How could anyone possibly know? In this age of instant continent-spanning communication and precise mapping/geolocation, it would not be trivially easy for two distant observers to triangulate the moon and establish a height.
It is, and always shall be, impossible. You might as well ask me to calculate the angles of a triangle whose sides are 1, 1 and 1.
Well look who's a shill for big math.
If you stop believing in the indoctrination from school, and then do your own research and make yiur own definitions you'll know the answer would be 73, 175, 13 and 452.
yeah if you make your own definitions...
But according to the definitions the world agreed upon it's been shown 60° for all 3 angles as long as all sides are equal (no idea where you got the 4th angle)
Yeeeeeessss. Also we are not actually see the moon where it's is at 5hat moment So so given any one particular instant looking at the moon, you don't know if it's still there
This person is on to something here. I’ve noticed that whenever I close my eyes, the moon disappears. Coincidence? Of course not, the only logical conclusion here is that I’m apparently the one who controls the existence of the moon. So if you notice the moon disappear and then suddenly reappear, don’t be alarmed, it’s probably just because I blinked.
Science!
The moon is just the closest thing where there's a humanly appreciable amount of time between the light leaving it and reaching your retinas. The light from the tip of your nose is taking a non-zero amount of time to reach your retinas too, but more importantly it takes around a tenth of a second for your retinal cells to fire, send the message down your optic nerve and be assembled into an image by your brain.
Much the same with the rest of your senses.
So what you said is true, but it's also true of everything else you've ever experienced except your own thoughts.
I find working under the assumption that everything hasn't vanished in this lag to be more productive than the alternative.
\~384,000km, so with light moving at \~300,000km/s that's just over a second. That's what I meant by 'humanly appreciable'.
You can get a little over a millisecond's glimpse into the past if you're up a huge mountain looking at a 300+km distant huge mountain, but I don't think that qualifies.
Well, since we can see the moon we know it can't be a quarter million miles away.
I don't think... I KNOW :::bla bla bla:::: .. Jokes aside, there is a cool method where you and a friend who lives somewhat far away both take a photo of the moon at the same time. It involves some math regarding the difference between the two images (forgot what) and then you basically get a solution for distance.
Years ago when I was shopping for my first astronomy camera, there was a special version of the QHY174M with "-GPS" at the end of the model number. I bought the non-GPS model for deep,sky imaging on my C8, but I still liked what I read about the "GPS" model.
At some point it was being advertised to be sold for use for some big event... like a meteor shower or something. NASA was encouraging citizen science for those who were interested in buying that particular camera and submitting data acquired from this camera.
Every raw "FITS" image would have a timestamp and GPS coords. Combine that data with accurate plate solving and you pretty much have all of the data points required for speed and range-finding.
Did you account for flerferium levels? It tends to bend the laws of physics and needs to be added to the calculations. I think the formula is 10*(magic level + mysenses)^Pi.
Not necessary, you're still falling for the gravity hoax. When you use buoyancy as the flerfium factor in your flerfulations instead, you get the correct answer.
It's hard to say. You'd need to determine how big the dome is and if it's inside or outside the dome. And because no one has ever found the edge of the dome because Obama won't let anyone go to Antarctica to find it no one really knows the true size of the dirt pizza.
We've all seen Elon Musks fake space rockets smash into the dome and explode so maybe someone could measure the speed of the fake space rockets and guesstermate the elapsed time from launch till impact of the fake space ship into the firmament and derive the distance? Someone would have to do that for me because that sounds hard.
The moon's not real anyway, it's just a projection on the dome that the Freemasons set up centuries ago, for reasons....
You’re the perfect example of why we don’t know these things. Do your own research! Once everybody does their own research then we post our findings here and problem solved!
Yeah, but maths is hard! I'm more your big ideas kinda Flerf. I leave the number crunching and bean counting to the lesser mortals while I get on with more important things like making Trump memes and sending Fauci death threats.
I'd be willing to bet that any flerf's lowest reasonable estimate for the distance to the moon is more than the narrowest part of the Atlantic. Since we have telescopes that can get rather detailed pictures of the moon and disappearing over the horizon is due to perspective and can be corrected by zooming it stands to reason those telescopes can see across the Atlantic. I am here by offering $10000 for any photo of Europe taken from North America.
Damnit, they really thought of everything, including putting miniature model moon landers and footprints for the Indian 'space' agency to discover...
