[Closed] These make the truthers look sensible

Seems we're about to discover the Truth.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/flat-earth-rocket-man-take-off-time-date-mad-mike-hughes-theory-a8068486.html

Yeah someone mentioned that on the Fake Moon Landings thread Cougar, so I'll make the same reply here:

Love his quote there: [i]"I don't believe in science. I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air, about the certain size of rocket nozzles, and thrust. But that’s not science, that’s just a formula. There’s no difference between science and science fiction."[/i]

Amazing stuff. Hope he survives.

I've met some of the https://copenhagensuborbitals.com/ team. Their stuff looks considerably less shonky than his and they are still not at the stage where they can put a person in it safely.

just read BBC's take on it. So he's going up to 1800 feet which will enable him to prove the earth's flat.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/item/93f087a5-33e5-49a5-b36b-0605c3fd2820

would a cheap air ticket and a window seat not suffice?

1800 feet?

I can see a hill out of my window which he could walk up in an hour and be higher than that?

if there's a hill to walk up, then it's not flat 😉
that's not going to help his argument.

does copenhagen suborbitals still exist?
the guy that founded the rocket organisation, and then made a submarine clearly needs some help.

1800ft though.
that's higher than the guy from Hyde (whom I have had the misfortune of meeting more than once) managed on at least one flight. not sure which one I like best... the rocket that nearly reached the height of the trees? the one that chased worms on Dartmoor? the one where they dug a bunker in morecambe bay for the the launch controller (looks good on telly) but measured the cable wrong and had to dig another bunker 10m closer? or the one that washed out to sea?

some people need attention. I say give it to them, especially if it's going to be entertaining 😉

does copenhagen suborbitals still exist?

Well there were a bunch of them at Maker Faire UK last April with rockets parts and such. So I assume they are still going.

Seemed like nice guys.

the guy that founded the rocket organisation, and then made a submarine clearly needs some help.

It’s a bit late for that, I reckon

Peter Madsen, 46, faces a murder charge over the death of [Kim Wall], whose headless, dismembered torso was found floating off Denmark’s capital city 10 days after she boarded the inventor’s self-built submarine for an interview.

[url= https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/03/denmark-submarine-trip-journalist-kim-wall-stabbed-15-times ]Article[/url]

I’m a convex earther, just to bring a second line of absurdity to proceedings. If it’s flat how come I have to ride up hill on my bike and why do I keep falling down holes?

And globally, why are there more upholds than downhills?

And why am I always cycling [i]into[/i] the wind?

Answer that globetards! 😆

Explain all the waterfalls flatards!

It’s a bit late for that, I reckon

Apparently he's not been part of them since June 2014 after some fall outs with other members:

https://copenhagensuborbitals.com/statement-former-copenhagen-suborbitals-member-peter-madsen/

Yeah, why don't miners fall out of the bottom? Eh?

Explain that Disctards

So he's going up to 1800 feet which will enable him to prove the earth's flat.

GrahamS - Member

And why am I always cycling into the wind?

Answer that globetards!

This resonates with my experiences. Compelling argument....I'm going to have to look into this 🙂

I want to know why Australia is called down under. Explain that one. If there’s a big ice wall surrounding us, how come it can’t be seen from anywhere. I’m sorry to say I’m rather sceptical of this flat earth theory.

Apparently he's not been part of them since June 2014 after some fall outs with other members

Indeed, I read that earlier. My comment was in response to Andy suggesting that Madsen needs help. Not that he doesn’t currently need it, of course, just that it might have been more useful before he invted that journalist onto his submarine.

Why don’t planes keep flying off the edges?

The ice walls obviously! Duh!

If game of thrones has taught us anything it's that giant ice walls are **** all use.

For anyone still doubting that Flat Earth belief is a thing:

I'm current enjoying the comments on a Flat Earth debunking video that is trending on YouTube (829,314 views, 11k Likes, 8k dislikes!!)

Some excerpts from a conversation I had with one of the more lucid Flat Earthers:

[b]FE'er:[/b] ..every fact that ive found so far points to a flat stationary plane. You mention the stars but fail to mention they all revovle around the north star. Makes me think your liar, just saying. The constant movement of the stars proves helocentric theory to be wrong..

(This struck me as a little odd as most FE'ers generally try to dodge questions about stars rotating around Polaris so I probed a little...)

[b]Me:[/b] Errr... except they don't! Go to the Southern Hemisphere and the stars appear to revolve around a completely different point in the sky, the Southern Celestial Pole, and they do so in the opposite direction. These are facts that anyone can check for themselves.?

[b]FE'er:[/b] I have already explained how water changes the perspective of everything get a clear glass glass fill it up with water draw Arrow on a piece of paper and look through the glass at the arrow it'll change direction.?
..
the firmament AKA ionosphere is water as it says in the Bible the water separating the water?

