T1B

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:11 am**

Goober McTuber wrote:

"The Flat Earth Society" is a parody site, dunce.

Not surprising to see you kick your own ass.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:32 am**

First off, RACK Lefty for doing his experiment.

Left Seater wrote:And in a shocking turn of events to exactly no one, my legs and feet didn't disappear.

To me, it is not shocking at all.

It is what happens when your camera -- lens -- is not on the surface.

The lens in your video is about 1.5 inches off the surface and it makes all the difference.

You video is like this one...

The first comment on that video is accurate.

I see that you say the camera is on the floor, yet the lens is not on the floor. It is parallel but raised slightly.
This small amount skews the experiment on a perfectly level plane with the object at the end still within focal range.

Click in the numbers (in the determine the horizon section)...

https://www.smokescreendesign.com/curva ... earth.html

Your lens is at .125 feet of eye height.
At that eye height, you would have to walk nearly 1/2 mile to be at the horizon.

So no, I am not surprised to see what is shown in your video.

Turn your phone so that it is perpendicular (sitting tall on the ground with the lens right at the bottom, almost on the earth's surface -- lens 1 centimeter off the ground) and your result will be different.

LS wrote:He claimed the guy didn't need the board to make the umbrella disappear, but of course he did

From that distance, he did.

But if he put the lens on the ground (as in other videos of his), and he moved from the umbrella, it would absolutely sink into the ground.
No doubt.

Your lens was off the ground, Lefty.

Left Seater wrote:He claims the guy walking across his yard (that is flat) slowly sinks into the earth. He posts videos of posts and walls, and claims they sink into the earth as well. If that were all true, why didn't my feet disappear first? The simple answer is the yard wasn't flat, nor was the football field, etc. If it was the people in the video wouldn't have appeared to lose their legs.

Wrong.

The answer is -----> your lens was off the ground.

It changed the perspective completely, just as in the video I put in this post.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:38 am**

Left Seater wrote:This route would cross over Antarctica on a daily basis. Some times it might cross directly over the pole. Of course it won't do that every time as it will want to take a route that has the most favorable winds.

Here is the shortest distance between the two cities:

http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=PER-EZE

Somehow Softball Bat will claim that this is also just a scam. That just because the plane crosses the Antarctic continent, it doesn't prove the ice wall/damn isn't there. Can't wait to hear his explanation of this flight. Oh wait, that's right, he refuses to discuss or much less even acknowledge that Southern Hemisphere flights exist.

1. Take the flight. Document it and post it here.

2. Going "over Antarctica" proves exactly squat.

3. If someone goes N-S over Antarctica, and crosses the pole, that would be something. I'd like to see it.

4. I don't know if there is an ice wall. I don't even claim to know the shape of the earth. How many times have I said that? If there IS an edge of the earth, maybe it isn't humanly possible to reach it.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:40 am**

shutyomouth wrote:It would cost trillions to keep a fictional story about the earth being a globe if it were flat.

Show us the math on that.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:47 am**

Jay in Phoenix wrote:Pssst...Papa. It's 'cause the Bible says it is so.

Even though it doesn't.

I for one, am still waiting for that Firmament picture. I mean, HE keeps demanding photographic proof of everything else, let's see him PROVE his perspective.

Oh my goodness.

1. Have I said word one about the Bible in this thread?

2. But now since you brought it up, it will not go well for you...

Genesis 1:14-16 - God placed the sun, moon, and stars IN the firmament
Genesis 1:6-7 - The firmament divides the waters above the firmament from the waters below the firmament
Psalms 148:1-6 - God established the waters above the firmament by a decree which shall never pass

Question: The waters that are above the sun, moon, and stars -- where do you imagine they are located?

3. Picture of the firmament? How would we know it can be seen?

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:49 am**

Dinsdale wrote:
Jay in Phoenix wrote:Pssst...Papa. It's 'cause the Bible says it is so.

Even though it doesn't.

"It is he who sits above the circle of the earth"

"four angels standing at the four corners of the earth"

Uhm... yeah. Maybe the bible isn't the best source of astronomy. Or anything else.

What is this gibberish?

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:03 am**

I told y’all there would be excuses. First of all my lens is less than 5/8 of an inch off the ground. No case around the camera either for this.

Second if the camera lenses in the other videos you posted were actually at ground level then the blades of grass would be the reason we can’t see the guy’s legs or the target. The blades of grass would have the same effect as the board in the umbrella video. The further someone is away from the camera the more the shortest blades of grass would obscure their legs.