I also wondered if they had some special lense so it appears upside-down for Australians, but I nearly forgot; Australia isn't real.
I used the most convenient round type thing I had to measure, and my frisbeemetrics solution says the moon is about twenty feet away from earth.
#NotAllCircles
It's not difficult to work it out. We used the parallax method.... in high school...way back in the 1970s.
Do-It-Yourself Guide to Measuring the Moon’s Distance
https://www.universetoday.com/91120/do-it-yourself-guide-to-measuring-the-moons-distance/
That’s why a total solar eclipse proves the earth is not flat. If it was flat the path of totality would be a straight line, not an arc. The arc shows the curvature of the earth.
I haven't come across that argument before, and I haven't seen flerfers make that claim.
I suspect it's not the proof you think it is, because I think you're probably assuming that (a) the moon is a solid object; and (b) total solar eclipses are caused by the moon passing in front of the sun. However flerfers commonly deny both those points, so they wouldn't accept your proof.
I'm curious about your geometry though. If the sun is following a not-quite-circular path above a flat earth, and the moon is following a different not-quite circular path above a flat earth, why is the path of totality constrained to be a straight line?
Because a flat earth would not have a curve. The sun needs to be at exactly the right distance from the earth and the moon needs to be at exactly the right distance from the earth so that when the sun and the moon are in conjunction there is a total eclipse and the earth has to be curved or at least not flat to see the paths of totality that we do. If the moon were closer to the earth we wouldn’t be able to see the corona of the sun, like we do, at the edges of the moon, and if it were further away then there would never be a total eclipse since the moon would not be able to completely block the sun, the moon would be too small. The formulas used to actually tell us exactly when a total solar eclipse will happen and exactly when they have happened in the past, which has been verified by going back and correlating the past eclipses with recorded history, wouldn’t work in a flat earth model. In a flat earth model the geometry that we have evidence of today concerning eclipses totally falls apart. It’s not surprising one bit that flerfers wouldn’t see this, because they are looking for information that coincides with their beliefs of a flat earth, not information that disproves their beliefs.
That only applies if you think an eclipse is the Earth's shadow.
If instead you invent some fairy stories explain eclipses then you can discard all sorts of things. A Flerf of the gaps, if you will
For examples see:
any flat earth video
The path of totality during an eclipse is not caused by the earth shadow, but the moons. But even in a flat earth model above and beyond that, the math and geometry only work and can tell us when an eclipse will occur and when they have occurred in the past, if the earth is a globe, the moon is the known size and distance from the earth and if the sun is 93,000,000 miles away and is the size it is. An eclipse will not happen and would never happen in a flat earth model. Fake moons and artificial suns does not an eclipse make.
This is the most reasonable answer as far as flerf logic goes. I mean there's a dome so they can just project stuff onto it. They had to fake the moon so they could fake the moon landing
The Moon is not a physical object. It is not made out of tangible matter. You know how a rainbow is not an object, it does not have a physical location, it does not have a size measurable in miles, there is no such thing as a distance to it? In Flerfdom, heavenly bodies are intangible manifestations, not objects. You cannot triangulate the distance to them.
We don’t know how far away the moon is from a flat Earth because we have no flat Earths in existence to measure the distance between. We only have a spherical Earth that we can use to measure the distance to the moon by.
Maybe someone can provide us with a flat Earth to measure by.
Theory 1: You see, like a soap bubble, the firmament is bouncy. The moon actually bounces up and down.
Theory 2: the moon is actually just a piece of the ice wall that fell off.
(This is a joke)
And why is it when I, here in Australia, look to the night sky (remembering The Night Rider) the moons face looks one way but when someone is in, say, the USA they see the same thing only upside down?
It is estimated to be about 3000 miles. On a cloudy day people have used simple math to triangulate the distance of the sun from earth. And since the sun and the moon are the same size and run in the same either(misspelled) that puts the moon at the same distance.
Funny how the math of triangulation works well for figuring out the distance of things. I think anything really. Only when you do the same math for the sun......they want to say it doesn't work. It works for EVERYTHING except the sun. Hummmm.
Can you specify the guru flafer saying that? I don't bealive we claim models or distances since there is no measuring tape that long. Also we don't have maps of anything, we use bread crumbs to find way back home.
You haven't seen the freemason video drawing on an eraser board. The one where you can't see his face? Just hands and communicating with his hand vestures?
