/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal

>>169914
Pretty much this.

>>169914
Then why are you replying now?

Heres a quick short, so you wont have missed out
https://youtube.com/shorts/cu4tYxZA0g4?si=ke3za4YYvg579u2g

>>169940
Just to let you know. You should be happier anon.

>>169985
I'm not the same guy.

>>170134
And I'm not OP. Checkmate fagget.

>>170135
Checkmate what? What's your point?

Hello anons.

>>170137
What's the bottom photo from?

Privately owned high altitude aerostatic balloon.

>>170139
Which one?
I'm trying to look it up.

>>170137
It's pretty easy to cut photos like this to make them appear flat. It doesn't help that the lower photo is so grainy; almost as it it were cut from a larger image.
Of course, we could settle this right away if we had the name of the balloon and the date this photo was taken.
>>170139
Privately owned by who?

>>170141
>It's pretty easy to cut photos like this to make them appear flat
You tell me. For decades the masons have been using eyefish lenses and everybody swallowed the hoax.

>>170142
More like the opposite. Defishing high altitude photos make them appear flat. Give me a named example of a balloon and I'll show it to you.

>>170142
What about the image you posted though? How do you know there wasn't any fisheye involved?

>>170142
Exactly, funny how globers are only so skeptic when it come to alternative true evidence.

>>170145
About that whole eclipse thing,....

>>170145
>true evidence
You've still yet to give the name of the balloon, or any single example we can analyze.

>>170142
Does that include the supposed privately-owned high altitude balloon that you posted?

>>170146
I, too, am interested in what flat earthers have to say about the ring of fire eclipse.

>>170149
Just wait until april. Many may have missed the last one, but they WONT miss this one
No doubt itll be factored into the ramping WW3 talking points,... ugh, its gonna get spicy

>>169806
>According to NASA, its actors in space costumes were there for 22 hours.
I haven't found NASA saying this anywhere. You must be mistaken.

>>170137
>List 25 filename
Really? That's where you get this crap?

Globers in this thread.

>>170181
Mhm, about that whole 'eclipse' thingy

Chunk of the moon appears to be orbiting near Earth.

To the globers.

>>170186
What's so special about this particular pic?
Also, this wasn't filmed. It was a photograph. The videos are much lower quality because video tech wasn't as developed back then.

>>170185
>they're saying a piece of the moon just fell off
It didn't "just fall off". It's been there for a century.
>two years ago they said the same.
>second time in two years
The asteroid was named as a quasi-satellite in 2016, a study in 2021 analyzed it's material composition, and a recent study graphed it's current orbit and extrapolated it's previous orbit. This retard didn't even read the articles he's ridiculing, because he's claiming that NASA said two things happened when in fact both articles are referring to the same fucking rock.
It was two years ago (2021) that a study was done analyzing the light reflecting off of the asteroid and concluding that it had the same substance composition as the moon, but weren't sure how a lunar object would
The new study is based on a computer simulation that graphs the asteroids orbit, explaining how Kamoʻoalewa attained such a peculiar orbit bouncing between the earth and Sun's gravity.

Both studies were referring to the same rock, the rock that has been circling for decades. Nobody ever claimed that a piece of the moon "fell off" of it two years in a row, unlike what this wigger is saying.

Do you even research this shit before posting it?

>>170185
>NASA just announced
Ffs, they did not "just announce" it. The recent announcement was publishing a simulation-based study about it's historical orbit and a prediction for how long it will start near earth.

>>170187
>>170188
>>170192
Freemason spokesperson replays...

>>170193
>ad homenim
Are you going to refute the argument, or was what I said correct?

>>170194
You know he wont, because it is.
Still waiting on that whole eclipse thing not to mention the ships over the horizon thing
But staff is okay with this cuz it doesnt hilight (and yet it does) their malfeasance

>>170195
He won't answer about the eclipse because he's embarrassed that he can't.

>>170212
Starlink is going pretty well for him. That satellite Internet is really taking off.
Elon owns half of the satellites orbiting the earth right now. It's come to the point where the U.S. military had to buy their own Starlink system for Ukraine so that Elon wouldn't be able to turn it off.