As for the Norwegian flight I will make you a deal. If that flight is approved, I will purchase a ticket for you and a guest on that flight round trip from Singapore to EZE. You will be responsible for getting yourself to Singapore and home. You will also be responsible for any hotels, meals, baggage fees, etc. However, you have to document the trip and post photos of the route and lack of an ice wall/damn.

Deal?

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 6:05 am**

Softball Bat wrote:
Your lens is at .125 feet of eye height.

At that eye height, you would have to walk nearly 1/2 mile to be at the horizon.

Your lens was off the ground, Lefty.

The answer is -----> your lens was off the ground.

It changed the perspective completely, just as in the video I put in this post.

For the sake of brevity I have condensed this down, but this post truly proves that you have to be the dumbest bat shit crazy moronic mother fucker to every post here. The Board Bitch is annoying, but you are truly fucking crazy.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:25 am**

Thanks for re-posting it, Duhrron, since it was all accurate.

No take on the subject matter?

Post it.

I'm sure I would find it wonderfully entertaining.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:55 am**

Lefty wrote:I told y’all there would be excuses.

What you call an "excuse," I call... ability to think.

Lefty wrote:First of all my lens is less than 5/8 of an inch off the ground. No case around the camera either for this.

Second if the camera lenses in the other videos you posted were actually at ground level then the blades of grass would be the reason we can’t see the guy’s legs or the target. The blades of grass would have the same effect as the board in the umbrella video. The further someone is away from the camera the more the shortest blades of grass would obscure their legs.

If your lens was 5/8 off the ground, that means you had the phone sitting "perpendicular," with the lens at the bottom of the phone -- and with no phone case, you assert.

:|

I find it hard to believe that such was the case, but at any rate...

1/8ths of inches make a BIG difference with what we are talking about here, Lefty.

If your lens was 5/8 of an inch off the ground (.052 ft) your horizon is 1,474 ft away. That is more than 1/4 a mile.

If your lens was say 1/8 of an inch off the ground, your horizon would have been just 646 ft away.

https://www.smokescreendesign.com/curva ... earth.html

Pause your video after you set the phone down and look at how much land is between you and the horizon.
It is a lot.

Now pause this video at 0:05 and see how much land is between his camera and the horizon.

It's not much.

He got his lens at a lower elevation than you did.

Now the blades of grass nonsense...

Is his horizon at... 0 ft away?

No, it isn't.

If his lens was at 0 inches of elevation (or negative elevation), we would not see land in front of the horizon as we do, because as I noted, his horizon would be at... 0 ft away.

https://www.smokescreendesign.com/curva ... earth.html

His camera is lower than yours.
And significantly so, such that we see the difference in results between the two of you.

poptart wrote:The answer is -----> your lens was off the ground.

Thanks, Duhrron.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 11:58 am**

For Lefty and Buttsy...

I will have so speak to your airline questions/comments later.

No time.

Ta-ta...

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 1:45 pm**

Ability to think huh? You sure aren’t doing much of it, nor basic listening. This video was not shot using a phone. It was filmed with a go pro. I removed the case as well. I specifically shot the film on a sidewalk so there would be no interference from grass or other such growth.

Now you doubt my lense is where it was but yet claim others got their lenses lower. Sure sounds like excuses, but let’s just assume for a second you are correct. (Yeah it is hard to do and a big stretch.) But assuming the other guy has his camera at a lower elevation anything at a higher elevation relatively close to the camera is going to block part of the guy’s body. The blades of grass are at a higher elevation than the camera. So collectively they are acting like the board in the umbrella video.

So if your claim is correct that his lense is lower then the grass is the Board. Just think it through. Or think about it another way if that helps. There are trees in my backyard that are well over 40 feet tall. They can easily be seen from the front of my one story house. However as I get close to my front door they disappear as the much shorter house blocks them from view. Same as the board, same as the blades of grass. Think, you can do it if you aren’t trolling.

Oh and for that video where the guy tries to equate the markers to ships, that video is worthless just like the umbrella video. Dude uses a blanket instead of a board to make some of them disappear. The blanket isn’t even across the ground and covers more of the furthest marker. Laughable Fail.

Posted: **Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:03 pm**

Softball Bat wrote:
Goober McTuber wrote:

"The Flat Earth Society" is a parody site, dunce.

I know that, you humorless tard.

Posted: **Thu Mar 01, 2018 4:52 am**

Posted: **Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:30 am**

Left Seater wrote:Now you doubt my lense is where it was but yet claim others got their lenses lower.

He did.

It isn't debatable -- and it takes 2 seconds of viewing to see it.

