43 thoughts on “Show me your shill cards

  1. khammad

    Words and more words from flat earth people but no proof or evidence.

    I was brave and gave simple, verifiable proof. Come on flat earthers, you be brave too and state some evidence that can be easily verified by us all.

    Let’s talk about proof they say, yet they provide none.

    1. ArmunnRigh

      @khammad:

      Posted at January 20, 2016 at 10:16 am:

      Moreover, the fact that the horizon, when looking at a 90º angle, always rises to eye level, regardless of height, shows that it can only be a “flattish” plane, certainly not curved.

      This is verifiable, reproducible proof of the flat-like nature of the earth.

      After all this back and forth, allow me to round up a few examples for assessment of the quality of your arguments in defense of the globe earth model, however. This is important, to clarify the reasons why a debate on your terms is impossible (which you know and appear to make it so voluntarily):

      There ARE NO reproducible verifiable facts that prove flat earth.

      Circular Reasoning

      Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, “circle in proving”; also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with. The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or evidence as the conclusion, and as a consequence the argument fails to persuade. Other ways to express this are that there is no reason to accept the premises unless one already believes the conclusion, or that the premises provide no independent ground or evidence for the conclusion. Begging the question is closely related to circular reasoning, and in modern usage the two generally refer to the same thing.

      – You assume that there are no verifiable facts as a premise to even begin the analysis.

      International flights are indeed proof. The time it takes to fly from LA to Sydney for that particular distance only works on a globe, not on a flat earth. Now consider all the international flights and their flight time versus distance. Try to make that all work perfectly on a flat earth. It can’t be done. In this way international flights prove s spherical earth.

      Fallacy of composition

      The fallacy of composition arises when one infers that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole (or even of every proper part).

      – One flight works on globe, not on flat, therefore none work on flat.

      and

      False Attribution

      The fallacy of a false attribution occurs when an advocate appeals to an irrelevant, unqualified, unidentified, biased, or fabricated source in support of an argument.

      – The attribution of what the flat earth map is has been made fallaciously, because you are not identifying (rather assuming) what the flat earth map is.

      therefore it is also

      Incomplete Comparison

      An incomplete comparison is a misleading argument popular in advertising. For example, an advertiser might say “product X is better”. This is an incomplete assertion, so it can’t be refuted. A complete assertion, such as “product X sells for a lower price than product Y” or “the new product X lasts longer than the old product X” could be tested and possibly refuted.

      – The flat earth model has not been defined, neither by me nor you, so there isn’t enough information for comparing both in the case of that airplane flight, or any other flight.

      In general, Khammad, you do not look at the evidence for the flat earth, nor do you look at the evidence against globe earth. You mostly Cherry Pick your evidence in defense, ignoring inconsistencies in your model and presentation. Ignoring what is presented, has you committing a Argumentum ad lapidem, usually from a Moral High Ground. You obviously do not want to accept any information because you keep Moving the Goalposts, asking for more and more verifiable evidence, ignoring the identified and mentioned problems with the ones you present.

      It is a matter of belief, ultimately, for you. In such cases, there is nothing anyone but yourself can do. Moreover, you appear to think that, for some reason, I am trying to convince you and make you change your mind. No, what I am interested in is for someone to debate with me fairly, intelligently and using no tricks about a matter that, I can accept, means nothing to you or very little. I will therefore try someone else, then.

      Thanks for your time, anyway.

  2. khammad

    Let’s talk about the flat earth facts now:
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    *There ARE NO reproducible verifiable facts that prove flat earth.

    There ARE reproducible verifiable facts that prove a spherical earth. Here are just 2:

    Thousands of international flights around the globe

    The earth curvature calculator has repeatedly proven accurate.

    dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-c…

    Reproducible means we can all easily check the fact

    Verifiable means the fact holds up to scrutiny.

    So ya, let’s talk about the facts.

    1. Blue Moon

      Just for the record, because I have kept out of this psy-op flat earth nonsense from the beginning, I’m with you Khammad- Thanks for hanging in there where so many otherwise reasonable people want to push this irrational argument- My reading is that because NASA lied about the moon shots, everything they espouse is wrong, including their foundational science, based on observations centuries older than any one could have ever dreamed of NASA- The point is, liars of this magnitude use a lot of good evidence to set up their scams- NASA sold good science to sell their lies- A spinning globe makes sense- Apollo moon shots do not- The latter does not negate the former- Do the meth/ sorry, do the math-

      1. ArmunnRigh

        @Blue Moon

        “Reasonable” as a positive and “Irrational” as a negative are terms mostly used to describe norm and absence of norm. In that same logic, one can say that realizing that 9/11 was a huge hoax is “irrational”, because it is “reasonable” to conclude that something of that magnitude couldn’t be pulled off. Yet, you know it has been done.

