Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Ladislaus,
What you have to understand is that flat earthers are not the ones proposing a model.

We are condemning the globe because it doesn't stand on two legs in terms of the science.
.
Flat-earthers don't have a model because their bull-hockey "theory" is a pile of crap.
.
You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
.
The spheroid earth model meets up just fine with all the observed data, from every branch of science.
.
2
Neil, I don't know if anybody else will appreciate this video, but I think you'll have fun with it...

i
.
The date at the end says MCMXLIII -- 1943.
.
That's the year they made pennies out of steel (saving copper for the war), but about a dozen copper pennies were struck by mistake.
Today there are only 4-1943 copper pennies known to exist and they're valued at roughly $200,000 each (two hundred thousand dollars).
.
The video shows precise identification of lighthouse beacons based on their flashing timing which is measured by stopwatch.
.
Curiously, such stopwatches were not yet invented during WWI.
.
So as our equipment gets more precise and sophisticated, better observations can be made.
.
This entire video would be nonsense if the earth were "flat" especially for the Cape Charles Light with 740,000 candlepower and 180 ft. in height.
See minute 2. Visibility is given in their tables based on height of the light above sea level, because of earth's curvature.
.
Why is such a powerful light not visible far out at sea? Because of the earth's curvature! 
3
General Discussion / Walter Williams
« Last post by Marlelar on Yesterday at 11:45:28 PM »
Thought provoking commentary.

On Black History Month
4
The idea of a model is based simply on what we see. We see a flat plane and so presume it is always like that.

But mapping is another issue.

The solidity of the firmament is speculation, but could be proven by science. Not by ordinary folks though.

I agree that the model is speculative. but there are questions over the different models, so people flat earthers are entitled to have different opinions. But one thing we are united around is our rejection of the globe.
.
Based on what we see, putting together all the data, when you come up with a model, it is a globe.
.
Simple.
.
5
Just sloppy.
.
The video you link is really, really bad. How could you be associated with such lowbrow junk?
The camera is out of focus, wobbling and off the page.
The reader hems and haws, saying "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand" -- unbelievable.
No mention of the publisher or even the title of the encyclopedia.
You know there have been some really bad encyclopedias in print.
If this is the kind of trash flat-earthers are reading, no wonder they're confused.
.

6
.
Why do flat-earthers pretend the earth is "flat" when everyone knows it's not?
.
7
The Earth God Made - Flat Earth, Geocentrism / Re: HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE
« Last post by Neil Obstat on Yesterday at 11:06:50 PM »
.
Why do flat-earthers pretend the earth is "flat" when everyone knows it's not?
.
8
.
Why do flat-earthers pretend the earth is "flat" when everyone knows it's not?
.
9
Neil is here feigning ignorance again.

He's so exposed.
.
Like I said, a tinge of jealousy --- flat-earthers are green with envy! Their rocket is a flop. 
10
.
It has been recognized for many centuries that the consistently circular shape of the shadow earth casts on the moon is direct evidence of the spherical shape of the earth.
.
There never has been any serious contention against this conclusion.
.
It is patently ridiculous to try making an example of what a sphere's shadow on another sphere looks like when the point of observation is a THIRD location (instead of the location of the shadow-casting sphere).
.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10