See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball
Source:
[None]
URL Source: https://youtu.be/-Ax_YpQsy88
Published: Dec 29, 2019
Author: Eric Dubay
Post Date: 2019-12-29 19:57:38 by wudidiz
Keywords: None
Views: 27148
Comments: 351
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-54) not displayed.
.
.
.
#55. To: Pinguinite, Cynicom (#34)
Absolutely true. 1.5" in the context of a 50,000 inch-long bridge can easily be accounted for as matter of being far within an acceptable tolerance of engineering accuracy. The waters on one side of the narrows from the other of course are the same: Level. Honestly? We don't know. Try watching and listening to the video. Condemnation before investigation is the highest form of ignorance. Exactly. Water = Level. (which is just one powerful, singular reason the Globe Earth model can forcefully be challenged.) We can only assume the huge stones of the pyramids were moved via manual labor... Some folks who've dug deep (no pun intended) have theorized/discovered that THE "art" that was used to moved the stone was... "Levitation." It would require knowledge of utilizing the earth's magnetism or other means. Some folks also say that this type of knowledge (as well as some hi tech knowledge of today) is some of the 'Fallen Angel' "secret" knowledge/tech that was originally restricted by God. (I realize this is a whole different tangent.) Is it absolutely straight? Go to observation deck on Willis (Sears) Tower and look out over Lake Michigan, the curvature is readily apparent. “I am not one of those weak-spirited, sappy Americans who want to be liked by all the people around them. I don’t care if people hate my guts; I assume most of them do. The important question is whether they are in a position to do anything about it. My affections, being concentrated over a few people, are not spread all over Hell in a vile attempt to placate sulky, worthless shits.” - William S Burroughs
It appears you've delved into quite a bit of "alternative" history yourself. If Antarctica has never actually been explored (as per Admiral Byrd's TV testimony, c.1954), then no one actually knows with any certainty exactly the extent of land and what lies within the interior of that alleged "continent." As you and others might realize, ALL movement to Antarctica is strictly controlled and restricted as per a global 1959 treaty... WHICH INCLUDED THE USSR. Saw the vid. Looked at many other vids as well as a comparison. NOT convincing. Btw I live near the ocean. I see a level horizon. Always have. If there's any "curve" it's minute and tapers at the very far ends of either 180 degree direction. Standing at sea level does not give a wide enough view to perceive curvature, the horizon is only 7 miles distant.
“I am not one of those weak-spirited, sappy Americans who want to be liked by all the people around them. I don’t care if people hate my guts; I assume most of them do. The important question is whether they are in a position to do anything about it. My affections, being concentrated over a few people, are not spread all over Hell in a vile attempt to placate sulky, worthless shits.” - William S Burroughs
AND...you "know" this BECAUSE...??? I find that statement as well as other ironic given your quote of Orwell. Maybe you should ponder what he said about those who were and still are able to "control" the past, present and future. (and what you, I, and others think is "proven history, proven science, proven political fact.") These same Orwellian "Controllers" wouldn't manipulate the narrative and truths of this world to support their own subversive agenda....OR...would they?? "Condemnation before investigation is the highest form of ignorance." If you're standing mid-ocean with a 360 degree view, are you able to see what would theoretically be a 28 mile radius? If so, would that provide a wide enough view of level horizon in your opinion? Moreover, exactly at what point does water start "curving? Not sure, but I don't recall noticing curvature from water level, only from skyscraper or plane.
“I am not one of those weak-spirited, sappy Americans who want to be liked by all the people around them. I don’t care if people hate my guts; I assume most of them do. The important question is whether they are in a position to do anything about it. My affections, being concentrated over a few people, are not spread all over Hell in a vile attempt to placate sulky, worthless shits.” - William S Burroughs
"Explorers"? You mean the ones who "explored the continent of Antarctica"? Please tell me -- who were they?? Scientists. You mean the ones who insist that there are more than two genders? The scientists who claim "Global Warming"? I am going to go out on a limb here and say you know very little about either Earth "Exploration" OR "Science" -- but "know" a whole LOT about "Interplantetary Travel" and "Space Exploration." Fine. Please explain ANY "fundamental concept of motion." And while you're at it, exactly what did I claim about Einstein that you object to? Thanks... I respect your own eyes, your own perspective.