        Moreover, let me just comment on something else you wrote as well:

        NASA sold good science to sell their lies

        If the “science” was good and valid, there would be absolutely no need to lie. It isn’t that hard to push a rocket straight up, for example, and allow it to use their supposed Newtonian principles, which have been proven valid as “good science”, haven’t they?

      2. khammad

        Sage words, Blue Moon.

        A flat earth argument can use Antarctic flights as proof (yet we still have not seen an Antarctic flight that doesn’t work from them). But a globe earth argument can’t use flight times?

        Does that seems scientific?

    2. ArmunnRigh

      @khammad

      Firstly, international flights are no proof of a globe at all. It merely means that there are airplanes that lift off in one country and land in another…

      Secondly, the “curvature” calculator is merely calculating the humanly visible vanishing point distances at different heights. It is not a proof of a globe. In fact, you need only use binoculars (or anything of the sort) to confirm that you can actually see beyond the supposed “curvature” calculator result.

      Nevertheless, I do agree with you that people should talk about facts.
      With this in mind, I suggest that a debate be arranged with John Le Bon, who has an open invitation to debate live over an internet conversation with anyone about the Globe Earth theory and the skepticism of it. So far, this has been the result, but I am sure that you have better arguments and facts to present (not being ironic here). If you insist, I may even be present at the time, if John so allows.

      You may contact him directly by messaging him on his Youtube channel.

      1. khammad

        AR,

        International flights are indeed proof. The time it takes to fly from LA to Sydney for that particular distance only works on a globe, not on a flat earth. Now consider all the international flights and their flight time versus distance. Try to make that all work perfectly on a flat earth. It can’t be done. In this way international flights prove s spherical earth.

        Flight times versus distance is the exact proof one needs to prove a spherical earth.

        About the earth curvature calculator, yes this does prove a spherical earth: sighting versus distance.

        No debate, not necessary. Just state the strongest piece of flat earth evidence. And dismissing perfectly good evidence such as flights and the earth’s curvature calculator that shows a globe is NOT proof of a flat earth.

        1. ArmunnRigh

          International flights are indeed proof. The time it takes to fly from LA to Sydney for that particular distance only works on a globe, not on a flat earth. Now consider all the international flights and their flight time versus distance. Try to make that all work perfectly on a flat earth. It can’t be done. In this way international flights prove s spherical earth.

          Flight times versus distance is the exact proof one needs to prove a spherical earth.

          How exactly doesn’t it work on a flat earth if there is no flat earth map to test it with? If you are referring to the Azimuthal Equidistant, it is not a flat earth map, it is a globe earth map projection. If you are sticking to the globe earth concept because of the map issue, that is, that a accurate flat earth map is yet to show up, then I can certainly understand your point of view.

          Still, that is but one of the aspects, although I surely accept that the absence of the map makes it harder to “picture”, we’re used to them, accurate or not. For example, this map projection isn’t accurate either and we traditionally have no problem accepting it, simply because we’re used to its shape and it apparently works for traveling purposes.

          About the earth curvature calculator, yes this does prove a spherical earth: sighting versus distance.

          Regarding the above I believe you didn’t understand what I was stating. What I’m saying is that the resulting distance in a calculation using that tool, related to height and supposed curvature, coincides with the vanishing point limits for the human sight. Moreover, the calculator does not take into account the supposed “oblate” nature of the supposed “pear-shape” like Earth spheroid and instead presents the calculations related to a perfect circle / sphere.

          The vanishing point limit is what is possible to be discerned by human sight on a straight line. It’s all about perspective. Now, of course that the higher one places oneself above sea level (not called sea curve, for some odd reason), the visible distance increases because of the angle at which you are looking, making the same straight line of sight reach further. Moreover, the fact that the horizon, when looking at a 90º angle, always rises to eye level, regardless of height, shows that it can only be a “flattish” plane, certainly not curved.

          No debate, not necessary. Just state the strongest piece of flat earth evidence. And dismissing perfectly good evidence such as flights and the earth’s curvature calculator that shows a globe is NOT proof of a flat earth.

          Debate not necessary? Wow… that caught me a bit by surprise, Khammad. You have your own radio show where you host debates about all kinds of subjects and suddenly a debate about this matter is not necessary? This is not like you will have to agree to anything, it is mostly for the interchange of ideas and to try to reach some clarification.

