Proof the Earth is Flat
According to flat earthers there are hundreds of proofs the earth is flat. So in this section we will analyze the proofs they provide and try to ascertain if they actually prove the earth is flat or not.
In reality some of the “proofs” that the earth is flat given by the flat earthers are not valid and some of these are outrageously and obviously incorrect.
Still there are main points raised by the flat earthers which raise interesting questions and do truly put our assumption that the earth is a globe into question.
There are real contradictions and inconsistencies with the globe model which deserve serious consideration.
your brain is flat
I am not saying the earth is flat. I am just considering all the options…
your right…
This tells you all you need to know. These people have no idea what science actually is. They pride themselves on being “scientific” yet their knee-jerk reaction is to hurl childish ridicule tactics at anyone who objectively analyses the evidence for all sides of the debate objectively.
They think it’s “scientific” to blindly trust whatever the current scientific consensus is, and ridicule anyone who commits the heresy of daring to question it. Meanwhile, the entire point of science is to question everything & do all you can to prove your current views wrong, not silence or dismiss any conflicting evidence.
They don’t understand the difference between Scientism and science. It’s as simple as that.
The masses truly are hopelessly ignorant.
Bang on. They are brain damaged by decades of media and television. And they get aggressive when you threaten to destabilise their false reality.
and your’s is round with nothing in it!
Your mom is flat
How do you know?
There’s an online video where a military F15 Fighter Jet pilot states “The world is just a flat plate below you.”
yes but he is not talking literally at average altitude they fly they would not be able to completely see the curve. I think we should just shove a ton of flat earthers onto a spacecraft(They’ll probably think their being silenced by the illuminate) and slam them into the window!
they do not believe NASA they have the LEDGIT pic the earth is round its just slowly curving sometimes u wont expect to see it inside , look on the outside if u dont believe me go to friggin space
First, Those nasa pics are photoshopped and are inconsistent with prior “photos” every time they have released a new one…
Second, why has NOBODY gone back to “space”??? Because they “lost all the technology” that “got us there”… including raw video footage.
Plus, why do WE need to go to “space”, when nasa supposedly has cameras in space (hubble), why don’t they just turn their camera towards earth and take some REAL pics… or better yet, a live feed of the “round” ball…
They won’t, because they CAN’T!
Once you stop being in denial, learn to be a freethinker, and forget EVERYTHING you were taught in school; your cognitive dissonance will cease to exist, thus allowing your mind to believe what your body can see and feel, not what you were told you see and feel.
if the earth is flat, how does the sun not light up the entire earth, if you can see stars on the other side of the earth at night, how can you not see the sun at night, if it is closer to you, and much bigger.
you are very ignorant
Yes. Good questions Ango.
Flat earthers don’t have good answers to these questions, globe earthers do have good answers.
Still it is possible there is some system that could produce the things we observe in the sky, even if we are on a flat plane. However, it would seem to me, that if this is the case, it is purposely created illusion. Because this globe earth model, it is a very good explanation of our observations. And the only working model we have at the moment.
So I completely understand where you are coming from.
Without being able to explain how these things work flat earthers can not expect thoughtful people like your good self to accept the possibility that the earth is flat.
So your points are logical and consistent with our actual observations.
My purpose here with this site is to investigate if it is possible to explain our observations with a different model to the one that is currently accepted. I do suspect that we have got major misunderstandings in how the universe is actually working, but at this point I am also not able to present an alternative model that even works, what to speak of working as well as the globe earth model. However, I suspect, in the future, we will be able to present such a model. And at that time we might be able to answer your questions.
But now, for the logical, scientifically minded, who want an explanation that works, globe earth model is the best we have.
But I think it is wrong…
Ango: a flat earth with a close sun works much better than a globe with an impossibly distant sun, which would light the entire half of the earth that faced the sun!
No flat earther has been able to explain how a flat earth with a close sun could work and be consistent with our observations.
For example I have the practical experience of being at the southernmost tip of South America in December. According to flat earth theory sun can never be further south than tropic of Capricorn. So sun has to be always north of tropic of Capricorn in flat earth model. But go down there, bottom of South America, long way south of the southernmost point of the sun, according to flat earth, and you will very clearly see the sun circling all around you. You will see the sun in the north, south, east and west at different times. This is totally impossible to explain using the flat earth model, but is exactly what we would expect to experience on a globe.
As far as the “impossibly distant” sun of the globe earth model. It is not the sun that is impossibly distant in the globe earth model. 93,000,000 miles, that is not impossibly distant, maybe even close to the real distance perhaps. What is impossibly distant in the globe earth model is the stars. You can’t put the stars light years away and expect to be still able to see them. But sun distance of the globe earth model, that is within the realms of possibility.
And, of course, like all flat earthers, you don’t understand the globe earth model. Of course, in the globe earth model, the sun is always illuminating half of the globe. But the globe is tilted. It is a brilliant concept. As the earth rotates around the sun, it remains always titled in the same way. So sometimes North, top, is tilted in towards the sun, that means whole North part will be illuminated into part of the other side of the earth, and whole south part will be dark, as we practically experience, then as it moves around whole earth will be vertical in regards to the sun, so then it will illuminate whole side, north to south, then moves around and bottom of the earth, south, will be pointing in towards the sun and top, North will be pointing out. So whole south will be illuminated and whole north pole will be dark, as we experience…
So, contrary to your statement, the globe earth model with 93,000,000 mile distant sun is working perfectly in explaining our observations, whereas flat earth model can not explain our observations at all. That is why I say flat earthers don’t look at the sky.
NASA? Hahahahahha, you’ve got to be kidding me? Really? So you’re trying to tell me that we should trust NASA, whom was founded by a SS Nazi soldier/Scientist who was also snuck into the country after the Great War was won over the axis powers(true Americans didn’t want any nazis coming her SO, Operarion Paperclip happened, WHICH WAS A REAL OPS MISSION YOU CAN LOOK IT UP, a mission that when any useful intellectual nazi scientist was wanted over here because they groveled over their life pleading to do anything America wanted just please spare their life, so insiders put a paperclip on their file and the next man in-line evaluating the Nazi knew to erase his horrible background, just to use for our own government, talking about that Government? THAT NASA? So trust those people that did that behind the backs of our own tea patriots? Sounds like some solid people to trust, and everything that I speak of is not conspiracy it is actual fact, so people can’t say, just being paranoid, no, it is real real legit proof just look it up. NOT TO MENTION, Werner von Braun, THE SNAKE WHOM I WAS REFERRING TO, whom founded NASA , ALSO EVERYONE SHOULD READ WHAT IS ON HIS HEADSTONE! A verse from the Bible that speaks about the firmament (dome that flat earth era speak of) being glorious handiwork of THE GOD THE CREATOR, so you are talking about someone who supposedly put a man on the mountain, who believes in Helio centrism, actually giving credit to the creator, the God of the Bible, and his handiwork in something that proves geocentric standard over heliocentric? Sounds like you all got your wires crossed and don’t know what sound doctrine is
I know right,the “Proof” a bird can deify gravity but tons of water in the ocean can’t….honestly their brain is flat
Yea, gravitational pull is so strong it holds us down, it holds skyscrapers down, it HOLDS THE WATERS TO THE EARTH BILLIONS OF GALLONS OF IT!! But it can hold a fkn helium balloon down….yeah okay! It’s buoyancy and density, that’s it, gravity is still only just a theory and has never been proven, and if you stay up-to-date on things, they are now trying to say that gravity is this the result of something else, so they don’t even know what you’re talking about.
It’s common sense things that are more dense go down things that are less dense go up things that are more buoyant float things that are less buoyant sink. It’s called sea level not see curvature when they found level water.
You can’t make water stick to a ball, there’s a man with a challenge that has a huge ball they doing at various speeds and if you can actually make water stick to the globe then they’ll give you 100,000 dollars, no one has completed the challenge yet, there is a cowboy who has a huge IQ that was going to debate with Neil DeGrass Tyson and was about to wreck Neil, who agreed to debate the guy, and then Neil’s handlers stepped in after the challenge was excepted and they scheduled a date and the handlers made Neil renig on his word and wouldn’t let him debate the guy, know why? Because Neil was about to get wrecked and studdering and screaming mad
In the bible somewhere it talks about the new Jeruselm coming down from heaven and saying how big it is that all the world would be able to see it, that could only happen if it is flat, if the earth is round then the people on the other side of the new Jeruslem would not be able to see it.
That’s because the people that wrote the bible believed the Earth was flat. It was written at a time when, generally, people believed the Earth was flat. It’s just further proof that the bible was written by ignorant men that were not inspired by a god in their writings.
When adults told me about Santa, the Easter bunny and the tooth fairy, I believed 100%. Then I grew up at around 8-9 years old and realized it was all BS. Grow up! The Earth is a sphere and anything else is pure, childish ignorance.
Not so RT.
check out Isaiah 40:22.
enjoy the truth!
Bible was not ‘written’ . The bible is a collection of texts.(convenient for priests–enoch book was excluded because it was too…real.)
The “enoch” book was excluded because it contradicts itself.
yes, your right that the bible mention that the earth is circle, but on the other side if you says circle it can be like a globe circle or a flat circle ..better luck next time…enjoy the truth
Wrong. The hebrew word for circle is NEVER used to describe a spherical shape. The word for circle in hebrew, which is what the old testament was originally in, means a FLAT circle. Circles are not spherical. Just like in english, a circle is a flat round shape, and the word Sphere is for round balls.
A circle and a sphere are two completely different things, a circle is as flat as you can get, on the other hand a sphere is like a ball you can bounce, you can never bounce a circle. Metaphorically
When in school elementary or high school , when the instructor said to get in a circle he didn`t say globe , he said circle . don`t confuse the two the are similar but different . You can draw a circle , but you can`t draw a globe !
“circle” in this verse is the Hebrew word CHUG, which is only used 3 times in Scripture. It can also be translated as “vault”. It most likely means a firmament like above the sky upon which God sits.
Isa 40:22 He sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers, hee stretcheth out ye heauens, as a curtain, and spreadeth them out, as a tent to dwell in.
$200,000 USD is offered if you can prove it is a globe in total rewards. One man is willing to pay $100,000 USD if you can prove its a globe.
Easy, the moon landing, the many trips around space, and the Hubble spacetelescope
Man, are you kidding us? NASA shows only fake computer modified pictures, fake Moon project Apollo (nobody has never reached the Moon). Regarding the Hubble – it’s one of the biggest fake told to the mass. It takes same photos as the telescope Sophia which is located in an aircraft Boeing 747 flying at 16 km height. Government “spent” 1,5B USD for just only the project and 1 B USD more for the so-called “launch”. Hubble is just a nice fairy-tale to the people who watch TV and social media. Don’t ever trust them.
Jake YOU GOT THIS! All you have to do is spend a little to make a lot OR tell your friend so he can save his money.
YOU can test it and prove for YOURSELF. Yes, not joking. A HAB, (high altitude balloon) $500-$1000 + A personal locator beacon, ($200-$300) + A GoPro camera, ($150-$300). Just sayin, Honest.
1. If the earth WERE flat, you could see for hundreds of miles, assuming there were no buildings in the way.
2. A flight from Santiago, Chile to Australia (No, Australia isn’t a hoax!) flies across the Pacific Ocean, but if the earth were flat, then the flight would cut through North America, and depending where in Australia it lands, maybe Asia.
3. Nor is Gravity a hoax, the earth doesn’t just “move up and catch you.” Gravity is what keeps everything in check. Also, the sun is 432,376 miles. NOT 32 MILES.
In all fairness, when you were told about the Easter bunny and tooth fairy you were also told the Earth is round. Should’ve taught you not to trust people.
How do you know for sure that the Earth is a sphere? Did someone tell you this?
Not an actually sphere but in the words of Tyson Neil DeGrasse, the earth is a oblate sphereoid more like a pear shape. If a giant rubbing his thumb over a cue ball…
You clearly have all the answers ! Wake up use your common sense use your initiative
And at least question the ludicrous offerings of the so called experts?
I don’t say earth IS FLAT but my own initiative says the experts don’t make a strong case for it being a globe either!
We are being deceived on many things by these people for sure this is something I DO believe!
There is a very strong case for globe earth. You can’t just admit you were wrong and decide to be neutral. Choose.
Yes. There is a strong case for the globe earth. Any thoughtful person has to admit that. But that is all it is. A strong case. Globe earth remains a theory until we can actually observe it.
That is really what this whole discussion rests on. There is very little proof that anyone has actually observed this beautiful blue ball rotating and floating in space.
If we could observe it, if we could just send people to the moon for example, and if we sent people to the moon in the 60’s it would be a simple routine thing now, sending people to the moon. And they could sit on the moon and sip cocktails in the moon cafe and see the fabulous blue marble rotating above them, there would be no question. Everyone would accept the earth was a globe.
Then it would be an observable fact that the earth was a globe.
But the problem is it does not seem that anyone has actually observed the earth globe. And it also does not seem that they are capable of giving us convincing imagery from their many satellites supposedly in geosynchronous orbits around 22,000 miles up. So that’s like being about two feet above a one foot diameter basketball. So from 22,000 miles up they should be able to give fabulous super-high resolution images of the earth. They’d still be very close, have to use a wide angle lens to get it in, but could be done. Earth would fill the whole frame.
But we don’t have any such imagery. All they give us a a low resolution picture that looks like simulated clouds on a relatively static background from one of the GEOS weather satellites.
So the point is we don’t have any convincing evidence that we are actually able to observe the globe earth. That is the issue.
If anyone could give me convincing evidence that we are on a spinning globe I would gladly accept it. But I have been looking for a long time, and so far have not found that evidence.
So if you know of any such observable evidence that we are on a spinning globe, then let me know.
Yes. There is a strong case for a globe earth. That I agree with. But it is not an observable fact that the earth is a spinning globe. That is a theory, yes, there is a strong case for it, but it is not confirmed.
It is possible there is another explanation for what we are experiencing and observing, different from our current belief in the spinning globe.
If people were so stupid back in the day like we are programmed to think then why can’t we rebuild the things that they built in the past. Apparently they knew more than what you think of them 😉
that is correct. also the mathew edition 1537 bible says the exact words Flat earth.
No it doesn’t. I have read the mathew edition. The bible actually says that the earth is round not flat. The flat earth has been so debunked that it is laughable that anybody believes it any more. Even one of the leaders of flat earth proved that the earth wasn’t flat.
There is a difference between a sphere and a circle. A round plate and a ball…North pole= arctic (center). South pole= Antarctica(the rim of the plate). Stars are in the firmament. What you call planets are wandering stars.
Closed environment we have. None can go beyond the so called glass ceiling.
God wins always
i`m glad to see that someone finally get`s it.
David Blaine, just look at the horizon.
The Bible does not state that the earth is a sphere, it says round, but, in the flat earth theory, the earth is also round, like a circle is round, and a circle is not a sphere, it also says, on movable and built on a Compas and short terms
In other old scriptures Earth rest on three elephants.
Go make a selfie there, u stupid idiot u.
No matter what direction you fly at hi, you always see curved horizon line.
What a stupid sheepshead idiotic dolbayebs can think flat earth….. fk
Couldn’t be cause the windows make it curved right?
Fish eye lens effect.
No where in the bible does it say this. However, In Isaiah 40:21-23 it says that God Yahweh puts his feet on the round earth. The Hebrew for round means spherical. In other words, God put his feet on the round earth, not the flat earth. The earth isn’t flat. Only stupid people think that the earth is flat. The earth is round and moves on its axis. Even a leading flat earther proved that the earth was round and not flat.
Terry,
The Hebrew word you are referring to in Isaiah 40:22 is
חוּג chug, and is used only three times. In the NASB it is translated twice as “circle” and once as “vault”, but never as “sphere”. And in Isa. 40:22 it does not say that God stood on it, but that He sits above it.
No my friend, the Bible is very clear about the earth being round/sphere/ball. It also speaks of the earth having a firmament, (water layer) above the clouds pre-flood and it also says sheol, (hell) is inside the earth. But science teaches there was no firmament and the earth is filled with super hot magma and a melty, (my word) iron core. What’s sad, just like evolutionary THEORY, they lie and teach you these things as fact, when they are not true, not proven!!! As for a round/flat earth consider this, MILLIONS of people on every continent would have to participate in the deception, (every generation) in order to keep it secret. BUT, most importantly, YOU can test it and prove for YOURSELF. Yes, not joking. A HAB, (high altitude balloon) $500-$1000 + A personal locator beacon, ($200-$300) + A GoPro camera, ($150-$300). I’m glad you are seeking answers and don’t accept the “status quo”. Honest.
The best lie is 99% truth , but that 1% makes it a lie, not a half truth a lie.
With you Brother. Also, (Matthew 4:1 ) when satan took Jesus to the tallest place to reveal all the Kingdoms.
in the Bible, it also talks about God laying down a firmament, which separates the waters of earth and Heaven.
Have you got real evidence not fake evidence can you prove it put cameras in space who prove it please do not fake pictures or videos
how deep do I have to dig in order for me to fall through the earth
Quite a long way, compared to the deepest hole we have ever dug (only seven and a half miles, see below)
So the point is we have no idea what is below us. We can not dig down very far and find out. Or at least we have not dug down more than 7.5 miles so far… But if the earth is flat you could theoretically dig through it. But we have not dug down more than 7.5 miles, which is nothing compared to the 8,000 mile diameter they give for the earth…. So the point is we can’t dig down very far so we don’t know…
Kola Superdeep Borehole
The Kola Superdeep Borehole is the result of a scientific drilling project of the Soviet Union in the Pechengsky District, on the Kola Peninsula. The project attempted to drill as deep as possible into the Earth’s crust. Drilling began on 24 May 1970 using the Uralmash-4E, and later the Uralmash-15000 series drilling rig.Wikipedia
Location:Pechengsky District
Country:Russia
Greatest depth:12,262 metres (40,230 ft, 7.619 miles)
Hi there.
Do you know of the video link where apparently they placed two measuring devices at the Bolivian Salt Flats 100 miles apart and it shows there is no curvature over that distance. Or is this just an urban legend?
Thanks. John
I have no idea…
If man cant break through the Firmament, why on earth does man think he can dig a hole and break through going down? God made it, only God can get through it.
Yes. The experiment failed to provide evidence that the given area was 100% flat. It was blamed on the instrumentation being faulty.
It’s the theory that is faulty, not the instruments.
Can’t use google, Facebook or youtube for truth anymore… they are censoring all the important truths!
Open sourced is the way to go
Yes I have seen the video. But like every truth Youtube and other media don’t want you to see they censor and or remove. Most of the crap that these globe people use saying debunks the flat earth. would make then look pretty stupid. But they have censorship on there side. At least when it comes to Youtube and such.
Due to Earth’s gravity it is physically impossible to have a flat Earth instead of a sphere. And gravity does exist.
It’s flat.
I need a new tire.
Hi Steve
You can say the earth is flat, I can say the earth is a cube, and others say the earth is a globe.
The difference is the people who say the earth is a globe have a scientific predictive model that works, they have constructed this model based on the assumption that the earth is a globe and it works very well. Globe earth model predicts what we see actually happening in the sky for example. So this is not absolute proof that the earth is a globe but it certainly shows that the earth could be a spinning globe and that our observations are consistent with being on a spinning globe.
