/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 163824
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.
2161 replies and 1092 files omitted.
Anonymous
No.160517
640x0.jpg
>flat earthers any time their shit is disproven
Anonymous
No.160639
File (hide): F940BA84E71942A365F846AE7E2763B4-5749442.mp4 (5.5 MB, Resolution:480x480 Length:00:03:06, Owen Benjamin M O O N W A V E.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Owen Benjamin  M O O N W A V E.mp4
Owen Benjamin || M O O N W A V E
Anonymous
No.161185
e29e6ed442240d7b 9.jpg
>Cavendish Experiment Proves Gravity? - (2:41 long)
>pseudoscience
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/Cavendish-Experiment-Proves-Gravity-:0
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/W2tADYOxjQu8/

-------

Transcript:
>In 1797, Henry Cavendish, the British scientist, Freemason, and wealthy grandson of the Duke of Devonshire, created an experiment which he claimed successfully proved the existence of gravity, measured its constant, and provided accurate figures for the exact masses of the Earth, Sun, Moon, and Planets. How did Cavendish achieve this quantum leap for heliocentric pseudo-science? He fixed two large lead balls on opposite ends of a torsion balance and hung them from the roof of his shed. By watching and recording slight motions of the contraption via telescope through his shed window so his mass would not affect the reading, Cavendish claimed to have proven gravity. Two small lead balls were hung near the large ones and any motion observed towards one another was touted as being the influence of gravity.
>Now, the Cavendish experiment has been widely criticized by the scientific community because never in over two centuries since its creation has anyone been able to replicate it! Firstly, the balls simply do not always attract one another as they must for the so-called gravitational constant to be constant at all. Sometimes the torsion balance turns towards the balls and sometimes away as it is impossible not to give some slight tremulous motion when interacting with it. Henry even complained in his notes how often as he was performing the measurement the contraption was still in oscillation. Secondly, since his calculated force of gravity was 10^39 weaker than the force of electro-magnetism, from which all material objects are composed, there is no control for the experiment which can factor out and positively differentiate the alleged gravitational force, from the known stronger electro-magnetic force. In other words, the balls could simply be attracting each other through static electricity, a known force existing in all things, billions of times stronger than gravity, and impossible to control for the experiment. Even though no one could replicate Cavendish’s findings, the experiment went down in history as a great success, and is still taught as veritable proof of universal gravitation in science textbooks today.
Anonymous
No.161188
27AE0E9CED3DF682C06301343DE85B14-96812.jpg
Would anyone be willing to provide me with lore pertaining to the old suns and moons in this particular image? I want inspiration for my fantasy setting. What are the black spheres next to the moons?

I've considered that a flat realm may be more interesting as a design for my fantasy setting, and I would like any unique lore that the flat realm model uses that would be inconsistent with the conventional round earth model.
It would of course be a missed opportunity to make my planet hollow, but perhaps I can work with that as physics get increasingly funky beyond the ice rings.
Anonymous
No.161189
161190
Another question, in the flat realm spinning model, where does the sun go when it sets, and why would it appear to dip below the horizon.
Assume I'd believe whatever you told me, but don't spare any details, as want this for worldbuilding.
Anonymous
No.161190
161191
>>161189
>where does the sun go when it sets, and why would it appear to dip below the horizon.
Perspective.
Read the thread for the pertinent answers, most are here.
Anonymous
No.161191
161192
>>161190
The thread is more than 600 posts long, so if you could help me out and point me to some post numbers, that would be much appreciated.
Anonymous
No.161192
161193
26wef8.jpg
>>161191
I'm sure it is just a matter of time for some anon come to the rescue.
Anonymous
No.161193
>>161192
It's also more of its own topic, tbh. I'm really only concerned with how to use this model as a fantasy cosmology. If anyone has thoughts/suggestions on that, I'd appreciate the input.
Anonymous
No.161245
1.png
2.png
NEW - Mar 3, 2022
CNN hit piece on Flat Earth
>Why some people STILL believe the Earth is flat
>Flat Earth videos rack up huge views on the Internet — but how could anyone believe such a fundamentally false idea? Daily Beast reporter Kelly Weill joins John Avlon on this week’s Reality Check to discuss her new book and explain how social media has given an old conspiracy theory a huge boost - and the best way to convince someone to leave these cult-like groups.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTSJC9Tmt4E
Anonymous
No.161378
162073
File (hide): 91497C30D7A020AB391C8BC084A98003-8140525.mp4 (7.8 MB, Resolution:640x480 Length:00:02:02, V-2 Rocket Films (FLAT) Earth in (1946).mp4) [play once] [loop]
V-2 Rocket Films (FLAT) Earth in (1946).mp4
>V-2 Rocket Films (FLAT) Earth in (1946).
https://odysee.com/v-2-rocket-films-%28flat%29-earth-in-%281946%29:a

