Prove Earth is a Sphere without using the word NASA

Who is behind this supposed round-Earth conspiracy and what is the purpose?

 

If you watch a ship go over "the edge" (the horizon) the tip of the main mast is the last thing to disappear. If the world were not spherical, you would see the stern disappear last as it fell off the edge.

 

Again, with that RIDICULOUS sailboat fallacy????????????????????

 

Originally, it was the European Monarchies who needed to convince their explorers/military that they would not "fall off the edge" while searching for new lands to pillage, rape and destroy.

Once the retarded masses actually bought into the blatantly obvious lie, Govts began to realize what an effective tool for mass mind control the spherical model was.

See, now that the earth is "round" we can all come together (under one tyrannical dictatorship) and we can all look after our "global neighbors".

Ironically, the U.N. flag is ITSELF the actual Flat Earth Map, dude!

See how they like to rub it in your face???

They think you're THAT STUPID.

 

There you go with the dome thing again. Stop deflecting and answer my question of a long time ago (repeated just recently). If your dome exists, who runs the projector? How do "they" change night to day to night again? How high is this dome? How did the international space station get through it? (I know, you're going to respond that the station doesn't exist, but I thought I'd try anyway). Is this dome a secret to everyone but you? And if it's a government cover-up (by any govt.), why bother to threaten the use of ICBM's when it's known they are just going to hit your dome? Awaiting logical answers.
Enjoy!

 

I forgot the most important question-What is the SHAPE of this dome?? (look up the definition of dome before you answer).
Enjoy!

 

Your questions cannot be answered. Not in my favor, and not in yours, either.

Obviously, since said questions have never or will ever be answered, this is by design.

The dome must obviously be much higher than 80,000 feet. Virgin couldn't get any higher than that.

Neither could that faker Baumgartener.

You are going to laugh, but let me tell you right now that nuclear weapons are ALSO a hoax.

Plenty of researchers (some with Ph.D's) fully believe what I propose, as I've found countless interviews demonstrating.

We are living in one huge, huge, huge Alien Ant Farm.

Its not even that far fetched, man.

 

In the models I've seen, the dome is dome shaped. As in "the great dome of the sky".

 

It's so far fetched it's unworthy of discussion or debate. Anyone who honestly believes the earth is flat is in serious need of therapy.

 

Interesting. So the theory is that the UN is tricking people into thinking that the Earth is round because it is easier to establish a tyrannical dictatorship over a round world than a flat one...Why is that again exactly? Why is a populace that knows the world is flat harder to subjugate than a populace who believes that the Earth is round? Seems kinda', I dunno, flimsy.

 

So the world is a big disk, with the north pole at the center and the edge is surrounded by an ice wall (do the white walkers live on the other side?). Small problem with that, the longitude lines. On a sphere, the longitude lines are merged at the north pole, spread out as they reach their maximum spread at the equator and then merge back together at the south pole. On the world you described, the longitude lines would reach their maximum spread in Antarctica. You would think that after all these centuries of people sailing around Cape Horn in South America that someone would notice that the distance between longitude lines at Cape Horn was bigger than the distance between longitude lines at the equator. And just to give you an idea of the distance we are talking about, the distance of 1 degree longitude at Cape Horn should be around 64 km while the distance between 1 degree longitude at the equator is around 111 km. That is quite a difference. Of course if the Earth was a disk as you suggested, the distance of 1 degree longitude at Cape Horn would be even bigger than 111 km. Yep, people would notice something like that.

I take it you have never looked at the night sky and tracked the stars. If you look long enough, you will see a star moving much more quickly than the others. With a little math, you can actually track its path and predict when you will see it next or when you friend in the next state over will see it.

If satellites didn't exist, please explain how GPS would work?

