1

Flat Earth General / Re: Dubay offers bounty on RE

« on: May 12, 2025, 04:59:16 PM »

I don't share Dubay's commitment to veganism (the Zizians, and Hitler himself were at least vegetarian, and veganism means animals get put down since farms raise animals as part of their business). Nor do I agree with his stance on Judaism. He should stick to flat Earth, and not push Nazism.

Eric Dubay's veganism has ravaged his body, and done nothing to improve his mind. God knows, it certainly hasn't improved his speech impediment.

But, like Goebels in Nazi Germany, he speaks well, and is a good salesman for flat earth. He has his ardent followers who think he's the next messiah.

What makes you think he appeals to NAZI ideology, bulma? I mean, he looks more like he's been starving in a concentration camp, than a NAZI foot soldier.

2

Flat Earth General / Re: Really, boats would have to sail up hill?

« on: May 12, 2025, 04:26:09 PM »

Bulmabriefs144, Virginia to Seattle is from the East Coast of the United States to the West Coast of the United States.

Maybe if you used the correct formula for earth curvature, instead of the flat Earth con man formula, you would have a far more accurate understanding of how much Earth curve you negotiated.

Look at the route you travelled, by looking at a to-scale Earth globe.  If you want to see the curve you travelled, mould a piece of wire on your earth globe between Virginia and Seattle to see the curve. Try and understand the globe earth model again, which you clearly never understood properly in the first place.

It's not that hard, Bulma.

3

Flat Earth General / Re: Really, boats would have to sail up hill?

« on: May 12, 2025, 01:12:22 PM »

It's like trying to reach geography to a monkey.

The monkey has the intelligence, but doesn't have the intellect to apply that intelligence.

4

Flat Earth General / Re: Ethically Sourcing Troling

« on: May 12, 2025, 02:34:17 AM »

If you look at all the flat earthers, the problem that eventually sold each of them that the earth was flat, and started their journey down the rabbit hole, is no matter how hard they tried, they couldn't prove to themselves the earth curves and measure that curvature.

No, it really isn't.
There are plenty of ways they can prove to themselves Earth can curve.
If they put in a tiny bit of effort they would be able to.

They have a much deeper need for Earth to be flat.
It could be that they accept their religion indicates Earth is flat and they don't want their religion to be wrong.
It could be that they were conned into it and don't want to admit it.
It could be that they are paranoid and are rejecting what they have been taught.
It could be that they simply can't handle reality and need to escape into a fantasy.

It certainly isn't because they can't prove to themselves Earth curves or they don't know how to measure it.
This is obvious from how many things that have been provided to them which would allow them to do that which they just reject.

A lot of them bought into the idea that if the Earth curves, then they should be able to see and be able to measure that curvature. Ofcourse they couldn't work out how to do it, and so started indulging in other flat earth material.

Mark Sargent, Phuket Word, Eric Dubay, Bulmabtiefs144 - to name a few.

A theodolite is the instrument.

I predict Bulmabriefs144 will do exactly as you predict, Data. He will ignore this thread now, completely, and these posts. He will only fight the battles he thinks he has a chance of winning, not the ones he knows he stands no chance.

5

Flat Earth General / Re: Ethically Sourcing Troling

« on: May 11, 2025, 03:45:43 PM »

What earth model? Flat isn't and can never be a model. If it's a flat circle, what is the diameter? If it's a flat square, what is the width? If there is a dome, what is the height of the dome? What is the thickness of the circle or the square? Flat earthers agree on flat, but can agree on nothing else, and have no other answers.

Flat defines nothing.

I had an argument with a flat earth fellow recently who conceded all known shortest distances between places are correct because they work. But when it was pointed out, all those known distances create a sphere, he disagreed.

See.  You can write a post without being obscene. 

LOL.

Actually a good post.

Soo..

One, it will be ignored.

Or two, someone like Bulma will try to create a false argument on what was actually posted.  Something like you are brainwashed into needing structure or some BS.  So, therefore frightened by FE.

If you look at all the flat earthers, the problem that eventually sold each of them that the earth was flat, and started their journey down the rabbit hole, is no matter how hard they tried, they couldn't prove to themselves the earth curves and measure that curvature. That is the suit of armor memory which keeps them invested. It's also their Achilles heel, and the chink in their armor if you can show them how to see that curvature and measure it.

Like I said, there is one simple instrument.

6

Flat Earth General / Re: Ethically Sourcing Troling

« on: May 11, 2025, 07:09:19 AM »

Don't worry about Data hopelessly trying to prove to you the earth at your feet is curved because of some stars he sees overhead.

Sorry.   Celestial navigation and celestial south works the way they do from the fact the earth is a spherical planet in a heliocentric solar system.

No, sorry. Why are you trying to convince a flat earther the earth is flat, by telling him to look at the stars? Would you tell someone to look at the stars to paint a picture of a hillside in front of them? You want him to look at some pretty stars in the sky and magically he no longer thinks earth is flat?

Dumb down your arguing and bring it back down to Earth.

The fact is celestial navigation works the way it does is due to the fact the earth is spherical.  One of the most fundamental reasons from centuries ago that lead to the understanding the earth is spherical.  That’s just true. 

But we both can agree that flat earther’s have less reasoning ability than a 1700’s sailor?  And a less useful earth model.

What earth model? Flat isn't and can never be a model. If it's a flat circle, what is the diameter? If it's a flat square, what is the width? If there is a dome, what is the height of the dome? What is the thickness of the circle or the square? Flat earthers agree on flat, but can agree on nothing else, and have no other answers.

Flat defines nothing.

I had an argument with a flat earth fellow recently who conceded all known shortest distances between places are correct because they work. But when it was pointed out, all those known distances create a sphere, he disagreed.

7

Flat Earth General / Re: Ethically Sourcing Troling

« on: May 11, 2025, 05:21:52 AM »

Don't worry about Data hopelessly trying to prove to you the earth at your feet is curved because of some stars he sees overhead.

Sorry.   Celestial navigation and celestial south works the way they do from the fact the earth is a spherical planet in a heliocentric solar system.

No, sorry. Why are you trying to convince a flat earther the earth is flat, by telling him to look at the stars? Would you tell someone to look at the stars to paint a picture of a hillside in front of them? You want him to look at some pretty stars in the sky and magically he no longer thinks earth is flat?

Dumb down your arguing and bring it back down to Earth.

