tell me this and im 100% on board

im not on here to try and wind anyone up i just am questioning everything whitch i belive is one of every flatearthers core requirments so here goes ..............how come in all of history has someone not cleared this up very easily and just gone to find the edge................BAM there it is .....simplist way to prove without doubt weather its flat or not

hmmmmmmm    your silence is almost deafening................it screams to me that this theory is thwarted by the simplest suggestion of a reasonably cheap and reletivly easy to achive test that could solve this once and for all ........im pretty sure that and expedition across artic landscape is a hell of a lot cheaper than the cost of putting a rocket into space so it makes me wonder why no one has done it yet ..........

Jesus mate, I’m not a flat earther, but you only waited thirty minutes.

No one is going to answer you right away.

There is no edge.

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

And infinite planes. And eggs.

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

And infinite planes. And eggs.

Can you explain why there’s so much inconsistency among FE theorist? Why 1 dome or two domes or infinite planes?

Quote from: boydster on March 02, 2019, 05:16:05 PM

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

And infinite planes. And eggs.

Can you explain why there’s so much inconsistency among FE theorist? Why 1 dome or two domes or infinite planes?

To some extent RE theorists are the same. Some of them afterwards became FEers. The rest continued getting indoctrinated.

im not on here to try and wind anyone up i just am questioning everything whitch i belive is one of every flatearthers core requirments so here goes ..............how come in all of history has someone not cleared this up very easily and just gone to find the edge................BAM there it is .....simplist way to prove without doubt weather its flat or not

Another alternative: Researching the flights. So you can conclude that the earth is flat and south polar centered.

Real reality is Expensive. Don't expect you can find it easily by just reading text books.

Even text books are being dying now without many people on earth are aware of it, except those at debate forums.

To some extent RE theorists are the same. Some of them afterwards became FEers. The rest continued getting indoctrinated.

This isn’t true. If they became FEers, they likely didn’t have a thorough understanding of everything. No scientist will disagree about how the laws of nature operate in the world.

Quote from: boydster on March 02, 2019, 05:16:05 PM

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

And infinite planes. And eggs.

Can you explain why there’s so much inconsistency among FE theorist? Why 1 dome or two domes or infinite planes?

It's a very diverse, geographically dispersed, decentralized group united around a single idea (a flat Earth) and with varying ideas on how that might work. Why wouldn't there be inconsistency? There is inconsistency in the monolith of RE science, which is much more well funded. Besides, human understanding of a subject exists independently of reality. Sometimes the two align, other times they don't.

Why can't there be competing ideas in FE while those championing their own models try to work out the details?

Quote from: AroundWeGo on March 02, 2019, 05:20:54 PM

Quote from: boydster on March 02, 2019, 05:16:05 PM

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

And infinite planes. And eggs.

Can you explain why there’s so much inconsistency among FE theorist? Why 1 dome or two domes or infinite planes?

It's a very diverse, geographically dispersed, decentralized group united around a single idea (a flat Earth) and with varying ideas on how that might work. Why wouldn't there be inconsistency? There is inconsistency in the monolith of RE science, which is much more well funded. Besides, human understanding of a subject exists independently of reality. Sometimes the two align, other times they don't.

Why can't there be competing ideas in FE while those championing their own models try to work out the details?

I don’t think competing ideas are bad, but you can see how the dome model vs infinite plane are two massively different ideas, yeah?

I’d like to ask what inconsistencies there are in RE, but whatever they are, they would nearly be as large as the two different models I mentioned.

Everyone can use the right (cellphone) cameras (not necessarily expensive ones) to see the true nature of the sun as shown by the previous video.

Big Question:
Do top physicists -- who 'rule' the media and education institutions-- DARE to accept this sun evidence OR they continue with regular text books theory?? 

There is no edge.

Fine
No "edge".
A dome would have a boundary.

Everyone can use the right (cellphone) cameras (not necessarily expensive ones) to see the true nature of the sun as shown by the previous video.

Big Question:
Do top physicists -- who 'rule' the media and education institutions-- DARE to accept this sun evidence OR they continue with regular text books theory?? 

They accept the true sun evidence.

Quote from: Danang on March 02, 2019, 11:06:22 PM

Everyone can use the right (cellphone) cameras (not necessarily expensive ones) to see the true nature of the sun as shown by the previous video.

Big Question:
Do top physicists -- who 'rule' the media and education institutions-- DARE to accept this sun evidence OR they continue with regular text books theory?? 

They accept the true sun evidence.

So do you think that footage is fake and unrepeatable?   

Quote from: boydster on March 02, 2019, 07:33:49 PM

Quote from: AroundWeGo on March 02, 2019, 05:20:54 PM

Quote from: boydster on March 02, 2019, 05:16:05 PM

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

And infinite planes. And eggs.

Can you explain why there’s so much inconsistency among FE theorist? Why 1 dome or two domes or infinite planes?

