1

Flat Earth General / Sandokhan's statement about the Sun rising in the west.

« on: May 10, 2025, 09:59:12 PM »

Sandokhan often claims that the Sun will rise in the west and set in the east, and that this will disprove the globe.
However, Sandokhan and the globularists seem not to have realized that this scenario is perfectly possible on a globe without any changes in the rotation of the globe, it is enough for the axis of the globe to tilt ≈ 180º, this would cause ALL celestial bodies that rise in the east to begin to rise in the west.

If the Sun does indeed rise in the west in the future, but some or all of the stars continue to rise in the east, this would mean that the Sun has changed the direction of its orbit and the stars have continued in their traditional orbits, and it would be proof that the Earth is stationary.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support donald trump

« on: April 27, 2025, 03:55:07 PM »

Government is psychological. If no one obeys, no one commands.

3

Flat Earth General / Climate change

« on: April 21, 2025, 06:41:19 PM »

Greenhouse effect does not exist.
The air is in thermodynamic equilibrium.
In 1919, Einstein demonstrated that if a gas was in thermodynamic equilibrium, the rate of adsorption by an infrared gas was equal to its emission.
That is, if you increase the amount of infrared-active gases in the atmosphere, you will increase the rate of absorption, but crucially, at the same time, you will increase the rate of emission.
Therefore, if the gas is in thermodynamic equilibrium, there will be no greenhouse effect – it will not store energy.
https://climatecite.com/albert-einstein-co2-cant-store-heat/


According to 'Direct Atmospheric Measurements', CO² levels were above 400 ppm in the 1940s:
https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia3/ciencia_globalwarmingpseudo243.htm



Climate change is caused by a universal imbalance: too much mass is transformed into energy, but too little energy is transformed into mass. The universe is a closed system, and the accumulated energy is producing too much heat.

Almost all human actions contribute to the increase in temperature, which is why climate change is much more serious than we think.

Fighting climate change requires transforming energy into mass to restore balance.

4

Flat Earth General / Katy Perry in space

« on: April 17, 2025, 11:43:13 AM »

We literally don't see any spinning ball, only impulsive and hallucinated globers are thinking this proves the spinning wet globe, and only ignorant flat earthers are denying that it is real.


Katy Perry said the Earth is flat:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIjfIgbpvCA/?igsh=NzM5dWlqdXhzMm1j

5

Flat Earth General / Re: Underwater horizon if the Earth were spherical

« on: April 01, 2025, 03:16:45 AM »

If the Earth was flat we would be able to dive into clear water and see the sun 24 hours a day,  because it would never set.

ON FLAT EARTH, THE SUN LITERALLY SETS. THE SUN SETS AT THE EDGES.



Celestial bodies with regular orbits (like the Sun) rises at one of the gates in the ground to the east beyond Antichtone, follow the eastern path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations according to the time of year. They sets at the easternmost part of the opening in the center of the Earth's plane, rise at the westernmost part of the opening in the center of the Earth's plane, follow the western path continuing in the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, sets at one of the gates to the west beyond Antichtone, and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the actual diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and rises on the other side almost instantaneously.  The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the high density of aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).


《The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises.》
– Eclesiastes 1:5


If the Earth were a globe, we should dive down and see the Sun even after it sets.

6

Flat Earth General / Underwater horizon if the Earth were spherical

« on: March 31, 2025, 07:04:31 PM »

If the Earth were spherical, it should be possible to see beyond the horizon by diving into clear water. We could dive into the water and see the Sun again after it sets.

7

Flat Earth General / Re: Pics of Another Sunrise Impossible on Flat Earth

« on: March 29, 2025, 07:35:14 AM »

During sunrise, the Sun is at a lower altitude than the altitude of the clouds.

How in a flat earth delusion where the sun is always 300 to 3000 miles above the earth.

The correct model BI-POLAR flat Earth is shaped like a Japanese coin:

The old earth is shaped like a doughnut argument.

Draw out your doughnut earth and gates and show how that explains what is actually witnessed from day to day.  Year to year..

If remember…

But the bipolar map is useless too.

Antarctica is a big island on a Bi-Polar flat Earth too.

  Been over this before. Your map would get people lost at sea and killed. 



If you travel straight south over South America and over the water you eventually end up under the celestial South Pole.  Your map you have to turn.


The sun on your map would have to travel by south / north over India.  Makes no sense.

If you travel straight east out of the USA Carolina’s, you end up in Spain/North Africa.  Not traveling between South American and Africa.

  AnneFrothingslosh.  Why do you flat earthers act like your lies have never been called out.  And you have been debunked? 

And how is your old drawings based on a earth shaped like a doughnut? 

😂😂😂😂😂😂

*In the real model, the Sun reaches a MAXIMUM of ≈ 12 km in altitude.

*A simple illustration of the Sun's path:


The red line illustrates the path of the Sun, which varies in position between the tropics throughout the year.

During sunrise, the Sun is at a lower altitude than the altitude of the clouds.

Which would require sunrise and sunset to be at the same time for everyone.
But it isn't.

When you that fact into consideration, what you end up with is a sphere (or at least the surface of a cylinder ignoring the end caps).
That is not a flat Earth.

The correct model BI-POLAR flat Earth is shaped like a Japanese coin

Spamming the same crap in multiple threads wont help you.
Your argument is just as wrong here as it was there.

*Sunsets do not occur at the same time all over the Earth for three main reasons:
1) The higher the altitude, the greater the density of the aether layers. The higher the density, the more the speed of light is reduced, resulting in a delay in apparent sunset at higher altitudes.

2) The closer the observer is to the edges, the greater the density of the aether layers. The greater the density, the more the speed of light is reduced, generating a delay in apparent sunset at longitudes closer to the edges.

3) Aether currents below the flat Earth conduct sunlight to the opposite side of the Earth plane, causing the Sun to simultaneously rise on one side and set on the other.

DO NOT LOOK DIRECTLY AT THE SUN!

It is actually safe to look at the disc of the sun, once its aurora recedes, something that only happens in the seconds before sunset.

I was pointing to the uphill angle of this picture (I stopped at the dirt pile to show how well before actual elevation, distance appears as upward slope).

As for the "spherical Earth", do you notice how the clouds start to climb up the sky?

No, as yet again you are spouting vague crap with absolutely nothing behind it.
What do you mean by "start to climb up the sky"?

Look at the position of the dark blue clouds, genius.

The alternative model, where the Sun literally rises and sets, is much more appropriate.

8

Flat Earth General / Re: Pics of Another Sunrise Impossible on Flat Earth

« on: March 27, 2025, 09:30:29 AM »

Why is it that you think this is impossible on a flat Earth?

It’s been drawn out and shown many times Bulma.  Has nothing to do with light turning corners.

Quick cartoon sketch of spherical earth clouds illuminated bottom up




You…

DataOverFlow2022 even validated phew physics. 👍

"U" shape of sunlight path means, the more distant clouds undergo sunlight illuminating at its upper part, while the less distant clouds undergo sunlight illuminating at the under part.

