The Rod of God -- (!) Pages 33 and 34 (!)

[poptart]

Seater,

1. I have no control over what other people think, post, or believe.

2. I could post about the southern hemisphere flights now, but it would open a can of worms and I don't yet have my facts in order. So I'm just going to wait until I have something accurate to say about it. I've also read dialogue and takes on the flights, and I don't feel real confident in what I read from people about them. So I'm exploring and waiting until the time is right to comment.

3. My "assumption" (very strong assumption) is that the globe is false. This is based on MANY things. Many things posted in this thread. But I don't declare that the earth is flat. I lean there, yes. Many things are coming to light on this topic. And many more will be coming soon. So I'm just watching.

4. The telescope thing was used for a specific example. A person watches a boat going further and further... Then it disappears. "It went over the curve" is what people will say. But if you put a telescope on it at that time, it become visible again. So it didn't go over the curve, but was just lost to sight due to perspective.

Would perspective eventually come into play when viewing along the surface of a flat earth with a telescope?
I don't know.

When we view the moon through a telescope, for example, the moon sits alon by itself in our sky.
It's totally different than viewing something that sits along a long, flat plane.

I just don't know the answer to your question.

[Atomic Punk]

2. I could post about the southern hemisphere flights now, but it would open a can of worms and I don't yet have my facts in order. So I'm just going to wait until I have something accurate to say about it. So I'm exploring and waiting until the time is right to comment.

3. My "assumption" (very strong assumption) is that the globe is false.

Would perspective eventually come into play when viewing along the surface of a flat earth with a telescope?
I don't know.

When we view the moon through a telescope, for example, the moon sits alon by itself in our sky.
It's totally different than viewing something that sits along a long, flat plane.

I just don't know the answer to your question.

First off dummy, if you point a telescope at the Moon or anything else, the Moon and everything else in the sky somehow moves. Ever notice that?

You are right though, you don't know shit, but you assume everyone is wrong.

[poptart]

First off?




You've got more to share?

[Atomic Punk]

Also, why does the Moon not line up with the constellations over a period of a year but has a 28 day cycle? Why are there seasons? Why does the Sun's declination seem to head South approaching Winter then approaches a higher declination toward Summer? I told you to use a stick to point at the Sun to where there is no show and plot lines at the end of the stick's shadow over a period of a year and see what happens.

[poptart]

You are so totally detached from reality that there's no point in trying to have a rational discussion.

Truth is, you are totally wrong.
You are NOT ABLE to have a rational discussion.
You're a fart.
No more than that.

88 loud-mouthed just like you in his first post in the thread.
Then he name-called me and was yapping about how I didn't know math and science -- and how my numbers were wrong.
lol

Then he had to eat humble pie, when the realization hit him that -----> poptart was right on the $$$.


You're just like Duncedale.
All bark.

You chose to discuss Antarctica, but were exposed as not even knowing what you were barking about.





You're a simpleton.

Study up.

[poptart]

Also, why does the Moon not line up with the constellations over a period of a year but has a 28 day cycle? Why are there seasons? Why does the Sun's declination seem to head South approaching Winter then approaches a higher declination toward Summer? I told you to use a stick to point at the Sun to where there is no show and plot lines at the end of the stick's shadow over a period of a year and see what happens.

AP, you can easily find discussion about all of these topics.
Just search around - and Google flat earth along with the topic.

[poptart]

Tart - how do you answer this..........

The distance between Rio de Janeiro and Cape Town is 3775 miles,
and the distance from New York to London is 3470 miles.

If the disc theory was correct, it would be something like 4x as far between the Southern Hemisphere cities,
since you'd have to traverse the two points further from the center of the disc (ie the North Pole)

How I answer...

1. I've not given a map of the earth which I say is *OFFICIAL*

2. How do -- you -- know those distances are correct?

I plugged those flights in here ---> https://www.airplanemanager.com/FlightCalculator.aspx -- and found that despite being different by just 300 miles, the flight times are different by almost 2 hours.
NY to London = 6 hrs 53 min
Rio to Cape T = 8 hrs 42 min

3. Do you have a globe? Look at it. Look at the distance between NY and SF. That is 2,500 miles. Then look at the distance from SF to Sydney Australia. That is 7,500 miles. How many NY to SF's can fit between SF and Sydney. It's more than 3, yes?