It's a very diverse, geographically dispersed, decentralized group united around a single idea (a flat Earth) and with varying ideas on how that might work. Why wouldn't there be inconsistency? There is inconsistency in the monolith of RE science, which is much more well funded. Besides, human understanding of a subject exists independently of reality. Sometimes the two align, other times they don't.

Why can't there be competing ideas in FE while those championing their own models try to work out the details?

I don’t think competing ideas are bad, but you can see how the dome model vs infinite plane are two massively different ideas, yeah?

I’d like to ask what inconsistencies there are in RE, but whatever they are, they would nearly be as large as the two different models I mentioned.

I would imagine the two biggest inconsistencies in RE theory would be Heliocentric v Geocentric. Though the latter perhaps far less accepted than the former in the RE community. At least from a scientific standpoint.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

I disagree.
A sphere has infinitely many edges.

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

I disagree.
A sphere has infinitely many edges.

Well then you're even more fucked in the head than the most retarded flat earther. Show us the edge of a sphere then. There are an infinite number of them so you should have no trouble choosing one, fucking numbnutz.

Quote from: JackBlack on March 03, 2019, 02:48:43 AM

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

I disagree.
A sphere has infinitely many edges.

Well then you're even more fucked in the head than the most retarded flat earther. Show us the edge of a sphere then. There are an infinite number of them so you should have no trouble choosing one, fucking numbnutz.

The angry REers are truly the most entertaining.

Quote from: JackBlack on March 03, 2019, 02:48:43 AM

Quote from: Prof. John Frink on March 02, 2019, 05:09:44 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 02, 2019, 04:00:59 PM

There is no edge.

A property common to all spheres.

I disagree.
A sphere has infinitely many edges.

Well then you're even more fucked in the head than the most retarded flat earther. Show us the edge of a sphere then. There are an infinite number of them so you should have no trouble choosing one, fucking numbnutz.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/edge

noun
a line or border at which a surface terminates:
Grass grew along the edges of the road. The paper had deckle edges.

Synonym study

1. Edge, border, margin refer to a boundary. An edge is the boundary line of a surface or plane: the edge of a table. Border is the boundary of a surface or the strip adjacent to it, inside or out: a border of lace. Margin is a limited strip, generally unoccupied, at the extremity of an area: the margin of a page.

Sounds like a sphere has an edge...  many of them...  Unless you are suggesting the sphere is all encompassing and infinite.

I would imagine the two biggest inconsistencies in RE theory would be Heliocentric v Geocentric. Though the latter perhaps far less accepted than the former in the RE community. At least from a scientific standpoint.

There is no "round earth community".  Just the nearly the whole world who accept the established science of the heliocentric model.

Geocentrists disagree for many of the same reasons that flat earthers do.

Hardly an inconsistency with "RE theory", which is just a flat earther term anyway.

Quote from: Stash on March 02, 2019, 11:44:49 PM

I would imagine the two biggest inconsistencies in RE theory would be Heliocentric v Geocentric. Though the latter perhaps far less accepted than the former in the RE community. At least from a scientific standpoint.

There is no "round earth community".  Just the nearly the whole world who accept the established science of the heliocentric model.

Geocentrists disagree for many of the same reasons that flat earthers do.

Hardly an inconsistency with "RE theory", which is just a flat earther term anyway.

So no geologists disagree about anything related to their field of research? Interesting. Literal Earth Scientists are all just one happy community, where no one challenges the ideas and opinions of their colleagues?

It is impossible to prove to a Flat Earther that the Earth is a sphere, because they reject every single bit of evidence or logic that shows that the Earth is a sphere. Ultimately, they can't observe the spherical Earth with their own senses, therefore they don't believe in it. But they do believe, for example, in radio waves even though these can't be detected with their own senses, either.

And ultimately, the reason why there is no scientific proof of the FE comparable to the proofs of the RE is.... conspiracy.

The funny thing is, many of the most vocal and condescending REers here have a very tenuous grasp on things they choose to argue about. Like you, for example, and the idea of constant acceleration. Or the idea that electromagnetic waves can't be detected with our senses.

Quote from: Unconvinced on March 03, 2019, 10:03:28 AM

Quote from: Stash on March 02, 2019, 11:44:49 PM

I would imagine the two biggest inconsistencies in RE theory would be Heliocentric v Geocentric. Though the latter perhaps far less accepted than the former in the RE community. At least from a scientific standpoint.

There is no "round earth community".  Just the nearly the whole world who accept the established science of the heliocentric model.

Geocentrists disagree for many of the same reasons that flat earthers do.

Hardly an inconsistency with "RE theory", which is just a flat earther term anyway.

So no geologists disagree about anything related to their field of research? Interesting. Literal Earth Scientists are all just one happy community, where no one challenges the ideas and opinions of their colleagues?

That’s not even close to what I said.  Unless you misread geocentrists as geologists?

I’m saying Shash’s argument that heliocentric vs geocentric ideas are an inconstancy in the model is wrong, because grocentrists reject the established model.  Whatever geologists may or may not agree on is irrelevant to my point.

It's possible I misread your post exactly as you described.