However with my cube earth model and your flat earth model we do not have any valid scientific predictive model and we can not even imagine how the earth could be flat or a cube and produce the observations that we see in the sky above us.
So any thoughtful person has to come to the conclusion that the only valid scientific predictive model we have is the globe earth model and it works very well. This puts a good level of confidence in the globe earth model. But we have no confidence at all in the flat earth, or cube earth models, because we can not even imaging how the earth could be flat [or a cube] and produce what we actually observe happening in the sky.
What we see happening in the sky is EXACTLY what we would expect to see happening in the sky if we were on a spinning ball…
So no intelligent person can accept your flat earth model or my cube earth model.
As I have said elsewhere I do not necessarily believe in the globe earth, but realistically, in the absence of any other working predictive model, we have to presume it is a globe spinning in space, unless you can provide a flat earth predictive model that works…
If we were spinning at any rate of speed there would no gravity at all. We would be forced to the outer edges of earth. This is fact. That theory is busted. In the Bible God said. The earth is still and will not be moved. So there is proof of a still earth. If the earth was a globe there is no way possible Alaska would have light 6 months out of the year day and night. So having an Equator is busted as well. Please explain how fact is proven wrong by Scientific theory! Scientific Theory have no fact at all.
ask some pilot
No matter what direction you fly at hi, you always see curved horizon line from left to right. You fly North you see curved horizon, you fly West – same curved horizon…
my God …..! some demagogues get paid for this idiocity…!
That is BS Roman. Have you ever been on an airplane? The horizon is FLAT as far as you can see from left to right. And if you would see a curve in the horizon, you would also see the horizon drop from the front, but you DON’T! It stays at eye level, which can only happen on a flat plane.
All you globe believers need to educate yourselves and stop letting other people tell you what is true, when you can see the opposite with your OWN eyes.
Gravity is a THEORY for the buffoons that don’t know.
Globe theory can NOT be proven is a small or large scale, flat earth HAS been! In a Burger King freezer using a mouse.
Ok, Chad DeWitt, I can see how you can believe almost any nonsense because you basically stated that’ God said it, so that’s proof right there’
**snipped: “Believe in. the church of science…**
Hi Jerry
It is not the purpose of this site to provide a platform for people who want to simply blindly believe in the church of science or blindly believe in the church of flat earth.
This is an investigation, an experiment ultimately, to determine if it is possible to construct another valid scientific model, a model that is radically different from the one we currently accept and the one which is preached by the church of science. So it is counter productive if you just write over and over and over again that “believe in science” and that other guy just writes over and over and over again “satellites don’t exist.”
This site is for people who are prepared to consider that the currently accepted ideas by science might be wrong. So it is pointless if you just reply to every post “science is great, science is right, just surrender to science…”
This is not the place for blind religious fanaticism either for science of for flat earth.
There is no doubt for any thoughtful honest person. NASA faked the manned moon landings and so many of the proclamations of science, particularly in regard to astronomy, the universe, etc, are based on assumptions that may or may not be correct. This is not knowledge, it is a collection of theories based on questionable assumptions.
It is not science that has given us the things that you praise. It is inspired human beings who discover the these things which already exist in nature. All of the wonderful things, they are already there in nature, and by divine inspiration some person is able to discover how to use these things, that are already there in nature, in some productive way. It is not science. It is discovery through inspiration.
So we already know NASA faked the moon landings, for example. Every thoughtful person knows this. So to have you spamming every comment with “NASA is great, I love NASA.” It is pointless. Why should we just repeat ourselves over and over and over again when these things are very well described and explained already? And, for example, we know satellites exist, every person with half a brain can easily establish and prove that satellites exist, so to have On the Level spamming every post with “Satellites don’t exist”, it is insane. Pointless.
So we are not going to have these insane, pointless, repetitive, monotonous conversations on flatearthfacts.com
you only see like 0.001% of the earths surface. of course it looks flat dummy
assuming you don’t get burned by the core, you would have to dig 12,742 km
truth sister lets expose these idiots, THE EARTH IS FLAT
The truth will be known!
Yes! the earth is flat, just ask the water it will never lie to you , it always seeks its own level, ALWAYS!! That is why we have the term sea level, airplane= air+plane, a thing that flies in the air over a plane. the list can go on and on. I have studied Ancient history for last 30 years read more than 500 books, One must be able to separate what is real and what is not real on many levels to understand truth as it is. remember sound=vibration=frequency on all levels of existence .
Look guys tbh the earth is ROUND. Loads of evidence to support this, like when a boat goes out to sea, it does not stay in sight. this shows its going around a curve. I’m still in school, but really, I think that flat earthers are just doing this for attention which is wasting money on research on this pretty crazy topic.
Thank you for reading, and do not be offended by my views. 🙂
Your wrong the ship doesn’t go over the so “called curve”. Go buy a p9000 camera and zoom in you will see the boat. What happens is that it leaves your visual perspective. Its like when you are driving on the highway and the street lights look like there different sizes the further way from you but there the same height.
you are half right but the reason you can still see it is because it didnt go over the curve yet get your facts straight dont be a disgrace to legitimate and confirmed science. go watch actual science you have been seeing too many conspiracy theories
then why cant you see new zealand from australia
Level is the constant in relation to the center of the earth. You are missing the context and tbh you are spouting the same old flat earther lines that are repeated over and over.
Gravity.
Gravity is a THEORY. not proven science.
Can you reproduce gravity in any setting?? If so I would love to see.
All the BS we were taught is NOT possible to replicate, reproduce, or proove in any way. Try it so you feel like the ignorant brainwashed sheep you are!
Hello! Not asking to debate, but more so asking to understand. This is the first I’m hearing in the FE Theory that gravity does not exist. What do Flat Earthers think keeps things close to the ground then? What is the other magnetic pull downward then? Simply curious!! Thank you!
Yes. There is the idea of density. More dense objects will fall down in a less dense medium. Like if you fill a balloon with hydrogen gas, because the density of the balloon becomes less than the density of the air it will not fall down, it will fall up. So similarly everything more dense than the air will fall down.
You can float on the water for example. So it is because of density that more dense things fall through less dense mediums.
Curious Researcher,
As Flat Earth Facts has stated, density is the reason things fall or float in a medium, such as iron falls in air and helium floats in nitrogen. However, as most flat earthers fail to comprehend or admit, there is in every float or sink scenario a definite direction that the objects fall or float, not that I’m saying that Flat Earth Facts is a flat earther one way or the other. Anyway, the directional tendency for these objects to either fall or float is in a direct response to the forces acting upon all the matter in that localized area and that force is what we, in the scientifically literate community, call gravity. Now the debate on whether or not gravity is a real force rages on but mostly in sub-basements and obscure chat rooms because it is pretty obvious that there are more important topics to occupy our minds than this. So, good luck in your search for factual knowledge and understanding, and remember, there are a lot of misinformed nutjobs out there so be careful not to fall victim to confirmation bias and misinformation.
Peace
All comments above do not prove the reality of a globe nor the reality of a flat earth.
Even James Newport, clearly a life-time scholar hints to one book that can provide empirical evidence to prove the flat earth , however even after reading 500+ books he’s not able to mention this books name and wants us to be convinced by the historical origine of the word airplane being shy just one letter of being airplanet.
Further mentioning of any subjects on the list that goes on and on he doesn’t provide and tells me he either has no clue how-to substantiate any scientific-claims or just wants to make a big impression with literally saying nothing.
I have bookmarked this page and in time will review every subject mentioned above and duplicate any scientific-fact or calculations by looking up what physics-laws tell us about the validity when being used as science-facts that dis-prove or prove the earth is a globe.
I will not discard science-theories just because they aren’t proven by the scientific method.
I’ll try to give popular science-theory the benefit of the doubt since in today’s world those (unproven) theories are widely used by scientists and I believe that when we use science properly, all things should be possible to prove or dis-prove using the scientific-method.
For now however, I’ll rest a few days but will return because the intent of the creators of this website seems quite legit and can prove to be a meeting-place where globers & flat-earthers can come together in mutual respect.
In the words that the terminator never uttered in the movie : ‘I’ll be back !!!’ 😉
To believe that large bodies of water can conform to the exterior of shapes is unscientific.
There is no science that can demonstrate or test that water can behave like this in any practical examples.
So it’s a belief that people have and nothing to do with science.
The science you are looking for is gravity. Gravity says that large heavy objects, like the earth, create a force that pulls everything towards its center of mass. So the water on the earth at every point is being pulled to the center of the earth by gravity. So this is the scientific explanation of how large bodies of water confirm to the shape of the earth. It is gravity, and to believe the earth is a ball one has to believe in gravity and it is gravity that makes all these seemingly impossible things possible, according to science.
One key thing on neither side being able to fully prove there argument is the fact that all of the globe people are so dead set against the flat earth model. Is because They have all been taught with television. And the hollywood special effects that look just like what they say is real. yet they can’t with all of there supposed picture and video evidence. That is because they can’t get past there indoctrination.
Yes. Of corse neither side can absolutely prove that their theory is correct. But globe earth people have a working predictive model, they can explain exactly how everything could work if the earth was a globe. And their theory matches our observations quite accurately. So globe earthers are presenting a reasonable explanation of what we observe that could be true. However flat earthers can not explain anything, they have no working model, they have nothing, just blind faith that the earth is flat. So you can not compare the flat earthers with the globe earthers. Flat earthers have a religious believe that the earth is flat with no explanation as to how it could work if the earth was flat. But the globe earthers have a working scientific model that explains how it could work if the earth was a globe.
Fly above 35,000 feet like I have and see it for yourself. Am I a liar for seeing it? For knowing science and having common sense? Some opinions aren’t worth reading, people. Someone fly these ‘leaders’ to space, let them space walk, see it, and then charge them the bill, please……..
Ryan do you mean you’ve seen it flat up at that height or you have seen it curved??
Thanks. John
First you can not see the earth’s curve at 35,000 feet. You can’t see it at 50,000 feet either. What you are seeing is the curve of the horizon. Even if you were on the Space Station at about 200 miles above the earth you wouldn’t see the entire earth.
The problem with flat earthers is that they are unable to comprehend the immense size of the earth. If one was able to stand in the middle of the Atlantic, with calm seas you’d only be able to see about three miles in every direction. That’s why the horizon looks flat. Every point that you look at if standing on the ocean would be about three miles away from you. Your whole viewing area would be roughly a six mile diameter. Do you know how small that is? If earth were the size of Epcot that six miles would be a 1/8 inch dot on Epcots surface.
If you have a 16″ globe, at about 3 0,000 feet in an airplane, if you could see all the way around you’d be able to see a circle about 450 miles in diameter. That would be about the size of a quarter on that 16 inch globe. Almost six miles up and you’d only be able to see a portion of the earth the size of a quarter on a sixteen inch globe.
The sheer size is enormous. Unless you’re an astronaut you’re never going to see the earth’s curve.
Kevin MC, you dropped out a while ago.
You said First but never followed up with Second ;-p
Have a healthy 2021
well according to the math given by NASA . you would be able to see curvature. Because you can see a lot more then three mile I have seen things that were close to a hundred miles away when the conditions are just right. And I have seen pictures and video taken fro a Nikon 900 with the inferred filter taken out of it and there was stuff you could make out as far as 3 to 4 hundred miles away.
If you are 100 or 200 miles up you can’t see any curvature. Because the horizon in all directions from your line of vision is the same direction from your eyes. So it means unless you get high enough to see the whole ball the horizon will always be a straight line all the way around as you rise up from a ball. Getting 200 miles above an 8000 mile ball is nothing at all.
Curious, so how do explain the lack of earth’s rotational speed having an effect on the winds? Winds go in all different directions at all times. Constantly varying in both direction and velocity, both laterally and vertically. Winds close to the surface may blow East at the surface, but South or West aloft. Pilots correct for earths magentic pull and wind direction and variation and velocity, but never for the earth’s rotational speed and direction. As a globe theory supporter, what is the explanation you may have on this? I am simply curious to get the globe theory view. Thank you.
Yes Curious, this is not really a problem for the globe earthers as they believe the whole atmosphere, the plane the clouds, the weather systems, the birds, the butterflies, they are all locked into the same frame of reference as the spinning earth, therefore the spin of the earth becomes irrelevant. If you are part of a system that is moving and everything around you is moving with the system then the movement of the system becomes irrelevant to you. Imagine you are in an airplane travelling at 600 miles per hour. Inside the airplane, because everything is moving at 600 miles per hour, it appears stationary to you, you do not feel that 600 miles per hour movement forward. You can walk to the back of the airplane just as easily as you can walk to the front. So because you are part of the same frame of reference as the plane, the moment of the plane becomes irrelevant to you.
So that is the globe earthers answer as to why they don’t need to consider the rotation of the earth. However, this presumes there is some system, some force, that is able to grab hold of and rotate the airplane, the clouds, the birds, etc, and pull them around with the rotation of the earth. But science has never proposed such a force. They have no explanation as to what could hold the atmosphere and everything in it, up to some distance, in the same frame of reference as the spinning earth and spin everything as if it was physically connected to the earth.
So this is a great failure of the globe earth model and they will never discuss this point. Always try to divert you away from it. But it is a great problem for the spinning globe model.
I keep trying to post this.
I will address this right now. Everything is not in the same frame of reference. Flights are faster one way than the other. Have you heard of the coriolis effect? It works because everything is not in the same frame of reference. No diversion or problems.
So you are a flat earther now? This is globe earth proof, everything is in the same frame of reference. If you don’t believe that then globe earth model fails to explain our observations?
So better decide which side you are on. If you want to take a side, of course I am not on either side, still this single frame of reference, it is a very essential part of the globe earth model, without it, globe earth model fails to explain our observations.
With out this you could go straight up in the air and just wait and the earth would spin underneath you and you could land in a different place.
But in reality you will land in the same place.
So our based on our observations and practical experience, if you believe in a spinning earth, then somehow, by some mystical unexplained force you remain linked in the same spinning frame of reference as the earth even when you are physically disconnected from it.
This is an unexplained mystery, something the globe earthers can not explain. But they have to assume this connection is there, keeping everything, atmosphere, planes, clouds, butterflies, etc, all spinning and synchronized with the spin of the earth..
Really, if we were honest, we would have to conclude that the earth is not spinning, based on our observations. But as you noted before, scientists are not noted for their honesty. They accept the things that go along with their beliefs and inconvenient things like this, that go against their beliefs, they ignore.
I am not a flat earther. Unless there is proof that earth is flat then I never will be. Your example does work, but the difference in position would be extremely small. Proof of what I said is that a flight between California and Georgia will be shorter going one way than the other way. A helicopter could go into the air and hover for 12 hours and land on the other side of the globe. It works.
“A helicopter could go into the air and hover for 12 hours and land on the other side of the globe.”
Sure. Why don’t you try it?
I can’t test it because I am literally12 years old, yet somehow smarter that about 1/2 of the people here. If I had a helicopter that I could spend 12 hours in I would, but I have school and I don’t have a helicopter or permission to be in China’s sky. Also, if I try it then you won’t believe me.
The earth’s oceans simply cannot curve around a globe earth. Large expanses of water are always level.
In a day and age where two neighbouring countries can’t even agree on a border, how is it that 12 countries and 54 states can all agree to make Antarctica pretty much off-limits to the general public? What is it they are trying to hide? 🤔
Antarctica is not off limits to the general public. They agreed to not take over or use Antarctica for military and resource purposes, essentially preserving it.
Antarctica IS off-limits to the public. Public are only allowed to go to a few spots on the edge on organized cruses and are not permitted to stay in Antarctica overnight. So all the general public can do is pay $20,000+ for an organized cruse and get off the boat in the morning on the edge and look at the penguins and get back on the boat. General public can not do more than that.
And there are a few research stations belonging to various countries, otherwise there is nothing there, very hostile climate, hard to stay there anyhow.
Not only is Antarctica off-limits, no unauthorized ships are permitted to cross over the 60 degree south latitude line. So that means the whole bottom third of the Southern Hemisphere is off-limits.
you can’t go beyond the 60 degree parrell because you would reach the firmament of heaven, read your bible, men can’t go into the heavens, earth is held up by pillars,and the angels stood at the four corners of the earth but you fuys believe what you want and i’ll believe God, but feel free to believe scientist, NASA, man, woman, goverments or whatever you want or believe in spongebob i know where i stand because we have freedom to make our own beliefs.
Try getting A job on Antarctica. then you can see that it exists.
Yes. Not only that it exists, but that it is dark for 24 hours a day in the middle of winter and light for 24 hours a day in summer. Just like on the North Pole…
Antarctica exists yes… but it’s not an ice shelf island at the bottom of a ball…..
“Antarctica IS off-limits to the public. Public are only allowed to go to a few spots on the edge on organized cruses and are not permitted to stay in Antarctica overnight. ” Why are you lying and being disingenuous? Again? There are no hotels so there is nowhere to stay and nobody in their right mind wants hotels there.
There are even yacht races around Antarctica.
Why didn’t you mention Jerome Poncet? Because you’ve never heard of him otherwise you wouldn’t have made the claims you did. You obviously haven’t visited the Faraday Bar
It is true David. You can’t stay overnight in Antartica unless you are working for some government scientific research station. So if you can’t stay overnight then there is not much chance for exploring it. All you can do is play around on the edge a bit, watch the penguins, and get back on your boat and go home. Why don’t you go there and stay there for more than a day?
“There are even yacht races around Antarctica.”
The Vendee Globe yacht race has supposedly been taking place since 1989. It starts and ends in the Northern hemisphere ( France ) which should warn everyone right there it’s a scam. It lacks the numerous radar checkpoints to verify the races. Why not start the race in Argentina or Chile? Or better at a location on Antarctica like Point Deception ( ha,ha!). You could post radar beacons every thousand miles along the Supposed Antarctic coastline to verify the race. You’ll only need about 14 of them if your globe reckoning is accurate. Of course if your wrong and Captain Cook is right you’ll need at least 70. Of course, this all begs the question why hasn’t any of this minimal objective verification been done since 1989?! If your honest you know it’s because they can’t. Same reason we cannot get a straight photographic image of a ball Earth from space, their claims are fiction.
Please view links below for mor information .
https://rickpotvinflatearth.blogspot.com/2015/05/ridiculous-yaght-race-around-antarctica.html
Rick Potvin’s Virtual Circumnavigation of Antarctica to Decide if Earth is Global or Flat: Ridiculous Yacht Race Around Antarctica can’t be Real. (rickpotvinflatearth.blogspot.com)
Rick Potvin’s Virtual Circumnavigation of Antarctica to Decide if Earth is Global or Flat: Ridiculous Yacht Race Around Antarctica can’t be Real. (rickpotvinflatearth.blogspot.com)
Ridiculous Yacht Race Around Antarctica can’t be Real.
I am sure this race is real On the Level. But it is not circumnavigating Antartica.
Check out the map:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/3974543.stm
They are not going anywhere near Antartica actually. They are going around the continents. And this going around the continents is equally possible on both the globe and flat maps. So this race does not prove it is a globe and does not prove it is flat. Race is possible in both models.