Original video, not edited:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjXwsj8kHT4
Anonymous
No.162069
162070 162426
maxresdefault.jpg
>Nikon P900 Stars- Real Stars and Planets vs NASA images. Stars are not what they tell us! - (4:51 long)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr6g7Pe92C4
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/9mmDFd0q5Lca/
Anonymous
No.162070
>>162069
>in this video people unironically think that a Nikon camera is giving them an undistorted picture
Anonymous
No.162073
>>161378
After watching both videos, I see no evidence for a flat earth. If you would be so kind as to indicate the part that you feel is evidence, that would be great.
Anonymous
No.162383
Okay, after scrolling through all of this, I've gotten some decent ideas for my fantasy setting.
Anonymous
No.162403
162405 162408 162409 162413
Question for flat earthers and round earthers: How can a world larger than Earth have a lower gravity? Preferably 0.9x to 0.8x.
Anonymous
No.162405
>>162403
Maybe if it were a gas planet? Lower mass should mean lower gravity.
Anonymous
No.162408
162425
>>162403
Uranus hos very low gravity, mate.
Anonymous
No.162409
1575337360396.png
>>162403
Cull all the dense mf's, like everyone ITT
Anonymous
No.162413
fmp,x_small,gloss,wall_texture,product,750x1000.u1.jpg
>>162403
>gravity
It doesn't exist. Think in density and buoyancy.
That said, there are 44 instances of gravity in this bread with plenty of information.
Anonymous
No.162417
162422
>>160435
So pic 4 does come up if you follow the link, it's page 35 if you follow the actual number of pages included in the pdf but 30 if you follow the numbers in the down-left corner of the pages.

Don't know what that means in the context of this document yet, though.
Anonymous
No.162418
Maybe someday I'll go through this thread.
Anonymous
No.162422
162598
>>162417
>Don't know what that means in the context of this document yet
It means that the military and NASA make all their calculations assuming Earth is flat, otherwise the math would be so incredible complex and unmanageable that all their projects will be unpractical. Not to mention that making calculations on the assumption that Earth is flat, the math checks perfectly out.
Anonymous
No.162425
162426
>>162408
Uranus doesn't exist, it's a CIA psyop
>refuses to elaborare further
Anonymous
No.162426
>>162425
>Uranus
>a so called planet
See >>162069 as an introduction.
Anonymous
No.162449
ACA2BDB47A357B06B20AECF5C44B39A3-326681.png
Zero doubt, this will be ironically weaponized but thats fine cuz you cant fake authenticity
Anonymous
No.162456
Aeiou Stars aren't real
Anonymous
No.162583
162584
hqdefault.jpg
>Antarctica Is NOT What You Think! [CLIP]
>A video that should end the idea that we live on a globe with a southern continent at the bottom surrounding the south pole.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoX27ItX22M
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/euyI2q1sZQZj/

Full Length Video on Rokfin: https://rokfin.com/post/80542/ARCHIVE
Anonymous
No.162584
>>162583
This is why Im on about flat earth.
I agree
Its curious/suspicious that there is no presented video of a complete 360deg. shadow. That should be readily available, easy to document and produce, and that it isnt being done is worthy of significant consideration.
Which legitimately leaves us with questions about why, and to what purpose. I know what conclusion you lot wanna jump to, because you're an idealogue.
As for the lengths of the shadows,... I dont know if the videographer has ever heard of slopes. Cuz you can very clearly obser e slopes in all the 'elongated/short' shadow videos.

