!mute @uncle toby .. 🔧 ...to the <#484517419637800970> u go 💨

<:CHECK6:403540120181145611> **uncle toby#6711** was muted
```
reason: .. 🔧 ...to the <#484517419637800970> u go 💨
```

@jeremy
@AstralSentient

how about >> 4,000+ sq mi

FLAT

@jeremy

i would settle for 4 miles

>>Bolivia salt flats

is their a way to prove its flat though

what instruments u use to make sure its flat

>>4,000+ SQUARE MILES, ..and ONLYYYY>> a 3 foot, 3 inch >>varition, in elevation change/s
--throughout >> the WHOLE THING <:BigSmiles:556070613224259594>

Basically, they level it, if it is flat, the beam remains parallel to the ground, if a globe, it starts angling up because earth drops away

flat means level to me but level means curved to a glober

elevation is from sea level though which is curved on the globe so

>>Bolivia salt flats (Salar de Uyuni)

```>> 4,000+ SQUARE MILES, ..and ONLYYYY >>> a "3 foot, 3 inch" >> varition, in elevation change/s
--throughout >> the WHOLE THING```
...cannot exist, ...on a BALL the >> "size" they tell us ❌

can it?...........on a **HUGER** ball? Maybe? ..but ,,
--Pfft,....the (small) "size" of the ball earth they tell us? nope ❌

i know but they will say elevation is from sea level which is curved so

im playing devils advocate with u

They level it and for the rest of the process, they use the beams as a reference

so the experiment proved nothing and the debate is still going

not a good xperiment

Explain?

It literally is based on the same principle as the giant slab

their is a huge debate going on over globe or flat they did an experiment and it didnt prove anything so

the debate continues

same principle but not a 4 mile straight flat object

You just assert it didn't prove anything, lol

Same principle,

Haha

well what did it prove

if the debate continues then proof has not been made

im sure one side would be jamming that experiment down the other sides throat if it proved something but until 5 minutes ago i never even heard of it

It was used to measure curvature of the earth. It didn't end any debate.
You know why?
The beams measured curvature, but it got upwards curve by descending into the ground, getting a concave curve

It was dismissed

they didnt do it near water

bad experiment

They actually did

And accounted for tides

what was the expirement

I'll find a link. It was the rectilineator.
But basically, it was dismissed, just like flat earthers would do if that giant slab you talk about was even constructed and showed curve.

I can ride my bike with no handlebars