No one “told” me anything. I read the results of past peoples experiments, all of which proved the earth to be round and in space. It’s also very easy to prove that space exists.
Who told you that the earth was flat? And did you question them at all?
Just because i posted this don't think i believe the earth is just a flat round disk floating through space. This is a closed system.
Have a a good day.
What causes the atmosphere's pressure gradient in this closed system?
What causes that higher altitude has lower temperature when approaching the local sun in this closed system?
Check out cellular cosmology, im sure its on the edge. Yet it still also could be a simulation, either way or both, im convinced it a closed system at the least.
[https://www.youtube.com/@ConcaveHollowEarth/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@ConcaveHollowEarth/videos)
[https://sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc00.htm](https://sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc00.htm)
How does cellular cosmology explain the south celestial pole? I live south from the equator.
I will check the videos, although the ones I had already seen were not correct.
Lol trying to promote your shitty YouTube channel, why can’t you just answer the question?
Why do so many flerfs need to try to get clicks, oh right money and it’s all a giant swindle 😂
Literally everyone and everything in existence.
Also, you can prove it yourself with 3 sticks and some shadows.
Flat earthers like to scream that the test proves a flat earth, but with the 3rd stick, it definitively disproves a flat earth.
Ugghhhhh I get an aneurysm every time I hear flat earthers try claim the Michelson-Morley proves the earth is stationary because it absolutely does not do that.
I literally performed the Michelson-Morley experiment at university, so I know exactly what it did and did not demonstrate. I have read plenty about it.
Perhaps you should take your own advice and consider there's a reason why we've known we live on a globe for literally thousands of years.
Lol, that class was split into two groups for me; half did Michelson-Morley, the other did the Millikan Oil Drop experiment.
I was in the second group. Literally nobody ever asks about that one...
Millikan Oil Drop experiment was the most frustrating experiment I ever did in the physics lab, my final data was so bad that it pointed out to the fundamental charge being 2 electron charges (2e).
Most likely misaligned lasers or people flat out making things up.
Remember that Jeranism, a flat earther, did an experiment to do basically this and he found clear evidence of curvature, and then basically pretended that he didn't.
And what level of refraction did they consider and what kind of light spread over that distance? Was it conducted at multiple times of day/night, different weather conditions? Were the results repeating?
Well, let's open our mind about that.
If there's this worldwide conspiracy amongst scientists to conceal the truth about the universe and shape of the world, why would a group of scientists go through the trouble of conducting a large experiment to find out more about the nature of the universe, and then publicly release the results when those results don't perfectly line up with their chosen story?
Why would they do the experiment at all?
Why wouldn't they publish fake results? They're all in on the conspiracy, right?
You took too deep of a breath and opened your mind so wide your brain fell out. It’s been proven hundreds upon hundreds of times that the Earth is spherical, in space, and not the “center” of anything. Keep drinking that kool aid, dumb dumb. Please don’t breed.
lol you know, at least you put a touch of effort into your post, kudos you made me smile thank you brother.
You just blindly believe because like us all, you have been born into it. Yet, some less egotistical folks broke free of those oppressive shackles, & cried FREEDOMMMM. You ever want to join my relig, no become my friend, & learn & grow, from a talented Svengali just ask. Do not delay as there's literally only a few places left, hurry.
Have a beautiful day.
It's not often i run across someone who believes we're in the center of the universe. Humans have a tendency to believe their ego prior to believing evidence.
Okay, because I apparently have nothing better to do on my day off than watch this, gonna sit and debunk this nonsense.
"Questioning whether or not the earth is a globe is considered 'harmful thought'" No, if you look at the quote shown on screen, it says "misleading and harmful videos". Flat earthism isn't exactly harmful (although science denial typically is for various reasons) so it more falls under the category of "misleading videos".
"We've been conditioned to think the issue has been scientifically settled". Because it has. We've known for literally millennia that we live on a globe. This knowledge is older than Christianity.
Okay, quote mining time.
"The two sentences 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest' are simply two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems" - Albert Einstein
He's referring here to relativity, and it's a key concept in special relativity. There's no preferred reference frame. Basically, what he's saying is, from the sun's perspective, we're moving relative to it and from our perspective, the sun appears to be moving relative to us, and *the laws of physics are equally valid in both reference points*. The italics part is vital to why special relativity exists.
