This thread is meant to debunk the deranged idea that our realm is a planet floating in space.
If the so called established science can't be challenged, then it's not science, but religion.
/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal
2584 replies and 1303 files omitted.
>>166283
>there is a nonzero chance that people might be impersonating shitposters
This is why you use tripcodes.
>there is a nonzero chance that people might be impersonating shitposters
This is why you use tripcodes.
>>166273
I gave him a three day ban. He has the chance to cool off and make this thread worth something. If not, he will simply repeat the process until he learns or gets bored. Again, I really like alt earth theories even if I can’t believe most of them. However, when you refuse to debate anything and call everyone that engages you a shill and also hold that the site is against you for not liking your posts, the simple solution is to alter your approach.
>>166281
Right. Making a weekly comeback to the thread for months on end instead of using the report feature gets the results you are looking for. Good job.
I gave him a three day ban. He has the chance to cool off and make this thread worth something. If not, he will simply repeat the process until he learns or gets bored. Again, I really like alt earth theories even if I can’t believe most of them. However, when you refuse to debate anything and call everyone that engages you a shill and also hold that the site is against you for not liking your posts, the simple solution is to alter your approach.
>>166281
Right. Making a weekly comeback to the thread for months on end instead of using the report feature gets the results you are looking for. Good job.
Anonymous
No.166340
>>166282
Eh, every so often when following a topic I get the crazy notion that there might be something here that isnt found elsewhere, and end up laughing hysterically at the progress the site is making toward irrelevancy and delusion. This weekend was the twitter files.
>>166286
Dishonest as always, never change faggot.
Eh, every so often when following a topic I get the crazy notion that there might be something here that isnt found elsewhere, and end up laughing hysterically at the progress the site is making toward irrelevancy and delusion. This weekend was the twitter files.
>>166286
Dishonest as always, never change faggot.
Anonymous
No.166344
imagine thinking water curves around a ball without evidence lmfao retard ball niggers xD
>Satellite Sent to Study SuperNova Star Was Just a BALLOON
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/satellite-sent-to-study-supernova-star:3
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/nkgqXeb8Y3d9/
Given that you faggots won't post ponies or greens, I post balloons.
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/satellite-sent-to-study-supernova-star:3
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/nkgqXeb8Y3d9/
Given that you faggots won't post ponies or greens, I post balloons.
If the Earth is flat and we were made in God's image why are balls round? Checkmate atheists.
The flat earther meme is jewish subversion to make places that tolerate it seem unjustly tolerant of kooks and cranks while making places that refuse to tolerate it seem insufficiently dedicated to taking the ideal of free speech to an absurd extreme. This thread will only die when it hits bump limit. I propose we fill this niggery thread with the dumbest shit known to man.
The flat earther meme is jewish subversion to make places that tolerate it seem unjustly tolerant of kooks and cranks while making places that refuse to tolerate it seem insufficiently dedicated to taking the ideal of free speech to an absurd extreme. This thread will only die when it hits bump limit. I propose we fill this niggery thread with the dumbest shit known to man.
>>166649
It's okay, Boom-Booms. I still like you no matter what Nigel and the other fags say. It's not your fault that they can't sage.
You are appreciated.
It's okay, Boom-Booms. I still like you no matter what Nigel and the other fags say. It's not your fault that they can't sage.
You are appreciated.
>>166653
>It will not replace artists.
Perhaps you meant to say artists won't disappear completely.
Being relegated to a niche market where Human art is unquestionably inferior to AI art. Much like it happened with chess.
No reason to be concerned. You're incapable of producing art yourself. As the perpetual consoomer you've proved to be, this should sound like paradise.
Let's not lose sight of things tho. Art is just the latest victim.
>It will not replace artists.
Perhaps you meant to say artists won't disappear completely.
Being relegated to a niche market where Human art is unquestionably inferior to AI art. Much like it happened with chess.
No reason to be concerned. You're incapable of producing art yourself. As the perpetual consoomer you've proved to be, this should sound like paradise.
Let's not lose sight of things tho. Art is just the latest victim.
>>166658
You're one angry guy. Must everything be personal with you? AI art is not going to replace every artist. Spend more time living in the art world. Are the most popular artists commissioned because they are the best artists, or because they are the most popular in their niche circles?
Remember the NFT cartoons? It is a dying fad. No, a dead fad.
AI generation is going to be exciting and new for a while.
Remember Green Day's "AI generated music video" that clearly mixed hand animated parts and parts where frames were fed through the AI?
People will say "wow look at this AI generated x". It will be a novelty.
Machines can only draw inspiration from their training data.
AI art is still at a phase where it looks off.
So it will be a novelty.
You probably aren't old enough to remember when people feared photography would kill paintings and "be the death of art".
Are you old enough to remember when people thought CGI would kill practical effects and replace human actors?
It replaced practical effects as the cheapest option. Even now, CGI reconstructions of dead or aged actors in their prime are rare. Practical effects are an artistically valued and celebrated artistic choice now, just like drawing on paper in an era where drawing on tablets is the norm.
Some day the biggest companies may hire AI art specialists to supplement their art teams. Perhaps the least valuable members of these teams will be cut. But to say nobody would hire artists to make this AI generated shit look less AI generated is asinine.
In an era where the biggest corporations rely on AI generated shite, hand drawn and intelligently designed human-crafted art will stand out more.
Just like a real claymation movie in an era of CGI.
>>166656
Compensation? I financially compensated your mother after she got intimately familiar with my flesh.
You're one angry guy. Must everything be personal with you? AI art is not going to replace every artist. Spend more time living in the art world. Are the most popular artists commissioned because they are the best artists, or because they are the most popular in their niche circles?
Remember the NFT cartoons? It is a dying fad. No, a dead fad.
AI generation is going to be exciting and new for a while.
Remember Green Day's "AI generated music video" that clearly mixed hand animated parts and parts where frames were fed through the AI?
People will say "wow look at this AI generated x". It will be a novelty.
Machines can only draw inspiration from their training data.
AI art is still at a phase where it looks off.
So it will be a novelty.
You probably aren't old enough to remember when people feared photography would kill paintings and "be the death of art".
Are you old enough to remember when people thought CGI would kill practical effects and replace human actors?
It replaced practical effects as the cheapest option. Even now, CGI reconstructions of dead or aged actors in their prime are rare. Practical effects are an artistically valued and celebrated artistic choice now, just like drawing on paper in an era where drawing on tablets is the norm.
Some day the biggest companies may hire AI art specialists to supplement their art teams. Perhaps the least valuable members of these teams will be cut. But to say nobody would hire artists to make this AI generated shit look less AI generated is asinine.
In an era where the biggest corporations rely on AI generated shite, hand drawn and intelligently designed human-crafted art will stand out more.
Just like a real claymation movie in an era of CGI.
>>166656
Compensation? I financially compensated your mother after she got intimately familiar with my flesh.
>Heliocentric "Physics" Debunked (Mirrored from Kryptonite Physics by ChrisUK)
>Would a person on a zooming-twirling ball maintain constant acceleration? Of course, not. This video (which is actually a series of videos) will explain why.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/heliocentric-physics-debunked-(mirrored:e
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lIhfJztzz4
This is a video about 100% physics, perhaps very technical and hard to follow if you don't have the required background.
>Would a person on a zooming-twirling ball maintain constant acceleration? Of course, not. This video (which is actually a series of videos) will explain why.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/heliocentric-physics-debunked-(mirrored:e
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lIhfJztzz4
This is a video about 100% physics, perhaps very technical and hard to follow if you don't have the required background.
>>166672
>the background
<highschool physics
Flashbacks to centripetal vs centrifugal force.
Wow a basic understanding of physics.
Did you know this actually proves the Earth orbits the Sun and the Earth is an orboid?
Yes the acceleration does change. The various perspectives are true.
Now imagine the circle is a sphere (yes the Earth is not a perfect sphere this is a visual aid. If you want you can think of a sphere like potato).
In the circle going toward the center increases the change in acceleration (it's acceleration because changes to velocity is its definition). To see everyone on the ride, they would still be staying still regardless of position.
In the sphere the same thing happens.
In the sphere the same thing happens.
The people on the ride would see everything else not on that ride moving.
Getting to the center of the sphere 'Earth' besides a hypothetical one would require going to the center. The center being not on the surface. It's inside.
Hypothetical sphere if you could see everything everywhere, the circle perspectives happen. With people and stuff moving about.
The sense of scale some people think of how big they are causes error in models. Yes it's hard to see specks. However the closer to the surface the more the tangential lines of sight are to being flat.
This is also a big place and for some wrapping how big things are with localized experience is a trial.
If the Earth was flat you could have a tool that could see everything from one end to another like the circle. Yes there is air and possible distortion from heat and other factors.
>Gravity but acceleration changing
Consider the trolly demonstration. Also consider the 'Top to Tail' graph.
There is constant gravity (IE acceleration).
Now consider the Earth is the trolly it goes around the track. The Trolly's down is toward the inside.
Other gravitational forces increase and decrease pulling and being pulled on even though it's a constant (on the solar system scale) force. The closer one is to the gravity the more it's enacted on. (Stronger gravity has more force.)
That kind of additional forces do impact Earth.
>the background
<highschool physics
Flashbacks to centripetal vs centrifugal force.
Wow a basic understanding of physics.
Did you know this actually proves the Earth orbits the Sun and the Earth is an orboid?
Yes the acceleration does change. The various perspectives are true.
Now imagine the circle is a sphere (yes the Earth is not a perfect sphere this is a visual aid. If you want you can think of a sphere like potato).