[poptart]

Wire boy is smarter than 95% of y'all.
He's been to the lake again.





Buildings in Toronto obviously can't be seen if the "ball" is correct.
But they are -- and easily.

Ball theory is WAY the hell OFF.


The vertical wire represents 25 miles -- which represents a 400 ft drop in ball earth world.

There is no hump at all.

It's flat.


Wire boy schools you once again.

So simple.

[Carson]

How is Goober supposed to get the last word in if you keep posting in bunches?

You're worse than m2.

[poptart]

this is the most compelling thing I'm currently following on the interwebs
And by far the most entertaining

Of course.

As I told Smackie, if I'm ever on his radio show, it'll be the highest-rated show.
The most highly anticipated.
The most entertaining, controversial, interesting, educational, fun, and rewarding.
Most meaningful.

One hour will not be enough.

In short, I would be the Donald Trump of T1B radio.

[Moby Dick]

this is the most compelling thing I'm currently following on the interwebs
And by far the most entertaining

Of course.

As I told Smackie, if I'm ever on his radio show, it'll be the highest-rated show.
The most highly anticipated.
The most entertaining, controversial, interesting, educational, fun, and rewarding.
Most meaningful.

One hour will not be enough.

In short, I would be the Donald Trump of T1B radio.

as long as you keep the Canadians in Canada...i'll listen.

[Goober McTuber]

It's amazing that you would approach me in the manner you did with this post -- after having been TOTALLY EMBARRASSED by me over the past couple of pages.

The only person you have EMBARRASSED anywhere in this thread is named "poptart".

[Jay in Phoenix]

But in you're insanity you see that as part / proof of the vast global conspiracy

As mentioned we can't have a rational discussion because you are not rational

Which has been the problem from the beginning of Sam's derailed thread. Pop's is so deep in his conspiracy bullshit, so irrational in his misguided thought process (if you can call it thought ) and so utterly full of himself that rational discussion is completely alien to him. Dinsdale summed it up beautifully in his earlier post about pop. He's isolated himself in a land of mental midgets, he's bought hook, line and sinker into Scriptural babble plus he says he doesn't know "what shape the Earth is" but "knows" it isn't round, yet continues to proselytize Flat Earth agenda.

Dude doesn't have a fucking clue what he is talking about. He knows damn good and well what shape the Earth, moon and planets are, he knows the size of stars and how planetary movement works, he knows how gravity affects everything from tides to time zones. He is just too deep in his spiritual cups to admit how committed he is to a nonsense cause, with "committed" being the operative word here.


He should be committed.



Pray for him.

Or laugh out loud, it's pretty much the same thing.

(edit) yeah, yeah, yeah, I included gravity with time zones. Fuck all, I was rolling and alliteration got the better of me.

[R-Jack]

You are so totally detached from reality that there's no point in trying to have a rational discussion.

You are NOT ABLE to have a rational discussion.

When one goes all KC on KC.....is that the time this thread had ran its course?

[Left Seater]

Tart - how do you answer this..........

The distance between Rio de Janeiro and Cape Town is 3775 miles,
and the distance from New York to London is 3470 miles.

If the disc theory was correct, it would be something like 4x as far between the Southern Hemisphere cities,
since you'd have to traverse the two points further from the center of the disc (ie the North Pole)

How I answer...

1. I've not given a map of the earth which I say is *OFFICIAL*

2. How do -- you -- know those distances are correct?

I plugged those flights in here ---> https://www.airplanemanager.com/FlightCalculator.aspx -- and found that despite being different by just 300 miles, the flight times are different by almost 2 hours.
NY to London = 6 hrs 53 min
Rio to Cape T = 8 hrs 42 min

3. Do you have a globe? Look at it. Look at the distance between NY and SF. That is 2,500 miles. Then look at the distance from SF to Sydney Australia. That is 7,500 miles. How many NY to SF's can fit between SF and Sydney. It's more than 3, yes?

