Fash20:


No matter the shielding you cannot emulate vacuum or space where there is no friction.

Stop making short, blind assertions that make no sense. Explain your position fully.

Msauza:



Bwahaha… this is not true!!!

Pilots and particularly airline companies avoid flying over the ocean in a longer distance. Hence just like human jumping over water to the other side, they would mainly avoid jumping directly and instead use stepping stones to shorten the distance of jumping over. It's better as it helps one from taking longer steps as to end up falling over and dirty oneself. Now, for airlines it is lucrative, safe and helps in terms of refueling.

Do you folks use common sense at all? Look at that map again. Why would a plane need to extend its journey by thousands of miles just to refuel? Alter its flight path by over 180° in a different direction when it could fly straight and short across the Indian ocean? How is it more lucrative to add thousands of miles extra to a journey? You make no sense.

Rossikki:
You make no sense. If "gravity" is powerful enough to keep all matter glued to the earth, including oceans and buildings, how do birds and insects rise up and fly? Saying it is because they eat and have energy is utterly ludicrous and fails to address the question. What sort of energy does an insect garner that can defy the powerful 'gravity' holding whole oceans and all land and objects to a spinning globe?

You still don't get it my man.
I'm trying to break it down for you as simple as possible. Try and rationalize. We are all objective here, stating facts and figures. Forget about theory this, theory that.

Gravity has magnitude, direction. It keeps all object to the surface of the earth. Even clouds are suspended in the air (all they are, are floating waters). They rise and increase in weight till they evaporate to drop at rain at certain temperatures and heights. Do you know that, if not for force of gravity, water (clouds) will rise indefinitely? And never fall back?

Buildings and seas have their "resoved" force in the direction of gravity. They are of great weights and have zero kinetic energy. This simply means, they do not have any tendency to oppose gravitational force. Do you know how loads for building are calculated?

It is called a dumping process, the load from the roof is sent to beams, beams sent to columns, sent to foundations deep below the earth surface. Water bodies met loads are far below sea level. In fact, there is no water load at 1cm above sea level.

Earth is denser at subsurface level. And mountains masses lies more below the ground. That is if you see a mountain of 10m height, about 20m is buried below ground level.

Now what I'm trying to explain to you is that, every natural and engineered mass on the circle is so designed by God (copied by the engineers) to have its weight in the sphere. It weighs "nothing" outside the sphere.

Now come to dynamic objects id est insects, birds, helium balloons, planes, helicopters, etc. The principle here is to make the overall weight less than the gravitational weight (do you know the 4 forces of a plane? Lift, drag.. .etc).

These objects are so designed that their shape makes it easy for them to 'walk' on a air. Basically sir, that's what all flying objects do. If the world is a vacuum, nothing will fly. Objects are made with lightweight material, with wings and some amount of internal energy to 'propel them.

It's simply physics. For insects, they are constantly flapping their wings in air, just like fishes are flapping their wings in water. For one downward flap, they rise by an inch. The wings curve in and flap down again. Continuously they fly. Their weights (are so small, that is zero load) and they are constantly generating energy. This makes them fly.

Others glide through air. Gravity is a simple concept my man. Open your mind wide and you will find the possibilities endless.

Rossikki:
You are not ready to learn. You are stuck in the "I learnt this and that in school and it can't be wrong" mode.

Lol broda, stop playing the blame game.
I have not mentioned "school" once in my assertions.

You ask questions, I answer you. But you have been on the defensive since. Try and prove me something. Instead of being the antagonist,

Give me something from the flat earth hypothesis.

Don't say NASA this, NASA that. Tell me, because the earth is flat, that is why this is.. ....

Convince me a shilling!

Rossikki:
Stop making short, blind assertions that make no sense. Explain your position fully.

What else do want me to say. Your wahala is getting too much

BTW
Up gunners. We won narrowly today.

WTF! are people still believing 'the earth is flat' bullsh!t?

whiz10:
WTF! are people still believing 'the earth is flat' bullsh!t?

Rossikki

FutureSenator:


You still don't get it my man.
I'm trying to break it down for you as simple as possible. Try and rationalize. We are all objective here, stating facts and figures. Forget about theory this, theory that.

Gravity has magnitude, direction. It keeps all object to the surface of the earth. Even clouds are suspended in the air (all they are, are floating waters). They rise and increase in weight till they evaporate to drop at rain at certain temperatures and heights. Do you know that, if not for force of gravity, water (clouds) will rise indefinitely? And never fall back?

Buildings and seas have their "resoved" force in the direction of gravity. They are of great weights and have zero kinetic energy. This simply means, they do not have any tendency to oppose gravitational force. Do you know how loads for building are calculated?

