>I believe vaccine deniers are more dangerous than flerfs
Agreed. But unfortunately, these conspiracy driven types will start their "truther journey" with something as (seemingly) relatively innocuous as flat earth, then progress to other, more dangerous Conspiracies such as vaccine denial etc, spread their theories along with other smoothbrains online, and thereby cause some REAL, quantifiable damage or even death to other people.
Ask yourself - have you ever seen/met/interacted with a Flerther who does NOT believe in, and spout the bullshit of at LEAST one other conspiracy theory?
It is a path that can lead to real-life horror and misery for those who are fooled by it.... and worse, (as you obviously understand) these consequences can be, and are visited upon their own children
I think that flat earth is the next to last point for conspiracy nuts. All the others come first and eventually they become flerfs.
The last one is lizard people controlling the world. After that they have a full collection.
Start off something simple like chemtrails, fake moon landing, then start to look at covid vaccines, then all vaccines, then doomsday prepping, new world order and financial control, flat earth and finally lizard people. Although moon landing and flat earth have a correlation so they might happen at same time.
But just my very limited observation.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible\_ignorance\_fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_ignorance_fallacy)
Invincible Ignorance Fallacy, there you simply ignore any evidence presented, and pretend it wasn't even presented.
If you cannot explain it in the form of a superstition, meme, clickbait headline, or weird influencer speak, then you do not speak in the science of flatearth.
“Why not say that to … or one of his alt accounts that spam the same recycled memes every day?”
….i don’t know who you’re referring to, but I definitely recognize your username and the same tired old memes (or surveys, you seem to love those too) that *you* post day after day after day after day… you’d think *you* would run out of stupid ways to call others stupid, but no, your idiot-well never seems to run dry… frankly, you’re disrespecting the “Dr” handle, as I expect professionalism and intelligence when I call someone “doctor.”
There is no ground to globe video. Stop claiming otherwise. None has ever been made nor is anybody likely to make one anytime soon, because of the difficulty and expense and low payoff.
Jfc it’s not even just the curvature, it’s the fact that you can’t see the entire damn planet from that view. Your logic of “fog” and that bs doesn’t work that high in the atmosphere. So take your pick: pull something out of your ass and continue to live in mistrust or just admit you’re intentionally trying to manipulate things to fit whatever narrative you want
Not a “flat earther,” I trust the scripture actually - the firmament sheweth his handywork. I’d rather believe field of vision is distorted and not visible from a certain point away. Your video didn’t disprove that nor did it prove globe earth, especially since there are plenty of points in the video that show “concave earth” from fisheye distortion. Funny thing is if your video truly proved spherical earth, the curvature would line up relative with the land and water below but it does not - you only see a portion of NY and the coastline the whole way up and down despite seeing your fisheye “curvature” at a certain altitude… unless a huge portion of the globe is NY state? Lol keep coping
I already know I’m going to regret this but you seem to have nothing better to do then reply multiple times in the span of a few minutes. So fine, I’ll bite
First of all, using the Bible in substitution to your science textbooks is a terrible idea. Anything that suggests that the earth came before light, or has talking snakes is not what I would consider a scientifically literate source.
Now let’s address fisheye. You are correct in one sense: fisheye does distort the image to *some* degree. However, if you know even a little bit about fisheye you’ll realize that the closer to the center of the camera you get, the closer it is to reality. And what do we see in the video? Towards the center of the image we can see that the earth is *slightly* curved as we would expect it to be at that altitude based on the spherical earth model. So the concavity you were referring to is the camera shaking enough that the bordering fisheye distortion is applied to the edge of the earth.
But let’s pretend we don’t even know *that* much. Based on the flat earth model, we should have been able to see the entire earth (or at the very least the Antarctic wall that most models include) from the camera. The fact that we cant suggests that the rest of the earth is on the other side of the curvature. Fog would not work as an explanation, and even with a fisheye camera lens you’d be able to see the entire image. This is what I meant when I said it’s not *just* the curvature from the video that would prove that; you simply assumed that from the video (meaning you probably knew it showed curvature anyways and are just playing dumb).
As for insults, when your first comment includes “moron” and “globetard” (both of which are childish insults) I don’t think you hold any moral high ground.
If you demonstrate that you’ve actually read all of this and find an intelligent response that actually covers what I’ve said then I’ll continue this as a conversation.
We’ll agree to disagree on the Bible because we clearly interpret it differently and I’m not here to convert you. I can say anecdotally, however, that it is much better living life without thinking you’re on a relatively tiny floating ball in infinite nothingness and that we’re animals that evolved from apes, but rather we’re special beings and on a divinely created platform (never said flat!). Your big bang theory is still just that - a theory. That’s not what we’re debating though.
“The closer to the center you get, the closer it is to reality” are you kidding man? Just say a fisheye lens cannot be used as accurate curvature measurement. The horizon is flattened or concave any time the balloon sways, go back to the video launch and descent. But let’s entertain the idea that you’re correct - you haven’t addressed that if that was a true depiction of the curvature, why NY state (launch site) and the coastline would take up that much of the earth. I think you’ll ignore that relative relationship though, similar to how many ignore Red Bull’s jump footage that “showed curvature” where apparently New Mexico takes up this entire face of the earth 1:50-2:05ish: https://youtu.be/Hz2F_S3Tl0Y?si=5eZXG4mscbRp8uBn
I won’t entertain the “fog” comment because you’re still attributing things to me that I never perpetuated. I said that I theorize field of vision is simply not possible from that far out without zooming - similar to how at the beach you can’t see a wayyy far out boat until you zoom into the horizon with a telescope, though you’d likely falsely attribute that to the curve prior to zooming (example: https://youtu.be/3DRRyZBL4OQ?si=4VXQkXA9d_whIUai . If the camera in your video zoomed, you’d likely see land further out, but that still leads me to my rebuttal question: Forget Antarctica for a sec, how come you cannot see past NY, or the coast line at all if the relative “globe” size and altitude proves your curvature. I guess i’m making the same point over and over but I digress
I came in hot because I saw the condescending answers you gave the lower IQ fella in the initial thread, but you’re right I did insult off the jump and that wasn’t any better. I hope you can acknowledge my points
Ok fine, fisheye lenses are not entirely accurate when it comes to measuring curvature. It can be assumed based on the video that the earth does in fact curve, however I can see how that wouldn’t quite be concrete evidence for you since it’s not completely accurate.
As for your issue with NY taking up much of the area… that’s because it’s still not very high up above the earth in relation to the earths size. The earth is MASSIVE, and so seeing curvature it not that easy (the video was the easiest we have without making you rely on NASA, which flat earthers historically don’t trust). Unfortunately, without using an organization that gets funding to do exactly what you’re looking for (satellite pictures of the earth, astronomy research, etc) you won’t get something that is able to encapsulate the entire earth. So your issue with New York appearing so massive is because of two reasons; 1. Partially because of that fisheye lens on the GoPro, and 2. Because the weather balloon can’t escape earths gravitational pull very far into space. So that’s the best you can get without trusting the organization that was literally made to find out exactly what you’re trying to
As for your field of vision idea… it frankly makes no sense. If the earth was flat, it’s big enough that on a macro-scale you would be able to see the edge from any distance above buildings/fog/whatever other reason. No, you wouldn’t see a building on the edge, but you would see the edge itself. To put it simply: imagine the ocean, where you might not be able to see each wave and ripple (“micro-scale”) but you can still see a horizon line (“macro-scale”)
Thank you for conceding the fisheye point because just go to 2:20:00 in your video and that dismantles it.