In the circle going toward the center increases the change in acceleration (it's acceleration because changes to velocity is its definition). To see everyone on the ride, they would still be staying still regardless of position.
In the sphere the same thing happens.
In the sphere the same thing happens.
The people on the ride would see everything else not on that ride moving.
Getting to the center of the sphere 'Earth' besides a hypothetical one would require going to the center. The center being not on the surface. It's inside.
Hypothetical sphere if you could see everything everywhere, the circle perspectives happen. With people and stuff moving about.
The sense of scale some people think of how big they are causes error in models. Yes it's hard to see specks. However the closer to the surface the more the tangential lines of sight are to being flat.
This is also a big place and for some wrapping how big things are with localized experience is a trial.
If the Earth was flat you could have a tool that could see everything from one end to another like the circle. Yes there is air and possible distortion from heat and other factors.
>Gravity but acceleration changing
Consider the trolly demonstration. Also consider the 'Top to Tail' graph.
There is constant gravity (IE acceleration).
Now consider the Earth is the trolly it goes around the track. The Trolly's down is toward the inside.
Other gravitational forces increase and decrease pulling and being pulled on even though it's a constant (on the solar system scale) force. The closer one is to the gravity the more it's enacted on. (Stronger gravity has more force.)
That kind of additional forces do impact Earth.
>>166652
There you go with the Ad Homenim again. You call him a name and talk about his character instead of refuting the point of his argument, just like you have hundreds of times before in this thread.
There you go with the Ad Homenim again. You call him a name and talk about his character instead of refuting the point of his argument, just like you have hundreds of times before in this thread.
Anonymous
No.166680
>>166658
>Being relegated to a niche market
The modern art market has always been corrupt and full of shit. It's only use is for laundering money and promoting woke nonsense. Flooding the market with AI images isn't going to kill the metaphysical concept of art.
>Much like it happened with chess.
This is my first time hearing of a global chess market, or chess having anywhere near the same cultural significance as art.
>You're incapable of producing art yourself.
This part is just wrong. You clearly don't know him, and even if you did it wouldn't be relevant to the argument.
>Being relegated to a niche market
The modern art market has always been corrupt and full of shit. It's only use is for laundering money and promoting woke nonsense. Flooding the market with AI images isn't going to kill the metaphysical concept of art.
>Much like it happened with chess.
This is my first time hearing of a global chess market, or chess having anywhere near the same cultural significance as art.
>You're incapable of producing art yourself.
This part is just wrong. You clearly don't know him, and even if you did it wouldn't be relevant to the argument.
>>166671
Again, AI art is just the tip of the iceberg. Kinda odd you've chosen to stick to that. Do you see it as a substitute to your lack of skill? You're mediocre even as a techie, but alright.
>Passing fad
You aren't well known for your critical thinking skills. Perhaps exponential thinking is just too much for you. No, AI art is not a fad. Judging entirely by its own history, it's almost certain it will outperform human artists.
Your side's not even on denial about this. They are holding on to the idea that Human art will be considered more valuable because it was made by a human. I didn't contradicted that statement. It's probably true, but being able to make a living out of a drastically reduced market isn't the only concern.
Hence the mention of chess. Chess masters no longer discover and formulate their games out of their own creativity. They're trying their hardest to memorise shit they can barely grasp. Stuff that chess engines have already mastered years ago. The mystery is dead. The game is and will forever be driven by machines now.
The same way human art contests will seem like a 5 y/o's competition. The real shit will be AI-generated.
Remember what I told you in your self-pity thread?
>Why even bother anymore? You could have the biggest epiphany of your lifetime one day. Only to wake up the very next day with hundreds of targeted ads right on your face.
>"Check it out! A million different versions of the story you were thinking about writing yesterday! Have fun!"
>It's alright. It's paradise for a perpetual consoomer. I don't expect you to understand it.
You should try to imagine it for a moment.
Also
>Ur just too young, Kid.
You aren't even thirty yet. Imagine going boom boom in order to shill for WEF goy-soft.
I am surprised no body saw the b 3.1416 N slipping off.
Again, AI art is just the tip of the iceberg. Kinda odd you've chosen to stick to that. Do you see it as a substitute to your lack of skill? You're mediocre even as a techie, but alright.
>Passing fad
You aren't well known for your critical thinking skills. Perhaps exponential thinking is just too much for you. No, AI art is not a fad. Judging entirely by its own history, it's almost certain it will outperform human artists.
Your side's not even on denial about this. They are holding on to the idea that Human art will be considered more valuable because it was made by a human. I didn't contradicted that statement. It's probably true, but being able to make a living out of a drastically reduced market isn't the only concern.
Hence the mention of chess. Chess masters no longer discover and formulate their games out of their own creativity. They're trying their hardest to memorise shit they can barely grasp. Stuff that chess engines have already mastered years ago. The mystery is dead. The game is and will forever be driven by machines now.
The same way human art contests will seem like a 5 y/o's competition. The real shit will be AI-generated.
Remember what I told you in your self-pity thread?
>Why even bother anymore? You could have the biggest epiphany of your lifetime one day. Only to wake up the very next day with hundreds of targeted ads right on your face.
>"Check it out! A million different versions of the story you were thinking about writing yesterday! Have fun!"
>It's alright. It's paradise for a perpetual consoomer. I don't expect you to understand it.
You should try to imagine it for a moment.
Also
>Ur just too young, Kid.
You aren't even thirty yet. Imagine going boom boom in order to shill for WEF goy-soft.
I am surprised no body saw the b 3.1416 N slipping off.
>>166679
Oh, really? Last time he called me a Jew before abandoning the discussion. It was only after the fact that I brought up his robowaifu. He even went on to spam the overboard with AI threads afterwards. What a sore bitch.
Besides, he's completely unwilling to address OP at all. It's all "Ad Homenim" from him. He gets what he gibs.
Oh, really? Last time he called me a Jew before abandoning the discussion. It was only after the fact that I brought up his robowaifu. He even went on to spam the overboard with AI threads afterwards. What a sore bitch.
Besides, he's completely unwilling to address OP at all. It's all "Ad Homenim" from him. He gets what he gibs.
>>166681
>the idea that Human art will be considered more valuable because it was made by a human
The value of art has always been and always will be subjective to the consumers and the surrounding culture. Just look at what sells for tens of thousands of dollars on the modern art market: does it all look like exceptional quality and creativity to you? I think not.
>being able to make a living out of a drastically reduced market
This could be a thing, but those who make livings off of the modern art economy aren't necessarily great artists themselves, nor are great artists necessarily rewarded by the existing economy surrounding art.
>isn't the only concern
What's the other concern?
>Chess masters no longer discover and formulate their games out of their own creativity.
Untrue.
>trying their hardest to memorise shit they can barely grasp.
Has always been a thing.
>The mystery is dead.
It wasn't really a mystery to begin with. It's a sport.
>The game is and will forever be driven by machines now.
Not true. You can still play chess without machines. It'll look in the background of highly publicized championships, but that's not the whole world of chess.
>art contests
Art contests are not the world of art.
>the idea that Human art will be considered more valuable because it was made by a human
The value of art has always been and always will be subjective to the consumers and the surrounding culture. Just look at what sells for tens of thousands of dollars on the modern art market: does it all look like exceptional quality and creativity to you? I think not.
>being able to make a living out of a drastically reduced market
This could be a thing, but those who make livings off of the modern art economy aren't necessarily great artists themselves, nor are great artists necessarily rewarded by the existing economy surrounding art.
>isn't the only concern
What's the other concern?
>Chess masters no longer discover and formulate their games out of their own creativity.
Untrue.
>trying their hardest to memorise shit they can barely grasp.
Has always been a thing.
>The mystery is dead.
It wasn't really a mystery to begin with. It's a sport.
>The game is and will forever be driven by machines now.
Not true. You can still play chess without machines. It'll look in the background of highly publicized championships, but that's not the whole world of chess.
>art contests
Art contests are not the world of art.
Anonymous
No.166686
Anonymous
No.166687
Anonymous
No.166690
Earth is a cat and Eartha Kitt is a space alien
>>166651
Back to top fren.
>>166685
>The value of art has always been and always will be subjective to the consumers and the surrounding culture. Just look at what sells for tens of thousands of dollars on the modern art market: does it all look like exceptional quality and creativity to you? I think not.
100% agreed. However, since AI is more efficient to the point it can flood the market and overwhelm Human art, it also holds an edge on the subjective.
>This could be a thing, but those who make livings off of the modern art economy aren't necessarily great artists themselves, nor are great artists necessarily rewarded by the existing economy surrounding art.
Agreed, and it is alright to rejoice on their dread.
>Chess masters no longer discover and formulate their games out of their own creativity.
>Untrue.
Today’s chess masters learn from chess engines, that is a fact.
>trying their hardest to memorise shit they can barely grasp.
>Has always been a thing.
To a lesser extent once theory had expanded enough? Yes. However, just as your previous example here:
<“Just look at what sells for tens of thousands of dollars on the modern art market: does it all look like exceptional quality and creativity to you? I think not.”
The fact that it was bad before, does not negate the impact of AI-generated art. Or chess engines in this case. This is why Bobby Fischer said computers were partially to blame for the dead of chess. With the rest of the blame being attributed to theory.
I mean, come on. The similarities, even down to the partial blame, are simply staggering.
>The mystery is dead.
>It wasn't really a mystery to begin with. It's a sport.