Now…

When a person is under a cloud say at noon, the bottom of the cloud is shaded from the top so the bottom is darker.  Or you can actually watch cloud shadows move across fields or mountains. 

Something like this for FE,


Now.  Flat earth.  How is the person farthest from the cloud and sun at sunset/sunrise seeing the cloud illuminated bottom up?  While the person closest to the sun/cloud is seeing the cloud illuminated top down with the cloud casting shadows on the earth?

The clouds illuminated from bottom up where the sun is relatively below the clouds made possible by a rotating earth in the heliocentric model.

Another impossible FE sunrise…



Time of picture: 7:35

Actual sun rise time 7:42

  Bulma.  Where the sun in the FE delusion is always above the clouds made / above the cloud ceiling. 

Where Bulma you claim light dies and that’s why the sun isn’t visible.  In your delusion Bulma, the sky shouldn’t even be illuminated until the disc of the sun is visible.  But the sky is illuminated by the sun several minutes before the sun rises.

During sunrise, the Sun is at a lower altitude than the altitude of the clouds.

The correct model BI-POLAR flat Earth is shaped like a Japanese coin:


Celestial bodies with regular orbits (like the Sun) rises at one of the gates in the ground to the east beyond Antichtone, follow the eastern path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations according to the time of year. They sets at the easternmost part of the opening in the center of the Earth's plane, rise at the westernmost part of the opening in the center of the Earth's plane, follow the western path continuing in the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, sets at one of the gates to the west beyond Antichtone, and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the actual diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and rises on the other side almost instantaneously.  The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the high density of aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).


《The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises.》
– Eclesiastes 1:5

9

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The Dark Side?

« on: March 26, 2025, 03:43:44 PM »

Below the flat surface of the Earth are layers such as the mantle, core, and bedrock.
Below the bedrock is an empty region, poor in aether, and probably flooded by the water of the ocean beyond Antichtone.
Below this empty region there may be some barrier of bedrock or ice, but it is not certain.

The aether has parabolic gradients that increase in density as it approaches the first firmament. This density is very high in the vicinity of Antichtone, preventing us from being able to reach that continent. Any ship or airplane sailing towards Antichtone will be deflected by the aether and will skirt the perimeter of the aether barrier until it reaches the opposite side of the Earth's surface. If the ship/airplane keeps moving forward, it will return to its starting point.
In the case of airplanes, there is an additional factor: airplanes depend on air for lift, they always travel along the density gradient for which they are configured, and the atmospheric layers have parabolic gradients, that is: the air becomes increasingly rarefied as it approaches the edge.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.
Circumnavigations in general cover an average distance of 40000 km, this is because the diameter of the Earth is actually ≈ 20000 km, the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.


The dense aether barrier also deflects electromagnetic radiation that strikes the Earth's surface to the opposite side. This alters measurements of the Earth's diameter that disregard the aether, and also allows the Sun to set on one side of the Earth's surface and simultaneously rise on the opposite side.

First question: there is an ice wall surrounding Antarctica, and Antarctica is guarded by the penguins NASA trained, so you can't go there

Second question: there is a firmament around the Earth, any rocket that goes up will hit the firmament and explode dramatically, basically you can't go to the bottom of the Earth.

There is no ice wall around Antarctica.
The first firmament may be traversable, and the apparent curvature in space images may be explained as an optical illusion.

10

Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth theory in a Nutshell

« on: March 26, 2025, 03:08:10 PM »

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

There is no strawman here, because flat Earthers don't even have a theory to twist from the start. If you are so smart enough to educate me, please point out a coherent flat Earth model containing at least the following information:
1. a map of the flat Earth (with a scale)
2. a picture of where the moon and the sun is located
3. physical parameter of the moon and the sun
4. orbital parameter of the moon and the sun (if they move)
5. basic explanation about the seasons and daylight cycle

It's a simple question, don't go around and assert bs.

It's obviously a strawman, because not all FET advocates follow the pattern you described.

1) The most accurate map of the flat Earth to date:


However, this is still not the correct map, the behavior of celestial bodies indicates that the flat Earth has a shape similar to a Japanese coin:


A new map needs to be created to reconcile the Bi-Polar map with the ring-shaped model.

2) What do you mean by that?
The Moon and the Sun are located in space, at an altitude that varies throughout the day, the maximum altitude they reach is ≈ 12 kilometers, and the minimum altitude is still unknown, but we know that it is below sea level.
And so far, the FE community does not have enough resources to go to the place where the celestial bodies are and take a picture (if that is really possible).

3) Both have ≈ 55,805 meters in diameter, have a flattened shape (but not completely flat), the Moon is probably composed of fluorescent and phosphorescent rocks, while the Sun is probably composed of hydrogen and helium plasma.

4) Here is an illustration to help you better imagine my explanation (remembering that it is a merely illustrative image and does NOT accurately represent the flat Earth):


Celestial bodies with regular orbits (like the Sun) rises at one of the gates in the ground to the east beyond Antichtone, follow the eastern path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations according to the time of year. They sets at the easternmost part of the opening in the center of the Earth's plane, rise at the westernmost part of the opening in the center of the Earth's plane, follow the western path continuing in the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, set at one of the gates to the west beyond Antichtone, and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the actual diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and rises on the other side almost instantaneously.  The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the high density of aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).


《The sun rises, and the sun goes down, and hastens to the place where it rises.》
– Eclesiastes 1:5

The Moon revolves around the Sun.


5) ● Seasons occur because the Sun's orbit varies in position throughout the year.
● The daylight cycle is determined by the Sun's position and the deflection of sunlight. In addition, the Sun literally sets.

11

Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth theory in a Nutshell

« on: March 25, 2025, 03:40:53 PM »

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

12

Flat Earth Debate / Re: NASA faked footage - seriously

« on: March 25, 2025, 03:35:54 PM »

Blah blah blah

Your questions seemed valid before, but now that they have been resolved, repeating the same questions makes you seem like a baby. The flat Earth theory remains irrefutable and unshakable, while the globe becomes increasingly obsolete and indefensible.

"𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙢𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙩𝙡𝙮, 𝙬𝙚 𝙨𝙚𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙛𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙙𝙞𝙛𝙛𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙡𝙚𝙨.
𝘿𝙤 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙠𝙣𝙤𝙬 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙤𝙣𝙡𝙮 𝙨𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙞𝙘𝙝 𝙞𝙨 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩?
𝘼 𝙜𝙡𝙤𝙗𝙚."

Or a flat Earth with aether-generated Ferrari Effect.

"𝙔𝙚𝙩 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣'𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙫𝙞𝙙𝙚 𝙖 𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙡𝙚 𝙚𝙭𝙖𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙨𝙪𝙘𝙝 𝙖𝙣 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙥𝙝𝙤𝙩𝙤 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙣𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙣𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙤 𝙡𝙞𝙚 𝙩𝙤 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮𝙤𝙣𝙚.
𝙁𝙤𝙧 𝙚𝙭𝙖𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙚, 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘽𝙡𝙪𝙚 𝙢𝙖𝙧𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚."

