Earth is oblate spheriod

@California Nightmare disprove gravity first

@California Nightmare well actually, it has a lot to do with it. A flat earth breaks the laws of physics among many other things.

Flat Earthers don't believe that gravity exists. The earth would only be liveable in the center if gravity remained the same but the planet was somehow magically flat.

And you're asking me to provide proof (which there are literally hundreds of pages to be typed) of something to disprove something that has absolutely no evidence.

Without even taking the myriads of ways to tell the Earth is spherical (which I will gladly do if need be), the flat earth conspiracy has no tangible proof. All the math, physics, and science from the last two thousand years would be erased if this conspiracy were true. Why aren't any flat Earthers rewriting the processes of the universe and how they work?

Any idiot can make a baseless claim, why aren't they doing the math to explain how everything works, since apparently Einstein, Hawking and literally every scientist is an ignorant buffoon

We've known the Earth was spherical for two thousand years.

Only religious idiots claim this heliocentric, simulation, hologram, whatever bs

@California Nightmare send a weather balloon up if you want personal proof for the type of people that "only believe it if they themselves can see it, regardless of mathematical proofs"

eratosthenes discovered the curvature 2000 years ago

@blackgirl this is like MKUltra on acid.

It's dumber. No critical thinking.
Hell, tranny and race debates are better @blackgirl

Can I get image perms or is there a channel for it?

Wonder what the anti vaxxers are up to

@Stabs someone for free coins ayy. Cool beans.

@California Nightmare I can prove it. It's just that any source and experiment i provide will be called fake news.

About those image perms?

@California Nightmare I'll write a few paragraphs I guess. I'm not into going into a long debate and I know you won't accept logic anyway, but my OCD dictates that I respond to the egotism in you

Lol. Too long to post all at once

1.)Different constellations are visible from different latitudes. Probably the two most striking examples are the Big Dipper and the Southern Cross. The Big Dipper, a set of seven stars that looks like a ladle, is always visible at latitudes of 41 degrees North or higher. Below 25 degrees South, you can't see it at all. And in northern Australia, just north of that latitude, the Big Dipper just barely squeaks above the horizon.

Meanwhile, in the Southern Hemisphere, there's the Southern Cross, a bright four-star arrangement. That constellation isn't visible until you travel as far south as the Florida Keys in the Northern Hemisphere.

2.) Solar eclipses


3.) If the Earth was flat, you'd be able to see the same distance no matter your elevation. Think about it: Your eye can detect a bright object, like the Andromeda galaxy, from 2.6 million light-years away. Seeing the lights of, say, Miami from New York City (a distance of a mere 1,094 miles or 1,760 kilometers) on a clear evening should be child's play.

But it's not. That's because the curvature of the Earth limits our sight to about 3.1 miles (5 kilometers) … unless you climb up a tall tree, building or mountain and get yourself a perspective from higher up.

4.) The Earth's curve becomes subtly visible at an altitude of around 35,000 feet, as long as the observer has at least a 60 degree field of view (which may be difficult from a passenger plane window). The curvature becomes more readily apparent above 50,000 feet; passengers on the now-grounded supersonic Concorde jet were often treated to a view of the curved horizon while flying at 60,000 feet. (So no, you won't always see curvature on a plane. Go fly on a jet and you will and it'll be obvious)

5.) In January 2017, University of Leicester students strapped some cameras to a weather balloon and sent it skyward. The balloon rose 77,429 feet (23.6 kilometers) above the surface, well above the level needed to view the planet's curves. The instrument aboard the balloon sent back stunning footage that shows the curve of the horizon.

As long as your balloon has a payload of less than four pounds, there are hardly any restrictions on launching it. Just call the Federal Aviation Administration ahead of time to make sure you're not headed into restricted airspace. (These were students, not "lying NASA scientists.")

6.) Other planets are spherical. Why is Earth the anomaly?

7.) Time zones. (The "spotlight sun" doesn't work. We can see the sun from Neptune but not on half of the Earth?)

@Seeker of Truth the black hole image was part of an international project.

Not NASA lmao😐

That's quite a bold claim.
A cover up of millions of people.

I'm questioning how a cover up involving millions of people is possible without anyone blabbing

I'm actually in the south where a lot of dumb (often Flat Earther) Christian fundamentalists live.

My dad almost fell for the flat earth conspiracy in all honesty

Southeast united states.
You could infer by the Christian fundamentalist part if you had any critical thinking

But anyway, you believe in the JFK conspiracy?

That one actually has lots of evidence for it.
That Lyndon Johnson, CIA were responsible. Oswald didn't kill him.

I'm not against conspiracies all together

Yay. Mutual agreement

Awww

Well no, you can watch him die on video.
There was def. more than one shooter though

"The magic bullet" all that bs

@Brian (Fourth Amendment) you do not remember your birth, correct? Then how do you know that you were born?

