For the flat Earth people!

[fonzerrillii]

I'm salty I actually read all this shit, especially when half of it is redundant shit that I already explained, plus nice work on the copy/pasting. I googled your shit....anyway!

I'm not denying atmospheric refraction at all, it actually supports the flat earth model more than it does the ball earth, but I don't even have to go that route.

Like stated in the refraction video I posted, Google Earth, which supposedly is a replica of the ball earth, shows something very different in it's model than actual photos.

Since we live in a you know... 3d world.... you also have to consider the horizon's curvature, not just height. Surely you're not suggesting that refraction flattens out the horizon are you? Because at 20 miles above the ball (like the image above) you should be able to see the horizon curve, but you don't in the REAL WORLD. Mind you, the focal length of Google Earth is 31.2mm.

So when I post this photo here:

This image, with a waaaay wider lens FOV shows a flat horizon (be sure to note the lens is 135Degree angle, not mm). But yeah, the refraction's flattening the horizon right? And if you check out the actual video on youtube you'll see it's flat when panned 360 degrees. You see it in the video I last posted. When you pan in Google Earth however, it stays curved.

But I know, you probably got your mind all in the gutter saying,"but that's not clear enough, clouds, refraction! refraction!"

But like my friend Mrs. Obama....

Wait, wait....

At 60 miles, we're at a flat line still so.....

And while on the subject of refraction,

I can also make the argument that the simple reason why you see beyond the supposed "geometric horizon" of a sphere is because THE EARTH IS FLAT. With minimal atmospheric blockage you can see further than the apparent horizon dip.

And how the fuck do you get crepuscular rays and sunspots with a convex atmosphere? The only high altitude footage you see with a curved horizon are from NASA and allied space agencies that are color graded, enhanced and are too close to be considered low-orbit footage...or just shitty cgi. Plus, the supposed ISS footage at 270 miles shows the earth moving, but footage from 60 miles, above the atmosphere, the earth is still. Why? Relativity? At what point do we SEE the earth move between independent rocket footage vs. NASA?

Check any non-NASA, non-government rocket/balloon footage and you will find a flat horizon at eye level.

This is why the felix red bull jump attempts to fool you into thinking the earth is curved at 38 miles up with fish eye lenses, when the first frame of the video gives you clue to what's really going on if you look out the door....



Eye-level to the camera, STILL and FLAT.

Nowhere in this muthafucka, besides NASA photos do you find curved surfaces.






I got memes, laser beams, math, graphs, surprises, the horizon, it rises..

so.....



This shit gettin boring.

I ain't bout to continue to school y'all over and over again and y'all clearly don't appreciate these asswhippins' I be handin' out. I'ma start chargin y'all to argue with me. Setup a connectpal...make some money off this shit.

Dude..... Are we still doing this.

Let's just go through this piece by piece....

1. All you have been doing is Copy and Pasting. I went through and took the time to look at the math and other theories and pieced them together. I did all this to ultimately make the point that all the math in the world doesn't really matter because ultimately.. You can't accurately quantify all the variables due to the effect of atmospheric refraction.


2. The fact that YOU CAN'T ULTIMATELY SEE.. the problem with your Horizon argument with pictures that you are posting is troubling.

Oh and I love the fact... that one of your pictures is taken from a video that I posted in the last thread... So good for you. Lets look at it...




A. Let's look at the Picture you posted..

B. Now let's look at the video....




C.

This image, with a waaaay wider lens FOV shows a flat horizon (be sure to note the lens is 135Degree angle, not mm).

- Curious At one point do that state the Lens Angle, the Distance to Horizon, and the Distance Across Horizon? Just curious, I must have missed this.


OK NOW TO THE DEBUNKING...


Based on the Height listed.. this picture was supposedly taken when the Balloon reached it's peak at 110,000 ft. That's 20.8 miles. That's at the 5:30 mark of this video.

What do we see at that Mark?

An obvious curved horizon.

I believe that your pic was taken at 6:35 mark.

And what do you see at that mark...

A slightly curved horizon..


But now you are saying to yourself.. But FONZ, I can put a straight red line through the blue area, so clearly that means the Horizon is clearly flat. It's shouldn't matter what direction the Camera is looking at during the 5:30 mark.
"Pseudo Science Rules Bitches"



Is the Camera high enough and far enough back to accurately see the surface of the Earth in One SHOT?

