/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal

>>164845
>>164865
This.
Essentially how I go about things.
>>164852
>If one's ideas don't withstand opposition
The question is not whether they withstand opposition or not. But rather, how much importance you want to grant to some random aspie. It's just like Jordan Peterstein said:

<"You don't have to put up with children's bullshit"
You can just opt out and say: "Well, feel free to make the last post ITT, you fucking manchild..."

>>164881
>You can just opt out and say: "Well, feel free to make the last post ITT, you fucking manchild..."
This.
A baller gang came to shit this bread and they are getting frustrated and making a fuzz because OP won't take them seriously.

>>164882
you know, this is observably, demonstrably false. I grew up in Florida and once or twice a year my old man would take me up to watch shuttle launches. They went up but they sure didn't come down for a few days.

>>164883
>you know, this is observably, demonstrably false
I guess your old man took you with him in day time. The photograph is a night time capture with a very long exposure to capture the rocket's real trajectory.

>>164884
>very long exposure
Perhaps ISO 3200.

>>164884
actually I'm going to say with almost certainty that I was there for STS-84's launch, the time of year feels right and I remember we had to get up REALLY early to go catch it

Launched: May 15, 1997 4:07:48 a.m. EDT
Landing Site: Kennedy Space Center, Florida
Landing: May 24, 1997, 9:27:44 a.m. EDT

>>164886
and to answer your next cope:
6:32 AM
Thursday, May 15, 1997 (EDT)
Sunrise in Daytona Beach, FL

>>164886
>>164887
Checking your NASA charts?

>>164881
Would that it were so simple.
Perhaps it hasn't occurred to you, but the flat earth psyop is as subversive to objective reality as the transgender craze, just targeting a different demographic.

>>164889
>sheer dishonesty
Flat Earth is based on demonstrable and reproducible experiments, not to mention wide inconsistencies in the heliocentric model.
Transgender craze is based on political correctness which by definition is deliberated distortion of language, when not suppression of inconvenient facts.

>>164891
Splitting hairs, they both involve a denial of objective reality with spurious ideas brought about by ignorant and stupid people
https://youtu.be/ww47bR86wSc

>>164892
Ahem, even if the video at first glance looks sound, jew propaganda is not welcome.

>>164889
I could see this. Making up wacky shit and associating it with your enemies they do all the time

I cringe when it's mentioned by people like Sven or Mike, even though they're usually good. I've also seen a few sites make articles about Nazi flat-earthers

>>164892
Literal jewTube propaganda, what are you doing?

The stupid people are the one's that watch propaganda for entertainment or think it's a good thing to post

Like I get videos can make good points (though they're not a replacement for you saying something yourself), but these kinds of videos are tailor-made propaganda, even has the whole literal atrocity propaganda at the start

The whole thing is masturbating redditor types because they watch it and go
>"haha, yes, those dummy dumbos are so dumb, good thing I am better than them and believe mr youtube man, haha, I'm smart"

None of it makes sense, it's just presented as if it does and implies, obviously, that if you don't follow it you are one of the dumbos
>You can fight against malice but not idiocy because you can use violence against malicious people
Like this. What is it supposed to mean? It's stated like it's profound but you can obviously punch a dumb person exactly as much as an evil person, every sentence in these is some kind of "if you kill your enemies, they win" stupid bullshit that's just meant to sound like it makes sense

I dare you to take a sentence out of that video that makes a concrete and useful point that you can actually back up. What's the point of the video? What is the point you're trying to make? Why post it? Stupid people are stupid and bad and don't think right? Why do you need to make this point? Why do you feel as if you can't make it yourself?

What's /Flat Earth General/'s Opinion on The Holocaust?

>>164888
yes, I googled scheduled STS launches because I was a child at the time. I'm sorry, is my objective, personal experience not good enough for you retard? KSFS launches are public for the most part, go watch one if you can scrape together enough allowance for a bus ticket to Florida

>>164898
Based

>>164891
>wide inconsistencies
Dozens of inconsistencies have been pointed out with the flat-earth model as well, many of which you've refused to reply to in this thread. I can't even count all the times the things you've asserted have been either refuted logically, or directly contradicted with more substantial evidence. Most of the time you just scroll past them and pretend they don't exist, because they obviously pointed out gaping inconsistencies in what you just said.
>>164891
>based on demonstrable and reproducible experiments
Even more have been done confirming that the earth is flat, but you've dismissed every single one of them as "NASA shills" without actually disputing their studies for their material.
You've set an impossible standard for any scientist or witness that could have refuted your worldview through ad hominem alone, because apparently everyone who proves you wrong is a "NASA/Freemason shill", even when they have no apparent connection to either organization. You claim that actors like NASA have absurd amounts of far-reaching influence on every continent, without any evidence to support it, let alone why or how; if you asked any other /pol/ack how or why the Jews control the global media and politics, you'd get a mountain of evidence in minutes, but you keep dodging those same questions about NASA. You lump all of them together as part of some grand conspiracy that has supposedly gotten all those separate parties to agree with seamless efficiency. You refuse to answer to anyone who makes an evidence-backed argument as a "shill" (ad hominem), without even trying to refute their arguments. You claim, without evidence, that any video or photograph that challenges your worldview is "photoshopped" without providing evidence or even trying to pursue evidence (such as checking noise patterns).
Not only that, preemptively excluding anyone who might have a connection to aerospace, geography or astrology organizations (in ALL countries, apparently) effectively excludes all scientists in that field, leaving only sketchy YouTubers as an excuse for a source.

What kind of argument would actually convince you? What kind of scientific source would you even consider acceptable if it proved the earth was round? What's your actual standard of evidence? Who would you accept that kind of evidence from? What kind of evidence would you consider to meet your standards of proof? Do you seriously only accept evidence that reaffirms your worldview?

