Re: Questions About the Flat Earth

by spinningwaterrockhaha Sat Nov 20, 2021 5:03 pm

Hi everyone,
Hope you're all well. I have been bothered by this for some time and haven't really seen this discussed much in the community. I see this as a simple proof that we absolutely cannot live on a ball; it simply makes no sense once we break down exactly what they are claiming.

Questions About the Flat Earth - Page 18 Simple10

Any thoughts are appreciated as I'm probably missing something.

by Gemini Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:38 am

Would be glad if someone shed light on the above

by spinningwaterrockhaha Tue Nov 23, 2021 10:45 pm

Gemini wrote:Would be glad if someone shed light on the above

I was working on it and ran it past my brother who said he understood it, but still thinks FE is nutty.

So, I made another one to hopefully explain it better, but not sure it helped. If this makes sense to you, or not, lemme know. Thanks.

Questions About the Flat Earth - Page 18 Fhg1yl10

by Greenlight144000 Sun Nov 28, 2021 3:48 pm

Hey everyone I have this question that has been giving me trouble.

How come we can see the aurora lights in Australia and New Zealand if the earth is flat and there is no South Pole?

by tycho_brahe Wed Dec 01, 2021 6:04 am

Greenlight144000 wrote:Hey everyone I have this question that has been giving me trouble.

How come we can see the aurora lights in Australia and New Zealand if the earth is flat and there is no South Pole?

It’s not a pole only phenomena. There have been reports of auroras far from the poles such as Cuba, Hawaii, and the Philippines.

by stjohnofthe88keys Mon Dec 20, 2021 7:12 pm

someone claimed to me focaults pendulum proved rotation of earth. They did not elaborate. I dont know if there is a rebuttal to this argument already done so that I can study it further. First I searched for it as a topic here and also checked Questions section. Can anyone direct me to a source I can study to understand how to respond to this objection.

by nowhereelsetogo Mon Dec 20, 2021 10:45 pm

stjohnofthe88keys wrote:someone claimed to me focaults pendulum proved rotation of earth. They did not elaborate. I dont know if there is a rebuttal to this argument already done so that I can study it further. First I searched for it as a topic here and also checked Questions section. Can anyone direct me to a source I can study to understand how to respond to this objection.

There's almost certainly something here that will answer your question about the ridiculous pendulum.

But could you not have had a look around the site first? There are literally hundreds of videos and discussions here, some of which cover this bollocks.

by stjohnofthe88keys Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:58 pm

nowhereelsetogo wrote:
stjohnofthe88keys wrote:someone claimed to me focaults pendulum proved rotation of earth. They did not elaborate. I dont know if there is a rebuttal to this argument already done so that I can study it further. First I searched for it as a topic here and also checked Questions section. Can anyone direct me to a source I can study to understand how to respond to this objection.

There's almost certainly something here that will answer your question about the ridiculous pendulum.

But could you not have had a look around the site first? There are literally hundreds of videos and discussions here, some of which cover this bollocks.

I used the search bar and used the searched for term "focault" on all topics and another search for the same term on all posts. I read the site rules before I posted about due dilligence and I respect that .
I will admit it was my first post ever this forum and maybe I am not as familiar with how to do searches and doing the search wrong. But maybe friend you would be kind enough as to give me a small clue to just one of the "hundreds" of videos you spoke of. Frankly your response surprised me as kind of snobbish and no value added for the new fag - fine whatever maybe someone else can help the new fag here

by tycho_brahe Tue Dec 21, 2021 12:05 am

Yes I agree the search engine sucks here. Use the “site:ifers.123.st focault” on your web browser for better results. I found a video where Eric explains it at the 1:47:52 mark.

https://ifers.123.st/t265-eric-dubay-answers-everyone-s-flat-earth-questions

I hope this helps. But there are many answers to your question. I just picked that one.

by stjohnofthe88keys Tue Dec 21, 2021 12:09 am

excellent thanks

by **Admin** Tue Dec 21, 2021 2:12 am

Flat Earth - Foucault's Pendulum

by stjohnofthe88keys Tue Dec 21, 2021 8:54 pm

inerratic wrote: Why do you believe that Plato was a heliocentric, ball earth-er? I have been reading Plato, Aristotle and their commentators for over 30 years, and although I am not an expert, I think I have proof that they did not believe that . Please let me know where you think would be a good place to make my case.

It's been a while but I had read Histories by Heroditus and I think I remember his writing about the sun being small and relatively close (compared to modern scientism) and I remember shrugging it off as "oh we know more than them now" because muh satelites

by Mantis Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:45 pm

In this entertaining interview with Alex Jones, David Rothschild claims that Jupiter and Saturn are closer to the sun than the earth is. Why would he say such a thing?

His statement contradicts the heliocentirc model but is true when we talk about the earth being a stationary plane and the planets and the sun being luminaries within the firmament.

Here’s the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5B5Kmb4nnY&t=1976s

And here’s the transcript:

AJ: I should bring up to Mr Rothschild that the polar ice caps of Mars are receding at several miles a year, much faster than ours, and that the moons of Jupiter and Saturn are melting, and in fact several of their moons were ice and are now liquid seas. Now, how are SUVs causing that, David Rothschild?  