8

Flat Earth General / Re: Ethically Sourcing Troling

« on: May 11, 2025, 02:34:07 AM »

As both Eric Dubay and Phuketword mentioned, you are using the sky (or in this case, a piece of paper) as "proof" the Earth is round.

I'll say it again.

Unless you go out with a ruler and a level, and measure the degree of curve, you haven't proved anything about the Earth. You just have a theory based on the assumption that because the sky looks a certain way, the Earth must be a certain way.

Charts don't prove anything about the Earth. Try again.

Don't worry about Data hopelessly trying to prove to you the earth at your feet is curved because of some stars he sees overhead. Earth curve can only be determined by accurately measuring earth curve.

You know, bulmabriefs144, there is a precision instrument you can buy (or hire) that will prove to you the physical horizon is lower than your eyeline. It will even tell you how many degrees lower, which increases as your altitude increases.

Go down to your handy hire place, and hire one for a couple of days of flat earth debunkery.

Would you like to finally measure the curve, Bulma, so your subconscious mind can release you from this flat earth nonsense?

9

Flat Earth Debate / Re: They've lied to the world about the stars

« on: May 10, 2025, 03:14:44 PM »

Only you would think their claims are valid and true, without any valid evidence.

We’ve already seen what Saturn looks like, taken many videos of Saturn, and we’ll keep taking more and more videos of Saturn, and keep seeing Saturn more and more.

What we’ve always seen and always shown on videos, in various degrees of quality, is valid evidence, showing their claims are falsehoods.

They created this story, from their biggest story of a ball Earth speeding through an endless space, which depicted other ball planets like Earth is, and one is Saturn, and they created an elaborate story for it.

At the time, and for centuries afterwards, and even today, though less and less than before, everyone believed their stories as true.

It’s clearly not believable anymore, it cannot hold up as true much longer.

They told us all the stars were trillions of miles away from Earth, and that they seemed to be twinkling but they’re not moving at all, it’s caused by an effect of our atmosphere.

But they also said there are some of them that aren’t stars, they are planets like Earth is, and they don’t always twinkle or ever twinkle like stars do.

I decided to look at their claims about Saturn, as an example case.

They told us what they saw, j but nobody else saw anything or could see it, or allowed to see it!

So what they always said to us, about Saturn, was that they saw it didn’t move at all, but they later found out it moved but very very slioely, and rotated like Earth does, but not as slowly as Earth does.

And that’s where they made up a very creative story for Saturn being another slowly rotating planet like Earth was made up before Saturn was told to be.

Nobody thinks of Saturn as moving at all. They said it wasn’t moving at all whenever they saw it for many years, studying it.

Observations are what is seen, what is not seen, what is partly seen, how everything looks to see of Saturn or any subject of study.

That’s the very first thing that I’ve seen, and everyone else has seen, looking at Saturn or seeing it on videos - it’s always in motion, or appears to be in motion, but is certainly never seen as motionless at all.

We’ve seen it for many years and night after night, everywhere on Earth almost.

If you say it’s caused by an effect of atmosphere, it would still not be seen as motionless by them either.

Their whole story is of Saturn being motionless, in everything they describe about seeing on Saturn.

They describe all sorts of detailed features of what they ‘saw’ and found out.

That’s clearly bs. We never see it motionless at all. No way they ever did either. For years? Get serious!

LOL! You act like you have all the astronomers notes on hand when talking about their observations.

You couldn't possibly. You haven't done your research in this, or the flat earth department, which is why your arguments get walked all over and spat on.

10

Flat Earth General / Re: Really, boats would have to sail up hill?

« on: May 10, 2025, 03:08:05 PM »

It's become clear to me, none of the flat earthers on this site are rich enough to own their very own earth globe.

They just need a practical one, that will help them in the real world. In the case of Bulma and Turbo, whose biggest career aspiration is sharpening pencils for somebody, I propose we start a go-fund me page, to get these guys an earth globe pencil sharpener each.

That way, they can fondle a different type of ball, while sharpening pencils and dribbling snot from their noses, and may elevate their understanding of the heliocentric model.

11

Flat Earth General / Re: Really, boats would have to sail up hill?

« on: May 10, 2025, 05:39:07 AM »

The mistake you are making, Data, is assuming a flat earfer like Bulma, can think in 3d like normal people like you and I can. These are people who live in a 2d world like Flat Stanley.

Are you kidding?  Bulma can't even draw more than one arrow to the center of a 2d circle.

That's exactly what I mean. A two year old child with a thick crayon could draw more technical drawings than bulma.

All flat earthers share a common quirk. They all say they understand the heliocentric model of earth with how gravity works, then, just like bulma, say something which illustrates they dont understand the heliocentric model at all.

It's really quite astonishing. This is what happens when someone watches too many flat screens, from television, to cell phone screens, to computer monitors, and in the case of bulma - his wall mirror where he checks his make-up. Flat, flat, flat.

Too brainwashed to realise his eyeballs which he views the world through - are globes.

12

Flat Earth General / Re: Really, boats would have to sail up hill?

« on: May 09, 2025, 03:42:42 PM »

Rather than a sailboat, I'll give you a rowboat. Have fun rowing uphill.

Why?

Your own post states otherwise.

Because it doesn't matter.

You'll get to the top of the hill. The drag you perceive from the hill didn't keep you from climbing the first 3/4 of the hill, nor the last 1/4 of it.

That you're delusional is cute. Really it is.

But at the end of the day, there is nothing preventing you from going up a hill nor down it, nor back up.

If gravity were a thing, a big heavy truck shouldn't get up a hill. I've been on mountain driving. I'm afraid trucks can in fact get up hills.

The mistake you are making, Data, is assuming a flat earfer like Bulma, can think in 3d like normal people like you and I can. These are people who live in a 2d world like Flat Stanley.

You can't just show Bulma a 2d drawing and expect shim to understand a 3d concept. Look at how confused you have made him. He doesn't know if he's Arthur or Martha.

If you seriously want to break the fourth wall with him, I'm sure you own a globe earth model? Start using that with arrows.

13

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: May 08, 2025, 01:46:39 PM »

When I said I have said no to the poor asking for money, I was referring specifically to the homeless.

I may sound cold, but the homeless, always seem to find the money for very expensive cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs. Well, the alcohol they can steal, but at least the cigarettes and drugs.

So, if I give them money to buy a nice meal or new clothes, that's me being naive. Any money I give will go straight up their arm or up in smoke. That's the reality.

