So, take a guided tour. You expect to fly with your own wings? I really doubt that anyone can stop you from going to the North Pole. There have been attempts to do so that were not stopped for that reason (they expected absence of ice but were surprised by it still being there). Plenty of aircraft overflights. The only problem is that gyrocompasses fail to operate at the pole due to Earth rotation, so sue them for keeping you safe. Anything you need to see can be seen within 5 degrees of it.
Something other than a Great Circle was the shortest distance? Prove it with the coordinates of the end points and the distance traveled.
Newtonian gravity is no worse off than electrostatic attraction and repulsion: the effect is described and no one knows the cause. In the case of gravity, it is mass. In the case of electrostatics, it is charge. We don't know why. But it works, which is the important thing. What happens in other galaxies is unknown, but what happens in our solar system is known. Don't get too obsessed over relativity. It claims to explain---but does so by invoking things that are even harder to explain, so its status as an explanation is precarious.
Magnetic fields require poles. Unless you want to throw out Maxwell's equations. Which you don't get to do, because you have no basis for doing so, since there is a south magnetic pole and its migration has been tracked. It is a bit displaced from passing through the Earth's center.
Lots of claims about NASA "fakery." Whenever I can see the basis for a claim, it turns out the claimant doesn't know what they are looking at. The Germans and the Masons: instead of "thank you," you treat them with unjustified suspicion. Just bigotry. The Masons are not a scientific institution, and any world they refer to is for mythological purposes for ceremony. You are taking their pagentry as being real. They know it is only pagentry.
Your lack of physical knowledge and innumeracy is pathetic. The force of gravity is entirely capable of compressing the atmosphere. Just because you can't work it out does not mean it is untrue. There is about a ton of air in a column extending to space for every square foot. What else is it supposed to weigh? Get acquainted with the facts before you spout nonsense. You don't know that it doesn't exist at the quantum level. It is exceedingly minor to be true, but it never goes away.
Your remark about gas laws doesn't connect with anything previously discussed. If I admit a dense gas into a bucket on a centrifuge, at high rpm (multiple g's), it will be dense at the bottom and less dense at the top. (A dense gas, like sulfur hexafluoride, makes the effect easier to demonstrate. An atmospheric gas would be more difficult.) The atmosphere is dense at the bottom and less dense at the top, as you go higher and higher. These happen to be facts.
I'm not insulting you, by which I mean I am not calling you names or denigrating your appearance. But pointing out the facts of your intellectual limitations is just being unpleasantly candid. You really don't know much of what you think you know. And you don't seem to understand that an alternate theory is not maintained by "questions" of the prevailing theory. That is just a cover for the embarrassment of ignorance. An alternate theory is maintained by an independent basis of explanation, better than the prevailing theory. Flat Earth has never gotten beyond questions---that are always answered.
You also have the problem that lots of people have flown around the world, confirming its geometry by distance traveled, that astronomers have observed a star field that extends in all directions (not just the northern hemisphere), and that we have experience and evidence from space flight. There are only several responses open to you. (1) You can ignore all this, which is the coward's denial. (2) You can claim it is all a massive conspiratorial lie, which is paranoid delusion, a form of psychosis. (3) You can wash your head in the sink, and start over from 500 years ago and make your way up to the present.
Magnetic fields require poles. Unless you want to throw out Maxwell's equations. Which you don't get to do, because you have no basis for doing so, since there is a south magnetic pole and its migration has been tracked. It is a bit displaced from passing through the Earth's center
Of course, but you've been more interested in debunking than in figuring out the counter argument.
NASA fakery.
I could probably find an hour of video examples, people's hands going through objects, items dropped going full g, when it's low g, air bubbles coming out in space walks, stuff like that.
masons pageantry
Like the pageantry for the public to justify the 50 million per day for their continued existence.
Your remark about gas laws doesn't connect with anything previously discussed. If I admit a dense gas into a bucket on a centrifuge, at high rpm (multiple g's), it will be dense at the bottom and less dense at the top. (A dense gas, like sulfur hexafluoride, makes the effect easier to demonstrate. An atmospheric gas would be more difficult.) The atmosphere is dense at the bottom and less dense at the top, as you go higher and higher. These happen to be facts.