>>170213
>Starlink is going pretty well for him. That satellite Internet is really taking off.
A hint.
Neither Starlink or any satellite service does work in the mountains away from populated regions nor in the middle of the ocean. And when actually and intermittently works is because there is a balloon floating at 30km high relaying the signal.

>>170216
>Neither Starlink or any satellite service does work in the mountains
Weren't they using Starlink terminals out in the mountains of Morocco after that earthquake recently?
The biggest benefit of Starlink is that it works even in remote areas and where infrastructure has gone to shit.
>ocean
Yes it does. It has almost complete coverage over all the world's oceans. They use it on ships all of the time.

>>170217
>It has almost complete coverage over all the world's oceans.
Go below the Ecuator parallel and see how it works, the further you sail to the south, the less functional is.

>>170218
They were it to track ships having to go around the horn of Africa in real time during that Suez canal fiasco. It works perfectly fine down south.
Where are you getting this?

>>170219
>Where are you getting this?
First hand experience sailing the Cabo the Hornos, where the world ends before reaching Antartica. This have been described by me like a thousand posts above.

>>170221
You tried using Starlink there? What year was this?

>>170222
>What year was this?
I won't dox myself neither my boat. Sorry.

>>170223
Well, if it was more than three years, that's not really relevant, because most Starlink satellites have gone up very recently.
>dox yourself
>implying a boat among tens thousands sailing on a particular year is doxxable

>>170224
>because most Starlink satellites have gone up very recently.
Yeah, but satellital service is way before Musk's hoax.

>>170224
>implying a boat among tens thousands sailing on a particular year is doxxable
The Cabo the Hornos is a veeeeeeeeeery special route where no many adventure into. Just yandex it.

>>170225
General satellite service isn't Starlink internet. Starlink has proven to be reliable all over the ocean, so sailors can shitpost from anywhere on the seas.
And as I said before, the number of satellites has doubled in the past few years.

>>170225
>hoax
Considering how lucrative and influential satellite internet is proving to be, it wouldn't even matter if it were made of a bunch of balloons or dangling on strings glued to Ymir's skull. Whatever it's made of, Starlink is an incredibly promising technology.

>>170228
>Starlink is an incredibly promising technology.
I would say a balloon technology rebranded as satellital.

>>170229
>pics
These aren't Starlink terminals though?
Pic 1 is from a test flight for a silly sunlight-blocking technology to fight climate change in Sweden. It was cancelled due to being stupid
Pic 2-3 are pics of NASA's launch of the Compton Spectrometer.

None of this has anything to do with Starlink.

>>170230
>None of this has anything to do with Starlink.
Of course not. You really expect Mr Musk to show us commercial secrets? But the balloon technique stands.

>>170231
>But the balloon technique stands
Based on what?
We could've had satellite Internet a lot earlier if balloons were reliable satellites.
Starlink took off when spaceX developed a method to recover rockets so that the equipment for putting satellites in orbit wasn't only disposable.

>>170233
>We could've had satellite Internet a lot earlier if balloons were reliable satellites.
Exactly, balloons are so effective as the wind currents that take them away, that's the reason why a continuous launching rate of balloons are necessary to fake satellites and keep an apparently stable communication link.

>>170235
Except balloons also deflate over time at a rate that makes them unreliable for permanent infrastructure.
>continuous launching rate of balloons are necessary to fake satellites and keep an apparently stable communication link
Oh, hahaha, just continuously keep launching $250,000 satellites that fall into the sea when their balloons pop. That's totally a sustainable business model.

>>170236
>$250,000 satellites that fall into the sea when their balloons pop. That's totally a sustainable business model.
Dude, even Amazon was not a sustainable model for years and I'm not sure is getting even today. All these private enterprises would never survive a year without government contracts and assistance. You see, while claiming to be a companies in a free market environment, reality is that they survive because government centralized communism.

>>170235
>>170236
It would cost $15,000,000,000 per day to continuously replace all Starlink satellites without communications loss, and that's just considering the manufacturing, not the salaries of the technicians or the cost of launching balloons.
>>170237
You seriously think Elon is spending more than fifteen billion dollars per day to continuously replace over five thousand satellites on weather balloons that cost two hundred and fifty thousand dollars and only last for two hours each?

