Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

a reply to: turbonium1

Every single video from a telescope shows planets wobbling... what are you even talking about...

Mars.... look it wobbles.... and you know why

a reply to: Akragon

But turbo said only Saturn spins and wobbles.

Did the flat earther........lie?

Shockedface

a reply to: TerryDon79

lol don't even get me started brother

a reply to: turbonium1

You

Pilots don't even ACCOUNT for any supposed 'curvature',

What was that question and that statement that made you change subjects.


Please cite what instrument is actually responsible for level flight.


Pilots don’t have to account for the curvature of the earth. They fly for a set pressure in the atmosphere that corresponds to an altitude.


The pressure, correcting for temperature, is the same at 30,000 feet if that plane is flying over the ocean, across the grand cannon, or over a large jagged mountain range.

The world's longest above-water mountain range is the Andes,[1][2] about 7,000 km (4,300 mi) long. The range stretches from north to south through seven countries in South America, along the west coast of the continent: Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, and Argentina. Aconcagua is the highest peak, at about 6,962 m (22,841 ft).

en.m.wikipedia.org...

If a plane uses a pressure range to stay at 30,000 feet flying over a large mountain range, why would it be different flying on a curved earth. The pressure anywhere on the globe for 30,000 feet is still going to be the same. And since the Altimeter and Vertical speed indicator both use the same reference pressure that corresponds to 30,000 get, they are going to help give data to maintain altitude at 30,000 feet.

A vertical speed indicator using differential pressure has no way of knowing the actual distance from the earth’s surface. It would for example, use a set reference pressure for 30,000 feet. The plane strays from this set pressure, the vertical speed indicator gives the deviation from the reference pressure as a change in distance over time.

The vertical speed indicator does not for example care if the ground is increasing in feet above sea level because the plane is flying towards a mountain. If the plane stays at set altitude, the vertical speed indicator shows no indication the ground is rising up above sea level to meet the altitude of the plane.

So the pilot doesn’t fly for actual distance above the ground. The pilot uses atmosphere pressure to fly a set pressure above the earth. And that pressure for that altitude would be the same no matter where it is on a globe.

a reply to: turbonium1

What the # dude you IGNORED my entire thread topic and argued altitude and other BS?

I better find your posts responding to me before I finish reading the last two pages.

Why do I get the feeling you are ignoring the OP point entirely?

Maybe because you have no way out and I JUST DEBUNKED YOU COMPLETELY.

a reply to: turbonium1

Its just so insulting disingenuous and looks extremely deceptive.

How the # are you not able to stay on topic?

Draw me a diagram showing how it's possible, you can't. Sorry but geometry is geometry.

You now look like a raving lunatic, disproved yet ignores the point and continues on and on about IRRELEVANT POINTS THAT ARE NULL AND VOID.

I don't give a # about pilots or altitudes. That's such utter BS.

This is about how the sun's rays on the bottoms of clouds proves the earth is a spheroid shape.

No more games I'm not putting up with this weasel crap!

Sorry I just get so frustrated and pissed off when some guy has the audacity to come argue garbage in front of me yet not to me directly.

And that their senseless arguing was IGNORING MY OP POINT COMPLETELY?

Like the # is pretending I never even said it.
This guy is brazen.

Does he even realize he is avoiding me??
How deep is this cognitive dissonance?

I framed this thread specifically so it will be clear there is NO GROUNDS to even consider flat earth as a plausibility anymore it's just untenable in virtually every aspect.

What insulted me the most was that he thought he could treat me this disrespectfully and get away with it.

originally posted by: turbonium1

I guess flat surfaces are called "navigation" too, right?

Yes it would...I was replaying to your stupid "curvature" statement like there would be a class in it if the world was a ball...lol

There is a "fat part of the Earth"? I bet America's the fattest country, right?

Why would you not fly over the north pole both times, then? Unless you had to fly to HI, or something, it makes no sense.

Well when you are flying to places along the equator such as to HI then to Guam then you can't fly over the northern routes. If you are flying Portland to England or Japan to Portland then you do, and it is called the Great Circle routes. We could fly in our C-130s from Japan to AK in about 10 hours, not easy to do in a C-130. To fly Japan to Guam, HI, CA would take like 3 or 4 days lol.

