It's just a question I have for globe retards. They always ask me where the edge of the earth is. That answer is pretty obvious. The Antarctic circle. It's a dumb fuckin question. Lol. The disingenuous part is that they are assuming the universe ends at the edge of the Earth if it was flat. It's the equivalent of standing in a giant field and drawing a 2 ft circle in front of you and then having someone ask you where the edge is. Edge of what? Edge of the field or edge of the circle?
I just had a retard ask me that question. I'm just wondering why you globe retards can't grasp that concept?
the universe is infinite so we cannot see the edge of it because its always expanding and you can tell by the movement of the galaxies. not even the hubble telescope or the space station or any other instrument can measure it.
since you are a flat earther explain the coriolis effect and the opposite seasons both in the northern and southern hemispheres
explain why the sun rises differently in summer than in winters
There's a North Pole which globe retards call the Arctic circle. Then there's the ring that encompasses the known Earth which is known as the Antarctic circle.
the universe is infinite so we cannot see the edge of it
I get it. Now just imagine that universe with a floor and we live in a small habitable zone on that floor.
since you are a flat earther explain the coriolis effect
It doesn't happen. You can't pick and choose when the Coriolis effect is a thing. It either is or it isn't. Airplanes traveling north to south can land without accounting for any Coriolis. So don't be retarded about it.
the opposite seasons both in the northern and southern hemispheres
Seasons are determined by the relative position of the Sun to the Earth. Just because the earth is flat does not mean that the sun doesn't have a relative relationship with the Earth.
explain why the sun rises differently in summer than in winters
Because it's in a different position in summer relative to its position in winter. The sun is closer to the positions that experience summer.
i will be here waiting for your intelligent reply
Why do you automatically assume that any common sense logical conclusion does not apply to a flat earth? Yet you will push dumb bullshit like the pressurize atmosphere of Earth existing next to the vacuum of space without a physical barrier. Complete retardation and you have no regrets.
this guy does an experiment just just a few steps north and south of the equator. you know nothing!
they have been feeding you lies
Seasons are determined by the relative position of the Sun to the Earth. Just because the earth is flat does not mean that the sun doesn't have a relative relationship with the Earth.
did you know that the earth moves too right? not only that that it moves it spins on its axis at a
23 degree angle
Because it's in a different position in summer relative to its position in winter. The sun is >closer to the positions that experience summer.
at least you got something right
Why do you automatically assume that any common sense logical conclusion does not apply to a flat earth?
because it doesnt. the planets above are around and the same is with the earth
this guy does an experiment just just a few steps north and south of the equator. you know nothing!
Hey retard, if you're going to claim that the earth is spinning at a thousand miles an hour at the equator, then the math has to add up with your experiment. You have to be able to predict the outcome using your variables. Flat earthers believe that there is an aether. The ether moves. You can see it's direction by looking at the jet streams on a flat earth map.
Flat Earthers aren't denying that there's some kind of force circling the North Pole. I have no doubt that we can see this force. The problem is that the force doesn't match the numbers given to us by the supposed earth rotation on a globe Earth.
For instance, we are in a car traveling 100 mph, You would expect to have traveled 100 miles in an hour. You can measure this and verify that you were traveling at 100 mph. Your experiment does not do this with the earth rotation. In fact, it proves that we are not rotating at a thousand miles per hour.
Why would you assume that the sun didn't move relative to the Earth if the earth is flat? It just seems disingenuous.
because it doesnt.
When I said common sense, I was referring to the previous statement where we both agreed that the sun would be in a different position relative to Earth during seasons. This is common sense. It would work on a globe or a flat Earth. Your disingenuous if you can't accept these basic observations.
the planets above are around and the same is with the earth
Show me a picture of a planet that's not CGI. What does it look like through a telescope? A star. What is a star? Sonoluminescence.
You can go to any amateur astronomy night and see multiple planets through ten different telescopes. What does it look like through a telescope? A fucking planet, retard. Leave your basement one time and see for yourself.
