Here's a puzzle for you...

[jochta]

The comment about the shape of glass in aeroplanes causing the Earth to appear curved is just taking the ****.

Why?

Do you know how glass and refraction works? Do you know the shape, density and curvature of the glass used in aeroplanes? Funnily enough when the aeroplane is on the ground nothing on the ground looks distorted. Funnily enough the pilots looking through different shaped glass see the curvature. Funnily enough even when there isn't any glass you can see the curvature.

<moderated> and refuse to acknowledge any of the evidence produced above. I'll give you another chance. Care to explain how libration works on the Moon if it's a flat fixed disc. I don't need anyone else's word for it, I can measure libration for myself.

[beardy]

Why is the horizon at eye level at 40,000 feet?

It isnt, it isnt at eye level at even lower altitudes than that.

[Manc33]

This is where we differ because I think it is at eye level and we would be arguing all day over it.

It was flat and at eye level in the Felix Baumgartner video (when he opens the door of the craft) supposedly 20 miles up.

The horizon cuts across the middle of the hatch...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvbN-cWe0A0

If anything the horizon is slightly higher than halfway. I am sure some boffin could easily work out just how far below Felix's line of vision that horizon would be on a 8,000 mile diameter ball at 20 miles up. Where's the curvature?

Even if we invent a silly answer like "He must have been using an anti-wide angle lens filming outside the hatch to straighten out the curve" or something, it doesn't explain how the hatch door is divided in two like that. The only answer left is "Felix's craft must have been tipped" which is unverifiable, but it doesn't look like it is tipping.

With the curved glass thing, it depends on how far away the object is. Nothing would be distorted if looking at stuff only hundreds or maybe even thousands of feet away. Once in the sky though, the horizon is then hundreds of miles further away than anything you could see on the ground (or just above it). With a small curved window, that horizon hundreds of miles away can have an added curvature. Just the same as putting a grain of sand under a magnifying glass and only moving it one millimeter away, now try moving it 100mm away. Look how small a plane window is and look how far away the object is being viewed. It is going to magnify a curve.

I'm not getting myself banned so I will stop posting about it. There's more than enough info and names given here (mainly Eric Dubay) and on the other 60 odd page thread elsewhere, for anyone to check into it themselves and come to their own conclusions.

[ddraver]

Jochta/Vorpal - we did this with him on BR - he didnt read that either. He is not interested in the truth. Plus his contention that flat earthers are not starting out with that position is also nonsense. It comes from pathetic attempts by religious people to "reprove" a geocentric universe and by extension the Genesis Myth. It gives you some idea of what we are dealing with when people try and disprove a photo...

Beardy/Shootist - I think you have the more interesting conversation. I also wonder why/how someone's - I don't want to say mind, because he's not a simpleton...knowledge? - can become so unbelievably warped

[Manc33]

Plus his contention that flat earthers are not starting out with that position is also nonsense.

Do you know each one personally?

Go see the thread on BR and I don't mention religious beliefs once, I have never been religious.

Why are you here with three posts, replying to this at 8AM?

The SECOND I made a post, you were here, how come?

My post: 7:56am.
You reply at: 8:06am.

You could make it a bit less obvious.

Are you working it in shifts? Who is taking over from you at 4PM?

If I am talking rubbish why don't you ignore me?

Surely that is a lot easier than taking the time out to reply?

People always come out of the woodwork whenever anyone is explaining this stuff. A guy called "Mark Sargent" did it to Eric Dubay, after Eric Dubay had initially come out with dozens of facts about it, they send out this "Sargent" guy to divert everyone away from Eric Dubay (Sargent is telling people there's an underground furnace and its all a man made Earth etc). Same thing every time lol. Or they have people like "Lord Steven Christ" diverting everyone.

There's only one guy that isn't either laughing or diverting everyone off into other subjects and that is Dubay.

If these flat Earth people are nuts why not just leave them to it?

[ddraver]

Id explain to you about time zones but you wouldnt read it

As I said on BR - you, and them, interest me.

[Manc33]

Id explain to you about time zones but you wouldnt read it

As I said on BR - you, and them, interest me.

I don't need to be told about how time zones work, I know how they work in both the heliocentric and geocentric models - they work in both.

Here's an interesting one "mars corrected images". Ever had a look at those? Have a look.

Just type it in Google and there they all are. Has to be Arizona.

From the blurb on one of the images...

