Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..
You can use google.

Here is a 'mirage' of Brisbane from 47 kilometres away.

The true reality of this Matrix! (Hello -Amber Plaster) (youtube.com)

This one? Skip to 2:30.



"... Whoever made this meme is either a downright liar, or has mentally misunderstood something that is beyond their capability".

Except no one has been able to demonstrate anything that will only occur on a flat earth and not ball shaped one.
If they have, please show us, otherwise we'll never learn.

It doesn't explain how our world/universe works at all.

And not so subtly accuses us of being agents for Satan, therefore you're justified in not having to engage meaningfully or truthfully

Select to expand quote

D3 said..
Except no one has been able to demonstrate anything that will only occur on a flat earth and not ball shaped one.
...
And not so subtly accuses us of being agents for Satan, therefore you're justified in not having to engage meaningfully or truthfully

He has got you sphere-earth losers on the ropes.

You just don't get it! An ALL powerful God is an all powerful god. He can make anything happen, including making a spheroidal earth work, or the flat one that we actually have.

1. There is no such thing as gravity: God just makes things sink.

2. Ships disappear over the horizon: God just makes them vanish unless you have a telescope.

The argument is currently, if I can summarise it:

The Earth is a sphere as proven by countless people over the ages. Standing up to tests and now even visible from space.

v.s.

There is a God that I believe in and he can do anything. Someone on youtube showed me where it said the Earth is flat.

Now, unless you want to explain Relativity to your new-found Labrador puppy, you should rejoice in the differences that society allows and celebrate PM33s choice to be logic free.

Hallelujah!

www.facebook.com/share/r/SgRDZvd9T1m3RHUU/?mibextid=oFDknk

"For most people, being described as a "flat Earther" is an insult. The idea of the Earth being flat is considered not only wrong, but a model of wrongness, the gold standard of being incorrect about something.

This being so, oddly enough, most people described pejoratively as "flat Earthers" do not actually believe that the Earth is flat. "Flat Earther" is simply a scientifically seasoned variation of "idiot".

theconversation.com/flat-wrong-the-misunderstood-history-of-flat-earth-theories-53808

Select to expand quote

remery said..
"For most people, being described as a "flat Earther" is an insult. The idea of the Earth being flat is considered not only wrong, but a model of wrongness, the gold standard of being incorrect about something.

This being so, oddly enough, most people described pejoratively as "flat Earthers" do not actually believe that the Earth is flat. "Flat Earther" is simply a scientifically seasoned variation of "idiot".

theconversation.com/flat-wrong-the-misunderstood-history-of-flat-earth-theories-53808

Define people who argue with flat earthers.

Bored?

This is the best interview on biblical cosmology.

Pastor Dean Odle on Biblical Cosmology aka Flat Earth (youtube.com)

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

^ The Flat Earth is "..scientifically proven.." I thought science was regarded as just another generally incorrect belief system? It wouldn't make sense to quote any 'science' stuff unless you thought is was credible. Speaking of science stuff, can anyone point me in the direction of where science proved the Flat Earth?

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..

When are you going to explain why the bottom half of the Chicago skyscrapers cannot be seen from Indiana Dunes?

Select to expand quote

When are you going to explain why the bottom half of the Chicago skyscrapers cannot be seen from Indiana Dunes?

Obviously it's the waves, blocking the view.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..

Obviously it's the waves, blocking the view.

Hmm, that's a very big wave. Around 150 metres. Six times higher than the tallest wave surfed in Nazare.... and in a lake!

It's not so much the waves as the spray off the top obscuring the vision. It's like a thin mist attenuating the light path. Since the spray falls back down into the water it doesn't affect the view of the higher floors so much

Select to expand quote

remery said..

decrepit said..

Obviously it's the waves, blocking the view.

Hmm, that's a very big wave. Around 150 metres. Six times higher than the tallest wave surfed in Nazare.... and in a lake!

I am pretty sure Decrepit is being sarcastic. I think those that have been through this argument again and again, have a strong sense oif sarcasm towards the 'reasoning' the flat-earther uses.

Select to expand quote

FormulaNova said..I am pretty sure Decrepit is being sarcastic.

remery said..

decrepit said..

Obviously it's the waves, blocking the view.

Hmm, that's a very big wave. Around 150 metres. Six times higher than the tallest wave surfed in Nazare.... and in a lake!

I am pretty sure Decrepit is being sarcastic. I think those that have been through this argument again and again, have a strong sense oif sarcasm towards the 'reasoning' the flat-earther uses.

Yeah no-**** sherlock.

I am pretty sure remery was also being sarcastic.

I am also pretty sure Mr Milk was being sarcastic.

I am also pretty sure everyone in this thread except Pcdefender is being sarcastic.

And even then I have my suspicions about Pcdefender.



