1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

The absence of a detailed explanation is not proof of a conspiracy - it is simply a polite refusal to entertain a line of questioning built on incorrect assumptions by people trying to trap them into an answer.

"Flat Earth is true" and "No curvature, it's just all flat" are emphatic confirmations and nothing else.

7 hours ago, farang51 said:

My intelligence

Don't forget your education, which is equally important.

19 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

"Flat Earth is true" and "No curvature, it's just all flat" are emphatic confirmations and nothing else.

No there was nothing emphatic whatsoever about the response of either pilot in those videos...

One pilot just dismissively says.. "Blue Sky, pretty flat [horizon]", clearly bemused at the daft level of questioning - clearly he (the Pilot) also understands its not expected to see anything other than a flat horizon at the altitude he flies at.

The other pilot dismissive waves his hand... stating...

... "the earths motion has nothing to do with it".....

and response to the daft question...

... 'so we don't compensate for the earths curvature when landing ?'..

> "we don't do anything" .... "curvature is... [waves hands dismissively]"...

....'so earth has to be a level stationary plane, right '...

> "Fairly... relative to us, yes"...

The Pilots clearly cannot be bothered with this line of questioning... and non of the answers highlight the pilots have any belief leaning towards a flat earth.

The fact that such videos are being used by flat-earthers highlights the lack of understanding of conversational nuance, and that they will desperately cling on to the thinnest shred of information and misuse it - just as you have.

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

No there was nothing emphatic whatsoever about the response of either pilot in those videos...

One pilot just dismissively says.. "Blue Sky, pretty flat [horizon]", clearly bemused at the daft level of questioning - clearly he (the Pilot) also understands its not expected to see anything other than a flat horizon at the altitude he flies at.

The other pilot dismissive waves his hand... stating...

... "the earths motion has nothing to do with it".....

and response to the daft question...

... 'so we don't compensate for the earths curvature when landing ?'..

> "we don't do anything" .... "curvature is... [waves hands dismissively]"...

....'so earth has to be a level stationary plane, right '...

> "Fairly... relative to us, yes"...

The Pilots clearly cannot be bothered with this line of questioning... and non of the answers highlight the pilots have any belief leaning towards a flat earth.

The fact that such videos are being used by flat-earthers highlights the lack of understanding of conversational nuance, and that they will desperately cling on to the thinnest shred of information and misuse it - just as you have.

You didn't include the one who says "Flat Earth? True". A good faith omission, no doubt.

Here you go, I look forward to read your retort that these pilots are merely playing along for fun, because it is all just so absurd…

0:19
- Because they say the pilots know a lot: do you think the Earth is flat or not?
- I know it's flat.
- You know it's flat… How long have you been flying for, you said?
- Over 30 years

6 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

You didn't include the one who says "Flat Earth? True". A good faith omission, no doubt.

I did miss that second part of that video...

Question: "is there a specific angle of downward tilt you have to fly at to.. " (interrupted)

Pilot "3 degrees, thats it"

Questioner: "3 degrees for the curvature of the earth ?"

Pilot: "oh, for the earth ? - we just fly over the trophospeher"

Question: "you have to keep going down because... " (interrupted)

Pilot: "Nooo... you actually have to nose up"

Questioner: "cos I was reading some stuff on the flat-earth that made sense - have you looked into it ?"

Pilot: "which one, sorry ?"

Questioner: "I was reading a lot of stuff on the flat-earth"

Pilot: - Realising he's dealing with an idiot - "OK.... yeah yeah yeah, true"

Questioner: "is true"

Pilot: turns away to end the conversation..."its true"

Questioner: "ok, got bless brother - have a good one"

Pilot: "You too"...

That exchange is not an admission of anything - its an example of how not to have a conflict about such a daft conspiracy theory with a paying passenger !!!

the other Pilots in the other videos... clearly saying "yeah, yeah"... Giving the interviewer what they want to hear so they'll go away - these professionals simply cannot be bothered with such stupidity.