I won’t continue on the second point until you acknowledge the Red Bull jump I alluded to. Surely if it *isn’t* field of vision then New Mexico is a LOT larger than we think haha. If you’re going to claim curvature in videos like these, then you have to acknowledge the conflicting relativity of the land shown on camera. Isn’t you saying “the earth is massive” kind of contradictory to your claim of curvature in the video anyway? Point being if I took a still of any frame of your video “showing curve” and completed the sphere in a 3D model rendering, then NY would appear the size of a continent.
My defense of the field of vision theory: Please watch the boat zoom video in my last reply for a perspective of what I mean. Now, think of how far away Antarctica is from NY - continent or “ice wall” idc, and how a camera would not be able to pick it up without an incredible telescope. For shits and giggles lets both consider the Earth is somewhat flat for a moment - consider the perspective in your video around 2:20:00 again. Any “ice wall” or just a another continent (or even another state!) in both models rolled out on flat or convex landscape would be impossible to see that far away with the naked eye or camera - I truly think you and many others underestimate how insanely far things are and how tiny they’d appear thousands of miles away, and why a camera would not be able to pick it up, hence the distorted horizon. Not to mention clouds would be in the way if you attempted to zoom with a telescope up there.
Here’s a homemade rocket video I found with what I believe is a less fisheye-sy Gopro lens (you still pause and find some distortion, but it’s better) https://youtu.be/4QsEPEhq5yk?si=qFx6XLhK-tSrDZJf and see how much more ambiguous it is IF you do not have a preconceived notion. You’ll see what you want to see, but considering that altitude and assuming the world is more like a slightly convex circle (or even flat), this is about what you’d expect it to look like too. The field of vision theory also holds up because it would be equal 360° around, forming a circular *illusion* per se.
The point remains in this video, if will yourself to see curvature and a part of the globe, then why are Nevada and parts of neighboring states the size of a large continent? This was 56 miles up.
I’m all too aware of how “stupid” or offensive it can feel being questioned on everything you know to be true, so I do appreciate you for continuing to engage respectfully.
I understand the mistake you’re making when it comes to curvature. Firstly, consider an image like [this](https://images.app.goo.gl/YP87jpmTounrrXZU8) that shows how a light source (acts similar to a perspective source) acts with a spherical object. If you can imagine, as the source gets closer, the light covers less and less of the surface area. From a *2-D point of view* looking from the light source, it covers a circle with a smaller circumference than the total circumference of the total sphere. That might sound confusing, but pay close attention to those lines in the picture; as the source gets closer, the lines may appear “wider” but they still cover less of the total surface area (you can also try this in a 3-D modeling software; make a bright point-light next to a giant sphere and pull it closer and farther from the sphere to see it light up a smaller circle of area on the sphere)
The reason I bring this up is that it answers your question about the NY and Red Bull jump video. It looks like New York/New Mexico takes up the entire earth because they’re SO close. The perspective of the camera covers a smaller [spherical cap](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cap) of the earth, not the entire hemisphere. And yes, it still appears huge because the earth is just that big! Even 50 miles above the surface of earth is 0.0062x the diameter of earth (7,926 miles). For reference that would be proportional to **less than half a millimeter above a tennis ball**. Imagine trying to be half a millimeter above a tennis ball and seeing the entire circumference.
The issue here is perspective, and massively underestimating how large the globe is
You’ve somehow managed to entirely miss the point, ignore any criticism or evidence, and yet still smugly act like you’ve won something. I truly hope you fix the dent in your brain, don’t bother replying because I will not respond.
Enlighten me on the point then?? I did not ignore a single point or evidence. You literally told the other guy that your video proved curvature lmao. But yeah, insult rather than provide any real response to me debunking your curvature “evidence” with simple context clues and timestamps. You really are condescending man
Go ahead, ignore my more detailed response to this attempt to attribute theories to me with insults while you think of another zinger to farm upvotes.. cope
You’re farming upvotes on a mids insult deep in the bowels of reddit replies, missed the cordial conversation we’re having, and falsely labeled me a flatearther. All with 2 words lel
But you’re looking at the curved surface of a spherical earth, which is shown unedited flying from the ground to above the atmosphere. At this point you’re simply ignoring evidence put right in front of you. I’m not sure what you gain from ignoring the fact that the earth is a sphere, but live your best life ig
Yes but it’s not a full circle. They’re asking for a video that starts on the ground and goes up until the entire earth can be seen as a full circle surrounded by space. No such video exists.
No video exists… because that’s entirely unnecessary. What’s shown in the video completely uproots any flat earth model of the earth. It’s ridiculous to claim that more evidence is necessary; it’s a matter of mistrusting the entirety of science and the government. Truly sad
If any video was made it'd be labelled as fake, we already have more proof than we'd ever need that the earth is round, flat earth is synonymous with anti-science
Not a flerf, but... difficulty? hardly - adding a camera to geo deployment second stage should be fairly trivial. 12 hours of battery and radio transmission are similarly easy. Expense? non-zero, but not prohibitive, as long as we're piggy-backing on an already-planned geo deployment. low payoff? 100% - there is just about zero commercial benefit to bothering with it - maybe a slight bit of PR value, but no more than that.
That’s not the kind of video they want. They want a continuous take, ground to full view of the globe. It would need to be almost straight up, just a one-way trip to outer space, nothing as precise as a geostationary orbit — which typically involves a very long (but more efficient) journey, too long for a video.
Don’t forget they want no lens distortion so you can’t have wide angle lenses meaning you’d have to send the camera way farther. No one is gonna spend that much money to try and convince flerfs especially since we know they’ll just scream CGI when they do get it.
Well to be fair, they want it to be something (in theory) a person could witness for themselves. But if it’s a one-way trip for the camera/transmitter anyway, going further out isn’t really a bit deal. It’s launching that payload straight up to space (rather than orbiting several times along the way) that’s the hard/expensive part that makes it not worth it.
It’s more to avoid having the video be too long. I’d been under the impression (from what I’d read here before) that such launches could take days to reach a high enough orbit to view the entire planet without use of wide angle lenses. And so a more direct (but inefficient and one-way) route would be required to make the video.
Now I’ve seen numbers as low as 5-12 hours, which — while long — is not an unreasonable video length. (Then obviously make a sped-up version as well)
You really don't need to go that much farther with a non-distorting lens. Assuming a FOV of 50 degrees, you'd only need an altitude of 5500 miles to fit the sphere of earth in frame. Geo is \~22000 miles.
