What would change your mind?

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 02:53:03 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on March 06, 2021, 02:48:28 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 12:29:18 AM

The Earth that you believe in will always curve downwards and away from your vision.

No, it wont.
For example, if you look down, you can clearly see it.

If you look down, of course you can see it.

And that is one of the key points.
You look down YOU SEE GROUND/SEA.
You look up, you see sky.
So what visually separates them other than the horizon?

Stop appealing to your stupid 0 degree level sight which no one has.
Instead just address the simple fact that the RE SHOULD have a horizon.
Either explain why it shouldn't, or admit it has one.

What you're missing is the major key and that major key is a standing start of a level outlook, not a raised vision into the sky with a stop off line.

Quote from: Stash on March 06, 2021, 02:49:59 AM

Your self-indoctrinated faith based religion of one is, well, at least consistent.

You've been provided an endless stream of demonstrations and evidence to the contrary and your only argument is that it's all a lie based solely on your belief system.
You refuse to provide and demonstrations, experiments, or evidence of your own to counter. You don't even understand what the thing is you are against. It's just you stomping your feet saying, "It's all a lie!"

No, that's not right. I give out plenty but you people don't accept it and then go into a frenzy about me not providing anything.
You throw a load of copy and paste into the ring and say " there you go."
Put some effort in.

People have done a lot more than just putting forth copy and paste stuff. Actual experiments have been done and many others have been shown. You've shown nothing. People make diagrams and such. You've rendered maybe one. Quite poorly and wildly inaccurate at that. Sure, people dig up information that reflects how 99.999% of folks think, engineer, & construct things. How things are used in the real world. Everything from how a roller coaster works to how a rocket flies. And everywhere and everything in between. And you just say it's all lies, even though shit works and works well as designed. That is just your faith talking. That's the real "there you go". You say it's all lies, and there you go.

Quote from: Stash

Like I said before, no one even remotely thinks you would ever change your mind. Faith based religions like yours don't work that way. Faith usurps all logic and evidence.

I certainly won't change my mindset on anything you people have put forward.
None of you can put anything forward from your own minds. You can't put anything into simple basic because your whole set up is all about following what's set out and replicating it.
It's a bit sickening to be fair.
I feel like I'm dealing with some people on some kind of spectrum.

You made up a carbonite crystal at the north pole that holographically projects the sun, moon, and stars onto a breathing dome and we are the ones on some kind of spectrum?

Quote from: Stash

All that's being done here is pointing out that you provide nothing but your devotion to your religion when faced with actual reality based evidence. There's no debating with faith. You've made that abundantly clear.

There's no religion but my devotion is in getting the truth or at least ensuring people can think for themselves and go looking for it. Because one thing's for sure. The oblate spheroid spinning in a vacuum around a big fiery ball of fire is sickeningly yet bemusingly nonsensical.

What makes it for sure?

The few 'explanations' we get from Sceptimatic are vague, meaningless and based on nothing but his claims.  He dismisses everything that science has come up with as silly and nonsensical and yet he can offer nothing even remotely believable (except to himself) to convince us to change our minds. 

If making up stories about carbonite crystals and breathing domes is his alternative to reality then he had better start coming up with something a bit more substantial than anything he has come up with so far.  Yet he accuses us of 'having no clue' about anything.  Pot and kettle comes to mind!

There's no religion but my devotion is in getting the truth or at least ensuring people can think for themselves and go looking for it. Because one thing's for sure. The oblate spheroid spinning in a vacuum around a big fiery ball of fire is sickeningly yet bemusingly nonsensical.

Hilarious. 

You literally just described your religious belief that leads you to simply disregard all of science.

Quote from: JackBlack on March 06, 2021, 02:48:28 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 12:29:18 AM

The Earth that you believe in will always curve downwards and away from your vision.

No, it wont.
For example, if you look down, you can clearly see it.

If you look down, of course you can see it.
Do we all go about looking down or do we generally look horizontally level?

And, if your Earth does not curve down and way from you then what the hell does it do?
Make up your mind.

Ok 8in per sq mile.
If you stood on a hill and that hill steeply dropped and curved away from you do yoy see an "edge" of the hill against the backdrop of the background?
Do you see the backside of a basket ball when looking at it?
Or do you see a circle's edge?
Do you have to look down to see down or can you see a FIELD OF VIEW?

