I'm challenging xCivicx to A Debate About Flat Earth
- Thread starter Th3Birdman
- Start date
-
- Tags
- debate flat earth
No, we're not doing this. Address the videos I provided, please. You are not talking to Neil, you're talking to Th3Birdman.
The Earth is an oblate spheroid, yes, and the poles are very slightly flattened, yes. It is extremely slight, but it's there. This has nothing to do with the fact that YOU said the image of the Earth I provided was "perfectly spherical", and how I used an actual perfect circle to debunk that. Admit you were wrong.
And you would be 100% incorrect. It is a single image on Kodak film paper, something I've already provided a source to the original image for.
Here it is again:
.jpg?mode=max)
The “Blue Marble”, first photograph of the full Earth seen by human eyes, December 7-19, 1972
Harrison Schmitt, or Ron EvansThe “Blue Marble”, first photograph of the full Earth seen by human eyesApollo 17, December 7-19, 1972, 005:06:24 GETVintage chromogenic print on fiber-based Kodak paper, 20.3 x 25.4cm (8 x 10in), with “A Kodak Paper” watermarks on the verso, numbered...
onlineonly.christies.com
You mean a lunar eclipse??? What does that have to do with anything?
The Sun being blocked by the Earth is a Lunar Eclipse. Apollo missions captured that too:
This is another deflection, meant to sap attention away from the irrefutable proof I gave with my video demonstration. You're attempting to sidetrack admitting you're wrong about there being "no stars" (even though you can clearly see stars in the photo I provided if you look very closely).
It is also (surprise surprise) completely wrong. Exposure is an inalienable part of photography. Like, have you ever fired a camera before? Exposure doesn't just mean you can only see bright things; it is an adjustment, meaning, you can adjust exposure, as the concept is always present.
To suggest exposure doesn't matter here is like saying oxygen doesn't matter to fish. Just like fish breathe oxygen, same as us, exposure matters on the dark side of the moon as well.
This is a nothing sentence. I specifically told you to bring whatever you wanted to say in this thread because you said I was derailing the other one. If you have a problem with that part of the conversation, bring it here.
xCivicx, I have lurked this site for a long time. I have seen every argument you've put forth on this site. Every single one of them has been thoroughly debunked, but you refuse to accept answers to the so-called "stumpers" you have. Most nikkas on this site are not intelligent enough to talk about the math and science that goes into explaining the shape of the Earth.
Unfortunately, you've run into me.
Easily debunked-- you are looking at a sphere from different angles and positions. This can be demonstrated with a model globe and a simple camera.
Anything else, or can we get to my questions that you ducked yesterday?
Reflected
Living in fear in the year of the tiger.
@xCivicx
I didn't see a notification for your response in the previous thread, I respond to everyone, at least before the point of total absurdity.
@Th3Birdman You guys should setup a debate on discord, but I know a few youtube channels that would actually host it in a formal manner if you wanted to go that route.
I didn't see a notification for your response in the previous thread, I respond to everyone, at least before the point of total absurdity.
@Th3Birdman You guys should setup a debate on discord, but I know a few youtube channels that would actually host it in a formal manner if you wanted to go that route.
I am a YouTuber. I run my own stuff, and debate people live. Civic hasn't yet realized the kind of breh he's up against. I literally do this for a living. All I do is provide rebuttals and receipts all day when I'm not streaming lol
He's in for a long day.
Reflected
Living in fear in the year of the tiger.
Have you ever been on Modern Day Debate, or any related channels? Voice sounds a bit familiar. lol
Paradoxical Tiger
Head Youngin of CatSet
If the earth was flat #catset would’ve knocked everything off the edge a long time ago
OneManGang
Veteran
No, we're not doing this. Address the videos I provided, please. You are not talking to Neil, you're talking to Th3Birdman.
The Earth is an oblate spheroid, yes, and the poles are very slightly flattened, yes. It is extremely slight, but it's there. This has nothing to do with the fact that YOU said the image of the Earth I provided was "perfectly spherical", and how I used an actual perfect circle to debunk that. Admit you were wrong.
