Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m

  • 280 Replies
  • 234058 Views
*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #120 on: March 03, 2015, 01:53:00 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #121 on: March 03, 2015, 01:59:11 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #122 on: March 03, 2015, 02:08:54 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.
Did you just happen to overlook the shit that he has took, or are you well aware of it but decide to have a pop at free thinkers, yet pretending you're one yourself.
Someone mentioned that you were a shill on another site. I'm tending to believe it now after watching how you're  going about your business.

A classic shill. Argue for something away from a globe then BANG, hit the flat Earth theorists right in the guts. It won't work. Anyone who plays the game will be found out sooner or later. Then from that point on, all you're doing is playing the game, only this time you're playing it out in the open for us all to see.

If you can't back up free thinkers then don't slag them down either. There's enough globalites on here that do all of that. From this point on you're a full on shill unless you prove otherwise.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #123 on: March 03, 2015, 02:27:12 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.
Did you just happen to overlook the shit that he has took, or are you well aware of it but decide to have a pop at free thinkers, yet pretending you're one yourself.
Someone mentioned that you were a shill on another site. I'm tending to believe it now after watching how you're  going about your business.

A classic shill. Argue for something away from a globe then BANG, hit the flat Earth theorists right in the guts. It won't work. Anyone who plays the game will be found out sooner or later. Then from that point on, all you're doing is playing the game, only this time you're playing it out in the open for us all to see.

If you can't back up free thinkers then don't slag them down either. There's enough globalites on here that do all of that. From this point on you're a full on shill unless you prove otherwise.

Can you please explain? Are you writing to me? I am confused. How am I shill if I demand people to not insult each other and to not slander each other? Free thinkers shouldn't insult people. That is not free thinking. It is just rude. Also, I am sure cikljamas took a lot of shit because of his approach, not because of his ideas. That other site you mentioned is a scam of someone who is not a free thinker, but a con artist making a parody. That guy wouldn't even consider for a second that he might be wrong. I wasn't the shill there, he was the shill. Same here, you can't call free thinking authoritarian imposing of ideas and insulting your opponent.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 02:31:45 AM by Saros »

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30061
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #124 on: March 03, 2015, 02:41:37 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.
Did you just happen to overlook the shit that he has took, or are you well aware of it but decide to have a pop at free thinkers, yet pretending you're one yourself.
Someone mentioned that you were a shill on another site. I'm tending to believe it now after watching how you're  going about your business.

A classic shill. Argue for something away from a globe then BANG, hit the flat Earth theorists right in the guts. It won't work. Anyone who plays the game will be found out sooner or later. Then from that point on, all you're doing is playing the game, only this time you're playing it out in the open for us all to see.

If you can't back up free thinkers then don't slag them down either. There's enough globalites on here that do all of that. From this point on you're a full on shill unless you prove otherwise.

Can you please explain? Are you writing to me? I am confused. How am I shill if I demand people to not insult each other and to not slander each other? Free thinkers shouldn't insult people. That is not free thinking. It is just rude. Also, I am sure cikljamas took a lot of shit because of his approach, not because of his ideas.
There's not much else to explain. I've just told you how it is. Now let's see if you can grasp this.
If cikljamas puts effort in like he does and is on the end of a mass of posters (globalites) who try every which way to ridicule him, then I expect he will retaliate and give a little bit back.
You're almost making out that these globalists are all nice in responding. They're not. Most are bell end's. Only some have any sense and some are simply spotty, snotty nosed kids.

Now let's get back to you. If you are not a globalist then your input is not needed in aid of them, no matter what. If you don't like what cikljamas is saying or any other free thinker, then just take a back seat and let them get on with what they're putting out.
It seems rather odd that cikljamas is putting excellent info into this forum. So good infact that it's guaranteed to make many people think. Those who have a thinking brain that is.

It seems that because he's hitting a raw nerve, there seems to be a full on approach to battering him from putting it out by many, including yourself, except you are using the ruse of playing a devil's advocate with a little mix of good cop, bad cop in. It's like you're acting all innocent whilst telling him he's wrong but not outright dismissing it for all to see as blatant.

What do you know?...what makes you know the truth and him, not?
What gives you the right to tell him to tone his stuff down and yet you don't appear to tell the globalists to tone down their constant crap towards him.

You're not real mate. You're playing a game but you're not alone. Far from it.
From now on, you're a shill and I'll let it be known on a regular basis.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #125 on: March 03, 2015, 02:59:19 AM »
Acenci,

Although i don't know what you have found, i am very delighted with that information. So, how are we going to celebrate it?

By opening and drinking off a few glasses of a good french champagne?

Hilarious parody about the guy whose theories Saros blindly follows. It seems that Saros is the greatest fan of him. " class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> Must see!

Just for the record, I never ever said I follow this guy, are you insane? You are either crazy or just lack any ability to understand what people share with you. That is just too much! You are seriously disturbed if you claim others do stuff which they don't. When did I say I believe this guy? Do you even have dignity or you simply like to claim bullshit about others for fun?

Here is why I got mad at Cikljamas. How can I believe a person who writes that I "blindly follow" someone just because I sent him few videos to watch, because I thought they were interesting, and as a response I only got "that guy is an idiot". How is this not slandering? Why shouldn't I feel offended? He never apologized. I am sorry, but it seems Cikljamas does all this work for himself and for his own ego. If he had a nice approach, I would never attack any of his claims, because they are interesting. I have supported them too on many occasions. However, being unable and unwilling to admit that sometimes you might be wrong is a sign of infantility. Same goes for Wild Heretic who stopped publishing my comments right after I asked him to admit that he can't be 100% sure the Earth is concave. He is still convinced it is. Anyway, personally I think it is all an act, as no one can be so stubborn unless they are crazy. Trying to find out proof that the Earth is flat doesn't mean you should be fanatical about it.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 03:02:08 AM by Saros »

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #126 on: March 03, 2015, 03:14:42 AM »
Nope. I happen to think the earth is flat, and, as Samuel Jackson would put it, "your ass ain't talkin' your way out of this shit".

#ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Pulp Fiction Scene - "Hamburgers"

I believe in the flat earth, and I don't care if I am with the 0.001%. The earth is flat and sooner or later you will find out, too. But probably you will find out only when you feel comforted by another 51% of the population being on your side.

So, talk to you in 10 years, when this fact will become mainstream knowledge. Provided we're not all chipped by then, and in that case I don't know who they'll kill first.

I don't know if they'll first kill the opposers or the sheeple. I think they have a plan to kill a few billion sheeple.

OK, that is the problem. You and cikljamas assume everyone else thinks the Earth is a sphere and only you suspect it's flat. You think you need to convince everyone else. Guess what. You're wrong. Other people believe the Earth is flat too, but don't act like dicks.

The Earth might be flat, but your arguments are weak. That is why people argue with you. I don't believe it is a sphere either, but I don't come here shouting that everything I say is correct, just because I said so.

You can't make weak arguments and then expect others to believe you.

I think that you guys don't believe in flat Earth, because if you did, you wouldn't be making arguments which can easily be refuted and would be more careful how you present yourself.

It is almost as if you want to discredit the idea that the Earth is flat by pretending you're a flat Earther and making stupid arguments supposedly to prove it. You're not convincing people this way. The opposite, if someone believes in flat Earth after reading the crap Cikjamas writes they might re-consider.

So, think about it. Look at my perspective's videos, he is very modest and takes time to explain stuff. Doesn't insult people and tell them they are idiots. Despite all that, it is not guaranteed he is correct. About these things you can never be 100% sure, and if someone is 100% sure that means he is a brainwashed mushroom. As if the point is not to think but to blindly believe in it. That is almost cultish..

"Weak arguments"? Ah ah, you lazy ass!

I spent 20 posts explaining the curvature formula and its conflict with all photographic and cinematic evidence (I provided plenty of examples), and yet you pretend I didn't, because that takes too much effort to disprove, and in fact it is impossible to disprove. That is my watertight argument and the reason I am so confident.

That's why I don't plan to waste any more time with you, despite the fact that everything you say is pretty wise. But you are not wise about me.
You're not wasting time with me. In fact, that is why you post threads in the first place. You want people to respond, right? Do you expect people to agree or disagree when you post a thread? I think you want them to disagree. It would be pretty boring if everyone agreed, right? How would you feel if everyone here believed in your claims 100%? I am sure you would leave the forum.


Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #127 on: March 03, 2015, 03:23:19 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.
Did you just happen to overlook the shit that he has took, or are you well aware of it but decide to have a pop at free thinkers, yet pretending you're one yourself.
Someone mentioned that you were a shill on another site. I'm tending to believe it now after watching how you're  going about your business.

A classic shill. Argue for something away from a globe then BANG, hit the flat Earth theorists right in the guts. It won't work. Anyone who plays the game will be found out sooner or later. Then from that point on, all you're doing is playing the game, only this time you're playing it out in the open for us all to see.

If you can't back up free thinkers then don't slag them down either. There's enough globalites on here that do all of that. From this point on you're a full on shill unless you prove otherwise.

Can you please explain? Are you writing to me? I am confused. How am I shill if I demand people to not insult each other and to not slander each other? Free thinkers shouldn't insult people. That is not free thinking. It is just rude. Also, I am sure cikljamas took a lot of shit because of his approach, not because of his ideas.
There's not much else to explain. I've just told you how it is. Now let's see if you can grasp this.
If cikljamas puts effort in like he does and is on the end of a mass of posters (globalites) who try every which way to ridicule him, then I expect he will retaliate and give a little bit back.
You're almost making out that these globalists are all nice in responding. They're not. Most are bell end's. Only some have any sense and some are simply spotty, snotty nosed kids.

Now let's get back to you. If you are not a globalist then your input is not needed in aid of them, no matter what. If you don't like what cikljamas is saying or any other free thinker, then just take a back seat and let them get on with what they're putting out.
It seems rather odd that cikljamas is putting excellent info into this forum. So good infact that it's guaranteed to make many people think. Those who have a thinking brain that is.

It seems that because he's hitting a raw nerve, there seems to be a full on approach to battering him from putting it out by many, including yourself, except you are using the ruse of playing a devil's advocate with a little mix of good cop, bad cop in. It's like you're acting all innocent whilst telling him he's wrong but not outright dismissing it for all to see as blatant.

What do you know?...what makes you know the truth and him, not?
What gives you the right to tell him to tone his stuff down and yet you don't appear to tell the globalists to tone down their constant crap towards him.

You're not real mate. You're playing a game but you're not alone. Far from it.
From now on, you're a shill and I'll let it be known on a regular basis.

Yeah, wise words.

Maybe we should just keep our three names in mind, and ignore everyone else. Out of the hundreds of users on this forum so far the two names that really seem to be genuine flat earthers are cikljamas and sceptimatic.

I suspect everyone else of being a shill or a sheeple.

On other forums it is much better. But I do admit that being in the 0.001% makes us all so paranoid that we tend to be aggressive to others who don't agree with us. But that is a natural consequence of being in the 0.001%.

It is a tough situation. That is why I feel so much solidarity with Zhib, because he certainly is in that 0.001%, too. Even if his ideas do not completely match mine.