How is anyone supposed to take you seriously like this? Is this how you intend to convince people that the world is flat?

And ffs, why doesn't this thread have IDs? It's impossible to have a consistent argument like this.

>>164896
That the theory of idiocy was derived in Nazi Germany in concentration camps has no bearing on the phenomenon, and I postrd it cuz OP is precisely the sort of idiot that is described in the video, since you're so quick on the uptake

>>164901
Wanna see him lose his shit?
Not a freemason, but I AM a Senior DeMolay; the youth version of freemasonry.
That oughta give him all the paranoid rope he'll need.
>>164902
Almost like OP didnt want to have a legitimate discussion

>>164882
>meme
>no meme or rationale to explain the curving phenomena
To answer the question, the rocket curves *because* the world is round: because the world isn't flat, gravity doesn't pull straight 'down', but towards the center of the earth, which is why a long-range rocket's path is a segment of an ellipse.
And, in a hypothetical circumstance that we lived on a flat 'realm' where 'gravity' represented a single-direction force, the rocket would still curve, because the rocket would travel both horizontally and vertically, but only it's vertical travel would be affected by said one-dimensional gravity: the difference is that for flat earth the rocket would be a sharper parabola, rather than an elliptical segment, and long-range rockets would be less of a pain to aim.
>>164883
I'm a Florida Man too. I don't go that often though. Too much driving, and I'm not fond of crowds.
>>164888
He doesn't need a chart to tell you if it was day or night.
What are you trying to argue here?

>>164906
I was one of those "I wanna be an astronaut" kids so when the old man had enough gas to take me up I went, just like Disney

>>164968
Bruh

1000 year old Flat Earth map.

>>165088
>shard earth image at the beginning
Now you're talking. Oh wait, nevermind. Nice claims, be even mocer if there was anything to vet, like someone alive in this century, or anything more than unverifiable claims

>>165089
>unverifiable claims
Such as like this realm is a ball?

>>165090
There are plenty of clues and hard experiments debunking the planet baloney, for example >>149637

>>165090
Only if you're willfully ignorant
>>165091
Still thinking that a bunch of guys on a boat cant produce enough error and variance in angle/calculation to produce those results eh?

>>165092
>guys on a boat
Incorrect. It is guys on the shore pointing at the distance. According to the paid "honorable and trustworthy scientists", the curvature would make the laser beam impossible to see. But because of the laser can be seen, their lies are busted.

Speaking of lasers, remember the time they spent $20k to buy a laser gyroscope to prove there was no actual planetary rotation, and accidentally proved there was rotation? Cuz, ya know, its not flat?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.triplem.com.au/story/flat-earthers-spend-20-000-trying-to-prove-earth-is-flat-accidentally-prove-it-s-round-129953
"What we found is, when we turned on that gyroscope, we found that we were picking up a drift," Knodel explains. "A 15-degree per hour drift.

"Now, obviously we were taken aback by that - 'Wow, that's kind of a problem.'

"We obviously were not willing to accept that, and so we started looking for easy to disprove it was actually registering the motion of the Earth."

You know what they say: If your experiment proves you wrong, just disregard the results!

"We don't want to blow this, you know?" Knodel then says to another Flat Earther. "When you've got $20,000 in this freaking gyro.

"If we dumped what we found right now, it would be bad? It would be bad.

"What I just told you was confidential."

Thanks Bob

>>165094
>You know what they say: If your experiment proves you wrong, just disregard the results!
This is exactly what the "respectable scientists" do all the time. Their experiment fails and they ask for more money to reach the result wanted by the establishment, and if not experiment can match the answer they want, they pull deliriant theories from their asses and promote them as truth. It is fucking preposterous.

>>165096
Oh, noticed this:
No wonder you lot like to use that calculator to 'debunk' the curve; it's wrong

>>165098
No idea what you're going for, the earth is NOT a sphere, plain and simple
>hurrr, cuz its flat
Its an oblate sphereoid. The curvature is different depending on where you ARE on the planet. Theres no simplified calculation that can give you accurate results that do not account for first calculating the exact curvature a specific area will show.
>it wouldnt be that significant tho!
Wont know until the correct calculations are done then. Something you fags stll need to work on, correct calculations. But that would get in the way wouldnt it?
See, when a person is convicted to an idea, they tend to strawman the opposition's argument in their haste to try and debunk it. This manifests as a lack of due diligence when attempting to present the opposition's position. Such as using a simplified version of the model and then debunking that simplified (read: inaccurate) model.
>but but, thats what you're doing
No, Im mot trying to debunk your/their model. Im pointing to the untenable elements of the equation, which would give rise to the skewed results one is seeing.
If you can find evidence that dozens of holes CAN'T be poked in, Ill be the first to admit it.
Still waiting tho

As you can see indicated in the previous citation and this one from their sourcepage, no allowance was made for the sphereoid natureof the planet, they are calculating it as though the planet is a theoretical (read: perfect) sphere.
Thats the problem.

>>165100
>Thats the problem.
None when the equation is translated to real life measurements. This bread has plenty of info and REPRODUCIBLE experiments (as the Scientific Method demands) to make your shilling improper as best, dishonest at worst.

>>165099
>Its an oblate sphereoid.
And how you know?

>>165101
You see that R figure on the image? That stands for RADIUS. with a SPHEREOID, the radius is NEVER EQUAL. Therefore, any equation that tries to use them AS equal, is FLAWED. Moving on
>>165102
Because people who can conduct proper experiments and equations have been doing so for millennia. Moron

Correction: if you're willing to crunch the numbers and illustrate how the variance is/would-be negligable, that would be a credible counterpoint. Its plausible, given the localized environment of the experiment.
Having said, the radius from the earth's core to the equator is longest, and the radius from the north pole to the core is the shortest.

