Flat or round earth? Riddle me this..

What? No one knows?

Rockets DO go straight up for a very short amount of time and then adjust their trajectory to parallel their intended orbit. They don't just go straight up and stop when they get to 'space'. They aren't just trying to get to space, they are also accelerating to a speed where their intended orbit will keep them from falling back down using centripetal force. That's roughly 17,700 mph. When they start their reentry sequence they start by rotating to a position so that when they fire their main rocket it slows them down and allows their orbit to decay.

Planes to not fly out into space when on autopilot or dip around because they are calibrated to sea level. So regardless of ground altitude they still stay aloft and level compared to sea level, which does not change. Barometers and altimeters are calibrated to sea level.

NASA I'm not even going to get in to.

Planes fly weird routes regardless because they rarely fly a straight line to their destination. After they take off they make their way to a well established lane in an established system so that they are easier to manage.

Good attempt. One wonders if we are spinning at 25,000 MPH, how they ever land again? Why do they bother to launch a rocket vertically at great energy expence, when they then 'plan' to fly a curve to only get horazontal at some point?

'Calibrated to sea level' is not an answer.

NASA video and images you obviously find impossible to defend.

One always attempts to go the shortest route to a destination. Planes often dont even do that. Well, not if one is looking at a globe...

.

Why does shit burn up on re entry and not entry?
If it's speed than why not slow down so shit doesn't burn up?

there should come a point where the glp gods just decide a theory is so stupid and so played out that it never gets posted again. its not flat. id give you proof, but you are convinced you wont accept any of it so why should anyone bother. you are simply wrong, and the debate is old and tired. and frankly, at this point, just to stupid to engage in.

You cant prove shit.

Mate, im not a 'flat earther' but im open to discussion. There are some brilliant minds that believe in flat earht. Men and women smarter than you and I. They do have some good points that i would like to see addressed. The same questions come up, but they are never answered convincingly, like some above.



.

You sound like a liberal.. pity you if you look like one..


.

They've blatantly lied to us all these years about evolution, so lying to us about the shape of the earth wouldn't really surprise me either....but I just don't know

If you are on the fence, research Eric Dubay on YouTube or elsewhere…he gives a fairly thorough overview of flat Earth and proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.

All I have to say is, you're not very bright are you...
end of any discussion with me....

Great reply lard ass.

Why act like a prima donna? When these difficult questions are asked, and you havent an answer, just bloody admit it! I and others the question the round earth theory have QUESTIONS! We are admitting we dont know. We are asking questions because the answers dont seem to fit the 'science'. That is a normal thing to do. But it is not a normal thing for liberals, the establishment, and less and less from establishment scientists, doctors, media, politicians, and judges.

We are told to believe so much of what is obviously bullshit, more and more people are beginning to question EVERYTHING!




.

It's not an attempt. I have my pilot license, my airframe AND my power plant license. Aero foil flight depends on globe earth, it is taught to EVERY pilot in flight school because it is the way it is. no amount of your common core fantasy psyop is going to change that.

Calibrated to sea level means their altitude reading does not change with the changing landscape. That's because air pressure stays relatively the same at flight altitude regardless of landscape. So 'calibrated to sea level' may not be YOUR common core answer, but it is the CORRECT answer according to physics.

NASA makes fake videos there is no doubt about it. But that does not mean we did not go to the moon. It just means the video they provide is bullshit, just like your idiotic flat earth theory.

Get your pilots license before you attempt to explain why planes fly the way they do. I don't think you could manage it because if you go to flight school using flat-earth theory as your standard of perception, you won't last a week. The FAA has SYSTEM that ALL aircraft MUST FOLLOW to avoid MIDAIR COLLISIONS. That means that when they take off they are directed BY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL to merge into a LANE OF AIR TRAFFIC according to their destination and departure point.

I swear to god you common core fucks are hilarious.

It's not a sphere or an oblate spheroid either.

Flat earth isnt 'my' theory. I have a paragliding licence..

NASA didnt just fake moon videos, the have faked ISS video and pics, and numerous other situations.
'Calibrated to sea level' would work on a flat earth... so you dont actually have a 'point'!

How do you explain how planes land and take off when the earth is spinning at 25k mph? How do astronauts exit and enter our atmosphere without getting ripped apart? Do they exit and enter the earth going with the spin or against it? How? Why?


.

Last Edited by metric on 10/03/2021 10:16 PM

I didn't say NASA just faked moon landing videos. I said they fake videos and used the moon landing as an example.

'Calibrated to sea level' means altimeters all read roughly 'zero' at sea level regardless of their geologic location because relative to earth center the level of the sea is roughly the same altitude. I'm sorry you can't grasp that. You are victim to pattern non-recognition because of the curriculum you were exposed to as a child. E.g. common core.

Planes can take off and land because the atmosphere is moving roughly the same speed as the surface of the planet, give or take 50mph either way.

Astronauts can leave and enter our atmosphere through controlled acceleration and deceleration and inside a spacecraft built to handle the stress of the maneuvers and atmospheric friction due to differences in speed.

This is all public information and you can do experiments in your own back yard to confirm it for yourself, if your common-core addled mind can handle it.

You are obviously a liberal. Conservatives dont go to nastiness as a default setting...

CTSL works for flat earth..

Why isnt there a problem leaving the atmosphere only re entering it?

.

LOL only liberals take things as nasty which aren't meant that way. Liberals also always accuse the other of what they are doing themselves. Your game is a weak psyop. Bet you don't even believe it yourself, you're just paid to play that hand. Pathetic.

Answer the question... with your 'common core addled mind...

There is actually more problems leaving the atmosphere than re-entering it. The amount of energy that is required is exponentially more than just slowing down for a re-entry sequence. They teach this stuff in grade school btw. Weren't you paying attention?

Really, so where are the flames and shit on exit?

Last Edited by metric on 10/03/2021 10:36 PM

...I sure would hate to be flying around mountains with an altimeter calibrated to sea level...

Have you every watched a launch? It's nothing BUT flames and shit. If you're asking where the flames go when they are further away, they are still there just harder to see because they are burning fuel and canned oxygen and have no atmosphere to react with.

Last Edited by Prodegger. on 10/03/2021 10:43 PM

Trust me. you would NOT want to be flying in ANY plane with an altimeter calibrated to anything else BUT sea level, and I'm here to tell you that there is not one altimeter in ANY flying craft that is calibrated to ANYTHING BUT sea level.

Lots of heat n flames n shit on RE ENTRY, nada on EXIT. They manmage to get the film on re entry....

Last Edited by metric on 10/03/2021 10:44 PM

FKN OATH! Gotta keep it in a straight line!

I've watched probably a hundred launches from my front yard which is roughly 90 miles south of Cape Canaveral. There are most definitely flames. That is a point not even worth arguing. If you are saying there is no flames you need to have your eyes examined. If you are trying to say that there are no flames coming off of the nose of the craft upon exit, that is because the craft is not moving fast enough to create enough friction to ionize the air around it. When it re-enters it is moving exponentially faster.

The flats have invaded this forum. Several threads in the last few days.

Pharmacies are running low on SSRI's too.