Debunking Flat Earth and the Hollow Earth

a reply to: turbonium1

My comment was on your post about measuring altitude. Your thoughts seemed to be off.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: turbonium1

How about comparing to standard atmospheric pressure and actual pressure. I suppose they could hang a really long tape measure out the window.

A plane flies level in air when not in ascent, nor descent....

1800 feet of curvature cannot vanish, however much you wish it ..

Here my turn to troll. Altitude is measured from the height of the plane to the ground. If thr earth were say a cube to maintain level flight are plane would hit an edge and flip 90 degrees.

Now heres thr fun part since thr plane can only verify its distance from earth under the plane does the plane ever truly change from a direct path. All your instruments would tell you your altitude hasnt changed and only someone outside of earths atmosphere would eben notice the strange change in direction. To people on the planet or in the plane no change would be detected.

So by your argument how do you know the earth isnt a cube? A cube actually makes far more sense then a flat piece of land hovering in space.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: turbonium1

How about comparing to standard atmospheric pressure and actual pressure. I suppose they could hang a really long tape measure out the window.

A plane flies level in air when not in ascent, nor descent....

1800 feet of curvature cannot vanish, however much you wish it ..

Here my turn to troll. Altitude is measured from the height of the plane to the ground. If thr earth were say a cube to maintain level flight are plane would hit an edge and flip 90 degrees.

Now heres thr fun part since thr plane can only verify its distance from earth under the plane does the plane ever truly change from a direct path. All your instruments would tell you your altitude hasnt changed and only someone outside of earths atmosphere would eben notice the strange change in direction. To people on the planet or in the plane no change would be detected.

So by your argument how do you know the earth isnt a cube? A cube actually makes far more sense then a flat piece of land hovering in space.

No.

The surface is not used during a flight, not for measuring altitude, nor to measure for level flight.

If a plane was plopped in air, some 30,000 feet altitude, the altimeter has no base measurement. How does an altimeter measure the correct altitude in a flight?

Sea level, for example, may be used....do you know why 'sea level' might be found quite useful?

Seems like some people don't understand what 'level flight' means, or how a plane finds 'level flight', within the atmosphere.

What measures a plane, being in 'level flight'?


Not the surface below the plane, first of all. The plane cannot measure 35,000 feet below it, let alone can it make out whether or not there's a lake or mountains, or anything else, for that matter..


How could the surface even work in measuring altitude, or level flight? It's not a single, uniformly flat, surface. It's mountainous, and so forth. How does a mountain range measure an altitude of planes flying thousands of feet above? As if...

It measures pressure, within the atmosphere.

That's how

originally posted by: turbonium1
It measures pressure, within the atmosphere.

That's how

You seem to think that you're arguing with people. You're really not, everyone gave up on this thread making any sense whatsoever a long time ago.

originally posted by: turbonium1
It measures pressure, within the atmosphere.

That's how

Wrong!

They get the altitude by listening to the baby unicorns under the console. The unicorns also tell the pilots when to turn on the pyramid Earth so people don’t realise it’s not a sphere.

I thought everyone knew this?

This raises another question - how can the atmosphere identify if a plane is in level flight, as well as when a plane is NOT in level flight..?

The atmosphere is seen as a random, scattered, directionless thing. Like a wind, just swooping around, randomly.

But when a wind is scattered, without clear direction, a plane struggles to fly level within that wind, too..

And the pilot may adjust the plane's altitude, to find calmer weather. To have a level flight, once again.


Our atmosphere is operating as level, same as the ground below the atmosphere.... is level.


It's all so perfectly simple.

a reply to: turbonium1

how can the atmosphere identify if a plane is in level flight, as well as when a plane is NOT in level flight..?

That’s the invisible dragons on the wings. They have radio contact with the pilots and the unicorns so they can keep their stories straight.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: turbonium1

how can the atmosphere identify if a plane is in level flight, as well as when a plane is NOT in level flight..?

