T1B

Dinsdale wrote:How about "gravity." He sees it working every second of every day, yet refuses to acknowledge its existence. And it explains almost all of his globe-earth doubts.

It certainly does not.

If it did, you would have posted the experiment showing water clinging to the outside of a ball as it spins at 1,000 mph -----> a long time ago.

You're talking out your @ss once again.

Same movie.


The globe is beyond stupid.

Rooster wrote:

Softball Bat wrote:The clouds move far enough away so that they finally sink out of view under the horizon.

I suspect it is the same with the sun.

Why would the sun and clouds sink under the horizon? In your opinion is Earth spinning like a plate balanced on a stick like you see people do in circuses? Or is it moving end over end— which is the only way those clouds would move below the horizon? And what shape is the Earth? A disc? A square? A triangle? Or some blob that changes shape as time passes?

Your flat Earth idea lacks details and specifics.

Rooster, I can appreciate your questions.

The flat earth discussion(s) we've had on the board have ultimately ended with nobody being satisfied.
I only intend to speak about what the Bible says in this particular thread.

I don't claim to know for sure what the shape of the earth is.
It has been shown to NOT be the globe we are told it is.
The curvature is not there.

But my assumptions are...

The earth is mostly flat.
It is stationary.
It is covered by a firmament which contains the sun, moon, and stars.

The sun would sink under the horizon because it moves out of our view and that's what happens to objects in the sky when they finally move out of our sight -- like clouds and planes do.

Do your own research if the topic interests you.
There is an abundance of material regarding the topic online.

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:'tart, what are your thoughts on "Hollow Earth Theory"?

https://www.gaia.com/lp/content/hollow- ... rtha-real/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollow_Earth

I haven't explored it very much, Marty.

I should.
If for no other reason, I would probably learn some more things.

Left Seater wrote:Sunsets and Southern Hemisphere flights are two you choose to ignore.

I don't have the answers to these things, Lefty.

I've explored them.
They don't prove the globe because the curvature for the globe is not present.

I don't have the answers, so I'm not going to be like you guys and just pull things out of my ass and then pass them off as fact.

Like water (and atmosphere) clinging to the outside of a ball as it spins around.

How DUMB.


I continue to research this topic as time permits me.

Softball Bat wrote:
I don't have the answers, so I'm not going to be like you guys and just pull things out of my ass and then pass them off as fact.

Yeah it is probably pretty hard pulling anything out of your ass with half a dozen or so plunger handles blocking the way.

Certainly nothing you have posted has been of any consequence, Duhrron.

You have been a big f@t -----> ZERO.





#expected

Softball Bat wrote:Like water (and atmosphere) clinging to the outside of a ball as it spins around.

How DUMB.

So because YOU can't comprehend physics, that means it doesn't exist. Allllllllrighty then.

The reason people don't seriously engage you on this topic is because it's a fruitless exercise. The original flat earth thread demonstrated that. It goes a little something like this:

1) You ask for proof/evidence of a spherical earth.
2) Proof/evidence is provided.
3) You claim said proof/evidence is fake.

Lather, rinse, repeat. It's a dog chasing its own tail, there's just no getting anywhere with you (or conspiracy theorists in general) when no matter what's produced, you can just conveniently go to the "FAKE NEWS" card.

Let me ask you these two questions.

#1 What would you need to see to be convinced earth is spherical? Because clearly, nothing that can be provided from the internet will work for you. Would anything convince you at all, just shy of being rocketed up into outer space yourself?

#2 If you did discover that earth is a sphere, how much would that change your entire outlook on the world, religion, etc? I imagine that would throw a wrench into your entire belief system, no?

Mgo wrote:So because YOU can't comprehend physics, that means it doesn't exist. Allllllllrighty then.

Show me the experiment.

The spinning ball with the water clinging to the outside of it.

It is LAFFABLE.

Have you thought about this?

Why would you believe such bullshit as that?


Prove the curvature.
Show it to me.

And if you want to post space pics, then I'll ask you to show me a video of a rocket going from land to space.

60 years of rockets supposedly going to space and we've still never seen that.

Does that make any sense to you at all?


