What are Globe Earthers scared of?

Sorry, but Coke is NOT Pepsi.

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on March 13, 2018, 09:01:51 AM

Quote from: dutchy on March 13, 2018, 04:43:49 AM

No ignorant puppets,..... the people around the Nile DON’T take burgers and coke to a picknick.
I was forced to use an alligator picture stealing burgers from the only nation in this world that even eats this trash during a picknick .

But kudos that you caught ONE aspect (crocodile vs alligator) missed the underlying humor, but still i am impressed with this magnitude of progress on your side.

That's a Diet Pepsi, dipshit!

No wonder you think the Earth is flat!

Your stupidity reaches new levels every other post !!!
In other countries people refer to pepsi as coke too !!
Pepsi cola and coca cola..... cola=coke

But how would you know, you silly 'sweet home Alabama' orientated simpleton.

Saying one thing and meaning another? How very telling ....

And Freebird is awesome.

Sorry, but Coke is NOT Pepsi.

What you say bro......
Can't argue with your idea of this world.....

...says the guy who doesn't know what a crocodile looks like.

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on March 13, 2018, 11:04:23 AM

Sorry, but Coke is NOT Pepsi.

What you say bro......
Can't argue with your idea of this world.....

It's sad that this is the most accurate map any flat earther has posted since I've been here.  It's a start, I guess...

Your stupidity reaches new levels every other post !!!
In other countries people refer to pepsi as coke too !!
Pepsi cola and coca cola..... cola=coke

Have some respect for veterans of the cola wars. 

Implying that Coke=Pepsi be fighting words to a lot of die hard fans of either brand.

Pepsi wins the Pepsi challenge as it tastes sweeter (and humans are wired like that). But in the long run the majority chose and choose Coca-Cola, as the sweetness can get overbearing.

At least I have read something to that effect somewhere. Might have been NASA.

Pepsi is disgusting, Coke is good, but..

I prefer a good, bitter IPA.

I prefer a good, bitter IPA.

Hear, hear!

Back to the topic: no, no one is afraid of flat-earthers, everyone knows they’re too dumb and too slow to cause any real damage. What is scary is the propagation of the idea that knowledge is not important, and that scientists, government, and the education sector are lying to everyone.

Back to the topic: no, no one is afraid of flat-earthers, everyone knows they’re too dumb and too slow to cause any real damage. What is scary is the propagation of the idea that knowledge is not important, and that scientists, government, and the education sector are lying to everyone.

What is actually scary is how so many people are afraid to have fun with thoughts and ideas for the pure joy of exercising their imagination.

Quote from: Obviously on March 14, 2018, 04:00:55 PM

Back to the topic: no, no one is afraid of flat-earthers, everyone knows they’re too dumb and too slow to cause any real damage. What is scary is the propagation of the idea that knowledge is not important, and that scientists, government, and the education sector are lying to everyone.

What is actually scary is how so many people are afraid to have fun with thoughts and ideas for the pure joy of exercising their imagination.

Don't forget the capacity for self-deception. If some of these users actually cared about limiting the spread of anti-knowledge ideas they would not be acting the way they are. That's pretty scary too.

Are you trying to suggest that flattards have an imagination? Hahahahahahaha! Please... As a group, they are the most unimaginative, uneducated, and stubborn people on the planet. Really, I’ve never met so many fucking dumb people who all believe the same crap someone spoonfed them via YouTube videos.

Quote from: Obviously on March 14, 2018, 04:00:55 PM

Back to the topic: no, no one is afraid of flat-earthers, everyone knows they’re too dumb and too slow to cause any real damage. What is scary is the propagation of the idea that knowledge is not important, and that scientists, government, and the education sector are lying to everyone.

What is actually scary is how so many people are afraid to have fun with thoughts and ideas for the pure joy of exercising their imagination.

People have known, tested and proven beyond any reasonable doubt the Earth to be flat long before anyone had ever dreamed of an internet. FET is already in a layer of categorical evidence above that of RET.  The next step for FET is absolute proof and that is on the way.

In the climb up the proof scale of whim, hunch, reasonable suspicion, probable cause, preponderance of evidence, proof beyond any reasonable doubt and absolute proof it is known that RET is lagging behind that of FET and can never catch up. We happen to know the reason why.       

Round Earth believers would be more true to themselves and to those observing them, if they could admit the efforts of FE theorists have opened their eyes to the possibility of a flat Earth.

RET only has a temporary advantage in number of people claiming to know correct Earth shape.  They do have reason to worry.
   

People have known, tested and proven beyond any reasonable doubt the Earth to be flat long before anyone had ever dreamed of an internet.

Rubbish, the earth has been accepted as a Globe in most places from a few centuries BC! This modern perverted version of a flat earth was a comparatively late invention and still no-one can make it fit the real earth.

FET is already in a layer of categorical evidence above that of RET.  The next step for FET is absolute proof and that is on the way.

