Does the FE have any real evidence?

  • 58 Replies
  • 15802 Views
?

turbonium2

  • 3781
  • +56/-30
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2025, 03:09:15 AM »
Level measures to flat and horizontal over its entire distance of instrument, which is entirely the length it is perpendicular to vertical.

Every point across level measures as flat and horizontal, not one point in its center.

Level is measured across two points in a line or span.

Every point along a level is perpendicular to vertical up and down at 90 degrees square.

That is how levels measure FOR a flat and horizontal surface of path, between two points over a distance, as a straight horizontal line.

Your curve is nothing but bs in a bs story. It will soon be ripped to shreds, and is already falling apart now.

Your liars laugh at people like you for being so foolish, they don’t respect you in the least. But have fun defending them, good times are ahead for you

?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 8424
  • +49/-96
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #31 on: March 01, 2025, 03:25:22 AM »
Level measures to flat and horizontal over its entire distance of instrument,


Really.  Provide a picture of an instrument doing such a thing. 




Quote
Flat Earth horizon still wouldn't look flat!




Compressing the photo makes it easier to see.

Quote







Or how about a laser test you wanted!

From this video…


Learned about this experiment using a laser tangent to the curved earth with a boat as a target on a lake 3 miles out.


Quote
Where Are We? Ch. 1 The Circumference of the Earth | Genius by Stephen Hawking

https://indiana.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/hawking_genius_ep06_clip01/where-are-we-ch-1-the-circumference-of-the-earth-genius-by-stephen-hawking/



In this clip from Genius by Stephen Hawking, learn how to calculate the circumference of the Earth. Three volunteers learn by measuring the flatness of the lake that they will be able to calculate the size and shape of the Earth. Using a powerful laser that projects a straight beam of light and a boat, the volunteers shoot the beam across the lake. This experiment shows the curvature of the lake. This was first discovered by the ancient Greek philosopher, mathematician and geometer Eratosthenes. He proved the Earth wasn't flat through observing the sun and the direction it cast shadows. If the Earth was flat, the sun would always shine at the same angle no matter what time of day it was. Using all the data collected from the curvature of the lake the volunteers are able to calculate the circumference of the Earth.




?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 8424
  • +49/-96
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2025, 03:27:22 AM »
Level measures to flat and horizontal over its entire distance of instrument,


Really.  Provide a picture of an instrument doing such a thing. 








Quote
Flat Earth horizon still wouldn't look flat!




Compressing the photo makes it easier to see.

Quote







Or how about a laser test you wanted!

From this video…


Learned about this experiment using a laser tangent to the curved earth with a boat as a target on a lake 3 miles out.


Quote
Where Are We? Ch. 1 The Circumference of the Earth | Genius by Stephen Hawking

https://indiana.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/hawking_genius_ep06_clip01/where-are-we-ch-1-the-circumference-of-the-earth-genius-by-stephen-hawking/



In this clip from Genius by Stephen Hawking, learn how to calculate the circumference of the Earth. Three volunteers learn by measuring the flatness of the lake that they will be able to calculate the size and shape of the Earth. Using a powerful laser that projects a straight beam of light and a boat, the volunteers shoot the beam across the lake. This experiment shows the curvature of the lake. This was first discovered by the ancient Greek philosopher, mathematician and geometer Eratosthenes. He proved the Earth wasn't flat through observing the sun and the direction it cast shadows. If the Earth was flat, the sun would always shine at the same angle no matter what time of day it was. Using all the data collected from the curvature of the lake the volunteers are able to calculate the circumference of the Earth.


*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #33 on: March 01, 2025, 01:58:29 PM »
Level measures to flat and horizontal
No, it doesn't.
Flat measures to flat.
Level measures as horizonal, perpendicular to down.

For planes, level means the same altitude.

We have been over this countless times.

Level is measured across two points in a line or span.
No, it is measured at one point.
Often one point along a line or span.

That is how levels measure FOR a flat and horizontal surface of path
No, that is how levels measure for a level and horizontal surface.

