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.
/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal
File (): EBB8999170B861DACE0B30BD4B4E3775-880166.jpg (859.5 KB, 1200x800, thtfx.jpeg)
File (): 5AFBC2B050DCE12E59A35BCA999CD5AD-6936214.gif (6.6 MB, 900x900, 900px-SunAnimation.gif)
2670 replies and 1400 files omitted.
>>165778
Found it!
>>163405
So. In this video, we watch the slow and painstaking process of supertanker making a right turn while descending over the horizon. Yes, the videographer zooms out and back in on occasion, however the zoom out and in occurs very fast, and couldn't cause the viewer to think that the slow, gradual dissapearance over the horizon has anything to do with the zoom.
Unless you're a flat earth glownigger like OP, that is
Found it!
>>163405
So. In this video, we watch the slow and painstaking process of supertanker making a right turn while descending over the horizon. Yes, the videographer zooms out and back in on occasion, however the zoom out and in occurs very fast, and couldn't cause the viewer to think that the slow, gradual dissapearance over the horizon has anything to do with the zoom.
Unless you're a flat earth glownigger like OP, that is
>>165794
The effect was produced by a solid prism.
Unless this is crystal magic where a crystal dome produces the same effect as a prism, you're full of shit and you know it, glownigger.
The effect was produced by a solid prism.
Unless this is crystal magic where a crystal dome produces the same effect as a prism, you're full of shit and you know it, glownigger.
Anonymous
No.165796
>inb4 some mlp image from the crystal empire against sombra n shit
>>165795
>The effect was produced by a solid prism
Actually a solid semi-sphere, then Dubay introduces the gas ionization phenomena and the difference between sunlight and day light.
Don't be a faggot a stop lying.
>The effect was produced by a solid prism
Actually a solid semi-sphere, then Dubay introduces the gas ionization phenomena and the difference between sunlight and day light.
Don't be a faggot a stop lying.
>>165797
So for the record, are you staking the claim that ionized gas produces a prismic effect?
Yes, it's a hemisphere but its still prismic (as in, effect), by your insistence.
So for the record, are you staking the claim that ionized gas produces a prismic effect?
Yes, it's a hemisphere but its still prismic (as in, effect), by your insistence.
File (): 82F48BFECA56818E75475A64F047C578-121622.jpg (118.8 KB, 1002x1002, 1pcs-Prism-Laser-Beam-Combine-Cube-Prism-for-405nm-450nm-Blue-Laser-Diode-5W-for-Optical.jpg)
File (): 9BFFBB5AB1CAD4BD1E47AA1E414C4E4C-76942.png (75.1 KB, 1699x2041, sneha-b-volume-of-triangular-prism-07-1606298603.png)
>>165798
>prismic effect?
Anon, it is obvious that gasses don't meet the prism definition. You are confusing the term perhaps with light diffusion (Physics 101).
>prismic effect?
Anon, it is obvious that gasses don't meet the prism definition. You are confusing the term perhaps with light diffusion (Physics 101).
Anonymous
No.165801
>>165800
However you did insist on a transparent mysterious solid dome which does fall on as prismatic effect, not only that the speed of light through the various mediums should be calculatable as with the energy required.
Some fuckery is going on.
Not only that but everything that goes on everywhere has to be described in detail and all the stuff has to match up.
I mean this should be a trifle really, in a solid dome the fuck is space rocks that land.
However you did insist on a transparent mysterious solid dome which does fall on as prismatic effect, not only that the speed of light through the various mediums should be calculatable as with the energy required.
Some fuckery is going on.
Not only that but everything that goes on everywhere has to be described in detail and all the stuff has to match up.
I mean this should be a trifle really, in a solid dome the fuck is space rocks that land.
File (): D0384AD1B09DD72CCEAB458A880DFEA6-129907.jpg (126.9 KB, 1280x960, dRBDrCrnHQrNyOwH32sl8Kpn.jpg)
>Flat Earth - Meteors, Comets and Craters
>Meteors, meteorites, asteroids, comets, and shooting stars are not what you have been led to believe.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/FlatEarth-MeteorsCometsandCraters:d
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/8ZogXzFn5Vqw/
>Meteors, meteorites, asteroids, comets, and shooting stars are not what you have been led to believe.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/FlatEarth-MeteorsCometsandCraters:d
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/8ZogXzFn5Vqw/
Anonymous
No.165804
>>165803
There's another interesting theory about objects falling from the dome. Not substantiated but it gives food for thought.
>Meteors
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3TVlW8PXkw
There's another interesting theory about objects falling from the dome. Not substantiated but it gives food for thought.
