Is The Earth Flat Or Round?

I have yet to see pictures taken that show the earth is a globe, but let me just preface that with a picture is worth a thousand words, and sometimes people just look at things differently.

View attachment 246690

Is this a bunny or a duck? It's called perspective.

I agree that flat earth makes about as much sense as the sun centered universe, both are questionable.

OK. Going from the point of perspective with regard to the rendering, be it rabbit or duck, neither. And this is I think relative to the FE perspective.
A rabbits ears even in profile do not appear on the rabbits head even from a side view the way that sketch presumed to imply.

Nor is a ducks beak similar to that. Not even in a pencil or black pen rendering. Because the dimensional shape of an actual duck beak is incongruent to that in the sketch.

Speaking of perspective.😉🦆🐇

The “geostationary communications satellite” was first created by Freemason science-fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke and supposedly became science-fact just a decade later. Before this, radio, television, and navigation systems like LORAN and DECCA were already well-established and worked fine using only ground-based technologies. Nowadays huge fibre-optics cables connect the internet across oceans, gigantic cell towers triangulate GPS signals, and ionospheric propagation allows radio waves to be bounced all without the aid of the science-fiction best-seller known as “satellites.”

View attachment 246692

Satellites are allegedly floating around in the thermosphere where temperatures are claimed to be upwards of 4,530 degrees Fahrenheit. The metals used in satellites, however, such as aluminum, gold and titanium have melting points of 1,221, 1,948, and 3,034 degrees respectively, all far lower than they could possibly handle.

View attachment 246693

So-called “satellite” phones have been found to have reception problems in countries like Kazakhstan with very few cell phone towers. If the Earth were a ball with 20,000+ satellites surrounding, such blackouts should not regularly occur in any rural countryside areas.

So-called “satellite” TV dishes are almost always positioned at a 45 degree angle towards the nearest ground-based repeater tower. If TV antennae were actually picking up signals from satellites 100+ miles in space, most TV dishes should be pointing more or less straight up to the sky. The fact that “satellite” dishes are never pointing straight up and almost always positioned at a 45 degree angle proves they are picking up ground-based tower signals and not “outer-space satellites.”

View attachment 246694

People even claim to see satellites with their naked eyes, but this is ridiculous considering they are smaller than a bus and allegedly 100+ miles away; It is impossible to see anything so small that far away. Even using telescopes, no one claims to discern the shape of satellites but rather describes seeing passing moving lights, which could easily be any number of things from airplanes to drones to shooting stars or other unidentified flying objects.

NASA claims there are upwards of 20,000 satellites floating around Earth’s upper-atmosphere sending us radio, television, GPS, and taking pictures of the planet. All these supposed satellite pictures, however, are admittedly “composite images, edited in photoshop!” They claim to receive “ribbons of imagery” from satellites which must then be spliced together to create composite images of the Earth, all of which are clearly CGI and not photographs. If Earth were truly a ball with 20,000 satellites orbiting, it would be a simple matter to mount a camera and take some real photographs. The fact that no real satellite photographs of the supposed ball Earth exist in favor of NASA’s “ribbons of composite CG imagery,” is further proof we are not being told the truth.

If Earth were truly constantly spinning Eastwards at over 1000mph, during the Red Bull stratosphere dive, Felix Baumgartner, spending 3 hours ascending over New Mexico, should have landed 2500 miles West into the Pacific Ocean but instead landed a few dozen miles East of the take-off point.

OK. Going from the point of perspective with regard to the rendering, be it rabbit or duck, neither. And this is I think relative to the FE perspective.
A rabbits ears even in profile do not appear on the rabbits head even from a side view the way that sketch presumed to imply.

Nor is a ducks beak similar to that. Not even in a pencil or black pen rendering. Because the dimensional shape of an actual duck beak is incongruent to that in the sketch.

Speaking of perspective.😉🦆🐇

Here is a concave/convex perspective training video.

You believe the Earth is flat?

P. S Love the sheep astronaut icon. 😆

This shows the wobble of the round earth.

If Earth were truly constantly spinning Eastwards at over 1000mph, during the Red Bull stratosphere dive, Felix Baumgartner, spending 3 hours ascending over New Mexico, should have landed 2500 miles West into the Pacific Ocean but instead landed a few dozen miles East of the take-off point.

What sheep astronaut icon?

I'm a caveman. I feel like Dino or a broken record player, repeating the same thing over and over. "Reversal of proof" or something like this. lol

Click on the link below regarding a concave hollow earth. For the record, I have posted this probably 5 times already. lol

https://christianchat.com/conspiracy-corruption-discussion-forum/concave-hollow-earth-theory.198187/

The sheep icon that appears in the video still in your post. To the left of the video title.