14

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: May 07, 2025, 10:55:11 PM »

you see, you POS, it's not if I or you went out of our way to help the poor/ needy whoever, it's that you went out of your way to purposefully REMOVE and BLOCK help to the poor/ needy whoever.

that's why you're a disingenous pos

because you tried to reframe to conversation to whataboutyou-ism and plucked the coin someone else donated, from the blind beggar's cup.

Who are you replying to?

15

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: May 07, 2025, 01:43:15 PM »

I'm not a Christian, but you are appealing to a strawman that globalism doesn't require or even suggest.

No, I'm saying that you're holding Christianity to a standard that you don't adhere to or agree with.

projection much?
deflect when it suits you

change words when you feel like it

change context to fit your narative

such a pos

Projection much?

At the end of it all, knowing that nothing I do could earn salvation (which is taught as a free gift called grace), I help with Lions and with a food bank. Do I do everything I possibly can the poor and needy? Not hardly. I do what I do, not that regularly and not that much.

But can you show me by example how you help the poor?
Because if not, you're being a scold that accuses without any sort of superior model.

This is what Jesus meant here.

The Pharisees were a group of people who tended to pay attention to keeping of law. They put aside a tenth of everything they had, even the herbs they grew. But like modern liberals and their handouts, the poor weren't helped. There were hungry people. There were sick in the streets with blindness, leprosy, and extreme lameness. Their condition persisted because the Pharisees did the same argument is you. "Jesus, you're an awful person. You eat with sinners, you heal on the Sabbath." Never a thought to... "Maybe I should be doing something for these people." Always an accusation against Jesus.

https://studygrowknowblog.com/2010/05/01/todays-atheist-modern-day-pharisees/
Today's Atheist has much in common with Yesterday's Pharisee.

The reason that the Pharisees and the others gave Jesus such a hard time had to do with the fact that they refused to believe that Jesus was actually God, the Son.  They were actually religious atheists, meaning, they failed to believe the truth about religion, choosing instead to believe their own inventions about religion.  They rejected truth, replacing it with self-created fantasies.

You make fantasies about the shape of the Earth to conform to your godless view of reality.
Just as you make fantasies about Christians being hypocrites, when most of them will admit their failings, including Paul, who is known as a quite boastful person (as an example he talks about how nobody speaks in tongues more than him).

Yet one of the things he mentions is boasting of your failings and sufferings. "If you say you have no sin, you deceive yourself..."
This theoretical hypocritical Christian people admit their faults, and will be glad to point out exactly how they have fallen short, and how great a sin God forgave for them. You give nothing for the poor, you do not clothe the naked, you do not feed the hungry, or help the sick. By all means, if I should be wrong about this, prove me wrong by doing all you can in these areas. But if I should be right, attacking me will have no effect.

You call me a POS but you have no idea what sort of person I am IRL.

Would you like to know how I help the poor?

When they ask me for money, I tell them, "No."

16

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: May 03, 2025, 02:13:51 PM »

This woman ought to you know that even if she is wrong, she can pivot her opinions, make a recanting video and start new videos. She nukes her account completely, and frankly I can't find her online.

She did pivot her view away from flat earth.  How much backlash should she need to endure before saying enough is enough and distance herself from that once supporting community that she was a prominent member of that now despise her?

She didn't.
https://m.youtube.com/@PatriciaSteere
Completely blank.

Pivoting means you continue to make videos, they are just not FE videos. She just talks about other hot potatoes. Doesn't seem like a great stretch.

But nope, she just gave up.

I don't "despise" her. But my BitChute account has a mix of gaming and FE videos. If I lost interest in FE, or you people managed to disprove it, then it would just be the gaming videos. As it is, I don't make many bitchute videos to start with.

Patricia Steere has quite literally disappeared from the internet.

Which brings up a very important question: was her Flat Earth position a persona? In other words, did an invented person calling themselves Patricia Steere come about, and then when no longer useful, fold up?
She's on Instagram, I see a few rather generic AI quality pictures.
https://www.instagram.com/therealpatriciasteere/
Her Facebook page looks like a typical Friends Only Nothing Showing page.

You think of flat Earth is some sort of cult where you leave and they disown you. But it's closer to the parable of the sheep and goats. Either you made an impression on me (Eric Dubay and Phuketworld) or "depart from me, I never knew you."

I have never in my life watched a Patricia Steere video. It's not a matter of me disowning her as her basically turning off the  internet. I don't know her. Never watched a Jeran video either, so I dunno him either until he basically did that stunt in Antarctica.

Now, I think I have watched a Mark Sargent video. Shut it off when I saw him use a $30,000 gyroscope. At that price, it's more than likely  programmed to move occasionally because it has a chip and electricity. They'll say the reason it does this is how sensitive it is.
Nope, the reason it does this is that it has has an internal clock.  Yeah ummm, a low key $35 no electricity gyroscope will do its actual job of showing real angular momentum, and you'll be able to see that there is none from Earth's rotation. I have a whistle/water compass. And once it stops rolling (usually at NW position) when you set it down, it sits there. The water doesn't adjust at all to Earth's rotation. It literally collected dust.

You don't have to do this to yourself, you know?

"Go back to sleep, and be a good little sheeple."

That's what you're suggesting.

That way has led the Earth to the point where government tried to impose absolute control.

In the 1930s and1940s everyone had to buy war bonds, and heaven forbid you want a steak because we need you on rations, using fake soap for your clothes and fake butter. Think of the troops!
 In the 2020s, wear your mask and take your vaccine, slave!

Yes, I do have to do this. Because globalism is and has been the instrument of destruction and oppression since ancient times.  You could even claim that the Tower of Babel was built so that you could see the curvature (it wasn't, it was to defend against future floods). What did building it mean? Well extrabiblical texts talks about Nimrod creating a state of absolute oppression to turn people in fear away from God. It talks about how pregnant mothers were lifting heavy stones while they were about ready to deliver.

I have to do this, because a man died on the cross to put a stop to this sort of shit, and I will see his goals through. A world where each of us is free and happy, where there is no government trying to deceive us in order to get rich off of nonsense which we get shown a few crappy pictures for billions a year.

If I told you that you don't have to do this, would you listen? No, because whatever you get out of this is too tempting to give up. There's nothing tempting about what I do, but unless I see someone willing to suffer this in my place, who will fight for what I don't?

This is why I don't care about Patricia Steere. She is yet another person who gave up.

You should care about Patricia Steere. She was a flat earther just like you.

You should care about her reasons for leaving flat earth and you should care about the way her former flat earth friends treated her after she turned her back on flat earth.

I recall, some flat earthers were so angry with her, they were inventing stories that she was really a man.