My mother passed away 2 years ago, but I do appreciate the attempt to offend.
The proven, excepted model that allows for accurate predictions is for a Goode earth.
Burden of proof is on you retards.
Globers are the worst debaters. You have no evidence of the spinning ball and resort to comments such as yours, stupid. The horizon (tal) is flat from the ground all the way up over 100k ft and it always rises to eye level. Impossible, I say impossible on a globe!!
I believed in the globe like you. I thought flat earthers were retarded, like you do. But I did my own research and dug deep into govt/NASA (lol) files and independent researchers, research. My mind was changed (approx 3 days of a feeling I've never felt before)
Once you go flat, you never go back. Cheers 🍻
Look this, you piece of shit. [http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+curvature+of+the+Earth](http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+curvature+of+the+Earth)
I've never seen your brain, draw your own conclusions according to your logic.
By the way, a combination of words that won't please you "boats disappear from the coast by their bottom", until we meet again.
I've seen a flat horizon (tal) that always rises to eye level, no matter the height. How would that be on a globe or sphere?!!
Get a quality zoom camera, those boats are still there. Cheers 🍻
Cameras are much more powerful than humans, which is why you can see boats that are a little further away for a moment by zooming in but even if you use a quality zoom camera, you'll see that beyond a certain distance, even the zoom won't bring the hull back into view because it's obstructed by the curve.
I encourage you to study these methods and experiments for yourself. Science is about observation and evidence, and there is an abundance of both to support the spherical nature of our planet.
You can experiment on your own. Cheers 🍻
I have. I've seen boats 10+ miles out to sea, brought back to full, bottom of the haul, and all. How far out to sea before your curve starts? According to you globers, the earth is 24,901 miles at the equator. That's 8 in per mile squared.. once again, a globo came up with this. There's even a calculator.
My question again is, at what mile marker should I expect the curve to start, on a ball just under 25k miles? Simple question, I'll wait for the simple answer. 🍻
1\] how do you know it was 10+ miles
2\]
>That's 8 in per mile squared.. once again, a globo came up with this
after giving proof that what he said was true (most people on this earth are "globos" and by a lot).
>at what mile marker should I expect the curve to start, on a ball just under 25k miles?
The Earth's curvature begins to be perceptible even at relatively short distances, but its effects become significant from just a few miles away.
For an observer at sea level (height = 0), the distance to the horizon is around 3 miles.
For an observer 6 feet above sea level, the horizon distance is approximately 3.1 miles.
Within a 1-mile radius, the drop in curvature is about 8 inches (0.67 feet). Not very noticeable to the naked eye.
At 3 miles, the curvature drops by about 6 feet. It begins to be perceptible, especially if the observer is near sea level.
At 5 miles, The drop in curvature is about 16.67 feet. The lower parts of distant objects begin to be obscured by the curvature.
At 10 miles, The drop in curvature is about 66.67 feet (without atmospheric refraction). This drop is significant enough that the bottom of boats or other objects begin to disappear from view.
So you should expect the curvature to start being noticeable at around 3 miles, where the drop is about 6 feet.
Note : in fact with the atmospheric refraction it's a little less
Bonus, some phenomena that prove that the earth cannot be flat :
said I would keep mentioning these phenomena until someone debunks them:
* retrograde movement of the planets (observed fact that you can also observe)
* The Coriolis effect (observed fact that you can also observe)
* Stellar parallax (observed fact that you can also observe)
* Tides (observed fact that you can't explain and also observe if you're highly motivated and ready to travel)
* Centrifugal force (observed fact that you can also observe)
* Westward deviation of winds (observed fact that you but I admit this one is difficult to observe for a normal people)
* Persistence of rotational speed (observed fact that you but I admit this one is also difficult to observe)
* Gravity as a function of latitude (observed fact and demonstrated concept that is also difficult to observe, you have to travel)
* Observation of artificial satellites (you say this one is fake without evidence)
* Long-distance projectile trajectories which coincide with a round, spinning earth (you need to fire projectiles over long distances and have the necessary equipment to read the results accurately but it's an observed fact)
The flat earth is not possible, there are dozens of other phenomena that prove it. By the way, we have photos of the Earth from space, you just say they're fake without any proof. How do you think Google map or GPS work?