All super simple questions you have yet to address.

https://images.app.goo.gl/J9CCVSomKeouhFpE8

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 03:01:19 AM

There's no religion but my devotion is in getting the truth or at least ensuring people can think for themselves and go looking for it. Because one thing's for sure. The oblate spheroid spinning in a vacuum around a big fiery ball of fire is sickeningly yet bemusingly nonsensical.

Hilarious. 

You literally just described your religious belief that leads you to simply disregard all of science.

It's not religion. It's called logical sense.

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 02:53:03 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on March 06, 2021, 02:48:28 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 12:29:18 AM

The Earth that you believe in will always curve downwards and away from your vision.

No, it wont.
For example, if you look down, you can clearly see it.

If you look down, of course you can see it.
Do we all go about looking down or do we generally look horizontally level?

And, if your Earth does not curve down and way from you then what the hell does it do?
Make up your mind.

Ok 8in per sq mile.
If you stood on a hill and that hill steeply dropped and curved away from you do yoy see an "edge" of the hill against the backdrop of the background?
Do you see the backside of a basket ball when looking at it?
Or do you see a circle's edge?
Do you have to look down to see down or can you see a FIELD OF VIEW?

All super simple questions you have yet to address.

https://images.app.goo.gl/J9CCVSomKeouhFpE8

We aren't looking at the back of any basket ball.
Come back when you have something legitimate.

Quote from: JJA on March 06, 2021, 04:01:29 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 03:01:19 AM

There's no religion but my devotion is in getting the truth or at least ensuring people can think for themselves and go looking for it. Because one thing's for sure. The oblate spheroid spinning in a vacuum around a big fiery ball of fire is sickeningly yet bemusingly nonsensical.

Hilarious. 

You literally just described your religious belief that leads you to simply disregard all of science.

It's not religion. It's called logical sense.

No, you said you are sure because it makes no sense to you.  That's ignorance, not logic.

Right.
Youre looking at the top and a relalllllly big ball.
So whats your problem?
You keep saying it curves away from you - right it cuurves away so you cant see the backsidethats what happens.
So whats your poeblem?

No, you said you are sure because it makes no sense to you.  That's ignorance, not logic.

It makes no sense because evidence.....real evidence shows it to be nonsense, not just the thought process of the nonsense of it.

Right.
Youre looking at the top and a relalllllly big ball.
So whats your problem?
You keep saying it curves away from you - right it cuurves away so you cant see the backsidethats what happens.
So whats your poeblem?

You are not stood there looking back at a basket ball. You are supposed to be on that ball.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on March 05, 2021, 02:08:49 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 05, 2021, 03:59:32 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on March 05, 2021, 03:16:03 AM

Again, why shouldn't the RE have a horizon?

Simple question, simple answer.
Assuming it was magically possible to stand on a globe as you believe it to be, then looking over  that globe with level sight will only offer you a curved angle away from your level vision. It leaves you with sky. That's it.

You may not like this answer but it is an answer, so don;t be coming back saying I haven't answered.

See, this is where you misunderstand size, scale, and perspective here on Earth. Your mind just doesn't seem capable of differentiating between what you see while standing on top of a basketball, compared to what you see while standing on Earth.

I know it must be confusing for you, but this is where the app, google earth, could be very helpful and educational for someone like you. Yes, it's a computer simulation of the earth, where you can test it against the physical world around you.

I use it all the time at work.

I'm not mixed up.
The Earth that you believe in will always curve downwards and away from your vision.
Anything you look at from a level vision will never reach a distant object just a score miles away.

8 inches per mile squared is all you need to know. It does not end up trivial even over the one mile, never mind mile after mile.

No. Eight inches per mile squared is all any flat earther thinks they need to know to throw at people. However, that's just a rule of thumb that does not account for observer height and atmospheric refraction. How many less flat earthers would there be in the world if they all read the fine print?

Sceptimatic, I dont know why you are trying so hard to create an alternate reality around yourself. Maybe you don't even remember why yourself, you've been at it for so long now. The only reason we are all having this forum discussion, is because science works. Think about that and try to absorb what that means for the world around you in which you live.

No. Eight inches per mile squared is all any flat earther thinks they need to know to throw at people. However, that's just a rule of thumb that does not account for observer height and atmospheric refraction. How many less flat earthers would there be in the world if they all read the fine print?

