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: 82
14
<< 79  80  81    83  84  85 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 01:58 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

originally posted by: turbonium1
The irony is that a belief in Earth as a ball, flying through space, is considered factual, yet those who don't believe it deserve to be scorned, insulted, and belittled, for simply having a different opinion, like any other issue has different viewpoints.





It's okay if you believe aliens are visiting Earth, abducting humans to cross-breed with aliens, to make hybrids, or whatever else, while there is not a shred of proof that aliens even exist, let alone anything else proven, for that matter, and no aliens appear, outside of those who have claimed to see, or claimed to be abducted by, said aliens...



Not a shred of proof exists, at all. Claims of aliens are not evidence of aliens. Nor is anything else proof of aliens, either.





But nobody mocks, or insults them for believing in aliens. Only one issue deserves scorn, and insults - a belief in Earth not being a ball flying through space, who dares to question this as not true is some sort of nut case, or a complete fool, obviously!





Gravity is a 'proven' force, so stop asking for proof of it, okay??





look man... well known and proven physics completely breaks down with your flat earth

These things like aliens or bigfoot... the frickin loch ness monster... they don't destroy a proven science

Not to mention obvious things you can see with your eyes... like meteors... or... stars.... ye know?

Flat earth is ridiculous... and to tell you the truth, aliens are more believable

So theres your irony...


edit on 30-3-2019 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 03:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1




Tell me exactly why you claim trig does not work....if you want a proper reply..

I did. Remember?



We cannot see objects very far away, but when they first can be seen, they appear to be lower in the horizon..
Unless they are overhead. How far away is the Sun, again? The dome?


Are you suggesting that everyone on Earth should see the Sun, all the time, on a flat Earth?

Or perhaps, you suggest the Sun should be directly overhead, all the time, when it appears in daylight?

How far away is the Sun, and how far away is the dome? Only rough calculations are done by non-NASA sources, which estimate the Sun is about 6000 miles from Earth, similar in distance to all stars, and 'planets', and the moon, as well.

The dome, or firmament, is not so well known for distance, except we know it is higher than the Sun, stars, et al.

A model of Earth as a flat plane shows why it works out so perfectly on Earth, far better than one could try to explain in words alone. It can be explained in words, but it's better to visualize it, to see how all the parts are integrated, in one, single flat Earth.

As most of the round Earth side, you seem to assume that the flat Earth would be so small, that the Sun would cast the whole world in sunlight, at the same time!!

What do you think the surface area of the flat Earth would really be?

An area that is so immense, there is nothing to even compare in scale, or scope, or size...we have nothing even close to match it, obviously.


And you also think the Sun is over 100 times larger than the Earth, and is 93 million miles away from Earth, too...


If it's over 100 times larger than Earth, why could flimsy clouds be able to block the Sun out, so easily? Because the Sun is small, and close, to the Earth, that's why clouds can block it out so easily.


Why would an immense Sun, far from Earth, get blocked out by little wisps of a cloud? As if.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 03:48 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1


Are you suggesting that everyone on Earth should see the Sun, all the time, on a flat Earth?
I have no idea how the sky should work on a flat Earth. It makes no sense to me.


How far away is the Sun, and how far away is the dome? Only rough calculations are done by non-NASA sources, which estimate the Sun is about 6000 miles from Earth, similar in distance to all stars, and 'planets', and the moon, as well.
Awesome. So, Polaris is 6,000 miles above the center of the flat Earth? Can you draw a picture demonstrating how that makes one's latitude (of which each degree is about 69 miles apart) correspond to the elevation of Polaris above the horizon? While you're at it, can you explain how Crux does sort of the same thing, but in the southern hemisphere?

Oh wait. I forgot. The Earth is variable. Lines of latitude are variable. Doesn't that make navigation problematic? Even with GPS satellites, which of course, don't exist?
edit on 3/30/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 04:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: turbonium1

originally posted by: turbonium1
The irony is that a belief in Earth as a ball, flying through space, is considered factual, yet those who don't believe it deserve to be scorned, insulted, and belittled, for simply having a different opinion, like any other issue has different viewpoints.





It's okay if you believe aliens are visiting Earth, abducting humans to cross-breed with aliens, to make hybrids, or whatever else, while there is not a shred of proof that aliens even exist, let alone anything else proven, for that matter, and no aliens appear, outside of those who have claimed to see, or claimed to be abducted by, said aliens...



Not a shred of proof exists, at all. Claims of aliens are not evidence of aliens. Nor is anything else proof of aliens, either.





