Sort:  

There is a explanation for everything, but at the end of the day, the earth is flat:

So they try and explain the south celestial pole by saying... "Lines get bent with the perspective" and "its just a massive perspective warp".

In other words.. "The south celestial pole disproves our flat earth so we just going to try and gloss over it with some pseudo-scientific rubbish about warping and bendy light"

I don't know anything about the stars in the sky, I always thought that it was non-sense what the "science" told us about that..

I just look at there is no curve and a bunch of other proof of a flat earth. Furthermore the whole globe model, seems completely unrealistic to me.

The Coriolis effect is not true for instance:

You say "I just look at there is no curve" and yet you've posted 3 different balloon flights now where I've highlighted the curve for you.

As fare as I remember, then the first one you showed that it was a fish eyed lens and the next ones you showed a curve when you blow up the contrast of the pictures? I am not convinced that this is sufficient. I dont know anything for sure, but I lean towards the flat earth.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 65359.95
ETH 3492.90
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.51