If you're interested... At about the 2:53 mark of "200 Proofs" you'll find the author start explaining the scientific dynamics of water, bridges, rail, perspective...(It's just a few minutes, but germane to the subject) Condemnation before investigation is the highest form of ignorance. I have already investigated the flat earth question. I do not need to watch a 2 hour video asserting that water is dry in order to remain legitimately confident that water is really wet. Especially when I took a shower that very morning, and needed a towel when I got out.
Why are wasting everyone's time and forum space with this nonsense? I can only guess that your are either an idiot or some kind of a plant endeavoring to make Christians look ignorant and anti-science. If you really believe this nonsense, book a flight that flies above 30,000 feet and look out the window, or take a pair of binoculars or a small telescope down to the sea on a clear day and watch a ship sail away from your position. How so? I do not need to watch a 2 hour video asserting that water is dry in order to remain legitimately confident that water is really wet. Especially when I took a shower that very morning, and needed a towel when I got out. Thanks for letting me know who NOT to take seriously, that sentience and truth is not a major priority in life. Why are YOU wasting MY time by posting this blather to me? I didn't ping you. Go back to sleep. Or watch an ISS "Live" feed of bad CGI and the comically obvious fish-eye lens of "earth." There's no need to seek truth beyond that which jeopardizes your Dewey/Rockefeller/Masonic indoctrination programming and obedience training. I've noted that since 2016 you have been trying to enlighten your fellow forum members with truth about our realm. I tip my cap to you! Well done. +1000 You were ahead of your time. And yes, once you seek and see the Truth, there is no returning. I also noted that The Usual Suspects were always the first to ridicule you as you were simply presenting Truth. And were here on THIS thread. Shame on them. Some people -- no matter how intelligent -- do not and will not ever admit that they have been bamboozled their entire lives with THE Mother of ALL Lies, backed up by Masonic/Talmudic lies regarding Heliocentrism, Gravity, Earth Movement, Evolution, and of course, Einstein's phony theory of "Relativity." There is no longer any excuse to ignore Truth. The Bible is the very first "Flat Earth" book; Flat Earth is proven via observation, by common sense, by REAL science. What a happy coincidence!
That is certainly the most intelligent observation in this whole thread and a for sure keeper.
I watched the second one. He claims that as one gains altitude, the horizon should be noticably lower than it is at sea level. This is stated while showing a video from a serious rocket climbing 50k or 100k feet, which in fact shows the horizon dropping lower contrary to his claim that it doesn't appear to do that. Placing my mouse on the horizon shows that it drops away. So the narrator is ignoring his own evidence. #3 Water does not have a perfectly flat surface, but it's certainly close enough to be called "level" when dealing with water in a bathtub or even a lake. When I said previously that a long trench would have water at the same altitude on both ends, that does not mean "level" as water surface would indeed follow the earth's curviture. The narrator false asserts this notion that water always seeks a "level" surface to mean perfectly flat, and never proves it, instead simply exploiting the common notion that water surfaces are flat to suggest that ocean surfaces are also flat. That is simply not the case and is a disingenuous argument. Even a glass of water has a curved water surface due to earth's curvature, though it would be very hard to detect or measure. #4 doesn't even make the slightest amount of sense. Maybe you can explain why he thinks the Gulf of Mexico is 11 miles higher than the American mid-west?
