Pop, you familiar with these books?

[Softball Bat]

The Pay-to-Shine Model

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the Guinness World Records is its “pay-to-play” approach.
Adjudication fees, application charges, and expedited review costs have created a system where
wealth is a determinant of recognition.

https://medium.com/@ibrahimzilzal/guinn ... 78796f7ee6




I am not aware of anyone claiming to have circumnavigated the flat earth by following the inside of the Antarctic ring.
Haven't looked into it at all.

[Mikey]

I am not aware of anyone claiming to have circumnavigated the flat earth by following the inside of the Antarctic ring.

Ever wonder why?

[mvscal]

I am not aware of anyone claiming to have circumnavigated the flat earth by following the inside of the Antarctic ring.

Ever wonder why?

Obviously a conspiracy to keep the true shape of the world secret for some as yet unrevealed purpose...and stuff.

[Softball Bat]

I am not aware of anyone claiming to have circumnavigated the flat earth by following the inside of the Antarctic ring.

Ever wonder why?

Not really.

I am much more interested in facts and science than I am people making claims about having done things.

[Mikey]

I am not aware of anyone claiming to have circumnavigated the flat earth by following the inside of the Antarctic ring.

Ever wonder why?

Not really.

I am much more interested in facts and science than I am people making claims about having done things.

[mvscal]

I am not aware of anyone claiming to have circumnavigated the flat earth by following the inside of the Antarctic ring.

Ever wonder why?

Not really.

I am much more interested in facts and science than I am people making claims about having done things.

No, you're not.

[Softball Bat]

Let me clue you two fellas in on something, since you seem a bit slow...


People continue to bait me into fl@t earth discussion, and it's been discussed for hundreds of pages in threads on 3 different message boards.

If you globe zealots were able to prove your globe with science and facts, such would never have happened.

The discussion would have ended in a page-or-so.

But the truth is, your globe is a ridiculous fantasy that could never be true.

Yet, you somehow love your globe so much, and have a deep-seated desire to cling to it.

My advice to you is to become a skeptic of your globe, RIGHT NOW.

Put the globe to the test. Be a skeptic.

Can you really prove it?

lol


Or...

Post your science and facts, right here in this thread, to prove your globe.



Good luck!

[Smackie Chan]

I am much more interested in facts and science than I am people making claims about having done things.

Don't know much about history
Don't know much astronomy
Don't know much about a science book
Don’t know much about the math I took

But I do know Testaments, Old and New
And I know if you believed them too
You’d be a wet-brained fool just like me

Don't know much about geography
Don't know much trigonometry
Don't know much about algebra
Don't know what a slide rule is for

So I doubt that one and one is two
And if I convince you to doubt it, too
You’d be an imbecile just like me

No one’s claimed that I’m an A Student
Never tried to be
‘Cuz if I were an A student, baby
Earth’s curvature I’d see

Don't know much about gravity
Don't know much astronomy
Don't know much about a science book
Don’t know much about the math I took

But I do know Testaments, Old and New
And I know if you believed them too
You’d be in Special Ed just like me

La, ta, ta, ta, ta, ta, ta (Gravity)
Hmm-mm-mm (Astronomy)
Whoa, la, ta, ta, ta, ta, ta, ta (Science book)
Hmm-mm-mm (Math I took)

But I do know Testaments, Old and New
And I know if you believed them too
You’d be a flat earther just like me

[Mikey]

Let me clue you two fellas in on something, since you seem a bit slow...


People continue to bait me into fl@t earth discussion, and it's been discussed for hundreds of pages in threads on 3 different message boards.

If you globe zealots were able to prove your globe with science and facts, such would never have happened.

The discussion would have ended in a page-or-so.

But the truth is, your globe is a ridiculous fantasy that could never be true.

Yet, you somehow love your globe so much, and have a deep-seated desire to cling to it.

My advice to you is to become a skeptic of your globe, RIGHT NOW.

Put the globe to the test. Be a skeptic.

Can you really prove it?

lol


Or...

Post your science and facts, right here in this thread, to prove your globe.



Good luck!