          I have stated above some proof and evidence of my ideas, so my part is done. I have dismissed nothing, as you can clearly confirm, so I have certainly not dismissed “perfectly good evidence”, I have responded to it, as you can read.

          Well, anyway, I really think it would be a great idea to have a debate about the flat earth and globe earth. If you ever change your mind, do take up John’s offer and contact him on his YouTube channel. I’d really be looking forward to that and will be present if you so desire, Khammad. Moreover, you can also bring someone else with you to the discussion, to assist you with your presentation.

        2. LusitAna

          Websites as planefinder.net or others provide no reliable proof of flight paths. They are as trustworthy as the news, a cute animation of little planes crossing a map. Well, not even a map, considering it includes no scale, therefore providing no means of calculating distance travelled.

          Flight times aren’t an appropriate measure of distance travelled either. Velocity isn’t constant so are we meant to do the calculation with an average velocity? Should we use the average velocity they give us on the site referred above? NOT reliable and ‘perfectly good evidence’.

          If one cannot calculate the distance travelled, how can one classify this as ‘perfectly good evidence’ of a round-oblate-spheroid earth? Should we trust the information displayed on those websites with those colourful graphics, because they say so and because it is based on something called ADS-B and MLAT technologies? I think not. If I don’t trust the news, why should I trust this website or others like it?

          This is relevant in one of the big alternative topics, the agenda 21, which has as one of its main focus the standardization and centralization of geospatial information (something I have some academic background on), for the greater good, they tell us. It has nothing to do with any possible deviation from national and local geospatial information from the ‘idealized spheroid’, I’m sure…

          Secondly, the contradiction in a curve calculator that considers the earth as a convex sphere (quoting from the website) and the mainstream science accepted ‘fact’ that it is an oblate spheroid.

          Is it sphere or is an oblate spheroid?! Get your ‘facts’ straight – No pun intended.

          1) Supposed flight paths – Not a fact;
          2) Curve calculator is a contradiction – Not a fact.

          On the other hand, Armunn Righ presented worthy information. Your replies to him not only suggest that what he brought to the discussion isn’t worthy of being looked at, but also just include a repetition of the same ‘facts’ presented earlier, in different words. No value added.

          It is you who have been disregarding evidence, or, if you prefer another word, information.

          If there’s something I’ve learned in life, it is that so many things I thought of as truths or facts, are not. That takes effort, being open to questioning and having love for knowledge, not for the infallible and set in stone.

          See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil

    3. Tal Shiar

      I am not sure why AB is calling KHam out?

      JLB could definitely be a shill, just like I think AB could be a shill. Many of us DO NOT know each other on the physically or personally level. Plus we DO NOT know what the agenda is of our fellow fakologists and why they found their way to this platform. What I can say is that trying to prove that someone is a shill is next to impossible. AB doesn’t screen for shills and he doesn’t help people once they enter this platform. IMHO.

      This whole platform is a case study for a student studying the DSM-IV. Personally, I have studied the DSM IV during my undergrad and graduate studies. Observing JLB’s videos has lead me to believe that he is preforming his own psychological experiment. It is either that or JLB has Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Then again, the NPD might be a result of his Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD). Only JLB can tell us, but I have a gut feeling that something is wrong with him. Just like my gut feeling about AB tells me something else about him. AB either has a bromance with JLB or they are working together. Sorry AB, just because you think that someone has a great radio voice doesn’t mean that everything they say is true. Just an FYI, Australian accents are not easy to listen to.

      I am perplexed as to why people on this platform believe something so wholeheartedly. Has no one on this platform learned anything from the media fakery? No one can be sure that world is flat and there will always be doubts in the narrative with the ball earth model. At the end of the day, we live on a planet that is running on a ball earth model. Shall the rest of the skeptics join us back down here on earth?

      PLEASE AB, PAY ATTENTION! The goal of the media is create a divide and separate us. They also want to keep us in fear. What has the FLAT EARTH theory done to this group? It has made people fight, strongly disagree and walk away from the community. The whole Flat Earth Theory has also created fear amoung our peers. People are fearful that we have clear shills around us. Has anyone studied how the flat earth theory has affect the fakologist community? I would love to see a poll of the community to know where they are at on this flat earth theory.

      In my opinion, I believe there should be more directions on this platform when it comes to topics. A community direction into one subject might really help us get down to truth. If we all work together to figure out a specific situation we might be amazed by our results. Also, how about AB takes a break from the flat earth stuff. Maybe a month?