Ive said it before, Ill say it again. There are a number of unanswered question about the globe model.
However, there are vastly more unanswered questions about a flat earth model, and until such a time as a flat earth model can be producex, from which a predictive model can be observed and validated through trial, its lunacy to attempt to throw out the globe, especially withiut being able to explain why calculus doesnt work.

Any day now on that.
Let me rephrase that. Lets assume the earth IS flat.
Why then does calculus apply cohesively to a multitude of naturally occurring phenomena, except the planet?
Am I to assume calculus is part of the masonic nasa conspiracy?
Anonymous
No.162586
162590
Another rephrase: Why does calculus produce cohesive results that indicate a globe model if the earth is flat? If calculus were capable of quantifying and predicting all walks of natural phenomena with accuracy, why does that accuracy dissolve when applied to the globe, especially in that the same multi-genre cohesion can be observed to indicate a globe?
Simply
>Calculus is a perfectly viable, until you apply it to the globe.
Why?
Bonus points if you approach the question from an arbitrary standpoint, as opposed to starting from... your usual.
>>149639
>>149962
>>149974
>>154733
Golly, I wonder why these posts dont warrant an answer/response
Anonymous
No.162590
162592
>>162586
>Calculus
Are you referring to trigonometry?
Anonymous
No.162592
>>162590
Did Newton invent trigonometry to map the circumference of the planet?
Anonymous
No.162598
162599 162600
Wow, a lengthy silence; I assume OP is versing himself with Calculus. This is not to cast aspersions on trig, its more to say that simplified equations on the internet will never give values that will match in-field values. The planet is far more nuanced than a simple equation or ratio of slope over distance.
>>162422
>otherwise the math would be so incredible complex and unmanageable that all their projects will be unpractical.
You said it, not me
Anonymous
No.162599
>>162598
>I assume OP is versing himself with Calculus
No nigger, I'm cooking diner after a long day.
Anonymous
No.162600
162736
>>162598
>This is not to cast aspersions on trig, its more to say that simplified equations on the internet will never give values that will match in-field values.
WTF are you talking about, math is math. Give some example where math won't apply.
Anonymous
No.162732
162733
IMG-20220324-000546-348-1623x2048.jpeg

Anonymous
No.162733
162734 162735
>>162732
Can someone explain to this nigger what relativity is
And whiplash
Anonymous
No.162734
>>162733
>relativity
>whiplash
Movies?
Anonymous
No.162735
>>162733
At least you tried
Anonymous
No.162736
162737
>>162600
Newton's planetary calculations. Go on, explain where he went wrong.
Anonymous
No.162737
162738
>>162736
>calculations
There's nothing wrong with them. The problem is that Newton assumes a heliocentric system, which is a fiction of course.
Anonymous
No.162738
162739
>>162737
Are you of the position that he didnt validate his calculations through testing?
Anonymous
No.162739
162740
>>162738
>validate
>testing
The calculations are fine, the issue is that they are applied to a theoretical model impossible to verify.
NASA and other transnational agencies claiming the existence of space are lying.
Anonymous
No.162740
162741
>>162739
So thats a yes then? You unironically believe that he invented Calculus, but didnt bother to perform a single experiment to test his findings?
Anonymous
No.162741
>>162740
>You unironically believe that he invented Calculus
Your words, not mine.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz would strongly disagree.
>but didnt bother to perform a single experiment to test his findings?
And how would he? Testing the numbers against moving celestial objects may match, but the core of the issue is if those objects in the firmament are really planets as Newton assumed.
Anonymous
No.162789
162790
File (hide): D742178025A27F2C3B2FF42D0AE5B7F7-2978930.mp4 (2.8 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:01:50, GAME OVER GLOBERS.mp4) [play once] [loop]
GAME OVER GLOBERS.mp4
GAME OVER GLOBERS.
Anonymous
No.162790
162791
>>162789
There's even a specific wikipedia on this for Norway
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_of_Norway
>A straight line along Norway's sea borders (the coastal perimeter) is 2,650 kilometers (1,650 mi) long.[1][2] Along the coast there are many fjords, islands, and bays, resulting in a low-resolution coastline of over 25,000 kilometers (16,000 mi).[3] At 30-meter (98 ft) linear intercepts, this length increases to 83,281 kilometers (51,748 mi)[4] (see the coastline paradox)