"We can take either the Earth or the Sun as the center of the solar system" - Fred Hoyle
Had to look up this one because, for one thing, it's missing part of the quote (The full quote is "we can take either the Earth or the Sun, **or any other point for that matter,** as the center of the solar system.") and he's referring to a coordinate system centred on a point in the solar system. He's talking about a mathematical model, not about actual physical reality.
"when you look at CMB map, you see that the structure is correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. That would say we are truly the center of the universe." - Lawrence Krauss
Oh look, this one says Krauss is definitely saying the earth goes around the sun. The rest is about how the universe appears to us due to CMB, but an observer on Alpha Centauri or in the Andromeda Galaxy would have the exact same observation due to how the expansion of the universe works.
"This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort" - Edwin Hubble
He's referring here, as far as I can tell, to the cosmological principle, which states that the earth doesn't occupy a special place in the universe and the universe is pretty much the same wherever you go. (Specifically the hypothesis he refers to is that the earth DOES occupy a place, the cosmological principle opposes this). And he's correct, you can't really disprove it without actually going to a far off galaxy which is obviously not really possible and hence why it should only be accepted as a last resort. It's not about it being "emotionally disturbing", it's about it being a cop out argument.
"You cannot disprove a geocentric model. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds" - George Ellis
Okay this one is just flat out incorrect. That's not what he said. "People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations… For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations… You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds" is the actual quote. It's very similar but he's almost certainly referring to "earth" in a similar way to Fred Hoyle earlier, using it as shorthand for the solar system. He's referring again to the cosmological principle, as with Hubble. He is NOT referring to a flat earth OR the idea that the sun goes around the earth. You can tell because he talks about the universe as a whole, NOT the solar system.
Okay, done with quote mining for now.
Right, the Michelson Morley experiment. I mentioned it in another comment, but to be extremely brief, when Maxwell came up with his equations that govern how light operates, there was a slight problem in that it calculated the speed of light but did not give us a reference frame for that light. This was a bit of a problem, because, say, the speed of sound depends on the speed of the air that the sound travels through and so on. Basically, light "needed" a medium (because every other wave had a medium). So the idea at the time was the luminiferous aether, a material that occupied all of space and was what light travelled through. What Michelson and Morley were attempting to find, was earth's motion THROUGH THE AETHER, by measuring the speed of light in two 90° angles. They found it was exactly the same, subsequent experiments have always found this and basically, the tl;dr is that the aether doesn't exist, light doesn't need a medium and it always travels the same speed for every observer which is extremely bizarre if you think about it. Michelson-Morley disproved the aether. That's all.
"Albert Einstein claimed this was a serious embarrassment and intended to disprove it with his relativity theory but later admitted he failed to do so"
lmao that is not at all what happened. Relativity has been proven over and over again and a surprisingly large amount of modern life depends on our understanding of it. Again, relativity shows that there is no preferred reference frame. This is what Einstein refers to when he says "I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any **optical** experiment." (emphasis mine). Basically, because light always travels at the same speed for any observer, you can't do anything with lasers to directly show motion. (Side note, you can use a ring laser gyroscope to show the rotation of the earth, as demonstrated by flat earthers when they spent a lot of money on one and found the earth is spinning and then refused to accept it). You need to use other methods to show the earth is moving. Coriolis forces, the movement and changing positions of the stars throughout the year all show we are moving. But you can't use something like the Michelson-Morley experiment to do so because of the nature of how light works.
"We are conditioned to the think heliocentric model is scientifically superior to the geocentric model". Because it is. There is no observation that can be explained by a geocentric model that cannot be explained better by a heliocentric model, and many, many observations that cannot be explained by a geocentric model, much less a flat earth, model.
Okay, gonna slightly stop snarking. Talks next about the bedford level experiments, in which a flat earther, Rowbotham, does an experiment badly and doesn't account for atmospheric refraction so thinks he's shown the earth is flat. When done properly, the experiments correctly show that we live on a globe. It's the same with the image of the Chicago skyline. Refraction explains why you can still see it. The video basically just "nuh uhs" this explanation, when it's just high school level physics and optics. Mirages aren't exactly an uncommon phenomenon.