It is called a dumping process, the load from the roof is sent to beams, beams sent to columns, sent to foundations deep below the earth surface. Water bodies met loads are far below sea level. In fact, there is no water load at 1cm above sea level.

Earth is denser at subsurface level. And mountains masses lies more below the ground. That is if you see a mountain of 10m height, about 20m is buried below ground level.

Now what I'm trying to explain to you is that, every natural and engineered mass on the circle is so designed by God (copied by the engineers) to have its weight in the sphere. It weighs "nothing" outside the sphere.

Now come to dynamic objects id est insects, birds, helium balloons, planes, helicopters, etc. The principle here is to make the overall weight less than the gravitational weight (do you know the 4 forces of a plane? Lift, drag.. .etc).

These objects are so designed that their shape makes it easy for them to 'walk' on a air. Basically sir, that's what all flying objects do. If the world is a vacuum, nothing will fly. Objects are made with lightweight material, with wings and some amount of internal energy to 'propel them.

It's simply physics. For insects, they are constantly flapping their wings in air, just like fishes are flapping their wings in water. For one downward flap, they rise by an inch. The wings curve in and flap down again. Continuously they fly. Their weights (are so small, that is zero load) and they are constantly generating energy. This makes them fly.

Others glide through air. Gravity is a simple concept my man. Open your mind wide and you will find the possibilities endless.

High falutin noise that does NOT address the issue. The reason you are so convoluted in your explanation is because you have no option but to confuse people. Talking about ''gravitational weight''. What nonsense is that? PROVE the existence of gravity first before talking of ''gravitational weight''. Everything around us indicates that objects fall down to the air when their are heavier than the air. When they are lighter, like a helium balloon for instance, they rise unaided. Beyond that, NOTHING LIKE 'gravity' is proven to exist. The only reason Newton came up with the 'gravity' scam is so that they could explain how it was possible for humans and buildings and matter to stick to the underside of their phantom globe without falling off, and to explain their claim that the earth and other 'planets' were spinning around the sun.



EXCERPTS - GRAVITY DOES NOT EXIST

1) “Any object which is heavier than the air, and which is unsupported, has a natural tendency to fall by its own weight. Newton's famous apple at Woolsthorpe, or any other apple when ripe, loses hold of its stalk, and, being heavier than the air, drops as a matter of necessity, to the ground, totally irrespective of any attraction of the Earth. For, if such attraction existed, why does not the Earth attract the rising smoke which is not nearly so heavy as the apple? The answer is simple - because the smoke is lighter than the air, and, therefore, does not fall but ascends. Gravitation is only a subterfuge, employed by Newton in his attempt to prove that the Earth revolves round the Sun, and the quicker it is relegated to the tomb of all the Capulets, the better will it be for all classes of society.” - David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma”


2) ''The ‘law of gravitation’ is said by the advocates of the Newtonian system of astronomy, to be the greatest discovery of science, and the foundation of the whole of modern astronomy. If, therefore, it can be shown that gravitation is a pure assumption, and an imagination of the mind only, that it has no existence outside of the brains of its expounders and advocates, the whole of the hypotheses of this modern so-called science fall to the ground as flat as the surface of the ocean, and this ‘most exact of all sciences,’ this wonderful ‘feat of the intellect’ becomes at once the most ridiculous superstition and the most gigantic imposture to which ignorance and credulity could ever be exposed.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny”


3) ''Einstein’s theory of relativity and the entire heliocentric model of the universe hinges upon Newton’s “law of gravitation.” Heliocentrists claim that the Sun is the most massive object in the heavens, more massive even than the Earth, and therefore the Earth and other planets by “law” are caught up in the Sun’s “gravity” and forced to orbit perpetual circles/ellipses around it. They claim that gravity also somehow allows people, buildings, the oceans, and all of nature to exist on the under-side of their “ball-Earth” without falling off.


4) Now, even if gravity did exist, why would it cause both planets to orbit the Sun and people to stick to the Earth? Gravity should either cause people to float in suspended circular orbits around the Earth, or it should cause the Earth to be pulled and crash into the Sun! What sort of magic is “gravity” that it can glue people’s feet to the ball-Earth, while causing Earth itself to revolve ellipses round the Sun? The two effects are very different yet the same cause is attributed to both.


5) “Take the case of a shot propelled from a cannon. By the force of the explosion and the influence of the reputed action of gravitation, the shot forms a parabolic curve, and finally falls to the earth. Here we may ask, why - if the forces are the same, viz., direct impulse and gravitation - does not the shot form an orbit like that of a planet, and revolve round the earth? The Newtonian may reply, because the impulse which propelled the shot is temporary; and the impulse which propelled the planet is permanent. Precisely so; but why is the impulse permanent in the case of the planet revolving round the sun? What is the cause of this permanence?” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”



6) “If the sun is pulling with such power at the earth and all her sister planets, why do they not fall down upon him?” -A. Giberne, “Sun, Moon, and Stars”


7) ''Furthermore, this magnetic-like attraction of massive objects gravity is purported to have can be found nowhere in the natural world. There is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other shaped-object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it! There is nothing on Earth massive enough that it can be shown to cause even a dust-bunny to stick to or orbit around it! Try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find that everything falls or flies off, and nothing sticks to or orbits it. To claim the existence of a physical “law” without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not science.''


