A Flat Earth article that I put together

Feel free to disagree with it, I am sure there are lots of mistakes in it. I have tried to be balanced, as a Flat Earther myself.

https://chipstero7.wordpress.com/2025/04/18/the-flat-earth/

Feel free to disagree with it, I am sure there are lots of mistakes in it. I have tried to be balanced, as a Flat Earther myself.

https://chipstero7.wordpress.com/2025/04/18/the-flat-earth/

Care to provide a summary, or even a list of key points?
Or are you just trying to advertise for your blog to get people to go there?

Feel free to disagree with it, I am sure there are lots of mistakes in it. I have tried to be balanced, as a Flat Earther myself.

Just as an FYI, Jeran Campenella (among others) recently left FE after he took a trip to Antarctica and witnessed the midnight sun that he had been convinced was impossible on a flat earth.

"Left."



What Round Earthers call it when a shill suddenly reveals their true colors after seeing they have enough followers, hoping they will convince those followers they were wrong.

Instructions to find evidence for:
a)   Earth being flat
b)   Covid virus not existing
c)   9/11 an inside job
d)   ...(add your own)...
Step 1: search the web for a) or b) etc.
Step 2: pick what some say in favor of a) or b) etc.
Step 3: call them “researchers”
Step 4: present them as reliable sources
Step 5: label those who offer contrary proof as “paid shills” or, at least, raise doubts about their critical skills.

That said, I must commend Chippy for being honest and intelligent enough to acknowledge that rocket propulsion can work in a vacuum. How, then, can he fail to understand that Kansas is “flat” ONLY relatively to the ellipsoid (or geoid) to which the U.S. Geological Survey refers elevation data?

Out of respect for his honesty, maybe I'll say something about one or two of his many points, later

"Left."

Yes, left.
Something pathetic FEers and their lying cult leaders can't accept.

There is absolutely no basis to think he wasn't a FEer.
He came out with loads of BS just like you and your cult leader.

But because you can't accept that a member of your cult left, you need to pretend they were never part of it.

So if I find a fake round Earther who has always been a flat Earther at heart, and I take him to the beach, and he suddenly says "Omg, I just realized how flat the horizon is!" you would automatically accept that he left without question? Of course you wouldn't! You don't even accept that I left without question. You think that some larger FE cabal kidnapped me and turned me against you. Or that I'm not educated, and went to skool inn tha booniez (spelling for emphasis). Sorry but ummm, no. I grew up in Connecticut until age 4. I've been in cities and countryside, as my parents were teacher and priest, and often moved. I've been to NYC, UK, South Africa, China, Mexico, and about 40 states of the US. I've climbed mountains, taken trains and planes and boats, and I know about seasonal inversion. And yes, I've had both private and public school education.

Like the cult members you are, you have been trying to educate me on how I'm wrong as you put it. In other words, at best you try to re-brainwash flat Earthers. And at worst, you can't even accept the idea that someone raised under your science could suddenly decide it is illogical.
I can accept that some people can't let go of RE. My father and uncle both cling to it like a security blanket, the former saying when inconsistent points are brought up "scientists know more about this than I do." In other words, he doesn't know why it's right or wrong, but he defends it anyway, rather than trying to figure it out. That would be like like paying high taxes each year and saying "I'm sure our government is spending this money well." The difference between a cult that can't accept people leave and a plausible argument that a person who leaves RE then leaves FE (because very few people receive FE as childhood education, but plenty are told at age 8 or so that the Earth is round and orbits the sun) probably had loyalty to RE in the first place. That's what, four mind changes? FE (early childhood) -> RE -> FE -> RE. Whereas most people just make the first change when they are too young to think critically.

