/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

>>171207
Post above imply that. Idk though.

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

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

Different Earth rotational velocity is inconsistent with an uniform gravity force.

>>172428
Those are linear speeds.
Do you not know how circumference works?

>>172430
>Those are linear speeds
You forgot to name the centrifugal forces involved.

>>172428
You clearly don't know how gravity works.

>>172434
You literally are a liberal arts chump with no grasp of physics.

>>172433
>centrifugal forces
Centrifugal force is an illusion. It's a term use to describe phenomena created by centripetal force. There is no force that pushes the object outward, only in one linear direction towards the horizon.
It's barely relevant to gravitational pull, but it is present. That's why they launch rockets from Florida: to benefit from the speed of the Earth's rotation closer to the equator.
>>172435
I'm an engineer, you stupid nigger.

>>172436
>I'm an engineer, you stupid nigger.
It shows, it shows....
If you are unable to grasp the significance of >>172428
then there is not much else to say.

>>172438
It is you who does not grasp it.
The difference in linear speeds at different degrees at different latitudes shouldn't have any visible impact on the inward gravitational pull towards the center of the planet. You're referencing centrifugal force as if it were an outward push, when really it's just an illusion created by linear velocity and centripetal force.
And you're unable to grasp this because you can't even grasp the middle school level physics concept that centrifugal force isn't actually real.

>>172439
>The difference in linear speeds at different degrees at different latitudes shouldn't have any visible impact on the inward gravitational pull towards the center of the planet.
It SHOULD.
>You're referencing centrifugal force as if it were an outward push
For practical purposes it is and is counterbalancing the "theoretical" gravitational push.

>>172440
>For practical purposes it is and is counterbalancing the "theoretical" gravitational push.
It literally isn't though. Your own post demonstrates that it doesn't.
>It SHOULD.
Why would it? It's a perpendicular velocity, not an opposite one.

>>172441
>It literally isn't though.
I really feel tempted to fire up FreeCAD and show you, in 3D how a rotating pseudo sphere would have forces counter balancing the mythical gravity. But that would be over the top and like to shoot a cannon at an insect.

>>172443
>I really feel tempted to fire up FreeCAD and show you, in 3D how a rotating pseudo sphere would have forces counter balancing the mythical gravity.
Do it.
>But that would be over the top and like to shoot a cannon at an insect.
Sounds like you're chicken.

>>172443
BTW, in case you didn't notice, the meme makes the math to support your argument. That said, it is disingenuous as the ocean mass is humongous and actually makes my point.

>>171203
can you tell us what the shape of the firmament is as described in the bible? its a dome retard.
dont try and weasle your way out by saying "uhh we dont know what it is/could be something else". tell us what you think the firmament is exactly
>>171204
they arent stretched, youre just coping that it fits the narrative of flat earth far closer than being of a total cosmic accident on a spinning orbiting tilting wobbling ball
>>172434
first your gay scientism consensus claimed gravity is a force, then when einstien came along he said its not a force and cant be measured. "how gravity works" is a still a mystery my dude

anyway, pangea is terravista, you fucking globetard chuds
https://youtu.be/xF4ww-9KmVw?si=IUqTIXmvqGP8SFw8

>>172526
Oh wait you're serious, I'm going to laugh even harder.
God didn't conspire in the land of darkness, He made it in full view.
>It's a dome.
It's arched as in curved. You might say,
>"but doesn't curves end? It's a dome idiot. Flaterf."
However God's Word is infallible.
Gen 1:6-8 KJV “And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.”
There's a separation. There's waters above and waters below.
>"Even if my picture source re-translated the Bible to an unknown version it means I'm right!"
If you're on a sphere-oid and look up, it looks like a dome. What a fucking shocker dude.
At any point on the face of the sphere it looks like a dome.
>"That doesn't prove anything. Like every post ever made in this whole thread it doesn't count."
Let's say I take your image at face value.
The supposed quotes apply to a sphere and other potential shapes.
Still works for the ol' rough ball. It's still moving about too.
>"But you said the Earth is moving, how can that be?"
In context it's talking about God and His strength, and also about how the foundation cannot be shaken.
Wait a minute that sounds sort of like a Jesus reference.
About Him being the chief corner stone.
>Gravity muh einstien
>"Y-you're all atheist science huffers!"
Only God knows everything perfectly, and if you ask He'll show you a bit.
Stuff eventually gets closer together.
Kind of like what occurs at the very end.
The math for gravity at the useful physical scale required remains the same. It's good enough.
You'll learn alot when you follow Jesus.
It's sort of why the scientific method is made, because it's a method, a tool, a means to try understanding what is happening and has happened to be applied what will happen unless it's something different.