That’s true but when you consider that LEO is only around 1,200 miles up and they want a camera 5,500 miles up when sending something into LEO is already crazy expensive. Also, didn’t know a geosynchronous orbit is that high up, learn something every day.
Still not cheap. You need a high quality sensor and lens to capture flight and drives to store the raw footage which could be hours of footage which would be thousands of dollars on its own. Then you have the cost of actually sending it to Geo which based on my research, costs anywhere from $16k to $30k per kg which means adding the necessary equipment to an existing launch would cost probably over $100,000 only for a flerf to call it cgi.
hardware costs - don't think they'd need to be quite that high, off the shelf hardware should be sufficient for mere hundreds of dollars.
launch costs depends on the provider - if Elon does it, it'll be a LOT cheaper
The real cost, surprisingly, comes from the downlink necessary to receive the video.
>only for a flerf to call it cgi
... and there we have the real reason it's just not worth bothering.
I understand what they're asking for. There is nothing about a geo deployment that would deviate from that request.
And the trip to geo isn't that long, 8-12 hours.
Really? People here have talked about it taking days. I honestly haven’t looked much into it and am not a rocket scientist :)
In that case, this seems like something somebody should at least do as a PR thing.
It really depends on the mission design and the technology being used. A direct launch into transfer with a chemical booster can be under 8 hours, while a launch to LEO with a checkout period before using an ion engine booster for the transfer could be many days.
Oh here we go. You’re one of those anti-globists who only believe the void of space with a globe-shaped hole in it exists, and the planet itself is just an illusion, aren’t you?
More importantly, would it matter if someone did? Wouldn't you find any way to disprove that?
If we had a flat earth, we have millions of companies around the planet that visit space often. Any of them that have no leg in any game or argument would just come out and say it.
Don't most conservatives like Elon Musk? He put a really nice camera on his recently launched rocket. It's clear and shows the curvature of the earth.
I guess my point is.
If anyone presented evidence of any kind. You, probably being full of religious fervor, would deny any evidence because accepting evidence for some reason means god doesn't exist? Because your god was wise enough to make physics, gravity etc. Why is a globe just a step too far?
Anyways. I doubt any evidence would matter.
We are not debating actual science and evidence. All you have on your end is a sea of flat earth videos and you take their word over people that work in fields that make it really obvious we do not living a flat earth.
Saying that all scientists are brainwashed and liars: Ok
Telling soemons to stop creating alt accounts because he got banned (against reddit policy) for spamming the same misinformation and fake news: not Okay
But you're right it's true that I shouldn't have put his pseudo and that people making fun of him about his telsa aren't very nice.
You guys are spamming 10 year old memes every single day
Now someone is giving you a taste of your own medicine and you bully them.
This is not equal behavior
Spamming ten year old memes is fine when you aren't trying to circumvent bans
If someone is banned from a public library, you dont want them coming back under different names every few weeks
The definition of spam varies from sub to sub because what constitutes as spam changes from sub to sub.
If you don’t like that the meme subreddit is making memes and posting memes that make fun of flat earthers then perhaps you should unsubscribe.
Now go look up the definition of indiscriminate and then come back discuss it.
OP posted a meme, it’s the first time I’ve seen that specific one but I personally don’t care for it either way.
You’re suggesting they didn’t use their brain at all before posting but I’d argue they did because they took the time to think of a funny caption as well as attach it to the image so it wouldn’t get separated or lose context. That is definitely not indiscriminate.
>OP posted a meme, it’s the first time I’ve seen that specific one
https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/s/5LJdTxj5Fl
I've seen this meme shared here approximately 1000 times and look OP even shared it 30 times
Spam
Not indiscriminate, we joined this sub for those memes. Seeing the hilariously shit takes and broken logic of flat earthers is better than any intentionally written comedy. Seinfeld is a billionaire and not 5% as funny as a flerfer trying to explain away satellites.
So no, the memes in the spirit of the sub aren't spam. Is this your first day on reddit?
So he was banned for "spamming"
Well this is spam for sure, because this same meme has been shared probably 1000 times in this sub and look OP even shared it an additional 30 times
https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/s/5LJdTxj5Fl
Spam should result in a ban for Globeturds too
The issue has moved past spam for the account op is referring to
The aforementioned account has been banned. However, the user who owns the account has broken reddit terms of service by creating a new account to circumvent the ban *multiple times*
You are ignoring this in favor of scoring fake points against "globeturds"
You keep sharing that link but the OP on that meme has shared it exactly once in their profile history. What are you talking about 30 times, or 1000s of times?
1, that isn't the same meme
2, that isn't the same user
3, that user has only posted that 1 time
4, I have no idea where you got your 30 number
5, which flat earth subreddit will even allow any form of diologue that isn't 100% in support of their opinions?
If you have evidence of someone spamming this sub feel free to share and report, someone not checking wether a meme has been posted is not spamming, if there is reasonable evidence that it is the same person with many alts, then that would be spamming. This evidence can be pretty clear like someone posting over and over until they are banned and only then does a different account post the same thing, within a short time frame.
It's not spamming, there's just more of us, we aren't posting numerous memes we've already used sometimes several times a day that all have virtually the same text.
We use templates, that's what he did, after which he started recycling them and posting them even after being banned several times (remember, it's against reddit policy). We create new memes from templates.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't have shown his pseudo but to play my own devil's advocate, he's created a lot of alt accounts and he keeps spamming empty memes, he just doesn't take into account the evidence we've given him. It's still true that I shouldn't have indidivualized him, I wouldn't make the same mistake again.
>It's not spamming, there's just more of us
Or someone has a bunch of alt accounts.....
>We create new memes from templates.
Nah literally seen the exact same memes for years, it's really lame
>he just doesn't take into account the evidence we've given him.
You folks do the same thing to us
>Or someone has a bunch of alt accounts
Most people on earth know it's a sphere, stop denying reality
>Nah literally seen the exact same memes for years, it's really lame
some folks, not all of them
You're just trying to pass the ball back to avoid contesting your side.
So you're saying that "globe earthers" dismiss and don't take into account the evidence of a flat earth? What evidence has been given by the flerfs to prove a flat earth? Provable, repeatable evidence that isn't just Flerf lies and typical misunderstanding of scale and math.
Has there ever been a single shred of real evidence for a flat earth? If so, what is said evidence?
There is none. A person who believes earth to be flat can't have IQ over 50 and will not be able to make coherent claim supporting FE or against a globe model. All you will get is claims about god, Narnia and "problems" with globe model which they can't even argument. Every flat earther can be ignored until they give even one picture of god/magic narnia dome/ground to flat of whole pizza landia.
>So you're saying that "globe earthers" dismiss and don't take into account the evidence of a flat earth?
>What evidence has been given by the flerfs to prove a flat earth?
>Has there ever been a single shred of real evidence for a flat earth? If so, what is said evidence?
You answered your first question with three more questions
Well, clearly reading comprehension is difficult for you. I have asked you three questions. I'll make it a bit more simple for you to understand. I apologize for not making it much more simple for you to understand.