On The Level cited a wiki entry/Rick Potvin’s but failed to include “The race starts and finishes in Les Sables-d’Olonne, in the Département of Vendée, in France; both Les Sables d’Olonne and the Vendée Conseil Général are official race sponsors.[11] The course is essentially a circumnavigation along the clipper route: from Les Sables d’Olonne, down the Atlantic Ocean to the Cape of Good Hope; then clockwise around Antarctica, keeping Cape Leeuwin and Cape Horn to port; then back to Les Sables d’Olonne.[12] The race generally covers approximately 24,000 nautical miles (44,000 km) and runs from November to February, timed to place the competitors in the Southern Ocean during the austral summer”
It then goes on to misrepresent te route acroohs the Southern Ocean. i.e. it a scam by Rick Potvin.
What do you mean by “Captain Cook is right “
“I am sure this race is real On the Level. But it is not circumnavigating Antartica.”
Yes, I agree. Flat Earth model requires any circumnavigation of the southern extremity/circumference be simply a smaller circle within the larger ice-wall circle. By such loose definition one can circumnavigate it by simply pacing in a circle. Such definitions are useless. An actual scientific investigation means exploring the entirety of the surrounding mass. Good luck with that.
Hi Flat Earth Facts,
Just something I noted from your link. The race route is only 23000 miles long! They’ll spend a good 14000 miles at least merely running back and forth from France to the bottom of South America or Africa. That only leaves 9000 miles to circumnavigate the supposed 14000 mile Antarctic continent!
The yachtsman are just looking for an excuse to party in South Africa or Chile/apArgentina and keep the globe hoax alive IMO!
” So this race does not prove it is a globe and does not prove it is flat. Race is possible in both models.” Actually it does because if Earth were flat the distances would be far, far greater and therefore the times taken far, far longer.
At 66,5 N or S. the circumference is 8,620 nm or 16.000 , on a Flat Earth at 66.5˚S it would be 19,800 nm. or 37,000 km.
So the race proves Earth is a spheroid.
Keith,
Maybe take a moment to look at water.
Notice how water that has been split or a drop of water CURVES????????
https://th.bing.com/th/id/R.3935c8d2c1eeac9f245d1b4e34ad9c00?rik=CjQs6pBvvjet5Q&riu=http%3a%2f%2fupload.wikimedia.org%2fwikipedia%2fcommons%2f5%2f5e%2fWater_drop_001.jpg&ehk=O3XG6%2fEq0S4hZwAoCxB3tSXY7VBWloAIegQAy011JyQ%3d&risl=1&pid=ImgRaw
There, water does in fact curve.
I’m still a fence sitter, but I am leaning towards Flat Earth. There are just too many things you can see from distances which the Ball tells us are under hundreds or thousands of feet of curvature. The math just does not add up. Over thirty years ago my father, a diplomat and high ranking Freemason, hinted to me of a flat earth through a series of ‘what if I told you’ questions (I guess that he was trying not to break his oath of secrecy). When I watched Eric Dubay’s and Mark Sargent’s Flat Earth vids it all started making more sense.
The Earth is BIG which makes the curvature of the Earth feel none existant.
(Recheck your math , it’s most likely wrong)
I guarantee that his math is wrong. Eric Dubey claims that an airplane has to drop hundreds of feet a minute if the earth were a globe. That’s pure b.s.
People have actually taken a level on flights thinking the plane would fly out of level. If you use the eight inch drop in a mile, an airplane about 260 feet long would only have to fly out of level 1/16th of an inch to circumnavigate the earth. That’s how much drop there is in 260 feet. At 30,000 feet it would be less than that.
If anyone can see a sixteenth of an inch in 260 feet with a spirit level I’ll give them $10,000.
I’ll take that $10,000 because NASA claims to be able to see parallax from billions of light years…making those divergences well below 0.0000200320512 (1/16th” in 260′). Thanks…
I saw the edge of the Earth the other day, when driving along the shore of Lough Corrib, in the West of Ireland. It was about 100 metres offshore – a flat edge, after which nothing. And when wondering why I hadn’t seen it before, I realized that were the Earth like a long roll of paper, joined together in a loop and scrolling round two points, the apparent ‘end’ of the earth (the edge) would vary as it scrolled round, and your witnessing of it would be a coincidence of space and time.
Hey Flat Earther people can any one of u help please??
One of u guys sent me a video a year or so ago, which unfortunately has got deleted from my computer, of this highly decorated American explorer in a 1962 B & W television interview who had been to the poll like so many more times than anyone else in the world etc etc etc
The point of the video was that this explorer said wen they got to the pole in the early 1960’s there was like this forever 1000 mtr high wall full of the worlds natural resources of gas oil etc and enough to sustain the world for like ever! He said forever guys to give u an idea of what they found!
Remember this is like the most famous decorated bloke ever saying this on live USA TV and not sone nut job.
Then in sometime like 1967 he returned to the Poll with an American amada of warships to the same place n it became a milaterised zone!!!
Have any of you got this video link or have seen it??? I was deffo on the fence with this flat earth stuff till l watched this video
Thanks guys
Sounds like you are talking about Admiral Byrd, he discovered there were was Nazii base at the S. Pole as well as flying saucers, no joke his military expedition was to search for a rumored Nazi base, Operation High Jump was attacked and they left before they were scheduled, here is his story. https://coolinterestingstuff.com/operation-highjump-declassified-pictures-ufo-evidence if you search for Operation High Jump you will find a lot more info.
Sounds like Admiral Byrd
https://youtu.be/PrdSal9uH28?t=247 – [the famous comments]
https://youtu.be/PrdSal9uH28 – LONGINES CHRONOSCOPE WITH RICHARD E. BYRD
https://youtu.be/fnmxsj-prhM – RICHARD E BYRD “DISCOVERY” 1933-35 EXPEDITION PART 1 74322
https://youtu.be/zXFcbK8zxOs – RICHARD E BYRD “DISCOVERY” 1933-35 EXPEDITION PART 2 74332
https://youtu.be/5KO6mWHvVks – 1940’s “LIVING HISTORY” BIOGRAPHY OF ADMIRAL RICHARD E. BYRD ARCTIC & ANTARCTIC RESEARCH 26954
If the TV or a science book says the earth is round then I automatically know to question it. The Machiavellian state NEVER tells the truth.
PLEASE can a flat earther try to explain sunset/sunrise, earthquakes and all tectonic movement with their model. I am desperate to see them try : )
As far as I can see there should be no problem describing tectonic movements on a flat plane vs. a globe. They would just be the same thing.
As far as explaining sunrise, sunset, they say sun is circling above a flat plane and does not actually go up and down but just moves across and it appears to rise and set due to perspective in the same way as if you see a cloud going across the sky it will appear to rise when it appears, it will go up high in the sky and will ‘set’ once it passes the horizon line on the other side. So we know the clouds are not rising and setting, they are at a constant height and are just passing above us. But perspective makes it appear that the clouds are rising over the horizon where they appear and then the same cloud will appear to rise above our heads and then when it has traveled to the point where it is almost not visible it will be on the horizon and a little bit later it will set below the horizon and disappear.
Now there are faults with this explanation, but that is the explanation the flat earthers give for the rising and setting of the sun, the rising and setting is an illusion caused by perspective, sun is actually just moving across like the clouds are.
So that means the solar system is geocentric an D not heliocentric, cause in their argument the sun is moving and not the earth. But it was proven by Galileo Galilei that the solar system is heliocentric and not geocentric, what about that?
Right, but about the cloud thing, that works because earth curves. Also, clouds move in straight lines and flat earth sun moves in a circle. Their sun doesn’t work.
Yes. Flat earth sun does not work, works OK in the Northern Hemisphere. But in the Southern Hemisphere, South America, for example, you can check out my video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GWJEve5A3I
You can see here that at the southernmost tip of South America in December the sun is circling around. You can see the sun in the North at noon and at midnight, it is below the horizon a bit, but it is in the South. Sun only sets for a few hours, in the South, then rises again a bit further around, in the south.
So that would be impossible on the flat earth map. Because there the sun is circling around in the middle and Antartica is around the outside edge. So it would be totally impossible to see the sun in the south from South America, on the flat earth map. Therefore the flat earth sun idea is wrong.
Could a flat earther please explain the benefits for NASA/government to lie about the shape of the earth? What do they get out of it, considering the billions that it would cost to fake it and keep it fake for so long?
No problem. First, how about a $22.629 billion dollar budget (in 2020 so far). Plenty of dough to keep up with the fakery. But most importantly… Without their “globe” model their evolution theory goes down the tubes. In short, they’re hiding the fact that was have a creator, and that ALL of what we see and experience is of the Most High God. The lie keeps people from the truth in so many ways. Science in general has become more of a religion now than anything else.
Hi Kevin, this is about the best not-scientific evidence (anyone with a crayon can draw, right ?)
https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~303661~90074314:Composite–Tavola-1-60—Map-of-the?qvq=q%3Apub_list_no%3D%2210130.000%22%3Bsort%3APub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No%3Blc%3ARUMSEY%7E8%7E1&sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&mi=0&trs=94
https://youtu.be/8GFuDB1qjo0 – [a YT-channel talking about this map] – 1587 World Map Showing Extra Land
Go out side in the morning in the winter right when you see the first sign of light in the horizon. Time how long it takes from that point to either when it actually gets light or till you can see the sun. then go out in the morning in the summer just before it gets light. and time how long it takes to get light from the time you see the first sign of light in the horizon. in the winter it is a lot quicker time then in the summer. that is a flat earth proof.
How is that a flat earth proof Jason???
Please explain how that proves the earth is flat????
try me!! you dont go and tell people your belifes and say that thats how it actually is saying your 100% and you right while everyone else is wrong it is your belif dont say grow up it is there belif dont shove it on them and when you learn to be an adult please notify me idiot
What is pushing more people to the Flat Earth movement is when Google/YouTube delete and sensor something that is harmless as someone saying the Earth is Flat,you know it must be true,or have some ring of truth to it..
Heck,there are millions of Alien and Ghost ,Big Foot videos and those cant be proven and those are not deleted!!!
But when the 8 inch per mile squared is proven to be a lie,that’s when the Globe Earth falls apart and my ears perk up!!! Get a camera and you can see the ships when they disappear from the so called curve!!
Hi Bob,
You sound like you have a good brain on your shoulders. I believe in Flat Earth for many reasons.
If space is a vacuum, why doesn’t the oxygen on Earth get sucked into space. I know the answer ! It’s in the Bible.
Good Luck with discovering the Truth.
Gravity. Also, where does the bible say earth is flat? Good luck to you too, just read my name.
Wake up sheeple the earth is not flat nor a globe in fact the earth does not exist it is just a figment of reality and we are living in a simulation where all of our peers are simply equivalent to NPCs and all the events and outcome are predetermined by our fate. we do not have free will and are just pawns in this game we call life
Gravity is not a force friends. It’s an acceleration. Our scientific betters at NASA will confirm this for you. But what causes this acceleration?
Additionally, the shape is not so important as the position. At the very least we know Earth is stationary and the universe is geo-centric.
Georges Sagnac proved the existence of the aether and its effect on the speed of light. Einstein himself stated that if the aether was detected his relativity could go in the garbage.
All celestial bodies we can view exhibit the same red-shift, showing that they are all moving away from Earth. Otherwise there would be red-shifted and blue-shifted bodies. This can only happen if Earth is in the center. This observation is what lead to the “expanding balloon” theory. Because the evidence says we’re in the center, but Hubble found that disturbing.
Whether people realise or like it or want to admit it, all of this has been the work of the Jesuits. They control more academia than any other group . The big bang theory that most people subscribe to for example, was invented by a Jesuit named Georges Lemaître who suggested it to Einstein.
google is the earth flat.
It may shock your flat heads.
No. It shocks us as to how much google has changed over the years. Google no longer presents the information available. Google is a censorship system, when you search on google they will present the results they want you to believe, they will not present you with an accurate summary of the information that is available. Google hides all information they don’t like, Google hides the information they don’t want you to know about and presents you with the information they want you to believe. Today Google is not a search engine, it is brainwashing.
Very true!
You won’t find these topics on Google and YouTube.
I had to use a different browser in order to find some useful info about the true state of the earth (flat).
Google is not your friend.
If you want to find some correct info, don’t use Google because you won’t find it. They are so biased and have an evil undertone.
Actually, there is no flat earth censorship on YouTube or Google. If you actually did anything other than be a parrot you would know that.
Of course there is flat earth censorship on YouTube and Google!!!
Search for Flat Earth on You Tube or Google, and see what comes up!
One of the best documented methods for determining the Earth’s roundness was first performed (to our knowledge) by the ancient Greeks. This was achieved by comparing the shadows of sticks in different locations. When the sun was directly overhead in one place, the stick there cast no shadow. At the same time in a city around 500 miles north, the stick there did cast a shadow.
If the Earth were flat then both sticks should show the same shadow (or lack of) because they would be positioned at the same angle towards the sun. The ancient Greeks found the shadows were different because the Earth was curved and so the sticks were at different angles. They then used the difference in these angles to calculate the circumference of the Earth. They managed to get it to within 10% of the true value – not bad for around 250 B.C.
Another piece of evidence for a globe is the difference between the night skies in the northern and southern hemispheres. The view is completely different because the Earth beneath you is pointing in a different direction. If the Earth were flat, the view should be the same. This can be made even easier by simply comparing when it is night and day in each country.
You can observe the planets as well. They all rotate, and watching over the course of a few days gives a clear picture they are spherical rather than flat. The chance that most of the planets are spherical but the Earth is flat seems very unlikely.
Fake science
But when science experiments are performed incorrectly they can appear to give the opposite result. If they are shared through social media, these false ideas can be spread quickly with no one to point out their flaws. One common example is the Bedford Level experiment, a form of which was first carried out in 1838 and used to “prove” the Earth was flat for over 30 years before an explanation was found.
This experiment involved placing a marker at a set height at either end of a canal about six miles long. If the Earth is round, then one marker should appear lower than the other when viewed at the same time through a telescope because the furthest marker would have fallen away with the curvature of the Earth. But it was reported that the markers are the same height, suggesting the Earth is actually flat. Modern day Flat Earth theorists still quote this experiment.
The problem is this doesn’t take into account the optical effect of the air over the intervening water, which bends or “refracts” the light as it travels from the marker to the telescope and makes it look like they are the same height. The solution is to use multiple markers along the length of the canal which, when observed, all appear to be at different heights.
Perhaps the most impressive experiment that even schools can do today is to send a camera up in a high-altitude balloon. The footage will show that from a high-enough vantage point you can see the curvature of the Earth. This is what Mike Hughes will find if he ever makes his rocket work.
Ultimately, arguing on the internet is not the best way forward for any scientific endeavour. We need to provide the means for people to test these theories themselves and to understand the results they get.
Yes. Some of your points are good indications that would support the idea of the earth as a globe. Realistically this is the obvious conclusion. But truth is sometimes stranger than fiction. Just because it seems the most likely choice does not prove it is actually true.
So the globe earth model is a model, a theory, and we have to remember that and keep our minds open to all the possibilities. That is science. Science is not selecting one option and religiously and illogically defending that option.
For instance you are incorrect in stating that you can see the curve of the earth by rising a few miles above such a large sphere. You will not see any curve. That is not possible. If you rise above a large sphere the horizon distance remains the same distance away in all directions, and will remain flat, you will not see any curve until you can actually get far enough up to see the whole ball. And for that you have to be thousands of miles up, not tens of miles up. So your idea of camera in a high-altitude balloon proving the flat earth is flawed. You will not see any actual curvature from this distance, the curvature displayed is due to the lenses used on the cameras, not the actual observation.
Yes. We can observe the planets and we can come to conclude that the planets, and the sun and the moon, are spheres suspended in the sky. So one of the principal ‘proofs’ put forward of a globe earth is “As above so below.” So they conclude that because we see globes suspended in space above us we must also be on a globe suspended in space. Again it is a plausible theory, but not actual proof. Just because we see globes floating above us does not prove that we are also on a globe.
The most convincing evidence you present is the view of the night sky from various locations on earth including North and South hemispheres and the equator. This is, in my opinion, the most convincing indication that we are situated on a globe spinning in space because what we observe in the sky is consistent with what we would observe if we were on a globe spinning in space. At at least at the moment I can not conceive of how such observations could be produced if we were on a flat plane. It may be possible, however, I do not think anyone has presented any theory that explains what we see happening in the sky in any convincing way except for the globe earth model. So without another working model it would be quite reasonable for any thoughtful person to be fairly confident that we are on a globe spinning in space.
As far as your sticks experiment it does not prove the earth is a globe. Your experiment is only valid if the sun is at a very great distance. If the sun is more local then you can get the same result on a flat plane of having the sun above one directly above one stick and at the same time not directly above another stick a few hundred miles away. In fact that is our experience, so if the earth was flat it means the sun must be closer to make it possible for this to occur. However if you can establish the actual distance of the sun at 93 million miles then your sticks experiment would become quite convincing also.
So yes, you are correct, that our observations do indicate that it appears that the most likely situation we are in which, for the most, part explains our observations, is that we are on a ball spinning in space however this still remains a theory and we do not have absolute proof of that. However it is quite legitimate, on the balance of probabilities and based on our observations and inability to present any practical working alternative theory, to have a fair degree of confidence in the globe earth theory. But it would be wrong to accept this theory as absolute fact. We still may not completely understand the actual system.
Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
Madhudvisa dasa
Your argument that an observer must be a significant height above the surface in order to detect a curve is, sadly, invalid. While we cannot visually detect horizontal curvature, we can measure how the surface curves away from us.
– https://i.stack.imgur.com/s7TA6.png
This links to a graph illustrating horizon distance as a function of altitude. As a logarithmic function, horizon distance increases rapidly within the first tens of meters of altitude.
– https://imgur.com/a/Bnx3xXK
This links to an image illustrating the obvious effect of altitude on horizon distance. You can see this effect yourself, if you visited a large body of water. While you might argue that the waves block the bottom portion of a distant ship, this effect still occurs on flat water. Lake Erie in the early morning is a perfect example. Take your boat 20, 30 miles out. Looking back at the shoreline, the twin cooling towers of Perry Nuclear Generating Station are, inexplicably, floating!
Is it that, or is it curvature? With the turbulent morning air, it may be difficult to make out the towers’ lower portions. However, if the atmosphere were calm, you would clearly be able to see only the top three fifths of the 500-foot tall towers. The rest is below your horizon, which, at a distance of 25 miles, equates to 322 feet of tower. When we include the effect atmospheric refraction, the lower 270 feet of the tower is hidden.
– https://imgur.com/a/aSihVY2
This final image provides a visual representation of the Perry Nuclear Station example.
Well if the earth was a globe or a pear shape rotating every 24 hours would maybe work except they throw in its at a tilt and there is a wobble if there was a wable the way they say it is. There would be observable differences. in when say for instance the sun was directly at 12:00 straight up you would be able to see it at different places in the sky not including its winter and summer paths at witch they are 24 hours full cycle but the paths at witch they travel going through the seasons would be back and fort up and down left and right . It would be all over the place with that wobble Plus the polaris Star is above the north poll winter and summer so even if it was billions of light years away travelling in a parallel direction with us it would be impossible to stay directly above our north poll and only moving from its observable location less then a couple degrees would be not possible at all if we had a wobble of only a thirty second of an inch that would be hundreds or thousands or even millions of miles or even more depending on how far it would be. so there are many thing that should make you at least question what you have been taught. especially when you believe it to be a scientific fact. And it is still only a theory. You should question every thing because not every thing is true.
