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 theory?

page: 22
14
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: LolliKum

So you are refusing to produce the flat Earth map. Like I said before, you are not an actual believer, just here to troll and argue.


Its impossible to make an accurate map of the globe on a flat surface. The distances won't add up or the shape of the land mass will be different. I have no doubt he knows this and has been trolling people. You coild make the arctic the center for example. Problem is flights out of australia would become longer than the fuel they can store. A flight from day Australia to peru would be days in the air.

That's exactly the trap I had planned. That is why they won't answer. They don't actually believe in FE, just want to argue.



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Is there anything wrong with the location of continents on this map?




posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: LolliKum
a reply to: wmd_2008


. . . Moon appears the other way up in the Southern Hemisphere . . .
This is the sort of silliness that all die hard sphere believers engage in, they imagine because you can explain an observed thing through a sphere, that it is exclusive to a sphere.
This is totally wrong, anything that can be explained through a spherical model of the earth can also be explained on the flat earth model as has been done for thousands of years.
There is no reason whatsoever that you cannot explain the exact same phenomenon as described in your post concerning the Moon using the flat earth.
Because you can explain it on a sphere does not automatically exclude the ability to explain it on the plane.
Anyway, concerning the apparent size of the Sun, I posted two videos on this thread showing the sun getting smaller close to the horizon. I guess I need to post those again for those who missed them.

and


So you avoid showing any proof that the Moon should reverse on the flat Earth if viewed from North or South of the Equator why am I NOT surprised by that.

If you measure the size of the Sun/Moon at the horizon highest point then horizon again they are exactly the same size on a camera sensor.



Also Eric Dubay is as dumb as they come



posted on Aug, 27 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: LolliKum
a reply to: wmd_2008



. . . I think the video is the one by D Marble and it was him in the west of USA (sun overhead) talking to someone in Yorkshire England and Australia . . .
That could be what it is talking about in the page I found about England and Western Australia, with the sun setting in the one and rising in the other.
Anyway, there was another video, though, that I was thinking of, probably by Globebusters, where they were talking about New Zealand and England without any mention of anyone in the US. I need to try to find that just by looking at some of them in my history and listen for a minute or two of them talking about it in a 2 or 3 hour long video.


Here you go right click on image for bigger view and you can see the time and date on the bottom




New Zealand and England in DAYLIGHT.
edit on 27-8-2018 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr


. . . hope people don't realize how stupid the idea actually is.
I don't think so. Let me ask you a question. Do you think people are stupid?
I mean, for thousands of years, people thought the earth was flat.
Do you think that all those people thought so because they were stupid?
I am getting criticized by one poster on this thread for getting my information from YT videos rather than from going outside and looking for myself.
Well, people back in older times were not watching movies on HBO in their houses or watching YT videos on computers, so they were doing things like sitting around on their roofs cooling off at night looking at the Moon and the Stars.
So there was no deficit of people going out and looking up, but still, they believed the earth was flat and that the Sun and the Moon were flat discs.
These were people who understood the positions of things in the heavens and cycles of movements better than we do today with all our fancy telescopes and technology.
Anyway, as to the specifics of your post, no, you do not have a true "setting" of the Sun on a plane earth, the Sun does not actually go below the earth, it is always above the plane but just leaves our range of observable space, whether it is mountains or hills or just the atmosphere full of moisture dispersing the light coming from it across longs distances of open air that ultimately obstructs it completely.
As to your statement or claim that "Moon phases can only be explained if the Earth is round", these people in the past who I do not consider as being stupid, they explained moon phases without having to interject a round Earth.
One explanation is that the Moon is actually a disc. This is what a lot of the ancients believed about both the Sun and the Moon. What some thought was that the Sun was not the actual source of light but that light came from beyond the Sun and was projected onto the disc that we see in the sky.
So, you end up with a semi-transparent disk with two light sources, on beaming onto the back of the Sun disc, and another bean shining onto the back side of the Moon. What caused the eclipses was two dark discs that also revolved over the Earth and would periodically go into the space behind the Sun and Moon discs and block the light projection coming from behind, which were like direct energy from Gods, where you had a God of the Sun and a God of the Moon.
Anyway, as to what I was saying before in an earlier post regarding my creating a YT channel for flat earth stuff, I did do that. I was using it before for posting combat videos from a combat group I belonged to in Second Life but is now defunct.
Here is a video I made that I just copied from a very long Globebusters video to isolate to the section where they were talking about how eclipses are figured out, and it is not by using a sphere Earth model but by looking at the cycles figured out in ancient times of those two dark discs.

edit on 2018828 by LolliKum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: LolliKum

No, it has nothing to do with internet censorship, it has to do with ignorance.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr


In order for flat earth to exist gravity cannot exist. And well we know it does or when we drop things it wouldn't hit the floor. We have proven the connection to mass and gravity in the lab. In order for the flat earth to be true every aspect of physics would have to be wrong and we know through experimentation thats just not true physics is describing reality.
This sounds very pretty and I am sure reading claims like this warms the hearts of desperate Sphere believers, but there is no substance to it.
The reality, sorry, is that there is no gravity and it is proven by science that there is no gravity.
The experiment is to build a vacuum chamber and see how fast things fall.
The myth is that if you were in a vacuum, and you had a feather and a hammer, and you let go of them at the same time, they would both hit the floor at the same time.
The problem for gravity believers is that objects do not fall at the same rate once you remove air resistance. All objects fall at their own rate according to the material they are made of regardless of the mythical other substance known as Mass.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:47 AM
link   
a reply to: LolliKum

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!?!!? There are alot of videos you can watch showing this.

edit on 28/8/2018 by Badams because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:48 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008


So you avoid showing any proof that the Moon should reverse on the flat Earth if viewed from North or South of the Equator why am I NOT surprised by that
There is nothing to show. You tell me, how would the explanation be any different from a spherical model to a flat model?


If you measure the size of the Sun/Moon at the horizon highest point then horizon again they are exactly the same size on a camera sensor.
The video you posted is a fail from the get go.
Sorry, but I had to turn it off at 50 seconds into it.
The guy says, of course the Sun will get smaller by being further away.
Well, he just proved Flat Earth right there.
The Spherical Earth Theory says the Sun is 93 Million miles away, so how would a few miles to allow for rotation of the sphere make any difference whatsoever?
edit on 2018828 by LolliKum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: wmd_2008


New Zealand and England in DAYLIGHT.
I was not questioning the ability of those two people in that scenario to both see the Sun at the same time.
What I was claiming is that according to the globe, if you believed it was an accurate representation of the Earth in real life, then there is a problem with those two and what they were seeing because the Globe says, no, they cannot because they are on the wrong side of the globe to be able to.
btw: I started looking for the video that explains this, I went back through my YT History to where I first started watching any FE videos. Apparently I watched a video on cut marks on stones in the Great Pyramid in Egypt and then YT gave me the suggestion for Globebusters, that was in the end part of March. Anyway, the point is I have a lot of those videos in my history of watching but I intend to look through all the ones I already watched to see if I can find it because it is pretty startling and a lot of people know about it and they have no explanation.
edit on 2018828 by LolliKum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Badams
a reply to: LolliKum

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!?!?!!? There are alot of videos you can watch showing this.



LMAO!!

So frickin hilarious




posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 12:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

I hope you're not about to tell me its CGI...



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Badams

I wasn't about to say anything... but since you asked...

I'll just repeat what I say in all of these threads... Flat Earthers are morons

Not that it isn't obvious anyways




posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

oh jeez, you had me all primed for some arguing then! It dumbfounds me that its even a thing this day and age. As someone who loves space, astronomy and physics, it really grinds my gears.



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Badams

And I am in the same boat... unfortunately they usually refuse to talk to me after a while...

Im on both of the Flat earthers no talk list here...

Quite ok though... I can still laugh along!

Flat earth is the door to idiocracy becoming reality... I only hope they're too dumb to breed




posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Badams




. . . alot of videos you can watch showing this.
Oh?
I see one. Well, I know it takes an incredible amount of horsepower to pump out a vacuum, that is one thing, and the other is that there are not a lot of chambers in existence and I am sure, none like this one in the video.
All I can say is, Isn't it peculiar that instead of a hammer, they dropped a plastic bowling ball?
Like I was saying before, and I am not backing down from it, things fall according to their material that they are made of.
My guess is that they cherry picked the bowling ball because it has the same electromagnetic attraction component as the feathers.
If you think about it for even one minute, you realize this video is completely insane.
They probably spent thousands of Dollars to do this, and why did they not have 10 or 15 different things dropped all at once with all the time and money spent to make this?
Well, the explanation is they cherry picked two objects they knew ahead of time had the came electromagnetic attraction coefficient, plastic and the feathers.
edit on 2018828 by LolliKum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Badams

And a grade 2 science education to boot




posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:23 AM
link   
a reply to: LolliKum
Would you prefer a coin?


Okay, I'll take your bait, lets think about this problem a little differently.

Do you agree with me that in a vacuum there is a absence oxygen?



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 01:50 AM
link   
a reply to: LolliKum
Sooo....we cannot agree that a vacuum is a absence of oxygen?? (amoungst other things)
edit on 28/8/2018 by Badams because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2018 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: LadyButterfly


I'm trying to post a video can you help me?

Let me know what the youtube vid is and I will post it up for you if you like.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join