/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal


If you want to see the latest posts from all boards in a convenient way please check out /overboard/

Name
Email
Subject
By clicking New Reply, I acknowledge the existence of the Israeli nuclear arsenal.
Comment
0
Select File / Oekaki
File(s)
Password (For file and/or post deletion.)

thtfx.jpeg
900px-SunAnimation.gif
748.png
Flat Earth.
Anonymous
No.148613
148618 148626 148828 149171 150423 157834
This thread is meant to debunk the deranged idea that our realm is a planet floating in space.
If the so called established science can't be challenged, then it's not science, but religion.
709 replies and 415 files omitted.
Anonymous
No.163024
163033
Oekaki.png
Overhead view.
See how the nipple represents the peak of the tide on the respective half of the pizza, the titty expanding ourward in an ovoid titty shape. Dont question it, boobies
Anonymous
No.163025
163033
Oekaki.png
sideways view, line pointing toward north pole
Anonymous
No.163033
163034 163077
maxresdefault.jpg
Scre040.png
>>163013
>>163023
>>163024
>>163025
>tides
I don't know much about tides, but you look obsessed by then.
So I investigated a bit and I found the usual sources claiming the existence of the moon's gravitational force as responsible. Of course that's pure non-sense based on faith. Then I went to a reputable source to find out about and perhaps to please your curiosity.

>Eric Dubay: Cause of the Tides (13:53 long)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEP3zhso8jE
Mirror:
https://odysee.com/@TheFlatEarthAwakening:0/eric-dubay-cause-of-the-tides-on-flat:b
https://www.bitchute.com/video/3kYRA7SE8We6/
Anonymous
No.163034
Screenshot_20220420-070037_DuckDuckGo.jpg
Screenshot_20220420-070414_DuckDuckGo.jpg
>>163033
>I dont know
Holy shit! Shocking. Thats the first scientific position youve taken all thread. Are you feeling okay?
Meanwhile, Dubay
>It doesnt make sense to me so its bullshit
Yeah, he says that alot. I did get a laugh out of pic 1 tho
>pic 2
Is that a hollow earth diagram?
>Mount Meru at the north pole
Citations Needed
Seriously, Im curious about this, and anecdotes dont cut it. If these e plorers found it, it should be repeatable.
Again, this seems to support hollow earth because meanwhile....
Anonymous
No.163035
Screenshot_20220419-160927_DuckDuckGo.jpg
Screenshot_20220419-160941_DuckDuckGo.jpg
Gonna get spec ific now, because the debate had a designated time structure.
How is this phenomenon possible?, where the stars can be observed to rotate in opposite directions, if its a flat earth?
Anonymous
No.163036
163037
https://youtu.be/bvi9jjyVuGo
Not sure what current events look like, but was very interested to see that Dubay has been somewhat uninvoted from FE conferences and panels? Ngl, I find his position on the Holocaust, Jews, and international finance to be quite CREDIBLE. Ngl, this is the first time he has said anything that make me want to have sterilized his parents
Anonymous
No.163037
>>163036
*makes me not want to have
Anonymous
No.163060
900.png
>Clouds behind the sun
https://www.bitchute.com/video/tBUui1UTPtM4/
Just a curiosity. /s
Anonymous
No.163076
unknown (18) (4).png

