Etzie
Discord ID: 438635923874250762
292 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/3
| Next
No idea what you're talking about.
๐ค
๐
I honestly kinda feel like this could be a server for government agencies to track who knows what or believes in what.
Like it's really really well layed out and detailed. That's a good thing.
But also sus...
||Bruce Wayne is Batman||
Yes
Can't upload pics
Vaccinate autism, problem solved.
Angular resolution is limited by diffraction. Diffraction is dependent on wavelength and arpeture size, defraction results in image blur, not disappearing of objects bottom first.
Diffraction is also only significant with very large F numbers (extremely small arpeture sizes) or very large distances/objects with very small angular size.
So what's your alternative @jeremy ? Because curvature already explains our observations perfectly.
So you don't have an alternate? Got it.
You said ships disappearing over the horizon has been debunked big time. And now you can't provide an alternative explanation that comes remotely close to describing what we see?
There is, some people just can't come to terms with it.
@jeremy Ever seen a sunset from an airplane at ~30,000ft?
On a flat earth, the sun is always above you. So if you're on an airplane at 30,000ft and the sun is setting from above you, why does it appear below you?
You can see a big ship disappear over the horizon with the naked eye, quite easily.
Have you ever gone to watch one for yourself?
No it doesn't
Cameras don't have the same resolution as an eye at 1x optical zoom. No where near the same resolution.
Oof
It might appear to be the case with a camera, because its resolution is nowhere near that of the eye. The advantage a camera has in this case is zoom.
Go out there and test it with your actual eye, since I assume you're a truth seeker.
Funny how you have to see things first hand to actual compare things with "the naked eye"
A video or photograph at 1x optical zoom is not comparable to the naked eye.
You don't listen.
It is relevant, because he's making a comparison to the naked eye... Without using the naked eye.
Ahh, but that's where resolution comes in.
No it doesn't
It is though
Byeee
I need to buy a decent lens or telescope.
There is a limit to what the eye can see, it's such a small lens.
I think I might just buy a P1000
It has ridiculous zoom. I already have a camera with a huge resolution, but the problem is that the sensor is full frame, so in order to get any decent zoom you need a HUGE lense, or telescope.
They're not that expensive tbh
Depends if you'll use it often or not.
I took this with my camera. Unfortunately it's not the full resolution, raw photo which I can't get until I fix my computer.
It's the milky way, with Sag A* in the middle, on the left one of the bright objects is Saturn. Not sure which though.
Na
๐
Na.. OH
If you're not a registered sex offended, you can't sexually offend.
I'm tilted sometimes
If Earth was curved, you'd be constantly walking downhill and uphill at the same time.
In other words, it'd be like it was flat.
Sun moves closer and further from the North Pole throughout the year
You can LITERALLY SEE the sun move
Throughout the year too
You have successfully been indoctrinated
The sun moves
Dude, just use your eyes
What?
Who is this guy
Adaaam, who said I was making an argument for a spherical earth
The sun does move. Open your eyes.
I wasn't vaccinated as a kid, no. Then the government FORCED me to get vaccinated.
It moved
Congratulations
Away from your area.
Otherwise it would be light
The sun is close, small and local dude
What do you mean why is it dark at night time. Its literally NIGHT
Denser objects will rest below less dense objects. Less dense objects will float above more dense objects.
It's super simple guys, you don't need gravity to explain it.
Density is simply mass/volume. No gravity involved whatsoever
Denser objects will naturally come to rest below less dense objects/mediums. Less dense objects will float above more dense objects. I explained already @Mystery Man
Density is simply mass/volume. No gravity involved whatsoever @Mystery Man
Why do I have to keep repeating myself?
No, mass is matters tendency to resist a force.
You don't need "gravity" to explain density.
What?
Gravity is a made up mathematical theory
We observe things
You don't need a theory to explain why things fall.
@Mystery Man the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. If you can't provide evidence to your claim, your claim can be dismissed without evidence.
What evidence?
Sorry, I'm scrolling up,generally trying to find your evidence.
๐
It's a misconception that flat earthers use the "formula" for the buoyant force. We know that less dense objects in a more dense medium will rise, no need for "gravity" at all.
Funny how you whinge about censorship, but we're constantly getting censored on other platforms.
I don't hear you complaining about that
Youtubes in on it too
Oops
You're digging yourself a hole
<:vcislit:507995456899514380>
It's true
||Thor is the strongest avenger||
Who's Daren?
๐
Oops
You can give it to yourself
<#564645027817717760>
Wait wrong one
292 total messages. Viewing 100 per page.
Page 1/3
| Next