Your curve is nothing but bs in a bs story. It will soon be ripped to shreds, and is already falling apart now.
You keep saying this, but all you can do to pretend it is falling part is continually lie.
And then when called out on your dishonest, delusional BS, you just flee like the lying coward you are, only to bring up the same refuted BS again later.

Look at how you yet again brought up BS about planes, which has already been refuted countless times, and then when your BS about it is refuted yet again, the very next post you just ignore it all as if you never said it.

?

turbonium2

  • 3781
  • +56/-30
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #34 on: March 08, 2025, 03:25:03 AM »
Level flight is always at altitude, over the flat and level surface of Earth,

Level is over a distance between two points, which measure as horizontal and flat across the two points of a distance or length.

Curves cannot measure as flat and horizontal between two points over a distance or length.

Level is measured over a span of two points, a line of a distance, and constantly measured for level in flights of planes.

Planes don’t follow in a curved flight path over a curved surface of Earth below them.

Level flight is a flat and horizontal path of all flights.

Planes use the air pressure around the planes to measure for level flights.

Air pressure flows above the flat Earth in flat and horizontal paths.

You cannot claim planes just adjust without measuring for a curved surface below, that’s nonsense.

The curvature of Earth they claim is a known measurement, but they never mention that. It fails to work instantly.

?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 8424
  • +49/-96
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #35 on: March 08, 2025, 04:27:25 AM »
Level flight is always at altitude, over the flat and level surface of Earth,



You been asked to name what instrument measures “level” flight where jets usually fly nose pitched up to increase angle of attack and lift.  Where lift is opposed to by gravity where the only way to gain altitude is to increase power to the engine / jets and change flight surfaces.

*

Torve

  • 2294
  • +83/-136
  • Autism Centre Owner
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #36 on: March 08, 2025, 06:01:49 AM »


Planes use the air pressure around the planes to measure for level flights.



No they don't.

The altimeter provides a metric of altitude, the height above an inferred surface which is not real. Below are mountains and valleys, not "level" at all.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #37 on: March 08, 2025, 12:46:58 PM »
Level flight is always at altitude, over the flat and level surface of Earth
Again, notice how this is entirely circular?
You falsely claim Earth is flat, to have that altitude be flat, to have planes flying at altitude be flying flat, to say Earth is flat.

It is dishonest, delusional BS.

Back in reality, level is perpendicular to down.
Level flight is flying at the same altitude above mean sea level, regardless of the shape of that mean sea level.
A plane flying level does not prove anything about the shape of Earth.

But because you are desperate to pretend your delusional fantasy is true, you keep lying to everyone.

Curves cannot measure as flat and horizontal between two points over a distance or length.
You sure love repeating this lie don't you, even though it has been refuted countless times.

Again, ALL measurements have some level of uncertainty.
That means a small enough portion of a large enough curve CAN be measured as "flat", because it is only flat to within that level of uncertainty.

And that can also most certainly be measured as horizontal.

But what makes your claim even more stupid, go get a flat, horizontal surface, and then draw a circle on it.
Guess what? That circle is a curve which is flat and horizontal.
If you pick any 2 points on that circle, then the between them you have a straight line which is horizontal.


Level is measured over a span of two points, a line of a distance, and constantly measured for level in flights of planes.
No, it isn't.
Planes flying level use the altitude. That is typically at ONE point.
Even their attitude is at one point.

Yet again, you are making up PURE BS to pretend your delusional fantasy is true.
What you are saying has absolutely no basis in reality.

Planes don’t follow in a curved flight path over a curved surface of Earth below them.
PROVE IT.
You keep asserting pure BS with no justification at all.

All the available evidence which says one way or another clearly shows Earth is round.
You have NOTHING to refute that evidence and NOTHING to go against it except your pathetic lies and denial.

Air pressure flows above the flat Earth in flat and horizontal paths.
Wrong again.
Air pressure exists as roughly spherical shells around a spherical Earth.
Again, you just assert pure BS with no evidence or justification.

You cannot claim planes just adjust without measuring for a curved surface below, that’s nonsense.
Why?
It has been explained to you countless times.
They monitor their altitude and make adjustments to maintain that altitude.
That will necessarily adjust for any change in shape of the surface.
And that does not require them to consciously know about the shape they are trying to maintain an altitude above.