Anonymous
No.163077
163079 163082
>>163033
>a reputable source
Are you being serious?
Anonymous
No.163079
>>163077
Unironically, he is serious
Anonymous
No.163082
>>163077
Absolutely. Dead serious.
Anonymous
No.163085
163090
garbage science.jpg
0920.png
>Cosmology Has Some Big Problems
>The field relies on a conceptual framework that has trouble accounting for new observations
>What do we really know about our universe?
>Born out of a cosmic explosion 13.8 billion years ago, the universe rapidly inflated and then cooled, it is still expanding at an increasing rate and mostly made up of unknown dark matter and dark energy ... right?
>This well-known story is usually taken as a self-evident scientific fact, despite the relative lack of empirical evidence—and despite a steady crop of discrepancies arising with observations of the distant universe.
>In recent months, new measurements of the Hubble constant, the rate of universal expansion, suggested major differences between two independent methods of calculation. Discrepancies on the expansion rate have huge implications not simply for calculation but for the validity of cosmology's current standard model at the extreme scales of the cosmos.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/cosmology-has-some-big-problems/
Take a comfy seat and enjoy an admission of scientific baloney when claims that are stated as fact are just deliriant theories. Hypothesis are not facts, but just speculation.
Anonymous
No.163090
163091
>>163085
But you said that outer space was fake
Anonymous
No.163091
163093
>>163090
Correct. Cosmologists base their theories on a false paradigm.
Anonymous
No.163093
163094
>>163091
But the guy in the article mentions the space telescopes. Is he in on the con?
Anonymous
No.163094
163095
>>163093
I have to guess that it is the same case like the normies. They believe that the "data" and "CGI" is real.
Anonymous
No.163095
163096
>>163094
But this is the same guy you're presenting as refuting the con. So which is it?
Anonymous
No.163096
163109
>>163095
>So which is it?
It is that you have comprehension difficulties.
The guy is not refuting the con, but admits that establishment' scientific theories are shaky at best and driven by ideology, not facts.
Anonymous
No.163109
163110
>>163096
But its Scientific American, arent they like the head of the Freemasonic Jewish round-earth psyop? Shouldnt we be distrusting them?
Anonymous
No.163110
163111
>>163109
>playing riddles
Try harder.
Anonymous
No.163111
163112
>>163110
Im just clarifying that unless they say something that you think supports your argument you present them as relevance, but the 99.99% of the time they go against your argument that theyre Nasa-masonic shills in on the psyop.
Anonymous
No.163112
163113
>>163111
So?
Anonymous
No.163113
163114
>>163112
So 99.99% of the time theyre actively involved in the psyop, which is something you can arbitrarily determine just by who they are, EXCEPT for 0.01% of the time when they are saying something that still supports the other 99.99% of their content (which you have already 'refuted'as 'disinfo'), but tangentially gives a nod to the need for more expansive models.
Nothing about his paper says anything that refutes a spherocal earth model, in fact the entirety of the content is based around such models.
In what way was posting that article credible to a flat earth position?
Anonymous
No.163114
163115
>>163113
I believe you are projecting and what you describe applies to (you).
You consider the information valid if only comes from oligarch funded sources, but independent ones are dismissed. But when some of the first bring doubt, you resort to a futile attempt to discredit OP's deluge of facts.
Anonymous
No.163115
163116
e7e26ffa8e26441587f19e3cb25f6918--so-funny-hilarious.jpg
>>163114
>literally claims that round earth science is a psyop
>literally posts a mainstream publication that institutionally supports the round earth
>Gets called out for it
>Nuh uh, its (you) who does that
Anonymous
No.163116
Long-Tongue-Closeup-Face.jpg
>>163115
Suit yourself.
Anonymous
No.163117
Heres a quick way to observe that the flat earth model is BS.
How come, if the sun is actually a disk some thousand miles away, why does it never distort in perspective?
If the earth were flat, the disk that is the sun would appear increasingly oval over distance due to perspective.
Anonymous
No.163118
163121 163122 163130
Clarifying for posterity
If the sun (and the moon) were disks, the only way they could appear as round is if they were perfectly perpendicular to the observer's position. As such, a person on the east coast viewing the evening sun could not see a round sun at the same time someone on the west coast viewing the afternoon sun perfectly round.
Unless.
A. The sun was actually impossibly far away
and/or
B. The sun is a sphere
Anonymous
No.163121
163124
latest.jpeg
>>163118
>Clarifying for posterity
Eww, no.
You are obfuscating for posterity.
From where did you get the idea that the sun and moon are disks?
Anonymous
No.163122
163125
addressing_Cadance_M.jpeg
>>163118
I give you a hint.
Anonymous
No.163123
@163121
This, sun's literally just a giant lamp from the heavens
Anonymous
No.163124
163128
>>163121
>where did you get the idea
Its been proclaimed by many of the 'sources' ITT, including you implicitly, in your attempts to claim that the planets/space phenomenon in general is a psyop.
Anonymous
No.163125
163126
>>163122
Imagine thinking this is an intelligent post
Anonymous
No.163126
>>163125
Actually a wise post.
Anonymous
No.163128
163129
star-in-moon.jpg
>>163124
The idea that the moon might be a disk has some ground, but it has not been proven, the same goes for the sun.
See the translucent moon and through it, a star.
Anonymous
No.163129
163132 163133
svdsa.png
>>163128
Anonymous
No.163130
163134 163311
1111.jpg
1112.jpg
1113.jpg
>>163118
>Clarifying for posterity
>If the sun (and the moon) were disks, the only way they could appear as round is if they were perfectly perpendicular to the observer's position. As such, a person on the east coast viewing the evening sun could not see a round sun at the same time someone on the west coast viewing the afternoon sun perfectly round.
Ahem.
Anonymous
No.163131
images-o.png