Lol. It does not look like a planet you fuckin retard. They constantly flicker and fluctuate. I think you might be more retarded than I originally thought.
he will deny deny deny since its all in faith not on empirical evidence. in a sense its a cult like the Q people no matter how you point the flaws they wont believe until the person that they follow tells them about it
I address every retarded thing you faggots say. The fact that you mentioned Q tells me everything. You want to make a connection between flat Earth and Q. Q is just the new Alex Jones. They feed you bread crumbs of truth and then scream at the top of their lungs the most retarded conspiracy theories. You associate anything you want to suppress with that group in an attempt to discredit. You have no interest in conversation.
Two poles on a spherical Earth, one pole in Flattard Land.
Make a plus sign. The horizontal line is the Earth. The vertical line is the magnetic pole. It still has a north and south polarity. One is above the earth and the other below. As above so below.
Star trails as seen from Australia
Star trails are amazing and I'm not going to pretend to know everything about them, but what I do know is that stars show no parallax relative to each other. This was suggest that all the stars exist at the same depth.
Before you say they are too far away to observe the parallax, just know that parallax is determined by the relative position of three objects. If I record a star trail, then a star at 100 light years away should appear to move twice the distance as a star that is 200 light years away. But we see all the stars move exactly the same distance as if it was a rotating blanket above us.
Imagine being so retarded that you ignore this evidence.
Tell me about it. Every observable fact dictates that the earth is flat and stationary, yet you'll believe jews at NASA because everyone else in the world does. Hell, You might as well believe the Holocaust.
Make a plus sign. The horizontal line is the Earth. The vertical line is the magnetic pole. It still has a north and south polarity. One is above the earth and the other below. As above so below.
Lulz. First, stop talking about the magnetic pole. I'm talking about the pole due to the axis of rotation that you can see by spinning any ball.
Second, how are you going to see the pole below in Flattard Land? The "plane" blocks your view. You'd have to go the the edge, and stick your head out over it. Line of sight, flattard.
Star trails are amazing and I'm not going to pretend to know everything about them, but what I do know is that stars show no parallax relative to each other.
In other words, you're going to ignore evidence writ large in the night sky that trivially corresponds to a spherical Earth, but make no sense in Flattard Land, and instead talk about parallax.
This was suggest that all the stars exist at the same depth.
Before you say they are too far away to observe the parallax, just know that parallax is determined by the relative position of three objects. If I record a star trail, then a star at 100 light years away should appear to move twice the distance as a star that is 200 light years away. But we see all the stars move exactly the same distance as if it was a rotating blanket above us.
You can't measure parallax of stars with your eyes, flattard. 2 * undetectable = undetectable. You need high-powered telescopes and precision measurement.
Every observable fact dictates that the earth is flat and stationary
First, stop talking about the magnetic pole. I'm talking about the pole
Fuckin retarded.
due to the axis of rotation that you can see by spinning any ball.
So you're claiming that the magnetic North Pole of the globe Earth is due to the earth spinning? So I can spend any ball and create a magnetic pole?
Second, how are you going to see the pole below in Flattard Land?
You don't. It's in the ground. If I stick a bar magnet into the ground with half of it above and half of it below, I'm not going to see the bottom half. A compass is attracted to magnets. Just because it's pointing at a magnet does not mean there is a magnet behind it also.
corresponds to a spherical Earth,
You can't measure parallax of stars with your eyes,
If you can record the movement of stars throughout the night, then you should be able to determine parallax. Parallax is determined on the relative distance between stars. Not between you and the stars. Between stars. A star at 100 light years away will appear to have moved twice the distance as a star 200 light years away. A star 500 light years away will have appeared to move twice the distance as a star 1,000 light years away.
You're literally ignoring half the night sky.
No. You want me to explain the stars as if they are what you say they are. What I am showing you is that they are not what you say they are. That doesn't mean I know exactly what they are. I just know that I can prove they are not what you say they are.
So you're claiming that the magnetic North Pole of the globe Earth is due to the earth spinning? So I can spend any ball and create a magnetic pole?
The magnetic pole is irrelevant for the topic of the stars. The stars correspond 100% to the fixed axis of rotation.
> Second, how are you going to see the pole below in Flattard Land?
You don't. It's in the ground.
Which is why the southern star trails trivially prove a spherical Earth, and disprove Flattard Land. Yet here you are, still bangin' on about Flerf, like the retarded monkey that you are. You have flattard religion.