NO.. That's why it panned around... and when it starts at the 5:30 mark.. The curve is OBVIOUS..


But now you are saying... But FONZ look at the 6:35 mark.. Look at the Red Lines on my picture.. They are Flat, so the Horizon is Flat... YOLO..



This is wrong, because you can see the slight bend of the Horizon near the edges of the screen at the 6:35 Mark...

Damn... that slight bend at the 6:35 Mark.. looks familiar. Where have I seen this before?

Oh YEAH...

It looks exactly like the above pic..(you remember the picture that Google fabricated to make a curve) except the pic doesn't have clouds. GAWD DAMN YOU CLOUDS and your Obstruction...




Let's take a commercial break right now and let's look at the Wiki definition of Horizon (Somehow I don't think you know what this means)...

The horizon or skyline is the apparent line that separates earth from sky, the line that divides all visible directions into two categories: those that intersect the Earth's surface, and those that do not.

In many contexts, especially perspective drawing, the curvature of the Earth is disregarded and the horizon is considered the theoretical line to which points on any horizontal plane converge (when projected onto the picture plane) as their distance from the observer increases. (SEE WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT)

For observers near sea level the difference between this geometrical horizon (which assumes a perfectly flat, infinite ground plane) and the true horizon (which assumes a spherical Earth surface) is imperceptible to the naked eye (but for someone on a 1000-meter hill looking out to sea the true horizon will be about a degree below a horizontal line).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon

So these Red Lines are wrong from jump... The true horizon is not going to be where they are located.




Now you must be saying... But Gawd Damn.. FONZ... you must be making shit up. You can't have a Slight curve.. I don't see shit. I'm Flatt-er Blind...

Well let's see what Wiki says again... To the Internets..




Curvature of the horizon.

From a point above the surface the horizon appears slightly bent (it is a circle). There is a basic geometrical relationship between this visual curvature

, the altitude and the Earth's radius. It is

From a point above the surface the horizon appears slightly bent (it is a circle). There is a basic geometrical relationship between this visual curvature

, the altitude and the Earth's radius. It is

The curvature is the reciprocal of the curvature angular radius in radians. A curvature of 1 appears as a circle of an angular radius of 45° corresponding to an altitude of approximately 2640 km above the Earth's surface. At an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft, the typical cruising altitude of an airliner) the mathematical curvature of the horizon is about 0.056, the same curvature of the rim of circle with a radius of 10 m that is viewed from 56 cm directly above the center of the circle. However, the apparent curvature is less than that due to refraction of light in the atmosphere and because the horizon is often masked by high cloud layers that reduce the altitude above the visual surface.

The curvature is the reciprocal of the curvature angular radius in radians. A curvature of 1 appears as a circle of an angular radius of 45° corresponding to an altitude of approximately 2640 km above the Earth's surface. At an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft, the typical cruising altitude of an airliner) the mathematical curvature of the horizon is about 0.056, the same curvature of the rim of circle with a radius of 10 m that is viewed from 56 cm directly above the center of the circle.

However, the apparent curvature is less than that due to refraction of light in the atmosphere and because the horizon is often masked by high cloud layers that reduce the altitude above the visual surface.

So the higher you go up... the less of the curvature (as long as you are staying in the exact same spot and ARE NOT MOVING BACKWARDS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY GOING UPWARDS...in that case the curve will become more obvious) LOGIC!!





NOW JUST FOR KICKS.. LET'S LOOK AT YOUR OTHER PICTURES

Rocket you Say... Went up 73 miles?

I'm not saying they don't launch rockets. Take for instance that last video, definitely a rocket launched. They say it's going into space, yet the video only showed it at what, 8-10 miles? I've heard that the just fly them into the ocean, all for show. Big fire crackers.

They claim rockets have oxidizers that allow rockets to work in the vacuum of space?

This dude says otherwise...

Well damn... What does Science say...

Scientists at the University of Calgary, scientists confirmed that space begins 73 miles (118 kilometers) above Earth's surface. Meanwhile the boundary recognized by many in the space industry is also a somewhat arbitrary 62 miles (100 kilometers).

http://www.space.com/6564-edge-space.html


So I take it that you are still saying that Space starts after the 73 mile mark, because that looks like.. Space to me.