>Meteors
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3TVlW8PXkw
>>165781
>>165790
Thanks for your reply.
I was actually thinking of these videos, reposting them here for the ease of access.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX_eBzCdBTk&ab_channel=EricDubay
6:37
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow2MoLQXJsQ
3:14
What do you think about them? The timestamps are the ones that discuss ship's hulls going over the horizon first.
>>165790
Thanks for your reply.
I was actually thinking of these videos, reposting them here for the ease of access.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FX_eBzCdBTk&ab_channel=EricDubay
6:37
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ow2MoLQXJsQ
3:14
What do you think about them? The timestamps are the ones that discuss ship's hulls going over the horizon first.
>>165807
But again, that's horseshit.
When we're talking about ladies walking, or cars driving, the relative area where the distortive visual effect is at MAX 2', which is acceptable given the threshold of the distortion.
In the video I provided, we're talking about watching AN ENTIRE SUPERTANKER, OVER 100' TALL, SLOWLY CROSS THE VISUAL THRESHOLD OF THE HORIZON.
We are not the same.
But again, that's horseshit.
When we're talking about ladies walking, or cars driving, the relative area where the distortive visual effect is at MAX 2', which is acceptable given the threshold of the distortion.
In the video I provided, we're talking about watching AN ENTIRE SUPERTANKER, OVER 100' TALL, SLOWLY CROSS THE VISUAL THRESHOLD OF THE HORIZON.
We are not the same.
Anonymous
No.165810
>>165808
To further clarify this point.
According to Eric Bidet, the proportion of the distorted object (ship) that is obscured is relative to the distance and pverall volume. Meaning, as something becomes more distant and miniscule, the more of it's body becomes obscured, at least if the earth was flat. Which it is not.
You can tell using the ship video, because the overwhelming width of the ship is quite prominent right up until the point that it disappears over the horizon.
Again to Bidet's assertion, the proportion of the vehicle that is distorted should be relative to the overall volume. Thats observably not the case. The entire height of the ship dsappears over the horizon WELL before the width does so. Unless they sailed into a sea of piranha solution, and that supertanker got dissolved from the base up, it is impossible for the flat earth model to account for the ship's disappearance, no matter HOW many straws of 'perspective' and 'zoom' one grasps at.
Simply put, when one comprehends physics, math, proportion, etc. - regardless of what their opinion of round/flat earth - that ONE video conclusively proves that the earth is not flat.
Which is also why OP won't touch that video with a 10 foot pole.
That he persists with this flat earth nonsense while knowing that his position is literally impossible - no matter how much rhetoric/pilpul he attempts - is the cause by which I assert he's a filthy glownigger, probably tasked with monitoring/obfuscating site activity (and most likely, just one of hundreds who have been sent to various chan-boards to keep an eye out for any Christchurch-esque activity).
Having said and having grasped his motivation, his position has long since been illustrated as arguing in bad faith, intellectually dishonest, as well as laughably unsupportable, excepting individuals one or more standard deviations of intellect below the average.
To further clarify this point.
According to Eric Bidet, the proportion of the distorted object (ship) that is obscured is relative to the distance and pverall volume. Meaning, as something becomes more distant and miniscule, the more of it's body becomes obscured, at least if the earth was flat. Which it is not.
You can tell using the ship video, because the overwhelming width of the ship is quite prominent right up until the point that it disappears over the horizon.
Again to Bidet's assertion, the proportion of the vehicle that is distorted should be relative to the overall volume. Thats observably not the case. The entire height of the ship dsappears over the horizon WELL before the width does so. Unless they sailed into a sea of piranha solution, and that supertanker got dissolved from the base up, it is impossible for the flat earth model to account for the ship's disappearance, no matter HOW many straws of 'perspective' and 'zoom' one grasps at.
Simply put, when one comprehends physics, math, proportion, etc. - regardless of what their opinion of round/flat earth - that ONE video conclusively proves that the earth is not flat.
Which is also why OP won't touch that video with a 10 foot pole.
That he persists with this flat earth nonsense while knowing that his position is literally impossible - no matter how much rhetoric/pilpul he attempts - is the cause by which I assert he's a filthy glownigger, probably tasked with monitoring/obfuscating site activity (and most likely, just one of hundreds who have been sent to various chan-boards to keep an eye out for any Christchurch-esque activity).
Having said and having grasped his motivation, his position has long since been illustrated as arguing in bad faith, intellectually dishonest, as well as laughably unsupportable, excepting individuals one or more standard deviations of intellect below the average.