If you want to claim it is nonsense, you need far more than a pathetic, baseless assertion.

The curvature of Earth they claim is a known measurement, but they never mention that. It fails to work instantly.
Yes, it is a known measurement, and you can know it to if your pull your head out of ass and start accepting reality.
You say it fails to work, but you are yet to provide a single example where it doesn't.


Your entire post is just a pathetic example of circular reasoning.
Again, your entire basis for every point you have said is your false belief that Earth is flat.
Discard that BS and your entire post falls to pieces.

*

Smoke Machine

  • 3975
  • +19/-20
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #38 on: March 08, 2025, 01:03:25 PM »
Level flight is always at altitude, over the flat and level surface of Earth,

Level is over a distance between two points, which measure as horizontal and flat across the two points of a distance or length.

Curves cannot measure as flat and horizontal between two points over a distance or length.

Level is measured over a span of two points, a line of a distance, and constantly measured for level in flights of planes.

Planes don’t follow in a curved flight path over a curved surface of Earth below them.

Level flight is a flat and horizontal path of all flights.

Planes use the air pressure around the planes to measure for level flights.

Air pressure flows above the flat Earth in flat and horizontal paths.

You cannot claim planes just adjust without measuring for a curved surface below, that’s nonsense.

The curvature of Earth they claim is a known measurement, but they never mention that. It fails to work instantly.

Wrong again, Turbonium.

Level flight is always at altitude over the curved surface of the Earth.

Much like if you had a roller in your hand, and ran your hand over the surface of a beach ball. Your hand maintains the same distance or altitude from the beach ball, much like a plane flying level over the Earth does.

Trust me, I'm a professional.  :D
For the overall shape of Earth to be flat, requires billions of people and billions of pieces of information about Earth to be wrong. Do the maths.

?

turbonium2

  • 3781
  • +56/-30
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #39 on: March 14, 2025, 09:45:57 PM »
Level flight is measured as a flat and horizontal path within air.

A plane that is 250 or 300 feet in length, measures for the air pressure around the plane in its flight.

Let’s say the plane reaches up to 25000 feet on its altimeter, and suddenly the altimeter stops working, for some reason.

They know at last reading they were at 25000 feet.

How could they maintain that same altitude without the altimeter?

By staying in level flight with other instruments like the VSI.

That’s what measures for level flight in air, not needing to see the altimeter is the same or not. The altimeter confirms it is level flight when it is the same altitude along the flight itself.

Obviously level flight will keep the same altitude over a level and flat Earth below it.

If Earth were a ball, keeping the same altitude over a flight would be a curved path flown by planes above a curved surface. It would never be in level flight, it would always be in a descent to match the downward curving surface of ball Earth.

Look at any ball. Imagine being in a tiny plane above it.

The only way to stay the same altitude above the ball is to follow its curved surface in a curved path of flight.

No fairy tale crap works here.



*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #40 on: March 14, 2025, 11:13:26 PM »
Level flight is measured as a flat and horizontal path within air.
What magic is measuring it as flat or horizontal?
Do you have any basis at all?
NO!

A plane that is 250 or 300 feet in length, measures for the air pressure around the plane in its flight.
And assuming it is perfectly level at the centre, then the drop due to the curvature on either side would be a mere 0.2 mm.
i.e. nothing they are going to be able to measure.
So useless for measuring the curvature of Earth.
And that is assuming they had an altimeter at at least those 3 points.

By staying in level flight with other instruments like the VSI.
The VSI is basically just a differential altimeter. It is not measuring some magic reference like you want to pretend.

If Earth were a ball, keeping the same altitude over a flight would be a curved path flown by planes above a curved surface.
And result in the same altitude and VSI readings as level flight over a hypothetic flat Earth.

it would always be in a descent
No, it wouldn't, as repeatedly explained to you.