Pop, this is where your lack of knowledge on air travel is killing your argument. When airplanes are crossing oceans they fly in tracks. These are set up on a daily basis to optimize winds and so that ATC will know where planes are at all times despite not having radar coverage over the oceans. You are given a time to enter your assigned track and certain times to cross certain waypoints. You are also assigned a time to exit said track. The track over the North Atlantic usually jives nicely with traffic from NYC to LON. Planes flying between these two cities enter and exit the track generally close to where they would be flying anyway. Not so for flights between Rio and South Africa. Most of the time the South Atlantic tracks have flights exiting further north on the African continent. These flights then have to turn south once over/near the African continent to reach S. Africa.

As for your globe question on NYC SFO and SFO SYD. Get your globe out and a piece of string. Cut the string to the length of NYC SFO. Then do the same for another piece of string from SFO to SYD. Then measure each. The NYC SFO will be just under 1/3rd the length of the SFO SYD string.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

When one goes all KC on KC.....is that the time this thread had ran its course?

Yes. It's what is known as "The End Times".

[smackaholic]

I walked into the mens room at ALB earlier this evening to drain the vein and I see a card with some biblical shit printed on it. The first sentence pretty much sums up what is going on here.

Trust in the LORD with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding

If that doesn't explain pop's psychosis, I don't know what the fukk does.

[Atomic Punk]

Also, why does the Moon not line up with the constellations over a period of a year but has a 28 day cycle? Why are there seasons? Why does the Sun's declination seem to head South approaching Winter then approaches a higher declination toward Summer? I told you to use a stick to point at the Sun to where there is no show and plot lines at the end of the stick's shadow over a period of a year and see what happens.

AP, you can easily find discussion about all of these topics.
Just search around - and Google flat earth along with the topic.

Why do you put your "faith" in Google and sites that are about nonsense? After all, you've admitted you don't know in many examples and you are undecided.

How about taking an Astronomy course or two and mix in some math and physics classes instead of relying on heretics? As Jay said, you are too stubborn to admit you're wrong. BTW, Astronomy wasn't invented by NASA.

A wise person in search of the truth would spend time learning about the topics I've described before relying solely on ideas that aren't scientifically proven. Quit deflecting and spend time learning from forbidden places like a library and at least a junior college. Then make your mind up... since you said you really don't have answers? I already know your response. You won't. Further debate is only for entertainment to ridicule you if that's your quest.

[poptart]

pop's psychosis

You claimed someone would be able to go 250 miles from the CN Tower and still see 90% of it.






Yap away, poodle.

[poptart]

As for your globe question on NYC SFO and SFO SYD. Get your globe out and a piece of string. Cut the string to the length of NYC SFO. Then do the same for another piece of string from SFO to SYD. Then measure each. The NYC SFO will be just under 1/3rd the length of the SFO SYD string.

You just admitted that what I said is right.

It should be over 1/3.

SF to Sydney: 7437 miles
NY to SF: 2,570 miles x 3 = 7,710 miles

Pop, this is where your lack of knowledge on air travel is killing your argument.

Hardly.
You assume the globe, so everything you think is aligned with this preconceived idea.

Scott posted supposed distance between two places.
He himself does not know what the distances really are.

All I did was pull up the very first travel plan (mileage and time) site I found and put in the numbers, out of curiosity.
I made no concrete conclusion.
Just an observation.

Again, I don't know the shape of the earth or what the true map looks like.

[poptart]

I provided links showing you could travel anywhere - you didn't accept it because those links are guided tours

You provided exactly jack shit to prove your point.

Enter Antarctica on the west side.
Cross it (with your guide lol) and tell him you intend to cross over the south pole and go into east Antarctica.



Let us all know how that works out for you.

[poptart]

Which has been the problem from the beginning of Sam's derailed thread. Pop's is so deep in his conspiracy bullshit, so irrational in his misguided thought process (if you can call it thought ) and so utterly full of himself that rational discussion is completely alien to him. Dinsdale summed it up beautifully in his earlier post about pop. He's isolated himself in a land of mental midgets, he's bought hook, line and sinker into Scriptural babble plus he says he doesn't know "what shape the Earth is" but "knows" it isn't round, yet continues to proselytize Flat Earth agenda.

Dude doesn't have a fucking clue what he is talking about. He knows damn good and well what shape the Earth, moon and planets are, he knows the size of stars and how planetary movement works, he knows how gravity affects everything from tides to time zones. He is just too deep in his spiritual cups to admit how committed he is to a nonsense cause, with "committed" being the operative word here.