Anonymous
No.165811
File (): 5286C713B6E91776908B6DE325B3DAB6-8979758.mp4 (8.6 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:02:47, FLAT EARTH MAP.mp4) [play once] [loop]
>FLAT EARTH MOON MAP WITH AMAZING DETAILS
Neither the source or content can be proven. Take it with two grains of salt and healthy skepticism.
Neither the source or content can be proven. Take it with two grains of salt and healthy skepticism.
Anonymous
No.165812
>Im just gonna ignore the elephant in the room, the thread
>>165814
Yes, but you'll never get an admission from OP. It's not literal narcissism, but the behavior pattern is the same; you're wrong and he's right, nevermind what the evidence shows
>inb4 hurr, it shows a flat earth
>inb4 your words not mine
Yes, but you'll never get an admission from OP. It's not literal narcissism, but the behavior pattern is the same; you're wrong and he's right, nevermind what the evidence shows
>inb4 hurr, it shows a flat earth
>inb4 your words not mine
File (): CC885AC96609D91C07B350793CF18FFC-117598.jpg (114.8 KB, 736x704, feStEGTcxW.jpg)
>>165815
>It's not literal narcissism, but the behavior pattern is the same; you're wrong and he's right, nevermind what the evidence shows
What a coincidence, because the same may apply to (you).
>It's not literal narcissism, but the behavior pattern is the same; you're wrong and he's right, nevermind what the evidence shows
What a coincidence, because the same may apply to (you).
>>165818
>n... no u!
Factually and evidently incorrect.
My assessment of (you) is based on observation and your displayed behavior. I'm perfectly open to theories that have evidential merit, and I am on record with a 'whackjob' theory of my own. And yet, I manage to avoid patronizing anons, dismissing their positions without merit (I read/watch/reply-to all of your posts, regardless) and outright ignoring evidence I can't contest.
No no, again, that's just (you)
>n... no u!
Factually and evidently incorrect.
My assessment of (you) is based on observation and your displayed behavior. I'm perfectly open to theories that have evidential merit, and I am on record with a 'whackjob' theory of my own. And yet, I manage to avoid patronizing anons, dismissing their positions without merit (I read/watch/reply-to all of your posts, regardless) and outright ignoring evidence I can't contest.
No no, again, that's just (you)
>>165819
>(I read/watch/reply-to all of your posts, regardless)
... Why? Why are you entertaining this retard with your attention?
You seem to have already understood that he can't be convinced, so why are you still arguing with him? Why not just ignore him? What are you trying to prove?
>(I read/watch/reply-to all of your posts, regardless)
... Why? Why are you entertaining this retard with your attention?
You seem to have already understood that he can't be convinced, so why are you still arguing with him? Why not just ignore him? What are you trying to prove?
Anonymous
No.165830
File (): E9B10644C5078B588E86B263C2F39F60-12152650.mp4 (11.6 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:04:03, WW2 and Flat Earth.mp4) [play once] [loop]
WW2 and Flat Earth.
Anonymous
No.165833
File (): B7B03770BF75ED8849BF23EDA8326F40-725483.png (708.5 KB, 1280x720, facehoof.png)
>>165832
>tacit acceptance and/or user largesse
>largesse
I'm impressed.
>faggots like him should be made to feel unwelcome
A bit over the top. Don't (you) think?
>tacit acceptance and/or user largesse
>largesse
I'm impressed.
>faggots like him should be made to feel unwelcome
A bit over the top. Don't (you) think?
>>165834
>over the top
Not at all. If he was posing the question/ideas to have a discussion, discuss the merits admit/acknowledge the flaws, and engage in GOOD faith dialogue/exchange, then yes, that would be over the top. IF that's what he was doing.
>over the top
Not at all. If he was posing the question/ideas to have a discussion, discuss the merits admit/acknowledge the flaws, and engage in GOOD faith dialogue/exchange, then yes, that would be over the top. IF that's what he was doing.
Anonymous
No.165837
>>165832
>ignorong him could be construed as tacit acceptance and/or user largesse
No it isn't. You can't go arguing with every retard on a chansite.
>Because more naïve and/or impressionable users might fall for his bullshit othwrise
That's none of your business; and no, they wouldn't.
>Because faggots like him should be made to feel unwelcome
Over the past year+ of arguing, you have not succeeded in making him leave. This isn't worth your attention.
>ignorong him could be construed as tacit acceptance and/or user largesse
No it isn't. You can't go arguing with every retard on a chansite.
>Because more naïve and/or impressionable users might fall for his bullshit othwrise
That's none of your business; and no, they wouldn't.
>Because faggots like him should be made to feel unwelcome
Over the past year+ of arguing, you have not succeeded in making him leave. This isn't worth your attention.