      1. Zalian

        AB’s site, Ab’s rules.

        Don’t like it, make your own, plenty of template sites available.

        The poll is a good idea though, by voice verified accounts aswell for total fairness please.
        Would love to see the result.

        For a guy armchair psychologist’ing JLB, you certainly seem to be “Projecting” alot, do you even listen to yourself Tal Shiar?

        Flat earth may or may not be true, but so far the evidence is in favor of at the very least, more true than any ball ever was.
        Censouring the discussion though, now that to me is “Schilly”, wouldn’t you agree?

        And in closing @Kham.

        I will listen to you the moment you bring something reasonable to the table that is not effing curvature math, maths as i have said a million times can prove anything.
        And in this case its just twisting perspective into magical curvature with fancy numbers.
        The observable effect is the same but the context changed with maths, and we all know controling the context is how “THEY” operate, lying with the truth as it were.

        What you claimed about flight paths has already been debunked thouroghly by the other posters in this thread, so i wont repeat (feels like that is all i do with some people on this forum lately, repeat my point for deaf ears over and over)

        Hope the next thing you come up with makes more sense, if it does i will be the first to listen, and if not i will be here to tear into it.

        -Zal

        1. Tal Shiar

          Zal,

          Sorry that you cannot see JLB’s psychological experiment. It must be obvious to us who have been studying him since his arrival. The psychological experiment the media is doing to the people is something that this site should be studying. After all, it is a powerful tool. It would be in your best interest to study the psychology of those around you. Its an interesting tool.

          Speaking in regards to you, I feel as though your comment was yet another distraction. Mathematics is everywhere and it would be ignorant (yes I am channeling my inner Michael Jackson) to just dismiss it. Everything from the music you listen to or the languages we speak are based off of mathematics.

          I don’t care to argue with you, but I know there are others on this site that will read my comment and agree with me. This is AB’s site and I completely respect that he created an awesome tool for all of us to come together. The only area that I disagree with him on is the leadership. To me there is a responsibility to help others see the media fakery. There are fakery to the fakery as well. So helping someone spot that should be another thing that people can learn here. The flat earth is huge leap for people and to be honest it screams disinfo to me.

          Also I don’t believe AB has confirmed that he believe in any model for the shape of the earth. I could be wrong though?

          When I was first told about AB’s site, I found his radio shows interesting. I loved the conversations with people from around the globe (flat earth if you must), but those conversations are no longer here. It is now focused on this flat earth distraction. Flat earth is a distraction to me because it servers no purpose. If the world was flat-so what! It means nothing! Not when we have real things going on down here on EARTH.

          I believe you have written me aggressive responses in the past and that is fine. After all, we come from different walks of life and therefore we should have differences of opinions. It is those differences that challenge our core belief system.

          Here is my question to you . . .

          What evidence did you discover that proved to yourself that the world is flat?

          1. Zalian

            What is evidence to me ?

            Nasa lying about everything (moon landings, ISS, Mars rovers), shady and easy to create globe pictures (only 2 so far thats official aswell), no real live footage from space, freemasons everywhere you see space mentioned, my own eyes, cell towers doing everything a satelite can, no one actually ever accounting for curvature in things that matter (surveying, flying planes etc), can’t feel any rotation ever, horizon rising to eye level, binoculars pulling things over the “curvature” back into focus, Sun certainly looks closer and smaller than ball theory states to me, Gravity makes no sense and is founded in so much BS its laughable, Dodgy experiments “proving” the globe (balls from a ceiling, pendulums), non exsistant corriolis effect (never accounted for by anyone, no matter what armchair “snipers” claim), the math supporting the globe is made so large that no one can ever relate it to anything real (billions and trillions of lightyears), the antarctic treaty (where there is smoke there is fire, why exactly can’t i go wherever i please in the antarctic? cause i would ruin the ecology? come on, no one buys that).

            I’m sure i forgot something aswell, but that was just off the top of my head.

            This to me adds up to people lying theire ass off, pushing a globe.
            And why would they do that?

            You need to get told the earth is round by the school system.
            Before they get to you, you dont even think about roundness, its crazytalk to any non programmed individual.

            Go to any “wild” tribe, and they think its flat too,

            observation > indoctrination.

            Flatness is self evident to anyone not buying government funded science fiction.