Anonymous
No.163132
163135 163136 163138
>>163129
>Deboonked
https://www.quora.com/If-the-moon-is-238-900-miles-away-from-earth-out-in-deep-black-space-then-how-come-we-can-see-the-clear-blue-sky-behind-it
Anonymous
No.163133
>>163129
You're not seeing the blue sky behind it, you're seeing the sky in front of it.
The sky is milky blue because of the color of the atmosphere. The moon is beyond the edge of the atmosphere, so part of it that isn't illuminated looks like the sky.
Anonymous
No.163134
163135
1575498059078.png
>>163130
<Deeeeeeeeboonk'd
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-moon-reflect-sun-rays-more-like-a-disc-than-a-sphere-as-it-appears-to-the-naked-eye-from-earth
Anonymous
No.163135
163137 163139
>>163132
>>163134
>Source: some random faggot
The only thing gayer than deboonking with snopes is deboonking with quora.
Anonymous
No.163136
163139
84014.png
>>163132
>Taking a pedophile as a source
Anonymous
No.163137
>>163135
Do these pedos draw their power from glober souls?!
Anonymous
No.163138
163140
>>163132
>Blue fog
It is speculation and I didn't find any research about it.
Still, why a supposedly solid object in the sky let us see stars through it remains a mystery.
Anonymous
No.163139
163141
>>163135
>>163136
Remember these? >>162945 >>162938
Anonymous
No.163140
163142
1575600514271.png
>>163138
>"Triple kill!"
https://www.quora.com/If-the-moon-truly-is-a-large-spherical-rock-why-can-we-see-stars-through-it
Anonymous
No.163141
>>163139
tks for the yous
Anonymous
No.163142
163146
index.jpeg
>>163140
>https://www.quora.com/If-the-moon-truly-is-a-large-spherical-rock-why-can-we-see-stars-through-it
>Don't fall for stupid meme
Like NASA's?
Anonymous
No.163143
1572324899637.jpg
>whataboutism
Don't worry anon, we all know it's just those pesky G5 towers dumbing you down.
Anonymous
No.163144
163145
Would you consider the possibility that the moon is actually self-luminescent?
Anonymous
No.163145
>>163144
It's reflective. It reflects the flight of the sun from the illuminated side.
Anonymous
No.163146
>>163142
Make an actual counter-argument.
Anonymous
No.163147
163308 163331
When this thread inevitably gets re-made, make sure it has IDs so that we can have real arguments with consistency.
Anonymous
No.163308
163310
>>163147
But anon, the flatty doesnt WANT arguments with consistency, he cant even be bothered to make arguments other than to point at videos and say 'its in there somewhere'.
Meanwhile if you post something incontravertable - and dobthe labor of providing screenshots, he'll ignore it entirely or (worse) will refuse to acknowledge the evidence.
Like here:
>>159481
Speaking of horseshit, remember this time?
Fuck IT, lets make it a double-feature! LITERALLY!
https://youtu.be/3OfbwhU5PQk
Anonymous
No.163310
163312
>>163308
I just think there'd be better discussions if it were more obvious when posters made arguments that directly contradicted each other.
Anonymous
No.163311
f3bd6995ed80c6e9c65ecdb16942777c.webp.png
b0351c65bb9fb7b23efadabea43700ba.webp.png
637d5044c8033a9e99636cb53e553da8.webp.png
>>163130
You don't see specular highlights on the moon because it's a very rough object with a high brightness. Here's it in blender
Anonymous
No.163312
pcqrkpXKi.png
>>163310
I admire your optimism
Anonymous
No.163314
>Globe shills.
Damn.
Anonymous
No.163328
85917553.jpg

