Flat earth theory?

a reply to: turbonium1

Speaking of stars and the technology to observe them, if I'm in Sydney Australia, what direction and inclination should I be looking to see Polaris, I look forward to your response.

a reply to: captainpudding

That away.
Over yonder.

a reply to: turbonium1

where in any of those videos do you see saturn spinning extremely fast ?, its so small and far away it looks like a flat 2d image , most of the time the camera is wobbling too much to see it properly!

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: turbonium1

where in any of those videos do you see saturn spinning extremely fast ?, its so small and far away it looks like a flat 2d image , most of the time the camera is wobbling too much to see it properly!

Are you not looking at a flat 2d image?

a reply to: turbonium1

So many truths you choose to ignore. Will you address items proving spherical earth brought to your attention. Or will you just go on contradicting yourself, and try to keep changing the subject. I don’t care what your believe, but you keep posting contradicting nonsense.

originally posted by: captainpudding
a reply to: turbonium1

Speaking of stars and the technology to observe them, if I'm in Sydney Australia, what direction and inclination should I be looking to see Polaris, I look forward to your response.

Well id look for ursa major that should help. Oh wait a minute nevermind.

a reply to: Nothin

Dont play dumb , you know exactly what I mean , Saturn doesn't look like a 3d image as the reflected light is so strong there are no shadows on its surface and has no depth with which to allude to its 3d form

SO how can you see it spinning , if it has no shadow or any other surface features which would indicate its revolution from these videos ?

a reply to: sapien82

Yes: know what you mean.
The comment wasn't intended to make you groan, from my smallness: but just, hopefully, to get you to think a little differently sometimes.

Most things we view on a screen are in 2d, of course. We then use our consensual reality experiences from the 3d world, to compare with the 2d images. Like you said: we notice shadows, odd forms, features, and textures, to form an image in our mind of what we think the object might look like in 3d reality.

If we map these shadows, odd forms, features, and textures: and then they seem to be moving: we may even get a sense of rotation, from a sequence of 2d images.

But we're still looking at a 2d image, and the perception of rotation, is happening in-between our ears, no?
We could get 1000 people, making the same observations, and all agreeing on the perceived rotation, they could all come to an agreement that Saturn, or whatever object: is rotating, therefore spherical.

Great! Good for them. All can now celebrate this new agreed-upon consensual reality.
Me: you know my answer already...

Don't want to argue about it. This thread is in LOL.
We're all here for distraction and entertainment, from the craziness of society, we come into the craziness of ATS.

My hope is to get you to consider viewing things differently, maybe only sometimes, if only for the fun of it.
Not conflictual, ok?

a reply to: Nothin

I think again there is a misunderstanding,

I mean specifically in those videos that turbo linked

saturn is bathed in so much light that there are no features to discern its 3d form , so how could you tell its spinning like a top from those videos , you cant because there is no surface features to show its rotation


yes but when we view a flat 2d image but it has light and shadow with identifiable features , from previous observations one could use their rational mind to conclude that the object is rotating,

how could anyone come to any other conclusion ?

based on their own experience of reality

You could ask every single human on earth what they think is happening and they would all say its rotating

What do you say ? oh its a projection flipping from image to image on a flat surface ?


there is no other way to view it

I could imagine all sorts of crap to explain it m y imagination could run wild , but under observation and with calculations it then reveals itself to be spherical .

We can even do the same here , if you take a spherical oject , say a white football with a smooth surface
bath it in enough sunlight so you cant make out any surface features

rotate it along its axis and video it , it would just look like a flat 2d surface from a distance
but then reduce the light and draw a mark on its surface such as a black circle , you can then see its rotating

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

Saturn spins like a top, which makes them liars, and only fools would still believe such liars, after seeing it's all a lie.

Actually Saturn spins like a big ball of gas and liquid.

Are you confusing the movement of Saturn’s upper weather for the spin of the bulk of its liquid body? Could you imagine making assumptions on Earth’s spin based only on the movement of Earth’s clouds.

That's your excuse? Seriously?

Anybody can see that Saturn spins like a top, and to deny it is ridiculous.

Not only that, Saturn 'wobbles' at the same time it spins like a top.


If you refuse to see the evidence with your own eyes, then go right ahead and believe NASA's lies, it doesn't matter to me.

a reply to: captainpudding

good luck getting an answer.

He's been asked any number of times...and, well, nothing of any substance is forthcoming. To absolutely no surprise, to any one.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Nothin

I think again there is a misunderstanding,

I mean specifically in those videos that turbo linked

saturn is bathed in so much light that there are no features to discern its 3d form , so how could you tell its spinning like a top from those videos , you cant because there is no surface features to show its rotation


yes but when we view a flat 2d image but it has light and shadow with identifiable features , from previous observations one could use their rational mind to conclude that the object is rotating,

how could anyone come to any other conclusion ?

based on their own experience of reality

You could ask every single human on earth what they think is happening and they would all say its rotating

What do you say ? oh its a projection flipping from image to image on a flat surface ?


there is no other way to view it

I could imagine all sorts of crap to explain it m y imagination could run wild , but under observation and with calculations it then reveals itself to be spherical .

