If THIS aint a clear ADMISSION THE MOON LANDING WAS FAKE I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS!!!!

Can you explain how it takes less time to sail to australia or new zeland from south africa than it would to sail to other places. australia is soooo far away in your maps, further than most other places in the world? can you elaborate on this in YOUR own words? how can one get to austraila so quick if it's sooo far a way?
 
muthafucker have you ever heard of the bering strait?

and who the fuck said this map was to SCALE?

you're grasping at straws because you cannot wrap you head around the concept being presented.

go back to lurking.

I'm grasping at straws? You said we can't possibly measure the size of other planets yet you post a picture that supposedly shows the size of the sun. Then you post a video with a ridiculous argument based on Koranic science.
 
Does this picture say that the sun is 27 miles in diameter and orbits 3000 miles directly above the equator?

Why does North America touch Asia? Do you think it's possible to drive from the U.S. to Asia?

Why is Australia bigger than North America?

You sit there typing on a computer connected to people all over the world but you think we don't yet have the technology to measure the size of a country?

Have you ever ventured out of your neighborhood?

This cat went form claiming the earth wasn't flat, but shaped like a cylinder(using that picture no less) :smh:, now he's contradicting his earlier claim, and saying the Earth is flat. Even though he KNOWS every other terrestrial planet in the Solar system is spherical.

1z1gt4y.gif
 
if i don't believe the earth is the shape that our science books tell us it is, why would i believe the force known as gravity works the way they tell us it does? i have plenty of information to back up my beliefs on the shape of this planet and i've posted it in numerous threads. and as far as big tex's post about facts or data that show the cold war was a huge hoax, look no further than the FACT that the vietnam war was nothing but a hoax to see an example of how wars are manufactured for profit. then take a look at the afghan-soviet conflict to see who the instigator was in that, and look who popped up 20 years later as the boogey man threatening america's "freedom". then look at the way the boogeyman disappeared and all of a sudden we're in fucking iraq for god knows what.

you cats just don't understand how this shit works out here. keeping the masses confused about even the most basic shit is a part of the plan. there's plenty of evidence in a book by zech sitchin called "genesis revisited" also.

you cats think i'm an idiot but im actually on a whole different level.



it's a cylindrical disk. remember, mufuckas thought it was flat at first for a reason. astronomy has been around for so long, if they knew as much as they knew about the universe so far back then, how could they have gotten the formation of the planet wrong? i don't give a fuck who say what, but there is a HUGE conspiracy about the true nature of the planets and the rest of the universe that if revealed would destroy all of the control mechanisms in the world mainly religion.

flatmap.jpg


http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm


Flat-Earth.gif


http://www.freewebs.com/cosmologies/medievalrationalism.htm




De-Streh. I feel ya...

For the record, there WAS a cold war...








... but it was concocted...









I think many more would understand where you're coming from if you improve your delivery (not saying mine is all that, but just saying).


You have a very heavy burden, because you see what most don't (due to school & programming). It's very easy to let your emotions hang out (because you'll begin to feel isolated, and will attempt to fight for your sanity).


Adjust your approach somewhat, and concentrate on what others may perceive in your words for more effectiveness.


Even I had a difficult time seeing what your take was (especially with the water/gravity thing)...



... but I understand now.



I'm no Guru or therapist, I'm just calling what I see. YOU ARE STILL RELEVANT, AND NEEDED...







IMPROVE YOUR DELIVERY, OR STAY READY FOR OPPOSITION (which will come anyway) AND REJECTION.






This is your path... (and mine as well).





Quovandxra and Mike123....






You two are knowledge BEASTS!!!!
 
De-Streh. I feel ya...

For the record, there WAS a cold war...








... but it was concocted...









I think many more would understand where you're coming from if you improve your delivery (not saying mine is all that, but just saying).


You have a very heavy burden, because you see what most don't (due to school & programming). It's very easy to let your emotions hang out (but you'll begin to feel isolated, and will attempt to fight for your sanity).


Adjust your approach somewhat, and concentrate on what others may perceive in your words for more effectiveness.


Even I had a difficult time seeing what your take was (especially with the water/gravity thing)...



... but I understand now.



I'm no Guru or therapist, I'm just calling what I see. YOU ARE STILL RELEVANT, AND NEEDED...







IMPROVE YOUR DELIVERY, OR STAY READY FOR OPPOSITION (which will come anyway) AND REJECTION.






This is your path... (and mine as well).