Haha, your friend Cikljamas got mad at me for saying the same thing! I told him that I find Zhib's videos interesting after I sent him few links. He said the guy is an idiot and basically accused me of being a shill. Double standards much? Now you're saying the same thing, but at the same time Cikljamas is your "friend". Omg, what hypocrisy! He is definitely not your friend! Just tell him you think Zhib might be right and see his reaction. By the way, Sceptimatic doesn't believe in flat Earth, he doesn't know if the Earth is flat or not. Ask him? OK, I will ask him. Scepti, can you please respond with YES or NO if you are 100% the Earth is flat? If you're not sure then why you're accusing the others of being shills for doubting?
« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 03:26:45 AM by Saros »

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #128 on: March 03, 2015, 03:32:33 AM »
This is my last thread here, and I am not participating in any other threads. As soon as this will be dead, I will be gone for good.

Promises, promises.....

This is about the fifth time you've said you're not going to post anymore acenci.  Can you please do us all a favour and just go?

And thank you on behalf of all the round earthers and most flat earthers.

      ::)

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #129 on: March 03, 2015, 03:36:37 AM »
I already asked Scepti, but I would like to ask all of you.

I want a YES or NO answer to the following question: Are you 100% sure the Earth is flat?





Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #130 on: March 03, 2015, 04:01:40 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.
Did you just happen to overlook the shit that he has took, or are you well aware of it but decide to have a pop at free thinkers, yet pretending you're one yourself.
Someone mentioned that you were a shill on another site. I'm tending to believe it now after watching how you're  going about your business.

A classic shill. Argue for something away from a globe then BANG, hit the flat Earth theorists right in the guts. It won't work. Anyone who plays the game will be found out sooner or later. Then from that point on, all you're doing is playing the game, only this time you're playing it out in the open for us all to see.

If you can't back up free thinkers then don't slag them down either. There's enough globalites on here that do all of that. From this point on you're a full on shill unless you prove otherwise.

Can you please explain? Are you writing to me? I am confused. How am I shill if I demand people to not insult each other and to not slander each other? Free thinkers shouldn't insult people. That is not free thinking. It is just rude. Also, I am sure cikljamas took a lot of shit because of his approach, not because of his ideas.
There's not much else to explain. I've just told you how it is. Now let's see if you can grasp this.
If cikljamas puts effort in like he does and is on the end of a mass of posters (globalites) who try every which way to ridicule him, then I expect he will retaliate and give a little bit back.
You're almost making out that these globalists are all nice in responding. They're not. Most are bell end's. Only some have any sense and some are simply spotty, snotty nosed kids.

Now let's get back to you. If you are not a globalist then your input is not needed in aid of them, no matter what. If you don't like what cikljamas is saying or any other free thinker, then just take a back seat and let them get on with what they're putting out.
It seems rather odd that cikljamas is putting excellent info into this forum. So good infact that it's guaranteed to make many people think. Those who have a thinking brain that is.

It seems that because he's hitting a raw nerve, there seems to be a full on approach to battering him from putting it out by many, including yourself, except you are using the ruse of playing a devil's advocate with a little mix of good cop, bad cop in. It's like you're acting all innocent whilst telling him he's wrong but not outright dismissing it for all to see as blatant.

What do you know?...what makes you know the truth and him, not?
What gives you the right to tell him to tone his stuff down and yet you don't appear to tell the globalists to tone down their constant crap towards him.

You're not real mate. You're playing a game but you're not alone. Far from it.
From now on, you're a shill and I'll let it be known on a regular basis.

Yeah, wise words.

Maybe we should just keep our three names in mind, and ignore everyone else. Out of the hundreds of users on this forum so far the two names that really seem to be genuine flat earthers are cikljamas and sceptimatic.

I suspect everyone else of being a shill or a sheeple.

On other forums it is much better. But I do admit that being in the 0.001% makes us all so paranoid that we tend to be aggressive to others who don't agree with us. But that is a natural consequence of being in the 0.001%.

It is a tough situation. That is why I feel so much solidarity with Zhib, because he certainly is in that 0.001%, too. Even if his ideas do not completely match mine.

Haha, your friend Cikljamas got mad at me for saying the same thing! I told him that I find Zhib's videos interesting after I sent him few links. He said the guy is an idiot and basically accused me of being a shill. Double standards much? Now you're saying the same thing, but at the same time Cikljamas is your "friend". Omg, what hypocrisy! He is definitely not your friend! Just tell him you think Zhib might be right and see his reaction. By the way, Sceptimatic doesn't believe in flat Earth, he doesn't know if the Earth is flat or not. Ask him? OK, I will ask him. Scepti, can you please respond with YES or NO if you are 100% the Earth is flat? If you're not sure then why you're accusing the others of being shills for doubting?

You might not be a shill, in which case do us all a favor, and, in the same way that I do, make sure you clearly state in every post that you believe the earth is flat and what is your strongest evidence.

Follow my example. To clarify that I am not a shill, when I post my doubts about this flight (in this thread) or the satellite videos, and other things that seem to disprove our theory, I always make sure to add that I still believe in the flat earth because of my curvature formula vs the cinematic evidence that the horizon doesn't curve according to it.

Forget about the 100% question to us, because that could be interpreted as a shill question. Why don't you rephrase it as: "do you think it is more likely that the earth is flat or spherical?".

A 100% question doesn't even satisfy facts such as who my parents are and what is my name. So please make an effort to not be mistaken as a shill. Play the devil's advocate but with moderation. If you overdo it, obviously we're going to suspect you of being a shill. Show us with sincerity that you believe in flat earth.