It connects because a) gases fill their container, b) in gravity the pressure will have a density gradient within that container, and c) 2 pressure systems cannot exist without a barrier between them. On the planetary scale, the atmospheric pressure is greatest at sea level and starts dropping off with altitude. The globe model has that atmosphere next to vacuum, contained by G... which is relativity, the theory that fails in 95% of predictions and does not exist at the quantum level.
You're right, I've made very few positive claims (gas laws and the electrostatic gradient of the earth, both of which are well established and both come with the implications requiring containment). Your primary point rests on appeals to NASA (a closed source, not repeatable and rests on faith of honesty) and on travel which is not a problem on a flat earth model either, look at the UN logo, the north pole at the center.
Magnetic fields require poles and there is no counter-argument. It is a natural consequence of Maxwell's equations and the necessary presence of an electric current. The Earth's field is hard to explain at all, but the geophysicists like to think the core is a magnetic transformer of the Sun's field. The alternative explanation is the Earth is a homopolar generator, developing a magnetic field by virtue of the rotation of a charged body (the Earth). But this is all part of the Earth being round, so it is nothing but a distraction from the main point.
NASA fakery? Bring it on. Air bubbles? Those are water condensation droplets from the suit environmental control system. Air bubbles don't behave by traveling in a straight line. No water tank exercise is as optically clear as a spacewalk. You are straining at gnats.
You've run out of slurs against Masons. I have my criticisms of NASA, but I don't need bigotry to power them.
The atmosphere fades away into lower and lower pressure. Look it up. There is no hard barrier to zero pressure. In fact there is no zero pressure. It just gets very small. There is the near-Earth medium. There is the cislunar medium. There is the interplanetary medium. There is the extra-solar-system medium. And there is the interstellar medium. And probably the intergalactic medium. The particle density just keeps going smaller and smaller.
None of my points rest on authority. Magellan was around before NASA. Astronomers were around before NASA. Cartographers were around before NASA. All that NASA provided was manned space flight and photos from orbital altitude. You don't like NASA? Try Russia. They publish their scientific findings. Try airlines and shipping lines. They go all over the globe---and know it is a globe. People have visited and can still visit the South Pole. All this information existed before NASA, so give up that comfort blanket.
You show an interesting and essentially mysterious electrical circuit for the electric field of the Earth. So what? It doesn't prove the Earth is flat. And a charged Earth is consistent with what we know. You have no positive case for your claim of a flat Earth. Just questions originating from your ignorance.
The counter is NOT that the earth is a monopole, just a different configuration than you're expecting when thinking in terms of the globe model. You would need to think more in terms of an electromagnetic field.
No, air bubbles escaping from the craft and bubbling away, like it was filmed in a pool. It's tricky to find the videos because youtube suppresses those videos. Here's one I found (not the greatest sample I would use, but covers the bases and is short): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz5xNxMP5lA
The rest is just repeating again, that navigation is done treating the travel area as flat. Planes do not need to make adjustments for the globe, they set direction and altitude and can set an autopilot to hold that vector and will end up at the destination.
No, that doesn't prove "flatness" but that effect DOES require a second material to achieve that kind of capacitance, which the bible calls firmament.
We already know what the terrestrial magnetic field is, and it has poles like all fields of its kind. No different configuration needed (and your diagram had nothing to do with magnetism).
This was a crummy video. The image was not clear and the supposed critical evidence was hard to distinguish. I've seen better, but the better versions show water droplets going away in a straight line, like it was filmed in outer space. I've seen the pool exercises. Lots of bubbles and murk in the way.
Planes set their direction per a spherical Earth, obtaining coordinates from the GPS system (orbiting around a spherical Earth) and inertial navigation. And the distances across the southern hemisphere are shorter than they would be on a disk map. There is no way a flat Earth works for navigation. Or for cartography---a point you keep ducking.
The Bible called it whatever it was translated it into, according to the understanding at the time. In the days of the Egyptians (of which Moses was educated as one), they supposed the existence of a firmament. It was a mistaken conception. There is no "firmament." There is outer space. It is also translated "heaven," which is closer to the truth. You have to decide in favor of truth over translation. God does not fool us with His creation. If you deny His creation, you are also denying Him.
If you have a crucial point of evidence, it can be stated in a sentence or two. It should not take an hour of wasted time to digest. I don't ask you to go study videos; I give you the information straight up because I understand it. The fact that you can't do this is a "tell" that you don't understand your own point of view.