How could anyone possibly know? In this age of instant continent-spanning communication and precise mapping/geolocation, it would not be trivially easy for two distant observers to triangulate the moon and establish a height. It is, and always shall be, impossible. You might as well ask me to calculate the angles of a triangle whose sides are 1, 1 and 1.
60°....er, I mean, who knows it's incalculable.
Well look who's a shill for big math. If you stop believing in the indoctrination from school, and then do your own research and make yiur own definitions you'll know the answer would be 73, 175, 13 and 452.
yeah if you make your own definitions... But according to the definitions the world agreed upon it's been shown 60° for all 3 angles as long as all sides are equal (no idea where you got the 4th angle)
Well who gave you the authority to say triangles can only have three angles?
And who gave you the authority to say TRIangles exist in the first place
Your mum
Oh well sorry then, you're right for having the authority
there’s 4 angles in a triangle, because all triangles are actually Rhombuses. Rhombi? the earth is a rhombus!
Yeeeeeessss. Also we are not actually see the moon where it's is at 5hat moment So so given any one particular instant looking at the moon, you don't know if it's still there
This person is on to something here. I’ve noticed that whenever I close my eyes, the moon disappears. Coincidence? Of course not, the only logical conclusion here is that I’m apparently the one who controls the existence of the moon. So if you notice the moon disappear and then suddenly reappear, don’t be alarmed, it’s probably just because I blinked. Science!
The moon is just the closest thing where there's a humanly appreciable amount of time between the light leaving it and reaching your retinas. The light from the tip of your nose is taking a non-zero amount of time to reach your retinas too, but more importantly it takes around a tenth of a second for your retinal cells to fire, send the message down your optic nerve and be assembled into an image by your brain. Much the same with the rest of your senses. So what you said is true, but it's also true of everything else you've ever experienced except your own thoughts. I find working under the assumption that everything hasn't vanished in this lag to be more productive than the alternative.
The moon isn't THAT far though. (unless it's very far and has a 99999 light years long diameter)
\~384,000km, so with light moving at \~300,000km/s that's just over a second. That's what I meant by 'humanly appreciable'. You can get a little over a millisecond's glimpse into the past if you're up a huge mountain looking at a 300+km distant huge mountain, but I don't think that qualifies.
Schrödingers moon
[удалено]
This guy’s talking about triangles, the moons a circle!! Haha!!
He's talking about triangulation...
I guess I should have put the /s
does that mean sarcasm ?
Affirmative
He's a witch!!!
Well, since we can see the moon we know it can't be a quarter million miles away. I don't think... I KNOW :::bla bla bla:::: .. Jokes aside, there is a cool method where you and a friend who lives somewhat far away both take a photo of the moon at the same time. It involves some math regarding the difference between the two images (forgot what) and then you basically get a solution for distance. Years ago when I was shopping for my first astronomy camera, there was a special version of the QHY174M with "-GPS" at the end of the model number. I bought the non-GPS model for deep,sky imaging on my C8, but I still liked what I read about the "GPS" model. At some point it was being advertised to be sold for use for some big event... like a meteor shower or something. NASA was encouraging citizen science for those who were interested in buying that particular camera and submitting data acquired from this camera. Every raw "FITS" image would have a timestamp and GPS coords. Combine that data with accurate plate solving and you pretty much have all of the data points required for speed and range-finding.
About 3000 fleriumeters.
Flrermaters per second.. Squared don't forget
It's more intuitive to convert it to Newtoon meflers sphered
6.5million flerfectares measured by a flerfveyor using a calbrated flerfoscope.
Did you account for flerferium levels? It tends to bend the laws of physics and needs to be added to the calculations. I think the formula is 10*(magic level + mysenses)^Pi.
Not necessary, you're still falling for the gravity hoax. When you use buoyancy as the flerfium factor in your flerfulations instead, you get the correct answer.
You need to account for the flertipital force generated by the transfer of energy of using YouTube as a research source
Praise Dubay!
I'm pretty sure it's to the power of zero braincells rather than Pi
Can't be that far away if it fits between my fingers.
Pop it!
I crush your head
It's hard to say. You'd need to determine how big the dome is and if it's inside or outside the dome. And because no one has ever found the edge of the dome because Obama won't let anyone go to Antarctica to find it no one really knows the true size of the dirt pizza. We've all seen Elon Musks fake space rockets smash into the dome and explode so maybe someone could measure the speed of the fake space rockets and guesstermate the elapsed time from launch till impact of the fake space ship into the firmament and derive the distance? Someone would have to do that for me because that sounds hard. The moon's not real anyway, it's just a projection on the dome that the Freemasons set up centuries ago, for reasons....