Well, what about revealing this "layer of categorical evidence above that of RET"? All we see is a model that fits nothing without magic of various sorts!

In the climb up the proof scale of whim, hunch, reasonable suspicion, probable cause, preponderance of evidence, proof beyond any reasonable doubt and absolute proof it is known that RET is lagging behind that of FET and can never catch up. We happen to know the reason why.       

Round Earth believers would be more true to themselves and to those observing them, if they could admit the efforts of FE theorists have opened their eyes to the possibility of a flat Earth.

I am 100% true to myself and all I see looking around perfectly fits the Globe earth, no question about it!

RET only has a temporary advantage in number of people claiming to know correct Earth shape.  They do have reason to worry.

Go back to sleep and dream about your flat earth as it's the only flat earth that you'll ever see.

PS Where are these accurate flat earth maps that you have claimed existed? Here we are waiting for these perfect maps, but they don't come!

People have known, tested and proven beyond any reasonable doubt the Earth to be flat long before anyone had ever dreamed of an internet. FET is already in a layer of categorical evidence above that of RET.  The next step for FET is absolute proof and that is on the way.

You keep saying that, yet you still don't have a model that matches real world observations.

In the climb up the proof scale of whim, hunch, reasonable suspicion, probable cause, preponderance of evidence, proof beyond any reasonable doubt and absolute proof it is known that RET is lagging behind that of FET and can never catch up. We happen to know the reason why.

I'm sorry, but if RET is so far behind in evidence, then why does the RE model match real world observations so well?

Round Earth believers would be more true to themselves and to those observing them, if they could admit the efforts of FE theorists have opened their eyes to the possibility of a flat Earth.

Flat Earth believers would be better served trying to work together to create a coherent, workable model before they claim victory over a model that is used every day by countless people all over the globe.

RET only has a temporary advantage in number of people claiming to know correct Earth shape.

Well, that and a model that actually works.

They do have reason to worry.

No, they don't.

People have known, tested and proven beyond any reasonable doubt the Earth to be flat long before anyone had ever dreamed of an internet. FET is already in a layer of categorical evidence above that of RET.  The next step for FET is absolute proof and that is on the way.

In the climb up the proof scale of whim, hunch, reasonable suspicion, probable cause, preponderance of evidence, proof beyond any reasonable doubt and absolute proof it is known that RET is lagging behind that of FET and can never catch up. We happen to know the reason why.       

Round Earth believers would be more true to themselves and to those observing them, if they could admit the efforts of FE theorists have opened their eyes to the possibility of a flat Earth.

RET only has a temporary advantage in number of people claiming to know correct Earth shape.  They do have reason to worry.
   

Dear friend.
We all see your continuous effort to convince people to use Flat model.
If it was useful, it would be used.

Please tell us which discipline or activity can be supported by Flat model?

Please tell us which discipline or activity can be supported by Flat model?

Drag Racing.

This requested "model" is a bit of a mystery? Would a model not open the door for misrepresentation of reality?

So that fact that observations on our flat Earth confirm our claimed shape is questioned because of why?

You can see that round Earth believers have a tendency to create new questions in their quest to sort out Earth shape reality and their reliance on models instead of reality says a lot about why the FE responses are powerful to the point of being truthful.   

This requested "model" is a bit of a mystery? Would a model not open the door for misrepresentation of reality?

Not if it's properly defined.  A good model can be an invaluable teaching aid and would go a long way towards convincing the unwashed masses that FET has any credibility whatsoever.

So that fact that observations on our flat Earth confirm our claimed shape is questioned because of why?

I'm sorry, but observing the motions of celestial objects do not confirm the earth shape that you claim.

You can see that round Earth believers have a tendency to create new questions in their quest to sort out Earth shape reality and their reliance on models instead of reality says a lot about why the FE responses are powerful to the point of being truthful.

Yes, RE'ers do have a tendency to ask deeper and deeper questions, while FE'ers have a hard time answering even the most superficial questions.

I'm afraid that climate change is gonna melt them thar ice walls, all the water will fall off into outer space, and I won't have any place to launch the pontoon!

Gotham, you seem to be able to form complete sentences, yet the things you say are causing us to conclude that you are a complete moron.

I am still amazed that people are able to use logic and reasoning in some parts of their lives (I mean, you have enough brains to start your computer, log into this forum, and type text in relatively decent English) and totally fail in this in other areas (like, how the fuck, with all the evidence that exists to prove that the earth is roughly spherical, and absolutely zero evidence for it being any other shape, do you believe the bullshit you believe?).

I won't have any place to launch the pontoon!

Is that a euphemism?

This requested "model" is a bit of a mystery? Would a model not open the door for misrepresentation of reality?

So that fact that observations on our flat Earth confirm our claimed shape is questioned because of why?

You can see that round Earth believers have a tendency to create new questions in their quest to sort out Earth shape reality and their reliance on models instead of reality says a lot about why the FE responses are powerful to the point of being truthful.