We know that New Orleans is mostly below sea level. If the Gulf were higher than the mid-west there would be a lot of ground under water that is not now. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
Of course. Seems the narrator in the video is claiming that if the earth was a sphere that the Gulf of Mexico would have to be 11 miles hire than the Mississippi plains, ergo the earth can't be a sphere. But I have no idea why he says the gulf must be 11 miles higher. I guess they call that a strawman argument.
A witness....
But IS it? And what to? You decide. FWIW, I watched your entire video...(and ironically noted the flat horizons in the background as well as the globe prop.) I do appreciate your research in this case...But know this -- Truth is being heavily censored and/or buries DEEP so that the average person can not find it easily. Here is reality. (You'll appreciate the hard number measurements and geometry.) This man is NOT standing at the actual "Geographical South Pole." Please note the placement of respective 'Ceremonial' AND 'Geographical' "SOUTH POLE." Thank you for at least checking those out... There's a misunderstanding of Dubay's "uphill" comment... Brief, simple experiment: Hold a ball at eye level. Run your finger from mid-ball up to the top. (It seems as though you are moving "up" along the ball, right? The Gulf of Mexico conundrum is explained via "Science's" own supposed 'Curvature' formula based on the supposed 25,000 circumference. Without understanding this formula as a reference, the "uphill" comment by Dubay makes little sense. (Below): UNIVERSAL EARTH CURVATURE FORMULA http://luuksteitner.nl/testing-the-earths-curvature/ The idea is simple: If you move further outwards, the surface of the Earth drops: As listed on this table, moving 10 miles outwards would result in a 66 feet drop: I would expect the problem with this approach would be obvious to anyone, but it turns out it isn’t. So let me explain: When are a looking at a distant object located on the globe, we are not looking in the direction parallel to the globe, but a bit downwards, directly at the object: This means we are not looking at the actual drop of the Earth’s surface between the spectator and the building, but we need to look at the height of the curvature between them: This obstacle height determines how much we can see of the target. I could give you one formula to calculate this height, but given the bad experience with the method the Flat Earthers use, I’ll take you through the calculations step by step so it can be understood. To calculate the obstacle height, we need to be at the middle between the spectator and target and in stead of the Earth’s radius calculate the distance from the center of the globe to this flat line. Then, the difference between the Earth’s radius and the distance to this flat line will give us the obstacle height. One can't trust the claims in this video. He simply makes claims about the various distances. The cerimonial and geographic south pole are reputed to only be a short distance apart, and they are that because the ice on which both are place shifts a few feet per month.
I read this explanation, and it seems it's not complete. I still have no idea why the gulf of Mexico needs to be 11 miles higher than the Mississippi plains on a global earth model.
Intelligent people knew the earth was a sphere well before Orwell was born. Apparently you've never studied history, just as you've never studied math or science. Moreover, exactly at what point does water start "curving? Water always follows the curvature of the earth. If you were a bacteria on a basketball, at what point would the ball start to "curve"? youtu.be/INhCw52M3WM And But don't watch these two videos. Don't question plate tectonics. Man, don't even think about using common logic. The academic gate keepers have given us all the truth of everything and it would be better to discuss flat earth before one even considers the validity of expanding earth. ______________________________________ Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.