DR: That’s because those planets are closer to the sun, my friend (laughs)

AJ: No, Jupiter and Saturn are not closer to the sun, neither is Mars

So who is right? Did Rothschild drop a truth bomb?

by round_earth_shill Sun Jan 16, 2022 2:29 am

My smug friend posted this with an off -handed joke about flat earth.

Is the imagery used in the article a composite? Because I know we don't actually have pictures of Earth from space.

https://notthebee.com/article/there-was-a-massive-volcanic-eruption-near-tonga-yesterday-and-the-footage-of-the-explosion-and-the-subsequent-tsunami-are-absolutely-harrowing

by NosLegio Sun Jan 16, 2022 4:14 pm

Look at the bottom text of the images. They're GEOCOLOR. It's ."satellite". Images made transparent and overlaid over a city lights static image.

Sauce: https://rammb.cira.colostate.edu/training/visit/quick_guides/QuickGuide_CIRA_Geocolor_20171019.pdf

https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/news/hunga-tonga-hunga-haapai-erupts-again

If you look closer at the shadows/etc you can tell they're flats.

by Apologia Christou Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:28 pm

Hello guys,

I've watched a bit of Eric's 6 hour documentary, and I have a question concerning one particular thing that he mentioned.

At 2:14:35 he says that no matter how the ball earth would tilt, there would always be 12 hour days and nights everywhere. But isn't this simply wrong? Or am I misunderstanding something?

For example, just the model we do have given by the heliocentrists, the tilt makes it so the north pole and south pole are always either lit or in darkness completely, and that much longer than just 12 hours.

Can somebody help me out on that? Here's the video:

https://youtu.be/zFAwRbKLYEo

by StillWakingUp Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:22 pm

Hi. I understand that there is no gravity force and overall the Archimedes principle can be applied instead. But what matters more is what decides where is up and where is down? Why isn't it vice versa and everything falls upwards?

by **Admin** Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:46 pm

A feather and an anvil will both fall but at different rates because one is radically denser than the air while the other is not. This debunks the supposed uniform speed of acceleration due to "gravity," 9.8 m/s/s which would more accurately be labeled something like the max acceleration towards density equilibrium. As long as something has enough mass and is aerodynamic enough to negate the air resistance of the fall, things will fall at the same rate of approx. 9.8 m/s/s When in a vacuum chamber, the factor of air resistance is removed completely so everything, even feathers, balloons and dandelion seeds etc. will all fall at the same rate. Removing the medium of air just makes it even easier for everything to settle towards its density equilibrium.

There is a pressure gradient formed by the amount of stacked air/water/land over you in a column which increases the pressure/weight/density the further down you go and that defines direction. And helium balloons fall up, not down, proving there is no downward directional bias. Please see the following videos for further explanation:

by Apologia Christou Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:00 pm

Hello Eric,

Could you maybe clarify what you meant by your statement that regardless of the earth's tilt there would always be 12 hour days and nights everywhere at any time? Am I simply misunderstanding something?

by StillWakingUp Thu Jan 27, 2022 4:47 pm

Admin wrote:A feather and an anvil will both fall but at different rates because one is radically denser than the air while the other is not. This debunks the supposed uniform speed of acceleration due to "gravity," 9.8 m/s/s which would more accurately be labeled something like the max acceleration towards density equilibrium. As long as something has enough mass and is aerodynamic enough to negate the air resistance of the fall, things will fall at the same rate of approx. 9.8 m/s/s When in a vacuum chamber, the factor of air resistance is removed completely so everything, even feathers, balloons and dandelion seeds etc. will all fall at the same rate. Removing the medium of air just makes it even easier for everything to settle towards its density equilibrium.

There is a pressure gradient formed by the amount of stacked air/water/land over you in a column which increases the pressure/weight/density the further down you go and that defines direction. And helium balloons fall up, not down, proving there is no downward directional bias. Please see the following videos for further explanation:

I've seen your videos prior to asking the question, and they don't explain why the direction of falling for more dense objects is down. Why isn't it to the side? What makes a direction for more dense object to fall down? And less dense to rise up (not fall up, as you suggested).

In pure vacuum on our flat earth the helium balloon will still fall down (assuming the balloon won't blow due to inner pressure).

by **Admin** Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:44 pm

Apologia Christou wrote:Hello Eric,

Could you maybe clarify what you meant by your statement that regardless of the earth's tilt there would always be 12 hour days and nights everywhere at any time? Am I simply misunderstanding something?

That was Gabrielle Henriet's statement:

59) Quoting Gabrielle Henriet, “The theory of the rotation of the earth may once and for all be definitely disposed of as impracticable by pointing out the following inadvertence. It is said that the rotation takes twenty-four hours and that its speed is uniform, in which case, necessarily, days and nights should have an identical duration of twelve hours each all the year round. The sun should invariably rise in the morning and set in the evening at the same hours, with the result that it would be the equinox every day from the 1st of January to the 31st of December. One should stop and reflect on this before saying that the earth has a movement of rotation. How does the system of gravitation account for the seasonal variations in the lengths of days and nights if the earth rotates at a uniform speed in twenty-four hours!?”

