Is the earth flat?

[Alpha]

Alpha what do you make of this stuff?

https://www.metabunk.org/soundly-pro...artrain.t8939/

The water argument is a consistent one throughout the thread and one that if observed by any one of us day to day you'd have to conclude that it conforms to it's shape and is level. You really need to supersize the observation.

A flat Earth would be good. Especially if its proof had a Truman Show type ending. That would be brilliant.

Didn't have a look but Mick West is a shill and has been debunked over and over, as has Soundly. You will find anyone trying to debunk 'flat earth' will only ever use visual phenomena or formal science. They will never use natural science, or practical, physical demonstrations using the tangible substances of the earth. What I mean by that is, when we look down a set of railway tracks disapearing in the distance, they appear to converge, although we know in reality they are parallel. That is a visual phenomena. Physical phenomena is testing the substances, water, gases etc.

Cool Memphis, it sounds like you do agree with one of my first principles, but I'll pop it here, you can confirm if you want.

Would you agree that it's an objective physical truth that a body of water will always take the shape of its container and the surface will always be level?

So at what scale do you believe the physics of water change? Because we have been told the circumference of the earth, and using geometry we can work out how much it is curving per mile. I can demonstrate the physics of water, we have used water in construction for centuries.

The Truman Show had lots of truths in it, but also pushed the propaganda of a dome.

I never punks out alpha just got tired of it. To answer your question simply I’m not a fundamentalist when it comes to the Bible.

Ok, so you weren't really interested, and if your tired and not interested, why bother continuing to post stuff that deals in nothing practical? And thanks for the reply on the bible stuff. Lots of truths in there for me but also lots of allegory.

Alpha what do you make of this stuff?

https://www.metabunk.org/soundly-pro...artrain.t8939/

The water argument is a consistent one throughout the thread and one that if observed by any one of us day to day you'd have to conclude that it conforms to it's shape and is level. You really need to supersize the observation.

A flat Earth would be good. Especially if its proof had a Truman Show type ending. That would be brilliant.

So where is the end of the world? Surely someone would have got and taken a picture there by now to prove that Alpha was right all along.

Who knows if there is an end? Like I asked Tito, does space have an end/ edge? Most would accept that space doesn't have an end, but have been programmed to think earth must have one. I have not explored this earth fully, we are restricted from freely exploring this place.

Now there was Admiral Byrd (not that I trust him) on national TV, stating that he had see a huge ice wall, and beyond that was more land, in one of his expeditions to Antarctica. So we don't really know for sure, until we are free to explore this place.

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

[TitoFan]

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

Yeah Alpha... but in actuality, what would that prove? Say we went to the North Pole (let's just call it that for the sake of having something to call it). Flat Earthers do not believe the Earth is a globe, hence no poles exist, only more and more flat land. Compass readings would be useless. The huge circumference of the Earth (to us globers) makes it difficult to point out the globe shape of the Earth without resorting to the old horizon argument. We'd surely have to continue our journey down the other side of the Earth maintaining the same longitude. To us globers, eventually we'd end up in the same place... of course we'd have to traverse Antarctica. Doesn't seem practical. A better way for me would be to circle the globe (again... to us globers), maintaining the same latitude until we arrived where we started. But then you, as well as every other Flat Earther, would brush it off as us having gone around in a big circle. So in reality a trip to anywhere would be fruitless. The only visual way to prove the shape of the Earth is to go into space. I'm not sure you believe in space... but call it a high enough altitude to gain a perspective unavailable through any other means.

[Alpha]

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

Yeah Alpha... but in actuality, what would that prove? Say we went to the North Pole (let's just call it that for the sake of having something to call it). Flat Earthers do not believe the Earth is a globe, hence no poles exist, only more and more flat land. Compass readings would be useless. The huge circumference of the Earth (to us globers) makes it difficult to point out the globe shape of the Earth without resorting to the old horizon argument. We'd surely have to continue our journey down the other side of the Earth maintaining the same longitude. To us globers, eventually we'd end up in the same place... of course we'd have to traverse Antarctica. Doesn't seem practical. A better way for me would be to circle the globe (again... to us globers), maintaining the same latitude until we arrived where we started. But then you, as well as every other Flat Earther, would brush it off as us having gone around in a big circle. So in reality a trip to anywhere would be fruitless. The only visual way to prove the shape of the Earth is to go into space. I'm not sure you believe in space... but call it a high enough altitude to gain a perspective unavailable through any other means.

What would it prove? Um, if we travelled north or south according to the globe model we would end up where we started. Travelling West or East, with a compass always pointing north can be done on a flat plane. There are lots of demonstrations of this, using a magnet and a compass. All you have to worry about is the consents. It would either prove more land, or we would end up back where we started. I disagree, a visual way to prove the shape of the earth is to observe standing bodies of water (as we understand the physics of the substance).

