I'm challenging xCivicx to A Debate About Flat Earth

[xCivicx]

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 ABOOUT 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.



Dummy, THAT IS NOT A NEW MOON.

THAT IS A CRESCENT MOON.

Jesus fukking christ lmao

I never said he worked for nasa i said hes connected to them, which he is

And again, he could never "teach" anything about the shape of the earth that wasnt cleared by the government first. You know this

You really went out of your way to google a random pear that most people have probably never heard of lmao

Ngt literally said that the earth is pear shaped with a noticeable bulge. You can try and talk your way around this all you want but the facts are you're wrong and the photos of earth dont look like this pear or a regular pear


The image i posted is of a new moon

The short answer of it is that you cannot see a new moon at night. A new moon is not in the sky at night! It rises with the sun and sets with the sun. The closest you can get to "seeing" a new moon is a "waxing crescent" right after the sun sets, or a "waning crescent" right before the sun rises.

And again you're still talking around my main point, as per usual. The moon completely blocking sunlight in 1 photo and barely blocking any sunlight at all in another pic doesnt make sense. Stay on topic and stop trying to nitpick

 

[Sauce and Footwork]

 

[xCivicx]

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.

Yeah, this is where you lost in this thread

This is why i stopped responding. I told you many times that theres no unified model, but i also explained the seasons, day and night cycles and eclipses all in this thread

You keep asking me to post some unified model because you know there isnt one

I answered every question you asked me in here, in good faith. You're scared to look at that video because its actual real world evidence of some of the concepts that you've been struggling with in this thread

 

[southpawstyle]

I kNoW hEs NoT wITh NASA bUt He KnOwS tHeM

 

[Th3Birdman]

I never said he worked for nasa i said hes connected to them, which he is

And now, you are LYING.

You literally said THIS:

xCivicx said:
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.

This is you, unequivocally attributing a quote from Neil TO NASA. You literally state that was the "officially established" shape of the Earth.

When I challeneged you on this, THEN you tried to juelz and say Neil is "connected" to NASA, even though he's literally not lol

Caught in a lie. Can't wait to see how you try to run this back

And again, he could never "teach" anything about the shape of the earth that wasnt cleared by the government first. You know this

Man, stop it. You are embarrassing yourself.

Private Christian institutions teach religious shyt that has not been "cleared by the government". Princeton is a private school fam, you are just showing you don't know what you're talking about YET AGAIN.

You really went out of your way to google a random pear that most people have probably never heard of lmao

Breh, this is a common pear in Asia. It literally appears across China, Korea and Japan, a combined population of 1.6 billion people.

Just because YOU are under-educated and don't know something exists doesn't mean others don't. A brilliant man like Neil would know of this fruit, especially if I knew about it.

And further, your response to being disproven about the pear thing is, "haha, you googled that"?

fukking embarrassing.

Ngt literally said that the earth is pear shaped with a noticeable bulge. You can try and talk your way around this all you want but the facts are you're wrong and the photos of earth dont look like this pear or a regular pear

Wait, so you're DOUBLING DOWN on this pear thing?
Breh, if you can't understand that the Hosui pear is roughly spherical, I can completely understand why you're a flat earther

The image i posted is of a new moon

No the fukk it was not-- it is a CRESCENT MOON. Dude, how hard is it for you to accept facts? This is incredible:

Lunar phase - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And again you're still talking around my main point, as per usual. The moon completely blocking sunlight in 1 photo and barely blocking any sunlight at all in another pic doesnt make sense. Stay on topic and stop trying to nitpick

No, you are just too stupid to understand explanations being given to you.


A new moon is the face of the moon that we can "see" that is not being illuminated by the sun's light. The diagram simply exists to show you the way this happens. These happen 12 times a year, or once every month.

New moon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You claimed this is OPPOSITE to a solar eclipse, because your silly ass is under the impression that New Moons occur AT NIGHT.

THEY DON'T.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Yeah, this is where you lost in this thread

This is why i stopped responding. I told you many times that theres no unified model, but i also explained the seasons, day and night cycles and eclipses all in this thread

You keep asking me to post some unified model because you know there isnt one

I answered every question you asked me in here, in good faith. You're scared to look at that video because its actual real world evidence of some of the concepts that you've been struggling with in this thread

I'm sure it does seem like talking in circles to a nikka that cannot keep up with the conversation


First of all, you stopped responding because the heat was too hot. This is exactly the same stunt Luken pulled when I turned up the stove on his ass. You are only responding now because you think people have lost interest in this thread, so you can spread your lies unmolested.

Second, yeah, I DO keep asking you for a unified model because I know there isn't one.

