@Human Sheeple Were you the one that did the modeling to show that a selenelion is possible on a globe?

I had a bet with the dragon, I used the dragon's numbers, boom the selenelion worked. My reaction was to the dragon "It's a globe!" The dragon said "No because we can't detect curvature"

So I said how the heck can we explain this on FE?

Superimposition of coherent light waves

Destructive interference

It then dawned on me that everything fit too perfectly, no refraction, light travelling in straight lines, I came to the conclusion that out of all the other globe evidence that "didn't fit" and this one that did that the Globe itself is directly derived from the study of the OCCULT.

How did you make the selenelion work, I'm wondering.

Shaving off small angles off all three axis

Cutting corners

Cutting corners?

Scaling Invariance doesn't wash with this, the distances to size ratio matches everything, to me it's the strongest evidence of the Globe I have seen

By far

So it was able to work within a particular area and that allowed a few degrees off to still work the lunar eclipse?

you can't just shave a few degrees of two axis, it won't work, it MUST have 3 axis corner cutting

So I am of the opinion the only way to verify the Earth is circumnavigate all 3 axis non stop in a straight line. If there's an edge, it's a plane, if no edge on all 3 axis, it's an oblate spheroid

Well, the primary issue was with the 2d plane for the lunar eclipse, sun being not directly aligned with the earth and moon.
I'm not familiar with modeling so I'm not quite sure what you mean, but what exactly does it take to make the selenelion work on the globe regarding its position. Do you have to change the sun's apparent position?

I'm not convinced the Earth is the cause.

Another method to prove the model would be predict which part of the "Globe" is supposed to be causing the shadow, fly a very big balloon up in the sky and cast a custom shadow on the moon

I'm aware, I was just interested that in your modeling showing selenelion working on a globe perfectly, exactly how has it been determined?

It would work on both spherical geocentric or a spherical heliocentric model also

IF a spherical Earth is indeed the cause of the shadow, which hasn't been tested and I remain skeptical

Initially I tried with two balloons, 2 axis corner cutting I failed to replicate it.

Even Russian Vids once thought like I did, "Impossible on a globe", it's worse, it's not only possible it fits TOO PERFECTLY

Hitler wasn't that bad of a guy if you think about it, He did kill Hitler

Could work on a ball earth in theory, but the issue primarily was they have to alter the position of the apparent sun to get it to work, that being variable by atmospheric conditions.

I've had senior globies admit they don't have a working refraction model, so the globe is still as of 2019 an incomplete model

The earth is obviously a triangle and the Egyptians were showing us

Y’all dumb

Honest question

Is mars flat?

You mean the red luminary in the sky Mars? Or the place on Flat Earth where they fake Mars?

The latter is flat yes

So then why do they claim all these phenomena work like over the horizon sightings, selenelion, and knowing the position of the sun?

So.... The planet Mars is flat?

@Human Sheeple how high on drugs are you?

Brother it’s a yes or no question

If they lack the working refraction model?

Sheeple. Your either a dumb fuck, high as balls, or paranoid.

I’m just here to find out if mars is flat

😃

They don't, they've had to come up with repeated ad-hoc excuses over centuries to get everything to fit, from gravity to abberation of light, to parallax, oscillations, deny the aether, particle wave duality, dark matter, black holes, white holes, flat universe

@Cake B0i ad hominem

@Human Sheeple is Mars flat?

Already answered that scroll up

@Human Sheeple show me a grain of solid proof the earth is flat

Dude you gave me two weird answers

I need you to just say yes or no

R = 6,371,000
h0 = 2,800
d0 = 443,000
R^2 = 4.0589641×10¹³
d^2+R^2 => d1 = root(h0^2 +2Rh0
d1 = root(2,800 + 2 x6,371,000 x 2,800)
d1 = root (7840000 + 35677600000)
d1 = root(35685440000)
d1 = 188905.9025 to 4 d.p.
(R+h1)^2 = d2^2 + R^2 => h1 = root(d2^2+R^2) - R
d2 = d0-d1
d2 = 443,000 - 188905.9025
d2 = 254094.0974
h1 = root (254094.0974^2 + 6,371,000^2) - 6,371,000
h1 = root(64563810383.4510 + 4.0589641×10¹³) - 6,361,000
h1 = root(4.065420481038345108741×10¹³) -6,371,000
h1 = 6376064.9942 - 6,371,000
h1 = 5064.994

5064 meters is greater than 3800 meters

And?