3. We should start with what 'flat' refers to - the SURFACE of Earth is flat, it doesn't refer to the entire planet, as 'flat', like some sort of giant 'pancake' shaped object. Being flat only refers to the surface of Earth, we can obviously see it's incredibly deep below the surface, so it's not entirely flat, anyway. You'd like to think it was pancake-shaped, since it would support your argument of nothing else being 'flat'.

Do you believe we have gone to the moon, or able fly out to where we are are outside of "firmament"?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Though you didn't ask me - I think the possibility US astronauts actually went to the moon is likely.

I realize NASA has faked a lot of photos and weren't straight about everything (like true colors etc).

But it is very possible they went. And if they did go, I bet ya they still keep going, secretly obviously, in a much more efficient and practical manner. They probably even have a rudimentary base or bases.

a reply to: Xtrozero

a reply to: Xtrozero

originally posted by: muzzleflash

But it is very possible they went. And if they did go, I bet ya they still keep going, secretly obviously, in a much more efficient and practical manner. They probably even have a rudimentary base or bases.

I can prove it 100% or the whole world is behind it. Also remember that the 1960s was analog and basically slide rulers...they not faking much.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I deleted my post about Guangzhou.

I saw the map calculated over Asia not over the Pacific.

I'll get the right numbers tho.

The point is still true that there is an inconsistency in the distances of Guangzhou to NY and HK and NY and HK to Guangzhou.

I just need to find the right numbers I've seen them so I know the flat projection skews everything drastically.

originally posted by: muzzleflash

But it is very possible they went. And if they did go, I bet ya they still keep going, secretly obviously, in a much more efficient and practical manner. They probably even have a rudimentary base or bases.

One of the reason I asked the question about the moon is if we can escape the earth then at some point we can move around the earth flat or round. I'm starting to get the feeling that a flat earth goes down the path that "God" created it for us and we are not allowed to leave or see the edge because he doesn't want us to.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
Sorry I just get so frustrated and pissed off when some guy has the audacity to come argue garbage in front of me yet not to me directly.

And that their senseless arguing was IGNORING MY OP POINT COMPLETELY?

Like the # is pretending I never even said it.
This guy is brazen.

Does he even realize he is avoiding me??
How deep is this cognitive dissonance?

I framed this thread specifically so it will be clear there is NO GROUNDS to even consider flat earth as a plausibility anymore it's just untenable in virtually every aspect.

What insulted me the most was that he thought he could treat me this disrespectfully and get away with it.

Looks like you have to wait until Friday to see TurboLag’s next move......

a reply to: muzzleflash
Does it not frustrate you that posters encourage turbo to stay off topic?

It appears that turbo has now become the topic lol.

Maybe you could ask every poster to quit trying to prove the earth is spherical by any other means other than the one you provided in the opening post.......or else this is going to be another 100 page + thread.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: muzzleflash
Does it not frustrate you that posters encourage turbo to stay off topic?

It appears that turbo has now become the topic lol.

Maybe you could ask every poster to quit trying to prove the earth is spherical by any other means other than the one you provided in the opening post.......or else this is going to be another 100 page + thread.

Turbo represents the ignorance that is the flat earth society. There is literally a whole society of Turbo’s. And the challenge of debating individuals that are blinded by being biased, and base their world views on blatant lies.

If a valid argument is presented, then that argument has ever right to be stuck to. Ignoring the argument, changing the subject, and trolling does not invalidate the valid argument. If anything, it confirms that it is detrimental to turbo’s argument.

If there was one thing intelligent humans should agree on, it should be the earth is spherical.

a reply to: neutronflux
You are already conversing with Turbo about flat earth on another thread.....you personally have written 23 pages on that particular thread.
Have you got anywhere?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: neutronflux
You are already conversing with Turbo about flat earth on another thread.....you personally have written 23 pages on that particular thread.
Have you got anywhere?

Yeap. Fighting ignorance, and keeping it contained.

People should fight the good fight for some perceived reward from you?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Now you are making it about me. That’s too rich after your last few posts.

Hahahahahahahaha