Jason you don’t at all understand the globe earth model. There is no “wobble” Earth north pole is always pointing towards Polaris and Earth’s south pole is always pointing to the southern celestial pole. So the earth does not wobble at all. It rotates itself once every 24 hours and rotates around the sun once a year. So because earth is always pointing in the same directly but is at an angle so as it moves around the sun the angle of the earth related to the sun changes. And that is what is causing the seasons, the different length of day and night during the year, etc.
So globe earth is a good model. It does work, it does, at least for the most part, predict what we observe happening in the sky. On the other hand the flat earth people have no working model. They have no idea at all how the system could work if the earth was a flat plane. So you should learn how the globe earth model works before trying to talk about it. It works quite well. That does not prove the actual system works in the same way as the model, but globe earth model is a valid scientific predictive model but flat earthers can not present any model which explains what we observe..
Flat Earth Facts~ Seriously? Seems you just Make Shit Up In Your Own Mind?!! What were you doing in Science Class when they were teaching you about the Earth Wobbling on it’s axis?? They allegedly discovered this back in the 1890’s! Stop accusing others of not understanding the globe earth model because it is CLEAR you are inventing your own globe earth model from your imagination!! And you state it over & again GLOBE EARTH ‘MODEL’ scientific definition of model is a conceptual, mathematical or physical representation of a real-world phenomenon. A model is generally constructed for an object or process when it is at least partially understood, but difficult to observe directly. In general, phenomena are the objects of the senses (e.g., sights and sounds) as contrasted with what is apprehended by the intellect. Greek verb “to seem,” or “to appear” does not indicate whether the thing perceived is other than what it appears to be. Explain who IT WORKS… Please explain how they came to the conclusion the sun is 93 million miles away from earth? Explain how they decided the moon is 238,855 miles from earth? How could they possible ever figure out the Milky Way is barreling through space, traveling 600 kilometers (373 miles) every second? Please describe how anyone could possibly prove earth is screaming through space at 1.3 million mph? The FACT is it doesn’t make ANY SENSE AT ALL! All these numbers are extreme & we’re allegedly spinning around 1000 mph! If we were truly spinning, orbiting, eclipsing & hurtling at these massive speeds WHY CAN’T WE FEEL IT? Common Sense is all that is needed to know for an absolute FACT earth is not a spinning ball, the sun & moon are the same size & same distance away. Oh & explain why all NASA’s computer graphic images show the earth to be PERFECTLY round when in fact Neil deGrasse Tyson says the earth is PEAR shaped an “oblate spheroid,” tales get taller on down the line! WAKE THE F UP! Also Please explain WHY THEY USE A FLAT EARTH MAP to navigate?? WHY is the UNITED NATIONS flag a FLAT EARTH MAP? I am not a Flat Earther but I damn sure know earth isn’t a spinning ball moving every direction at those unbelievably ignorant speeds! You cannot prove any of the ball earth bullshit! All you can do is regurgitate what you were told & obviously you weren’t paying to close attention to that either. Please answer all the above questions or don’t bother responding at all. Please read all my other questions that cannot be explained if earth was actually spinning around at 1000 mph.
Yes. Obviously your science teacher did not understand the globe earth model if she taught you the earth was wobbling on it’s axis. It doesn’t wobble at all, according the the globe earth model. And yes, most of the globe earth people don’t understand it either. One day I will make a video and explain it. The earth absolutely does not wobble or have to wobble on its axis in the globe earth model.
So you are mislead by your science teacher…
Yes. They, the globe earthers, speculate on so many things they absolutely do not know are true or not. The distance of the moon, the distance of the sun, the distance of the stars, they don’t know actually. So I agree.
But the thing is they have constructed a model and a story of how it works, which is far far better than what the flat earth people have got. The flat earth people have the idea the earth is flat but no idea how anything could really work if the earth was flat. The globers have a believable story at least, but if you ask a flat earther how it works, he can not even tell a believable story that predicts what we observe happening…
School Experiment Proves NOTHING when they’re using a FISH EYE LENS! Wow. Unbelievable how truly Gullible the majority are. Sheeple believing everything their government tells them. Common Sense. Use your OWN senses! I Believe What I SEE & can FEEL. Spinning around 1000mph, eclipsing the sun at 67,000 mph while hurtling through space at 1.3 million mph ~ BULLSHIT! PROVE IT. And don’t say NASA proved anything because they ADMIT they never passed the Van Allen Radiation Belts & they ADMIT the only pictures of earth they have are CGI fake computer images. I can SEE FOR MILES & MILES & MILES. The songs & movies tell you the truth! Gee why is the UN’s flag FLAT EARTH MAP. DING!
“Fake science
But when science experiments are performed incorrectly they can appear to give the opposite result. If they are shared through social media, these false ideas can be spread quickly with no one to point out their flaws. One common example is the Bedford Level experiment, a form of which was first carried out in 1838 and used to “prove” the Earth was flat for over 30 years before an explanation was found.
This experiment involved placing a marker at a set height at either end of a canal about six miles long. If the Earth is round, then one marker should appear lower than the other when viewed at the same time through a telescope because the furthest marker would have fallen away with the curvature of the Earth. But it was reported that the markers are the same height, suggesting the Earth is actually flat. Modern day Flat Earth theorists still quote this experiment.
The problem is this doesn’t take into account the optical effect of the air over the intervening water, which bends or “refracts” the light as it travels from the marker to the telescope and makes it look like they are the same height. The solution is to use multiple markers along the length of the canal which, when observed, all appear to be at different heights.”
This is an old post but a clarification needs to be made.
The experiment referenced above is not Bedford Level but merely Huxley’s bogus attempt imo to discredit it. Bedford Level involved Parallax getting into a river and watching with a telescope from within a foot or so of the surface a distant boat travel 6 or so miles away from his location. All impossible on supposed modern day ball Earth guesstimates.
Day and night have different constellations
Meaning the earth is a globe
(At first glance we can not see constellations at day
Because it’s bright , but there is some called day constellations look it up)
There are 2 possibilities. Either the earth is spinning or everything we see in the sky is spinning around the earth. What we observe is identical in both cases. So you can not say “the earth is spinning” by observation. Because we are inside the system. There is recitative spinning. But there is absolutely no way we can tell if it is the earth spinning or if it is everything else spinning around the earth. Our observations would be identical in both situations.
Please look up Coriolis force. If you accept the existence of hurricanes and the fact they are all spinning in the same direction in the northern hemisphere, then science tells you this is because earth is spinning.
SERIOUSLY? It means the earth is not moving & everything else is! DING.
People who insult flat earthers are stupid. If the government would tell the truth in everything then there will be no dispute.The people in the world have been lied to so much they don’t know what to believe is the truth and less they went up in space themselves. NASA had lied to the world in a lot of things. Flat earthers just want to know the truth . If the world never lied … There will never be a conspiracy. I respect the people who won’t just believe anything just because they saw it on the news are because NASA said they did it… I respect the people who ask the questions boldly. Everyone just wants to know the truth we have been deceived so much so leave these flat earthers insults to yourself.
why don’t you flat earthers go to the docks and look at the ships leaving and watch them “sink” into the horizon as they pass your line of sight.
Gee, take a telescope & zoom right to the ship. How’s that possible if there’s curvature. DING!
“uses the bible as an excuse in stead of looking out in the horizon and not seeing china”
Funny how spinning ball believers start calling names & cannot back up anything they say! Answer this ball believers: 1) Why are there NO REAL ACTUAL PHOTOS OF EARTH?? Every picture NASA has of earth they ADMIT are computer generated images. 2) Explain why Armstrong & crew faked they were in space when they weren’t? Accidentally released video proves they were NOT in space at all! 3) Why did Buzz Aldrin SAY they never went to the moon? 4) Please Demonstrate & Explain how Water can curve. 5) If the THEORY of Gravity (never been proven as Fact) is true & it is so Strong it can hold down the weight of the oceans, why doesn’t it pull down a helium balloon? Or Butterfly? How are we able to even jump off the ground? 6) Explain why the construction of railroads, roads, bridges, etc. never calculated the ‘alleged’ curvature. 7) If earth is spinning around why can’t a helicopter just hover & be in a different area. 8) If earth is spinning around why aren’t flights shorter when going with the spin. 9) If earth was truly spinning 1000 mph how can airplanes land safely. 10) If earth is spinning 1000 mph & eclipsing the sun at 67,000 & hurtling thru infinite space at 1.3 million mph while wobbling on an ‘alleged’ axis why can water/lakes at times be so completely still? And WHY can’t WE FEEL It. Science teachers could NEVER answer these questions & they’d get PIST off & tell us to Shut It. Also, why can we see so much farther than curvature would allow? Explain all the videos people have made showing the earth IS NOT A SPINNING BALL from cameras they attached to balloons. Yeah. Explain ALL that.
I am new to even the concept of flat earth. I had no idea anyone in the world believe in it up until a few months ago.
I have been researching just out of curiosity and seeing how they explain various things like seasons. The number one thing that has opened me up to the possibility of it being true is that I first went to YouTube to see if I could find a video explaining how Flat Earth seasons north and south of the equator worked. To my surprise, I couldn’t find a single video on flat earth… only how flat earth is wrong. Based on all the truths they censor, this obvious censorship makes me think it too must be real.
The questions you pose here are really great things to consider.
One thing I know for sure, however God shaped this Earth, he did an amazing job!
Yes. You can only find videos that YouTube believe in on YouTube… It is no longer YouTube, because they do not allow the things YOU believe. Only the things they believe. They need to change their URL to OurTube…
To both of you: search globe busters on YouTube. They are an entire flat earther channel. Why do you keep deleting this?
Reality: NASA’s Lunar Missions were fantasy rides. Besides, nobody can land on the moon, it is a plasma emitting its own light. The lesser light rules the night. Science confirms ChristianTheology. Read GENESIS.
FACT: So many online trolls obfuscating reality, evil.
Wake up sheeple! Anticipate 7 years of hell on Earth.
Shalom
I hate that so many people think that fake moon landing = flat earth. It doesn’t matter.
“A believer cannot be convinced of anything, because the believer has a deep-seated need to believe.” Carl Sagan
Globetards act contemptuously towards flat-earthers, ignorantly parroting whatever is heard.
Question everything: I’m not convinced by the lie.
Until NASA releases genuine photographs of the Earth in its entirety, I don’t believe anything NASA purportedly claims. (Flat-earth society is psyops.)
Envision the mechanics of our Heliocentric solar system, absolute absurdity! Perpetual motions of celestial bodies rocketing toward oblivion, yet we do not perceive any motion; this madness is totally pseudoscience! Einstein’s theory of Relativity is kaput! Apparently, we live on a stationary plane!
South Pole: Admiral Richard E. Byrd discovered a landmass the size of the United States of America. Wake up sheeple!
All the lies we have been forced to accept is CRAP.
Understanding the realities of the sun and moon, there is harmony, peace reflecting the Devine and incomprehensible genius of YHWY. The Book of Genesis appears to be literally factual, don’t be fooled! For sure we didn’t evolve out of scum!
Both arguments are true and is based on the perspective of the observer. In this case its not the relativistic observer in a light travel thought experiment but an actual observer in the 4th dimension ( time dimension). For the 4th dimension observer the Earth is FLAT. For us mortals stuck in space dimension with the illusion of time flow caused actually by space expansion all objects will try to eventually converge to their center of mass and so will pursue sphericity and so we will always experience a SPHERE earth. Friends, REALITY is but only an ILLUSION wrt either dimension.
if we have this powerful force call gravity that holds everything from flying off the ” globe” then how does a butterfly fly or a balloon raise up when released from a child’s grip with this tremendous force holding it down also if the world spins west to east at 1000 miles and hour and a 747 has a max speed of 700 mph explain how if can take off from California and ever get to boston if the earth is moving below at 1000 mph after a hour it would be over 300 miles over the pacific ocean now lets ask ours ourselves how ships and plains that use a gyro to achieve rigidity this means level front to rear , level side to side how could it find boston as the plane flies rigid it did not compensate for the surface constantly dropping below them if it did really curve they would be above out in space and even if it could make it now it is going to land on an 1/4 mile strip that is headed 1000 miles mph in the opposite direction against the forward movement of the 747 at 300 mph landing speed come on landing strip would move behind plane in seconds makes total since how the plane can perform these ever day events only if earth don’t spin or has no this is undisputable proof of a flat and still earth with no curvature and no amount of your brainwashed bull shit can explain this away any scientific fantasy would only sound stupid but in case u still argue get a pilots manual where it states all instruction should consider a flat earth
Well if the earth is spinning 1000 mph and the airplane is sitting on its surface, then the plane is also traveling 1000 mph. When it takes off its speed is added to the speed it was already traveling with the earth. So no matter which direction it takes of in the planes motion with the earth at rest on the surface is maintained. You really need to think more deeply and follow the physics to the only conclusion that is permitted. There is no debate about the shape of the earth except with those of us who think we know enough about a subject to believe we are right in our conclusions, but don’t realize that we don’t really know as much as we think we do about that subject to realize we are wrong. I would never bend so low as to degrade or put anybody’s beliefs down, I would only suggest that we all need to understand our limitations when it comes to our own cognitive abilities. I would also suggest that we all take a step off our high horses and realize that we are all guilty of believing we cannot possibly be wrong about what we believe. I know it hurts our egos and we dislike admitting that our ability to reason is not always perfect but we are not perfect thinkers. So, instead of coming to a conclusion about any subject using only limited understanding and not following a hypothesis all the way to the only possible conclusion available, maybe it would be better to step back and rethink our thinking and reasoning processes. We must first teach ourselvesf how to think in a way that does not lead us to the self deception that we can reason without mistakes, and realize our limitations. It’s true, this way is much harder to do than the usual way we think but it’s the only way to insure that we are not being lazy in the process of concluding our understanding this universe we find ourselves in.
Butterfly Flight = beating it’s aerodynamic wings, based on the density of air, butterfly wings push the air much like a spoon in coffee.
Balloon = usually they are filled with a gas lighter than air OR because of thermodynamics, (extra heat inside) they rise just the same.
Spinning Earth = Think of economies of “scale”. Example, your point of view vs. an ants point of view. Because of the size of the earth, relative to ours, you would have to reach an altitude of 35,000 feet just to see the curvature of the earth, (and that person would be very fast in our eyes). Another way to look at it, think of being on a bus, moving at 100 mph, why are you able to move backward or forward inside the bus? You’re going the same speed. SO, planes can take off/land/fly because the motion is internal to the earth and the velocity of the earth from an external frame of reference doesn’t matter. Only the relative velocity between plane and earth does. Does this help you?
I could keep going, but truth is, I’m with you on MISTRUSTING our scientific community. They have taught us a bunch of crap theory as truth like Darwinian evolution or the earth being a set of concentric circles of stuff, (crust, magma, inner/outer core) when it’s not like that at all. And we know this for fact now with all the earthquake sensors on each continent. So yeah, I’m with you on their being MORE. Gravity is only part of the answer and I don’t think our sun has a nuclear furnace at its core either. And general relativity is junk. Gravity yes, Relativity yes, BUT general relativity does not work for deep space. And I think plasma and electricity play a bigger role. BUT when it comes to the earth being a sphere or not. If you really have a fire in your heart to see the truth yourself, all you need is A. gopro camera B. HAB, (high altitude baloon), it’ll set you back about $1500 total, but then you’ll know the truth. You would have a better argument talking about the earth being hollow to some degree. Peace, Honest.
At 35,000 ft you can not see the earth’s curve. All you see is the curve of the horizon. At 35,000 ft the horizon is only about 230 miles out, no way to see the earth’s curve. Even at the height of the space station, 250 miles, the horizon is just over 1,500 miles out. You can’t see the earth’s curve on the space station either, all you see is the curve of the horizon.
https://www.quora.com/At-what-altitude-do-you-see-the-curvature-of-the-Earth
Honest AZ, the problem with arguing that we are moving within earths frame of reference, is that that argument directly contradicts coriolis force in its manifestations regarding everything from storm/weather mechanics to bullet/missile trajectories. It’s does nothing but build mistrust and confusion because the application of the frame of reference becomes arbitrary depending on the desired answer. You want to take extremely long shots with a rifle, suddenly coriolisd is needed. Want to explain the spin of low and high pressure systems above and below the equator, coriolis is the cause. You want to know how far off course a 747 will be after 10 hours of straight flight…well, it doesn’t exist for 747’s. How come Felix Baumgartners balloon drifted the way it did…yeah, again, no coriolis to be found.
Bryan, you don’t understand. There is no detectible difference between a stationary earth with everything rotating around it and a rotating earth with things relatively stationary around it. The relative motion is the same either way. The rotational force that causes your coriolis effect is there in both cases. There is no difference, no way you can determine, if the earth is rotating or the plants, sun, moon, starts and constellations are rotating around the earth. Relatively the motion is the same, the forces are the same, the Coriolis effect is the same.
The only way you could find out what is actually happening is if you could get outside the whole system, and observe it from a vantage point outside the system. But you can not do that. So right now you can not determine if you are on a stationary earth with things rotating around it or if you are on a rotating earth with things more-or-less stationary around it.
I do understand. That’s why Einsteins relativity can work. You can fix anything as static, and then everything else moves around it. That’s easy. But what I was getting at is that coriolis is arbitrarily cited…it exists when someone needs it, and thennn…. it doesn’t exist when it’s not needed. It has been conclusively proven that coriolis has nothing to do with the rotation of water in either hemisphere: it’s pressure, external forces like drag, temperature…some or maybe all of those to some degree. The atmosphere doesn’t rotate uniformly “around” the earth either. At different latitudes it moves in different directions at different speeds. Yet, it just seems to be accepted as working despite the logical contradictions presented by an earth that rotates uniformly in one direction. The current earth science paradigm is rubbish, it’s concocted.
You say to Bryan :
“The only way you could find out what is actually happening is if you could get outside the whole system, and observe it from a vantage point outside the system. ”
If Bryan flies over the mentioned continents that are now called “south-pole” then he would be outside the system having a view of the system.
I’m only saying He Could Observe The System if them MIS-leaders of the world wouldn’t shoot his plane down 😉
Maybe, but it is a long way and there is no plane that Bryan could take that would have enough fuel to go there and come back. So even if he does not get shot down we would probably never see him again…
Honest A like i said any explanation would sound stupid like a spoon stiring coffee really how does that rise up with a tremendous force holding it down ???? Air in balloon lighter think about what you say if there is a tremenduos force (gravity) holding cars rocks baseballs golfballs dogs cat us etcetera from flying off this globe spinning at the supposive 1000 mph you proof my point the balloon is lighter than all these but it is not held by gravity si i rises up if gravity was responsible for stop all the other items i mention from flying off how the hell is something so light not held down by gavity read post again then think before you comment like i said science is bullshit so when u answer with scientific explanation it sounds stupd spoon stirry coffee ? Are you a science idiot they can not except anything that makes since because it only proofs the suck
Wow…. all that I have witnessed in my twenty years with NASA….so I faked it and didn’t tell myself? Too much time on your hands folks!