Talking about stars a figured out a huge error in hypothesis. How do you explain the night sky? Yes, you said that there is a dome above and I'm guessing that all the stars and planets are orbiting inside this dome. However, with this setup, it is impossible for our night sky to exist. Let me explain. When you look at the night sky, you see from horizon to horizon half of the stars that are visible from the northern hemisphere (the other half is hidden by the curvature of the Earth and the brightness of the Sun). South of the equator has totally different stars that cannot be seen from the northern latitudes, like Alpha Centauri (again, due to the curvature of the Earth). I made an picture to illustrate the next part.



Now, I hope this is a decent representation of your flat Earth model. As you can see, if someone from the northern latitudes was to look at the southern horizon, they wouldn't see the equatorial stars that we see, rather they would see the southern pole stars. If someone standing on the equator looked at the northern horizon, the North Star (Polaris) would not be sitting on the horizon like we see it, but rather several degrees above it. I know you are going to try to blame this on perspective, but perspective can't explain the fact that the stars and constellations in the southern skies would be much wider apart than stars and constellations of the northern skies.

Now you said in your OP that we couldn't use the word "NASA" in explaining our position, so I'm giving you one. Try to explain without using the word "conspiracy".

 

Photos of the models, please.
Enjoy!

 

I forgot another point I was going to make and that was about the Amateur radio operators. My point was not that there is something to bounce the signal off of, but rather why would sending a signal 477,800 miles from New York to the moon and back down to Hong Kong would be more effective than just send the radio signal the 8,048 miles across the world? The answer, the curvature of the Earth prevents line of site radio transmissions beyond a certain distance, so the only way to get a signal from New York to Hong Kong is by bouncing the signal off of something to go around the curvature.

 

That's funny!

You probably believe the crap reasoning behind why a flight from South America to Australia has to have multiple layovers, even though its only supposed to be a short flight, lasting only a few hours too, don't you? Ha!

 

What does airline travel have to do with radio propagation?

 

He's a troll, he just enjoys the argument.

 

Sarah Palin never said that. She said that you could see a Russian Island from an Alaskan Island. Tina Fey, as Palin, said that she could see Russia from her house.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/russia.asp

 

You shouldn't have watched the Truman show while you were baked.....

 

O.K., who/what is Virgin in the context you're using? How much higher than 80,000 ft? Wikipedia Flight altitude record indicates one flight to 59.6 miles (7/17/62, Robert Michael White, X-15). If nukes are a hoax, why all the hoopla about Iran getting them? And I'm still waiting for dome photos.
Enjoy!

 

You can fly directly from Santiago, Chile to Sydney, Australia. Quantas flight 322 flies on Wednesdays. It's not a short flight, it's 11,000 kilometers (6875 miles) (13 hrs 40 minutes). At the latitude of Santiago and Sydney (roughly 33 Degrees south), the earth's circumference is about 33,000 km. Roughly speaking the distance from Sydney to Santiago is the same as New York to Tokyo.

http://www.travel.com.au/flightsear...light2=LA801_QF322&fare1=QF1384&flight1=LA806

 

We're on a thread where a poster SERIOUSLY thinks the earth is flat. You took my sarcasm/humor FAR too seriously.

 

I guess I won't be getting an answer to this one? Not surprised...I wouldn't want to have to defend such an outlandish claim either...but then again I wouldn't have thrown it out there to begin with.

 

Its about the psychological effect.

If people believe its a sphere, they believe they can only go so far away, and that all people are interdependent and connected, which we clearly are not.

Its about collectivism.

It's also about making people believe we are insignificant in this "massive universe".

It makes people like you not care about things as much.

It makes people believe we weren't created, but instead are random and ugly.

- - - Updated - - -

I really do, too.

 

The Earth's shadow falls on the moon during a Lunar eclipse, and it's always curved. The only shape that always throws a round shadow is a sphere.

 

To be perfectly honest, that sounds like pure charlatan BS. You are really reaching deep, but I'll digress for the sake of discussion.

Assuming that your massive, multi-century, global conspiracy theory is true, how many people alive today would you say are in on it? Also, since it would be so ridiculously easy to prove that the Earth is flat if it were true, why is it that nobody has blown the cover off of the whole thing with irrefutable proof at some point during the last several hundred years that the game has been supposedly rigged?