There is no “proof” that you would ever accept. In fact I would challenge you to even define your version of the word “proof.” You claim to believe in science. All science points to the fact that the earth is (approximately) spherical and yet you deny this by repeatedly claiming that it hasn’t been proven. I’m not even going down that rathole because you would continue to deny it. You want “proof” of a global earth and yet when challenged to provide any evidence at all of a flat earth all you can come up with is, well this map sort of shows what I’m thinking.

Keep believing whatever you want to believe. Either you’ve been trolling us all this time, or you are hilariously incapable of critical thought.

Oh, and RACK Songwriter Chan

[Roux]

I am much more interested in facts and science

I'll accept that.

It is my understanding that you and your wife are not that far from Houston.

Considering your interest in facts and science, I am happy to buy tickets for you and your wife to visit the historic Space Center Houston.

It is one of the most amazing museums in the world, and the site of some of mankind's most historic moments. You and your wife will enjoy it.

The only thing that I ask is for you to share your experience with the board, tell us what you saw, what you thought about it, what you learned. This will be fun.

[Softball Bat]

All science points to the fact that the earth is (approximately) spherical

No, it doesn't.

You have certainly not posted anything to prove that we live on your globe earth.

Your camp gibbers about how "It's already settled fact," or some such thing.
That is comical.

If it was settled fact, then why not just leave it alone?

Why keep debating for page-after-page with wingnut poptart?

lol


I asked Smackie where the center of the earth is and how he knows that.
And to post his proof that we are spinning.

Be chose to bail out of the thread.



#science

[Softball Bat]

I have been to the space center a couple of times, Roux.

I don't see any proof for your globe in your post.


"Go to NASA" doesn't prove jack.

[Roux]

Well, it appears that nothing short of you seeing the curve of the earth with your own eyes will suffice for you.

Fortunately, the price is going down. Just $50,000

[Softball Bat]

You want “proof” of a global earth and yet when challenged to provide any evidence at all of a flat earth all you can come up with is, well this map sort of shows what I’m thinking.

You claim the globe is a fact.
I do not claim that the flat earth is a fact.

I assume the earth is flat and stationary, and that is based on a number of things.

It is what we experience.
We do not move, and the sun, moon, and stars move in a circuit above us.

Water does not behave in the way it must behave if your globe is true.
And chirping "gravity" does not make it so.

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

The curvature for your glove is simply not there, as was shown, AGAIN, in the video I posted in this thread.

I do not have to prove the earth is flat, because I do not claim it is a fact that it is.

[Softball Bat]

Well, it appears that nothing short of you seeing the curve of the earth with your own eyes will suffice for you.

Fortunately, the price is going down. Just $50,000

Are you going?

:smile:

[Mikey]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

Ever tossed a soaking wet tennis ball into the air? If not then you should give it a try. You’ll probably find that no matter how high you toss it or how much you spin it, it will still be pretty wet when it comes down. Wet enough to make a big splat on the ground. When spinning it, don’t forget that earth…allegedly…rotates only once every 24 hours.

[Smackie Chan]

I asked Smackie where the center of the earth is and how he knows that.
And to post his proof that we are spinning.

He chose to bail out of the thread.

I chose to disengage for the reason Mikey cited and for the same reason I seldom involve myself in having any sort of serious discussion with you because they're exercises in futility. You'd simply reject the science and any source from which it was taken, and counter with some silly picture of a lighthouse or the CN Tower to "prove" your point. When I asked you to explain from a scientific basis some questions regarding basic earth science, you fall back on what you "believe" and "assume," which is based on Scripture, not science:

I assume that earth is flat, stationary, and enclosed by a firmament.
The sun, moon, and stars are IN the firmament.
So, there is no such thing as space.

Those assumptions run counter to accepted and proven science. Having a meaningful discussion about the issue requires both parties engaged in the debate to start from some point of commonality. Or if not, for there to at least be some competing scientific or mathematical arguments to counter what is universally accepted within the scientific community. You offer none. I asked you to provide the dimensions of the flat earth. Should be MUCH easier to measure length & width of a two-dimensional surface than the radius & circumference of a sphere. Where are those measurements? Oh, gee, they're unattainable & unmeasurable because:

I assume that it is not possible for humans to get to the edge of the earth. Or at least not get there and come back alive.