>>165103
I think Eratosthenes was the first to do a real experiment proving that the Earth is round so I think technically only one millennium

People have been sailing on ships for millennia though, and people even before Eratosthenes saw how boats sink below the horizon instead of shrinking forever, but idk if that counts as an experiment

Also this
>During lunar eclipses, Aristotle observed that earth casts a curved shadow onto the surface of the moon
https://thecreationclub.com/the-shape-of-the-earth-aristotle-and-the-scientific-method/

>Aristotle was not the first person to argue that Earth is round – earlier arguments date back to the 6th century B.C. But Aristotle seems to be the first to offer observational evidence using the earth’s-shadow method.

According to this also only one millennium. Also apparently I was wrong about Eratosthenes since this is saying 6th century BC and Eratosthenes was like 1-2nd or something

IIRC, the flat-earth explanation for it is that it's a random undetected, unseeable, second moon or sister planet that causes the eclipse, and that one is round for some reason

>>165112
This is pure nonsense. Light and images aren't beams. You should be able to see the moon and it's reflection from multiple angles.

>>165112
Kinda fun to make but I wish the meme didn't use such a dumb model since it's hard to get a nice trail reflection like in the image with these relative scales, though I also think I made my waves too high, and it's BSDF instead of a glass shader for actually reflective water since that would take way too long to render

>>165122
*actually refractive water

>>165122
Youre not taking that meme seriously, are you? Like, the image is so ridiculously modified that its absurd. Especially funny, givrn how flat earthers are all up in arms about "NASA edits" n shit. Like seriously, has one never seen a r3flection of the moon? Its not prominent, in fact the reflection of the moon is proportionate to its size in the night's sky, and such memes are disingenuous on their face.
But its quite obvious when it happens.

The flat earth thread is homosexual.
Every so often a new meme is posted, insulting people who know the earth is round. Flatties can't prove their world is flat, they just imitate a liberal's idea of conservative talking points like AI.
Speaking of AI...
Wouldn't it be funny to turn an AI racist like Tay?
https://youtu.be/hUQNiy4K7VU

>>165125
Not exactly mistaken, but still off-topic.

>>>/ub/5774 →

>>165126
More like >>>/cyb/

>>165130
>Polaris stays put
It just stays northish due to it's relative position to the pole of the northern hemisphere, tracing out a small circle. It still moves vaguely, it's just that you could only tell the significant distance if you were at the north pole. The night sky changes overtime anyway. It even changes with the seasons; that's why we can see different parts of the stars at different times of the year, and why people come up with horoscopes or whatever based on what stars are most visible on a particular month.
>19.2 billion miles
A mere inch in the vastness of space. The galaxy is absolutely enormous, and the void between galaxies is even bigger.
>Galaxy is moving
Polaris is part of the milky way Galaxy, so how far the galaxy is moving isn't isn't significantly relevant because Polaris would be moving at the same speed as our sun relative to all the other stars in the galaxy.

>>165130
https://www.quora.com/Has-an-amateur-astronomer-measured-a-stellar-parallax?share=1
This data was generated by Dennis di Cicco, impressively using mass produced 11 and then 16 inch Schmidt Cassegrain telescopes. The sine-like pattern is consistent with the expected parallax associated with Barnard's 1.833 parsec distance. It is worth noting that each of those points is derived from hundreds or thousands of digital images which were stacked, analyzed, and averaged to compensate for the disruptive effects of Earth's atmosphere, the greatest single hindrance to ground-based astrometry.

>>165130
>>165135
>>165136
>ITT: OP shares an unsourced meme he found on Reddit/Facebook without even bothering to research the claims it makes for even one minute
Many such cases.

>>165135
>It just stays northish due to it's relative position to the pole of the northern hemisphere, tracing out a small circle.
Sorry, not good enough.
That star is fixed and no amount of shilling can deny it. The heliocentric theory is bullocks,

>>165135
>It still moves vaguely
I strongly disagree. When sailing, a sextant is used to know the current position, that's done pointing at Polaris and it is more than accurate. If the star moves, even slightly, the errors in the charts would be evident as they won't match with IRL coordinates.

>>165150
>>165147
It's movement is only visible in the middle of the Arctic circle. It is just barely off-center.
But that aside, how would that prove that the earth were flat?

Oh, as I went back over the thread I found this post: >>149123
It went through that arguement on how ships sink at horizon. How these ships reappear when you zoom in, meaning it the ship isn't hidden behind any curvature.
The only explanation to prove otherwise would be that those videos are fake, unlikely imo.

The second vid in this post shows and series of photos of a man walking away from a camera on football field. His lower body sinks below the horizon line. I can still not wrap my head around how this visual phenomena happens but clearly the football field is to small of a distance to experince any curvature.

I'm gonna try to recreate this as an experiment for myself. I'll lay with my cheek against hte ground of at the goalposts of a football field and then try to see the bottom of the bag I dropped at the other end.

If the bag's bottom is gone, this doesn't necessarily prove the earth is flat but it does prove that black man scientist is using faulty reasoning in his proofs in the last vid in this post. That alone speaks volumes to me.

>>165152
>But that aside, how would that prove that the earth were flat?
Pretty evident Sherlock, the supposedly ball is jumping non stop and therefore the stars on the dome should also move accordingly, but they don't because Earth is fixed and unmovable.
See >>165130 and plenty of posts above.

>>165154
The stars are part of the same galaxy, so they're moving with relative relation to the earth as well.
The sky changes over time, but it takes thousands of years because there's so much distance to travel.
This doesn't prove anything.

>>165155
>The sky changes over time, but it takes thousands of years because there's so much distance to travel.
>but it takes thousands of years
Exactly, nobody was there thousands of years ago. Just trust us. /s

>>165156
>Implying if you don't personally see it, it can't possibly be true
Well, you could refer to ancient Egyptians who built a pyramid at exactly 30 degrees longitude and latitude in their time based on the stars above them, while the stars above them shifted to change those coordinates since then.