(just so I ain't gotta punch it in again, in that last line above - guess what, Carantoc is being sarcastic)

Well it is a reason previously given by Pete, for the bottom half of ships missing, when they are obviously most way over the horizon..
Just trying to show him, how ridiculous that explanation is. (But knowing it will have no effect)

brandoneicher.com/blogs/news/the-best-view-of-the-chicago-skyline-is-in-indiana

American ABC admits openly due to the curvature of the earth you should not be able to see the skyline.

A picture of the Chicago skyline taken almost 60 miles away, is actually a mirage. Joshua Nowicki (@StartVisiting) snapped the pic Tuesday night from Grand Mere State Park in Stevensville. Under normal conditions, even when extremely clear, this should not be visible, due to the curvature of the earth. The Chicago skyline is physically below the horizon form that vantage point, but the image of the skyline can be seen above it.


Mirage of Chicago skyline seen from Michigan shoreline (abc57.com)

And your point is?

Or don't you think mirages occur?
If so, then why can't you see the skyline without that particular atmospheric condition?

If the earth was flat you should be able to see a 400m tower from 60 miles away

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..
Well it is a reason previously given by Pete, for the bottom half of ships missing, when they are obviously most way over the horizon..
Just trying to show him, how ridiculous that explanation is. (But knowing it will have no effect)

Do you think PM33 is grinning when he sees he has new freshmeat each year to 'prove' to him that the earth is not flat? I can picture someone at their computer late at night, with a room full of globes and Mercator projection maps with lines drawn all over them, laughing when someone has the crazy idea that the world is not flat and held up by turtles.

I think your sarcasm is lost on some as they haven't seen the same arguments used repeatedly and the typical response of 'nope' that we have seen.

Select to expand quote

D3 said..
And your point is?

Or don't you think mirages occur?
If so, then why can't you see the skyline without that particular atmospheric condition?

If the earth was flat you should be able to see a 400m tower from 60 miles away

See, you say that they are mirages and that they occur in certain weather conditions.

PM33 will say that these mirages are always there and that other random weather conditions block them.

He will not be drawn on the issue when someone compares an actual photo of the skyline and asks where the missing parts of the buildings are in the mirages. That's far too deep for consideration.

And didn't someone calculate, that the top half of the towers should indeed be visible, inversion or not.
Some of those towers are very tall.

Select to expand quote

Pcdefender said..
American ABC admits openly due to the curvature of the earth you should not be able to see the skyline.

A picture of the Chicago skyline taken almost 60 miles away, is actually a mirage. Joshua Nowicki (@StartVisiting) snapped the pic Tuesday night from Grand Mere State Park in Stevensville. Under normal conditions, even when extremely clear, this should not be visible, due to the curvature of the earth. The Chicago skyline is physically below the horizon form that vantage point, but the image of the skyline can be seen above it.


Mirage of Chicago skyline seen from Michigan shoreline (abc57.com)

That's from Warren Dunes. When are you going to explain why the bottom half of the Chicago skyscrapers cannot be seen from Indiana Dunes?

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..
And didn't someone calculate, that the top half of the towers should indeed be visible, inversion or not.
Some of those towers are very tall.

Yes! I put in the Willis Tower at 1,451 ft, observer height as Warren Dunes + 6 ft, and target distance as 52 miles across Lake Michigan. This curvature calculator show that the top of the building could be seen without refraction. Presumably with a very good telescope and on a clear day.



walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Advanced%20Earth%20Curvature%20Calculator&state=--21.8288-933796.224-9-3106.68-5~0.0343-9-21-9#App

Select to expand quote

remery said..3 times in a row...
Yes! I put in the Willis Tower at 1,451 ft, observer height as Warren Dunes + 6 ft, and target distance as 52 miles across Lake Michigan. This curvature calculator show that the top of the building could be seen without refraction. Presumably with a very good telescope and on a clear day.



walter.bislins.ch/bloge/index.asp?page=Advanced%20Earth%20Curvature%20Calculator&state=--21.8288-933796.224-9-3106.68-5~0.0343-9-21-9#App

Everest is the highest mountain above sea level at 8,849 m. So we should be able to see it from anywhere on a flat Earth. Why then does it appear lower than the mountain the closer mountain?

Select to expand quote

remery said..
Everast is the highest mountain above sea level at 8,8849 m. So we should be able to see it from anywhere on a flat Earth. Why then does it appear lower than the mountain the closer mountain?

Did sleepy Joe help you with those words ?

Everast is 88km high ?

Select to expand quote

remery said..
Everast is the highest mountain above sea level at 8,8849 m. So we should be able to see it from anywhere on a flat Earth. Why then does it appear lower than the mountain the closer mountain?

"Perspective" is the crazy reply you would receive if you ever get one.