This is why the felix red bull jump attempts to fool you into thinking the earth is curved at 38 miles up with fish eye lenses, when the first frame of the video gives you clue to what's really going on if you look out the door....

---- 0:03 mark.. There is an Obvious Slight Curve... Are you seriously telling me that you can't see this? Maybe you have Eye problems. That would explain a lot.


Ok lets continue to this picture...

And how the fuck do you get crepuscular rays and sunspots with a convex atmosphere?

To the internets...

Crepuscular rays occur when objects such as mountain peaks or clouds partially shadow the sun's rays. The name crepuscular means "relating to twilight" and these rays are observed at sunrise and sunset. Crepuscular rays appear to diverge outward from the setting sun, and are visible only when the atmosphere contains enough haze or dust particles so that sunlight in unshadowed areas can be scattered toward the observer.

The light rays are actually parallel, but appear to converge to the sun due to "perspective", the same visual effect that makes parallel railroad tracks appear to converge in the distance. (THAT DAMN PERSPECTIVE CREEPS UP AGAIN) Crepuscular rays are often red or yellow in appearance because blue light from the sun is selectively scattered out of the beam by air molecules.

Light rays scattered by dust and haze occasionally appear to converge toward the "antisolar" point, (the location on the horizon opposite the point where the sun is setting). These rays, called anti-crepuscular rays, originate at the sun, cross over the sky to the opposite horizon, and appear to converge toward the antisolar point because of perspective.

In the photo above, the sun is near the horizon behind the observer and sunlight is reflecting off the small cloud in the top right corner of the picture. Mountains and clouds behind the observer are responsible for the shadows in between.


Looks like the Light is Converging to me? Are these Pics also CGI??


This is fun... FOR SCIENCE!!!!

 

[R-One]

Dude..... Are we still doing this.

Let's just go through this piece by piece....

1. All you have been doing is Copy and Pasting. I went through took the time to look at the math and other theories and pieced them together and I did all that ultimately make the point all the math in the world doesn't really matter because ultimately.. You can't accurately quantify all the variables due to the effect of atmospheric refraction.


2. The fact that YOU CAN'T ULTIMATELY SEE.. the problem with your Horizon argument with pictures that you are posting is troubling.

Oh and I love the fact... that one of your pictures is taken from a video that I posted in the last thread... So good for you. Lets look at it...




A. Let's look at the Picture you posted..

B. Now let's look at the video....




C. - Curious At one point do that state the Lens Angle, the Distance to Horizon, and the Distance Across Horizon? Just curious, I must have missed this.


OK NOW TO THE DEBUNKING...


Based on the Height listed.. this picture was supposedly taken when the Balloon reached it's peak at 110,000 ft. That's 20.8 miles. That's at the 5:30 mark of this video.

What do we see at that Mark?

An obvious curved horizon.

I believe that your pic was taken at 6:35 mark.

An what do you see at that mark...

A slightly curved horizon..


But now you are saying to yourself.. But FONZ, I can put a straight red line through the blue area, so clearly that means the Horizon is clearly flat. It's shouldn't matter what direction the Camera looking at during the 5:30 mark.
"Pseudo Science Rules Bitches"



Is the Camera high enough and far enough back to accurately see the surface of the Earth in One SHOT?

NO.. That's why it panned around... and when it starts at the 5:30 mark.. The curve is OBVIOUS..


But now you are saying... But FONZ look at the 6:35 mark.. Look at the Red Lines.. They are Flat, so the Horizon is Flat... YOLO..



This is wrong, because you can see the slight bend of the Horizon near the edges of the screen at the 6:35 Mark...

Damn... that slight bend at the 6:35 Mark.. looks familiar. Where have I seen this before?

Oh YEAH...

It looks exactly like the above pic.. except the pic doesn't have clouds. GAWD DAMN YOU CLOUDS and your Obstruction...




Let's take a commercial break and let's look at the Wiki definition of Horizon (Somehow I don't think you know what this means)...

The horizon or skyline is the apparent line that separates earth from sky, the line that divides all visible directions into two categories: those that intersect the Earth's surface, and those that do not.