Well isn't that convenient. Any scientist who attempts to take measurements will die trying. But those measurements are crucial to try to explain nighttime, and whether the space (sorry, shouldn't use a word you don't believe in) it occupies is geocentric or heliocentric. Your response?

Night time is not difficult on a flat earth, Smackie.
The sun is an overhead light.
It moves further and further away from you until it disappears under the horizon.

Very scientific. What is the nature of the sun's movement in the sky, and how do you know this? Does it travel in a circle within the firmament, or sway like a pendulum from one end of the earth to the other? How are the different seasons accounted for on a flat earth? These questions are easily answered with global earth science. Are there any prominent flat earth scientists you can cite who have studied this and derived mathematical models and equations explaining it?

Science is quantitative and is based on math, measurements, experimentation, and observation. You asked me some questions. I'll answer them.

What is the distance to the center of the earth, and how do you know this?

Equatorial radius: 3,963.1906 miles
Polar radius: 3,949.9028 mi

The numbers are different because the earth is ellipsoidal rather than perfectly spherical, with a slight bulge at the equator and slightly flattened poles.

Now, the only way for me to know this for sure is for me to personally take the measurements myself; otherwise, I have to trust others who have far more knowledge and experience in this arena than you or I do. And this is where our discussion falls apart, since you have NO trust in ANY science that contradicts Scripture, and aren't going to take measurements yourself. You simply reject the accepted science and measurements without countering with any competing data. Because you have none.

Simple geometry is what Eratosthenes used to closely approximate the earth's radius. Not that you'll accept this, but his methodology was brilliant. He did this by considering two cities along the same meridian and measuring both the distance between them and the difference in angles of the shadows cast by the sun on a vertical rod in each city at noon on the summer solstice. (He took the measurements exactly one year apart). The two cities used were Alexandria and Syene (modern Aswan). A geometric calculation reveals that the circumference of the Earth is the distance between the two cities divided by the difference in shadow angles expressed as a fraction of one turn. Once the circumference was calculated, computing the radius is easy. (r = C/2π). Modern technology, including measurements taken from space (I know, it doesn't exist in your world) have yielded more precise measurements.

Show me the proof you have that we are spinning.

To answer the question of how fast Earth spins, you need to know two things: how long it takes to make a full rotation, and Earth’s circumference. The time it takes Earth to rotate so the sun appears in the same position in the sky, known as a solar day, is 24 hours. However, the time it takes Earth to complete one full rotation on its axis with respect to distant stars is actually 23 hours 56 minutes 4.091 seconds, known as a sidereal day.

With this information, to work out how fast Earth is spinning we need only our planet’s circumference. At the equator, its circumference is roughly 40,075 kilometres, so dividing this by the length of day means that, at the equator, Earth spins at about 1670 kilometres per hour.

Of course, these computations are based on assumptions you don't believe, so you'll simply reject it. But I have answered your science questions with science answers. I don't expect the same courtesy in return.

[Sudden Sam]

[Diego in Seattle]

The few times I've engaged SB on this subject was due to sheer boredom. As Smackie & Mikey have pointed out presenting fact-based arguments is an act of futility due to SB's refusal to accept facts. At this point I have to wonder how much of your lives are filled with boredom to continue this pointless endeavor?

[Screw_Michigan]

Let's talk tennis. That's much more fun than discussing flat earf.

[Mikey]

Let's talk tennis. That's much more fun than discussing flat earf.

Not by much.

…besides, see my previous post. I already connected the two subjects.

[Ken]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

In a prior thread, I had already suggested that you try an experiment for yourself regarding this. But you chose to ignore it.
I'll pose it again (but to no avail, I'm sure). Get on a bicycle, into a car, on a skateboard, or whatthefuck ever. The earth rotates (as proven) 360 degrees in a 24 hour period which is equal to 15 degrees/hr. Go ahead, move forward, and slooooowly turn 15 degrees in exactly 1 hour's time. Do you reeeealy think you'd feel that turn? Would you be 'flung' from your bicycle?

I have no shame in saying it again... globe-deniers are the lowest form of human intelligence. You throw hundreds of years of proven science/mathematics out the window w/your only refute being 'I don't know' or 'that's ridiculous' rather than proof of a flat earth from your standpoint... a standpoint, btw, which is a stupidity of supernova proportions.