Chess Masters used to figure this sport out. Today, they simply study chess engines, leagues ahead of them. You should go deeper than this. You can start by watching some of Bobby’s interviews.
>The game is and will forever be driven by machines now.
>Not true. You can still play chess without machines. It'll look in the background of highly publicized championships, but that's not the whole world of chess.
>What's the other concern?
It’s just not the same, Anon. Creativity is no longer king when everything you can come up with, will be beaten by the guy who memorized the chess engine's game. There's a reason why Chess Masters prefer this approach. It's simply not competitive to rely on your own creativity, over learning and vomiting stuff from the chess engine. Fischer was right, only casual players can escape what has become of it. This is why he wound up hating it, by his own words.
I mean, even Fischer Random is being slowly eroded. How exactly do you make a “Fischer Random” with art anyways?
>art contests
>Art contests are not the world of art.
Only reason why contests are mentioned, is because they are the only sure format that Human art can prevail. You can expect scandals such as Niemann’s in no time.
>Inb4: U can’t stuff the technology back into a box.
Two words: nuclear energy.
Btw.
No, you are not redpilling AI’s, Nigel. The same way they kicked you out of every social media platform, the same way you’ll be gatekept from the technology. And if you analyze this post. You will know the problems I associated to AI will not go away if you pressed a magical button to instantly wipe out every kike, and every nigger, fag, tranny and shitskin on this planet.
It makes sense to try and use it for the time being tho. It can only be restrained once /ourguys/ are on top.
Back to top fren.
>>166685
>The value of art has always been and always will be subjective to the consumers and the surrounding culture. Just look at what sells for tens of thousands of dollars on the modern art market: does it all look like exceptional quality and creativity to you? I think not.
100% agreed. However, since AI is more efficient to the point it can flood the market and overwhelm Human art, it also holds an edge on the subjective.
>This could be a thing, but those who make livings off of the modern art economy aren't necessarily great artists themselves, nor are great artists necessarily rewarded by the existing economy surrounding art.
Agreed, and it is alright to rejoice on their dread.
>Chess masters no longer discover and formulate their games out of their own creativity.
>Untrue.
Today’s chess masters learn from chess engines, that is a fact.
>trying their hardest to memorise shit they can barely grasp.
>Has always been a thing.
To a lesser extent once theory had expanded enough? Yes. However, just as your previous example here:
<“Just look at what sells for tens of thousands of dollars on the modern art market: does it all look like exceptional quality and creativity to you? I think not.”
The fact that it was bad before, does not negate the impact of AI-generated art. Or chess engines in this case. This is why Bobby Fischer said computers were partially to blame for the dead of chess. With the rest of the blame being attributed to theory.
I mean, come on. The similarities, even down to the partial blame, are simply staggering.
>The mystery is dead.
>It wasn't really a mystery to begin with. It's a sport.
Chess Masters used to figure this sport out. Today, they simply study chess engines, leagues ahead of them. You should go deeper than this. You can start by watching some of Bobby’s interviews.
>The game is and will forever be driven by machines now.
>Not true. You can still play chess without machines. It'll look in the background of highly publicized championships, but that's not the whole world of chess.
>What's the other concern?
It’s just not the same, Anon. Creativity is no longer king when everything you can come up with, will be beaten by the guy who memorized the chess engine's game. There's a reason why Chess Masters prefer this approach. It's simply not competitive to rely on your own creativity, over learning and vomiting stuff from the chess engine. Fischer was right, only casual players can escape what has become of it. This is why he wound up hating it, by his own words.
I mean, even Fischer Random is being slowly eroded. How exactly do you make a “Fischer Random” with art anyways?
>art contests
>Art contests are not the world of art.
Only reason why contests are mentioned, is because they are the only sure format that Human art can prevail. You can expect scandals such as Niemann’s in no time.
>Inb4: U can’t stuff the technology back into a box.
Two words: nuclear energy.
Btw.
No, you are not redpilling AI’s, Nigel. The same way they kicked you out of every social media platform, the same way you’ll be gatekept from the technology. And if you analyze this post. You will know the problems I associated to AI will not go away if you pressed a magical button to instantly wipe out every kike, and every nigger, fag, tranny and shitskin on this planet.
It makes sense to try and use it for the time being tho. It can only be restrained once /ourguys/ are on top.
>>166692
>AI
I agree with pretty much everything you said. People shouldn't wary of AI, a Pandora's Box that can't be closed, we should probably leap to take advantage of it while we still can.
Off topic, but just imagine AI pony waifus. Imagine a having a fully voiced mare complete with generated images and a built in chat program that isn't pozzed. We will make mares real and the normies will be defeated. Imagine a world where even (You) can get an antisemitic marefriend.
>AI
I agree with pretty much everything you said. People shouldn't wary of AI, a Pandora's Box that can't be closed, we should probably leap to take advantage of it while we still can.
Off topic, but just imagine AI pony waifus. Imagine a having a fully voiced mare complete with generated images and a built in chat program that isn't pozzed. We will make mares real and the normies will be defeated. Imagine a world where even (You) can get an antisemitic marefriend.
Anonymous
No.166697
1676512876.png (663.6 KB, 3000x3112, aryanne - easter egg - surprise.png)
Imagine the best written show of all time. It's soytoon toonboom bean mouth shit generated by an AI. Who would watch it?
>>166692
>Two words: nuclear energy.
Nuclear energy hasn't been put in a box, it's just been suppressed by glowniggers assassinating scientists because they don't want the technology to spread. Digital technology isn't the same as rocket science.
>Two words: nuclear energy.
Nuclear energy hasn't been put in a box, it's just been suppressed by glowniggers assassinating scientists because they don't want the technology to spread. Digital technology isn't the same as rocket science.
>>166715
>Nuclear energy hasn't been put in a box, it's just been suppressed
Ikr. The Fukushima meltdown was likely caused by an Israeli virus. I hope man-made "hazards" generate enough doubts about AI.
>Digital technology isn't the same as rocket science.
True, once it's out there, it's out there forever. Still, shutting down further development is still an option. Good luck making breakthroughs on your laptop. Lol.
>>166714
Lmao. AI already trashes you.
>>166694
You do you, bud. I don't mind marefriends for /pol/cels.
But artificial wombs are dysgenic. Antisocial and autistic traits should continue to be breed out.
>Nuclear energy hasn't been put in a box, it's just been suppressed
Ikr. The Fukushima meltdown was likely caused by an Israeli virus. I hope man-made "hazards" generate enough doubts about AI.
>Digital technology isn't the same as rocket science.
True, once it's out there, it's out there forever. Still, shutting down further development is still an option. Good luck making breakthroughs on your laptop. Lol.
>>166714
Lmao. AI already trashes you.
>>166694
You do you, bud. I don't mind marefriends for /pol/cels.
But artificial wombs are dysgenic. Antisocial and autistic traits should continue to be breed out.
>>166718
>shutting down further development is still an option. Good luck making breakthroughs on your laptop
That is far more likely, and I'd be glad to discuss the implications of it on /cyb/ or /mlpol/, but not in the flat earth thread.
>shutting down further development is still an option. Good luck making breakthroughs on your laptop
That is far more likely, and I'd be glad to discuss the implications of it on /cyb/ or /mlpol/, but not in the flat earth thread.
Anonymous
No.166722
>>166721
You are Seb.
No matter how hard you try to force a meme, it will never convince anyone worth a damn.
You are Seb.
No matter how hard you try to force a meme, it will never convince anyone worth a damn.
Anonymous
No.166729
>The Antarctic Sky Ice and the Ice Wall - (10:50)
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/the-antarctic-sky-ice-and-the-ice-wall:6
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/bpoGwMl3E7KK/
There are a few stories about the blue ice being the dome's material.
-----
Because of lack of ponies, here you have it, Earth under the dome.
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/the-antarctic-sky-ice-and-the-ice-wall:6
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/bpoGwMl3E7KK/
There are a few stories about the blue ice being the dome's material.
-----
Because of lack of ponies, here you have it, Earth under the dome.
Anonymous
No.166739
Anonymous
No.166741
1677388160.mp4 (2.6 MB, Resolution:270x480 Length:00:02:26, ROCKET HITS THE WATERS ABOVE IN FLORIDA .mp4) [play once] [loop]
>September 24,2022.
>Another rocket hits the waters above in Florida
It is curious as rockets' trajectories always bend looking for a horizontal path instead of the vertical shortest way to space. /s
>Another rocket hits the waters above in Florida
It is curious as rockets' trajectories always bend looking for a horizontal path instead of the vertical shortest way to space. /s
Anonymous
No.166742
1677470815.jpg (148.9 KB, 1280x720, x9B15E81-61F7-4ED3-97BD-A62EE4C5A10C.jpg)
>Are they faking space? The answer ...
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/are-they-faking-space-the-answer-...:5
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmWdK6e75j4
Only 3:51 long.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/are-they-faking-space-the-answer-...:5
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmWdK6e75j4
Only 3:51 long.
Why do you keep posting garbage? Sure it annihilates flat earth stuff just by reposting their own stuff, but the quality is awful.
There's no engagement of any previous point.
There's no engagement of any previous point.
Anonymous
No.166764
>Physics Ends the Heliocentric Model - (8:49)
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/physics-ends-the-heliocentric-model:7
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kex4zxPOTkA
There is no much to say when using physics to debunk fairy tales.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/physics-ends-the-heliocentric-model:7
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kex4zxPOTkA
There is no much to say when using physics to debunk fairy tales.