The sky changes over time. It has in human history.
And tbh, the sky changing slightly over time doesn't even necessitate the world being round. It could happen in flat earth too.

>>165157
>Implying if you don't personally see it, it can't possibly be true
The Scientific Method demands that observations and experiments to be reproducible. If only a selected priest caste has the means to do it, more yet, their sponsors forbid anyone to build and fly airships without their consent and regulation, then the Scientific Method is violated and what is left are just myths based on faith.

>>165158
>observations and experiments to be reproducible
I I go through all the work to find the data for this and explain it step by step how they came to that conclusion, are you actually going to take it seriously, or are you going to just dismiss immediately because astronomers were the ones who did it?

>>165157
>And tbh, the sky changing slightly over time doesn't even necessitate the world being round. It could happen in flat earth too.
There is a theory about it, precisely the one suspecting that there is a lot more land beyond the Antarctic wall.

>>165158
>has the means to do it
Okay, I know science is often controlled by corporate greed, but how do you expect the means for scientific experiments to be distributed evenly? Science has always been done by those with means: the equipment to do so isn't free.
Not denying the obvious corruption or conflicts of interest in the scientific communities or their sponsors, but I'm just curious about how you think scientific institutions should be run/funded.

>>165159
>I I go through all the work to find the data for this and explain it step by step how they came to that conclusion, are you actually going to take it seriously
I don't think so, your train of thought is about to pick "space", "cosmos", "gravitational forces" and alike up. All of them are demonstrable non-sense and a hoax.

>>165162
So, no, you wouldn't take it from astronomers then, even if they wrote their steps out entirely.
What kind of source would you even accept to prove it then? What is your standard of evidence?
Idk how anything is supposed to be proved if people go about dismissing those who dedicated their lives to studying the topics without reading them.

>>165162
Forgot to call him Le Mason while you're at it.

>>165163
>What kind of source would you even accept to prove it then?
A faceberg meme, of course.

>>165162
>demonstrable
These have been demonstrably reaffirmed by scientists all over the world who publish their results step-by-step. You're quick to dismiss those refutations as "NASA shilling" though.

>>165160
Do you seriously not think there's any land in Antarctica? You think all those photos are fake?

>>165166
>These have been demonstrably reaffirmed by scientists all over the world who publish their results step-by-step.
There is something very wrong with their science. No curve ---> no planet ---> no space ---> no cosmos ---> no gravity
Just not finding the curve makes the whole "science" fall down like a house of cards.

>>165167
What is beyond the Antarctic wall is unknown, pictures and video only show a few kilometers from the shore, exploration is forbidden under threats of violence.

>>165168
>curve
The curve has been shown evidently by hundreds of sources. You've been selectively choosing results that reaffirm your worldview.
But of course, anyone who isn't a shady YouTuber or a Facebook memer is a NASA shill, right?
>space
Holy shit, the world doesn't even need to be round for that. It is a fact of life that the air gets thinner with higher altitude. Go hiking in the mountains after spending a year at sea level and you'll know.
Can you not even imagine a "realm" where the air is so thin that there's basically nothing at all?
That aside, there's hundreds of different forms of evidence that space exists, but I'm not even going to bother listing them this time because all of the other times I did you called them "NASA shills".
>no cosmos
The "cosmos" are whatever you see in the sky above you: something you can literally see.
>no gravity
Again, has been confirmed and reaffirmed in so many different ways, but you wouldn't accept even a single source that contradicts your worldview. So now we're just contradicting each other to no end.

>>165169
>We'd totally prove our worldview, but the scary NASAmasons would kill us!
They can't stop Japs from hunting whale to extinction there, but they can somehow track every individual who sets foot on the ice and have caught everyone who's tried to see past it?
What utter bullshit. For a group of people who claim to be rebelling against the new world order, you lot come off as awfully cowardly. Imagine being afraid of blue helmets.

>>165170
PewDiePie knows.

>>165169
>exploration is forbidden
You know scientists go to Antarctica for research all of the time, right? It's not that hard to get approved. I had a professor who went there.

>>165174
>You know scientists go to Antarctica for research all of the time, right?
Not sure if you think people are stupid or your IQ is below 60.

>>165175
I don't expect you to believe it. You're probably just going to call them fakes/shills.

>>165176
Well, we have already millions of nurses and doctors who denied reality by going along with a non-existent epidemic, because of the money. And this is a glaring example of how corrupt humanity has become.

>>165171
>>165172
Welcome to the flat earth thread, where all your carefully constructed arguments will be summarily ignored, and OP will insist that his boomer-tier memes make sense

>>165218
>8:06 - The genesis of the modern Flat Earth Society
You are being way too dishonest, it is well known that the Flat Earth Society is controlled opposition used to ridicule Flat Earth.
Either you demonstrate the curvature or you have no case.

>>165219
>posting a video is dishonest
Sure thing bud. What is it when you've been presented with dozens of resources that display curvature, but refuse to even acknowledge the post (presumably to avoid illustraying that you cant contest the points, other than to maybe claim nasa/mason/wtfe shill)?
Hint, it's related to the word 'ignore'

>>165220
>What is it when you've been presented with dozens of resources that display curvature
Which has been debunked over and over again in the bread.
>Hint, it's related to the word 'ignore'
I agree. Projecting much?

>>165221
>saying mason or nasa once and then never adding anything is 'debunking'
>also you're the one who's ignorant
Right? All those equations and calcularions and historic citations, the moon, the tides, all 'debunked' cuz Eric Dubay cant into actual science, and OP cant into critical thinking.