Learn more.....

Gravity Does Not Exist:

http://ifers.123.st/t158-gravity-does-not-exist

Rossikki:


High falutin noise that does NOT address the issue. The reason you are so convoluted in your explanation is because you have no option but to confuse people. Talking about ''gravitational weight''. What nonsense is that? PROVE the existence of gravity first before talking of ''gravitational weight''. Everything around us indicates that objects fall down to the air when their are heavier than the air. When they are lighter, like a helium balloon for instance, they rise unaided. Beyond that, NOTHING LIKE 'gravity' is proven to exist. The only reason Newton came up with the 'gravity' scam is so that they could explain how it was possible for humans and buildings and matter to stick to the underside of their phantom globe without falling off, and to explain their claim that the earth and other 'planets' were spinning around the sun.



EXCERPTS - GRAVITY DOES NOT EXIST

1) “Any object which is heavier than the air, and which is unsupported, has a natural tendency to fall by its own weight. Newton's famous apple at Woolsthorpe, or any other apple when ripe, loses hold of its stalk, and, being heavier than the air, drops as a matter of necessity, to the ground, totally irrespective of any attraction of the Earth. For, if such attraction existed, why does not the Earth attract the rising smoke which is not nearly so heavy as the apple? The answer is simple - because the smoke is lighter than the air, and, therefore, does not fall but ascends. Gravitation is only a subterfuge, employed by Newton in his attempt to prove that the Earth revolves round the Sun, and the quicker it is relegated to the tomb of all the Capulets, the better will it be for all classes of society.” - David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma”


2) ''The ‘law of gravitation’ is said by the advocates of the Newtonian system of astronomy, to be the greatest discovery of science, and the foundation of the whole of modern astronomy. If, therefore, it can be shown that gravitation is a pure assumption, and an imagination of the mind only, that it has no existence outside of the brains of its expounders and advocates, the whole of the hypotheses of this modern so-called science fall to the ground as flat as the surface of the ocean, and this ‘most exact of all sciences,’ this wonderful ‘feat of the intellect’ becomes at once the most ridiculous superstition and the most gigantic imposture to which ignorance and credulity could ever be exposed.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny”


3) ''Einstein’s theory of relativity and the entire heliocentric model of the universe hinges upon Newton’s “law of gravitation.” Heliocentrists claim that the Sun is the most massive object in the heavens, more massive even than the Earth, and therefore the Earth and other planets by “law” are caught up in the Sun’s “gravity” and forced to orbit perpetual circles/ellipses around it. They claim that gravity also somehow allows people, buildings, the oceans, and all of nature to exist on the under-side of their “ball-Earth” without falling off.


4) Now, even if gravity did exist, why would it cause both planets to orbit the Sun and people to stick to the Earth? Gravity should either cause people to float in suspended circular orbits around the Earth, or it should cause the Earth to be pulled and crash into the Sun! What sort of magic is “gravity” that it can glue people’s feet to the ball-Earth, while causing Earth itself to revolve ellipses round the Sun? The two effects are very different yet the same cause is attributed to both.


5) “Take the case of a shot propelled from a cannon. By the force of the explosion and the influence of the reputed action of gravitation, the shot forms a parabolic curve, and finally falls to the earth. Here we may ask, why - if the forces are the same, viz., direct impulse and gravitation - does not the shot form an orbit like that of a planet, and revolve round the earth? The Newtonian may reply, because the impulse which propelled the shot is temporary; and the impulse which propelled the planet is permanent. Precisely so; but why is the impulse permanent in the case of the planet revolving round the sun? What is the cause of this permanence?” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”



6) “If the sun is pulling with such power at the earth and all her sister planets, why do they not fall down upon him?” -A. Giberne, “Sun, Moon, and Stars”


7) ''Furthermore, this magnetic-like attraction of massive objects gravity is purported to have can be found nowhere in the natural world. There is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other shaped-object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it! There is nothing on Earth massive enough that it can be shown to cause even a dust-bunny to stick to or orbit around it! Try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find that everything falls or flies off, and nothing sticks to or orbits it. To claim the existence of a physical “law” without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not science.''


Learn more.....

Gravity Does Not Exist:

http://ifers.123.st/t158-gravity-does-not-exist

Accepted my lord. I'm outta here,

Sometimes you just stop arguing.. .