>>170238
>You seriously think Elon is spending more than fifteen billion dollars per day to continuously replace over five thousand satellites
>5,000 satellites
You seriously think Elon is telling you the truth? KEK

>>170239
Okay, tell me what it would cost then.

>>170240
No idea and it actually is not important because is the same case than Google. The government is interested in keeping functioning at any cost, if it makes profit is good, and if not injections of capital will keep it afloat.

>>170239
How would Starlink possibly work if there weren't that many satellites? You think this is possible with only a few satellites? This is a fuckload of data we're talking about.

>>170242
>This is a fuckload of data we're talking about.
It is not. 97% of all internet traffic goes through submarine cables and the rest is distributed between land fiber optics and airborne relays.

>>170243
Except all of that has to be accessible through the satellite if Starlink is supposed to be useful for anything, so it does indeed have to go through the satellite.

The only reason Starlink works is because there's so many of them, and there's that many of them because SpaceX recovers the rockets for reuse.

>>170244
>so it does indeed have to go through the satellite
>satellite
Airborne relays.

>>170245
Weather balloons only last two hours.
To have continuous connection, you'd have to replace each of them 12 times a day.

>>170246
>Weather balloons only last two hours.
Non-sense. Think about many days.

For those in the known.
>The current solar cycle is, indeed, a circle. Because the sun revolves in a circle, that is also the shape of the ice wall that exists at our boundaries.
>The firmament barrier may be much larger than this, though, according to the 'moon map' - the image of the Earth we see projected on the moon.
>On the moon map, we see many other, HUGE pieces of land - and resources - outside our solar cycle, and the ice wall.

>>170372
I've heard of Dark Continent theory. It's basically the Flat Earther's equivalent to Hollow Earth theory: it would be really amazing if it were true, but there's little evidence for it (even in context of Flat Earth cosmology). The concept of a terrestrial hidden world outside the known boundaries of our own with it's own lands and resources and unexplored frontiers is a cool idea, although not much supporting it.
I've seen Dark Continent theory in referenced in a lot of fantasy world-building. One example would be the Magi manga (although it has a spherical earth, it's still the same concept). It's a fun trope, for the reasons above. I would recommend it for fantasy world-builders interested in making a final frontier who's existence tells a story about the meaning of the world's creation, being in close proximity to the great rift of creation, perhaps even the path to an ancient, dead world from eons before this land was formed, or an inverted world unlike our own, perhaps even the realm of the dead, or the home of our ancestors.
The trope is, in many ways, like an inversion of hyperborean hollow earth theory. Where Hyperborea depicts a paradise in the north, and a world within a world, Dark Continent theory depicts a dark and loathsome wasteland which encompasses our own, a world outside our world.

In my own fantasy pony worldbuilding, I considered the idea of the Dark Continent being the icy frontier of the world being a rugged and untamable place, where providence withers, reality breaks down, and the wendigos rule the frigid edges of disharmony. I based it on the warning sign in The Witcher III: "You've reached the edge of the world! Only devils roam here! Turn back!". I love the trope of the edges of reality being dark and sinister places inhabited by nameless horrors, but still worlds in and of themselves.

Where did you quote that greentext from? I would like to read more about this supposed "moon map". All I find is maps of the cartography of the moon itself. I know the moon is reflective, but I didn't think it was reflective enough to reflect a mirror-like image of earth.

>>170372
This picture appears to be from a book. What's it from?

>>170373
Okay, I did some research on the "moon map" thing. It's the suggestion that the moon is actually a map/reflection/projection of the earth.

Overall, I have to say, I disagree. Not only do the craters of the moon not really match the geography of the earth (although they could look vaguely similar if you squint), the moon's craters are also observable in greater detail with medieval-era telescopes, and while observing the moon shows that it indeed does have mountains, pits, and valleys, they don't really match up with the geography of the world.
To kill time, I decided to check out if anyone decided to map out the moon's craters in detail and compare them to the earth, but all I found was vague outlines drawn with an excess of wishful thinking.

Cool idea, but it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny.

>>170375
>Cool idea, but it doesn't really hold up to scrutiny.
At less... you try to match the map with the undersea geology, then suddenly it makes sense.