And then like that says
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox
Anonymous
No.162791
162792
>>162790
>Benoit Mandelbrot
Yes, his observations on the dynamics of planes will very neatly put the final nail in the flat earth coffin, assuming we get to it
Anonymous
No.162792
162793
>>162791
>his observations on the dynamics of planes will very neatly put the final nail in the flat earth coffin
Interesting. Would you deliver?
Anonymous
No.162793
>>162792
(you) of all anons ought appreciate the irony when I say
>Spoonfeeding Request: DENIED
Anonymous
No.162794
162795 162796
How are either of you retards supposed to convince each other if neither of you ever want to put in the minimum effort to "spoon-feed" the over party?
It's the same shit every week with you fucks. Ffs, just explain your viewpoints.
Anonymous
No.162795
162797
2367315.jpg
>>162794
They enjoy the attention that they get from each other more than the arguments themselves.
Anonymous
No.162796
162797
>>162794
Either side would claim that the minimal-to-moderate effort has since been applied, and in their specific mentalities they would be right.
Both parties feel justified in disregarding any/all of the opposition arguments, and point tontheir opponent's inabikity to see what they see as evidence of the other's folly.
Anonymous
No.162797
162798
>>162795
>>162796
It's all so tiresome.
Anonymous
No.162798
162799 162822 162824
th.jpg
>>162797
Tired no longer friend. The horizon will always be flat.
Anonymous
No.162799
162800 162801
>>162798
>Pic
This is facebook tier retardation
Anonymous
No.162800
434-4349649_transparent-smug-anime-face-png-mlp-flash-sentry.png
>>162799
>deflection
Anonymous
No.162801
162802
>>162799
Welcome to the flat earth thread
Anonymous
No.162802
162803 162805
>>162801
And yet, globers cannot prove the curve, unless NASA told me so.
Anonymous
No.162803
162804
>>162802
So how autistic are you?
Anonymous
No.162804
162809
>>162803
>personal matters
Stick to the topic.
Anonymous
No.162805
162806
>>162802
Its been countless times, in countless ways, by countless methods.
A bit hyperbolic, the point being that (you) and your lot have JUST enough technical knowledge to THINK youve unassailable proof, when all you have is a bunch of experiments that need to be reevaluated.
Cuz thats how science works. When an experiment gives results outside the well-established expectation, you first vet the experiment, not the well-established finding. Becaude at the end of the day, theres more money in refuting a well established finding than the theory that comes of it.
I would love to be presented with the same experiment conducted by numerous people using different equipment and achieving the same/correlating results. But I dont, all I have is a bunch of niche attempts to conduct an experiment that dont pass the most basic threshold for anything more than data sampling.
And thats what (you) have presented as evidence, which when asked for specifics, BEGAN the infamous 'spoonfeed denied' campaign.
TL;DR OP cant put up but wont shut up
Anonymous
No.162806
162808 162809
th3.jpg
>>162805
Allow me to synthesize the curve issue here: "Fake Science" fed by the freemasons.

