42) In the ball-Earth model Antarctica is an ice continent which covers the bottom of the ball from 78 degrees South latitude to 90 and is therefore not more than 12,000 miles in circumference. Many early explorers including Captian Cook and James Clark Ross, however, in attempting Antarctic circumnavigation took 3 to 4 years and clocked 50-60,000 miles around. The British ship Challenger also made an indirect but complete circumnavigation of Antarctica traversing 69,000 miles. This is entirely inconsistent with the ball model.

okay but there are actually races doing this with records like i had shown, there are more than one such race. some form Oz, some from Europe.

@MR VLAK And kudo's for digging in and doing your own research dude. It's the only way you'll ever know.

a sail boat averges 6-8miles per hour, that speaks to the 16k miles form Albany around Antarctica and back taking 102 days. If would take a sail boat 300 plus days if the size is more than 60k miles

@MR VLAK They say a lot, they can say they are sailing around a ball all they like, proving it is a completely different story. All their routes can be plotted on the FE map. I

the times woudl add up though

@MR VLAK Yes and they took 3-4 years. Documented.

would not

3-4 years is still 3-4x how long it will take in todays yachts so it doesn't really add any merit

69k miles @ 6mph = 11500hours, divided by 24hr a day = 479 days/ 365days =1.3 years

that's conservatively

vs 102 days on a GE

<:Hmm3:469473862619496449>

Good thing the stars have been the same year-on-year since the beginning of time. Otherwise nobody could possibly navigate by the stars if they kept changing all the time.

Yeah I am also glad the rotation of the earth and its axis as we move through the universe together with our solar system and adjacent systems is constant

@MR VLAK Which you can't prove..

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/activities/jeff/Doppler.html

the dopper effect. Light is waves, sound is waves.. easy to grasp

Yeah radar only works on a flat plane.

What does your article prove and how does it prove it?

The Doppler Effect Proves A Flat Earth: Something To Think About Before I Stream This Saturday
Ignore X
The cute picture above gives a basic example of what the doppler effect is: as a sound approaches a stationary listener the pitch of the sound is higher. As the sound passes the observer and moves away, the pitch of the sound becomes lower. You've probably heard this if you have ever stood nearby an approaching train or ambulance.

Here is where it gets interesting: the doppler effect disproves the round earth. Think about it: the round earth (including the atmosphere) is supposedly spinning at 1000mph. The direction of rotation is from west to east. That means the atmosphere must be circulating with the earth from west to east. The speed of sound is 767mph. Remember: sound travels through a medium (in our case, air) and cannot travel where there is no material to move through. So the earth and you are each moving at the breakneck speed of 1000mph. Imagine you are standing facing west and someone half a mile away lights a firecracker. If the earth is really spinning at 1000mph, and sound only moves through the atmosphere at 767mph, you would NEVER be able to hear the sound of the firecracker exploding. The sound would never catch up with you. When you see a lightening strike in the west, you should never be able to hear thunder if the earth is round and spinning as spherists claim.

This shows that the earth really is Flat. I encourage you to put on your proverbial caps and think away. The earth is NOT round. I will be streaming live this Saturday at 8pm eastern time. My twitch channel is here, tune in and let me know what you come up with regarding the this "doppler dilemma". Or any other Flat earth question. When you open your mind, you will find that Planar Theory kicks ball belief every time...

It explains how wave frequency changes depending on if a object moving to or away your viewing point.

that extract of your is meaningless and assumes that everything contained in the earth atmosphere is not a closed system. Remember the fly in the car example?

Doppler effect proves that the stars and we are moving through the universe.

@MR VLAK It's stationary until you can prove otherwise. Your entire model is based on an unproven assumption.

If FLat Earthers believe in the doppler effect, then they should believe that the starts are moving based on the same logic

@MR VLAK You can only reason and deduce logically if you start from a proven base-foundation - which you don't have. So you may call it "logic" but it's not really that, because I can reverse engineer every single one of your claims back to it's root where every single one of them will fall apart.

This is what building your foundation on a rock is all about.

That's what's interesting about your logic. You start from a proven base and when it doesn't match your agenda you turn to another direction. I have shown it in our discussion multiple times.

I have come to the conclusion you are in to deep and by accepting even the slightest possibility of anything else would be in too much of a conflict of your beliefs.

@MR VLAK You have only linked articles that triggers your confirmation bias. You have not proved anything. Flat Earth is a huge field and there's lots of avenues that can be debated until the cows come home, but ultimately doesn't prove anything either way.

If that is so why do you not accept that you can be right and wrong?

Stick to what we can prove. You will not convince me logically I guarantee you that.

@MR VLAK I know for a fact it's flat and stationary - all the science is there. All the logic is there. I'm not here trying to figure out what shape it is.

Why would we be conditioned to believe a round earth?

@MR VLAK Because you don't teach your slave gangs how to make guns and gunpowder. Smart people can't be controlled so easy.

Being a product of the system makes you believe in the system too. People will even defend it.

Just to point out something, vlak has a good point though, you can't accept that you might be wrong, which is problematic... All the same rhetoric applies to you too DeeJay, you too could be taught incorrectly with regards to an agenda, and you too are essentially a product of a system that you believe in and even defend... The measure here is that you both are equal, so unless you don't accept the golden rule, and treat one another as equal, you will never get anywhere in terms of being able to reason.