Hey Gary. It’s hard work and effort to unravel the truth from lies. It’s wrong to dismiss eother side of this argument. Clearly, you working at NASA provides you with valuable insight into whatever area you worked in. The problem arises when someone dismisses everything NASA related as fake or everything NASA related as 100% real. It ís abundantly clear that NASA fakes imagery and claims it to be real. It goes without saying that NASA has said unequivocally that they sent men via rockets to the moon and back. There are many, many anomalies with regard to the logisitics of these journeys as well as the imagery and tangible goods related to the Apollo program. Aside from that, there is the direct evidence that founding nasa scientists and their entourage were war criminals (Von Braun), occultists (LRon Hubbard & Jack Parsons) and secret socoety members (Walt Disney) involved in the propagandra industry….so, at face value there are trust issues. It is likely that very much of it is real, the question is how much of it? Look, lots of hollywood sets are real and tamgible, but it doesn’t mean the movie is real or true.
G’day,
I certainly wouldn’t want to defame anyone that was an employee of nasa. They are only told what they need to know. The same with the general public. So to say they were all in on the lies, is probably not true. The way I got onto Flat
Earth was to see how nasa was faking space travel eg. wearing harnesses to emulate floating and using green screens.etc There’s an excellent series on YouTube, called Faking Space.
Travelling to the moon and sun is possible, because they’re within the Firmament. That brings up the other questions, how does our air stop being sucked out into the vacuum of space. The Firmament obviously holds it in. A ball spinning at 1000 mph or roughly, just doesn’t make sense. When ypu have volcanoes spewing smoke straight up, it should be like a steam train, trailing behind it. Also migrating birds would be thrown off course. Planes that stay level for their whole journey, not dipping for a curvature. The questions are endless !
Well Mac, it is obvious from your questions that you have not put nearly enough thought into answering them yourself. These questions are simplistic at best, utterly ridiculous at their core. 1000 mph is almost motionless when we are talking about something as large as the earth. A basketball spinning 1000 mph has will have millions and millions of revolutions in 24 hours, but the earth will only spin 1 (one) time in the same 24 hours at 1000 mph. Spin that same basketball 1 time in 24 hours and you are completely unable to detect any movement what so ever. When a plane or bird takes off from the ground it is motionless relative to the ground, meaning the object is traveling at the same exact speed, in the same direction as the ground. No matter which direction an object takes off from relative to its ground state, only the objects motion is to be taken into account. If an object takes off at 10 mph to the west, its already going 1000 mph backwards with the spin of the earth. So, relative to the earth, the object is traveling only 10 mph, not 990 mph backwards. Same goes with taking off to the east, it still is only traveling 10 mph relative to the earth, not 1010 mph forward. I think your reference to some youtube video is the biggest issue as to why you lack actual answers to these questions you pose. You need to seek education and answers to these silly questions in a place where those who teach actually have credentials, such as colleges, and or other places of higher learning. These kinds of ridiculous questions only prove my point in that most if not all flat earthers lack a basic understanding of physics. So what if the earth appears flat to our human senses, we see that it is a sphere using our technologically advanced tools. There is no debate about the shape of the rock we live on, only about the lack of scientific literacy common among those people who claim it is flat. Litterally thousands of data points that show a globe and not one serious point otherwise. And please don’t claim the questions possed so far are anything but silly. You only show your lack of brain power, or to put it in a nicer way, you show your lack of following an inquiry all the way to the only possible conclusion, you commit the sin of accepting the first apparent conclusion you come upon instead of discarding any and all conclusions that leave unanswered questions in it’s wake. If you still have questions then you have failed to find real knowledge.
So, a computer generated image of earth is a fake image huh? Lol. Watch this:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mxhxL1LzKww
Only 24 people have been far enough away from the earth to see it’s full disc without having to turn their head from side to side.
Even from the space station you only see a fraction of the earth’s disc.
Come on folks, think for a change!
Hey Allen. Computer generated is by definition com[uter generated. Is it based on real data that accurately represents reality? Maybe. Maybe not. NASA claims that they have real photohraphs of earth from the moon, taken on actual film. Yup, regular old old camera film in a hassleblad camera…extreme cold did nothing to the film or camera apparently. Anyhow, in the earthrise photo taken by apollo astronauts, there is an image artefact [a box]around the earth, how is that? There are also ‘images’, claimed to be single image captures of the moon transiting in front of the earth, the same ditigal artefacts are present in the raw images. Hard for nasa to claim it is a raw single image and yet it is an obvious composite.
“HEY” Bryan? Who cares? CGI does not mean fake whether you want it to be so or not. As I said, think for a change. Flat earth makes absolutely no sense, at least not if you’re able to reason properly. A globe earth, in a heliocentric solar system makes perfect sense. At least if one has an IQ above 120. Please, using a flat earth system, tell us exactly when the next lunar eclipse is going to occur? The next solar eclipse? That is the reason we make fun of flat earthers. They don’t reason properly!
You have a good point of course, globe earth model can explain virtually everything we see happening in the sky very convincingly. Flat earthers have no idea whatsoever how to explain anything really. What to speak of solar and lunar eclipses, they can’t even explain how day and night happen on their flat earth map and get it to line up with our observed reality…
Flat earth facts, yes, I do understand your point of view and as far as you say we need to think outside the box sometimes otherwise advancements in science are not possible. Very true but much like things such as when we drop in ball from our hands it will usually fall towards the ground, when we study the data about the shape of this planet it usually if not always points towards a round spinning revolving Rock. I would however like to understand where it is you come to the conclusion that the moon landings were fake. [… incomprehensible gobbley gook…]
There is no need to discuss it here. You obviously have not studied the Apollo moon missions, otherwise you would not be asking. So there is plenty of material out there. Study it yourself. Someone who is claiming the Apollo moon missions were real is not a thoughtful person, not a scientist, not intelligent. You will not find any big NASA scientist or official NASA spokesman making any claims about them sending men to the moon in the 1960’s. No thoughtful person could accept such rubbish. So please study it yourself and come to your own informed conclusion.
So what makes moon landings fake? The fact that you think it’s fake?
What makes you think the moon landings are true?
All you have is the story told by NASA. That is all anyone has.
There is no way you can know if the moon landings are true or not.
You just have blind religious faith in NASA. That’s all.
I have investigated NASA’s claims and so-called evidence and if you also actually investigate you will be able to conclusively prove that the moon landings were faked by NASA. There is ample evidence of this. But you have not investigated it. You just have blind religious faith in your gods at NASA.
Why fake it? You just automatically distrust anything that is said by scientists or the government.
Yes, that is the intelligent approach. We should automatically distrust anything said by scientists and the government. Government, of course, politicians, they always lie. That you can determine from the history quite easily. And scientists, they very often lie also, but also they are very often mistaken.
So yes, an intelligent person will want to see proof. Not that we just blindly believe what the government and the scientists say. That is a very dangerous position to take.
But I am not at all unreasonable. If they can prove earth is a globe I will accept it.
I admit they have made a good case for the earth being a spinning globe, and have given us a good working model, that allows us to logically explain our observations, based on the premise that we are on a spinning globe.
But they have not given us any proof that we are on a spinning globe.
You are correct, if we could go out far enough away and take a look, that would be proof. But we can’t go any higher than 60 miles, at least with 2021 technology…
So until we can go up 20,000 or 50,000 miles and then look back, we have no proof.
I note you posted then deleted “Flat Earth Facts has just written a new comment on “Proof the Earth is Flat”. Here an excerpt:
David, show me the technology that allows men to go up 20,000 or 50,000 miles and look back and see the shape of the earth??? NASA admits they can not send people out of low earth orbit. Due to many yet to be resolved problems. Low earth orbit is as…”
Because you realised you have blown your cover yet again.
I didn’t delete it. And you can’t answer it.
Look guy, last time i had my iq tested officially in 7th grade it was 147. So I pass your first test. I didn’t claim CGI = fake. But, when NASA claims to take single image unaltered pictures and those pictures show digital editing artifacts, then NASA has a credibility problem, not Bryan. Civilizations long before globe earth theory came about were accurately predicting eclipses, planetary conjunctions, etc., so do you deny history and archaeology? You are trying to equate reason with accepting indoctrination. No thanks.
“A ball spinning at 1000 mph or roughly, just doesn’t make sense.”
Really? It doesn’t? Try this at home. The earth takes 24 hours to make a full rotation. Take a basketball, place an ant on it, now spin the basketball one complete rotation in 24 hours. Does the ant fall off? No! The speed of the basketball’s spin is equivalent to that of earth’s. One thousand miles an hour is nothing when you understand the sizes involved! A flat earther telling us what makes sense and what doesn’t is hilarious! Yes I’m making fun!
Exactly my point, most flat earthers have a hard time comprehending the size and magnitude of our planet, our solar system, our galaxy, and our universe. Because we humans evolved to only necessarily think on the scales of the grassy Savannahs were we spent out infancy, it’s hard for us to think beyond our intuition. When you pose a scenario to people who have little ability to imagine things beyond their previous experiences, where they need to contemplate the vastness of this universe, people have a very hard time stepping out of their comfort zone. These kinds of thoughts confuse those of us who are scientifically illiterate. When we use only our intuition to deduce facts about our surroundings, we usually make mistakes because our intuition fails us time and time again. Of course the earth appears flat to us, we are tiny compared to the earth. Of course we believe we are at the center of rhe universe because it appears that way. However, since we have developed instruments and technologies that do not rely on our intuition, we have discovered that we are usually wrong. We cannot rely on our 5 senses to come to concrete conclusions about reality, we need extra senses to actually know for sure that we are correct or incorrect about reality. Keep up the deep thoughts,
Hi Jerry. You left your logic somewhere far away. You have to use your faulty senses to perceive the readings of your instruments. Hens your readings are going to be just as faulty as the observations you make with your five senses. But you have a good point. We can’t comprehend the world around us with our five senses. So we make stories to try and make sense out of it. The globe earth story, for example, the flat earth story for another example. The reality, however, may be something completely different.
Yet one “story” makes sense, and can used mathematically to determine stellar phenomenon such as eclipses. The other “story” is just that, a story with no semblance of sense to it!
Yes Allen I agree totally. The globe earth story is a very good story, it does make sense and does make accurate predictions as you state. You are completely correct. If one wants a logical, well thought-out and intellectually satisfying story to describe the workings of the universe, then all we have is the globe earth story. But my point is that yes, it is a good story, but there is no guarantee that the reality exactly matches our story. There could be another story that makes sense and generates accurate predictions based on different assumptions. Like I have mentioned we presume earth is rotating, that is causing the movement of the heavenly bodies we observe in the sky, another story could presume that the heavenly bodies are rotating in the sky and the earth is not rotating. And you could make a story that is just as satisfying and convincing based on that premise. So my point is we don’t know actually the real situation.
If you want proof then just look at earth from far enough away. Or look at my name.
Yes. This is the problem. Looking at your name proves nothing. And we can’t get far enough away from the earth to look back.
The great fabulous advance in USA’s space travel program is sending some rich men up 60 miles and looking down from there.
That is like looking down at a 8000 inch basketball from 60 inches up. So 800 inch basket ball from 6 inches up. Really a basket ball is about 12 inches so. 12/800 * 60 = .9 inches.
So it is like being one inch above a basketball and looking down. So you won’t be able to see much. And you won’t be able to tell if it is a ball or if it is flat or if it is something else.
So that is the problem. We can only get 60 miles up and look down.
Now if we could get, say 20,000 miles up and look down, or 50,000 miles up and look down, then we would be able to see.
But we can’t.
The most fabulous modern 2021 cutting edge technology only allows us to go up 60 miles…
“So that is the problem. We can only get 60 miles up and look down.” Who told you that lie?
“Now if we could get, say 20,000 miles up and look down, or 50,000 miles up and look down, then we would be able to see.” We have done, so why are you being dishonest?
“But we can’t.” Yes we can.
“The most fabulous modern 2021 cutting edge technology only allows us to go up 60” No it doesn’t
David, show me the technology that allows men to go up 20,000 or 50,000 miles and look back and see the shape of the earth???
NASA admits they can not send people out of low earth orbit. Due to many yet to be resolved problems.
Low earth orbit is as far as we can go, according to NASA. So who are you to disagree?
Hi flat earth facts, yes you always have good points it’s obvious you’re not an idiot and that you choose to reserve your position until, I guess what, more facts come in? I’m not sure how you think there may be some other possibility. Well actually there may in fact be a different possibilities than Flat Earth, Round earth, hollow Earth, donut Earth, all that stuff but the facts and evidence as we see them point towards a certain thing and away from other things. So I mean the evidence for Round earth, all of it points towards a round earth. is. I can in fact prove myself that the earth is round there are several things that I can do to show you that earth is around. I mean because the Earth is tilted on it’s axis we can be in two different spots on the planet at two different days and measure the shadow from a stick when the sun’s directly overhead and that’s proof, proof by way of looking at a ship that disappears bottom up when veiw from land thats on the water, I’m not really understanding why these aren’t good enough proofs for you to prove to yourself that the earth is round and not flat. I mean what would it take for you to make the distinction of the shape of the earth being round and not flat and not some other shape? Would you have to actually leave the planet Earth and look back at it from a distance? Would that convince you that it’s round and not something else? Well humanity has done that already but if you don’t accept the pictures, the evidence, the testimony of millions, the millions of data points that show that we are a spacefaring species then I’m not sure how you could ever prove any alternate kind of shape for the earth, If you don’t accept the evidence that we can show you and you reserve your decision for later, that just means that you will never accept a position as being right or wrong one way the other as far as the way you accept evidence. Now don’t get me wrong, no disrespect whatsoever, I think you’re a very intelligent writer I give you props for standing up to the possibilities that something else is true, but as we see it now there is no other possibility, it’s firm, it’s clear, it’s obvious that we can say for sure 99.999% sure that the Earth is round. So to take that 0.001% chance that the Earth is something other than what we perceive it to be is to take the position from non-existing or no evidence whatsoever. Anyway I would advise you to go ahead and make a decision on what you actually believe because the alternative can’t be proven, so if you believe some alternatives you can never prove it. The only thing that we can prove for a fact is the shape of our planet is round. Anyway, keep thinking deeply.
Yes. Your points are very good and almost all the tests confirm the hypothesis that the earth is a ball. But not all of them. But that is because it is the generally accepted story, it is a very well developed story and a story we are told from birth to death. It is just the way we have come up with for describing our reality. Yes. It might be true as you say, but I am keeping my options open as I do have some information from a reliable source detailing the structure of the universe, etc, which also I do not completely understand, but which describes the reality we experience in quite a different way. For example in that description the earth is stationary and everything it moving around the earth. It gives a very reasonable description of how this works, the mechanical arrangements, etc. And I realise that we would have no way of knowing actually, if it was the earth rotating or if it was everything else rotating around the earth. It is not something we can find out because we are within the system, we can detect the relative motion but we can not determine if it is the earth rotating or if it is things rotating around the earth.
There are so many points like that. We can not tell actually, but we have accepted a certain story and developed that story in a very detailed way and have come to consider that story actual fact.
So I am absolutely sure that things are not exactly as we believe them to be, exactly how different they are, that only time will tell.
Of course if we could actually fly out far enough (10,000 miles+) and look back that would be proof. And there should be no problem providing such proof. At least for rich people they should be able to take a ride out there and look back. But they can’t. There is no proof actually that anyone has ever been out of low earth orbit.
So let us wait for them to work out how to get men out of low earth orbit and when they can do it then they will be able to take pictures and we will all know…
“David, show me the technology that allows men to go up 20,000 or 50,000 miles and look back and see the shape of the earth???” We did it, or are you denying Sputnik, Gagarin, Jodrell, Vostok, Woomera, the Apollo missions, all the other USSR. Russian, USA, EU, Japan, PRC and Indian missions to the Moon, Mars, Venus and beyond? All of them? If you are you need verifiable proof none of them happened, so come on, demander of proof, where is yours?
“NASA admits they can not send people out of low earth orbit. ” No they don’t.
“Due to many yet to be resolved problems.” but they could risk it but why bother for just repeating something that has already been accomplished?
“Low earth orbit is as far as we can go, according to NASA. ” What did you miss out all the qualifiers. Only liars do that.
“So who are you to disagree?” Given the qualifiers, which you wilfully ignored, I don’t disagree. You are yet again playing semantics, just like the Flat Earth cultists et al do.
No one has ever claimed to do it, send people out of low-earth orbit, only NASA with the Apollo missions. And yes. NASA’s Apollo missions were absolutely faked. Every thoughtful person knows that. Please be honest enough to watch this video:
https://youtu.be/ePvBRA9P5As
If you actually watch this you will be 100% convinced of the fact that all the Apollo missions ever did was to go up into low-earth orbit and then land at the appropriate time.
So yes. The Apollo missions were absolutely faked and no man has ever left low-earth orbit so no man has ever been able to observe the globe earth. So it is NOT an observable fact that the earth is a globe.
It is a theory. And there are other possibilities. But, if we can actually go to the moon, etc, in the future and observe it, then it would be an observable fact. However so far no one has observed it.
And yes. Everyone follows the Americans. So as America is faking space, then other countries will also naturally follow America and fake space also.
Now put a teaspoon of water on the ball, to represent an ocean. SPIN IT , hmmm. Any oceans on your Wilson after 1 rotation?
The basketball doesn’t have enough gravity to hold the water onto it so earth pulls it down. If yo did that about 100000000000 miles away from anything and you used a bigger,non hollow ball then the water would stay on.
It is true that we just believe what we are taught, if we were taught the earth was not spinning and someone told us it was spinning we would laugh at them and call them a fool.
However, to give credit where credit is due, the scientists, and the proponents of the spinning globe earth model have presented a very good working predictive scientific model which does predict with a very great deal of accuracy our observations. On the other hand flat earth people do not have any agreed on model even, so, presuming the earth is flat, they have not way to predict or explain anything we see happening in the sky, etc.
So a thoughtful person, analyzing the available information, would have to admit we have a good case for a spinning globe earth and we have not got any case at all for a flat stationary earth.
That is the point. If the flat earthers had a model, if they could explain how it works, if they could explain anything at all… They would have to have a scientific predictive model at least as good as the globe earth model… Otherwise is is just blind fait in a belief system.
Globe earth model is more than that. It is a belief system, and yes, it is not proven absolutely, but they have got a very well developed logical and consistent working scientific model which is quite persuasive and most thoughtful persons can become fairly confident the earth is a spinning globe upon studying and testing the model…
“Your points are very good and almost all the tests confirm the hypothesis that the earth is a ball.”
Really? Which tests don’t confirm the “hypothesis”? Do they really not confirm or do you just not understand the outcomes of the tests?
I really am interested in knowing which tests you’re referring to.
There are many examples of being able to see things in the distance which should not be visible on a ball of the said dimensions, for example.