Proof of your globe? A stitched together cartoon

FE 1 : 0 GE

@Human Sheeple are all planets flat?

So if you model a superior mirage on a globe, what kind of light bending does it take to reach over the horizon? Wouldn't it have to go over the line of sight first then bend down over the curvature?

Is the sun flat???

https://youtu.be/hRz5zzyx28M

Superior mirages are quite obviously shadows

@Human Sheeple oh I get why your no brainless, your Christian!

So*

@Cake B0i More Ad hominems

Hey that’s rude

Don’t attack someone’s religion

I don't mind, when someone uses ad hominem fallacies, it means they lack the ammunition to fight back.

What in the f is a ad hominem?

I rest my case

I’m guessing you’re in a speech and debate class in high school?

I love how your arguments cherry-pick the words about how the images are stitched together, but ignore the part where they say that the images used are primarily from the Terra satellite

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_balloon_satellite

Yes "satellite"

@gohan is Mars flat?

Which conveniently can't get high enough to take a whole picture of the Earth, so they take a bunch of images and map it onto a sphere

Ergo, cartoon ball

@Царь I wouldn't say it's flat, but I'm not a Flat Earther

Oh okay

Thank you 🙏🏼

But the question is, are you a flat Marser?

And, uh, do you have proof that they use these "Geostationary Balloon Satellites" as opposed to satellites in space?

Some pictures would work great

Nah I’m more a flat Jupiterer

Like, 4 or 5

@AstralSentient are all planets Flat or just earth and Mars?

@Царь Earth ain't a planet as flat earthers describe it.

What

Then what is earth

The Earth is the floor

The floor is flat

Hm

Okay

You see, there is a special way of looking at it all

I guess

But sometimes the floor isn’t flat

If the Earth isn’t a planet then what is it?

Not it's just MOSTLY flat, because 70 percent of the Earth is covered in water

@Царь It's the floor

*just casually ignore my jupiter picture*

THAT DOESNT ANSWER ANYONES QUESTION

Why would anyone acknowledge it my dude

I ask if it flat and you post a picture of it

Anyways, so Earth is the floor okay but what planet or celestial body are we on?

It's also interesting to note that sometimes the stars come to Earth

Because earth is moving

...what?

Around the sun

Stars come to Earth?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo_fighter

Everyone knows that

WW2 these stars couldn't be shot down and lapped around allied Aircraft

If a Star came close to earth we’d all die

I don’t think it was a star my guy

Well one of these stars made an aircraft fly backwards

Another star made the electrics all fry

It changed course in mid air

No it didn’t

Because if it did

We’d all die

Are you assuming it's a star?

There a kbjillion degrees

Or get taken by it’s gravitational pull

So I don’t think it’s a star

Could be some sort of ufo

But definitely not a star

UFO? Unidentified? I.e. something that may contadict the heliocentric model that the finest airmen in the world at that time could not shoot down and are powerless to do anything about

:CmonBruh:

I don’t see your point? How does that mean it was a star

Out of all things in the universe

How could it be a star

Like if it was

That would mess up literally everything in the solar system

So like

How could it be a star

Glowing orb of light? That's a star

no

The stars came into the air and chased fighter planes

It's on record

If I turn off the light and someone points a flashlight at me, it would appear to be a orb of light

That doesn’t mean it’s a star

Why do you assume all glowing orbs of lights are stars?

No it didn’t happen 😂

A star couldn’t do that without destroying the planet

Also, those "stars" disprove flat Earth

Yeah

Sure

Idk how but okay

I’m still just wondering how could a star come near our planet without interfering with the moon, earth, gravitational pulls, and other stuff like that

And why of all things

Chase some plane

Like

I dont think they believe in those types of stars

Do you honestly believe that?

https://www.project1947.com/fig/1945a.htm

I think they think stars are like, dots on the dome

I think the stars are alive

How?