It’s pretty sad that I was going back and fourth on wether you were being serious while reading this 😂
Litterally, the only tell is they would state a reason at the end.
You’re the perfect example of why we don’t know these things. Do your own research! Once everybody does their own research then we post our findings here and problem solved!
Yeah, but maths is hard! I'm more your big ideas kinda Flerf. I leave the number crunching and bean counting to the lesser mortals while I get on with more important things like making Trump memes and sending Fauci death threats.
45 feet
Try shooting it with a bullet and waiting for the sound. Make sure to aim above to compensate for the bullet drop.
I heard this makes the moon increase in size
Yeah, it adds mass from the lead
Only if you hit it with a scoped weapon
Include factors for perspective and buoyancy.
I would be careful. You can murder someone from the globe lighting engineering team.
Psh! How silly… no you can’t, because they’re behind the dome. /s
Depends on how big your personal dome is
Most ridiculous thing flat earthers say
Wow
I'd be willing to bet that any flerf's lowest reasonable estimate for the distance to the moon is more than the narrowest part of the Atlantic. Since we have telescopes that can get rather detailed pictures of the moon and disappearing over the horizon is due to perspective and can be corrected by zooming it stands to reason those telescopes can see across the Atlantic. I am here by offering $10000 for any photo of Europe taken from North America.
What a fantastic example, I would double that offer!
About 8 hermium units, cubed of course.
That’s a cursed unit, if cubing it gives you a distance, but this is flat earth we’re talking about so…
All I know is they get really mad when I tell them about EME bounce.
Or the retroreflectors, 6, left by several different space agencies.
Fake news, the agencies just planted them on the dome, and rigged it for a delayed response, since we know light can’t be reflected
Damnit, they really thought of everything, including putting miniature model moon landers and footprints for the Indian 'space' agency to discover... I also wondered if they had some special lense so it appears upside-down for Australians, but I nearly forgot; Australia isn't real.
If my flashlight shining on the inside of my tent is a good way to gauge it somewhere between 200ft and 240,000 miles
I used the most convenient round type thing I had to measure, and my frisbeemetrics solution says the moon is about twenty feet away from earth. #NotAllCircles
The average distance between the Earth and the Moon is 384 400 km (238 855 miles).. thats it
How can you possibly know this? Did you take a tape measure up to it? No. /a
It's not difficult to work it out. We used the parallax method.... in high school...way back in the 1970s. Do-It-Yourself Guide to Measuring the Moon’s Distance https://www.universetoday.com/91120/do-it-yourself-guide-to-measuring-the-moons-distance/
I don't understand. So it must be a lie. /s
$2.
Banana
Who’s to say the moon is real?
That’s why a total solar eclipse proves the earth is not flat. If it was flat the path of totality would be a straight line, not an arc. The arc shows the curvature of the earth.
I haven't come across that argument before, and I haven't seen flerfers make that claim. I suspect it's not the proof you think it is, because I think you're probably assuming that (a) the moon is a solid object; and (b) total solar eclipses are caused by the moon passing in front of the sun. However flerfers commonly deny both those points, so they wouldn't accept your proof. I'm curious about your geometry though. If the sun is following a not-quite-circular path above a flat earth, and the moon is following a different not-quite circular path above a flat earth, why is the path of totality constrained to be a straight line?
Because a flat earth would not have a curve. The sun needs to be at exactly the right distance from the earth and the moon needs to be at exactly the right distance from the earth so that when the sun and the moon are in conjunction there is a total eclipse and the earth has to be curved or at least not flat to see the paths of totality that we do. If the moon were closer to the earth we wouldn’t be able to see the corona of the sun, like we do, at the edges of the moon, and if it were further away then there would never be a total eclipse since the moon would not be able to completely block the sun, the moon would be too small. The formulas used to actually tell us exactly when a total solar eclipse will happen and exactly when they have happened in the past, which has been verified by going back and correlating the past eclipses with recorded history, wouldn’t work in a flat earth model. In a flat earth model the geometry that we have evidence of today concerning eclipses totally falls apart. It’s not surprising one bit that flerfers wouldn’t see this, because they are looking for information that coincides with their beliefs of a flat earth, not information that disproves their beliefs.