>>165838
>tries to conflate Mlpol with all other chansites, including 4chan
Get fucked, our demographics are way different than other chans, the circumstances are entirely different and so the strategy must also be proprietary. Additionally, I don't argue with every asshole on the site because A. Most assholes dont persist for literal years with a conclusively fallacious premise and B. Because for some reason, people tend to leave the flatty alone.
>none of your business
Get fucked, this site IS my business. Its called TAKING responsibility. If (you) knew the first thing about it, we wouldnt be having this cpnversation/issue.
>he hasnt left, not worth your attention
Oh, so now you're concerned with how I value my time? Get fucked thrice. The intent is not to make him leave, (tho it would be nice) the intent is to cement in his and other eager flatties looking for a beachhead of sorts that these ideas and the pilpul methods of asserting then will NOT go unopposed, and will be readily destroyed at leisure, often casually.
>tries to conflate Mlpol with all other chansites, including 4chan
Get fucked, our demographics are way different than other chans, the circumstances are entirely different and so the strategy must also be proprietary. Additionally, I don't argue with every asshole on the site because A. Most assholes dont persist for literal years with a conclusively fallacious premise and B. Because for some reason, people tend to leave the flatty alone.
>none of your business
Get fucked, this site IS my business. Its called TAKING responsibility. If (you) knew the first thing about it, we wouldnt be having this cpnversation/issue.
>he hasnt left, not worth your attention
Oh, so now you're concerned with how I value my time? Get fucked thrice. The intent is not to make him leave, (tho it would be nice) the intent is to cement in his and other eager flatties looking for a beachhead of sorts that these ideas and the pilpul methods of asserting then will NOT go unopposed, and will be readily destroyed at leisure, often casually.
>>165839
Okay, fine. Argue with him all you want, but for the love of god, sage your posts so the rest of us don't have to see this thread at the top of the overboard/catalog every day.
Okay, fine. Argue with him all you want, but for the love of god, sage your posts so the rest of us don't have to see this thread at the top of the overboard/catalog every day.
>>165840
>Im the reason its on the overboard
Glad you mentioned it.
Why are /vx/ threads on perma-bump? Is it cuz the /vx/ threads are of such quality that exceeds even mainboard threads? Or is there something else to it?
>Im the reason its on the overboard
Glad you mentioned it.
Why are /vx/ threads on perma-bump? Is it cuz the /vx/ threads are of such quality that exceeds even mainboard threads? Or is there something else to it?
>>165842
Sounds like an interesting discussion for /qa/. No idea why the /vx/ catalog is like this.
In the meantime, remember to sage. You're not the only one who argues with OP. I do it too on occasion, but I sage the thread so as to not give it extra attention. Just because OP bumps it doesn't mean you have to.
Sounds like an interesting discussion for /qa/. No idea why the /vx/ catalog is like this.
In the meantime, remember to sage. You're not the only one who argues with OP. I do it too on occasion, but I sage the thread so as to not give it extra attention. Just because OP bumps it doesn't mean you have to.
>>165843
>sage
Respectfully declined
>I dont know why
I do, and were it not for this thread it wouldnt be an issue. Unfortunately, this thread enjoys the fruits of the otherwise utility of the perma bump on /vx/, which stymies the natural user rejection of such threads as these, if it was to either hit bump limit and be remade or be bumplocked and still be remade.
>/qa/
Riiiiiiiiiight. I'll add it to my letter to Santa while I'm at it.
>sage
Respectfully declined
>I dont know why
I do, and were it not for this thread it wouldnt be an issue. Unfortunately, this thread enjoys the fruits of the otherwise utility of the perma bump on /vx/, which stymies the natural user rejection of such threads as these, if it was to either hit bump limit and be remade or be bumplocked and still be remade.
>/qa/
Riiiiiiiiiight. I'll add it to my letter to Santa while I'm at it.
Anonymous
No.165847
Flat eartherism is a jewish psyop
>>165846
Why, for the rp games, of course that is, the ones other than dick strangler's, who insists on posting to the mainboard cuz... reasons
Why, for the rp games, of course that is, the ones other than dick strangler's, who insists on posting to the mainboard cuz... reasons
>>165848
I don't think perma-bumping threads necessarily help games. Making new threads isn't that hard.
I don't think perma-bumping threads necessarily help games. Making new threads isn't that hard.
Anonymous
No.165851
>>165849
Well, when I was running a game, I insisted that my threads be immediately bump locked, but I had a hard on for AVOIDING the main page and then later, the overboard.
