I'm challenging xCivicx to A Debate About Flat Earth

[Th3Birdman]

You're slipping

Nikka those are not new moons!


You're literally showing images of the moon with the Sun's light on it. If the Moon is lit, it's NOT a new moon.

Educate yourself, jesus christ:

Phase | Definition, Examples, & Facts

Phase, any of the varying appearances of a celestial body usually as seen from Earth as different amounts of its disk are illuminated by the Sun. The Moon displays eight phases: new, waxing crescent, first quarter, waxing gibbous, full, waning gibbous, last quarter, and waning crescent.

www.britannica.com

 

[Th3Birdman]

I believe that lunar eclipses are caused by a 3rd transparent celestial body crossing paths with the moon

And where is your evidence for this object?

You keep asking for an accurate flat earth model. I never said there was one. This is a strawman. Stop posting it

Nikka, you are well and truly delusional.

By the very nature of you stating "The Earth is flat", you are creating a model. The statement itself is a model. You are making claims about the shape of the Earth, meaning your statement acts as an image would. You have made claims about the Sun in the sky. THAT is a model. You've said the Moon is a projection-- THAT IS A MODEL.

If you suggest the Earth is flat, there has to be an accurate depiction of that claim. I can tell you that an iPhone exists, and I'm able to describe that iPhone where you can draw or write down what that iPhone looks like based on my description.

You are not weaseling out of this: post your model. Draw it, if you need to. YOU ARE MAKING A CLAIM IN A DEBATE. YOU NEED TO SUPPORT IT WITH A MODEL SO THAT WE CAN CHALLENGE THAT CLAIM.

Otherwise you have nothing to debate with and are operating from an advantageous position, where you get to attack our model, but we cannot challenge yours because you don't post one.

You are in this thread talking about how the Sun rotates above the Earth and how that heats the Equator. Surely, you should be able to depict this with an image? Florida and Hawaii are real places. I know, because I've been there, and flown over them to see the shapes of them. The way they are depicted on a globe/map is accurate to my own personal experience observing these places from planes. Because they are real, we can draw them how we see them.

That then follows that we can make an accurate model of the Earth based on our observations.

You don't have one that remotely makes sense and matches observed phenomena. That doesn't concern you? This entire time, you believe something that literally there isn't a shred of objective evidence for. You're clearly religious.

You don't know how shapes work and you don't know how circular motion works. You should go watch a couple youtube videos on circular motion

Lmao you should stop. You can't tell an ellipse from a circle, my nikka.

And I am a YouTuber-- I don't need to watch Flerf YouTubers. I would rather debunk them and make them look foolish to thousands of people.

You know, like I've been doing you

 

[Th3Birdman]

If @xCivicx does not produce a model, consider this debate won, in my favor.


You cannot debate with nothing to debate with. You claim the Earth is flat, you have to provide a way for us to test this claim.

If you're going to post images that you do not support, then you have nothing, and therefore, you don't have an argument.

He's made claims in the affirmative on the Sun's path in the sky, therefore, the model that he subscribes to is the one he posted earlier, which was this:

As we have already debunked this model, and he stated he doesn't even believe this model, he now needs to produce something that matches what he says happens with the Sun in the sky. I will even accept drawings from him.

We need something from him that we can actually verify the validity of. What Flerfs like to do is question reality, but not answer questions about the bubble they think they live in.

You cannot attack our model without providing one. If you admit you have no model, you have admitted defeat.

 

[Geordi]

Nikka those are not new moons!


You're literally showing images of the moon with the Sun's light on it. If the Moon is lit, it's NOT a new moon.

Educate yourself, jesus christ:

Phase | Definition, Examples, & Facts

Phase, any of the varying appearances of a celestial body usually as seen from Earth as different amounts of its disk are illuminated by the Sun. The Moon displays eight phases: new, waxing crescent, first quarter, waxing gibbous, full, waning gibbous, last quarter, and waning crescent.

www.britannica.com

Hold on, so to prove his point he posted an image of the moon developed from a spacecraft orbiting the moon?