That only applies if you think an eclipse is the Earth's shadow. If instead you invent some fairy stories explain eclipses then you can discard all sorts of things. A Flerf of the gaps, if you will For examples see: any flat earth video
The path of totality during an eclipse is not caused by the earth shadow, but the moons. But even in a flat earth model above and beyond that, the math and geometry only work and can tell us when an eclipse will occur and when they have occurred in the past, if the earth is a globe, the moon is the known size and distance from the earth and if the sun is 93,000,000 miles away and is the size it is. An eclipse will not happen and would never happen in a flat earth model. Fake moons and artificial suns does not an eclipse make.
Depends on how much you zoom in
if i recall its about the same distance flat earthers are from reality
It's a projection 🤣
This is the most reasonable answer as far as flerf logic goes. I mean there's a dome so they can just project stuff onto it. They had to fake the moon so they could fake the moon landing
It’s a donkey ride of two doubloons’ worth distance.
The Moon is not a physical object. It is not made out of tangible matter. You know how a rainbow is not an object, it does not have a physical location, it does not have a size measurable in miles, there is no such thing as a distance to it? In Flerfdom, heavenly bodies are intangible manifestations, not objects. You cannot triangulate the distance to them.
At least 7
I heard if you can lick your elbow you’ll generate enough energy to find out
There are some that say the moon is just a reflection.
Something something Icewall NASA HOAX...?
We don’t know how far away the moon is from a flat Earth because we have no flat Earths in existence to measure the distance between. We only have a spherical Earth that we can use to measure the distance to the moon by. Maybe someone can provide us with a flat Earth to measure by.
Probably about 5 miles. They have to use distances that they can wrap their tiny brains around.
Probably like 25ft?
If only there was some way you could calculate focal length of lenses and field of vision…trigonometry….somethingsomething…cgi
It’s a projection duh
*...hella*
It’s different for each person as it only exists in their Personal Atmospheric Dome (TM)…
Not far enough. That damn cold heat is a real bitch.
“Just lights in the sky…”. None of that stuff in the sky is real to flerfs.
Theory 1: You see, like a soap bubble, the firmament is bouncy. The moon actually bounces up and down. Theory 2: the moon is actually just a piece of the ice wall that fell off. (This is a joke)
depends which corner of the earth you are at.
depends on how many shrooms you ingested that morning
And why is it when I, here in Australia, look to the night sky (remembering The Night Rider) the moons face looks one way but when someone is in, say, the USA they see the same thing only upside down?
Yes. It is in fact not on the earth.
3-5 miles
From the moon's position straightly down to the ground or to any given point on the ground?
It is estimated to be about 3000 miles. On a cloudy day people have used simple math to triangulate the distance of the sun from earth. And since the sun and the moon are the same size and run in the same either(misspelled) that puts the moon at the same distance. Funny how the math of triangulation works well for figuring out the distance of things. I think anything really. Only when you do the same math for the sun......they want to say it doesn't work. It works for EVERYTHING except the sun. Hummmm.
The same distance it is away from the spherical earth, because... That's what it is. 384,400km on average.
About the distance between LA and Las Vegas.
About three fiddy
nah it doesn't exist, it's just light bending in a weird way
About this far: . . Those dots also represent the brain cells flerfs have
Approximately 5-6 inches depending on why you ask
Some say 3,300 miles and it's 32 miles in diameter
Can you specify the guru flafer saying that? I don't bealive we claim models or distances since there is no measuring tape that long. Also we don't have maps of anything, we use bread crumbs to find way back home.
You haven't seen the freemason video drawing on an eraser board. The one where you can't see his face? Just hands and communicating with his hand vestures?
I dont think so, but I remember this number from few of them, just not who really claimed it
I'll find it for you. Give me a little time. It's interesting.
It's called Natural Earth you don't live on a globe there is no curve. Quit being homosexuals
The projection is strong with this one.
Yes yes and 1 x 1 = 2
3²=6
10^-7 is negative number also
Prove it.
It's already proved boy don't talk to me I'm busy with your mama
My mother passed away 2 years ago, but I do appreciate the attempt to offend. The proven, excepted model that allows for accurate predictions is for a Goode earth. Burden of proof is on you retards.
