Originally Posted by P A N (Post 1710116)

"

-Flat Earthers don't claim to know what's in space. We think it's a clock, and that the moon is self-luminous. What causes eclipses is moot, as it's not relevant to debunk the globe. To think it is means your brain is working on the basis of a fallacy of division.

-Flat Earthers - usually - believe the Earth is the center of creation, that the sky revolves around it. What's up there is fairly mysterious to us, which we're okay with, but we tend not believe they are infinitely burning balls of fire.

-Gravity does not exist. It is the most prevalent theory of course, but there is no evidence of its existence beyond the "proof" that we're not falling off a ball. Coincidentally, we need gravity to not fall off the ball. if this strikes you as odd, just try to find proof of gravity. Instead of gravity (which we only need to stick to the ball), Flat Earthers believe in electromagnetism and density, which are very easily testable and exist everywhere. There is up and down, in the Flat Earth Theory, and it's as simple as that.

-Yes. Antarctica is an ice wall which encircles the Earth. There is no south pole. There is a north pole at the center of the map, which makes south appear to exist as the opposite of it. Researching any public expeditions to the south pole will show that there is a "Ceremonial Pole" where you can go and take a selfie. You can't find the true south pole, and they claim this is because the Earth is wobbling.

-Also yes. All photos of a spherical Earth are fake. All independent balloons (reaching altitudes of 120,000feet) show a flat horizon.

Decent questions.

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1710243)

I didn't imply all over the planet. The next total eclipse in the US will be on 8/21 and will be visible at varying degrees from Oregon all the way to Georgia. What causes the eclipse and why can it be seen by so many?

Just to be clear, I am 100% humoring you and don't buy a single shred of anything you've posted so far. How about explaining the photos from the space missions and the thousands of satellites from dozens of countries all over the planet?

http://photos.state.gov/galleries/un...lantis-500.jpg

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1710286)

No, it doesn't make sense, but let's set that aside for now. I have a question.

In this flat Earth scenario, how do satellites with a polar orbit function (that is, satellites whose orbit passes over the North Pole, then the South Pole, then North Pole, over and over)? What sort of path are these satellites following?

For that matter, how do any satellites stay in orbit? The whole principal of an orbit is that a satellite is continuously falling in a circle around a sphere, and it's a balancing of gravitational pull and inertia that keeps them traveling that path. In a flat world with no gravity, how do they stay up and what keeps them moving in what would be a circle around nothing parallel to the flat surface of the Earth?

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1710286)

No, it doesn't make sense, but let's set that aside for now. I have a question.

In this flat Earth scenario, how do satellites with a polar orbit function (that is, satellites whose orbit passes over the North Pole, then the South Pole, then North Pole, over and over)? What sort of path are these satellites following?

For that matter, how do any satellites stay in orbit? The whole principal of an orbit is that a satellite is continuously falling in a circle around a sphere, and it's a balancing of gravitational pull and inertia that keeps them traveling that path. In a flat world with no gravity, how do they stay up and what keeps them moving in what would be a circle around nothing parallel to the flat surface of the Earth?

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1710385)

^I'd like to hear a response to my questions.

Originally Posted by P A N (Post 1710386)

I like your questions.

This orbital question would require some imagination. Like I say, proving the Earth is not a ball has little to do with answering the greater questions of our existence in the resultant paradigm of thought. Regardless of that, I believe the concept of antigravity to be quite valid, though mislabelled. I think it's electromagnetism, but that's moot. The history and achievements of it are well documented, and I believe that we've come much farther with it than we're being led to believe. In short, I don't find it hard to imagine that what we're being told are vehicles with orbital trajectories out in the vacuum of space could be inner-space vehicles which can adjust course easily. A possible "polar path" could be simply that a craft of some kind is merely bouncing from one side of the map to the other. Meaning, what we percieve as south is actually the perimeter of the Earth and north is in the middle, so it just has to reach the boundary and go back in the opposite direction. There is also the possibility that the ISS is the only satellite up there, and it could be suspended in a similar manner, or guided by a gps-like system. F*ck, that thing could be a hologram for all I know.

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1710383)

You're right, everything might be a lie and that thousands of people are lying to you to make you believe something that doesn't benefit them in any way. Or, the facts are actually facts. Claiming conspiracy is just a lazy tactic to avoid backing up your statements.

Originally Posted by Janszoon (Post 1710388)

Many different countries and many different corporations have launched satellites. Are you saying all of them—including countries that are enemies and corporations that are rivals—are working together to lie to us?

Originally Posted by Frownland (Post 1710330)

In short, if the science doesn't match what you believe, go ahead and make up some of your own.