[JPGettysburg]

Let's talk tennis. That's much more fun than discussing flat earf.

Iga
Iga
Iga

Number one

[JPGettysburg]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

In a prior thread, I had already suggested that you try an experiment for yourself regarding this. But you chose to ignore it.
I'll pose it again (but to no avail, I'm sure). Get on a bicycle, into a car, on a skateboard, or whatthefuck ever. The earth rotates (as proven) 360 degrees in a 24 hour period which is equal to 15 degrees/hr. Go ahead, move forward, and slooooowly turn 15 degrees in exactly 1 hour's time. Do you reeeealy think you'd feel that turn? Would you be 'flung' from your bicycle?

I have no shame in saying it again... globe-deniers are the lowest form of human intelligence. You throw hundreds of years of proven science/mathematics out the window w/your only refute being 'I don't know' or 'that's ridiculous' rather than proof of a flat earth from your standpoint... a standpoint, btw, which is a stupidity of supernova proportions.

Yes.
And just as low are the left-wing democrats calling a liberty loving capitalist, president trump, a fascist.
These left wing crazies have to be either extremely stupid, or brainwashed as hell to actually believe that BS propaganda.

[Softball Bat]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

Ever tossed a soaking wet tennis ball into the air? If not then you should give it a try. You’ll probably find that no matter how high you toss it or how much you spin it, it will still be pretty wet when it comes down. Wet enough to make a big splat on the ground. When spinning it, don’t forget that earth…allegedly…rotates only once every 24 hours.

This is your science experiment that backs up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball?





Fabulous!

[Softball Bat]

(poptart would) counter with some silly picture of a lighthouse or the CN Tower to "prove" your point

Both of those demonstrate that the curvature for your globe is not in existence.

And btw, when I posted about the lack of curvature when viewing CN Tower, smackaholic and 88 came in and TOTALLY wet the bed with their replies, demonstrating that they had not even the most rudimentary understanding of the issue.

Nobody cared.
Poptart was the dummy.

lolz

[Softball Bat]

I assume that earth is flat, stationary, and enclosed by a firmament.
The sun, moon, and stars are IN the firmament.
So, there is no such thing as space.

Those assumptions run counter to accepted and proven science.

That is what you think.

Water clinging to the outside of a flying, spinning ball is not -----> proven.

It is patently absurd.

Just because a lot of people think it is true, it does not become reality.

If you want to believe it is proven, enjoy!

I don't care.

Why do you insist that I believe it?

[Softball Bat]

I asked you to provide the dimensions of the flat earth.

I do not have to provide dimensions for the flat earth, because I do not know that the earth is flat.
I certainly do not claim it is a fact.

It is my assumption that the earth is flat.

I am a globe denier.

[Softball Bat]

Very scientific. What is the nature of the sun's movement in the sky, and how do you know this? Does it travel in a circle within the firmament, or sway like a pendulum from one end of the earth to the other? How are the different seasons accounted for on a flat earth? These questions are easily answered with global earth science.

They might be easily answered if you deny reality, and claim that water does what we know it does NOT do.

[Softball Bat]

Equatorial radius: 3,963.1906 miles
Polar radius: 3,949.9028 mi

The numbers are different because the earth is ellipsoidal rather than perfectly spherical, with a slight bulge at the equator and slightly flattened poles.

Now, the only way for me to know this for sure is for me to personally take the measurements myself; otherwise, I have to trust others who have far more knowledge and experience in this arena than you or I do. And this is where our discussion falls apart, since you have NO trust in ANY science that contradicts Scripture, and aren't going to take measurements yourself. You simply reject the accepted science and measurements without countering with any competing data. Because you have none.

Okay, you know how far it is to the center of the earth, because a scientist has said so, and it has become accepted knowledge.

I have countered by showing you that the curvature for your globe is not there, and therefore the earth is not the globe you say it is.
And I have countered by relaying the obvious truth to you that water will not behave the way you say it does on your globe earth.

When you get down to brass tacks, you and your camp relies on what NASA has told us.

They are not trustworthy, and demonstrably so.