Pause his video at 0:05 and notice how much land there is before the horizon.
Not much.

That = low camera position.

Pause your video at 0:41 and notice how much land you see before the horizon.
MUCH more than in the other guy's video.

That = higher camera position.

Posted: **Thu Mar 01, 2018 9:39 am**

Lefty and Buttsy, I have not forgotten your airline questions/comments.
I will speak to them, but I want to ask you to inform me about your globe model first.

Assume you are on a beach and your eyes are 6 ft above sea level.
There is a boat in the distance that is 10 ft tall and it is moving away from you.

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-ca ... t=imperial

Click the link and you will know that your distance to the horizon is 3 miles.

As the boat reaches the 3 mile point away from you, it begins to disappear from your view due to the earth curvature

Right?

The bottom disappears first, right?

So the bottom of the boat first disappears from your view -- up to the middle part of the boat disappearing -- up to the top of the boat that finally disappears completely from your view when it is approximately 7 miles away.

Bottom gone.
Middle gone.
Top gone.

In that order, right?

Is this accurate?

Posted: **Thu Mar 01, 2018 1:21 pm**

If you remove the effect of evaporation which can distort images over water then generally yes. You can see the top of a ship for longer than you can see the water line of the same ship.

I do not know the distances involved or know if your distances are correct.

Posted: **Fri Mar 02, 2018 7:58 am**

Okay, then just to be clear...

Two individuals are on a beach watching a 10 ft tall boat move away out on the water.
Person A gets his eyes down to absolute sea level.
Person B is at 6 ft above sea level.

When the boat has disappeared for Person A (at approximately 4 miles), person B will still see almost all of the boat above the horizon.

Right?

You can click the link and easily see the numbers.
They are based on what the dimension of the globe supposedly are.

https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-ca ... t=imperial

But you don't have to click if you don't want to.

I'm just mainly interested to know if I have captured the essence of what you are saying will happen on the globe.

The essence...

As the boat moves away, the person at a higher elevation will see more of the boat above the horizon than the person who is at the lower elevation.

True?

Posted: **Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:08 am**

I have no clue. I got me camera lens damn near all the way on the ground and could still see things. How someone at sea level is going to see anything with salt water in their eyes is beyond me. Further I have no clue if the measurements are correct in this link or not.

Posted: **Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:13 am**

Left Seater wrote:I have no clue. I got me camera lens damn near all the way on the ground and could still see things. How someone at sea level is going to see anything with salt water in their eyes is beyond me. Further I have no clue if the measurements are correct in this link or not.

You have no clue...

Well that's at least something you can say honestly..

However, being a totally fraudulent piece of shit...you can't deal with the truth..

Posted: **Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:08 am**

LS wrote:I have no clue. I got me camera lens damn near all the way on the ground and could still see things. How someone at sea level is going to see anything with salt water in their eyes is beyond me. Further I have no clue if the measurements are correct in this link or not.

Oh my goodness..

1. Of course you could still see things.
At 5/8 inch off the ground it was 1/4 of a mile to the horizon.
It is at the horizon that things get blurry.

2. The earth curvature calculator is one of probably a dozen (or more) that are on the interweb.
They all show the same thing.
They are based on the globe.

Forget about the calculator and the salt water for a minute.
lol

I am interested in the essence of your model.

A person at a higher elevation will see more of the boat above the water compared to a person at a low elevation.

True?

Posted: **Fri Mar 02, 2018 1:59 pm**

Yes. This is why from my mom’s condo we can see one more floor of the sand piper building across the bay than if we stand at ground level.

Posted: **Fri Mar 02, 2018 3:31 pm**

Softball Bat wrote:

A person at a higher elevation will see more of the boat above the water compared to a person at a low elevation.

True?

Draw yourself a picture, you just proved that the earth is round. Fuckin moron.

Posted: **Sat Mar 03, 2018 3:58 am**

Not to mention the pilots and ATC folks that have to keep their mouths shut. The hush money alone would put Airlines out of business.

Posted: **Sat Mar 03, 2018 5:01 am**

Papa Willie wrote:Still no answer to the flight in question. Still no response as to how absurd it would be to fly millions of miles per day (collectively) further.

Every single airline out there would say "fuck it - if the earth is flat, we're gonna fly in a straight line."

They are slaves to the globe.

Posted: **Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:07 am**

Derron wrote:
Softball Bat wrote:

A person at a higher elevation will see more of the boat above the water compared to a person at a low elevation.

True?
Draw yourself a picture, you just proved that the earth is round. Fuckin moron.