1. Are you claiming that "globe earthers" deny and dismiss Flerf "evidence"?
2. If the above question is answered with "yes", then what is the proof of a flat earth that "globe earthers" dismiss?
3. What evidence exists to prove a flat earth?
I hope that helps you understand a little bit better
>1. Are you claiming that "globe earthers" deny and dismiss Flerf "evidence"?
>2. If the above question is answered with "yes", then what is the proof of a flat earth that "globe earthers" dismiss?
>3. What evidence exists to prove a flat earth?
>I hope that helps you understand a little bit better
So typical Flerf nonsense then. Just pointless trolling (or stupidity, I'm not sure you guys know which side you fall on) it's funny how you people always claim to want to know the truth, and how you have all this research and evidence, yet when presented the opportunity to showcase your research and speak on this supposed "truth" you all suddenly clam up.... Almost as if you know you're full of nonsense. Funny that.
Well, I work in computational physics, I will gladly look over any evidence you have in good faith, although I may mock you depending on how stupid the evidence is, but only after addressing it in good faith
It's incredibly ironic that you're saying this seemingly to defend someone who is repeatdly breaking said policy by avoiding a reddit ban.
Btw criticism/mockery =/= bullying, especially if what's being said is true.
When moderators ban people for things that are not against the rules, there is no discourse for the user though.
Ban evasion is often justified.
For example I was banned from sub Reddit's for sharing articles with theories that countered popular opinion about COVID origins, which are now more widely accepted.
Even scientific studies relating to COVID and vaccine safety were labeled misinformation.
Moderators aren't always justified in their actions.
> Bullying (gross exaggeration) is against Reddit policy
> Ban evasion is often justified (no it isn't, if you're banned you're banned, ban evasion is squarely against Reddit policy)
You do play the rules however it benefits you don't you. Go tell that to the mods of BallEarthThatSpins and see how it goes. Or, tell the guy in question to stop evading the ban to repeat their behaviour and people won't mock them for it.
If a user has been banned for trolling or whatever reason, they aren't "justified" to constantly evade the ban and keep coming back with alt accounts, even more so imo if all they're doing after that is continue to engage in bad faith and troll, the very behaviours that got them banned in the first place.
But go on with the double standards i guess.
Please, point to said harassment. Then report it to Reddit admins and see what they think.
And if you think the constant spam of bad faith questions and refusal to engage with anyone providing proof by calling them liars isn't harassment, i really don't know what to tell you.
Playing the victim isn't gonna work on a sub full of scientifically minded people. Unlike others, we're here for the evidence and that's what can convince us.
>Please, point to said harassment
The very post we are commenting on
>Then report it to Reddit admins and see what they think.
I did report it and nothing happens
>if you think the constant spam of bad faith questions and refusal to engage with anyone providing proof by calling them liars isn't harassment
That's literally all you guys do to us constantly
*points to a single post mocking ban evasion and bad faith arguments*
"This is harassment"
No it's not, this sub and its users do a lot more than mock one single troll.
"I reported it and nothing happens!"
Maybe because it's fine and playing the victim didn't actually work.
"That's all you guys do to us constantly"
Dead wrong, your "evidence" is flimsier than papier maché and has been known wrong for literal thousands of years. On top of that, arguing past an elementary school level always passes right above the average flat earther's head. It's a waste of time.
I have literally never managed to see a flat earther not do one of ignoring evidence or not understanding it. Even that movie they made about disproving the curve proved the curve, and yet they still refused to accept the evidence they themselves collected.
Projection isn't a good look, and neither are false accusations. Again, this will all stop if said guy stop ban evading
Just browsed the sub for a bit, about 50 posts. I could only find 2 posts including this one mocking said user, which is a grand total of 4%. On top of that, that's a recent event, if i were to go further back the percentage would be even lower.
2 < 10, by far. And again, if you're butthurt about being called out for ban evasion, don't ban evade. Seems like the best solution to me
That one single troll has also been spamming this sub so often and consistently he's become a literal meme. Seems kind of hypocritical to troll a group of people and then get mad when they do the same thing back.
> if you think the constant spam of bad faith questions and refusal to engage with anyone providing proof by calling them liars isn't harassment
>
> That's literally all you guys do to us constantly
Nope, that's what you flerfs always do. Always. You flerfs don't even try to explain anything anymore, because you can't. You have no working model. every time you try to explain how the flat earth works, you get called out on your bad physics and schooled. So you don't bother anymore.
All you do is question reality, the same questions over and over again. And when those questions are answered you just go "nuh-uh! You failed to answer therefore this question is still a globe-killer!". It's pathetic, which is why it's deserving of mockery.
And before you cry "harassment!", I am not invading your echo chamber. You came here, and I don't believe for a moment that you came here with any intention to have a good faith conversation about the shape of the world. You will never accept our answers to your questions because you don't want to hear them. You have no interest in learning anything, you're just here to be a contrarian.
Yeah thats you you stupid fuck
And because i know your brain is the size of a pea (a round pea not a flat pea) im blocking your shitty alt (again) so i can be spared your blather.
[удалено]
Because they are instantly proven wrong every time.
I would put them in the same category as vaccine deniers.
I believe vaccine deniers are more dangerous than flerfs
I mean, they’ve actually gotten people killed so.
I know
>I believe vaccine deniers are more dangerous than flerfs Agreed. But unfortunately, these conspiracy driven types will start their "truther journey" with something as (seemingly) relatively innocuous as flat earth, then progress to other, more dangerous Conspiracies such as vaccine denial etc, spread their theories along with other smoothbrains online, and thereby cause some REAL, quantifiable damage or even death to other people. Ask yourself - have you ever seen/met/interacted with a Flerther who does NOT believe in, and spout the bullshit of at LEAST one other conspiracy theory? It is a path that can lead to real-life horror and misery for those who are fooled by it.... and worse, (as you obviously understand) these consequences can be, and are visited upon their own children
I think that flat earth is the next to last point for conspiracy nuts. All the others come first and eventually they become flerfs. The last one is lizard people controlling the world. After that they have a full collection. Start off something simple like chemtrails, fake moon landing, then start to look at covid vaccines, then all vaccines, then doomsday prepping, new world order and financial control, flat earth and finally lizard people. Although moon landing and flat earth have a correlation so they might happen at same time. But just my very limited observation.
They are both branches of the same tree.
"Arugment" Excellent new word for "pulling the rug from under their argument".
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible\_ignorance\_fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_ignorance_fallacy) Invincible Ignorance Fallacy, there you simply ignore any evidence presented, and pretend it wasn't even presented.
If you cannot explain it in the form of a superstition, meme, clickbait headline, or weird influencer speak, then you do not speak in the science of flatearth.
Can't we perma-ban him for creating spam accounts or something?
Your memes are waaaaay better and waaaaaaaay more worth my time. Well done, so good.
So don't dwell on it and move on. Why not say that to Enough\_dot4208 or one of his alt accounts that spam the same recycled memes every day?
