If you want the long rambling insane answer to the stars riddle, mostly argued with memes and unique physics then take a gander at:

27. The Stars Declare the Truth

Be warned: you are peeking inside the Necronomicon here. Madness lies within.

Wow. That is really quite something. I lost count of the number of explanations that were simply skated over by ‘but he said billions therefore he must be making it up’.

Hey Graham, I was thinking,

How does your Tame FEer explain eclipses?

How does your Tame FEer explain eclipses

Shadow Object innit.

Hm?

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Lunar+Eclipse

he said billions therefore he must be making it up

Yeah they don’t like large numbers as they are unnatural. Basically it’s the same as the common reaction you get to formulae.

Essentially “sciencing, maffs and bukes R hard therefore lies, masons, Satan etc”

How does your Tame FEer explain eclipses

Solar eclipses are “easy” because the sun and moon are the same size (which makes the size of the shadow a bit odd but okay). Lunar eclipses are more tricky. Some of them have bizarre theories about an extra Shadow Moon.

Not tackled that with my FE’er yet. Currently trying to process the response to my questions that he just offered:

Him: I’ll start by saying you are right about machanical pressure. But it can’t exist without the use of air or water pressure. Air and water pressures are what cause Friction. If you didn’t have the gap of air/water, gas/liquid, hydraulic / pneumatic. Things would simply fuse together,or bounce away from each other uncontrollably. Its friction that allows things to move in a controlled manner. The manipulation of the water and air pressures.?

you have the right idea about manipulating air to make things lighter. But it isn’t the location of the pressure ( high and low). But the temperature of it (hot or cold. For example a hot air balloon.?

I… erm… I… whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?¿?!

Are you quite sure it’s not HIM stringing YOU along?

I’ve gone for this response:

Thank you Christian. I appreciate you taking the time to answer. Sorry if these are stupid questions but this theory is very new to me.

You mentioned that friction cannot exist without air/water, so if I pumped all the air out of a sealed tank then would that create a frictionless environment inside it?

You also said it was temperature that mattered for weight. I’m not sure I quite follow. A hot air balloon floats, yes, but so does a cold helium balloon. And wood floats on cold and hot water. What am I missing?

The wait begins.

And wood floats on cold and hot water.

[MontyPython]

What else floats on water?

[/MontyPython]

A DUCK?

Graham why do you do this ? genuine q but i assume you have never had an epiphany moment where they go oh yes all that stuff i thought is bollocks sorry and rejoin the ranks of the rational *

You are incredibly polite and patient

* not at all a dig like i could have a pop at someone for wasting time arguing with idiots on the internet

Honestly I don’t really know Junkyard. It’s oddly compelling and sometimes they question basic reality so much that I do learn things.

You do get small epiphanies sometimes on specific points. But they quickly talk themselves round with “but there is no curve”.

Back to the game… Ahh rats. As I suspected he’s switched tact from pressure and heat onto good ol’ density/bouyancy.

Christian: there’s never a stupid question if you’re trying to understand something. It all has to do with density. Does the hot/cold temperature make the air less dense/more dense then the air around it. If it’s less dense it will float up, more dense it will fall down.?

I’ve just innocently played a standard rebuttal for now..

Me: Aaaah now density I do understand (I think). It’s just a measure of mass per volume.
But what is it that causes the less dense things to go up and more dense things to go down? Density itself doesn’t have any kind of direction, so what force makes objects order themselves vertically by density??

That’s a shame. I thought he was on a new and interesting flerfer theory there, but actually he is just awful at explaining it. 🙁

cheers for the explanation but i always think of

You cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into.

They are all just irrational nobbers IMHO

I guess a part of me does naively hope that if I can just plant the tiniest seed of doubt in their mind then one fine day it might germinate into a solitary rational flower in their garden of weeds.

But honestly I know they are lost causes. So I mostly just enjoy gently tugging at their half-assed theories to see what new idiocy falls out.

Junkyard’s dead right. You are wasting your time. It’s not possible to win here.

I mostly just enjoy gently tugging at their half-assed theories to see what new idiocy falls out.

now that i can respectunderstand 😉

molgrips – Member
Junkyard’s dead right. You are wasting your time. It’s not possible to win here

Are you new to the internet?

so what force makes objects order themselves vertically by density?

Natural order isn’t it, it’s what keeps the sun and clouds in the sky and dogs from walking on their hind legs and talking.

Is part of this about what sorts of people one knows?

I mean, I’ve made out with a girl whose doctoral research involved using satellite data to track tectonic plate movements. She wasn’t a lizard, and she definitely believed in satellites orbiting the Ball Earth. I have no reason to doubt that what she spends her life doing is genuine.

I suppose my point is, not everyone has had this experience. If everyone you ever sleep with works in a call centre, maybe you start to think that the scientific community is mostly lizards and perfidious freemasons.