Look at any ball. Imagine being in a tiny plane above it.
Now instead of imagining it being a tiny plane ABOVE it, imagine it going back the other way.
The only possible for your delusional BS to work is if a particular path would measure as a descent one way, and then an ascent the other way.
i.e. it is dishonest, delusional BS, which has already been refuted with you fleeing from the refutation like the lying coward you are.

If you were honest, you would have a very simple answer for the OP "No", because you have no evidence.
If you did you would have provided it rather than appealing to this already refuted BS.

?

turbonium2

  • 3781
  • +56/-30
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2025, 02:07:44 AM »
No, it would descend each way, being always atop the ball Earth below it.

Everywhere you are on a ball or above a ball is downward from your position, you’re always on top of a ball, or above the top of a ball in a plane.

Everywhere is downward from you, no mater where you are or go to.

A plane would always have to curve down above a ball Earth, because it would always curve downward from you.

There are no level paths above an always curving downward ball Earth.

?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 8424
  • +49/-96
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2025, 02:09:39 AM »
No, it would descend each way, being always atop the ball Earth below it.




You’re babbling incoherently.

We can’t be under a ball, looking up to a higher part of a ball.

There’s only one viewpoint from a ball, another viewpoint is also atop the same ball at another position on it.

Stop using these stupid diagrams, they’re pure garbage.

And yet you ignore it’s all relative for objects on a sphere.





?

DataOverFlow2022

  • 8424
  • +49/-96
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2025, 02:11:15 AM »
No, .

Now explain why on the equinox why the sun rises due east and sets due west where on a flat earth the sun should visibly turn during the day and wouldn’t set. 

*

donutearth

  • 29
  • +2/-2
  • IF GLOBE, WHY MAP FLAT?? CHECKMATE, SCIENCE
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #44 on: March 15, 2025, 10:00:39 PM »
No, it would descend each way, being always atop the ball Earth below it.

I believe you mean the plane would ascend in your untrue scenario.

Also, gravity pulls the plane toward the Earth's center, making the flight path always tangent to the surface.

*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #45 on: March 16, 2025, 12:02:12 AM »
No, it would descend each way, being always atop the ball Earth below it.
Again, this makes no sense.
You cannot have it descend both ways.
If it is going down one way, it has to go up the other way.

And to see just how much BS you are spouting, just ask where the plane came from.

Everywhere you are on a ball or above a ball is downward from your position
i.e. if you consider this plane in level flight at some point in time, previously it was at a point that was below. This means it must be going up.
Correct?
Because that reasoning is just as valid as saying that it is going towards a point that was below so it must be going down.

Both ideas are equally valid, because both are pure BS.

They are staying level.
They are not going up or down.

Again, the VSI does not magically measure against a magical reference.


If you wish to assert such delusional BS, you need more than your pathetic assertion.
Explain why it must be descending, when at any point it has come from somewhere else you claim is below.
You can't just look one way to pretend your BS works.


Or, you could trying being honest for once in your pathetic existence and admit you have no evidence.

*

Smoke Machine

  • 3975
  • +19/-20
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #46 on: March 16, 2025, 03:42:08 AM »
No, it would descend each way, being always atop the ball Earth below it.

Everywhere you are on a ball or above a ball is downward from your position, you’re always on top of a ball, or above the top of a ball in a plane.

Everywhere is downward from you, no mater where you are or go to.

A plane would always have to curve down above a ball Earth, because it would always curve downward from you.

There are no level paths above an always curving downward ball Earth.

That's correct.

Everybody and everything on Earth, is simultaneously on top of the world, wherever they or it, is. You are literally king of the world wherever you are!

In that sense, everything is on a level playing field.

No different really, to everybody being on a perfectly flat plane.

Planes work on altitude, which is why in the cockpit of any plane there is an instrument called an altimeter. Planes can still fly level or parallel to the ground beneath it.

Again - for you who does not listen - planes like people - are extremely tiny compared to the size of the Earth.
For the overall shape of Earth to be flat, requires billions of people and billions of pieces of information about Earth to be wrong. Do the maths.

?

turbonium2

  • 3781
  • +56/-30
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #47 on: March 29, 2025, 03:23:18 AM »
Planes would always have to follow a curved flight path above a curved ball Earth surface, because it would not be a flat surface.