NASA: We're up here now. Trust us. And this phenomenal ISS was assembled perfectly airtight by guys on cords, in space suits, with bulky gloves, right up here in space, flying around the earth. Machine shop? Naahh... we don't need one. And bring the craft down for maintenance? Naahhh... we never have to. We just fly around up here year after year, and everything stays sealed up perfectly. Seals, pumps, hoses, filters, etc... all just dandy. No machine shop needed. Nope. And we're so happy and comfortable. NASA is really smart and good, ya know?


rotf...



Are you out of the damn mind?!?



Sorry, Mgo, but most of the smart people that have looked into flat earth have recognized that the heliocentric model is a total joke.

There just happens to be a LOT of really dumb asses.

I mean, REALLY dumb.

People have been trained very well not to think.


I broke free and am able to think for myself.
Damn glad I did.

Softball Bat wrote:
Are you out of the damn mind?!?

People have been trained very well not to think.

At least you got that one right. English mother fucker.

Softball Bat wrote:

Mgo wrote:So because YOU can't comprehend physics, that means it doesn't exist. Allllllllrighty then.

Show me the experiment.

The spinning ball with the water clinging to the outside of it.

It is LAFFABLE.

Once again, your inability to comprehend how gravity works, does not mean it doesn't exist.

Prove the curvature.
Show it to me.

It's been shown to you many times. You claim that every image and video taken of earth is fake. There's no where else the discussion can go after that.

Sorry, Mgo, but most of the smart people that have looked into flat earth have recognized that the heliocentric model is a total joke.

These "smart" people aren't credentialed in any scientific field. Why should I give a shit what some dumb kook with a blog thinks about the shape of earth?

People have been trained very well not to think.


I broke free and am able to think for myself.
Damn glad I did.

Oh, now that's rich. Yes, the guy who does not question a single word from a book written 2600 years ago by unsubstantiated sources, but laughs in the face of rock solid science, is certainly "thinking for himself." Yep, that's exactly how I define independent thought.

Softball Bat wrote:
The spinning ball with the water clinging to the outside of it.

It is LAFFABLE.

Coming from a guy who thinks there water magically suspended above the moon and sun is -------->

LAFFABLE.

Softball bat just went Softball bay again. Mgo asks two simple basic questions and Softball Bat vomits words and lots of double and triple spacing but completely ignores the questions.

This is why I think he is trolling.

Mgo wrote:It's been shown to you many times. You claim that every image and video taken of earth is fake.

NASA tells you that their pics are fake.

Are you aware of that?


I honestly don't believe you are at all up to speed on this topic.

You are still at the stage where you knee-jerk recoil if someone challenges your globe.


Look into the topic more.

Or don't.

I don't care what you do.

Dinsdale wrote:

Softball Bat wrote:
The spinning ball with the water clinging to the outside of it.

It is LAFFABLE.

Coming from a guy who thinks there water magically suspended above the moon and sun is -------->

LAFFABLE.

Magically suspended?
lol

This is now the 2nd time you have said this, and no, I have never said I believe that.

Be constructive, Dins.
Find the water sticking to the outside of a spinning ball experiment.

That'd be an A+ for you.

Left Seater wrote:Softball bat just went Softball bay again. Mgo asks two simple basic questions and Softball Bat vomits words and lots of double and triple spacing but completely ignores the questions.

This is why I think he is trolling.

Mgo's two questions need not have even been asked.

1. The earth curves at a given rate (8" per square mile). So show me an example of it. I have posted probably a dozen examples of that curvature NOT being so. Showing evidence of the curvature would be a good start to proving your globe.

2. I lived as a Christian for 30+ years thinking I was on a spinning ball. Flat earth is not a salvation issue. If the earth is a globe, it's a globe.

Your question should be reversed.
What if the earth is known to be flat, stationary, and enclosed?

At that point, are you still going to deny the Creator?


No more flat earth talk unless it has to do with what I wanted to talk about here in 'Spray's thread.
The Bible.

Christians, comment on the Scriptures I posted.

Softball Bat wrote: Mgo's two questions need not have even been asked.

Yeah since you refuse to answer direct questions, we should stop posting them.

Softball Bat wrote:The earth curves at a given rate (8" per square mile)

8 inches per square mile? Care to explain that.

Softball Bat wrote:No more flat earth talk unless it has to do with what I wanted to talk about here...

In other words, I am unable to support my position so I am taking my ball and going home. Real open minded, searching of answers of you.