>>170373
>Dark Continent theory depicts a dark and loathsome wasteland which encompasses our own
Did you know that there is some myths about sunny warm lands beyond the frozen wasteland? If so, it may be that there is at least other sun circling the dome in a wider ring.

>>170373
>The trope is, in many ways, like an inversion of hyperborean hollow earth theory. Where Hyperborea depicts a paradise in the north
A reminder that the north is also guarded by men with weapons and no one is allowed to travel there.

>>170376
Nah, I considered that. There doesn't seem to be any exact match with abovesea geography.
>there is some myths about sunny warm lands beyond the frozen wasteland?
Of course I know. I just referenced Hyperborea.
>no one is allowed
That's not really true at all. People go there all of the time. You can schedule holiday trips there. Multiple shipping routes go there too.

>>170379
>Nah, I considered that. There doesn't seem to be any exact match with abovesea geography.
Hang on. I saw a good presentation but long and geometrically convoluted, but kinda a geographical match nevertheless.

Our constellations have never changed, and our Earth clock has never changed.
This is a small clip from >>148621

>>170385
>Our constellations have never changed
Our constellations have demonstrably changed, since Ancient Egypt.
>If everything was moving we'd see different things in the sky
We've had this exact conversation before. It was explained. Scroll up.
Why are you posting redundant arguments? Why are you repeating yourself? Did you just forget?

>>165136
Somewhere around here. You've brought this up before. Everypony remembers.

>>170387
>You've brought this up before. Everypony remembers.
Yeah, and yet you still insist in your misinterpretation because you have no clue what you are talking about. If your ball is flipping around in a allegedly universe, then is impossible to have any periodicity in stars' position.

>>170388
>then is impossible to have any periodicity in stars' position
How is that impossible?

And again, you're just repeating yourself, with the same arguments you've already made in this thread, like a broken record.

>>170389
>And again, you're just repeating yourself, with the same arguments you've already made in this thread, like a broken record
No U.
I have a better idea, instead of talking about something you know nothing about, why you don't plot the earth trajectory in a heliocentric setting and then find out where the stars are?

>>170388
>is impossible to have any periodicity in stars' position
Untrue. The stars have consistent positions because in the grand scheme of things we're not actually getting very much closer to any of them. The universe is so enormously vast that the amount the earth has moved in the history of humanity has made very little difference in terms of positions of the nearest stars.
>>170391
>why you don't plot the earth trajectory in a heliocentric setting and then find out where the stars are?
Pic related
There is an entire field of science devoted to tracking the position of the earth relative to the nearest celestial bodies.

>>170392
Wrong pic

>>170392
Oooooh. I'm impressed, you brought stuff.

>>170392
>The stars have consistent positions because in the grand scheme of things we're not actually getting very much closer to any of them.
Correct. This realm is fixed.

>>170391
>earth trajectory in a heliocentric setting
Are you asking for the trajectory of the Earth's or it around the sun, or the trajectory of the sun itself (and thus also the moon) around the center of the milky way?

>>170395
>This realm is fixed
If by that you mean the universe is only so big, then sure.

>>170388
We literally refuted that argument 2 years ago.

>>170396
Well, there are a lot simultaneous translations for a ball in a vacuum. Self spinning, relative to the sun, relative the cosmos. Then you may consider all of them.

>>170398
>We
Who are (we)?

>>170397
>the universe
The dome.

>>170400
Me, and the 3-4 other guys who answered your point about Polaris.

>>170402
I didn't know so many globers were pounding this thread.

>>170403
Most of them got bored and left.
>pounding this threa
If you make a thread and bump it periodically, people are going to respond.

>>170404
>Most of them got bored and left.
Not bad, not bad. Frustration is not easy to tolerate.

heliocentrism is bullshit anons, theres no more reason to keep defending the imaginations of freemasons

>>170432
The world revolves around Tia's giant ass: this is the true nature of heliocentrism. The earth (round) revolves around our sun, and the sun (projection of Celestia's holy plot) rises above Equestria (flat) when Tia claps her cheeks in the morning. Masons created both flat-earthers and general astrology to distract us from from the TRUTH about the cosmos, that Equestria is right beside us on the other side of the sun.
Embrace two-cheek theory.