You don't need fine print. It's pretty self explanatory.

Sceptimatic, I dont know why you are trying so hard to create an alternate reality around yourself. Maybe you don't even remember why yourself, you've been at it for so long now. The only reason we are all having this forum discussion, is because science works. Think about that and try to absorb what that means for the world around you in which you live.

The reason we're having this discussion is because people like you think you can alter people's minds to go back to the absolutely unscientific nonsense of a global model.

The reason why you people stay must be en masse ego boosting,  pertaining to the mainstream authoritative narrative.


Basically you come armed with all the references you need. You don't even need to think....and yet.....and yet....here you are spending your time on a flat Earth forum making lots and lots of posts....for what?


If you were honest and said " oh I'm here to learn about alternate theories because I question the globe" I'd say, fair enough. If you said you were here to play devils advocate, I say, fair enough.


I have nothing against any of you, to be fair.............................but.

Quote from: Themightykabool on March 06, 2021, 05:07:34 AM

Right.
Youre looking at the top and a relalllllly big ball.
So whats your problem?
You keep saying it curves away from you - right it cuurves away so you cant see the backsidethats what happens.
So whats your poeblem?

You are not stood there looking back at a basket ball. You are supposed to be on that ball.

You say "not"... followed by...   
Care to finish the thought?

If you were honest and said " oh I'm here to learn about alternate theories because I question the globe" I'd say, fair enough.

Ok I will be honest and say I'm here to hear about alternate theories. You have your alternate theory.  I have the evidence to support the globe model. What I lack is the evidence from you to support your alternate theory.  I can't accept it unless you provide that evidence.  You simply making claims and dismissing the globe model as silly and nonsensical is not the evidence I need.  You question the globe because you have a personal vendetta against it so you have convinced yourself it is wrong.

I would say the Sun and Moon are physical bodies. I would say the Earth orbits the Sun and that the Moon orbits the Earth.  Watch the sky over a period of a year and I would say you will see evidence that supports that without reading a word from any book.  You say they are holographic reflections produced by some crystal inside the Earth.  Ok provide the evidence that I should accept what you say over what I say. For example how does the crystal produce the energy to emit the light which produces the holograms? And why does the Sun change its appearance continuously while the Moon always appears the same.  And why do stars disappear behind the Moon suggesting it is a solid body?

The globe model explains all this but your alternate theory doesn't.

Quote from: JackBlack on March 06, 2021, 02:54:55 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 02:53:03 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on March 06, 2021, 02:48:28 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 12:29:18 AM

The Earth that you believe in will always curve downwards and away from your vision.

No, it wont.
For example, if you look down, you can clearly see it.

If you look down, of course you can see it.

And that is one of the key points.
You look down YOU SEE GROUND/SEA.
You look up, you see sky.
So what visually separates them other than the horizon?

Stop appealing to your stupid 0 degree level sight which no one has.
Instead just address the simple fact that the RE SHOULD have a horizon.
Either explain why it shouldn't, or admit it has one.

What you're missing is the major key and that major key is a standing start of a level outlook, not a raised vision into the sky with a stop off line.

No, what you are missing is the fact that the RE SHOULD have a horizon, a fact you are yet to refute or challenge in any meaningful way, which instead you need to continually appeal to a magical level sight with no FOV.

Remember, you are not merely claiming that the horizon should not be visible in such a hypothetical and physically impossible FOV. Instead you are claiming the RE should not have a horizon AT ALL!
That means you cannot appeal to a level sight.

Now again, ANSWER THE QUESTION! It is an extremely simple question you continually refuse to answer because you know you have no answer.
Why shouldn't the RE have a horizon?
What visually separates the ground/sea from the sky?

No, that's not right. I give out plenty

It is right. You not liking that wont change that.
You give out nothing of value, dismissing evidence provided as a con-job, with no justification at all, completely ignoring logical arguments that show you are wrong, and continually refusing to answer questions and instead pretending to by answering different questions.

The example above is just yet another example of this behaviour of yours.
You cannot justify your lie that the RE shouldn't have a horizon, so instead of attempting to answer the extremely simple question, you instead deal with a completely different question.

None of you can put anything forward from your own minds.

We have put forward plenty, but as you have no rational objection, you need to find some excuse to dismiss it.

