Wouldn't that mean night was always drastically longer than the day and it would be day here and in australia simultaniously, even if the sun orbits the earth like that.
Or does the sun kind of wizz around just out of reach in a fixed patern?
I just cannot fathom why people choose to buy into this shit. It's just completely beyond my comprehension that people would come up with, much less believe, any of this.
Plus, these are hypotheses, not theories; theories need supporting evidence.
I was about to make a post about this exact question. It fascinates me endlessly, to the point where I've probably watched more flat earth videos than most flat earthers.
The closest to an answer I've got is that I just think these people either believe they're smarter than the school system or society has ever given them credit for, or that they're aware they might be a little less intelligent on some level, so seek to grasp on to any conspiracy theory that could be plausibly true if you choose to follow one very narrow line of logic (such as "I can't see the curve").
The FE lot are always going on about 'observable reality', making out that if you can't see something with your naked eye, it mustn't exist. They also love to tell you whatever they've found is irrefutable, yet ignore or accuse anyone attempting to refute it as either an idiot or a NASA shill.
In short, I think it's a way to make themselves feel clever. They've worked out (aka been spoonfed an idea) the biggest conspiracy ever, and they're in on it and all the clever scientists are either stupid or evil. The only reason to do this would be to salve their wounded egos.
There also seems to be a religious element for some of them, because apparently the bible's description of the earth doesn't work with a round earth or heliocentric model. There's plenty of atheist FE nuts, though.
On a basic level flat earth and the sun going around the earth is much more intuitive it is only that you have been told the opposite all your life you accept it as more reasonable.
When you think about it the idea that down changes where you are and to the exact opposite is utterly ridiculous.
And the idea that it isn't that the small yellow disk in the sky we can see moving across the sky is moving across the sky but we are spinning at over 1000mph at the equator 'but just don't notice' is absurd.
The best part is that it pretty much started off as a 4chan /x/ in-joke. What's the dumbest conspiracy we can come up with and see if people buy it? It took off faster than anybody could have expected I'm sure.
It's fashionable to shit on "the other place" around here but the way its userbase has wielded influence over wider internet culture to begin meta-trolling society at large over the last decade is fucking great.
I suppose there's two types of people, those who latch on to the more intuitive idea, because why wouldn't you trust your own brain, and those that enjoyed immensely the feeling you get when you learn the far more complex and awe inspiring ideas in play.
I'm really not trying to be an intellectual snob about it, though it's beginning to sound that way.
It's been said by some that 4chan truly did meme the Trump presidency into existence. I don't know if I want that to be true or not. It's impressive but terrifying.
I keep looking at the picture and then looking at the replies and getting confused because they're not in all caps. Every time I scroll past the thread I just assume it's on /iq/.
They didn't invent it, no more than /pol/ invented Donald Trump. They are certainly responsible in a large part for its contemporary popularisation, along with similar sub-communities on Reddit etc which are basically descendants of 4chan.
>>4492 The problem is that there are a lot of people who believe it, but the communities are littered with trolls (actual old fashioned trolls, not the modern twitter ones) who are egging them on.
The non FE people (such as the one this chap was replying to) are a huge part of the problem too, I reckon. There's no sense encouraging them, and we already know we can't unmake their minds on the matter.
The only FE video that made me sad was one in which the bloke was talking about teaching his daughter her teachers were lying to her.
The problem is most of his videos only have at most a hundred views (how did you even find him) so that is hardly a good example I found this guy with a quick search their video has 40,000 views
>Isn't the whole FE thing just a massive psy-op to tar all conspiracy theorists as mental?
Why would you possibly need that, when mental people believe these things anyway?
Take a good look at all of the major religions especially the ones you don't believe in, or ones that have died out now consider how many people believe/believed in them in them and how socially acceptable it is to believe/believed in them despite the craziness of what they believe/believed.
And aside from anything else I fail to see what these ideas have to do with devaluing 'real conspiracies'. If a government official announced tomorrow that there has been wide spread corruption and ministers are embezzling millions of pounds and taking bribes for writing favourable legislature then I fail to see how a man believing that the earth is inside out and the real surface is populated by dinosaurs devalues the other persons credibility.
>>4499 >I fail to see how a man believing that the earth is inside out and the real surface is populated by dinosaurs devalues the other persons credibility
Have you not being paying any attention to how establishment media works?
The reporting of Skripal has been a perfect example of how anyone who questions official narratives is a... dun, dun, dun, unhinged conspiracy theorist, of the Ike and Jones variety.