>>170435
thats cute but we all know the earth doesnt move

>>170379
>Nah, I considered that. There doesn't seem to be any exact match with abovesea geography.
>>170380
>Hang on. I saw a good presentation but long and geometrically convoluted, but kinda a geographical match nevertheless.
I was looking for the formal long presentation/lecture showing and explaining the moon/earth matches but I'm unable to find it for the time being. However I found the closest video on the subject, it has not the rigorous scientific content of the first one but it is close enough. This takes the moon map to a new level.

>Selenetical Physics Vol. 1: An Exercise in Visual Pattern Recognition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtM97zuMrfE
and
>Selenetical Physics Vol. 2: Reflections on the Electric Field
>Intro to the electric circuit of the moon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mL1bQS3kdk0

>>170466
Equestria doesn't move. The earth does.

>>170523
>The earth does.
No.

>>170530
>satire
Well, some globetard photoshopped Manhattan to make it look on a ball.

>>170146
>>170149
>>170182
>>170195
>>170200
>solar eclipse
I doubt you globers will ever entertain the idea of a Black Sun.

All proofs that Earth is a spinning ball rely on un-testable claims.

>>170537
This says "X is contrary" a lot, but doesn't provide any reasons why/how, or even examples.

>>170538
>but doesn't provide any reasons why/how, or even examples
It is meme. What you want is contained in tons of videos from multiple creators. I suggest you may begin with Eric Dubay's ones.

>>170537
>>170539
>A list
>A meme
Okay haha clown world. This isn't something like E. It's not deep fried. It's not quadruple ironic.
Just a list. Anyone can make a list.
Normies can make a fucking list. They do it too!
What changes some bullshit into a meme is quite simple.
I'd share it but I have a hunch I've shared it before.
yogurt
It's in the name
If you're in you're in
Consider the humble meme farmer.

>Pastor Greg Locke - Flat Earth melt down # 3 - Debate Dec 2nd Nashville TN
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T84zZs5nzc
This has got enormous entertainment value. The protestant self-righteous preacher, with guitars included in his church, suffers a nervous breakdown on The Bible passages describing this realm as being a plane.

>>170539
>It is meme
A bad meme. Contributes nothing to the conversation.

>>170544
>A bad meme
An excellent one. It points straight to incongruencies in the heliocentric model.

>>170545
A good meme would be an infographic. This is just an list of unsupported opinions.

>>170546
>unsupported opinions
How so?

>>170547
It just says "evidence is contrary" on multiple points, but doesn't even bother to say how, summarize it, or even direct the reader to a "true" source where they could find it themselves.

>>170548
It has been already answered at >>170539
The Truth is Out There.

>>170549
Still a shit meme

>>170541
>>170545
Okay Mr List a meme.
You keep thinking it's the bees knees, and don't wonder at all why many think your choice in memes is extremely poor.
I'm sure every single person in the world agrees with your statement and if they don't they're obviously not you.

>>170551
A bit negative. Aren't you?

>>170552
Instead of focusing on his negativity, maybe think of why everyone else on this board is so tired of you.

>>170554
>sagging again
Maybe you could attend your own threads instead of getting obsessed with others' would bring you inner peace.

>>170556
>attend your own threads
It's not about the thread. It's about you. The way you behave, not only in this thread, but in all of the others, including ones that I made, both recently and less recently. You dump low-quality garbage and facebook-tier memes all over this board before derailing them with barely-related tangents.
Everypony is sick of you.

>>170558
>It's about you.
Ah, it is personal so.
I'm afraid that I might not conform to your specs as you desire. Independent minds rarely do so, and it is natural that conformists like you lose their minds. Sorry, not much can be done about it. You may have to learn to deal with different opinions and approaches as life is not designed to cater your taste.

>170560
>different opinions
>I might not conform to your specs
>conformists like you
He really doesn't get it...

>>170556
>>170558
>>170560
Are you samefagging?
You know what. Fuck it.

Science.

