Flerfspective

Every flat earther that I’ve asked to present a working flat earth model has lied to me and deflected. If you choose to engage with me and do the same, you will be blocked. Anyone on my blocked list is a proven liar and coward that can’t admit they have no working model.

Let’s try this again @xT8TYx and @6lackHeart69… Salar de Uyuni salt flats. A standard mirror has thousands of times more curvature than the earths surface, which means we should see thousands of times LESS distortion from Uyuni than any man-made mirror in your house. I see nothing at all contradictory to this basic math in the observations at the salt flats. Where’s the discrepancy with the globe here? There is none you can show, so that assertion is dismissed. Worse is that you’ve both repeatedly ignored is my entire argument. Deflecting to curvature is an argument about how big the globe is, not whether or not it’s flat. I asked you to address the obstruction of the entire bottom half of the mountain range connecting all the peaks when there’s nothing topographical between the observer and the mountains in the distance BECAUSE it’s a globe exclusive observation. A curved geometry produces this result without question, as shown in my basic diagram. A flat geometry does not. So the fact we observe this obstruction completely falsifies flat earth. Unless you can refute this, there’s no argument. I’m not here to argue how big the globe is, unless you can admit the geometry shows earth can’t be flat. Can either of you address this please? Show how a flat plane will obstruct line of sight to the mountains. The angular size isn’t an issue. Those peaks prove the angular size is plenty big enough to see. It’s just obstructed. Show us how a flat plane can produce this result. I’ve waited almost a week now.

On today’s episode of: “Can any flat earther explain…” Let’s discuss the sunlight intensity and what a flat earth predicts vs what the globe predicts. The sunlight on the surface at noon on a sunny day is 120,000LUXm² more or less depending on your location. So use I2=I1x(D1/D2)² and see how bright the sun would be at the distance from the sun you would be during sunset. Include the atmosphere as well, and it's still daylight. Not to mention the elevation angle this geometry produces at these distances. Yet, the globe predicts a sharp drop in the light intensity as obstruction occurs at the horizon, which is exactly what happens. 🤔🤷‍♂️

Coming from the “builder” that claims measurements and math are imagination. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 The irony couldn’t be greater.

He’s still deflecting and doubling-down on stupidity.

This pathetic liar thinks that making another claim, anyone can prove is false, is proof of a claim about the 1972 blue marble photo he claims is a painting, with no proof of said claim.

Meant to add the observation. Lol.

How flat earthers react when you show empirical measurements they can go verify themselves that prove their claims wrong. Do they not realize how obvious it is that they’re scared?

So… asking someone who claims earth is flat to prove how a flat geometry produces the obstruction we see, is illogical and irrelevant now? Anything to avoid addressing their own claims. 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I asked him to address the fact that a flat geometry cannot produce the clear obstruction we have see at Salar de Uyuni. This is his response after days if deflecting. 🤦‍♂️🤣🤣🤣🤣. He “doesn’t care” that a flat earth can’t produce this observation, only that he would rather lie about what the globe predicts we would see. 50,000 feet of hidden height at a max distance of 85 miles??? Really?? According to what fucking math? lol!!!!!

Flat earth fails under the slightest scrutiny. Any flat earthers up for a round? Let’s test this geometry, shall we? #FlatEarth #FlatEarthFail

He’s STILL deflecting. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Deflections are not entertained. Try again coward.

Maybe I need to add #FlatEarth. It seems flat earthers don’t want to address anything I bring up that is a major issue for flat earth.