For the recent surge in "Flat Earthers" in GAW, this is for you.
(media.greatawakening.win)
✈️ Planes ✈️
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (335)
sorted by:
Hyperbole theorizing can be fun for sure. Linear thinking limits these theories however, pun intended, get it Linear Flat. But one pesky question that I have been unable to find resolution to or even seen any theory proposed to provide explanation. How does a or ANY flat earther describe the clear existence of Precession. Now we cant stop there because this isnt Linear. Before anyone has an extraordinary answer of profound nonsensical wisdom. How does a or ANY flat earther prescribe the relationship of verifiable and quantitative realized proof of Precession and celestial bodies, objects, constellations as they track mathematically calculable in position geometrically and astronomically through time and space and placement along horizons and arc minutes of sky from horizon and quantified to specific celestial time events in relation to time space on earth.
Explain this I will be a TRUE believer.
Hey look, no answers! Almost like these guys just come here enough to say “the earth is flat herp derp” for the sole purpose of making us look stupid. Look at all their comments- “you haven’t looked into it”, “you’re ignorant”, “you supported Trump which is going against the grain”, etc.. Not once in this thread have I seen anyone say “here’s the evidence” because there is none. They’re just here to make us look bad.
Oh look it's a ship going over the horizon. Let me get my binoculars, oh look, the ship is going over the horizon, let me get my telescope, where the hell is the horizon?
When they took that long range camera shot across a great lake to capture Chicago??
Something is odd.
Go when the temperature of the air and water is the same.
"They" made someone look stupid. But it wasnt "us" "They" made someone look bad; This also wasnt "us"
Precession, as in Axial precession the tilt of the earth?
Trying to sound smart it seems with big words, but this runoff sentence needs punctuation. Rephrase or inbox me to clarify.
Precession, as in Axial precession the tilt of the earth?
Critiquing grammar on a forum. Subvert and off topic, mean while providing the same need for said grammar critiquing. There is your clarity.
Back to the question. Explain Precession (not defined intentionally) from a flat earther perspective. I am all ears. Since you missed the rest of it, explain Precession in relation to solar, celestial and sky calculated and predictable movements. There I simplified it for you. Expecting no answer as all, 1st prediction, grammatical analysis by you, 2nd prediction, whimsical Wiki reference with crayon sketch showing how Precession could exist in the TRUE Flat Earth, 3rd prediction. Or you over achieve and do all 3 with some additional nonsense to circumvent the question and talking point.
I'll just keep it simple.. there's no photographs of earth from space. There's no photographs of earth from space. There's no PHOTOGRAPHS of earth from space. Synge that into your head until you understand why it is 100% reasonable to believe the earth is indeed flat. 4x4=16 but also 1,160-1,144=16 also. All the calculable math and predictions in lieu to precession or any other event could indeed be reimagined for the flat earth, being those formulas and equations were built off of each other's assumptions. You must understand how a university full of students acting as a think tank works right? Assume X, find Y for your assignment, show your work! They are all just theories stacked upon each other, mathematically agreeing with each other so they all seem true. It is now a labyrinth of work to be undone, and slowly it will be. Your continued mascot of science is the god forsaken NASA unfortunately, and they will continue feeding globers information that "adds up", however their credibility is laughable and anyone who believes anything they say are fools. Perhaps you'll see the sea on a calm sunny day, when the water appears like glass and it's easy to tell there's no curve.
You kept that very simple alright. Simply incoherent as expected. Photographs, photographs, photographs. Your thought process is so tied to modern wiki education it is laughable. Space and photographs have nothing to do with precession, its existence or anything relative to the matter. If you kept it simple you should simply say, shucks I dont know what precession really is. Nevermind. Kick a can back to the popsicle stand get a popsicle. It is not a re-imaginable event, this flimsy try hard double down explanation is the precipice of why the entire idea and proposed theories behind the absurd flat earth idea falls on its ass at every single level, angle and corner. BTW precession was utilized 1000s of years prior to photographs photographs photographs, um google earth, um NASA um whatever nonsense you have to explain as modern era applications applied to space, earth and sky relationships. Not even going to describe anymore. Like teaching a toddler why they need to wear a diaper.
There's also the geometric experiments you can run to calculate approximate circumference from shadow length; it disproves flat and anything but some spheroid or derived from a spheroid.
Last person I told this to I believe came back and then believed it was a pear.
Bloody hell!
Absolutely. I used Precession as a singular topic and talking point. They are probably trying to Wiki/Google edumacate right now on it. There are a zillion other ways to ask a question for explanation based on their vast knowledgeable understanding of alternate universe theory and punch a hole in that wet bag. But wasnt necessary since one single topic derailed the truman show train