            That being said, the map is still up in the air, but it was never claimed to be more than a “working model” anyway, kinda like working titles in movies.
            I’m sure there is quite alot still to be discovered if we ever get a real map of our world (even “ballers” must agree the map projections for the ball isnt accurate either).

            When its all said and done the Globe hinges on NASA and some questionable experiments, and they are both being debunked into the ground right now.

            Personally i can not understand fakeologists defending the mainstream, seems wierd to me.

            “they lie about everything, and schills are everywhere”

            “But the globe is true, Nasa, school and freemason scientists told me, also
            look at this perspective….ehm curvature formula, SCIENCE!”

            Cognetive dissonance at it’s most obvious.

            -Zal

          2. ab Post author

            Once my schedule changes and or I get more energy, I’ll go back to more interviews. Thanks for your patience in my ball earth skepticism. I don’t have time to steer every misled visitor here, but am pleased that many regulars step up to help.

          3. Tal Shiar

            @Zalian,

            To be honest, I have many of the same questions that you have about space. Satellites, the moon landings, the failed Galactic Earth Project, and how they never show us images of earth and the dark side of the moon. There is something that they are keeping from the public and no one can say for sure what that is.

            Now factoring in the list that you provided. The list seems to be made up of things that you are questioning. It isn’t based off of science or any research that can be looked over and examined. I know when some people have a difficult time understanding something they just pass it off as bull. Sometimes you really have to dive deep into these things and see what they are trying to say. Then once you have a better understand, maybe even drink the “kool-aid” you then can question what you are being told.

            Now how about you think about this from another angle.

            I believe a great way to research this topic is to understand both sides of the topic. So I have another question for you.

            Can you give me reasons that you believe the earth could be a ball shape? What is the evidence to support that?

        2. Curious

          @Zalian

          I agree with you. Add to it: when possible water will always level itsself. A ball model spinning with 1000 m. per hour, add to it the tilt and the wobbling. No thank you very much.

          1. Tal Shiar

            @Curious – Water also clings to the sides of a breaker. Which is why you always pour a little bit over the the line. Also there is atmospheric pressure that you are not factoring in. These are things that anyone can do and test out for themselves.

          2. Curious

            Tal Shiar

            I wrote it a little bit in a hurry. I know very well that water tends to curve up let’s say the side of a cup.\
            Water is extremely complicated stuff and behaves itself much more different as you can immagine yourself.
            See for this as an introduction: www.dichtes-wasser.de/ Use English version.

          3. Curious

            @ Tal Shiar

            See for this as an introduction: www.dichtes-wasser.de/… Use English version.

            Noticed he is building up a new website. So you have to wait a little bit.

            Also there is atmospheric pressure that you are not factoring in.

            What has that to do with it? Explain yourself.

          4. Curious

            @ Tal Shiar

            That site is not safe. I now am questioning who you are. I did a trace and who is look up and what came up wasn’t good!

            Told you that side is under reconstruction and Dr.rer. nat. Peter Augustin is 100% safe. Do a search on the internet.

            Who I am is non of your bussiness, but absolutely not a shill.

      2. ArmunnRigh

        This whole platform is a case study for a student studying the DSM-IV. Personally, I have studied the DSM IV during my undergrad and graduate studies.

        DSM? Oh you mean this consensual, uncontroversial manual?

        The Great DSM Hoax – How Mental Disorders are Created and Sold

        You want to catalog people who appear here using this as reference? That would mean that another person could use a bible as reference and say that you suffer from “sin” disorder.

        It is either that or JLB has Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Then again, the NPD might be a result of his Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD).

        This is quite a claim to make! I have seen “experts” in Psychology also say that people who investigate alternative viewpoints (their term is “conspiracy theories”) are suffering from personality disorders! At least we all here at Fakeologist are in the same nut-house, even if at different wards.
        Moreover, that claim is just Psychologist’s fallacy.

        Only JLB can tell us, but I have a gut feeling that something is wrong with him. Just like my gut feeling about AB tells me something else about him. AB either has a bromance with JLB or they are working together. Sorry AB, just because you think that someone has a great radio voice doesn’t mean that everything they say is true. Just an FYI, Australian accents are not easy to listen to.

        I have a gut feeling about you and other people who comment here too, yet, I don’t go around spreading my unfounded opinion, which might influence someone against those particular people I feel odd about. Moreover, you are directing your argument about John le Bon (and about the flat earth topic, because you equate the two at this point) towards the presenter’s character, personality or supposed issues, failing to refute the arguments themselves.

        This is a Red Herring, ad hominem fallacy.