>>165222
>All those equations and calcularions and historic citations, the moon, the tides, all 'debunked' cuz Eric Dubay
Nope, all debunked by IRL experiments and observations.
At this point you are not even pretending with your shilling.

>>165223
>debunked by IRL experiments and observations from people performing irrelevant and inadmissible as evidence due to alack of controls
Ftfy

>>165223
>all debunked by IRL experiments and observations.
None of that met generally accepted standards of quality or precision for experiments.
>shilling
Do you actually think that, or are you just talking out of your ass? You think Anons here argue with you because they're paid to do it, and not just because you keep shoving absurdist nonsense in their faces?
So long as this crap keeps coming up on the overboard, idiots are still going to take the bait and reply to it. There is no shilling, because they do it for free.

>>165226
Ridiculous notions demand ridicule; it's flat-shaming.

>>165341
No, THIS is flat-shaming.

>>165341
>>165344
>flat-shaming
Amateurs.

>>165347
>Mark Twain
All that ad homenim, and you just quoted a literal, open, known Freemason.
Which is not to discredit the quote; it's a decent quote, but an example how something can make sense despite who says it, so long as it's substantial.
Think of that next time you dismiss/discredit a scientific study because people in the business of studying space might be affiliated with NASA, and judge the arguments on the substance and not the speaker.

Give up already globeheads

>>165398
Lmao

>Think the NASA moon hoax is bad? Check out the Russian moon hoax
>Actual broadcast footage of a Russian lander on the moon. Hey? Who paved the roads on the moon for your toy to move across?
And the normies still swallow this swill.

>>165426
What are these videos from?

>>165427
Russian space program, landing on the moon.

>>165434
You're right. The obvious children's show should have chartered a trip to space so that fan submissions can be authentically displayed in zero gravity. In the 70's, by the video quality.
Nothing ridiculous about that position.

>>165433
I mean where can I find the video? What's this one called.

>>165437
As I suspected: this was a promotional video, not actual footage.
>"The LK Russian: Lunniy Korabl (Лунный корабль—"lunar ship") was a Soviet lunar lander and counterpart of the American Lunar Module (LM). The LK was to have landed up to two cosmonauts on the Moon. It completed development and was test flown successfully in Earth orbit, but never reached the Moon because development of the N1 rocket, which was required to take the Lunar Lander to the Moon, was unsuccessful."
This was never meant to be presented as real.

>>165438
>>165426
This isn't a hoax. It's a demo video to show how the fober was supposed to drive. It was released before the launch was scheduled. It wasn't meant to be passed off as real.

Ffs, this is why you have to read the descriptions of things before sharing them. What a waste of time.

>>165440
>What a waste of time.
It is not. Most people have no idea that the Russian and Chinese, not to mention Iran, North Korea and Japan, are also involved in the space hoax.

Hey guys did you know the earth is flat and space is a myth and stars aren't real? It's true, because a meme calls everyone who disagrees stupid. Just look at the sky outside and tell me if you see Venus or Keppler or Todano or Anur any other alien world. If there are no aliens why do no aliens want to have sex with me hmm? Clearly the crests are to blame. Get owned globetard. It is as the genius Kanye East said...
>AEIOU stars arent real

The Earth is round like a pregnant mare

>>165442
>space is a myth and stars aren't real?
Well, you can see by yourself. >>155834

>>165443
>Black science man
>a nigger able to grasp time and abstractions
Totally credible. /s

>>165450
Says the fag posting facebook memes and shit
>>165445
>Science says acturus is like, super far. But like, I can tots see it. Checkmate globeys

>>165444
>The Earth is round Flat like a pregnant mare
Fixed for ya

>>165454
Show me a pregnant mare that's flat

Go on, you took the bait. You 'fixed that for me', so pony up. Show me the flat pregnant mare that 'fixes' what I said.

>>165461
>Go on, you took the bait.
Yeah right.

>>165441
That video literally wasn't a hoax, because it was publicly a promotional video.
The waste of time is that the poster presented it as if it had been passed-off as real footage, which it never was.

>>165454
Since when are pregnant mares flat?

>>165465
>The waste of time is that the poster presented it as if it had been passed-off as real footage
It is obvious that no cameraman would be already on the moon to film the landing.

>>165467
Sexy.

>>165468
Yeah, because it's not supposed to be real. It's literally just a promo video, like the ones you see in toy stores.

>>165467
Tha k you

Hey OP, what's the speed of light?

If the earth is flat why are boobies round?

August 16, 2022.
>Why are There No Flat Earth Whistle-Blowers?
>When confronted with objective, demonstrable, empirical proof that Earth is not a fantastical tilting, wobbling, spinning space-ball, one sticking point that globe defenders consistently revert back to is, if the evidence flat Earthers are presenting is true, then why has there not been a single whistle-blower to come forward and expose this mother of all conspiracies? How is it possible that not one of the hundreds of thousands of people that NASA has employed over the decades has come forward and admitted the hoax? What about the Russians, the Chinese, the Japanese and all the other government space agencies along with SpaceX, Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin and other corporate space enterprises? If Earth is not a globe and we never went to the Moon, why haven't these governments or corporations tattletaled on each other and exposed this massive lie to the masses?
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/Why-are-There-No-Flat-Earth-Whistle-Blowers:f
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/LJGKUCpVhHi1/

>165510
>objective, demonstrable, empirical proof
Gaslighting, again. Your lack of comprehension dpes not constitute evidence

>>165510
since you missed it the first time:
>>165479

>>165510
Eric Dubay is a glow-op plant from an actual Freemason family, who propagates strawman nonsense about Flat Earth to discredit the Flat Earth movement and quash free and open discourse on the subject so that his followers stay distracted from researching real inconsistencies.

>>165510
I can't believe people still support this IFER shill. He talks past his audience and distracts them all the while discouraging actual independent flat earth research while sicking his Facebook trannies on independent researchers who dare to contradict him.