>>4500 >The reporting of Skripal has been a perfect example of how anyone who questions official narratives is a... dun, dun, dun, unhinged conspiracy theorist,
I'm not quite sure what you mean by this? The Russians did it. There isn't enough evidence to prove it, but they like everyone thinking it was them but not being able to prove it, they like everyone to know that if you fuck with them one day they are coming for you and no one can stop them.
What is the idea that you think is being dismissed off hand? What are the questions that are being suppressed?
Do you think it was some sort of false flag? If that was the case it seems pointless our response has been fairly feeble.
>of the Ike and Jones variety.
You mean like the guy who though he found the flaw in MI6 psyOps because of simular time codes on pictures, and was highly obnoxious aboutr it, but he failed to consider airports have corridors that look the same? I couldn't imagine why people would dismiss them off hand.
>>4501 >I'm not quite sure what you mean by this? The Russians did it. There isn't enough evidence to prove it, but they like everyone thinking it was them but not being able to prove it
One of those "unknown knowns" that led to the Iraq misadventure.
It was a throwaway example, but sure, you're right, it's utterly wrong to question the official narrative:
The laughably incompetent assassins of the world's most nefarious security state (completely subverting our rather bloated GCHQ) - run simultaneously by a decentralised "Wild East" oligarchy and the iron will of that modern day Napoleon, Putin - did totally try to knock off a kindly old-Ruskie who never troubled anyone/brave, self-sacrificing dissident/er... MI6 collaborator (depending on when you tuned into the news).
Pissing your pants and jabbering incoherently isn't the same as a rebuttal lad, do better, write something more constructive. Otherwise it isn't a shock people dismiss your opinions as 'of the Ike and Jones variety'.
>>4506 You know how reasonable doubt works. Lay out a plausible alternative for us that accounts for two deaths, three seriously ill, and the presence of two positively identified GRU operatives in a residential area of Salisbury in the vicinity of the target's home and nowhere near the tourist trail.
Or alternatively, save yourself some money by bulk-buying incontinence pads on AliExpress.
>>4507 I can't question the validity of a claim unless I offer an alternative? Sorry to say it, but you're being silly.
Could it be that the specifics of the murky world of international espionage are simply unknown to a bunch of ill-informed pseuds on an imageboard? You're wanting a certainty that is far beyond any of our clearances.
I merely pointed out how those who don't accept the inconsistent narrative offered by the British state, are subsequently (and routinely) smeared by establishment media. This shouldn't be a surprise. But perhaps, to you, it is.
>>4508 >I can't question the validity of a claim unless I offer an alternative?
Correct. That is generally how scepticism works. If you want to question the explanation, you need to explain what doesn't add up or what isn't accounted for. All you've in before "that wasn't me" done is spot empty incoherent conspiracy bollocks.
>a bunch of ill-informed pseuds on an imageboard
PKB, lad.
Well lets look at what you've actually claimed and go from there...
>The laughably incompetent assassins of the world's most nefarious security state (completely subverting our rather bloated GCHQ) - run simultaneously by a decentralised "Wild East" oligarchy and the iron will of that modern day Napoleon, Putin -
>The laughably incompetent assassins of the world's most nefarious security state (completely subverting our rather bloated GCHQ)
GCHQ is not omnipotent and this isn't a group of eskimo teenagers plotting a jihad on Facebook. The Russian agents understand how to use secure methods of communication. It would be like claiming that 9/11 couldn’t happen because the US air force exists.
>run simultaneously by a decentralised "Wild East" oligarchy and the iron will of that modern day Napoleon, Putin -
I'm not quite sure what you are trying to claim here, it is almost like you are trying to say the attack couldn't have happened because it is impossible for the Russian state to exist and operate even though it plainly does as we see it every day. Those 2 ideas are not as contradictory as you think that is basically how the Roman Empire operated for hundreds of years.
>did totally try to knock off a kindly old-Ruskie who never troubled anyone/brave, self-sacrificing dissident/er... MI6 collaborator (depending on when you tuned into the news).
>did totally try to knock off
Well he was poisoned with Novichok so someone obviously did try to kill him and killed several others in the process. the question then becomes who would have the capacity to do that and a motivation to do that
>a kindly old-Ruskie who never troubled anyone/brave, self-sacrificing dissident/er... MI6 collaborator (depending on when you tuned into the news).
Well yes he is certainly suspected a MI6 turn coat I don't think anyone is disputing that, and quite crucially the Russians believe he was and have openly stated it and convicted him of the crime.
So does any of this provide constructive argument for why these events happened and the official line is bullshit? not really.