That should be concerning for you-- you literally subscribe to an ideology that YOU KNOW there isn't evidence for. So either you are admitting you're talking out of your ass, or you are admitting to lying about what you believe, because you like the attention for being known as the tallest midget on this forum.

If there is no model, you don't have a valid claim.

The heliocentric model accounts for every single phenomenon we observe in reality.


And lastly, YOU HAVE NOT answered every question I have asked you. I have asked you to explain the seasons, and you used a model that YOU ADMIT IS INCORRECT.


Therefore, YOU HAVE NOT ANSWERED THE FUKKING QUESTION.

Do you not see the problem? You have tried to "answer" my questions with models that you have admitted are inaccurate. That means you still haven't answered the questions



Damn nikka, why is this so hard for you to understand??????????

 

[xCivicx]

And now, you are LYING.

You literally said THIS:



This is you, unequivocally attributing a quote from Neil TO NASA. You literally state that was the "officially established" shape of the Earth.

When I challeneged you on this, THEN you tried to juelz and say Neil is "connected" to NASA, even though he's literally not lol

Caught in a lie. Can't wait to see how you try to run this back





Man, stop it. You are embarrassing yourself.

Private Christian institutions teach religious shyt that has not been "cleared by the government". Princeton is a private school fam, you are just showing you don't know what you're talking about YET AGAIN.




Breh, this is a common pear in Asia. It literally appears across China, Korea and Japan, a combined population of 1.6 billion people.

Just because YOU are under-educated and don't know something exists doesn't mean others don't. A brilliant man like Neil would know of this fruit, especially if I knew about it.

And further, your response to being disproven about the pear thing is, "haha, you googled that"?

fukking embarrassing.




Wait, so you're DOUBLING DOWN on this pear thing?
Breh, if you can't understand that the Hosui pear is roughly spherical, I can completely understand why you're a flat earther





No the fukk it was not-- it is a CRESCENT MOON. Dude, how hard is it for you to accept facts? This is incredible:

Lunar phase - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

No, you are just too stupid to understand explanations being given to you.


A new moon is the face of the moon that we can "see" that is not being illuminated by the sun's light. The diagram simply exists to show you the way this happens. These happen 12 times a year, or once every month.

New moon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You claimed this is OPPOSITE to a solar eclipse, because your silly ass is under the impression that New Moons occur AT NIGHT.

THEY DON'T.

Ngt doesnt work for a private education institution he works for an institution that receives its curriculum from government institutions so I'm not sure why you posted yet another deflection

The statement i posted in quotes explains that the crescent moon is the closest we can come to being able to see a new moon. I posted that picture to show that, once again, with the sun being behind the moon during both a new moon and a solar eclipse, 2 different results are produced, and that DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, even if you factor in that both occur during the day

Now you're calling ngt brilliant when you were literally arguing against him earlier in this thread. Lol

You even qualified the name of that pear because you KNOW that its not a regular pear. Wouldnt the brilliant ngt be aware enough to ALSO qualify the specific "hosui pear", if he was ACTUALLY talking about that pear?

 

[xCivicx]

I'm sure it does seem like talking in circles to a nikka that cannot keep up with the conversation


First of all, you stopped responding because the heat was too hot. This is exactly the same stunt Luken pulled when I turned up the stove on his ass. You are only responding now because you think people have lost interest in this thread, so you can spread your lies unmolested.

Second, yeah, I DO keep asking you for a unified model because I know there isn't one.

That should be concerning for you-- you literally subscribe to an ideology that YOU KNOW there isn't evidence for. So either you are admitting you're talking out of your ass, or you are admitting to lying about what you believe, because you like the attention for being known as the tallest midget on this forum.

If there is no model, you don't have a valid claim.

The heliocentric model accounts for every single phenomenon we observe in reality.


And lastly, YOU HAVE NOT answered every question I have asked you. I have asked you to explain the seasons, and you used a model that YOU ADMIT IS INCORRECT.


Therefore, YOU HAVE NOT ANSWERED THE FUKKING QUESTION.

Do you not see the problem? You have tried to "answer" my questions with models that you have admitted are inaccurate. That means you still haven't answered the questions



Damn nikka, why is this so hard for you to understand??????????