[b]Me:[/b] So if I understand your response (to me) correctly, you believe that everyone in the Southern Hemisphere is looking at the night sky through water in the firmament/ionosphere and refraction in this water is what makes the stars appear to rotate in the opposite direction? Is that correct?
Okay, but it isn't just direction or rotation that changes. They are looking at completely different constellations of stars. Most notably they can see the Southern Cross (which is why it appears on so many flags in the Southern Hemisphere) and they cannot see the North Star/Polaris.?

[b]FE'er:[/b] I live in Florida and I can see the north star and the Southern Cross in other words they're just too far away to see the North Star and some of the other constellations because when you look through water at certain angles it changes the angle that appears back at you.?

[b]Me:[/b] Great, so you are in a good position to take star trail photos that show the stars appearing to rotate around the North and South Celestial Poles at the same time. A good practical experiment for a truth seeker.
As for the North Star being too far away to see in the Southern Hemisphere: how can that be when people in Australia, South America and South Africa can all see the Southern Cross despite the fact that on a Flat Earth map they are about as far apart as they can get and they are facing different directions??

No reply for 14 hours 🙁 I'm looking forward to see what convoluted physics-defying logic he goes for next, but I suspect he'll either play the "God did it" card or just quietly walk away and post the same argument somewhere else.

And if you think Flat Earth is bad. Here's an analysis video of a guy that doesn't believe in atoms, mostly because he can't find a proper photograph of one 🙄

(swearing warning)

It's odd because he sounds like someone who could easily grasp atomic theory.

well, they are a bit of a theory. People have some very strange misconceptions about atoms and properties of materials

Not biting Charlie 😉

Did get a reply from my FE'er though. He's sticking with the idea that folk in the Southern Hemisphere see different constellations because of refraction. And can't see Polaris because they are too far away.

I've asked him to explain how that works given:

[img] [/img]

But so far he's not keen on that.

He also insists that [i]"There isn't a place in the world where the stars move in different directions, it's fake. They all go around the North Star."[/i] whilst also positing that [i]"people in the southern hemisphere see counter-clockwise because they're closer to the firmament and looking at a different angle will give you different perceptions when you are looking through water anyone that has gone fishing knows this."[/i]

So they don't go counter-clockwise, and when they do it's because of refraction in the magic space dome.

You can see why it is challenging to convince these people of anything approaching reality.

Not biting Charlie

Fair enough but watch the above video. The guy wasn't criticising old textbook models of atoms as miniature solar systems, he was saying atoms literally don't exist because he can't find a photograph of one.

Anyways, my tame FE'er has just informed me of another startling fact: [i]"you can't see the Milky Way from the northern hemisphere"[/i]. 😯

I can only assume the guvmnt have some kind of massive space projector set up around here to fool the sheeples: http://www.newcastlephotos.co.uk/-/galleries/astro

every fact that ive found so far points to a flat stationary plane

Love the use if the word 'fact'. Has your new friend heard of Foucault's pendulum?

Isn't the point of flatearthers that they don't actually believe the earth is flat, but they don't realise that no one else believes it. So individually they all think they are subverting and trolling the true believers in a Colin Hunt "flat earth, whey hey, pull my finger" stylee. Not realising that they are trapped in a logical cage of their own construction.

Has your new friend heard of Foucault's pendulum?

Pretty sure that is too sciencey.

Museums and other places where you might find a working Foucault's pendulum are exactly the kind of places that have been indoctrinating sheeple with globe Earth propaganda y'see.

Honestly, if they can deny that they see the stars rotating in the sky then you have little hope of getting them to accept a special science pendulum. 😆

Isn't the point of flatearthers that they don't actually believe the earth is flat

Nope. Some are trolls. But many, like the guy I'm talking to, are bible literalists who talk about [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament ]the firmament[/url] citing Genesis as "evidence".

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NKJV

Others are just your general anti-science anti-"elite" conspiracy nuts.

Didn't even know all this was a "thing"!

So do they think other planets/moons Are flat too, out of curiosity?

It varies Poopscoop. Most think the sun and moon are balls but are only 3000 miles away, inside the firmament. The other planets are usually treated like stars, stuck to the firmament.

So why, in their eyes, is only the earth flat?

I know,I know, they must have that covered in some way...

It's an interesting insight into the human mind I suppose as much as anything.

For the Bible literalist ones it's because God created the world, the heavens and the stars. [i]cf[/i] Genesis

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NKJV

For the conspiracy loons, because it [i]explains[/i] what they see/feel, like flat horizons and no spinning sensation.

Most of them don't believe in stuff like space or gravity. That's all just part of the steeple brainwashing. 😆

Should we all join the flat earth society and troll them from within? It really is fascinating that people genuinely believe this.

For the conspiracy loons, because it explains what they see/feel, like flat horizons and no spinning sensation.

