Exactly

For example mass surveillance, spying, crazy stuff that looks like sci fi do exist

But we need a lot of investigation to separate what is real from what is not

As far as I know physics works, otherwise I wouldn't be where I am rn

The theory of earth rotating for example

Depends on gravity

Buoyancy depends on gravity

It's a very tricky thing

The definition of it is weird and really looks like fantasy

But it works very well en

Rn*

Brb

Ye I think that we are simply too ignorant these days to realize the truth

@Ɱ Ø Ʈ Ħ so if the earth moves up, are you insinuating the reason things drop is because the earth moves towards them ?

Guys, some clarification: What Moth is suggesting is called Universal Acceleration and is an idea promoted by the Flat Earth Society, which is considered controlled opposition on this server. Discussion of this idea isn't tolerated as anything suggested by the FES is believed to be deliberate lies.

k

Nvm then

good morning drew

well

how goes it

Morning Cat!

What up

Serbia gay lol

Why is FES considered controlled opposition? I don't know about you guys, but to the outside, the differences between them and other flat earthers aren't very big when it comes to the actual flat Earth part. They seem to have vastly different ideas about what happens outside of it, though. I still can't tell what makes these communities distrust them, if anyone could explain

exactly that

's

why they exist

What do you mean?

Many flat earthers have many different ideas about what lies beyond the firmament

Not just FES

There isn't a unified FE model

TBH, I have no idea why FES is considered controlled op. 🤔

Because there isnt one which can explain all phenomenons

I assume because flat earthers think the FES is made to make flat earthers look bad to the public?

That doesn't really make sense to me either, because the non-controlled opposition beliefs are still just as wild, if not even more unbelievable.

They look bad to the public anyways, no offense

Anyway. That aside I have a question about so called 'luminaries' that replace the stars in the sky.

First of all, if you try and zoom a P-900 into Jupiter or Saturn, you will turn up with the odd blur that flat earthers claim are luminaries.

However, if you look at them at the right time through a telescope, you will see a spherical object. The reason I say spherical, is because if you are an astronomer and track the movements of planets throughout the sky, you will see them show you different sides. For Saturn, which doesnt have many surface features, you can tell that it is transiting the sun by the orientation of it's rings when it shows up on your telescope.

You can see venus, mars, Jupiter, and Saturn. I believe you need a much more powerful telescope to see Uranus and Neptune, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Likewise, if you zoom into a star with a P-900, you will see an out of focus blur that flat earthers call luminaries. However, there are telescopes that allow you to see them much more clearly. They appear as bright dots with varying amounts of lense flare, resembling mini-suns.