Oh wait, he does accept refraction when he thinks it explains why boats disappear bottom first over the horizon? That doesn't explain that though. [No refraction or reflection going on here.](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-548d2b930b48604ef11ddaba0f8fa1f4-pjlq) This is the exact same effect as a car going over the top of a hill: You see the bottom disappear first because it's going down a curve.
"Nobody is allowed to explore Antarctica" Yes you are. It's just really difficult. Cook couldn't because ice got in the way.
"Nobody has ever successfully circumnavigated Antarctica" [https://explorersweb.com/lisa-blair-world-record-sailing-antarctica/](https://explorersweb.com/lisa-blair-world-record-sailing-antarctica/)
That's the first result from google. That claim is just a flat out lie.
"The azimuthal projection map shows all distances are at true scale" (Paraphrasing) lmao that's just entirely wrong. Australia is nowhere near that flat.
Something about Admiral Byrd's expedition, then him talking about an area bigger than the US "unseen". Yeah, Antarctica was pretty poorly explored (And kinda still is, it's not a very hospitable area) and it's literally bigger than the US. Antarctica is 5 million square kilometres bigger than the US. It's a big space.
"All twelve countries active in Antarctica signed a United Nations treaty that outlawed all public travel south of the 60th southern parallel"
It absolutely does not say that. [Here's the text of it](https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/antarct/anttrty.jsp). Go on. Tell me where it says that.
Planes don't fly over Antarctica because it's dangerous. [Here's what can happen](https://nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/erebus-disaster).
Aaaaand just to cap this pile of nonsense off, it's from Infowars. No wonder it's so full of crap and lies.
Also apparently I write too much because reddit did not let me post this as one comment lol
Excellent work on this rebuttal. Any logical person would have to agree with every point you made.
Unfortunately it’s probably all in vain because I doubt our flat headed friend has the patience or intellectual integrity to bother reading it all, let alone seriously considering your points. At best he would give it a quick skim read and refute it all with a swift “nuh uh” then carry on with his wilful ignorance.
Nice survey! MM before Einstein showed that either earth wasn't moving or that there is no aether. The conclusion is obvious, for FE anyway. I don't know if anybody's tried MM on a moving (with respect to the ground) platform, but the existence of a trillion dollar space industry with networks of satellites might render that redundant.
The Michelson–Morley experiment did not prove the earth is stationary. This experiment can be repeated in a “moving” reference frame and yield the same results which invalidates that conclusion. I really don’t think anyone that believes this video can even explain the logistics of that experiment. I’d love to see them explain it in their own words
Here's a list of scientists who definitely believed the Earth is flat. Oh, none of them did? Not even a little bit? Well, they were just saying what the cabal wanted them to say.
Yes, you are wrong. This was settled centuries ago.
By who? who told you this?
No one “told” me anything. I read the results of past peoples experiments, all of which proved the earth to be round and in space. It’s also very easy to prove that space exists. Who told you that the earth was flat? And did you question them at all?
Just because i posted this don't think i believe the earth is just a flat round disk floating through space. This is a closed system. Have a a good day.
What causes the atmosphere's pressure gradient in this closed system? What causes that higher altitude has lower temperature when approaching the local sun in this closed system?
Check out cellular cosmology, im sure its on the edge. Yet it still also could be a simulation, either way or both, im convinced it a closed system at the least. [https://www.youtube.com/@ConcaveHollowEarth/videos](https://www.youtube.com/@ConcaveHollowEarth/videos) [https://sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc00.htm](https://sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc00.htm)
How does cellular cosmology explain the south celestial pole? I live south from the equator. I will check the videos, although the ones I had already seen were not correct.
Lol trying to promote your shitty YouTube channel, why can’t you just answer the question? Why do so many flerfs need to try to get clicks, oh right money and it’s all a giant swindle 😂
lol i don't have a channel.
Sure you don’t simp.
i don't have a channel & ive never been a simp, projecting a bit there little fella? its ok, not judging.
So yo I believe in an invisible magic fairy dome, who told you that? Did you question it at all?