Believing in something doesn't mean it is a reality. There is still a possibility it isn't. I just wanted to know how strong your belief is. In my humble opinion, you can't believe in something like that unconditionally. The same way you shouldn't believe the Earth is round either implicitly. We can't be sure. I have shown many times that I defend the FE idea, but I don't agree with all the claims made by FE'ers. Is this wrong? Please check the history of my comments. I have never written in this forum that the Earth is a round sphere. I tend to think it is flat, but regardless of the amount of evidence, there is no way to be completely sure. Do you see what I am saying? While some fanatics here are ready to fight that it is flat or round. Anyway, please respond to the poll I posted.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #131 on: March 03, 2015, 05:38:46 AM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Has one of your carers just typed this message?


Nope. I have left the forum in case you didn't notice.
This thread has got hilarious.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #132 on: March 03, 2015, 12:14:51 PM »
One question for moderators : When it becomes obvious that somebody is mentally ill person, shouldn't you restrict access (to such a person) to this forum?
Are you really that mean? Now I am mentally ill, because I told you to be a bit more skeptical of your own theories? You should be the first to get thrown out since you have insulted so many people here for no reason at all. Who is not an idiot and insane in your opinion? Focus on the topic and provide better explanations instead of being impolite. That is why I argue with you about this stuff. You're just rude and disrespectful. Be a little bit humble please! Apparently, it is too much to ask.
Did you just happen to overlook the shit that he has took, or are you well aware of it but decide to have a pop at free thinkers, yet pretending you're one yourself.
Someone mentioned that you were a shill on another site. I'm tending to believe it now after watching how you're  going about your business.

A classic shill. Argue for something away from a globe then BANG, hit the flat Earth theorists right in the guts. It won't work. Anyone who plays the game will be found out sooner or later. Then from that point on, all you're doing is playing the game, only this time you're playing it out in the open for us all to see.

If you can't back up free thinkers then don't slag them down either. There's enough globalites on here that do all of that. From this point on you're a full on shill unless you prove otherwise.

Can you please explain? Are you writing to me? I am confused. How am I shill if I demand people to not insult each other and to not slander each other? Free thinkers shouldn't insult people. That is not free thinking. It is just rude. Also, I am sure cikljamas took a lot of shit because of his approach, not because of his ideas.
There's not much else to explain. I've just told you how it is. Now let's see if you can grasp this.
If cikljamas puts effort in like he does and is on the end of a mass of posters (globalites) who try every which way to ridicule him, then I expect he will retaliate and give a little bit back.
You're almost making out that these globalists are all nice in responding. They're not. Most are bell end's. Only some have any sense and some are simply spotty, snotty nosed kids.

Now let's get back to you. If you are not a globalist then your input is not needed in aid of them, no matter what. If you don't like what cikljamas is saying or any other free thinker, then just take a back seat and let them get on with what they're putting out.
It seems rather odd that cikljamas is putting excellent info into this forum. So good infact that it's guaranteed to make many people think. Those who have a thinking brain that is.

It seems that because he's hitting a raw nerve, there seems to be a full on approach to battering him from putting it out by many, including yourself, except you are using the ruse of playing a devil's advocate with a little mix of good cop, bad cop in. It's like you're acting all innocent whilst telling him he's wrong but not outright dismissing it for all to see as blatant.

What do you know?...what makes you know the truth and him, not?
What gives you the right to tell him to tone his stuff down and yet you don't appear to tell the globalists to tone down their constant crap towards him.

You're not real mate. You're playing a game but you're not alone. Far from it.
From now on, you're a shill and I'll let it be known on a regular basis.

Yeah, wise words.

Maybe we should just keep our three names in mind, and ignore everyone else. Out of the hundreds of users on this forum so far the two names that really seem to be genuine flat earthers are cikljamas and sceptimatic.

I suspect everyone else of being a shill or a sheeple.

On other forums it is much better. But I do admit that being in the 0.001% makes us all so paranoid that we tend to be aggressive to others who don't agree with us. But that is a natural consequence of being in the 0.001%.

It is a tough situation. That is why I feel so much solidarity with Zhib, because he certainly is in that 0.001%, too. Even if his ideas do not completely match mine.

Haha, your friend Cikljamas got mad at me for saying the same thing! I told him that I find Zhib's videos interesting after I sent him few links. He said the guy is an idiot and basically accused me of being a shill. Double standards much? Now you're saying the same thing, but at the same time Cikljamas is your "friend". Omg, what hypocrisy! He is definitely not your friend! Just tell him you think Zhib might be right and see his reaction. By the way, Sceptimatic doesn't believe in flat Earth, he doesn't know if the Earth is flat or not. Ask him? OK, I will ask him. Scepti, can you please respond with YES or NO if you are 100% the Earth is flat? If you're not sure then why you're accusing the others of being shills for doubting?

You might not be a shill, in which case do us all a favor, and, in the same way that I do, make sure you clearly state in every post that you believe the earth is flat and what is your strongest evidence.

Follow my example. To clarify that I am not a shill, when I post my doubts about this flight (in this thread) or the satellite videos, and other things that seem to disprove our theory, I always make sure to add that I still believe in the flat earth because of my curvature formula vs the cinematic evidence that the horizon doesn't curve according to it.

Forget about the 100% question to us, because that could be interpreted as a shill question. Why don't you rephrase it as: "do you think it is more likely that the earth is flat or spherical?".

A 100% question doesn't even satisfy facts such as who my parents are and what is my name. So please make an effort to not be mistaken as a shill. Play the devil's advocate but with moderation. If you overdo it, obviously we're going to suspect you of being a shill. Show us with sincerity that you believe in flat earth.

Believing in something doesn't mean it is a reality. There is still a possibility it isn't. I just wanted to know how strong your belief is. In my humble opinion, you can't believe in something like that unconditionally. The same way you shouldn't believe the Earth is round either implicitly. We can't be sure. I have shown many times that I defend the FE idea, but I don't agree with all the claims made by FE'ers. Is this wrong? Please check the history of my comments. I have never written in this forum that the Earth is a round sphere. I tend to think it is flat, but regardless of the amount of evidence, there is no way to be completely sure. Do you see what I am saying? While some fanatics here are ready to fight that it is flat or round. Anyway, please respond to the poll I posted.

