Is the Moon flat also, then?
Printable View
Is the Moon flat also, then?
The moon is definitely round, so how can the earth be flat?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
Spicoli mentioned this awhile back, and it's a good question to ask.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterThe moon is definitely round, so how can the earth be flat?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
But it's like looking at a pool table and thinking because the balls are round, then the table must be round as well.
Not really because you can see the straight edges on a pool table where as the straight edge you see as the horizon is a disc slice section of the sphere that is earth, not your distortion of your eyes telling you it is flat.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaSpicoli mentioned this awhile back, and it's a good question to ask.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterThe moon is definitely round, so how can the earth be flat?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
But it's like looking at a pool table and thinking because the balls are round, then the table must be round as well.
It is the exact same thinking, of course we can see the edges of the table, but we are not that size in relation to the earth. An ant on a pool looking at the balls, then thinks the table has to be round. That's the thought pattern.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanzNot really because you can see the straight edges on a pool table where as the straight edge you see as the horizon is a disc slice section of the sphere that is earth, not your distortion of your eyes telling you it is flat.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaSpicoli mentioned this awhile back, and it's a good question to ask.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterThe moon is definitely round, so how can the earth be flat?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
But it's like looking at a pool table and thinking because the balls are round, then the table must be round as well.
And yes chocolate can be liquid :p and at this point I've forgotten what relevance that may have in this head numbing redundancy.
Lets stop using 'flat' disk and instead go with Pizza Earth and surely the differences and disagreements will die out.
Yes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
If a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
What type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Would Mexico be like a giant jalapeno?
Flat tostada, surrounded by a wall of sour cream to keep everything from sliding off.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanz
Watery pizza... ugh... I'm having none of it.
If I fill a glass from a sink, seems about right. Unless I toss ice cubes in it. Seems to be the same with salt, Nestle quick, sand, cat food and marbles also.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWhat type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Or if you fill the sink, or a pool or anything else. You may throw in ice cubes but the water will still find it's level and the surface will remain flat. Lets leave that the other stuff out, as the claim of a globe has to be that water (which we are told covers over 70% of the earth's surface) can conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf I fill a glass from a sink, seems about right. Unless I toss ice cubes in it. Seems to be the same with salt, Nestle quick, sand, cat food and marbles also.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWhat type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Now would you agree that the core of science, should be observable, measurable, testable, and repeatable, using tangible substances. Meaning basically, if I claim something to be a reality, then you would expect me to show you something you could observe, test, measure and repeat yourself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaOr if you fill the sink, or a pool or anything else. You may throw in ice cubes but the water will still find it's level and the surface will remain flat. Lets leave that the other stuff out, as the claim of a globe has to be that water (which we are told covers over 70% of the earth's surface) can conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf I fill a glass from a sink, seems about right. Unless I toss ice cubes in it. Seems to be the same with salt, Nestle quick, sand, cat food and marbles also.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWhat type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Now would you agree that the core of science, should be observable, measurable, testable, and repeatable, using tangible substances. Meaning basically, if I claim something to be a reality, then you would expect me to show you something you could observe, test, measure and repeat yourself?
And would you expect the water surface of a pool, sink, etc, to be anything other than flat? A few feet versus thousands of miles? If you draw a circle 200 miles in diameter on the ground.... and take 2 inches of circumference.... would the line not be indistinguishable from a straight line? I know you don't want to hear about the "S" word (scale)... but it is what it is.
You keep asking about gravity. Well, you either believe Newton's law of universal gravitation, or you don't. Obviously, you don't. Why does the water conform to the Earth's surface? Well, just a wild guess... but gravitational force vectors are perpendicular to the Earth's surface at any given point, and are co-linear with the Earth's center. So at any given point, you'll have gravity forces acting on any mass, including water, pulling it straight down.
We'll there are 2 forms of gravity, Newtonian and Einstianian, and neither has been proven, so lets stick to facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by AlphaOr if you fill the sink, or a pool or anything else. You may throw in ice cubes but the water will still find it's level and the surface will remain flat. Lets leave that the other stuff out, as the claim of a globe has to be that water (which we are told covers over 70% of the earth's surface) can conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf I fill a glass from a sink, seems about right. Unless I toss ice cubes in it. Seems to be the same with salt, Nestle quick, sand, cat food and marbles also.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWhat type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Now would you agree that the core of science, should be observable, measurable, testable, and repeatable, using tangible substances. Meaning basically, if I claim something to be a reality, then you would expect me to show you something you could observe, test, measure and repeat yourself?
And would you expect the water surface of a pool, sink, etc, to be anything other than flat? A few feet versus thousands of miles? If you draw a circle 200 miles in diameter on the ground.... and take 2 inches of circumference.... would the line not be indistinguishable from a straight line? I know you don't want to hear about the "S" word (scale)... but it is what it is.
You keep asking about gravity. Well, you either believe Newton's law of universal gravitation, or you don't. Obviously, you don't. Why does the water conform to the Earth's surface? Well, just a wild guess... but gravitational force vectors are perpendicular to the Earth's surface at any given point, and are co-linear with the Earth's center. So at any given point, you'll have gravity forces acting on any mass, including water, pulling it straight down.