Spinning globe model works well in meteorology, ballistic, astronomy, geology (including seismology), navigation, satellite technology and other disciplines.
Observations and measurements showed it, and usage of conclusions opened way to understand next set of observations.

Which discipline would benefit by abandoning globe model and reverting to flat model?

Globe earthers aren't scared of nothin' nor nobody.

Which discipline would benefit by abandoning globe model and reverting to flat model?

Not a discipline but an observation...
That a geodesic/great circle route is supposedly the shortest route from A to B on your 3d globe model.
A Danish military base called Nord in Greenland is located 850 km from the geographic North Pole.
If an airplane would fly a circle around the North Pole some 5000 km long it would be the shortest circle around the pole when the plane would leave from the Nord base.

Should it be able with modern navigation tools and non interfering bad weather to fly such an alternative route ?

Quote from: Macarios on March 18, 2018, 01:05:50 AM

Which discipline would benefit by abandoning globe model and reverting to flat model?

Not a discipline but an observation...
That a geodesic/great circle route is supposedly the shortest route from A to B on your 3d globe model.
A Danish military base called Nord in Greenland is located 850 km from the geographic North Pole.
If an airplane would fly a circle around the North Pole some 5000 km long it would be the shortest circle around the pole when the plane would leave from the Nord base.

Should it be able with modern navigation tools and non interfering bad weather to fly such an alternative route ?

The Great Circle route is indeed considered the shortest route from A to B in navigation. However you have only given one position, Nord, but no other position to which we are navigating. But with modern navigation tools the airplane can navigate any route.

Quote from: Macarios on March 18, 2018, 01:05:50 AM

Which discipline would benefit by abandoning globe model and reverting to flat model?

Not a discipline but an observation...
That a geodesic/great circle route is supposedly the shortest route from A to B on your 3d globe model.
A Danish military base called Nord in Greenland is located 850 km from the geographic North Pole.
If an airplane would fly a circle around the North Pole some 5000 km long it would be the shortest circle around the pole when the plane would leave from the Nord base.

Should it be able with modern navigation tools and non interfering bad weather to fly such an alternative route ?

From Danish military base called Nord in Greenland to where?
The shortest pat between two points is:
- in plane, the straight line between them
- on sphere, the shorter part of the great circle through both

Ok, on the Flat Earth, what would be the shortest path from Antananarivo?
The shortest path from point A back to point A is:
- in plane, zero
- on sphere, zero

Quote from: dutchy on March 18, 2018, 01:50:44 AM

Quote from: Macarios on March 18, 2018, 01:05:50 AM

Which discipline would benefit by abandoning globe model and reverting to flat model?

Not a discipline but an observation...
That a geodesic/great circle route is supposedly the shortest route from A to B on your 3d globe model.
A Danish military base called Nord in Greenland is located 850 km from the geographic North Pole.
If an airplane would fly a circle around the North Pole some 5000 km long it would be the shortest circle around the pole when the plane would leave from the Nord base.

Should it be able with modern navigation tools and non interfering bad weather to fly such an alternative route ?

From Danish military base called Nord in Greenland to where?
The shortest pat between two points is:
- in plane, the straight line between them
- on sphere, the shorter part of the great circle through both

Ok, on the Flat Earth, what would be the shortest path from Antananarivo?
The shortest path from point A back to point A is:
- in plane, zero
- on sphere, zero

I was clear, wasn’t i ?
Can you fly in a circle around the North Pole from Nord base - Nord base ?
If so your flightpath isn’t a great circle route !

Then i’ll explain the relevance ,...

 

Quote from: Macarios on March 18, 2018, 05:41:32 AM

Quote from: dutchy on March 18, 2018, 01:50:44 AM

Quote from: Macarios on March 18, 2018, 01:05:50 AM

Which discipline would benefit by abandoning globe model and reverting to flat model?

Not a discipline but an observation...
That a geodesic/great circle route is supposedly the shortest route from A to B on your 3d globe model.
A Danish military base called Nord in Greenland is located 850 km from the geographic North Pole.
If an airplane would fly a circle around the North Pole some 5000 km long it would be the shortest circle around the pole when the plane would leave from the Nord base.

Should it be able with modern navigation tools and non interfering bad weather to fly such an alternative route ?

From Danish military base called Nord in Greenland to where?
The shortest pat between two points is:
- in plane, the straight line between them
- on sphere, the shorter part of the great circle through both

Ok, on the Flat Earth, what would be the shortest path from Antananarivo?
The shortest path from point A back to point A is:
- in plane, zero
- on sphere, zero

I was clear, wasn’t i ?
Can you fly in a circle around the North Pole from Nord base - Nord base ?
If so your flightpath isn’t a great circle route !

Then i’ll explain the relevance ,...

The shortest path is not that way.
What is the Nord base - Nord base distance?