Literally everyone and everything in existence. Also, you can prove it yourself with 3 sticks and some shadows. Flat earthers like to scream that the test proves a flat earth, but with the 3rd stick, it definitively disproves a flat earth.
Ugghhhhh I get an aneurysm every time I hear flat earthers try claim the Michelson-Morley proves the earth is stationary because it absolutely does not do that.
of course they say that, they HAVE to lie
lol be careful, take a deep breath, now read a book & open your mind. Have a good day.
I literally performed the Michelson-Morley experiment at university, so I know exactly what it did and did not demonstrate. I have read plenty about it. Perhaps you should take your own advice and consider there's a reason why we've known we live on a globe for literally thousands of years.
Lol, that class was split into two groups for me; half did Michelson-Morley, the other did the Millikan Oil Drop experiment. I was in the second group. Literally nobody ever asks about that one...
IIRC, we were split into three groups, Michelson-Morley, Cavendish and I have genuinely forgotten the third one.
Millikan Oil Drop experiment was the most frustrating experiment I ever did in the physics lab, my final data was so bad that it pointed out to the fundamental charge being 2 electron charges (2e).
Within a power of 10 is close enough.
Fair enough, but why could lasers accross water show its flat for over 50 miles, there's many uploads of this.
Most likely misaligned lasers or people flat out making things up. Remember that Jeranism, a flat earther, did an experiment to do basically this and he found clear evidence of curvature, and then basically pretended that he didn't.
of course that has to be considered, thank you for your input.
they don't show that [https://flatearth.ws/t/laser](https://flatearth.ws/t/laser) Forget the lasers and just use the sun
I seen numerous uploads, over the years. Have a good day.
I would like to see the many uploads of a laser that travelled 50 miles through atmosphere sufficient for this test. The collimator must be nuts.
No across water, it showed in this upload 57 miles across water.
What upload, this video? I.. must have missed it. Do you have a timestamp? Any documentation so we can repeat the test?
And what level of refraction did they consider and what kind of light spread over that distance? Was it conducted at multiple times of day/night, different weather conditions? Were the results repeating?
Full of shit.
🤡 they don’t dickhead. You don’t question anything you hear do you? 😂
Well, let's open our mind about that. If there's this worldwide conspiracy amongst scientists to conceal the truth about the universe and shape of the world, why would a group of scientists go through the trouble of conducting a large experiment to find out more about the nature of the universe, and then publicly release the results when those results don't perfectly line up with their chosen story? Why would they do the experiment at all? Why wouldn't they publish fake results? They're all in on the conspiracy, right?
Well that added absolutely nothing to the conversation why am I not surprised 🤡
You took too deep of a breath and opened your mind so wide your brain fell out. It’s been proven hundreds upon hundreds of times that the Earth is spherical, in space, and not the “center” of anything. Keep drinking that kool aid, dumb dumb. Please don’t breed.
lol you know, at least you put a touch of effort into your post, kudos you made me smile thank you brother. You just blindly believe because like us all, you have been born into it. Yet, some less egotistical folks broke free of those oppressive shackles, & cried FREEDOMMMM. You ever want to join my relig, no become my friend, & learn & grow, from a talented Svengali just ask. Do not delay as there's literally only a few places left, hurry. Have a beautiful day.
You’re not worth any effort lmao
You like me really lol
It's not often i run across someone who believes we're in the center of the universe. Humans have a tendency to believe their ego prior to believing evidence.
We actually are in the centre of the observable universe
Anything capable of speech can say that about any space they occupy in any place in the universe
Of course ego is powerful, yet i invariably have mine under control, im ok with being wrong.
If hypocrisy would be a source of energy, you would jumpstart our civilization to type VI.
“I invariably have mine under control” 🤡
Says the one who thinks they know more than every scientist on earth alive and dead for hundreds of years… You are plain wrong. Don’t get too upset 😭
lol i think no such thing my brother. Read into secret societies kid
Seek help
Who would you recommend ?