We cannot measure over a ball by measuring for level, because it cannot measure for the small curve in it.

Curves of any size or length cannot be measured with levels, because there is no level surface over a curving surface.

Curves are measured differently with other instruments than levels. They must be measured for whatever curve is there over any distance.

No surface can be measured by one single point on it. There’s no way to reference the surface by one single point on it.

When we use a 3 foot long spirit level over a floor, it measures over that three feet of floor surface. Same as a laser level measures over a surface by the whole distance of it.

So now, when we use both levels we confirm it is flat over three feet, say.

When we know the surface is entirely flat over three feet, no curve can exist over it.

There cannot be a curve over three feet, when it measures as level and flat and horizontal over it.

And that is the whole problem with your curved surface on a ball Earth.

Levels cannot measure for any sort of curves, it is impossible.

Planes have to measure for level flight in air, constantly and over and over again while in flight.

They measure for level over the planes length or along two points over the plane, and above and below it.

What is it really measuring? Two points over its length, and its height from top to bottom.

It does NOT measure one single point on the plane in its middle or whatever point you think it does. That would be completely useless and wouldn’t measure s(&) at all!


*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #48 on: March 29, 2025, 03:39:35 PM »
Planes would always have to follow a curved flight path above a curved ball Earth surface, because it would not be a flat surface.
And you are yet to demonstrate they don't.

We cannot measure over a ball by measuring for level, because it cannot measure for the small curve in it.
You don't need to measure the small curve.
You just need to make sure all the points along it are level.

When we use a 3 foot long spirit level over a floor, it measures over that three feet of floor surface.
No, it doesn't.
It measures for level at 1 point.
It measures for straight, with a significant uncertainty when talking about the curvature of Earth, over that distance.

When we know the surface is entirely flat over three feet, no curve can exist over it.
There cannot be a curve over three feet, when it measures as level and flat and horizontal over it.
How many times are you planning on having this desperate BS of yours refuted?

Again, the device is not perfet.
We do not know the surface is entirely flat.
We know it is flat to some level of uncertainty.
A curve can hide in that uncertainty.
You ignoring that wont change it.


So no, that is the problem with your desperate BS, and is not a problem at all for the RE.

Planes have to measure for level flight in air
Using a fundamentally different method.
Now this level is done by measuring the altitude at a given time and seeing how that varies.
That most certainly can follow a curve.

The attitude is measured using a gyro.
Again, not along the plane.


What is it really measuring?
Altitude.
It is NOT measuring along the plane and seeing how it varies.

The level of uncertainty in the measurement of altitude would make it useless if they measured like you were suggesting.

So again, if you honestly answered the question asked, you would simply say no.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30129
  • +136/-102
  • The Only Yang Scholar in Ying Universe
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #49 on: January 27, 2026, 09:14:09 PM »
A curve can hide in that uncertainty. ... Now this level is done by measuring the altitude at a given time and seeing how that varies.


 Jack, your "hidden curve" argument is a Mathematical Fantasy used to dismiss physical reality. If a 3-foot spirit level measures "level" and "flat," it means there is Zero Tangible Deviation. You claim the curve "hides" in the uncertainty, but you fail to realize that over hundreds of miles, those "hidden" deviations must accumulate into a massive, measurable drop. Yet, every long-distance bridge, railway, and canal is built on a Stationary Flat Datum. Stop the Semantic Games.

 
  • The Flight Path Fraud: You claim planes measure level by altitude? Ridiculous. Pilots use an Artificial Horizon (Gyroscope). A gyroscope maintains its rigidity in space. If a plane flew over a curve, the gyroscope would show the plane's nose gradually pitching up as the Earth "curved away" beneath it. Pilots never have to compensate for this supposed 8-inch-per-mile-squared drop. They set their course and fly Level. If the Earth were a ball, "level flight" would be a constant, controlled descent. Dishonesty: Exposed.