[TitoFan]

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

Yeah Alpha... but in actuality, what would that prove? Say we went to the North Pole (let's just call it that for the sake of having something to call it). Flat Earthers do not believe the Earth is a globe, hence no poles exist, only more and more flat land. Compass readings would be useless. The huge circumference of the Earth (to us globers) makes it difficult to point out the globe shape of the Earth without resorting to the old horizon argument. We'd surely have to continue our journey down the other side of the Earth maintaining the same longitude. To us globers, eventually we'd end up in the same place... of course we'd have to traverse Antarctica. Doesn't seem practical. A better way for me would be to circle the globe (again... to us globers), maintaining the same latitude until we arrived where we started. But then you, as well as every other Flat Earther, would brush it off as us having gone around in a big circle. So in reality a trip to anywhere would be fruitless. The only visual way to prove the shape of the Earth is to go into space. I'm not sure you believe in space... but call it a high enough altitude to gain a perspective unavailable through any other means.

What would it prove? Um, if we travelled north or south according to the globe model we would end up where we started. Travelling West or East, with a compass always pointing north can be done on a flat plane. There are lots of demonstrations of this, using a magnet and a compass. All you have to worry about is the consents. It would either prove more land, or we would end up back where we started. I disagree, a visual way to prove the shape of the earth is to observe standing bodies of water (as we understand the physics of the substance).

Traveling east or west would be a lot more practical. We would end up in same place, using all the navigational technologies known to man. Still, I believe you (and every other flat Earther) would discount that by claiming we had actually traveled in a circle within the flat Earth. That's why I believe it would be fruitless.

[Alpha]

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

Yeah Alpha... but in actuality, what would that prove? Say we went to the North Pole (let's just call it that for the sake of having something to call it). Flat Earthers do not believe the Earth is a globe, hence no poles exist, only more and more flat land. Compass readings would be useless. The huge circumference of the Earth (to us globers) makes it difficult to point out the globe shape of the Earth without resorting to the old horizon argument. We'd surely have to continue our journey down the other side of the Earth maintaining the same longitude. To us globers, eventually we'd end up in the same place... of course we'd have to traverse Antarctica. Doesn't seem practical. A better way for me would be to circle the globe (again... to us globers), maintaining the same latitude until we arrived where we started. But then you, as well as every other Flat Earther, would brush it off as us having gone around in a big circle. So in reality a trip to anywhere would be fruitless. The only visual way to prove the shape of the Earth is to go into space. I'm not sure you believe in space... but call it a high enough altitude to gain a perspective unavailable through any other means.

What would it prove? Um, if we travelled north or south according to the globe model we would end up where we started. Travelling West or East, with a compass always pointing north can be done on a flat plane. There are lots of demonstrations of this, using a magnet and a compass. All you have to worry about is the consents. It would either prove more land, or we would end up back where we started. I disagree, a visual way to prove the shape of the earth is to observe standing bodies of water (as we understand the physics of the substance).

Traveling east or west would be a lot more practical. We would end up in same place, using all the navigational technologies known to man. Still, I believe you (and every other flat Earther) would discount that by claiming we had actually traveled in a circle within the flat Earth. That's why I believe it would be fruitless.

Of course it would be more practical, but like I said, if we travel west or east, keeping north at a 90 degrees, as shown by demonstrations (let me know if you haven't seen these, and I'll try to find one for you) or you could try the experiment yourself, can be done on a flat plane. Going any other direction than north or south also defeats the point I am trying to make, that we are not free to explore this place.

I think free exploration north or south (preferably north) is the key to finding out about this place where on. It is not necessary for proving we are not on a globe, as the physics of tangible substances like water and gases can do that simply.

[Fatboxingfan]

Makes no sense at all

[TitoFan]

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

Yeah Alpha... but in actuality, what would that prove? Say we went to the North Pole (let's just call it that for the sake of having something to call it). Flat Earthers do not believe the Earth is a globe, hence no poles exist, only more and more flat land. Compass readings would be useless. The huge circumference of the Earth (to us globers) makes it difficult to point out the globe shape of the Earth without resorting to the old horizon argument. We'd surely have to continue our journey down the other side of the Earth maintaining the same longitude. To us globers, eventually we'd end up in the same place... of course we'd have to traverse Antarctica. Doesn't seem practical. A better way for me would be to circle the globe (again... to us globers), maintaining the same latitude until we arrived where we started. But then you, as well as every other Flat Earther, would brush it off as us having gone around in a big circle. So in reality a trip to anywhere would be fruitless. The only visual way to prove the shape of the Earth is to go into space. I'm not sure you believe in space... but call it a high enough altitude to gain a perspective unavailable through any other means.