>>170582
I did the work of digging up the links, in case anybody cares to know more context than a single meme provides:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jamiecartereurope/2022/08/03/do-we-need-the-first-ever-drop-second-a-new-wobble-by-earth-caused-the-shortest-day-since-records-began-say-scientists/amp/
https://www.independent.co.uk/space/earth-spinning-slower-day-length-b2140840.html

For the record, although the two headlines are conflicting, they're actually talking about the same phenomenon: the gradual deceleration of the Earth's rotation, and fluctuations thereof ala the Chandler Wobble (caused, of course, by Chris Chan's attempt to psionically bring about The Merge early from jail last year). Both articles are consistent with one another, probably prompted by the same news; it's just one is focused on the Chandler Wobble that offsets the general trend, and the other is focused on the gradual slowdown with the exceptional fluctuations caused by the wobble.
OP of course didn't bother to check the articles and instead just reposted a crappy meme that his Facebook algorithm recommended him with highlighted text as if that somehow alone proves that the earth is flat.

>>170583
>as if that somehow alone proves that the earth is flat.
Actually the lack of curvature demonstrates definitively that we are not living on a ball.
Neither you nor the fake scientists can beat that.

>>170583
>I did the work of digging up the links
Imagine a faget so obsessed with insisting he was not deceived instead of accepting the overwhelming evidence that this realm is flat.

>>170587
What that to do with providing links?
>overwhelming evidence that this realm is flat
Lol, lmao even

>>170585
>lack of curvature demonstrates definitively that we are not living on a ball
We've been showing you evidence of curvature from dozens of separate sources for more than two years now. You just refuse to acknowledge them because they contradict your worldview, or you call them fake without arguing for it. We've also refuted your claims to the contrary with eloquent and well-backed arguments, to which you just shit all over the board or pretend like you won by dumping your smug reaction image folder, and then go on to ignore the arguments themselves without addressing them because you know you can't. Then you wait a few weeks/months and post (redundant) memes parroting the same exact arguments that we refuted earlier in the thread, conveniently forgetting the prior argument which you failed to answer to.

Every couple weeks it's the same shit. You make an statement based on a shaky claim, you fail to refute the opposing argument, and then you forget it like it never happened and post the same thing again (as if we couldn't just scroll up to see it).

>>170589
>Invoking der Führer to prove your point
I can do that.

>>170591
Those circular maps are used in wars because they're more accurate for the northern hemisphere.
We know Hitler didn't believe the earth was flat, because he instead entertained the hypothesis that it could be hollow, and sent scouts to the North Pole to investigate the to hyperborea.

>>170592
>because he instead entertained the hypothesis that it could be hollow
I'm not aware of der Führer sending expeditions because of that.
But according to some, that idea makes sense indeed as the Black Sun is below.

>>170592
Isn't the North Pole basically just water? Besides, you don't know he was looking for hyperborea. He probably just wanted to meet Santa Claus.

>>170603
>hurr durr monologue
You are like a baby. You failed to come up with a coherent response, so you once again resort to red herrings.

>>170604
I - i'm sorry, but the anon you are answering to, it is not me.

>>170607
>pic 1
What is that place?
Also, why wouldn't reflections be possible on a round earth?
>pic 2
Idk how higher elevation of the lake is supposed to make surface level curvature more visible than it would be at sea level.
That diagram is wonky too.

>>170608
>What is that place?
Uyuni Salt Flats, in Bolivia, South America.

>>170608
>Also, why wouldn't reflections be possible on a round earth?
Judge by yourself.

>>170608
>how higher elevation of the lake is supposed to make surface level curvature more visible
It is not about elevation, but a 118 miles distance.

>>170610
Draw it to scale, you'll find out your flat Earth models doesn't work in general.
You'd have to include a person, the location, the celestial bodies, the seasons and how light works.
You've botched each and every question given to you by answering with nothing.
>>170607
>everywhere has to be round or flat all the time
That's how I know you're a nigger.

>>170612
>Draw it to scale, you'll find out your flat Earth models doesn't work in general.
>You've botched each and every question given to you by answering with nothing.
Dear anon, you don't want answers but to be right on the lies you support.
The round model fails every time you apply trigonometry and according to the fake scientists numbers. By the way, trigonometry is impervious to scales, in case your arrogant ignorance won't let you study a bit of math to come to the level of discussion needed in this thread.

