Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - odvetnik_irsic

Pages: [1]
I cannot comprehend why a debate needs to even go on. It seems that the FE'ers will never concede regardless of the evidence.  Needless to say Geodetic Surveying clearly and quickly proves that the earth is round. This is based on everyday experience from professionals in the field and which is based on over 300 years of geodetic surveying being conducted independently by countless surveyors over the centuries.  Clearly a debate with FE'ers has become so utterly preposterous that I question their sanity. 

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

My question is rhetorical; Why can't the FE sun & moon be proven.  I have grown tired of this debate as it is really akin to debating with a 4 year old.  Contrivances, obfuscation, moronic "evidence," pseudo-science, etc..  What I would like to know is why FE'ers cannot simply produce proof of:

1) The exact distance of the moon & sun
2) The exact size of the moon and sun
3) Scientific measurements of the sun and moon's existence at various points on the globe since advanced astronomical equipment should easily verify this. 

These points are sine qua non to the FE argument.  "Thinking" that the world looks flat is about all the evidence you have and this is kind of "intellectual" argument is the kind that a child would make.  Publish your data along with your methodology and allow it to be tested and peer-reviewed.  If you cannot prove such absolutely basic data points then I think we can assume this debate is truly pointless and OVER. 

Let's face it FE'ers, the moon is a globe.  It is not a self-illuminating orb (or disk) rotating a few thousand miles above the earth.  Come on, that's just a ridiculous conclusion that proven already.  So, it follows that if the moon is a globe, so is likely the earth.  Here is but one example of a back-yard astronomer that has taken some remarkable videos of the moon, which clearly shows it is an orb, and sadly, NO it is not self-illuminated as you can clearly see from the footage. 

The moon is a 3D object and the distance from the earth is 240,000 miles.  Yes!  How do we know this?  Well, simple.  Scientists use lasers to measure the distance.  In fact they have measured that the moon is moving a few inches away each year.  Now that's precise. 

My question to the FE'ers is how can you question this? And if you disagree WHY can't you take your own independent measurements to prove otherwise?! Come on, this should be as easy as 123.  You make ridiculous claims and then you cannot make your own scientific measurements to prove otherwise?  This is but one reason you FE'ers need to give up...nothing you claim is even a plausible assumption. 

Flat Earth Debate / Transit of Venus = Round Earth Reality
« on: March 15, 2016, 01:26:07 PM »
I'm curious to hear what FE'ers have to say about the phenomenon of the transit of Venus. This well-studied planet, which was known to the ancient scholars at times transits in front of the sun.  If this is the case (and it is), then we can essentially close the book to the Flat Earth nonsense.  That Venus is a planet I think does not need to be debated, does it? Well, since it periodically crosses the face of the Sun that would mean that Venus crosses between the FE disk and the earth, and this I think we can pretty much eliminate this option.  Venus is well documented and easily observable...and yes it is round!  This phenomenon was also very useful in early calculations, which helped to measure the exact distance and size of the sun.

These are well tested and observable facts so I am looking forward to some ridiculous denials that Venus exists...

I would like an honest discussion on Copernicus and Galileo and HOW exactly do FE'ers conclude that these do men were key figures in the round earth conspiracy.  As I understand it their conclusions were based on observations, in particular their observations of venus as it circled the sun, which was demonstrated empirically. 

Is it really logical to conclude that these two men of science conspired to lay the ground work for 500 years of round earth propaganda?  Is this really the position FE'ers take?  Of course you will need to explain HOW their observations fit into the round earth model. 

Maybe they were aliens?

Let me even suggest one not so outlandish scenario which should be a logical conclusion given Flat Earthers' predilections for conspiratorial fantasy:

We all know governments engage in co-intel and disinformation campaigns.  Intelligence organizations are known to infiltrate conspiracy or grass roots groups to manipulate (take control of the direction and to neutralize) them and given the tremendous amount of conspiracies floating around space, aliens, the moon, etc., have you ever once considered that NASA is covertly playing a role in the dissemination of disinformation to entrap gullible conspiracy theorists and to draw them into a quagmire and waste society's resources?  Just consider that maybe those "strange" videos they produce are purposely being fed to groups such as yours?  Now you can't honestly think that "masters of the universe" could be so clumsy do you?  They understand group psychology infinitely more than you do and understand how easily people can be manipulated. Something to consider...