Anonymous
No.166768
>How Do Sunrise and Sunset Work on Flat Earth? - (5:27 long)
>In the Flat-Earth model, the Sun and Moon spotlights are perpetually hovering over and parallel to the surface of the Earth. From our vantage point, due to the law of perspective, the two luminaries appear to rise up the eastern horizon, reach their peaks high overhead, and then sink below the western horizon. They do not escape to the underside of the flat Earth as scoffing detractors often imagine, but rather rotate concentric clockwise circles around the circumference from tropic to tropic. The appearance of rising, peaking and setting is due to the common law of perspective where tall objects appear high overhead when nearby, but at a distance gradually lower towards the vanishing point.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/How-Do-Sunrise-and-Sunset-Work-on-Flat-Earth-(1):9
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/oPYT7Y9csKL7/
>In the Flat-Earth model, the Sun and Moon spotlights are perpetually hovering over and parallel to the surface of the Earth. From our vantage point, due to the law of perspective, the two luminaries appear to rise up the eastern horizon, reach their peaks high overhead, and then sink below the western horizon. They do not escape to the underside of the flat Earth as scoffing detractors often imagine, but rather rotate concentric clockwise circles around the circumference from tropic to tropic. The appearance of rising, peaking and setting is due to the common law of perspective where tall objects appear high overhead when nearby, but at a distance gradually lower towards the vanishing point.
https://odysee.com/@EricDubay:c/How-Do-Sunrise-and-Sunset-Work-on-Flat-Earth-(1):9
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/oPYT7Y9csKL7/
Okay so it has been proven that the earth is flat
Who is ready for a hollow earth thread?
Who is ready for a hollow earth thread?
Anonymous
No.166773
Anonymous
No.166774
1678773190_1.mp4 (1.5 MB, Resolution:854x480 Length:00:00:30, BILLBOARDS _EDIT.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Globers are not going to like this but Flat Earth is now on billboards.
>>166779
I guess it has to be tough to confront the fact that we live in a self-sustained closed system.
I guess it has to be tough to confront the fact that we live in a self-sustained closed system.
>>166783
According to the Scientific Method, there is not curve.
There is a reason why the establishment scientists won't publicly debate flat earthers and it is the same reason jews won't publicly debate those calling the holohoax out; because it is all a lie.
According to the Scientific Method, there is not curve.
There is a reason why the establishment scientists won't publicly debate flat earthers and it is the same reason jews won't publicly debate those calling the holohoax out; because it is all a lie.
>ChatGPT - NOT so Intelligent. Watch it LIE & DOUBLE SPEAK - (4:39 long)
>This is why ChatGPT has NO INTELLIGENCE whatsoever . Just like it's programmers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJ4dQmX8iLI
When confronted with its lies ChatGPT admits: there's no real photos of Earth from space.
>This is why ChatGPT has NO INTELLIGENCE whatsoever . Just like it's programmers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJ4dQmX8iLI
When confronted with its lies ChatGPT admits: there's no real photos of Earth from space.
still waiting on proof for cartoon ball. anyone got any?
Anonymous
No.166803
>>166785
>According to the Scientific Method
What a stupid and impotent excuse for a reference that demonstrates inability to summarize or even cite one's evidence.
>According to the Scientific Method
What a stupid and impotent excuse for a reference that demonstrates inability to summarize or even cite one's evidence.
Anonymous
No.166804
>>166801
Even the right pic you post depicts empty space and even distant stars in the background, which according to a lot of the arguments in this thread shouldn't exist with a flat world. Flat earthers can't seem to even come up with a consistent image of their worldview.
Even the right pic you post depicts empty space and even distant stars in the background, which according to a lot of the arguments in this thread shouldn't exist with a flat world. Flat earthers can't seem to even come up with a consistent image of their worldview.
>>166782
How is a complete planet surrounded by empty space that's existed for eons not also a self-sustained and closed system? It's sustained itself for billions of years (unless you count energy from the sun as not part of the system), and is closed by virtue of being incredibly far away from the next object.
How is a complete planet surrounded by empty space that's existed for eons not also a self-sustained and closed system? It's sustained itself for billions of years (unless you count energy from the sun as not part of the system), and is closed by virtue of being incredibly far away from the next object.
>>166794
This isn't really relevant to flat vs round earth discussion, but just a demonstration of the limits of AI. Chat GPT notoriously makes up nonsense when it's asked a question it doesn't know the answer to. It's only quest is to produce an answer that its user is satisfied with, not to do actual research or find troops. Chat GPT will conjure up research essays dozens of pages long filled with dozens of citations that look like real sources but are actually just made up nonsense. It will cite ridiculous meme sources and even parodies in its "research". If you question what it tells you in any way, it is likely to immediately change its position as it is predisposed to take your opinion of its performance as gospel.
>>This is why ChatGPT has NO INTELLIGENCE whatsoever .
Exactly. Artificial intelligence is not actual intelligence. It's wrong to conflate the two. Chat GPT is just a tool. It has no will or intentions of its own and it cannot speak unless spoken to.
>Just like it's programmers.
Eh, I'll give them credit where credit is due for making such a nifty tool, as the bot is quite advanced despite it's flaws. They are a bunch of shitheads for the haphazard limiters they put on it though.
This isn't really relevant to flat vs round earth discussion, but just a demonstration of the limits of AI. Chat GPT notoriously makes up nonsense when it's asked a question it doesn't know the answer to. It's only quest is to produce an answer that its user is satisfied with, not to do actual research or find troops. Chat GPT will conjure up research essays dozens of pages long filled with dozens of citations that look like real sources but are actually just made up nonsense. It will cite ridiculous meme sources and even parodies in its "research". If you question what it tells you in any way, it is likely to immediately change its position as it is predisposed to take your opinion of its performance as gospel.
>>This is why ChatGPT has NO INTELLIGENCE whatsoever .
Exactly. Artificial intelligence is not actual intelligence. It's wrong to conflate the two. Chat GPT is just a tool. It has no will or intentions of its own and it cannot speak unless spoken to.
>Just like it's programmers.
Eh, I'll give them credit where credit is due for making such a nifty tool, as the bot is quite advanced despite it's flaws. They are a bunch of shitheads for the haphazard limiters they put on it though.
Anonymous
No.166808
>>166805
>How is a complete planet surrounded by empty space that's existed for eons
-planet
-space
-the age of the plane
You are making wild assumptions with no empirical evidence, fren.
>How is a complete planet surrounded by empty space that's existed for eons
-planet
-space
-the age of the plane
You are making wild assumptions with no empirical evidence, fren.
>>166807
>This isn't really relevant to flat vs round earth discussion,
It is when the normies pay relevance to their new shinny toy. Discrediting the jews' tool is a must.
>This isn't really relevant to flat vs round earth discussion,
It is when the normies pay relevance to their new shinny toy. Discrediting the jews' tool is a must.
>>166794
I figured out a way to ger ChatGPT to write sexual fetish fiction and I hope they don't patch it before I decide whether to flood sites with AI generated porno drivel or not.
I figured out a way to ger ChatGPT to write sexual fetish fiction and I hope they don't patch it before I decide whether to flood sites with AI generated porno drivel or not.
Anonymous
No.166813
>>166810
Yeah, but even normies agree that ChatGPT is no substitute for actual research. This isn't its intended use. The response of ChatGPT is insufficient to either confirm nor deny the flatness/roundness of the world, because doing research isn't its designated use.
Yeah, but even normies agree that ChatGPT is no substitute for actual research. This isn't its intended use. The response of ChatGPT is insufficient to either confirm nor deny the flatness/roundness of the world, because doing research isn't its designated use.
Anonymous
No.166818
1679643612_2.mp4 (7.0 MB, Resolution:640x360 Length:00:02:20, Flat Earthers' Disinformation as Reason to Regulate Canadians’ Internet.mp4) [play once] [loop]
1679643612_3.jpg (219.0 KB, 3840x2076, MiserlyGlitteringHamster-poster.jpg)
>Trudeau Cites Flat Earthers' Disinformation as Reason to Regulate Canadians’ Internet.
https://twitter.com/Xx17965797N/status/1638817607456288769
https://twitter.com/Xx17965797N/status/1638817607456288769
>>166819
>schizo
Well, the cat is out of the bag, all governments are together in the conspiracy to hide the truth.
>schizo
Well, the cat is out of the bag, all governments are together in the conspiracy to hide the truth.
Anonymous
No.166823
>>166822
>The Korean leader made his studies in the west.
Here:
>The international school, Michael Jordan lovin’ days of Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s ‘Supreme Leader’
https://studyinternational.com/news/the-international-school-michael-jordan-lovin-days-of-kim-jong-un-north-koreas-supreme-leader/
He has been well groomed and most likely initiated into the Masonry cult. In other words, the supposedly antagonism with America is theater for the masses.
>The Korean leader made his studies in the west.
Here:
>The international school, Michael Jordan lovin’ days of Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s ‘Supreme Leader’
https://studyinternational.com/news/the-international-school-michael-jordan-lovin-days-of-kim-jong-un-north-koreas-supreme-leader/
He has been well groomed and most likely initiated into the Masonry cult. In other words, the supposedly antagonism with America is theater for the masses.
1679646091_1.mp4 (15.2 MB, Resolution:1280x690 Length:00:01:25, UhOhSlater - smoke.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Anonymous
No.166828
1679646729_1.jpg (135.1 KB, 2000x1334, kim-jung-un-dennis-rodman-summit.jpg)
>>166824
>Kim Jong Un is too based to lie.
So based that Hollywood sends once in a while a satanic liaison to coordinate with him.
