How can you believe in something you've never tried to disprove?
On the contrary, most of us set about to do just that. I thought it was the stupidest thing imaginable.
If you've got a lot invested in the globe and space model then it's difficult to honestly research.
People don't want their Star Trek movies to be spoiled, or would hate to have to admit to friends what they've discovered.
If my dad owned a money making kleenex factory I would dislike anything that would seem to cure the common cold.
You have to have little to lose.
Tell me your favorite comedians and what music you like, I can figure out a lot by that. And maybe a hobby or two.
What you've done is set out to disprove mainstream. Not the other way around. Entirely different position. I know my statement is true because otherwise you would have already known the answers I provided and that your bullet points were wrong. In turn destroying FE for you.
I have nothing invested in globe or spin. Though I have written math which doesn't work if that's wrong. Where the results are within 1-2 minutes of observable reality. Whereby my math was an estimate. Accordingly, it continues to validate the status quo and debunk FE every step of the way. This is empirical evidence.
To date, I've not been able to substantiate a single FE claim. Not one.
Your rejection of our fundamental understanding of reality with absolutely no supporting evidence to do so, says a lot about you.
>This is empirical evidence.
Crazy, cause it's empirical evidence that changes ball earthers' minds.
>To date, I've not been able to substantiate a single FE claim. Not one.
I don't get that at all.
Okay.
(post is archived)