Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
Well they certainly can't end up flying over my house 10 minutesafter launch so that I can photograph them at the exact same time that the flight plans said they would be there and post the photographs on ATS, because turbo said that cant happen!

10 minutes after launch? Show me your photographs of these rockets, because nobody else has ever taken images, or videos, of rockets, 10 minutes after launch.

Why haven't you taken videos of it? Show me other videos, if you haven't taken any....

Let's see your evidence, and then I'll comment afterwards...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You

If the Earth was curved, a level flight, at 30,000 feet altitude, staying there for 6-7 hours, would be over 1400 feet HIGHER than 30,000 feet above the Earth, assuming it began at sea level.

No. Because the pilot and controls are set to maintaining 30,000 feet. Why would the plane gain altitude.

The planes are set to fly LEVEL, which results in steady altitude. If Earth was curved, planes flying LEVEL cannot maintain steady altitude, which they all do, of course. The only way that is possible, is if Earth is FLAT, not curved.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: Rikku

Well, yes it does when you read the preceding sentences.

Turbonium's strawman claim is that planes would have to constantly adjust for a curve. He has failed to demonstrate that a) they don't and b) they can't.

As pressure at high altitude is always less than that at low altitude, a plane can't just keep on climbing because it has somehow failed to allow for the ground dropping away below it - sooner or later the wing will fail to 'bite'. This is what exactly happened to the X-15 aircraft when they got to the edge of the atmosphere.

Planes don't have to adjust for a curve, the atmosphere is following it and does it for them.

No, the atmosphere does NOT follow a curve, and if it DID, how could it magically make planes follow it, without even measuring for a constant descent, which would HAVE to occur, if planes had curved flight paths.

You cannot make planes fly a curved trajectory without flying a descent, to FOLLOW a curved flight path. It's absolutely impossible. If planes WERE flying in a curved path, the VSI would measure it as a constant descent, and obviously they do NOT measure a descent, they measure LEVEL flight!

a reply to: turbonium1

You

No, the atmosphere does NOT follow a curve,

Corrected for temperature. Why wouldn’t the pressure at 30,000 feet in the open atmosphere same around the globe?

You

DID, how could it magically make planes follow

It’s not magic. You fly the plane, or set the controls to stay at the pressure band that corresponds to 30,000 feet for this example.

If the power settings and flight surfaces are set to not gain altitude, the plane is flown to the pressure band that corresponds to 30,000 feet in this example. Why would the plane gain altitude.

a reply to: turbonium1

Any convoluted and stupid argument by you to move the topic off comets who’s existence destroys the flat earth lie.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

You

No, the atmosphere does NOT follow a curve,

Corrected for temperature. Why wouldn’t the pressure at 30,000 feet in the open atmosphere same around the globe?

You

DID, how could it magically make planes follow

It’s not magic. You fly the plane, or set the controls to stay at the pressure band that corresponds to 30,000 feet for this example.

If the power settings and flight surfaces are set to not gain altitude, the plane is flown to the pressure band that corresponds to 30,000 feet in this example. Why would the plane gain altitude.

Because the atmosphere is not that precise, the air pressure doesn't measure instantly, in fractions of a millimeter. When a plane flies into other areas, the air pressure changes, but the plane remains level, right? That's how we know planes fly level, throughout flights, regardless of the changes in air pressure during flights.

Flying level cannot happen if we fly over a curved surface. A straight flight path is level, it is not a curved path. Planes fly level, over a level surface, and proves that Earth is flat.

a reply to: neutronflux

As far as I know he never responded to me.
A month in...
No notifications of a response.

I'd go dig thru the last pages but I'm thinking it's safe to say there was no response.

That alone tells me EVERYTHING I need to know.

a reply to: neutronflux

I literally gave every opportunity and was specific and everything.

There's no way I'm unfair about it.

I've gone above and beyond fairness and bent over backwards to allow any reasonable dispute to be heard and considered in depth.

a reply to: turbonium1

I'm sorry sir as good as you are at using capitalization and punctuation, and actually speaking enough sense I know exactly what you're saying - the fact you cannot address or deal with me at all speaks volumes of your cognitive dissonance.

I gave and still give every opportunity to play ball but the fact of the matter is that your brain is simply malfunctioning.

You decided a belief and now either twist anything to try and fit that preconception, or flat out ignore the biggest flaws in that belief. Won't even discuss it.

Your desperation in ignoring this is the beginning of the end for your beliefs. You are not immune to the Truth.

I've had it up to here with your ignorance and insolence and Im afraid you may be suffering from a physical brain injury or you were just genetically deformed from the start.

I'm truly sorry and do sympathize with your situation and I can help and heal you but you must come to terms with the fact you aren't intellectually capable of calling any shots on anything and need to step back and allow capable humans to handle geophysics.

I dont mean to insult you it is just clear as day your brain isn't functioning properly.

The sun on the bottom of a cloud is so freaking simple to interpolate from that any thinking questioning person with basic math skills could figure out once shown. The average person easily gets it.

Seriously tell me - do you take psychoactive medications? Do you have a physical brain injury?

Because I bet money that something is seriously wrong here. This does NOT add up!

a reply to: neutronflux

I admit it is exceptionally difficult to deal with insolence of this magnitude.

I honestly dont mean to be disrespectful or prejudiced but damn man, this guy... LOL.

It's remarkable levels of cognitive dissonance, denial, outright knowingly avoiding things etc.

I almost think he's lying now. No one could be this obtuse.

And you know what? # what he thinks cuz he doesn't think.

I don't give a # if he thinks the earth is a skittle in a sea of chocolate milk he can just get lost.