[Mikey]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

Ever tossed a soaking wet tennis ball into the air? If not then you should give it a try. You’ll probably find that no matter how high you toss it or how much you spin it, it will still be pretty wet when it comes down. Wet enough to make a big splat on the ground. When spinning it, don’t forget that earth…allegedly…rotates only once every 24 hours.

This is your science experiment that backs up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball?





Fabulous!

It's called real world observation. You opined that there's no way that water can cling to a flying spinning ball. I proposed an example of exactly that, which is easily observable, and you seem to discount it. What, then, are you looking for? How do you define a "science experiment?" Why would you believe that a tennis ball could hold onto the water but the earth cannot? Yes the mechanisms attracting the water to the ball are different. Both are examples of different physical laws (gravity and surface tension, for example) of attraction, neither of which is any more or less legitimate than the other. You are OK with one because it fits your pre-conceived beliefs, but not the other. Sounds like a typical "Christian."

If I were still in college and taking upper division Dynamics and/or Statics (both of which I got A's in BTW) I might expound on the laws of centrifugal and centripetal force, gravity, surface tension, etc. In fact, I might even have gone through the analysis with actual numbers. But that's the distant past and it wouldn't have convinced you anyway. These relationships were developed over the years by very smart people through direct observation and development of mathematical relations. None are "proven" in the sense that you apparently require, but are accepted because they perfectly describe real world relationships. That's what most of us call science. You, on the other hand, are going to believe only what you want to believe, and have obvious limits in your capability of applying critical thinking. Your loss, not mine.

[Softball Bat]

Simple geometry is what Eratosthenes used to closely approximate the earth's radius. Not that you'll accept this, but his methodology was brilliant. He did this by considering two cities along the same meridian and measuring both the distance between them and the difference in angles of the shadows cast by the sun on a vertical rod in each city at noon on the summer solstice. (He took the measurements exactly one year apart). The two cities used were Alexandria and Syene (modern Aswan). A geometric calculation reveals that the circumference of the Earth is the distance between the two cities divided by the difference in shadow angles expressed as a fraction of one turn. Once the circumference was calculated, computing the radius is easy. (r = C/2π). Modern technology, including measurements taken from space (I know, it doesn't exist in your world) have yielded more precise measurements.

Now Smackie, let me clue you in on something, and also demonstrate quite simply to you how arrogant the globe believers are...

Eratosthenes ASSumes in his experiment that the sun is very distant (93 million miles away), and that the sun's rays are coming in perpendicular to the earth.

If the earth is flat and the sun is close, the rays are not coming in perpendicular to the earth.

That explains the difference in the shadows at those locations.

Right?

[Softball Bat]

Show me the proof you have that we are spinning.

You gave me an answer, which I appreciate.

Of course, these computations are based on assumptions you don't believe

Right.
You have made the assumptions that you know the circumference of the earth, and that the earth is a globe.
You found a speed that you believe we are spinning, but did not explain how it is that you know we are moving at all.

Is it not possible that the sun, moon, and stars are moving above us?


You must rely on NASA to tell you that we are on a globe.

[Softball Bat]

As Smackie & Mikey have pointed out presenting fact-based arguments is an act of futility due to SB's refusal to accept facts.

The problem is that the globe cult tells me things are facts when they are NOT facts.

They make assumption after assumption after assumption...


Test your globe, Diego.

Do you have the balls for it?

[Softball Bat]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

Get on a bicycle, into a car, on a skateboard, or whatthefuck ever. The earth rotates (as proven) 360 degrees in a 24 hour period which is equal to 15 degrees/hr. Go ahead, move forward, and slooooowly turn 15 degrees in exactly 1 hour's time. Do you reeeealy think you'd feel that turn? Would you be 'flung' from your bicycle?

You have posted a concept, a rationalization, but not an experiment or demonstration.





You want us to believe that if a lake that runs from Object A to Object B, say 5 miles, water bends by 17 feet over that distance.
I say that is ridiculous, and I say water lays flat (unless disturbed) over that 5 mile distance.

You will say, "GRAVITY!! Why do you deny science?"


Do you have an experiment showing us water bending this way over distance?