No, sorry, I don't see what you are saying, because that is precisely the way the shills talk about 911: "there is no way to be completely sure". For example shill Joe Rogan. They say that it seems that it is a controlled demolition, but he is not an expert so he could be wrong. That is precisely shill talk, minute 3:29, bingo! 100% shill talk.

#ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Joe Rogan and Eddie Bravo - confirmation bias and 9/11

More on this shill:

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Joe Rogan's Moon Hoax Mystery

We need sincerity, passion and conviction. You are not showing much of it. Instead you're spending your time arguing against the few flat earthers left on this forum. It's time to stop doing it, or we certainly will classify you in the same folder as Joe Rogan, Alex Jones and Mark Dice.

Thank you for the nice analysis. You completely lack discernment, but it is your choice to be wrong. Who are you? We? You and cikljamas? Are you suddenly a single person? What gives you the right to speak on behalf of the flat Earth society? This is not a job interview, but an open forum. I am not arguing against the flat Earth idea. I am arguing against you. Do you all share the same inability to understand why someone shares an opinion? You're not representatives of the flat Earth belief, you're representatives of yourself. Just because you think you're pro flat Earth doesn't entitle you to some special privileges that no one should criticize you and if they do that means they are shills. Anyway, I am not going to argue with you any longer as apparently you're not going to change your style.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #133 on: March 03, 2015, 12:17:56 PM »
I'm really getting the impression that Saros, acenci and ckljamas are the same person having some kind of insane argument with themselves.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #134 on: March 03, 2015, 01:31:45 PM »
I'm really getting the impression that Saros, acenci and ckljamas are the same person having some kind of insane argument with themselves.

OMG, are you all paranoid? At the end it would turn out there are only two people in this forum - me and you, right? I guess they should start showing the IP address of everyone, so that people know there are actually different people here. However, I do hope acenci and cikljamas are two different people.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #135 on: March 03, 2015, 02:46:10 PM »
I also stopped discussing politics with my parents, because they're trapped in the left-right paradigm, whereas I know that it is a global scam, ruled by a secret government. My father doesn't understand that we're like ants. He thinks he matters something in the world (he's a politician). Not only am I unable to discuss 911 with him, nor the fake beheadings but if he finds out that I believe in flat earth (I told my mother) he will think I need to be placed in a mental hospital.
If you want to scuttle your dad's career, just make public what you think. Be sure to include the part about believing the Earth is flat. That'll show him!

Get some rest. You're certainly not going to save the world by posting here.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #136 on: March 04, 2015, 03:02:10 AM »
We're not sure yet. We're consulting with one another right now. Don't forget that I am also sceptimatic, according to some conspiracy theorists...

It's not easy being a flat-earther. I've lost about six friends thanks to telling people I believe in flat earth. They weren't worth much, but we had been friends for a long time.

Actually I didn't lose them, but they didn't reply to my emails. Since I won't write them again, we might not be in touch because of this. I am disappointed by them, so I won't write them again.

I am very tired. I have moved to another forum. This forum was created to wear us out and get the best of us, and to minimize its effect on the world. This is like an internet extermination camp for flat-earthers.

I also stopped discussing politics with my parents, because they're trapped in the left-right paradigm, whereas I know that it is a global scam, ruled by a secret government. My father doesn't understand that we're like ants. He thinks he matters something in the world (he's a politician). Not only am I unable to discuss 911 with him, nor the fake beheadings but if he finds out that I believe in flat earth (I told my mother) he will think I need to be placed in a mental hospital.

I am sad and tired.

Whenever I try to make someone understand, the non-shills I mean (you wouldn't understand), they go into denial and start re-interpreting formulas (the curvature formula) and images (I showed them the bubbles rising in space / swimming pool) to fit their spherical earth delusion.

I am so tired...

What do you mean by saying "to wear us". You joined the forum yourself. If you're getting tired, maybe you should write less. There is no hidden agenda. You can write as much as you want as often as you want. I don't see how this constitutes a conspiracy. By the way, the best place to publish stuff is youtube. You can make your original video and discuss whatever you want in the comments section. As for the conspiracies, there is plenty of them. It is naive to think conspiracies don't exist.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #137 on: March 04, 2015, 03:36:47 AM »
I'm really getting the impression that Saros, acenci and ckljamas are the same person having some kind of insane argument with themselves.

I'm beginning to think the same thing, simply because one of the apparent ALTs, acenci, has promised to leave the forums half a dozen times now, but has failed to do so.

It's notable that all three ALTs repeatedly use the same claim that the round earthers are all "shills", which as I recall was initiated by sceptimatic way back when.

Maybe all four are each an ALT?  Which of course "they" will all deny LOL.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #138 on: March 04, 2015, 05:00:15 AM »
I think I might stay after all. At least on this thread.

As you've teased us several times in the past by "threatening" to depart these forums, can you please save us all a lot of grief—both round earthers and flat earthers—and simply LEAVE and NOT return?

Thanks in advance (said he hopefully LOL).      ::)

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #139 on: March 04, 2015, 05:50:07 AM »
I'm really getting the impression that Saros, acenci and ckljamas are the same person having some kind of insane argument with themselves.

I'm beginning to think the same thing, simply because one of the apparent ALTs, acenci, has promised to leave the forums half a dozen times now, but has failed to do so.

It's notable that all three ALTs repeatedly use the same claim that the round earthers are all "shills", which as I recall was initiated by sceptimatic way back when.