What would it prove? Um, if we travelled north or south according to the globe model we would end up where we started. Travelling West or East, with a compass always pointing north can be done on a flat plane. There are lots of demonstrations of this, using a magnet and a compass. All you have to worry about is the consents. It would either prove more land, or we would end up back where we started. I disagree, a visual way to prove the shape of the earth is to observe standing bodies of water (as we understand the physics of the substance).

Traveling east or west would be a lot more practical. We would end up in same place, using all the navigational technologies known to man. Still, I believe you (and every other flat Earther) would discount that by claiming we had actually traveled in a circle within the flat Earth. That's why I believe it would be fruitless.

Of course it would be more practical, but like I said, if we travel west or east, keeping north at a 90 degrees, as shown by demonstrations (let me know if you haven't seen these, and I'll try to find one for you) or you could try the experiment yourself, can be done on a flat plane. Going any other direction than north or south also defeats the point I am trying to make, that we are not free to explore this place.

I think free exploration north or south (preferably north) is the key to finding out about this place where on. It is not necessary for proving we are not on a globe, as the physics of tangible substances like water and gases can do that simply.

Alpha, no offense... but this is where sometimes we've gone astray. With all due respect, this is the kind of statement that can be taken as a bit demeaning by someone trying to argue their point with you. I'm perfectly capable of understanding what north is..... what 90 degrees are..... which is why I say "using all the navigational technologies known to man." Also, for you to say that traveling north-south is the only way to prove/disprove that we're on a globe, seems a bit questionable to me. If the Earth is truly a globe as we say, it matters little in which direction we circumvent it, as long as we keep a true and steady direction. The simplest would be either north-south, or east-west..... but either would be just as effective.

[Alpha]

I did offer to fully fund an expedition to Tito, as long as he paid for all the consents to be approved first, to go to Antarctica. But he probably thought I was joking. I'm serious, the offer still stands to anyone. I'm happy to set up joint accounts, with whoever is interested, with joint authority and access, and deposit 10 to 20 thousand, once all consents to be approved. But now I would prefer to travel North. But either way, if anyone is keen, to go either north or south, let me know, get all the consents approved so we are able to explore freely and we are on.

Yeah Alpha... but in actuality, what would that prove? Say we went to the North Pole (let's just call it that for the sake of having something to call it). Flat Earthers do not believe the Earth is a globe, hence no poles exist, only more and more flat land. Compass readings would be useless. The huge circumference of the Earth (to us globers) makes it difficult to point out the globe shape of the Earth without resorting to the old horizon argument. We'd surely have to continue our journey down the other side of the Earth maintaining the same longitude. To us globers, eventually we'd end up in the same place... of course we'd have to traverse Antarctica. Doesn't seem practical. A better way for me would be to circle the globe (again... to us globers), maintaining the same latitude until we arrived where we started. But then you, as well as every other Flat Earther, would brush it off as us having gone around in a big circle. So in reality a trip to anywhere would be fruitless. The only visual way to prove the shape of the Earth is to go into space. I'm not sure you believe in space... but call it a high enough altitude to gain a perspective unavailable through any other means.

What would it prove? Um, if we travelled north or south according to the globe model we would end up where we started. Travelling West or East, with a compass always pointing north can be done on a flat plane. There are lots of demonstrations of this, using a magnet and a compass. All you have to worry about is the consents. It would either prove more land, or we would end up back where we started. I disagree, a visual way to prove the shape of the earth is to observe standing bodies of water (as we understand the physics of the substance).

Traveling east or west would be a lot more practical. We would end up in same place, using all the navigational technologies known to man. Still, I believe you (and every other flat Earther) would discount that by claiming we had actually traveled in a circle within the flat Earth. That's why I believe it would be fruitless.

Of course it would be more practical, but like I said, if we travel west or east, keeping north at a 90 degrees, as shown by demonstrations (let me know if you haven't seen these, and I'll try to find one for you) or you could try the experiment yourself, can be done on a flat plane. Going any other direction than north or south also defeats the point I am trying to make, that we are not free to explore this place.

I think free exploration north or south (preferably north) is the key to finding out about this place where on. It is not necessary for proving we are not on a globe, as the physics of tangible substances like water and gases can do that simply.

Alpha, no offense... but this is where sometimes we've gone astray. With all due respect, this is the kind of statement that can be taken as a bit demeaning by someone trying to argue their point with you. I'm perfectly capable of understanding what north is..... what 90 degrees are..... which is why I say "using all the navigational technologies known to man." Also, for you to say that traveling north-south is the only way to prove/disprove that we're on a globe, seems a bit questionable to me. If the Earth is truly a globe as we say, it matters little in which direction we circumvent it, as long as we keep a true and steady direction. The simplest would be either north-south, or east-west..... but either would be just as effective.