That’s the invisible dragons on the wings. They have radio contact with the pilots and the unicorns so they can keep their stories straight.

Don't forget about the gremlins too, pesky little critters but useful for gauging wind direction.

What happened to your most favorite fantasy phantom, called 'curvature'?

An 1800 foot phantom. specifically?

Gremlins, or dragons, or unicorns, must have 'stolen' the curvature, right?

Once you can answer which of them stole the phantom curvature, it will be the official explanation, or the only one, anyway.


How can anyone think the Earth isn't a big ball, spinning forever in space, everything sticking to the big ball, except insects and birds, although oceans curve around it, no problem, and if you were looking at Earth from space, you could see Australians are walking upside down!

Why doesn't NASA have any images of Australians walking upside down?

Does gravity pull us down to Earth's surface, while in orbit, Earth's gravity is well below, cannot pull us at that point, or beyond. That is '0' gravity, where everything just 'floats around.

Where is Earth's gravity, again? Oh, right - it is below Earth orbit, right?

And what is it, again, that is holding the moon in place, near Earth?

Earth's gravity stops below Earth's orbit, so that doesn't work, right?


But you said it does hold the moon, too.

When you are in 0 g, there is no gravity.

Where does gravity come in?

Earth's gravity stops below Earth's orbit. But gravity also has a gigantic invisible fishing line, which was cast out 250,000 miles away, and it's enormous hook, after several attempts, latched itself on to the catch, where it holds it to this very day!

a reply to: turbonium1

Did you take the trip? Are you some day?

If not, why not?

Take the trip..

xaxa

originally posted by: WarriorMH
a reply to: turbonium1

Did you take the trip? Are you some day?

If not, why not?

Take the trip..

xaxa

Sure, right after you account for the 1800 feet of missing curvature!

And it won't cost you a dime, either.

If you can't account for it, then say you can't account for it.

At least that;s an HONEST answer.

It's certainly much better to deal with, for once,

Don't keep on acting like the question I've asked you has been answered, or keep on ignoring it, completely, like it's not even there. It is all so very cowardly, too.

a reply to: turbonium1

What thats crazy talk you mean the only way to measure altitude is based off air pressure. And thr only way a plane could know if it is flying level is to remain at a specific air density as it travels?

Why thats just silly be much easiet for yhr pilot to just drop a line below thr plane and figure out how far off the ground he is. They use them in construction. So i guess what your trying ro tell me is altimeters are estimates of distances. But sutely you can use a rope and show how flight changes as you fly. Better yet go with unicorns they can at least toot their own horn.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: WarriorMH
a reply to: turbonium1

Did you take the trip? Are you some day?

If not, why not?

Take the trip..

xaxa

Sure, right after you account for the 1800 feet of missing curvature!

And it won't cost you a dime, either.

If you can't account for it, then say you can't account for it.

At least that;s an HONEST answer.

It's certainly much better to deal with, for once,

Don't keep on acting like the question I've asked you has been answered, or keep on ignoring it, completely, like it's not even there. It is all so very cowardly, too.

So you didn't take it, take the trip, see for yourself with your own eyes

Don't you trust your own eyes?

If you see it with your own eyes will you still say is not true?

I'm not afraid of anything because i have seen it on my own, no camera or stupid explanations

Don't keep acting like the answer is not there, waiting for you

Go.Take.The.Trip

originally posted by: WarriorMH

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: WarriorMH
a reply to: turbonium1

Did you take the trip? Are you some day?

If not, why not?

Take the trip..

xaxa

Sure, right after you account for the 1800 feet of missing curvature!

And it won't cost you a dime, either.

If you can't account for it, then say you can't account for it.

At least that;s an HONEST answer.

It's certainly much better to deal with, for once,

Don't keep on acting like the question I've asked you has been answered, or keep on ignoring it, completely, like it's not even there. It is all so very cowardly, too.

So you didn't take it, take the trip, see for yourself with your own eyes

Don't you trust your own eyes?