From the you-tubes I’ve seen most of these folk live in a Doublewide in a park, on the Florida Panhandle…I don’t think you get to own/rent one of these pieces of prime real-estate by having a stella (no pun intended) academic career…

From the you-tubes I’ve seen most of these folk live in a Doublewide in a park, on the Florida Panhandle

In which case you’d imagine that they at least know someone who has actually seen a rocket or Space Shuttle launch.

Where do they imagine they go to when they fly straight up into the sky, trailing a huge plume of vapour and disappear from view?

Where do they imagine they go to when they fly straight up into the sky, trailing a huge plume of vapour and disappear from view?

Behind the ice wall. It’s all part of NASAtards’s clever plot to keep you believing.

Duh!

I had a read of some of that stars-declare-the-truth link last night and just gave up in despair. Basically it came down to “I don’t understand astrophysics [whcih is fair enough] therefore it can’t be true and also Google didn’t give me an in-depth 4-year degree course in the space of a 0.005 second search”

Where do they imagine they go to when they fly straight up into the sky, trailing a huge plume of vapour and disappear from view?

Ah well, that one links up nicely with another nut job theory. Many of them repeat the explanation of the Bermuda Triangle. Basically, because you can see that they don’t go straight up (where the sheeple are brainwashed to think space is – so why wouldn’t you go straight up) and that they actually start to curve over to the East, they carry on curving over, NASA cuts the live camera feeds so that no-one gets to see them plummet to the sea in the Bermuda triangle – no people on ships have witnessed them hitting the sea because…the Bermuda triangle – people don’t go there you see, because it’s the Bermuda Triangle.
Obviously, that proves space is fake.

You might be surprised nickc. This guy claims to have a degree in maths and has been a practising attorney for 30 years, including jury trials. And he’s no fool!

[video]https://youtu.be/-bpHFj97-X4[/video]

What mechanism creates a floating disc in space?

Why is this disc world concept round? Why no square earth theory?

yeah…he’s also “met the Lord….” so all bets are off really aren’t they. 😆

As Graham suggests, one thing you get out of discussing things with these idiots is that you have to work out why things are like they are. In this case there is indeed a widespread misconception – when rockets go into space, the difficult bit isn’t reaching the required altitude, it’s reaching the required speed for orbit. You have to go really, really fast to stay in orbit.

Why no square earth theory?

Good question that. I guess they would argue that since the secret UN NWO security forces won’t let them near the ice wall* then they don’t know the actual shape. Some say it is an infinite plane.

* (note: adventure holidays to Antarctica and commercial flights over or near it are not real. If you book them then they will be cancelled. By NASA presumably)

yeah…he’s also “met the Lord….”

So it’s not just me that hears “before I met the Lord” and thinks “before I had my mental breakdown”

You have to go really, really fast to stay in orbit.

You know that I know that, right? Not sure if you misunderstood my point or are expanding on it, sorry!

Anyway, yeah, that’s another thing that gets thrown around; the ‘speed’ of things and a total lack of misunderstanding of relative velocities. On one NASA post about the supply vessel docking with the ISS, a flerfer claimed it as proof that the ISS is fake since it is impossible to connect to something travelling at 17000 mph. There’s also an element of the ‘big number’ effect in there as well probably. e.g. “look at the picture of this ‘Astronot’ supposedly in the ISS doing 17000mph – he’s wearing shorts and a t-shirt and hasn’t noticed / forgotten to pretend he’s doing 17000 mph in front of a green screen! LOL!!!!”

Why wouldn’t it be round?

Ever seen a flat bubble?

Apparently the awkward Sydney to Santiago direct flight also isn’t real, according to one of the websites linked here (I went looking to see how they addressed the most obvious evidence disproving their theories – the answer appears to be to claim that all the people who’ve been on such flights are stooges who are in on the deception).

What possesses these freaks to sit in front of a video camera and talk bollocks, then upload it for everyone to see/laugh at/rip apart? Why can’t they just live happily knowing they’re right and we’re all wrong? (I know the answer and it’s related to the last line in GrahamS’s last post)

Somewhere I’ve got a list of six or seven flight numbers, with live flight radar links, that are basically impossible on a flat earth.

The general consensus seems to be that those flights are fictional and are just their to prop up the lie. Occasionally someone says “Oh yeah I’ve flown that route” and they are shouted down as a shill. 🙄

Update from my FE’er coming shortly…

Previously on Flerfer Insanity.. I’d put out the standard rebuttal expressing surprise that density has a direction.

Here’s how that went:

FE’er: Your right, but air pressure does. Thats what im trying to explain, air/ air pressure has a direction. This is what gives planes lift. Understand??

Still confusing air pressure and density? Ah well..

Me: No, sorry not getting it 🙁 How/why does air pressure have a direction? Like if I blow into a party balloon then the air pressure pushes equally on all sides and makes it expand in all directions. And once inflated it doesn’t change shape when I turn it upside down, which it would do if all the air pressure inside was only pushing one direction.?