In many contexts, especially perspective drawing, the curvature of the Earth is disregarded and the horizon is considered the theoretical line to which points on any horizontal plane converge (when projected onto the picture plane) as their distance from the observer increases. (SEE WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT)

For observers near sea level the difference between this geometrical horizon (which assumes a perfectly flat, infinite ground plane) and the true horizon (which assumes a spherical Earth surface) is imperceptible to the naked eye (but for someone on a 1000-meter hill looking out to sea the true horizon will be about a degree below a horizontal line).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon

So these Red Lines are wrong from jump... The true horizon is not going to be where they are located.




Now you must be saying... But Gawd Damn.. FONZ... you must be making shit up. You can't have a Slight curve.. I don't see shit. I'm Flatt-er Blind...

Well let's see what Wiki says again... To the Internets..




Curvature of the horizon.

From a point above the surface the horizon appears slightly bent (it is a circle). There is a basic geometrical relationship between this visual curvature

, the altitude and the Earth's radius. It is

From a point above the surface the horizon appears slightly bent (it is a circle). There is a basic geometrical relationship between this visual curvature {\displaystyle \kappa }

, the altitude and the Earth's radius. It is

{\displaystyle \kappa ={\sqrt {\left(1+{\frac {h}{R}}\right)^{2}-1}}\ .}

The curvature is the reciprocal of the curvature angular radius in radians. A curvature of 1 appears as a circle of an angular radius of 45° corresponding to an altitude of approximately 2640 km above the Earth's surface. At an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft, the typical cruising altitude of an airliner) the mathematical curvature of the horizon is about 0.056, the same curvature of the rim of circle with a radius of 10 m that is viewed from 56 cm directly above the center of the circle. However, the apparent curvature is less than that due to refraction of light in the atmosphere and because the horizon is often masked by high cloud layers that reduce the altitude above the visual surface.

The curvature is the reciprocal of the curvature angular radius in radians. A curvature of 1 appears as a circle of an angular radius of 45° corresponding to an altitude of approximately 2640 km above the Earth's surface. At an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft, the typical cruising altitude of an airliner) the mathematical curvature of the horizon is about 0.056, the same curvature of the rim of circle with a radius of 10 m that is viewed from 56 cm directly above the center of the circle.

However, the apparent curvature is less than that due to refraction of light in the atmosphere and because the horizon is often masked by high cloud layers that reduce the altitude above the visual surface.

So the higher you go up... the less of the curvature (as long as you are staying in the exact same spot and ARE NOT MOVING BACKWARDS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY GOING UPWARDS...in that case the curve will become more obvious) LOGIC!!





NOW JUST FOR KICKS.. LET'S LOOK AT YOUR OTHER PICTURES

Rocket you Say... Went up 73 miles?



Well damn... What does Science say...

Scientists at the University of Calgary, scientists confirmed that space begins 73 miles (118 kilometers) above Earth's surface. Meanwhile the boundary recognized by many in the space industry is also a somewhat arbitrary 62 miles (100 kilometers).

http://www.space.com/6564-edge-space.html


So I take it that you are still saying that Space starts after the 73 mile mark, because that looks like.. Space to me.




---- 0:03 mark.. There is Obvious Slight Curve... Are you seriously telling me that you can't see this? Maybe you have Eye problems. That would explain a lot.


Ok lets continue to this picture...

To the internets...

Crepuscular rays occur when objects such as mountain peaks or clouds partially shadow the sun's rays. The name crepuscular means "relating to twilight" and these rays are observed at sunrise and sunset. Crepuscular rays appear to diverge outward from the setting sun, and are visible only when the atmosphere contains enough haze or dust particles so that sunlight in unshadowed areas can be scattered toward the observer.

The light rays are actually parallel, but appear to converge to the sun due to "perspective", the same visual effect that makes parallel railroad tracks appear to converge in the distance. (THAT DAMN PERSPECTIVE CREEPS UP AGAIN) Crepuscular rays are often red or yellow in appearance because blue light from the sun is selectively scattered out of the beam by air molecules.