        I am perplexed as to why people on this platform believe something so wholeheartedly. Has no one on this platform learned anything from the media fakery? No one can be sure that world is flat and there will always be doubts in the narrative with the ball earth model. At the end of the day, we live on a planet that is running on a ball earth model. Shall the rest of the skeptics join us back down here on earth?

        Who among the people who have been presenting evidence and arguments against the globe model and for a flat one, as ever based their claims on “belief”? The fact that you or someone else refuse to look at and test the evidence yourselves, does not lead to the conclusion that it is only unfounded belief. It cannot be proven? Why can’t it? That is Argument from ignorance. Additionally, you have also used a slick Argumentum ad Populum there, trying to affirm that «at the end of the day we live on a planet that is running on a ball earth model», which does not prove its validity.

        PLEASE AB, PAY ATTENTION! The goal of the media is create a divide and separate us. They also want to keep us in fear. What has the FLAT EARTH theory done to this group? It has made people fight, strongly disagree and walk away from the community. The whole Flat Earth Theory has also created fear amoung our peers. People are fearful that we have clear shills around us. Has anyone studied how the flat earth theory has affect the fakologist community? I would love to see a poll of the community to know where they are at on this flat earth theory.

        This includes Appeal to Fear, Appeal to Consequences and Appeal to Emotion, at least. You are appealing to Ab for intervention on a discussion that should be an objective debate, simply because you think there are fearful consequences to having the debate in the first place. I can only imagine what you think the consequences of discussing 9/11 as a hoax “when no one else was doing it” were back in the day of the Ab Irato blog (pre fakeologist.com).

        In my opinion, I believe there should be more directions on this platform when it comes to topics. A community direction into one subject might really help us get down to truth. If we all work together to figure out a specific situation we might be amazed by our results. Also, how about AB takes a break from the flat earth stuff. Maybe a month?

        To «get down to the truth» is exactly what discussions are for. By having a serious unbiased exchange of ideas, where both sides get a say and objectivity is maintained, using no tricks but actually willing to look at the evidence for and against, I was able to understand years ago the “no plane” issue here with Ab and Simon, for example.

        Still, for a debate to take place, it takes at least two – and participating in it with eyes and ears closed, repeating the same arguments that have already been addressed, is actually what shills are paid to do. No, I am not saying that you are a shill, nor do I think you are.

    4. richard benedict

      Yes Miss Khammad, let talk about the facts. Fact-I smart off about Simon Shack and the response is instantaneous yet I humbly submit this question below and I am ignored.

      “… I shall quite viddying flat earth videos when someone can adequately explain to me how I was able to stand on the shoreline of Indiana Dunes State park and personally see the Chicago skyline 50 miles away across open water, when it is averred to be 1,473 feet below the horizon according to earth curvature calculators.
      eye height=6 ft
      target distance=50 miles

      dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/…
      www.smokescreendesign.com
      chicagocamping.org
      Thus far, no one walking on the face of the earth has provided me with a satisfactory explanation.”

      And that is a fact, Jack, that is a natural fact.

      Read more: fakeologist.com/2016/01/20/let…

      1. khammad

        Richard Benedict,

        The shoreline of Indiana Dunes State park is several miles long. What is your precise location on that shoreline?

        We will need your location for total transparency.

        1. ArmunnRigh

          The usual bombardment of already addressed and refuted objections, reveals that the evidence being presented is not being read, viewed, considered.

          For the benefit of the interested readers, who may stumble upon this post, here is a video, where perspective is explained, particularly, that “underwater” effect.

          Additionally, your response does NOT address the original question, which was not whether the buildings look underwater or not, but the fact that even seeing the building is impossible with curvature.

          richard benedict stated:

          “… I shall quite viddying flat earth videos when someone can adequately explain to me how I was able to stand on the shoreline of Indiana Dunes State park and personally see the Chicago skyline 50 miles away across open water, when it is averred to be 1,473 feet below the horizon according to earth curvature calculators.
          eye height=6 ft
          target distance=50 miles
          dizzib.github.io/earth/curve-calc/…
          www.smokescreendesign.com
          chicagocamping.org……
          Thus far, no one walking on the face of the earth has provided me with a satisfactory explanation.”

          What did you choose to respond? That the buildings look underwater to you, instead of explaining how, according to the calculator presented by khammad, the buildings are even visible in the first place! Moreover, the “looks underwater” objection has been explained over and over in previous posts!