>>165513
>>165514
>shilling hard
Not good enough. Try again.
By the way, if you can find the curve, please post it here.

>>165515
>Criticize Eric (((Dubay)))'s monopolizing of Flat Earth discourse and censoring any criticism of Jesuits on his platform
>Somehow this is shilling in behalf of... Someone?
Nice try tranny. Go back to licking the boots of that lying Hofjuden. Surely there is no connection between the groups. They're totally uninvolved, because that "well-researched" said so. No further discussion is required.

>>165516
Stay on topic. Proof of the curvature may help a lot.

>>165517
Where did I say that there was a so-called curve? I'm saying that Eric and his trannies are full of shit and have been subverting the movement for years with his bullshit.
>Stay on topic
So long as Eric Dubay and his shills keep monopolizing flat earth research, he IS the topic. He's got more than half the movement wrapped around his finger, and he's using his """credibility""" to silence independent researchers.

>>165518
>So long as Eric Dubay and his shills keep monopolizing flat earth research, he IS the topic.
Absurd.
A man doesn't make the subject, but physical reality. Stop gaslighting with not related wild claims and stick to the topic.

>>165519
He doesn't make the subject, he monopolizes it. That's why he torpedos opposing flat earthers all of the time and bans them from his platforms. He is a fucking plant and a profiteer manipulating people looking for truth.

>>165520
>He doesn't make the subject, he monopolizes it.
You are choosing to go personal, and again, it is off topic.

>>165519
>not related wild claims
How is blatant controlled opposition not related? This is the thread about the globers mythos, isn't it? Eric Dubay is a part of the whole NASA glow-op coverup. His job is to keep flat earth researchers eating sterilized breadcrumbs out of his palm to make them easier to control and prevent truthers from taking decisive action. I wouldn't be surprised if he reports directly to the 32nd Degree while laughing about how his fans uplift him as a "leader" in "opposition" to Judeao-freemasonry. That race-mixing turbonigger has been taking his own followers for fools, and his sockpuppet Thai tranny worshippers only reinforce his cult of personality.
>>165521
>muh topic
Oh, what are you gonna do, tranny? Are you gonna ban me from the thread like your savior Eric does to all the other independent researchers on his forums? Are you gonna go cry to the mods? Can't handle criticism of an obvious 32nd Degree Jesuit plant? Give me a fucking break. Newsflash: just because someone tells bits and pieces of truth doesn't mean they're not USING YOU.

>>165522
>Eric Dubay is a part of the whole NASA glow-op coverup
Substantiate the claim. Go on, I'm interested.

>>165523
He is from a Freemason family. His own great uncle was a member of the 32'd Degree, and Eric himself has been seen wearing masonic pins before he got into this.
You don't think it's weird how so much of the flat earth truth movement revolves around one personality? How, despite uncontested control of the media by NASA, Dubay has never been substantially threatened? Why his videos alone are so easy to access on the internet, when even toothless clowns like Alex Jones need to keep jumping platforms? How he's able to post his videos with impunity while others are silenced or killed every day? Why he's able to have such a following despite whistleblowers being treated, killed and made examples of? There's an obvious reason why they won't get rid of him: he's no threat to them. His purpose is to control the narrative so that independent researchers can't make achievements, and so that his videos smother any groundbreaking discoveries and prevent action from being taken so that Flat Earth researcher can't make any gains.
And based on his behavior, he's done a good job of that. He's got an enormous following of Facebook normies who believe everything he tells them just because they include crumbs of truth that NASA doesn't consider to be threatening to the narrative, and more importantly he keeps them from looking into things that could actually harm them, like the Jesuit connection between the Freemasons and the globist hoax.
He talks about Jews the same way other controlled opposition clowns like Spencer do, while not saying anything that could actually cause them to face consequences. And despite "calling out" Jews on the globist narrative, he's painfully silent on the other more atrocious crimes of the Jews, like white replacement and genocide (which he willfully participates in by cohorting with Thai trannies).
He silences skeptics and voices that dare to try to turn the narrative away from himself so he can ensure that all flat earth discussions stay on topic related to whatever he just posted that month.

>>165524
>His own great uncle was a member of the 32'd Degree
Yup, and he publicly disavowed him and cut all ties.
>He silences skeptics and voices that dare to try to turn the narrative away from himself
Incorrect, he bans shills and any other trying to derail the subject, like (you).

>>165524
>He talks about Jews the same way other controlled opposition clowns like Spencer do, while not saying anything that could actually cause them to face consequences.
Not true. Dubay is known for praising NatSoc and avoiding any contact with jews promoting Flat Earth.

>>165525
>he publicly disavowed him
Only after it was pointed out repeatedly and he could no longer cover it up.
>he bans shills and any other trying to derail the subject, like (you).
Oh, so anyone who criticizes Dubay and his impotent vicegrip on the flat earth research community is a shill who needs to be silenced? Nobody can have that opinion genuinely? Anyone who opposes /ourguy/, not flat earth, is a shill? A heretic that must be purged by the Jesuit oath?
That really says a lot about what you think of him.
>>>r/The_Donald
Might be more your speed.
Don't let the door hit you in the maggot-ridden faux vagina on the way out.

>>165528
Slander is all you got. Very jewy of (you).

>>165527
>praising NatSoc
So did Spencer. That doesn't make him legitimate, nor does it make him an actual threat to Jews.
It's not just what you say about Jews, but what you say should be done about them, and the results thereof.
At this stage, it doesn't actually bother Jews to be implicated in the glove conspiracy, because the average globist normie is so deep in the works that it doesn't effectively harm them; in fact, Jews have weaponized the words of impotent glow-ops like Eric Dubay to not only discredit Flat Earth researchers, but to discredit truthers about Judaism too.
If he actually cared about removing Jews, he'd list the names of more specific Jews who've directly leading the globist agenda, but he won't because that might put his continued Hofjuden shekels in jeopardy.
Stop acting like this faggot is your savior just because he's "brave" and keeps telling you what you want to hear. It's barely better that taking narratives directly from NASA.