Questions About the Flat Earth - Page 18 B9fb3-10

by **Admin** Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:45 pm

StillWakingUp wrote:
Admin wrote:A feather and an anvil will both fall but at different rates because one is radically denser than the air while the other is not. This debunks the supposed uniform speed of acceleration due to "gravity," 9.8 m/s/s which would more accurately be labeled something like the max acceleration towards density equilibrium. As long as something has enough mass and is aerodynamic enough to negate the air resistance of the fall, things will fall at the same rate of approx. 9.8 m/s/s When in a vacuum chamber, the factor of air resistance is removed completely so everything, even feathers, balloons and dandelion seeds etc. will all fall at the same rate. Removing the medium of air just makes it even easier for everything to settle towards its density equilibrium.

There is a pressure gradient formed by the amount of stacked air/water/land over you in a column which increases the pressure/weight/density the further down you go and that defines direction. And helium balloons fall up, not down, proving there is no downward directional bias. Please see the following videos for further explanation:

I've seen your videos prior to asking the question, and they don't explain why the direction of falling for more dense objects is down. Why isn't it to the side? What makes a direction for more dense object to fall down? And less dense to rise up (not fall up, as you suggested).

In pure vacuum on our flat earth the helium balloon will still fall down (assuming the balloon won't blow due to inner pressure).

by Xander Thu Jan 27, 2022 6:57 pm

StillWakingUp wrote:
Admin wrote:A feather and an anvil will both fall but at different rates because one is radically denser than the air while the other is not. This debunks the supposed uniform speed of acceleration due to "gravity," 9.8 m/s/s which would more accurately be labeled something like the max acceleration towards density equilibrium. As long as something has enough mass and is aerodynamic enough to negate the air resistance of the fall, things will fall at the same rate of approx. 9.8 m/s/s When in a vacuum chamber, the factor of air resistance is removed completely so everything, even feathers, balloons and dandelion seeds etc. will all fall at the same rate. Removing the medium of air just makes it even easier for everything to settle towards its density equilibrium.

There is a pressure gradient formed by the amount of stacked air/water/land over you in a column which increases the pressure/weight/density the further down you go and that defines direction. And helium balloons fall up, not down, proving there is no downward directional bias. Please see the following videos for further explanation:

I've seen your videos prior to asking the question, and they don't explain why the direction of falling for more dense objects is down. Why isn't it to the side? What makes a direction for more dense object to fall down? And less dense to rise up (not fall up, as you suggested).

In pure vacuum on our flat earth the helium balloon will still fall down (assuming the balloon won't blow due to inner pressure).

It's a good question. To start with your last question first, a balloon is denser than a vacuum so of course it will still fall,

I personally don't think you need a force to explain why things fall down rather than up, sideways etc. It's a law of nature that heavy things will displace lighter things in a downward direction. Logically it could never happen any other way. However I do understand why people are unhappy with that answer. Some of these people have proposed it could be the electromagnetism of the earth that makes down down or just electrostatic charges. I don't dismiss this completely, but I don't think it's right because electromagnetism and electrostatic forces work in all directions. You can pick a piece of paper up with an electrostatically charged balloon for example. This therefore fails at explaining why down is down.

by Apologia Christou Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:48 pm

Admin wrote:
Apologia Christou wrote:Hello Eric,

Could you maybe clarify what you meant by your statement that regardless of the earth's tilt there would always be 12 hour days and nights everywhere at any time? Am I simply misunderstanding something?

That was Gabrielle Henriet's statement:

59) Quoting Gabrielle Henriet, “The theory of the rotation of the earth may once and for all be definitely disposed of as impracticable by pointing out the following inadvertence. It is said that the rotation takes twenty-four hours and that its speed is uniform, in which case, necessarily, days and nights should have an identical duration of twelve hours each all the year round. The sun should invariably rise in the morning and set in the evening at the same hours, with the result that it would be the equinox every day from the 1st of January to the 31st of December. One should stop and reflect on this before saying that the earth has a movement of rotation. How does the system of gravitation account for the seasonal variations in the lengths of days and nights if the earth rotates at a uniform speed in twenty-four hours!?”

I see thank you, may I ask where this quote is from?

And secondly, it seems that Gabrielle is in this instance assuming that the earth is not tilting. The tilt of the earth would indeed (at least theoretically) make up for this seeming inconsistency, wouldn't it? That's the whole reason why I was confused when you said in the documentary video which I posted above, that we would have had 12 hour days and nights even if the earth was tilting.

I was just not sure if I misunderstood something or if you simply misspoke.

by siriusrising Mon Jan 31, 2022 12:52 pm

Has anyone else been studying the YouTube videos of godgevlamste?
In a series of videos starting with
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFPfPKJCx3Q
He posits the theory that the Moon is a reflection of a gigantic earth. I found them to to very interesting. Food for thought. Just wondering what other ifers members thought.

by Sponsored content

Questions About the Flat Earth