6 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Here you go, I look forward to read your retort that these pilots are merely playing along for fun, because it is all just so absurd…

0:19
- Because they say the pilots know a lot: do you think the Earth is flat or not?
- I know it's flat.
- You know it's flat… How long have you been flying for, you said?
- Over 30 years

The last video you posted is equally as idiotic - loaded questions - pilots clearly cannot be bothered to engage with the stupidity - and one commentator (advising fighter pilots) whos clearly a nut.

The 'do you have to dip nose ?' discussion and 'can you see the curvature?' questions - are really really daft - we've all looked out of an air-craft window - of course we cannot see the curvature - the scale is too vast.

The Pilots - are not playing along for 'fun' - they're simply avoiding further discussion idiots asking stupid but loaded questions (something I should be doing here really !!!)

None of this is proof or evidence of anything - and certainly not proof at all that any of those 19 pilots believe the earth is not spherical.

Ask them the direct question (unmasked with stupidity): "Is the earth an oblate spheroid (a globe) or do you believe it is flat like a plate?" - their answer will be clear and unambiguous....

23 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Ask them the direct question (unmasked with stupidity): "Is the earth an oblate spheroid (a globe) or do you believe it is flat like a plate?" - their answer will be clear and unambiguous....

Again:

0:19
- Because they say the pilots know a lot: do you think the Earth is flat or not?
- I know it's flat.
- You know it's flat… How long have you been flying for, you said?
- Over 30 years

There are plenty others who say it unambiguously. It's just a fact that some pilots claim the Earth is flat. That doesn't mean you have to agree with them, nor does it prove anything, but trying to frame their statements so that they fit into a predetermined conclusion is not an effective approach.

On 1/19/2026 at 1:01 PM, how241 said:

Isn't there lots of stuff, equipment, and a vehicle that was left up there and can be seen by telescopes and satellites?

Wow!

Stuff? Equipment? A vehicle? How did they get up there?

I'm going looking for a pic or two on AI. Or phone me mate Elvis. But wait a mo! Probably be asleep now cause of the time difference, So call him later.

4 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

Again:

0:19
- Because they say the pilots know a lot: do you think the Earth is flat or not?
- I know it's flat.
- You know it's flat… How long have you been flying for, you said?
- Over 30 years

There are plenty others who say it unambiguously. It's just a fact that some pilots claim the Earth is flat. That doesn't mean you have to agree with them, nor does it prove anything, but trying to frame their statements so that they fit into a predetermined conclusion is not an effective approach.

In videos like these, I am quite certain the answers are not genuine.

If a stranger approached me with the same questions, I would probably nod along and agree - not because I actually do, but because the quickest way to deal with a fruitcake is to let them move on.

These pilots are doing exactly the same thing.

Yes, you could probably find some pilots who are willing to go on record claiming they believe the Earth is flat. That does not make the Earth flat - it simply means they, too, are fruitcakes.

There is an overwhelming body of clear, unambiguous evidence showing that the Earth is an oblate spheroid. Anyone who genuinely believes it is flat is simply, and spectacularly, wrong.

Of course, I can already see the comments coming - from yourself, Rumak, and Stiddle - I believe everyone should agree with me and I never accept I'm wrong. In this case, that happens to be correct.

Being wrong in this context has nothing to do with whether someone agrees with me personally. Disagreement is perfectly acceptable when there is credible evidence, sound reasoning, and a coherent alternative explanation. What is not acceptable is rejecting established reality.

A claim is simply wrong when it directly contradicts the entirety of modern scientific knowledge and factual understanding, especially when that knowledge is supported by centuries of observation, experimentation, independent verification, and practical application. The shape of the Earth is not a matter of opinion, belief, or consensus by popularity - it is a measurable, testable fact.

There is no genuine evidence supporting a global conspiracy to conceal a flat Earth. What is presented instead are emotional arguments, flawed reasoning, misunderstood concepts, cherry-picked data, and interviews taken out of context or distorted to fit a preconceived narrative. None of this constitutes evidence.

When an argument relies on suspicion rather than proof, assertion rather than measurement, and selective interpretation rather than the full body of available data, it does not represent a competing viewpoint - it represents an error. Calling that error out is not intolerance of disagreement; it is a recognition that some claims are simply false.