Quovandxra and Mike123....






You two are knowledge BEASTS!!!!

Would you like to enlighten us on why you think the earth is flat?

Why exactly do scientists want us to believe it is spherical?
 
De-Streh. I feel ya...

For the record, there WAS a cold war...








... but it was concocted...









I think many more would understand where you're coming from if you improve your delivery (not saying mine is all that, but just saying).


You have a very heavy burden, because you see what most don't (due to school & programming). It's very easy to let your emotions hang out (because you'll begin to feel isolated, and will attempt to fight for your sanity).


Adjust your approach somewhat, and concentrate on what others may perceive in your words for more effectiveness.


Even I had a difficult time seeing what your take was (especially with the water/gravity thing)...



... but I understand now.



I'm no Guru or therapist, I'm just calling what I see. YOU ARE STILL RELEVANT, AND NEEDED...







IMPROVE YOUR DELIVERY, OR STAY READY FOR OPPOSITION (which will come anyway) AND REJECTION.






This is your path... (and mine as well).





Quovandxra and Mike123....






You two are knowledge BEASTS!!!!

Can you explain it to me more articulately then? no judgements on anyone in this thread. Does time change when sailing to Australia from South africa?
 
Can you explain how it takes less time to sail to australia or new zeland from south africa than it would to sail to other places. australia is soooo far away in your maps, further than most other places in the world? can you elaborate on this in YOUR own words? how can one get to austraila so quick if it's sooo far a way?
i see what you're trying to do. first off, you might want to explain whether or not you have taken the trip since you're trying to hint at it.
 
Would you like to enlighten us on why you think the earth is flat?

Why exactly do scientists want us to believe it is spherical?



You missed the point of my prior post bruh...


NEVER ONCE HAVE YOU EVER HEARD ME SAY "THE EARTH WAS FLAT" (Let's just get that out of the way okay?).


I was calling on the OP to be more specific and educational in his approach. Because if he doesn't explain himself properly off rip, he'll get MF's like you thinking he said the fucking Earth is FLAT... Capiche?

:cool:
 
i see what you're trying to do. first off, you might want to explain whether or not you have taken the trip since you're trying to hint at it.

That's a cop out. Are you saying that everyone who has made that trip has lied about the time it takes to complete the journey?

C'mon man.
 
You missed the point of my prior post bruh...


NEVER ONCE HAVE YOU EVER HEARD ME SAY "THE EARTH WAS FLAT" (Let's just get that out of the way okay?).


I was calling on the OP to be more specific and educational in his approach. Because if he doesn't explain himself properly off rip, he'll get MF's like you thinking he said the fucking Earth is FLAT... Capiche?

:cool:

He did tho.
 
De-Streh. I feel ya...

For the record, there WAS a cold war...








... but it was concocted...









I think many more would understand where you're coming from if you improve your delivery (not saying mine is all that, but just saying).


You have a very heavy burden, because you see what most don't (due to school & programming). It's very easy to let your emotions hang out (because you'll begin to feel isolated, and will attempt to fight for your sanity).


Adjust your approach somewhat, and concentrate on what others may perceive in your words for more effectiveness.


Even I had a difficult time seeing what your take was (especially with the water/gravity thing)...



... but I understand now.



I'm no Guru or therapist, I'm just calling what I see. YOU ARE STILL RELEVANT, AND NEEDED...







IMPROVE YOUR DELIVERY, OR STAY READY FOR OPPOSITION (which will come anyway) AND REJECTION.






This is your path... (and mine as well).





Quovandxra and Mike123....






You two are knowledge BEASTS!!!!
you're right 100% and i did mean that about the cold war, i know it "happened", but it was largely posturing. and i am still studying this planetary information myself and i didn't even intend to start the debate but i let my excitement about it get the best of me. the funny shit is how people forget that this world was considered "flat" from the gate, and it was changed to "round" by the same people who fought for control of the world and still maintain it. the reason behind it, i've already stated. one of the keys to understanding our existence lies in this secret.


http://ftp.fortunaty.net/com/sacred-texts/earth/za/za22.htm

The sun passes over the earth and returns to the same point in 24 hours. If in 2 hours, 51 minutes, and 56.5 seconds, it passes from the meridian of the Valencia end of the cable to that of its termination at Heart's Content, a distance of 1942 statute miles, how far will it travel in 24 hours? On making the calculation the answer is, 16,265 statute miles. This result is only three miles greater distance than that obtained by the first process.

