Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.2K

Serious question.

You niggers hate on flat earth yet when I disprove your shitty globalist faith you get pissed at me.

Post your top 1. Best argument for a globalist earth and let’s settle it it. I was a genius two years ago when I was a globalist and the moment when I questioned the globalist earth model I became a moron.

So let’s do it. A former genius vs a current modern day globalist; what’s your argument? Why do you believe in globalism?

Serious question. You niggers hate on flat earth yet when I disprove your shitty globalist faith you get pissed at me. Post your top 1. Best argument for a globalist earth and let’s settle it it. I was a genius two years ago when I was a globalist and the moment when I questioned the globalist earth model I became a moron. So let’s do it. A former genius vs a current modern day globalist; what’s your argument? Why do you believe in globalism?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (87).
[–] • 2 pts

Explain how a balloon can stay stationary in one spot like a satellite can for decades. The old C-band and KU-band satellite TV systems relied on the satellites being stationary relative to Earth and in a specific arc at the equator. I setup several C-band satellite dishes in the 80s and I guarantee you that you must be pointed directly at the satellite in order to catch its signal. Any bit off in any direction and you get nothing. There are mathematical formulas for figuring out where you should align your dish based on your latitude and inclination considering the satellites are 22,500 miles away.

Balloons, yeah that's the stupidest excuse for why FE can't explain satellites away.

[–] • 0 pt

Explain how satellites are an economically sound venture vs ground based towers?

Doesn’t make sense. You are a boomer and believe we landed on the moon, you ever watch the final nasa launch from the moon? You see the confetti?

[–] • 1 pt

Satellites are launch once and use for decades economical. They have huge coverages areas with high bandwidth. A single satellite can cover the whole continental United States area and provide at least 24 channels of analog video and a couple hundred analog audio channels. Digital broadcast satellites can have even more digital audio and video channels. By comparison, towers have very little reach yet require huge amounts of power to do so. You would need towers located all over the US to get the same coverage as a single satellite and would not have anywhere near the necessary bandwidth. The cost of installing, running and maintaining so many towers would greatly exceed the cost of building and launching all the satellites.

Satellites are also two-way. You can transmit to a satellite with relatively little power (parabolic dishes FTW). Terrestrial towers could be two-way, but you would need more towers with high power to have subscribers transmit to them making the whole concept laughable. Look at how bad cell phone connections are to see how this isn't very practical or economical. Satellites just do the job way better than a ground based tower network could and for less cost.

Now explain why we don't have a gazillion towers on Earth if satellites aren't real/economical enough?

[–] • 0 pt

We have a gazzilion towers everywhere. 95% of all communication is through towers and cables.

If satellites existed, we should see them in all the pictures from “space” we don’t. Considering that all the pictures from space are admitted cgi. What evidence do you have that we live on a globalist earth?