But that is not my point, my point is that even if you have a very good story [model] that does make very good predictions there is no guarantee that your story is exactly reflecting the reality. The reality still may be different, even if you have a very good model that predicts very well. For example I have given the possibility of the rotation not being the earth rotating but the objects rotating around the earth. It is the same rotation, relatively speaking, and from within the system we can’t tell what is rotating.
So there is no difference in our observations either way, therefore you can choose either option and create an equally good model either way. But the reality? That we can not determine from within the system.
Which is why Mankind has ventured out of the system, placing cameras and other instruments far outside the Earth’s atmosphere. But you’re wrong about the Earth’s rotation not being detectible from an earthbound experiment. It’s been done already, just last year.
So why not describe the experiment and explain how it proves the earth is rotating. Actually you can not prove it. That is the point. You can detect a rotation, but you can’t show if it is the earth rotating or if it is everything rotating around the earth. There is certainly a rotation and we can detect the rotation, but we can not determine from within the system if the rotation is the earth of if it is the things rotating around the earth. We just can’t know this. Because there is no difference in the effect.
I think that it’s pretty obvious when you look at a time lapse picture of the north star and another of the southern cross, and see the circles that all the stars make, that we’re the ones rotating. How would that work, two distinct sets of circles, if it were the stars rotating? Wouldn’t there just be one big set of circles?
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=uq+93pHo&id=9B35B44972A2226C5E2DF26D443FFB510D6A26B1&thid=OIP.uq-93pHoIa8HXmqY3sEPbgHaD4&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Flh3.googleusercontent.com%2Fproxy%2FIiWus0BeWtpZhcdorH5JBevGdSqUpx7KRhuP6LKGPX8eenwXX4saCm6hJBEFWoZFBsd7xquQf5XWzgD-tzr73vF1XfhAphJS%3Dw1200-h630-pd&exph=630&expw=1200&q=northern+star+time+lapse&simid=608011415246538433&ck=937211548B45E8DB665B2CF71945F8F7&selectedindex=9&form=EX0023&adlt=off&shtp=GetUrl&shid=476e50e5-e7e7-41d5-a3ee-ed92ba992901&shtk=VGltZSBMYXBzZSBQaG90b3MgT2YgTm9ydGggUG9sZSAtIHRpbWUgbGFwc2U%3D&shdk=Rm91bmQgb24gQmluZyBmcm9tIHRpbWVsYXBzZWtleS5ibG9nc3BvdC5jb20%3D&shhk=Q2AN34SPWBRPm3Tq5u%2FvE63yo1Loeu0I7Mmkg4GWp74%3D&shth=OSH.Sd5LlLNjbZz2t9wxEfjV3A
https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=2y573MDW&id=F6E3BE05843045042B4BBD8EE9E555946CC9B2B0&thid=OIP.2y573MDWGMKEgnJxy12SWwHaEK&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2F8w3n-s9i7WQ%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&exph=720&expw=1280&q=southern+cross+time+lapse&simid=608004650603776253&ck=2D10D944EE2FF7FFE402F88CE48F7099&selectedindex=14&form=EX0023&adlt=off&shtp=GetUrl&shid=fea7f79c-5df3-4a5c-86ae-71b17081f3e3&shtk=U291dGhlcm4gQ2VsZXN0aWFsIFBvbGUgdGltZWxhcHNlIC0gWW91VHViZQ%3D%3D&shdk=Rm91bmQgb24gQmluZyBmcm9tIHd3dy55b3V0dWJlLmNvbQ%3D%3D&shhk=i4j3t51F2JqR2svcR%2Fg2JgPSlv355vK9bkdczzQrw8w%3D&shth=OSH.XOjO8p%252B4hVyMEDowpVvEng
No. You could set up a rotating system of stars around a stationary earth and achieve exactly the same result and we would not be able to tell the difference. Michael is telling us light bends so that is why we can see things that should be hidden by the curve of the earth, so if we are to believe Michael and light does bend then we can’t believe anything we see anyhow.
There is no way you actually think that every star in the known universe is orbiting around the earth? How actually deluded are you? Of the 60 sextillion known starts every single one rotates around earth? The absolute mental gymnastics that you have to go through to think the earth is flat is astounding. Do you have mental issues?
Not exactly. This is coming from a model I have seen but do not completely understand. In this model the whole universe is only four billion miles across and earth is in the center and the stars are more-or-less projected on mirrors around the outside. So this model describes a system which could produce the visual experience we get, using a system that is totally different from what we understand alltogether. But no light year distances, the stars are not other suns, the earth is stationary and in the center, etc, etc, etc. Totally different from what we believe but still capable of describing and predicting all our observations just as well as the globe earth story.
So the reality is we don’t actually know anything about the size of the universe, the distance of the stars, where the stars are even, if we believe Michael’s bending light theory, etc. We have just guessed these things and over the years come to believe that our guesses are facts…
So there is a model that provides a very logical explanation as to how all the stars can appear to rotate around the earth. Actually it is more-or-less a projection of stars, the actual stars are somewhere completely different from where their reflections appear. The stars are not actually rotating around the earth but they appear to because of the projection system. From earth we see the projection, not the actual stars.
But the details don’t matter as much as the point that we really have no idea actually what is going on. We have come up with a story and tell that story, but we don’t know actually if our story has any relation at all to the actual reality.
My point is that other stories about the universe that are equally believable and consistent can also be told and who is to say which story is the correct one that describes the actual reality? What makes us think that the story NASA and the scientists tell us is the “true” story. Of course they think it is the true story, but there are many other possible stories, all equally possible, but only one of the stories reflects the actual reality.
Read this:
https://physicsworld.com/a/optical-gyroscope-on-a-chip-can-detect-earths-rotation/
Then explain why you believe the Earth is a fixed plane while all other observable objects not only rotate daily around the Earth, but also move in independent directions. If everything we see are just lights on a rigid, transparent dome, how does the Moon change its positions with respect to the stars each night? The distant stars themselves are not in fixed positions, but they’re moving in relation to one another as seen from Earth, but over long timespans, sometimes longer than a human lifetime to noticeably move.
Then you’ll have to explain retrograde motion in planets observed from Earth, such as Mercury and Mars. You’ll also have to account for the movements of asteroids and comets. It sounds extremely outlandish to have every object in the Universe in motion EXCEPT for the Earth. I mean, why is this so impossible for you to wrap your head around?
Yes. It is very difficult to wrap our heads around an alternative view. I understand your points. We have been trained so extensively in this world-view that it is almost impossible to consider there could be any alternative view.
It is because of your current beliefs of how the universe is that you can not conceive that everything else could be moving. Actually I could not conceive either, I, like you, still have great difficulty conceiving a different system. But I have seen a description of a different model, and it is COMPLETELY different from what we believe.
You only can not conceive anything else because you don’t have another working model. If someone explained to you another logical working model that also explains these things then you could conceive it.
Yes. Of course, there are two rotations we observe, one is the 24 hour rotation we believe is caused by the rotation of the earth, the other is the 365 day rotation that we believe is caused by the earth moving around the sun. As you note the moon, planets, etc, they are also moving because with these rotations but they have their own independent movements also so the planets, for example, are seen in different constellations at different times. So they are moving with the whole system but at the same time they have independent movement. The planets are described as being like ants walking around on a rotating potters wheel. Stars, on the other hand, remain in their fixed positions on the wheel.
So this is the basis of the alternative model. These two rotations are not caused by the earth, they are caused by a big structure rotating around the earth. It is not a dome, it is a 3D structure rotating. And not everything is fixed but everything is moving with the whole system.
So this is the model and it can explain everything we see happening in the sky just as well as the globe earth model including the retrograde motion of the planets, etc.
And it is not just the earth that is not rotating. Earth is only a very very tiny part of a huge non-rotating plane. It is almost incomprehensible to try to conceive of the size of the non-rotating section. It is huge and earth is very tiny. So there is a huge plane, of which the earth is only a tiny part, with this whole manifestation of the sky going on above it.
That is the alternative model. Of course more detail is required, but it can perfectly explain everything we observe and be used to predict the exact occurrences of things like solar and lunar eclipses, etc.
So the details, at this moment, are not that important. It is important to understand that it is possible to scientifically and logically propose another model that works at least as well as the globe earth model starting with completely different premises as to how the universe works.
My point is we don’t know if the globe earth model is correct. It is a nice model, a nice story, but it is only one story, it is the only story we know, however it could be that other stories could be told also that are equally good but describe the things in totally different ways.
” but you can’t show if it is the earth rotating or if it is everything rotating around the earth. ”
Observed proof of rotation. Trade winds, TRS, gyroscopes and gyrocompasses, ocean currents, weather patterns and so on.
Foucault pendulum: http://www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au/jw/foucault_pendulum.html
Coriolis & water: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXaad0rsV38
Stellar aberration: https://www.coursera.org/learn/einstein-relativity/lecture/6QX91/stellar-aberration
Stellar parallax: http://www.math.nus.edu.sg/aslaksen/gem-projects/hm/0506-1-16-Parallax.pdf
Doppler effect: http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/Cyberia/Bima/doppler.html
The Sagnac effect: http://www.wettzell.ifag.de/LKREISEL/G/LaserGyros.html
Weight variation due to latitude: https://youtu.be/CkhxPm15PFo
David, you are unable to think, you are stuck on one theory, your mind is paralyzed by your strong belief in that one theory. This is a general problem with science. The scientists get a pet theory and become myopic on that, they search for evidence to support their pet theory and refuse to acknowledge anything that may question or contradict your theory.
So you are presenting actual evidence that we are experiencing rotation. And there is no question, there is a rotational force involved in the system. Everyone agrees with that.
But there are two ways to generate the identical rotational force. One way is to have the object itself rotating, and the other way is to have the object stationary and have the system rotate around the object.
So either system will generate exactly the same result.
And from within the system all we can do is choose a reference point and calculate the motions of the other objects in the system relative to that reference point.
But from within the system we can not determine actually what is rotating and what is stationary.
So it is simply not possible for you, from within the system, to determine what is rotating and what is stationary.
So it is quite valid to consider the earth as being stationary and to calculate the movements of the other objects in the system in relation to a stationary earth.
The only way anyone could determine what is actually happening would be to get outside the system, and observe the system from a point outside the system.
And we are unable to do that. So we don’t know. And we can’t find out. Both a rotating earth and a stationary earth with a rotating system around it are equally valid theories.
The distance when travelling 10˚ due east or west parallel to the equator.
At 60˚N or S the distance is 300 nm or 555.8 km. Personal experience.
At 30˚N or S the distance is 520 nm or 962.3 km. Personal experience.
On the Equator the distance is 600 nm or 1111.2 km. Personal experience.
For correcting sextant altitudes for the Earth’s curvature the formulae are;
Dip = 0.97 x Square Root (Ht of Eye in feet). Personal experience.
Dip = 1.76 x Square Root (Ht of Eye in metres). Personal experience.
Also magnetic compasses only function because of the earth’s magnetic field, which only exists as it is because the earth is spherical. There is no such thing as a mono-pole magnet in nature. Only people who have actually worked with them or studied their development know this. I have done both. Not a single FE cultist has done either. Not a single one. Never. Not a one. Personal experience.
Gyrocompasses only work because the Earth is slowly rotating and gravity is a fact. Only people who have actually worked with them or studied their development know this. I have done both. Not a single FE cultist has done either. Not a single one. Never. Not a one. Personal experience.
You need to explain these things properly in a properly written and illustrated article.
The way you are writing here is unintelligible. You can not just write “personal experience” and presume that others will accept it. You have to explain it properly and clearly in simple english that anyone can understand.
You are just writing unintelligible meaningless out of context things. It may make sense to you, you might understand what you are saying, but no one else will. So it is useless. Unless you write in a way the audience can understand and comprehend what you are saying it is pointless for me to post what you write.
If you can actually document the things you are saying properly it is nice. But I think you are saying things that you have not personally actually done. For example how and when did you measure the distance at 60 degrees N and S and come up with 300 NM at both times. When were you there and how did you measure it? You can’t just say these things without any substantiation.
And what are these crazy formulas? Dip = .97 x Square Root of Height of the eye in feet???? You have not got any distance in your formula, so it will not work, it is just rubbish writing numbers in the hope of confusing people and in the hope that people will think you are a brilliant mathematical genius and therefore accept the earth is a globe. These are rubbish formulas, at least as you have presented them.
Also totally nonsense statements you inject as if they were facts “Earth’s magnetic field only exists because the earth is spherical????” In which universe is it that magnetic fields can only be generated by spheres???? Not in the universe I am in…. This is just rubbish, nonsense, not any better than the nonsense flat earth ramblings.
Other rubbish “Gyrocompasses only work because the earth is slowly rotating…” You don’t know that. The earth may be stationary and the system may be rotating around the earth. You have to accept that is also a valid scientific explanation and would result in the same effect.
So of course we know you are personally convinced the earth is a globe. But that is a completely different thing to proving the earth is a rotating globe floating in space.
You have to accept not everyone shares your belief system and if you are to convince others of your belief system then you need to explain it properly in simple english that they can understand.
Not just rant and rave and write half-baked things that might mean something to you, but are totally incoherent to others.
“Michael is telling us light bends so that is why we can see things that should be hidden by the curve of the earth, so if we are to believe Michael and light does bend then we can’t believe anything we see anyhow.”
Yet another false equivalency and serious disingenuity.
David, think before you write. This is a very valid point. The only way that the globe earthers can explain the contradictory observations, being able to see objects at a distance, which if we were actually on a globe 8000 miles in diameter, would be hidden behind the curve, is “Light bends around the curve.”
Globe earthers typically deny this in the beginning, then the thoughtful ones investigate it and find that it is actually true, we can see further than we should be able to see on a globe of the said dimensions.
So they then have to use the “light bends around the curve” arguments. Because if we were on a globe there would be no other way to see things that are hidden by the curve.
So it means, to explain the observable reality, which contradicts the theory that we are on a globe, they have to say we are not actually seeing properly. The light is bending around the curve.
So that destroys everything, because all the globe earth ideas are based on our sense perception. And there is the presumption that when we see something, it is actually where we see it. But if we have to believe light bends to make things that should be hidden behind the curve visible, then we can not trust anything that we see with our eyes. Because, if light bends, the thing may be in a completely different place to where it appears to be to our eyes.
So don’t just dismiss things because they may go against your preconceived ideas.
The idea of this site is to actually think about things. Not to just regurgitate either flat earth or globe earth ideas we have got from others.
Hi Flat Earth,Facts, so yes, you are correct in that nothing can ever be 100% knowable and true as far as we as human beings can say for sure, without any possibility otherwise, that we know any kind of knowledge fully and completely. There always exist knowledge that we are not privy to because everything that we can claim in science, as theory, must be in some way falsifiable. But a lot of people have a hard time with this kind of concept. […. so so many words snipped ….]
Hi Jerry. There’s no point writing so many words without saying anything. So if you want to say something say it in a paragraph or so so we can understand what you are saying. The point is actually we know very little and we have stories, stories passed down to us by scientists, they get refined and polished up over the years, but are still based on the original premises which may or may not be correct. Particularly about astronomy, the nature of the universe, creation, etc. Truly we have no idea. We only have these stories told by scientists which may or may not be true but which satisfy the people who think they must know, even though it is impossible for them to know by the scientific method. So we have the stories.
Ok Flat Earth Facts, thanks for listening, ive had my say, I can say no more on such a moronic subject such as this. We all know there is no debate over the shape of our planet or the facts about our place in this solar system, if some people refuse to accept the evidence as truthful, non-biased, provable, repeatable, peer reviewed facts then those people will never accept anything at face value. Sometimes you just must determine what’s more powerful, your intuition or technology and all the extra sensory data that allows us to see and know things that otherwise would be impossible. I choose to go with the best and simplest explanation that does not require me to do mental gymnastics to fit a somewhat silly notion into the space reserved for reality.
Thanks For listening, sorry if I pissed off some of the readers of your site.
Hi Jerry, thank you very much for your contributions to the discussion. Your view is shared by many, perhaps most, people. You have accepted what you have been taught without question and believe the “non-biased, provable, repeatable, peer reviewed facts” you have been indoctrinated with since birth.
And maybe the globe earth model is correct. Realistically it is a very good model, and there are so many accurate predictions it makes and experiments you can perform that appear to confirm it. And there is no other competing model. So I understand and respect your views and would probably have the same views myself.
The only thing is I have seen, but not really comprehended, another, quite different, model, and have no reason to believe this other model is not correct.
So this has caused me to question the current model. But I understand that others, like your good self, have no reason to question the current model.
So again, thank you very much for your input.
Flat earthers say they have evidence and stuff, but I guess they aren’t allowed to tell us about it. A few days ago I saw an article that said there was proof that earth is flat and there was no proof. I wish anyone had real proof s I could have a good argument.
Yes. I agree. Flat earth proofs are weak. But if you look at the globe earth proofs, they are also not conclusive.
That is the more interesting thing. Try to get a globe earther to prove the earth is a globe.
That is also a very difficult thing to do.
Yes. We do have a good model that explains everything quite logically presuming the earth is a globe. But when you boil it down all we have is the model, and it does quite accurately predict our observations of the system, however we really don’t know if the system is working in the same way as our globe earth model proposes it is.
Difference with the flat earth people is they don’t have a working model. They have no idea how the earth could be flat and at the same time allow us to observe what we see happening in the sky and how we are able to navigate around the “globe”.
So globe earth idea, it is a logical, scientific, theory. With a good predictive model. But still it is a model. We are very limited in our ability to observe the system. We are stuck here on the earth and gaze up into the sky and try to make sense out of it. Try to imagine what it is, out there in the sky, and what our position is within it all. But ultimately all we can see is some lights moving around in the sky.
And globe earth model is a very good way of proposing how it is working and what is our relationship within it. But it may not be correct.
For example, from within the system, we have no way of determining what is actually moving. We take a reference point and presume that is stationary and calculate other movements relative to that reference point. So forget the globe for the moment.
We presume the earth is rotating around the sun, we presume the sun is in the center. That is only an arbitrary choice. From within the system we can not tell. You can just as easily select the earth as your reference point and calculate everything as rotating around the earth. Both models are equally valid.
So it is only religion that decides if we are going to choose the sun or the earth as the center.
In previous times they chose the earth as the center, and that is completely valid, just as valid as choosing the sun as the center.
Some sun worshipers wanted to change it to the sun being in the center, but they only changed it because of their religion. It is equally valid scientifically and mathematically to consider the earth to be in the center.
The point is we don’t know actually. We can’t know. Because we are in the middle of a complex system and we can’t see much of how it is working. So all we can do is speculate and make some model. So yes, we have this globe earth model, it is a good model, but it may not be actually correct. It is the best, only really, working model we have at the moment.
That is the problem with the flat earthers, they have no working model…
Because of relativity, the sun could be moving around the earth. But that is more difficult to understand so we just use the sun as a fixed point.
Earth is indeed Round ( and Flat )!
Did you notice that your cited proof actually tried to claim the Vendee circumnavigated Antarctica whereas it never did and never claimed to, it co=ircimnavicated the globe.
Rick Potvin uses a pictorial representation from the Antarctica Cup Yacht Race and claims it is from the Vendee whereas they are entirely different races.