He should be committed.

[poptart]

Wire boy > AP

A wise person...

Why are the buildings seen -- and why is there NO curvature from L-R -- even though it is 25 miles?
Flat.

Tia, mr science wizard.

[poptart]

Note the "flatiture of the earth" starting @ 7:39. Cool video.

The video is inconclusive, Buttsy.

Do something...

Go to 1:07 and pause the video.
Put a ruler up to the screen and notice that he's barely off the ground and yet there is a definite curvature going on behind him.
Do it.

Then go to about 3:30 and run it.
Wow -- it's curved.
But then as he moves the camera, the curve goes away and if you pause it right at 3:38 and put a ruler up to the screen, you'll see that there is actually a slight inverse curve.

Go to :16 and just notice the style of the windows.
They are very curved.

This distorts things as you look out of through them.
It rounds everything as evidenced by the curvature of the earth at 1:07, when he's barely off the ground.

[Smackie Chan]

Yeah, any type of logical analysis of the whole thing just makes my head hurt.

1. Read the Bible
2. Believe the Bible
3. Ditch reasoned analysis
4. Headache gone!

Amazing foolishness.

There have been MANY issues raised by me here that go beyond what the Bible says.

If you choose not to engage, but instead drive by and act like you're smart, that's your choice.

As to my "drive by," I stated several pages ago that because you can't argue with a sick mind, I would no longer try, and I haven't. My post you quoted was not directed to you, and was not intended to make me look smart. It was a quick summation of what I perceive your solution to everything is, and is very close to the truth despite your protest to the contrary.

More than once, you've alluded to the foolishness of others who subscribe to the religion of science rather than simply believing what you characterize as God's words to be taken very literally at face value. You then try to use "science" to defend your positions despite ridiculing those who use science to contradict it. Your hypocrisy in so doing notwithstanding, the difference, as I see it, is that rather than accepting findings based on objective scientific methodology, you accept only those rooted in the mantra, "God said it, I believe it, and that settles it." Whatever doesn't fit that is quickly dismissed as being a joke, faked, or promoted with the intent of deceiving the masses. You consider what you're doing to be analytical, open-minded, and reasoned, whereas I see it as you cherry-picking evidence (the most rotten of it) from the camp of the enemy (science) to support a close-minded foundation. No sense in accepting anything that could potentially contradict what's in the Bible, because it leads to headaches.

God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

Your tenacity is admirable. Your objectivity, not so much. Using faith as the cornerstone for scientific belief invariably leads to subjectivity, and you wind up accepting as credible science only that which supports what you already believe. Admittedly, this is not a fallacy limited to religious belief, but is necessary for those who attempt to use science to corroborate scripture, and there is plenty of pseudo-science out there from which to choose, as you've abundantly demonstrated. When it comes to thorny issues for which you have no ready Biblical explanation or any "science" to support them, you resort to:

I am exploring.

Exploring is not what you're actually doing, since exploration is the search for, and analysis of, information to determine facts. You already know the truth - your truth, not to be confused with facts - so what you're doing is not exploring, but seeking validation. If you were truly exploring to determine the facts, it would imply you have doubt about what you believe - about your faith - and of that faith, you have no doubt. You are looking for evidence to validate what just ain't so, and try as you might, you won't find it, because it doesn't exist. What does exist, in abundance, is evidence that proves the Earth is spherical, rotating, and in orbit rather than flat and stationary. What also exists is a fair amount of junk science attempting to prove otherwise that is, and should be, mocked for its overwhelming inability to withstand objective scrutiny.

You continually cite NASA as the enemy of the people because their agenda is anti-Christian and they are unable to tell the truth. What I see is that you are using NASA as the embodiment of science (specifically astronomy) because it is much easier to take on a single, relatively new organization than it is to rationally dispute centuries of scientific thought, evidence, and achievements. NASA, in case you're unaware, was not the first to sell a spherical earth. They simply make a convenient scapegoat for you to dismiss the work of Copernicus, Kepler, Hubble, and countless other astronomers. Why believe them when you have...String Boy! Forget that NASA even exists. Your real take is that most sciences - not just astronomy, but also chemistry, paleontology, anthropology, and biology, to name a few - are jokes because there are elements of them that contradict scripture.