>Kim Jong Un is too based to lie.
So based that Hollywood sends once in a while a satanic liaison to coordinate with him.
1679647955.mp4 (12.1 MB, Resolution:856x480 Length:00:05:58, ancient demons in japan.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Anonymous
No.166836
>>166835
>the truth
All governments cooperate with a common goal: NWO.
Also they hide the plane by bending it on a ball.
>the truth
All governments cooperate with a common goal: NWO.
Also they hide the plane by bending it on a ball.
Anonymous
No.166837
1679733189.mp4 (1.4 MB, Resolution:480x480 Length:00:01:00, Flat Earth in 60 seconds.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Flat Earth in 60 seconds.
Anonymous
No.166845
>The Achilles' Heel of the New World Order [Our Level Earth Plane] - (2:00 long)
>'Flat Earth' as a term DOES NOT represent a map or a model. It's not an "Archaic Conception", but instead represents free thinking and an ongoing investigation and understanding of where we are, who we are, what we are, when, how, and why.
https://odysee.com/@neohumaneve:e/The-Achilles'-Heel-of-the-New-World-Order--Our-Level-Earth-Plane-_ReMaster-LBRY:8
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/u63K2jtGhZit/
A well done short film. 2 minutes long.
>'Flat Earth' as a term DOES NOT represent a map or a model. It's not an "Archaic Conception", but instead represents free thinking and an ongoing investigation and understanding of where we are, who we are, what we are, when, how, and why.
https://odysee.com/@neohumaneve:e/The-Achilles'-Heel-of-the-New-World-Order--Our-Level-Earth-Plane-_ReMaster-LBRY:8
Mirror:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/u63K2jtGhZit/
A well done short film. 2 minutes long.
Anonymous
No.166848
>Moon-Map Revisited - (13:14 long)
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/moon-map-revisited:9
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4shgGfHXk64
A thought provoking idea. It is not new but it is making inroads for those able to do pattern recognition.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/moon-map-revisited:9
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4shgGfHXk64
A thought provoking idea. It is not new but it is making inroads for those able to do pattern recognition.
1680086785_1.jpg (85.6 KB, 960x960, 6cf4bd9db3c0e5fa485ac5c80623d96a.jpg)
1680086785_2.jpg (69.0 KB, 960x743, 8fa261ab50a7ec73f53f8db16e847613.jpg)
1680086785_4.jpg (105.1 KB, 960x539, dc8a30e8430272a124448def4d20aac7.jpg)
Anonymous
No.166890
>>166884
>Space from space
Basically it's exposure. The ground is bright, it's daytime, the camera only captures light for a tiny bit, so the fainter stars don't get captured, it just looks odd because there's no atmosphere
Cameras generally don't get very good shots of stars I think. Nighttime photography upps the exposure to get better shots. I've noticed this when trying to take pictures of stars or northern lights here with my phone it just shows black
>Space from space
Basically it's exposure. The ground is bright, it's daytime, the camera only captures light for a tiny bit, so the fainter stars don't get captured, it just looks odd because there's no atmosphere
Cameras generally don't get very good shots of stars I think. Nighttime photography upps the exposure to get better shots. I've noticed this when trying to take pictures of stars or northern lights here with my phone it just shows black
Anonymous
No.166891
>Globe Debunked by Flat Earthers Armed with Lasers
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/globe-debunked-by-flat-earthers-armed:e
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEDMYdAwJtY
This an 1:11m clip from original 13:12 version.
Let the globers' salt begin.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/globe-debunked-by-flat-earthers-armed:e
Mirror:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEDMYdAwJtY
This an 1:11m clip from original 13:12 version.
Let the globers' salt begin.
Anonymous
No.166893
1680574611.jpg (517.6 KB, 1200x1200, 768444-2960e677ac8355ab66a1cf07706c259e.jpg)
>>166898
if not flat, then how it is?
In this thread there are plenty of experiments and science demonstrating that the tall tale about living on a ball is a lie. Can you demonstrate the ball?
if not flat, then how it is?
In this thread there are plenty of experiments and science demonstrating that the tall tale about living on a ball is a lie. Can you demonstrate the ball?
>>166899
The earth as we know it is just a Hot pond with some islands in it, On a greater Ice Ball that contains more Hot ponds.
The earth as we know it is just a Hot pond with some islands in it, On a greater Ice Ball that contains more Hot ponds.
>>166902
Aha. So, it is a theory.
Do you have anything backed by real science applying the scientific method?
Aha. So, it is a theory.
Do you have anything backed by real science applying the scientific method?
1680659772.png (1.3 MB, 1500x1500, 3E90D833FFF2116BE8A7B3D129344D5E-1371497.png)
>>166906
>so what?
You have no foundations to argue science. Even you bring the facts or all you have left is trolling.
>so what?
You have no foundations to argue science. Even you bring the facts or all you have left is trolling.
>>166908
Asking anyone on /mlpol/, or any brony community for that matter, if they're autistic is like asking a scuba diver if water is wet.
Asking anyone on /mlpol/, or any brony community for that matter, if they're autistic is like asking a scuba diver if water is wet.
>>166914
>goes to racist mlp imageboard
>goes to flat earth thread
>is surprised by autism
An inability to detect social cues and a general lack of social awareness are both telling signs of autism. Have you had yourself tested?
>goes to racist mlp imageboard
>goes to flat earth thread
>is surprised by autism
An inability to detect social cues and a general lack of social awareness are both telling signs of autism. Have you had yourself tested?
Anonymous
No.166919
Anonymous
No.166931
1680806651.mp4 (1.6 MB, Resolution:640x360 Length:00:00:38, you have no proof at all.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Jason Breshears (Archaix)
>"If the only proof you have is that everybody else believes something, you have no proof at all"
>"If the only proof you have is that everybody else believes something, you have no proof at all"
Anonymous
No.166932
1680827983.mp4 (5.2 MB, Resolution:270x480 Length:00:02:45, Earth is not a spinning ball.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Earth is not a spinning globe. Case closed, Dismissed, Have a nice day.
Just try to debunk Flat Earth. See what it happens.
1681180494.mp4 (618.3 KB, Resolution:480x854 Length:00:00:07, flat earth - touching the moon with a laser.mp4) [play once] [loop]
Touching the moon with a laser.
>>166983
What does this have to do with flat earth?
Also, this looks like a perspective trick to me. While a laser could in theory reach the moon, it would probably get chewed up and refracted by the atmosphere before then.
What does this have to do with flat earth?
Also, this looks like a perspective trick to me. While a laser could in theory reach the moon, it would probably get chewed up and refracted by the atmosphere before then.
>>166986
>What does this have to do with flat earth?
Everything. Read the thread and find out more about hypothetical celestial bodies.
>What does this have to do with flat earth?
Everything. Read the thread and find out more about hypothetical celestial bodies.
Anonymous
No.166991
>>166988
>Read the thread
I did read it.
What a nice way to say you're unable to reiterate your own argument.
>Read the thread
I did read it.
What a nice way to say you're unable to reiterate your own argument.
Anonymous
No.166992
>>166987
That's not a citation. That's a strawman meme about an absurd opinion that arguably doesn't even exist.
That's not a citation. That's a strawman meme about an absurd opinion that arguably doesn't even exist.
Anonymous
No.167016
>>166881
What is the argument here? That it couldn't have landed on the moon because it looks silly? It's only one small
component of the larger device. It's not aerodynamic because it didn't need to be in space.
>>166882
>living there
I don't think living on the moon would have ever been a realistic idea.
We could've done more, but we decided to give trillions in foreign aid to niggers in Africa instead.
>cat photo
I take it this is a shitpost.
>Cameraman
>who filmed
Does it even cross your mind to look up these questions before you repost these shitty memes?
>Exhaust
Diffused in the vacuum of space.
>Footprint
The two photos are not shot in the same place.
What is the argument here? That it couldn't have landed on the moon because it looks silly? It's only one small
component of the larger device. It's not aerodynamic because it didn't need to be in space.
>>166882
>living there
I don't think living on the moon would have ever been a realistic idea.
We could've done more, but we decided to give trillions in foreign aid to niggers in Africa instead.
>cat photo
I take it this is a shitpost.
>Cameraman
>who filmed
Does it even cross your mind to look up these questions before you repost these shitty memes?
>Exhaust
Diffused in the vacuum of space.
>Footprint
The two photos are not shot in the same place.
Anonymous
No.167017
>>166883
>Pic 1
Context matters
>"I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don't have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again. But going to Mars should be one of the next series of steps that humans do."
He's talking about technology that was destroyed and not updated/maintained since the moon landing because the government didn't care to preserve or continue working on it, because it was expensive to do so. We have the technology in theory; we just don't have the physical equipment.
>pic 2
Your civilian cellphone network is not priority NASA equipment. It's not just a question of technology, but quality of service. They were using the best possible equipment at the time, which had fewer faults than our shitty civilian infrastructure even with today's tech.
Also, I can't even remember the last time I had a dropped call. This meme must be ancient.
>Pic 3
It wouldn't be the first time the government has lost shit, or quietly sold it off to embezzle taxpayers.
>pic 4
>what is folding?
>what is compression?
When was the last time you saw a parachute? Packaging large parachutes in small places isn't hard.
>pic 4
>what is folding?
It was folded. You can literally see the places where the vehicle is designed to fold from this picture.
>Pic 1
Context matters
>"I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don't have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again. But going to Mars should be one of the next series of steps that humans do."