Softball Bat wrote: In other words, I am unable to support my position so I am taking my ball and going home.

A ball is a round sphere like the earth. Or is it a flat ball ??

Real open minded, searching of answers of you.

As requested before, please formulate your statements in the English language if you want people to even consider that you have a take.

Left Seater wrote:8 inches per square mile? Care to explain that.

Oh my goodness...

This is almost unbelievable.

But not really.


Derron, why does this topic anger you so much?

Post your response to the Bible questions if you want dialogue from me.

You're not making a lick of sense here.

D- for you.
And that is generous.

Softball Bat wrote:The earth curves at a given rate (8" per square mile).

I see you're still struggling with junior high school math.

But the idea that you're doubling down on making a fool of yourself is------->odd.

The funniest aspect has always been that you, Seater (and others) are so sure about your globe, yet you don't even know the basics involved with it.

Truly an amazing spectacle.

"Square mile" was a typo by me there.
Trying to multi-task here.

Earth curvature on your globe model is 8" per mile squared.
Fact.

It has been posted for you dozens of time by now, yet you still flail, struggle with it, and try to divert, and blatantly LIE about it.

Hence, we reach the impass where it is no longer possible to have a discussion with you.


Enjoy your globe!

Softball Bat wrote:NASA tells you that their pics are fake.

Are you aware of that?

I'm not, because they've never said that. I'm sure that's just YOUR interpretation of something you read.

I'm sure they use filters and/or combine separate images together to get the best quality image. Is that why you think they're fake?

But if you don't want to believe NASA, you realize other countries like Japan also have spacecraft that have captured images of earth, right? But I'm sure you'll just claim they're a part of the global cover-up.

Softball Bat wrote:Your question should be reversed.
What if the earth is known to be flat, stationary, and enclosed?

At that point, are you still going to deny the Creator?

I would not.

Softball Bat wrote:
Earth curvature on your globe model is 8" per mile squared.
Fact.

I see you're still struggling with junior high math. And no, it's the opposite of "fact."

It's been explained to you over and over again. Your math teachers obviously knew you were an idiot, so didn't bother to teach you the basics. And everyone here knows you're an idiot, too.


Go back and read Goob's link again.

Goober McTuber wrote:http://embracetheball.blogspot.com/2016 ... uared.html

He does a great job explain why you're a fucking idiot, with no math knowledge whatsoever, you flaming fucking tard.

http://earthisnotflat.com/

Since you're an idiot who doesn't know how graph paper works, this guy actually plots out your fucking stupidity.

The funny thing about tart's "you're all a bunch of sheep that believe whatever you're told!" schtick is that when you take all of human history into account, to believe in a spherical earth is actually the more progressive, open-minded concept. tart's biblical flat earth was the bedrock stance for centuries, NOT to be questioned, lest you want to risk being stoned to death. It took a few very smart mofos throughout ancient history (notably the Greeks) to begin to shake up this world view. And now with modern day technology, any and all doubts have been put to rest. For reasonable people, anyway.

Anyway, pop, if you want to see earth from high above with your own two eyeballs, you can even do it yourself. Just take some of those Korean shekels you scammed from your newly minted believers, and fashion yourself one of those high altitude balloons equipped with a camera, and get that puppy up to about 100,000 feet or so. Hell, they've done this in high schools and space clubs for kids. I'm sure you can figure it out.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Softball Bat wrote:NASA tells you that their pics are fake.

Are you aware of that?

I'm not, because they've never said that. I'm sure that's just YOUR interpretation of something you read.

I'm sure they use filters and/or combine separate images together to get the best quality image. Is that why you think they're fake?

They tell us that they are CGI, composites, mosaics, etc.

But if you don't want to believe NASA, you realize other countries like Japan also have spacecraft that have captured images of earth, right? But I'm sure you'll just claim they're a part of the global cover-up.

As previously posted...







Do you think this is real?

poptart wrote: Your question should be reversed.
What if the earth is known to be flat, stationary, and enclosed?

At that point, are you still going to deny the Creator?

Mgo wrote:I would not.

This is good.

Dins, I was aware of the material in your links YEARS AGO.

I'm not talking about the earth curvature for something 1,000 miles away.
lol

And I'm not talking about refraction.
I'm talking about earth curvature over relatively short distances.