>>172526
The funny thing is that the hoax of the roundness of the plane is being exposed everywhere and "authoritative" men of science are looking like lying clowns.

>>172580
>It's arched as in curved. You might say,
Relax anon.

>>172580
>the math for gravity
now we wait for the actual part where you defend this, because you havent yet.
"math for gravity" is just the measurement of falling objects, objects tend to fall at an acceleration of ~9.8 meters per second. we can assume what is the cause, BUT this is an effect not cause. ofc im no saying flat earther theory on the cause is a air tight sealed theory, but neither is the CAUSE of gravity from the bending and warping of space-time, according to einstein

the reason flat earthers become flat earthers (especially Christians you could say) is because we simply looked for curvature, couldnt find none, and no one has provided it yet. verifiable proof of the curvature should be simple and easy to do, given the confidence that so many hold for it.

>>172587
> the reason flat earthers become flat earthers (especially Christians you could say) is because we simply looked for curvature, couldnt find none, and no one has provided it yet. verifiable proof of the curvature should be simple and easy to do, given the confidence that so many hold for it.
Uh, I usually ignore this thread whenever I see it bumped, but…holy shit. I honestly never realized there were people using this site who are actually this stupid.

This is a picture of the earth, taken from space more than fifty years ago. As you can see, it’s fucking round. End of discussion.

How has an argument about this subject been going on for three whole years? I mean, god damn.

>>172589
>I honestly never realized there were people using this site who are actually this stupid.
>people
*Person
It's literally just one persistent retard.
He made this thread without IDs to disguise that it's just him bumping it all this time.

>>172589
There's no discussion despite best efforts. At the time it was shocking too, but then you realize it's just some retard who can't hold a conversation in any way.
One might just let the thread build up. Just more and more garbage of flatearth that didn't even make sense.
That nobody on the site wants.
There's no actual point being made despite appearances.
It's just one fucker shitting it up refusing all communication. Had that stupid fucker listened at the very beginning three to four years ago, he wouldn't have burned every bridge.
But no the fuck enjoys jumping to conclusions, and ignoring who somebody is, and if it really should be done in the first place.

>>172590
>*person
Well, two at least. He did convert me with this thread.

Though, I kinda doubt the anon your replied to were serious. I mean, "I got pictures of it"? Eeh.

>>172589
good goy

>>172595
Yh, that guy's post wasn't very mature I agree but I don't really like these memes either, despite believing in flat earth.

I think it's better to avoid insults but I can relate to retaliating with insults (I'm guilty of this myself) so I can understand. Still tho, I would advise against it. This way it is easier to convince others of your point when neither side has gotten hurt.

>>172593
>>172596
You're a reasonable anon, what arguments are actually convincing.
Because the other guy certainly won't.

>>172587
Have you ever heard of the Cavendish experiment?
The point is that in physics shows gravity works repeatably, it doesn't have to show the underlying meanings of why.
Although some observations about the nature of the event can be made its uncovering an aspect that is has.

You are able to design another Cavendish experiment accounting for all the minutia you want eliminated, fully documented so others can try. And then the results are shared, and differences or similarities are compared and why that occurs.
Human error is a crazy thing that has to be accounted for.

>>172596
fuck that, used to have this same mentality, until i realized globetards are absolutely braindead dishonest people. dont go easy on them, they always give us shit for literally nothing.
dont get me wrong, I want to address every point in a mature matter whenever its needed, and thats what i do. nothing wrong with using memes to poing out logical inconsitencies, dont take offense to in and see the humor in it.
>>172597
globe has the burden of proof. please prove the existence of curvature without appealing to CGI/photo manipulation and fish eye lenses.
>>172598
henry cavendish was also a freemason, sure his experiment COULD deserve credit for demonstrating electrostatics. but not credit for demonstrating gravity. the measurments that are used are labeled Gforce, but thats just the measurement. it doesnt prove gravity. the experiment uses leadballs to control for magnetic causes but even leadballs are electrostatic like all objects.

>>172599
>globetards are absolutely braindead dishonest people
You realize that "globetards" are ~99% of people, right? You really think that everyone except for your fringe Facebook group is dishonest and braindead?
>I want to address every point in a mature matter whenever its needed, and thats what i do
On most days when you bump this thread you just dump a bunch of badly compressed jpeg memes that make redundant arguments that have already been discussed earlier in the thread, and don't even make arguments in the text entry to back them up.
>please prove the existence of curvature without appealing to CGI/photo manipulation and fish eye lenses.
You say that any picture that contradicts your narrative is CGI/Photoshop, without even attempting to analyze the pictures for CGI artifacts as any other researcher would.
We've demonstrated curvature in multiple ways in this thread, many of which you've simply ignored without responding to, or conveniently forgotten about (as the redundant memes indicate time and time again).
>electrostatics
Electrostatic force is measurable based on the material and other circumstances. Scientists who have attempted to recreate the Cavendish experiment with greater precision factor that into the equation.