And you would be 100% incorrect. It is a single image on Kodak film paper, something I've already provided a source to the original image for.
Here it is again:
The “Blue Marble”, first photograph of the full Earth seen by human eyes, December 7-19, 1972
Harrison Schmitt, or Ron EvansThe “Blue Marble”, first photograph of the full Earth seen by human eyesApollo 17, December 7-19, 1972, 005:06:24 GETVintage chromogenic print on fiber-based Kodak paper, 20.3 x 25.4cm (8 x 10in), with “A Kodak Paper” watermarks on the verso, numbered...
You mean a lunar eclipse??? What does that have to do with anything?
The Sun being blocked by the Earth is a Lunar Eclipse. Apollo missions captured that too:
This is another deflection, meant to sap attention away from the irrefutable proof I gave with my video demonstration. You're attempting to sidetrack admitting you're wrong about there being "no stars" (even though you can clearly see stars in the photo I provided if you look very closely).
It is also (surprise surprise) completely wrong. Exposure is an inalienable part of photography. Like, have you ever fired a camera before? Exposure doesn't just mean you can only see bright things; it is an adjustment, meaning, you can adjust exposure, as the concept is always present.
To suggest exposure doesn't matter here is like saying oxygen doesn't matter to fish. Just like fish breathe oxygen, same as us, exposure matters on the dark side of the moon as well.
This is a nothing sentence. I specifically told you to bring whatever you wanted to say in this thread because you said I was derailing the other one. If you have a problem with that part of the conversation, bring it here.
xCivicx, I have lurked this site for a long time. I have seen every argument you've put forth on this site. Every single one of them has been thoroughly debunked, but you refuse to accept answers to the so-called "stumpers" you have. Most nikkas on this site are not intelligent enough to talk about the math and science that goes into explaining the shape of the Earth.
Unfortunately, you've run into me.
Easily debunked-- you are looking at a sphere from different angles and positions. This can be demonstrated with a model globe and a simple camera.
Anything else, or can we get to my questions that you ducked yesterday?
I salute the time and effort you’re putting in because I quit that a long time ago. Keep your foot on they neck bruh
OneManGang
Veteran
Astounding nikkas say things like this in the damn information age where knowledge has never been easier to attain
THE EARTH IS ROUND AND OP IS STILL A RETARD
Fill Collins
I didn't mean to verge!
Flat earthers tell me, what does the government/NASA/"elites" actually gain from telling people otherwise?
I think I have satisfactorily answered your questions, now here are mine (because you basically pretended I didn't say these things to you in the other thread):
Regardless of the shape of the Earth, there are natural phenomena that science communicators and Flat Earthers empirically observe, these being the day/night cycle, the changing of the seasons, eclipses, stars in the Northern Hemisphere being different to the ones in the Southern Hemisphere and sunsets.
Provide for me a Flat Earth model that explains these all at the same time:
-- accounts for the day/night cycle
-- accounts for the seasons
-- accounts for eclipses, solar and lunar
-- accounts for the stars in the Northern Hemisphere being different from the Southern Hemisphere
-- accounts for why we see the sun setting
REMEMBER: Your model needs to explain all of these things AT THE SAME TIME. Do not provide for me multiple models, I'm asking you for ONE.
If you cannot provide a model, provide an explanation for each one of these things that doesn't contradict the other.
Regardless of the shape of the Earth, there are natural phenomena that science communicators and Flat Earthers empirically observe, these being the day/night cycle, the changing of the seasons, eclipses, stars in the Northern Hemisphere being different to the ones in the Southern Hemisphere and sunsets.
Provide for me a Flat Earth model that explains these all at the same time:
-- accounts for the day/night cycle
-- accounts for the seasons
-- accounts for eclipses, solar and lunar
-- accounts for the stars in the Northern Hemisphere being different from the Southern Hemisphere
-- accounts for why we see the sun setting
REMEMBER: Your model needs to explain all of these things AT THE SAME TIME. Do not provide for me multiple models, I'm asking you for ONE.
If you cannot provide a model, provide an explanation for each one of these things that doesn't contradict the other.