The video I posted?  It puts Jeran's behavior on display. One of the things about real FE ppl is they understand they were wrong before. Yet Jeran immediately (after supposedly being FE until about 24 hours before) adopts a smug attitude, asking FE to accept that he knows what he is talking about, and does a number of stunts to show RE is real. Nowhere is there any sense of sympathy for those who used to believe as he did. Just "you're wrong, and this proves it." This is not behavior consistent with a new convert. This would be like being in a MAGA parade a day ago, and then within hours of Trump saying something they don't like, they join a protest that is ready to storm some conservative's house. The leap from here to there is simply too far. An ex-Trump supporter would stages defect over the course of months. An ex-Christian would stop going to church, then over time, join another religion or decide they are atheists. Only two things account for a rapud shift like that. Extreme duress (in the religion example, seeing your group kill a person in cold blood or do some pretty intense stuff) might make you run as fast as you can from it, but there's nothing like that here, just a casual disproof. Or the ex-whatever was really a fake whatever. Nothing else accounts for the abrupt change without any sympathies to the former group. Jeran and the other guy saying stuff like...

Look there's my breath!

See? No green screen.

Sometimes you are wrong.

That sort of smug RE mentality that carries in his talking is not consistent with an ex-convert. Yesterday I watched videos on Muslims who converted to Christian faith. One of them recalls praying to Jesus and Allah, until finally concluding one of these is not worth her worship. I'm a syncretic Christian. This means that I took some ideas from China and Japan with my Christianity. Over time, I've become more Christian again. It's a slow process. Nothing like this shit.

The basis for believing he never was a FE follower? It's simple. My own religious background has taught me the difference between easy converts and real converts.
Paul watched Thomas being stoned. Then he went toward Damascus. He was struck blind. He had to trust the followers of Jesus for healing, and it was a long process of the disciples trusting whether he really had converted (and some Christians doubt him today). Constantine supposedly converted, but his loyalty seems ultimately to Rome, and I suspect he planned to corrupt the church under Roman Catholicism.

"Left."



What Round Earthers call it when a shill suddenly reveals their true colors after seeing they have enough followers, hoping they will convince those followers they were wrong.

Eric Dubay would have you believe that everyone who claims to be an FE’er is a shill, including you. 

Paul watched Thomas being stoned

hem... it was Stephen who was stoned

Constantine supposedly converted, but his loyalty seems ultimately to Rome, and I suspect he planned to corrupt the church under Roman Catholicism.

Constantine's loyalty was not to Rome but to himself. Yes, he used Christianity to consolidate his power. But there was no distinction then between Roman Catholicism and other branches of Christianity. And with the transfer of the imperial court to Constantinople it was the Eastern church (labelled Orthodox after the schism with Rome) to be close to the imperial power, not the Roman one.

And yes, closeness to power often corrupts a church. Just see the Russian Orthodox church now rooting for Putin, or pro-Trump evangelicals who are abandoning the ideas of Christian charity and empathy
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/13/opinion/trump-usaid-evangelicals.html

Or that I'm not educated, and went to skool inn tha booniez (spelling for emphasis).

Given how much you’re constantly wrong about, can you really blame us for questioning the quality of your education?

or pro-Trump evangelicals who are abandoning the ideas of Christian charity and empathy
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/13/opinion/trump-usaid-evangelicals.html

Over 33 trillion in debt, both parties running the USA abandoned good stewardship long ago.  Anyone telling you it’s not going to hurt to bring that debt down to prevent a collapse similar to the USSR are snake oil salesmen. 

So if I find a fake round Earther who has always been a flat Earther at heart

Again, right from the start you set up a strawman.
What do you have to indicate he has always been a REer at heart?
Absolutely nothing.
You and your position are just so pathetic you cannot handle the possibility that someone who was a FEer actually realised it is BS and left it.

Probably because one of your big cult things is how you were wrong and have now seen the light and converted from RE to FE, and are desperate for it to only be that way.

You don't even accept that I left without question

I accept that you either entirely fail to understand the RE model or repeatedly lie about.
I understand that either you were conned by someone telling you crap, or you just couldn't handle reality so escaped into a fantasy.

Like the cult members you are, you have been trying to educate me on how I'm wrong as you put it.

No, we have been calling out your delusional BS.
That's all.

And do you know the easy way to see which one is the cult member trying to educate, vs which is the one supporting reality?
The one continually fleeing from topics, spouting pure BS and ignoring the refutation of it (i.e. you) is the cultist.

you can't even accept the idea that someone raised under your science could suddenly decide it is illogical.