You will note the Vendee goes around Cape Agulhas (20˚E) and continues east to pass just south of Aus and Kiwi and on to Cape Horn (67˚W) staying north of Antarctica for the most part. The distance from Agulhas going east to Cape Horn is around 10,000 nautical miles
The race generally covers about 24,000 nautical miles which is 27,600 statute miles., not “only 23000 miles long”.
there is a Nobel prize waiting for anyone who can show that the earth is not round. Well it is not a perfect sphere but close enough that only very precise measurments made by advanced instruments can show the tiny bulge at the equator and slight variation here and there on the land masses.
Who’s up for beling the most famous person on earth and getting a huge cash prize that comes with the Nobel prize. Just think, with a Nobel, you’ll get asked to attend parties in your honor at billionaire’s houses and get paid to do talk shows and commercials, as well as get to meet all the rest of the Nobel winners.
Only the good life. All you have to do is do some good science in a way that can pass peer review and any and all tests and experiments that can be thrown at it and boom, you rich and famous. Lets do it together, make it a double Nobel.
I acylly think the earth is flat. Becuse there is non webbsite that provs that the earth is round.
But there is no website that proves the earth is flat????
This is the insanity of flat earthers.
Actually of course, as we have pointed out many times, the globe earth model is a very good model and presents a very good logical and scientific case for the globe earth model.
There are so many websites that logically and scientifically and quite convincingly present the globe earth model. But there is no such website anywhere which logically and scientifically presents any model based on the earth being flat.
So there is no reason actually, logically or scientifically, to believe the earth is flat. It is a belief, a religion, not founded on any logical or scientific basis.
My interest is different. I have seen a different model which I have no reason to believe is incorrect. And that very elaborate model describes the universe in very different ways to what we currently believe. So it is for this reason that I suspect the reality may be vastly different from what we currently believe.
So bacon there is no logic in your reasoning. True of course, there is no proof the earth is a globe, that is a fact, but that does not mean the earth is flat. So there is a problem with your logic Bacon.
“Actually of course, as we have pointed out many times, the globe earth model is a very good model and presents a very good logical and scientific case for the globe earth model.”
Correction, as you keep claiming. It is an observable fact. End of.
David it is not an observable fact that the earth is a globe. You can not observe it. No one can observe it.
This rocket they are sending up 60 miles and coming straight back down, that is US space state-of-the art technology.
Space station, etc. 100-200 miles up only.
So there is no way to observe it.
But it should be possible to observe from geostationary satellites, some 20,000 miles up. But they don’t provide us with any imagery.
The only imagery we get is from one GEOS satellite, not very believable and not even one image an hour.
We have NO REALTIME IMAGERY AT ALL from space of the spinning ball.
Why?
If we have thousands of geosynchronous satellites up there? Why not send down high definition realtime ball images from many different angles? That would be extremely useful for so many purposes.
But they seem unable to do it?
I am not opposed to the idea of the earth being a spinning ball David, and if it was an observable fact that the earth is a spinning ball, then I would be able to observe it. But it is not an observable fact.
You can not observe it. I can not observe it, and they don’t even provide us with believable imagery of it?
“My interest is different. I have seen a different model which I have no reason to believe is incorrect. And that very elaborate model describes the universe in very different ways to what we currently believe. So it is for this reason that I suspect the reality may be vastly different from what we currently believe.”
So why don’t you present it, as you have been asked?
I wish I could present the Vedic Model, but I don’t comprehend it sufficiently to present it at the moment. You can read about it in the Fifth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam:
https://prabhupadabooks.com/sb/5
I do have a section on it on this site and have written a few articles there:
https://flatearthfacts.com/vedic-model/
So you can check out the Bhagavatam and these articles.
The existence of a website doesn’t prove anything.
Have you actually studied flat earth? The globe earth model doesn’t work. There are so many holes in the spinning ball theory.
Hi John
Yes. I have studied flat earth and I have studied globe earth. There is no flat earth model. There is no science behind flat earth, flat earthers can not provide any explaination or model to show how, with a flat earth, we could, for example, see what we see in the sky. They can not even explain how the exact day and night works if the earth was flat. The most basic things, flat earthers do not agree on among themselves and can not explain.
Globe earth model, on the other hand, is clear, simple and universally accepted and is a very good scientific predictive model that does a very good job of explaining practically all our observations.
You say “the globe earth model doesn’t work.” Please be specific and let me know exactly what about the globe earth model does not work, and explain how the flat earth model [whatever that is??] works better.
“So this site is not for globe earthers who are stuck with the globe concept or flat earthers who are stuck with some dogma. It is for thinkers who want to exercise their minds and think outside the box, or the globe.” So you keep saying, but when I post something that exercises your mind you delete for spurious reasons. i.e. you are scared of the truth and are not prepared to think for yourself.
No David, I delete your posts when you just unthinkingly regurgitate things that you have heard.
I have posted quite a few of your comment’s today. So be thankful for that. And I have given you thoughtful replies.
And I have given you the chance to put all your ideas down in a properly written article: “Proof that the Earth is a Globe” and if you can come up with such an article that conclusively proves the earth is a globe and it is written in easy to understand english, I will post your article on the site and will approve all your comments on that article only.
So write the article. And submit the article. That is the next step.
“Have you actually studied flat earth?” No, because there is nothing to study. However I have studies the Flat Earth cult
“The globe earth model doesn’t work.” Yes it does. Try navigating long distances at sea.
There are so many holes in the spinning ball theory.”
So what are these “holes”, I have h-yet to find one.
Hi David, I hear you, yes, I agree, of course globe earth model works and there are not many holes in it. There were a lot of holes in the original ideas, but gradually, with the help of some of the greatest minds in history, they have been able to construct a model, by titling the earth, etc, that does quite accurately make predictions quite close to our actual observations.
My point is it is a model. We have observed the system from our very limited perspective and using the brains of these great thinkers and scientists, they have tried to imagine a mechanical system that could produce the things we observe happening in the sky and around us.
So this idea of a globe floating and rotating in space, that is someones imagination. Of course it is a very reasonable conjecture because we see, the planets, the sun, the moon, globes floating in space. So it is not unreasonable to propose, “As above, so below,” that we are also on a globe floating in space, just like the other globes floating in space.
But we don’t know that actually. We have constructed a valid scientific predictive model using this hypothesis.
That is my point. And I have seen a different model, based on completely different premises.
So I completely understand your position. You have a perfectly good, working model in the globe earth, and flat earth people have nothing. If you ask how it could work if the earth was a flat plane they just don’t know. They have no way of explaining how it could work. So they don’t have a working model, they are not scientific.
But, if another working model could be presented, based on completely different premises to the globe earth model, and if it worked as well as or better than the globe earth model, then any intelligent person would have to consider it.
However, at this point in time, no one has been able to present such an alternative model, so realistically at the moment there is only the globe earth model. No one has been able to present an alternative working model.
And it may be correct, we may be on a ball spinning in space. That is a possibility.
However, it is also possible that we are mistaken and the actual situation is quite different from the one we imagine.
That is the point of this website, to explore the possibilities outside the globe earth model, and to see if we can ultimately present a valid working scientific model that is as good or better than the globe earth model in its ability to predict our actual observations, but is based on completely different assumptions.
So this site is not for globe earthers who are stuck with the globe concept or flat earthers who are stuck with some dogma. It is for thinkers who want to exercise their minds and think outside the box, or the globe.
Flat Earth Facts,
You stated:
“There were a lot of holes in the original ideas, but gradually, with the help of some of the greatest minds in history, they have been able to construct a model, by titling the earth, etc, that does quite accurately make predictions quite close to our actual observations.”
Thank you for stating so clearly your belief. It’s better to remember a few facts.
Globists invented Earth’s tilt to explain why Mariner’s claimed to be able to see Polaris over 20 degrees south of the equator. People sometimes dispute this, but I’ve provide video claimed to be made at the equator showing Polaris several degrees above the horizon. Time and further observation will provide more evidence, freedom providing.
Further, the Earth tilt explanation assumes the Earth orbits the sun. If Earth doesn’t orbit sun then no seasons according to this theory. However, as I’ve mentioned the noon/midnight paradox proves the Earth cannot orbit the sun and provide consistent 24 hour days year around. This has been covered in other posts. Therefore, Earth tilt is not a viable explanation whether or not Earth is a ball or plane ( you know which I prefer ).
Have a great day!
The idea of the tilting of the rotating globe earth is to explain the seasons and the changing lengths of the days and nights that we actually experience in different parts of the world. The tilt makes it possible to have the 24 hour days and nights at North and South poles. This is the main reason for the tilt. And it is a very wonderful way of explaining what we actually observe happening. Something that flat earthers are not able to explain at all.
I do not believe you can see Polaris at 20 degrees south of the equator at sea level. Maybe on the top of a high mountain, perhaps, but not at sea level.
So you need to prove this, or disprove it. There is no point just quoting what some mariner from the 1800’s said. It is not very difficult to establish what you can see at 20 degrees south of the equator. And I can almost 100% guarantee you will not be able to see Polaris there at any time at sea level.
So there is no point you going on and on that you can see Polaris at 20 degrees South when it is not possible to see at all.
You just believe what Eric Dubey says and quote it endlessly without thinking. But I challenge you. You can not see the polestar from 20 degrees south of the equator. It is up to you to prove me wrong with conclusive evidence.
Flat Earth Facts,
You stated:
“The idea of the tilting of the rotating globe earth is to explain the seasons and the changing lengths of the days and nights that we actually experience in different parts of the world.”
I apologize, you are correct but only in part. Tilting the Earth does nothing to explain the Mariner’s seeing or not seeing Polaris since Polaris must always be over the axis of spin according to their model and whether or not the axis is tilted makes no difference. The Southern hemisphere should not view Polaris at all given their tangential view, but they do. Several modern observers, including globists claim to see Polaris a few degrees ( not 20 ) South of the equator.
Tilting the globe only purports to explain the seasons in the heliocentric model or if you further assume in contradiction to observation that the Earth orbits the sun ( note: noon/midnight paradox previously mentioned and never explained by you ). It does not explain it in the geocentric model, consistent with observation.
You are incorrect to state flat Earther’s cannot explain seasons. It has been explained by local solar circuits over the equator ( equinoxes ) and tropic of Cancer or Capricorn ( Winter or Summer solstices ). The solar circuits vary in velocity depending on daily circuit length to maintain 24 hour period.
Btw, I agree with you further evidence should be provided regarding visibility of Polaris in Southern hemisphere, but I’m not at all convinced Polaris won’t be visible. Many people have seen it a few degrees south of the equator ( impossible if Earth is a ball ). The globe model makes this impossible due to directional view obstruction from Earth tangent to the circle.
Eric Dubay is likely wrong that globists of the day used Earth’s tilt to explain view of Polaris, but it’s no less counter factual than to claim Earth orbits the sun.
A question for you. What would it take to prove Polaris can be seen from sea level south of the equator? Previously, I provided a purportedly equatorial video showing Polaris above the horizon but as I mentioned cannot vouch for it. If conditions permit I would like to test it myself. Of course modern day paranoia over the common cold may hamper rational free travel.
Take care and have a great day!
P.S.
Wikipedia now claims Earth’s axial spin wobbles causing Tropic of Cancer to vary from 22-24 or 25 degrees! How convenient, but then how does Polaris remain over the North Pole? Anyone see Polaris 2 or more degrees off?
Hi On the Level
Don’t take much notice of Wikipedia. An “encyclopedia” that anyone can write anything in is totally useless. Wikipedia is a flawed concept.
Yes. I agree with your realizations about the reason for the tilt of the earth in the globe model.
As far as testing if you can see polaris 20 degrees south it would be very easy to do in Australia. Cape York, that is our Northernmost point, that is about 10 degrees south. Darwin, main city in Northern Territory, that is about 12.5 degrees south of the equator. Broome, somewhere I could easily go at the moment, is at 18 degrees south of the equator. On the east coast Cairns in Northern QLD is about 17 degrees south, Townsville is a bit under 20. So anywhere in Australia north of Townsville, that is less than 20 degrees south of the equator. So easy to test in Australia.
So
Flat Earth Facts,
Message received and Understood. But I still have questions. You are correct in steering me back to more appropriate content for a site such as this one.
I guess we all have the bad habit of selectively trying to push our own, often times biase world view because our minds function best and are more comfortable when there are no contradictions to challenge that world view. It is hard for us to consider that we may have been wrong about our basic understandings of the universe and how we fit into it. It can shake us to our core.
Anyway I’ve gotten a few hints about a radically different proposal to explain the observations we make in this universe and I’ve inquired about it before. Something about mirrors and relective light. I’m truly interested in learning about other hypothesis for what I can observe. If this is an inappropriate topic or to personal I understand. You could tell me the name of it or something.
I do have a long history in the study of human belief systems and their individually unique rituals and the reasoning behind them.
In my view the biggest hurdle I would have to jump in order to entertain an alternative descriptive model that matches our observation, it would have to describe it better and with less over all assumptions than the previous accepted model.
You are correct when you say people sometimes need to at least consider opening up their minds to the possibility that there may be a better model out there, and believe me, I’m open to all possibilities as long they pass the bullshit test.
One other thing, I’m am definitely not fanatic about the conclusions I’ve come to about NASA and their behavior but when you make claims such as&& humanity has never walked on the moon based on a statement by some NASA employee made in questionable context I then I mind of need,to know the name and position within NASA, as well as time and place where these remarks were made. I mean Its only fair that if everyone keeps claiming that NASA is such a hugely deceptive agency full of nefarious motives than I’m gonna feel obligated to respond in kind.
Hi Jerry. Thanks for the thoughtful reply, and yes, I understand that you love NASA and can’t believe they would ever lie about anything. And I am sure that you are correct also for 99% of the employees of NASA and I am sure they are also doing real valuable research work. However a thoughtful honest examination of the “man on the moon” story does not hold up. There is no proof. So just to resolve this issue once and for all I will issue a very simple challenge to NASA, to Elon Musk, to the Chinese Space Agency, to the Indian Space Agency, and to Russia of course, etc.
These days all these countries clam to be able to send unmanned missions to the moon. They should all be able to quite easily send up something, land on the moon, and do stuff up there with their robotic remote control, etc. And remember, the moon is very close and easy to see from the earth. So my challenge is that at least one of these grand space organisations can construct an unmanned rocket, all it has to do is land on the moon facing the earth and unfold, and inside there will be lots of solar panels and there will be some batteries also to be charged by the solar panels during the long lunar day, and then during the night, when that part of the moon is dark as seen from earth, the little moon buggy will start flashing its very bright low power LED floodlights at Earth. Maybe Morse Code, “I LOVE THE USA”, if it’s American. Or just flash red, white and blue floodlights. You know. Very very very easy thing to do with today’s technology. India could do it for 80 million dollars only.
And it could keep going until the batteries died, maybe five years, maybe even ten years. That would be very simple to do, proof to everyone that at least we can send unmanned missions to the moon.
How easy is that? So that is my simple challenge. So let them do this, let them prove to us that at least they can do unmanned missions to the moon. We don’t actually even have proof of that yet.
And on your side you can agree to stop this NASA men on the moon nonsense until they provide some proof that at least they can send unmanned missions to the moon. It is so so so so easy to do something on the moon that can be seen from earth with a telescope at least. And that would be such a great thing to see. For the first time some evidence that at least a gadget made by men is on the moon. Actually I don’t even believe they are capable of doing this. But I think you can agree that it is a reasonable thing for us to ask them to do?
Just do something that we can see from the earth on the moon???
Flat Earth facts,
I fully agree with your Idea to put something on the moon that would prove to the whole world that we have at least sent unmanned missions to the Moon. But the fact is space agencies from the whole world have already taken pictures of the lunar Landing sites of the Apollo missions even today we can shoot a laser at the moon and bounce it off a mirror that was placed up there by the Apollo mission engage the exact distance down to the centimeter how far away the Moon is from Earth
Hi Jerry
Look at google earth, earth from satellites, and compare the quality of the earth satellite images to NASA’s “photos” of the landing sites on the moon. It is just a few smudged pixels? Do you think if they really could take photos of the landing sites on the moon they would just give us a few smudged pixels? They are cheating you Jerry. They are not photos of anything, just a few smudged pixels, doesn’t prove anything at all. In this age of super high definition photos from space, NASA gives us a few smudged pixels and you believe them???
You misunderstand my point Jerry. If they were going to go to the moon and they were actually on the moon it would be so so so easy for them to do something that we could see from earth through telescopes. So if they could actually go to the moon they would do something there we could see from earth for sure. But because they haven’t it is a very strong indication they could not go to the moon.
Reflectors on the moon, it is another joke Jerry. The moon is a reflector, you could already bounce lasers off the moon before they put reflectors on it. It was already done, bouncing lasers off the moon, before they put the so-called reflectors on the moon.
It is crazy, you know those reflectors are only 1 foot square? You know a laser spreads out very quickly. By the time that laser beam gets to the moon it will be bigger than the moon in width… How many photons of light will fall on their one foot square mirror. And when the reflection of that one foot square mirror comes back to the earth it will have spread out also to the size of the earth or more. How many reflected photons are going to come into the telescope to be detected? None.
And how will they identify if these are photons reflected from the moon or other light? All they have to check is the color of the light. They use a green laser, so they are just looking for green light, but Jerry green is also included in the sunlight, green is everywhere. The reality of this experiment is they can not differentiate the photons of green light supposedly reflected from the supposed mirrors on the moon with other green photons that are just hanging around.
The actual way they do this experiment is they fire the laser and keep the detector closed until the exact instant when they “know” the reflection will be coming back from the moon, [because they already know the distance to the moon…] so they just open the detector for that micro millisecond… And if they see green they call that a ‘return’ from the moon… If they were to leave the detector open all the time it would be constantly picking up green light…… So they only open it up at the instant they “know” the reflection will be coming from the moon, and if the see green they presume it must be from the moon….
And even then so many times this experiment does not work, they can go for months without getting any ‘returns’ from the mirrors on the moon.
So again Jerry, NASA is fooling you, playing you for an idiot.
Flat Earth Facts,
You bring up some very interesting points about the smudged, pixelated pictures of the lunar landing sights. You would think, with all of our high definition, quality optics, why could we not pick up better images of the sights where the American astronauts landed on the moon. I don’t have the answers to this puzzle yet but could it be that Google Earth’s satilights are orbiting earth from just a few dozen to a few hundred miles off the surface of earth and the moon is about 180,000 miles away? That is a 179,300 mile, or there abouts, difference and maybe this is the reason. I will investigate this some more but you got me thinking.
And please, there is no reason to put me down for my beliefs, it is the consensus, you know. There is plenty of evidence to validate why I think this to be true.
Anyway, good point. Till next time.
The reason NASA’s “photos” of the luna landing sites are just a few smudged pixels is they are faking them. There is no other explanation. They are taken from a satellite orbiting the moon, not from hundreds of thousands of miles away. I think only 60 miles up, or they can easily put a satellite only 60 miles up from the moon and from 60 miles up you can get very good high definition images using today’s cameras. But they give us a few smudged pixels only.
They know it is faked and they know they will be caught if they give any high definition images. Because, in the future, when they are exposed, they can just say, “Well actually we were mistake, it was not really the landing site, just a few smudged pixels.”