If you can record the movement of stars throughout the night, then you should be able to determine parallax.
No, retard. Turn your head: can you "record the movement" of everything about you? What's the parallax for a mountain miles away when you turn your head?
Parallax is determined on the relative distance between stars. Not between you and the stars.
You're retarded. Parallax is determined by the distance between you and the object. The closer an object is to you, the more parallax.
The magnetic pole is irrelevant for the topic of the stars.
For your explanation of stars. I'm telling you that your explanation of the stars are wrong. The flat earth theory is that stars exist within the ionosphere which is created by the magnetic field.
Which is why the southern star trails trivially prove a spherical Earth
They don't. There is no parallax between the stars. There is also an inverse square law for light that the heliocentric model is ignoring.
What's the parallax for a mountain miles away when you turn your head?
For one, That is a disingenuous argument. Star trails are recorded throughout the night over the course of several hours from a perspective on earth that is rotating a thousand mph, revolving around the sun at 67,000 mph, which is revolving around the Milky Way at 448,000 mph, which is itself traveling at 1.3 million mph, relative to the stars. Yet I can look at the same exact stars in the same exact layout that the Egyptians were looking at when they built the pyramids.
But to stick with your mountain example, if you were to record the far-off mountains during a car trip, then played that recording back in fast forward, would the mountains that are closer to you appear to move further? That's called parallax.
You're retarded. Parallax is determined by the distance between you and the object.
No. That's just called depth. Parallax is the relationship between multiple objects from a certain perspective. Take your left hand and hold a finger 6 in in front of your eyes. Take your right hand and hold a finger 12 inches in front of your eyes. Now move your head slightly. Notice how your fingers don't line up anymore. The distance between your fingers is parallax.
For your explanation of stars. I'm telling you that your explanation of the stars are wrong.
The facts of the night sky are trivially explained without the use of a compass. Nothing you said changes that. You keep trying to bring in the magnetic pole because you are retarded.
The flat earth theory is that stars exist within the ionosphere which is created by the magnetic field.
Which is completely retarded, as the magnetic poles can be seen to wander, but the fixed stars do not. Regardless, flattard fantasies are irrelevant to basic facts about the night sky. You might as well be talking about dragons and fairies.
>Which is why the southern star trails trivially prove a spherical Earth
They don't.
It's a trivial consequence of a rotating spherical Earth, but makes no sense in Flattard Land.
There is no parallax between the stars.
As I've already said, parallax has been measured, and flattards like you ignore it.
There is also an inverse square law for light that the heliocentric model is ignoring.
More flattard bullshit.
For one, That is a disingenuous argument.
No, it's the REAL argument that corresponds to a turning, spherical Earth, and stars light years away, instead of your flattard bullshit.
Star trails are recorded throughout the night over the course of several hours from a perspective on earth that is rotating a thousand mph, revolving around the sun at 67,000 mph, which is revolving around the Milky Way at 448,000 mph, which is itself traveling at 1.3 million mph, relative to the stars.
Don't forget to include the distances between objects.
Yet I can look at the same exact stars in the same exact layout that the Egyptians were looking at when they built the pyramids.
We don't have precise star charts from the time of the pyramids, flattard, so your use of "exact" here is completely made up. Given the distances to the stars, it's not surprising that basic constellations made up of patterns across the night sky are still recognizable. But the stars positions are moving, as we have measured. Which flattards like you ignore.
But to stick with your mountain example, if you were to record the far-off mountains during a car trip, then played that recording back in fast forward, would the mountains that are closer to you appear to move further? That's called parallax.
No shit, flattard. Hence the distance between you and the mountains is what counts, as I said.
Because all of you retards say the same dumb shit. A retarded conversation would be talking about how jews lie about everything then using Einstein to explain physics.
Obviously you don't understand the concept. Globe retards assume that flat eaters believe the universe ends at the edge of the earth. That's a retarded assumption.
Flat grug moment.
Lol. It's cool. You're just a glob retard. I didn't expect you to understand.
It's just an example of your own willful ignorance. You assume you were right only because you assume others are wrong. You have no substance to argue your case.