Why would I argue with a wall? It doesnt respond. In fact my IQ would be downgraded 20 freaking points if I saw any hope here in this one guy.

It's much more useful to help the helpable. The helpless only suck our energy and time into oblivion for zero benefits.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Turbo is an enigma. Does Turbo believe his / her own lies? Or is it just an extreme case of playing devil’s advocate? Or does turbo not believe in flat earth, but wants a flat earth following? Or is turbo a psychologist doing a case study on how people defend what they believe when confronted with blatant falsehoods. Or is Turbo just lonely.

Who can say.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: muzzleflash

Turbo is an enigma. Does Turbo believe his / her own lies? Or is it just an extreme case of playing devil’s advocate? Or does turbo not believe in flat earth, but wants a flat earth following? Or is turbo a psychologist doing a case study on how people defend what they believe when confronted with blatant falsehoods. Or is Turbo just lonely.

Who can say.

I'm like "see how straight lines are straight?" and all I get is "but airplanes dude" and Im immediately like STFU and GTFO lol.

It better be a damn psychologist.

a reply to: neutronflux

I give him 10% for effort and being able to write in English decently.

He would have gotten a 50% for effort like the other flat earth proponents but the insolence cost him 40%.

We are not as advanced a civilization as people assume if this is any indicator.

People thousands of years ago - primitives - understood what a straight line was.

originally posted by: muzzleflash

The sun on the bottom of a cloud is so freaking simple to interpolate from that any thinking questioning person with basic math skills could figure out once shown. The average person easily gets it.

Since you're suggesting that this cannot happen on a flat surface, only on a curved surface - what would happen if it was flat, in your opinion?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: muzzleflash

Turbo is an enigma. Does Turbo believe his / her own lies? Or is it just an extreme case of playing devil’s advocate? Or does turbo not believe in flat earth, but wants a flat earth following? Or is turbo a psychologist doing a case study on how people defend what they believe when confronted with blatant falsehoods. Or is Turbo just lonely.

Who can say.

I'm simply looking at all the evidence. I'm also looking at who is hiding evidence from us, deliberately.

Who would spend years and years to invent the first rocket, who developed the first rocket which supposedly flew humans to the moon, and back, make his last words on Earth say that God created the Firmament, above Earth?

It's clearly a final admission of the truth, for all to see, from a man who would know the truth, more than any human on Earth would have known, or ever would know. To this very day, in fact.

So you believe that he actually created rockets that flew humans to the moon, but you refuse to believe his final admission to us, of the Firmament existing...


If you seriously believe that he didn't think the Firmament existed, that he picked a random quote from the Bible, because he was a religious man, and so he wanted us to know that he was a religious man, with a quote from the Bible.

Among thousands of quotes in the Bible, he randomly picked one which mentioned the Firmament, being the one thing in the Bible which he would have known was either real, or was not real, which means he chose this quote knowing it was true, because if he didn't believe it was true, he wouldn't have wanted to put it on his own tombstone, to be his last words, on Earth.

This was a powerful message to the world, from the creator of rockets, who told us the truth, at the end, and to claim it's not relevant, or he meant nothing by it, except to show he was 'religious', by using a false quote, knowing it' was wrong, because he was such a total hypocrite!

Von Braun mentioned the existence of the Firmament, on his tombstone, because he KNEW it existed, and he TOLD us so, in his last words on Earth.

No more excuses for what he told us. It doesn't wash.

a reply to: turbonium1

Still waiting for any form of evidence from you that it is impossible for a plane to adjust for a curve. Or that pressure altimeters are the only ones in use. Or any evidence at all really, about anything.

a reply to: turbonium1

You have not look at all the evidence. You only look at the evidence that fits your dumb narrative.

Von Braun said a lot of things. You pick on a biblical quote and twist its meaning into a fraudulent claim.

a reply to: turbonium1

You've already been shown it, multiple times, don't lie and say you haven't. You do not get to decide what's allowed. You don't get to dictate what counts as evidence. I've posted videos and photos that I've personally taken. If you bothered to read what people posted you'd know that.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: muzzleflash

The sun on the bottom of a cloud is so freaking simple to interpolate from that any thinking questioning person with basic math skills could figure out once shown. The average person easily gets it.

Since you're suggesting that this cannot happen on a flat surface, only on a curved surface - what would happen if it was flat, in your opinion?

You actually responded to me??
Omg... hold on....


Ok... needed a defibrillator jump real quick there. Hahahah

------ As I explained on page one most succinctly, in a flat earth scenario there is no way for the sun's rays to directly shine on the bottom of clouds as the sun is above them not below them. The 'reflection' assumption was thoroughly debunked.

In order to explain how a direct ray can hit the bottom of the clouds like in these photos, you would need to show us a diagram of the geometry (while being realistic) and that my friend is impossible. Cannot be done.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

The problem is that people decide what constitutes reality and then attempt to twist everything to fit that preconception.

The rational approach is to admit you don't know yet and entertain all theories until the evidence starts rolling in to help us discard the poor theories and uphold the good ones.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”

Reading books by brilliant authors like Arthur Conan Doyle can really help equip people with good thinking techniques. My first real introduction into critical thinking was that when I was a kid I was reading books by authors like Carl Sagan, Michio Kaku, the Time Life series on paranormal/ufos/etc (I had access to the whole collection) and also my grandfather had several World Book collections that I would just get lost in for hours and hours on hundreds of occasions.

These types of source materials are what made me who I am today. Of course that's a very short version, no one who reads stuff like this as a kid will stop there, no way, this is the type of literature that creates the desire to go find more and become addicted in a voracious appetite for knowledge that only grows and never ceases.