It's a fact of our objective reality that the natural physics of water, are that it will always fill it's container and the surface will remain flat. Look at any body of water. This is a fact Tito. Objective reality. Natural science, empirical evidence. Test, repeat, observe for yourself.
So can you demonstrate your claim Tito? Or should we just believe your theory?
Pour your glass of water, then imagine it as big as a car, whats the surface like? Then imagine it as big as a building, whats the surface like? Then imagine it as big as a planet, whats the surface like? Always flat, because we know how this tangible substance works in this reality. At what point in your mind does the water start to conform to the outside shape of the glass?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWe'll there are 2 forms of gravity, Newtonian and Einstianian, and neither has been proven, so lets stick to facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by AlphaOr if you fill the sink, or a pool or anything else. You may throw in ice cubes but the water will still find it's level and the surface will remain flat. Lets leave that the other stuff out, as the claim of a globe has to be that water (which we are told covers over 70% of the earth's surface) can conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf I fill a glass from a sink, seems about right. Unless I toss ice cubes in it. Seems to be the same with salt, Nestle quick, sand, cat food and marbles also.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWhat type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Now would you agree that the core of science, should be observable, measurable, testable, and repeatable, using tangible substances. Meaning basically, if I claim something to be a reality, then you would expect me to show you something you could observe, test, measure and repeat yourself?
And would you expect the water surface of a pool, sink, etc, to be anything other than flat? A few feet versus thousands of miles? If you draw a circle 200 miles in diameter on the ground.... and take 2 inches of circumference.... would the line not be indistinguishable from a straight line? I know you don't want to hear about the "S" word (scale)... but it is what it is.
You keep asking about gravity. Well, you either believe Newton's law of universal gravitation, or you don't. Obviously, you don't. Why does the water conform to the Earth's surface? Well, just a wild guess... but gravitational force vectors are perpendicular to the Earth's surface at any given point, and are co-linear with the Earth's center. So at any given point, you'll have gravity forces acting on any mass, including water, pulling it straight down.
It's a fact of our objective reality that the natural physics of water, are that it will always fill it's container and the surface will remain flat. Look at any body of water. This is a fact Tito. Objective reality. Natural science, empirical evidence. Test, repeat, observe for yourself.
So can you demonstrate your claim Tito? Or should we just believe your theory?
Pour your glass of water, then imagine it as big as a car, whats the surface like? Then imagine it as big as a building, whats the surface like? Then imagine it as big as a planet, whats the surface like? Always flat, because we know how this tangible substance works in this reality. At what point in your mind does the water start to conform to the outside shape of the glass?
Reread my post and then reread yours. You completely ignored my questions regarding scale, and seem hellbent on the pool of water. You pooh-pooh the gravity laws and only regurgitate what you've said over and over again.
Thus, I'm satisfied I've gone as far as I can with this argument, and am officially convinced you will never change your mind, because to begin with you dismiss hundreds of years of science, not to mention people who have actually flown in space.
I take it you've never flown in space, right?
Round Earther to Flat Earther....... over and out.
Your question regarding scale is irrelevant. Drawing a line in the ground? Are you trying to dispute the factual physics of water in this reality? Just give me 1 example that you have seen with your own eyes, of water conforming to the exterior of a shape like it would have to on a globe.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWe'll there are 2 forms of gravity, Newtonian and Einstianian, and neither has been proven, so lets stick to facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by AlphaOr if you fill the sink, or a pool or anything else. You may throw in ice cubes but the water will still find it's level and the surface will remain flat. Lets leave that the other stuff out, as the claim of a globe has to be that water (which we are told covers over 70% of the earth's surface) can conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf I fill a glass from a sink, seems about right. Unless I toss ice cubes in it. Seems to be the same with salt, Nestle quick, sand, cat food and marbles also.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaWhat type of gravity are you talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIf a sphere to scale..not sure what that exactly means but there it is..spins at what is to be thought 1000 miles per hour (?). Lets say a normal size globe with consideration to soil, surface and ocean depths and terrain ;D, would surface water not be likely to hold for the most part and rather than just slide off. Oh and gravity and stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaYes Chocolate can be a fluid, but it's water that is claimed to be able to conform to the exterior of a shape.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
the pizza claim is a winner btw ;D
Would you agree that in our reality, water will always fill it's container and the surface will always be flat?
Now would you agree that the core of science, should be observable, measurable, testable, and repeatable, using tangible substances. Meaning basically, if I claim something to be a reality, then you would expect me to show you something you could observe, test, measure and repeat yourself?
And would you expect the water surface of a pool, sink, etc, to be anything other than flat? A few feet versus thousands of miles? If you draw a circle 200 miles in diameter on the ground.... and take 2 inches of circumference.... would the line not be indistinguishable from a straight line? I know you don't want to hear about the "S" word (scale)... but it is what it is.
