Sign into an existing account

You kikes would love that wouldn't ya. Lol. Tell more more about how I should trust the science. Hell, maybe you'll talk me into believing the Holocaust or getting a vaccines. You know, because of all the scientific evidence.

NASA is a nigger. I'd agree. They are the ones that did the calculating, and it doesn't add up. The question is, why do you believe the explanation they give for it not adding up? It's not evidence. It's simply an explanation.

Cool story. Now tell me about the time you sucked your first baby dick rabbi.

Lol. You dumb. Weather can affect visibility not curvature. Like when it's foggy out and you can't see a car three lengths in front of you. This effect can vary. Maybe the next day it's five lengths. Maybe the next day it's 2 miles.


There is no other variable. Weather does not create a special mirage that does not invert. It's impossible.


It literally tells you how far a human eye can see in the current weather conditions. Meaning that it's a perfectly acceptable explanation as to why you can't see something you might normally be able to see on a clear day.


For one, it's not a mirage. A mirage is a reflection. Reflections are inverted. Facts. But it is also very rare to have 100% visibility over 60 miles of water. Rare. Not impossible.


I don't care about definitions. The Holocaust will be defined as a genocide of 6 million jews. I only care about facts. You cannot provide me a single example of a mirage that is not inverted. The only examples that exist are when the curvature is in question. If it were possible, you could reproduce the results on a smaller scale.


That's why the definition is wrong. It's scientifically impossible for a reflection to not be inverted. Refraction is something different. Like a pencil in a glass of water making the pencil appear like two pieces. Or like fish in a river not being exactly were they appear when viewed outside of the water. Again, this phenomenon you speak of cannot be reproduced on a smaller scale. It only exists when the institutions that gave us the earth curvature is trying to explain why that curvature isn't hiding objects behind it.


Because I simply disproved curvature by using the calculations provided by the institutions that say there is curvature. The explanation I am given as to why it doesn't add up has no more credibility than telling me that Nazi gas chambers have wooden doors.


Reflections are inverted. There is no way around it.


If it is a mirage, it is an inverted reflections of the land onto the gasses above it. It might not be as recognizable as a building would be when inverted but it is inverted.


That's specifically my opinion here on voat. People here should be smart enough to understand how much influence kikes have over all of the major institutions. But to be in a place that denies the Holocaust, denies safe vaccines, denies global warming, denies school shootings, and so on, it's pretty obvious that there is an effort to defend institutional explanations for the lack of curvature. If this was elsewhere, I'd just call you a dumbass.


So on a foggy day when visibility is low and I can't see three car lengths in front of me, does that mean the earth curvature starts at two car lengths? How do you not understand that visibility has nothing to do with curvature but can affect the distance a human eye can see?


If curvature existed you would NEVER see the skyline. Weather phenomenons do not flatten out the Earth temporarily.


You are a dumb faggot that thinks an institutional explanation is proof.

Have you ever stood outside in the sun and looked to your right or left, and observed the sun shining on objects in either direction? The moon is just further away. Depending on the angles, a greater or lesser portion of the visible surface will be illuminated.

I've exchanged comments with some of the most dedicated flatters over the years, and only one so far has even acknowledged a video by the reddit douche known as professor dave explains. Specifically, his flat earth debunkings. It's pretty clear why they see his videos as their kryptonite, but still disappointing in the face of what should be an easy win. If the earth were actually flat.

In his 'debunkings' playlist section, if you're interested. He goes into detail on the seasons, sun and moon appearance, and a bunch more.

But still, seeing the curve, or lack of curve, for ones self is superior to any theoretical 'proofs' one way or another. What I'll achieve once I finally get around to it is acquiring my own legitimate data and seeing for myself. Pictures and images on the internet aren't real, and are often faked. Much of 'official' reality is faked by TPTB, so skepticism is the smart way to go.

The problem here is if flat earth theorists can't refute a debunking by a 'professor dave' type, the theory basically dies of cringe.