You could have picked any name you wanted. I doubt you spend a lot of time thinking about it. But you naturally had to announce that you had a big dangus. That's what insecurity is. Going around talking about other people having tiny dicks doesn't help your cause.
You're the one with insecurities. I'm not the type of person that's always thinking about people's dicks. Are you a dick energy detective? Are you always sniffing out dick energies? Lol.
Flat tards like you have a learning disability that renders you unable to picture 3D objects in your mind. Explaining it is pointless because you are literally incapable of understanding.
tell you what? if you believe so much on the flat earth do a video yourself denying the Coriolis effect on both hemispheres.
there's no ether. what you say in the infrared and on water vapor loop is the jet stream which consists of a river of water in the atmosphere . there's a polar jet and there's a sub tropical jet at subtropics
there's also AN AUSTRAL polar jet too. again, the ether that you speak of doesnt exist. now if you wanna talk about metaphysics then that's another topic which btw falls in the realm of the OCCULT
so if you believe in ethers then you are an occultist too
I don't need to do a video debunking the Coriolis effect. It's already been done. Pilots have to land planes.
there's no ether.
Nicola Tesla said there is absolutely an ether and that Einstein is a retarded jew. But I guess Tesla is just some white guy. Not as smart as those jews.
there's also AN AUSTRAL polar jet too.
No. It's one or the other. Your version of it looks like a chaotic, retarded mess. A flat earth representation of the same phenomenon shows a steady cycle.
so if you believe in ethers then you are an occultist too
Occult means hidden. So yeah I'm a believer that the powers that be are hiding things.
[ + ] HelenHighwater
[ - ] HelenHighwater 4 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:25:42 ago (+4/-0)
Explain a total lunar eclipse and how any part of the planet could still see the sun.
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:06:56 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 3 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 09:46:50 ago (+3/-0)
you know that there are two artic cycles right?
the universe is infinite so we cannot see the edge of it because its always expanding and you can tell by the movement of the galaxies. not even the hubble telescope or the space station or any other instrument can measure it.
since you are a flat earther explain the coriolis effect and the opposite seasons both in the northern and southern hemispheres
explain why the sun rises differently in summer than in winters
i will be here waiting for your intelligent reply
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:29:52 ago (+0/-2)
There's a North Pole which globe retards call the Arctic circle. Then there's the ring that encompasses the known Earth which is known as the Antarctic circle.
I get it. Now just imagine that universe with a floor and we live in a small habitable zone on that floor.
It doesn't happen. You can't pick and choose when the Coriolis effect is a thing. It either is or it isn't. Airplanes traveling north to south can land without accounting for any Coriolis. So don't be retarded about it.
Seasons are determined by the relative position of the Sun to the Earth. Just because the earth is flat does not mean that the sun doesn't have a relative relationship with the Earth.
Because it's in a different position in summer relative to its position in winter. The sun is closer to the positions that experience summer.
Why do you automatically assume that any common sense logical conclusion does not apply to a flat earth? Yet you will push dumb bullshit like the pressurize atmosphere of Earth existing next to the vacuum of space without a physical barrier. Complete retardation and you have no regrets.
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:16:27 ago (+1/-0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oO06N_WdvEU
this guy does an experiment just just a few steps north and south of the equator. you know nothing!
they have been feeding you lies
did you know that the earth moves too right? not only that that it moves it spins on its axis at a
23 degree angle
at least you got something right
because it doesnt. the planets above are around and the same is with the earth
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:59:34 ago (+0/-2)
Hey retard, if you're going to claim that the earth is spinning at a thousand miles an hour at the equator, then the math has to add up with your experiment. You have to be able to predict the outcome using your variables. Flat earthers believe that there is an aether. The ether moves. You can see it's direction by looking at the jet streams on a flat earth map.
https://youtu.be/ok-HuJnP-ag
Flat Earthers aren't denying that there's some kind of force circling the North Pole. I have no doubt that we can see this force. The problem is that the force doesn't match the numbers given to us by the supposed earth rotation on a globe Earth.
