The recent failed SpaceX Starship launch flushed out the "Flat Earth" retards in droves, making "FIRMAMENT" trend on Elon Musk's X.com. Is it a psyop targeting fuckwits? Yup. Check this graphic sowing the obvious #'d BOT ACCOUNTS. Each account tweeted random Flat Earth faggotry. INFORMATION WARFARE!
(media.greatawakening.win)
🧠 These people are stupid!
I’m agnostic on the flat-earth vs globe-Earth dialectic, I have no way of proving or disproving either hypothesis categorically using the scientific method. Further, I have seen compelling hypotheses for both scenarios. I’m not prepared to pick a side in this debate yet. I think there’s more evidence to be revealed. Flame at will 😂🔥
yeah. it's not like the greeks calculated the circumference of the earth to within 200 miles by using the movement of shadows in a well or anything... probly all just crap.
The Masons worship Pythagoras, Gnostic secret society philosopher & mathematician. He promoted the helio-centric model during the time of antiquity. The fact that this debate goes that far back & sexret societies Masons were involved in "the moon landing", I believe this is a RELIGIOUS battle iver our understanding of earth.
I chose the biblical truth. I chose to trust my God given senses.
Genesis 1:20: "“Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens.”
Oops, it's the atmosphere
Ah.. then all you need is a yardstick and a camera.
They're too triggered to even consider how that would work.
masons like math, so math=bad. they like tools too, better start living in a leanto built from braches.
While few people on this earth are equipped to acquire the "quality" of evidence that flat earthers inconsistently demand (personal observation with one's own physical senses has a greater "believable quality" than anything else that can be presented or learned), the flat earth theory doesn't even stand up to its own cross-scrutiny.
For example, flat earth often presents an entirely different visual/model to explain any single phenomenon. Day/night cycle? Here's one model. Seasons? Here's a totally different model. Eclipse? Jet streams? Anything happening in the southern hemisphere? Each scientific explanation has a different presentational model to demonstrate the phenomenon in flat earth theory. The moment you try to use the "incorrect" flat earth model to explain a different phenomenon that the model wasn't designed to explain, the flat earth theory immediately breaks. No "truthful observation" supports all other "truthful observations" through the flat earth perspective of inquiry.
There is no flat earth visual model that can simultaneously explain all of this planet's natural phenomenon at the same time.
The globe earth model doesn't have this weakness. Everything can be explained simultaneously, at the same time. Day/night, eclipses, jet streams, weather, climate, seasons, time zones, etc. Each observable phenomenon supports the truth of another. The supporting truths make it self-evident that the earth is indeed a globe.
In providing us tools to seek out and acquire knowledge, God didn't limit us to our 5 senses (see, hear, touch, feel, taste), he gave us a brain too. The scriptures are loaded with examples of how truths can be revealed/unlocked through ponderous thought and solemn prayer.
Add tides to the list
—Cosmologist George Ellis in Scientific American, "Thinking Globally, Acting Universally", October 1995
Coriolus effect.
Consider the following:
Good points. I'd speculate that quantum computing and ai could have solved these challenges many years ago. Just a thought.
Flat earth society was created by freemasons. Eric Dubay is a freemason. Samuel Rowbotham who wrote Zetetic Astronomy using the pseudonym Parallax was a freemason.
EDIT: I see you, clowns. Downvote me harder. 🤡
Get a telescope and a helicopter. Go to the shore of Lake Superior and point your telescope at the helicopter, and have the helicopter fly away in a straight line at a constant elevation.
If the Earth is flat, the helicopter will be visible forever no matter how far it goes. But that's not what happens. What happens is it disappears over the horizon. BECAUSE IT CURVES DOWN.
There, now you have a way of proving a hypothesis. Go get 'em tiger!
Haha, that's your convincing proof?
ever research how a very long bridge or other such infrastructure is built ? no earth curvature calculation used for vertical adjustments
Do you have any comprehension of the Earth's sheer scale compared to our puny megaprojects? The biggest would be smaller than a mote of dust on a billiard ball. The mote of dust doesn't need to worry about the ball's curvature.
what? either the curvature is real and needs to be accounted for or it's not real and doesn't.
