It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Flat Earth Believers, I would like to hear your ideas.

page: 8
15
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

[Playing the devil's advocate here, don't shoot on me, I'm not a flatearther]

After watching this video I start to believe in the concave Earth aswell!



So it's apparently easy to make a surface seem convex or concave with a camera.




posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: TerminalVelocity

Either my first or second post showed using Istanbul Turkey the distance of 30 miles and with a picture that there was no curve . All the buildings over the 30 miles go up parallel to one another and the water is a straight line .In other words no curve .



posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1




Those don't look real to me .Looks like something NASA would put out and something you can see in a Hollywood movie if you prefer


Well the first video is from the ESA, and how do you think those hollywood movies get the footage like that...from space agencies so they are real.



.Lets bring it down to earth where we live and we have measuring tapes we can check to see if the earth is curved instead of being told it is . real prof .real place .with real pictures .in real time .


Why because you know we see the curvature of the Earth when we get high enough?

Well let's see...

You do understand that is was known as far back as Eratosthenes.


While living in Alexandria, Eratosthenes received some amazing correspondence from the city of Syene in southern Egypt. In particular, it said that, on the Summer Solstice,

the shadow of someone looking down a deep well would block the reflection of the Sun at noon.

In other words, the Sun would be directly overhead at this time, not a single degree to the South, North, East or West. And if you had a completely vertical object, it would cast absolutely no shadow.



But Eratosthenes knew that this wasn’t the case where he was, in Alexandria. Sure, the Sun came closer to being directly overhead at Noon on the Summer Solstice in Alexandria than at any other time during the year, but vertical objects still cast shadows.

And — like any good scientist — Eratosthenes did the experiment. By measuring the length of the shadow cast by a vertical stick during the solstice noon, he could figure out what angle the Sun made with the vertical direction at Alexandria.


scienceblogs.com...



posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mythkiller
a reply to: pfishy

I'm leaning towards the "convex" earth after watching this...





Wow...first time I learned of this "problem". Very...and I mean véry hard to accept as a fact.



posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

The hypothesis of a ball earth goes way back and yes the ships seemingly to disappear over the horizon was part of that at the time but they were either using a weak telescope at the time or just their eyes . It has more to do with what is known as the vanishing point and can be extended using more powerful telescopes so what seemed to vanish back in the day can be seen today . Now the guts to this ball earth lies not in some crazy calculations based on millions of miles with things travelling at thousands of miles a hour but on simple math of the curve of the earth over distance and looking at that .

The curve to the ball earth is like building 7 to the 911 deal . deal with the curve first and then we can start to look at other issues and things .



posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1




The hypothesis of a ball earth goes way back and yes the ships seemingly to disappear over the horizon was part of that at the time but they were either using a weak telescope at the time or just their eyes .


It's not a theory it is called science...you should try to learn about it someday.

As for the rest of your post...




posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Mastronaut

1.) that's a pretty awesome case coming from someone typing with a cracked one.

2.) my Canon has a fish eye lens setting. Maybe all cameras are built with that into it just in case someone decides to drop it from a balloon.



posted on Jul, 22 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   


A simple illustration of my belief.



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: the2ofusr1

using your " flat earth map " explain the direct flights :

perth > johannesberg [ 11 hour flight time - subsonic ]

source

or the volvo ocean race leg 5 :

Auckland - Itajaí

source

acording to your flat earth map - both feats are impossible

explain


Well If you paid nearly 2,500 euros for that flight from Perth to Johannesburg and crossed over land for any substantial time then it would prove that the world is flat, and it is closer to 12 hours non stop btw, half the rotation of the Earth which is spinning over 1000mph, and the plane is flying into that rotation going East to West.. According to Phage, planes aren't allowed to be in air for 6 hours at a time in case of engine failure, so this flight alone disproves his claim, and has qnyone made this flight and documented anyhthing or is it just listed? Ever hear of blackouts and rerouting, have to land in another area for an hour to refuel, anything of that sort?

So no it is not impossible if the world was flat, look at the U.N. flag and that is what flat earthers believe, a flight from Perth to johannesburg is plausible, but you would be flying over land most of the time.
edit on 23-7-2015 by iDope because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 02:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015

originally posted by: iDope
a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

All pilots are being told that they just land every six hours incase an engine blows out? That is as dumb as a deaf and blind mongoloid, How does that make sense to anyone? Think about it? There are 13 hour nonstop flights leaving everyday at all times. How would an engine be considered safe after 6 hours of if it is just going to take off again and may fail after 2 hours? They don't check every part of the turbine and ensure it is safe everytime it lands. I myself have been on an 8 hour straight flight over ocean and land, is it safer crashing into ocean cause they have life jackets? LOL, that is a lie that they are told, trust me. All North pole and South Pole are militarized and you cannot fly over them if you tried. Good luck proving any point you tried to make.


They don't land every 6 hours, they can't fly over water for more than 6 hours at a time.