Maybe all four are each an ALT?  Which of course "they" will all deny LOL.
Yeah, actually, I have a better one. You're sceptimatic, how about that? Prove you're not.

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #140 on: March 04, 2015, 10:40:17 AM »
Great job Acenci!

Let's give them some more food for thought:

Quote
If we know the proximate distance between any two places, in the south, on or about the same latitude, and have the difference of solar time at these two places, we can calculate, accordingly, the length of a degree of longitude at that latitude. Such elements we have from the map, recently published, of New Zealand, in the "Australian Handbook, Almanack, and Shippers' and Importers' Directory, for the Year 1872." 1 It is there stated that the distance (mail route) between Sydney and Nelson is 1400 miles (sea measure), equal to 1633 statute miles. From this distance it is proper to deduct fully 50 miles for the distance in rounding Cape Farewell and sailing up Tasman Bay, at the head of which Nelson is situated. But if we allow 83 miles, which is more than sufficient, we have the straight-line distance, from the meridian of Sydney to the meridian of Nelson, as 1550 statute miles. The two places are nearly on the same latitude, and the difference in longitude is 22° 2´ 14″. 2 The whole matter now becomes a mere arithmetical question: if 22° 2´ 14″ give 1550 statute miles, what will 360° give? The answer is 25,182 miles. Hence, a 360th part of this distance is one degree; and the length of such degree is nearly 70 miles. But upon a globe, such as modern astronomers affirm the earth to be, the length of a degree at the latitude of Sydney would be 49.74 nautical miles, or 58 statute miles. Hence we find that the actual length of a degree of longitude at the latitude of Sydney is nearly 12 miles longer than it could possibly be if the earth is a globe of 25,000 miles' equatorial or maximum circumference; and the distance round the earth, at that latitude, is 25,182 statute miles, instead of 20,920, the difference between theory and fact being 4262 miles.

If, now, we take, from the same map, the distance between Melbourne and Bluff Harbour, South New Zealand--1400 nautical, or 1633 statute miles--and take the difference of longitude between the two places, allowing 50 statute miles for the angular or diagonal direction of the route to Bluff Harbour, we find the degrees of longitude fully 70 statute miles; whereas, at the average latitude of the two places, viz., 42° S., the degrees, if the earth is a globe, would be less than 54 statute miles; thus showing that in the south, where the length of a degree of longitude should be 54 miles, it is really 70 miles, or 16 miles longer than would be possible according to the theory of the earth's rotundity.

From the above two cases we also find that the degrees of longitude at the latitude of Bluff Harbour, on the southern point of New Zealand, are somewhat longer than the degrees between Sydney and Nelson, where they ought to be--if the earth is globular--several miles less; and also that, according to the same doctrine, there is an excess of 7466 statute miles in the whole circumference. Read more : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za42.htm



Can someone explain these differences:

According to map published in the "Australian Handbook, Almanack, and Shippers' and Importers' Directory, for the Year 1872", and after proper (and even more than sufficient) deduction of certain number of miles, we get these results:

Sydney - Nelson : 1550 miles (2480 km)
Melbourne - Bluff Harbour : 1583 miles (2532 km)

According to Google maps above distances are incorrect, let's see for how much:

Sydney - Nelson : 1310 miles (2107 km)
Melbourne - Bluff Harbour : 1335 miles (2149 km)

The differences between these two estimations:

Sydney - Nelson : 240 miles (373 km) 16,5 %
Melbourne - Bluff Harbour : 250 miles (383 km) 16,5 %
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #141 on: March 04, 2015, 11:23:20 AM »
I was exactly hoping for this kind of support, so thank you.

At any rate, despite the tremendous efforts I put into this forum, and my tragic family situation (a shill for a father, a sheeple for a mother, a physicist pseudo-scientist and gatekeeper for a cousin, all flat-earth deniers), I consider my mission accomplished. I have extensively proven flat earth based on the curvature formula, and I am exhausted but very satisfied.

This would not have been possible without you guys, you (two or three) flat-earthers, but also without the shills, for their punctual criticism and objections. So thanks to all and bye bye. For the flat-earthers, see you on the other forum (off limits to shills).

Thank you for the latest monster fail post.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #142 on: March 04, 2015, 11:35:58 AM »
Give my regards to all your colleagues in the department of shills.

Didn't you say you were leaving?
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #143 on: March 04, 2015, 11:38:51 AM »
Ah ah!!!!

Bingo!!!

Corsica seen from Genoa, 227 km away from its highest peak (Monte Cinto, which is 2706 meters) and a spherical earth drop of 4043 meters!!!

<more pictures 'n' stuff>

Enjoy, geographical revisionsts.

*Sigh* As usual, a critical piece of information is nowhere to be found in your "analysis". From how high were the photos taken? Do you know why it matters?

You're still misapplying that formula.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #144 on: March 04, 2015, 11:43:57 AM »
I was exactly hoping for this kind of support, so thank you.

At any rate, despite the tremendous efforts I put into this forum, and my tragic family situation (a shill for a father, a sheeple for a mother, a physicist pseudo-scientist and gatekeeper for a cousin, all flat-earth deniers), I consider my mission accomplished. I have extensively proven flat earth based on the curvature formula, and I am exhausted but very satisfied.

This would not have been possible without you guys, you (two or three) flat-earthers, but also without the shills, for their punctual criticism and objections. So thanks to all and bye bye. For the flat-earthers, see you on the other forum (off limits to shills).

If what you say is true, you must be a terrible disappointment to your parents. Are you still living at home?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #145 on: March 04, 2015, 12:55:50 PM »
Great job Acenci!