95% of what NASA is handing out is most certainly true although even I am willing to accept that here and there they might be engaging in disinformation.  It's the 5% of disinfo that is insidious and becomes to focal point of the disenfranchised part of society.  Quite possibly you're being played by the organization that you give so much of your energy to.   

In the end is it logical to conclude that 100% of NASA is fraudulent?  Certainly not. 

Flat Earth Debate / Flat earth under a dome? Prove it...
« on: March 05, 2016, 12:49:14 AM »
This "minor detail" in the flat earth model has got me wondering.  Since this is central to the flat earth being viable for life (I assume unless there are more nonsensical versions not requiring a dome) I would like proof that it exists.  Where is it?  How do you know it exists? Where is the empirical evidence?  I won't even go so far as to ask how thick it is...although since flat earthers subscribe to their own physical fantasies we don't need to debate gravity and how it could be structurally viable.  Then assuming we all agree that there is substantial proof of the existence of a dome where do the sun and the moon float around and what is the mechanism for their flight through the air.  Then finally, if the sun and moon fly around in predictable patterns then we would known the exact position at any given moment meaning that with a high powered telescope (using any number of light frequencies).  In a flat earth you can see both from any position on the disk (leave the dual earth drivel out of this discussion because I want to limit the amount of insanity on this subject)...this should be testable and proven at any time of the day/night so I would like to see the scientific evidence.  I believe that you can commission a wide variety of public and private telescopes to prove this.  Proof please. 

1. Scientifically prove your dome exists with direct empirical evidence.
2. Scientifically prove that your sun/moon are viewable at the same time underneath the dome with natural light/UV/X-Ray telescope images.  This should be a home run for you.

Since Flatearthers can prove absolutely NO empirical evidence to substantiate their outlandish claims, I wanted to re-submit the argument that satellites do indeed exist.  I would like to use the example of Japan's Himawari-8 weather satellite.  It was produced by Mitsubishi and generally used to track weather in Oceania and Japan.  Their images are readily available to be viewed by anyone.  So, Flatearthers would have us believe that all of this is indeed fake...a part of a grand and insanely complex conspiracy to keep the truth from the masses.  We are led to believe that space doesn't exist?  Oh really; prove it empirically.  We are told by flat earthers that satellites don't exist even though the ISS has been documented countless times by even backyard astronomers.  No satellites? Well, there are untold billions being spent on space programs to launch satellites for various purposes so you claim that the teams designing satellites and rockets are what; actors? When they launch rockets they go where exactly and do what exactly?  The images that satellites send back to earth are where exactly?  Weather satellite images are fake?  Really?

So, here's a challenge.  Prove that these satellites are fake and that the images are fake.  Then try to comprehend the insanity of such a claim given the tremendous infrastructure required to design, produce, launch, manage, and then to falsify the fact that the earth is "flat." Does this seem logical? 

Flat Earth Debate / Why no Whistleblowers?
« on: March 03, 2016, 11:19:11 PM »
Given the massive scale of this 500 year old conspiracy that requires the involvement of millions of participants to keep the charade going (including military, international space agencies, physicists, engineers, pilots, marine navigators, professors, intellectuals, etc.) WHY has there never been a credible whistleblower exposing your claims?  Where are there intellectuals with credibility that claim the world is flat?  There is really NO WAY to contain a conspiracy as grand as this and the only people who propagate this nonsense are internet trolls.  One paranoid schizophrenic who probably looks like a Bond movie villain claims that Steven Hawking knows about this (and laughs with his "credible intellectual" colleagues) yet chooses not to share this information with the rest of the blind masses.  What insanity. 

So, why has no one blown the lid on this?  Given the huge number of scientists and professionals that would have first-hand knowledge that the world is flat, why exactly has not one of them released confidential documents on SURELY Julian Desange knows that the world is flat, right?! LOL.

Flat Earth Debate / Genesis according to Flat Earthers?
« on: March 02, 2016, 02:03:54 PM »
Ok, so here's one question that has NEVER been answered.  We don't need to go as far back as the creation of the universe but I would like to know the following according to the Flat Earth Model:

1. Who created the flat earth?
2. How was it created assuming that the rest of the galaxy/universe follows different physical properties?
3. Why is the earth "different" than the rest of the universe?

