YOU GLOBE EARTHERS think you KNOW IT ALL Huh - WAKE UP

[Summer]

What makes it a Masonic theory, vs a theory that is independently testable by yourself, at least for basic physics? It appears you believe in static electricity, isnt that also a masonic theory?

I've never seen anything about evolution in any physics textbook I've ever read.

if it is nihilistic drivel, feel free to provide a better theory that is testable.

Are you willing to accept the results of your perception hypothesis, or will you just post hoc explain away whatever doesn't match your present beliefs?
After all, Flat earthers claim to be the open minded ones. wouldn't that mean you are open to changing your mind based on the best evidence?

I can see static electricity and feel it. Tell me when you can see gravity.

Also, if the earth is spinning at 1,000mph and rotating at 66,000mph around the sun while the solar system is supposedly barreling through space, why does Polaris NEVER change position?

 

[Robert5493]

I can see static electricity and feel it. Tell me when you can see gravity.

Also, if the earth is spinning at 1,000mph and rotating at 66,000mph around the sun while the solar system is supposedly barreling through space, why does Polaris NEVER change position?

you can see and feel static electricity?
or do you see and feel the "effects" of static electricity? just like you see and feel the "effects" of gravity.


this is a non sequitur,
but as you are a proponent of perspective,
notice how the sun appears to stay at the same place in the sky when you are driving? like it is following you out the window? (why does this happen in a flat earth?)

This is because you are driving only a few miles down the road in comparison to the sun which is 93,000,000 miles away.
so draw that out like a triangle, and you can see that the difference in angles at the bottom are negligible.
just did the math, and it is an angle of 89.9999999degrees. so you are looking at "apparently 90 degrees" no matter what. The triangle is so skinny, it is like a line.

Now do the same thing for the earth orbital diameter at ~93,000,000 miles vs the distance to Polaris at about 2.5454448 x 10^15 Miles
That is a lot of decimal nines, so it doesn't matter if it is winter or summer polaris appears at the same 'angle' in relation to the earth.

as for the earths spinning, that is the point of the presently north star.
The axis is pointing at Polaris, that is why it is the one that doesn't seem to move in relation to the earths axis.

 

[Summer]

you can see and feel static electricity?
or do you see and feel the "effects" of static electricity? just like you see and feel the "effects" of gravity.


this is a non sequitur,
but as you are a proponent of perspective,
notice how the sun appears to stay at the same place in the sky when you are driving? like it is following you out the window? (why does this happen in a flat earth?)

This is because you are driving only a few miles down the road in comparison to the sun which is 93,000,000 miles away.
so draw that out like a triangle, and you can see that the difference in angles at the bottom are negligible.
just did the math, and it is an angle of 89.9999999degrees. so you are looking at "apparently 90 degrees" no matter what. The triangle is so skinny, it is like a line.

Now do the same thing for the earth orbital diameter at ~93,000,000 miles vs the distance to Polaris at about 2.5454448 x 10^15 Miles
That is a lot of decimal nines, so it doesn't matter if it is winter or summer polaris appears at the same 'angle' in relation to the earth.

as for the earths spinning, that is the point of the presently north star.
The axis is pointing at Polaris, that is why it is the one that doesn't seem to move in relation to the earths axis.

LOL no you can actually see static electricity very clearly if the lights are off.

And sorry dawg your math doesn’t add up if our solar system isn’t stationary.

 

[Robert5493]

LOL no you can actually see static electricity very clearly if the lights are off.

And sorry dawg your math doesn’t add up if our solar system isn’t stationary.

no, you can see excited nitrogen photon discharges from electric potentials with the lights off. That is an effect, not the electricity itself.
That is certainly not the "static" electricity fields that attracts and repel objects to one another.

Your turn
my math works perfectly for a non stationary model, do the same math for the solar system moving in relation to the pole stars.
now show me the stationary flat earth math; how far away is the sun? the moon? the stars?
How can I see Polaris from Canada, but not from Australia?
why do the stars spin counterclockwise around polaris from Canada, but spin clockwise around Sigma Octanis (southern Pole star) in Australia?

 

[Summer]

no, you can see excited nitrogen photon discharges from electric potentials with the lights off. That is an effect, not the electricity itself.
That is certainly not the "static" electricity fields that attracts and repel objects to one another.

Your turn
my math works perfectly for a non stationary model, do the same math for the solar system moving in relation to the pole stars.
now show me the stationary flat earth math; how far away is the sun? the moon? the stars?
How can I see Polaris from Canada, but not from Australia?
why do the stars spin counterclockwise around polaris from Canada, but spin clockwise around Sigma Octanis (southern Pole star) in Australia?