In blue marble, we literally see ALL OF AFRICA, at an altitude of NO MORE THAN 12 km. It is 100% incompatible with the globe.

"𝙞.𝙚. 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 "𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙜𝙡𝙤𝙗𝙚" 𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙢𝙚𝙖𝙣𝙨 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙙𝙚𝙡𝙪𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝘽𝙎.
𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙙𝙤𝙚𝙨𝙣'𝙩 𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙬 𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙛𝙖𝙪𝙡𝙩 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙜𝙡𝙤𝙗𝙚."

On both the globe and the flat Earth, the edge of the universe cannot exceed 62 kilometers in altitude.

"𝙒𝙃𝙔?
𝙎𝙩𝙤𝙥 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙚𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝘽𝙎.
𝘾𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙡𝙮 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙞𝙣 𝙝𝙤𝙬 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙬𝙖𝙫𝙮 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙖𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙢𝙖𝙜𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙬𝙨 𝙞𝙩 𝙩𝙤 𝙗𝙚 𝙡𝙖𝙧𝙜𝙚 𝙞𝙣 𝟮 𝙙𝙞𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨, 𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙧𝙙.
𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙄 𝙙𝙤𝙣'𝙩 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙢𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙖 𝙘𝙧𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙮 𝙥𝙞𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙞𝙘𝙝 𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙬𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙤𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙨𝙤𝙧𝙩."

🤣 Maybe you need to look at the image more and try harder to understand it, you seem to have a learning disability or extreme cognitive dissonance.


If you attempt to make any diagonal or horizontal measurements, the concavity of the local shell will prevent the measurement from going beyond 62 km.

13

Flat Earth Debate / Re: NASA faked footage - seriously

« on: March 22, 2025, 09:13:57 AM »

We never see a globe, we always see a circle.
The apparent curvature is just a superficial detail, likely caused by distortion generated by the absurdly dense layers of aether.

etc.

Stop trying to pretend you understand science and answer this question please:

Why can't we see the rim in any of the photos and videos, including the 4-hour long Roadster video?

Why do you think this should be visible?

14

Flat Earth Debate / Re: NASA faked footage - seriously

« on: March 22, 2025, 06:27:44 AM »

We never see a globe, we always see a circle.
The apparent curvature is just a superficial detail, likely caused by distortion generated by the absurdly dense layers of aether.

Space photos of Earth are incompatible with the globe. A glaring example, blue marble:


We can see practically the whole of Africa in this image.
The Moon reaches a maximum height of 12 km at the highest peak of its daily orbit, that is: the blue marble was photographed at a distance of no more than 12 km from Earth.

Wolfgang Pauli made a calculation showing that the radius of curvature of the observable universe cannot be more than ≈ 31 km if zero-point energy/ether exists.


"If the electromagnetic field really had a zero-point energy that did not disappear, then the radius of the universe would be 31 km."
– Wolfgang Pauli
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F0901.3640&ved=2ahUKEwiywPSt-quGAxUNppUCHb78Bx4QFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw3vsIgyQMZQbZyV36GpemxI https://academic.oup.com/astrogeo/article-abstract/53/1/1.24/218451?redirectedFrom=fulltext
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

Globularists often claim that this would imply an Earth with a diameter of only 62 km. However, we can resolve this with a wavy firmament.

Globularists also claimed that a wavy firmament would allow for an infinitely large universe, but the wavy firmament only allows the universe to be horizontally large, the radius of the vertical distance between the center of the Earth's surface and the second firmament cannot be greater than 31 km.


A simple calculation about the visibility of the entire African continent clearly in the blue marble image, taking into account the maximum height of 12 km, on Walter Bislins' calculator:


Obviously this is a grotesque violation of the law of perspective, so there must be aether interference in large quantities.

15

Flat Earth Debate / Re: NASA faked footage - seriously

« on: March 17, 2025, 02:25:07 AM »

All the photographs and video that shows the Earth to be round, most of which has been produced by NASA.

It is the stated position of the FE community that all of this material is fake.

Contradict the above if you will.

An example; video taken from the ISS.



Today the quality of this material and the volume produced is such that one must ask: how is it possible to create so much detailed video? It would be a colossal task. Disney couldn't do it, they'd be bankrupt in a, well, a lot shorter time than they are going to be. Meanwhile, the ISS keeps churning out video.

Does anyone who thinks the video above is fake believe they themselves could produce a fake video like this? Do they know anyone who could? Do they know even where to start?

The images and videos are true, I don't see a globe.

16

Flat Earth General / Re: Qibla direction was false so far

« on: March 11, 2025, 02:14:15 AM »

And furthermore, if the Earth were a globe, Muslims would be praying facing space rather than facing the Qibla.

17

Flat Earth General / Re: TFES is Camping

« on: January 28, 2025, 02:49:38 AM »

TFES is controlled opposition. Eric Dubay knows it,

I know it, and unfortunately for you, there are a few real flat Earthers here that know it.

TFES now claim, correctly or otherwise, that the Rim Model was never their own, and that they adhere to a different model. Yet they are reluctant to publicize or discuss this other supposed model, which they do and have in the past kept a secret for practical purposes.

[/size]


No they don't. Stop lying. There is nothing wrong with the rim model, even in the face of the so-called Final Experiment.


What some flat Earthers do in the face of this thing is to claim that the reason we see different sky in northern and southern hemisphere is because there are two horizontal layers of sky, inner and outer. But the rim (since it is earth not sky) is largely untouched.

But they claim they don't know the overall shape of Earth, so they can keep pushing the problem around.

[/font][/size]

[/size]
Versus people who arrogantly behave as though they were there when the Earth was created and know its shape.

Eric Dubay is a controlled opposition, he defends a very wrong model and uses ridiculous arguments.
TFES still defends many wrong things, but it is less worse than Dubay.

18

Flat Earth General / Is the Moon transparent or behind the Sun today?

« on: December 30, 2024, 12:05:39 PM »

This is the position of the Sun and Moon shown in Time and date. There is no eclipse happening today.

The Flat Earth Monopole app shows the same situation:

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Is the video 3 guys 1 hammer fake?

« on: December 30, 2024, 12:02:55 AM »

First of all, I ask that you do not read this text if you are sensitive, as it is a topic that is very disturbing for most people.

I do not in any way intend to minimize the gravity of this case. But apparently, the conspirators lied about the case of the Dnepropetrovsk maniacs.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dnepropetrovsk_maniacs

According to information from the establishment, the victim who appears in the video "three guys one hammer" (which I will not link to because the video is extremely disturbing and I believe that posting the link is a violation of the rules of this forum) would be Sergei Yatzenko, who had throat cancer.
The victim does not scream at any point in the video, which could be explained by the victim's throat cancer.

However, the victim who appears in the video cannot be Sergei Yatzenko, the victim is actually Alexei Kovbasa.