But current GMs,... ahem insist that it is too troublesome for players to check the thread(s), and further that lol the audience see when there's activity.
spoiler alert: it ain't gonna change
Well, when I was running a game, I insisted that my threads be immediately bump locked, but I had a hard on for AVOIDING the main page and then later, the overboard.
But current GMs,... ahem insist that it is too troublesome for players to check the thread(s), and further that lol the audience see when there's activity.
spoiler alert: it ain't gonna change
Imo, bump locking this thread is the correct course of action, but staff is notorious for refusing my seggestions simply because it's me making it.
Anonymous
No.165854
>>165853
Thats true, it isnt. But neither is the problem going to be properly addressed if I do so again, respectfully declined.
Thats true, it isnt. But neither is the problem going to be properly addressed if I do so again, respectfully declined.
File (): 038FB9DA03F4D0CA6CC93E6AB62E20E4-97008.png (94.7 KB, 839x928, disgusting.png)
>>165852
>Imo, bump locking this thread is the correct course of action, but staff is notorious for refusing my seggestions simply because it's me making it
One thing is your non-stop screeching because you would have to admit you were living a lie. But to sabotage a thread with bump-locking is totally a different league and shows how far, and low, you are willing to go to silence the opinions and facts you don't like.
Very commie of you.
>Imo, bump locking this thread is the correct course of action, but staff is notorious for refusing my seggestions simply because it's me making it
One thing is your non-stop screeching because you would have to admit you were living a lie. But to sabotage a thread with bump-locking is totally a different league and shows how far, and low, you are willing to go to silence the opinions and facts you don't like.
Very commie of you.
File (): 20BE94FB5DA7EFC5180D76C15C32A02C-271151.png (264.8 KB, 1280x720, rgeb39n8s.png)
Anonymous
No.165862
Who am I kidding, thats the intellectual honesty the site has been known for, these days.
>>165855
>sabotage
This right here. OP considers it sabotage to NOT be able to bump this shit in perpetuity
>sabotage
This right here. OP considers it sabotage to NOT be able to bump this shit in perpetuity
File (): 02AF5206CC3425C085411EF49FD1C2B0-1548984.gif (1.5 MB, 680x787, pinkie pie ---haters---.gif)
Anonymous
No.165866
Nigger.
Anonymous
No.165869
Due to technical concerns brought up by users, bump limit on /vx/ has been lowered to 2,147,483,647. We apologize for any problems that the overly high bump limit has caused.
File (): 38CC88E8662340885230E36B392D6D28-12036873.gif (11.5 MB, 640x360, derpytech5.gif)
I want to thank all of our concerned users for pointing out the critical flaw in our bump system that has been with us for years.
https://mlpol.net/vx/50370
https://mlpol.net/vx/51841
https://mlpol.net/vx/53728
https://mlpol.net/vx/55271
https://mlpol.net/vx/58626
https://mlpol.net/vx/60316
Look at those pathetic reply numbers that effectively organizes a campaign of such a scale. The need for a patch to the number of replies was long overdue. We have now solved this issue effective immediately.
https://mlpol.net/vx/50370
https://mlpol.net/vx/51841
https://mlpol.net/vx/53728
https://mlpol.net/vx/55271
https://mlpol.net/vx/58626
https://mlpol.net/vx/60316
Look at those pathetic reply numbers that effectively organizes a campaign of such a scale. The need for a patch to the number of replies was long overdue. We have now solved this issue effective immediately.
Tbh, the bump limits on all of the boards are too high.
But the fact that /vx/ has no bump limit and no archive makes it stand out.
But the fact that /vx/ has no bump limit and no archive makes it stand out.
>>165875
There was a bump limit of a ridiculous 2000. Far too small to be of use as the examples on the board show. We have now patched this. To think we almost got to that number naturally if we didn't get alerted to the problem.
There was a bump limit of a ridiculous 2000. Far too small to be of use as the examples on the board show. We have now patched this. To think we almost got to that number naturally if we didn't get alerted to the problem.
Anonymous
No.165877
>>165852
There is no reason to single this thread out among any of the others on /vx/.
I think bump limits should be fixed, but not in a way that targets any particular thread.
There is no reason to single this thread out among any of the others on /vx/.
I think bump limits should be fixed, but not in a way that targets any particular thread.
>>165876
What's the bump limit now?
Imo, it shouldn't be higher than 500, which is the highest it ever was back on 4chan (for faster boards like /a/ and /v/). I really don't think there's any reason for them to be higher than that.
What's the bump limit now?
Imo, it shouldn't be higher than 500, which is the highest it ever was back on 4chan (for faster boards like /a/ and /v/). I really don't think there's any reason for them to be higher than that.
