It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

Help ATS via PayPal:

# "Flat earth?" Who are these people and what is their purpose?

page: 8
11
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 07:06 PM

originally posted by: VanDenEviL

Since the maths proving earth is an oblate spheroid is sound, there is no need to question it.

What values is that math based on and what is calculated?

What values? The dimensions of the earth! Longitudinal and latitudinal diameter.

posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 07:06 PM

originally posted by: VanDenEviL

And really, with this 42 km difference, which is about 0.3 percent of the total, on that scale, it should pretty much be looking like a perfect sphere.

And in that pic, there is almost a 10 percent difference in length between the polar diameter line and the equatorial diameter line, which is by a factor 30 plus.......

LOL. No mate. Not even close. Try again.

posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 07:09 PM

looks flat to me no matter how many experiments I do with this thing guys.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 06:48 AM

originally posted by: ignorant_ape

FFS -You just lied about the dimmensions of MongolianPaellaFish`s image

What did I lie about? The diameters were given. Is there not a around 0.3 % percent difference between them? A mere 42 km?

Now look at the pic.

You really think a 0.3% difference will give that oblate appearance? You should see this is wrong at first glance, but go ahead, put a ruler next to them and see the difference.

On my screen the polar diameter is 7.9 cm. The equatorial dimaeter is 8.7 cm.

Is that a 0.3% difference?

You can keep saying that I am lying but you are just talking.

Correct me where I am wrong with something substantial instead of baseless accusations, why would you even assume that I would be lying instead of just being wrong about something?

edit on 24-9-2016 by VanDenEviL because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 06:49 AM

LOL. No mate. Not even close. Try again.

More talk.

What am I wrong about then? Correct me.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 06:50 AM

What values? The dimensions of the earth! Longitudinal and latitudinal diameter.

And how did they get those values?

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 06:51 AM
Oh my days, is this guy even for real? It's like he missed the last 200 years of scientific development.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:06 AM

I see, so you have no way to refute what I just pointed out to you "scientific" fellas.

Resorting to ridicule. You are the one looking stupid here.

Pretty pathetic behavior as a response to a post that was simply pointing out the facts.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:18 AM

originally posted by: VanDenEviL

I see, so you have no way to refute what I just pointed out to you "scientific" fellas.

You've been refuted dozens of times, you just can't seem to understand the basic concepts involved.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:24 AM

originally posted by: VanDenEviL

What values? The dimensions of the earth! Longitudinal and latitudinal diameter.

And how did they get those values?

They measured the planet.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:25 AM

Wth are you talking about? Nothing has been refuted. I was only told that I was lying and some other pathetic drivel. Where you get the "dozens of times" from is beyond me.

You obviously have no way to refute that in that pic you posted, the numbers don't match up up with the actual shape and dimension of the Earth in it.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:31 AM

sigh - REAL science is not done by holding a ruler up to your monitor

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:43 AM

That's complete BS.

Holding a ruler next to it is a perfectly valid method to show that the pic doesn't add up with the numbers it is supposed to represent.

Conclusion, either that pic has been tampered with or the diameter values are incorrect.

What a pathetic display you are offering. Nothing of substance.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 07:47 AM

Still waiting for you to tell me what I was lying about, or what I am wrong about exactly.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 08:15 AM

originally posted by: MongolianPaellaFish

originally posted by: VanDenEviL

What values? The dimensions of the earth! Longitudinal and latitudinal diameter.

And how did they get those values?

They measured the planet.

Yes, my point is that this math is based on the assumption that the Earth is a sphere, and it is calculated by using a reference point of which it is assumed that the sphere revolves around it.

Anyways, I originally responded to this comment,

Since the maths proving earth is an oblate spheroid is sound, there is no need to question it.

What MATH proves it is an OBLATE spheroid? The math used is based on the properties of a perfect circle.

edit on 24-9-2016 by VanDenEviL because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 08:19 AM

Where's the math to prove it's flat?

Every single flat earth "map" has obvious flaws. They all rely on the air travel times, which they get wrong.

So how about showing some evidence that the world is flat?

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 08:32 AM

So how about showing some evidence that the world is flat?

I wasn't trying to prove that the Earth is flat, sofar. What I did prove is that the "oblate Earth" pic that was posted does not show what it is supposed to show.

This has nothing to do with FE.

I also was questioning the claim that math shows it is an OBLATE spheroid. This also has nothing to do with FE.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 08:56 AM

originally posted by: VanDenEviL

So how about showing some evidence that the world is flat?

I wasn't trying to prove that the Earth is flat, sofar. What I did prove is that the "oblate Earth" pic that was posted does not show what it is supposed to show.
Because you can't.

This has nothing to do with FE.
I guess you're in the wrong thread then.

I also was questioning the claim that math shows it is an OBLATE spheroid. This also has nothing to do with FE.
You've done more than just that. To say otherwise would be untruthful. Anyone can read your replies and it will be obvious you're a "flat earther".

But again, you dodge the whole evidence request. Is that because there isn't any?
edit on 2492016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 09:06 AM

I guess you're in the wrong thread then.

Did I do anything to upset you, oh delicate flower?

I merely responded to others mentioning an oblate spheroid so take it up with them.

You've done more than just that. To say otherwise would be untruthful. Anyone can read your replies and it will be obvious you're a "flat earther".

You sound quite rabid. Like I just said, I didn't say Earth was flat and I wasn't trying to prove it sofar, so your demand for proof and evidence is totally uncalled for, regardless of what my views might be.

posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 09:13 AM

Right. I'm "rabid" lol.

I'm not the one who just dismisses everything because it doesn't fit with their belief that the world is flat. All the flat earthers prove is they can't understand science.

It's actually quite amusing watching the rediculous replies about how NASA is fake, how photos are fake, how we can't do this that or the other. And there's never any evidence to prove anything they claim.

top topics

11