Flat Earth?

[The Bastard]

This thread is over. Any proof provided is either ignored or dismissed, and Mad Paul just responds with ad hominem attacks when questioned. Any point to it going on ?

[paul's got wright]

Provide your best proof then so we can scientifically scrutinise it! What a wally, do you seriuosly think proof has ben provided in this thread? What is it? Go on give us the thread ender?

You are petrified of being proven to be incorrect, or mod forbid, shown up for your lack of knowledge about your religious beliefs.

Link us to any proof in this thread or any other you proof if you prefer.  Lets examine it, otherwise take your religious fanatacism elswhere. This is the science thread, as is stipulated in the op.  You just cant handle it.

I will post the op by gerry again. Try and read it then refute that. Should be easy right?

[Chinahand]

Yawn. 

[paul's got wright]

Did you really come in to yawn or was it " morbid fascination? 

The thing is china this thread shouldnt have made it this far, if the spinning oblate spheroid was so easy to prove.

But clearly, to the average neil, it isn't.  Why is that?

I will give you the same analogy as before. If anyone started a thread saying "cleverly better than scholes?"  you would not find me in there. The rason being, i know he's not. Its not a belief.

But to the people who come here to appeal to ridicule,authority etc etc, this has become a shock to their beli3f syst3m.

Seems as not one person will offer any scientific proof, here besides you, please will you give us your best china. The thread ender. So we can scrutinise it together scientifically.  Lets have it out in the open to get the religious zealots out of here. Thanks

[Neil Down]

2 hours ago, Chinahand said:

Yawn. 

+1

[dilligaf]

7 hours ago, finlo said:

21 hours ago, dilligaf said:

You have just let yourself down there .

Care to explain the "mistakes" in his videos? 

Making them for one

[Neil Down]

1 minute ago, dilligaf said:

Making them for one

Game, set and match to dilli...

[finlo]

31 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

Game, set and match to dilli...

Easy to see how NASA get away with it such are the levels of gullibility.

[paul's got wright]

1 hour ago, dilligaf said:

Making them for one

How so silly dilly?

[paul's got wright]

1 hour ago, Neil Down said:

Game, set and match to dilli...

But how is it neil? Did he provide thread ending proof for the ball? No, more obfuscation coz thats wll he has. No proof

[paul's got wright]

If i have to go back through the thread and bring them all up in chronological order i will. No worries. Scrutinise them one by one. 

The point is that there are religious trolls in here, calling to an end to the thread! A flat earth thread! 

And the irony is that all they have to do is prove the spinning globe and it would be over! But they cant!!! Astounding isnt it. Rather than just end it with scientific proof,  as they claim is do easy to do, they turn up trolling and fantasisng. 

" professing themselves to be wise, they became fools"

Anonymous

 

[Bobbie Bobster]

45 minutes ago, paul's got wright said:

If i have to go back through the thread and bring them all up in chronological order i will. No worries. Scrutinise them one by one

You haven't the balls to do this, Paul.

[Chinahand]

Evidence of the shape of the earth provided in this thread -

The existence of the horizon.  Observable easily.  Watch the Ben sail out into the bay, or walk up Peel Hill looking out to the Galloway lighthouse.

Watching a double sunset by watching the sun set at a lower level and quickly moving to a higher level.  Easily doable.  This can used to give a rough estimate of the size of the earth by timing how long it takes for the sun to set a second time compared to how much higher you are.

Watching the stars and how they rotate around polaris in the northern hemisphere and just off the Southern Cross in the Southern Hemisphere.  Measuring how the positions of the stars change as you move with latitude. Easily doable.  The measurements cannot be replicated on a flat earth, only on a globe.

Measuring how shadows lengths change at different places around the earth.   Why does the shadow of a 1 m stick never get shorter than a certain length on say the Isle of Man, but will shrink to nothing at certain times in the tropics. Harder to do due to Umbra and penumbra effects, but simply do a survey of sundials - why do their gnomons change angle at different locations, something very easily explained by a globe, totally incomprehensible for a flat earth model. Easily doable.

Understanding timezones.  Seeing how you far you have to change your watch as you travel around the world.  Easily doable.

I do very strongly want to make clear that the predictions from the purely childish flat earth models are totally incapable of explaining the details of how angles to the sun change at different latitudes and times, as it is incapable of explaining the equinox; while the spherical model explain it with great accuracy, enabling navigators to chart their position as they sail around the globe and designers of sundials to accurately predict solar time.

Measuring the dip of the horizon.  This is quite hard, but perfectly doable with patience and/or equipment.

Seeing how the period of a Foucault's pendulum changes with latitude.  Why does it rotate in 23.93 hours at the poles, but at 23.93 hours divided by the sine of the latitude elsewhere?  Perfectly doable, but as it involves a heavy weight and 20 foot of wire, quite involved.  But you can easily check out the various Foucault's pendulums set up around the world to see that this is so.

All these are perfectly easily to do as an individual who is patient and careful.

Then there are the innumerable examples from satellite observations, gps, geostationary communications satellites, weather satellites etc etc.

To pretend all this, and the billions of pounds of commercial business it relies on is fake is cretinous.

[Neil Down]

28 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

Evidence of the shape of the earth provided in this thread -

The existence of the horizon.  Observable easily.  Watch the Ben sail out into the bay, or walk up Peel Hill looking out to the Galloway lighthouse.

Watching a double sunset by watching the sun set at a lower level and quickly moving to a higher level.  Easily doable.  This can used to give a rough estimate of the size of the earth by timing how long it takes for the sun to set a second time compared to how much higher you are.

Watching the stars and how they rotate around polaris in the northern hemisphere and just off the Southern Cross in the Southern Hemisphere.  Measuring how the positions of the stars change as you move with latitude. Easily doable.  The measurements cannot be replicated on a flat earth, only on a globe.

Measuring how shadows lengths change at different places around the earth.   Why does the shadow of a 1 m stick never get shorter than a certain length on say the Isle of Man, but will shrink to nothing at certain times in the tropics. Harder to do due to Umbra and penumbra effects, but simply do a survey of sundials - why do their gnomons change angle at different locations, something very easily explained by a globe, totally incomprehensible for a flat earth model. Easily doable.

Understanding timezones.  Seeing how you far you have to change your watch as you travel around the world.  Easily doable.

I do very strongly want to make clear that the predictions from the purely childish flat earth models are totally incapable of explaining the details of how angles to the sun change at different latitudes and times, as it is incapable of explaining the equinox; while the spherical model explain it with great accuracy, enabling navigators to chart their position as they sail around the globe and designers of sundials to accurately predict solar time.

Measuring the dip of the horizon.  This is quite hard, but perfectly doable with patience and/or equipment.

Seeing how the period of a Foucault's pendulum changes with latitude.  Why does it rotate in 23.93 hours at the poles, but at 23.93 hours divided by the sine of the latitude elsewhere?  Perfectly doable, but as it involves a heavy weight and 20 foot of wire, quite involved.  But you can easily check out the various Foucault's pendulums set up around the world to see that this is so.

All these are perfectly easily to do as an individual who is patient and careful.

Then there are the innumerable examples from satellite observations, gps, geostationary communications satellites, weather satellites etc etc.

To pretend all this, and the billions of pounds of commercial business it relies on is fake is cretinous.

I hate to break this to you China, but you’ve just wasted  however long that took you to type. Fruitloop will be back asking for proof.

[paul's got wright]

1 hour ago, Bobbie Bobster said:

You haven't the balls to do this, Paul.

The ballless have made themselves known a long while ago blobster, as you well know, what with this being one of your fave topics an all x