>>172599
>"I used to debate people, but I keep getting ass reamed."
>"Since I've stopped debating people I have no obligation because I've said I already won and they can't take that away from me."
Bravo.
>Globe has burden of proof
Flatearth has burden of proof, and every example provided doesn't prove it.
You wanted to upend everything you got to do it.
>"See they're not doing what I tell them to, it means I'm right!"
Oh wait, it's been done. In this thread.
>they always give us shit for literally nothing.
You mean, you walk in. Shit everywhere, say that's proof. And when it's pulled apart it's shit. You cry fowl, that wasn't what really happened, what really happened is that globetards btfo. Mhmm.
>I want to address every point in a mature matter whenever its needed, and thats what i do.
But you won't. And didn't.
IN 2,234 POSTS THERE'S NOTHING
And you wonder why you're hypocritical fuckerying angers people.
>"dont go easy on them"
Okay do it. You won't.
I believe in Swede anon however to not be a massive cock gargling faggot like you.

>>172601
yes, 99% of people are dishonest with themselves. cope about it. that reality. also, youre objectively using CGI images, not real photographs, no matter how much you cry about it. its not just me "calling it CGI". you demonstrated ZERO verifiable evidence of curvature, were still waiting on that. also, youre retarded if you think im going to read all 2000 replies in this thread just to keep track of which points have or havent been mentioned yet. can you also tell us how factoring electrostatics points to the existence of gravity in the experiment? looks like you skipped over that part, or youre expecting us to just know all the details or read your mind
>>172602
my senses tell me that the ground is stationary, and flat is a discription of surface. what we observe is flat. youre the one jumping through hoops and putting youre faith in institutions for evidence of curvature, not us. your claimed 3959 mile radius is a positive claim which requires burden of proof.

>>172603
>youre objectively using CGI images, not real photographs
Citation needed.

>>172603
>yes, 99% of people are dishonest with themselves
Lol. Peak narcissism.
>youre objectively using CGI images, not real photographs
Go ahead and prove that.
>you demonstrated ZERO verifiable evidence of curvature
Scroll up.
>read all 2000 replies in this thread just to keep track of which points have or havent been mentioned yet
Not my fault if you've got a goldfish memory.
>can you also tell us how factoring electrostatics points to the existence of gravity in the experiment?
The amount of force electrostatics can produce is limited and measurable. If objects move under circumstances where electrostatics would not be enough to move them, that shows that another force is at play.
You could reproduce this experiment yourself knowing those factors.
>or youre expecting us to just know all the details
I am expecting you to come into the conversation knowing some of the details, at least those that should be obvious.
>my senses tell me that the ground is stationary
Your senses are in synch with the earth because your body is in motion alongside the earth.
Flying a on plane at cruising altitude also feels like you're not moving.
>your claimed 3959 mile radius is a positive claim which requires burden of proof
You can literally measure it. They measured it in 2nd century ancient Greece. It was proven years ago.
Your claim of a 49747.75 mile circumference of Antarctica is preposterous, and is demonstrably false as per various flight paths and maritime routes in that area.

>>148828
>>149174
>>156686
>>158063
>>158055
Just a refresher. There's more too.

>>172604
did you verify the photo yourself? if not then how can you claim its real? youre obviously appealing to institutional authority, and CGI is the only thing it can be. not real = therefore fake, and must be CGI
>>172605
>peak narcissism
having blind institutional faith and rejecting all observational evidence, is narcissism. holding a contrary position isnt. you cant prove youe photo to be real so its fake, by default. they fake them using CGI. how else would it be fake silly?
>scroll up
no, that takes way longer to do than for you to easily, simply post your proof in one post. you wont do it though.

again, you expect us to know all the details and read your mind instead of just laying it out and saving us a TON of time here. please show us how exactly they controlled for electrostatics and found the force of gravity. saying "they did it" is not an argument that supports your position.
>Your senses are in synch with the earth because your body is in motion alongside the earth.
this is called a presumption, you carry the burden of proof still. prove the motion of earth. planes and vehicles move, that doesnt make it logically comparable to earths motion, especially when you still carry the burden of proof
>You can literally measure it
flat earthers gave it the name "eratosthenes fallacy" because its literally the most basic, retarded, first baby step mistake that globers make. i shouldnt have to explain myself any further, do your research and find out why measuring with parallel rays doesnt work when sunrays arent parallel. as for flight paths, im detecting major dunnin kruger moment. most international flights start off going northbound, which makes no sense on a ball. you also cant explore the 60th parallel freely and privately on your own, the UN made a treaty against it. so please do tell how flight paths and boats deboonk the icewall