The description of the murder of Alexei Kovbasa in the official Ukrainian case report describes exactly what happens in the video:
"June 28, 2007 - On this date, a previously unfamiliar A.S. Kovbasa was driving along the road, who stopped near Saenko and Suprunyuk. Saenko V.I. and Suprunyuk I.V. proceeded to hit him with a hammer in the head area, after which they dragged him into a forest plantation, where, acting with particular cruelty, they inflicted multiple blows with a hammer on the head for a long period of time, blows with a screwdriver in the eyes and stomach, also pressed on [the victim's] chest and stomach, causing severe suffering to the victim."

The video and photographs the killers took posing with the corpse are dated June 28, 2007, while Sergei Yatzenko was murdered on July 12, 2007.

Here is a photo of Sergei's corpse:
https://photo.unian.net/photo/77179-ubiystva-v-dnepropetrovske
(It's not too disturbing, but avoid watching if you are sensitive).
Sergei Yatzenko's face is still recognizable after the murder, while the victim's face in the video has become completely unrecognizable.

"July 12, 2007 - On this date, a previously unfamiliar Yatsenko S.A. was passing along the indicated road. on a motorcycle Dnepr-11 registration number 95-48 DNI"
Yatzenko was riding a motorcycle before he was killed, while Kovbasa was riding a bicycle. This documentary shows that the victim in the famous video was riding a bicycle:


Therefore, there is no apparent reason why the victim (Alexei Kovbasa) did not scream during the murder, which indicates that the video is fake/edited.
According to Wikipedia, Igor Suprunyuk also stated that the video is fake.

20

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photograph the Sun

« on: December 29, 2024, 06:26:32 PM »

*Ok JackBlack, you are right about the rainbow.

*A wavy firmament is not a magical shape that allows absurd sizes. The radius of the distance between the top of the second firmament and the center of the universe cannot be greater than 31 kilometers:




*It is not possible to discard ether and aether without violating the principle of Occam's Razor.
Ether allows us to explain several things such as zero point energy, telluric energy, quantum vacuum, Foucault pendulums, Sagnac effect and Coriolis effect using just one element.
Aether is the only way to explain the theory of relativity. Space works like a fluid.
The behavior of aether is consistent.

*The inverted density of aether fits perfectly into Occam's Razor, it explains several facts.

*I have explained the orbits of regular celestial bodies and the large variations in speed very perfectly and successfully. Your confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance hinder your understanding.

Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

Your statement about "angular rate of motion" is just unjustified delusion.

And apparently you don't know what a regular orbit is either.
Circumpolar orbits = circular orbits about the north or south pole.
Regular orbits = orbits of celestial bodies that rises and sets on the edge.

*Here a globular physicist explains why a Sun below the first dome would turn the Earth into an oven:
https://cref.if.ufrgs.br/?contact-pergunta=insolacao-na-terra-plana-forno-para-cozinhar-terraplanistas

*As the zoom is removed, you can clearly see that THE BOAT BEGINS TO DISAPPEAR FROM BOTTOM TO TOP, CLEARLY PROVING THAT THE PERSPECTIVE IS HIDING THE BOATS.


Small boat being hidden by perspective on a FLAT lake:

21

Flat Earth General / Re: Antarctica is a Big Island? Good!

« on: December 20, 2024, 10:02:39 PM »

Antarctica is a big island on a Bi-Polar flat Earth too.

22

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photograph the Sun

« on: December 19, 2024, 01:31:14 PM »

Jackblack, your spam argument modus operandi has become monotonous. You always ask childish questions, I answer them and you retort saying something like "we can discard this magic and use a globe to explain everything in a simple way".


*I didn't repeat anything, I explained the same thing in a clearer way.

*Colors are not always visible when looking directly at the prism, it depends on the light and the angle. And we can use a wide light source.



Sometimes we can see rainbows by looking directly at the Sun or Moon, without rain.











Why doesn't water create a rainbow?



*A parabola has a circular top.

*A wavy firmament or a firmament with walls does not magically make the universe any size, it allows for a horizontally large universe, but it REQUIRES that the radius of the distance between the edge of the observable universe and the center of the Earth's surface be only 31 km.
If you disagree, then try drawing a universe with a wavy edge or curved walls where the distance between the edge and the center of the universe is magically greater than 31 km.


*I have already demonstrated several times that aether is indispensable, reality becomes absolutely complex and chaotic if you disregard aether.

Everything depends on aether, even general relativity, so beloved by RE, is actually a description of aether.

And the ether is the cluster of particles/energies that flow through the aether.
The ether allows the quantum vacuum, telluric energy and many other concepts to be understood as one thing, in addition to explaining all the effects related to the "movements of the Earth".


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

*The inverted density refers to the density of the AETHER, it is not the same thing as the absurd atmospheric density model advocated by some FEs.

*The speed of celestial bodies is not a problem for FE.

*You cannot explain why you believe my explanation of regular orbits is flawed.

*The Sun can be seen at the same time from opposite parts of the flat Earth because of the aether.

*A light inside a room is not as hot as the Sun.
https://cref.if.ufrgs.br/?contact-pergunta=insolacao-na-terra-plana-forno-para-cozinhar-terraplanistas

*Rowbotham's perspective theory has been PROVEN.
Zoom makes the horizon recede:


Hiding a small boat on a flat lake:

23

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 18, 2024, 08:06:25 AM »

*Facts are not nonsense.

 Ok?  Long post of nothing to try and change the subject.  Classic FE bait a switch to get away from the simple evidence that kills flat earth.

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond

You are not answering the questions.

And you are ignoring   the constellation southern cross is an aid to find the stationary south celestial pole that is relative south for all points south of the hemisphere unless you are directly under the celestial South Pole.

That only works for a spherical earth.

And you didn’t actually address the real criticism of your map.

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed.

I have already answered your questions:

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed.

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

The midnight Sun at both poles is associated with the moons Eos, but this fact still needs to be further researched before it can be fully understood.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090404141630/https://www.science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm

And putting the cardinal points in the wrong position will not save the crazy ball Earth.

24

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 18, 2024, 07:37:40 AM »

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:

I would say a just as inaccurate version.
You still can't explain flights from Sydney to North America without adding on loads of nonsense which solely serves to try to save this model.

The aether

Or we can take the sane approach of discarded a completely unneeded aether and instead have Earth be round.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.

The issue isn't just circumnavigation, but also just simple point to point distances.

the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.

No, the globe was based upon reality, where measurements and simple calculations directly give the diameter without any need to appeal to a flat Earth fantasy.

The dense aether barrier

Also performs more unneeded magic.

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

No, they apply equally to all FE models.

And your attempts to save the bipolar also work equally for all FE models.

You need to have aether perform so many feats of magic that you could have it do so for any FE model, even the cat model, and just claim it works.
You have no evidence for all this magic, nor can you quantify it.

Meanwhile, the RE doesn't need any of that magic, and can give numerical predictions which match reality.

*Facts are not nonsense.