>>165529
Oh, pardon. Was I wrong about what I said? Are you willing to refute that, or are you too afraid that Eric "Trust The Plan" Dubay might not actually be on your side?
Open your fucking eyes.

>>165530
>>165531
>slanderous shilling
Would you mind to return to the bread's topic.

>>165532
>implying criticism of a major player in globist agenda isn't on topic
>getting this buttmad about the reputation of a lying crypto-Jesuit
Topkek. Why are dubtroons so mad about the fact that they're being MKULTRA'd

>>165534
>I'm not butthurt at all
>D-don't mind that I replied to it 10 times!
The absolute state of Dubay trannies.
I can see that you're stuck too far up his gaping AIDs-ridden asshole to be convinced, but next time you tune in to one one his videos, pay attention to what he DOESN'T say just as much as you consider what he does.

>>165535
(((They))) aren't sending their best anymore.
Goodnight.

>>165536
Of course they aren't. They're sending faggots like Eric and his orbiters.
Sweet dreams, tranny.

>>165537
In case you missed, take a look to the book title, faggot.

>>165538
>N-no you're the infiltrator! There's no way Eric could be!
I see you haven't actually gone to bed. Typical Dubay simp, just has to put one more word in when his husbando is insulted.
Next you're probably going to go crying to the mods like you do on all his platforms.

>>165515
>>165517
You mean other than the pics and video that you keep choking except to claim 'debunked' without merit?
>>165524
Ngl, that IS interesting
>>165539
Thank you, that was hilarious. I hope you dont honestly think a flat earth is a credible position, but I appreciate you taking the time to indicate how unsupportable Dubay/OP is in their position.

>>165540
Watch your fucking mouth, globist.

>>165540
>>165541
>coping
Seriously, would you mind to bring hard scientific facts instead of character assassination and straw mans?

>>165542
>the burden of proof is on YOU, goy!
What do you want some bank receipt from his Jesuit overlords? You want me to get one from every other NASA shill in the world too? I guess I'll just call their accountant.
>His actions speak for themselves. Have you seen how hard he polices his chat forums? He's fine letting his troons regurgitate whatever he says, but when people try to actually take action he shuts down, silences and bans dissenters. If anyone ever dares to post the addresses of masonic lodges in his chats for the sake of organizing LEGAL protests/watches around them, he has us kicked immediately. He's the enemy of anyone who ever wants to take action to settle this movement nearly 70 years in the making, because he's made it about himself.
But we'll totally just beat the globers by converting one Facebook boomer at a time, amirite? No reason to organize around lodges? No reason to demand open debates? No reason to have independent research in the flat earth community? Surely, the problems will just fix themselves, right?
You are an eceleb-worshipping simp. You take any criticism of that troon-enabling racemixer as an affront to the movement, not a critique on his bloated ego. Flat earth was doing fine before he came about. We'd all be better off without him.
But surely, I'm just a shill, right? Surely NASA pays me to shitpost about him on this board, when you and I both know they have the resources to kill him and make it look like a yoga accident, if they actually wanted to that is (they don't).

>>165541
Theres that ignorant narcissism that flat earthers are known for. Post more ebin FB maymays yo!
>>165542
So, NOT the video of a supertanker very clearly, slowly, and deliberately crossing over the horizon, as well as a multitude of other evidence that any rational thinking person would realize refutes the whole premise?

>>165544
>perspective and refraction
Try again against a hard laser shore to shore. You can't beat that baller.

>>165545
>perspective and refraction explains why ships disappear over the horizon
As I said, ignorant narcissim
Speaking of lasers, I assume you have conducted the experiment?
Also speaking of lasers, thanks Bob

>>165547
My latest post was about that ship thing. The counter arguement that I found in this thread, it's relatively early in the thread, to the idea that ships "sinks" at the horizon because of the curvature was a video were a guy zoomed out from having a perfectly in view and then it disappeared into the horizon. I think it "sunk" as he zoomed out but it went a bit fast, so it's a bit hard to tell.

The explanation was that the image of the ship converges with the horizon and the first part of it is the bottom part of it. Kinda like foreshortening in drawing, the building's wall that is closests to you is larger then the wall further away but in reality they are both the same size.

I have tested and the horizon does indeed follow eye-level, at least for the height of a human being. Meaning, if you lay down or stand up the horizon follows. This means you test if these visual phenomena exists. All you need is a relatively short distance of flat ground and something to place at the end. Then you can lay down at the other end and if you can't see the object on this parallel and flat distance because the horizon obscures the bottom this phenomena exists and therefore puts the proof of ships sinking at the horizon in question. I haven't found a flat enough surface yet, the pitch I found had a hill in the middle of it. But Neil Tyson made this arguement in one of these videos so if this is true it shows that, he, a professional astrophysist and Ph.D guy, uses faulty proofs.

Anyway, I'm gonna try to find some flat surfaces.

>>165548
Yes, and thats a bullshit argument given that the zoom out occurs toward the end of the video, after the overwhelming majority of the ship has already slowly disappeared past the horizon.
And that says nothing of the dozens of pieces of evidence which OP has simply opted to ignore (read: ignorance) because he knows his only recourse is to either fuck off for a few days and come back with more FB memes, or to make non-arguments with le smug pony reaction.
Like thelaser gyroscope incident which IS LITERALLY NOT POSSIBLE on a flat earth.
For the record, Im NOT a globe advocate, Im actually a 'broken egg' advocate, which allows for BOTH the instances of curious findings/readings, WHILE acknowledging and allowing for OBVIOUS proof that the earth ISN'T flat, including and not limited to the laser gyroscope.
But OP isnt interested in coming to a consensus, he just wants to posture like him and Dubay are smarter than fucking EVERYONE, when their own 'evidence' doesnt pass muster.