Not just science, but history as well, seems to be considered a joke by you, since no textbooks or history books I'm aware of from any country, civilization, or religion that are deemed credible by any historians recount the lives and works of any flat earth scientists. You've posted links from individuals and organizations that try to convince folks that what we've been taught for centuries regarding the shape of the Earth and the solar system of which it is a part has been a lie, but all have failed quite miserably and laughably in doing so. I'm also unaware of any universities or institutions of higher learning anywhere in the world - even Christian institutions like TCU, Baylor, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Boston College, and countless others - that offer courses in flat earth studies. From where I stand, it appears your take is that the scientific knowledge collected by mankind from all civilizations across many centuries is to be tossed away like so much rubbish because there has been an anti-Christian bias globally and through time, and that only an infinitesimally small fraction of the human population - those who take every word of the KJV of the Bible literally - know the real truth. The rest of us are dismissed as sheep.

God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

It should come as no surprise that your greatest "ally" in this thread is Moving Sale. From the perspectives of his board persona and his profession, it makes perfect sense. On the board, he's a contrarian who intentionally pits himself against the majority and "popular" opinions. It's what he does. As a defense attorney, his stock in trade is to dig up and effectively use whatever scant evidence may be at his disposal to minimize punishment for clients, who even he will admit aren't the most savory of characters. Essentially, he picks a side and runs full speed ahead with it, which is what you've done in this thread and why he's "defended" you. Again, there's something to be admired about that. He's not defending the position you've taken, just that you've taken a position and stuck with it. The fact that it's an incorrect and absurd position is immaterial.

You present the "ball earth" as if it's a theory. Human evolution is a theory. The big bang is a theory. The unified field is a theory. The Earth being spherical, taking about 24 hours to rotate once on its axis, and ~365.25 days to revolve around the sun are not theoretical. They are facts that are easily proven and have been proven in multiple ways many times by countless people. Your disbelief in what is clear and accepted by the sheep is symptomatic of your sickness I alluded to earlier, which I'll call willful ignorance. You choose not to believe what is plain to see to show your god how faithful you are to him and what he allegedly wrote. How do I know this? Because I know your answer to the question "What would it take to convince you that the Earth is spherical, orbits the sun, and rotates on its axis?" That answer is, "Nothing can convince me."

God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

Most of us on the board were likely raised with a religious upbringing, probably some form of Christianity. I was raised Catholic. There are incentives, shall we say, to at least profess having some type of Judeo-Christian faith in this country. Try running for national office as an acknowledged atheist or Muslim and see how far that gets you. You yourself have stated you wouldn't vote for Trump based almost solely on your belief that he isn't Christian enough, and there are millions in this country who base their votes on similar criteria despite the fact it has little to do with effective leadership. Those arguing against you on the religious front (as opposed to the astronomy front) in this thread are most assuredly not representative of the country as a whole. There is societal, political, and professional pressure in most areas of the country to profess Christianity, even if one doesn't necessarily believe in it.

Then there's the pressure exerted by the religion itself, which is based almost entirely on fear. What greater motivation is there to believe that Jesus is the Savior than the avoidance of eternal suffering? Given that most of us were indoctrinated from an early age to believe this, and the pressure to continue believing it continues into adulthood, it's no huge surprise that Christianity is such a popular belief. It's not easy (for some, anyway) to abandon their indoctrination (read: brainwashing) and take an objective look at spirituality and faith. For many, and I'll include you among them, retaining the insurance policy/security blanket that is Christianity is much easier. The issues you alluded to that "go beyond what the Bible says" all eventually get back to - you guessed it - what the Bible says. Using a source to verify itself, even if it's a collection of separate writings, is not scientific, objective, or valid. It is purely faith-based.

God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

I expect a slew of "LOLs" and for you to go all KC on me. ("I'm not being willfully ignorant! You are!") That's fine. I'm not looking to argue with you. I'll honor your stated wish to allow you to believe what you want to believe (as if you need anyone to allow you to do that). If your faith helps get you through the day and makes your life more fulfilling, then by all means keep practicing it. I would merely suggest not trying to use what you consider to be science to trump real science in an effort to validate your faith - it isn't working, and won't work any better if you continue trying. It simply makes you look clownish. All you really need to say when your faith is questioned is:

God said it, I believe it, and that settles it.