*Aether is indispensable. Everything depends on aether. General relativity itself actually describes aether.
There are no mechanisms capable of explaining the curvature of space without aether. The curvature of space occurs when a celestial body absorbs aether.

"According to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there would not only be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense"
- Albert Einstein, “Geometry and Experience,” in Sidelights on Relativity, 1983, p. 30

"…in 1905 I was of the opinion that it was no longer allowed to speak about the ether in physics. This opinion, however, was too radical, as we will see later when we discuss the general theory of relativity. It does remain allowed, as always, to introduce a medium filling all space and to assume that the electromagnetic fields (and matter as well) are its states…once again “empty” space appears as endowed with physical properties, i.e., no longer as physically empty, as seemed to be the case according to special relativity. One can thus say that the ether is resurrected in the general theory of relativity….Since in the new theory, metric facts can no longer be separated from “true” physical facts, the concepts of “space” and “ether” merge together."
- Albert Einstein, “Grundgedanken und Methoden der Relativitätstheorie in ihrer Entwicklung dargestellt,” Morgan Manuscript, EA 2070, as cited in Ludwik Kostro, Einstein and the Ether, 2000, p. 2.

*Making vague statements about distances without specifying them will not turn the Earth into a crazy ball.

*The globe is based on errors and distortions of reality. Eratosthenes' method does not take aether into account.

Evapotranspiration and precipitation demonstrate that the Earth is flat and that the diameter of the Earth is ≈ 20000 kilometers.
Calculation of the annual evapotranspiration of the Earth based on the Thornthwaite method.
The method uses this set of equations:
ETp = 16 × (10 × Tm ÷ I)^A
I = Σ (0,2 × Tm)^1,514
A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × I) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × I^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × I^3)

ETp = evapotranspiration.
I = annual heat index.
A = exponent calculated based on I.

I take into account that the average temperature of the Earth is ≈ 14º C.

January (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
February (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
March (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
April (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
May (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
June (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
July (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
August (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
September (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
October (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
November (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
December (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423

4,75332226423 × 12 = 57,0398671708
I = 57,0398671708

A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × 57,0398671708) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × 57,0398671708^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × 57,0398671708^3)
A ≈ 1,3885
 
ETp = 16 × (10 × 14 ÷ 57,0398671708)^1,3885
ETp ≈ 57,64

Annual evapotranspiration:
ETp = 57,64 × 12
ETp = 691,68 millimeters

Evapotranspiration over the total area of ​​the Earth:
ETp = 510100000 (Earth Area) × 691,68
ETp = 352825968 cubic meters
ETp = 352825,968 cubic kilometers

Here we have data on annual precipitation in all countries on Earth:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-precipitation-per-year?tab=table

Precipitation = 327 + 1485 + 89 + 1010 + 1030 + 591 + 562 + 534 + 1110 + 447 + 1292 + 83 + 2666 + 1422 + 618 + 847 + 1705 + 1039 + 2200 + 1146 + 1028 + 416 + 1761 + 2722 + 608 + 748 + 1274 + 1904 + 1604 + 537 + 228 + 1343 + 322 + 1522 + 645 + 3240 + 900 + 1646 + 2926 + 1348 + 1113 + 1335 + 498 + 677 + 1543 + 703 + 220 + 2083 + 1410 + 1500 + 2274 + 18 + 1784 + 2156 + 384 + 626 + 788 + 848 + 2592 + 536 + 867 + 1831 + 836 + 1026 + 700 + 1187 + 652 + 2350 + 1996 + 1651 + 1577 + 2387 + 1440 + 1976 + 589 + 1940 + 1083 + 2702 + 228 + 216 + 1118 + 435 + 832 + 2051 + 1668 + 111 + 250 + 630 + 121 + 533 + 1834 + 667 + 661 + 788 + 2391 + 56 + 656 + 934 + 1513 + 1181 + 2875 + 1972 + 282 + 560 + 92 + 2041 + 758 + 450 + 241 + 346 + 1032 + 2091 + 285 + 1500 + 778 + 1732 + 2280 + 151 + 1150 + 1054 + 619 + 1414 + 125 + 494 + 402 + 2928 + 3142 + 1130 + 1738 + 2348 + 600 + 854 + 2054 + 74 + 637 + 460 + 1212 + 1427 + 2301 + 1583 + 2880 + 3200 + 59 + 686 + 2330 + 2526 + 2497 + 824 + 1162 + 3028 + 282 + 495 + 1274 + 900 + 636 + 1712 + 250 + 2331 + 624 + 1537 + 252 + 691 + 1071 + 1622 + 1168 + 2200 + 207 + 593 + 161 + 1180 + 565 + 78 + 1220 + 715 + 1300 + 206 + 2000 + 2044 + 1821 + 167 + 1020 + 657.
Precipitation = 185750
Precipitation = 185750 ÷ 195
Precipitation ≈ 952,56
Precipitation = 952,56 × 510100000
Precipitation = 485902948717 mm
Precipitation = 485902 km


In other words: if the Earth's diameter were 40000 km, this would mean that annual precipitation is greater than evapotranspiration, which is impossible. Initially, I attributed this discrepancy to the chambers of rain, hail, snow, frost, and dew connected to the first firmament described in the Book of Enoch. Now that I realize that navigations indicate that the Earth's diameter is ≈ 20000 km, we can better explain the discrepancies.
Repeating the calculation and taking into account a diameter of 20000 km, the results are consistent:

January (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
February (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
March (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
April (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
May (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4 75332226423
June (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
July (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
August (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
September (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
October (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
November (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423
December (0,2 × 14)^1,514 = 4,75332226423

4,75332226423 × 12 = 57,0398671708
I = 57,0398671708

A = 0,49239 + (1,7912 × 10^-2 × 57,0398671708) - (7,71 × 10^-5 × 57,0398671708^2) + (6,75 × 10^-7 × 57,0398671708^3)
A ≈ 1,3885
 
ETp = 16 × (10 × 14 ÷ 57,0398671708)^1,3885
ETp ≈ 57,64

Annual evapotranspiration:
ETp = 57,64 × 12
ETp = 691,68 millimeters

Evapotranspiration over the total area of ​​the Earth:
ETp = 314159265,35898 (Earth Area) × 691,68
ETp =  217297680663,5 cubic meters
ETp 217297681 = cubic kilometers

Here we have data on annual precipitation in all countries on Earth:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/average-precipitation-per-year?tab=table