But nobody mocks, or insults them for believing in aliens. Only one issue deserves scorn, and insults - a belief in Earth not being a ball flying through space, who dares to question this as not true is some sort of nut case, or a complete fool, obviously!





Gravity is a 'proven' force, so stop asking for proof of it, okay??





look man... well known and proven physics completely breaks down with your flat earth

These things like aliens or bigfoot... the frickin loch ness monster... they don't destroy a proven science

Not to mention obvious things you can see with your eyes... like meteors... or... stars.... ye know?

Flat earth is ridiculous... and to tell you the truth, aliens are more believable

So theres your irony...



Aliens are more believable to some of you, which is, as I said, truly ironic.

What makes aliens more believable than believing the Earth is not really a big ball, zipping through space, then?


What is the proven science of Earth being a ball, flying through space?

It all started when 'science' held up 'proof' of Earth being a ball - right?

Right. They pointed out that ships go over Earth's 'curvature', that's why we couldn't see them past that point in the oceans!!

When we used magnification, later on, the ships were visible, once again! What about the 'curvature', that ships supposedly had all sailed over?

'Science' ignored it. And still do. Sometimes, they even claim it is true, which is even more laughable.


That is not science, in any way. It is the opposite of science. They lied, instead of telling the truth, to us. And they KEPT that lie going for centuries, which is sick, and evil, because it shows they have deliberately deceived us for many centuries, for an ultimate goal - to remove God, and remove creation, and then, to replace it with their god - which is called 'science'.


What is certain to see, if you choose to see it, was how 'science' lied to us, and kept lying to us, about ships going over 'curvature' of Earth. The ships did not vanish, and did not go over 'curvature', and that is an absolute fact. It is proven beyond a doubt.

Why would anyone not see they lied to us, for centuries, because they wanted us to believe the Earth was round, and to make up a lie is all they needed to do, for us to buy it?


You cannot excuse this as a simple mistake, because they KEPT this lie going for centuries afterward. That is purely insidious, and sinister, without a doubt.


'Proven science', right?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 04:52 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

Your babbling is even more discombobulated than usual

What does your stupid rant have to do with the article below?



Flat Earth Follies: Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly!

flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com...


So that's a constant VERY SLOW PITCH rate of 0.00201° per second or just 0.12° per minute.

But does the pilot actually has to keep pitching forward?

No. Again, you have to understand how aircraft work.

Planes control pitch using a control surface called the Elevator (usually on the trailing edge of the Horizontal Stabilizer)

The Elevator does not directly control the Pitch of the Airplane - it controls the RATE OF PITCH.

I think that Flat Earthers don't understand this concept.

To maintain level flight the pilot must find BOTH the elevator trim and power setting which maintains a constant altitude - they mostly use the Vertical Speed indicator to make fine adjustments to elevator trim to find the constant pitch rate that keeps Vertical Speed near zero and then makes POWER SETTING adjustments as needed to hold that Vertical Speed with a fairly constant airspeed. If you want a higher airspeed you need to both increase power AND adjust the elevator trim so the pitch rate matches OR ELSE YOU WILL START CLIMBING.

This is a fact, I have personally flown small planes and they teach you about power control pretty much from Day #1. You climb & descent mostly by changing the power setting (which changes when you make other configuration changes such as increasing flaps).

Now, how is a pilot supposed to tell that a TINY fraction of the elevator trim has to do with the curvature rate as opposed to all of the other forces acting on the airplane? They couldn't possibly.

A curved gravity equipotential presents ABSOLUTELY ZERO issues for an airplane in flight.

So YES, the PLANE is (technically) constantly pitching forward as it flies the curvature of the Earth. But it doesn't feel like pitch because DOWN is changing at the same time and it's an incredibly slight rate of pitch overwhelmed by other dynamic forces acting on the aircraft.


Please point out one false fact from, “Flat Earth Follies: Planes would have to constantly pitch down to fly“



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



an object has more mass and density than air, so the object will fall through air, until it contacts a denser surface, like the Earth's surface, or the floor of a building.


Then what keeps earths air from floating away?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:02 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



If there was a force pulling objects to the Earth's surface, why would we be able to stay 35 floors above the Earth, in a building? Wouldn't the force pull us to the ground?


Your are a loon. Gravity keeps you pulled to the floor. If the floor is weak, then you are pulled through the floor. Using your logic, a person should be able to walk out on a floor made out of 1/16” thick sheet of lead as long as the total weight of the lead sheet is more than the person. That is not the case.