If they cannot fly for 6 hours at a time over water how is there a straight shot flight from Perth Australia to Johannesburg South Africa that takes 12 hours? According to the flight map not once does it cross land the entire flight, going East to West. It does cost 2,500 Euros but still, it is listed, and is a nonstop flight.



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Space agencies have a much larger budget than any Hollywood flick, so why are space agencies footage considered real when they likley invented the technology to stage such fakes?



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: iDope

iDope, what's your take on day & night? Where are the sun and the moon positioned? Also, what's underneath the flat earth? How thick is it?



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 03:38 AM
link   
It would be so cool if the earth was flat.

Just imagine the money that could be saved on rocket fuel to launch satellites. Hell they could send them off the edge of the earth with balloons.

No..No.. scratch that. Even better. Just toss them off the side.

Set up rail tracks to the edge and we could launch Enterprise size ships. Soo cool.



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: iDope

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015

originally posted by: iDope
a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

All pilots are being told that they just land every six hours incase an engine blows out? That is as dumb as a deaf and blind mongoloid, How does that make sense to anyone? Think about it? There are 13 hour nonstop flights leaving everyday at all times. How would an engine be considered safe after 6 hours of if it is just going to take off again and may fail after 2 hours? They don't check every part of the turbine and ensure it is safe everytime it lands. I myself have been on an 8 hour straight flight over ocean and land, is it safer crashing into ocean cause they have life jackets? LOL, that is a lie that they are told, trust me. All North pole and South Pole are militarized and you cannot fly over them if you tried. Good luck proving any point you tried to make.


They don't land every 6 hours, they can't fly over water for more than 6 hours at a time.



If they cannot fly for 6 hours at a time over water how is there a straight shot flight from Perth Australia to Johannesburg South Africa that takes 12 hours? According to the flight map not once does it cross land the entire flight, going East to West. It does cost 2,500 Euros but still, it is listed, and is a nonstop flight.


If there is a straight flight from Perth to Jberg that doesn't fly over any land; the most obvious explanation would be the airline has found a way to avoid ETOPS regulation, possibly by using planes with more engines?



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 06:40 AM
link   
a reply to: MagnaCarta2015

There are also 10h 35m nonstop flights from San Francisco to Tokyo.



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: teslarocks

I was looking up simulations of seasonal cycles in antarctica and came across this,lol it looks a bit like a flat earth model to me.



can anyone find a decent simulation of day and night cycles in antarctica...I cant seem to find that explains it in simple terms oh looky I did find one

which one makes more sense?


all this spinning has me dizzy giving me motion sickness.
edit on 23-7-2015 by TWILITE22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
What about a domed earth model? Anyone have any thoughts about this?



posted on Jul, 23 2015 @ 06:23 PM
link   
a reply to: pfishy
This is the best evidence I can come up with for the FE 'theory'. I call it the Flatter's Triangle, using the three cities of Sydney, Santiago (Chile), and Los Angeles.

Using this randomly chosen online distance calculator www.distance.to... I find the distance between these cities to be:

Sydney to LA- 7501 miles

LA to Santiago- 5593 miles

Santiago to Sydney- 7055 miles.

Take a look at this map, presumably posted earlier as a potentially viable FE map- maps.bpl.org...

Anyone convinced by this?



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 02:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: angryhulk
a reply to: iDope

iDope, what's your take on day & night? Where are the sun and the moon positioned? Also, what's underneath the flat earth? How thick is it?


Well according to flat earth theory the sun is much closer to earth and much smaller than reported by space agencies. Both the sun and moon are about the same size and rotate above the Earth in a spiral motion. The moon and sun are alays at an equal distance from eachother, which explains why you can see a full moon in broad daylight. If the Earth was a globe it would be impossible to see the Moon full in broad daylight. There is only one pole and that is North, the South pole is just the opposite of the Noth yet it doesn't exist, only the North does. Science has proven the "poles" shift and differ over years so how can you trust a compass? Because it always points North!

What's beneath the Earth? I don't know and noone knows for sure whats beneath a globe Earth. Just recently they discovered crystald water beneath the Earth after a volcanoe erupted, which indicates there is water below our percieved surface. Not one scientist has been to the center of the Earth so noone knows what lies below a few hundred miles, it is all theory. And still the globular Earth theory has yet to be proven in any way that I can check for my self therefore it is not science and not replicatable.



posted on Jul, 24 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: pfishy
What about a domed earth model? Anyone have any thoughts about this?


Well a flat Earth would have to be domed Earth, there would have to be an enclosre in order for us not to be able to leave, and a projection of what we should believe would be set above us in order for us to have our gods and deities and time awareness. From what I have seen throughout history, the ancients knew alot about astronomy and our place in the universe, yet it wasnt until 500 years ago where it was proposed that the Earth was a globe, by Magellan whom 'proved: the Earth was round by sailing around it. There is no need to circumnavigate the Earth to prove it is a globe, you can get to each continent by boat on a flat Earth model just as well.




top topics



 
15
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join