We can even do the same here , if you take a spherical oject , say a white football with a smooth surface
bath it in enough sunlight so you cant make out any surface features

rotate it along its axis and video it , it would just look like a flat 2d surface from a distance
but then reduce the light and draw a mark on its surface such as a black circle , you can then see its rotating

Why do you believe Saturn is 'bathed in so much light', when the light appears to emanate from Saturn itself?

Saturn clearly spins like a top, and is 'wobbling' at the same time......nobody can excuse that as a 'light effect'.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: turbonium1

where in any of those videos do you see saturn spinning extremely fast ?, its so small and far away it looks like a flat 2d image , most of the time the camera is wobbling too much to see it properly!

I see it spin extremely fast, and 'wobbling' at the same time, as I said.

When the camera is stable enough to capture Saturn, it clearly moves at an extremely fast rate.

a reply to: seagull

Oh I know, it's just kind of become tradition to ask him for what is probably the easiest flat earth proof every week or two

a reply to: turbonium1

That's your excuse? Seriously?

Anybody can see that Saturn spins like a top, and to deny it is ridiculous.

By what features. And weather in the atmosphere, which Saturn has, is not how fast the bulk of the liquid planet spins.

a reply to: turbonium1

Again

Here is your list....

How can Polaris being at the apex of the celestial filament drop below the horizon when traveling south across the equator.

A blatant falsehood by turbo

Polaris is far too distant from Australia to be seen from there. It has nothing to do with the Earth being a ball. A plane can't be seen when it's too far away, either, but the plane is obviously seen when it is near enough, as we all know.

Where do you look in the Australian night sky to see Polaris with the naked eye or with a telescope?

You cannot say what would cause a brick thrown straight up into the air in the flat earth no gravity model reverse its direction to fall back to the earth. Specially in the context of Newton’s first law and your assertions of:

If gravity offers resistance to a rocket, why would a bird, or insect, not face any resistance, when flying above Earth, as the rocket supposedly does, when flying up from the Earth?

And

That is what gravity is supposed to do, is it not?

How do all the scientists prove such a force exists? They don't.

If this force existed, it would offer RESISTANCE to opposing forces, no?

But no resistance is offered at all. This proves there is no force at all.

With your own words, “But no resistance is offered at all. This proves there is no force at all.” Why would a brick thrown straight up into the air “care” if it is falling up away from earth in a less dense atmosphere? With “But no resistance is offered at all”. How is that different than a brick falling to earth because the atmosphere is less dense. What makes a brick thrown straight up into the air reverse direction and fall back to earth in the flat earth model?

What is the flat earth model answer to the retrograde of the visible plants path across the night sky the ancients called wanders?

If the moon is only 6000 miles away in the earth’s atmosphere, why doesn’t the flat earth society fly a blimp to the moon to make their case? They have time to take cruises full of alcohol, gambling, and debauchery? I bet the amount of money spent on one flat earth society booze cruise on alcohol and condoms would pay for a blimp mission.

The summer solstice for the northern Hemisphere is the northern Hemisphere’s longest period of daylight hours. For the flat earth model, how is the same day the Southern Hemisphere’s shortest period of daylight hours?

You ignore the biological effect of gravity.

a reply to: turbonium1

I don't think anyone would be surprised IF you said there was a little man dragging Saturn through the sky...

It doesn't wobble, and one can not the clouds spinning unless they have an extremely powerful telescope...

Without which it does not appear to spin... to anyone but you that is

originally posted by: neutronflux

How can Polaris being at the apex of the celestial filament drop below the horizon when traveling south across the equator.

Where do you look in the Australian night sky to see Polaris with the naked eye or with a telescope?

I've already explained why it cannot be seen in Australia.


But, please, explain why you think every star above Earth, should be seen from any point on a flat Earth, if you can...


Do you think a flat plane has infinite view of all things above it? That's what you are suggesting here, no?

a reply to: turbonium1

I've already explained why it cannot be seen in Australia.

Be cause the curvature of the earth.

How would you not be able to see the highest point of the celestial sphere marked by Polaris with earth’s most powerful telescopes in the flat earth model from any given point.

How would Polaris visibly get lower and lower on the horizon while traveling south across the equator in the flat earth model.

But, please, explain why you think every star above Earth, should be seen from any point on a flat Earth, if you can...

If you were at the highest point in the Rocky Mountains on a clear night in the flat earth model with a good telescope, why wouldn’t you be able to see the stars only visible from the Southern Hemisphere?

Do you think a flat plane has infinite view of all things above it? That's what you are suggesting here, no?

Yes, you can gaze off into infinity on a clear night into space. What is preventing me using a 11” reflector telescope in the northern Hemisphere on a clear night from seeing stars only visible in the Southern Hemisphere. As you travel across the earth, stars don’t dim noticeable. They drop behind the curvature of the earth called the horizon.

Turbo you are full of blatant falsehoods. You cannot stand people see through your BS, and people call you out on your BS. All the while you just keep contradicting yourself.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: turbonium1

That's your excuse? Seriously?

Anybody can see that Saturn spins like a top, and to deny it is ridiculous.

By what features. And weather in the atmosphere, which Saturn has, is not how fast the bulk of the liquid planet spins.

You cannot see Saturn spinning like a top, and 'wobbling' at the same time, but you somehow believe it's a 'liquid planet', with a 'weather' system?!?!

The evidence does not support your argument, it only supports mine...