[poptart]

I can appreciate you taking time to type all of that out, but honestly, it's SO full of mischaracterizations that I would barely know where to begin in responding.

Let's just say, wire boy didn't quote any Scripture as he gave his simple demonstration that the ball earth is BUNK.

I'm not interested in majority view or prevailing view.
I'm interested in the truth.


Pyramid structures were built around the world prior to people adopting a sphere earth as the majority view.
PHENOMENAL structures, with the Giza Pyramids being the most famous and probably most incredible.

They are marvels not only in dimension, but in architecture, masonry, construction, mathematics, astronomy, and overall engineering.
They are BEYOND marvels.
Really unbelievable structures.
We can't approach doing what they've done -----> now.

So we're now so smart and advanced and know so much about our world?
We're so certain of it?




pffft...

People at that time knew things we don't know, and did things we still can't do.
And the prevailing view when the pyramids were built (or when they were allegedly built) is that the earth was... flat.

Are we really smart now?


Wire boy is pretty smart.
I'll say that.

[Smackie Chan]

I can appreciate you taking time to type all of that out, but honestly, it's SO full of mischaracterizations that I would barely know where to begin in responding.

No need.

Let's just say, wire boy didn't quote any Scripture as he gave his simple demonstration that the ball earth is BUNK.

I didn't claim he did.

I'm not interested in majority view or prevailing view.

That has been made quite clear.

I'm interested in the truth.

I'm interested in facts. Your truth may be (and is) different from my truth and is subject to change and interpretation. Facts are immutable.

Pyramid structures were built around the world prior to people adopting a sphere earth as the majority view.
PHENOMENAL structures, with the Giza Pyramids being the most famous and probably most incredible.

They are marvels not only in dimension, but in architecture, masonry, construction, mathematics, astronomy, and overall engineering.
They are BEYOND marvels.
Really unbelievable structures.
We can't approach doing what they've done -----> now.

So we're now so smart and advanced and know so much about our world?
We're so certain of it?




pffft...

People at that time knew things we don't know, and did things we still can't do.
And the prevailing view when the pyramids were built (or when they were allegedly built) is that the earth was... flat.

Are we really smart now?


Wire boy is pretty smart.
I'll say that.

Okay then.

[smackaholic]

pop's psychosis

You claimed someone would be able to go 250 miles from the CN Tower and still see 90% of it.






Yap away, poodle.

Link?

[Goober McTuber]

So 'tart - if the earth is flat, how thick is it? Is it like a flat piece of bread, or is it like a 24,000 mile long thin & lengthy penis? (Goobs wanted to know that.)

I am so deep in your head, I could take a shit on your pituitary gland.

[poptart]

pop's psychosis

You claimed someone would be able to go 250 miles from the CN Tower and still see 90% of it.






Yap away, poodle.

Link?

http://theoneboard.com/board/viewtopic. ... &start=840

Page 22


Jay did a shitty job of explaining things. There is a curvature over a mile. It is an imperceptible one, but it is there. And I am still having a little trouble with poptart math. (8" X 30 = 600ft) And spare me the "it multiplies geometrically", or whatever the fukk it was you were mumbling. What you are refering to with your moronic drawings has some significance over 60 degrees of change. 30 miles is a damn near imperceptible change. 2 vertical line drawn 30 miles are less than 1/2 degree from being perfectly parallel. That is simple arithmetic. It is still to early in the morning to up my math game to trigonometry, but, that pretty much means that at 30 miles away 8" x 30mi = a little more than 20 ft. Let's call it 25 feet, just to error on the batshit crazy side of the real number. That jibes pretty well with your pics of upper meheeco.

- smackaholic



What I was "mumbling" about is mathematic FACT, numbnuts.

You claimed earth curvature is 8" a mile -- mile-after-mile... such that curvature over 30 miles would be just 25 ft.
Truth is, there's a 600 ft curvature over 30 miles.




So extrapolate your 8" per mile rate to 250 miles and you've got a curvature of 167 ft.

Meaning, if one viewed the CN Tower (1,800 ft tall), over 90% of it would visible from 250 miles away.

Complete lunacy.

And yet you keep driving by to call me names.


That's why you are a top drawer 'tard.

[Moby Dick]

And Goobs - quit hurting my feeling.