Again - it does not strike me as surprising that it is Red, Rumak, Stiddle and Yourself who hold this belief that the earth is flat.

14 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

On 1/19/2026 at 9:01 AM, how241 said:

Isn't there lots of stuff, equipment, and a vehicle that was left up there and can be seen by telescopes and satellites?

Wow!

Stuff? Equipment? A vehicle? How did they get up there?

I'm going looking for a pic or two. Or phone me mate Elvis. But wIT! Probably be asleep now cause of thE time difference, Call him later.

Items that were left on the Moon cannot be seen from Earth with a telescope. None of it.

Apollo missions left equipment behind - lunar module descent stages, instruments, flags, footprints, and laser retroreflectors. However, all of it is far too small to be optically resolved from Earth.

The largest Earth-based telescopes can only resolve features on the Moon that are roughly 1–2 km across. Apollo hardware is measured in metres. This is basic optics .

What can be detected from Earth are the laser retroreflectors left by the astronauts. Observatories still fire lasers at the Moon and measure the return time to calculate the Earth–Moon distance with millimetre accuracy. You are not “seeing” the equipment - you are measuring its physical effect. That experiment has been independently repeated for decades, worldwide.

There 'actual' photographs of the landing sites - including descent stages and astronaut tracks - these come from lunar orbiters flying tens of kilometres above the surface, not from Earth.

So.. we cannot see Apollo hardware through a telescope - and moonlanding deiners claim this as some sort of proof while showing their ignorance of the scales and optics of earth telescopes.

That fact that 'items left on the moon' cannot been seen from earth does not argue against the Moon landings. It simply reflects the limits of resolution and the size of the objects involved. Claims to the contrary are based on misunderstanding, not evidence.

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Items that were left on the Moon cannot be seen from Earth with a telescope. None of it.

Apollo missions left equipment behind - lunar module descent stages, instruments, flags, footprints, and laser retroreflectors. However, all of it is far too small to be optically resolved from Earth.

The largest Earth-based telescopes can only resolve features on the Moon that are roughly 1–2 km across. Apollo hardware is measured in metres. This is basic optics .

What can be detected from Earth are the laser retroreflectors left by the astronauts. Observatories still fire lasers at the Moon and measure the return time to calculate the Earth–Moon distance with millimetre accuracy. You are not “seeing” the equipment - you are measuring its physical effect. That experiment has been independently repeated for decades, worldwide.

There 'actual' photographs of the landing sites - including descent stages and astronaut tracks - these come from lunar orbiters flying tens of kilometres above the surface, not from Earth.

So.. we cannot see Apollo hardware through a telescope - and moonlanding deiners claim this as some sort of proof while showing their ignorance of the scales and optics of earth telescopes.

That fact that 'items left on the moon' cannot been seen from earth does not argue against the Moon landings. It simply reflects the limits of resolution and the size of the objects involved. Claims to the contrary are based on misunderstanding, not evidence.

You can't expect anything sensible from a bloke that insists viruses don't exist, and if one is unwell, not to seek help from Pharma's medication.....😒

18 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Yes, you could probably find some pilots who are willing to go on record claiming they believe the Earth is flat. That does not make the Earth flat - it simply means they, too, are fruitcakes.

They are fruitcakes according to your viewpoint and that is perfectly fine. Indeed, these pilots exist and it would be very interesting to hear them expand on their rationale. After all, they are seasoned professionals with considerable flying experience, whom thousands of people trust with their lives. They aren't marginal or irrelevant commentators.

2 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

I was merely applying the much-lauded principle which the intelligent and educated folk abide by:

actually, as in most every other post, you were misapplying underlying principles.

8 minutes ago, transam said:

You can't expect anything sensible from a bloke that insists viruses don't exist, and if one is unwell, not to seek help from Pharma's medication.....😒

Agreed. While many conspiracists understandably object to being lumped into a single group, and in principle I agree with that objection - why would they want to be associated with other idiots !! - a clear pattern does emerge. Those who believe one major conspiracy are often predisposed to believe others as well.