>>172608
>having blind institutional faith and rejecting all observational evidence, is narcissism
You don't know the definition of narcissism.
>CGI is the only thing it can be. not real = therefore fake, and must be CGI
There are ways to examine photos for CGI artifacts, and you have not attempted any of them. You are only saying that they are fake because they contradict your foregone conclusion.
>simply post your proof in one post.
I won't make the same argument for the third time in the same thread just because you lack the mental capacity to remember them.
>so please do tell how flight paths and boats deboonk the icewall
You remember that conversation we had earlier that concluded with the idea of the world being shaped like an orange? The one where the longest flight on earth takes the same amount of time no matter what direction you leave from (something that would be impossible on a flat earth). Scroll up and check it again.
>you also cant explore the 60th parallel freely and privately on your own, the UN made a treaty against it.
It's not impossible. You're grossly exaggerating the level of restrictions there.

>>172608
did you verify the meme yourself? if not then how can you claim its real? youre obviously appealing to your own authority, and CGI is the only thing it can be. not real = therefore fake, and must be CGI

>>172610
>"Nuh uh nobody can ever prove any piece of evidence."
Classic.
For everybody I would recommend this video because it shows a pretty neat picture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kavhDHv0JW4

Here you go. Did you scale matters?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHa4AJwZDZg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwpNn2eGxHg

>>172593
>>172596
>Though, I kinda doubt the anon your replied to were serious.
>Yh, that guy's post wasn't very mature
I made the post, Anne Frankly I'm a little disappointed in you, Sven. I wouldn't have expected to find you here that's right, I'm everywhere, OooOoOOOoooOoOooO....

>I mean, "I got pictures of it"? Eeh.
Here's the thing, dude. Like I said, I never really paid much attention to this thread, and from what I've skimmed so far I don't feel like there's anything in here worth delving too deep into. I'm honestly starting to wonder how many of the "flat earth" apologists are just larpers having a few keks, and if that's the case then far be it from me to interfere with anyone's fun. But I've encountered plenty of this kind of schizo pseudoscience over the years, and in my experience there is always a certain contingent of gullible people who get taken in by it. If you're seriously among them, you're free to believe whatever you like, but I would nonetheless urge you to stop and give this matter like ten seconds of serious thought.

The earth has been photographed from space numerous times. There are thousands of satellites currently in orbit around it, many of which are crucial to tech systems you use every day. The planet has been circumnavigated by air and sea by many different people in many different eras. If you want to verify the shape of the earth for yourself, you can hop on a plane in Stockholm and fly east until you reach Tokyo. You can also reach Tokyo by flying west. If you want to spend a lot of time and money, you can pick a direction and keep flying, and eventually you will end up right back where you started.

I have no doubt that Boom Boom and whatever other schizo morons are on the flat-earth side of the argument have all sorts of convoluted troll physics on hand to explain how everything I've just gone over would still be possible to do on a flat earth. Maybe some of it even sounds convincing; if you cherry pick enough data and argue it forcefully enough, you can "prove" just about anything. Since I don't know shit about physics and can't even pass a remedial math course, I honestly can't refute any of it. However, let's just apply Ockham's Razor and a healthy dose of common sense to the problem and see where we end up:

We know that the concept of a round earth is overwhelmingly accepted by scientists, the general public, philosophers, all major religions, and damn near everyone else except for a tiny sliver of schizos on the internet. We also know that there is extensive documentation of the earth being round, obtained independently by different parties, working in different disciplines over the course of multiple centuries, and that entire industries, from aeronautics to shipping to telecommunications, base their entire profit model on the assumption that the earth is a sphere.

So, there are really only two possibilities as I see it:

One: the earth is round, because it's fucking round and the subject is closed.

Two: you are being fed an elaborate lie, which only a tiny sliver of internet schizos with extremely poor grammar are intelligent enough to see through. The entire body of scientific knowledge has been skillfully manipulated, in an elaborate conspiracy that spans national borders and centuries, by a shadowy Jewish cabal. This cabal has gone to an absolutely preposterous amount of trouble to construct this convoluted kabuki theater in order to hide the truth of the flat earth from you, because.............uh....................... uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh............................. uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........................................ um.................................................................................... uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm........................... uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................umumumumumumumumumumummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...................................................................................................................................................ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.................................................................................................................................... why exactly?

I'll leave you to think on it.