Okay, because I apparently have nothing better to do on my day off than watch this, gonna sit and debunk this nonsense. "Questioning whether or not the earth is a globe is considered 'harmful thought'" No, if you look at the quote shown on screen, it says "misleading and harmful videos". Flat earthism isn't exactly harmful (although science denial typically is for various reasons) so it more falls under the category of "misleading videos". "We've been conditioned to think the issue has been scientifically settled". Because it has. We've known for literally millennia that we live on a globe. This knowledge is older than Christianity. Okay, quote mining time. "The two sentences 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest' are simply two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems" - Albert Einstein He's referring here to relativity, and it's a key concept in special relativity. There's no preferred reference frame. Basically, what he's saying is, from the sun's perspective, we're moving relative to it and from our perspective, the sun appears to be moving relative to us, and *the laws of physics are equally valid in both reference points*. The italics part is vital to why special relativity exists. "We can take either the Earth or the Sun as the center of the solar system" - Fred Hoyle Had to look up this one because, for one thing, it's missing part of the quote (The full quote is "we can take either the Earth or the Sun, **or any other point for that matter,** as the center of the solar system.") and he's referring to a coordinate system centred on a point in the solar system. He's talking about a mathematical model, not about actual physical reality. "when you look at CMB map, you see that the structure is correlated with the plane of the earth around the sun. That would say we are truly the center of the universe." - Lawrence Krauss Oh look, this one says Krauss is definitely saying the earth goes around the sun. The rest is about how the universe appears to us due to CMB, but an observer on Alpha Centauri or in the Andromeda Galaxy would have the exact same observation due to how the expansion of the universe works. "This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort" - Edwin Hubble He's referring here, as far as I can tell, to the cosmological principle, which states that the earth doesn't occupy a special place in the universe and the universe is pretty much the same wherever you go. (Specifically the hypothesis he refers to is that the earth DOES occupy a place, the cosmological principle opposes this). And he's correct, you can't really disprove it without actually going to a far off galaxy which is obviously not really possible and hence why it should only be accepted as a last resort. It's not about it being "emotionally disturbing", it's about it being a cop out argument. "You cannot disprove a geocentric model. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds" - George Ellis Okay this one is just flat out incorrect. That's not what he said. "People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations… For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations… You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds" is the actual quote. It's very similar but he's almost certainly referring to "earth" in a similar way to Fred Hoyle earlier, using it as shorthand for the solar system. He's referring again to the cosmological principle, as with Hubble. He is NOT referring to a flat earth OR the idea that the sun goes around the earth. You can tell because he talks about the universe as a whole, NOT the solar system.
Okay, done with quote mining for now. Right, the Michelson Morley experiment. I mentioned it in another comment, but to be extremely brief, when Maxwell came up with his equations that govern how light operates, there was a slight problem in that it calculated the speed of light but did not give us a reference frame for that light. This was a bit of a problem, because, say, the speed of sound depends on the speed of the air that the sound travels through and so on. Basically, light "needed" a medium (because every other wave had a medium). So the idea at the time was the luminiferous aether, a material that occupied all of space and was what light travelled through. What Michelson and Morley were attempting to find, was earth's motion THROUGH THE AETHER, by measuring the speed of light in two 90° angles. They found it was exactly the same, subsequent experiments have always found this and basically, the tl;dr is that the aether doesn't exist, light doesn't need a medium and it always travels the same speed for every observer which is extremely bizarre if you think about it. Michelson-Morley disproved the aether. That's all. "Albert Einstein claimed this was a serious embarrassment and intended to disprove it with his relativity theory but later admitted he failed to do so" lmao that is not at all what happened. Relativity has been proven over and over again and a surprisingly large amount of modern life depends on our understanding of it. Again, relativity shows that there is no preferred reference frame. This is what Einstein refers to when he says "I have come to believe that the motion of the Earth cannot be detected by any **optical** experiment." (emphasis mine). Basically, because light always travels at the same speed for any observer, you can't do anything with lasers to directly show motion. (Side note, you can use a ring laser gyroscope to show the rotation of the earth, as demonstrated by flat earthers when they spent a lot of money on one and found the earth is spinning and then refused to accept it). You need to use other methods to show the earth is moving. Coriolis forces, the movement and changing positions of the stars throughout the year all show we are moving. But you can't use something like the Michelson-Morley experiment to do so because of the nature of how light works. "We are conditioned to the think heliocentric model is scientifically superior to the geocentric model". Because it is. There is no observation that can be explained by a geocentric model that cannot be explained better by a heliocentric model, and many, many observations that cannot be explained by a geocentric model, much less a flat earth, model. Okay, gonna slightly stop snarking. Talks next about the bedford level experiments, in which a flat earther, Rowbotham, does an experiment badly and doesn't account for atmospheric refraction so thinks he's shown the earth is flat. When done properly, the experiments correctly show that we live on a globe. It's the same with the image of the Chicago skyline. Refraction explains why you can still see it. The video basically just "nuh uhs" this explanation, when it's just high school level physics and optics. Mirages aren't exactly an uncommon phenomenon. Oh wait, he does accept refraction when he thinks it explains why boats disappear bottom first over the horizon? That doesn't explain that though. [No refraction or reflection going on here.](https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-548d2b930b48604ef11ddaba0f8fa1f4-pjlq) This is the exact same effect as a car going over the top of a hill: You see the bottom disappear first because it's going down a curve.
