Flat Earth Uprising?

P A N · 11-07-2016, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChelseaDagger

Maybe, maybe not... Though it kinda makes you wonder how those big balls would react about you inquiring about my breast size.

oh snap.

**Frownland** · 11-07-2016, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P A N

oh i understand that you can see it. i'm gonna get into that after a few more questions.

You can also see its moons, which is a good way to get an idea of the density of the planet. The way that the moons react to Jupiter's gravity tells us that it has an extremely low density, low enough to only be a gas (especially with a planet that big).

DwnWthVwls · 11-07-2016, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P A N

oh i understand that you can see it. i'm gonna get into that after a few more questions.

You completely ignored my response.. or do you just ignore math in general to help prove your theory?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChelseaDagger

Maybe, maybe not... Though it kinda makes you wonder how those big balls would react about you inquiring about my breast size.

I did no such thing...

Idk what you are talking about.

**Janszoon** · 11-07-2016, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P A N

no you didn't. you said what it would depend on, and i clarified.

Yeah, I did, chief. Try this:

Read what I wrote
Apply it to what you asked

Presto.

P A N · 11-07-2016, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

Simple geometry to disprove flat earth...

Let me know when you find a place on your flat world where you can make 3 90 degree turns and end up at your starting location.

sorry i missed this.

anyway, just because you can draw it does mean it's been done. this is why it's important to familiarize ourselves with logical fallacies. it is a logical fallacy called a "circular argument" to assume the ability to navigate an equilateral triangle on the surface of a sphere is proof of a ball-earth... unless of course you have proof that someone has actually traversed a 30,000km triangle, which you don't, because it's never been done. theoretically, this would certainly be possible on a ball earth.

P A N · 11-07-2016, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

I'd imagine that would depend on how far away from you the surface of your imaginary flat plane stretched and how much the thickness of atmosphere at that distance diffused light.

how is this an answer? it just says it would depend on things. it gives no hint of an answer in the least.

**Frownland** · 11-07-2016, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P A N

sorry i missed this.

anyway, just because you can draw it does mean it's been done. this is why it's important to familiarize ourselves with logical fallacies. it is a logical fallacy called a "circular argument" to assume the ability to navigate an equilateral triangle on the surface of a sphere is proof of a ball-earth... unless of course you have proof that someone has actually traversed a 30,000km triangle, which you don't, because it's never been done. theoretically, this would certainly be possible on a ball earth.

Why don't you try it?

P A N · 11-07-2016, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Why don't you try it?

haha. you fund it, i'll do it man. team work.

**Janszoon** · 11-07-2016, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P A N

this can't be independently validated. i know that seems like a cop out, and some bleating sheep will quote this line and put a laughing face under it or some totally original and witty thing. it's not a cop out. belief in jupiter requires faith.

You're right, it is a cop out. You asked for something, I provided it, and your response is that it doesn't exist. Jupiter has been observed by telescope for several centuries and has been photographed by many, many people for decades. To pretend it doesn't exist is just silly.

**Janszoon** · 11-07-2016, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P A N

how is this an answer? it just says it would depend on things. it gives no hint of an answer in the least.

How is it not an answer?