For instance, we are in a car traveling 100 mph, You would expect to have traveled 100 miles in an hour. You can measure this and verify that you were traveling at 100 mph. Your experiment does not do this with the earth rotation. In fact, it proves that we are not rotating at a thousand miles per hour.
Could have fooled me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_balancing
Why would you assume that the sun didn't move relative to the Earth if the earth is flat? It just seems disingenuous.
When I said common sense, I was referring to the previous statement where we both agreed that the sun would be in a different position relative to Earth during seasons. This is common sense. It would work on a globe or a flat Earth. Your disingenuous if you can't accept these basic observations.
Show me a picture of a planet that's not CGI. What does it look like through a telescope? A star. What is a star? Sonoluminescence.
https://youtu.be/CSIPolpvjBY?si=Y5hMo3vCC4kHsZtQ
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:24:27 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:37:22 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:40:03 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:14:34 ago (+2/-0)
Imagine being so retarded that you ignore this evidence.
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:21:32 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:54:29 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:28:24 ago (+0/-1)
Make a plus sign. The horizontal line is the Earth. The vertical line is the magnetic pole. It still has a north and south polarity. One is above the earth and the other below. As above so below.
Star trails are amazing and I'm not going to pretend to know everything about them, but what I do know is that stars show no parallax relative to each other. This was suggest that all the stars exist at the same depth.
Before you say they are too far away to observe the parallax, just know that parallax is determined by the relative position of three objects. If I record a star trail, then a star at 100 light years away should appear to move twice the distance as a star that is 200 light years away. But we see all the stars move exactly the same distance as if it was a rotating blanket above us.
Tell me about it. Every observable fact dictates that the earth is flat and stationary, yet you'll believe jews at NASA because everyone else in the world does. Hell, You might as well believe the Holocaust.
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:55:01 ago (+2/-0)
Lulz. First, stop talking about the magnetic pole. I'm talking about the pole due to the axis of rotation that you can see by spinning any ball.
Second, how are you going to see the pole below in Flattard Land? The "plane" blocks your view. You'd have to go the the edge, and stick your head out over it. Line of sight, flattard.
In other words, you're going to ignore evidence writ large in the night sky that trivially corresponds to a spherical Earth, but make no sense in Flattard Land, and instead talk about parallax.
No, it suggests that stars are very far away, that parallax measurements are hard to do, but when they are done, flattards like you will just ignore them anyways, like Barnard's Star: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard's_Star , or the Gaia measurement of parallax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_(spacecraft) .
You can't measure parallax of stars with your eyes, flattard. 2 * undetectable = undetectable. You need high-powered telescopes and precision measurement.
You're literally ignoring half the night sky.
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 13:12:17 ago (+0/-1)
Fuckin retarded.
So you're claiming that the magnetic North Pole of the globe Earth is due to the earth spinning? So I can spend any ball and create a magnetic pole?
You don't. It's in the ground. If I stick a bar magnet into the ground with half of it above and half of it below, I'm not going to see the bottom half. A compass is attracted to magnets. Just because it's pointing at a magnet does not mean there is a magnet behind it also.
If you can record the movement of stars throughout the night, then you should be able to determine parallax. Parallax is determined on the relative distance between stars. Not between you and the stars. Between stars. A star at 100 light years away will appear to have moved twice the distance as a star 200 light years away. A star 500 light years away will have appeared to move twice the distance as a star 1,000 light years away.
No. You want me to explain the stars as if they are what you say they are. What I am showing you is that they are not what you say they are. That doesn't mean I know exactly what they are. I just know that I can prove they are not what you say they are.
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 13:34:20 ago (+2/-0)
The magnetic pole is irrelevant for the topic of the stars. The stars correspond 100% to the fixed axis of rotation.
Which is why the southern star trails trivially prove a spherical Earth, and disprove Flattard Land. Yet here you are, still bangin' on about Flerf, like the retarded monkey that you are. You have flattard religion.
No, retard. Turn your head: can you "record the movement" of everything about you? What's the parallax for a mountain miles away when you turn your head?
You're retarded. Parallax is determined by the distance between you and the object. The closer an object is to you, the more parallax.
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 14:06:40 ago (+0/-1)
For your explanation of stars. I'm telling you that your explanation of the stars are wrong. The flat earth theory is that stars exist within the ionosphere which is created by the magnetic field.
