Rampage explains how outer space is a hoax

[Fedora Millionankles]

So you would know the circumference of the earth then right? I would assume you know exactly how far one is able to physically see an object in the distance before the object drops behind the curve right?

Yes I do and can cite the experiment we used to deduce it.
Yes I do and I can even give you the correct formula as ‘8 inches per mile squared’ is incorrect.
I have also used Focault’s Pendulum to verify earth’s rotation and to find out my latitude on earth and so can you.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

Exactly. Anything that would prove something, clowns like you would dismiss.

I actually think that you are scared. You don't want to find out that you were fooled. It would be a shot to your ego.

Now you are just projecting and confirming your bias as well as the fact that you reside on the top left of the Dunning Kruger chart.

 

[Copper Burner]

Yes I do and can cite the experiment we used to deduce it.
Yes I do and I can even give you the correct formula as ‘8 inches per mile squared’ is incorrect.
I have also used Focault’s Pendulum to verify earth’s rotation and to find out my latitude on earth and so can you.

How far can one see an object before it falls behind the curve and is out of view? This should be very easy for you to answer.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

I don't just accept what's given to me, especially when my basic questions somehow cannot be a answered.

I am not satisfied.

I’ve answered all of your questions and you failed to answer a single one of mine.
At this point, I’ll stop engaging with you because I feel like I’m picking on someone who rode the short bus to school and wears his underwear outside of his pants.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

How far can one see an object before it falls behind the curve and is out of view?

That would depend on the height of the object, the height of the observer, and the refractive index at the time.
See how illiterate you are? Even your questions are as incomplete as your education.

 

[Copper Burner]

I’ve answered all of your questions and you failed to answer a single one of mine.
At this point, I’ll stop engaging with you because I feel like I’m picking on someone who rode the short bus to school and wears his underwear outside of his pants.

Uh oh. It was time to back something up and now look at you run. Coward. Fraud.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

Why exactly would they need to do that? To satisfy the request of some random flerfs that aren’t satisfied by the pictures they’ve already taken, the mass amounts of satellite images already released, and the countless hours of livestream from the ISS and their space walks?
Let’s be honest, flat earth is a religion for uneducated science deniers and no amount evidence will be good enough to sway their faith.

It's got absolutely nothing to do with flat earthers. What a stupid thing to say. The supposed non stop quest for knowledge and information and you think they haven't left cameras up there just because 'they don't need to'.
As for your mention of "images", are you referring to the endless barrage of enhanced and generated "images" of what they think space and the planets look like? There are next to no actual images that are claimed to be raw photos. Always enhanced with added colour, stitched together composites etc.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

Uh oh. It was time to back something up and now look at you run. Coward. Fraud.

Back what up, imbecile? I’ve answered everyone of your questions and you stayed silent for everyone of mine.
How about you back up your positive claim of the earth being flat, since you’re so confident that all of science has been fooled and idiots like you are the only ones that know the truth.

 

[Copper Burner]

That would depend on the height of the object, the height of the observer, and the refractive index at the time.
See how illiterate you are? Even your questions are as incomplete as your education.

It depends on nothing but circumference of earth and distance. There's no variables.

If you want something to reference for calculation purposes, how far is a 100ft tall building visible before it completely disappears behind the curve?

This is easy stuff college boy.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

It's got absolutely nothing to do with flat earthers. What a stupid thing to say. The supposed non stop quest for knowledge and information and you think they haven't left cameras up there just because 'they don't need to'.
As for your mention of "images", are you referring to the endless barrage of enhanced and generated "images" of what they think space and the planets look like? There are next to no actual images that are claimed to be raw photos. Always enhanced with added colour, stitched together composites etc.

Have you seen the live streams of earth from satellites and the ISS during spacewalks? They satisfy what a camera on the moon would supply. No need to do what you’re saying to satisfy a bunch of science deniers and illiterate bafoons.
The ‘72 Blue Marble photo was taken with a real camera with the negatives being in a museum. Your argument is debunked.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

It depends on nothing but circumference of earth and distance. There's no variables.

If you want something to reference for calculation purposes, how far is a 100ft tall building visible before it completely disappears behind the curve?

This is easy stuff college boy.

See, you just showed how scientifically illiterate you are.
So the height of the observer and refraction, both variables, don’t matter? Congratulations, you’re a moron.
Why don’t you tell us what you believe it should be and then I’ll demonstrate how it’s wrong and how idiotic you are.

 

[Copper Burner]

See, you just showed how scientifically illiterate you are.
So the height of the observer and refraction, both variables, don’t matter? Congratulations, you’re a moron.

You are purposely muddying the water to avoid answering a simple week 1 at college question.

You're flat on the earth, how far is the distance before a 100ft building disappears behind the curve? There's literally a formula out there created by scientists that doesn't vary dummy.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I don't just accept what's given to me, especially when my basic questions somehow cannot be a answered.

I am not satisfied.

Then don't be satisfied.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Exactly. Anything that would prove something, clowns like you would dismiss.

I actually think that you are scared. You don't want to find out that you were fooled. It would be a shot to your ego.

 

[CyberRubberDuck]

See, you just showed how scientifically illiterate you are.
So the height of the observer and refraction, both variables, don’t matter? Congratulations, you’re a moron.
Why don’t you tell us what you believe it should be and then I’ll demonstrate how it’s wrong and how idiotic you are.

Lol.
You're a tool.

 

[lsa]

I don’t not believe in UFOs per se. I think it’s entirely possible aliens have been here. That video he shared is rubbish though.

Bigfoot is fake as shit though. A giant man like ape wandering the forest still never been caught on camera. No remains or skeletons ever found. Yeah come on now

Poop, what about poop?
Does Big foot poop in the woods?
It seems like he or she doesn't.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Poop, what about poop?
Does Big foot poop in the woods?
It seems like he or she doesn't.

the absence of poop and dead bodies is problematic. the answer given is that they evolved to avoid the much weaker but way more dominant species homo sapiens. part of that survival strategy is to hide all traces of its existence from us and fly under the radar so to speak.

 

[lsa]

the absence of poop and dead bodies is problematic. the answer given is that they evolved to avoid the much weaker but way more dominant species homo sapiens. part of that survival strategy is to hide all traces of its existence from us and fly under the radar so to speak.

yeah....
Thats not going to fly with me bud.
So Big foot was pretty much the only animal that evolved beyond pooping in the woods to hide from humans?

Also give me a few legit big foot foot prints.
Not even that exist.

There are 1000 of wild life cameras out and never was a big foot caught on them.

Its almost... like big foot... does not.... exist.

 

[Chad R. Thundercock]

The Thicc Earth Society would like to have a word with you

!Ay, coño! Me encanta cómo Ecuador es el ano del mundo.

coño is the only word i recognize out of that and i am all about the coño ese. i'm not quite sure what else you are saying but chupa mi verga pendejo. hijo de puta.

Dije en español «Oh fuck! I love how Ecuador is the asshole of the world.» Pinche mamón, este gringo imbécil.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

yeah....
Thats not going to fly with me bud.
So Big foot was pretty much the only animal that evolved beyond pooping in the woods to hide from humans?

Also give me a few legit big foot foot prints.
Not even that exist.

There are 1000 of wild life cameras out and never was a big foot caught on them.

Its almost... like big foot... does not.... exist.

im not a proponent of the bigfoot hides its poop theory fyi. just passing on the info.

your wrong about the prints though and that's a fact. ever heard of jeff meldrum? phd and expert in bipedal locomotion. he absolutely has staked his career on prints (actually trackways) he says cannot be faked. some of which he has gotten in the field himself.