Sorry Tito, not trying to be demeaning at all, things in text can be taken differently than they are intended. I'm was not sure if you have seen those demonstrations or not. But they clearly demonstrate that north can also be navigated in a circle on a flat plane.

I did not say this "traveling north-south is the only way to prove/disprove that we're on a globe" at all.

I said "It is not necessary for proving we are not on a globe, as the physics of tangible substances like water and gases can do that simply"

[walrus]

You asked me why I still contribute, because I can. Way too much of a conspiracy involving every country with satellite and space travel, the current ISS, Tesla, Richard Brandon, Jeff bezos, Elon musk too many private satellite companies currently operating, so much communication and data flowing through satellites, damn the list of the coverup would have started in the 1400’s till today. It doesn’t make sense. I believe shit is hidden and lied about all the time. In this case it just doesn’t make sense.

[Alpha]

You asked me why I still contribute, because I can. Way too much of a conspiracy involving every country with satellite and space travel, the current ISS, Tesla, Richard Brandon, Jeff bezos, Elon musk too many private satellite companies currently operating, so much communication and data flowing through satellites, damn the list of the coverup would have started in the 1400’s till today. It doesn’t make sense. I believe shit is hidden and lied about all the time. In this case it just doesn’t make sense.

Of course you can, but if your tired and not interested it seems strange. Nothing in your post practically demonstrates a globe.

So, as you are correct that you can continue to contribute, I will continue to ask you for practical demonstrations.

Would you agree that it's an objective physical truth that a body of water will always take the shape of its container and the surface will always be level?

[Memphis]

Alpha what do you make of this stuff?

https://www.metabunk.org/soundly-pro...artrain.t8939/

The water argument is a consistent one throughout the thread and one that if observed by any one of us day to day you'd have to conclude that it conforms to it's shape and is level. You really need to supersize the observation.

A flat Earth would be good. Especially if its proof had a Truman Show type ending. That would be brilliant.

Didn't have a look but Mick West is a shill and has been debunked over and over, as has Soundly. You will find anyone trying to debunk 'flat earth' will only ever use visual phenomena or formal science. They will never use natural science, or practical, physical demonstrations using the tangible substances of the earth. What I mean by that is, when we look down a set of railway tracks disapearing in the distance, they appear to converge, although we know in reality they are parallel. That is a visual phenomena. Physical phenomena is testing the substances, water, gases etc.

Cool Memphis, it sounds like you do agree with one of my first principles, but I'll pop it here, you can confirm if you want.

Would you agree that it's an objective physical truth that a body of water will always take the shape of its container and the surface will always be level?

So at what scale do you believe the physics of water change? Because we have been told the circumference of the earth, and using geometry we can work out how much it is curving per mile. I can demonstrate the physics of water, we have used water in construction for centuries.

The Truman Show had lots of truths in it, but also pushed the propaganda of a dome.

I guess the answer to your question is two fold and both with the caveat that is 'as far as I can see'. I've never conducted any scientific experiments but at a very basic say what you see level, water does conform to it's container and is 'level'. Would that be the same at my local fifty meter pool or reservoir? Don't know. I could observe in both of those relatively small containers that the water is conforming to it's boundaries. level? I couldn't say, but it would look that way. I apply the same logic to putting up a shelf. Does it look level? Then that's good enough for me.

I would imagine every flat/globe earther has been debunked and debunked again. If they weren't, we wouldn't have this thread. What is it about what I posted that you don't like? Not the people presenting it, but the methods or practices they use?

I don't really understand the train track idea. Flat, globe, the result would be the same.

[Fatboxingfan]

Alpha cannot lick the dust off those bottoms of Beanz shoes. Beanz soccintly dismantle your points like a laser beam, one by the one, zap! Zap! Zap! I love him and he's style when he does like that's! When he gets going he is unstoppable, he fires up those discourse engines on his all 8 cylinders and nobody can touch him!

[walrus]

Alpha cannot lick the dust off those bottoms of Beanz shoes. Beanz soccintly dismantle your points like a laser beam, one by the one, zap! Zap! Zap! I love him and he's style when he does like that's! When he gets going he is unstoppable, he fires up those discourse engines on his all 8 cylinders and nobody can touch him!

I like to touch beaner

#touchbeanz

[walrus]

I wish alpha could present a couple things. He has his argument I understand. However when asked to present any theory of what the earth may look like if not round, at least an iota instead of saying those who ask him about the edge are using scarecrow arguments seems short sighted. In addition why? For what reason would so many countries and private companies involved in space travel and satellite tech and communication cover this up. How would it not leak out? It would be one of the greatest cover ups in, well in anything ever. It’s just a question.

[Fatboxingfan]

he trusts his eyes when "conducting" his "water experiemnts" but says we cant trust our eyes.