No, I fully understand that the world has so many idiots in it, that go through school without caring at all, just to reject stuff they don't understand.
You "deciding" it is illogical doesn't actually make it so.
You rejecting it for illogical garbage, doesn't make that illogical garbage true.

the former saying when inconsistent points are brought up "scientists know more about this than I do."

In other words, unlike you, he is not a delusional arrogant prick that thinks he understands better than all those scientists to just reject everything they say without them having a chance to defend himself.

But what inconsistencies? I am yet to see you present a single one.
I have seen plenty of lies about alleged ones by you, but none hold up to scrutiny.

So it seems they are right to reject your crap and accept what the scientists know.
And it seems you are intentionally exploiting their ignorance to pretend there is a problem, just like a cultist would.

The difference between a cult that can't accept people leave and a plausible argument that a person who leaves RE then leaves FE (because very few people receive FE as childhood education, but plenty are told at age 8 or so that the Earth is round and orbits the sun) probably had loyalty to RE in the first place.

Great job on another sentence that doesn't make sense.
What is the difference?

That's what, four mind changes?

No, just three.
RE->FE->RE.

But if you really think about it, it is pretty much just 2.
Because the first one is really not giving a damn.
Then they go to a strong position that Earth is flat, then reject that and go to a strong position that Earth is round.

Whereas most people just make the first change when they are too young to think critically.

And for people like you, that is quite late in life. Have you reached the point to be able to think critically yet?
Because you don't act like it.

The video I posted?

You mean a video of carefully cherry picked moments, which cannot possibly demonstrate what you are claiming?
Again, anyone with the ability to think critically would understand this.

But not a good little cultist like you that just obeys your cult leader.

One of the things about real FE ppl is they understand they were wrong before.

No, they don't.
They get tricked into believing BS and then think they were wrong before.
They then typically use this to develop a smug sense of superiority to pretend they must be so correct now because they have seen through their past errors.

(in the religion example, seeing your group kill a person in cold blood or do some pretty intense stuff

Like seeing your cult turn on you and act like you a horrible monster, as you and your leader have done?

That sort of smug RE mentality

You mean smug FE mentality.

My own religious background has taught me the difference between easy converts and real converts.

You mean your own anecdotal experiences have lead you to be heavily prejudiced.

You have no real basis at all.

We can see how long he was saying crap for the FE cult.
There is not a single reason at all to think he was faking it.
The one with an actual reason to think he is faking it is your cult leader, who refused to go to Antarctica, as if he new it would show he is a lying POS.

You sound like someone blubbering when the prosecuting attorney catches you in a contradiction.

"You... you haven't any proof!"

It's called psychology.

I know what seems logical in terms of behavior. Such as wearing a down jacket with no hat nor gloves for 24 hours and what should be temperatures cold enough to give you frostbite from nothing more than convection. That is crazy.

Frostbite can occur when temperatures drop below 32°F (0°C), especially when combined with wind chill, which can increase the risk significantly. Wind chill factors can make it feel much colder, leading to frostbite in exposed skin in as little as 15 minutes at very low temperatures.

But Antarctica is at a high temperature of well below that.

The average temperatures of the continent are extremely low. However, there are notable differences between the various areas, due to continentality, i.e. the distance from the sea, but also to the altitude.
In the coldest months, July and August, the daily average is -5/-6 °C (21/23 °F) in the South Shetland Islands, -10/-12 °C (10/14 °F) in the Antarctic Peninsula, -15/-18 °C (0/5 °F) on the coast surrounding Antarctica, while it drops below -60 °C (-76 °F) in the coldest areas of the plateau.
In the warmest months, December and January, the daily average is 1/2 °C (34/35.5 °F) in the South Shetland Islands and the Antarctic Peninsula, it ranges from -2 to +2 °C (28.5 to 35.5 °F) along the coast surrounding Antarctica, while it drops below -30 °C (-22 °F) in the coldest areas of the plateau.

Yet he only grabs his gloves to pick up a snowball. And why does he pick up a snowball? Because like more of the demonstrations, it's a prop. Props are for stage plays.