FE’er: don’t forget there is air pressure on the outside of the balloon. Not only that, how did the air get in the balloon. Air was going one direction, then you manipulated it to go into another Direction. Once the balloon is blown up if you let go the air pressure will then push the balloon and all the air will come out in One Direction. Research how friction works and what you have to have in order to create it.?

people often forget that there is air pressure on them at all times that’s why on a cloudy day sometimes you can get a headache or pressure in you head. Air pressure man?

Cloud headaches? Man, wait till he hears about wifi!

Me: But the air will just come out wherever the hole is. If the pressure in the balloon was only pushing in one direction, then it wouldn’t get out until the hole was in that direction. And if it only pushed in one direction then when you let go of the nozzle the balloon would only fly in one direction, instead off whizzing around randomly.?

Me: Here’s a nice short slow-motion video of a balloon popping:

[video]https://youtu.be/tvd6-143ZGE[/video]

In the first clip you can see air is blown out equally on all sides of the balloon because the pressure inside it was pushing equally on all sides.
In the second clip you can see him introducing a hole and the air rushes out that hole deflecting the smoke sideways.?

FE’er: exactly now you’re starting to understand air pressure and water pressure always flow to the easiest point. This is why water always flows level. This proves that so-called gravity isnt a force. Not only can you not duplicate gravity. No one can prove it’s manipulation on anything. What’s awesome is you just explain that without even knowing it.?

Ah yes, interpreting direct contradictions as proof. That’s always fun. 🙄

FE’er: the one thing you’re going to have to understand is I can’t teach you anything I can just show you things you’re the only one that can teach you.?

Me: I understand Christian. You did say you don’t have all the answers and you’ve been very patient in answering my queries.
You presented me with a new interesting theory, so my instinct is to scrutinise it, see if it matches my observations and ask questions about it.
Thinking about practical real-world examples I can see no evidence to support the idea that density or air pressure have any inherent component that specifies direction.
I suggest that direction is imparted by some external force, possibly one that is stronger when objects have more mass.?

Hint hint

FE’er: just because nobody believes the truth doesn’t stop the truth from being the truth and just because everyone’s brainwashed into believing a lie doesn’t make that lie true. Until one will start looking at this world like a child and stop thinking one knows. One will be nothing more than a sheep in the flock.?

Me: Absolutely. And I am all for examining things from first principles. I learn loads just by trying to explain things to my children because they always ask “Why?”
I value the truth as well. I told you I was not a deceiver. I considered your theory with an open mind, but the simple truth here is that my real-world observations just do not match the theory you describe. I’m sorry if that disappoints.?

To be continued…

(unless folk are bored of it now?)

More sarcasm needed

Oh dear he seems predictably cross that I’m not buying into this drivel.

FE’er: I’m not saying you are a deceiver but it is amazing that my entire discussion on this video has only been two weeks so you’re telling me that you have found what you consider truth or at least not true about what I’m saying in two weeks time. Not only that do I need to give you a website that will teach you how friction works because you haven’t mentioned anything about it. Seems like you simply dismiss it without saying wow you’re actually right you need air to have friction. It’s fairly easy to see who wants to learn and who doesn’t. Your opinion is your own sir.?

I’ll be apologetic while pushing for concrete evidence or an excuse to post my own evidence:

Me: Christian, not at all. All I am saying is that you have presented a theory to me regarding air pressure and density. I have scrutinised your theory and found that it conflicts with observable reality. With no explanation for this apparent conflict and no strong evidence to reinforce the theory I must consider it unproven.?

FE’er: give me an example of it not matching what you experience in life please.?

Alright reversal it is then. This should be interesting.

Me: Okay, I’ll not retread the ones we’ve already discussed and try to suggest a new one:

Let’s take two large solid boxes. They have identical volumes but one is very tall and narrow, while the other is very short but very wide.

If their weight was determined by directional air pressure pushing down on to them then we would expect the wide box to be the heaviest as it has a much larger top area to push on from above. A far larger column of air rests on it.

And yet place them on a balance scale and the boxes weigh the same.?

THIS Happy to help but I may bypass sarcasm and end up at derision and scorn.

exactly now you’re starting to understand air pressure and water pressure always flow to the easiest point. This is why water always flows level.

Strange how the easiest point is always downhill in the direction of gravity

He did say one true thing, he cannot teach you, I will give him that

This just popped up on FB.

http://www.iflscience.com/space/fat-earther-tries-so-very-hard-argue-astronaut-live-tv/

Surely a really simple experiment would be to have a container in vacuum and then do something involving friction. Object on a gentle slope that would slide down without friction or something.

Yeah I’ve not tackled his “friction needs air” argument yet, but that would be the thrust of it: stuff in a vacuum still has friction – if it didn’t you’d be seeing vacuums used all over the place for friction-free bearings etc!

Imagine the improvements in electricity generation alone that could be made with true friction-free environments!

Oh, of course, that’s part of the conspiracy too.