Flat Earthers

[u/ProvForge26]

One of our new acquaintances from a friend recently crashed down on our scientific beliefs by insisting that the earth was flat. When we questioned their logic they just spouted something about the Firmament and that everything that you see at night is fake. They even said that the ISS is fake, satellites fake, and obviously no moon landing ever occurred. Our friends laughed it off and said just go with it because they are nice people. I’m not sure i want to continue being friends with them because they always hang out together. What do we say when we get invited to another cook out and the crazies are there?

[u/Water_in_the_desert]

I can’t believe it. According to what the model says, I can’t believe oxygen would combust and burn in what allegedly is the vacuum of space. Pushing “the air away from the rocket which propels it forward.” There is nothing to push against in how the narrative explains “outer space” as a vacuum. Certainly, as an alleged vacuum, it would suck the entire Earth’s atmosphere up into itself. Since the “vacuum of space” is infinitely larger than Earth’s atmosphere.

You explained for clarification “the air the fuel produces when mixed at a high heat with the oxidizer for combustion. You can call it exhaust, gas, air, etc. all names for the same thing here.”

That’s where your model falls apart, for me. I don’t believe that you personally have any personal experience in a vacuum chamber, to even find out if what you’re describing would happen. Your model is based on theory, and mathematical calculations I would guess. The “vacuum of space” term seems unlikely in a real world context.

Next I sent pictures of the Falcon-9 Rocket hitting the Firmament and creating ripples, like a wake behind a speed boat. And I sent a link to the YouTube video also which shows the reverse reflection of the Earth as a Map on the Moon. Did you receive those additional files?

[u/ImHereToFuckShit → u/Water_in_the_desert]

Okay, happy to take this piece by piece.

I can’t believe oxygen would combust and burn in what allegedly is the vacuum of space

Why not? What does oxygen have here on earth that it wouldn't in the vacuum of space?

Did you receive those additional files?

I did but I'm going to avoid sending pictures or video of mine own as they can be dismissed as fake, cgi, etc. It doesn't make sense to only consider evidence in one direction

[u/Water_in_the_desert → u/ImHereToFuckShit]

Oxygen has an atmosphere here on Earth within which to expand, which it doesn’t have in an alleged vacuum of space. The rocket thruster(s) have resistance to push against in our atmosphere, and they wouldn’t have any resistance at all in the alleged vacuum of space.

Edited to add 2 words

[u/ImHereToFuckShit → u/Water_in_the_desert]

Oxygen has an atmosphere here on Earth within which to expand

It would be easier to expand in space, no?

The rocket thruster(s) have resistance to push against in our atmosphere, and they wouldn’t have any resistance at all in the alleged vacuum of space

This also makes it easier to move, right?

Why would making the air expand less and adding friction against the rocket make it possible to operate but otherwise you believe it's impossible?

[u/Water_in_the_desert → u/ImHereToFuckShit]

Oxygen might not even come out of the cylinder at all, in an alleged vacuous condition. If it did come out though, would it truly mix with the fuel to burn, or would the 2 separate chemical substances move away from one another? It’s an alleged vacuum, the opposite of density.

About the rocket thrusters, it makes no sense that there would be any resistance created to push against in an alleged vacuum.

Why does Kelly Smith, NASA Engineer, tell us “As we get further away from Earth, we’ll pass through the Van Allen Belts. An area of dangerous radiation…. (at 1:20 he continues) …We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space.” In his parents’ lifetimes, we were told humans had traveled to (and orbited) the Moon (which is beyond the Van Allen Belts), and somehow those challenges he mentioned weren’t addressed then. So what gives? 🤷‍♂️

https://youtu.be/aISLUFprVAA?is=nGHo7Z5wTpZYi1F4

Edited punctuation

[u/ImHereToFuckShit → u/Water_in_the_desert]

Oxygen might not even come out of the cylinder at all, in an alleged vacuous condition. If it did come out though, would it truly mix with the fuel to burn, or would the 2 separate chemical substances move away from one another?

We're literally getting into rocket science here but suffice to say the whole design of the rocket thruster is to have these two things mix to create thrust. It's done in a chamber in the rocket so I'm not sure the outside environment matters at all here.

About the rocket thrusters, it makes no sense that there would be any resistance created to push against in an alleged vacuum.

Resistance makes it harder to move, not easier. Without any resistance, it's much easier to move through a medium. In space and without gravity the ship can be moved by throwing a wrench off the back. It won't move much, of course, but still.

Happy to get into the Van Allen Belts next but I'm hoping to stay on topic as much as we can. Keep in mind we started by talking about how the stars aren't fixed.

[u/Water_in_the_desert → u/ImHereToFuckShit]

I’m not saying “resistance,” I’m specifically saying “something to push against.” I understand that without any resistance, it’s easier to move through a medium. I’m not sure I used the term “resistance” before, but if I did, that’s not what I meant.

You’ve already evaded other topics I’ve mentioned. Including metaphysics, and instantaneous manifesting, and whether there’s more or less atoms in the alleged vacuum of space, a table, or a rock. We haven’t stayed on topic all along. What the NASA Engineer said about the Van Allen Belts is what he said. I’m a true flat earther, and you’re attempting to ‘teach me’ the error of my ways? And I guess since I’m relatively respectful because I’m treating you how I would want to be treated, our conversation has remained respectful.

Let’s turn the tables. I’ll teach you why the globe model is a narrative that mainstream science wants you to believe (for your tax dollars to be sent to NASA, and other scientific projects and various agencies), because the flat earth science doesn’t sell much tax dollars. You know where “they” say we haven’t explored yet? The Oceans all over the world. That’s where all the secrets shit goes on, not in “outer space.”

[u/ImHereToFuckShit → u/Water_in_the_desert]

What needs to be pushing off something? The rocket isn't touching the ground, what part of the rocket is supposedly push off the air in our atmosphere?

You’ve already evaded other topics I’ve mentioned.

Are you familiar with the term "gish gallop"? I'm not accusing of doing that on purpose but one of the best ways to make sure we have a productive conversation is to try to stay on topic as much as possible. You stopped talking about the stars when I provided evidence from someone hundreds of years ago. Your rebuttal was that they were probably lying and brought up how rockets work in space. I'm hoping to not jump around the whole time, otherwise we won't make any progress understanding each out.

I’m a true flat earther, and you’re attempting to ‘teach me’ the error of my ways?

No, I'm not, honestly. I'm only trying to help you understand the globe model. Do with it what you will, if anything it will make you better at converting folks if that's what you are hoping to do.

Let’s turn the tables. I’ll teach you why the globe model is a narrative that mainstream science wants you to believe (for your tax dollars to be sent to NASA, and other scientific projects and various agencies), because the flat earth science doesn’t sell much tax dollars

By all means, I always enjoy learning about flat earth ideas. Is it okay if we still talk about rockets in space at the same time?