Flat Earth General / Yes, the ISS is REAL...hard to believe isn't it
« on: March 01, 2016, 09:56:02 AM »
In the demented world of a Flatearther, the entire world is one giant conspiracy with the hidden flat earth at the cusp...yes, it just all makes so much sense, NOT.  Well, I won't really spend too much time explaining why I think flat earthers are absolute nutters and paranoid, so instead I thought I'd share a fantastic short documentary on the ISS, which is narrated by Sunita Williams, a NASA astronaut.  She basically takes you around on an un-edited tour of the ISS with very long scenes, which should even convince the staunchest nut that this is for real.  Loved it...and loved the shots of the ROUND EARTH from the windows. 

I hope you'll all enjoy it and just maybe this is help at least a few lost souls snap back to reality:

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

Flat Earth Debate / Proof of a round earth: Himawari 8 Satellite Images
« on: February 29, 2016, 12:24:45 AM »
I think the reason rational people have issues with FE'ers is that your theories are arbitrary, unscientific, easily refuted, un-mathematical, and that you have absolutely NO scientifically tested empirical evidence to test your claims.  You are assuming there is a massively complex and long-standing global conspiracy against all of you "independent thinkers."  Aside from the mountain of evidence supporting the existing model of our round earth and space, you need to seriously think how insane and paranoid this conspiracy is.  The proponents of FE claim that the last 60 years of rockets and space travel are all a sham?  How many satellites have been launched? How many rockets deployed payloads?  How many people have been involved in your paranoid conspiracy? How many international space programs over the years that work independently of one another?  Private space programs?  So you claim all of this was, and is to fool you into believing that the world is indeed flat and all of this was just one part of the conspiracy, even though to orchestrate such a massive and complex operation is not comprehensible let alone feasible.  Name some credible astrophysicists or ex-space program employees that claims the world is indeed flat.  Let's not even talk about the trillions of dollars spent on these programs and all of the data that they have compiled over the years.  Of course, you have absolutely no logic to back up your claims. You simply disregard evidence because you cannot explain it and because it does not fit your limited mental paradigm.

Excuse me, but satellites are real (and always have been) and transmit data about the earth, which proves the earth is indeed round.  Yes guys, SPACE IS REAL!

For example take a look at the Himawari 8 weather satellite launched by the Japanese meteorological society in 2015.  The satellite is used by multiple agencies and is able to be viewed daily by the public.  It takes high resolution photos every 10 minutes and yes YOU TOO can watch them.  And no, these video clips are not falsified assuming you think you can create fake satellite images of extreme high complexity every 10 minutes including animating the earth's weather.  If you indeed feel that this is all fake you really should seek counseling.  I accept that conspiracies exist and have for ages but subscribing to such paranoid theories as the Flat Earth model is the leading edge of insanity. Face it, you are in the company of crack pots and lunatics if you indeed believe the earth is flat, that the physics governing your FE is arbitrary, we live under a dome, and that space is fake. 

The Himawari 8 was indeed the first satellite to create photos of our Round Earth in true color.  The images are amazing. Enjoy the satellite images:

The Distance from the North Pole to the equator is approximately 10,000km.  There is no doubt there?

1.  IF the distance from the North Pole to the Equator is in fact 10,000km (r), and then the accepted distance around the equator is 40,000km (C)
Then, following the mathematical equation C = 2(Pi)R

2. The Actual Circumference on a FLAT EARTH would be in fact approximately 63,000km

This does in fact not work where the accepted equator is 40,000km.  A 10,000 mile distance from the North Pole to the Equator, and a Circumference of 40,000km only works on a round globe. The Math simply does not work on a Flat Earth Model. 

Two questions; and this should be simple to answer for FE experts:

1. What is the cicumference of the flat earth?

2. What is the distance from the North Pole to the FE edge, i.e. Radius?

That's all. Who can answer this?

Flat Earth Debate / Sun and Moon under FE
« on: February 23, 2016, 11:37:47 PM »
Ok. So you FE disk is flat, right? There is a dome over your FE disk right? Your "sun" and "moon" are fixed at constant distances in, right? We acknowledge that powerful telescopes exist and are readily available (not only at public observatories), right?


1. If the earth is flat then both the sun and moon would be viewable from every point on your flat disk. Forget your "atmospheric density" argument. In the night sky you would be able to point a high powered telescope in the direction of your flying "sun" disk and provide proof. I want to see it.