In life though, to be fair, when you are part of any group and you leave that group, you lose the support from that group.

Jesus Christ said nothing about worrying about the shape of the Earth, so I'm astounded you use Jesus Christ as one of the reasons for your continuing flat earth membership.

I'm not suggesting you go back to sleep and be a good little sheeple. I'm suggesting you re-evaluate what you invest your time and energy into. Again, you refer to globalism like you are referring to Satan.

17

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: May 02, 2025, 06:00:47 AM »

Listen to yourself.

When I was out west years ago, I was stuck for few days working on a farm where people were in a cult. One of the things that struck me was the emotionality and decisions governed by impulses.

For example, some guy draws perfectly good (if perverted) art. Rather than channeling it in a positive way (making artistic flyers for Twelve Tribes to advertise their ministry), the elders simply tell him his skill isn't valuable, he tosses all of his artwork into the fire, and years of practice are deemed worthless.

This woman ought to you know that even if she is wrong, she can pivot her opinions, make a recanting video and start new videos. She nukes her account completely, and frankly I can't find her online.

You praising a person for being governed by their fear.  But that's to be predicted.  Gutless cowards and bullies (same thing). It doesn't take much nerve  to join the majority against one or two lone flat Earthers in shouting them down. Try waking up each day to speak against the majority, even knowing that your comments will mostly be ignored or outright ridiculed. And the next day, and the next. You happen to know that you're right, so you don't back down. But it's a very special kind of self-inflicted torture to endure this day after day, year after year.

You don't have to do this to yourself, you know?

Patricia Steere may have woken up one morning and decided to live without the internet at least for a long while. Unlike food, water, sunlight, and sex, people dont need the internet or social.media platforms to live.

You don't need social.media either, you know.

18

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: May 01, 2025, 04:24:52 AM »

Patricia Steere is one of the people Eric mentioned in his fake FE shills parody.  Along with Jeran.

Eric doesn't seem to think she was ever a true believer in it, citing that her show was called "FE and other hot potatoes (where we never talk about FE and always talk about other hot potatoes)." But apparently, she was heavily harassed.
https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/gl87m3/any_clue_what_patricia_steere_diddoes_for_a_living/
Which means par for the course, where bullying Flat Earthers is seen as socially acceptable instead of a really douchey thing to do.
Frankly, she removed every single video she had, so she has no real online presence anymore.

I've only ever seen Phuketworld and Eric. Didn't Mark Sargent that Antarctica expedition? You call these people grifters, but most ppl don't make a cent from FE.  Meanwhile, the real ones will always have more class than their opponents any day of the year. They put up with defending an unpopular idea, day in and day out, when their detractors try to make their lives hell.
 And guess who makes more money? Most Flat Earthers are so outcasted that they don't have a regular job. Round Earthers are not only able to hold normal jobs, but if they are good at convincing the masses, they can work as school teachers or at NASA (a billion a year tourist industry with multiple museums dedicated to "science" funded by taxpayers). 

These people are generally not my spokesmen. I've only hear one Phuketworld video (the one on the sun not shrinking). Eric Dubay, I watch because occasionally his videos are interesting. Like that mountains are giant trees, or stuff about Atlantis.

I don't believe in FE because of them though. I believe in it because of you guys, ironically. You see, if this forum were mostly quiet, I'd get bored and eventually check somewhere else. But the very fact that when I push, there's alot of reaction tells me "There's something there." Like a loose thread, I just want to pull at it until it unravels. The more outrageous you are about not accepting that your eyes actually show mostly flat land that doesn't seem to move, and with stars and sun and moon appearing to go around us, the more my brain craves mystery.

Good on Patricia Steere for realizing she made a mistake, having the ability to remove all her videos, and walk away from a toxic environment like the flat earth circuit. I had the impression it was like she was stuck on a roller coaster enjoying the ride, until the roller coaster went out of control and she didn't enjoy it anymore, and the only way off was to jump.

I agree my eyes mostly show flat land around me that doesn't appear to move. Unless you purposely avoid reading my posts, you would know this. You would also know I argue the flat earth frame of mind is how everybody experiences life on earth in our immediate surroundings. From a psychological perspective, I find it interesting.

I'm sure you agree with me regarding this. I see it as a natural human default for survival. What the earth is doing, is beyond our human control.

19

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 29, 2025, 04:46:38 AM »

Dude, you act like I haven't done beach experiments of my own.

Experiment 1: Walking towards the sea angles the sun's glare higher, making it go from hitting me with sunlight in my chair about 10 yards from the beach to not reaching the edge of the water when I enter the water.

Experiment 2: Bayside sunset. The sun set behind the buildings to the point where sunlight should have been blocked. But there was light opposite the sun in the sky (a nice purple sky) and the sea itself was golden.

Your experiments by contrast are built on faulty assumptions. I could of course do them. But we're not due for the beach for another three months or so. New Jersey is fucking cold, and don't got there until between July and September.
It would also be a waste of time. They're idiotic. You have two people in a boat because you can't understand simple perspective. Sea always appears to rise to eye level as I demonstrated from the fucking second floor of a ship, where the nearby pillar actually showed the level of horizon.

Experiment 1 shows the glare of the sun is based on relative angles. Experiment 2 demonstrates the apparent position of the sun at sunset is not the actual position due to the angle displacement. You experiments just show that you are utterly incapable of realizing how simple angles work, so you believe some nonsense about the sun's position that isn't so. It's not even warm enough to go in our pool yet. You want me to go to the ocean to confirm something I've already seen.

All I wanted, was to show you how perspective drawing differs from reality. The sea horizon is the easiest way to prove you were lied to by Eric Dubay and other Flat Earth experts. You can prove it to yourself on three months time, then, when you can finally do your own research and stand on your own two feet, instead of being told what to think and believe by these charlatans.

What future do these flat earth grifters have? Eric Dubay looks like his vegan lifestyle is about to cause all his hair to fall out. Meanwhile Mark Sargent looks like a heart attack waiting to happen from eating too many pizzas he likes to arrange the pepperoni on to look like an azimuthal world map.   Nathan Thompson will get arrested again for harassing kindergarten children about flat earth. Nathan Oakley will have a road rage incident where he gets his lights punched out, for acting like a twit. Dmarble is no longer a flat earther. Patricia Steere is no longer a flat earther. Jeran is no longer a flat earther. Phuketworld is a flat earther who bafflingly argues all proofs for globe earth, instead prove flat earth, and there is no way of knowing.

