Found this in my bookmarks again. Does anyone still have the old photograph where they're working on the giraffe? I used to send that one to people and now I only have a very small copy.
Flat Giraffersthree zoos. the same sneeze.
The pause afterwards is the bit. Watch the ear, not the neck. These are the original speeds. The three full clips are below the comparison.
Three full clips · original speed
Flat Giraffershe was seventeen when i was in primary school
Found the booklet from our school trip. Milo is seventeen in that one, seventeen in the 2013 guide and seventeen in this summer’s leaflet. I am thirty-one.
The three dates are in the pictures. My mum kept the school folder.
Flat Giraffersthe centre of gravity is the part nobody answers
I have read the gravity section on Expose Giraffes twice and the replies I find keep arguing about whether people have seen one. That is not what the section is asking.
They are saying the animal is built the wrong way for the surface it stands on. A picture of it standing there does not explain how it stays there.
If we were to entertain the potentiality of the modern Flat Earth consensus, the question arises as to whether the center of gravity of a giraffe in nature would warrant a threat to its survival by natural selection through the expected pull off the surface as a result of its collective weight distribution and gravitational drag off of its surface.
The Gravitational Dilemma · Expose Giraffes
Collapse or expand reply by rustred
People answer this with pictures of horses as though a horse has the same amount of neck above it.
Show more comments
Collapse or expand reply by brickwork
If it has to spread its legs to get water, I do not see why we assume it has no balance problem when it is standing.
Collapse or expand reply by flatlander
Their problem is using gravity to explain it. The ground does not need to pull anything for an object to stay on it.
Collapse or expand reply by marl
If the earth is not flat, the flat-earth part of this is not a problem a giraffe has to solve.
Flat Girafferswhere are the group admins?
Does anyone know when the group admins last replied? I wanted to ask linen about one of the pictures. Their profile only has the older posts.
I might be missing a different account.
Flat Giraffersthe climate argument is about what we are asked to accept
People keep answering Climate Change Error as if the claim were that a giraffe changes the weather. The claim is that getting people to accept this much animal living on that little landscape changes what they are prepared to believe about the landscape.
“survive on desert trees” is the bit I keep coming back to. You are shown a huge body and a few branches, then told the combination is ordinary. If the picture works, nobody asks what has to be supplied outside it.
Collapse or expand reply by brickwork
The animal gets all the attention and the trees become background. That is a very effective way of making the background seem sufficient.
Show more comments
Collapse or expand reply by metricsea
You have put a quantity in the argument without measuring it. “A few branches” in one photograph is not the total food available.
Collapse or expand reply by halfstep
The preceding habitat argument matters here. This paragraph takes that objection as established; it does not start by proving it again.
Collapse or expand reply by marl
Why would an anti-climate group pick this animal? Would a small animal living on very little make the same point with less to explain?
Flat Giraffersbefore the battery is a very specific cutoff
Historical Sightings says they have not found a photograph from before the battery. People reply with paintings, which are a different kind of thing.
I want to separate the claim that a picture is old from the claim that it shows an independent encounter. A date printed under a later reproduction does not establish either on its own.
Collapse or expand reply by nailbrush
Before photography would give you no photographs of anything. The question has to include which battery and which photographic process.
Flat Giraffersi think giraffes actually aren't real.
i have been thinking about this since yesterday and nobody has given me an answer that isn't just a picture of a giraffe.
the head is too far from the rest of it. you can make the legs longer or the neck longer but doing both is excessive. then somebody has added the little knobs. why the knobs. they don't do anything.
every picture that is supposed to prove a giraffe exists was taken by someone who went somewhere specifically to see a giraffe. that is not an independent sample. i have never found one accidentally. horses appear in places. a horse will be standing in a field you weren't expecting. all giraffes have an appointment.
also look at how they drink. that cannot be the approved way to drink. if i sold you something that needed to stand like that to reach water you would send it back.
i'm not saying they're people in suits. i don't think there is enough space. i'm saying we have accepted a drawing of an animal and then built a whole set of places where you are allowed to look at the drawing.
please stop sending me the same video. the video has a fence in it.
Collapse or expand reply by mothproof
You have ruled out every possible observation before asking for observations. An animal doesn't become imaginary because somebody put a fence around it.
