Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

When you try claiming amputees and blind people are the 'subject' of discussion, you might need some help, and strong meds.

I've been asking you to address the problem if how 'curvature' could appear in only 1/2 mile, but not the first 2 1/2 miles, because it cannot work that way, and hiding from it, changing the subjects suddenly, bizarrely, doesn't make it go away.

It seems you've never realized that a ship is entirely, or mostly, in view for 2 1/2 miles, before it completely vanishes in only 1/2 mile further out, from your bizarre reaction to it.


In fact, I only realized it recently, too. So obvious, nobody even realizes it - 'curvature' cannot exist, plain as day.

a reply to: turbonium1

*Yawn*
Oh look, more scientific illiteracy and bald-faced lies.
Stop it.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Thats all he has man... lies to perpetuate his delusion

but again... funny as hell...

and very sad

a reply to: turbonium1

Merriam-Webster

expanse noun

ex·​panse | ik-ˈspan(t)s
Definition of expanse
1: FIRMAMENT
2: great extent of something spread out
an expanse of calm ocean

a reply to: turbonium1

You will not answer the question.

You do believe the earth is spherical

Come on man. If you believe the earth is flat….

I want you to make it official.

Are you saying the all women’s expedition, double amputee Duncan Slater, and Ian Berry, a British deaf man as reported by the Deaf Digest never made to the South Pole. And you are claiming they are lying?

a reply to: turbonium1

You

When you try claiming amputees and blind people are the 'subject' of discussion, you might need some help, and strong meds.

No. But I am highlighting how ridiculous you are.

And you are just digging a deeper hole.

And, the above by you is a false argument.

This is what I am attacking.

How can they pretend a massive continent exists on Earth, without a shred of proof for it? They claim it's off-limits to fly over it side to side, over the 'south pole', and spew out ridiculous excuses why it's off-limits for anyone to fly over it, or explore it all.

The above is a total fabrication.

Like comets, the Antarctic is well studied, mapped, and documented.

And.Yes Turbo, you can even go the South Pole. Even you.

Antarctica is on!

www.expeditions.com... =%25epid!%7C%25eaid!%7C0&utm_term=south%20pole%20tour&gclaw.ds&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI2-KUsfbN8wIVBWxvBB0r-QraEAAYASAAEgJMu_D_BwE

We are excited to announce that we will be operating the following expeditions in Antarctica for the 2021-22 season, beginning in November: Journey to Antarctica: The White Continent; Antarctica, South Georgia & The Falklands; and Antarctica & Patagonia: Legendary Ice & Epic Fjords.

1. Fly the Drake & Cruise Antarctica

The most popular way to fly to Antarctica, these trips combine the comfort and expediency of flying with all the benefits of then exploring Antarctica by small expedition ship.

Flies to Antarctica in just 2 hours, avoiding Drake Passage
Well suited to anxious sailors or travellers short on time
Operates December - February only
Tried & tested operation over 13 years
Typically 8 days from $10,000 per person

www.swoop-antarctica.com... hgvfN8wIVum1vBB0ksgt9EAAYAiAAEgJBiPD_BwE

With numerous expeditions record.

Like the all women’s expedition.
Like double amputees and veterans making the trip.
Like the deaf making the trip.

Or this stout soul

Aron Anderson the first person to reach the South Pole in a wheelchair
3:07 min

My playlist

Share
Published torsdag 22 december 2016 kl 10.06
On Wednesday Aron Anderson from Stockholm became the first person in the world to reach the South Pole in a wheelchair.
He’s spent 21 days, 10 hours a day, crossing the Antarctic ice on a wheelchair with skiis, a trek of 640 kilometers. The temperature along the way, in the Antarctic summer, averaged 30 degrees below zero Celsius.

The expedition, called Pole of Hope, is part of a campaign to raise money to fight cancer among children in Sweden.

Dave Russell made contact with Aron Anderson right after he reached the South Pole, and asked what the biggest challenge has been:

“There were many, but the first one was to get out on the polar plateau,” Aron Anderson says. “That was a climb of around 2000 meters, which was really really hard. Then after that, I ski only using my arms, and the glide on the snow here is really hard.”

sverigesradio.se...

Documented cases of trips to the South Pole.

Come on man. If you believe the earth is flat….

I want you to make it official.

