Guy explains flat Earth theory convincingly and how round earth proof aren't absolute

originally posted by: NNN87

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: berenike

According to flat earth guys, the edge is in Antarctica.

Yes, that implies that going round the Antarctic would take longer than going round the Equator. Another proof that flat Earth is wrong.

There was a lot of expeditions to the south in the early 1820, where some of the explorers (not sure if it was James cook, but ill get back to u on that) mention that it took them nearly 3 years and a number around 160, 000 km to circum navigate the ice wall in Antarctica. Like i said ill get back on the proper details.

No ( ToJames Cook that is):
First Voyage
Second Voyage
Third Voyage

I was required to learn the history of James Cook off heart in Primary School.

a reply to: NNN87

Research on Sir James Clark Ross - to name him correctly - does indeed lead one to the rather well-known Ross Ice Shelf.

My simple research didn't throw up too much about it being the edge of a Flat Earth, though. Or explain if there's enough of it to go round the entire (flat) world.

Collapsing ice shelves seem to be a bit of a problem lately, but I can't find any warnings telling people to beware of falling off the edge of the world. Never mind, I'll stay inland and see if that will stop me worrying about it.

originally posted by: berenike
a reply to: NNN87

Research on Sir James Clark Ross - to name him correctly - does indeed lead one to the rather well-known Ross Ice Shelf.

My simple research didn't throw up too much about it being the edge of a Flat Earth, though. Or explain if there's enough of it to go round the entire (flat) world.

Collapsing ice shelves seem to be a bit of a problem lately, but I can't find any warnings telling people to beware of falling off the edge of the world. Never mind, I'll stay inland and see if that will stop me worrying about it.

That's what i find intriguing my self, lets assume the world is flat, there doesn't have to be an edge. If no one ever mentions one, also none of the explorers ever saw an edge so the only conclusion i can possibly come up with is that the land just keeps going, more to discover.

Come to think of it, the only reason for anyone to create a globe model, is to make us seem insignificant and small in the vacuum of space. No where to go kind of mentality. Keep us centralised and constantly side tracked, just a thought though.

Oh almost forgot, i watched a documentary on the north poll last year (ill try and remember the name) but there is a glacier wall there also, and the tour guide said only people with special permission are aloud to go over. Just a side

a reply to: NNN87

I'd like a source on that claim. Not that I don't believe it, it's just that I'd like to see the original claim to evaluate the context and variables. Thanks!

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: NNN87

I'd like a source on that claim. Not that I don't believe it, it's just that I'd like to see the original claim to evaluate the context and variables. Thanks!

Sorry not sure to what claim you are referring to? If it's not to much trouble may you please quote my claim on a claim

a reply to: NNN87

i shall take a wild stab in the darrk - and predict that the claim he wishes you to cite oare :

1 - the identity of the alledged expedition leader [ hint - cook was very dead in 1820 ]

2 - citations for the 160 ooo km voyage log [ bonus for explauning how they provisioned this trip in 1820 ]

3 - a explaination of where the " ice wall " went [ was it moved to westeros ? ]

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: NNN87

i shall take a wild stab in the darrk - and predict that the claim he wishes you to cite oare :

1 - the identity of the alledged expedition leader [ hint - cook was very dead in 1820 ]

2 - citations for the 160 ooo km voyage log [ bonus for explauning how they provisioned this trip in 1820 ]

3 - a explaination of where the " ice wall " went [ was it moved to westeros ? ]

But i already did that, correct me if i am wrong the ice shelf is called, Ross Ice Shelf, there an Larsen A ice Shelf somethings along those lines, there many with different names, they seem to hug the coast of Antarctica, i haven't been there nor am i allowed, so that's as far as i know, if could that would be sweet.

originally posted by: PoetryInMotion
Yes this is true, so let me move the goalposts and apply this concept to the sun.

The distance to the sun is about 150 Million km.

Yet from our perspective the sun's angular size changes dramatically during the day.