Quote from: JJA on March 06, 2021, 04:01:29 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on March 06, 2021, 03:01:19 AM

There's no religion but my devotion is in getting the truth or at least ensuring people can think for themselves and go looking for it. Because one thing's for sure. The oblate spheroid spinning in a vacuum around a big fiery ball of fire is sickeningly yet bemusingly nonsensical.

Hilarious. 
You literally just described your religious belief that leads you to simply disregard all of science.

It's not religion. It's called logical sense.

No, it is called a complete absence of logical sense and reasoning.
You yet again religiously assert that the RE model is nonsense, while being completely incapable of showing a single fault with it.
And likewise being incapable of defending your lies about it.

It makes no sense because evidence.....real evidence shows it to be nonsense, not just the thought process of the nonsense of it.

Something not being supported by or it being contradicted by evidence does not mean it makes no sense, it just means it is incorrect.
But what evidence would that be?
Do you mean the plentiful evidence showing the horizon below eye level, exactly as expected for a RE, and not what is expected for a FE?
Or do you mean the evidence of water obscuring the view to the base of a distant object, even though both the object and observer are above water level, clearly demonstrating the water is curved?
Or do you mean your pathetic experiments in a sink where your observations match those expected for a RE?

The reason why you people stay must be en masse ego boosting

That would be the reason you stay, and the reason you avoid anything which shows you are wrong, unless you can find some way to twist it to get out of it.
We stay because we care about the truth.
This would include seeing an argument which actually stands, which shows the RE model is wrong, and thus accepting the RE model is wrong, as well as explaining why arguments put forward are incorrect, and the latter includes arguments from both the RE side and the FE side.

Quote from: Smoke Machine on March 06, 2021, 05:30:56 AM

No. Eight inches per mile squared is all any flat earther thinks they need to know to throw at people. However, that's just a rule of thumb that does not account for observer height and atmospheric refraction. How many less flat earthers would there be in the world if they all read the fine print?

You don't need fine print. It's pretty self explanatory.

Quote from: Smoke Machine

Sceptimatic, I dont know why you are trying so hard to create an alternate reality around yourself. Maybe you don't even remember why yourself, you've been at it for so long now. The only reason we are all having this forum discussion, is because science works. Think about that and try to absorb what that means for the world around you in which you live.

The reason we're having this discussion is because people like you think you can alter people's minds to go back to the absolutely unscientific nonsense of a global model.

The reason why you people stay must be en masse ego boosting,  pertaining to the mainstream authoritative narrative.


Basically you come armed with all the references you need. You don't even need to think....and yet.....and yet....here you are spending your time on a flat Earth forum making lots and lots of posts....for what?


If you were honest and said " oh I'm here to learn about alternate theories because I question the globe" I'd say, fair enough. If you said you were here to play devils advocate, I say, fair enough.


I have nothing against any of you, to be fair.............................but.

Eight inches per square mile, applies to ground zero, being the world according to an ant or insect on the ground. If you really want to experience eight inches per square mile, have one of your kids bury you at the beach up to your eyeballs.

Lots and lots of posts are for something. The fact is, myself and a few of the other posters in this thread, have managed to change the minds of two or three flat earthers in the past. So, it's not impossible. It can be done.

While you're being true to yourself in holding your viewpoints, so are we. Likewise, you don't have to be in this thread either, making all your posts. You could resign to the believers only section and live in ignorant bliss. But, you're here.

So, obviously, you want to hear what we have to say. Maybe it's because we represent 99.9999 percent of society views you get to meet outside cyberspace?

I'm here because I find the psychology aspect you're peddling, fascinating. Have you ever watched Derren Brown's tv specials, "the hero" or "the push"? People's thoughts can be manipulated.

I would argue, you are a flat earther sceptimatic, because of flat earth propaganda. Eight inches per square mile among many of your other card tricks, gives you away. It's flat earther bread and butter trope.

You didn't think 8 inches per square mile, up all by yourself, yet here you are denouncing everybody else for not thinking for themselves and being indoctrinated. The thing with education and university, is you are taught to think for yourself and question everything.

Flat earth propaganda works exactly the same as the nazi propaganda used on Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940's. It's also no different to advertising campaigns, taking full advantage of YouTube algorithms.

I agree with SM.  Flat Earth belief is not about proving what shape the Earth is. Like all other conspiracy theorists it is purely about sticking two fingers up at those they consider to represent 'authority' and rebel against popular thought.