FutureSenator:


Accepted my lord. I'm outta here,

Sometimes you just stop arguing.. .

Sure...Since you cannot prove that gravity exists, you might as well step.

Rossikki:


Sure...Since you cannot prove that gravity exists, you might as well step.

Lol. I only explain to people who are ready to learn. And I don't like repeating myself.

You will understand, sooner or later.

Peace.

you know for the first time since reading this topic, I have decided to swallow everything science tells me with a pinch of salt.

it's not like I believe 'the earth is flat' story yet, but lately I have been observing the night sky and below are my observations:

could it be that the reason why we get to see only one side of the Moon is because the Moon is actually flat?

if the earth is moving through space, why do we have the same stars mapping our sky?

all alien space crafts are portrayed as being disc-like, why? is it because they have an idea of what the planets look like?

Fash20 and FutureSenator

Thank you for taking the time to explain things.

AngelSweetLips:
Fash20 and FutureSenator

Thank you for taking the time to explain things.

You're welcome

AngelSweetLips:
Fash20 and FutureSenator

Thank you for taking the time to explain things.

We live and learn! The essence of life!

You are very welcome!

FutureSenator:


Lol. I only explain to people who are ready to learn. And I don't like repeating myself.

You will understand, sooner or later.

Peace.

You have nothing to teach. You are merely a parroter of falsified, unproven conventions.

Rossikki:
You have nothing to teach. You are merely a parroter of falsified, unproven conventions.

WTF are you even saying ... He left you alone because he knows you can never learn.

Have you proven yours yet. You are annoying.

Sometimes I feel like shaking some sense into you like this

Fash20:



WTF are you even saying ... He left you alone because he knows you can never learn.

Have you proven yours yet. You are annoying.

Sometimes I feel like shaking some sense into you like this

I've been begging you to present ONE single, authentic photograph of the spherical earth released by NASA or any other 'space' agency, in all their years of 'space exploration'. So far you've NOT done that. (Composite, CGI images of course do not count).

And you are asking me to prove? NO. YOU need to prove the earth is a sphere. Heck. YOUR folks have (supposedly) hundreds of satellites, shuttles, space stations etc etc supposedly out there orbiting 'space', and yet, NOT ONE of them has been able to take a SINGLE AUTHENTIC CAMERA-TAKEN PHOTOGRAPH of the earth?

in over 70 YEARS of 'space exploration'?

Mr Parroter. Why don't you go and ask your masters what they are hiding?

Or are you scared they'll punch you in the nose like in that picture above?

Or more likely, konk your head.

Rossikki:


If you try to FLY out of the earth space, your plane will BURN to smithereens. Your systems will go haywire, and you would be forced to change flight direction. Space travel by NASA is faked, according to the Flat Earth theory, because there is a point where you can take up a shuttle and as it starts to leave the earth's atmosphere, a BLAZING ATMOSPHERIC HEAT forces the craft to level off before turning back down to land in some remote location, fooling people that a shuttle has actually left the earth.

The Flat Earth model claims there is a sort of heated metal 'dome' overhanging the earth, similar to what is described in Genesis and by many other religious traditions. The 'dome' is recognised by scientists, and is known as the Van Allen Belt. It is what prevents man from leaving the immediate earth space.

Flat Earthers say that NO human or craft has ever left earth space, which is just a few thousand miles around the earth, due to being turned back by the Van Allen Belt. This belt bears uncanny resemblance to the 'firmament' spoken of in Genesis creation accounts.

All NASA displays of space travel are ...faked. In fact, they say, outer space actually... may not exist. As in, 'the universe' is really just the flat Earth, a small sun and moon rotating it to provide seasons, some stars, and further up is.... the Creator and Heaven (the world of souls). Finish.

It is a radical view, but there it is.


RENDITIONS

.............................................


........................


'Domed' flat earth with sun and moon rotation

Then I think there should be a force field(attraction or repulsion) between the sun and the moon if they are aligned as shown in the 'flat earth'.

Moreso, the flat earth hypothesis didn't describe how the moon gets its light since we've learnt the moon doesn't produce it's light and it doesn't explain why we have half moon, full moon or crescent shaped moon.

PS: I watched the video and I quite concur with the points raised as I've been doubting the 'sphericity' of the earth since I've been taught

GMan650:


Then I think there should be a force field(attraction or repulsion) between the sun and the moon if they are aligned as shown in the 'flat earth'.

Moreso, the flat earth hypothesis didn't describe how the moon gets its light since we've learnt the moon doesn't produce it's light and it doesn't explain why we have half moon, full moon or crescent shaped moon.

PS: I watched the video and I quite concur with the points raised as I've been doubting the 'sphericity' of the earth since I've been taught

Here's a full explanation by the flat earth movement.