 
  • The Uncertainty Cop-Out: You hide behind "uncertainty" because you have no Positive Evidence of curvature. In science, if you can't measure it, and it doesn't affect the physical mechanics of the system (like construction or flight), it doesn't exist. You are essentially saying, "The Earth is curved, we just can't see it or measure it because it's too subtle." That isn't science, Jack; that's Blind Faith in a mathematical ghost. Scientific Bankruptcy: Confirmed.




 
The level of uncertainty in the measurement of altitude would make it useless if they measured like you were suggesting.


 
  • The Altimeter Reality: Altimeters measure air pressure, Jack. On a flat Earth, air pressure layers (isobars) are parallel to the flat ground. That’s why a plane can maintain a constant altitude without "pitching down." If the Earth curved, the pressure layers would curve too, but the Gyroscopic Inertia would still show the plane moving away from the surface. You can't use one instrument's limitations to ignore another instrument's Absolute Proof of Flatness.

 
  • The 3-Foot Challenge: If a 3-foot level is "too small" to see the curve, then use a 10-mile laser. We've done it. The results are always the same: No Curvature. You keep shrinking your "proof" into the realm of "uncertainty" because you know that at any measurable scale, the Globe model fails. Grow up.

 Jack, your "hidden curve" is like a "hidden dragon" in your garage—if no one can see it, feel it, or measure it, it’s just a Imaginary Narrative. Planes fly over a level plane because that is what the physics of the atmosphere and gyroscopes dictate. Stop the Spam and explain why pilots don't have to adjust for the 8-inch drop every single mile.
He (somebody) is a troll homo playing role of girl.

(Look at the date)

WERERPC LEVEL2

DAY ENDS IN (ESTIMATED):


*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #50 on: January 28, 2026, 12:37:10 PM »
your "hidden curve" argument
Is an objective fact about reality.
You need to live in a fantasy where there is no uncertainty.

it means there is Zero Tangible Deviation
And rather than appealing to useless words, why don't you put a number on that?
Can you measure a deviation of 1 nm over 2 m?

over hundreds of miles
Again, where is the construction doing that?

every long-distance bridge, railway, and canal is built
Based upon the terrain or water, and in segments, rather than trying to have a single baseline for it all.

Pilots ... gyroscope
And as pointed out in the other thread, they have a self-righting mechanism, that you can't explain.

And in another thread you contradict yourself by claiming something is making gyroscopes rotate on a FE to allow a gyrocompass to work.
Again, you are just wilfully lying to everyone.

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30129
  • +136/-102
  • The Only Yang Scholar in Ying Universe
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #51 on: January 28, 2026, 10:41:11 PM »
And rather than appealing to useless words, why don't you put a number on that? Can you measure a deviation of 1 nm over 2 m?

 Jack, you’re playing the "nanometer" game to hide a Kilometer Problem. We don't need to measure nanometers when the globe math dictates a 6-foot drop over 3 miles. That’s not a "tiny deviation"; that’s a massive, measurable physical gap. If you can't find that 6-foot drop on a calm lake or a long bridge, your model is dead at the Hardware Level. Stop hiding behind infinitesimal numbers to avoid the Macro Reality. Scientific Bankruptcy: Confirmed.


 
  • The Construction Segment Fallacy: You claim bridges and canals are built in "segments" to avoid the curve? Jack, whether you build in segments or one piece, if those segments are all Level, they form a Flat Plane. If the Earth were a ball, each segment would need to be tilted at a specific angle relative to the previous one to account for the curvature. Engineers use Spirit Levels and Theodolites that treat the Earth as a stationary, flat baseline. There is no "curvature coefficient" in the Suez Canal blueprints. It’s 120 miles of Zero Curve. Engineering Fraud: Exposed.


 
  • The Gyroscope Self-Righting Myth: You call it a "self-righting mechanism"? Jack, that’s just a Software Patch for a mechanical truth. A mechanical gyroscope is a Rigid-in-Space instrument. If the Earth were rotating 15 degrees per hour beneath it, the gyro would show that drift. It doesn't. You have to invent "electrical gravity correction" to explain why the instrument stays level with the flat Earth. You’re not explaining the gyro; you’re explaining why you have to manipulate the gyro to fit the ball. Hardware Audit: Failed.