These people are your spokespeople.

20

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 28, 2025, 10:04:19 AM »

If only the physical are real, then everything that is energy is fake.

This means your thoughts, your feelings, things like a rainbow or radiation. 

If you are a person with fake thoughts and fake feelings, then why should I talk to you?

The world is fake. It is filled with phenomena that are not in fact part of your physical world.
I am a spirit creating a physical body around myself. The physical is fake, the spiritual is real.

Not the other way around.

If you don't believe me, grab a rock, tie it to yourself and throw both overboard from that boat of yours.
Your dying thoughts should be, "You know, nothing about that rock will change, but when my life force leaves this world, I'll be just like that rock..." Because I know your dying thoughts will be deep and philosophical like that.

"You're a ghost driving a meat coated skeleton, made from stardust, riding a rock, hurtling through space. Fear nothing."

Do the beach experiments.

21

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 27, 2025, 11:41:14 AM »

What makes you think this world is all that real?

We had a fake president of the US. We've had fake viruses. We've certainly had fake events. We even have fake weather!

I happen to know this world isn't real. You're the one gullible enough to be fooled.

And you're dumb enough to believe hair color dictates intelligence. Dumb blondes is a joke that blondes play to see if the other colors of hair are that gullible, and no surprise, they are. Blondes secretly solve all the world's problems in an underground research area.

For the record, I go to the beach every year. And you know what? The beach line angles up to the horizon. There's no curve. Stop being gullible!

You were born into this physical world in a physical body. The Earth you walk around on is physical, too.  Is there something fake about the physicality of this world, you'd like to share?

I'm not talking about your political views, or your conspiracy shit views on viruses real or fake.

Well, you know what, dumbass? This year when you go to your beach, stand with your feet at the waterline and look out at the horizon, and ask yourself if water always finds it's level, and the water from my feet forward is level, then how can the sea level horizon be at my eye level? Do it while you are fishing at the beach, waiting for a fish to bite. Then test your eyesight by increasing your elevation and observing how much further you can magically see out to sea.

Then, hire a boat, put a life jacket on your dear old dad, and ask him to head out in the boat straight out, about 5 to 6 kilometers and watch him through your telescope.

Is that too much to expect from a dumb flat earther like you? Or are you just too much of a coward?

I'm smart enough to know a silly blonde joke would upset the German in you, greatly.

22

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 27, 2025, 03:15:18 AM »

All that proves is that you have a powerful telescope.

For the sake of argument, you're watching your friend after sunset.

Watch.

\          O
  \
---\
    /
  /
/

The horizon line at sea level with no telescope.

Now with a telescope.

\          O
  \
    \
      \
        \
           \
             \
=======\
                 \
                   \
-------------------\
                 D /
            DD /
======= /
               /
             /
           /
         /
       /
     /
   /
 /

All a telescope does is change focal length. In fact, the =  part is due to the tunnel vision effect of looking through a long lens. You notice that O in both pictures? That's the sun out of angle because it's set. "The sun won't come back into view, that proves..." Nothing. Unless the point is to prove you don't understand, then you've done a bang up job of that.

There is no such thing as a physical horizon line. It strongly resembles a rainbow. You can make a rainbow show up when spraying water away from the direction of sun toward your eyes. Here's the fun part. Not only does it stay still no matter the change in elevation or distance of water, not only does it move forward and back when you move forward and back, but I tested jumping in the air. The rainbow jumped. Light interpreted by the eyes. Rainbows are not a physical phenomenon. Similarly, horizons do the same rise and movement. So do mirages for the most part.

So you and your friend get in a boat, and you see the boat "sinking" as it moves away, just as you see the boat sinking with your normal eyes as it moves away.
Of course, if you had a camera with a zoom lens, you would zoom in, see the boat (Pictured as DD then D) reverse its sinking, and come back into view. Then you can zoom it out, and watch it sink again. You read these refraction data things, and you trust them. This is your problem right there.

You have only fake pictures with regard to your so-called horizon lowering. And no, I'm not talking about AI pictures. Even AI pictures from some stock website tend to get it right.



A real camera showcasing real zoom. And they aren't flat earthers. They're camera geeks showing off hardware.

Omg, the island they point at appears to rise!

I was wondering how long it would take you to crawl out from under your rock with yet another ridiculous reply dreamed up.

Some people like you, just do not want to live in the objectively real world. I guess it is so much safer living in your subjective fantasy world 24/7.

You need to actually do the beach experiments by physically looking out at the sea horizon. These are practical experiments, which is why I asked you how far away you lived from the ocean. Remember? I know you're a backwards country bumpkin in high heels, but you take dumbness to new depths. Are you blonde?

The beach experiments are not thought experiments like Einsteins elevator thought experiments in outer space.

Beaches are easily accessible real places. The ocean is an easily accessible real place. The sea horizon is physically real and physically hides objects floating on it, depending on your elevation and the distance that floating object is from you. A telescope will only magnify what you can see, and will not bring into view floating objects behind the ocean curve.

The beach experiments are the easiest way in the world any of you dopey flat earthers can try and prove the earth is flat once and for all and see first-hand the Earth is curved.

Cowards.

23

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Re: Space Travel, the Firmament & God

« on: April 26, 2025, 03:44:41 AM »

can you explain why people the world over attend church on Sundays

Do you mean in objective reality, or just in their head?

Perhaps impact wasn't the best wording.
Yes, people's beliefs and feeling can impact what they do in the real world.
But them believing something is real does not make it real.

Religion being crap is your subjective reality.

I would say it is quite objective.
Religions are not based upon reliable evidence, directly contradict reality and have caused so much harm to people.

I'm sure you are quite happy to objectively celebrate Christmas and Easter

Which are a result of the seasons.
Christmas being a celebration about the ending of winter.
Easter being about spring and fertility and birth.

And before you try to play that game, just ask what people celebrate then. Especially people like me.

For Easter it would be things like chocolate eggs, a few days off and maybe going to the Easter show.
What does that have to do with Christianity? Nothing.
Even hot cross buns aren't from Christianity.

As for Christmas, again, most of what people do aren't about Christianity.

They are not Christian holidays. They are holidays that have been stolen by Christianity to try to convert pagans.
Christianity stealing these and perverting them does not mean they are a result of religion.
The hypocrites are all the Christians who celebrate it, pretending it is a Christian celebration, while going along with so many pagan rituals.

But, you want to know the real kicker? The objectively real kicker?
I use my belief in a higher being to great effect in my everyday work.

