Flat Earth...

The moon being a chunk of Earth is one of three leading NASA endorsed theories for its origin. There's four reputable theories all inclusive of Round Earth.

And NASA is a nazi organization right? My cousin is a Nazi... and/or working with Nazi's... Give me a break dude. This is way too paranoid a theory for me. Hey... you might be right and laugh at me in the end, but i'll place my bet with the devil on this one. 

I don't understand? I mean I get where you're going with this. Ex-SS-rocket-scientists were some of the biggest helpers in the revolution of space science post-ww2 but I would not be so sure they're Nazis nor is that what I'm saying here.

You're presupposing NASA is an evil entity out to deceive the masses... i just think that's baloney. I don't believe it. I believe all the pictures are true, there are people in space, there are satellites not only in our space but closing in on Jupiter on other planets, i believe we have a rover on mars... i do not believe for one second those are lies. 

Whatever that has nothing to do with the eclipse... i still think it's the earth's shadow on the moon when there is an eclipse. That shadow is round. 

Even of there's a Mars it's very likely got its own branch(es) of Illuminati etc and easily is another planar circle like us or of were a pear shaped ovally sphere-topped Earth, same thing for Mars, just as corrupt.

I just don't believe you on this one bud. I think it's a ridiculous conspiracy theory. 

This image, and others like it, clearly show how the Earth is not flat. On a flat earth, the sun would not be able to cast a shadow like that on the clouds; however, since the Earth is spherical, it's possible for the sun to descend below the horizon and cast the mountain's shadow on the clouds.  Flat-earthers are either trolls or mentally deranged(rational madman) who offer piss-poor evidence for their claims and who spout nonsense. 

I am curious how that proves that the Earth is not flat.

Go ahead, explain how the shadows prove that the Earth is not flat.

The difference between us is I need to insult you exactly 0 times or hurl a single word of abuse to your side to win. Your side only wins via intimidation and bullying via authority/genetic fallacy and ad hominem attacks.

Let's observe what you are saying and the flat-earth arguments against it.

Let's start here: 

"The difference between us is I need to insult you exactly 0 times or hurl a single word of abuse to your side to win. Your side only wins via intimidation and bullying via authority/genetic fallacy and ad hominem attacks."

XD ok... let's see what YOU are able to prove. I'll insult you later ;)

3:38 of your video: "to abandon your senses and everyday experiences in order to believe in science stuff is wrong..."

Ok, so this suggests that the sun is always visible, the horizon on a lake or ocean never obstructs it(relatively flat areas that the video creator used to demonstrate his point), it's just too far away to see and, by using various devices to increase our visual range, the sun will become visible once more.

Let's say that the sun disappears from your view with the naked eye at 6:00 pm. You use your video recorder, as the video does, to zoom in on the 'horizon'. Are you suddenly going to see the sun reappear as you've zoomed in on the horizon? 30 minutes pass and the video recorder can't zoom in any further and loses the sun... it's now too far away... are you going to break out various telescopes, increasing in power, every time the sun disappears from view? Shell out some serious money and you should be able to see the sun 24/7 if you have a strong enough telescope... buy the right telescope and range shouldn't be an issue.

I see this as a very simple experiment one can do at home, waiting until the sun 'disappears' over the horizon and then using a telescope or a video recorder to make the sun magically reappear by zooming in. After all, the sun never disappears over a relatively flat horizon, right?

What you can do is find yourself an area with a relatively flat horizon and record the sun's setting. When it disappears, zoom in and make it reappear. Upload your video for the world to see.

Also, the video does not disprove the picture I linked... the picture clearly shows the shadow the mountains cast on the clouds as the sun disappears below the horizon. Your video says the sun never disappears but merely gets too far away to be seen. A sunset caused by the sun's light fading due to range will not cause a shadow to be cast upwards. 

This video[www.youtube.com/watch?v=gseNeL_Rung] serves the purpose of showing that the Earth is always BELOW the sun according to the flat earth model. All of the light that lands on the Earth is pointing downwards to some degree no matter the range. Distant mountains are not able to cast shadows that go upwards unless the sun goes below the horizon causing them to cast shadows that go up. 

I literally just tested this myself with my phone's flash light and a bottle of hand sanitizer. Having the light source ABOVE the bottle, but merely moving it away results in a shadow that is cast on the ground(or my bed) that merely lengthens until it is subsumed by the increasing darkness of a light source that is becoming more distant. The light source never goes below the bottle/bed. As a result, the shadow never gets directed upwards. However, using the edge of the bed as a horizon on which the sun goes over and sets and using a notebook to function as the clouds, the bottle casts a shadow exactly like the mountains on the shadow. 