Light rays scattered by dust and haze occasionally appear to converge toward the "antisolar" point, (the location on the horizon opposite the point where the sun is setting). These rays, called anti-crepuscular rays, originate at the sun, cross over the sky to the opposite horizon, and appear to converge toward the antisolar point because of perspective.

In the photo above, the sun is near the horizon behind the observer and sunlight is reflecting off the small cloud in the top right corner of the picture. Mountains and clouds behind the observer are responsible for the shadows in between.


Looks like the Light is Converging to me? Are these Pics also CGI??


This is fun... FOR SCIENCE!!!!

using science and logic

I've proved this

Prove me wrong

 

[fonzerrillii]

using science and logic

I've proved this

Prove me wrong

Just like these other pictures I came across..

I heard that the PCP-station is extremely popular in the Trap House.

 

[fonzerrillii]

The funniest thing about this FLAT EARTH Conspiracy is that the Flat Earthers originally were the winners. It was the predominate theory. How can it be a conspiracy if you were the prevailing thought in the entire world? How can the man be holding you down when you were the man?

 

[cashwhisperer]

Dude..... Are we still doing this.

Let's just go through this piece by piece....

1. All you have been doing is Copy and Pasting. I went through and took the time to look at the math and other theories and pieced them together. I did all this to ultimately make the point that all the math in the world doesn't really matter because ultimately.. You can't accurately quantify all the variables due to the effect of atmospheric refraction.


2. The fact that YOU CAN'T ULTIMATELY SEE.. the problem with your Horizon argument with pictures that you are posting is troubling.

Oh and I love the fact... that one of your pictures is taken from a video that I posted in the last thread... So good for you. Lets look at it...




A. Let's look at the Picture you posted..

B. Now let's look at the video....




C. - Curious At one point do that state the Lens Angle, the Distance to Horizon, and the Distance Across Horizon? Just curious, I must have missed this.


OK NOW TO THE DEBUNKING...


Based on the Height listed.. this picture was supposedly taken when the Balloon reached it's peak at 110,000 ft. That's 20.8 miles. That's at the 5:30 mark of this video.

What do we see at that Mark?

An obvious curved horizon.

I believe that your pic was taken at 6:35 mark.

An what do you see at that mark...

A slightly curved horizon..


But now you are saying to yourself.. But FONZ, I can put a straight red line through the blue area, so clearly that means the Horizon is clearly flat. It's shouldn't matter what direction the Camera looking at during the 5:30 mark.
"Pseudo Science Rules Bitches"



Is the Camera high enough and far enough back to accurately see the surface of the Earth in One SHOT?

NO.. That's why it panned around... and when it starts at the 5:30 mark.. The curve is OBVIOUS..


But now you are saying... But FONZ look at the 6:35 mark.. Look at the Red Lines.. They are Flat, so the Horizon is Flat... YOLO..



This is wrong, because you can see the slight bend of the Horizon near the edges of the screen at the 6:35 Mark...

Damn... that slight bend at the 6:35 Mark.. looks familiar. Where have I seen this before?

Oh YEAH...

It looks exactly like the above pic.. except the pic doesn't have clouds. GAWD DAMN YOU CLOUDS and your Obstruction...




Let's take a commercial break and let's look at the Wiki definition of Horizon (Somehow I don't think you know what this means)...

The horizon or skyline is the apparent line that separates earth from sky, the line that divides all visible directions into two categories: those that intersect the Earth's surface, and those that do not.

In many contexts, especially perspective drawing, the curvature of the Earth is disregarded and the horizon is considered the theoretical line to which points on any horizontal plane converge (when projected onto the picture plane) as their distance from the observer increases. (SEE WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT)

For observers near sea level the difference between this geometrical horizon (which assumes a perfectly flat, infinite ground plane) and the true horizon (which assumes a spherical Earth surface) is imperceptible to the naked eye (but for someone on a 1000-meter hill looking out to sea the true horizon will be about a degree below a horizontal line).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon

So these Red Lines are wrong from jump... The true horizon is not going to be where they are located.




Now you must be saying... But Gawd Damn.. FONZ... you must be making shit up. You can't have a Slight curve.. I don't see shit. I'm Flatt-er Blind...

Well let's see what Wiki says again... To the Internets..




Curvature of the horizon.