Are you saying the all women’s expedition, wheel chair bound Aron Anderson, double amputee Duncan Slater, and Ian Berry, a British deaf man as reported by the Deaf Digest never made to the South Pole. And you are claiming they are lying?

the geographic South Pole - last degree expedition 2013

m.youtube.com...

a reply to: turbonium1

The only thing you can do is add on to how ridiculous you are, dig your hole deeper, and make slanderous statements about people documented and testifying as making it to the South Pole.

a reply to: turbonium1

By the way. Concerning the ports / base camps of Antarctica, and the documented, mapped, and verified geography of Antarctica. By people that give accounts of traveling the actual routes.



explorersweb.com...

Makes the below utter no sense. And is ridiculous like you.

Alright, I'm convinced.

I'm now a Flat Earth convert.

And now I wonder, Turbo, what's on the bottom side?

a reply to: neutronflux

Here is todays no nonsense Del, he doesn't put up with hearsay and sophistry.

www.youtube.com...

Maybe give him a phone on his next one ?

a reply to: guidedbyblake

I’m going with Turbo’s playbook. It’s all CGI.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: guidedbyblake

I’m going with Turbo’s playbook. It’s all CGI.

Not about sides, about truth and living with yourself.

originally posted by: guidedbyblake

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: guidedbyblake

I’m going with Turbo’s playbook. It’s all CGI.

Not about sides, about truth and living with yourself.

I though it was about what method of navigation on the sea that actually works?

a reply to: neutronflux

Unless you are there in person, who knows ! Sailors (and pilots) do know, on 'levels' !

For fun, don't know if this feed has been posted here yet, great stuff !

t.me...

originally posted by: neutronflux
Are you saying the all women’s expedition, double amputee Duncan Slater, and Ian Berry, a British deaf man as reported by the Deaf Digest never made to the South Pole. And you are claiming they are lying?

I know that there is no 'South Pole', so none of them were ever there, since it doesn't exist.

And no, I'm not claiming any of them are lying. I'm sure they were just told they were at the 'South Pole', and would have believed it was true, unaware it was a lie.

Now that I've addressed your questions, you have no more excuses to not address MY points, so stop hiding from them, for once...

originally posted by: Schmoopee
a reply to: turbonium1

Merriam-Webster

expanse noun

ex·​panse | ik-ˈspan(t)s
Definition of expanse
1: FIRMAMENT
2: great extent of something spread out
an expanse of calm ocean

Once again, since all of you keep avoiding it, are the two passages in the Bible describing the firmament/expanse/skies, as being in THE MIDST of the waters, DIVIDING the waters ABOVE the firmament/expanse/skies, from the waters BELOW the firmament/expanse/skies....


Genesis 1:6..

"And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters."

Genesis 1:7..

"And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so."


Every one of you know it must be a solid object/barrier, in order to divide the waters above it, from below it, right?

So why are you all so afraid to admit it? There's nothing to be afraid of, when it's the truth. But, to deny the truth, and cling on to their lies, will only hurt yourself, by causing internal conflict, and insecurities, among other negative things.

As the saying goes, the truth shall set you free. It's set me free, and will set you free, by opening your eyes, and minds, to these truths in front of you. It's your own choice - accept the truths they've hidden from us, for centuries, or deny these truths, and live with all their lies.

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
Alright, I'm convinced.

I'm now a Flat Earth convert.

And now I wonder, Turbo, what's on the bottom side?

The Bible simply describes God creating Earth within the void, or nothingness, and that it is immovable (several times, in fact), and that it was set upon it's pillars, or foundation. There are no other descriptions of it, beyond that, so nobody but God knows what is "on the bottom side" of Earth. By NOT describing anything else there, I would assume it is entirely made of rock, soil, and all the materials we already know in in the Earth today.

The deepest we've dug into the Earth so far, is 40,230 feet, or 12.2 km, or 7.58 miles.

The Mariana Trench is about 7 miles deep, nearly the same depth we've dug to on Earth.

It seems we cannot dig much deeper than that, due to the extreme pressure at such depths. The temperatures are also extreme, but we could probably overcome that problem. But we cannot overcome the extreme pressure, it appears. There are no materials today, that are strong enough to build a shaft from, that can withstand the extreme pressure.


Maybe that was God's intent, to make it impossible to pass through it. Or maybe he left it up to us, as a challenge for us to try and overcome someday. Whatever is at Earth's other side, or it's bottom, is completely unknown for sure.

Many such things are unknown to us, like what 'heaven' is, or is not, what happens to us when we die, how did God create the Earth, and all life on Earth, and the heavenly bodies above Earth, and the firmament above both Earth and heavenly bodies....

a reply to: turbonium1

Maybe there are other continents, with people there too. Wonder what's on the other side of their Flat Earth. Hmm, food for thought.

Another point - you asked me what is on the bottom of Earth, and I said nobody knows but God, perhaps it is the same materials found in Earth already, it's unlikely we'll ever dig much deeper than 7-8 miles.