Is it false lead is more dense than a person? Is it false a floor made out of 1/16” lead can be big enough in square feet to weigh more than a person? Yet, I would say a person walking out on a floor made of 1/16” thick sheet of lead would tear through the lead sheet.
edit on 30-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



A bird flies above Earth without any resistance from the most powerful, omnipotent force in the universe, which is 'pulling' all objects to the Earth's surface?? Are you serious? That's a complete joke!


Then why can’t a person fly by flapping their arms?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:09 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



When you look down a road, what do the light/electrical posts appear like, which are beside the road, further and further away from you?


You do understand when you pass south of the equator, Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon. Then Polaris completely disappears below the horizon. How does the highest point in the night sky for flat earth disappear below the horizon when you pass south of the equator?

Wtf? What does your rant have to do with the below?

“Why did ancient sailors have to rely on a completely different set of constellations and stars for navigation in the Southern Hemisphere because the north star and many northern constellations are not visible once you cross south of the equator. And the Earth’s South Pole has a different set of constellations and stars circling what is considered the South Pole Star vs the very different stars and constellations that circle polars. You are blatantly ignoring the different stars and constellations that are different between the north and south Hemispheres. And the different stars and constellations for the southern and northern Hemispheres that circle to different points in the night sky.

Are you just going to keep blatantly lying?

And exactly why is the sun more overhead in the summer in the northern Hemisphere and the sun is simultaneously lower to the horizon In the Southern Hemisphere lets say at noon on June 25th?

It’s sad to see you blatantly lie and ignore reality......
edit on 30-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

edit on 30-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: turbonium1


Are you suggesting that everyone on Earth should see the Sun, all the time, on a flat Earth?
I have no idea how the sky should work on a flat Earth. It makes no sense to me.


How far away is the Sun, and how far away is the dome? Only rough calculations are done by non-NASA sources, which estimate the Sun is about 6000 miles from Earth, similar in distance to all stars, and 'planets', and the moon, as well.
Awesome. So, Polaris is 6,000 miles above the center of the flat Earth? Can you draw a picture demonstrating how that makes one's latitude (of which each degree is about 69 miles apart) correspond to the elevation of Polaris above the horizon? While you're at it, can you explain how Crux does sort of the same thing, but in the southern hemisphere?

Oh wait. I forgot. The Earth is variable. Lines of latitude are variable. Doesn't that make navigation problematic? Even with GPS satellites, which of course, don't exist?


Ships navigated the Earth long before any lines of latitude or longitude were drawn on maps, sorry to trash your whole argument with the facts, yet again.


You also have an argument about how Polaris corresponds to latitude, as if it's an established fact. How do you even know if your claim is really true, in the first place? No idea, right?

What proves that claim is true, anyway? Don't ask me why the elevation of Polaris in the horizon matches to latitude lines, when you haven't shown valid proof of that claim, to begin with!


Is this claim like the claim about ships vanishing over 'curvature', or is it not another grotesque lie, used to support their falsehoods, for many centuries?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:23 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



Ships navigated the Earth long before any lines of latitude or longitude were drawn on maps, sorry to trash your whole argument with the facts, yet again.


And again

You do not understand when you pass south of the equator, Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon. Then Polaris completely disappears below the horizon. How does the highest point in the night sky for flat earth disappear below the horizon when you pass south of the equator?

Wtf? What does your rant have to do with the below?

“Why did ancient sailors have to rely on a completely different set of constellations and stars for navigation in the Southern Hemisphere because the north star and many northern constellations are not visible once you cross south of the equator. And the Earth’s South Pole has a different set of constellations and stars circling what is considered the South Pole Star vs the very different stars and constellations that circle polars. You are blatantly ignoring the different stars and constellations that are different between the north and south Hemispheres. And the different stars and constellations for the southern and northern Hemispheres that circle to different points in the night sky.

Are you just going to keep blatantly lying?

And exactly why is the sun more overhead in the summer in the northern Hemisphere and the sun is simultaneously lower to the horizon In the Southern Hemisphere lets say at noon on June 25th?

It’s sad to see you blatantly lie and ignore reality......
edit on 30-3-2019 by neutronflux because: Fixed



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:40 AM
link   
when our resident troll advances the " arguement " that :

we cannot measure the elevation of polaris - and determine that each degree of latitude = 111km apart .

ts time to give up -



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1



When you look down a road, what do the light/electrical posts appear like, which are beside the road, further and further away from you?


You do understand when you pass south of the equator, Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon. Then Polaris completely disappears below the horizon. How does the highest point in the night sky for flat earth disappear below the horizon when you pass south of the equator?