"Believe it or not, around sunset and sunrise, the Martian sky is actually blue in the vicinity of the setting sun or rising sun"



Its actually blue because it is actually Earth, actually.

[Shootist]

Definitely a troll. No doubt about it. More interesting is the apparent desire of a moderator to censor the suggestion. Possibly because the concept of a flat earth would appeal to the subconscious of a cyclist?

[Manc33]

Definitely a troll. No doubt about it. More interesting is the apparent desire of a moderator to censor the suggestion. Possibly because the concept of a flat earth would appeal to the subconscious of a cyclist?

This is the best comment in all of this or the thread elsewhere.

I'm not a troll, if I ask for real images and never get shown any, am I a troll for asking that?

Why would that make me a troll? I have always been inquisitive, it's hardly my fault "I think" is it.

[ddraver]

Corrected for aeroplane windows again I expect?

Those invisible, magic, 10s of miles high mountains around the edge would make for a great tour stage though Shootist...

[Shootist]

Found him!

[beardy]

It was flat and at eye level in the Felix Baumgartner video (when he opens the door of the craft) supposedly 20 miles up.

That craft doesnt have any reason to be level and it certainly looks as if it is not level in the external shot, it would make sense if, like aircraft, the door opening faced downwards as that is where passengers enter, climbing UP stairs from the ground.

Meanwhile if you are flying a light plane you can see you are level from your wingtips position and how your nose is (and the attitude indicator) and the horizon is below eye level.

Compared to a craft where we dont know if it was level or where its door is positioned. We do not have any good reason to even expect the doorway to face horizontally, let alone use it as a counter proof.

[Manc33]

£24,503,877 for a moon buggy?

Yep.

That was in 1969 as well.

"$38,000,000 in 1969 has the same purchasing power as $254,884,579 in 2014"

Converted back to pounds, in todays money the moon buggy cost £164,301,214

NASA is faking absolutely everything, not just the moon landing.

Moon landing is also the one subject most of the well known conspiracy theorists won't touch - because it is a real one. None of them talk about it, Alex Jones doesn't (hell he has astroNOTs on his show praising them etc), David Icke never has mentioned it, agh, its no use, its obvious then, too obvious.

This is apparent by the fact that every single rocket or shuttle launched does a curve at a certain height and curves so much, it levels off. They just lie as usual and claim it is best to exit the Earth's atmosphere that way - when it causes the maximum heat compared t going through vertically. Tell another one why don't ya.

Methinks there's a certain height we can send these things up to and no further. Where's the re-entry video's?

Where's those images I never get shown, of the Earth from space, pfffffffff, no point asking, it's like asking a brick wall. I asked for 60 odd pages on BR and now here, without one single one getting posted, only mock ups.

[Shootist]

I'm not a troll, if I ask for real images and never get shown any, am I a troll for asking that?

Why would that make me a troll? I have always been inquisitive, it's hardly my fault "I think" is it.

If you want real images they are there by the millions on the internet. There is enough information on the internet to solve all the problems you are posing with ease, evidenced, listed, confirmed, and illustrated. Take the example I gave about the old Greek looking down wells at midday. Yet you choose to seek answers to the mysteries of the universe on a cycling forum. Right. If you were truly inquisitive then you would be far too busy trying to assuage your thirst for knowledge to bother messing about here.

I've met your sort before. You are not actually that rare. You delight in challenging people to find answers to damn fool questions, and when they endeavour to do so you then challenge their answers with more damned fool rebuttals. You delight in irritating others. You are not a seeker after truth, you are a troll, pure and simple.

However, I'll give you your genuine real images. Providing you prove to me beyond doubt that you are a real person and not an artificial intelligence program being used by Microsoft as a research tool into trolling.

Where is Great Big Billy Goat Gruff when you need him?

[beardy]

Where's the re-entry video's?

Hollywood can make any video that you want from them. Videos dont constitute evidence of any exploits as they are easier to create than it is to send out a craft. On the other hand many of the other proofs for or against can be tested personally or by crunching data which couldnt be faked.

You can not make all the distances and bearings between points on the Earth consistent with a flat earth, it needs a globe shape to function. This data is constantly tested by people in vehicles across the world using all sorts of different methods to measure the distances and angles.

Many of us have shortened journeys by using great circles instead of rhumb lines, which just isnt possible on a flat surface.
http://uk.mathworks.com/help/map/great- ... rcles.html