Anonymous
No.163331
163332 163334
>>163147
Seriously though, why would it get remade? You do know that there's no bump-limit on /vx/ right?
Anonymous
No.163332
163333
you can't stop me.gif
>>163331
Yeah. The thread is fine how it is.
Globers' bullying can't stop the truth.
Anonymous
No.163333
163335
>>163332
Yeah, this is the flatty, who doesnt want ids.
I didnt say there wasnt anything wrong with this thread, only an idiot would think that (proven right again), and lo along comes the idiot to proclaim such.
I was just alluding to the fact that there is no need to repost a thread cuz golly gee, I wonder WHY threads on /vx/ dont have a bump limit.
Thats disingenuous, I know exactly why, I just wonder if anyone ELSE thinks it was a bad idea
Anonymous
No.163334
163339
>>163331
Threads have bump limits, they just don't slide.
Anonymous
No.163335
163341
>>163333
I think all boards could benefit to have shorter bump limits, tbh. It's unhealthy for threads to go on this long.
Anonymous
No.163336
unknown (23) (8).png
I might make a thread about the ideas that come with flat-realm cosmologies in fantasy settings.
A lot of conventional fantasy settings assume a standard planetary model for their material planes, but have infinite/expanding flat realms for their extraplanar space. The concept of an infinite flat realm surrounded by concentric ice rings where the borders of reality grow thin is a world-building cosmology I want to experiment with; it could be good for pony-themed games.
Anonymous
No.163337
DfCw7mKUYAE5iTF (1).jpg
The ice rings could be something like the Dark Continent in the Magi setting. Perhaps also a shadowy spot in the center of creation where new suns are born.
Anonymous
No.163339
>>163334
Incorrect, /vx/ bump limits were removed
Anonymous
No.163341
163343
i came.png
>>163335
>It's unhealthy for threads to go on this long.
What happen? Is truth too hard for ya?
Anonymous
No.163342
163344
Imagine being so ignorant that you insulate yourself from your own incompetence and then smugly shove it in everyone's face, under the pretemse that everyone ELSE is stupid.
Anonymous
No.163343
>>163341
No, it's that threads dragging on for a long time without being remade causes decline in discussion quality within those threads.
I was referring more to the main board though.
Anonymous
No.163344
>>163342
Better you should prove Earth is round. Can ya?
Anonymous
No.163346
>163344