>And thats what (you) have presented as evidence, which when asked for specifics, BEGAN the infamous 'spoonfeed denied' campaign.
I disagree, you and your cohorts can not ask for specifics when the bread has plenty of it. And the very reason is because you are unwilling to research more, let alone to read this whole thread.
Anonymous
No.162808
162812
>>162806
>this thread has lots of specifics, go now and find them
Anonymous
No.162809
162810
>>162804
How can the earth be flat when its hollow? It can be only one, and its not flat.
>>162806
How are the jews involved?
Anonymous
No.162810
162811
>>162809
>How are the jews involved?
Not the jews per se, but the masons.
Read the bread for details.
Anonymous
No.162811
162813
>>162810
>Not the jews
Opinion discarded
Anonymous
No.162812
>>162808
That's why you need to lurk moar.
Anonymous
No.162813
162814
>>162811
Oh its not just that its not the Jews, but:
the moon is fake (not a planetoid)
the planets are fake (cuz a nikon camera yo)
the stars are fake (theyre not stars, theyre... did I mention the nikon camera?)
and much more!
Go on, sift through thenpages of that shit. Or else you're a shill, or braindead. Thats OPs position.
Anonymous
No.162814
>>162813
>Thats OPs position.
Actually is not only OP's position, but hard evidence posted here.
(You) have plenty of time to debunk it, and yet (you) squandered it with strawmans and character assassination attempts.
Go figures.
Anonymous
No.162815
162816
Screenshot_20220228-080616_DuckDuckGo.jpg
We pointed at two boats with lasers
we cant do simple math
our homemade rockets ran into atmopheric conditions, er, the firmament dome
ANTARCTICA
we cant comprehend scale, dimension, or circular/spherical-obloid geometry
... all for the low low price of hours+ of your time!
Anonymous
No.162816
d1e.png
>>162815
>we cant do simple math
Now you are being maliciously deceptive, aka dishonest.
The math is already set by the freemasons stating that the supposed globe has a radius of 3,959 miles, experiments debunk that in an unequivocal way.
See >>149071 pic 3.
Stop lying.
Anonymous
No.162817
162818
1646305855901.png
Flat Earth is a Jewish psyop to make right wingers look like retards.
Anonymous
No.162818
162819
>>162817
Sure, if (you) can debunk it, but you cannot.
Anonymous
No.162819
1437262.jpg
>>162818
I could, but you'd pretend that it's bullshit, like a good shabbos goy.
Anonymous
No.162822
162823 162824
>>162798
It does cut through the Earth. It's a magnetic field. What did you think?
Anonymous
No.162823
162824
>>162822
Wait until he gets to the part about gravity 'not being real'
Anonymous
No.162824
163525 164825
download (3).png
>>162822
>>162798
Оh, you mean compasses don't point into the ground? Compasses can't even point down so they'd just rotate on the axis they can point to anyway. But it's a field. It's going along the axis not pointing straight at the North. We see the same thing on smaller observable scales too