No, that isn't objectively real.
That is your belief.

Unless you can demonstrate how your belief itself is causing impact it is really nothing.
And even if you do that, it is still just your belief, not the actual being you believe exists.

One of the conundrums with belief in a higher being and belief, is one can never really be sure if it's the higher being believed in, doing any response, or the belief in the higher being and belief in a specific outcome, which is the prime mover. Belief itself, I think, is that powerful. Combined with the concept of a higher being, I think the power of belief, is amplified. Maybe it's amplified by the mere visualisation of an authority figure seated on a throne.

Flat earthers get too caught up in the size of Earth and the universe, and so, never really invest themselves in exploring the power of belief or the power of believing in a higher being. It's unfortunate.

Christmas has the word "Christ" in the very name, and you still argue it has nothing to do with Christianity and Jesus the Christ! Even Easter, you pretend has nothing to do with Christianity and the cruxifuxion of Jesus Christ. You really are just like a flat earther, unable to accept reality, aren't you? For you, how these holidays are totally unrelated to Christianity, is your subjective reality. All you see is presents and chocolate Easter eggs.

Maybe I could employ my subjective belief in a higher being technique with your permission, to demonstrate impact in the real world with you? It might be fun.

I could send you an image by way of thought, or you could invite me to describe the painting on the wall near your computer, as an example.

Again, such a thing requires your permission and cooperation, and being shall we say, a "non-believer" I'm doubtful you'd even say yes. Besides, my technique involves liaising with your higher being. 

But, it's all my subjective reality, right? You or I having a higher being can never be objectively proven, can it? My subjective reality could never affect your objective reality, could it?

Being on this forum is likely an escape from reality for you. The possibility that a person or bot, or words on a screen could objectively affect your real world probably scares the shit out of you and you want no part of it.

But, here's the next kicker. My thoughts and energy go into the words I type here in reply to you, which I know you will read, and vice versa. So, you and I, are already affecting each other's objective reality because reading, and even interacting on a forum in dialogue, generates thoughts. The time it requires to read posts and type posts, also uses up objectively real time, on both sides.

24

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Re: Space Travel, the Firmament & God

« on: April 24, 2025, 11:41:45 PM »

Objective reality and subjective reality. Both are real.

No. Objective reality, or more simply "reality",  is what is real.
"subjective reality" is your subjective interpretation of the world, which has no impact on what is actually real.
You believing something to exist, does not make it part of reality.

The globe earth is the former while the flat earth is the latter, as you are fully aware.

i.e. flat Earth is your own subjective belief and is not part of reality, it is not actually real.
It is just in your mind, your imagination.

The fact that a grown adult like you cannot grasp this concept, shows just how delusional you are.

Wrong again.
I fully understand.
And you are now yet again acting like a FEer.
You act like just because I don't agree with your BS, I must be too stupid or brainwashed or delusional to understand.

I understand people have beliefs about the world.
That does not make those beliefs true.
It does not mean that them believing something exists actually makes it exist.

I understand subjectivism. I understand solipsism. But if I follow that, that means what I believe is real, not what you believe, as you are just part of my subjective experience of the world.
So my perception of someone else believing a god exists does not mean a god exists.
Sure, they can claim otherwise, but that doesn't matter because they aren't mean and in this view the person I know definitely exists is me.

You dismiss all religion like you are superior to it, but instead, you're too much of an imbecile to understand it.

No, I dismiss religion for the crap it is.
And yet again, you act like a FEer, just throwing out insults because you can't defend your position.
Instead of accusing others of being an imbecile, try to explain.

You owe an apology to all your flat earther friends on this site for being such a total prick.

No, I don't.
They owe an apology to everyone for claiming Earth is flat and then refusing to defend it or admit they are wrong.

If subjective reality has no impact on what is real, can you explain why people the world over attend church on Sundays? Did you know churches are real places in our real world where people really go to sing praises to a higher being and think about that higher being?

Can you explain why the flat earth society is a place on the internet where you can really visit? Again, real people who really think the earth is fucking flat and they have been lied to their entire lives about the shape of the earth. Do you think that doesn't have an impact on the real world around them, with all those delusional thoughts?

You wouldn't even be here if you didn't think the backward thinking of believing earth were flat, offered some danger to the real world if the idea were accepted by too many people.

Religion being crap is your subjective reality. I'm sure you are quite happy to objectively celebrate Christmas and Easter which are a result of religion.  I know you simultaneously call religion crap and God a piece of shit at every opportunity. That makes you a hypocrite on top of every other name I've already called you, doesn't it?

But, you want to know the real kicker? The objectively real kicker?

I use my belief in a higher being to great effect in my everyday work. My subjective reality intersects often with objective reality.

Your next sentence will be, "Prove it." Unfortunately, no example I can provide will ever prove it to you.

Maybe you can devise a way?

25

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Re: Space Travel, the Firmament & God

« on: April 23, 2025, 03:28:47 AM »

Doesn't your national anthem include references to God?

No, it doesn't.

I thought you enjoyed the freedoms, scaled legal system, and customs built from a Christian based society?

No, I enjoy the freedoms, legal system and customs built from rejection of key parts of Christianity.
Christianity gave us the dark ages.
The enlightenment, leading us away from Christian rule and establishing things like religious freedom, is what produced the society we have now.
It certainly isn't based upon Christianity.

It's like this, Jacky Boy.
If you choose to believe in God, then God is real to you.

All that does is show just how delusional you are.
Something is either real or not.
Believing in an imaginary fiend doesn't make it real.
It either exists regardless of if you believe in it, or it does not exist regardless of if you believe in it.

You know what else is real, Jacky boy?

Objective reality and subjective reality. Both are real.

The globe earth is the former while the flat earth is the latter, as you are fully aware.

God is also subjective reality.

In subjective reality, anything can be quite real to the person who believes it.

The fact that a grown adult like you cannot grasp this concept, shows just how delusional you are. You dismiss all religion like you are superior to it, but instead, you're too much of an imbecile to understand it.

"Either something is real or it isn't" - what a fucking crock of shit. You're full of it.

You owe an apology to all your flat earther friends on this site for being such a total prick.

26

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airplane gyroscopic instruments proves FE made useless long ago.

« on: April 22, 2025, 04:10:29 PM »

Planes don’t need to measure their various heights above Earth, it has mountains and undersea bottoms of ground, and planes don’t need to measure them, each has an altitude as well, sea level is 0 feet altitude, planes are set for whatever altitude on ground, they don’t measure over all the rest of Earths surface, which varies over the entire surface, but is all a flat surface at 0 feet altitude or sea level.