Precipitation = 327 + 1485 + 89 + 1010 + 1030 + 591 + 562 + 534 + 1110 + 447 + 1292 + 83 + 2666 + 1422 + 618 + 847 + 1705 + 1039 + 2200 + 1146 + 1028 + 416 + 1761 + 2722 + 608 + 748 + 1274 + 1904 + 1604 + 537 + 228 + 1343 + 322 + 1522 + 645 + 3240 + 900 + 1646 + 2926 + 1348 + 1113 + 1335 + 498 + 677 + 1543 + 703 + 220 + 2083 + 1410 + 1500 + 2274 + 18 + 1784 + 2156 + 384 + 626 + 788 + 848 + 2592 + 536 + 867 + 1831 + 836 + 1026 + 700 + 1187 + 652 + 2350 + 1996 + 1651 + 1577 + 2387 + 1440 + 1976 + 589 + 1940 + 1083 + 2702 + 228 + 216 + 1118 + 435 + 832 + 2051 + 1668 + 111 + 250 + 630 + 121 + 533 + 1834 + 667 + 661 + 788 + 2391 + 56 + 656 + 934 + 1513 + 1181 + 2875 + 1972 + 282 + 560 + 92 + 2041 + 758 + 450 + 241 + 346 + 1032 + 2091 + 285 + 1500 + 778 + 1732 + 2280 + 151 + 1150 + 1054 + 619 + 1414 + 125 + 494 + 402 + 2928 + 3142 + 1130 + 1738 + 2348 + 600 + 854 + 2054 + 74 + 637 + 460 + 1212 + 1427 + 2301 + 1583 + 2880 + 3200 + 59 + 686 + 2330 + 2526 + 2497 + 824 + 1162 + 3028 + 282 + 495 + 1274 + 900 + 636 + 1712 + 250 + 2331 + 624 + 1537 + 252 + 691 + 1071 + 1622 + 1168 + 2200 + 207 + 593 + 161 + 1180 + 565 + 78 + 1220 + 715 + 1300 + 206 + 2000 + 2044 + 1821 + 167 + 1020 + 657.
Precipitation = 185750
Precipitation = 185750 ÷ 195
Precipitation ≈ 952,56
Precipitation = 952,56 × 314159265,35898
Precipitation = 299255549810 mm
Precipitation = 299255,55 km

*The south celestial pole is clearly not a problem for the Bi-Polar map.

*Aether's behavior doesn't solve the problems of the other maps, and aether is evidence-based, not magic.

25

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 16, 2024, 12:13:58 PM »

The Bi-Polar model is the model that the Universal Zetetic Society, which inherited Rowbotham's movement, came up with after they verified the Antarctic Midnight Sun in the 1920's; although they did not have a specific continental layout for it at the time.

Oh yes, well now, you who are so wise in the ways of science.

You made an expedition to Antarctica a century ago, so you suggest and I won't contradict. Is it too much to ask for you to make an expedition to Australia now this decade?

There is no need for anyone to travel to Australia. Flights between Australia and the Americas have already been explained.

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:



The aether has parabolic gradients that increase in density as it approaches the first firmament. This density is very high in the vicinity of Antichtone, preventing us from being able to reach that continent. Any ship or airplane sailing towards Antichtone will be deflected by the aether and will skirt the perimeter of the aether barrier until it reaches the opposite side of the Earth's surface. If the ship/airplane keeps moving forward, it will return to its starting point.
In the case of airplanes, there is an additional factor: airplanes depend on air for lift, they always travel along the density gradient for which they are configured, and the atmospheric layers have parabolic gradients, that is: the air becomes increasingly rarefied as it approaches the edge.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.
Circumnavigations in general cover an average distance of 40000 km, this is because the diameter of the Earth is actually ≈ 20000 km, the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.


The dense aether barrier also deflects electromagnetic radiation that strikes the Earth's surface to the opposite side. This alters measurements of the Earth's diameter that disregard the aether.


The Bi-Polar Flat Earth model was used in antiquity and was rediscovered by the Universal Zetetic Society.

26

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 16, 2024, 12:12:25 PM »

Going straight relative south out of Arizona doesn’t lead to the US west coast.  Going straight relative east out of the Carolinas doesn’t take you parallel to the coasts of South America and Africa.  Your map would get people lost at sea and killed.

The south celestial pole works perfectly on the Bi-Polar map, it works better than on the globe.




Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

The midnight Sun at both poles is associated with the moons Eos, but this fact still needs to be further researched before it can be fully understood.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090404141630/https://www.science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast09dec97_3.htm

And putting the cardinal points in the wrong position will not save the crazy ball Earth.

27

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 16, 2024, 02:07:09 AM »

In the southern hemiplane,

Really?

So.  There are these simple but relatively accurate star atlases for the night sky.  They are based off month and time.  They are dial types that show the night sky for a certain time of year.

Northern hemisphere





Southern hemisphere



I would find it hard to believe that standard Star Atlas for the southern hemisphere would be accurate for a flat earth?


And it gets worse than that…


Care to draw out how people in Australia, Africa, and South America can look south and see the constellation Southern Cross?  Where the Southern Cross can be a navigational aid to find south? Find the southern celestial pole. 



And not this..

No one uses Sigma Octatntis to navigate to the supposed south pole.

I've ignored nothing, but I am going to start now by ignoring your stupid bullshit.

??

You keep trying to change the subject with basically lying how navigation in the southern hemisphere works with a sextant.  It’s not based off the celestial South Pole for the southern hemisphere where Polaris isn’t visible because of the earth’s curvature? 

How to find the celestial South Pole makes sense on a globe / sphere.






The celestial South Pole is meaningless on a flat earth

The reason a dial star atlas of the southern hemisphere is accurate is due to the fact the earth is demonstrably spherical which results in persons looks south from Africa, Australia, or South America where they all look to the same southern celestial pole.  And they see the one celestial constellation the Southern cross circling the southern celestial pole. 


And it even gets more worse for the flat earth model..

Debunking flat Earth using only a stick.

The below video by the same person shows the actual path the stick shadow traveled in France for a time around the equinox.

Your arguments only refute the Unipolar map and do not apply to the Bi-Polar map.

28

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 16, 2024, 12:59:54 AM »

This map shows more credibility although it makes the ice wall obsolete. Has the FES addressed this?

I disagree. I think it shows equal absurdity.

Have a look at the East coast of Australia on either of those "maps" for example. Now draw a straight line from any point along the East Coast of Australia on either map to the North pole. On both maps, the line is travelling in a West direction through Australia to the "North" pole. Try explaining the motion of the sun on these bi-polar "maps".

Directions are all wrong, and navigation and reality, relies on directions being correct, with magnetic North always pointing actually North, as it is on the globe earth.

The bi-polar model is in the trash just like Gleesons map flat earth is in the trash.

In the southern hemiplane, the south end of a compass will point directly toward the magnetic south pole.

Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They sets at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and be born on the other side almost instantaneously. The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

29

Flat Earth General / Re: The Bipolar model

« on: December 15, 2024, 06:30:49 PM »

A more accurate version of the Bi-Polar map:



The aether has parabolic gradients that increase in density as it approaches the first firmament. This density is very high in the vicinity of Antichtone, preventing us from being able to reach that continent. Any ship or airplane sailing towards Antichtone will be deflected by the aether and will skirt the perimeter of the aether barrier until it reaches the opposite side of the Earth's surface. If the ship/airplane keeps moving forward, it will return to its starting point.
In the case of airplanes, there is an additional factor: airplanes depend on air for lift, they always travel along the density gradient for which they are configured, and the atmospheric layers have parabolic gradients, that is: the air becomes increasingly rarefied as it approaches the edge.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.
Circumnavigations in general cover an average distance of 40000 km, this is because the diameter of the Earth is actually ≈ 20000 km, the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.