DRAMATICALLY Really any REAL proof of that

The net and more importantly youtube is awash with Flat Earth BS many are obvious bible thumpers so they are scientifically challenge from the start then you have people with a really POOR understanding of science and what they see.

The main problem is the crazy lengths they go to to justify their claims so for instance they say the Earth is NOT rotating because they can't feel it

The argument they use the Earth is approx 24,000 miles in circumference at the Equator and rotates once in 24 hours so speed at the Equator is approx 1000 miles per hour yet you don't feel you are moving. Well the Earth rotates at an amazing 0.00069444444 rotations per minute they are in an enclosed environment (the atmosphere) they have been held to the surface by gravity since birth. Lets look at an example you are in a plane on the runway before take off you are stationary you feel normal, the plane accelerates to take of speed you feel the movement it banks you feel the movement it reaches cruising altitude and speed does it feel like you are doing 500-600 mph ? .

When Concorde was in service and flying at Mach 2 (1350 mph) passengers were served meals drinks like a normal aircraft did it feel like they were doing 1350 mph NO.

There is a video on youtube from a claimed engineer saying that a plane could not land on a North/South facing runway because of the Earths rotation he just ignores gravity.

They ignore ships on the horizon disappearing from the Hull up using BS about perspective look through binoculars or a telescope it still disappears from the hull up.

They also claim every pic/video take from space is CGI, Satellites are Balloons (they are the balloons) they seem to ignore that from the Southern Hemisphere the Moon / Constellations are the opposite way up from the North that couldn't happen on a flat Earth.

If these people had to control their breathing by thinking about it they would be dead,

a reply to: NNN87



Top Gear (Clarkson & May ) DROVE a car to the North Pole.



Here save up and visit Antarctica

Antarctica Tours

a reply to: swanne

Hey there. In regards to your shadow on moon during eclipse comment... take a look at this picture, which i took a month ago now, find it fitting here to show that a non spherical shape with a triangle base will always emit a shadow that is a sphere.

a reply to: Bombholder081888

I see not any pictures?...

a reply to: swanne

Ok a more pro FE thread, for the record I am a roundy with an open mind to FE/fractal/etc, came across FE Martin Liedtke through the mudflood/reset/PDP ( petrie dish phenom ), did not throw throw the baby out with bath water and have learnt much, because of his FE choice many waver away from his history/herstory/mystory data and incredible digging n research, many vids he does do not touch FE but give exlent data, like 1720-1820-1920-2020 hundred year bouts >



Anyways what peoples feelings and open mindedness allowed moi to learn, maybe not FE but much other amazing to me unknown material from the past.

a reply to: MuonToGluon

a reply to: TerryDon79

there are sooo many things that question round earth. forget for a moment that its flat or round. flight paths in the southern hemisphere ONLY work on the USGS flat earth map. whats the explanation for that? there are many others that make people question mainstream stories. even archeologists cant fully agree on when ancient structures were built or who built them or whether or not theres water erosion on the sphinx. at the very least i think its healthy to at least question some of the things that dont make sense.

everyone always jumps to dumb arguments for trying to put down people arguing the earth is flat. like what they can see in space but if you actually look at the REAL images of zooming into stars they look odd. take a look at these


nothing wrong with questioning it. even Admiral Byrd the last explorer of modern times explained that there was land BEYOND the Antarctic ice which was NOT frozen and full of resources.

THAT and another point i will make are two VERY good motives for keeping the big secret.

1, access to untapped endless resources would keep us controlled here with price gouging and control in general.

2, if there is more land out there then that would mean that keeping us here and keeping the land for certain people would make sense. why do you think the powers that be are OK with destroying what we have here...

that doesnt prove a thing but it is a good argument... as are many others.

i would indulge the discussion further on a point to point debate. but please i dont want to hear things like "well if i look up there and the moon and mars "looks" round that just HAS to mean that this is round too!"... that doesnt prove anything. NONE of whats up there compares to whats here. no water, no life, no atmosphere. so why should the shape BY DEFAULT automatically prove it to you. you are only basing it off of information an entity created by NAZI scientists told you.