The heliocentric thoery absolutely does not account for whats in the video that you're too scared to watch

It does not account for the time discrepancy between the sidereal and solar day

It does not account for the concept of flight on a ball spinning at different accelerations at different locations on said globe

You cannot and will not ever be able to produce evidence of water "curving"

You cannot and will not ever be able produce an example of water sticking to a ball

Your problem is that you keep trying to argue your points with mathematical equatiobs and theories

Im just posting real life observable phenomena that completely dismantle helicentric theory

This thread has gone for a lot of pages with very little new information being added after a certain point, just talking in circles

I have many many more proofs that point towards the earth being flat and unmoving. You know this because apparently you've been watching me for years

And yes, i have explained the seasons. Concentric centripetal motion of the celestial bodies spiraling inward and outward. Thats the explanation.

But then again you did seem to be struggling with the concept of centripetal motion ealier in the thread when i introduced it, so i can see why its taking some time for you to catch on

 

[Jasonmask]

Idk how or why you guys waste time w these imbeciles

 

[Sauce and Footwork]

The heliocentric thoery absolutely does not account for whats in the video that you're too scared to watch

It does not account for the time discrepancy between the sidereal and solar day

It does not account for the concept of flight on a ball spinning at different accelerations at different locations on said globe

You cannot and will not ever be able to produce evidence of water "curving"

You cannot and will not ever be able produce an example of water sticking to a ball

Your problem is that you keep trying to argue your points with mathematical equatiobs and theories

Im just posting real life observable phenomena that completely dismantle helicentric theory

This thread has gone for a lot of pages with very little new information being added after a certain point, just talking in circles

I have many many more proofs that point towards the earth being flat and unmoving. You know this because apparently you've been watching me for years

And yes, i have explained the seasons. Concentric centripetal motion of the celestial bodies spiraling inward and outward. Thats the explanation.

But then again you did seem to be struggling with the concept of centripetal motion ealier in the thread when i introduced it, so i can see why its taking some time for you to catch on

Bro are you really serious right now??? Like you legit not trollin???

 

[Th3Birdman]

Ngt doesnt work for a private education institution he works for an institution that receives its curriculum from government institutions so I'm not sure why you posted yet another deflection

1. In addition to giving lectures for the University of Maryland, Neil was a researcher for Princeton. Princeton is a private university:

Princeton University - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The pear comment came after his tenure with Maryland, which ended in the 80s.

2. Again, you said NASA was the one to make the claim, because you thought Neil was a NASA scientist. He is not, and has never been-- accept the fukking L bro. You are looking real bad right now.

The statement i posted in quotes explains that the crescent moon is the closest we can come to being able to see a new moon. I posted that picture to show that, once again, with the sun being behind the moon during both a new moon and a solar eclipse, 2 different results are produced, and that DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, even if you factor in that both occur during the day

You just debunked yourself-- the crescent moon is THE CLOSEST we can come to being able to see a new moon. IT IS NOT A NEW MOON.

Self-induced L.

Now you're calling ngt brilliant when you were literally arguing against him earlier in this thread. Lol

You even qualified the name of that pear because you KNOW that its not a regular pear. Wouldnt the brilliant ngt be aware enough to ALSO qualify the specific "hosui pear", if he was ACTUALLY talking about that pear?

Neil is a fukking astrophysicist; he's brilliant by definition.

And you're lying again. I did not ARGUE AGAINST what Neil said. I stated multiple times that you are trying to bring others into OUR ARGUMENT, attributing Neil's quotes to me, as if they are positions that I personally hold.

I have been trying to get you to focus on MY arguments. For the millionth time:

You are in a debate with Th3Birdman. You are not debating with Neil. You must keep the debate to statements I've made and questions I've raised.

I have not used The Flat Earth Society against you, so stop using other institutions against me.

Learn how to debate.

 

[xCivicx]

1. In addition to giving lectures for the University of Maryland, Neil was a researcher for Princeton. Princeton is a private university:

Princeton University - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The pear comment came after his tenure with Maryland, which ended in the 80s.

2. Again, you said NASA was the one to make the claim, because you thought Neil was a NASA scientist. He is not, and has never been-- accept the fukking L bro. You are looking real bad right now.







You just debunked yourself-- the crescent moon is THE CLOSEST we can come to being able to see a new moon. IT IS NOT A NEW MOON.

Self-induced L.






Neil is a fukking astrophysicist; he's brilliant by definition.

And you're lying again. I did not ARGUE AGAINST what Neil said. I stated multiple times that you are trying to bring others into OUR ARGUMENT, attributing Neil's quotes to me, as if they are positions that I personally hold.

I have been trying to get you to focus on MY arguments. For the millionth time:

You are in a debate with Th3Birdman. You are not debating with Neil. You must keep the debate to statements I've made and questions I've raised.

I have not used The Flat Earth Society against you, so stop using other institutions against me.

Learn how to debate.