If you see it with your own eyes will you still say is not true?

I'm not afraid of anything because i have seen it on my own, no camera or stupid explanations

Don't keep acting like the answer is not there, waiting for you

Go.Take.The.Trip

Seeing it with your own eyes is an opinion. Cameras are better than saying you saw something. In case you don't understand why that is, please study what 'evidence; is, and is not, considered to be.

Obviously, you cannot account for the curvature.

So you just ignore it, and say 'take the trip', repeatedly. As if that helps your case, or something....

Sad, indeed.

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: WarriorMH

originally posted by: turbonium1

originally posted by: WarriorMH
a reply to: turbonium1

Did you take the trip? Are you some day?

If not, why not?

Take the trip..

xaxa

Sure, right after you account for the 1800 feet of missing curvature!

And it won't cost you a dime, either.

If you can't account for it, then say you can't account for it.

At least that;s an HONEST answer.

It's certainly much better to deal with, for once,

Don't keep on acting like the question I've asked you has been answered, or keep on ignoring it, completely, like it's not even there. It is all so very cowardly, too.

So you didn't take it, take the trip, see for yourself with your own eyes

Don't you trust your own eyes?

If you see it with your own eyes will you still say is not true?

I'm not afraid of anything because i have seen it on my own, no camera or stupid explanations

Don't keep acting like the answer is not there, waiting for you

Go.Take.The.Trip

Seeing it with your own eyes is an opinion. Cameras are better than saying you saw something. In case you don't understand why that is, please study what 'evidence; is, and is not, considered to be.

Obviously, you cannot account for the curvature.

So you just ignore it, and say 'take the trip', repeatedly. As if that helps your case, or something....

Sad, indeed.

So cameras are better unless they lie because they show things like a fish eye lense

Go take the stupid trip and see for yourself if this is true or not, then you can keep ranting about whatever you want to rant

Sad that you avoid seeing things on your own, scared of something? lmfao you are like a kid afraid of the dark

Looking for reasons, go see it, is right there, it takes 30 minutes to reach and everything can be answered, just go!

But oh no, mister afraid is not going, better look for reasons to avoid it and call "Sad" when someone who has seen tells you to also go see

The best evidence is the one your eyes show you and you can go see for yourself as many times as it requires to prove it wasn't a one time thing, you think human kind had cameras all along? Now you turn to science to try to prove you don't understand science?

So much logic here xaxa.

Cheap trolling

a reply to: turbonium1

So we have you saying cameras are lying because of "fish eye" lenses... And we've given you Cameras that are not convex lenses...

Now Cameras are better then actually seeing it...


How lost are you

Not nearly as 'lost' as 1800 feet of curvature, that's for sure!


Lost for any sort of answer, too.


Cameras ARE better, when used correctly.

But if you ever go tp court, just say 'I saw so and so, do this and that, with my OWN EYES!.

When the other side shows the judge and jury clear images, which prove you are wrong, then you'll have a clue as to why a camera works much better, than just saying 'I saw it with my own eyes!'.

originally posted by: turbonium1
Not nearly as 'lost' as 1800 feet of curvature, that's for sure!


Lost for any sort of answer, too.


Cameras ARE better, when used correctly.

But if you ever go tp court, just say 'I saw so and so, do this and that, with my OWN EYES!.

When the other side shows the judge and jury clear images, which prove you are wrong, then you'll have a clue as to why a camera works much better, than just saying 'I saw it with my own eyes!'.

But if you ever go tp court, just say 'I saw so and so, do this and that, with my OWN EYES!.

So much noise, can you hear the noise?

I hear it, looks like someone running away from the truth and right away available evidence, blah blah blah blah blah

Want to take the trip?

Let's raise the money with one of those crowd funding things, just for you

What about that, are you willing?

And then you can bring pictures that all your friends will say are edited or mistaken because of the fish eye lense?

Worst case scenario they will say you were paid and now you are part of the conspiracy


Win win!!!