The dense aether barrier also deflects electromagnetic radiation that strikes the Earth's surface to the opposite side. This alters measurements of the Earth's diameter that disregard the aether.


The Bi-Polar Flat Earth model was used in antiquity and was rediscovered by the Universal Zetetic Society.

30

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Photograph the Sun

« on: December 15, 2024, 12:06:45 PM »

You can't create a rainbow with artificial light without glass; you use sunlight when you make a rainbow in a garden.
In order to reproduce a natural-looking rainbow in an environment isolated from sunlight, three things are needed:
1) Water.
2) Light.
3) Glass.
Glass disperses the light that passes through it and the colors are seen in the water droplets. Without glass, rainbows do not occur because water alone cannot disperse enough light to create a rainbow.
In an open environment, the rainbow occurs without the need for glass because there is already the firmament, which disperses the light, while the colors are visible in the raindrops.
A rainbow takes the shape of the glass that disperses the light, outdoors, the rainbow has the shape of an arch because it takes the shape of the firmament.
Even if rainbows were possible on the globe, water droplets would have to magically form an arc in the sky for the rainbow to have that shape, or the arc shape could be a result of the curvature of the globe, but that would require the Earth to be the same size as the rainbow, so it is equally impossible.

The mechanisms behind the movements of celestial bodies still need to be further investigated, they may be associated with telluric energy, magnetism or ether, but we should not just invent things.

The rainbow is evidence of a firmament.
The first firmament is also important to explain the division between the less dense layers of aether and the ultradense layers, which must necessarily exist on a flat Earth.

You can create artificial rainbows with only a prism and a flashlight, no water droplets required, you can also create a rainbow with nothing more than a drop of water and a flashlight, both of which do not involve the sun or your "firmaments" (which I have yet to see evidence of by the way).

You also imply that rainbows would not be possible on a globe earth, and say that the arc a rainbow takes would have no reason to be shaped thusly on a globe earth. What you fail to mention is that rainbows in their entirety are circular; the same shape as you can observe in a garden hose. This is because water droplets are roughly spherical and they refract light in a circular shape.

Based on this, the rainbow is not evidence of a firmament. It can exist independently of one, and it does. You also go into a ton of pseudoscientific jargon that has no logical basis, leaving me only more skeptical of the flat earth model.

If you can't photograph the sun, how about touch the firmament instead?

And one more thing: the FE model has an extremely difficult time explaining celestial motion whereas the RE model has no issue at all, isn't this a huge point in favor of the RE model?

The mechanism that generates a rainbow involves
1) Light.
2) Something to scatter the light (this could be a prism, a mirror, or a firmament).
3) A medium in which the scattered light is seen (this could be water droplets or a solid surface).

A prism disperses light, and colors are seen on a solid surface.


It is not possible to create a rainbow using just a drop of water and a flashlight, I have personally tested this, and I have never seen any video or image of anyone managing to do this.

Rainbows appear circular when observed from above because the first firmament is shaped like a parabola.

The firmament is at ≈ 10 km altitude, while an airplane does not go much higher than 2 km altitude. An airplane does not fly high enough to reach the firmament.
Altitude measurements above ≈ 1 km that disregard aether give false results because aether directly interferes with the measurements.

Wolfgang Pauli made a calculation showing that the radius of curvature of the observable universe cannot be more than ≈ 31 km if zero-point energy/ether exists. 


"If the electromagnetic field really had a zero-point energy that did not disappear, then the radius of the universe would be 31 km."
 - Wolfgang Pauli
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fpdf%2F0901.3640&ved=2ahUKEwiywPSt-quGAxUNppUCHb78Bx4QFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw3vsIgyQMZQbZyV36GpemxI https://academic.oup.com/astrogeo/article-abstract/53/1/1.24/218451?redirectedFrom=fulltext
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/9/1/011/pdf

It is not possible to deny the existence of the ether/aether without violating the scientific method and the principle of Occam's Razor, because only it is capable of explaining a gigantic amount of facts that are inexplicable in other theories.

Globularists often claim that this would imply an Earth with a diameter of only 62 km. However, we can solve this with several curved walls in the structure of the second firmament, the radius of the universe will be the distance between one wall and the center of the area between 4 walls.


Globularists also went on to claim that curved walls would allow for an infinitely large universe, but curved walls only allow the universe to be horizontally large, but the radius of the vertical distance between the center of the Earth's surface and the second firmament cannot be greater than 31 km.



Density of aether:
1) Inverted density.
● The layers of the atmosphere are parabolic in shape and the density of the atmosphere decreases as it approaches the first firmament.
● The layers of aether are parabolic in shape, and the density of aether increases as it approaches the first firmament. The density of the lowest layer of aether is twice the average density of the troposphere. Therefore, refraction behaves as if the atmosphere had "inverted density".
https://youtube.com/shorts/CL_I8_nDzh4?si=gW1rSXD7VccI_O-Q

Approximate density of aether in the troposphere:
2,45 kg/m^3 (1,225 kg/m^3 × 2)


2) Velocity of celestial bodies.
The celestial bodies with regular orbits rise at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone, follow a path through the zone between the Tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, always making their natural variations. They set at one of the gates in the west beyond Antichtone and pass beneath the Earth at a speed of 20000 km per second (the true diameter of the Earth is only 20000 km), causing the celestial bodies to accelerate and rise on the other side almost instantaneously.

● Proposed mechanism;
1) The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s.
2) The resistance generated by the density of aether reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

D = 20000^2/0,464^2 
D = 400000000/0,215296
D = 1857907253,2699
Therefore, the aether density at the distance to the Sun will be approximately 1857907253.2699 times the aether density in a no-resistance scenario (± the aether density in the troposphere).

Density = 4551872770,51 kg/m^3

The flat Earth perfectly explains the movement of celestial bodies, there is no great difficulty.

So apparently Anne has given up the most absurd claim that, after setting, “the celestial bodies are accelerated and born on the other side almost instantaneously”. Good.
But

I didn't give up, this explanation is still perfect.

The fact is (as we can easily check in this era of instant communications), when an observer in South America sees the Sun setting, the Sun is still visible for some hours in Tahiti. So the “edge”, for the  observer in South America, is BEYOND Tahiti.
And when the Sun sets in Tahiti, it's still visible for some hours in Samoa. So the “edge”, for the  observer in South America, is ALSO BEYOND Samoa.
And when the Sun sets in Samoa, it's still visible for some hours in Vanuatu. So the “edge”, for the  observer in South America, is ALSO BEYOND Vanuatu.
And when the Sun sets in Vanuatu, it's still visible for some hours in New Guinea.
And so on and so on, through Sumatra, Ceylon, Somalia, Gabon, Brazil.