Even a bump limit of 300 would be large, considering the speed of this board.
>>165880
>The old bump limit was put in place for roleplay as multiple people each post for a turn which eats up the normal size of a thread.
I remember this. Imo, that was a mistake...
Imo, its why I care about this issue, because I feel like I contributed to the problem by selfishly requesting that the bump limits be increased for those RP threads back in the day, without consideration for the long-term damage it would do to the site. I've since realized that that was probably a bad idea.
>Bump limit now is 2,147,483,647.
Oh, I see this is a shitpost.
Shitposting aside, could we maybe talk about this in /qa/? There's already a thread up on the topic: >>>/qa/5974 → I don't want to shit-up this thread, even if some other Anons would rather discuss their meta grievances here for some reason...
Bump limits have been an issue I've been trying to raise awareness of for a while, and I think it's worth some more serious discussion.
>The old bump limit was put in place for roleplay as multiple people each post for a turn which eats up the normal size of a thread.
I remember this. Imo, that was a mistake...
Imo, its why I care about this issue, because I feel like I contributed to the problem by selfishly requesting that the bump limits be increased for those RP threads back in the day, without consideration for the long-term damage it would do to the site. I've since realized that that was probably a bad idea.
>Bump limit now is 2,147,483,647.
Oh, I see this is a shitpost.
Shitposting aside, could we maybe talk about this in /qa/? There's already a thread up on the topic: >>>/qa/5974 → I don't want to shit-up this thread, even if some other Anons would rather discuss their meta grievances here for some reason...
Bump limits have been an issue I've been trying to raise awareness of for a while, and I think it's worth some more serious discussion.
Anonymous
No.165884
>>165882
I don't recall you making a big scene when the decision was made either. It's not like we don't have an entire board for meta issues.
I don't recall you making a big scene when the decision was made either. It's not like we don't have an entire board for meta issues.
Anonymous
No.165891
>Eric Dubay
>Why isn't Polaris Visible from Australia?
>Globe Earthers are taught the reason that the North Pole Star cannot be seen from southern locations like Australia or New Zealand is because it is hidden behind the supposed curvature of their globular Earth. Similar to what is taught about boats disappearing beyond the horizon, they claim these boats and the Pole Star are disappearing behind the physical curvature of a globe, and insist if the Earth was truly a stationary plane that Australians should have no trouble viewing Polaris.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/Why-isn't-Polaris-Visible-from-Australia-:d
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/5cULQxgB1pmK/
>Why isn't Polaris Visible from Australia?
>Globe Earthers are taught the reason that the North Pole Star cannot be seen from southern locations like Australia or New Zealand is because it is hidden behind the supposed curvature of their globular Earth. Similar to what is taught about boats disappearing beyond the horizon, they claim these boats and the Pole Star are disappearing behind the physical curvature of a globe, and insist if the Earth was truly a stationary plane that Australians should have no trouble viewing Polaris.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/Why-isn't-Polaris-Visible-from-Australia-:d
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/5cULQxgB1pmK/
File (): A3A196519459C0B05442F82B1AF6651C-797985.png (779.3 KB, 1398x1483, b202f525cc93423f.png)
Anonymous
No.165895
>>165894
To make it more accurate, make the CIA glownigger look like less of a chad and make the flat earther retard on a leash also babble about magic and psychic powers and History Channel-tier ancient alien nonsense to distract people from the jews in banks and government.
To make it more accurate, make the CIA glownigger look like less of a chad and make the flat earther retard on a leash also babble about magic and psychic powers and History Channel-tier ancient alien nonsense to distract people from the jews in banks and government.
Anonymous
No.165941
File (): A472CB788F6E9748749B91A39ACDAEF4-2591708.mp4 (2.5 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:00:59, the lie is CRACKING_EDIT.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Cracking the ball lie.
Anonymous
No.165952
File (): 093FACE42C03B13A524CF83E453D0745-12010054.mp4 (11.5 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:06:42, Black Sun Model Explained - With Visuals.mp4) [play once] [loop]
>Black Sun Model Explained - With Visuals
Just a theory.
Just a theory.
Anonymous
No.165956
File (): 68D3D9DBDB1B87E32EFDE340B4444C30-16643.jpg (16.3 KB, 512x385, facebook_1663288789495_6976338822936040640.jpg)
Hey, Pettan niggers.
If the earth is flat why does centrifugal force let slings work?
If the earth is flat why does centrifugal force let slings work?