He's talking about technology that was destroyed and not updated/maintained since the moon landing because the government didn't care to preserve or continue working on it, because it was expensive to do so. We have the technology in theory; we just don't have the physical equipment.
>pic 2
Your civilian cellphone network is not priority NASA equipment. It's not just a question of technology, but quality of service. They were using the best possible equipment at the time, which had fewer faults than our shitty civilian infrastructure even with today's tech.
Also, I can't even remember the last time I had a dropped call. This meme must be ancient.
>Pic 3
It wouldn't be the first time the government has lost shit, or quietly sold it off to embezzle taxpayers.
>pic 4
>what is folding?
>what is compression?
When was the last time you saw a parachute? Packaging large parachutes in small places isn't hard.
>pic 4
>what is folding?
It was folded. You can literally see the places where the vehicle is designed to fold from this picture.
Anonymous
No.167018
>>166859
>not strong enough to move anything else
We already had this discussion. You must have either ignored the response of refused to acknowledge it.
It doesn't move anything else because solids aren't easy to move, but liquids move easily.
Remember the analogy to the weight of a quarter in your pocket when jumping? That's why you don't feel anything: it's too subtle.
>all these other memes
Ffs, these are the same redundant arguments over and over again. You keep posting more of them, even though any of us could just scroll up to see them.
We talked about Polaris. We talked about curves. We talked about horizon perspective. We talked about how earth looks from space. We talked about boats. We had every one of these topics before, but you keep regurgitating more memes about the exact same thing you've already said, instead of just replying to those same discussions. Why do you keep repeating yourself with things you've already said and posted?
>not strong enough to move anything else
We already had this discussion. You must have either ignored the response of refused to acknowledge it.
It doesn't move anything else because solids aren't easy to move, but liquids move easily.
Remember the analogy to the weight of a quarter in your pocket when jumping? That's why you don't feel anything: it's too subtle.
>all these other memes
Ffs, these are the same redundant arguments over and over again. You keep posting more of them, even though any of us could just scroll up to see them.
We talked about Polaris. We talked about curves. We talked about horizon perspective. We talked about how earth looks from space. We talked about boats. We had every one of these topics before, but you keep regurgitating more memes about the exact same thing you've already said, instead of just replying to those same discussions. Why do you keep repeating yourself with things you've already said and posted?
>>167099
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VtJFb_P2j48&pp=ygURQmlsbCBueWUgc2V4IGp1bms%3D
Remember when Bill Nye had some show that featured this Jewish gem.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VtJFb_P2j48&pp=ygURQmlsbCBueWUgc2V4IGp1bms%3D
Remember when Bill Nye had some show that featured this Jewish gem.
Anonymous
No.167101
Anonymous
No.167104
>>167099
Okay, but what does that have to do with flat earth?
Neither of them believe in flat earth, including the one you said was more qualified.
Bill Nye is a hack and a showman, more of a TV personality than a scientist, but it's not like he invented the concept, nor is he a particularly vocal proponent of it. You won't have to look far here to find people who think he's full of shit, but how is that relevant to the conversation?
Okay, but what does that have to do with flat earth?
Neither of them believe in flat earth, including the one you said was more qualified.
Bill Nye is a hack and a showman, more of a TV personality than a scientist, but it's not like he invented the concept, nor is he a particularly vocal proponent of it. You won't have to look far here to find people who think he's full of shit, but how is that relevant to the conversation?
>>167111
It's still a decent question though, because the implicit followup is what is the incentive for such an elaborate lie, if supposedly the shape were of little actual consequence.
It's still a decent question though, because the implicit followup is what is the incentive for such an elaborate lie, if supposedly the shape were of little actual consequence.
>>167113
>the implicit followup is what is the incentive for such an elaborate lie
1) To discourage the idea of going beyond the Antarctic perimeter because supposedly there is nothing to see there
2) To discredit ancient civilizations' knowledge and also The Bible.
>the implicit followup is what is the incentive for such an elaborate lie
1) To discourage the idea of going beyond the Antarctic perimeter because supposedly there is nothing to see there
2) To discredit ancient civilizations' knowledge and also The Bible.
>>167116
>1) To discourage the idea of going beyond the Antarctic perimeter because supposedly there is nothing to see there
Why would they want people to not go there if there's nothing there? Heck, it would make more sense for them to commercialize it with "edge of the world" resorts and whatnot.
>2) To discredit ancient civilizations' knowledge and also The Bible.
There are easier ways to do this. Most people believe the earth is round, and most people are still religious. Round earth does not notably prevent people from being religious. Also, not all ancient civilizations said the world was flat.
>1) To discourage the idea of going beyond the Antarctic perimeter because supposedly there is nothing to see there
Why would they want people to not go there if there's nothing there? Heck, it would make more sense for them to commercialize it with "edge of the world" resorts and whatnot.
>2) To discredit ancient civilizations' knowledge and also The Bible.
There are easier ways to do this. Most people believe the earth is round, and most people are still religious. Round earth does not notably prevent people from being religious. Also, not all ancient civilizations said the world was flat.
Anonymous
No.167124
>The Inverse Square Law Proves Local Sun
>This video demonstrates how the Inverse Square Law proves the sun is local, and disproves the heliocentric model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIjFkdbBe-8
Mirror:
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/the-inverse-square-law-proves-local-sun:5
>This video demonstrates how the Inverse Square Law proves the sun is local, and disproves the heliocentric model.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIjFkdbBe-8
Mirror:
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/the-inverse-square-law-proves-local-sun:5
>>167117
>Why would they want people to not go there if there's nothing there?
There is nothing according to the masons.
>Round earth does not notably prevent people from being religious
Round earth is a deceptive statement claiming that The Bible is wrong.
>not all ancient civilizations said the world was flat
Really? Would you mind to provide citations?
>Why would they want people to not go there if there's nothing there?
There is nothing according to the masons.
>Round earth does not notably prevent people from being religious
Round earth is a deceptive statement claiming that The Bible is wrong.
>not all ancient civilizations said the world was flat
Really? Would you mind to provide citations?
>>167127
>There is nothing according to the masons.
What is there according to non-masons then? Conventional science says there's outer space and a vast cosmos. What do you think is there?
>>167127
>deceptive statement
It has not notably prevented people from being religious or Christian, so it's a rather impotent method. This isn't really a decent motive for fabricating and maintaining such an elaborate lie that would take tons of resources to keep secret.
>citations
Greeks philosophers 5th century BC:
https://archive.org/details/earlygreekastron0000dick/page/n5/mode/1up
And that's just one example.
>There is nothing according to the masons.
What is there according to non-masons then? Conventional science says there's outer space and a vast cosmos. What do you think is there?
>>167127
>deceptive statement
It has not notably prevented people from being religious or Christian, so it's a rather impotent method. This isn't really a decent motive for fabricating and maintaining such an elaborate lie that would take tons of resources to keep secret.
>citations
Greeks philosophers 5th century BC:
https://archive.org/details/earlygreekastron0000dick/page/n5/mode/1up
And that's just one example.
Anonymous
No.167144
1682997079.jpg (80.3 KB, 1280x720, Twilight_looking_angry_S4E26.jpg)
Anonymous
No.167147
Anonymous
No.167154
>>167146
If you want to bump the thread, bump it yourself.
I sage 1/5 posts I make to this board, and I did on 4chan too. I only bump the highest quality threads.
If you want to bump the thread, bump it yourself.
I sage 1/5 posts I make to this board, and I did on 4chan too. I only bump the highest quality threads.
>"We haven't been to space." U.S.S.R. Cosmonaut Igor Volk (Confirmed)
>Does the fact that former U.S.S.R. cosmonaut Igor Volk admitting in 2014 that no one has been to space prove the earth is flat? Well, not necessarily, but it certainly evinces that all claims related to space are fake and it demolishes the number one proof of the globe. Furthermore, it proves that BIG lies are not only possible but are happening right now.
>The space deception is everywhere and permeates all major institutions including academia, enforcement agencies, governments, media, and religious institutions.
>This information from a brave whistleblower should be shared everywhere! Everyone should know the name Igor Volk.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/we-haven't-been-to-space.-u.s.s.r.:8
Mirrors:
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=YB3AW9BNNM42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0g2jPuN2Kg
>Does the fact that former U.S.S.R. cosmonaut Igor Volk admitting in 2014 that no one has been to space prove the earth is flat? Well, not necessarily, but it certainly evinces that all claims related to space are fake and it demolishes the number one proof of the globe. Furthermore, it proves that BIG lies are not only possible but are happening right now.
>The space deception is everywhere and permeates all major institutions including academia, enforcement agencies, governments, media, and religious institutions.
>This information from a brave whistleblower should be shared everywhere! Everyone should know the name Igor Volk.
https://odysee.com/@TabooConspiracy:c/we-haven't-been-to-space.-u.s.s.r.:8
Mirrors:
https://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=YB3AW9BNNM42
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0g2jPuN2Kg
>>167172
>number one proof of the globe
People knew the earth was round even before we ever got to space.
>number one proof of the globe
People knew the earth was round even before we ever got to space.
>>167175
People were actually told that this realm is not a plane.
To believe that lie doesn't change reality.
People were actually told that this realm is not a plane.
To believe that lie doesn't change reality.