At the core of this is a reflexive scepticism towards any official or institutional narrative. Healthy scepticism is valuable, but when it hardens into automatic disbelief of well-established, proven facts simply because they are accepted by the mainstream, it ceases to be rational. At that point, it borders on pathology - a mental sickness.

As noted earlier, it would not surprise me in the slightest if some of these individuals question the existence of gravity, or even time itself.

2 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

They are fruitcakes according to your viewpoint and that is perfectly fine. Indeed, these pilots exist and it would be very interesting to hear them expand on their rationale. After all, they are seasoned professionals with considerable flying experience, whom thousands of people trust with their lives. They aren't marginal or irrelevant commentators.

Those Pilots we see in your 'tiktok' videos aren't going to expand on their flat-earth principles because they don't have any !!!... They are being approached by fare-paying passengers, asked questions politely, and they engage courteously. Once it becomes obvious that the questions are loaded from a flat-Earth perspective, these 'seasoned professionals' do the sensible thing - they disengage. Agreeing briefly is often the quickest way to end the interaction, avoid conflict, and prevent their time from being wasted.

They are seasoned professionals precisely because they are not going to debate a flat-Earther while sitting in the cockpit of an aircraft. They have far more important responsibilities.

Interpreting these videos as some form of “evidence” does not demonstrate insight or critical thinking - it highlights a state of delusion.

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

Those Pilots we see in your 'tiktok' videos aren't going to expand on their flat-earth principles because they don't have any !!!... They are being approached by fare-paying passengers, asked questions politely, and they engage courteously. Once it becomes obvious that the questions are loaded from a flat-Earth perspective, these 'seasoned professionals' do the sensible thing - they disengage. Agreeing briefly is often the quickest way to end the interaction, avoid conflict, and prevent their time from being wasted.

They are seasoned professionals precisely because they are not going to debate a flat-Earther while sitting in the cockpit of an aircraft. They have far more important responsibilities.

You're stating an opinion categorically, which neutralises your point before you even attempt to make it. We don't know what lies behind those statements made on the fly.

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Interpreting these videos as some form of “evidence” does not demonstrate insight or critical thinking - it highlights a state of delusion.

55 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

It's just a fact that some pilots claim the Earth is flat. That doesn't mean you have to agree with them, nor does it prove anything, but trying to frame their statements so that they fit into a predetermined conclusion is not an effective approach.

1 minute ago, rattlesnake said:

You're stating an opinion categorically, which neutralises your point before you even attempt to make it. We don't know what lies behind those statements made on the fly.

Correct - so neither are their 'on the fly' comments valid 'evidence' against the earth being an oblate spheroid !

That said - a very small number of pilots have stated the earth is flat - and that fact is routinely misused.

A handful of individuals who happen to hold a pilot’s licence have publicly claimed the Earth is flat. They are outliers, not representatives of aviation, aeronautics, or navigation practice.

Crucially:

- Being a pilot does not make someone an authority on geodesy, astronomy, or physics

- Pilots are trained to operate aircraft, not to redefine the shape of the planet

- Their day-to-day work assumes a spherical (oblate spheroid) Earth through navigation systems, great-circle routes, inertial reference systems, and GPS corrections

There is no recognised aviation body, airline, regulator, or training organisation anywhere in the world that teaches or endorses a flat-Earth model. None.

Finding “some pilots” who say the Earth is flat proves only one thing:
... that people in any profession can hold irrational beliefs.

It does not outweigh:

- Centuries of astronomical observation

- Satellite geodesy

- GPS and inertial navigation

- Timekeeping and relativity corrections

- Independent verification by every spacefaring nation

In short:

A pilot claiming the Earth is flat is not evidence. It is an anecdote - and a bad one.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Correct - so neither are their 'on the fly' comments valid 'evidence' against the earth being an oblate spheroid !

Exactly. Welcome to the wonderful world of nuance, where each issue is considered under the lens of the multiple shades of grey which lie between the polar "pro" and "anti" stances.

Now I don't find it excessive to posit that these are striking statements to say the least, and that it would not be a useless endeavour to further delve into what they are based on.

30 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

...

Again - it does not strike me as surprising that it is Red, Rumak, Stiddle and Yourself who hold this belief that the earth is flat.