The Phases of the Moon

When one observes the phases of the moon he is simply observing the moon's day and night, a natural shadow from the sun illuminating half of the spherical moon at any one time.

The lunar phases vary cyclically according to the changing geometry of the Moon and Sun, which are constantly wobbling up and down and exchange altitudes as they rotate around the North Pole.

When the moon and sun are at the same altitude one half of the lunar surface is illuminated and pointing towards the sun, This is called the First Quarter Moon. When the observer looks up he will see a shadow cutting the moon in half. The boundary between the illuminated and unilluminated hemispheres is called the terminator.

When the moon is below the sun's altitude the moon is dark and a New Moon occurs.

When the moon is above the altitude of the sun the moon is fully lit and a Full Moon occurs.

The time between two full moons, or between successive occurrences of the same phase, is about 29.53 days (29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes) on average. This denotes the cycle of alternating altitudes.



Q: Why does everyone on earth see the same phase of the moon?

A: They don't. The phase you see varies depending on your location on earth. In Flat Earth Theory this is explained by the different observers standing on either side of the moon. On one side it is right-side up, and on the other side it is upside down.

Imagine a green arrow suspended horizontally above your head pointing to the North. Standing 50 feet to the South of the arrow it is pointing downwards, towards the Northern horizon. Standing 50 feet to the North of the arrow, looking back at it, it points upwards, above your head to the North. The arrow flip-flops, pointing down or away from the horizon depending on which side you stand.


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Phases+of+the+Moon

Ever since my laptop keyboard developed a fault, a lot of nonsensical ideas have floated around and I've not been able to refute them to my satisfaction.

fortunately, I previously provided a proof of the earth's motion around the sun. the thread can be found in the science section library. I believe the ideas I presented there logically imply that the earth is NOT flat.

Teempakguy:
Ever since my laptop keyboard developed a fault, a lot of nonsensical ideas have floated around and I've not been able to refute them to my satisfaction.

fortunately, I previously provided a proof of the earth's motion around the sun. the thread can be found in the science section library. I believe the ideas I presented there logically imply that the earth is NOT flat.

You really have to offer more than this to disprove our assertions.

.

Rossikki:
The earth is not a globe, or a sphere.

It is a flat circular plane.

Discuss.

Actually, there are some valid points one can consider here but you also failed to give us a genuine photographs of the surface of the Earth to proof its flatness.

it's funny when you say Nasa hasn't released a single photo claiming the earth is round
but you claim the earth is flat? on account of whose photo graph?
can you explain the horizon's to me? if you say the earth is not flat then tell me why when you go to the beach and stare into the horizon (the farthest end) ships appear to submerge from underneath the sea as opposed to moving on a straight line. also why is the moon round? wouldn't it be logical to have a flat satellite hanging above the earth? or maybe that is a large picture painted by NASA and they paid some Mexicans to move it around for millions of years just to hide the shape of the earth.
why has every other planet that we have observed with our telescope turned out to be round but earth is such a special snowflake it decided to defy all known laws and become "le flaty"
humans have launched satellites into space for many years, and some have taken pictures of the earth, and it's a blue globe
tell me how that is a hoax? except you don't think satellite exist, then explain to me how mobile phones and other communication system work without their existence.

how come this thread even made it this far? personally i dont think you flat earthers exist outside the internet
never met one before that believed the earth was flat and could confidently explain it with solid evidence.

Interesting perspective

Rossikki:
THE SINGLE PICTURE THAT PROVES THE EARTH IS FLAT



'In this photograph, the Chicago skyline can be seen clearly. The picture was taken by Joshua Nowicki as he stood at Grand Mere Park, Michigan, which is approximately 57 miles away, across Lake Michigan from Chicago.

If the earth were a globe, none of the buildings, including the Sears Tower (now called the Willis Tower), would be visible. They would all be below the horizon. The top of the Sears Tower would be 194 feet below the horizon. The only thing that would be visible in the entire Chicago skyline would be the uppermost 85 feet of the antennae on the top of the Sears Tower. In fact, however, the entire Sears Tower and all of the other buildings along the shore in Chicago can be seen in the Nowicki photograph. That picture by Joshua Nowicki of the Chicago skyline proves that the earth is flat.

http://henrymakow.com/2016/02/Edward-Hendrie-Flat-Earth-Defense.html#sthash.poaESwAy.dpuf

It's unfortunate that you can't see how your post contradict each other which I'll highlight for your.
Note I'm not in support of FLAT EARTH theory but I only hold a second thought about GRAVITY

FutureSenator:


Gravity has magnitude, direction. It keeps all object to the [size=13pt]surface of the earth.[/size] Even clouds are suspended in the air (all they are, are floating waters). They rise and increase in weight till they evaporate to drop at rain at certain temperatures and heights. Do you know that, if not for force of gravity, water (clouds) will rise indefinitely? And never fall back?