Slika:New Moon.jpg - Wikipedija, prosta enciklopedija

sl.wikipedia.org

This marks the first time that accurate shadows at this level of detail are possible in such a computer simulation. The shadows are based on the global elevation map being developed from measurements by the Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter (LOLA) aboard the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). LOLA has already taken more than 10 times as many elevation measurements as all previous missions combined.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Hold on, so to prove his point he posted an image of the moon developed from a spacecraft orbiting the moon?

Slika:New Moon.jpg - Wikipedija, prosta enciklopedija

sl.wikipedia.org

That's what science deniers do-- they use the bits of science that "agree" with them, but deny the bits that don't.

The problem with this method is that science is a whole-- the other parts of science form a collection of knowledge that all fits the other observed phenomena. Astronomy works because chemistry works, for example. We know how hot a star is and what fuel it's burning based on its color, because its chemical makeup and temperature determine that color.

You can't take one part of science to disprove science-- it either all fits, or it doesn't, and that's where science's power comes from- harmony.

Seismographs prove the Earth is a round spheroid, by the way. During an earthquake (another thing Civic's flat earth cannot explain), there are seismic waves that are produced and can be measured with seismographs. What we see on that instrument is that there are P-Waves and S-Waves, and the P-Waves cause a "shadow zone", which tells us not only does this planet have a spherical core, but what that core is made of and how it affects the magnetosphere. That's how geology proves a spherical Earth.

You see, all this shyt is connected. That's how science works.

 

[Th3Birdman]

This nikka @xCivicx is still ducking this thread, trying to make claims in a whole other thread so people won't see this 3-month ass whooping I been giving him, so I'm upping this thread to answer those points this goofy ass dude tried to slide in a nearly dead thread.

You couldnt explain why the diagrams of a new moon and a solar eclipse both show the sun, moon and earth in the exact same positions yet produce the exact opposite effects

Your silly ass thinks posting an image showing two different phenomena is showing "opposite effects".

You don't even understand that you have no clue what you're talking about.

A New Moon is NOT the OPPOSITE of a Solar Eclipse, dummy.

New moons only occur IN THE DAY TIME.

Solar Eclipses only occur IN THE DAY TIME.

How is this "opposite effects"? What is "opposite" here?

You didn't know what the officially established shape of the earth was(according to nasa) then when I explained to you was it was, you even started arguing against the findings of nasa at one point because you didn't want to admit you dont know as much as you want people to think you do.

NASA did not make the statement you made you fukking fool-- that was Neil DeGrasse Tyson, a person who is not, and has never been affiliated with NASA you goddamn moron

Neil is a fukking teacher. The closest NASA came to being affiliated with dude is when they awarded him the Public Service Medal, a medal only awarded TO CIVILIANS.

You literally have no clue what you're talking about.

I said I wasnt responding to anymore of your theorycrafting in that thread until you actually addressed the real world phenomena that supported my statements

Breh, this is a 33-page thread of me doing nothing but debunking your bullshyt. You can lie in other threads, but you can't in this one.

 

[Mike Nasty]

Don't bother debating him. That dummy could just buy a ticket on flight he says doesn't exist, but he'd rather argue it's fake.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Don't bother debating him. That dummy could just buy a ticket on flight he says doesn't exist, but he'd rather argue it's fake.

He just tried to pull some sucker shyt in the Luken thread, and make it seem like I haven't been pulling this nikka's card since July.

I was gonna let this thread rot on the vine, but after that, the smoke has been renewed.

I'm down to embarrass this nikka anytime.

 

[xCivicx]

This nikka @xCivicx is still ducking this thread, trying to make claims in a whole other thread so people won't see this 3-month ass whooping I been giving him, so I'm upping this thread to answer those points this goofy ass dude tried to slide in a nearly dead thread.