Please do elaborate on your "thoughts," Duhrron.

If you could manage something beyond hoots and grunts, that would be splendid.

Tyvm!

Posted: **Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:16 am**

Papa Willie wrote:Still no answer to the flight in question. Still no response as to how absurd it would be to fly millions of miles per day (collectively) further.

Every single airline out there would say "fuck it - if the earth is flat, we're gonna fly in a straight line."

poptart wrote:For Lefty and Buttsy...

I will have so speak to your airline questions/comments later.

Poptart wrote:Lefty and Buttsy, I have not forgotten your airline questions/comments.
I will speak to them, but I want to ask you to inform me about your globe model first.

We are in the middle of a discussion about the horizon, 'spray.
Important points have already been made.
At least for those who choose to digest information.

I recognized a long time ago that some are just not capable of digesting info.

But there are some things left be pointed out.

I will reply to your airline querries.

Be prepared, however...

Your questions and your whole line of ASSUMPTIVE thinking is just simply ASININE.

But I will get to it.

After the horizon discussion has reached it's climax.

Posted: **Sat Mar 03, 2018 8:41 am**

Left Seater wrote:Yes. This is why from my mom’s condo we can see one more floor of the sand piper building across the bay than if we stand at ground level.

What this guy presents is on the money.

7:54 to 8:00 - Boats do not go over the horizon, they simply merge into the horizon.

He is right on, and it is what I presented already in a few videos where the land camera was nearly at 0 elevation.

The whole video should be watched, but what you watch from 3:07 to 4:18 is very telling.
Very telling, indeed.

He shows how much of the boat is above the hard horizon when he is at 40 ft of elevation.
He shows how much of the boat is above the hard horizon when he is at 6 ft of elevation.

It is THE SAME AMOUNT OF THE BOAT.
If anything, the amount of the boat seen over the hard horizon actually increases slightly at a lower elevation of viewing.

If the boat was going over the curve of the earth, the amount of the boat seen above the hard horizon would DECREASE as viewing elevation decreases.

It doesn't.

Watch the video.

Think about it.
Let it sink in.
Digest it.
It is reality.

The boat (as it moves away, or if a person decreases their viewing elevation) gets "swallowed up" little-by-little by the blurring horizon until it is completely gone from view.

This is the reality of human viewing.

There are no boat going over the curvature of the earth.
When a boat disappears it has disappeared simply due to viewing perspective.

Sea LEVEL.

LOL

Posted: **Sat Mar 03, 2018 9:53 am**

This is Derron's speed.

Posted: **Sun Mar 04, 2018 3:43 am**

Softball Bat wrote: Please do elaborate on your "thoughts," Duhrron.

My thoughts ?? You are quite possibly one of the dumbest mother fuckers to ever post here and you support that with every post.

Who is more tedious ?? You or the Board Bitch....I give it to you, because even Moving Parrot will not waste the time you do trying to convince everybody of your fucked up, ridiculous ideas and amuse us all with your ranting.

Who loses their shit more over Trump??...you or Screwy. Well Screwy might beat you there, since I am sure his fuckin eyeballs pop out of his head every time he has to mention Trumps name.

Whose posts are more frequently passed by the majority of this board ??? Yours...Moving Fail....LTS ?? Yours are pretty predictable ...Lefty toys with you like a cat with a mouse...Moving Bitch might be good for a quick skirmish..but usually ends with his white flag blast two posts in. LTS we all know is fucking bonkers and I would not read one of his posts and waste a minute of my life.

You are in some pretty good company as far as being in the group of bat shit crazy, ranting, fucked up posters that this board has seen in the 13 plus years it has been around.

Posted: **Sun Mar 04, 2018 6:36 am**

poptart wrote:Please do elaborate on your "thoughts," Duhrron.

If you could manage something beyond hoots and grunts, that would be splendid.

Posted: **Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:31 am**

shutyomouth wrote:It would cost trillions to keep a fictional story about the earth being a globe if it were flat. There would be 0 sense in that. None. Again - if it were actually flat - so what? We're here regardless.

'Tart's not grasping the actual reality of his fantasy.

Transportation alone. I've been over this many a time with you. Other than once saying "I don't really understand that" when presented with an Australian-Santiago flight, you won't comment on that any longer. It was the only time I ever saw you use any logic in this troll job. That one flight pattern would burn (I think I figured it out to be) an extra 30,000 gallons on a one way trip if your theory is correct.

Now why in the fuck would they want to do that, 'tart?

1. I have not shown any model/map of the earth and declared it to be THE model/map of the earth.

That being the case, how in the world have you shot me down?