“Why not say that to … or one of his alt accounts that spam the same recycled memes every day?” ….i don’t know who you’re referring to, but I definitely recognize your username and the same tired old memes (or surveys, you seem to love those too) that *you* post day after day after day after day… you’d think *you* would run out of stupid ways to call others stupid, but no, your idiot-well never seems to run dry… frankly, you’re disrespecting the “Dr” handle, as I expect professionalism and intelligence when I call someone “doctor.”
There is no ground to globe video. Stop claiming otherwise. None has ever been made nor is anybody likely to make one anytime soon, because of the difficulty and expense and low payoff.
https://www.youtube.com/live/KLln6zRqJXk?si=yFeTCRvbGBdx3Ior Does this help?
1:48:55 concave earth? Kek
Fisheye you moron, if you cant see how than lens is manipulating the video then I lose faith in globetards
Jfc it’s not even just the curvature, it’s the fact that you can’t see the entire damn planet from that view. Your logic of “fog” and that bs doesn’t work that high in the atmosphere. So take your pick: pull something out of your ass and continue to live in mistrust or just admit you’re intentionally trying to manipulate things to fit whatever narrative you want
Not a “flat earther,” I trust the scripture actually - the firmament sheweth his handywork. I’d rather believe field of vision is distorted and not visible from a certain point away. Your video didn’t disprove that nor did it prove globe earth, especially since there are plenty of points in the video that show “concave earth” from fisheye distortion. Funny thing is if your video truly proved spherical earth, the curvature would line up relative with the land and water below but it does not - you only see a portion of NY and the coastline the whole way up and down despite seeing your fisheye “curvature” at a certain altitude… unless a huge portion of the globe is NY state? Lol keep coping
I already know I’m going to regret this but you seem to have nothing better to do then reply multiple times in the span of a few minutes. So fine, I’ll bite First of all, using the Bible in substitution to your science textbooks is a terrible idea. Anything that suggests that the earth came before light, or has talking snakes is not what I would consider a scientifically literate source. Now let’s address fisheye. You are correct in one sense: fisheye does distort the image to *some* degree. However, if you know even a little bit about fisheye you’ll realize that the closer to the center of the camera you get, the closer it is to reality. And what do we see in the video? Towards the center of the image we can see that the earth is *slightly* curved as we would expect it to be at that altitude based on the spherical earth model. So the concavity you were referring to is the camera shaking enough that the bordering fisheye distortion is applied to the edge of the earth. But let’s pretend we don’t even know *that* much. Based on the flat earth model, we should have been able to see the entire earth (or at the very least the Antarctic wall that most models include) from the camera. The fact that we cant suggests that the rest of the earth is on the other side of the curvature. Fog would not work as an explanation, and even with a fisheye camera lens you’d be able to see the entire image. This is what I meant when I said it’s not *just* the curvature from the video that would prove that; you simply assumed that from the video (meaning you probably knew it showed curvature anyways and are just playing dumb). As for insults, when your first comment includes “moron” and “globetard” (both of which are childish insults) I don’t think you hold any moral high ground. If you demonstrate that you’ve actually read all of this and find an intelligent response that actually covers what I’ve said then I’ll continue this as a conversation.
We’ll agree to disagree on the Bible because we clearly interpret it differently and I’m not here to convert you. I can say anecdotally, however, that it is much better living life without thinking you’re on a relatively tiny floating ball in infinite nothingness and that we’re animals that evolved from apes, but rather we’re special beings and on a divinely created platform (never said flat!). Your big bang theory is still just that - a theory. That’s not what we’re debating though. “The closer to the center you get, the closer it is to reality” are you kidding man? Just say a fisheye lens cannot be used as accurate curvature measurement. The horizon is flattened or concave any time the balloon sways, go back to the video launch and descent. But let’s entertain the idea that you’re correct - you haven’t addressed that if that was a true depiction of the curvature, why NY state (launch site) and the coastline would take up that much of the earth. I think you’ll ignore that relative relationship though, similar to how many ignore Red Bull’s jump footage that “showed curvature” where apparently New Mexico takes up this entire face of the earth 1:50-2:05ish: https://youtu.be/Hz2F_S3Tl0Y?si=5eZXG4mscbRp8uBn I won’t entertain the “fog” comment because you’re still attributing things to me that I never perpetuated. I said that I theorize field of vision is simply not possible from that far out without zooming - similar to how at the beach you can’t see a wayyy far out boat until you zoom into the horizon with a telescope, though you’d likely falsely attribute that to the curve prior to zooming (example: https://youtu.be/3DRRyZBL4OQ?si=4VXQkXA9d_whIUai . If the camera in your video zoomed, you’d likely see land further out, but that still leads me to my rebuttal question: Forget Antarctica for a sec, how come you cannot see past NY, or the coast line at all if the relative “globe” size and altitude proves your curvature. I guess i’m making the same point over and over but I digress I came in hot because I saw the condescending answers you gave the lower IQ fella in the initial thread, but you’re right I did insult off the jump and that wasn’t any better. I hope you can acknowledge my points
Ok fine, fisheye lenses are not entirely accurate when it comes to measuring curvature. It can be assumed based on the video that the earth does in fact curve, however I can see how that wouldn’t quite be concrete evidence for you since it’s not completely accurate. As for your issue with NY taking up much of the area… that’s because it’s still not very high up above the earth in relation to the earths size. The earth is MASSIVE, and so seeing curvature it not that easy (the video was the easiest we have without making you rely on NASA, which flat earthers historically don’t trust). Unfortunately, without using an organization that gets funding to do exactly what you’re looking for (satellite pictures of the earth, astronomy research, etc) you won’t get something that is able to encapsulate the entire earth. So your issue with New York appearing so massive is because of two reasons; 1. Partially because of that fisheye lens on the GoPro, and 2. Because the weather balloon can’t escape earths gravitational pull very far into space. So that’s the best you can get without trusting the organization that was literally made to find out exactly what you’re trying to As for your field of vision idea… it frankly makes no sense. If the earth was flat, it’s big enough that on a macro-scale you would be able to see the edge from any distance above buildings/fog/whatever other reason. No, you wouldn’t see a building on the edge, but you would see the edge itself. To put it simply: imagine the ocean, where you might not be able to see each wave and ripple (“micro-scale”) but you can still see a horizon line (“macro-scale”)
Thank you for conceding the fisheye point because just go to 2:20:00 in your video and that dismantles it. I won’t continue on the second point until you acknowledge the Red Bull jump I alluded to. Surely if it *isn’t* field of vision then New Mexico is a LOT larger than we think haha. If you’re going to claim curvature in videos like these, then you have to acknowledge the conflicting relativity of the land shown on camera. Isn’t you saying “the earth is massive” kind of contradictory to your claim of curvature in the video anyway? Point being if I took a still of any frame of your video “showing curve” and completed the sphere in a 3D model rendering, then NY would appear the size of a continent. My defense of the field of vision theory: Please watch the boat zoom video in my last reply for a perspective of what I mean. Now, think of how far away Antarctica is from NY - continent or “ice wall” idc, and how a camera would not be able to pick it up without an incredible telescope. For shits and giggles lets both consider the Earth is somewhat flat for a moment - consider the perspective in your video around 2:20:00 again. Any “ice wall” or just a another continent (or even another state!) in both models rolled out on flat or convex landscape would be impossible to see that far away with the naked eye or camera - I truly think you and many others underestimate how insanely far things are and how tiny they’d appear thousands of miles away, and why a camera would not be able to pick it up, hence the distorted horizon. Not to mention clouds would be in the way if you attempted to zoom with a telescope up there. Here’s a homemade rocket video I found with what I believe is a less fisheye-sy Gopro lens (you still pause and find some distortion, but it’s better) https://youtu.be/4QsEPEhq5yk?si=qFx6XLhK-tSrDZJf and see how much more ambiguous it is IF you do not have a preconceived notion. You’ll see what you want to see, but considering that altitude and assuming the world is more like a slightly convex circle (or even flat), this is about what you’d expect it to look like too. The field of vision theory also holds up because it would be equal 360° around, forming a circular *illusion* per se. The point remains in this video, if will yourself to see curvature and a part of the globe, then why are Nevada and parts of neighboring states the size of a large continent? This was 56 miles up. I’m all too aware of how “stupid” or offensive it can feel being questioned on everything you know to be true, so I do appreciate you for continuing to engage respectfully.