Oswald reportedly got a coca cola instead of fleeing. He was def. set up or did it for the fame

And also the autopsy was secretive and no one was allowed to see the body (or something like that, if memory serves)

MKUltra is a proven conspiracy theory that the CIA admitted to, so not much to debate about there because it is confirmed

Vaccines aren't evil and don't cause autism though. That jumps back into crazy conspiracy theories

Anyone seen the JFK movie - Oliver stone? I'd recommend if you haven't

Well, glad we can agree on some things at least.
Still, Earth isn't flat and it's very dumb to continue believing so.
Anyhow, I feel this server is a conspiracy overload so back to MKUltra server.

Later 👋

Yeah, U.S. shouldn't get involved

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/strange-but-true-seals-found-sexually-assaulting-penguins/

https://beta-washingtonpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/beta.washingtonpost.com/opinions/pete-buttigieg-wouldnt-be-americas-first-gay-president/2019/03/26/0b7b1eb4-41de-11e9-922c-64d6b7840b82_story.html?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&outputType=amp&usqp=mq331AQA#aoh=15630512393353&amp_ct=1563051262481&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

What is right or wrong from biological stance?

Killing is "wrong" because it's counterproductive to reproducing and continuing the species. Incest could be considered similar because of genetic deformities. But Nothing is objectively wrong to the universe.

@Deleted User not objectively. But to judge it would really depend on context.
Stealing from a poor beggar? Pretty wrong.
Stealing from a rich billionaire that wouldn't even notice and it wouldn't affect his health or life negatively? Not really.

I'm of the mindset that if you do something that's considered "wrong", get away with it and it doesn't negatively affect the "victim" in such circumstance, then it's totally okay. Some people could live by their own rules and morals and do fine, but their are so many people, and so many (frankly, idiots), that government then becomes needed to dictate what many do.

But really, if the universe is left with just black holes and inanimate objects, did anything really matter? Did the so-called human morals really mean anything?

Should be carbon taxed to hell to such a degree that it's cheaper to go renewable than to pay tax

Regular citizens aren't responsible for the majority of climate change effects/pollution. The government and coal companies are the real problems.
Cars need not be banned, they'll be phased out.

@Deleted User cars are, but that's often due to lax government regulations. Cars could be made more efficient, even if they're not electric.

The economy will die if automation takes the job market and climate change/migration costs trillions in the coming decades.
Strict regulations to ensure the well-being of the Earth and eco-system are necessary.

It is very close (20-40 years)
In some ways, it is already here

Self driving cars and AI will make menial jobs hard to find. More than half of jobs in the U.S. could be automated in 50 years

Well... most experts agree jobs will be slashed rather quickly.
New jobs will become available, but that likely mean millions of people will need to be re-trained and put in position to survive in the advancing technological world

@Deleted User this.
Nuclear fission was the answer for decades. Molten salt reactors are even safer, have less waste, but weren't ever used by the U.S. over the traditional reactors.

*Fusion* may also become a possibility. Predictions say it may be a reality in 10-30 years.
Although using it on a nationwide scale probably couldn't be accomplished for a bit longer.

@Deleted User first off, I'm more of a social democrat/democratic socialist. Actual communism won't be a reality in my country for decades.

As for why I agree with your view: because switching to renewable would take time and lots of money. Nuclear is relatively safe and the waste (the main problem) can be stored safely/re-used. So "Why is a communist agreeing to my view?"

Because they don't share in the stigma and see nuclear as a viable alternative, not something to be phased out entirely.

@G a b e גבריאל Greece and Syria? Actually, it's a form of capitalism with social benefits. They're being used in some of the greatest countries, including many European (especially Scandinavian) countries and countries in Oceania (NZ, Australia), which are also doing very well. But I suppose most super-developed countries are when compared to the U.S.

Oh wait... was that directed at someone else? Oops lol

For daily question : https://youtu.be/A8zWWp0akUU

English fixed <:smug:591181720565579807>

Absolutely not. The U.S. standard of living, healthcare, education, etc. isn't great, but the economy is doing well and unemployment is low (although workers are underpaid).

People imo put too much stock in things like that and the stock market, etc. A lot of factors go into what makes a country great, and one particular thing doesn't guarantee anything. @Bruni

It doesn't really matter in my opinion. I consider us all humans with the same upsides and downsides.
Israel isn't even Israel. It's a piece of land that humans drew borders on to create a country.

^this
If we're being technical

@Deleted User drug use shouldn't be a crime. If caught, they should be sent straight to addiction therapy, not jail.

In the United States?

We should do what Norway does

Maximum sentence 20-40 years.
Give prisoners more freedom, redesign the actual prisons to be better on mental health.
Legalize hard drugs and make addicts go to mandatory rehab.

US has 5% of world pop. and over 20% of prisoners

Okay, no Vox.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halden_Prison?wprov=sfla1

Just learn about the prison architecture instead of hollering fake news like a dumbass

Stop systematically targeting people of color, redesign prisons, send addicts to mandatory rehab, lower max. sentence to 40 years.

Perfecto

But a black person with weed possession is 4x more likely to be arrested than white counterpart caught with it. Stuff like that.
Police should just be held accountable

And when they are,they're still less likely to go to jail

Weed shouldn't be illegal anyway.

And black someone without criminal record would still be more likely to get arrested with it than white someone without criminal record

Why are alcohol and tobacco legal?