Again in the Boston Post, for Oct. 30th, 1856, Lieut. Maury gives the following as the correct distances, in geographical miles, across the Atlantic by the various routes (circle sailing).




Nautical
Miles.





Statute
Miles.

Philadelphia to Liverpool


3000


=


3500

New York "


2880


=


3360

Boston "


2720


=


3173

New York to Southampton


2980


=


3476

" to Glasgow


2800


=


3266

Boston to Galway


2520


=


2940

Newfoundland to Galway


1730


=


2018

Boston to Belfast


2620


=


3056

If we take the distance (given in the above table) between Liverpool and New York as 3360 statute miles, and calculate as in the last case, we find a nearly similar result, making allowance for the detour round the south or north of Ireland.

"The difference of time between London and New York

p. 93

which the use of the electric cable makes a matter of some consequence, has latterly been ascertained afresh. It is 4 hours, 55 minutes, 18.95 seconds." 1

The results of these several methods are so nearly alike that the distance 16,262 statute miles may safely be taken as the approximate circumference of the earth at the latitude of Valencia.

If the distance from Valencia to the Cape of Good Hope, or to Cape Horn, had ever been actually measured, not calculated, the circumference of the earth at these points could, of course, be readily ascertained. We cannot admit as evidence the calculated length of a degree of latitude, because this is an amount connected with the theory of the earth's rotundity; which has been proved to be false. We must therefore take known distances between places far south of Valencia, where latitude and longitude have also been carefully observed. In the Australian Almanack for 1871, page 126 2, the distance from Auckland (New Zealand), to Sydney, is given as 1315 miles, nautical measure, which is equal to 1534 statute miles. At page 118 of the Australian Almanack for 1859, Captain Stokes, H.M.S. Acheron, communicates the latitude of Auckland as 36° 50´ 05″, S., and longitude 174° 50´ 40″, E.; latitude of Sydney, 33° 51´ 45″, S., and longitude 151° 16´ 15″, E. The difference in longitude, or time distance, is 23° 34´ 25″, calculating as in the case of Valencia to Newfoundland,

p. 94

we find that as 23° 34´ 25″ represents 1534 statute miles, 360° will give 23,400 statute miles as the circumference of the earth at the latitude of Sydney, Auckland, and the Cape of Good Hope. Hence the radius or distance from the centre of the north to the above places is, in round numbers, 3720 statute miles. Calculating in the same way, we find that from Sydney to the Cape of Good Hope is fully 8600 statute miles.
 
Need I remind everyone that JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD HAS SATELLITES THAT TAKES PICTURES OF THE PLANET EARTH !!!

And guess what its a sphere.

Just like the other planets you can study with your telescope.

Really though...
 
Need I remind everyone that JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD HAS SATELLITES THAT TAKES PICTURES OF THE PLANET EARTH !!!

And guess what its a sphere.

Just like the other planets you can study with your telescope.

Really though...
Argument Three - The impossibilities of holding unsecured objects in place on a curved surface

1) Staying on top

Once again, picture in your mind a round world. Now imagine that there are two people on this world, one at each pole. For the person at the top of the world, (the North Pole), gravity is pulling him down, towards the South Pole. But for the person at the South Pole, shouldn't gravity pull him down as well? What keeps our person at the South Pole from falling completely off the face of the "globe"?

2) Falling off

As we begin to make this argument, we acknowledge beforehand that we are aware of the property of matter known as friction. Yes, we realize that whenever two surfaces are held together by any force there will be a static frictional force that will resist any motion by either surface in any direction other than parallel to the force. The example we are using is an extreme situation, and would involve the object in question to travel a considerable distance (tens of degrees of latitude) from the "top" of the planet.

Using the "round Earth" theory, setting an object on the earth would be like setting grains of sand on a beach ball. Certainly a few grains would stay - right around the top, the surface is nearly horizontal - but when you stray too far from the absolute top of the ball, the grains of sand start sliding off and falling onto the ground. The Earth, if round, should behave in exactly the same fashion. Because the top is a very localized region on a sphere, if the Earth were in fact round, there would be only a very small area of land that would be at all inhabitable. Stray to the outside fringes of the "safe zone", and you start walking at a tilt. The further out you go, the more you slant, until your very survival is determined by the tread on your boots. Reach a certain point, and you slide off the face of the planet entirely. Obviously, something is wrong.