If you want to ignore (deny) all the evidence that is has been given to us by modern technology it is (from ground level at least) pretty difficult to prove the shape of the Earth. However the evidence for the Earths true shape can be gathered by pretty much anyone in this day and age.  I can buy all the equipment I need online for about the cost of a months salary.  It is not just something we rely on the likes of NASA for anymore.

Back in the dark ages when this sort of technology was not available, there was perhaps a stronger case for thinking the Earth might be flat.  Flat Earthers today are essentially people who prefer to role play as those who lived in ancient times.  Overlooking and living in denial of all the evidence that is available to us now.  If that makes you happy then fine.  But I have got better things to do with my life than live in constant denial in that way.

Denialism is present all around us in different forms. It's defined basically as "a person's choice to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth. It's an irrational action where a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality." Flat earth is an extreme denial. The most extreme denial.

The pathway to such an extreme denial is fascinating. Propaganda is a big part of it, but there has to be another underlying psychological reason.

It's a shame that Mike Hughes, a passionate flat earther, died on his homemade rocket, before reaching the height he wanted, and satisfying his curiosity as to the shape of the world.

A homemade helium balloon, if flat earthers were legitimate about truth, could reach a height of 35 kilometers with go pro cameras filming the whole journey. It's affordable, and it's already been done.

This leads us back to the psychological reasons for wanting to continue living in denial, and not wanting to do such an experiment with a helium balloon and go pro cameras.

This leads us back to the psychological reasons for wanting to continue living in denial, and not wanting to do such an experiment with a helium balloon and go pro cameras.

You can indeed send a balloon and camera up for next to nothing - why haven't you done it?  We were all taught incorrectly about the horizon (which does not curve at any, publicly at least, attainable height), and yet rather than learn you were mistaught you just stay wrong instead...

You can indeed send a balloon and camera up for next to nothing - why haven't you done it?

Because we aren't paranoid and wont simply reject all the evidence available.

If I tried to verify all the evidence for everything in science I would waste my entire life doing so, and still not be able to finish. There is simply too much for any single person to do so.
So instead I accept the mountains of evidence available instead of thinking there is a massive conspiracy to hide the truth, including plenty of high altitude footage.

We were all taught incorrectly about the horizon (which does not curve at any, publicly at least, attainable height), and yet rather than learn you were mistaught you just stay wrong instead...

And do you have any evidence to support that claim?

Quote

If you were honest and said " oh I'm here to learn about alternate theories because I question the globe" I'd say, fair enough.

Ok I will be honest and say I'm here to hear about alternate theories. You have your alternate theory.  I have the evidence to support the globe model. What I lack is the evidence from you to support your alternate theory.  I can't accept it unless you provide that evidence.  You simply making claims and dismissing the globe model as silly and nonsensical is not the evidence I need.  You question the globe because you have a personal vendetta against it so you have convinced yourself it is wrong.

A personal vendetta against a globe?

I've got no vendetta. I merely discard it because I do not see nor perceive it as being a globe and I absolutely do not believe the stuff cast out as factual, for it.
You're going well overboard.

I would say the Sun and Moon are physical bodies.

Good for you but you have no real proof of what you're told.

 I would say the Earth orbits the Sun and that the Moon orbits the Earth.

Good for you but you have no real proof.

  Watch the sky over a period of a year and I would say you will see evidence that supports that without reading a word from any book.

Nope, there is no provable evidence of a globe, nor balls of rock and gas in a vacuum.

  You say they are holographic reflections produced by some crystal inside the Earth.  Ok provide the evidence that I should accept what you say over what I say.

I can't provide evidence. I can only give out my reasons why I think this may be the case.
When I start putting it out as fact, like you do with your belief, then you can ask for factual proof.
The difference is mine is my theory and yours is given out as factual for which you accept as being that but you have no proof of it being that.

 For example how does the crystal produce the energy to emit the light which produces the holograms?

It doesn't. It channels it.
The energy comes from beneath the crystal. A super carbon arc like a huge welding arc for an analogy.

 And why does the Sun change its appearance continuously while the Moon always appears the same.

Arcing.

  And why do stars disappear behind the Moon suggesting it is a solid body?

Washout of light. Stars are just points of light from crystal reflection/refraction.

The globe model explains all this but your alternate theory doesn't.