Thank you. I haven't read that thread.
Do you answer my question there?

https://flatearth.ws/felix-baumgartner


Felix Baumgartner and Red Bull Stratos
[Cut]Flat-Earthers questioned that if the Earth is rotating, then why Felix jumped straight down to the same location? First, Felix still retained the inertia he had when he was still standing on the surface. And second, he did not jump straight down to the same location. He went up 39 km and landed 37 km away due to various factors, including the Coriolis effect from Earth’s rotation.

https://flatearth.ws/felix-baumgartner


Felix Baumgartner and Red Bull Stratos
[Cut]Flat-Earthers questioned that if the Earth is rotating, then why Felix jumped straight down to the same location? First, Felix still retained the inertia he had when he was still standing on the surface. And second, he did not jump straight down to the same location. He went up 39 km and landed 37 km away due to various factors, including the Coriolis effect from Earth’s rotation.

I did the math by calculating the time he left the balloon, to the time he landed, and counted 3 minutes and 35 seconds. I used three minutes for a rough estimate to calculate JUST the spinning of the earth, and came up with 50 miles, which about 50% less distance than the dare devil went.

Now let's go with orbiting speed of about 66,600 mph with just three minutes of landing time, that came up with 3,330 miles. So, let's just round down and say, there is about 3,000 miles of lost mileage from jump to landing.

Does this sound reasonable? Please check my math.

I already know the answer though, it's because he was synchronized by gravity.

So, was is he synchronized by gravity, or was he not?!?! I'm curious to find this answer. At what point was he locked to gravity and what point was he outside of gravity.

Do we have the wind speeds of the day, direction, speed of the fall, altitude of balloon, and drag of man falling in space suit?

The conclusions are entirely unverifiable in my mind, even the photo says, "some footage is from previous attempts", or something like this. It could be copied and pasted, edited, slowed down, and etc. Now if we had an unedited version from maybe a go pro or something, that would help.

To say, this is proof of anything, is hardly verifiable. If so, how?

Now let's go with orbiting speed of about 66,600 mph with just three
minutes of landing time, that came up with 3,330 miles. So, let's just round
down and say, there is about 3,000 miles of lost mileage from jump to
landing. Does this sound reasonable? Please check my math

Mr. Bumgartner was wearing a camera during the jump.

The claim of different footage used is one of the dismissive FE's used to discount the jump.
However the jump did not incorporate different footage into coverage of the actual jump.

Cut from the prior linked article @ https://flatearth.ws/felix-baumgartner
Before Felix performed the jump, he did test runs twice, using a different module. Flat Earthers identified several differences from the different footage of the drop and concluded it was a sloppy manipulation. In reality, there were two modules, one for the test jumps, and the other for the actual record-breaking jump. From the published videos, the entire Earth’s surface visible to Felix was all land, and no ocean was in sight. Flat-Earthers questioned it: if Felix jumped from space, then Earth’s ocean around the US should be visible. In reality, Felix jumped from merely 39 km, not nearly high enough to call it “space.” From such an altitude above Roswell, NM, the ocean should not be visible, consistent with the published videos.

Is this the time to start proving the sun centered universe wrong, without
using the Bible?

Well, I think this thread is done, or least is done as far as the Bible Study goes.

I don't understand your point of posting this video. Maybe it belongs in the extreme sports thread.

In other words, what's your point man? lol

Is this the time to start proving the sun centered universe wrong, without using the Bible?

I will just spell it out, since I don't know how else to put it.

There seems to be verifiable evidence that the faster a plane flies, the higher the nose must pitch up. I won't ask you to verify this, or confirm it, but I have already stated the example two times. So, you can dismiss this again, it won't bother me none, but this is the point I wanted you to understand.

If the earth is convex, like the Heliocentric model proclaims, planes would need to be angled downward, the faster they go, or else they would gaining altitude.

I will use pictures to help illustrate the point. Want to stay with the Biblical theme for a little bit.


View attachment 246663

This is a plane taking off, notice how far the nose is angled up?!?!

View attachment 246664

This is a plane landing, notice how far the nose is angled down?

View attachment 246665

This is a plane losing altitude, by pointing it's nose down. It's still airborne some how!! lol

View attachment 246666 SR 71 taking off.

I have neither the time or the inclination to teach you the principles of flight. However, of course an aircraft remains airborne when the nose is pitched down. The wing is designed exactly that way. Pilots also reduce power to ensure that the descent is controlled. Otherwise they will fly into the ground. Like I've said, it is the airflow over the wing that matters. That will vary according to speed and rate of ascent or descent.

The earth's circumference is 40,000 km, give or take. The normal height for commercial aircraft is around 9 km. For sure the earth is a globe. However, from an aircraft's point of view, the curvature is minimal. It is just visible from 9 km. Few people can see it from an aircraft because the field of view is too narrow.