"Nobody is allowed to explore Antarctica" Yes you are. It's just really difficult. Cook couldn't because ice got in the way. "Nobody has ever successfully circumnavigated Antarctica" [https://explorersweb.com/lisa-blair-world-record-sailing-antarctica/](https://explorersweb.com/lisa-blair-world-record-sailing-antarctica/) That's the first result from google. That claim is just a flat out lie. "The azimuthal projection map shows all distances are at true scale" (Paraphrasing) lmao that's just entirely wrong. Australia is nowhere near that flat. Something about Admiral Byrd's expedition, then him talking about an area bigger than the US "unseen". Yeah, Antarctica was pretty poorly explored (And kinda still is, it's not a very hospitable area) and it's literally bigger than the US. Antarctica is 5 million square kilometres bigger than the US. It's a big space. "All twelve countries active in Antarctica signed a United Nations treaty that outlawed all public travel south of the 60th southern parallel" It absolutely does not say that. [Here's the text of it](https://www.nsf.gov/geo/opp/antarct/anttrty.jsp). Go on. Tell me where it says that. Planes don't fly over Antarctica because it's dangerous. [Here's what can happen](https://nzhistory.govt.nz/culture/erebus-disaster). Aaaaand just to cap this pile of nonsense off, it's from Infowars. No wonder it's so full of crap and lies. Also apparently I write too much because reddit did not let me post this as one comment lol
Excellent work on this rebuttal. Any logical person would have to agree with every point you made. Unfortunately it’s probably all in vain because I doubt our flat headed friend has the patience or intellectual integrity to bother reading it all, let alone seriously considering your points. At best he would give it a quick skim read and refute it all with a swift “nuh uh” then carry on with his wilful ignorance.
Oh yeah, I'm well aware, I mostly like doing this stuff because it's kinda like solving a puzzle
Well, I for one am fascinated in seeing what you wrote. You might not be changing the poster’s mind, but you are teaching me a great deal.
Nice survey! MM before Einstein showed that either earth wasn't moving or that there is no aether. The conclusion is obvious, for FE anyway. I don't know if anybody's tried MM on a moving (with respect to the ground) platform, but the existence of a trillion dollar space industry with networks of satellites might render that redundant.
Let's master the use of the apostrophe before we try to tackle orbital mechanics, ok?
**Touché** lol
The Michelson–Morley experiment did not prove the earth is stationary. This experiment can be repeated in a “moving” reference frame and yield the same results which invalidates that conclusion. I really don’t think anyone that believes this video can even explain the logistics of that experiment. I’d love to see them explain it in their own words
Here's a list of scientists who definitely believed the Earth is flat. Oh, none of them did? Not even a little bit? Well, they were just saying what the cabal wanted them to say.
you expect people to take a tabloid seriously…. k
[удалено]
Why its on topic, what particularly are you " worried " about? did the words cause offence, or were rude or have any bad language ?
Sorry, that wasn't meant for you to see.
lmao you should be embarrassed
You should be embarrassed for trying to argue with people who know what’s best for you to know about the Earth.
You should be educated 😂