Let's give them some more food for thought:

Quote
If we know the proximate distance between any two places, in the south, on or about the same latitude, and have the difference of solar time at these two places, we can calculate, accordingly, the length of a degree of longitude at that latitude. Such elements we have from the map, recently published, of New Zealand, in the "Australian Handbook, Almanack, and Shippers' and Importers' Directory, for the Year 1872." 1 It is there stated that the distance (mail route) between Sydney and Nelson is 1400 miles (sea measure), equal to 1633 statute miles. From this distance it is proper to deduct fully 50 miles for the distance in rounding Cape Farewell and sailing up Tasman Bay, at the head of which Nelson is situated. But if we allow 83 miles, which is more than sufficient, we have the straight-line distance, from the meridian of Sydney to the meridian of Nelson, as 1550 statute miles. The two places are nearly on the same latitude, and the difference in longitude is 22° 2´ 14″. 2 The whole matter now becomes a mere arithmetical question: if 22° 2´ 14″ give 1550 statute miles, what will 360° give? The answer is 25,182 miles. Hence, a 360th part of this distance is one degree; and the length of such degree is nearly 70 miles. But upon a globe, such as modern astronomers affirm the earth to be, the length of a degree at the latitude of Sydney would be 49.74 nautical miles, or 58 statute miles. Hence we find that the actual length of a degree of longitude at the latitude of Sydney is nearly 12 miles longer than it could possibly be if the earth is a globe of 25,000 miles' equatorial or maximum circumference; and the distance round the earth, at that latitude, is 25,182 statute miles, instead of 20,920, the difference between theory and fact being 4262 miles.

If, now, we take, from the same map, the distance between Melbourne and Bluff Harbour, South New Zealand--1400 nautical, or 1633 statute miles--and take the difference of longitude between the two places, allowing 50 statute miles for the angular or diagonal direction of the route to Bluff Harbour, we find the degrees of longitude fully 70 statute miles; whereas, at the average latitude of the two places, viz., 42° S., the degrees, if the earth is a globe, would be less than 54 statute miles; thus showing that in the south, where the length of a degree of longitude should be 54 miles, it is really 70 miles, or 16 miles longer than would be possible according to the theory of the earth's rotundity.

From the above two cases we also find that the degrees of longitude at the latitude of Bluff Harbour, on the southern point of New Zealand, are somewhat longer than the degrees between Sydney and Nelson, where they ought to be--if the earth is globular--several miles less; and also that, according to the same doctrine, there is an excess of 7466 statute miles in the whole circumference. Read more : http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za42.htm
http://i.imgur.com/EY2e8yu.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/DsQ60B8.jpg

Can someone explain these differences:
Sure. [Ignoring the apparently meaningless "New York to Los Angeles" reference.] The obvious explanation is that Rowbotham was overstating the distances by about 16%.

Quote
According to map published in the "Australian Handbook, Almanack, and Shippers' and Importers' Directory, for the Year 1872", and after proper (and even more than sufficient) deduction of certain number of miles, we get these results:

Sydney - Nelson : 1550 miles (2480 km)
Melbourne - Bluff Harbour : 1583 miles (2532 km)

According to Google maps above distances are incorrect, let's see for how much:

Sydney - Nelson : 1310 miles (2107 km)
Melbourne - Bluff Harbour : 1335 miles (2149 km)

The differences between these two estimations:

Sydney - Nelson : 240 miles (373 km) 16,5 %
Melbourne - Bluff Harbour : 250 miles (383 km) 16,5 %
Rowbotham's figures for the distances are simply wrong. The 1872 distances may be the routes taken by sailing ships instead of great circle distances, or they could simply be in error. Measurement of distance traveled at sea was not as accurate in 1872 as now. Believe it or not, we can do some things more accurately 140 years later. Another, very real, possibility is that Rowbotham used incorrect numbers, intentionally or otherwise. His track record for accurate information is not good. Does anyone have access to the cited volume to check this? It may be in the reference or rare-book section of an Australian big-city or university library?
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #146 on: March 04, 2015, 01:17:00 PM »
I was really going to leave, but I can't leave these personal attacks unanswered.

First of all, don't try any character assassination, because the fact that I am living at home with my parents does not in any way reduce the validity of my arguments, nor my dignity.

Second, I don't even want to investigate your sick life, because certainly someone who is fighting on a daily basis to preserve and defend lies cannot have a life that is more decent than mine.

Third, your attempts to debunk all my proofs don't work, because I have addressed all your objections before. The problem with you shills is that if there are three points in someone's argument, after he's done explaining the third point, you ask for his first point again.

Then someone else comes along and he asks the truther to explain his second point again. Then another shill comes along and he says the truther forgot to explain his third point.

This is my last post, unless I am really bored, in which case I will come back to get frustrated again with you shills. Never underestimate the power of boredom. If you ban me, you might do me a favor.

You're still here?
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #147 on: March 04, 2015, 01:36:52 PM »
I was really going to leave, but I can't leave these personal attacks unanswered.

First of all, don't try any character assassination, because the fact that I am living at home with my parents does not in any way reduce the validity of my arguments, nor my dignity.

You think your dad is a shill and your mom is a sheeple, but you will take their handout... Very dignified.


Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #148 on: March 04, 2015, 01:45:13 PM »
Rowbotham's figures for the distances are simply wrong. The 1872 distances may be the routes taken by sailing ships instead of great circle distances, or they could simply be in error. Measurement of distance traveled at sea was not as accurate in 1872 as now. Believe it or not, we can do some things more accurately 140 years later. Another, very real, possibility is that Rowbotham used incorrect numbers, intentionally or otherwise. His track record for accurate information is not good. Does anyone have access to the cited volume to check this? It may be in the reference or rare-book section of an Australian big-city or university library?