Weed lowers IQ by an avg. of like 4-7 points.
And only morons put too much stock into IQ tests.

IQ results will vary if someone takes the test under different cirucmstances

Weed is one drug that literally has little to no harm. More studies should be done, sure. But there are plenty of examples of intelligent stoners. Carl Sagan is a good example

Anything can be addictive. Psychological addiction isn't physical addiction though

Cheese and caffeine are more addictive than weed lol

Which study exactly?

No, marijuana use doesn’t lower your IQ
https://wapo.st/1sPawZ5

The reason research isn't done enough is because it's illegal at the federal lebel, making it difficult. It was fine for everyone to use it throughout human history until just recently.

If it was legalized, it could be regulated and make profit. It would also allow more rigorous studies to be done.
But most studies either say there's little change in IQ or just a minimal change, which likely wouldn't drastically affect anything important.

The IQ change is usually associated in *heavy users*.
That isn't even the majority of marijuana users.

And the medical benefits outweigh any negative I've seen thus far. If a future study were to reveal something jawdropping, then maybe I'd reconsider.

If I were you, I'd be more concerned with the kids and people being prescribed things like SSRIs, which we *really* don't understand the effects of

True true. More studies needed. Medical benefits could include for stress and pain relief, in my opinion. Instead of taking morphine or Tylenol, just light a joint.

And SSRIs are ntidepressants. Serotonin.

They prescribe it for depression and hope it works, even though the side effects can be scary and can make mental health worse. I was put on Celexa for a month when I was a teenager, which is crazy to me now thinking back.
Serotonin (supposedly) helps by balancing out the chemical imbalance in brain. We can't even measure serotonin in the brain though.
It's a lot of guess and checking, trying different meds/different doses till you feel "normal".
Millions are prescribed them.

I flushed mine down the toilet tbh.
They made my stomach feel like it was melting one night. (Idk what was going on)

I've heard promising results on studies involving psilocybin mushrooms and possibly LSD for depression.
Are you against those?

I've been moving towards a similar position.
It feels more like the government is giving drugs to people who are dissatisfied with a monotonous, impoverished, etc. life.
A sense of purpose would likely do wonders for many of those people.

And I just realized I'm typing in qotd chat lmao

Abolishing all welfare?
Do you not support things like universal healthcare?

UBI temporarily might be okay.
Thinking ahead to the future (a few decades), as many as half of the jobs in the U.S. will be completely automated. There needs to be some kind of cushion at least for the transitioning from menial manual labor jobs to newer ones after they're phased out.
There are actually more vacant houses than poor people, and houses can even be 3D printed for cheap.

As for the lack of purpose, I don't think religion is necessary. While possibly effective, it also tends to lead to many outdated opinions and ways of thinking. Community of any kind would give people purpose. It doesn't necessarily need to be religion.
And work only gives a sense of purpose usually when it's something you love to do. Strenuous manual labour likely contributes to mental health.

@Deleted User I agree with most of this.
However, I support pedal to the metal on technological advancements.

And if a country has enough resources to give everyone a home for cheap prices, I think it should be done. I know that may not be preferable from a capitalistic standpoint, but I don't really think capitalism will continue to work. And many experts say that by the end of the 2020s (only ten years), automation will drastically alter jobs available.
Halting the technological process doesn't seem feasible at this point.

But ya, I'm about discord(ed) out at this point. Very civil discussion even if we do disagree on certain ideas. Hope to continue on this (or another topic later ;))

I disagree. I wholeheartedly think technology should be done at the fastest speed possible (I'd really like to cut some of the defense budget for NASA especially).

But regardless of how doable it is to slow technological process (it is technically, since the U.S. is a few decades behind a few Asian and European countries technology-wise), things like self-driving cars and restaurants run by AI/machines will be a reality in ten years. Even if all jobs paid well and adjusted their wages for inflation (like what should've been done for decades), there simply won't be as many. Truck drivers won't be needed, retail workers won't be either, nor many others that are rigid and/or require lots of physical labour.

Alright, sure. Well actually, I'll add it to watch later. I'm in the middle of cooking right now, but send a friend request or I'll just tag you sometime later once I watch it.

Ultimate goal of government should be to attain a perfect society (utopia), where the lifespan reaches its maximum possible limit biologically and technology advancement becomes the main objective over, say... making money and starting wars.
Nuclear fusion should be made available quickly to stop reliance on non-renewable energy. Automation and AI use should skyrocket to the point where humans aren't needed whatsoever for manual labour.
Interstellar propulsion should be created with the objective of preserving humanity or whatever evolves from humans.
Humans that break the law would be forced to live out a prison sentence in a virtual state, feeling like months-years for them, but lasting only seconds in real life. (The tech is being developed for this.)

<:wtf:591182282648190986>

Earth is oblate spheriod<:happy:507991686320750592>

Then physics and science in general must be rewritten.
Gravity cannot work on flat planet.

Flat Earthers need to figure this stuff out. They need to do the math and redefine the universe.

@el pebble nah

What if even inanimate objects like planets and stars have small level of consciousness?<:cool:507986727953235970>

Earth is a cube

In a glass of cosmic sweet tea

Which god is drinking