Uh I’m a globie

But you clearly don’t know your own model.

So don’t bother trolling the opposing model. Learn yours first.

<:Gottem_red:469143846178127882>

uh

im a globie too but ok

what are your top 3 pieces of evidence then?

convince us

#1?

#1?

ok....let's skip to #2?

That’s to hard for em. What about #3?

😂

#1 is ALWAYS ships on the horizon. <:giggle:485714802123997184>

First thing they say

#2 Is airplanes

#3 is why would the government lie to us

We could go on

Lol

@Drewski4343 @Metallica what do you 2 globies say, im not going to debate your points

Well there’s a few reasons but one major one to me is that I don’t fully believe that there is a god, and it seems like the only way a flat earth with an impenetrable dome could exist is if it was created by a higher power.

I’m not saying that it’s impossible, but the creation of the globe without a god just makes the most sense to me.

bruh

@Angus ?

I have an excellent reason! There are TWO celestial poles visible in the sky. One in the northern hemi and one in the south. The sky rotates around the northern celestial pole counter clockwise. The sky in the southern hemi rotates the opposite direction around entirely different stars and constellations. It's an impossibility for such a phenomenon to be observed on a flat earth and is 100% consistent with how the sky would move on a globe earth. Bonus fact: the south celestial pole is visible looking due south from EVERY point of land south of the equator - even from continents completely opposite of each other on the flat earth model, which should also be impossible.

one of my favorite quotes on my wall of Post-Its

"Impossible is just an opinion"

Yeah

I'm excited to discuss this! I just taking my daughter to daycare be right back.

@Flat Earth PhD Sorry for the delay! I know that argument: the dome creates an inverted image due to refraction in the southern hemisphere. Problems with that 1) this would create an mirrored image, which is not what you see - completely different stars and constellations. 2) a refracted image would create massive distortion, which you can clearly see in the image you posted. The stars would appear stretched and distorted, particularly at the celestial equator.
That second image seems to be a concave earth pic. The two celestial poles argument would work on that model because there's still a sphere involved.

Also, my other point seems to have been missed - The south celestial pole is visible from ALL POINTS in the southern hemi.

And the only way that can work is on a globe model (or concave, I suppose)

or somethings going on in the sky we dont understand

Does people actualy belive in this kind of $h!t

@everyone

@Lingen yes people really believe earth is a spinning ball

There's the possibility that the sky is doing *something* strange... But, how we observe the sky to move is 100% consistent with the globe earth model. So, that's why I still lean towards the globe earth.