Do it yourself... you will get the same results. 

Antartica... earlier in this thread, you said that "you can take a helicopter near it just high enough to avoid the harsh winds and to see barely into it".

So, essentially, one isn't really seeing anything of Antartica...  it's a distant place never to be reached. Explain to me how there is a lot of documentation of Antarctica's wildlife if one can barely see into it let alone get to the place and study it up close? If nothing lives there, where do they live that would enable us to know so much about them? 

I know what you're trying to say but due to the exact same illusion that creates a miraged oasis in a desert, the actual limit of vision isn't the kind of limit you think. There's a maximum "squash" meaning if you zoom in enough it doesn't undo itself squashing into the ground. I will like you to look here and see that the mirage illusion is not fixing itself as you zoom in. (Will post link to vid once I find it).

Antarctica trips are nowhere near as deep into it as you think... Unless you mean scientists there for official, NASA/Roscosmos-permitted research.

I pointed out the fact that our senses are not objective, that they are subject to illusions/distortions in perception, and should not form the basis of us rejecting scientific claims, theories, etc, as suggested in the video you posted. In 3 posts, you did not address that. In not addressing that, it's kinda difficult for you to link any other video that claims the earth is flat because X doesn't make sense. 

Your second video uses a tennis court that is in the straight sun and that is experiencing heat haze. Find a video of an object disappearing on a tennis court at a distance while the weather is overcast. Or, as one commentator said, the experiment should be replicated on a cold day. If the illusion can be explained by distance alone, as you said it would be, the same should happen regardless of temperature decrease. You can not say that distance causes X to happen as does mirages(effects of heated air) and then post a video of a tennis court in the straight sun in an attempt to prove that distance is the one variable causing it.

Analogous example: Water(distance) is the cause of hypothermia(visual illusion), but due to the same exact reasons, sheer coldness(heat/mirages) that results in a person's body temp dropping below a certain point can cause hypothermia(visual illusion) too. *posts a video of a person getting hypothermia after being dunked in cold water. "See, water causes it".

As you can see, hopefully, the above is illogical. If one were to put a person in warm water, we would see that water is not the cause of hypothermia, which would lead one to think that temperature has something to do with it. For you, find a video that replicates the same experiment but on a cool day or whatever. Only then will it be considered as good evidence. 

Note how the trees are perfectly visible at the beginning. As the camera moves below the hill[0:26], the tops of the trees become distorted and appear to be floating as they are now being viewed through the warm air that was heated by the ground... Point is: your video does not prove that DISTANCE/SQUASH/VISION LIMIT is a factor. Rather, it shows that things can be distorted when viewed through hot air heated by asphalt or similar that was sitting in the sun. 

I still have not received a compelling flat earth explanation for the experiment I did, that shows quite clearly that in order for a mountain to cast a shadow on clouds above it, as shown in the picture, the sun needs to set below the horizon. Flat Earth videos clearly show that the sun is always above the Earth no matter how far away it is from one point on the Earth. I will sketch this out if need be... but the light hitting Earth is always doing so at a downwards angle... the angle of impact becoming less and less as the sun moves away from a reference point. It's never going to cast a shadow upwards with the same intensity made possible if the sun were to set below a horizon as the sun never sets on flat earth; it's always above it...

You don't seem to understand what distortion based on perspective is.

The clouds are relatively in place and moving much slower than the sun at that given moment, so the Sun's angle alters much more rapidly than the clouds do enabling the shadow to alter since they aren't moving in alternate angles at the same rate.

In trying to counter 'senses' you use an image of clouds and shadows, the irony is not lost on me. You must stop thinking that you are less entitled to think your way into the truth and start realising that no authority is entitled to tell you what is right or wrong if logic and your senses all say it's wrong. Both logic and the senses say it's wrong, then it's wrong. At the end of the day I don't give two shits if you think I'm mentally ill or not, I could pass a sanity test with flying colours. It's easy, I could even admit I believe the Earth is flat. I know how they screen people, they are rarely evil themselves. Even the top ranking people in Illuminati have some benevolence to them (leaders tend to never be fully malignant, such as Airmax wasn't). Leaders have to have some good in them somehow so they don't get overthrown or hated, unless they're an omnipotent type of tyrant like Aizen in Blech or Klaus in Vampire Diaries and The Originals.

lol, nope! I said earlier that our senses are tailored to and designed for dealing with relatively small objects right in front of us. Images of clouds, etc that I linked are easily discernable objects to a species that relies on upon and priorities vision. If you wanted to walk away with any knowledge of clouds, their formation, composition, etc, you'd have to forgo your senses and intuition and actually use some science to arrive at objective conclusions regarding their existence. Just because you can make sense of small objects in front of you does not make you qualified to make claims about the cosmos, which exists on a totally different scale than we are used to, using only your eyes and 'intuition'. 