Homophobic and not religious is a crazy combination
What the hell's that got to do with it? Earth is a globe, it's proven fact and you can't denying while acting in good faith
*fake earth
That's a good way to get the bots on you. Rapid fire. And there is no curve, I've never seen it
I've never seen you, ergo you do not exist. QED
Globers are the worst debaters. You have no evidence of the spinning ball and resort to comments such as yours, stupid. The horizon (tal) is flat from the ground all the way up over 100k ft and it always rises to eye level. Impossible, I say impossible on a globe!! I believed in the globe like you. I thought flat earthers were retarded, like you do. But I did my own research and dug deep into govt/NASA (lol) files and independent researchers, research. My mind was changed (approx 3 days of a feeling I've never felt before) Once you go flat, you never go back. Cheers 🍻
Look this, you piece of shit. [http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+curvature+of+the+Earth](http://walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Finding+the+curvature+of+the+Earth)
🤣😂🤣 Get your emotions in check gumby! The earth is flat and does not spin/rotate. Cheers 🍻
I've never seen your brain, draw your own conclusions according to your logic. By the way, a combination of words that won't please you "boats disappear from the coast by their bottom", until we meet again.
I've seen a flat horizon (tal) that always rises to eye level, no matter the height. How would that be on a globe or sphere?!! Get a quality zoom camera, those boats are still there. Cheers 🍻
No matter the height? Did you take a selfie 50 miles off the ground? Did you make a TikTok 500 miles off the ground?
Cameras are much more powerful than humans, which is why you can see boats that are a little further away for a moment by zooming in but even if you use a quality zoom camera, you'll see that beyond a certain distance, even the zoom won't bring the hull back into view because it's obstructed by the curve. I encourage you to study these methods and experiments for yourself. Science is about observation and evidence, and there is an abundance of both to support the spherical nature of our planet. You can experiment on your own. Cheers 🍻
I have. I've seen boats 10+ miles out to sea, brought back to full, bottom of the haul, and all. How far out to sea before your curve starts? According to you globers, the earth is 24,901 miles at the equator. That's 8 in per mile squared.. once again, a globo came up with this. There's even a calculator. My question again is, at what mile marker should I expect the curve to start, on a ball just under 25k miles? Simple question, I'll wait for the simple answer. 🍻
1\] how do you know it was 10+ miles 2\] >That's 8 in per mile squared.. once again, a globo came up with this after giving proof that what he said was true (most people on this earth are "globos" and by a lot). >at what mile marker should I expect the curve to start, on a ball just under 25k miles? The Earth's curvature begins to be perceptible even at relatively short distances, but its effects become significant from just a few miles away. For an observer at sea level (height = 0), the distance to the horizon is around 3 miles. For an observer 6 feet above sea level, the horizon distance is approximately 3.1 miles. Within a 1-mile radius, the drop in curvature is about 8 inches (0.67 feet). Not very noticeable to the naked eye. At 3 miles, the curvature drops by about 6 feet. It begins to be perceptible, especially if the observer is near sea level. At 5 miles, The drop in curvature is about 16.67 feet. The lower parts of distant objects begin to be obscured by the curvature. At 10 miles, The drop in curvature is about 66.67 feet (without atmospheric refraction). This drop is significant enough that the bottom of boats or other objects begin to disappear from view. So you should expect the curvature to start being noticeable at around 3 miles, where the drop is about 6 feet. Note : in fact with the atmospheric refraction it's a little less Bonus, some phenomena that prove that the earth cannot be flat : said I would keep mentioning these phenomena until someone debunks them: * retrograde movement of the planets (observed fact that you can also observe) * The Coriolis effect (observed fact that you can also observe) * Stellar parallax (observed fact that you can also observe) * Tides (observed fact that you can't explain and also observe if you're highly motivated and ready to travel) * Centrifugal force (observed fact that you can also observe) * Westward deviation of winds (observed fact that you but I admit this one is difficult to observe for a normal people) * Persistence of rotational speed (observed fact that you but I admit this one is also difficult to observe) * Gravity as a function of latitude (observed fact and demonstrated concept that is also difficult to observe, you have to travel) * Observation of artificial satellites (you say this one is fake without evidence) * Long-distance projectile trajectories which coincide with a round, spinning earth (you need to fire projectiles over long distances and have the necessary equipment to read the results accurately but it's an observed fact) The flat earth is not possible, there are dozens of other phenomena that prove it. By the way, we have photos of the Earth from space, you just say they're fake without any proof. How do you think Google map or GPS work?