I’m sold

Oh dear, I might have accidentally broken my tame FE'er 🙁

We were discussing where the stars were in his belief, given that he said that water in the firmament alters what stars you see and their direction, and he offered up this image:

[img] [/img]

Spotting a slight flaw in his reasoning I asked for a clarification:

[b]Me:[/b] Interesting image. Does that match your belief? The stars seem to be shown on the inside the firmament there, "lights in the firmament of the heaven" as I think the Bible says?
So what water is it that causes them to diffract??

And he started to tip into standard tangential meltdown...

[b]Him:[/b] it isn't exact it's just a picture. But it matches what we see everyday 100% when it comes to day light in the summer, day light in the winter. Density not gravity. The lies of outer space because we all know you can't generate lift without pushing off of something. I don't have the answer to all the questions. But I am 100% sure HELIOCENTRIC theory is a lie, which includes your ball Earth, outer space, gravity, the big bang, and evolution. I said in the very first comment that I am a truther, not a flat earther. Just so happens that the truth points to a flat Earth which eventually proves that God is real and the Creator.?

I tried to soothe him back down...

[b]Me:[/b] I am just trying to better understand your position and that means asking you questions about how it all works. You are absolutely not obliged to answer them though of course.
Likewise I am happy to try to answer any questions you may have of the globe Earth.?

But it didn't work that well because he already knows all the answers...

[b]Him:[/b] the questions that I would ask would be rhetorical only because I have been spending years researching them and found my own answers like how does a rocket engine work in space without an oxidizer. I researched that you can't use liquid oxygen without oxygen around the surrounding area you can't just bottle it up and use it whenever or once a rocket gets into space what does it push off of to move. I've been researching how aircraft's work for a long time. Not to mention in a aircraft there is something called a gyroscope this instrument also proves the Earth to be flat. I guess here is a question that isn't rhetorical why doesn't a gyroscope lean if spun continueusly as the Earth rotates??

I offered an answer...

[b]Me:[/b] Yeah I can gladly answer that for you: The Earth rotates very slowly. About half the speed of the hour hand on a clock.
If you placed a gyro on the hour hand of a clock running at half speed would you expect it to lean over??

But got no response. So I thought I'd try Rob Hilton's suggestion and see if that got a nibble...

[b]Me:[/b] If you would like to see the Earth's spin imparting movement on something then you could look at a Foucault Pendulum. I believe there are 8 in Florida which you could visit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum?

But nothing back since.

Typically if you trigger them into full "all the theories at once" rant then it is a sign that the discussion is over.

Shame.

You can't argue with these people. It's pointless.

Keep going Graham you can break him 😉

Oh I completely agree it's utterly pointless.
These people are too far gone to listen to sheeple like me.

But.. it is fascinating to gently probe how deep the delusion goes and what they will convince themselves of (e.g. not being able to see the Milky Way, rockets being impossible, and stars [i]not[/i] rotating in the south).
I don't try to break them, I just gently pick at the edges to see what they say.

And it can be a rewarding intellectual exercise, like explaining quantum theory to a kitten - you learn far more than the kitten does. 😆

Ooh, a new reply, he's still (just barely) on the hook:

i don't think that pendulum proves anything. How could it.?

Where to start...? Read Wikipedia? I suspect inertial frames of reference are going to be lost on him.

Good effort Graham S. It's all totally pointless as has been pointed out. I think I enjoy it in an odd way though. I swing from reasoned responses and polite poking holes to all out condescending / ridiculing ****. Today I'm feeling t***ish:

[img] [/img]

LOL@Paul. Maximum Condescension Engaged! 😆

I try not to give into that temptation. It's hard sometimes, especially when you have some ALL CAPS guy screaming about GLOBETARD SATANIST MASONIC SHEEPLES etc, but that conversation rarely goes anywhere interesting.

The ones I like to speak to are the ones that manage a basic command of English in a reasonably polite tone. They will at least attempt to explain their barking views.

Dead link 🙁

Foucault pendulum?
Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name

[edit]found it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foucault_pendulum (looks the same)

No idea why that link doesn't work. Very odd.

Anyway I went with this gentle explanation:

Well the Foucault Pendulum demonstrates that [b]something[/b] external is operating which causes the pendulum's swing to slowly rotate in a very predictable manner that corresponds directly to its latitude on Earth. Agreed?
On a spinning ball Earth that rotational movement is explained and there is a simple formula that defines how many degrees the pendulum will appear to rotate each sidereal day, based on its latitude.?

No reply yet. It can take them a while if it contradicts their "reality" too much. I'm expecting accusations of scientific fraud, but hopefully we'll get a groovy explanation of some kind of special force at work.

Yep we're going with scientific fraud:

[b]Him:[/b] I'm going to have to disagree on what this thing says it proves the only way it could do what it say it can do is if the Earth was a ball and you place the pendulum on the axis points and you watched it from above but nowhere else on the ball would it work. So if the Earth is a ball the pendulum isn't going to work in Florida?

..so I am going to have to assume they have these things around the world because they know it doesn't prove anything and they're trying to push an agenda

🙄