>>165549
>But OP isnt interested in coming to a consensus, he just wants to posture like him and Dubay are smarter than fucking EVERYONE
Jealous.

>>165550
And theres the narcissism

>>165549
>Dubay
The problem with Dubay isn't him being narcissistic, ignorant or wrong. It's that he's intentionally manipulating other flat-earthers into only discussing the sterile flavor of dialog that his Jesuit masters deem to be acceptable and banning them whenever they drop real truth bombs or organize action to expose the masons.
The globe hoax will continue so long as controlled opposition like Dubay leads flat earth research.
>>165550
But of course his tranny orbiters will always spring to action to defend him. Dr. Rodchareon's sessions aren't cheap, right?
Keep up those yoga lessions. Try hard enough and a drunk might mistake you for FEMALE.

>>165552
>jesuits and masons
Oh, youre also intellectually lazy/dishonest. For sport, can you validate that position, or are you likewise "super duper sure"?
>globe hoax
Oh ffs, theres more of them.
Lads, you know who you are, I warned you this would happen.

>>165554
The Dubay clan are generational satanists with deep proven connections to the U.S. Army and CIA, and his disgusting Thai concubine is confirmed elite Thai Hofjuden of the Thai Royal Army (aka Masons). They troon-out their offspring from infancy in their perverse NWO Baphomet worship. Just look at his "father"'s feminine shoulder and hip proportions: evidentiary of being a FTM tranny. Eric himself was videotape crossdressing in 'his' youth.
He parades his orbiters with crumbs of truth while stopping them from looking at the big fish. That's IFERS was always so heavily moderated. That's why he keeps banning people for asking too many questions, making constructive criticisms: his JOB is to control the narrative to keep FE under NWO control, so that (((they))) get to decide what gets released and when through the mouth of their false-prophet glow-op whore.

>>165556
>>165557
That was excellent anon. 5/5 stars, your video confirmed a LOT of things I had intuited.
However, it neglects the point that the Earth is demonstrably not flat. Not saying it's 'round' like contemporary science suggests it is (which I refute btw) but it is conclusively not flat, and if you are wont to suggest it is,... well die in fire cuz you're lost the plot.

>>165560
>it neglects the point that the Earth is demonstrably not flat.
Of course not, the plane has some mountains in the middle.

>>165568
My only hope for this thread is that you'll realize what an insipid fuckwit you are, and lament all the bullshit you have spewn from your fingertips.
Though, there's no doubt that you'll ever admit to it, such is the narcissism you have liberally displayed.
I don't contest that there are issues with the professed globe model, I've admitted it previously; having said, a rational person could use the multitude of evidence - yours included - to conclude that the earth is not flat. That you persist is on you, and I wish you well in that realization.

>>165569
Don't forget about the firmament, and the gravity hoax.

>>165570
Yes, the firmament and gravity hoax - as depicted by ignorant retards - is also completely false, baseless, and the sort of thing only a child who likewise believes in Santa Claus would deem credible, thanks for the reminder.

It doesn't look like the sun is millions of miles away at all.

>>165578
Only if you're retarded

>>165579
How so?

>>165578
How doesn't it?

>>165581
Who doesn't it?

Meanwhile
https://youtube.com/shorts/T0f6u39jlRA?feature=share
Carl Sagan explaining how ancient Greeks knew the Earth is round

Serious question for non-flatties:
Which of the following conspiracy theory groups is MORE plausible?
Flat Earth
-or-
Q anon
?

>>165723
Q Anon is the belief that there are good Jews, which is bollocks. It's clearly a Psyop to convince the boomers to sit around and do nothing.
The world turning out to be flat all along is impossible, and more likely than the existence of a good Jew.

>>165724
So, you acknowledge that they are comparably ridiculous, impossible, and lacking any evidence that can pass basoc standards?

>>165725
>conflating the Q psyop with well documented and undeniable Flat Earth
Ahem. Have you even read this bread?

>>165726
Glow harder faggot

>>165723
QAnon is just a bunch of other individual conspiracy theories lumped together by feds to discredit them. It included stuff like Epstein sex trafficking and other plausible scenarios.

>>165737
How is this confusing?
When you're at the south pole, every direction is north.
If you were at some ice ring, any place on the ring would be facing north.

>How Can Ushuaia Get 17 Hours of Daylight on a Flat Earth?
>During December every year Ushuaia, Argentina, the southern-most city in the world, just below the 54th southern latitude receives over 17 hours of daylight with a maximum of 17 hours and 20 minutes occurring on the Winter Solstice. Globe Earthers often claim this would be impossible on a flat Earth arguing that a local, revolving, spotlight Sun should not be able to illuminate such a southern location for so long.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/How-Can-Ushuaia-Get-17-Hours-of-Daylight-on-a-Flat-Earth:d
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/p1BIY7u71dS9/

>>165771
>the dome firmament is solid glass
Keep grasping at straws, dumbass
>>165557
Frenly reminder

>>165774
>firmament is solid glass
Your words, not Dubay's
>Dubay exposed
Already debunked.

>>165775
No, those are definitely his words. So, how does air travel work if the dome is solid? Cuz a hemisphere prism doesnt leave room for,... mountains, for example.

>>165775
2:52 - "If our Earth plane is covered by a crystalline translucent dome firmament"

>>165549
>Yes, and thats a bullshit argument given that the zoom out occurs toward the end of the video, after the overwhelming majority of the ship has already slowly disappeared past the horizon.
Sorry, I don't really follow, could you elaborate.