In order to avoid the aforementioned scenario, (which obviously is inaccurate, as you very rarely hear of people falling off the face of the planet) we are forced to assume that, in the "round Earth" theory, there would be a gravitational field radiating from the center of the planet. All objects, be they rocks, insects, humans, or other planets would have, under Efimovich's theory, have a gravitational "charge" that would, under a certain alignment, cause them to be attracted to the center of the Earth. Unfortunately, like a magnet in a stronger magnetic field, it would undoubtedly require a long time to re-align an object's gravitational charge, were this the case. And so we go to argument four, which deals with difficulties in having different "downs" for different people.
 
Need I remind everyone that JUST ABOUT EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD HAS SATELLITES THAT TAKES PICTURES OF THE PLANET EARTH !!!

And guess what its a sphere.

Just like the other planets you can study with your telescope.

Really though...

Every country is a big exaggeration but I get your point. Still, this moron probably doesn't believe Satellites exist so...
 
here is no indication that the early Egyptians attempted to offer explanations, other than mythical poetic, for the movements of the heavenly bodies. An early Egyptian conception was that the universe is a rectangular box. The Earth is slightly concave and sits at the bottom of the box. The sky is the top of the box, and it is supported by the peaks of four mountains located at the corners of the flat Earth. A river flows around the Earth, and carries the boat of the sun god. There was a belief that the universe came into existence from the primordial chaos of the waters, and that the heavens, Earth, and other natural objects and forces were personalized as gods. Nut, the sky goddess, arched over the flat earth with her four limbs supporting her.

Shu, god of air, lifted Nut with his two hands. Nut gives birth to the stars every evening. In some depictions of Nut, astronomical tables of star risings are tattooed on her body. There apparently were no attempts (other than mythological) to explain the motion of the heavenly bodies, even though accurate observations were made.

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cach...perate+in+flat+earth&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us
 
If the Earth is cylindrical, how do explain the fact that half the world is dark while the other half is light?

My man, have you ever been up in a plane? Have you ever looked out the window and looked at the curvature of the planet?

Or are those movie screen the U.S. Government put in the windows to dupe you?
 
yall are telling me ALL these ancient people were just idiots like me?

map_homer_world.jpg



map_portolan.jpg


map_cosmas_b.jpg


map_cosmas_tabernacle.jpg


Its not about being idiotic. Those people didnt know everything or understand everything, as far as we know. They did not live in paradise, their world was utopia, they were not perfect.

I dont understand why you, and apparently you expect us to, accept in what the ancient civilizations believed was true because... they were... ancient?
 
If the Earth is cylindrical, how do explain the fact that half the world is dark while the other half is light?

My man, have you ever been up in a plane? Have you ever looked out the window and looked at the curvature of the planet?

Or are those movie screen the U.S. Government put in the windows to dupe you?
the curvature is caused by our own limited vision, we can only see so far. and when i said i think it's cylindrical, i meant that the earth is somewhat like a shallow bowl. that's the only way i can conceive that it holds our water.

Consider a 1-dimensional being, living on a line, it can only go backward and forward. Now, to make that being's universe infinite but yet finite, we simply mess around in the 2nd dimension and make the line a circle. For the 1-dimensional being it is still a line because it has no knowledge of the 2nd dimension and thus, it does not know it isn't actually following a line but is in fact in an infinite loop or circle.

The same scenario would hold true for the 2-dimensional being if you make that circle a sphere. The 2-dimensional being would think his universe is infinite while a higher dimensional being would recognize that it is clearly not.

That leads to the idea that our 3-dimensional perspective of the universe might actually be 'fake'. We are actually in a finite universe, yet it appears infinite from our perspective.

How this universe would actually look to a 4-dimensional being is beyond our capability to fully comprehend, as we are not yet on a level where we can interact effectively with the 4th dimension, even though we are aware of it and are influenced by it (time/space).

http://www.pufoin.com/pufoin_perspective/ascension1.php
 
You still have not answered whether or not you believe that all the other planets are flat as well.

And tell me why noone ever falls off the side of the planet.

Just because ancient people believed something doesn't make it true. There are many old religions that people still strongly believe in. Can they all be right?
 
Its not about being idiotic. Those people didnt know everything or understand everything, as far as we know. They did not live in paradise, their world was utopia, they were not perfect.

I dont understand why you, and apparently you expect us to, accept in what the ancient civilizations believed was true because... they were... ancient?
you do realize ancient egyptians and sumerians had knowledge of the universe too right? i bet you don't even know who the sumerians were.
 