No, contrary to what you state I do NOT believe that the earth is flat, but that doesn't stop me from listening with an open mind to the arguments brought forward by both sides. As I stated earlier in this thread: the 1965 Rockwell Polar Flight - which Richard posted and which I looked into - as good as kills the Flat earth hypothesis in which a Northpole-Southpole circumnavigation is not possible.

On the actual topic of this thread I am less convinced that the US in 1969 put a man on the moon, but I do not completely reject the possibility despite all the holes in the official narrative.

The only thing that I am completely sure about is that the mRNA shots are anything but 'safe and effective' and are harming and killing people at an unprecedented scale.

On my credibility scale > flat Earth = 10%, Man on the moon = 40% and mRNA poison dead-shots = 100%

4 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

No, contrary to what you state I do NOT believe that the earth is flat, but that doesn't stop me from listening with an open mind to the arguments brought forward by both sides. As I stated earlier in this thread: the 1965 Rockwell Polar Flight - which Richard posted and which I looked into - as good as kills the Flat earth hypothesis in which a Northpole-Southpole circumnavigation is not possible.

On the actual topic of this thread I am less convinced that the US in 1969 put a man on the moon, but I do not completely reject the possibility despite all the holes in the official narrative.

The only thing that I am completely sure about is that the mRNA shots are anything but 'safe and effective' and are harming and killing people at an unprecedented scale.

On my credibility scale > flat Earth = 10%, Man on the moon = 40% and mRNA poison dead-shots = 100%

Got it - so you are just trolling for debate about something you don't believe in - posting web-links from people who's content you don't agree with....

Its a forum designed for discussion - so fair enough... Less dangerous than trying to convince people to to take life saving vaccines.

33 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

They are fruitcakes according to your viewpoint and that is perfectly fine. Indeed, these pilots exist and it would be very interesting to hear them expand on their rationale. After all, they are seasoned professionals with considerable flying experience, whom thousands of people trust with their lives. They aren't marginal or irrelevant commentators.

and.... it seems you are likely to believe a carpenter can explain the evolution of trees in detail.

12 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

and.... it seems you are likely to believe a carpenter can explain the evolution of trees in detail.

So your take is that a pilot doesn't necessarily have the knowledge and training to understand, perceive and explain whether the Earth is an oblate spheroid or a level plane?

1 minute ago, rattlesnake said:

So your take is that a pilot doesn't necessarily have the knowledge and training to understand, perceive and explain whether the Earth is an oblate spheroid or a level plane?

Do you think topic is included in his pilot's training? I doubt that it is. I also doubt that they learn how it's the lack of buoyancy that would cause an unpowered plane to crash.

Some of the pilots may be as misinformed about mathematics and physics as you are. You're an ace at sniffing out that type.

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Got it - so you are just trolling for debate about something you don't believe in - posting web-links from people who's content you don't agree with....

Its a forum designed for discussion - so fair enough... Less dangerous than trying to convince people to to take life saving vaccines.

That's a very disingenuous comment Richard! I have never posted a thread on Flat Earth, and I have never endorsed the premisse. But when Rattlesnake posts his contributions on that subject I read them with an open mind and I do not categorically dismiss it, but on the whole I now only give it a 10% chance that the Earth is flat.

I posted this thread about the faked moon-landing as imo it is more credible that it is a hoax than that they actually succeeded in getting a man on the moon and bringing him and his crew back safe and sound.

And lastly I will do anything I can (except lying) to convince people to do some research on the Lie of the life-saving vaccines by continually posting information about the dangers of that poisoned grail of medicine.

17 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

So your take is that a pilot doesn't necessarily have the knowledge and training to understand, perceive and explain whether the Earth is an oblate spheroid or a level plane?

Don't you remember.... it's 'remarkably difficult' to understand what you cannot see or feel?

10 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

That's a very disingenuous comment Richard! I have never posted a thread on Flat Earth, and I have never endorsed the premisse.

My apologies - you posted this thread about the Apollo Moon landings being faked which also morphed into a flat-earth debate - you never instigated that.