 
  • The Gyrocompass Confusion: You claim a contradiction? No, Jack. A Gyrocompass interacts with the Aetheric/Magnetic Flux of the stationary Earth to find North. A Directional Gyro maintains its orientation in space. One measures the field, the other measures the plane. Your inability to distinguish between these two reflects your Institutional Programming, not a flaw in our model. Inquiry Failure: Confirmed.

Jack, you're trying to use "segmental construction" as a shield, but geometry is ruthless. A million flat segments cannot create a sphere without an angular tilt at every joint. Show us the tilt in the blueprints, or Stop the Spam.

Actually, it’s quite simple: Engineers build on a Level Base, not a Curved Surface. You’re the only one trying to build a house on a ball and wondering why the floors are flat.

Wake up to the real world, Jack.
He (somebody) is a troll homo playing role of girl.

(Look at the date)

WERERPC LEVEL2

DAY ENDS IN (ESTIMATED):


*

JackBlack

  • 26157
  • +51/-79
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #52 on: January 30, 2026, 12:42:36 PM »
Jack, you’re playing the "nanometer" game
To demonstrate you are wilfully lying to everyone.

You want to ignore the uncertainty, so you can pretend Earth is flat.
Back in reality, that uncertainty means you can't tell.

the globe math dictates a 6-foot drop over 3 miles.
And what are you using to measure that?
A theodolite which does show the dip?
Or are you trying to construct a solid beam made straight, in which case what is your uncertainty for that beam?

You have no idea.
You are appealing to a fantasy because you can't show a fault with reality.

Wake up to the real world, Jack.
Follow your own advice.
Wake up to a world that has experimental uncertainty/measurement error, and understand the implications of that on distinguishing between a flat and curved surface.

?

turbonium2

  • 3781
  • +56/-30
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #53 on: January 30, 2026, 08:50:45 PM »
Everything seen and everything measures it as flat, horizons are seen over a flat surface, at any height above a massive flat surface, and they are actually illusions, because they will always be seen from a distance away but vanish away at more distance over the surface, when another horizon forms at a longer distance away!



*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30129
  • +136/-102
  • The Only Yang Scholar in Ying Universe
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #54 on: January 31, 2026, 09:22:35 PM »
Back in reality, that uncertainty means you can't tell. [...] What are you using to measure that?


 Jack, if your model requires a deviation of 6 feet over 3 miles, and you claim "uncertainty" makes it impossible to tell, you are admitting that your globe is physically unverifiable. An error margin that swallows 6 feet of physical drop isn't "science"—it's a cover-up.

  • The Measurement Audit: You ask what I use to measure. We use the most precise level in existence: Standing Water. Over a 3-mile stretch of a calm lake or canal, there is no 6-foot drop. Water does not conform to your "uncertainty" principles; it conforms to its nature, which is to remain perfectly level. If the Earth were a ball, the surface of that water would have to curve. It doesn't. You don't need a "solid beam" when you have the physics of fluids. Hardware Audit: Water is the level, and it’s flat.
  • The Uncertainty Fallacy: You claim we "can't tell" because of measurement error. Jack, 6 feet is not a subtle vibration; it is the height of a doorway. If you are standing at point A and an object 3 miles away at point B is visible at your exact eye level, your 6-foot curve is missing. To claim this is "uncertainty" is to say that every surveyor, every engineer, and every long-distance observer is suffering from the same 6-foot hallucination. Inquiry Failure: Exposed.
  • The Reality Check: You say I'm appealing to a fantasy. The "fantasy" is a world where 70% of the surface is covered in water that somehow curves while remaining level in every localized test. You are fighting against the Mechanical Truth of the theodolite and the spirit level by clinging to microscopic "errors" to avoid the macroscopic reality. Scientific Bankruptcy: Confirmed.


 
Wake up to a world that has experimental uncertainty/measurement error...


 I am wide awake, Jack. I see a world where engineers build 100-mile railways and 120-mile canals (like the Suez) without ever accounting for your "curvature." If your 8-inch-per-mile-squared formula were real, those projects would fail at the construction phase. They don't fail because they are built on a Stationary Plane.