>>162823
GRAVITY holds no WATER
*deflated beach ball*
Anonymous
No.162825
162826
Screenshot_20220410-192150_Brave.jpg
lol wut
Anonymous
No.162826
162828
b3c.gif
>>162825
>Flat Earth Society
Controlled opposition. If you actually read this thread you would already know it.
Anonymous
No.162828
1521064278013.gif
>>162826
>Controlled opposition
Anonymous
No.162829
File (hide): 9EFF799D383166197732C71F7A60DF60-4404388.mp4 (4.2 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:02:56, Hitting The Dome.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Hitting The Dome.mp4
Some rocket surfing the dome.
Anonymous
No.162838
31854.png
32110.png
2356.jpg
>Chris UK - Globe Lie Gamechanger
>The following video portrays a scientifically proven analysis that not only questions the preconditioned narrative that we live on a spinning ball but also how that information has been packaged into a format that pertains to alleviate any doubt regarding the shape, structure, and multifaceted dynamics of how our world and the universe can exist. We can choose to follow the status quo and never question the world we live in, or, we can choose to disseminate the evidence, open our eyes, and realise that truth can only be obtained when science and our senses are coaligned.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Awq4-ETSTbw/
The video has some math and might not be suitable for most ballers.
Anonymous
No.162861
162862 162863
Screenshot_20220410-192018_Brave.jpg
Flat eartherism is a psyop to distract whites from jews because there are no jews to talk about when it comes to radio waves or centrifugal force
Anonymous
No.162862
>>162861
There are freemasons and that is close enough as freemasonry is judaism for the goyim.
Anonymous
No.162863
162865
>>162861
I feel like either way it's mostly just schizos, but this makes more sense than the other conspiracy. I still don't know what they gain from saying the Earth is round if it's flat. Best answer I've gotten is something vague about defying god because bible says it's flat
Anonymous
No.162865
sunset.jpg
>>162863
>I still don't know what they gain
The truth.
Anonymous
No.162875
162877
https://youtu.be/4Qpzl8bWMnI
While not appearing to be a strict flatty in a literal sense, analysis of this guy can offer insight into the dynamic in which a flat earther conceptualizes and formulates their worldview and argues their case.
Note, he is at no point making an argument. His points have the appearance of arguments, but all he is arguing is his personal disbelief, based on a lack of comprehension of what he is seeing. This is the trap flat earthers beckon reasonable skeptics into, and why 'debates' and discussions with flat earthers never go anywhere.
Its not about arguing facts and evidence, because if facts and evidence were comprehended there'd be no argument.
Flat earthers insist on arguing their diabelief, which is as subjective as what one thinks 'the best flavor of ice cream is'. Additionally, flatties positions (from their perspective) is actually insulated by a lack of comprehension.
Now, a skeptical person wouldnt conclude either a flat or a round earth, they would keep asking questions to determine which viewpoints, data sets, figures, and values are corroborrated by other experiments and data sets. Eventually, those values will coalesce into an aggregated spectrum of concurrence and consistency.
Flat earthers however have already jumped the shark and have wilfully vested their interest in proving/promoting flat earth rather than asking the questions that would lead them to a viable and predictive model that can withstand scrutiny.
In short, being a flat earther is about promoting a 'flat earth' - as in, an ideologue - rather than pursuing a framework that explains all the observable phenomena, while accounting for a flat earth.
You cant educate a person on how ignorant they are of the existing science when their worldview depends on that ignorance, and they will resent you for trying. Protip: thats what the Psalm(?) about pearls before wolves/dogs is about.
Anonymous
No.162877
162887
>>162875
>but all he is arguing is his personal disbelief, based on a lack of comprehension of what he is seeing
Projecting much?
By the way, that man is using his brain and bases his belief on a very real phenomena: entropy.
On the other hoof, globers base their faith on establishment's fairy tales.
Anonymous
No.162887
>>162877
If the earth is flat, why do Radio Towers work best when they are tall?
The earth is not flat, and Radio Towers are tall so their signal can travel around the globe better.
Anonymous
No.162935
IMn2izUymi90_960.jpg
>Witness the Flat Earth Awakening of Owen Benjamin
https://www.bitchute.com/video/IMn2izUymi90/
Anonymous
No.162936
162937
>tides
https://youtube.com/shorts/dreHvsvXR9c?feature=share
Anonymous
No.162937
162938
>>162936
>African charlatan
Try again.
Anonymous
No.162938
162941
>>162937
Not an argument.
The point is: if gravity isnt real, the moon isnt real, the earth is flat etc.,
Explain the tides
Anonymous
No.162941
162943
>>162938
>Not an argument.
Pretty much it is. Taking seriously an African in art, philosophy, science, or logic, is preposterous.
Anonymous
No.162943
>>162941
Tides, wh3n3ver you're ready
Anonymous
No.162945
163139
>thinks an ad hominem is an argument
This thread, in a nutshell
Anonymous
No.162946
163010
Unscientific nonsense like Terrain Theory and Flat Earth are PsyOps to make any site that welcomes talk of it look unappealing.

Where do discussions about these things go?

Do the Flat Earthers have answers for why trebuchet calculations must account for the curvature of the earth to hit their targets, and why they miss their targets if they assume the earth is flatter or more curved than it actually is?

Can Terrain Theorists explain Antibiotics?
Anonymous
No.163010
163011 163012 163685
>>162946
>psyop
Concurred
https://youtu.be/he-7vs0BkLE
One should draw their own conclusions
Anonymous
No.163011
163013 163014
bust_pfft_by_xsparklingstarlight-d9v0g25.png
>>163010
>One should draw their own conclusions
I did.
DITRH allowed the glober to win. Why? I don't know.
Going straight to the basic facts: If there is not curve, then there is not planet, then there is not space, then there is not universe, and the whole fake science comes down in a spectacular fashion.