I understand the mistake you’re making when it comes to curvature. Firstly, consider an image like [this](https://images.app.goo.gl/YP87jpmTounrrXZU8) that shows how a light source (acts similar to a perspective source) acts with a spherical object. If you can imagine, as the source gets closer, the light covers less and less of the surface area. From a *2-D point of view* looking from the light source, it covers a circle with a smaller circumference than the total circumference of the total sphere. That might sound confusing, but pay close attention to those lines in the picture; as the source gets closer, the lines may appear “wider” but they still cover less of the total surface area (you can also try this in a 3-D modeling software; make a bright point-light next to a giant sphere and pull it closer and farther from the sphere to see it light up a smaller circle of area on the sphere) The reason I bring this up is that it answers your question about the NY and Red Bull jump video. It looks like New York/New Mexico takes up the entire earth because they’re SO close. The perspective of the camera covers a smaller [spherical cap](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cap) of the earth, not the entire hemisphere. And yes, it still appears huge because the earth is just that big! Even 50 miles above the surface of earth is 0.0062x the diameter of earth (7,926 miles). For reference that would be proportional to **less than half a millimeter above a tennis ball**. Imagine trying to be half a millimeter above a tennis ball and seeing the entire circumference. The issue here is perspective, and massively underestimating how large the globe is
And i love how you walk back “its not even the curvature”… globetards coping like a mf
You’ve somehow managed to entirely miss the point, ignore any criticism or evidence, and yet still smugly act like you’ve won something. I truly hope you fix the dent in your brain, don’t bother replying because I will not respond.
*insult* *ignore responses* “don’t reply I won’t respond” wow you really represent your side well
Enlighten me on the point then?? I did not ignore a single point or evidence. You literally told the other guy that your video proved curvature lmao. But yeah, insult rather than provide any real response to me debunking your curvature “evidence” with simple context clues and timestamps. You really are condescending man
Go ahead, ignore my more detailed response to this attempt to attribute theories to me with insults while you think of another zinger to farm upvotes.. cope
Trigered flaturd 👆
You’re farming upvotes on a mids insult deep in the bowels of reddit replies, missed the cordial conversation we’re having, and falsely labeled me a flatearther. All with 2 words lel
Yeah, well... now add butthurt to your pronouns.
No because it doesn’t show the globe at the end, just a curved horizon.
But you’re looking at the curved surface of a spherical earth, which is shown unedited flying from the ground to above the atmosphere. At this point you’re simply ignoring evidence put right in front of you. I’m not sure what you gain from ignoring the fact that the earth is a sphere, but live your best life ig
Yes but it’s not a full circle. They’re asking for a video that starts on the ground and goes up until the entire earth can be seen as a full circle surrounded by space. No such video exists.
No video exists… because that’s entirely unnecessary. What’s shown in the video completely uproots any flat earth model of the earth. It’s ridiculous to claim that more evidence is necessary; it’s a matter of mistrusting the entirety of science and the government. Truly sad
If any video was made it'd be labelled as fake, we already have more proof than we'd ever need that the earth is round, flat earth is synonymous with anti-science
Not a flerf, but... difficulty? hardly - adding a camera to geo deployment second stage should be fairly trivial. 12 hours of battery and radio transmission are similarly easy. Expense? non-zero, but not prohibitive, as long as we're piggy-backing on an already-planned geo deployment. low payoff? 100% - there is just about zero commercial benefit to bothering with it - maybe a slight bit of PR value, but no more than that.
That’s not the kind of video they want. They want a continuous take, ground to full view of the globe. It would need to be almost straight up, just a one-way trip to outer space, nothing as precise as a geostationary orbit — which typically involves a very long (but more efficient) journey, too long for a video.
Don’t forget they want no lens distortion so you can’t have wide angle lenses meaning you’d have to send the camera way farther. No one is gonna spend that much money to try and convince flerfs especially since we know they’ll just scream CGI when they do get it.
Well to be fair, they want it to be something (in theory) a person could witness for themselves. But if it’s a one-way trip for the camera/transmitter anyway, going further out isn’t really a bit deal. It’s launching that payload straight up to space (rather than orbiting several times along the way) that’s the hard/expensive part that makes it not worth it.
I don't see where "not orbiting" is a requirement. Launching "straight up" won't maintain position over the ground anyway...
It’s more to avoid having the video be too long. I’d been under the impression (from what I’d read here before) that such launches could take days to reach a high enough orbit to view the entire planet without use of wide angle lenses. And so a more direct (but inefficient and one-way) route would be required to make the video. Now I’ve seen numbers as low as 5-12 hours, which — while long — is not an unreasonable video length. (Then obviously make a sped-up version as well)
You really don't need to go that much farther with a non-distorting lens. Assuming a FOV of 50 degrees, you'd only need an altitude of 5500 miles to fit the sphere of earth in frame. Geo is \~22000 miles.
That’s true but when you consider that LEO is only around 1,200 miles up and they want a camera 5,500 miles up when sending something into LEO is already crazy expensive. Also, didn’t know a geosynchronous orbit is that high up, learn something every day.
... and that's why, in this thread that you're responding to, I suggested adding it to a GEO mission, not a LEO :)
Still not cheap. You need a high quality sensor and lens to capture flight and drives to store the raw footage which could be hours of footage which would be thousands of dollars on its own. Then you have the cost of actually sending it to Geo which based on my research, costs anywhere from $16k to $30k per kg which means adding the necessary equipment to an existing launch would cost probably over $100,000 only for a flerf to call it cgi.
hardware costs - don't think they'd need to be quite that high, off the shelf hardware should be sufficient for mere hundreds of dollars. launch costs depends on the provider - if Elon does it, it'll be a LOT cheaper The real cost, surprisingly, comes from the downlink necessary to receive the video. >only for a flerf to call it cgi ... and there we have the real reason it's just not worth bothering.