Stop hiding behind nanometers to explain away the missing feet. The math is simple, the observation is clear, and the "uncertainty" is only in your desperate defense of a failing model.


 The 6-foot drop is missing, Jack. No amount of "measurement error" can make a ball out of a flat surface. System Audit: Failed. Reality: Still Flat.
He (somebody) is a troll homo playing role of girl.

(Look at the date)

WERERPC LEVEL2

DAY ENDS IN (ESTIMATED):


*

Timeisup

  • 4166
  • +9/-18
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #55 on: February 10, 2026, 01:25:45 AM »
Einstein's relativity necessitates the earth is flat in Minkowski space as all theoretical stable orbits form straight lines, and those at equidistant positions to the surface of the earth form a flat plane in Minkowski space.

Sweet, down to a sentence. The math is left as an exercise to the reader.

You have to give this guy credit for lashing together so much pseudoscience clap trap in the one post.
You have to remember that this guy just makes stuff up that is no  way backed by any credible science. That’s why he never presents any as there is none!
All he gives is s number of random scientific terms put together.

When you boil all this flat earth juice down all you are left with is a thin smelly residue of conspiracy.

If you want to really find out the truth go out on a clear night and look up. Aside from the 10,000 or more Starlink satellites whizzing around with more added each month there are thousands of other satellites along with the ISS of which many can be seen with the naked eye or a pair of binoculars.
You can even download s number of  apps that tracks these satellites. The tracking of course is based on all these satellites doing orbits around a spherical earth.

The choice is yours:
a) believe in reality and the evidence such as the seen reality of satellites
b) believe in pseudoscience bullshit that had no basis in reality and only exists in someone’s fevered imagination.

Of course what flat earthers do to counter reality is go and make up a bunch of new bullshit to explain away satellites that only a total idiot would swallow.
such as; they are all balloons!
Balloons in a stable orbit carriring a load of scientific gear!

Are you serious?

By all means believe the earth is flat and that Trump always speaks the truth and actually came top of his class at college! While your at it add to your belief  list:
Tooth fairy
Leprechauns
Santa
Unicorns
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

*

Timeisup

  • 4166
  • +9/-18
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #56 on: February 10, 2026, 01:35:07 AM »
Pure sad comedy!
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

*

Timeisup

  • 4166
  • +9/-18
  • You still think that. You cannot be serious ?
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #57 on: February 10, 2026, 01:52:17 AM »
The FE model doesn't seem to really hold up against any real scrutiny. This is supposed to be more open ended, in the sense of where people can try to prove that the FE is better than the RE. As of now, I do not think it is possible for anyone to provide a legitimate argument of a FE. So, if you want to prove me wrong, this is the place.

Of course the poor flat earth believer  has no verifiable evidence to fall back on as there is none!

All they have and have ever had is conspiracy topped of with spun together pseudoscience and just making stuff up.

If you don’t believe me just go read any post from a flatly and they resort to either of those three approaches.

What they never ever do mainly because they can’t is provide verifiable and repeatable evidence that had been published in a reputable scientific journal.

Why? Because no such evidence exists! Why doesn’t it exist? It doesn’t exist because the earth ain’t flat!

All they can do is put forward pseudoscience which is basically scientific terms dipped in bullshit.

What they then do to explain  why none of this is ever published   is to play the conspiracy card. All the scientific journals and the world of science are controlled by THEM!

Their third option which is used regularly is just to make stuff up that they pull out their ass.

It’s the only three options they have with the truth absent from them all.
"I can accept that some aspects of FE belief are true, while others are fiction."

Jack Black

Now that is a laugh!

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30129
  • +136/-102
  • The Only Yang Scholar in Ying Universe
Re: Does the FE have any real evidence?
« Reply #58 on: February 10, 2026, 04:24:33 AM »
Where can I get tickets to watch full of this shadow theater performance ?  ;D
He (somebody) is a troll homo playing role of girl.

(Look at the date)

WERERPC LEVEL2

DAY ENDS IN (ESTIMATED):