Dr. David P. Stern, NASA...

https://www-spof.gsfc.nasa.gov/stargaze/Shorizon.htm

If you are standing atop a mountain 1 km high, your horizon should be 112.88 km (70.14 miles) away
(we neglect the refraction of light in the atmosphere, which may modify this value).

The calculation should also hold the other way around.



With eyes at ground level, the mountain (1 kilo high) will finally disappear completely from your view (not accounting for refraction) when you reach 70.14 miles distance away from it.

8" x 70.14 x 70.14 = 39,357 inches (3279.75 ft) (1 kilometer).

The earth curvature on the globe is approximately 8" per mile squared.

This is FACT.



Now, if you don't agree with this FACT, then tell me what you think the fact is on your globe.

If your eyes are at water level and you are looking over a lake that is 10 miles wide, how much curvature to you contend is present on your globe over that span of 10 miles?

Let Dins tell us what the fact is on this globe that he contends is fact.

I will comment no further here on anything other than the Bible.

Enough of the clown show -----> see avatard.



I predict Dins will again divert.

Well that and the time wasted. But yeah, got to keep this conspiracy under wraps. I would be killed if I let the cat out of the bag.

Dinsdale wrote:I see you're still struggling with junior high math. And no, it's the opposite of "fact."

It's been explained to you over and over again. Your math teachers obviously knew you were an idiot, so didn't bother to teach you the basics. And everyone here knows you're an idiot, too.


Go back and read Goob's link again.

Goober McTuber wrote:http://embracetheball.blogspot.com/2016 ... uared.html

He does a great job explain why you're a fucking idiot, with no math knowledge whatsoever, you flaming fucking tard.

This is one of the greatest self-ass-kickings of all time.

This link that you've now posted two times (and used to call me an idiot) pimps this link ---> https://dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-ca ... t=imperial <--- for calculating the earth curvature correctly.

Yes, the very link that I have posted and referenced dozens of times, and which Dinsdale has repeatedly insisted is incorrect.

LMAO x a million!






OMG...

Too damn funny!

Let's just say that your world view is pretty retarded and leave it at that.

BTW pops...

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/03/30 ... senal.html

A new intercontinental ballistic missile hailed by Russian President Vladimir Putin as being able to fly over the North or South Poles and strike any target in the world reportedly was test-launched for the second time Friday.

Softball Bat wrote: And if you want to post space pics, then I'll ask you to show me a video of a rocket going from land to space.

Softball Bat wrote:
I will comment no further here on anything other than the Bible.

And you further support your position by being a fucking liar.

Derron wrote:
And you further support your position by being a fucking liar.

Straight-up. PROVEN liar. But he defends his asinine "they've never filmed it" with "it's fake."

There's no reasoning with a religious zealot... ever. And I've met dozens of zealots, and they all shared one thing in common -- extremely low intelligence (along with the money never coming out right in business deals -- their other common trait).

The Mesopotamians didn't have telescopes 6000 years ago. Hell, they didn't have pencils. They looked at the fucking night sky, and drew in the dirt, and scratched on rocks. And still managed to figure out the basics. And even they were smarter that Shithead Bat.

Derron wrote:

Softball Bat wrote:
I will comment no further here on anything other than the Bible.

And you further support your position by being a fucking liar.

What do you think I lied about?

Try to make some sense for a change, Derron.

Dinsdale wrote:

Softball Bat wrote: And if you want to post space pics, then I'll ask you to show me a video of a rocket going from land to space.

After your self-plungering was exposed for all to see, you're still in here running your mouth at me?





Did you not watch your rocket video, or what?

The feed cuts at 1:29.
The cut is there for everyone to see.

At 1:37 they start another video.


#fail





No surprise, of course.

Dinsdale wrote:

Derron wrote:
And you further support your position by being a fucking liar.

Straight-up. PROVEN liar. But he defends his asinine "they've never filmed it" with "it's fake."

There's no reasoning with a religious zealot... ever. And I've met dozens of zealots, and they all shared one thing in common -- extremely low intelligence (along with the money never coming out right in business deals -- their other common trait).

The Mesopotamians didn't have telescopes 6000 years ago. Hell, they didn't have pencils. They looked at the fucking night sky, and drew in the dirt, and scratched on rocks. And still managed to figure out the basics. And even they were smarter that Shithead Bat.

Go away, clown.