I’ll let you do the math on that since you’re the one making the insane claim that Polaris stays in the same place despite so many factors of movement between planets, solar systems and galaxies. Enjoy some more Dubay videos for answers to your questions about star motions.


View: https://youtu.be/X-w8acuxF6w



View: https://youtu.be/V_RceH0-hSk

 

[Robert5493]

I’ll let you do the math on that since you’re the one making the insane claim that Polaris stays in the same place despite so many factors of movement between planets, solar systems and galaxies. Enjoy some more Dubay videos for answers to your questions about star motions.

Again, how far are the sun moon and stars in your flat earth models? How does the flat earth model explain the fact that Polaris (and the southern pole star) BOTH stay at the same position?

Nowhere in the first video does he explain why the star field spins in opposite directions in the southern "rim" region. He makes two separate arguments that are mutually exclusive. He claims "scale perspective and horizon" but then fails entirely to explain why people in tierra del fuego would see the same starfield as people in Australia. On a flat earth, they would have entirely different perspectives as they are at far different points on the Rim.
In the second video, notice how he never goes further "south" than the "equator"? and makes no mention of the southern pole star? because the model falls apart at that point.
Lots of eerie music and random pictures in both for some reason?

Do you just want to swap youtube videos and let other people make your argument for you?


ok here is a guy that even stays clear of "science and math" for those who are weak on either/both.
4 videos in total, far shorter simpler and logically consistent than the 2 you posted. No eerie music and random pictures either.



View: https://youtu.be/_bHqBy92iGM?t=97


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su-fmoZUkF8



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd-FAyHdpxI&t=67s



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ae_XdFEQDw

 

[Summer]

lol hey look you and Google both promote the same videos.

I don’t claim to know how far away the sun, moon or stars are. I haven’t ever visited them. Nor has anyone else.

And just so we’re clear, because Polaris (and the South Pole star according to you) don’t move, this is proof that we’re living on a spinning globe that is rotating around the sun in a solar system that is moving in a galaxy that is moving?

 

[Robert5493]

lol hey look you and Google both promote the same videos.

I don’t claim to know how far away the sun, moon or stars are. I haven’t ever visited them. Nor has anyone else.

And just so we’re clear, because Polaris (and the South Pole star according to you) don’t move, this is proof that we’re living on a spinning globe that is rotating around the sun in a solar system that is moving in a galaxy that is moving?

Again, how far are the sun moon and stars in your flat earth models? How does the flat earth model explain the fact that Polaris (and the southern pole star) BOTH stay at the same position?
I'll do the math for you. Just give me the numbers.


I never said they don't move, I said they don't apparently move in relation to the earth. I never made the claim that was proof of anything about a moving galaxy, only a model that accurately and consistently predicts what we observe. Like planetary motions, eclipse etc.

 

[Summer]

Again, how far are the sun moon and stars in your flat earth models? How does the flat earth model explain the fact that Polaris (and the southern pole star) BOTH stay at the same position?
I'll do the math for you. Just give me the numbers.

Again, I don’t claim to know.

 

[Robert5493]

Again, I don’t claim to know.

yet you appear to be claiming the globe earth model, that accurately and consistently predicts what we observe, like planetary motions, eclipse etc. and explains it in an internally consistent way, is inferior to a flat earth model that can do none of these things. Based on what? Masons?

 

[Summer]

yet you appear to be claiming the globe earth model, that accurately and consistently predicts what we observe, like planetary motions, eclipse etc. and explains it in an internally consistent way, is inferior to a flat earth model that can do none of these things. Based on what? Masons?

Based on many things. It’s funny that they can’t provide any real images or video of the globe earth from space. Instead, all amateur footage taken from miles higher than any commercial plane goes shows no curve. Like I’ve said before, NASA can’t seem to decide how big the continents are in every photo of the planet they’ve released. There are various glitches and inconsistencies in the fake ISS footage. Things falling to the ground in “zero gravity”. Things that are teleporting, remaining completely stationary while floating. It’s nonsense. Even SpaceX fakes their test rocket footage. It’s all nonsense. Not only does it push atheistic nihilism, it also generates a lot of money that goes who knows where.

 

[Robert5493]

Based on many things. It’s funny that they can’t provide any real images or video of the globe earth from space. Instead, all amateur footage taken from miles higher than any commercial plane goes shows no curve. Like I’ve said before, NASA can’t seem to decide how big the continents are in every photo of the planet they’ve released. There are various glitches and inconsistencies in the fake ISS footage. Things falling to the ground in “zero gravity”. Things that are teleporting, remaining completely stationary while floating. It’s nonsense. Even SpaceX fakes their test rocket footage. It’s all nonsense. Not only does it push atheistic nihilism, it also generates a lot of money that goes who knows where.

you're moving the discussion from things that you can directly observe and calculate or test, to insinuations of "I've found some things I think are inconsistent, so there must be a conspiracy".
but from that, even if everything you say is true and there is some kind of massive conspiracy, this in now way supports a flat earth narrative unless you also have a model that can explain what we observe. Thus far, no one has even remotely done so. Only individual explanations for specific observations, all of which are mutually exclusive of each other.

in the videos, watch the last of the 4 for me. (I watched both yours) Look at the size of the conspiracy you are speaking about, and tell us who it is that would be benefitting?