Your silly ass thinks posting an image showing two different phenomena is showing "opposite effects".

You don't even understand that you have no clue what you're talking about.

A New Moon is NOT the OPPOSITE of a Solar Eclipse, dummy.

New moons only occur IN THE DAY TIME.

Solar Eclipses only occur IN THE DAY TIME.

How is this "opposite effects"? What is "opposite" here?










NASA did not make the statement you made you fukking fool-- that was Neil DeGrasse Tyson, a person who is not, and has never been affiliated with NASA you goddamn moron

Neil is a fukking teacher. The closest NASA came to being affiliated with dude is when they awarded him the Public Service Medal, a medal only awarded TO CIVILIANS.

You literally have no clue what you're talking about.





Breh, this is a 33-page thread of me doing nothing but debunking your bullshyt. You can lie in other threads, but you can't in this one.

Wait so you think that neil degrasse tyson, a astrophysicist who is directly connected to nasa, came up with the shape of the earth all by himself and nasa, a government institution that claims to have mapped the earth from space, had absolutely no input in his conclusion?? You think what you just posted makes sense?

Those two pictures you posted are almost the exact same

New moon

Solar eclipse

The sun is literally still illuminating the earth in ONLY ONE of these images even though the sun moon and earth are supposedly in the EXACT SAME POSITIONS IN BOTH PHOTOS

What are you not getting about the fact that this doesnt make sense??

 

[xCivicx]

Don't bother debating him. That dummy could just buy a ticket on flight he says doesn't exist, but he'd rather argue it's fake.

What are you talking about?

 

[xCivicx]

He just tried to pull some sucker shyt in the Luken thread, and make it seem like I haven't been pulling this nikka's card since July.

I was gonna let this thread rot on the vine, but after that, the smoke has been renewed.

I'm down to embarrass this nikka anytime.

And you're STILL in here ducking the infrared video.

 

[Devilinurear]

believes the earth is flat but to much of a coward to prove the world wrong.


He can learn how to sail and prove you can't sail from Cali to Asia.

He is just trolling he don't believe his own bullshyt

 

[Th3Birdman]

Wait so you think that neil degrasse tyson, a astrophysicist who is directly connected to nasa, came up with the shape of the earth all by himself and nasa, a government institution that claims to have mapped the earth from space, had absolutely no input in his conclusion??

Oh my god.

Breh-- Neil DeGrasse Tyson is not "directly connected to NASA"; the nikka was a staff member of the Hayden Planetarium, and has been the director of that Planetarium since 96-97.

He has NEVER WORKED FOR NASA.

Further, Neil stated the shape of the earth is an oblate spheroid, similar to a pear.


THIS IS THE PEAR HE WAS TALKING ABOUT GOOFY NIKKA:

This is a Hosui Asian Pear (Pyrus Pyrifolia).

Pyrus pyrifolia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This has been explained to you already. Like always, you ignore evidence that contradicts your bullshyt talking points.

Those two pictures are almost the exact same

New moon

Dummy, THAT IS NOT A NEW MOON.

THAT IS A CRESCENT MOON.

Jesus fukking christ lmao

 

[xCivicx]

Once again



Debunk this @Th3Birdman already

 

[Th3Birdman]

Once again



Debunk this @Th3Birdman already

You have been ducking this thread so long, you seem to have forgotten the parameters of this debate:


YOU need to answer questions. You don't get to keep asking questions and then move on to something else after I've answered them. I get to have a turn to ask you a question. I have been the only person in this thread answering questions.


I'll be more than happy to get to this video, but you still have not provided me with a single model that explains the seasons, the day night cycle, and eclipses all at the same time.

You gave us a stupid gif that I have already thoroughly debunked, and after I did that you ran away from that image, stating it's not a real image.


Well then, you still need to provide an accurate image in that case.



Otherwise, YOU CANNOT CLAIM THE EARTH IS FLAT.