11 Longest Bridges In The US Lake Pontchartrain Causeway - 23.83 miles Manchac Swamp Bridge - 23 miles Louisiana Airborne Memorial Bridge - 18.2 miles Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel - 17.6 miles Bonnet Carré Spillway Bridge - 11 miles Louisiana Highway 1 Bridge - 8.26 miles Jubilee Parkway - 12.87 miles San Mateo-Hayward Bridge - 11.27 miles Seven Mile Bridge - 6.7 miles General W.K. Wilson Jr. Bridge - 9.78 miles Norfolk Southern Lake Pontchartrain Bridge - 5.8 miles
a 20 mile bridge allegedly drops 267 feet assuming round earth is true. there is no other direction over this length of such a construction project (e.g., train track or bridge) that would be ignored as "dust". try again.
I'm not here to say round earth is wrong and flat earth is right. just pointing out that this is just one of the inexplicable issues
Incorrect. There are things in the air that refract/reflect light, thus at a certain point an object will no longer be visible. Foggy days are enough to prove this.
I'm challenging the horizon bit because I see this as a common argument against FE and knowing about how light/optics work removes the horizon argument.
For those who think I'm spewing bull, take a stroll through optical engineering land.
It won't just wink out of sight like there's fog. (Unless there's fog.) It will, from your point of view, slowly descend until you can only see the top, then it will disappear.
Explain how refraction can do that.
Here's an example of the problem we face in this argument: FEers simply dismiss any attempt to reason, usually using science that is bullshit - but it sounds good, and it gives them a chance to look like they know THE SECRETS. So it becomes useless to even try talking to them. That's why the ban hammer gets dropped.
You don't see it because you're inside it.
Here's another experiment, then. Fly from Brazil to Australia. The shortest route should be over the Arctic. See if that's where you go.
Are you listening to yourself my man?
I work on optical systems for the military, so I thought I'd weigh in with actual science, yet you've gone off on this tangent about how "I can't see it because I'm inside it." You're sounding rather hypocritical no?
But to address your point of an object not "winking out of sight"...if you're actually interested in learning...
Imagine looking into a body of water. If it's deep enough you won't be able to see the bottom. I assume you realize that you have refraction and sediments and particles ect ect. All true. It's also true that air is a fluid, just not one that's dense enough to hold sediments, yet it still holds things that cause light to deflect. It's not just refraction friend, but also reflection, absorption, scattering, and a few more things.
Both camera lenses and your eyes work by taking in light and they see the light that's reflected off of objects. Let's starting putting this all together aight? If the light bouncing off of an object is reflected, refracted, absorbed, scattered, and more by the time it reaches your lens, it will become more difficult to see. The more light emitted the more clear the image, hence the further the light of an object has to travel through a medium(air, glass, water, ect) the less likely you are to be able to make out what it is clearly...which is why the military goes with 'detect' and 'identify' when designing optical systems...but maybe that's too far off topic.
Thus, going back to address your heli example, no, it would not be visible forever in that scenario if the Earth is flat. Assuming the Earth is flat in your heli example, the heli would obviously get increasingly smaller as it departs, which obviously makes it more difficult to see. However, the amount of materials in the air that can interfere with light's travel would also increase, so you would also see the heli get fuzzier until it 'disappears'.
And if for some reason, none of that rings as true for you, perhaps you would consider this google maps link: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/28.190254,-80.5950473/28.4522586,-80.5566903/@28.3177039,-80.5401822,11.5z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0?entry=ttu
From this beach you can see Canaveral's launch buildings on most days in most reasonable conditions. It's 16 miles away. According to ChatGPT, the calculation of the average person standing with their feet in the ocean should only be able to see roughly 2.88 miles before considering atmospheric conditions....but nah of course, reject the evidence of our eyes and all that 1984 shit
If you're on Lake Superior, why not just use a boat? Then just after it drops out of view, have it launch a flare, so the "perspective" folks can finally have some.
Sounds fine to me. I suppose I chose helicopter because it's faster and would shut them up sooner.
From my perspective, I'm hoping you disappear.
Rhumb Lines and Great Circle Routes
Spend $500 on parts from Amazon. You can verify for yourself that the earth is round. Easy peasy, all done.
You can do it with a broomstick and a piece of string