I've visited a cult. I know abnormal behavior, having seen people literally throw their prized possessions into a fire. You know what's really abnormal? When people point out problems like this in their attempts to explain why they aren't so.
"The mountain looks like it's right nearby!"
Almost like... they are inside a closed filming room.
"No, no, it's not green screen."
You're right! It's the newest technology, ILM Volume which uses a screen that has no color tone, just a 360 screen.   
https://illumin.usc.edu/the-volume-how-the-mandalorian-revolutionized-filmmaking/
So while they're doing half-truths about green screen, the current tech has no such problem. One problem that it does have is screwy shadows, a problem pointed out with real criticisms of the "24 hour sun."

Let's watch a Columbo episode interrogation, and you tell me, what is more plausible? The criminal just saying "Huh! That's pretty weird!" or having a ready excuse for Columbo's questions?

The more prepared they are, the more Columbo (and the audience) realizes something about this feels too planned. 

You sound like someone blubbering when the prosecuting attorney catches you in a contradiction.

I see you are projecting again.

I know what seems logical in terms of behavior.

You know what seems logical TO YOU!
Often without you really thinking about it.
In reality, what you are demonstrating is that you either can't think logically or you repeatedly decide not to.
You go and quote stuff and don't even bother reading it and understanding it to know it doesn't support you.
Or you do, and then just lie about it.

Such as wearing a down jacket with no hat nor gloves for 24 hours and what should be temperatures cold enough to give you frostbite from nothing more than convection.

And is that with or without the radiation from the sun warming you?
And was that the case for the trip to Antartica, or are you just saying it was.

Frostbite can occur when temperatures drop below 32°F (0°C), especially when combined with wind chill, which can increase the risk significantly.

And notice the key part?
It CAN, not it will.
And what can significantly increase that chance, wind chill.
So without wind it is much harder.

So if you have temperatures below 0, with no significant wind, then you are not likely to get frostbite.

The average temperatures

And again demonstrating either a lack of an ability to think, or just lying to everyone.
Using an average is pointless.
What was the actual temperature there?

And to make it even more pathetic, look at what you have done.
You have quote that frostbite can occur below 0 (which if taken logically assuming they did it correctly, would mean it can't occur above 0).
You then provide this:

In the warmest months, December and January, the daily average is 1/2 °C (34/35.5 °F) in the South Shetland Islands and the Antarctic Peninsula, it ranges from -2 to +2 °C

So a daily average, of above 0 C.

Yet he only grabs his gloves to pick up a snowball.

Yes, because direct contact with ice is much colder than contact through the still air.

I've visited a cult.

And you are a member of one now.

You know what's really abnormal? When people point out problems like this in their attempts to explain why they aren't so.

And you know that works both ways, including pointing out things to pathetic cultists that will do whatever they can to reject reality, i.e. people like you.

a problem pointed out with real criticisms of the "24 hour sun."

You mean pathetic lies you can't substantiate?

The more prepared they are, the more Columbo (and the audience) realizes something about this feels too planned.

As if someone involved in the experiment had planned it, not necessarily him.

Instructions to find evidence for:
a)   Earth being flat
b)   Covid virus not existing
c)   9/11 an inside job
d)   ...(add your own)...
Step 1: search the web for a) or b) etc.
Step 2: pick what some say in favor of a) or b) etc.
Step 3: call them “researchers”
Step 4: present them as reliable sources
Step 5: label those who offer contrary proof as “paid shills” or, at least, raise doubts about their critical skills.

That said, I must commend Chippy for being honest and intelligent enough to acknowledge that rocket propulsion can work in a vacuum. How, then, can he fail to understand that Kansas is “flat” ONLY relatively to the ellipsoid (or geoid) to which the U.S. Geological Survey refers elevation data?

Out of respect for his honesty, maybe I'll say something about one or two of his many points, later

Thanks for the criticisms. Helps me make my article better. I removed the pancake argument and replaced it with something else.

Yeah the youtubers have taken the last 1000 years of shite arguments and compressed them into an owl terd. They see the tree, not the forest. The ax, but not the tree.