10 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

But when Rattlesnake posts his contributions on that subject I read them with an open mind and I do not categorically dismiss it, but on the whole I now only give it a 10% chance that the Earth is flat.

When anyone posts a claim that so clearly contradicts proven fact - such as denying that the Earth is an oblate spheroid - it is not a sign of open-mindedness to entertain it and discuss it. It is simply being daft.

Open-mindedness does not require suspending reason or discarding evidence. Some claims do not deserve debate because they have already been settled by overwhelming, independently verified fact. Treating them as “open questions” is not intellectual curiosity - it is confusion and idiocy.

10 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

I posted this thread about the faked moon-landing as imo it is more credible that it is a hoax than that they actually succeeded in getting a man on the moon and bringing him and his crew back safe and sound.

I would agree that, given the technical limitations of the era, it can be easier for a layperson to be taken in by moon-landing denial videos and misinformation. However, those claims have been thoroughly examined, repeatedly debunked, and dismantled in detail many times over.

The persistence of these arguments is not due to a lack of answers, but a refusal to accept them.

10 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

And lastly I will do anything I can (except lying) to convince people to do some research on the Lie of the life-saving vaccines by continually posting information about the dangers of that poisoned grail of medicine.

This is precisely why people repeatedly pushing dangerous anti-vaccine narratives is such a problem. These claims are not harmless opinions - they are misinformation that genuinely stupid or vulnerable people may believe, with real consequences for both individual and public health.

It is no different from campaigning against seatbelt or helmet use, or from repeatedly posting threads attempting to convince people that basic safety measures are unnecessary. The resulting harm is not hypothetical - it is well documented in communities influenced by anti-vaccine beliefs.

We have already covered this ground extensively in the anti-vax threads, and there is no need to derail this discussion by revisiting it yet again here.

16 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

37 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

Do you think topic is included in his pilot's training? I doubt that it is. I also doubt that they learn how it's the lack of buoyancy that would cause an unpowered plane to crash.

Some of the pilots may be as misinformed about mathematics and physics as you are. You're an ace at sniffing out that type.

Don't you remember.... it's 'remarkably difficult' to understand what you cannot see or feel?

I remember it well. And we agree that the oft-used argument below is invalid.

On 12/23/2024 at 5:26 AM, johnnybangkok said:

If you think that the earth is just a theory then just ask a pilot or an astronaut or even my 6 year old kid who seems to know more than you do.

14 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

It would be interesting to ask them if their aircraft corrected the trajectory to compensate for the Earth's purported curve… There already are a lot of testimonies from airline pilots saying it is not the case.

Of course it's not the case..... you completely lack an understanding of the fundamental principles of Newtonian (the simple kind) physics. Did you sleep through all the subjects in grades 9 - 12 or just physics?

For our spherical Earth/moon landing dubious friends here’s a very interesting site.

It’s scientific and philosophical in its nature with some maths involved for those willing and able.

This chapter is called From stargazers to starships and covers the plane of the elliptic, the seasons, astronomy, time, Newtonian physics and orbital mechanics… but its written in a fairly comprehendible fashion, showing how scientific discovery built upon earlier work and theory’s.

www.phy6.org/stargaze/Sintro.htm

18 minutes ago, HighPriority said:

For our spherical Earth/moon landing dubious friends here’s a very interesting site.

It’s scientific and philosophical in its nature with some maths involved for those willing and able.

This chapter is called From stargazers to starships and covers the plane of the elliptic, the seasons, astronomy, time, Newtonian physics and orbital mechanics… but its written in a fairly comprehendible fashion, showing how scientific discovery built upon earlier work and theory’s.

www.phy6.org/stargaze/Sintro.htm

I'll be having a look at that site HP; if I can get in.

What keeps an aircraft, or helicopter, up? Why it's fluid mechanics. Owl was always on about that. It was his passion for years. Unfortunately no longer with us.

1 hour ago, Stiddle Mump said:

What keeps an aircraft, or helicopter, up? Why it's fluid mechanics.

Not quite.. fluid mechanics is central, but with a crucial extra ingredient: Newton’s laws. What keeps aircraft and helicopters up is aerodynamic lift, which comes from how they push air.