P.S. I took a look at that hour-long video and it opened with absolute drivel based on total ignorance. I pity you that you could find it persuasive.
So, take a guided tour. You expect to fly with your own wings? I really doubt that anyone can stop you from going to the North Pole. There have been attempts to do so that were not stopped for that reason (they expected absence of ice but were surprised by it still being there). Plenty of aircraft overflights. The only problem is that gyrocompasses fail to operate at the pole due to Earth rotation, so sue them for keeping you safe. Anything you need to see can be seen within 5 degrees of it.
Something other than a Great Circle was the shortest distance? Prove it with the coordinates of the end points and the distance traveled.
Newtonian gravity is no worse off than electrostatic attraction and repulsion: the effect is described and no one knows the cause. In the case of gravity, it is mass. In the case of electrostatics, it is charge. We don't know why. But it works, which is the important thing. What happens in other galaxies is unknown, but what happens in our solar system is known. Don't get too obsessed over relativity. It claims to explain---but does so by invoking things that are even harder to explain, so its status as an explanation is precarious.
Magnetic fields require poles. Unless you want to throw out Maxwell's equations. Which you don't get to do, because you have no basis for doing so, since there is a south magnetic pole and its migration has been tracked. It is a bit displaced from passing through the Earth's center.
Lots of claims about NASA "fakery." Whenever I can see the basis for a claim, it turns out the claimant doesn't know what they are looking at. The Germans and the Masons: instead of "thank you," you treat them with unjustified suspicion. Just bigotry. The Masons are not a scientific institution, and any world they refer to is for mythological purposes for ceremony. You are taking their pagentry as being real. They know it is only pagentry.
Your lack of physical knowledge and innumeracy is pathetic. The force of gravity is entirely capable of compressing the atmosphere. Just because you can't work it out does not mean it is untrue. There is about a ton of air in a column extending to space for every square foot. What else is it supposed to weigh? Get acquainted with the facts before you spout nonsense. You don't know that it doesn't exist at the quantum level. It is exceedingly minor to be true, but it never goes away.
Your remark about gas laws doesn't connect with anything previously discussed. If I admit a dense gas into a bucket on a centrifuge, at high rpm (multiple g's), it will be dense at the bottom and less dense at the top. (A dense gas, like sulfur hexafluoride, makes the effect easier to demonstrate. An atmospheric gas would be more difficult.) The atmosphere is dense at the bottom and less dense at the top, as you go higher and higher. These happen to be facts.
I'm not insulting you, by which I mean I am not calling you names or denigrating your appearance. But pointing out the facts of your intellectual limitations is just being unpleasantly candid. You really don't know much of what you think you know. And you don't seem to understand that an alternate theory is not maintained by "questions" of the prevailing theory. That is just a cover for the embarrassment of ignorance. An alternate theory is maintained by an independent basis of explanation, better than the prevailing theory. Flat Earth has never gotten beyond questions---that are always answered.
You also have the problem that lots of people have flown around the world, confirming its geometry by distance traveled, that astronomers have observed a star field that extends in all directions (not just the northern hemisphere), and that we have experience and evidence from space flight. There are only several responses open to you. (1) You can ignore all this, which is the coward's denial. (2) You can claim it is all a massive conspiratorial lie, which is paranoid delusion, a form of psychosis. (3) You can wash your head in the sink, and start over from 500 years ago and make your way up to the present.
Of course, but you've been more interested in debunking than in figuring out the counter argument.
I could probably find an hour of video examples, people's hands going through objects, items dropped going full g, when it's low g, air bubbles coming out in space walks, stuff like that.
Like the pageantry for the public to justify the 50 million per day for their continued existence.
It connects because a) gases fill their container, b) in gravity the pressure will have a density gradient within that container, and c) 2 pressure systems cannot exist without a barrier between them. On the planetary scale, the atmospheric pressure is greatest at sea level and starts dropping off with altitude. The globe model has that atmosphere next to vacuum, contained by G... which is relativity, the theory that fails in 95% of predictions and does not exist at the quantum level.