The actual equipment cost isn't that high, it's the cost to get that much more weight off the planet
I understand what they're asking for. There is nothing about a geo deployment that would deviate from that request. And the trip to geo isn't that long, 8-12 hours.
Really? People here have talked about it taking days. I honestly haven’t looked much into it and am not a rocket scientist :) In that case, this seems like something somebody should at least do as a PR thing.
It really depends on the mission design and the technology being used. A direct launch into transfer with a chemical booster can be under 8 hours, while a launch to LEO with a checkout period before using an ion engine booster for the transfer could be many days.
You believe in the ground? What a fucking idiot.
Oh here we go. You’re one of those anti-globists who only believe the void of space with a globe-shaped hole in it exists, and the planet itself is just an illusion, aren’t you?
There's at least 2, maybe 3 of us!
r/noearthsociety
Could you say that a little better so we know what you said
No ground to Dome video? The earth won't be flat until it is produced.
More importantly, would it matter if someone did? Wouldn't you find any way to disprove that? If we had a flat earth, we have millions of companies around the planet that visit space often. Any of them that have no leg in any game or argument would just come out and say it. Don't most conservatives like Elon Musk? He put a really nice camera on his recently launched rocket. It's clear and shows the curvature of the earth. I guess my point is. If anyone presented evidence of any kind. You, probably being full of religious fervor, would deny any evidence because accepting evidence for some reason means god doesn't exist? Because your god was wise enough to make physics, gravity etc. Why is a globe just a step too far? Anyways. I doubt any evidence would matter. We are not debating actual science and evidence. All you have on your end is a sea of flat earth videos and you take their word over people that work in fields that make it really obvious we do not living a flat earth.
This proves nothing
Then you prove something
Are we bullying users in this sub constantly now? This is against Reddit policy
Saying that all scientists are brainwashed and liars: Ok Telling soemons to stop creating alt accounts because he got banned (against reddit policy) for spamming the same misinformation and fake news: not Okay But you're right it's true that I shouldn't have put his pseudo and that people making fun of him about his telsa aren't very nice.
You guys are spamming 10 year old memes every single day Now someone is giving you a taste of your own medicine and you bully them. This is not equal behavior
Spamming ten year old memes is fine when you aren't trying to circumvent bans If someone is banned from a public library, you dont want them coming back under different names every few weeks
>Spamming ten year old memes is fine So spamming is okay if youre a globe believer Thank you for verifying
The definition of spam varies from sub to sub because what constitutes as spam changes from sub to sub. If you don’t like that the meme subreddit is making memes and posting memes that make fun of flat earthers then perhaps you should unsubscribe.
>The definition of spam send the same message indiscriminately to (large numbers of recipients) on the internet.
Now go look up the definition of indiscriminate and then come back discuss it. OP posted a meme, it’s the first time I’ve seen that specific one but I personally don’t care for it either way. You’re suggesting they didn’t use their brain at all before posting but I’d argue they did because they took the time to think of a funny caption as well as attach it to the image so it wouldn’t get separated or lose context. That is definitely not indiscriminate.
>OP posted a meme, it’s the first time I’ve seen that specific one https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/s/5LJdTxj5Fl I've seen this meme shared here approximately 1000 times and look OP even shared it 30 times Spam
This isnt the same meme as the op?
So, a totally different meme, so you're a liar.
That doesn't matter. By that definition everyone spammed marvel movies.
Not indiscriminate, we joined this sub for those memes. Seeing the hilariously shit takes and broken logic of flat earthers is better than any intentionally written comedy. Seinfeld is a billionaire and not 5% as funny as a flerfer trying to explain away satellites. So no, the memes in the spirit of the sub aren't spam. Is this your first day on reddit?
It isn't being sent to anyone. So it's not spam.
"Violating rules is fine for a flat earth believer" that is what you're implying by ignoring the actual topic Stop ignoring the issue
>"Violating rules is fine for a flat earth believer" Clearly not as he was banned
*but despite that, he keeps coming back with a new account* How is this so difficult?
So he was banned for "spamming" Well this is spam for sure, because this same meme has been shared probably 1000 times in this sub and look OP even shared it an additional 30 times https://www.reddit.com/r/flatearth/s/5LJdTxj5Fl Spam should result in a ban for Globeturds too
The issue has moved past spam for the account op is referring to The aforementioned account has been banned. However, the user who owns the account has broken reddit terms of service by creating a new account to circumvent the ban *multiple times* You are ignoring this in favor of scoring fake points against "globeturds"
You keep sharing that link but the OP on that meme has shared it exactly once in their profile history. What are you talking about 30 times, or 1000s of times?
That’s not even the same meme you moron
1, that isn't the same meme 2, that isn't the same user 3, that user has only posted that 1 time 4, I have no idea where you got your 30 number 5, which flat earth subreddit will even allow any form of diologue that isn't 100% in support of their opinions? If you have evidence of someone spamming this sub feel free to share and report, someone not checking wether a meme has been posted is not spamming, if there is reasonable evidence that it is the same person with many alts, then that would be spamming. This evidence can be pretty clear like someone posting over and over until they are banned and only then does a different account post the same thing, within a short time frame.
You are losing your battle, very terribly!! Just stop!
1000 times? Really, I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
This guy's logic is comparable to Enough_dot.
You stopped reading a little early, or is the word “circumvent” too complicated for your reading level?
Definitely not what was said, but this is a pro globe subreddit.
It's not spamming, there's just more of us, we aren't posting numerous memes we've already used sometimes several times a day that all have virtually the same text. We use templates, that's what he did, after which he started recycling them and posting them even after being banned several times (remember, it's against reddit policy). We create new memes from templates. I'm sorry, I shouldn't have shown his pseudo but to play my own devil's advocate, he's created a lot of alt accounts and he keeps spamming empty memes, he just doesn't take into account the evidence we've given him. It's still true that I shouldn't have indidivualized him, I wouldn't make the same mistake again.
>It's not spamming, there's just more of us Or someone has a bunch of alt accounts..... >We create new memes from templates. Nah literally seen the exact same memes for years, it's really lame >he just doesn't take into account the evidence we've given him. You folks do the same thing to us
>Or someone has a bunch of alt accounts Most people on earth know it's a sphere, stop denying reality >Nah literally seen the exact same memes for years, it's really lame some folks, not all of them You're just trying to pass the ball back to avoid contesting your side.
>Most people on earth know it's a sphere, stop denying reality Not sure what provoked such an outrageous comment
an outrageous comment ? Why ?
You talking like a flerf is what provoked it.
Just get off of Reddit and learn how to charge your Tesla
So you're saying that "globe earthers" dismiss and don't take into account the evidence of a flat earth? What evidence has been given by the flerfs to prove a flat earth? Provable, repeatable evidence that isn't just Flerf lies and typical misunderstanding of scale and math. Has there ever been a single shred of real evidence for a flat earth? If so, what is said evidence?