From a point above the surface the horizon appears slightly bent (it is a circle). There is a basic geometrical relationship between this visual curvature

, the altitude and the Earth's radius. It is

From a point above the surface the horizon appears slightly bent (it is a circle). There is a basic geometrical relationship between this visual curvature {\displaystyle \kappa }

, the altitude and the Earth's radius. It is

{\displaystyle \kappa ={\sqrt {\left(1+{\frac {h}{R}}\right)^{2}-1}}\ .}

The curvature is the reciprocal of the curvature angular radius in radians. A curvature of 1 appears as a circle of an angular radius of 45° corresponding to an altitude of approximately 2640 km above the Earth's surface. At an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft, the typical cruising altitude of an airliner) the mathematical curvature of the horizon is about 0.056, the same curvature of the rim of circle with a radius of 10 m that is viewed from 56 cm directly above the center of the circle. However, the apparent curvature is less than that due to refraction of light in the atmosphere and because the horizon is often masked by high cloud layers that reduce the altitude above the visual surface.

The curvature is the reciprocal of the curvature angular radius in radians. A curvature of 1 appears as a circle of an angular radius of 45° corresponding to an altitude of approximately 2640 km above the Earth's surface. At an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft, the typical cruising altitude of an airliner) the mathematical curvature of the horizon is about 0.056, the same curvature of the rim of circle with a radius of 10 m that is viewed from 56 cm directly above the center of the circle.

However, the apparent curvature is less than that due to refraction of light in the atmosphere and because the horizon is often masked by high cloud layers that reduce the altitude above the visual surface.

So the higher you go up... the less of the curvature (as long as you are staying in the exact same spot and ARE NOT MOVING BACKWARDS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY GOING UPWARDS...in that case the curve will become more obvious) LOGIC!!





NOW JUST FOR KICKS.. LET'S LOOK AT YOUR OTHER PICTURES

Rocket you Say... Went up 73 miles?



Well damn... What does Science say...

Scientists at the University of Calgary, scientists confirmed that space begins 73 miles (118 kilometers) above Earth's surface. Meanwhile the boundary recognized by many in the space industry is also a somewhat arbitrary 62 miles (100 kilometers).

http://www.space.com/6564-edge-space.html


So I take it that you are still saying that Space starts after the 73 mile mark, because that looks like.. Space to me.




---- 0:03 mark.. There is Obvious Slight Curve... Are you seriously telling me that you can't see this? Maybe you have Eye problems. That would explain a lot.


Ok lets continue to this picture...

To the internets...

Crepuscular rays occur when objects such as mountain peaks or clouds partially shadow the sun's rays. The name crepuscular means "relating to twilight" and these rays are observed at sunrise and sunset. Crepuscular rays appear to diverge outward from the setting sun, and are visible only when the atmosphere contains enough haze or dust particles so that sunlight in unshadowed areas can be scattered toward the observer.

The light rays are actually parallel, but appear to converge to the sun due to "perspective", the same visual effect that makes parallel railroad tracks appear to converge in the distance. (THAT DAMN PERSPECTIVE CREEPS UP AGAIN) Crepuscular rays are often red or yellow in appearance because blue light from the sun is selectively scattered out of the beam by air molecules.

Light rays scattered by dust and haze occasionally appear to converge toward the "antisolar" point, (the location on the horizon opposite the point where the sun is setting). These rays, called anti-crepuscular rays, originate at the sun, cross over the sky to the opposite horizon, and appear to converge toward the antisolar point because of perspective.

In the photo above, the sun is near the horizon behind the observer and sunlight is reflecting off the small cloud in the top right corner of the picture. Mountains and clouds behind the observer are responsible for the shadows in between.


Looks like the Light is Converging to me? Are these Pics also CGI??


This is fun... FOR SCIENCE!!!!

I disagree with all the shit you said and will return to smack all that shit down, but on a serious note, I'm on this grind right now, preparing for a trip this weekend, got shit to do, so I'ma have smack all this shit down later when I have time.

quick refute - If the fuckin rocket failed at 73 miles and the edge of so-called space is 73 miles, then can't you put fuckin 2 and 2 together? Goddamn, you throwin whatever can stick at this point?

Until next time...

It's flat.