And exactly why is the sun more overhead in the summer in the northern Hemisphere and the sun is simultaneously lower to the horizon In the Southern Hemisphere lets say at noon on June 25th?



I've already explained this to you, but it's obviously not getting through to you, yet..


First of all, you don't understand the Earth's vast size, which is the reason we cannot see everything above Earth in any one position of the surface. Same as we cannot see the Sun everywhere on Earth at the same time, either.

A single star is only visible at certain points on Earth, like Polaris, for example. It is seen only in northern regions of Earth, because it is always directly north, above the Earth. Polaris isn't seen all over the Earth, because the surface of Earth is far too large to see all of the stars in any given position, on the surface.

If Polaris could be seen anywhere on Earth, including in the south, that would mean Earth is much smaller than it actually is, and the Sun would always shine down on us, all the time, over the entire Earth. Endless daylight, without any darkness of the night sky. Not a good thing, indeed. Night separates day, for a very good reason.


Anyway, you must understand it is the vast size of Earth which prevents us from seeing all the stars, etc. at one point below. So now you know



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
when our resident troll advances the " arguement " that :

we cannot measure the elevation of polaris - and determine that each degree of latitude = 111km apart .

ts time to give up -





It's time to give up asking for proof of your claims, that's for sure.


If we can measure the elevation of Polaris, and determine the latitude, show me the measurements, at least, since you're the one who keeps on claiming it.

Support your own claims, for once.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1


....you don't understand the Earth's vast size,...


Just how 'vast' is the Earth?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1



A single star is only visible at certain points on Earth, like Polaris, for example. It is seen only in northern regions of Earth, because it is always directly north, above the Earth. Polaris isn't seen all over the Earth, because the surface of Earth is far too large to see all of the stars in any given position, on the surface.


How the f’n way is the highest point in the model of flat earth’s sky not seen from every mount top on earth.

Again....

You do not understand when you pass south of the equator, Polaris gets lower and lower on the horizon. Then Polaris completely disappears below the horizon. How does the highest point in the night sky for flat earth disappear below the horizon when you pass south of the equator?

And explain

www.britannica.com...

At the summer solstice, the Sun travels the longest path through the sky, and that day therefore has the most daylight. When the summer solstice happens in the Northern Hemisphere, the North Pole is tilted about 23.4° (23°27´) toward the Sun. Because the Sun’s rays are shifted northward from the Equator by the same amount, the vertical noon rays are directly overhead at the Tropic of Cancer (23°27´ N). Six months later, the South Pole is inclined about 23.4° toward the Sun. On this day of the summer solstice in the Southern Hemisphere, the Sun’s vertical overhead rays progress to their southernmost position, the Tropic of Capricorn (23°27´ S). The






When and What Is the Summer Solstice?
www.timeanddate.com...

The summer solstice is the longest day of the year. Solstices are opposite on either side of the equator, so the summer solstice in the Northern Hemisphere is the winter solstice in the Southern Hemisphere, and vice versa.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
when our resident troll advances the " arguement " that :

we cannot measure the elevation of polaris - and determine that each degree of latitude = 111km apart .

ts time to give up -





It's time to give up asking for proof of your claims, that's for sure.


If we can measure the elevation of Polaris, and determine the latitude, show me the measurements, at least, since you're the one who keeps on claiming it.

Support your own claims, for once.


The person doesn’t have to. The only explanation that the highest point in the night sky would disappear below the horizon as you travel south of the equator is the earth is curved.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

And you need to explain
Why did ancient sailors have to rely on a completely different set of constellations and stars for navigation in the Southern Hemisphere because the north star and many northern constellations are not visible once you cross south of the equator. And the Earth’s South Pole has a different set of constellations and stars circling what is considered the South Pole Star vs the very different stars and constellations that circle polars. You are blatantly ignoring the different stars and constellations that are different between the north and south Hemispheres. And the different stars and constellations for the southern and northern Hemispheres that circle to different points in the night sky.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: turbonium1

So. How are one set of stars and constellations circling Polaris. And a completely different set stars and constellations circling the South Pole Star.

Let’s see you try to blatantly lie your way out of this one......



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Polaris is the only star that stays in one position.

It is called the north star, but it is actually the center point of Earth.

Every other star moves around Polaris, which doesn't move at all. Because it is in the direct center.

Time lapse images show how stars rotate above Earth in a circular motion, and Polaris is stationary, in the direct center. And that's why we have the same stars after thousands of years. As it will always be the same stars, in future.




top topics



 
14
<< 79  80  81    83  84  85 >>

log in

join