Of course. The globe model has been made up to fit what people see, over time.
All sorts of magical mysteries got added as people started to question.

what you are missing is the fact that the RE SHOULD have a horizon

No, I'm not missing anything to do with that..... you are.

I can't provide evidence. I can only give out my reasons why I think this may be the case.

So your alternate theory is based on nothing other than your opinion then. 

Good for you but you have no real proof of what you're told.

Just like you have no real proof that your model is correct.  You have no real proof that what you believe is true either.  The globe model is based on evidence. Yours is based on opinion only.  The opinion of just you it seems.  One person not liking and therefore dismissing the globe model is hardly likely to change the thinking of science I'm afraid. No matter how much you might like it to. 

When I start putting it out as fact, like you do with your belief, then you can ask for factual proof.

This has been pointed out to you before.  You don't do anything else other than put it out as fact. While at the same time sitting there smugly on your backside all day asking us to us explain this and explain that as simply as possible for you just so you can shoot us all down in flames and feed your ego even more. Your latest post below is just another example of you doing just that.

Arcing.

What is arcing and how?  Once again explain don't just claim.  One word answers mean nothing.  Apart from making it obvious you are just guessing.

Washout of light. Stars are just points of light from crystal reflection/refraction.

Wash out of light?  How can that be true when stars visibly disappear behind the dark portion of the Moons disk?  The Moon moves eastwards in the sky relative to the stars so when the Moon is waxing (between new and full Moon) stars disappear behind the eastern (dark limb).  How can that be caused by washout of light.  Again a pure guess on your part and a pretty poor one at that.  Try again.

Eight inches per square mile, applies to ground zero, being the world according to an ant or insect on the ground. If you really want to experience eight inches per square mile, have one of your kids bury you at the beach up to your eyeballs.

Bring it right down to the deck if you want.
The thing is I catered for all this stuff you people use by standing upright at about 5 to 6 feet in height and looking level.
And also it's per mile squared not a square mile.

Lots and lots of posts are for something. The fact is, myself and a few of the other posters in this thread, have managed to change the minds of two or three flat earthers in the past. So, it's not impossible. It can be done.

I'd like to know who because nothing you lot are saying has any nudge on me to change my mind.
You need to remember that I changed my mind from a globe and not just at the drop of a hat. I started to question everything. Here I am arguing for alternate Earth to the one bullied into us.


 

While you're being true to yourself in holding your viewpoints, so are we. Likewise, you don't have to be in this thread either, making all your posts. You could resign to the believers only section and live in ignorant bliss. But, you're here.

You may feel you are being true to yourselves. I have no issue with that. I just believe you are wrong. Not just slightly wrong but massively wrong overall in following the global model set out for you.
That's not a dig at people who follow that. It's just my personal thought with my view of the model set out.

So, obviously, you want to hear what we have to say.

I honestly don't care what you have to say.
If you interact with me I'll obviously answer to what I feel I want to. If you decided never to post another word I'd carry on as usual.
That's not specific to you.

Maybe it's because we represent 99.9999 percent of society views you get to meet outside cyberspace?

Maybe that's what you think.

 

I'm here because I find the psychology aspect you're peddling, fascinating. Have you ever watched Derren Brown's tv specials, "the hero" or "the push"? People's thoughts can be manipulated.

You're here because you find it soothing that you have somewhere to join in with internet bullies and get some satisfaction out of joining a posse of so called intimidators and feeling smug about having all the ammo already stacked up for you to pick and choose when to fire. No real need to think.

I fnd is fascinating how people like you actually go about in life with that attitude.......But, there you go. It shows how we perceive each other....right?

 

I would argue, you are a flat earther sceptimatic, because of flat earth propaganda. Eight inches per square mile among many of your other card tricks, gives you away. It's flat earther bread and butter trope.
You didn't think 8 inches per square mile, up all by yourself, yet here you are denouncing everybody else for not thinking for themselves and being indoctrinated

Globalists made that up, not me.
I can only go on what I can argue against in what is put out by global minded people.
And it's per mile squared not a square mile.

The thing with education and university, is you are taught to think for yourself and question everything.

Not how I see it.
You think for yourself and your marks become useless because you thought for yourself.
You follow a curriculum. You follow what is set out for you to regurgitate from memory once exam time comes around.
It's as simple as that.