 

[fonzerrillii]

I disagree with all the shit you said and will return to smack all that shit down, but on a serious note, I'm on this grind right now, preparing for a trip this weekend, got shit to do, so I'ma have smack all this shit down later when I have time.

quick refute - If the fuckin rocket failed at 73 miles and the edge of so-called space is 73 miles, then can't you put fuckin 2 and 2 together? Goddamn, you throwin whatever can stick at this point?

Until next time...

It's flat.

So the Edge of Space is the Location of the Dome? And nothing can cross that 73 mile barrier... So the Rocket failed because it hit the Dome which is at 73 miles above the Earth.

I'm just going to tuck this one away for later....

 

[fonzerrillii]

But you know what.. Fuck it.. I get your point man. I mean damn look at all this Marxist CACS that work with NASA..

 

[fonzerrillii]

And let's just take away Katherine Johnson's Medal of Freedom... CAC's don't deserve Medals..

 

[fonzerrillii]

I mean you had a CAC... Running NASA..

Charles Bolden..

I mean look at this dude... Clearly he is a CAC.

I mean even his WIFE is a CAC...

Does he have no Shame....

 

[roots69]

Damn, Yall still going at it???

 

[roots69]

I mean you had a CAC... Running NASA..

Charles Bolden..

I mean look at this dude... Clearly he is a CAC.

I mean even his WIFE is a CAC...

Does he have no Shame....

He has no shame spending your tax dollars!! He was just on the hill for upgrading all those flights he took.. Our tax dollars...

 

[fonzerrillii]

He has no shame spending your tax dollars!! He was just on the hill for upgrading all those flights he took.. Our tax dollars...

So every single Black Person that has every worked for NASA... is just there to spend our tax dollars and waste money. They are all part of the conspiracy?

I'm just going to put this one away for later.

 

[roots69]

So every single Black Person that has every worked for NASA... is just there to spend our tax dollars and waste money. They are all part of the conspiracy?

I'm just going to put this one away for later.

I just said what he did!! Its amazing how yall defend the lie!! Good luck

 

[Mr. Del]

I'm about to hit the gym and I can't wait to read the 10 to 11 quotes that I'm going to see in my notifications when I get back.

I give you credit for lasting this long. I have a 5 reply maximum. But Knowledge was dropped, and I picked up some of it.

 

[fonzerrillii]

I give you credit for lasting this long. I have a 5 reply maximum. But Knowledge was dropped, and I picked up some of it.

Man I don't know how I lasted this long...

I'll probably tap out for a couple pages and either Vicious or road rage will pick up the
Slack. That's typically the pattern here.

 

[Gods_Debris]

Man I don't know how I lasted this long...

I'll probably tap out for a couple pages and either Vicious or road rage will pick up the
Slack. That's typically the pattern here.

Man you Meek Mill'd that fool

 

[Soul On Ice]

 

[cashwhisperer]

Alright! Y'all got me!

I had to really sit down and watch this entire video and it really proved that the earth was not flat so....Y'all won. There. I said it.


que'd for 2:33

 

[sharkbait28]

do flat earthers believe in gps?

GPS? These flat Earth niggas prolly still typing addresses into AskJeeves and Altavista and shit.

 

[sammyjax]

Man if you don't sit yo ass down

 

[cashwhisperer]

Man if you don't sit yo ass down

That's my exact intent. Y'all won, it's not flat......

 

[futureshock]

I might be a little late......



For The Win

No, Shaq does not believe the world is flat: 'I'm joking, you idiots'


By Nina Mandell March 24, 2017 11:17 am

Shaquille O’Neal confirmed that he actually knows the world is round — despite his brief stint as a member of the flat-earth team.

When asked about his theory about the earth not being round, he seemed mystified people actually believed that he believed the earth is flat.

“The first part of the theory is, I’m joking, you idiots. That’s the first part of the theory. The second part is, I said jokingly that when I’m in my bus and I drive from Florida to California, which I do every summer, it seems to be flat. When I’m in my plane, and we’re getting ready to land, and I open up the window, and I’m looking at all the land that we’re flying over, it seems to be flat. But this world we live in people take things too seriously,” he said on the Art of Charm podcast.

 

[fonzerrillii]

bump

 

[mailboxpimp]

du ass niggaahz think the world is round like a globe. lmfao