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.
759 replies and 441 files omitted.
Don't worry anon, we all know it's just those pesky G5 towers dumbing you down.
Would you consider the possibility that the moon is actually self-luminescent?
It's reflective. It reflects the flight of the sun from the illuminated side.
Make an actual counter-argument.
When this thread inevitably gets re-made, make sure it has IDs so that we can have real arguments with consistency.
But anon, the flatty doesnt WANT arguments with consistency, he cant even be bothered to make arguments other than to point at videos and say 'its in there somewhere'.
Meanwhile if you post something incontravertable - and dobthe labor of providing screenshots, he'll ignore it entirely or (worse) will refuse to acknowledge the evidence.
Speaking of horseshit, remember this time?
Fuck IT, lets make it a double-feature! LITERALLY!https://youtu.be/3OfbwhU5PQk
I just think there'd be better discussions if it were more obvious when posters made arguments that directly contradicted each other.
You don't see specular highlights on the moon because it's a very rough object with a high brightness. Here's it in blender
Seriously though, why would it get remade? You do know that there's no bump-limit on /vx/ right?
Yeah. The thread is fine how it is.
Globers' bullying can't stop the truth.
Yeah, this is the flatty, who doesnt want ids.
I didnt say there wasnt anything wrong with this thread, only an idiot would think that (proven right again), and lo along comes the idiot to proclaim such.
I was just alluding to the fact that there is no need to repost a thread cuz golly gee, I wonder WHY threads on /vx/ dont have a bump limit.Thats disingenuous, I know exactly why, I just wonder if anyone ELSE thinks it was a bad idea
Threads have bump limits, they just don't slide.
I think all boards could benefit to have shorter bump limits, tbh. It's unhealthy for threads to go on this long.
I might make a thread about the ideas that come with flat-realm cosmologies in fantasy settings.
A lot of conventional fantasy settings assume a standard planetary model for their material planes, but have infinite/expanding flat realms for their extraplanar space. The concept of an infinite flat realm surrounded by concentric ice rings where the borders of reality grow thin is a world-building cosmology I want to experiment with; it could be good for pony-themed games.
The ice rings could be something like the Dark Continent in the Magi setting. Perhaps also a shadowy spot in the center of creation where new suns are born.
Incorrect, /vx/ bump limits were removed
>>163335>It's unhealthy for threads to go on this long.
What happen? Is truth too hard for ya?
Imagine being so ignorant that you insulate yourself from your own incompetence and then smugly shove it in everyone's face, under the pretemse that everyone ELSE is stupid.
No, it's that threads dragging on for a long time without being remade causes decline in discussion quality within those threads.
I was referring more to the main board though.
Better you should prove Earth is round. Can ya?
Waiting on you sweet-cheeks
Do you realize the huge effort NASA and its followers are putting to shut up just a tiny minority who disagree? Quite remarkable. Isn't it?
>>163350>You do realize theres alot of people telling me Im an idiot
Maybe, just maybe, you ARE an idiot
Name calling doesn't make Earth a ball.
Try again with facts next time.
Well every time I do you either cant comprehend them, call the authors/videographers names, or outright ignore incontravertable evidence. So no, you get what you fucking deserve
>>163361>low effort shilling
You have to come with something more creative. For example explain why there is not curve at all.
Transoceanic flights prove a flat earth.
>>163366>unable to connect the dots
(You) must be college educated.
>>163367>music and psychology
So, in your 'dot connecting', where does profit motive apply?
>>163368>music and psycholog
You don't qualify to evaluate even physics 101. That said, read a book nigger.
Oh, thays just college. That is what you said, college.
I got my engineering creds - which people actually pay me money for, enough to have employees, no less - from a trade school. But, accredation is an appeal to authority argument, and has no bearing on the discussion.
And speaking of no bearing on the discussion, in an ironic parallel to ITT, here's the latest Flat Earth Fridays!Credit, I was oblivious to Sci Man Dan until this thread showed up https://youtu.be/2huZYKlAdVQ
That paid shill together with all NASA spoke persons won't debate Eric Dubay. There has to be a reason for them not to take that golden opportunity to shame and discredit the Flat Earth poster boy.
Interestingly, the same scenario applies to holohoax propagandists who always decline to debate holohoax debunkers.
>>163376>Flatty's cannot dispute this.
Interesting details. And yet heliocentrism is not holding water, the announced curve cannot be found, then the globe is a fantasy.
As usual, surely Globebuster made an answer video to the glober. Videos of answer and counter-answers (polemic) populate jew-tube. By posting that Sci-fi Dan video, you are posting a partial view on the subject.
Take in count that OP refrains from posting this kind of crap and sticks to the facts.
>>163379>sci fi dan
Ngl, thats hilarious, cuz its not wrong. Still, this is the flat earth thread so this is where such content applies, whether in support or in contest of flat earth ahem
theory. Gives an idea, actually; youll see.>based nasaponr
Heres a 25 minute video showing the very slow process of a distant supertanker deacending over the horizon.
Pay specific attention to how OP reacts to yet more incontravertable visual evidence of curvature
Recommended at 2x speed
Because the sensors are square. But the lens does add barrel distortion, it's just slight enough in most cases that you don't notice it. In 3D renders people add in fake distortion to make it look more realistic
Actual photo of a straight buildinghttps://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1SpyTP7rdwv6N-cA9VToYfBIS8yj6lg5Py2XfOeo488Q/edit#slide=id.g141444f9b3_1_251>>163365
The reasoning for this could be as simple as the winds being strong or them not wanting to risk having a problem while being in the middle of nowhere to land. But I'm guessing there's also some economy to it, since flights aren't always simple A to B but can have people going to multiple different destinations and if you go a path that's close to many others you can make dropoffs for all of those places, and load on new passengers, places probably more worthwhile than Africa
How do you explain flight paths being curved most of the time? Including, yes, when they do actually go from Africa to South America or Australia