Flat earth propaganda works exactly the same as the nazi propaganda used on Germany in the late 1930s and early 1940's. It's also no different to advertising campaigns, taking full advantage of YouTube algorithms.

Bringing nazi stuff up is pointless. The world we know of people is full of propaganda in all aspects of stuff, so using it in specifics that suit you, is only relevant, to you.

I agree with SM.  Flat Earth belief is not about proving what shape the Earth is. Like all other conspiracy theorists it is purely about sticking two fingers up at those they consider to represent 'authority' and rebel against popular thought.

In your mind you can think what you want.

If you want to ignore (deny) all the evidence that is has been given to us by modern technology it is (from ground level at least) pretty difficult to prove the shape of the Earth.

It's pretty difficult to find real evidence of a globe because there is no real evidence.
I believed all the global stuff once upon a time because I fell into that exact mindset of following mass opinion and a curriculum on top of adults telling me, on top of seeing all kinds of fictional movies to little news tit bits on so called rockets going into so called space....etc.
I questioned it.... and sill am.

My overall thought process up to now is, we 100% do not live on a globe and the Earth is most certainly something different to what we've been coaxed into believing.

However the evidence for the Earths true shape can be gathered by pretty much anyone in this day and age.

No it can't.

  I can buy all the equipment I need online for about the cost of a months salary.  It is not just something we rely on the likes of NASA for anymore.

You can buy all kinds of equipment but none of it proves a spinning globe and vacuum of space.

  Overlooking and living in denial of all the evidence that is available to us now.  If that makes you happy then fine.  But I have got better things to do with my life than live in constant denial in that way.

most of us have better things to do. Do you think I send all my life on this forum?
Do you?
I put a small part of my day into this forum, so try again.

It's pretty difficult to find real evidence of a globe because there is no real evidence.

What is the evidence that proves you are right then?  What is the evidence that proves the Sun and Moon are anything other than a G2V type star and the Earths natural satellite respectively?  What evidence is there to prove the Sun is not a star.... as we've been told?

My overall thought process up to now is, we 100% do not live on a globe and the Earth is most certainly something different to what we've been coaxed into believing.

Fair enough. I really would like to know how equatorial mounts work 100% successfully in both the northern and southern hemispheres then if Earth is not a globe.  It's the most obvious answer and you don't need to be told that.  If I am told something and I can then go and try it myself then what do I conclude about what I have been told?

Denialism is present all around us in different forms. It's defined basically as "a person's choice to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth. It's an irrational action where a person refuses to accept an empirically verifiable reality." Flat earth is an extreme denial. The most extreme denial.

The pathway to such an extreme denial is fascinating. Propaganda is a big part of it, but there has to be another underlying psychological reason.

It's a shame that Mike Hughes, a passionate flat earther, died on his homemade rocket, before reaching the height he wanted, and satisfying his curiosity as to the shape of the world.

A homemade helium balloon, if flat earthers were legitimate about truth, could reach a height of 35 kilometers with go pro cameras filming the whole journey. It's affordable, and it's already been done.

This leads us back to the psychological reasons for wanting to continue living in denial, and not wanting to do such an experiment with a helium balloon and go pro cameras.

The key question is in bold and who it actually does apply to. It could well be you lot denying an alternate Earth to the one you follow unconditionally, it seems.

Quote

I can't provide evidence. I can only give out my reasons why I think this may be the case.

So your alternate theory is based on nothing other than your opinion then.

It's based on simple experiments that show potentials as to what alternate Earth may be from my point of view.
To understand it from my side it has to be looked at from my side...not referenced against because it sways from a globe model of en masse, comfort.

You talk about alternate theories.  OK during the mid 20th century there were two theories about the origin and age of the Universe.  One said that the Universe had a beginning and was expanding.  The other said the Universe did not have a beginning and was essentially static.

One theory predicted there should be an 'echo' of when the beginning happened.  In the 1960s that echo was detected and so evidence was found which provided overwhelming support for one theory over the other.  So the steady state theory was discarded.

If we say that the Big Bang is equivalent to the globe theory and the steady state theory is equivalent to your theory, what is needed is some compelling and verifiable evidence that your theory is correct and therefore a better theory than the globe model.  Where is that evidence?

It's based on simple experiments

OK explain these experiments fully so we have something to go on.  Not just your claims about 'simple experiments'.