"Explorers"? You mean the ones who "explored the continent of Antarctica"? Please tell me -- who were they?? You throw out strawmen dude. Many people have gone to Antarctica, use Google if you're interested in who discovered it. I'm talking about people such as Ferdinand Magellan Ferdinand Magellan (/mYÈa[lYn/[1] or /mYÈd’[lYn/;[2] Portuguese: Fernão de Magalhães, IPA: [fh~ÈnPw dh mPcPÈŽPjƒ]; Spanish: Fernando de Magallanes, IPA: [fe~Ènando ðe macaÈŽanes]; c. 1480 – 27 April 1521) was a Portuguese explorer who organised the Spanish expedition to the East Indies from 1519 to 1522, resulting in the first circumnavigation of the Earth, completed by Juan Sebastián Elcano. Apparently you've never heard of him. Do you believe in airplanes and boats? They have frequently traveled across the globe. If the earth was flat as you believe, boats would have fallen off long ago, and airplanes would have been able to see where the edges were. Additionally, navigation would be impossible since all charts and headings assume a spherical earth. Scientists. You mean the ones who insist that there are more than two genders? The scientists who claim "Global Warming"? It's only left wing snowflakes, not scientists, that believe that in the same way you flat earthers believe you have it right. Climate change is a racket where SOME paid off individuals repeat what they're told to repeat. The true experts know it's all a hoax. I am going to go out on a limb here and say you know very little about either Earth "Exploration" OR "Science" -- but "know" a whole LOT about "Interplantetary Travel" and "Space Exploration." I'm going to go out on a limb and say you've never attended any type of school. Surprised you know English. Of course you would have no idea of Newton's Laws of Motion. And I seriously doubt you know the difference between Algebra and Calculus. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I suppose there is no north pole either, eh? Compasses are devices of the devil, right? No matter where you are on the planet, north is still north, and south is still south. You could be in Africa, China, the US, Europe, it doesn't matter. The fastest way to get to Europe from the US would be to travel east. BUT you COULD travel west and STILL get there, it'd just take much longer. You'd have to cross the Pacific, go over Russia, then arrive in Europe. OR you could take the shorter route over the Atlantic and get there faster. Do you think the Pacific Ocean and Russia are fake too? Please explain ANY "fundamental concept of motion." Never heard of Newton's Laws of Motion I take it... From Wiki First law Second law Third law And while you're at it, exactly what did I claim about Einstein that you object to? You said, "Einstein's sham 'Theory of Relativity' save the day for Fake Science. " amongst other laughable remarks you made. You have no idea of what the Theory of Relativity is, so never mind making any sort of claim against it. 193 countries is quite a feat. I've been to 43 of the lower 48 states when driving trucks. Just a few in New England and North and South Dakota and Montana are not on the list. I drove a lot of miles safely over a period of about 15 years. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
I'm glad I did not waste any time watching that video. ;) "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
If the Gulf of Mexico were at a higher elevation than the Midwest, the Mississippi River would flow north. “I am not one of those weak-spirited, sappy Americans who want to be liked by all the people around them. I don’t care if people hate my guts; I assume most of them do. The important question is whether they are in a position to do anything about it. My affections, being concentrated over a few people, are not spread all over Hell in a vile attempt to placate sulky, worthless shits.” - William S Burroughs
Comments (96 - 351) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIt doesn't mean a 1.5 inch margin of error for construction of a bridge that size would be outside acceptable tolerances.
#56. To: Cynicom (#35)
The ancients knew it before they laid the foundations for their pyramids.Without looking how did they "level" for the foundation over such an expanse?
#57. To: StraitGate (#36)
#58. To: Pinguinite (#37)
To find out what's level over a large distance, they could have easily just dug a long trench and filled it with water. Water not flowing will reveal the exact same altitude on both ends.
#59. To: Pinguinite, Cynicom (#41)
The ancients solved problems like how to move massive rocks of dozens of tons using only manual labor -- an art pretty much lost just due to inventions making the old ways obsolete. But sometimes more credit is given to them than is due.
#60. To: Liberator (#52)
Place a straight piece of paper over the horizon...
#61. To: titorite (#44)
#62. To: Dakmar (#60)
#63. To: Liberator (#62)
#64. To: FormerLurker, Pinguinite (#47)
You'd have to erase any intelligence, logic, or rational thought a person has for them to believe in a flat earth.
#65. To: Dakmar (#63)
#66. To: Liberator (#65)
#67. To: FormerLurker (#48)
What do you think is the purpose of explorers and scientists throughout history of plotting to trick you, Liberator, into thinking the earth is a sphere where in reality we're all riding on the back of a huge turtle?