Now, from here we can establish that GRAVITY is a downward force that's why things don't escape from earth into the space.

Apart from gases and air which have lighter density every other things tend to FALL to Earth surface due to the same GRAVITY.

Buildings and seas have their "resoved" force in the direction of gravity. They are of great weights and have zero kinetic energy.

Do you mean object like International Space Station has less weights and plenty kinetic energy that's why it can float outer space?

This simply means, they do not have any tendency to oppose gravitational force. Do you know how loads for building are calculated?

With this it's evident that you don't understand gravity yourself

It is called a dumping process, the load from the roof is sent to beams, beams sent to columns, sent to foundations deep below the earth surface. Water bodies met loads are far below sea level. In fact, there is no water load at 1cm above sea level.

We all know. Now let me ask you, does earth itself has weight?

Earth is denser at subsurface level. And mountains masses lies more below the ground. That is if you see a mountain of 10m height, about 20m is buried below ground level.

With this we can then conclude that earth is massive in weight, right?

Now what I'm trying to explain to you is that, every natural and engineered mass on the circle is so designed by God (copied by the engineers) to have its weight in the sphere. It weighs "nothing" outside the sphere.

This is where you contradict yourself.
You first establish somewhere that

"They are of great weights and have zero kinetic energy"

but now you're saying It weighs nothing outside the sphere but do you know that all objects that weigh nothing outside the sphere were manufactured from earth's materials which have great weight and zero kinetic energy according to you

Now come to dynamic objects id est insects, birds, helium balloons, planes, helicopters, etc. The principle here is to make the overall weight less than the gravitational weight (do you know the 4 forces of a plane? Lift, drag.. .etc).

These objects are so designed that their shape makes it easy for them to 'walk' on a air. Basically sir, that's what all flying objects do. If the world is a vacuum, nothing will fly. Objects are made with lightweight material, with wings and some amount of internal energy to 'propel them.

It's simply physics. For insects, they are constantly flapping their wings in air, just like fishes are flapping their wings in water. For one downward flap, they rise by an inch. The wings curve in and flap down again. Continuously they fly. Their weights (are so small, that is zero load) and they are constantly generating energy. This makes them fly.

The question we need to ask here is:
Does EQUAL QUANTITY of gravitational force exerted on everything on earth both natural and artificial or everything on earth experiences different level of gravitational force on them?
According to basic physic our answer to this is that everything experiences equal amount of gravitational force on them.

Likewise, for every action there must be a reaction which means for Airplane to float in air the force generated must equal or high than the gravitational force. Now if gravity exerts equal amount of force on every object, the force generated by insect or bird must be equal to/grater than gravitational force itself. [b]Does this true?

Others glide through air. Gravity is a simple concept my man. Open your mind wide and you will find the possibilities endless.

According to basic physic F=ma, which means the bigger the MASS and Acceleration the bigger is the FORCE which makes SUN gravity to hold all the planet in space. Now, if gravity is true. Does planet suppose to float in space or suck inside the Sun Consider how massive some planets are. Remember, you know Gravity has direction and magnitude.

Why would gravity that allows big structure to stick to the surface of the earth allows gigantic planet like Jupiter to be flowing outside when the GRAVITY of the SUN will be 100 times that of the earth Unless if you want to tell us that these planets are outside of SUN gravity.

Why will small Earth gravity even over power the gigantic SUN gravity in the first place Because It was the same SUN gravity that passes through the earth to hold other planet in place.

In fact there are lot of questions to ask when it comes to this almighty GRAVITY that works in mysterious ways.

Rossikki:
Do you folks use common sense at all? Look at that map again. Why would a plane need to extend its journey by thousands of miles just to refuel? Alter its flight path by over 180° in a different direction when it could fly straight and short across the Indian ocean? How is it more lucrative to add thousands of miles extra to a journey? You make no sense.

Have you also looked at the distance of crossing the ocean from SA to Australia is longer than that of the middle east to Australia? I guess it will make no sense to fly over the indian ocean over long distance. It is risky.

Rossikki:


Here's a full explanation by the flat earth movement.


The Phases of the Moon

When one observes the phases of the moon he is simply observing the moon's day and night, a natural shadow from the sun illuminating half of the spherical moon at any one time.

The lunar phases vary cyclically according to the changing geometry of the Moon and Sun, which are constantly wobbling up and down and exchange altitudes as they rotate around the North Pole.

When the moon and sun are at the same altitude one half of the lunar surface is illuminated and pointing towards the sun, This is called the First Quarter Moon. When the observer looks up he will see a shadow cutting the moon in half. The boundary between the illuminated and unilluminated hemispheres is called the terminator.

When the moon is below the sun's altitude the moon is dark and a New Moon occurs.

When the moon is above the altitude of the sun the moon is fully lit and a Full Moon occurs.

The time between two full moons, or between successive occurrences of the same phase, is about 29.53 days (29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes) on average. This denotes the cycle of alternating altitudes.



Q: Why does everyone on earth see the same phase of the moon?

A: They don't. The phase you see varies depending on your location on earth. In Flat Earth Theory this is explained by the different observers standing on either side of the moon. On one side it is right-side up, and on the other side it is upside down.

Imagine a green arrow suspended horizontally above your head pointing to the North. Standing 50 feet to the South of the arrow it is pointing downwards, towards the Northern horizon. Standing 50 feet to the North of the arrow, looking back at it, it points upwards, above your head to the North. The arrow flip-flops, pointing down or away from the horizon depending on which side you stand.


http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=The+Phases+of+the+Moon

The earth is spherical. The only people who would take the earth as flat are lay persons. The proof that the earth is round is like when you look at the horizon, the earth and the heavens always seems to come together. That is because the earth is round. If the earth was flat, you would have never had that view where you see the earth and sky seems to touch each other from the distance.

Rossikki:
PROOF FROM FLIGHT


..........................................[img]http://flatearthscienceandbible.files./2016/02/img_9612.jpeg[/img]

''If we were living on a spinning globe, airplanes would constantly have to dip their noses down every few minutes to compensate for the curvature of the earth (with a circumference of 25,000 miles the earth would be constantly curving at the speed of an airplane). In reality however, they never do this! They learn how to fly based on a level flat plane.

Also if the earth was spinning, the airplanes going west would get to their destination much faster since the earth is spinning in the opposite direction. If the atmosphere is spinning with the earth, then airplanes flying west would have to fly faster than the earth’s spin to reach their destination. In reality, the earth is flat and airplanes just fly level and reach their destination easily because the earth is not moving.''

https://flatearthscienceandbible./2016/02/08/top-ten-undeniable-flat-earth-proofs/


THE HORIZON ALWAYS APPEARS FLAT

........................................

On photos made by amateur drones, the horizon always appears as a perfectly straight line, while footage made by NASA and other space agencies always shows some curvature.



The Supposed Curvature Factor Is Not Presented in Engineering Plans!



Railways or canals over hundreds of miles long are always cut and laid flat, without any curvature factor calculated. Even odder is that engineers and architects, as people of science, do not seem to mind this at all.

First, Gravity acts equally pulling us to the centre of the sphere. An airplane flying has simply achieved a balance between the force of gravity and lift and so, there's no need to dip down, the airplane will stay in that circle as long as the speed is maintained.
Horizon appears flat because horizon is the object getting smaller with distance and your altitude from the ground is almost nothing compared to the earth's radius (Even if you are flying in an SR-71 stealth plane at 110000ft).
The speed of and airplane is relative to the earth sometimes even, the airspeed and groundspeed aren't the same.
A building isn't wide enough for the earth's curvature to make any significance to it's construction. Railways are not continously long rods. They're connected continously and so, for each piece, the earth's curvature isn't of much significance

Rossikki:


High falutin noise that does NOT address the issue. The reason you are so convoluted in your explanation is because you have no option but to confuse people. Talking about ''gravitational weight''. What nonsense is that? PROVE the existence of gravity first before talking of ''gravitational weight''. Everything around us indicates that objects fall down to the air when their are heavier than the air. When they are lighter, like a helium balloon for instance, they rise unaided. Beyond that, NOTHING LIKE 'gravity' is proven to exist. The only reason Newton came up with the 'gravity' scam is so that they could explain how it was possible for humans and buildings and matter to stick to the underside of their phantom globe without falling off, and to explain their claim that the earth and other 'planets' were spinning around the sun.



EXCERPTS - GRAVITY DOES NOT EXIST

1) “Any object which is heavier than the air, and which is unsupported, has a natural tendency to fall by its own weight. Newton's famous apple at Woolsthorpe, or any other apple when ripe, loses hold of its stalk, and, being heavier than the air, drops as a matter of necessity, to the ground, totally irrespective of any attraction of the Earth. For, if such attraction existed, why does not the Earth attract the rising smoke which is not nearly so heavy as the apple? The answer is simple - because the smoke is lighter than the air, and, therefore, does not fall but ascends. Gravitation is only a subterfuge, employed by Newton in his attempt to prove that the Earth revolves round the Sun, and the quicker it is relegated to the tomb of all the Capulets, the better will it be for all classes of society.” - David Wardlaw Scott, “Terra Firma”