I don't EVEN want to know where that thing is located!

[Mammy]

And Goobs - quit hurting my feeling.

I don't EVEN want to know where that thing is located!

South side of Peoria, IL. I keep it in a shoe box in an attic there.

By damn Willie dat better not be our Timmy you gots inside that box. He been missin' since you gots that paternal order from the judge.

You go to hell for dis old man

[Goober McTuber]

South side of Peoria, IL. I keep it in a shoe box in an attic there.

By damn Willie dat better not be our Timmy you gots inside that box. He been missin' since you gots that paternal order from the judge.

You go to hell for dis old man

Mammy and shutyomouth made a baby? The horror.

[Jay in Phoenix]

:xxxl:

I'm not interested in majority view or prevailing view.
I'm interested in the truth.

No, you are not. As Smackie rather eloquently pointed out, you are only interested in cherry picking the bits of misinformation that "support" your version of "truth". You have said you don't have time to address many of the questions asked in this long, repetitive thread, yet you have time to spam the thread with multiple back-to-back-to-back-to-back responses that avoid the most rational questions to repeat your redundant nonsensical lol's, laughing chimps, stfu's and other choice bits of foolishness. You accuse me and others of lies, yet stand on the middle of your own lies and hypocrisy, like a pig in shit. Enjoy the wallow, you're going nowhere with this. Sure, you have managed to suck everybody into continuing this crap with your persistence and stubborn rhetoric, but the only thing you have accomplished is the scorn and ridicule of the entire board. Your not a martyr for your cause 'tart, just a sad little old man spinning around and around with one foot nailed to the floor.

Pyramid structures were built around the world prior to people adopting a sphere earth as the majority view.

PHENOMENAL structures, with the Giza Pyramids being the most famous and probably most incredible.

They are marvels not only in dimension, but in architecture, masonry, construction, mathematics, astronomy, and overall engineering.
They are BEYOND marvels.

Really unbelievable structures.
We can't approach doing what they've done -----> now.

So we're now so smart and advanced and know so much about our world?
We're so certain of it?

People at that time knew things we don't know, and did things we still can't do.
And the prevailing view when the pyramids were built (or when they were allegedly built) is that the earth was...
flat.

Are we really smart now?

This is meaningless and a distraction. While there is no question that the pyramids, not only in Egypt, but planet wide were technological wonders, these same people were also worshipping idols, performing blood sacrifices, engaging in mass genocide and playing early versions of soccer with severed heads, just to scratch the surface.

How brilliant is all that?

[Smackie Chan]

these same people were...playing early versions of soccer with severed heads...

How brilliant is all that?

I give 'em points for resourcefulness.

[Jay in Phoenix]

I guess, as it also gives a bizarre twist on scoring some head.

[Dinsdale]

[
Enter Antarctica on the west side.
Cross it (with your guide lol) and tell him you intend to cross over the south pole and go into east Antarctica.

Can one get a guide to take them across any continent, much less the one with no food and water?

Pops, why don't you go hire a guide to take you on a walking trip from Nome, AK on through to Canada... in winter.

Wait, you can't?

That proves Alaska is FUCKING CLOSED and you can't go there, and that the earth is flat.


Yup, you're still a weapons-grade moron. And a true champion of logical fallacy.

[Diego in Seattle]

One needn't cross Antarctica. Just go to the South Pole (the actual one) & circle it with a compass in hand.

[Mikey]

One needn't cross Antarctica. Just go to the South Pole (the actual one) & circle it with a compass in hand.

I don't think a compass will react in the manner you think. But, then again, I do not know what you think a compass will do as you circle the South Pole. Care to explain?

It would probably cause an anomaly or possibly even a singularity.

[Atomic Punk]

I know near the North Pole we used "Grid NAV" and the charts are set up so you can navigate where the inertial navigation systems have to be switched due to the rapid longitudinal changes. The magnetic compasses are pretty much useless there. So the grids are set up in... well... grids. I forget which latitude the grid charts started at in the Arctic Circle. Not sure what the Naval Aviation squadrons used that were deployed to the South Pole. The crews flew C-130's with skis and they never had to go through Navy SERE School in San Diego and Warner Springs, CA. I knew one Penn State grad that feared SERE school so much that he wanted the Antarctic squadron.