everything is a theory

@Ætos thanks birdy

@Covariant Canonical Quantization IDK, maybe you'd fall off?

gn sleepy time

I'm saying

<:smart:484956754489376781>

what does it look like

Yeah, anytime, Snapchat filter girl

😜 😂

you know it

There was a picture of the edge

ugh i think i just threw up in my mouth a bit

But I lost it

it fell off the edge

Edge of the internet maybe

*When you lose your picture of the edge by dropping it off the edge.*

i have an image of it

@Ætos lmao

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/450910594778923008/554900534411264010/latest.png

^^

Pictures of the edge of the earth could be classified info who knows

..

Meh, fair enough

Flat Mars Society

No, no, Mars Earth Society

is there an actual intelligent argument for the orbiting globe model

omg

🤔

this is hilarious

Yes, I think I found one, actually

😂 😂 😂 😂

That they were taught it in school

Actually this was a recent experiment, so feel free to critique it.

Ok

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owj9QDuV_dE

I’ll just DM it, easier that way.

if you can prove to me earth is flat i will send you a special pic

<:butthurt:507983822244151306>

damn I cant post images in here

feels bad

I wonder if I can

Special pic? Lmao.

lmaio

lmao

I can

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YLF-ELd14cDh4WhJ-czg5eCeEixq8jabXuhYJOEuyYI/edit?usp=sharing

Behold a proof.

Anyone here actually been in space?

Ya

a couple times

It is particularly convincing.

What about orbit?

@Covariant Canonical Quantization

I was joking

Space is fake, remember

<:smart:484956754489376781>

😳

the axis of a spinning sphere keeps attitude in space, the axis of an orbiting spinning sphere scribes parallel lines

Bruh I flapped my hands up into orbit

Attitude? In space?

<:GWbruhGalaxyThink:405065193287319552>

I thought my attitude would remain fairly constant in space.

lmao

Perhaps I’ve been looking at this all wrong.

Bruh Earth is actually shaped like Mar10 d1ck

I saw it with my own eyes

When I did the big flap into orbit

🤔

he behavior of gases in the vacuum of space has fatal consequences for the heliocentric model itself and for our alleged exploration of it first, gases do not “collapse” under and cannot be retained by their own gravity, which means there cannot be a gaseous sun and consequently no solar system

simple

@Covariant Canonical Quantization

<:thonkstein:522273013366784000>

Seems legit

Kind of randomly, @AstralSentient have you ever considered getting a unique profile picture?

I have before

Just curious.

But I removed it

Ah

What would I put there anyways.

Idk, most people have something they want there.

I have an eagle and consequently have been called “crazy bird”.

<:n_:507995520724369431> igga bird

Maybe consider something “Astral”?

Maybe?

That’s neat

Teach the controversy, flat earth in schools 😎

No one has been to the other side.

^

Classified information

a container of gas depressurizes homogeneously, just as it pressurizes homogeneously, and that means it does not produce a force vector pointing in opposite direction of the valve. Rocketry in vacuum therefore is a delusion and a fairy tale. Recoil by exiting gas only works in an atmosphere, which provides mass for the exhaust to push against and friction to hold on to. The postulated vacuum of space is the ultimate sucking machine, and thus, any gas exiting the nozzle of a rocket is immediately sucked away and rendered ineffective.
on earth, in order to maintain the ball fantasy, you have to ignore and discard everything you’ve ever learned about basic geometry and physics principles take your sun set reflection for instance. We look at it and take for granted that it happens on a ball earth. But it doesn’t, water on a sphere is necessarily a convex mirror and reflects light like any convex surface: as a spot, not a line. if the horizon follows you as you rise, you are looking at the horizon of a plane surface. full stop. The same is true for objects disappearing “behind” or “under” a horizon: If you look at a disappearing ship at the horizon with binoculars, then, in case of a geometric horizon (i.e. a sphere) you will see the remaining part magnified, in case of a horizon of perspective, you will see the entire ship again, because you just moved the vanishing point farther away. With infinite magnification you would be able to see a ship infinitely far away on a plane, but not a ship that has “sunk” beyond the curve of a sphere. railways, bridges, tunnels, canals etc. NEVER work to a curved datum line, always to a perfectly straight horizontal reference <:Pi_thonk:524745505398587392> <:maths:437153267928006666> <:thinkfold:406575734195224577>

Fabrication

new argument

I would jokingly say for good reason, but I realize I’ll probably piss a few people off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYLiBEgLOYE

The Ice Wall is Antarctica. Kind of hard to “look over” a continent.

Not really