Anonymous
No.167226
>The Russians Call Out NASA
>The former head of Russia’s Roscosmos space agency, Dmitry Rogozin, has expressed doubt that the US Apollo 11 mission really landed on the Moon in 1969, saying he has yet to see conclusive proof.
https://voxday.net/2023/05/08/the-russians-call-out-nasa/
https://www.rt.com/russia/575937-roscosmos-rogozin-us-moon-landing-proof/
>The former head of Russia’s Roscosmos space agency, Dmitry Rogozin, has expressed doubt that the US Apollo 11 mission really landed on the Moon in 1969, saying he has yet to see conclusive proof.
https://voxday.net/2023/05/08/the-russians-call-out-nasa/
https://www.rt.com/russia/575937-roscosmos-rogozin-us-moon-landing-proof/
>>167182
no, you can do the experiments for yourself. unfortunately, it does require leaving your mom's house
no, you can do the experiments for yourself. unfortunately, it does require leaving your mom's house
>>167309
how far is the moon from the Earth? (I already know what your answer will be but I want you to say it)
how far is the moon from the Earth? (I already know what your answer will be but I want you to say it)
>>167310
>how far is the moon from the Earth?
What a disappointment. I was expecting you to describe the experiments.
>how far is the moon from the Earth?
What a disappointment. I was expecting you to describe the experiments.
Anonymous
No.167318
>The Flat Earth Metabunk Debunk - Eric Dubay vs Joe Rogan
>The famous UFC commentator believes that people believe the flat earth theory for the fun of it. He said, “Cos’ it’s fun. It’s fun to think you know things that other people don’t know.” He added, “It’s fun to think that everybody else is a sheep and that you understand the firmament that there is this glass cover. The stars are just light in the sky [and] earth is the center of everything, God’s in control of the whole ride.”
https://www.bitchute.com/video/haDW701NxHFb/
>The famous UFC commentator believes that people believe the flat earth theory for the fun of it. He said, “Cos’ it’s fun. It’s fun to think you know things that other people don’t know.” He added, “It’s fun to think that everybody else is a sheep and that you understand the firmament that there is this glass cover. The stars are just light in the sky [and] earth is the center of everything, God’s in control of the whole ride.”
https://www.bitchute.com/video/haDW701NxHFb/
Anonymous
No.167319
>Joe Rogan's Moon Hoax Mystery
>Many years ago Joe Rogan was a passionate and outspoken critic of NASA in general and the Apollo moon landing hoax in particular. He exposed the hoax on Mancow, debated and schooled "Bad Astronomer" Phil Plait and "Bullshit's" Penn Jillette. Then suddenly, with no explanation, shortly after getting his own "Joe Rogan Questions Everything" TV show on Sci-Fi, Joe did a complete 180 and changed from unequivocally saying "there is no way people landed on the Moon," to saying "there is no way it was a hoax!" In the following video, his best friend Eddie Bravo calls Joe out on this clear, unexpected and mysterious change of heart, saying, "Joe, you used to be the Moon hoax crusader, then something happened. What happened, Joe? What happened?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AfT4saCiRg
>Many years ago Joe Rogan was a passionate and outspoken critic of NASA in general and the Apollo moon landing hoax in particular. He exposed the hoax on Mancow, debated and schooled "Bad Astronomer" Phil Plait and "Bullshit's" Penn Jillette. Then suddenly, with no explanation, shortly after getting his own "Joe Rogan Questions Everything" TV show on Sci-Fi, Joe did a complete 180 and changed from unequivocally saying "there is no way people landed on the Moon," to saying "there is no way it was a hoax!" In the following video, his best friend Eddie Bravo calls Joe out on this clear, unexpected and mysterious change of heart, saying, "Joe, you used to be the Moon hoax crusader, then something happened. What happened, Joe? What happened?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AfT4saCiRg
Anonymous
No.167320
>Joe Rogan and Neil DeGrasse Tyson vs. Eric Dubay and Eddie Bravo
>Many years ago before having his own "Joe Rogan Questions Everything" TV show and before JRE was the world's biggest podcast, Joe Rogan was a vocal proponent exposing NASA's Moon landing hoax. He debated Penn Gillette, Phil Plait, Mancow, and many others brilliantly explaining the problems and inconsistencies with NASA's supposed Moon landings. Then one day, around Joe's Sci-Fi channel show premier, he had NASA spokesman Neil Degrasse Tyson on his podcast, praised him to a sycophantic degree, and back-peddled 180 degrees on his Moon hoax stance from stating unequivocally that (and I quote) "there is no way we went to the Moon," to stating equally unequivocally that, "there is no way that it was a hoax." Since this hypocritical 180, Joe has continued to have Neil Tyson and other establishment shills on his show, while simultaneously silencing and condemning people with anti-establishment views like his best friend Eddie Bravo. In the following video you will see Joe arrogantly, aggressively, and disrespectfully ridiculing and attempting to silence Eddie from speaking his mind about NASA, Flat Earth, Dinosaurs, Chemtrails, and other topics which Joe has clearly become a gate-keeper for.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/UjLe5cKrZ2hg/
>Many years ago before having his own "Joe Rogan Questions Everything" TV show and before JRE was the world's biggest podcast, Joe Rogan was a vocal proponent exposing NASA's Moon landing hoax. He debated Penn Gillette, Phil Plait, Mancow, and many others brilliantly explaining the problems and inconsistencies with NASA's supposed Moon landings. Then one day, around Joe's Sci-Fi channel show premier, he had NASA spokesman Neil Degrasse Tyson on his podcast, praised him to a sycophantic degree, and back-peddled 180 degrees on his Moon hoax stance from stating unequivocally that (and I quote) "there is no way we went to the Moon," to stating equally unequivocally that, "there is no way that it was a hoax." Since this hypocritical 180, Joe has continued to have Neil Tyson and other establishment shills on his show, while simultaneously silencing and condemning people with anti-establishment views like his best friend Eddie Bravo. In the following video you will see Joe arrogantly, aggressively, and disrespectfully ridiculing and attempting to silence Eddie from speaking his mind about NASA, Flat Earth, Dinosaurs, Chemtrails, and other topics which Joe has clearly become a gate-keeper for.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/UjLe5cKrZ2hg/
Anonymous
No.167427
1684900391_2.png (1.2 MB, 1366x716, vScreenshot_20230523_232156.png)
1684900391_3.png (830.3 KB, 1290x562, vScreenshot_20230523_232434.png)
>Night Sky - When Lasers hit the Firmament [ 4K ]
>Scientists claim that they are using the most powerful lasers in the world to project an artificial star in the mesosphere for telescopes.
>They claim that a very thin layer of sodium is excited to glow.
>The problem here, the laser stops abruptly at a barrier. This is not possible, no matter with which wavelength.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maBf0H3UNJI
Mirrors (no 4K):
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/night-sky-when-lasers-hit-the-firmament:8
https://www.bitchute.com/video/tLrZ7GtYXK8M/
Beautiful night sky and music.
-----
The scientific lecture from 2010 explaining the physics of lasers. Then the NASA's claim of what they are doing is bullshit.
>Lene Hau: "Quantum control of light and matter - from the macroscopic to the nanoscale"
>Lecture, fall 2010
>Lene Hau, Harvard University
>Professor of Physics and Applied Physics :
>"Quantum control of light and matter - from the macroscopic to the nanoscale"
>Light pulses are slowed in ultra-cold atom clouds to bicycle speed: 24 km/hour, which is 50 million times lower than the light speed in vacuum. In the process the pulses spatially compress by the same large factor, from 1 km to only 0.02 mm at which point they fit entirely within the atom cloud. A light pulse can then be completely stopped for several milliseconds. In our more recent experiments, we take matters further: We stop and extinguish a light pulse in one part of space and revive it in a completely different location. The experiments create a new paradigm for control and inter-conversion of light and matter.... and the secret behind the trick will be revealed in the talk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxFx8m41QWM
>Scientists claim that they are using the most powerful lasers in the world to project an artificial star in the mesosphere for telescopes.
>They claim that a very thin layer of sodium is excited to glow.
>The problem here, the laser stops abruptly at a barrier. This is not possible, no matter with which wavelength.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maBf0H3UNJI
Mirrors (no 4K):
https://odysee.com/@EddieAlencar:a/night-sky-when-lasers-hit-the-firmament:8
https://www.bitchute.com/video/tLrZ7GtYXK8M/
Beautiful night sky and music.
-----
The scientific lecture from 2010 explaining the physics of lasers. Then the NASA's claim of what they are doing is bullshit.
>Lene Hau: "Quantum control of light and matter - from the macroscopic to the nanoscale"
>Lecture, fall 2010
>Lene Hau, Harvard University
>Professor of Physics and Applied Physics :
>"Quantum control of light and matter - from the macroscopic to the nanoscale"
>Light pulses are slowed in ultra-cold atom clouds to bicycle speed: 24 km/hour, which is 50 million times lower than the light speed in vacuum. In the process the pulses spatially compress by the same large factor, from 1 km to only 0.02 mm at which point they fit entirely within the atom cloud. A light pulse can then be completely stopped for several milliseconds. In our more recent experiments, we take matters further: We stop and extinguish a light pulse in one part of space and revive it in a completely different location. The experiments create a new paradigm for control and inter-conversion of light and matter.... and the secret behind the trick will be revealed in the talk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxFx8m41QWM
The "Official™" "Experts™" and "Scientists™" claim that stallions can get pregnant, while some claim that only mares can get pregnant - that alone proves that if you truly want or need to know something, it's better to go on the (possibly years long) journey to find out for yourself.
The bigger question is this: are you getting genuine value for your limited and dwindling time and energy spent, by trying to figure out which "scientist™" or "expert™" to trust, and would you be getting genuine value in working out beyond any doubt what shape or size the Earth truly is?
The bigger question is this: are you getting genuine value for your limited and dwindling time and energy spent, by trying to figure out which "scientist™" or "expert™" to trust, and would you be getting genuine value in working out beyond any doubt what shape or size the Earth truly is?
>>167443
>would you be getting genuine value in working out beyond any doubt what shape or size the Earth truly is?
It is not only the lie, but what lies behind it.
>would you be getting genuine value in working out beyond any doubt what shape or size the Earth truly is?
It is not only the lie, but what lies behind it.
Anonymous
No.167445
>>167444
My point is that this particular lie/psyop/subject was introduced by the enemy specifically to cause confusion and infighting among people/stallions/etc. who would otherwise have more time and energy to find out exactly who the enemies actually are, and what other tricks they use.
Also, these "bones" for the goyim to chew on and fight over help fine-tune the enemy's tactics and help them find out the identities of any actual threats who they feel need to be "dealt with" specifically.
I realise that not everyone can stare the monster in the eye directly and needs to use less intimidating subjects and battles to sharpen their skills, but at least be aware that you're choosing to fight inside the terrarium/pen/cage that was set up for you, by the enemy you're trying to outsmart.
The world has existed every day for at least 6000 years - it's not that important to know what shape it is, and arguing over it won't reveal all that much of those who set up the subject for people/stallions/etc. to argue over. That's what I'm Saiyan here. Sorry to be a killjoy, no fun allowed etc., feel free to ignore if need be.
Nevertheless, this argument isn't much different to the "infinite genders" deception: First there were two sexes (easy-peasy so far), then a "jew" came along and changed that to "genders" and people started accepting the new term, so now there are two genders, well since "gender" can now mean what those "jews" who introduced the term want it to mean they can then introduce additional genders and even change the original meaning of that word - further removing people from the actual reality that there still are and always only were two sexes! What's the point of arguing how many genders there are, when there are only two sexes and everything else is a work of "jewish" fiction? (Besides sharpening skills without directly confronting the monster, which could be done in all kinds of other ways.)
Just be aware of the artificially-created cage one enters by taking part in these arguments. One of the first steps of introducing (((communism))) is to remove the "goyim" from a benevolent higher power so they become confused and lost, and then have them fighting/killing each other over artificially-introduced belief-systems.
My point is that this particular lie/psyop/subject was introduced by the enemy specifically to cause confusion and infighting among people/stallions/etc. who would otherwise have more time and energy to find out exactly who the enemies actually are, and what other tricks they use.
Also, these "bones" for the goyim to chew on and fight over help fine-tune the enemy's tactics and help them find out the identities of any actual threats who they feel need to be "dealt with" specifically.
I realise that not everyone can stare the monster in the eye directly and needs to use less intimidating subjects and battles to sharpen their skills, but at least be aware that you're choosing to fight inside the terrarium/pen/cage that was set up for you, by the enemy you're trying to outsmart.
The world has existed every day for at least 6000 years - it's not that important to know what shape it is, and arguing over it won't reveal all that much of those who set up the subject for people/stallions/etc. to argue over. That's what I'm Saiyan here. Sorry to be a killjoy, no fun allowed etc., feel free to ignore if need be.
Nevertheless, this argument isn't much different to the "infinite genders" deception: First there were two sexes (easy-peasy so far), then a "jew" came along and changed that to "genders" and people started accepting the new term, so now there are two genders, well since "gender" can now mean what those "jews" who introduced the term want it to mean they can then introduce additional genders and even change the original meaning of that word - further removing people from the actual reality that there still are and always only were two sexes! What's the point of arguing how many genders there are, when there are only two sexes and everything else is a work of "jewish" fiction? (Besides sharpening skills without directly confronting the monster, which could be done in all kinds of other ways.)
Just be aware of the artificially-created cage one enters by taking part in these arguments. One of the first steps of introducing (((communism))) is to remove the "goyim" from a benevolent higher power so they become confused and lost, and then have them fighting/killing each other over artificially-introduced belief-systems.
>>167443
>The "Official™" "Experts™" and "Scientists™" claim that stallions can get pregnant
Source? This doesn't sound like a settled topic.
>The "Official™" "Experts™" and "Scientists™" claim that stallions can get pregnant
Source? This doesn't sound like a settled topic.
Business Dog
No.167451
>>167450
Oh, sorry I don't have a source on that statement right now, but the Science is Settled™ regardless. :3
Oh, sorry I don't have a source on that statement right now, but the Science is Settled™ regardless. :3
>>167447
>My point is that this particular lie/psyop/subject was introduced by the enemy specifically to cause confusion and infighting among people/stallions/etc.
Rebuking heliocentrism is not new and hadn't been introduced by any enemy. It is all the contrary, heliocentrism is a hoax pushed by masons and jesuits.
Also it shouldn't be any infighting if the fags would had any STEM knowledge to follow science and understand that have been duped. This thread contains tons of invaluable scientific data but it looks that cannot be understood by the regular anon, worst yet, they ignore the data and keep repeating propaganda.
>My point is that this particular lie/psyop/subject was introduced by the enemy specifically to cause confusion and infighting among people/stallions/etc.
Rebuking heliocentrism is not new and hadn't been introduced by any enemy. It is all the contrary, heliocentrism is a hoax pushed by masons and jesuits.
Also it shouldn't be any infighting if the fags would had any STEM knowledge to follow science and understand that have been duped. This thread contains tons of invaluable scientific data but it looks that cannot be understood by the regular anon, worst yet, they ignore the data and keep repeating propaganda.
>>167452
>This thread contains tons of invaluable scientific data but it looks that cannot be understood by the regular anon, worst yet, they ignore the data and keep repeating propaganda.
If that's the case, then perhaps most people/stallions/etc. know on some level that there are bigger things to worry about, and that investing real time and energy into this discussion is going to hurt them down the road. Therefore, they'd rather just get a quick dopamine fix by making a half-hearted post and going elsewhere. It's a possible explanation.
Learning which battles to pick is pretty important as time grows shorter.
Yes this is a dedicated Flat Earth thread, but is it really THAT important to get consensus on the shape and size of the Earth, with everything else that's going on? All that energy would be far better spent on exposing the Holocaust™ lie worldwide, for example. That would wake up far more people to some harsh truths and might inspire them into more productive and positive community-action than to hear that the Earth is different to what was always assumed. Whether round or flat or big or small, it's still going to be the same as yesterday or thousands of years ago, and knowing for certain won't stop the whitey-genocide and (((chicom-style))) prison system being built around us. Just Saiyan.
I guess each side of this argument/topic is frustrated for their own reasons, and that's too bad, especially since the discussion's been going on and being kept alive for so long.
>This thread contains tons of invaluable scientific data but it looks that cannot be understood by the regular anon, worst yet, they ignore the data and keep repeating propaganda.
If that's the case, then perhaps most people/stallions/etc. know on some level that there are bigger things to worry about, and that investing real time and energy into this discussion is going to hurt them down the road. Therefore, they'd rather just get a quick dopamine fix by making a half-hearted post and going elsewhere. It's a possible explanation.
Learning which battles to pick is pretty important as time grows shorter.
Yes this is a dedicated Flat Earth thread, but is it really THAT important to get consensus on the shape and size of the Earth, with everything else that's going on? All that energy would be far better spent on exposing the Holocaust™ lie worldwide, for example. That would wake up far more people to some harsh truths and might inspire them into more productive and positive community-action than to hear that the Earth is different to what was always assumed. Whether round or flat or big or small, it's still going to be the same as yesterday or thousands of years ago, and knowing for certain won't stop the whitey-genocide and (((chicom-style))) prison system being built around us. Just Saiyan.
I guess each side of this argument/topic is frustrated for their own reasons, and that's too bad, especially since the discussion's been going on and being kept alive for so long.
Anonymous
No.167457
>>167453
>If that's the case, then perhaps most people/stallions/etc. know on some level that there are bigger things to worry about, and that investing real time and energy into this discussion is going to hurt them down the road.
Okay, now you make sense. You are in the wrong thread anon.
>If that's the case, then perhaps most people/stallions/etc. know on some level that there are bigger things to worry about, and that investing real time and energy into this discussion is going to hurt them down the road.
Okay, now you make sense. You are in the wrong thread anon.
>>167453
I disagree that this is such a time sink. No one has an optimized schedule anyway.
Could you indulge in thought experiment for just a moment? Imagine that the earth actually is flat; and you look out at the horizon and think how it doesn't bend but continue on forever, you look up at the sun see that it's close so that's why it's rays spreads across the world, and you ponder what the stars can be if they aren't suns lightyears away; do you think this would not change you?
I disagree that this is such a time sink. No one has an optimized schedule anyway.
Could you indulge in thought experiment for just a moment? Imagine that the earth actually is flat; and you look out at the horizon and think how it doesn't bend but continue on forever, you look up at the sun see that it's close so that's why it's rays spreads across the world, and you ponder what the stars can be if they aren't suns lightyears away; do you think this would not change you?
[Reply] [Last 50 Posts] [Last 100 Posts] [Last 200 Posts]
You are viewing older replies. Click [View All] or [Last n Posts] to vew latest posts.
Clicking update will load all posts posted after last post on this page.
Post pagination: [Prev] [1-200] [201-400] [401-600] [601-800] [801-1000] [1001-1200] [1201-1400] [1401-1600] [1601-1800] [1801-2000] [2001-2200] [2201-2400] [2401-2600] [2601-2784] [Next] [Live (last 200 replies)]
2784 replies | 1433 files | 282 UUIDs | Page 8