>>159481
Waiting on you sweet-cheeks
Anonymous
No.163348
163350
https://youtu.be/MYnjzsjeMK8
Anonymous
No.163349
163350
https://youtu.be/313icHT2XF8
Anonymous
No.163350
163351 163357
rgzdgrd.png
>>163348
>>163349
Do you realize the huge effort NASA and its followers are putting to shut up just a tiny minority who disagree? Quite remarkable. Isn't it?
Anonymous
No.163351
163353
>>163350
>You do realize theres alot of people telling me Im an idiot
Maybe, just maybe, you ARE an idiot
Anonymous
No.163353
163356
80c1.png
>>163351
Name calling doesn't make Earth a ball.
Try again with facts next time.
Anonymous
No.163354
163355
833357.png
BB46398162E4FD4E912CF64A7E03EC8E-106791.png
Behold, spacetime.
Anonymous
No.163355
>>163354
The Ponker Po
Anonymous
No.163356
>>163353
Well every time I do you either cant comprehend them, call the authors/videographers names, or outright ignore incontravertable evidence. So no, you get what you fucking deserve
Anonymous
No.163357
>>163350
>huge effort
Not really.
Anonymous
No.163361
163362 163363
https://youtu.be/Lw4JMl1sErY
Anonymous
No.163362
>>163361
>Flat Earth Society
>controlled opposition
Take a hike, shill.
Anonymous
No.163363
163364
maxresdefault.jpg
>>163361
>low effort shilling
You have to come with something more creative. For example explain why there is not curve at all.
Anonymous
No.163364
>>163363
Why would I lie though?
Anonymous
No.163365
163366 163482
File (hide): D329AF7AF4CAE71FA5615D91217EA489-2327297.mp4 (2.2 MB, Resolution:632x480 Length:00:02:00, Transoceanic flights prove a flat earth.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Transoceanic flights prove a flat earth.mp4
Transoceanic flights prove a flat earth.
Anonymous
No.163366
163367
>>163365
>trans-atlantic flights dont go direct from the bottom of africa to australia
>flat earth is the ONLY explanation
Literally lmao rn, ty
Anonymous
No.163367
163368
>>163366
>unable to connect the dots
(You) must be college educated.
Anonymous
No.163368
163369
>>163367
>music and psychology
Guilty
So, in your 'dot connecting', where does profit motive apply?
Anonymous
No.163369
163370
>>163368
>music and psycholog
You don't qualify to evaluate even physics 101. That said, read a book nigger.
Anonymous
No.163370
163372
>>163369
Oh, thays just college. That is what you said, college.
I got my engineering creds - which people actually pay me money for, enough to have employees, no less - from a trade school. But, accredation is an appeal to authority argument, and has no bearing on the discussion.
And speaking of no bearing on the discussion, in an ironic parallel to ITT, here's the latest Flat Earth Fridays!
Credit, I was oblivious to Sci Man Dan until this thread showed up
https://youtu.be/2huZYKlAdVQ
Anonymous
No.163372
>>163370
>Sci Dan
That paid shill together with all NASA spoke persons won't debate Eric Dubay. There has to be a reason for them not to take that golden opportunity to shame and discredit the Flat Earth poster boy.
Interestingly, the same scenario applies to holohoax propagandists who always decline to debate holohoax debunkers.
Anonymous
No.163376
163377 163379
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDy95_eNPzM
Flatty's cannot dispute this.
Anonymous
No.163377
>>163376
>Flatty's cannot dispute this.
Interesting details. And yet heliocentrism is not holding water, the announced curve cannot be found, then the globe is a fantasy.
Anonymous
No.163379
163383
>>163376
As usual, surely Globebuster made an answer video to the glober. Videos of answer and counter-answers (polemic) populate jew-tube. By posting that Sci-fi Dan video, you are posting a partial view on the subject.
Take in count that OP refrains from posting this kind of crap and sticks to the facts.
Anonymous
No.163383
136925FE922672BB94D224D49018916D-4095225.jpg
>>163379
>sci fi dan
Ngl, thats hilarious, cuz its not wrong. Still, this is the flat earth thread so this is where such content applies, whether in support or in contest of flat earth ahem theory. Gives an idea, actually; youll see.
>based nasaponr
Anonymous
No.163405
https://youtu.be/zixc8eojZdg
Heres a 25 minute video showing the very slow process of a distant supertanker deacending over the horizon.
Pay specific attention to how OP reacts to yet more incontravertable visual evidence of curvature
Recommended at 2x speed
Anonymous
No.163482
Flight_Map_High_Res.jpg
>>163017
Because the sensors are square. But the lens does add barrel distortion, it's just slight enough in most cases that you don't notice it. In 3D renders people add in fake distortion to make it look more realistic

Actual photo of a straight building
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1SpyTP7rdwv6N-cA9VToYfBIS8yj6lg5Py2XfOeo488Q/edit#slide=id.g141444f9b3_1_251

>>163365
The reasoning for this could be as simple as the winds being strong or them not wanting to risk having a problem while being in the middle of nowhere to land. But I'm guessing there's also some economy to it, since flights aren't always simple A to B but can have people going to multiple different destinations and if you go a path that's close to many others you can make dropoffs for all of those places, and load on new passengers, places probably more worthwhile than Africa

How do you explain flight paths being curved most of the time? Including, yes, when they do actually go from Africa to South America or Australia