File (): 8ABE5301A983625CC0DA6E0C29D59B5C-463332.png (452.5 KB, 1061x1024, mocking.png)
Anonymous
No.165968
File (): A39519D73EB94C02B5968429ABC153F1-5537808.gif (5.3 MB, 1280x720, haters gonna hate.gif)
File (): 18D0EB81F9E167F51ED805668BEBCFCB-2553600.mp4 (2.4 MB, Resolution:640x360 Length:00:00:53, Truth in plain site on a Flat Earth.mp4) [play once] [loop]
>>165894
It is wrong to assume that retards are glownigger plants just because they make a community look bad. Dealing with retards is, sadly, a consequence of being a haven of free speech.
That being said, I have no doubt that glowies plant bullshit on altchans and other free speech forums to discredit places like this.
It is wrong to assume that retards are glownigger plants just because they make a community look bad. Dealing with retards is, sadly, a consequence of being a haven of free speech.
That being said, I have no doubt that glowies plant bullshit on altchans and other free speech forums to discredit places like this.
>>165974
Glowniggers do indeed promote the controlled opposition "Flat Earth Society" website. Plenty of politicians and NASA propagandists mention it over and over again for character assassination purposes. That said, experiments don't find any curvature, so the whole ball shaped scam does go down in flames.
Glowniggers do indeed promote the controlled opposition "Flat Earth Society" website. Plenty of politicians and NASA propagandists mention it over and over again for character assassination purposes. That said, experiments don't find any curvature, so the whole ball shaped scam does go down in flames.
>>165978
Actually they are experiments that most people can reproduce, which is the very definition of science sticking to the Scientific Method.
Actually they are experiments that most people can reproduce, which is the very definition of science sticking to the Scientific Method.
Anonymous
No.165981
File (): E37BEE20850C9BD7F461C9D4B728B4F4-384913.jpg (375.9 KB, 1280x713, ball shaped earth - why lie.jpg)
>Why Would They Lie About Flat Earth? - (6:37 long)
>When confronted with blatant NASA lies and obvious globe inconsistencies, the #1 most common frequently asked question is undoubtedly: but why would anyone lie about the shape of the Earth!? For what purpose would there be a multi-generational worldwide conspiracy to cover up the truth of our home? Why would NASA spend billions of dollars building rockets just to prank the population about outer space? What on Earth would be the point of hiding the flat Earth?
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/WhyWouldTheyLieAboutFlatEarth:3
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/jKOj2zORvKUo/
>When confronted with blatant NASA lies and obvious globe inconsistencies, the #1 most common frequently asked question is undoubtedly: but why would anyone lie about the shape of the Earth!? For what purpose would there be a multi-generational worldwide conspiracy to cover up the truth of our home? Why would NASA spend billions of dollars building rockets just to prank the population about outer space? What on Earth would be the point of hiding the flat Earth?
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/WhyWouldTheyLieAboutFlatEarth:3
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/jKOj2zORvKUo/
>>165980
>the ones that showed the opposite
Glad you brought it. The very definition of science is that it is not fixed or settled, never ever. Independent experiments unraveled the conspiracy wide open and the scam is undeniable.
>the ones that showed the opposite
Glad you brought it. The very definition of science is that it is not fixed or settled, never ever. Independent experiments unraveled the conspiracy wide open and the scam is undeniable.
>>165982
>it is not fixed or settled, never ever
>the scam is undeniable.
How can you say that it's not fixed or settled, and then immediately say that it's "undeniable"? Are you even listening to yourself?
>it is not fixed or settled, never ever
>the scam is undeniable.
How can you say that it's not fixed or settled, and then immediately say that it's "undeniable"? Are you even listening to yourself?
>>165983
You are confusing physical phenomena with an agreement among conspirators to lie about the former.
You are confusing physical phenomena with an agreement among conspirators to lie about the former.
>>165985
See, that's what I'm talking about. You just dimiss any experiments that disprove your worldview on the basis that they're conspiring against you. Anyone who comes up with a result that indicates curvature of the earth must be lying.
That's the purest form of ad homenim.
See, that's what I'm talking about. You just dimiss any experiments that disprove your worldview on the basis that they're conspiring against you. Anyone who comes up with a result that indicates curvature of the earth must be lying.
That's the purest form of ad homenim.
>>165986
Not quite. Given that experiments paid and promoted by masons and their proxies are done with equipment and circumstances only controlled by them, and therefore not suitable for replication, their claims are highly in doubt.
Think about it, people are not able to build an airship, like a zeppelin, and go to Antarctica to explore without mason's soldiers threatening violence and confiscation.
