the myth of flat earth debunked again

[jonojim1337]

It's not like 1862 is the time of the Druids or something.

View attachment 373575

Doesn’t make sense why it’s covered in dirt for this type of structure. It’s supposedly a grave for a royal and yet badly maintained?

Also there is this there and it’s clearly not a modern British structure.

 

[Bradskii]

The road rises and fall along its entire length. At eye level you can only see about 3 miles to the horizon. With my drone at 300 feet, the view is out to 21 miles. The drone can see trucks approaching that it can't see at 6 feet.

Same looking out to sea. There might be no ships in sight at ground level, but send the drone up to 1,000 feet and it can see ships almost 40 miles away. How do you explain that?

To @Apple Sky...please don't ignore this. How do you explain it?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Doesn’t make sense why it’s covered in dirt for this type of structure. It’s supposedly a grave for a royal and yet badly maintained?

It's the middle of the Scottish Highlands and the Scottish weather is terrible at the best of times. Have you never heard of weathering?

Also there is this there and it’s clearly not a modern British structure.

Well, it was built in 1852, it's not really modern, but that's an entirely you problem.

 

[jonojim1337]

Here he tries to debunk the coin experiment but I think he inadvertently proved it. You can se the coin melts into the table before he zooms in.

Also this one was interesting.

 

[jonojim1337]

It's the middle of the Scottish Highlands and the Scottish weather is terrible at the best of times. Have you never heard of weathering?



Well, it was built in 1852, it's not really modern, but that's an entirely you problem.

Sorry I don’t believe the lügenpresse.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Sorry I don’t believe the lügenpresse.

....

 

[Apple Sky]

Same looking out to sea. There might be no ships in sight at ground level, but send the drone up to 1,000 feet and it can see ships almost 40 miles away. How do you explain that?

Why wouldn't it ?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Why wouldn't it ?

If a piece of a ship is high above the water (so that ripples or waves don't come into it) and the water is planar, then that piece of ship should be visible to any eye that is also above the level of the plane.

But we know that the altitude of one's eye affects what one can and cannot see, because the curvature of the earth interposes itself.

 

[prodromos]

Everything you say is wrong.

Perfect self description. I don't think you have posted a single true thing in this thread.

 

[jonojim1337]

If a piece of a ship is high above the water (so that ripples or waves don't come into it) and the water is planar, then that piece of ship should be visible to any eye that is also above the level of the plane.

But we know that the altitude of one's eye affects what one can and cannot see, because the curvature of the earth interposes itself.

Because of perspective, objects will rise of they are below the horizon and drop if they are above, and become smaller, so that eventually even a big boat will be covered by a small wave that’s a mile or two in front of it. Eventually you won’t see the object at all because we don’t have infinite resolution in our optics and simply can’t take in all the light.

I think the Debunk coin table video proved this well. Before he zooms in there is no gap between the coin and the table.

 

[prodromos]

Are you talking to yourself?

It's the only thing that makes any logical sense.

 

[FaithT]

When I say 'round' I mean a flat round circle.

Yeah well, the earth isn’t a flat round circle. I can’t even believe I’m discussing such silliness with you.

 

[jonojim1337]

Perfect self description. I don't think you have posted a single true thing in this thread.

 

[prodromos]

The Balmoral pyramids were built in the 1800s, that's a proven and evidenced fact, and you're a fool of the highest order and it's only because of the rules of this website that stops me REALLY expressing with the vitriol you deserve how I really think of you and your claims.

I am personally in awe of the calm and patience you have exercised in the face of such monumental stupidity. I thought @Apple Sky was bad, but she is a total lightweight in comparison to our new friend.

 

[FaithT]

I understand that but don't people think odd things of every subject imaginable?

I just don't understand why this is such a hot topic?

Probably because anyone with a working brain knows better.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Eventually you won’t see the object at all because we don’t have infinite resolution in our optics

Changing your altitude doesn't affect the resolution of your optics.

 

[jonojim1337]

Changing your altitude doesn't affect the resolution of your optics.

But like I said object will melt into the plane because of perspective.

 

[jonojim1337]

Sheldon Surya on Instagram: "This guy literally just proved NASA lies about the stars. He puts sunlight through a crystal glass of water… and the exact same star patterns appear. Not burning balls of gas, just frequencies of light interacting with w

A groundbreaking video reveals a possible alternative explanation for the nature of stars and our reality. Using a crystal glass of water, the video shows patterns that resemble starlight, raising questions about NASA's depiction of the stars as burning balls of gas. The video challenges the...

www.instagram.com

 

[jonojim1337]

I am personally in awe of the calm and patience you have exercised in the face of such monumental stupidity. I thought @Apple Sky was bad, but she is a total lightweight in comparison to our new friend.

 

[prodromos]

No it has been the official narrative for 500 years.

The Moscow Patriarchate likes to consider themselves "new Rome", but that has nothing to do with any empires past or present. It doesn't matter how many churches fall under their jurisdiction, a Patriarch is just a bishop, and he gets a single vote in a Church Council, same as every other bishop. The Orthodox Church rejects the papacy, so there is really no basis for claiming Moscow to be 'new Rome'. Constantine actually expanded the city of Byzantium into what he initially called "New Rome", but it simply became known as "Constantine's city" aka Constantinople.