Is the earth flat?

[Alpha]

you're totally confused man.. when seeing the perfect sphere from outer space on video from countless space shuttle missions, what is blocking your view from seeing the whole flat Earth? Can you say what is blocking your view? you don't even understand what an argument means. You use the example of a house blocking two people's views. So what in the example of observing the Earth from outer space signifies the house which is blocking your view from seeing the entire flat Earth? Can you answer that question? you keep repeating about water like a broken record and nobody is talking about water. What is blocking your view from seeing The flat Earth from outer space?

that would be my last question and you can go on in your delusions. I don't want to interrupt them. I thought perhaps you had some common sense. Guess I was wrong.

Also why don't you or one of your pals drive to the edge of the Earth and take a photo and post it here in this thread? I want to see a photo of the edge of the Earth. that is surely testable can't one of you people drive to the edge and take a photo and post it here? Yeah I didn't think so

Firstly images are not proof of anything as they can be manipulated. I think there is a bit of misunderstanding here, when you said "If it was all flat you could see the entire global landscape", I took that to mean that if one was standing on earth, hence the stuff in the way.

You said the Earth is flat. What shape is it then? A square? A rectangle? now you're saying it's flat but there is no edge? What shape would that be then? You're the one who doesn't answer any questions.

I said it's demonstrably level based on the tangible substance. I haven't fully explored this place, so I don't make assumptions. I have never seen an edge or been to it, who says it isn't an infinite plane?

Sorry Alpha, you are badly mis-informed. Very few serious geodesists stoop to arguing with flat-Earthers, owing to the appalling ignorance of flat-Earthers and their inability to deal with basic physics and mathematics, combined with very sketchy general knowledge and the lack of critical thinking skills. Flat-Earthers do rank high on any good gullibility index, however.

Flat-Earth doctrine is based on the original confidence trick pulled by Samuel Rowbotham, starting in the 1840s. Today it is pushed by professional Russian trolls and conspiracy theorists. There is zero credible evidence to support the flat Earth, and every one of Dubay’s dubious 200 ‘proofs’ (almost none of them would constitute a proof in any regular sense of the word) has been debunked many times and many ways. Most of them are claims without evidence.

After decades of investigation, measurements and analysis, there is no evidence to support the flat Earth, and it all supports the approximately spherical Earth model. If you cannot understand that, you clearly have not had it explained to you properly.

Objective reality is not up for debate sorry. You don't even understand the physics of water, and believe it does something else at some undefined scale, but are unable to practically demonstrate your belief. Math is a formal science.

The physics of water is the best scientific evidence that we are not on a globe.

Most people who begin questioning the globe know the heliocentric model inside out. I have been at this since Jan 2016. I am questioning the affirmative claim that we live on a globe. The globe model works perfectly as a concept. Unfortunately it does not match reality. Water being the most obvious problem.

You still haven't responded to anything I've asked you and have failed to provide a physical, practical demonstration of a standing body of water conforming to the exterior of a shape, as the globe claims it must. You are an intellectually dishonest zealot who can't practically demonstrate your beliefs.

[palmerq]

Bloody ell, Carl froch restarted this thread, thanks Carl.

You gits should go on his podcast and try to convince him!

[walrus]

http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/Longitude.html

[Fatboxingfan]

Nice post walrus-Frodo. Hope it clears up poor Alpha's delusions.

[Alpha]

Nice post walrus-Frodo. Hope it clears up poor Alpha's delusions.

Still waiting on your physical, practical demonstration of a standing body of water naturally conforming to the exterior of a shape, as the globe claims it must.

[Alpha]

http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/Longitude.html

Like I said, created on a flat earth map. There are dozens of flat earth models which work in mainstream science to predict and in some cases, like when NASA compares the two models, flat earth is the more desirable one: NASA - A comparative study of spherical and flat-Earth geopotential modelling at satellite elevations "Flat-Earth modelling is a desirable alternative to the complex spherical-Earth modelling process." https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19850023280 "flat-Earth modelling can be justified and is numerically efficient." https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19850023281

Again, not promoting any maps or models, just providing information.

At the end of the day, the physics of the substance known as water show us how it behaves in our reality. It is testable, repeatable, demonstrable and practical.