Air flows over Earth in a flat path, of course. We know what happens if we don’t travel level to air, it conflicts with the level flow of air, in normal conditions, and creates turbulence, and the air always wins that battle, every time.

They’ve now made up a most ludicrous and nutty pack of nonsense ever told to us.

Of course, everything is solved by their greatest bs story they had made up long ago.

They have nothing to prove it exists, cannot demonstrate it exists with any objects on Earth, and proves it’s just bs.

Which they use as an ‘answer’ for everything that they cannot actually account for.

Curved surfaces and curved flight paths would certainly be measured for as a curve, if there was a curved surface or curved flight path, which would be from the plane itself, a constant and steady descent, which is perhaps 3 or 5 feet per minute of flight at 500 mph, and we would always fly planes in constant descents, even for short distances. The whole Earth would be curved, all over it, every distance on it.

There is nothing about your made up force to begin with, it doesn’t exist, that’s why they cannot ever prove it exists or demonstrate it exists. If we can prove and demonstrate magnetic force exists, we’d surely be able to prove and demonstrate your ludicrous force exists too, but even easier than magnetic force is.

We have a made up force that pulls down all things from air to the surface while for absolutely no reason or logic, adjusts its strength to each objects mass, and pulls them all down to the surface at the very same speed!

It gets worse from that point, but I digress.

Planes measure for level flight in air, which is a flat and straight and horizontal path over the Earth, which is also flat.

There’s no proof of anything in their excuse even exists to start with, so it’s ridiculous that they use such crap in combination for their story.

Nobody on Earth knows what is under a few thousand feet of Earths surface. Making up a ‘core’ in the center of their ball Earth is complete nonsense, without a shred of proof for it being true!

Then they add in their made up bs story of a great universal force which exists in all things, which pulls in other objects with less of their made up force. Except they can’t ever prove it, which would be very easy to prove, if it wasn’t just made up and told was true!

Hey, how about using our instruments and their measurements as indicated on them as true, as real? That’s better than making up bs stories that never work at all.

Our instruments measure as indicated, that’s why we built them, and why we have gauges on them to measure things for us.

Imagine how that would ever work! What exactly are the instruments on planes measuring here? Why would they measure for something that we don’t even know about in the first place?

‘Ok Ralph, I want to let you know that when you’re flying a plane, the gauge will measure for level flight, but we don’t know what it really means by that. I heard it’s now called level to Earths curvature and our instruments are hit by waves of gravity in Earths core, and makes the read level over the ball Earth surface, or maybe it’s curved air pressure, or both, I have no idea.  Anyway, forget what I just said, it’s bs anyway. We know what level means, and know how to measure for level, which has nothing to do with any curves’

For a guy who denies Earth is a globe and has no fucking idea what other shape the ground he walks on is, you sure do talk the big talk.

Measuring for level is ordinarily an immediate Earth concern, and only relevant to your immediate environment.

Likewise, it's relevant to a pilot who doesn't want to crash the plane he/she is immediately flying.

27

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Re: Space Travel, the Firmament & God

« on: April 22, 2025, 02:41:20 PM »

A physical body has to eat to survive.

Why?
Because the being you worship allegedly made it that way?

A soul needs to be nourished the same way the physical body needs nourished.

No, in a vastly different way, such as through friendship or companionship, and activities.

Your god is as loving as a parent who sits idly by while their eldest child beats, rapes and kills their younger children; even though they could intervene and stop it.
That is not a loving being.
That is an evil POS that is not worth worshipping at all.

If you know about “such” evil, then why don’t you stop it?

You seem to have ignored a key part there.
I'm not capable of stopping it. Especially not all of it.
But your god (if it actually existed) can, the parent in that example can.
And at no significant cost to them.

Limited humans have an excuse when they are unable to stop things.
Your evil POS has no such excuse.

But notice how you are doing absolutely nothing to try to defend your evil POS now.
Instead you just deflect.
Again, just like FEers.
You can't defend your position, so you deflect.

And there are also many good parents that walk with Jesus.

There are good parents who are "Christians.
There are good parents who are not "Christians.
There are bad parents who are "Christians.
There are bad parents who are not "Christians.

But how many non-religious people hate their children for being gay?

Now.  If the if there is only survival.  None of what you listed is evil.

Again, your evil POS does nothing for morality.
The only way in which the argument you are making is in any way defensible is if you simply say that none of that is evil, and in doing so demonstrate that you are truly morally bankrupt.

But it seems to make you more angry with no sense of respect for others.

I'm not angry at all.
You are now again, acting like a FEer.
Because you can't defend your position, you just insult others.

As for respect, I respect things that are worthy of respect.
I do have a sense of respect, and that comes with sense, which means not respecting things which are not worthy of respect, especially those which promote disrespect of things without cause.

And why should I have any respect for such vile, fictional beings?
Do you respect Voldemort, or Darth Vadar?

Or are you saying I'm not respecting you because I'm being mean to your imaginary fiend?
Do you respect neo-Nazis, but not saying anything bad about Hitler?

Seeing there is something good, understanding there is a source of goodness that is something other than acts of survival, and wanting to serve that good because it feeds the spirit like food is needed to nourish our bodies (or understand that our spirit needs exercise like our bodies) is fake?

Your evil POS is not good.
It is not a source of goodness any more than people are.
Again, your god helps with nothing.

Why can't you see people as that source of goodness as something other than acts of survival?
Why does your evil POS need to be involved at all?

Tsk, tsk, tsk Jacky boy.

Doesn't your national anthem include references to God? And this is the way you refer to God? I thought you enjoyed the freedoms, scaled legal system, and customs built from a Christian based society? You need to wash that dirty mouth of yours out, with a cake of soap.

It's like this, Jacky Boy.

If you choose to believe in God, then God is real to you.

It's as simple as that.

28

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 22, 2025, 08:47:35 AM »

The horizon looks to be at your eye level, but it can't be  can it? That horizon line out at sea, has to be the same level as the bottom of your feet. Your eye line is however high as it is, above the bottom of your feet.

This is why I told you. On the Dead Sea, it's 400+ m below the sea level. In the upper atmosphere, it's thousands of feet above sea level. But horizon always appears at eye level. This is why water seems to rise when you look straight ahead. Yes, I know that with water at the level of the of the bottom of my feet, sea level is at basically zero elevation. But the sea is not the horizon. The horizon is the brain telling the eye, or the camera telling a lens where top, bottom, and front are, and organizing objects according to coherent  positions. And yes, I did make a horizon in this post.