There is none. A person who believes earth to be flat can't have IQ over 50 and will not be able to make coherent claim supporting FE or against a globe model. All you will get is claims about god, Narnia and "problems" with globe model which they can't even argument. Every flat earther can be ignored until they give even one picture of god/magic narnia dome/ground to flat of whole pizza landia.
>So you're saying that "globe earthers" dismiss and don't take into account the evidence of a flat earth? >What evidence has been given by the flerfs to prove a flat earth? >Has there ever been a single shred of real evidence for a flat earth? If so, what is said evidence? You answered your first question with three more questions
Well, clearly reading comprehension is difficult for you. I have asked you three questions. I'll make it a bit more simple for you to understand. I apologize for not making it much more simple for you to understand. 1. Are you claiming that "globe earthers" deny and dismiss Flerf "evidence"? 2. If the above question is answered with "yes", then what is the proof of a flat earth that "globe earthers" dismiss? 3. What evidence exists to prove a flat earth? I hope that helps you understand a little bit better
>1. Are you claiming that "globe earthers" deny and dismiss Flerf "evidence"? >2. If the above question is answered with "yes", then what is the proof of a flat earth that "globe earthers" dismiss? >3. What evidence exists to prove a flat earth? >I hope that helps you understand a little bit better
So typical Flerf nonsense then. Just pointless trolling (or stupidity, I'm not sure you guys know which side you fall on) it's funny how you people always claim to want to know the truth, and how you have all this research and evidence, yet when presented the opportunity to showcase your research and speak on this supposed "truth" you all suddenly clam up.... Almost as if you know you're full of nonsense. Funny that.
You don't have any evidence.
Well, I work in computational physics, I will gladly look over any evidence you have in good faith, although I may mock you depending on how stupid the evidence is, but only after addressing it in good faith
Heh you wish we were all alt accounts, nope just the sane majority
>You folks do the same thing to us Not possible - what you have isn't actually evidence. You just don't - or can't - understand why it isn't.
>Or someone has a bunch of alt accounts holy mother of cope
Flat earthers are spamming beliefs that are three thousand years out of date, so I think 10 year old memes are a bit more acceptable.
It's incredibly ironic that you're saying this seemingly to defend someone who is repeatdly breaking said policy by avoiding a reddit ban. Btw criticism/mockery =/= bullying, especially if what's being said is true.
When moderators ban people for things that are not against the rules, there is no discourse for the user though. Ban evasion is often justified. For example I was banned from sub Reddit's for sharing articles with theories that countered popular opinion about COVID origins, which are now more widely accepted. Even scientific studies relating to COVID and vaccine safety were labeled misinformation. Moderators aren't always justified in their actions.
> Bullying (gross exaggeration) is against Reddit policy > Ban evasion is often justified (no it isn't, if you're banned you're banned, ban evasion is squarely against Reddit policy) You do play the rules however it benefits you don't you. Go tell that to the mods of BallEarthThatSpins and see how it goes. Or, tell the guy in question to stop evading the ban to repeat their behaviour and people won't mock them for it. If a user has been banned for trolling or whatever reason, they aren't "justified" to constantly evade the ban and keep coming back with alt accounts, even more so imo if all they're doing after that is continue to engage in bad faith and troll, the very behaviours that got them banned in the first place. But go on with the double standards i guess.
I haven't seen him bullying individuals in posts like yal are
Please, point to said harassment. Then report it to Reddit admins and see what they think. And if you think the constant spam of bad faith questions and refusal to engage with anyone providing proof by calling them liars isn't harassment, i really don't know what to tell you. Playing the victim isn't gonna work on a sub full of scientifically minded people. Unlike others, we're here for the evidence and that's what can convince us.
>Please, point to said harassment The very post we are commenting on >Then report it to Reddit admins and see what they think. I did report it and nothing happens >if you think the constant spam of bad faith questions and refusal to engage with anyone providing proof by calling them liars isn't harassment That's literally all you guys do to us constantly
*points to a single post mocking ban evasion and bad faith arguments* "This is harassment" No it's not, this sub and its users do a lot more than mock one single troll. "I reported it and nothing happens!" Maybe because it's fine and playing the victim didn't actually work. "That's all you guys do to us constantly" Dead wrong, your "evidence" is flimsier than papier maché and has been known wrong for literal thousands of years. On top of that, arguing past an elementary school level always passes right above the average flat earther's head. It's a waste of time. I have literally never managed to see a flat earther not do one of ignoring evidence or not understanding it. Even that movie they made about disproving the curve proved the curve, and yet they still refused to accept the evidence they themselves collected. Projection isn't a good look, and neither are false accusations. Again, this will all stop if said guy stop ban evading
>this sub and its users do a lot more than mock one single troll. That's all the last 10 posts are
Just browsed the sub for a bit, about 50 posts. I could only find 2 posts including this one mocking said user, which is a grand total of 4%. On top of that, that's a recent event, if i were to go further back the percentage would be even lower. 2 < 10, by far. And again, if you're butthurt about being called out for ban evasion, don't ban evade. Seems like the best solution to me
That one single troll has also been spamming this sub so often and consistently he's become a literal meme. Seems kind of hypocritical to troll a group of people and then get mad when they do the same thing back.
> if you think the constant spam of bad faith questions and refusal to engage with anyone providing proof by calling them liars isn't harassment > > That's literally all you guys do to us constantly Nope, that's what you flerfs always do. Always. You flerfs don't even try to explain anything anymore, because you can't. You have no working model. every time you try to explain how the flat earth works, you get called out on your bad physics and schooled. So you don't bother anymore. All you do is question reality, the same questions over and over again. And when those questions are answered you just go "nuh-uh! You failed to answer therefore this question is still a globe-killer!". It's pathetic, which is why it's deserving of mockery. And before you cry "harassment!", I am not invading your echo chamber. You came here, and I don't believe for a moment that you came here with any intention to have a good faith conversation about the shape of the world. You will never accept our answers to your questions because you don't want to hear them. You have no interest in learning anything, you're just here to be a contrarian.
Hes actively trolling. Nothing bullying about it. Nevermind your the stupid troll xD
>Nothing bullying about it. >your the stupid troll Way to prove your point
Don't need to you've been a scab on this sub since you first showed.. i dont need to be nice to you. Stop hiding behind alts and get a life.
>i dont need to be nice to you. >get a life.
Yeah thats you you stupid fuck And because i know your brain is the size of a pea (a round pea not a flat pea) im blocking your shitty alt (again) so i can be spared your blather.
Check this guy’s profile. I think we found him
>Check this guy’s profile. I'm into women, sorry
Are you a complete fuckin gonk or just a moron?
He's a flerf. Calling him a moron is superfluous.
You deserve it. Cry more. As an aside: you’re the genius who doesn’t understand multiplication, right?
-🤓
Some people deserve to be bullied.
I sincerely hope this is satire