So, WHERE IS THE EDGE ?

Only possible answer: there's NO EDGE. Earth's surface closes on itself, like the surface of a cylinder... or of a SPHERE

You are forgetting the relief of the continents. The Sun sets behind the continental relief, in addition to setting on the edge.

So, why the observer in South America cannot see the relief of the African continent silhouetted against the disk of the rising Sun?

Because the African continent is too far away to be resolvable and the atmosphere causes distant targets to appear blue, making Africa visually indistinguishable from the ocean. There is also haze, pollution and humidity.

We know that the Sun, for example, must be outside the first firmament because rainbows can only occur if the first firmament scatters the Sun's light.

You have had this refuted before.
Rainbows are caused by light interacting with raindrops. It has nothing at all to do with any firmament.
White light enters a raindrop and is reflected/refracted around the drop, coming back out at various angles depending on the wavelength.
This creates an angular separation between the light source and a particular colour being visible.
We observe this as an arc, or if you are high enough, a circle.

No firmament is needed for this, nor have you been able to provide an explanation of just what you think the firmament is doing.
It clearly isn't that firmament is splitting the light into various wavelengths, because then no water would be needed.

So just what do you think the firmament is doing?
Can you provide a coherent explanation? Preferably with a diagram, showing the difference in the light before and after the firmament?

Furthermore, a Sun below the firmament would cause the Earth to become extremely hot.

Why?

The orbits of the celestial bodies that set can only occur with them outside the first firmament.

The path of celestial objects make no sense on a flat Earth. Observations clearly match up to a round Earth.

If you decide to invoke magic bendy light which just magically bends to get whatever result you need, then it can be anywhere.

Celestial bodies with regular orbits rises at one of the gates on the ground in the east beyond Antichtone

Except they can always be observed above some location on Earth, showing they aren't rising from beneath a flat surface.

Also, you appear to be rejecting the most common FE model, where there is no "east", as east and west go around in circles.

So what continent do you think is the most east? And how come you can fly around the world going east?

The natural speed of celestial bodies is ≈ 20000 km/s and the resistance generated by the density of the aether above the Earth's surface reduces the speed of celestial bodies to ≈ 1670 km/h (0,464 km/s).

Why?

How come we can fly from Australia to the US, going east?
How come it is so much faster to fly there, than to stop over in London?

Your map simply doesn't match reality.

You can't create a rainbow with artificial light without glass

We can. There is nothing special about sunlight.
It is just a white light source.

Again, explain what magic you think the firmament is doing.

Glass disperses the light that passes through it

Your firmament clearly does not.
If it did, you would see that all the time, and no rain would be needed.
For example if I get a glass prism, and split up the light, it is easily seen as a spectrum, with no rain needed.

The water droplets and the glass are doing the same thing, splitting up the light, just in different ways.

A rainbow takes the shape of the glass that disperses the light, outdoors, the rainbow has the shape of an arch because it takes the shape of the firmament.

No, it doesn't.

The shape of a rainbow, i.e. one from rain, is that way because the raindrops cause the light to appear at particular angles relative to the sun, which means it is a circle.

For glass, it depends on the shape of the glass.

Even if rainbows were possible on the globe, water droplets would have to magically form an arc in the sky

Why?
That would be if instead of being droplets, they were a continuous mass of water.

Because they are droplets, it all works on angles.

Two simple diagrams to explain it:

First, we see the interaction of light with a single droplet (simplified).
The white light hits the droplet, and due to internal reflections and refraction, it comes back out with different wavelengths coming out at different angles.
And that angle is what is important.

This single droplet is not enough to create the rainbow. To understand that, we look at many droplets:


For this we see white light hitting multiple droplets.
For simplicity, I have only shown the resulting coloured rays of light which make it back to the observer.
We see different raindrops reflect different wavelengths back to us.

While I have only shown those droplets, you could have that entire image filled with droplets, and the only coloured light coming back to us are those at the appropriate angle.
And that means the rainbow will adopt those particular angles for the particular colours, meaning we get a circle, or at the least the portion of the circle which go through the raindrops.

Rainbows are possible on a globe. They have nothing to do with a firmament. They do not require water droplets to accumulate into any particular shape. They just require a large amount of water droplets being hit by white light.

The mechanisms behind the movements of celestial bodies still need to be further investigated, they may be associated with telluric energy, magnetism or ether, but we should not just invent things.

So we shouldn't do exactly what you have been doing and what the people you follow have been doing?

The rainbow is evidence of a firmament.

No, they aren't.
You are yet to explain why water alone is insufficient, nor have you been able to provide any actual explanation of just what the firmament is doing to cause it.
So it is in no way evidence of a firmament.

The first firmament is also important to explain the division between the less dense layers of aether and the ultradense layers, which must necessarily exist on a flat Earth.

So it is something which is only needed for a FE, and not reality, and is just made up to try to save a flat Earth to avoid admitting that Earth isn't flat?

*I have explained very well the importance of the first firmament in the creation of a rainbow.
The first firmament disperses the light and the drops are the medium in which the colors are seen.

Water droplets alone are not capable of refracting enough water to generate a rainbow, it is even possible that the first firmament pre-disperses the light and the water droplets have a complementary role of dispersion, but water alone is not capable of generating the complete color palette visible in the rainbow!


*A Sun inside the first firmament would be like a Sun inside a greenhouse, the heating would be absurd.

*The path of celestial bodies on a flat Earth makes perfect sense.

You have done a service to the flat Earth theory by showing that light does not need to bend upwards, but only bends as it approaches the surface:


This aligns perfectly with the workings of perspective described by Rowbotham:


https://sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za32.htm#page_201

This explains how objects like boats disappear on the horizon.
The rises and sets of celestial bodies occur because of the continental relief, in addition to the fact that they rises and sets on the edge.


*The aether has parabolic gradients that increase in density as it approaches the first firmament. This density is very high in the vicinity of Antichtone, preventing us from being able to reach that continent. Any ship or airplane sailing towards Antichtone will be deflected by the aether and will skirt the perimeter of the aether barrier until it reaches the opposite side of the Earth's surface. If the ship/airplane keeps moving forward, it will return to its starting point.
In the case of airplanes, there is an additional factor: airplanes depend on air for lift, they always travel along the density gradient for which they are configured, and the atmospheric layers have parabolic gradients, that is: the air becomes increasingly rarefied as it approaches the edge.

In total, the distance covered by a circumnavigation close to the equator will be approximately twice the length of the equator.
Circumnavigations in general cover an average distance of 40000 km, this is because the diameter of the Earth is actually ≈ 20000 km, the globe was adapted for this by doubling the diameter of the Earth and adding a large area of ​​water.


The dense aether barrier also deflects electromagnetic radiation that strikes the Earth's surface to the opposite side. This alters measurements of the Earth's diameter that disregard the aether.