Flat earthers you just jump off the edge tbh

the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change.

Lol this applies to you equally too hey

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs

Gravity... Once you understand this, then everything else you understand will be questioned

@Sheamus I don't agree with much of anything you said there. This is not about the art of the debate. This is about what we can prove. It's all about the science. Why is it then that only the flerfer has to prove his model and not the globulist? Why should I see the other party as an equal when right from the get-go I am not being treated as such? I have not seen ONE globe proof even worth considering.

Brian Cox is a nothing but a pseudo-intellectual and a fraud.

lol

That right there is your problem DeeJay.. You might not care, but the people that pay attention see you for what you are, any chance of reasoning is lost with you because you break the trust of the golden rule. You are literally dictating, not reasoning.

its not the person I am showing you. I am showign you objects falling in a vacuum. Saying you dislike the person and therefor do not entertain it proves Shaemus' point

He's a proven liar and has no credibility whatsoever.

I will edit him out and his voice

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AV-qyDnZx0A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XJcZ-KoL9o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frZ9dN_ATew

there no person I dont even know that you hate

@MR VLAK So balls and feathers prove that balls and feathers can fall in a vacuum. Does it prove the vacuum exists? Nope.

Gravity... Gravity exists

Prove it.

And tell me that was a perfect vacuum?

Open your mind. I will sent you some DMT to restart the system

I believed the lies for 44 years. I wasn't born a flerfer.

Two objects of different densities falling at the same acceleration.. gravity..

@MR VLAK That's likely the maximum speed something can fall through the Ether.

why at the same acceleration if the densities are different? you said objects sort themselves by density

Yes, they are sorting themselves because they are falling. When they reach the bottom they have sorted themselves. Your vacuum is not a perfect vacuum.

You need to meet people half way DeeJay, you cannot expect to make no effort on your part and others to come to your mindset.. You can be just as wrong as anyone else is about anything. If you can't accept that, why should anyone else?

You can only claim to be better than anyone else, but the universe is designed to restore balance, this is why we have a golden rule, it's universally observed to solve any problem you have to balance things out evenly. Your claim is measured by your actions. The only problem that exists is that you think you are better than others, and until you solve that problem, you won't understand why people have a lack of interest to take you seriously and continue to accept the globe model, but will merely entertain your audience to let you show everyone else yourself how you think you are better than the rest of us, and i assure you many of us find it humorous. You really ought to think about that.

You guys are just proving density.

no...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icXVeaIiM2g

a vacuum increases the effect of your density theory

@Sheamus People can laugh all they want, it's just the mind trying to deal with the trauma. I don't think I'm better than others at all, I'm actually a pretty humble and quiet guy. How am I supposed to budge with proven science on my side? All I am being is factual and straight forward. The honest approach as opposed to the condescending one. Honestly who here actually watched the entire 200 proofs video?

@Deejay from Earth yes and they too haven proven science, rejecting and denying theirs is no different from them rejecting yours... This is why you need to reason, not dictate

@Sheamus Where is this "proven science" my good sir?

I tried, but I cannot get over the fact that most of those only work in a world without gravity which I unfortunately cannot accept does not exist.

How about now?

In general, a scientific law is the description of an observed phenomenon. It doesn't explain why the phenomenon exists or what causes it. The explanation of a phenomenon is called a scientific theory. It is a misconception that theories turn into laws with enough research

gravity does not rely on magnetism...

just btw

What is it called when a scientific theory is taught as a scientifically proven fact?

science

i want to get to the magnetic gravity story...

What is the difference between a theory and imagination?

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested, in accordance with the scientific method, using a predefined protocol of observation and experiment.[1][2] Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge

So when are you going to test it?

Its been tested, I have given you three videos with the same results (repeated).

anyhow I wan to come back to the FE understanding that gravity is magnetic

Where was the results of your videos published?

For peer-review?

you can go do the research about whom verified it or go to any high school in the world where they will show you experiments that do the same

lets get back to your magnetic gravity story... please

What experiment can I do at home to verify the results for myself?

You see, I keep posting proofs and you keep ignoring them at your own convenience.

Four conclusive experiments performed by the top scientists of their day proved that the Sun, Moon and stars revolve around us, and that Earth is the fixed, motionless centre of the universe.

The Michelson-Morley, Michelson-Gale, Airy's Failure and Sagnac experiments scientifically proved Geocentrism and nearly crushed the dying Heliocentric theory until Mr. Einstein came through with his Special Relativity mathematical denial of the proven Aether and philosophically (not scientifically) banished the Aether from study ever since.

These studies and peer reviewed experiments are never covered in any university courses. These conclusive peer-reviewed and repeated scientific results are nowhere debated or denied, merely suppressed and ignored. The fact of the matter is that Geocentrism has been conclusively proven for over a century.

In 1913 Sagnac conducted an experiment to test the speed and constancy of light and proved the existence of the Aether (Disproves relativity) Therefore, The Michelson-Morley experiment, conducted using an interferometer clearly demonstrated that the Earth was motionless. The Michelson-Gale experiment detected the Aether/Firmament passing over the surface of the motionless Earth. Airy's Failure, demonstrated that it is the stars moving relative to a stationary Earth, and not the fast orbiting Earth moving relative to comparatively stationary stars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP0rt6EktEo

I ignore them like you ignore your misunderstanding of gravity

See I give you peer-review and you post youtube videos about density.