Quote from: marco mineri on April 28, 2025, 09:40:29 AM

or pro-Trump evangelicals who are abandoning the ideas of Christian charity and empathy
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/13/opinion/trump-usaid-evangelicals.html

Over 33 trillion in debt, both parties running the USA abandoned good stewardship long ago.  Anyone telling you it’s not going to hurt to bring that debt down to prevent a collapse similar to the USSR are snake oil salesmen.

same problem here in Europe, but it could be solved if we all went back to tax the rich, and the great corporations. Putting also an end to tax havens. And what the present US administration wants is to cut taxes even more, mainly in benefit of the rich. All very Christian.

Or we could, at least, crack down on tax cheats. But

Quote from
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/31/briefing/us-federal-government-spending-doge.html

"Some layoffs could even increase the deficit. The Biden administration wanted to hire more workers at the Internal Revenue Service to crack down on tax cheats. Experts said the plan would bring in $2.5 in tax revenue for every $1 spent. Trump wants to get rid of the new employees anyway"

same problem here in Europe, but it could be solved if we all went back to tax the rich, and the great corporations. Putting also an end to tax havens. And what the present US administration wants is to cut taxes even more, mainly in benefit of the rich. All very Christian.

Typical. Always using the rationale that income taxes punish the rich... who of course need to be punished for being greedy capitalists, while we
conveniently ignore leftist politicians being rich
because they ummmmm, help the poor! That's it, our altruistic leftists benefactors  help the poor, let's only focus our attention on successful captains of industry.

Let's also ignore all of the
tax loopholes
which mean that rich people often never pay the taxes we think they should pay, so inevitably working poor get hit by taxes on every paycheck, while nonworking poor get benefits that most rich would drool over. My $100k a year provost uncle was talking about how in Detroit, some guy could go and apply for benefits and get a better house than him, all furnished by screwed up welfare laws.

Also, it isn't even true.

---

Trump floats the idea of starting income taxes at $150,000.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewleahey/2025/03/14/trumps-goal-of-no-taxes-on-under-150000-may-cost-social-security/
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-eliminate-tax-people-earning-less-150000-howard-lutnick-2044049
https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/trumps-latest-pitch-no-taxes-if-you-earn-less-than-usd150k
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-latest-tax-proposal-no-064321282.html
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/global-trends/us-news-us-citizens-earning-under-150000-to-pay-no-tax-trumps-big-plan-revealed-united-states-commerce-secretary-howard-lutnick/articleshow/118986772.cms
(Claimed by multiple news sources)

And you're misusing the word Christian. I won't tolerate you dirtying the name of Christianity anymore.

Cracking down on tax cheats includes the waitress from Sleep Pony Bar who says she earns $15 dollars a week in tips when she actually earns $1200 a week in tips because she wears that skimpy outfit and also does a pole dance and strip show between waitress shifts. Leftists are sanctimonious asshole who think we should care about someone cheating in taxes, when we happen to know they cheat on theirs regularly, but it's okay for them, because they are environmentalists, social justice advocates, or some other charity hero. Allegedly.

I don't want the IRS making the government $2.50 for every $1 spent. I want the government to stop collecting money from citizens who just want to get ahead. That's not a crime! Whether they are that slightly slutty waitress, or OG Donald Trump while he still did real estate, we should not be taxing success or property ownership. Nor taxing charity.

We should be taxing consumption, particularly of luxury goods. You wanna tax the rich? How about taxing the rich when they buy costly items like designer jeans or $250,000 perfume. After all, as Judas said (the person you truly follow, not Jesus), “Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.”

It is Christian to reward work, "Do not muzzle and ox while he is trampling grain" and "a worker deserves his wages." But even followers of Judas can appreciate the idea of punishing wasteful expenses is a more worthy tax.

Typical. Always using the rationale that income taxes punish the rich... who of course need to be punished for being greedy capitalists, while we
conveniently ignore leftist politicians being rich

No, we don't.
You just keep appealing to this to deflect from the actual issue.

Let's also ignore all of the tax loopholes

You mean the very things people like us call out because of the problems with it?

Also, it isn't even true.

Trump is quite good at lying to everyone.
So far all I have seen is him help the wealthy.

I won't tolerate you dirtying the name of Christianity anymore.

It is hard to dirty such a tainted name.

We should be taxing consumption, particularly of luxury goods.

And the problem there is it isn't a decent tax, and how you define such things.
That is a strategy to try to keep poor people looking poor.