2. What is your explanation for your disk to maintain its position; what keeps its constant rotational position, if gravity doesn't exist!?

3. If there is a magical dome over the flat disk, how was it created? Who? How?

4. If there is actually a dome, provide evidence of its existence. Are you claiming that every film of rockets leaving our atmosphere are fake? Well this is far more convincing PROOF of a lack of a dome than the FE'ers complete lack of evidence. There is absolutely zero evidence of a dome?

5. Why is the moon illuminated? Why is there even a moon under the FE model!? Under the FE model a moon has NO purpose. Its existence has no rational explanation.

6. What is the mechanism which provides the planet with "solar energy?" Can a ball 32 miles across generate enough heat to warm the planet!?

Looking forward to some really crazy answers...

Flat Earth Debate / How is time defined by thr FE theory?
« on: February 23, 2016, 09:31:08 AM »
If indeed the the flat earth does not circle the sun in 365 days, how exactly is a year on thr flat earth defined?! What actually is a "year" and if the earth is actually flat why is a year defined arbitrarily as 365 days? Under the FE model the concept of a "year" does not exist in any objective sense. Please explain.

By the way, can a FE believer explain the mechanics behind four seasons...and why the seasons are opposite in the two "hemispheres" on the FE model?

Flat Earth Debate / Antarctica is in fact a continent; Go and see it!
« on: February 22, 2016, 07:09:36 AM »
There is a ton of information on travel to Antarctica; SO, there are 12 hour chartered flights on Qantas 747's out of Australia that fly over the entire continent and even over the South Pole.  Yes, indeed all you flat earth folks (particularly the ones in OZ) should get yourselves on one of these flights and prove to us that the entire flight is one big CGI black ops journey.  Looks like the perfect opportunity to disprove the Round Earthers (or Flat Earth Deniers) once and for all.  Here is your chance to prove us all wrong.  Just keep in mind not to spout vitriolic statements about these kinds of flights existing. Finally do something and prove to us all that you are correct or at the very least you can prove that these flights fly you in a "Matrix-like" false reality...or whatever else you can imagine...

For reservations:

Come on, you can front a lousy $1,200 to prove us all wrong can't you?!?!

Flat Earth Debate / Antarctica IS a continent...Really!
« on: February 21, 2016, 12:00:58 PM »
Regarding Antarctica, the mythical ice wall, men in black guarding it; Two empirically easy ways to disprove that Antarctica is not some mystical barrier (like out of Game of Thrones) but an actual land mass that can be circumnavigated along a constant parallel (and which has many times). Apparently it's been done by this guy who sailed it in 102 days:  And no, this guy didn't sail in a circle along the 25,000 mile Ice Wall that you FE'ers claim exists... There is even an Antarctica Cup Race, which is 14,600 miles... about 10,000 miles less than the distance you FE'ers claim is the distance along your Ice Wall.  Well, I'm sure you can all crowd fund and raise enough to tag along on one of these races.  But heck that would be too much of a commitment for you... or you could email the guy that won...or wait, he is a government disinformation agent!

A last point about Antarctica (yes it's a continent); Google the "Vinson Massif." It is a 16,000ft mountain well within the confines of Antarctica and which is one of the seven summits climbed by a multitude of mountaineers, including one of my good friends (who has completed all 7 summits).  It has been climbed and well documented by so many climbers that it puts the FE theory of Antarctica to shame.  There is NO ice wall barrier and there are NO military or international paramilitary forces defending Antarctica.  My colleague traveled to the continent quite simply and climbed the Vinson Massif with relative ease. The photos I saw showed mountains and endless expanses of the Antarctic ice sheets as far as the eye could see. My friend is not a government agent but a well-respected cardiologist. This is so easily proven that it is embarrassing for me to be wasting my time on this.

Here's even a company that specializes in adventure tours to Antarctica, including touring to the south pole! Well, this MUST be a government front organization. 

Watch this ascent of the Vinson Massif: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank">  or this one: " class="bbc_link" target="_blank"> 

Instead of wasting time on mathematics and physics, which only gets FE'ers in a tizzy, good old rational evidence will HOPEFULLY re-set their brains to accept that their theories are wasting their precious time on this round planet...

I can hardly wait to see what nutty rebuttals this post will get...


Pages: [1]