You're right, I've made very few positive claims (gas laws and the electrostatic gradient of the earth, both of which are well established and both come with the implications requiring containment). Your primary point rests on appeals to NASA (a closed source, not repeatable and rests on faith of honesty) and on travel which is not a problem on a flat earth model either, look at the UN logo, the north pole at the center.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Diagram-showing-a-schematic-equivalent-circuit-for-global-electric-circuits-credit-28_fig1_258381209
Magnetic fields require poles and there is no counter-argument. It is a natural consequence of Maxwell's equations and the necessary presence of an electric current. The Earth's field is hard to explain at all, but the geophysicists like to think the core is a magnetic transformer of the Sun's field. The alternative explanation is the Earth is a homopolar generator, developing a magnetic field by virtue of the rotation of a charged body (the Earth). But this is all part of the Earth being round, so it is nothing but a distraction from the main point.
NASA fakery? Bring it on. Air bubbles? Those are water condensation droplets from the suit environmental control system. Air bubbles don't behave by traveling in a straight line. No water tank exercise is as optically clear as a spacewalk. You are straining at gnats.
You've run out of slurs against Masons. I have my criticisms of NASA, but I don't need bigotry to power them.
The atmosphere fades away into lower and lower pressure. Look it up. There is no hard barrier to zero pressure. In fact there is no zero pressure. It just gets very small. There is the near-Earth medium. There is the cislunar medium. There is the interplanetary medium. There is the extra-solar-system medium. And there is the interstellar medium. And probably the intergalactic medium. The particle density just keeps going smaller and smaller.
None of my points rest on authority. Magellan was around before NASA. Astronomers were around before NASA. Cartographers were around before NASA. All that NASA provided was manned space flight and photos from orbital altitude. You don't like NASA? Try Russia. They publish their scientific findings. Try airlines and shipping lines. They go all over the globe---and know it is a globe. People have visited and can still visit the South Pole. All this information existed before NASA, so give up that comfort blanket.
You show an interesting and essentially mysterious electrical circuit for the electric field of the Earth. So what? It doesn't prove the Earth is flat. And a charged Earth is consistent with what we know. You have no positive case for your claim of a flat Earth. Just questions originating from your ignorance.
The counter is NOT that the earth is a monopole, just a different configuration than you're expecting when thinking in terms of the globe model. You would need to think more in terms of an electromagnetic field.
No, air bubbles escaping from the craft and bubbling away, like it was filmed in a pool. It's tricky to find the videos because youtube suppresses those videos. Here's one I found (not the greatest sample I would use, but covers the bases and is short): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz5xNxMP5lA
The rest is just repeating again, that navigation is done treating the travel area as flat. Planes do not need to make adjustments for the globe, they set direction and altitude and can set an autopilot to hold that vector and will end up at the destination.
No, that doesn't prove "flatness" but that effect DOES require a second material to achieve that kind of capacitance, which the bible calls firmament.
This one is an hour long, but addresses every point you've made and more. https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/TheTop20ProofsEarthisNotaSpinningGlobe:b
I'm just not wanting to keep repeating, and the limits of text form preclude adequate explanation.
We already know what the terrestrial magnetic field is, and it has poles like all fields of its kind. No different configuration needed (and your diagram had nothing to do with magnetism).
This was a crummy video. The image was not clear and the supposed critical evidence was hard to distinguish. I've seen better, but the better versions show water droplets going away in a straight line, like it was filmed in outer space. I've seen the pool exercises. Lots of bubbles and murk in the way.
Planes set their direction per a spherical Earth, obtaining coordinates from the GPS system (orbiting around a spherical Earth) and inertial navigation. And the distances across the southern hemisphere are shorter than they would be on a disk map. There is no way a flat Earth works for navigation. Or for cartography---a point you keep ducking.
The Bible called it whatever it was translated it into, according to the understanding at the time. In the days of the Egyptians (of which Moses was educated as one), they supposed the existence of a firmament. It was a mistaken conception. There is no "firmament." There is outer space. It is also translated "heaven," which is closer to the truth. You have to decide in favor of truth over translation. God does not fool us with His creation. If you deny His creation, you are also denying Him.
If you have a crucial point of evidence, it can be stated in a sentence or two. It should not take an hour of wasted time to digest. I don't ask you to go study videos; I give you the information straight up because I understand it. The fact that you can't do this is a "tell" that you don't understand your own point of view.
P.S. I took a look at that hour-long video and it opened with absolute drivel based on total ignorance. I pity you that you could find it persuasive.