Again, i never said he was a nasa scientist. I said they have to sign off on the things that he teaches. You're imagining everything else

Nasa has written articles about ngt and he tours nasa facilities fairly recently. Hes connected to nasa

The reason ngt was brought up was because the shape of the earth that HE puts forth is the generally accepted shape of the earth according to your community. If you cant even agree on something as basic and accepted as that, coming from the heliocentric community, then what are you even arguing?

Again, the crescent moon photo was to show that two different phenomena occur when the sun moon and earth are in the exact same positions. Thats literally it

 

[Th3Birdman]

The heliocentric thoery absolutely does not account for whats in the video that you're too scared to watch

It does not account for the time discrepancy between the sidereal and solar day

It does not account for the concept of flight on a ball spinning at different accelerations at different locations on said globe

You cannot and will not ever be able to produce evidence of water "curving"

You cannot and will not ever be able produce an example of water sticking to a ball

Your problem is that you keep trying to argue your points with mathematical equatiobs and theories

Im just posting real life observable phenomena that completely dismantle helicentric theory

This thread has gone for a lot of pages with very little new information being added after a certain point, just talking in circles

I have many many more proofs that point towards the earth being flat and unmoving. You know this because apparently you've been watching me for years

And yes, i have explained the seasons. Concentric centripetal motion of the celestial bodies spiraling inward and outward. Thats the explanation.

But then again you did seem to be struggling with the concept of centripetal motion ealier in the thread when i introduced it, so i can see why its taking some time for you to catch on

Literally every point you made here is false.

1. Stop trying to avoid what I have already presented and trying to move on. I'll get to this video, but only after you have provided me with a model that explains the phenomenon we see in reality, i.e., seasons, day night cycle, 24 hours of night/day in Antarctic and Arctic, etc.

2. You don't know what a sidereal day and solar day are. Multiple people in the thread (including me) have showed you that you don't know the difference between these two concepts. You confuse a sidereal day with a solar day. You are just repeating already debunked Flerf talking points.

3. This is gibberish. You don't even know what you're trying to say. Planes continue to retain the momentum imparted upon them by the spin of the Earth. This is baby's first physics lesson:

Inertial frame of reference - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

4. Here is water curving:

5. I'll do you one better-- here is an image and video of water AS A BALL, which is also evidence of water curving:

6. Theories are how facts are explained, genius. You don't know what words mean.

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years!

www.dictionary.com

7. You haven't posted a SINGLE item that debunks the Heliocentric model. It is embarrassing that you believe you have.

And yes, i have explained the seasons. Concentric centripetal motion of the celestial bodies spiraling inward and outward. Thats the explanation.

And finally, you have NOT explained the seasons. Just saying something is not an explanation-- YOU NEED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF THAT ASSERTION.

This requires a testable model. This is why we keep asking you for a model. In order for a statement about nature to have any power, it must come with a model that can be tested. You admit your model doesn't exist, therefore YOU HAVE NOT EXPLAINED THE SEASONS

You at best have a hypothesis, but one that is easily disproved by observation and math.

 

[Geordi]

This thread is back. We got tourists going to space and nikkas still dont believe.


Its like the articles that said after the airplane was invented many people still would not believe it happened.

 

[Th3Birdman]

Again, i never said he was a nasa scientist. I said they have to sign off on the things that he teaches. You're imagining everything else

Nasa has written articles about ngt and he tours nasa facilities fairly recently. Hes connected to nasa

The reason ngt was brought up was because the shape of the earth that HE puts forth is the generally accepted shape of the earth according to your community. If you cant even agree on something as basic and accepted as that, coming from the heliocentric community, then what are you even arguing?

Again, the crescent moon photo was to show that two different phenomena occur when the sun moon and earth are in the exact same positions. Thats literally it

Another basket of bullshyt and lies.

YOU SAID NASA OFFICIALLY STATED THAT WAS THE SHAPE OF THE EARTH. Stop fukking lying.

Give me a link of NASA referring to the Earth in the way Neil did.



Neil is literally the first and only human that has referred to the Earth as "pear-shaped", because he is a science communicator, and is trying to dumb it down for speds like you that can't understand basic things like what an oblate spheroid is.

Everyone to say it after him is repeating what he said because it's a good approximation and visual for the lay person.

Every other institution of science refers to it as an oblate spheroid. It's sad that you don't understand the dumbed down version.



And the crescent moon photo was a photo of a crescent moon. The Moon moves, you idiot-- by the time it's a waxing crescent, it has MOVED. It is NOT the same thing or even the same position as a New Moon, because if it was IT WOULD BE A NEW MOON.

Jesus.