#68. To: FormerLurker (#49)
If you can't understand the most fundamental concepts of motion, you have no business even mentioning Einstein.
#69. To: Dakmar (#66)
#70. To: Dakmar, Pinguinite (#66)
#71. To: Liberator (#57)
Try watching and listening to the video.
#72. To: Liberator (#70)
Freedom is a social skill.
#73. To: StraitGate (#71)
I have already investigated the flat earth question.
#74. To: Anthem (#72)
(Edited)
Why are wasting everyone's time and forum space with this nonsense?
#75. To: wudidiz (#1)
(Edited)
#76. To: Liberator (#73)
Thanks for letting me know who NOT to take seriously
#77. To: Pinguinite (#50)
My theory is that the human mind has a greatly underestimated ability to believe things that are not true. Massively underestimated. It's the reason why some Muslims blow themselves up, why people hate Trump so much, why countries are largely one specific religion over vast periods of time, and so on. It's a basis for deception something we are all subject to and I don't consider anyone immune, including myself.
#78. To: Liberator (#51)
Thanks for trying to be fair & open-minded to even that degree. Respect. But honestly and objectively? At least 150 of Dubay's "Proofs" are "compelling". Seriously.
#79. To: Pinguinite (#78)
#4 doesn't even make the slightest amount of sense. Maybe you can explain why he thinks the Gulf of Mexico is 11 miles higher than the American mid-west?
#80. To: BTP Holdings (#79)
If the Gulf were higher than the mid-west there would be a lot of ground under water that is not now. ;)
#81. To: Liberator (#75)
#82. To: Pinguinite (#81)
A witness....
#83. To: Pinguinite, BTP Holdings (#78)
Statute Miles Away Maths = Drop 1 1 x 1 x 8 = 8 Inches 2 2 x 2 x 8 = 32 Inches 3 3 x 3 x 8 / 12 = 6 Feet 4 4 x 4 x 8 / 12 = 10 Feet 5 5 x 5 x 8 / 12 = 16 Feet 6 6 x 6 x 8 / 12 = 24 Feet 7 7 x 7 x 8 / 12 = 32 Feet 8 8 x 8 x 8 / 12 = 42 Feet 9 9 x 9 x 8 / 12 = 54 Feet 10 10 x 10 x 8 / 12 = 66 Feet 
The mathematics
#84. To: Liberator (#82)
#85. To: Liberator (#83)
#86. To: Liberator (#64)
AND...you "know" this BECAUSE...???
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination 
#87. To: Liberator, Dakmar (#65)
If you're standing mid-ocean with a 360 degree view, are you able to see what would theoretically be a 28 mile radius? If so, would that provide a wide enough view of level horizon in your opinion?
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#88. To: Pinguinite (#85)
#89. To: Liberator (#67)
(Edited)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#90. To: Liberator (#82)
The South Pole is fake
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#91. To: Liberator (#83)
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#92. To: Liberator (#68)
Newton's laws of motion are three physical laws that, together, laid the foundation for classical mechanics. They describe the relationship between a body and the forces acting upon it, and its motion in response to those forces. More precisely, the first law defines the force qualitatively, the second law offers a quantitative measure of the force, and the third asserts that a single isolated force doesn't exist. These three laws have been expressed in several ways, over nearly three centuries,[a] and can be summarised as follows:
In an inertial frame of reference, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.[2][3]
In an inertial frame of reference, the vector sum of the forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration a of the object: F = ma. (It is assumed here that the mass m is constant – see below.)
When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body.
"After tomorrow those SOB's will never embarrass me again. That’s not a threat. That’s a promise.” – LBJ to his mistress Madeleine Brown on the eve of JFK assassination
#93. To: Pinguinite (#81)
#94. To: StraitGate (#71)
watch a 2 hour video asserting that water is dry
#95. To: FormerLurker (#87)
(Edited)
Water always follows the curvature of the earth.
.
.
.