Why do you talk as if you're saying anything I do not already know?

I'm still waiting for a somewhat scientific explanation on why a mirror is needed. You insist it's needed, and you say I'm dodging by not responding to that part, but the fact is that you're not explaining why it's needed. Instead you just keep arguing semantics over and over and over and over again.

a mirror is needed to refract because he refuses to use one to look at his reflection.

Please end this trolling. You don't really believe in a flat earth.

Shame on our mods for allowing this thread for so long.

think about it man. logically if there is a tiny inconsequential % of people that DO believe the earth is flat it stands to reason that a few are in the JSP population. and in my experience those who have wildly irrational beliefs are disproportionately more likely to loudly talk about them. Like have you ever met someone who believes in chem-trails that doesn't tell everyone that will listen about them?

i have always believed, and still do, that the flat earth theory (in those who are not incredibly religious and clinging to a center of the universe mentality) comes secondary to the paranoid anxiety that there is a worldwide shadow organization secretly controlling everything around the globe. Which is why scientific proof won't work on them, they only looked at the science after deciding it was all true due to their ideas of the Illuminati. Its almost like they're trying to prove the flat earth for no other reason than to prop up the Illuminati conspiracy.

Yup, just coincidence every Astro-nots is a Freemason and Freemasons always tell you the truth. No one ever lies, why would anyone ever think someone is - clearly their deluded....

Faps

of course they are, because if they weren't your conspiracy becomes unbelievable. everytime you run into a logical issue to keep believing you just widen the conspiracy. every, damn, time.

so, like, even if there was proof linking most, if not all astronauts to one secret society or another, you wouldn't think it was a strange coincidence? or even question it for that matter?
I donno, I get the impression you'd just dismiss something like that pretty quickly without even giving it an ounce of thought, even though the situation begs to be examined further.

it's a conspiracy, so it must be completely absurd bullshit, right?

not at all. but those aren't direct comparisons. I could fully accept SOME astronauts being part of a secret society because i don't have a view of the universe which depends on ALL of them being in on it. In card's case, IF the earth were flat, it would only take one person to leak the secret. Not only astronauts, but all people involved in the design and control of space travel. and air travel, if the earth is flattened out many planes need to be flying faster or slower than what they report as cruising speed to cover up the secret that Austrailia and LA are farther than the ball earth suggests, this would include pilots, mechanics who work on overly pushed engines, plane refuelers who put in more fuel than the are reported to need for the flight. etc. then add on to that the cold war for the space portion, two contentious nations carrying out wars in collusion with each other as they would both be freemasons. satellite operators, physicist, astronomers, etc.

that's my point, my ideas of a conspiracy ( i believe in some ) are based on facts, not wild speculation in a defensive maneuver to get around issues with my world view. Modifying space pictures with a curved lens isn't something he has proof of, its simply a way for him to get around video of the earth from space as proof of a round earth.

I'm not dodging, I was offline. I'm honestly surprised that you are going backwards now. I figured after some reading you would have realized that water really does refract light and wouldn't be trying to still argue that it doesn't.
The pictures of flashlights don't look distorted because everything is submerged. The rays of light bouncing off the flashlight and enabling you to see and take a picture of it are refracted too, just like the light the flashlight itself is emitting. A picture of a fully submerged pencil will look fine too, but a partially submerged pencil looks broken.
If you don't think that water refracts light, can you explain that picture of a spoon in a plastic cup I posted earlier?



No, you are forced to dodge. Here is a question you are guaranteed to dodge: if light refracts when it hits glass and light refracts when it hits water, why can you make a rainbow using glass but not water? Both are mediums of a density different than air, so both will affect light in a similar way. Why does a glass prism work, but a water one doesn't?