UFOs mean "Unidentified", so how do we know what those sightings were?

[citation needed]

Dead things do not correct course.

Well neither dead nor alive my guy

They aren’t living

They do not meet the characteristics of a living organism

So are they just meteors with wings?

No

who is piloting the meteors then?

Who could have made better aircraft than America?

Fallen angels?

@AstralSentient I think so yes

Not fallen though

You're still not explaining why you assume it has to be a star and what this has to do with flat Earth.

They flew in the sky to intervene when we were killing each other

Wings?

Flat Earth seems incompatible with me.
I'm not Christian, so none of this works for me.

So stars have wings?

some of them also have scuba tabks

Photo of them?

https://images-ext-2.discordapp.net/external/t9vW2vtZ-m57Xu9rLQ8XtwTrrUqUwUhh0OvVxJdCM1c/https/cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/419246750260264960/481031434677649418/ISSscuba.gif

Alright, @Cake B0i has been warned for '**Bad word usage**'.

I don’t think that’s a Star my dude

If you can't be civil we'll send you to the little boys table

A star is a ball of plasma

With constant nuclear reactions

I'd rather be at the little boys table then with you

I think it's not a star either I think it's a scuba diver in a swimming pool

That is not a star

🤦

You jumped from stars to scuba tanks... Why?

Ok, this took a left turn

I'm gonna leave

All we have to work on is "lights in the sky"

You’re not making any sense

A left turn? This veered off a cliff and into a ravine

So light in sky means star?

Couldn’t be an aircraft

Before shredding the vehicle and the people inside

I took that metaphor too far

In any case, ball lightning matches the description of these "Foo Fighters" pretty closely

So it might've just been ball lightning

We went inside a black hole event horizon

They sent experts in to investigate all this and they admitted there were a bunch of lights in the sky that modern science and the heliocentric model could not explain they even tried to cover this up

Yes... But your explanation is angels, so...

@AstralSentient When did we go inside a black hole event horizon?

I have an Angel angle. 😉

Hm, let's see...

Which sentence was it that passed the point of no return?

Seems not very covered up wheh you have all of these documents

The globe might well be useful for astronomy, but there's so many holes in it, which is why I don't buy it.

The moment starts now¿

Also, I dont see how this is relevant to anything

This is 70 years ago now

They've been declassified

<:smart:484956754489376781>

Alright, @Царь has been warned for '**Bad word usage**'.

I lost track of this conversation a while ago.

Can I try to convince you of the globe with one thing

<:silly:507986623850348547>

Not the spinnign lights in the south pole please

y not

because I see the same shit in a vortex tunnel but the walkway is flat

Yeah, but you dont see the same objects looking in different directions in a vortex hallway.

Or anywhere.

And yet you claim 443km away is a refraction phenomenon but reject the possibility that the light coming from an orb of burnign hydrogen gas 10 trillion km away isn't being bent in any way shape or form whatsoever.

That my friend is double standards, you can't definitively tell me the light coming from the stars isn't being bent.

You can't even triangulate the sun on the globe

Slight nitpick, stars aren't orbs of burning hydrogen gas

They fuse together hydrogen, they don't burn it.

And that's meant to be many orders of magnitude closer according to heliocentrism

Aren't stars seen at night though?

"nuclear" burn although I remain skeptical of particle physics

Where there is significantly less temp

yes they are

so long as you live in an area with little light pollution

So... what's the problem then?

Do you acknowledge that the apparent and geometric positions of all luminaries in the sky differ by an un-known margin?

I guess

sup @Citizen Z

I've been keeping the zombies entertained

🤦

They think foo fighters aren't real then go on to say they are UFOs

Then they admitted they haven't got a clue where anything in the sky actually is

Then they tried to say stars don't change course

When did anyone say this?

Pepega

Scroll up

You're excellent at twisting people's words around