I'm sure you, like most of us, would like to know what exists further within the Earth, and see if we end up on the other side of a ball Earth, or reach the bottom of Earth, which would be impenetrable like the firmament, most likely.

Anyway, my point is that we all want to know what exists further and further within the Earth, and it's only the extreme pressure down there, that prevents us going any further down. We're always trying to develop stronger materials, and would use them to build shafts that can hold up to these pressures.

Then why wouldn't everyone want to know what exists ABOVE the Earth, by launching rockets straight up, the whole way, and see if it keeps flying until it's a tiny dot, and then vanishes from all sight, instead of them claiming rockets are in 'space', and preventing us from ever SEEING it ourselves, using absurd excuses for it being 'unsafe'? No problem, I'll sign a waiver that declares they are not liable or responsible for anything that happens to me, within their 'restricted zones'! I'm sure many people would sign such a waiver, too! Besides, these areas are NOT American owned, they are international waters, open to ALL nations and ALL people. And they clearly are NOT doing it for our 'safety', when they invite everyone to see rockets at the launch sites, where many rockets have crashed into flames, all over the place. If you believe it's safe at the launch site, then you sure as hell know it's safe, and likely much safer, within their 'restricted zones', right?

The debris often has a parachute attached to it, as well. No parachutes pop out of a crashing rocket around the launch sites, that's for sure! The chances of any debris even coming down within a mile of you are virtually nil, or next to nil. You'd see it when it's ejected from the rocket, high above you, so plenty of time to move elsewhere if you had to, which is very unlikely to begin with. You could even dive into the ocean with scuba gear, at the last minute before it hits the ocean, for that matter! Your boat might be destroyed, but you'd survive, and others around there would save you, as they all had signed the same waiver, as you did!


I mean, people climb Mt. Everest all the time, and other dangerous mountains, they can end your life with one mistake, or just by it's lethal atmosphere. There's nobody making these mountains 'restricted zones' from people, and they've PROVEN to kill hundreds or thousands of people over the years. Everest has claimed about 300 people alone.

Millions of people have died in cars, nobody prevents us from driving them. Flying a plane is allowed, even though it's claimed many pilot's lives, including my uncle in WWII, sadly.

All sorts of other things are 'unsafe', and have ended countless lives, yet are not 'restricted' from doing, or going to, or CLIMBING UP, and many are FAR more 'unsafe', than seeing rockets drop debris at 15,000 feet, within a 300 mile area!


I'm completely baffled that people just accept all this BS, say they have seen the rockets in 'orbit', which is a tiny light moving along a pitch black sky! It doesn't dawn on them that they only showed these tiny 'lights', very recently. Why didn't they ever tell us where to see rockets for the first 50 years or so? I guess they didn't think about telling us where to see them for 50 years, and then realized 'Hey, why don't we tell everyone where our rockets can be seen as they 'orbit' Earth?'

What about using your own mind, and intelligence, for once, and figure out they're full of BS, and tricks like these 'lights at night'. Anyone can figure out that they'd have told us where to see their 'rockets' all along, not after 50 years of silence!

Anyone can also figure out that they're using a ridiculous excuse to prevent us from seeing rockets fly over the ocean, 100-300 miles off the coast, and have no legal right to prevent people from these international waters to start with.

Does anyone here like to be played for a fool? No.

Does everyone here know we ARE being played for fools? Does anyone actually believe it is about 'our safety'? Anyone think it's safer at the launch site, than 2-300 miles off the ocean coast?

If you had the chance to see a rocket fly above you, 300 miles off the Atlantic coast, would you jump at the opportunity?
If the US military didn't prevent everyone from going there, we'd have SPECIAL CRUISES, just to go and see rockets over them, from the ocean!

But they will NEVER let us see rockets from there, and if you really think it's because it's 'too dangerous' to go there, you are beyond hope, or fear the truth so much, you're happy to live in a state of denial.


They will never launch a rocket straight up, either. It will hit the firmament, every single time, and reveal the truth for all time.

To hide rockets after 3-4 minutes, when they fly out of sight, over the ocean, and prevent everyone from GOING to the ocean, to SEE a rocket above them, or near them, and never launch a rocket straight up, which would prove what they claim is actually TRUE.....goes beyond all common sense, and rational thought, but only if you ever DO think about it for a minute!


I want PROOF of this claim about rockets in 'space', not their BS claims, and BS tricks! I'm not afraid of seeing the truth, so why would anyone else not want proof, instead of their claims, and tiny lights at dark, which never existed for the first 50 years or so, for some strange reason!