It was mentioned someone thought they knew why I felt sad, not sure it was you, but I've given it some thought and will reply to it here.

I believe it is because when I found Ray Peat,
I found a logically consistent thinker who had an overarching model of life (Generative energy model, structure and energy at every level) which explains many things far better than most of the existing medical models that I've read thus far.

I had assumed others were attracted to his work and this community for the same reasons, and thus would be equally critical thinkers with minds open to real evidence.
This thread has been an eye opener for me, and see now that many people are not seeking evidence of the most accurate model of our world to date, but something else entirely.
I don't know what that is. A sense of superiority? keepers of secret knowledge? more intelligent than everyone else? a flex 'I'm more anti-narrative than everyone else'?

Whatever it is, it certainly is not open minded critical thinking, but a closed camp of self referential inflexible beliefs.
Contrary to this flat earth discussion, Ray's health model is logically consistent and testable as such.
I truly hope Ray Peat, and this forum, don't get lumped in with flat earth frivolity and thereby dismissed by association to newcomers.

 

[Robert5493]

all amateur footage taken from miles higher than any commercial plane goes shows no curve.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ7R9-15Zsw

 

[LeeLemonoil]

Still no answer to one simple questions.

Why had nobody been to the edge of Terra Flatulenca and brought documentation?

Why don’t you fund a Space-X-ride to see the disc with your own eyes?

 

[Mister]

Entertaining thread.

But lol just watch at the sun, moon and other planets, it's clear they're balls. Why would the earth be different?

 

[Jing]

Still no answer to one simple questions.

Why had nobody been to the edge of Terra Flatulenca and brought documentation?

Why don’t you fund a Space-X-ride to see the disc with your own eyes?

Because you can't just freely travel the earth without restrictions how would you possibly get to this "edge" even if there is one? But your ego is so big you think you have discovered everything when in reality we are a Tiny speck on a massive peice of land what we know of as earth is nothing in comparison to what land they are hiding.

 

[LeeLemonoil]

Because you can't just freely travel the earth without restrictions how would you possibly get to this "edge" even if there is one? But your ego is so big you think you have discovered everything when in reality we are a Tiny speck on a massive peice of land what we know of as earth is nothing in comparison to what land they are hiding.

So, no answer. Not even an Argument. Just „your ego“ - which doesn’t factor in here one bit btw -

And and unproven, unevidenced Claim that there is a vast, secret territory on this Planet that isn’t free to travel.

Next question:
How do you know? Evidence please. Not only your ego-driven, Self-grandiose „I know, you don’t“

How are these restricted areas guarded or hidden? Since when?

And is that an integral part of Terra Flatulenca-Hypothesis? That vast restricted areas exist and that restriction is why there cannot be proof? Or is that the belief of one faction/sect of Flatearthers and others offer other hypothesis?

 

[LLight]

Entertaining thread.

Yes, but now it's sad.

The "I can't see it, therefore it can't exist" team is not in a good state. It looks too much like Biden interventions to be funny anymore.

Not sure if they are not just trolling, they are often borderline.

 

[mariantos]

LETS TALK ABOUT THE SUN GLOBE EARTHERS

Why don't the Sun rays appear parallel? I REALLY WANT TO KNOW

View attachment 41769

View attachment 41770
View attachment 41771

Read the book of Enoch chapter 72 to learn about the sun, its movements, etc. The book of Enoch, from chapter 72 to chapter 82 speaks of the luminaries of heaven. You will see that both the sun and the moon pass through certain gates (portals). I recommend it to everyone who wants to know the truth.

 

[JamesGatz]

yet you appear to be claiming the globe earth model, that accurately and consistently predicts what we observe, like planetary motions, eclipse etc. and explains it in an internally consistent way, is inferior to a flat earth model that can do none of these things. Based on what? Masons?

How is that NOT a valid argument if they lie on everything else?

Isaac Newton had a huge incentive to lie because the 2 secret societies he's in have huge agendas to lie to people about this garbage and after he released this scam he was appointed into the Royal Society and Knighted so he could infiltrate the education systems

The Moon Landing was faked

NASA has NEVER sent a person into space

Sattelites dont exist

The ISS doesnt exist

They pump out fake climate data

They CGI and photoshop fake images of Earth

But of course this is the ONLY thing they're telling the truth about right Robert? Joke