But, that's just it, Bulmabriefs144. The sea in the example I gave, IS the horizon line. It is the physical horizon line.

You can prove it, by standing at that water line with the most powerful telescope you have. Your friend who owns a boat, heads out from you to the horizon in front of you. Now, depending on how tall you are, that horizon line should be roughly 4.8km ahead of you, not taking into consideration, refraction index. After about 4.8km, you will observe through your telescope, your friend's boat start to look like it is sinking with the horizon line hiding it more and more as the boat continues away from you.

The sea horizon line is simply the curve of the sea water.

If that horizon line was the same as the horizon line taught in perspective drawing, and the Earth were flat, the horizon line would be higher and at your eye level, and you would be able to continue seeing your friend's boat, until it is too blue from Earth's atmosphere to see anymore.

The 4.8km, isn't far enough away for it to disappear into blueness, instead, earth curvature removes it from view.

The higher you go in a plane, the further away the horizon line is, but also, the lower it is from your natural eye line. You are looking down at it more. It becomes more and more pronounced in it's lower elevation from your natural eye line.

Sorry, man. Eric Dubay and other flat earth priests and priestesses, have given you a massive bum steer on this.

29

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 19, 2025, 04:09:00 PM »

They are trick questions.

They are a trick because you can obviously find the answer to them with even a basic search of my own past posts.

I am tired of answering the same questions over and over again, and having you guys play a police interrogation on me "Look, you answered that differently that time! You must be lying." Suit yourselves. No answer will be forthcoming.

Why is it so goddamn hard for you to answer two yes or no questions?

Most real questions do not have a yes or no answer that you can trap people in, they have what is called a nuance.

For example, does water always find its level? No, because that is the wrong phrase. Yes, water is always level. There is no such thing as a pool of water that mounds. You've just described a Dragon Quest slime there. But why is "find its level wrong?" Well it implies a wrong assumption that water is not level to start with, and has to seek out a level height. If this were so, waves could not happen. But waves move back and forth because there are things like springs and whirlpools. Water is level, but it flows in and out of areas based on conditions.  Because by find, you are implying that there is some force leading it to be level, when no, it simply is level. So that's not a yes or no answer but a "mostly yes, I guess."

What about the second question? Well, if your question is "can you see a farther away object from a higher elevation?" Yes, you can. But you can also see a tall and wide object (such as a mountain) from a fairly low elevation. And you can see a high up object (such as a plane or balloon) from either elevation. The way you phrased this question is also awkward, because it essentially also asks "is there a longer 'box' of perspective from a higher vs lower elevation?" Unfortunately, the answer to that one appears to be no. Even though you can see objects that are like 100 miles away, this is effectively compressed perspective. That is to say, if at nearly sea level, three to five miles looks to be as far as you can see, your perspective looks to be the same width. Is that a yes answer? A no answer? Something else?

If your questions really are as simple as you claim they are, the answer is yes to both. But if they are trick questions, then the answer is one you'll need to read that paragraph to understand.

Ok, so you head on down to your nearest beach on a fine or cloudy day, but one where you can see that straight ass, level, motherfuckin horizon out to sea, where seawater meets sky. A gentle breeze has flattened the waves to the point the sea looks like a plane of glass laying flat.

We've all seen it, and I know you have, too, Bulma. Now, because water always finds it's level, the surface of that sea water in front of you to the horizon, is as perfectly level as it could possibly be.

So, you walk down to the water's edge, so the water line is equal to the undersides of your feet. Now, you look across at that horizon in front of you.

The horizon looks to be at your eye level, but it can't be  can it? That horizon line out at sea, has to be the same level as the bottom of your feet. Your eye line is however high as it is, above the bottom of your feet.

This means, when you look at that physical horizon line out at sea, with the bottom of your feet at sea level, you must be looking ever so slightly down at that physical horizon line. In this instance, your eyeline cannot be the same as the surface of the seawater at the undersides of your feet level.

Do you catch my drift?

Now, let's say, for dramatic purposes you are 6'5 tall, and standing next to a 4' tall person doing the same observation and you both have equal eyesight tested and proved. As the 4' tall person's eyes are 2.5' lower to the ground than your eyes, it stands to reason the 4' tall person must see the horizon as closer, than you do. If two sets of eyes have the same eyesight, and distance of earth seen, is dictated by change in altitude and not eyesight capability, it stands to reason, that even though that seawater to horizon is perfectly level, it must also be curved.

In fact, if you went into that seawater and submerged yourself until your eyes, or more specifically pupils, were at the waterline, looking out at the horizon,, at long long last, your eyeline would be matching up with your physical horizon in front of you.

What have you got to say about that, Bulma? You agree water always finds it's level. You agree a person can see further with elevation.

Therefore that seawater must be curving downwards in front of you and the physical horizon as seen out at sea, is ever so slightly different, to the horizon line taught in perspective drawing. At ground level the differences are almost imperceptible, but the difference is there. In art and perspective drawing, you can get away with calling the eyeline the same as the horizon line.

But now you know better.

30

Flat Earth General / Re: WHY would the government trick us?

« on: April 19, 2025, 10:18:26 AM »

SmokeAndMirrors, take a look sometimes at the number of comments I get. It is anywhere from three to five, often with three or more different posters.

In other words, yes, it does begin to feel like bullying.

Second, I don't offer you unsolicited advice, do I? What about unsolicited education? No, I only explain my position (and I am often asked to repeat it anyway).  When I was younger, my grandmother used to give everyone advice about what she thought we should do with our lives. But last I checked, you're not related to me, so "Eric Dubay is not a good Christian man" is going to fall on deaf ears. You get to pick your Neil deGrasse Tyson guy, so if I wanna watch videos, yeah that's on me. I have also watched some Happy Science and Patchman (Spirit Science) videos. No, I'm not a follower of either of these, they just have fucking interesting movies.

For fucksake, Bulshitbeliefs144! Aren't you trying to school everybody here in the mindset of the flat earther?

Why is it so goddamn hard for you to answer two yes or no questions?

Do you believe water always finds its level?

Do you believe your visual distance to the horizon increases with altitude?

They are not trick questions, Bulma!!!!!

Most flat earthers would be falling over themselves to answer yes to both questions and most globe earthers the same!!

It's s base to start at.

You know what? Fuck it. In my next post I'm going to explain to you how you can easily disprove the physical horizon is the same as your eyeline.