They don't. There is no parallax between the stars. There is also an inverse square law for light that the heliocentric model is ignoring.
For one, That is a disingenuous argument. Star trails are recorded throughout the night over the course of several hours from a perspective on earth that is rotating a thousand mph, revolving around the sun at 67,000 mph, which is revolving around the Milky Way at 448,000 mph, which is itself traveling at 1.3 million mph, relative to the stars. Yet I can look at the same exact stars in the same exact layout that the Egyptians were looking at when they built the pyramids.
But to stick with your mountain example, if you were to record the far-off mountains during a car trip, then played that recording back in fast forward, would the mountains that are closer to you appear to move further? That's called parallax.
No. That's just called depth. Parallax is the relationship between multiple objects from a certain perspective. Take your left hand and hold a finger 6 in in front of your eyes. Take your right hand and hold a finger 12 inches in front of your eyes. Now move your head slightly. Notice how your fingers don't line up anymore. The distance between your fingers is parallax.
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 14:33:11 ago (+2/-0)
The facts of the night sky are trivially explained without the use of a compass. Nothing you said changes that. You keep trying to bring in the magnetic pole because you are retarded.
Which is completely retarded, as the magnetic poles can be seen to wander, but the fixed stars do not. Regardless, flattard fantasies are irrelevant to basic facts about the night sky. You might as well be talking about dragons and fairies.
It's a trivial consequence of a rotating spherical Earth, but makes no sense in Flattard Land.
As I've already said, parallax has been measured, and flattards like you ignore it.
More flattard bullshit.
No, it's the REAL argument that corresponds to a turning, spherical Earth, and stars light years away, instead of your flattard bullshit.
Don't forget to include the distances between objects.
We don't have precise star charts from the time of the pyramids, flattard, so your use of "exact" here is completely made up. Given the distances to the stars, it's not surprising that basic constellations made up of patterns across the night sky are still recognizable. But the stars positions are moving, as we have measured. Which flattards like you ignore.
No shit, flattard. Hence the distance between you and the mountains is what counts, as I said.
[ + ] TomMacdonald
[ - ] TomMacdonald 2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:42:45 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:58:55 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 14:51:03 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:55:44 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 09:53:06 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:21:07 ago (+0/-2)
Lol. It's cool. You're just a glob retard. I didn't expect you to understand.
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:43:58 ago (+1/-0)
It doesn't matter what flat tards believe lmao
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:56:28 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:07:47 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:03:50 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:18:33 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:38:48 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:40:45 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:42:58 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 09:50:31 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -2 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:22:11 ago (+0/-2)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:45:27 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:53:01 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 10:55:26 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:00:15 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:06:02 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 1 point 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:17:29 ago (+1/-0)
pretty much
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 13:28:26 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:04:53 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] big_fat_dangus
[ - ] big_fat_dangus 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:19:24 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:40:36 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 11:24:00 ago (+0/-0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWc9SfwnSxM
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:08:16 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 0 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:17:54 ago (+0/-0)
tell you what? if you believe so much on the flat earth do a video yourself denying the Coriolis effect on both hemispheres.
there's no ether. what you say in the infrared and on water vapor loop is the jet stream which consists of a river of water in the atmosphere . there's a polar jet and there's a sub tropical jet at subtropics
there's also AN AUSTRAL polar jet too. again, the ether that you speak of doesnt exist. now if you wanna talk about metaphysics then that's another topic which btw falls in the realm of the OCCULT
so if you believe in ethers then you are an occultist too
[ + ] McNasty
[ - ] McNasty [op] -1 points 2 monthsMar 12, 2024 12:33:06 ago (+0/-1)
I don't need to do a video debunking the Coriolis effect. It's already been done. Pilots have to land planes.
Nicola Tesla said there is absolutely an ether and that Einstein is a retarded jew. But I guess Tesla is just some white guy. Not as smart as those jews.
No. It's one or the other. Your version of it looks like a chaotic, retarded mess. A flat earth representation of the same phenomenon shows a steady cycle.
Occult means hidden. So yeah I'm a believer that the powers that be are hiding things.