          Is this what’s to be expected from an honest debate? You have already your mind made up, you are in no condition to partake in a discussion of ideas that may or may not support your claims – that’s what a debate is all about. I for, instance have addressed each and every objection raised to myself directly and yet I continuously see evidence being ignored, circular arguments and avoidance.

          This is not even a debate, much less a serious or honest one. A debate takes two, at least, and one side of the table is covering ears, eyes and singing “? the globe is alive with the sound of music ?” while the other side is making their presentation. You and Khammad should be ashamed of yourselves, not at all for what you believe or consider having evidence for, but for having come this far down the line and being unable to have an authentic debate over the subject being contested, when each and every other topic ever discussed at Fakeologist.com has and always will be as controversial, deemed ridiculous and avoided by most of the world’s people as this one is, or maybe even more so!

          When first I looked at the “no planes” 9/11 perspective, I laughed, discarded evidence, avoided contradictions to maintain my mental safe spot – after all, they couldn’t have possibly pulled that off, could they? Then, when I finally got down to checking neutrally Simon Shack’s evidence, I conceded, I couldn’t ignore the fact that I had been wrong and I promised to myself that I would never fall into that trap ever again. By the way, did you know or do you remember that the “no planes” avenue was mentioned to be a Discredit By Association by none other than Alex Jones?!

          I don’t care whether you see things as I do or not, what I do care is that you treat the matter and the people who actually are interested in it with the same respect you deserved when you were looking at other matters as difficult to digest as this one!

          1. Tal Shiar

            When I look at that photo, it looks like water level is higher than the city. Its a clear observation to me. Your response is all over the map. Evidence, not opinions are the only thing that will convince those who research the subject. Also, you have not shown me the same respect. Keep that in mind.

          2. ArmunnRigh

            @Tal Shiar:

            How exactly have I not shown you respect? I have responded every time you addressed me in the most intelligent and open way I can offer.

            Now you either want to take part in a discussion or you don’t, but if you do, at least go through what is presented. That is the respect I’m asking, not for me, this is not a personal thing, but toward the subject at hand.

            My response is a repetition of the answer that had already been provided earlier, time and time again. Yes, it is annoying and I am irritated, because it shows that all that was presented before was skipped.

        2. Curious

          @Tal Shiar

          I’m sorry, but this picture clearly shows that there is an arch. The city looks like it is underwater. Why can’t you see that?

          The horizon is straight.

  3. Tom Dalpra

    ‘Paid shills’ this, ‘paid shills’ that. Jon certainly seems to make an effort to ram this term home. He also puts the term in quotes on the title page of the video.

    I’m sure most people who’ve made it to this site are comfortable with the idea of controlled opposition.
    Clearly there are people on-line and surely in ‘the youtube community’ that Jon refers to, and even on this site, who are agents of some sort ? Sponsored by military intelligence, I’d say. It’s just part of the scenery in these fields of research, isn’t it?
    If the research is any good, anyway.

    Maybe it’s paranoid vanity and I’m delusional, but I don’t think so.
    I think it’s inevitable that there’s the odd so-called ‘shill’ about.

    Obviously the false accusations and the suspicion that Jon identifies goes on as well, and I’d say there’s a valid point there, but for me, this doesn’t mean there aren’t agents, or ‘ shills’, on line.

    .

    1. ArmunnRigh

      @Tom Dalpra

      That is not exactly what John is referring to in this presentation. I was in the call where he first mentioned it and have a better understanding of his point.

      My comment to his video on Youtube was:

      «The idea that paid shills exist, in my personal experience, makes me more aware to the information, more selective. It makes me more alert, not less so, or even dismissive. However I understand that for this to happen, honest curiosity and will to know is required. Those who take information as a fad or with only freakish interest, will certainly be affected, I agree.
      It is somewhat naive to consider that they wouldn’t have people of their own setting up information traps as soon as the boom started occurring, if for all other hoaxes, such as 9/11, the various shootings and terrorist attacks, there were already people in place ready to distribute disinformation (which would qualify as shills, of course, whether or not there is actual evidence – which is nearly impossible to obtain).
      This said, I also have to admit that the best way to counter any potential shills is to provide as much objectivity as possible in the information conveyed, so as to dry them of attention (again, if the shills do exist), without actually mentioning or going openly against a persona, yes. As you very well pointed out, focusing on whether or not the person behaves as a shill moves the discussion away from the real important matter: the actual objective research.»

      His reply was

      «+Armunn Righ Very well said. I could not have put it better myself.»

      which makes it clear that this is his point.