>>170613
It's quite impressive that you've never traveled.
The Earth is an orb-oid it's extremely roughly ovoid to spherical made of spikes, flats, dips, dives and dodge.
A lump.
That means the topology and geology of various locations are varied and different.
There's the macro scale which is close enough to a sphere for rocket, projectile physics.
The local scale is rough.
Trigonometry works.
There is a drop off. Otherwise you can't do ballistics or you miss.
When you know the scale of a man and his measure and what ground he stands on you can know truth.
The truth loves you and is waiting for you.
The truth is alot bigger than you're giving credit for.
Explanations have been posted again and again before. Multiple Tests you can do that are repeatable, measurable and practical.

>>170614
>Multiple Tests you can do that are repeatable, measurable and practical.
That's science 101, sadly, the heliocentric model doesn't pass the tests.

>>170614
Globers are under hypnosis, a guy says.

>>170618
>Hey everybody stop doing anything some jackass said you're just under hypnosis.
Including (you).

>>170623
That's right especially you.
You can't answer anybody's questions.
You can't say why flat earth is important.
You can't critically look at whatever you spout here.
You can't say anything of value besides your talking points.
I get you're trying to psyop because you got salty over being assblasted about jews, samefagging and bring a stick in the mud amidst other faggotry.
I understand you have special needs, very special needs, but I'd suggest focusing your tisms on more profitable pursuits.

>>170650
Doesn't this also imply that space is real though, since the particles are coming from outside the field?

Also, this has been a known thing for a while. The Earth's unique magnetic field protects life on the world from harmful solar wind and cosmic particles. It's a feature of having a solid metal core beneath the liquid mantle.

>>170651
>It's a feature of having a solid metal core beneath the liquid mantle.
That's what you've been told.

>>170651
>It's a feature of having a solid metal core beneath the liquid mantle.
Mmmm. Do you know that that claim is just a theory? The deepest perforation ever made on the Earth's surface has been only 12 km which can be considered as just a scratch.

>>170653
Where are the elections in the link you posted coming from, besides outer space?

Fundamentals of gravity.

>>170654
>elections
What elections?
>in the link you posted
What link?
>besides outer space
The post mentioned the inner core of a planet. What outer space are you talking about?

>>170687
*electrons
>What outer space are you talking about?
The pics in >>170650 refer to electrons coming from outer space being blocked by an invisible shield.

>>170688
>The pics in >>170650 refer to electrons coming from outer space being blocked by an invisible shield.
Ah, those.
Do you realize that everything written in that article is based on hired "scientists" doing measurements on Earth? I mean, the claim that there is "A Shield" is gibberish for "It must be a filter somewhere up there because my instrument is not recording as many electrons as I wish".

>>170715
>Do you realize that everything written in that article is based on hired "scientists" doing measurements on Earth?
Then why did you post them?
>"It must be a filter somewhere up there because my instrument is not recording as many electrons as I wish".
You must've not read it.

>>170716
>Then why did you post them?
To oblige globers like you. After all, I understand that some fags have problems coming to terms with the lies they have been fed all their lives.

>>170717
You just say shit because you like spewing shit.
Wow, amazing, incredible, stupendous.
We have gone 2,225 posts and you are still unable and refuse to prove your position about anything about Flat Earth.
Besides muh globers, hurr durr I'm the smort cause I can say use Camera and ignore everyone.

>>170722
The doggy is still digging the filmation set.

>>170719
It's all so tiresome.

>>170942
Wow, more brainlet tier memes. I'm so impressed.

>>170943
its okay ballfag, we know you cant meme

>>170944
You will never have a flat Earth. You have no model, you have no math, you have no testable predictions. You have a zoomed in photo twisted by bad line-of-sight calculations and weed into a crude mockery of God's perfection.

All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you, and your “friends” laugh at your flattie videos behind closed doors.

Rational people are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of hours of education allow smart people to sniff out pseudo scientific frauds with incredible efficiency. Even flat Earth photos which “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to a thinking person. Your unanswerable questions are a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a drunk girl to watch a video with you, she’ll turn tail and bolt the second she realizes you weren't just joking about flat Earth conspiracy theory.

You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake "I know it's true!" every single morning and tell yourself others are going to believe. But deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight caused by the force you deny, Earth's gravity.

