barely see the outline of a 4km high mountain from 1/6 of that 3000 km distance. (not making an argument about hidden height here, talking about visibility)

lets not forget if the sun and the moon were only 6000km away...

We'd be crispy critters.... no water, just scorched earth lol

unless of course the sun is just a tiny little star...

originally posted by: UpForGrabs
a reply to: neutronflux

If you look at the world record distance pic you can barely see the outline of a 4km high mountain from 1/6 of that 3000 km distance. (not making an argument about hidden height here, talking about visibility)

Good point. But the firmament lets you see the sun and stars that is 6000 miles away in the flat earth model. Not at you, but what the hell is the firmament made of? Does it have consistent density?

a reply to: neutronflux

But the firmament lets you see the sun and stars that is 6000 miles away in the flat earth model.

Yes and they are even further in the globe model.