Yup. I found a scanned copy of the 1888 Edition of Australian Handbook, Almanack, and Shippers' and Importers' Directory in Google Books. The entry for Nelson on its Page 509 (page 564 in the pdf) begins:



where it states the distance to Sydney is 1180 miles. Presuming these are nautical miles, 115% of 1180 nmi gives 1357 statute miles. This is fairly close to cikljamas' 1310-mi great-circle distance, especially considering the stated distance probably includes some maneuvers (Rowbotham suggested 50 miles).

Maybe they revised the distance between the 1872 and 1888 editions, or maybe Rowbotham lied, or simply goofed. There is no significant discrepancy in the modern distance and the one given in 1888.

Do not use Rowbotham's Zetetic Astronomy as a reference! It is not reliable. This is yet another example. Read it for entertainment if you want, or as a case study in poor reasoning and/or 19th-century flim-flam. It can be fun to spot the misinterpretations, inconsistencies, logic fails, and, probably, outright lies, in small doses.

[Edit] Correct 1189 to 1180 (two places).
« Last Edit: March 04, 2015, 01:48:23 PM by Alpha2Omega »
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

*

cikljamas

  • 2432
  • Ex nihilo nihil fit
Re: Sydney(Australia) to Santiago(Chile): direct flight, 12hrs 30m
« Reply #149 on: March 04, 2015, 03:17:16 PM »
Year 1888, that is 7 years after Rowbotham's last edition of his "Earth not a globe"...Quite enough time for covering up operation...But they cannot cover up everything...

During Captain James Clark Ross’s voyages around the Antarctic circumference, he often wrote in his journal perplexed at how they routinely found themselves out of accordance with their charts, stating that they found themselves an average of 12-16 miles outside their reckoning every day, some days as much as 29 miles. Lieutenant Charles Wilkes commanded a United States Navy exploration expedition to the Antarctic from August 18th, 1838 to June 10th, 1842, almost four years spent “exploring and surveying the Southern ocean.” In his journals Lieutenant Wilkes also mentioned being consistently east of his reckoning, sometimes over 20 miles in less than 18 hours.

“February 11th, 1822, at noon, in latitude 65.53. S. our chronometers gave 44 miles more westing than the log in three days. On 22nd of April (1822), in latitude 54.16. S. our longitude by chronometers was 46.49, and by D.R. (dead reckoning) 47° 11´: On 2nd May (1822), at noon, in latitude 53.46. S., our longitude by chronometers was 59° 27´, and by D.R. 61° 6´. October 14th, in latitude 58.6, longitude by chronometers 62° 46´, by account 65° 24´. In latitude 59.7. S., longitude by chronometers was 63° 28´, by account 66° 42´. In latitude 61.49. S., longitude by chronometers was 61° 53´, by account 66° 38´.” -Captain James Weddell, “Voyages Towards the South Pole”

“In the southern hemisphere, navigators to India have often fancied themselves east of the Cape when still west, and have been driven ashore on the African coast, which, according to their reckoning, lay behind them. This misfortune happened to a fine frigate, the Challenger, in 1845. How came Her Majesty’s Ship ‘Conqueror,’ to be lost? How have so many other noble vessels, perfectly sound, perfectly manned, perfectly navigated, been wrecked in calm weather, not only in dark night, or in a fog, but in broad daylight and sunshine - in the former case upon the coasts, in the latter, upon sunken rocks - from being ‘out of reckoning,’ under circumstances which until now, have baffled every satisfactory explanation.” -Rev. Thomas Milner, “Tour Through Creation”

The equatorial circumference of the supposed ball-Earth is said to be 24,900 statute or 21,600 nautical miles. A nautical mile is the distance, following the supposed curvature of the Earth, from one minute of latitude to the next. A statue mile is the straight line distance between the two, not taking into account Earth’s alleged curvature.

From near Cape Horn, Chile to Port Philip in Melbourne, Australia the distance is 9,000 miles. These two places are 143 degrees of longitude from each other. Therefore the whole extent of the Earth’s circumference is a mere arithmetical question. If 143 degrees make 9,000 miles, what will be the distance made by the whole 360 degrees into which the surface is divided? The answer is, 22,657 miles; or, 8357 miles more than the theory of rotundity would permit. It must be borne in mind, however, that the above distances are nautical measure, which, reduced to statute miles, gives the actual distance round the Southern region at a given latitude as 26,433 statute miles; or nearly 1,500 miles more than the largest circumference ever assigned to the Earth at the equator.



THIS IS WHY WE HAVE ALL THE REASONS TO BELIEVE ROWBOTHAM'S WORDS, NOT THE WORDS OF NASA SHILLS...SO WE CAN REPEAT:

The “Australian Handbook, Almanack, Shippers’ and Importers’ Directory” states that the distance between Sydney and Nelson is 1400 nautical or 1633 statute miles. Allowing a more than sufficient 83 miles as the distance for rounding Cape Farewell and sailing up Tasman Bay to Nelson leaves 1550 statute miles as the straight-line distance from the meridian of Sydney to the meridian of Nelson. Their given difference in longitude is 22 degrees 2’14”. Therefore if 22 degrees 2’14” out of 360 is 1550 miles, the entirety measures 25,182 miles. This is larger than the Earth is said to be at the equator, and 4262 miles greater than it would be at Sydney’s southern latitude on a globe of said proportions! One 360th part of 25,182 gives 70 miles as the distance between each degree of longitude at Sydney’s 34 degree Southern latitude. On a globe 25,000 miles in equatorial circumference, however, degrees of longitude at 34 degrees latitude would be only 58 miles, a full 12 miles per degree less than reality. This perfectly explains why Ross and other navigators in the deep South experienced 12+ mile daily discrepancies between their reckoning and reality, the farther South travelled the farther the divide.
"I can't breathe" George Floyd RIP