      1. Tom Dalpra

        Armunn

        Thanks, that clears it up a bit.
        At least he seems to agree with you and I that it would be naive to think there weren’t agents, of some sort, on line.
        The point about it being counter-productive to focus on personalities rather than the research is
        fair enough; if people are going to accuse people of being shills they should be able to produce evidence.

        1. ArmunnRigh

          @Tom Dalpra

          It would certainly be important to also watch this video of his, in which he is remarkably eloquent in putting across his points:



          It might be an important self-reflection for the people he mentions, I consider.

      2. UNreal

        @Armunn

        your Youtube comment very well sums up my view, only better !
        every imaginable area of investigation will contain everything from “information traps” to controlled opposition, gatekeepers and “shill’s”.

        reading your post, i also realize that i’ve myself sometimes been more severe on the person representing the evidence than the evidence itself (or lack therof).

        as an example, pertaining to the flat earth movement i very quickly wrote off Mark Sergeant, Jeranism and Eric Dubay. the fact that all these researchers engage (imo) in one or more of the 3d’s (disinform, distract & divide) has not prevented any of them to have helped me gain new insights or question my stance. thanks to Ab/Fakeologist i’ve continued to listen to the information provided by all above-mentioned researchers/personas and what i’ve gained from this you sum up very well Armunn:

        “it makes me more alert, not less so”

        in a nutshell, i really think we should focus more on the information and on clear thinking, rather than calling out for “shills” like has been the case with John Le Bon both on this site and on Cluesforum where his detractors have largely ignored his invitation for intelligent, argumentative discussion.

        1. ArmunnRigh

          @UNreal:

          Cheers!

          Yeah, knowing that there will certainly be people out there aiming at trolling you or misdirecting you with disinfo, makes you stay alert and pay even more attention to what is being said, instead of who or how, at least in my view.

          Moreover, there’s a quote from a Portuguese poet (António Aleixo) that I’ll translate below:

          «P’ra a mentira ser segura
          e atingir profundidade,
          tem de trazer à mistura
          qualquer coisa de verdade.»

          in English:

          «For the lie to be secure
          and have a deep root,
          it must be have mixed with it
          something of the truth.»

          So even if one is a shill, there will be bits of the truth mixed in, otherwise there will be no traction to get followers and interest. So if one focuses on the information and validates it through our own logical process and research, not only will one be able to navigate the information itself, but also tend to find yourself among gradually more honest and intelligent people, due to your own standards.

          John’s point appears to be merely: do not focus on the persona (appearance), but on the information (action), in order to minimize time wasting and derailment through personality cult, with which I agree.

          1. UNreal

            re,

            your points and focus on logic and information really are insightful. also appreciate that you are blunt about having formed your opinion on a matter you have spent a long time looking into.

            many shy away from even forming their own opinion on the flat/spheroid earth despite devoting much time and effort on the topic. there is a perverse effect of such an attitude* of refusing to form an opinion which is that the debate never really happens and no progress is made on the core of the matter. this then allows for fringe movement and arguments to prevail, and this seems to be an important part of the meme or strategy in the FE debate.

            we have a very concrete, no-nonsense way to confirm the shape of the earth: modern land survey tools triangulating (air/ground) over sufficient and adequate distances. and no need for straw man arguments such as bending light or plane trajectories over unverified maps.

            Failure to State fallacy: Never actually stating a position on the topic, rather constantly being on the attack or asking questions.

          2. ArmunnRigh

            @UNreal

            Thanks for your thoughts on the discussion!

            Interestingly, your quote:

            Failure to State fallacy: Never actually stating a position on the topic, rather constantly being on the attack or asking questions.

            Certainly sounds like a method taken from the Frankfurt School, for sure:

            en.metapedia.org/wiki/Cultural…

            en.metapedia.org/wiki/Cultural…

            en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfur…

            The critique for its own sake, with the only objective purpose of deconstruction and demoralization, that can then be taken advantage of by the promotion of group-think, allowing far easier control through harnessed and impoverished language (political correctness).

            Interesting isn’t it?

    2. Tal Shiar

      Hey Tom,

      I really enjoyed your response and I honestly was thinking the same thing when I was listening to the youtube video. Nothing about what JLB says makes me think that shills don’t exist. I think one thing that people have to accept is that we really will never know the truth about anything. We have been lied to about so much that it is hard to distinguish the truth. Even when you think you have discovered the truth, you still question it. I feel as though governments have spent money on all sorts of things. Some of those things were a complete waste of money. So it would only make sense that they have a division that follows these sites and its content.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.