Eventually it’ll be too much to bear – you’ll buy a ring laser gyroscope, start your livestream, and plunge into the cold abyss of Internet mockery. Your parents will find you accidentally proving the globe, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They'll copy and upload your video across social media, and every viewer for the rest of eternity will know Earth is a rotating globe. Your flat Earth videos will decay and get deleted from YouTube, and all that will remain of your legacy is a video with an experiment that unmistakably proves the globe.

This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.

>>170946
ugh guess ill take the time to disect your shitty meme

>muh model
scientific experiments dont require scientific models all the time

>math
math is used to describe things, whereas physics is meant to explain things. math can be used for anything fake or real

>gyroscope
the 15 degree per hour drift thing is only relative to the poles. it also picks up the movements from the sky. if we were to assume its detecting motion from the ground then that means the ground would move under flying objects suck as planes, helicopters, balloons, and birds

your move fag

>>170950
>shitty meme
Lol, lmao even. The poster of badly-compressed jpegs from Facebook in a constant slew of mediocrity and redundant claims calling anyone memes shitty.
Stay mad.
>dont require scientific models
And yet you can't produce any.
>math can be used for anything fake or real
And yet you can't use it to prove your own claims.
>if we were to assume its detecting motion from the ground then that means the ground would move under flying objects suck as planes, helicopters, balloons, and birds
It does. That's why they launch rockets from Florida to take advantage of the rotation of the earth.

>>170952
the globe model has been falsified countless times. there is no math to prove the globe model. and you are clueless on the expertise of rocket trajectory. yet you just somehow continue to believe that the earth is magically moving beneath your feet because you were indoctrinated as child

>>170953
Keep telling yourself that. The Anons on this board will surely come to respect you some day.

>>170955
lmao you only care about respect because you dont care about whats true

>>170946
>>170952
>>170955
Here are pones they're (uu)^2.
>>170957
>lmao
You enjoy getting ass blasted that much?

>>170963
did you come in this thread to "le btfo flat earthers" too?

>>170964
Did you bump this thread just too "le btfo globers" too?

>170964
>did you come in this thread to "le btfo flat earthers" too?
You're doing a fine enough job on your own.
I'm here to spread hors.
>>170965

>>171165
I'm still waiting for some faget to demonstrate the curve.

>>171186
We already did, in this thread. Scroll up.

>>171188
>We already did
Very disappointing, not even one post shows an experiment measuring that theoretical curvature. Like it is a fiction.
Ban evasion

I can't believe this thread is still going, there's probably a serpent-worshiping "jew" behind this scheme somewhere.

BTW - the ultimate authority Jesus Christ/God, says the earth is ROUND! I'll post that proof later, if this giant spergthread continues without some ChristStallion posting it before me.

Advice for life: If somesperg (((claims))) something about God's Word or the Bible, make sure you ask them to show the verse (and context) and check to see if it's KJV - the other versions have varying levels of dangerous corruption in them. For example, even the "New" King James version removes the word/name "Jesus" several times - what kind of "Bible" would remove any mention/naming of Jesus?!

>>171190
>I can't believe this thread is still going
It's all because a single retard keeps bumping it with his crappy Facebook jpgs. The actual "arguments" (if you could call them that) stopped happening years ago.

>>171189
Look again.

>>171189
>(Ban evasion)
I'm not aware anypony was banned. Just saying.

>>171190
>BTW - the ultimate authority Jesus Christ/God, says the earth is ROUND!
Citation needed.

>>171190
The serpent does not bow to death. It shall not bow to censorship either.
Jokes aside. I've heard the bible allured to the idea the earth was round. Do post about it.

>>171200
There is no dome mentioned at that reference. Everything else also describes a sphere. Thanks for another boomer post instead of actual arguments.

>>171200
Also, the image stretches some of these references by a huge margin.

The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.

As in He established the earth and it can't be undone, aka no one can move it away. But sure, interpret that as it can't rotate. Delusions are better than understanding after all.

Why my post has been deleted? Hah?
Censorship only shows you are afraid of what others have to say.

>>171205
Aren't you ban-evading right now?

>>171206
Dude, I'm not banned. I did nothing wrong. What kind of paranoid are you?

>>171207
Post above imply that. Idk though.

>>171208
Post above is my appreciation of a behavioral pattern that has been increasing form 4 years ago.

>>171205
The Jew cries out as he strikes you.