Not quite. Given that experiments paid and promoted by masons and their proxies are done with equipment and circumstances only controlled by them, and therefore not suitable for replication, their claims are highly in doubt.
Think about it, people are not able to build an airship, like a zeppelin, and go to Antarctica to explore without mason's soldiers threatening violence and confiscation.
>>165989
That's just attacking the character of the scientist, and not refuting the substance of the experiment themselves.
>done with equipment and circumstances only controlled by them
Have you considered just attacking a camera to a high altitude balloon and letting it fly up into the atmosphere? Even schools can do that; and they do so all the time. Try it yourself.
Or just putting sticks in the sand at different locations and measuring the shadows of their angles. Even the ancient Greeks could do that.
There are so, so, so many sources unaffiliated with NASA or masons or whatever you want to call them that can be independently verified. Nobody is going to take you seriously if you just dismiss all of them because they didn't come to the conclusion that you wanted them to.
That's just attacking the character of the scientist, and not refuting the substance of the experiment themselves.
>done with equipment and circumstances only controlled by them
Have you considered just attacking a camera to a high altitude balloon and letting it fly up into the atmosphere? Even schools can do that; and they do so all the time. Try it yourself.
Or just putting sticks in the sand at different locations and measuring the shadows of their angles. Even the ancient Greeks could do that.
There are so, so, so many sources unaffiliated with NASA or masons or whatever you want to call them that can be independently verified. Nobody is going to take you seriously if you just dismiss all of them because they didn't come to the conclusion that you wanted them to.
>>165989
>go to Antarctica to explore without mason's soldiers threatening violence and confiscation
Japanese fishermen go to Antarctica to poach endangered whales all of the time. It's not that hard.
>go to Antarctica to explore without mason's soldiers threatening violence and confiscation
Japanese fishermen go to Antarctica to poach endangered whales all of the time. It's not that hard.
>>165990
Ahem.
If it cannot be replicated and then when taking a different approach to confirm the mason experiments you find out that it is all rubbish... Then what else you can say?
Ahem.
If it cannot be replicated and then when taking a different approach to confirm the mason experiments you find out that it is all rubbish... Then what else you can say?
>>165992
>Then what else you can say?
Then you have to look at the substance of the experiments and analyze each step to see if there were mistake, and check to see if the researchers didn't account for variables.
Then you peer review the experiments and over time continue to reevaluate them until a contemporary understanding is reached.
>mason experiments
Or teenagers with a weather balloon.
>Then what else you can say?
Then you have to look at the substance of the experiments and analyze each step to see if there were mistake, and check to see if the researchers didn't account for variables.
Then you peer review the experiments and over time continue to reevaluate them until a contemporary understanding is reached.
>mason experiments
Or teenagers with a weather balloon.
>>165994
>Then you have to look at the substance of the experiments and analyze each step to see if there were mistake
This whole bread is about that, and the mounting evidence against the ball hoax is overwhelming.
>Then you have to look at the substance of the experiments and analyze each step to see if there were mistake
This whole bread is about that, and the mounting evidence against the ball hoax is overwhelming.
>>165995
I disagree, on the basis that of the many experiments presented in this thread, the researchers involved made key mistakes that were not accounted for in their studies.
>overwhelming
And at that point you're just exaggerating. It's easy to make odds look like that if you dismiss any opposing viewpoint as a shill.
Tell me, why do cameras mounted on balloons floated by teenagers show visible curvature?
>>165993
Yes. Hungry Japs will go anywhere.
I disagree, on the basis that of the many experiments presented in this thread, the researchers involved made key mistakes that were not accounted for in their studies.
>overwhelming
And at that point you're just exaggerating. It's easy to make odds look like that if you dismiss any opposing viewpoint as a shill.
Tell me, why do cameras mounted on balloons floated by teenagers show visible curvature?
>>165993
Yes. Hungry Japs will go anywhere.
[Reply] [Last 50 Posts] [Last 100 Posts] [Last 200 Posts]
You are viewing older replies. Click [View All] or [Last n Posts] to vew latest posts.
Clicking update will load all posts posted after last post on this page.
Post pagination: [Prev] [1-100] [101-200] [201-300] [301-400] [401-500] [501-600] [601-700] [701-800] [801-900] [901-1000] [1001-1100] [1101-1200] [1201-1300] [1301-1400] [1401-1500] [1501-1600] [1601-1700] [1701-1800] [1801-1900] [1901-2000] [2001-2100] [2101-2200] [2201-2300] [2301-2400] [2401-2500] [2501-2600] [2601-2700] [2701-2770] [Next] [Live (last 100 replies)]
2770 replies | 1431 files | 277 UUIDs | Page 5