[Softball Bat]

It's called real world observation. You opined that there's no way that water can cling to a flying spinning ball. I proposed an example of exactly that, which is easily observable, and you seem to discount it. What, then, are you looking for? How do you define a "science experiment?" Why would you believe that a tennis ball could hold onto the water but the earth cannot? Yes the mechanisms attracting the water to the ball are different. Both are examples of different physical laws (gravity and surface tension, for example) of attraction, neither of which is any more or less legitimate than the other. You are OK with one because it fits your pre-conceived beliefs, but not the other. Sounds like a typical "Christian."

If I were still in college and taking upper division Dynamics and/or Statics (both of which I got A's in BTW) I might expound on the laws of centrifugal and centripetal force, gravity, surface tension, etc. In fact, I might even have gone through the analysis with actual numbers. But that's the distant past and it wouldn't have convinced you anyway. These relationships were developed over the years by very smart people through direct observation and development of mathematical relations. None are "proven" in the sense that you apparently require, but are accepted because they perfectly describe real world relationships. That's what most of us call science. You, on the other hand, are going to believe only what you want to believe, and have obvious limits in your capability of applying critical thinking. Your loss, not mine.

Make a video of your tennis ball experiment and post it here.

:smile:


Understand, Mikey, that I assumed we live on a globe for 55 years.
I never questioned it.

When I first heard about flat earth, I laffed and scrolled it.

Only when I actually decided to look at it did I realize how many ASSUMPTIONS I have bought into about the globe.

If you *delete* NASA, and all of your indoctrination into the globe that you have encountered every day of your life, you begin to realize that the globe cannot stand up to scrutiny.

Test it and you will find it to be ridiculous.
It is frankly, a joke.

The problem is, most people never test the globe.

Start out by being a globe skeptic.
See if you can honestly prove it, without using NASA as a crutch.

[Roux]

See if you can honestly prove it

10 ways you can tell the Earth is round

How Do We Know the Earth Is Round?

Round Earth Clues: How Science Proves that our Home is a Globe

Empirical evidence for the spherical shape of Earth

5 ways we can prove Earth is round, not flat

[Ken]

Post a science experiment backing up your fantastical claim that water can cling to the outside of a flying, spinning ball.
It is absurd.

Get on a bicycle, into a car, on a skateboard, or whatthefuck ever. The earth rotates (as proven) 360 degrees in a 24 hour period which is equal to 15 degrees/hr. Go ahead, move forward, and slooooowly turn 15 degrees in exactly 1 hour's time. Do you reeeealy think you'd feel that turn? Would you be 'flung' from your bicycle?

You have posted a concept, a rationalization, but not an experiment or demonstration.

I have most certainly presented an experiment. W/out question, I have. But all you've got is a deflection and an inability to actually THINK about the presented experiment. The earth is really REALLY big. You apparently don't get that. And you are similarly REALLY obtuse and stupid.

I sincerely hope you aren't teaching our younger generations about the low-brow, uneducated and ignorant concept of a flat earth.

[Softball Bat]

Ken, I'm afraid your hypothetical demonstration is an apples and oranges comparison.

I guess the point you want to make is that we are moving, but that movement is relatively slow in relation to the size of the globe.
Because of those factors, you say we don't feel the movement, and water is not flung off the earth.

We are supposedly moving at near 1,000 mph at the equator.

Can you demonstrate that we are in motion?

I asked Smackie to post proof that we are spinning, and I credit him for at least posting an answer.
He did not post proof (or evidence) that we are spinning, but instead posted an explanation for why he believes the the speed at which "experts" say that we are spinning.

I say we are not moving at all.

Prove to me that we are.


I would ask you, Smackie, or anyone interested in this topic, to slowly and carefully read pages 63 to the first paragraph of page 69 at this link -----> https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/lib ... othan).pdf

The earth is not moving, imo.

[Softball Bat]

See if you can honestly prove it

10 ways you can tell the Earth is round

This is predictable, yet very embarrassing.

Their #2 proof is debunked by poptart here (and many other places) ----> http://theoneboard.com/board/viewtopic. ... n#p1028483
My post on 6/12/20, 7th post from the bottom.

Their #4 proof is also easily debunked.
They make the ASSumption that the sun is very far away.
Naughty, naughty.

A close sun on a flat earth would produce the same effect that they say is PROOF of the globe.
lol

I will waste no more time with this nonsense.
Produced by people who are either ignorant, or who have an agenda.