Show more comments
Collapse or expand reply by mudlark
Ducks manage to drink with their heads down as well. Why would that be impossible?
Collapse or expand reply by windowseat
ducks are quite a lot closer to the ground. i am asking about the amount of animal above the ground.
Collapse or expand reply by teaspoon
The little knobs could be protective, or something else. I have never seen a proper explanation of what they do.
Collapse or expand reply by teaspoon
Someone has found that old Expose Giraffes site again. New thread here. I remembered this post first, then spent half an hour trying to find a bookmark in a browser I no longer have.
Flat Girafferswhy does the same sort of neck get a different explanation?
The physiology paragraph says ostriches “use their neck to hide within the sand”. Put that premise aside for a second and look at the job assigned to each neck. One long neck supposedly gets the animal down into cover. The other is explained as a way of reaching up.
Whenever I ask why a giraffe needs that much neck, I get told that long necks exist in nature. Fine. Why does the comparison stop just before the behavior?
Show more comments
Collapse or expand reply by mothproof
There is another jump here. A neck being capable of a movement and an animal using that movement to hide are separate claims. Which one is the alleged omission?
Flat Giraffersboth of the recordings are still there
The two recordings on Expose Giraffes both play. I remembered the Professor video much more clearly than the written introduction, which is probably why I thought I remembered the whole argument.
The Anonymous one is a different sort of message. I keep seeing people put a quote from one above a screenshot of the other. Please use the actual links.
Flat Girafferswhy is the animal allowed to outlive its explanation?
The Lamarkian Quandary says the theory “relied entirely upon the alleged observations of giraffes”. I think that is why the page keeps coming back to it. The animal is supposed to be evidence for the explanation, then the explanation loses its authority and the animal carries on being evidence.
How much of what people think they have observed is actually the diagram they were taught? I remember a neck reaching for a branch much more clearly than I remember what the surrounding lesson said.
Show more comments
Collapse or expand reply by metricsea
Rejecting a theory does not erase the things it tried to explain. An observation can remain useful even if the account attached to it was wrong.
Flat Giraffersthe unicorn comparison is about acceptance
The comparison to the unicorn is not saying Scotland has a secret breeding population. It is pointing out that an animal can become an official fact without people asking whether there is an animal behind it.
We put the label in an official place and then treat the official place as confirmation of the label. That is what interests me about zoo signs too.
Flat Giraffersthe mouth moves after the head has stopped
I keep going back to the frame before this one. The head stops first. Then the mouth carries on. That looks like two mechanisms.
Flat Giraffersthe little book is up
Role of the State. I’ve put sample pages beside the cover. Linen’s section is in there.
Flat Giraffersdoes anybody have the one before they put the skin on
I had a smaller picture of workmen beside a frame. The one I’ve got now is too cropped to tell if it’s the same thing.
Flat Giraffers
[removed]
[Post removed]
Flat GiraffersSame patch, different decade
These are from Wrenfield's 2002 and 2015 visitor guides. Look at the dark fork halfway up the neck and the small pale notch underneath it.
Thirteen years, two different animals according to the captions, and they're still using the same pattern. I think we are looking at a covering that has been reused. I've circled the part I mean, not the entire animal.
Enlarge image ↗Flat GiraffersWho signed off on that height?
A tall structure in an open space needs lightning protection. Put ears on the same structure and suddenly the question is stupid.
My drawing shows the height of the head above the fence. There is nothing above it to take a strike. Either the two knobs are doing something we're not being told about, or the entire design is unsafe. Calling it an animal doesn't answer that.
Enlarge image ↗No discussions match this search.
−+Collapse or expand reply by mothproof
This the photograph?
−+Collapse or expand reply by teaspoon
Yes. That's the one. Mine had almost no writing left under it.
Show more comments
−+Collapse or expand reply by windowseat
I still have the photograph with the loose covering saved. Never found where my copy came from.
−+Collapse or expand reply by mudlark
People are still replying. Not as many names I recognise though.
−+Collapse or expand reply by vellum
There is a later announcement from the same paper as well. Someone linked both in Paper Trails.
−+Collapse or expand reply by ribbedglass
I came back because the neck argument was still bothering me. I know how that sounds.
−+Collapse or expand reply by halfstep
I thought Voss was an old username until I actually opened the circus paper.