You keep asking about gravity. Well, you either believe Newton's law of universal gravitation, or you don't. Obviously, you don't. Why does the water conform to the Earth's surface? Well, just a wild guess... but gravitational force vectors are perpendicular to the Earth's surface at any given point, and are co-linear with the Earth's center. So at any given point, you'll have gravity forces acting on any mass, including water, pulling it straight down.
It's a fact of our objective reality that the natural physics of water, are that it will always fill it's container and the surface will remain flat. Look at any body of water. This is a fact Tito. Objective reality. Natural science, empirical evidence. Test, repeat, observe for yourself.
So can you demonstrate your claim Tito? Or should we just believe your theory?
Pour your glass of water, then imagine it as big as a car, whats the surface like? Then imagine it as big as a building, whats the surface like? Then imagine it as big as a planet, whats the surface like? Always flat, because we know how this tangible substance works in this reality. At what point in your mind does the water start to conform to the outside shape of the glass?
Reread my post and then reread yours. You completely ignored my questions regarding scale, and seem hellbent on the pool of water. You pooh-pooh the gravity laws and only regurgitate what you've said over and over again.
Thus, I'm satisfied I've gone as far as I can with this argument, and am officially convinced you will never change your mind, because to begin with you dismiss hundreds of years of science, not to mention people who have actually flown in space.
I take it you've never flown in space, right?
Round Earther to Flat Earther....... over and out.
Just 1 piece of empirical evidence of your spinning ball earth. Just 1.
Of course I won't change my mind, because I know it's a lie.
You are the 1 ignoring the actual natural science, or formulas and languages that were created by man.
Trusting the words of those you believe have been to space, is only hearsay. Again, it's not something you have seen for yourself.
And finally, I will repeat, I'm not trying to convince anyone. I have repeatedly advised that everyone does their own research and finds the knowledge for themselves. But I don't find it interest that you are trying to change my mind.
I can get into every other point, but I always start with natural science and water, empirical over artificial. The globe is only a belief.
No hey...... you're right. I've decided to become an explorer and venture off to the edge of the world. I mean, if it's flat, there must be an edge to it, right? Kind of excited, really.
Not sure what I'll find at the edge of the world, but whatever it is, I'll be sure to report back.
Thinking there's an edge is something that has been programmed into you. Not something you reasoned for yourself or have seen. Now neither have I, but like I have said, water needs to be contained in this reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
But good luck, try going to Antarctica first and see how far you get.
The globe should be quite an easy thing to prove, just let an independent party circumnavigate from the north pole, down over the south pole and right back around to the north pole again. Let us pull out a compass at the actual poles, we can also use star trails to prove are at the actual poles, that would prove where we are, not some military designed GPS (Global haha) system.
Or better yet, turn the apparently real hubble around, and give us an unedited live stream view of the earth.
People circumnativigate the globe all the time, by boat, plane, hot air balloon, etc. Why would only north to south be needed to disprove your idea? I mean other than because only it could from your way of thinking. What, in your mind, happens when someone or something sets out east or west, say from near the equator, and winds up in the same place without changing course?
Ha
Earlier this month, China made history by landing a rover on the ‘dark side of the moon’ for the first time.
While China’s National Space Administration has posted several photos and videos of the landing, conspiracy theorists aren’t convinced.
Now, one conspiracy theorist claims he has evidence that the moon landing was fake.
Scott C. Waring, who runs UFO Sightings Daily, believes he’s spotted a ‘stage prop line’ in a photo of the Jade Rabbit rover.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/science/chi...-moon-13855050
No live video of this again? We are in 2019 right? We had live (fake) footage in the 60s, but can't manage it now?
Compare the Chinese photo's with NASAs, and the scale sizes of both.
Space is fake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
Yeah right. Space if fake, blah, blah, blah. There is a question on post 301 you've yet to answer.
I've been fascinated by space travel since early childhood.
New VIDEO shows Chinese probe roaming the ‘dark side’ of the Moon
https://www.rt.com/news/448807-china...-e-moon-probe/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZmYX5nVwLc
I can't see it, what does it say?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
Yeah right. Space if fake, blah, blah, blah. There is a question on post 301 you've yet to answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaI can't see it, what does it say?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
Yeah right. Space if fake, blah, blah, blah. There is a question on post 301 you've yet to answer.
It says......
Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pking
Ok flat earthers believe the north pole is in the center, so your compass will always point north towards the center. So by traveling east or west around the north pole you can easily circumnavigate back to your starting point.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by AlphaI can't see it, what does it say?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
Yeah right. Space if fake, blah, blah, blah. There is a question on post 301 you've yet to answer.
It says......
Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pking
I was going to post this in the history thread, but I guess it fits here as well:
Werhern Von Braun's original 1948 unpublished novel, Men Between The Planets mentions "the Elon" as the leader of Mars. It was not published until 2006, as Project Mars: A Technical Tale, and then translated and re-published as The Mars Project in 1953.
https://mainlyboxing.files.wordpress...1948.png?w=768
The part about Elon, the book refers to a Martian that leads the people of Mars as "the Elon".
An interesting coincidence?