You want to make claims about stuff that our senses never evolved to deal with. You want to link videos that tell us to trust our senses as opposed to scientific evidence, etc. You can feel free to arrive at your own conclusions using your senses, but you'd be wrong in doing so. Reality does not have to make sense to you in order for it to be true. 

"In trying to counter 'senses' you use an image of clouds and shadows, the irony is not lost on me."

I used an image of clouds and shadows as that is what anyone can observe, that's what I wanted an explanation for under the flat earth model. I, however, did not sit outside and speculate about what is going on millions of miles away or thousands of feet up. I also did not create a bogus, dishonest experiment to give credence to unfounded intuitions like the ones you linked me to where they wouldn't know what an independent variable was even if it bit them in the ass. Knowing the information that I know about the traditional solar system(globular Earth, etc) and the information I gained from watching flat earth videos(how the sun moves, etc), I then performed a small experiment to figure out as to why a shadow would be cast in such a way using the position of my phone's flashlight as the independent variable and keeping everything else constant. Turns out, a shadow being cast like that, on clouds above a mountain, can only happen on a globe when the sun sets below the horizon. You were invited to test it out yourself(I highly doubt you did). 

"At the end of the day I don't give two shits if you think I'm mentally ill or not,"

At the end of the day, you're the one rambles on about conspiracy theories and never provides any GOOD evidence for them. The little experiment you linked me to on the tennis court was horseshit. How you portray yourself on here just shows how deluded you are. For example, you accused me of being conspiratorial here: www.debateart.com/forum/topics/99?page=3&post_number=69  Having a 'page=1' has no influence over whether or not people go to the second page and it's not indicative of anyone trying to hide something. If I didn't want the second page to be seen by others, why would I even link the thread? The only thing it shows is that I was navigating through the forums and, tbh, you are the only one on this site who would spend their time focusing on such nonsense like url formatting when it has no impact whatsoever. 

"There must be a reason as to why he has a 'page=1' in the URL", the mentalist says to himself XD

There's a plethora of evidence, I was only doing defence here not offence. I was defending Flat Earth as plausible against your fallacious attacks. I was not attacking Round Earth theory or the authorities that uphold it at all so far in this dialogue between us.

When I was in the Navy I watched as an oil drilling platform appeared over the horizon. It did not appear all at once. It was revealed from top to bottom. This is because the horizon is curved. Also, I circumnavigated the Earth, sailing East to West. Something that is impossible on a flat Earth.

Have you actually looked at anything I posted, Grugore?

This is direct Ad Hominem. I have said no such thing and it has nothing to do with Flat Earth Theory at all to say that Australia doesn't exist.

No one said you did ;) all I said was that its people like you who spout complete flat earth nonsense. The only difference between flat-earthers who say Australia doesn't exist and you is that they take their conspiratorial hogwash one continent further. 

Lol???? Australia existing is literally not the point to diaprove flat Earth on at all.

Australia existing, and the fact that many flat earthers would deny that simple fact or call it into question, in a way disproves, or rather discredits or delegitimizes, your group. I asked for evidence regarding claims you make in this thread and you respond with nonsense. You showed a video that 'demonstrates' the effects of distance done on a tennis court in the sun/heat. It's so easy to provide legitimate evidence, yet you fail miserably. How about finding a video that takes place in the absence of temperature variations that produce mirages and then see if distance alone causes the same illusion. Finding a video done during overcast or similar weather ought to be easy where there is no temperature variation that causes mirages. Surely there's a flat-earther out there that would realize "Hey, let's actually test to see if distance alone causes this stuff instead of doing it in the baking sun where mirages and other temperature-variant induced visuals are present." 

They don't offer good evidence to suggest that Australia doesn't exist, just speculation. You don't offer good evidence behind your claims, just nonsense. They take it one continent further than you do and that's really the only distinction between you two. So how you and that group conduct themselves is disqualifying, if you guys are vying to gain credibility or defend your ideas. 

You are basically saying that since a ridiculously huge proportion of rapists have believed the Earth was Round and believed they were entitled to rape that person at that time, that Round Earthers believe that rape is okay.

^^^^^ I KNOW THIS IS IDIOTIC, I AM HIGHLIGHTING TO THIS GUY HOW OUTRAGEOUS HIS ATTACKS TO ME ARE.

Australia is real under any proper Flat Earther's model, do not fall for the following tricks: