Flight times on the flat Earth map

flat earth truth

Eric doesn't want to debate with him, because he thinks Mark is a shill. It is that simple. Why would you want to have a debate with someone you consider a shill? By the way, Mark lied outright when said that Eric believes the disc moves upward. He never apologized too.

flat earth truth

Like I said, you don't want to be convinced. Listen to Mark's video about flight times. He claims there are no flights, when there are. He claims flights disappear when they don't. He doesn't explain how a plane can get from Sydney to Santiago in less than 12 hours. He talks about connections, which is by the way absolutely irrelevant. You can fly from Rome to Paris through Moscow. So what? There are direct flights too! Anyone with an open mind will see straight away that Mark is bullshitting. Not sure about your research on flight times, but obviously you were very biased to not see the obvious mistakes.

Eric is at least consistent. Why should he apologize to someone he considers a shill.

I already told you before, and it is all in the TFES thread where we got into that argument:
www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=62950.0#.VSunhGK_tWI

You don't want to weigh the evidence we gave you. Don't make me repeat it again. It is on the thread.

I told you about the "shill" issue. Eric is not a reliable judge of who is a shill (cf. previous post).

He attacked him from the very start, when the probability of Mark being a "shill" was near zero. So, if Mark is not a shill and gets upset, you can forgive him for making up any lie about Eric, given how he was treated.

And ultimately we all decided to not call anyone a "shill" anymore, because it is unfair and we just don't have the supporting evidence.

Yes, I can't give you all the evidence all over again. Let's postpone it by a few days.

We acted as shills? It is human to not have his opinions on his favorite subjects. In fact our opinions were more common than his.

Yes, ok, we can go on forever like this. For now let us agree to disagree.

Perhaps I will get beat up for this, but I think it is worth putting out there.

I have heard from the "Flat Earth Experts" over and over about the conspiracy and coverup and lies concerning, "the ball earth spinning 1,000 miles an hour and hurtling through space orbiting around the sun".

There is a consistent error that I hear in this thinking.  They always group a spherical earth with a spinning and orbiting earth.

My first eye-opener was when I realized that the earth is in the center of the universe and is completely stationary. I think it is very clear that it has never been proved experimentally at all that the earth is moving either on an axis or in an orbit.  I think it is wrong to associate the lie about "movement" of the Earth with the "shape" of the Earth, and I think too many people do this. 

These two realities should be kept separate in order to have an honest discussion.  It is unfair to an uninformed viewer to convince him that a spherical earth is a necessary component to the lie of a "moving earth".  The two ideas are not joined.

If we think that NASA is falsifying images, have we ever thought how horrific it is to these people, all scientists included, to think that the Earth is "stationary", let alone flat?  They have more than enough reason to never show a video of a round earth because it does not rotate and they cannot show that but through falsified animations. 

I came to the the forums with an open mind and actually quite excited about the prospect that the Earth could be, in fact Flat.  But the various arguments that have been put out by the "experts" and the videos have not been "watertight".  It takes a lot of work to wade through videos that contain a metric ton of "F" words and various types of religious propaganda and invective, only to retrieve a few ounces of workable data.  It is a frustrating business where the so-called experts are more full of paranoia and name-calling than they are with facts and experimental data.

I believe there is enough proof to show that the earth is not moving, but very little so far to show that it is flat. I think many of us would like to see more facts and more proof rather than "gurus" who claim to have all the answers but are too afraid of the honest questions, and in reality actually do not have the answers to them.

Nobody has reasonably explained yet, according to the FE model, with experimental data and/or observation:
The "rising" and "setting" of the sun and moon
The southern hemisphere movement of the stars
How the sun behaves in Antarctica

I have been looking for answers myself, and trying to find answers from the "experts" and have found nothing to support the model in these areas.  To me it seems that the "theory" is getting weaker and weaker regardless of the popularity of personalities involved or how many hits they receive on YouTube.

But you can't simply disagree. If you claimed the capital of Italy is Turin, and I said it is Rome. You don't even have the right to disagree unless you're trolling. It is pretty much the same with the flights. There ARE non-stop flights between South America and Australia which fly the distance in ~12 hours. Denying it is similar to denying Rome is the capital of Italy, so sorry, you can't disagree. Some things are just facts.

LIT, where do you stand on 911? If you deny it was an inside job, we are even. It would be as bad saying that Rome is not the capital of Italy. You cannot be the judge of what is right and what is wrong. I thought we all agreed on this. That the only rule is mutual respect. Not being forced to agree with someone.

Right! Why don't you please go and check how many flights were cancelled. What happened with the rest of the flights? They didn't fly either? I am sorry, but what you just posted is not evidence at all. It is like telling me Vanuatu doesn't exist, because I have never been there, and in order to verify it exists I need to fly first. You guys mistake wild guesses with evidence.

Acenci, like I said you guys are denying the obvious evidence and the most basic logic. You're suggesting now that the flights take only 12 hours or less because they stop for fuel? So a flight which should take 40 hours on a flat disc takes only 12 hours, but your argument is that it takes shorter because they stop? There haven't been many delays either. You can check the history of the flights. I repeat, you don't have ANY evidence, but you deny the evidence that exists.

flat earth truth

You chose what to believe in despite the evidence to the contrary. You don't have to post everything you wrote before, because it wasn't true. I just want to figure out if you're trolling me here or you're serious. If it is the latter, then please look again, because you're wrong. This is not a matter of opinion. It is either true or not. Do you think the flights are fake or not? If you think they are fake? What is your evidence? What you believe in means that people don't fly between South America and Australia. That is why Mark is a liar or a super naive person who believes youtube videos unsupported by facts. Did you know that some people post compelling evidence Michelle Obama is a man? Do you believe in that too?

Mark said that they disappear from GPS and thats what they do so there is no evidence that these flights are correct.

Hi fellas.  I'm still not sure what trolling or shilling means, but I do believe that we are all sincere in trying to uncover the truth in these things.  I do not think that all the flight data proves a flat earth, but I still do think that many of the flight paths also do not describe a proper spherical earth either.  There are many that do not make sense if they are supposed to be flying across a globe, but on a flat earth map they seem to make more sense.  

Sometimes, also, a person will have an understanding of a subject that another just does not get - and many times it is because of simple miscommunication of ideas - I know what I am trying to get across but you do not understand it in the way I am saying it.  Sometimes, too, when things just "do not add up", that is enough for one person to question it, but another person will see it as "not enough evidence".