2) ''The ‘law of gravitation’ is said by the advocates of the Newtonian system of astronomy, to be the greatest discovery of science, and the foundation of the whole of modern astronomy. If, therefore, it can be shown that gravitation is a pure assumption, and an imagination of the mind only, that it has no existence outside of the brains of its expounders and advocates, the whole of the hypotheses of this modern so-called science fall to the ground as flat as the surface of the ocean, and this ‘most exact of all sciences,’ this wonderful ‘feat of the intellect’ becomes at once the most ridiculous superstition and the most gigantic imposture to which ignorance and credulity could ever be exposed.” -Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny”


3) ''Einstein’s theory of relativity and the entire heliocentric model of the universe hinges upon Newton’s “law of gravitation.” Heliocentrists claim that the Sun is the most massive object in the heavens, more massive even than the Earth, and therefore the Earth and other planets by “law” are caught up in the Sun’s “gravity” and forced to orbit perpetual circles/ellipses around it. They claim that gravity also somehow allows people, buildings, the oceans, and all of nature to exist on the under-side of their “ball-Earth” without falling off.


4) Now, even if gravity did exist, why would it cause both planets to orbit the Sun and people to stick to the Earth? Gravity should either cause people to float in suspended circular orbits around the Earth, or it should cause the Earth to be pulled and crash into the Sun! What sort of magic is “gravity” that it can glue people’s feet to the ball-Earth, while causing Earth itself to revolve ellipses round the Sun? The two effects are very different yet the same cause is attributed to both.


5) “Take the case of a shot propelled from a cannon. By the force of the explosion and the influence of the reputed action of gravitation, the shot forms a parabolic curve, and finally falls to the earth. Here we may ask, why - if the forces are the same, viz., direct impulse and gravitation - does not the shot form an orbit like that of a planet, and revolve round the earth? The Newtonian may reply, because the impulse which propelled the shot is temporary; and the impulse which propelled the planet is permanent. Precisely so; but why is the impulse permanent in the case of the planet revolving round the sun? What is the cause of this permanence?” -N. Crossland, “New Principia”



6) “If the sun is pulling with such power at the earth and all her sister planets, why do they not fall down upon him?” -A. Giberne, “Sun, Moon, and Stars”


7) ''Furthermore, this magnetic-like attraction of massive objects gravity is purported to have can be found nowhere in the natural world. There is no example in nature of a massive sphere or any other shaped-object which by virtue of its mass alone causes smaller objects to stick to or orbit around it! There is nothing on Earth massive enough that it can be shown to cause even a dust-bunny to stick to or orbit around it! Try spinning a wet tennis ball or any other spherical object with smaller things placed on its surface and you will find that everything falls or flies off, and nothing sticks to or orbits it. To claim the existence of a physical “law” without a single practical evidential example is hearsay, not science.''


Learn more.....

Gravity Does Not Exist:

http://ifers.123.st/t158-gravity-does-not-exist

Any object heavier than air? You want to say, the sun and moon are lighter than air?
If you're trying to explain buoyancy. It's caused by difference in density. Density is just the amout of mass per volume and weight is the gravitational force acting on a mass and Pressure is the force acting on area. So, objects that are fall through fluid because its mass is greater than the amount of the column of fluid holding it because the surface area under the object is small. for the fluid to carry the body, the body must displace an equal amout of mass of the fluid, but unfortunately, the body can't displace more fluid than its own (the body's) volume. So, if the volume of fluid of certain density which the body can displace is not up to the mass of the body, the body will fall under gravity. (For every action there's equal and opposite reaction). The Pressure all exist because of gravitational force and density difference creates buoyancy. Gravity is an invisible force (just as electromagnetic, strong and weak forces are all invisible). Also, all the gravity equations work in reality

FutureSenator:


Lol broda, stop playing the blame game.
I have not mentioned "school" once in my assertions.

You ask questions, I answer you. But you have been on the defensive since. Try and prove me something. Instead of being the antagonist,

Give me something from the flat earth hypothesis.

Don't say NASA this, NASA that. Tell me, because the earth is flat, that is why this is.. ....

Convince me a shilling!

NASA isn't the first organisation to get into space. In 1959, the soviet union launched two successful missions to the moon using the Luna rocket. the first successful unmanned landing was in 1966 also by the Soviet Union.
Even the first successful manned space launch with Yuri Gagarin was by the Soviet Union in 1961
The NASA Apollo mission started in 1961 and ended in 1972. Adobe Photoshop was first released in 1990 Adobe systems was founded in 1982.
Apart from The Canadian Space agency, NASA, Soviet and Europe, there're many private space agencies. Even the popular one Space X is currently active.
So, even if NASA was to be lying, there're many other space agencies and people own personal telescopes
All this flat earth bullshit are simply the result of rumours, speculaions and false beliefs about a so called "Illuminati" or "New World Order".