2. You can point out that flights you see on your computer screen match your globe, and that is all well and good.

Doberman Pinschers match a horse by having four legs. Guess what? They are not are a horse.

3. Take one of the flights. If you can. Good. And what does that prove?

Posted: **Sun Mar 04, 2018 7:38 am**

Some here are involved in construction.

The ISS was assembled up in space by men on cords, in space suits, with bulky gloves?

And they got everything sealed up perfectly.

All of it, just so.

Do ya think?

"It's construction. No problem, poptart! They're NASA. What's the matter with you?"

o
m
g

Critical thinking -----> suspended.

Posted: **Sun Mar 04, 2018 8:48 am**

x2

Discuss...

Posted: **Sun Mar 04, 2018 2:30 pm**

As for your videos, if, and that is a huge assumption they are exactly what they say they are then there is an interesting data point that either needs explanation beyond my abilities or there is one thing that doesn’t fit with a globe model. However given the videos you have previously linked us up too my confidence in these videos is low. Especially when it doesn’t match up with my own experience of viewing condos across the bay from my mom’s condo.

But again just making the huge assumption that these videos are what excatly what they claim to be, that doesn’t prove the earth isn’t a globe. There are hundreds of other points that do support a globe model and this one (alleged) outlier. One outlier among hundreds of other data points doesn’t mean the whole thing is scrapped. It means further info is needed on the outlier. Maybe external factors cause it. Maybe there is something we don’t yet understand about it.

But again, if you and your fellow believers of a non globe earth want to take one (alleged) data point over hundreds of other points as proof then you have every right too. At the same time it is incumbent on you to provide a shape model that supports your claims. Failure to do so just makes you a conspiracy theorist.

So, ready to discuss the other points that do support a globe model? Have you thought about taking me up on my offer to take a trans polar flight?

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:13 am**

Of course.
We all know that.

I think you somehow did not read my post very carefully at all.

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:19 am**

Left Seater wrote:As for your videos, if, and that is a huge assumption they are exactly what they say they are then there is an interesting data point that either needs explanation beyond my abilities or there is one thing that doesn’t fit with a globe model. However given the videos you have previously linked us up too my confidence in these videos is low. Especially when it doesn’t match up with my own experience of viewing condos across the bay from my mom’s condo.

But again just making the huge assumption that these videos are what excatly what they claim to be, that doesn’t prove the earth isn’t a globe. There are hundreds of other points that do support a globe model and this one (alleged) outlier. One outlier among hundreds of other data points doesn’t mean the whole thing is scrapped. It means further info is needed on the outlier. Maybe external factors cause it. Maybe there is something we don’t yet understand about it.

1. This is not one outlier, Lefty. These videos are all over the internet. The curvature for the globe is not there. That is why people like me have become alert to it.

2. Take pics (on a few different days -- so atmospheric conditions are different). Take one pic from the beach and another one from your mom's condo. Also find out the exact distance from where you are to some point across the bay (a tower, building, etc.). See what you see.

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2018 3:37 am**

Right Softball Bat. One thousand videos saying the same thing are still only one data point.

I have used a telescope on different days from both her balcony and the beach in front of her condo. I can see one additional floor from her balcony. Granted humidity needs to be low and low temps also help.

So again we have one data point that says one thing while we have hundreds that say something else. You choose to ignore the overwhelming data for this one thing.

I can’t wait to hear your takes on these other points. Fingers crossed we hear something on these soon.

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2018 7:02 am**

We've talked about it.

Pilots are some of the last people who will speak straight about this issue.
Never in a forum like this.

That paycheck, pension, etc., is pretty important to them.

Btw, about greed...

NASA takes 52 million dollars a day from us.

And what do they give us?

Cartoons, stories, things produced in a studio, and rockets going up which have never gone to space.

Posted: **Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:37 am**

I think you have it exactly backwards, 'spray.

NASA has been fleecing and making fools of the American public for decades now.

It's not a grand, vast conspiracy.
Most of the schlepps who work at NASA are just like you and I.
They punch the clock, do their job in their department, and don't know what is going on at the highest level of the organization.
And they've been raised up like you and I were -- since kindergarten -- to KNOW that the earth is a globe.

Going back hundreds of years, there have alway been people who have been of the understanding that the earth is flat.
It is what all of our senses and surroundings inform us of.

The globe is actually found to be very ridiculous if you have the ability to step back away from your indoctrination and put it on trial.
The issue is, most people never put it on trial.

The ISS is even more ridiculous.

T1B

Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit

Re: Trump/GOP bullshit