Argument Three - The impossibilities of holding unsecured objects in place on a curved surface

1) Staying on top

Once again, picture in your mind a round world. Now imagine that there are two people on this world, one at each pole. For the person at the top of the world, (the North Pole), gravity is pulling him down, towards the South Pole. But for the person at the South Pole, shouldn't gravity pull him down as well? What keeps our person at the South Pole from falling completely off the face of the "globe"?

2) Falling off

As we begin to make this argument, we acknowledge beforehand that we are aware of the property of matter known as friction. Yes, we realize that whenever two surfaces are held together by any force there will be a static frictional force that will resist any motion by either surface in any direction other than parallel to the force. The example we are using is an extreme situation, and would involve the object in question to travel a considerable distance (tens of degrees of latitude) from the "top" of the planet.

Using the "round Earth" theory, setting an object on the earth would be like setting grains of sand on a beach ball. Certainly a few grains would stay - right around the top, the surface is nearly horizontal - but when you stray too far from the absolute top of the ball, the grains of sand start sliding off and falling onto the ground. The Earth, if round, should behave in exactly the same fashion. Because the top is a very localized region on a sphere, if the Earth were in fact round, there would be only a very small area of land that would be at all inhabitable. Stray to the outside fringes of the "safe zone", and you start walking at a tilt. The further out you go, the more you slant, until your very survival is determined by the tread on your boots. Reach a certain point, and you slide off the face of the planet entirely. Obviously, something is wrong.

In order to avoid the aforementioned scenario, (which obviously is inaccurate, as you very rarely hear of people falling off the face of the planet) we are forced to assume that, in the "round Earth" theory, there would be a gravitational field radiating from the center of the planet. All objects, be they rocks, insects, humans, or other planets would have, under Efimovich's theory, have a gravitational "charge" that would, under a certain alignment, cause them to be attracted to the center of the Earth. Unfortunately, like a magnet in a stronger magnetic field, it would undoubtedly require a long time to re-align an object's gravitational charge, were this the case. And so we go to argument four, which deals with difficulties in having different "downs" for different people.


How does this address what I wrote? Why arent picture good enough for you? Every satellite is rigged by whoever "runs the world" I suppose? And by the way, even in your cylinder theory, gravity would still have to work the same way. So I dont get your post.
 
You still have not answered whether or not you believe that all the other planets are flat as well.

And tell me why noone ever falls off the side of the planet.

Just because ancient people believed something doesn't make it true. There are many old religions that people still strongly believe in. Can they all be right?
LMAO, nobody falls off the side of the planet because it's not a gotdam sphere! did you read this thread?
 
How does this address what I wrote? Why arent picture good enough for you? Every satellite is rigged by whoever "runs the world" I suppose? And by the way, even in your cylinder theory, gravity would still have to work the same way. So I dont get your post.
gravity is irrelevant in my argument as far as it's operation. i never DISCOUNTED the EXISTENCE of a force that brings objects back to the ground when they have no propulsion force sending it otherwise.
 
LMAO, nobody falls off the side of the planet because it's not a gotdam sphere! did you read this thread?

I'm talking about the edge. If the planet is flat there must be an edge like there are in the pictures you posted as "evidence". if someone travels in a straight line, he/she would eventually come to the edge of the world and eventually fall off.
 
you do realize ancient egyptians and sumerians had knowledge of the universe too right? i bet you don't even know who the sumerians were.

Do you understand that they were not perfect beings and that while they had some knowledge, they obviously did not know everything? I mean they also "knew" what happens in the afterlife. Should I just accept that as truth too?
 
Can you explain it to me more articulately then? no judgements on anyone in this thread. Does time change when sailing to Australia from South africa?

I REFUSE to dispute what you said in your earlier post... makes perfect sense to me...


Why?


Because I don't subscribe to the theory that the Earth is flat.



I'll freely admit that I don't know everything...



... but I WILL question EVERYTHING...

:cool:
 
I had a homie that just got back from Western Australia a few months ago. He flew back and forth from L.A. I just got off the phone whit him and he said it took about 14 hours... Ya'll now im a avid pundit of all "fringe" information. I just want to be debunked so I can believe!!!:cool::eek::lol::dance:

worldmap.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Lol, you had me going for a minute. Now I know even you dont believe in the theory you introduced us to. Hey its alright, there are lost of unexplained phenomena out there, no one has all the answers. Maybe our purpose here is to strive to find them all.
 
Back
Top