Everyone with half a brain who has investigated the NASA manned moon missions knows it was faked, even, as I have mentioned before, almost everyone in NASA. I have spoken with so many of these NASA people and have not found anyone in NASA who is prepared to come out and defend the idea that they put men on the moon in the 1960s. They either know it was faked or they are not sure if it was real or not.
Try and find any NASA official defending the idea they sent men to the moon in the 1960s. Try to find any NASA official who is trying to give evidence they did it. You will not find it. Because they know the faked it. They just hope it will go away. Too embarrassing for them now.
Flat Earth Facts,
The Lunar Landing Module is only around 10 feet across. Remember, these satellites are 60 miles up. Lunar features are very big, many miles across at that. If you are still unsure, then I suggest trying to see a 10 feet sign 60 miles away. Using a powerful telescope or a camera able to zoom in a lot, you would find that the sign is too blurry to see at all. Combine that with the fact that the lunar surface has a high albedo, causing an image of that tiny little dark/gold colored lander to be easily overtaken by the light reflected by the moon. Finally, explain me this: Why would NASA lie to us? The time and effort to convince the Earth is round if it is flat would be larger than any coverup ever imagined. We are talking billions, possibly trillions of dollars worth of money here. Besides, why would countries like China, Russia, and America, all sworn enemies of each other, agree to waste money so much on such a useless task? Also, the Earth was proven to be round in 500 BC by the Greeks, so the Greeks must have lied about the fact the Earth was round. For a total of 2,500 years of human existence, they have kept this a secret. During World War 2, why would Nazi Germany and the Allies agree to keep this wrapped up? How are new scientists told the Earth is flat without them going to the internet and saying the Earth is actually flat? Also, if the Earth was flat, and Gravity always pulls down, then why are the satellites that help you make these posts not just falling down on the Earth and causing the internet to never exist? What keeps the Sun and the Moon from doing the same?
Signed,
A person who believes the Earth is round
NASA is lying because they get paid to send men to the moon, but they can’t send men to the moon, but they still want the money and their jobs. So they lie.
It’s got nothing to do with the shape of the earth. NASA lie to us because they are getting paid to do things they can’t do, like send men to the moon, and if they didn’t lie to us they wouldn’t get the money and would loose their jobs. So they lie. Of course not everyone in NASA. 99% believe in what they are doing, and no doubt they are also doing real valid scientific work as well. But some things they can’t do, but they want the money, so they pretend to do them and lie about it.
In regard to your other point Jerry, about being open to the possibility that a better model may exist. Yes. Actually it would be great to be able to present a model that works at least as well as the globe earth model but realistically at the moment we don’t have it…
It is a problem for all of us, myself included, we are so convinced of the globe earth that it is very very very difficult for us to seriously consider anything else, myself included.
So I have read the details of this other model but it refuses to stick in my mind because of my long conditioning to the globe earth model. So I will read the books again and maybe try to describe it and perhaps make some videos about it over the coming months. But at the moment I am not capable of explaining it and do not comprehend how it works actually. But I am quite sure that it does work.
So maybe, with your help, we can work it out in time.
Meanwhile let at least one of the space agencies do something that we can see from the earth on the moon, at least with an unmanned mission. I would be very surprised if they can do this, I don’t think they even actually know where the moon is. But I could be wrong and they might surprise me.
I would be very pleased actually if they could provide proof, and it should be simple for them to do. But so far they have not provided anything at all convincing, rather the fact that they can’t go to the moon now proves they couldn’t go to the moon in the 1960’s. You know, how difficult can it be really, to go back to the moon, if you have already been there and come back safely six or more times???
But they can’t go to the moon. And they can’t really do another fake CGI moon trip because we all expect them to do something on the moon we can see from the earth. You know, just some lights on the moon, during the dark moon night, flashing red, white and blue in one of the craters. It would be fantastic. And so so so easy to do with today’s technology. Elon Musk could donate a couple of tesla powerwalls and some solar panels and a few floodlights and your set. Just imagine how much light you could generate with a powerwall and led floodlights on the moon….
It could even be a big Tesla sign. The possibilities are endless.
Ok Flat earth Facts,
Thank you for your timely response. Only through mutual respect and a reasonable over all attitude towards our fellow human beings can people collaborate to find truths that may be hidden from us, whether purposefully or because of a simple lack of knowledge.
I have been exploring some alternative models to gauge whether or not there may be some credence to these claims and have observed so far that most of them have in common the detrimental aspect of presumption. Many assumption need to be made in order to believe the rest of their outline. But fear not, if there are alternative models that at least match our currently understood model, we will discover them.
I pledge to keep an open mind to this possibility and will continue my investigations into these matters. I mean, does not the scientific model require that we look at all the evidence before we come to any concrete conclusions.
Maybe you could prompt your readers to give some examples of alternatives that are not solely focused on the shape of our planet or the common mistrust in authority that is pervasive in those communities?
Anyway, thanks for allowing me to be a voice in your disscutions/debates.
Hi Jerry. Yes. Realistically there is no competition for the globe earth model at the moment. At least not as far as I am aware. Globe earth model is the only practical working model we have to make sense of the universe we find ourselves in. But that does not actually mean it is correct and I suspect at least some aspects of it may be completely wrong. Only way really to find out is to get information from someone who knows. I am confident that the people who wrote the books I have been studying know, and I plan to try and understand it and describe it. But it will take some time. But should be an interesting ride…
True, flat earth facts
But anything we learn or accept as information worth paying attention to, don’t we run the risk of committing the error of giving credence to a proposed model because our guru says so, as you so convincingly pointed out on many a responce? How do we accept new knowledge provided by a source unless we verify it all before hand?
Yes of course. That is the risk. Accepting so-called knowledge from someone who does not know. So the key is to find someone who actually knows, that is the only way really to get real knowledge. It is your great fortune if you accept knowledge from a bonafide source and your great misfortune if you accept knowledge from someone who does not know.
The thing is by speculating, by ‘science’, we can never really understand things that are beyond our sense perception. By definition science is observation and experiment. So science depends completely on the observations of our senses, which are extremely limited and faulty. So the ability of science to comprehend and explain things that are beyond our sense perception is practically zero. And as far as the universe is concerned, with our senses, we can hardly perceive any of it at all. So when you can’t see something to speculate on what it is and how it works is bound to result in incorrect theories and misunderstandings.
Anyhow the point is we have another model, presented by living entities who know, who can view the universe from different perspectives, as opposed to our scientists who can only peer out into the dark sky from this tiny little earth planet. Realistically, through our sense perception and the scientific process, we can’t know much at all about the universe, because we can’t perceive the universe. All we can see is a few lights moving around in the sky. But we have no idea how they are moving, what they are, how far away they are, what is moving them, what is the mechanical arrangement behind it all, and we have no idea what we can’t see. We can only see a few things that are illuminated and we only have a very small angle of view.
So the point is science with the scientific method of obeservantion and experimentation is not at all well positioned to tell us anything much at all about the universe.
So let us at least try this little adventure and see how the great ancient sages of India describe it, having actually seen it from all angles of vision. These great sages have either seen it themselves or heard about it from others who have seen it themselves. So if we want to truly understand how the universe works then we have to find out about it from people like this, people who have actually seen it and who actually know how it works…
Flat Earth Facts,
A little regress here but I wanted to address your firm belief that because NASA cannot send men to the moon today, this means we could not do it 50 years ago. I think that you have not taken into account the fact that we no longer have the facilities that constructed the machines that we used to get there. Such as the Saturn V rockets and all the stages. The facilities and the machine tools have been taken apart, the people who specialized in those components have retired, and there is no longer as many people, places, or the budget to fully work up a completely new mission. There were some 400,000 people that worked on the Apollo missions, hundreds of factories, and billions of dollars to make it happen. But the one thing that I think drove the massive project foward more than anything else was the U.S.A, it’s people, its massive industrial capacity and our desire to beat the Russians to the moon, this made it possible. That and the fact that at the time we were more ready to take on tremendous risk of life and failure to beat the hated communist, who in the eyes of the American people at the time posed the greater risk to our freedom and way of life. The reason we cannot just up and send a man to the moon today is because we dismantled the system that enabled the Apollo missions in the first place. It takes an effort greater than some GDP of most countries in this world to get a system of that magnitude up and going.
I think that if you place your lack of trust in everything NASA aside and actually study all the data, all the data, and not just the data that agrees with your conclusion, you will have to admit the vast resources it takes to get a mission, like a moon shot up and going, that the U.S.A. was and is capable of this.
Some would have you believe that we have lost the technology to send man to the moon and beyond, this is not so. We simply have discontinued the facilities and personnel, the money and resources, the reason and the drive to commit to another vast undertaking like the moon shot. Look at what the U.S.A and the free world were capable of 20 years earlier in WW 2. The massive resources of the U.S.A, England, Australia, Russia, and Europe were enough to effectively reshape the world. The amount of manpower and machine capability we were able to place into play during that decade had never been seen in history and on a scale of orders of magnatude greater than ever before.
Humanity and especially the drive and might of the U.S.A. industrial complex are capable of so much more than just getting to the moon. Imagine if all our scientists worked together as opposed to against each other, we surely would be like a world similar to star trek now. If you have ever seen the program star trek, I would love to see humanity get to this stage of sophistication and intelligence. What do you think?
More NASA rubbish Jerry. You know the whole Apollo mission went from USA having practically no space experience at all to putting men on the moon in ten years? So back in the 1960’s Jerry, at the beginning of the 1960’s NASA had nothing, nothing at all, and within 10 years they had men walking on the moon???
So what you have written is insane, our technology today is thousands of times better than what we had in the 1960s Jerry. And now we have so many new materials, we have so many new fabrication systems, now it is so easy with 3D printing and other technologies to make one-off things.
We never had the technology to send men to the moon Jerry. For example on of the reasons NASA gives for not being able to send men to the moon is the deadly radiation. We do not, today, have the technology to shield the astronauts from this deadly radiation, so we did not have the technology to shield the astronauts from the radiation in the 1960s. So Jerry NASA never sent men to the moon, it is a story, like a fairy tale. Adults don’t believe in fairy tales.
Practically everyone at NASA knows Jerry, that they did not send men to the moon in the 1960s. Any actual intelligent scientist, they know it was impossible to send men to the moon in the 1960s. It is still impossible to send men to the moon today!
So you need to wake up from this NASA induced trance Jerry.
Flat Earth Facts,
It does not further the debate to get angry and repeat my name, Jerry, over and over again. I am not an insane person, at least not as of my last straight jacket fitting. So please, be a kind host and try to not degrade my beliefs simply because they differ from your own.
I have had to curb my own frustrations as well so I understand.
Anyway, you do, as always, bring up some great points of interest. The idea about the radiation being too deadly without shielding. Well, the explanations they give to that problem seems pretty reasonable to me. They say that the lunar vehicle was only in the deadly zone for a short period of time and the route that was chosen skirted around the main danger zones.
The mission timetable was chosen because it coincided with the relatively low solar radiation period when the sun was in an inactive phase of its output and the solar winds were minor compared to an active solar output phase.
It seems to me that every item of discrepancy you bring up there is a reasonable explanation around the problem and every proof that I posit, you have a willingness to shot it down. I don’t know if you or I will ever agree completely on everything but at least we can agree that neither one of us has been to the moon so only those people who have, and those who witnessed it, can know for sure. It just seems to me a far more outlandish idea that the entirety of the human race has been fooled. All the most intellegent folks alive, except for a few hundred outliers who somehow escaped the huge network of hush men in charge of keeping a lid on the conspiracy. If there were a world wide conspiracy to keep this hush hush, then why do these higher ups not take people such as yourself out to the woodshed and make you disappear? If they, who ever they are supposed to be, can keep an entire planets population from learning the secret, how on earth did you and your fellow whistle blowers not get paid off or brought into the fold of conspirators?
I think this line of questioning should put some kind of doubt into your firmly held belief that there is some powerful upper echelon that, for God knows what reason, is in charge of keeping a lid on the lie.
I am honestly curious as to your ideas concerning this huge secret and how could it ever be pulled off? Please, with all due respect and all joking or illusions aside, what do you think is really going on? And have no worries, I do not work with THEM.
Hi Jerry
But you are sometimes just like On the Level with his non-existent satellites when it is so easy for On the Level to determine for himself that satellites exist. Whenever I present some conclusive facts you just try to change the subject and move on to something else. Which is the tactic of the scientists. If their model does not work in some way they try desperately to steer the people away from that and hide that fact. So they are dishonest actually.
This idea that you have that I should not disturb your beliefs. That is not scientific. Science is not supposed to be about beliefs, it is supposed to be about facts. So it is not that I should respect your incorrect beliefs, that is not science. I can point out various facts that prove the ideas of science are not working in particular situations, that proves that the theory the scientists have at the moment is not yet completely correct.
If you are not prepared to accept that certain aspects of science are not correct then there is no possibility of science ever advancing. So every scientific theory should be open to testing and verification and if there are faults they should be exposed and analyzed and used to perfect the model in the future.
The problem is science presents us with faulty imperfect models and then demands we accept them as fact. This is very dishonest.
You are also dishonest, if you take your current email, saying that radiation is not a problem you can just go around it, well that is totally opposite what NASA, who are your authorities, currently say. NASA say currently that one of the reasons it is impossible for them to send humans beyond low-earth orbit is the radiation. And they will not be able to do it until they solve this radiation problem. So the problem was not solved in the 1960s. In the 1960s they did not know about the deadly radiation, remember they had never been in space, and the US space program had only been going a few years before they had men walking on the moon??? So it was all faked. For political reasons. Because Russia was so far ahead of the US in space, Russia was first with everything, so the US considered it in the interests of National Security to become first in space. So your President demanded NASA put men on the moon “before this decade is out,” that was the 1960s. So there was no choice, NASA’s funding and future depended on it, so they had to at least pretend to put men on the moon before the end of the 1960s.
And pulling it off is so simple, hardly anyone in NASA needed to know. All that is coming from the astronauts in space is an audio signal and a telemetry signal that has got readings from the various instruments on the ship. So all they have to do to fake it is to inject a training datastream into the system. NASA is almost 100% about simulation. If you go to there place there in Houston you will not find any actual spaceship building, you will find 100% that facility is dedicated to producing simulations of space. They have got lifesize models of all their space ships, all the Russian space ships, etc. They have a huge pool to simulate zero gravity so they can film their space walks, they have a huge green-screen studio, biggest in the world, they have an outside area with simulated luna and martian landscapes, etc. But no actual spaceship building.
So back in the 1960s also they were putting most of their efforts into simulation, for “training”. You should research these things. Why should I have to write it all out for you? Why don’t you do some research yourself instead of just blindly believing in NASA???
Question for fellow flat earthers? So if I’m on a plane that is strictly following a line of latitude, then does that mean that in order to follow the line of latitude, the plane must continually “follow the curve” and adjust its “yaw” direction along the latitudinal line on a Flat Earth map? I’m genuinely curious, as this question is stumping me. Thanks!
Curious Researcher,
If I am correct here and you are asking this question honestly, assuming that you are referring to an aircraft that is flying over a flat earth, or flat earth map, then this simple question has no answer. Lines of latitude only refer to those lines that run parallel to an equatorial direction and in the flat earth frame of thinking, there is no equator because there cannot be one on a flat planet. So, because there are no lines of latitude in a flat world there are no adjustments that need to be made for an aircraft except to place the plane in a continual yaw. In other words simply make a big circle. However this makes no sense because there would be no need to follow lines of latitude on a flat world because they refer to a spherical shape and on a flat world the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. Latitudanal lines on a flat world would just be big concentric circles that get larger the farther away from the north pole you get.
So, this very confusing, extremely counter-intuitive line of thought just goes to further prove that the flat earth mentality completely lacks any real cohesive logic and will only serve to steer you away from reality which is that the planet that we live on is a sphere and not a flat plane. If this is not already obvious to you and you have seriously looked over all the available evidence then what you need to alter is the way you interpret that evidence as opposed to altering evidence to fit your interpretation.
My advise to you would be to follow closely what Flat Earth Facts has to say about the subject as he is well versed in the current scientific, and otherwise crack pots, understanding of all thoughts and subjects related to this topic. Regaurdeless of his conclusions concerning some of the things that the United States of America, and their superior space agency, NASA, is capleble of, he does understand all the views held by both sides of the debate and is a great source of information where ever this line of inquiry may lead you. Good luck.
So Flat Earth Facts,
I’m a dishonest, desperate, faulty, blind, unresearched, demanding, evasive, imperfect, pretender, I am undeserving of respect and my country is afraid of Russia,
That hurt. But when you compared me to On The Level, that was going overboard.
Just so we know, I have billions of people with an overall consensus about reality and the constituent laws of this universe. and the camp you happen to belong to consists of individuals who seem to share the common attribute of exhibiting certain mental instabilities, including but not limited to imaginary and magical thinking, related to and focused on an over reaching, abusive ,dishonest, secretive authority figure who is bent on keeping the human population in the dark about a huge, impossibly complex conspiricy perpetrated upon the unsuspecting, ignorant, uneducated masses to got them to believe something incorrect about reality, one that every person on earth can verify the validity of that claim for themselves. I rest my case.
Hi Jerry
I never said you were “dishonest, desperate, faulty, blind, unresearched, demanding, evasive, imperfect, pretender…” You are putting words in my mouth I did not say. I know you are a faithful follower of modern science and NASA. And yes, they have millions of followers. But just because an idea is accepted by millions, does not mean it is correct. And On the Level, he is a faithful follower of his flat earth doctrine which prescribes that the earth is flat and satellites don’t exist, etc, etc.
Now it is the same thing, but I have to give you the point that your side, the side of modern science, does present logical arguments and has got good working predictive models to back up their claims, so in that sense your beliefs are far superior to the beliefs of On the Level. However, both of you are the same in that you have unflinching faith in things that you do not really know if they are true or not.
Yes. I give you the credit of going with the masses. But the masses are not always correct…
And you miscategorize me. I do not belong to either group. I do not have a side. I am just looking for the truth. You have decided already what you think is true and you will not consider any other possibility, along with your millions of friends, and On the Level, he has also decided to believe in what he believes with his dozens of friends. So you have certainly got the numbers on your side and On the Level is certainly incorrect…
Still I am prepared to consider the alternatives. I am not, obviously, happy with the description put forward by the flat earth people, and although I do very much appreciate the beauty and logic and great effort that has been put into developing the spinning ball model, there are aspects of this story also which simply do not stand up to close investigation, indicating to me at least, that it is also not a completely correct description of our situation in the universe.
So you and On the Level share the position of having chosen a side and closed your minds to all other alternatives. It is not an unusual position. People usually do that. They pick one of the existing teams and join it and support it and believe what the team believes. But in this case my strong suspicion is that neither the flat earth team nor the spinning ball team are correct…
So I am open to be convinced but as soon as I put up some suggestion to you, some problem with your model, you do not address it, you can not explain it, and like your other team members, you just try to change the subject and hide the contradictions and problems in your model…
Same of course with the flat earth people, but they have a lot more problems and contradictions to try and hide…
Flat Earth Facts,
All kidding aside, with all due respect,–rambling nothingness snipped–
“Their stupidity does not amaze me, its when they’re smart that amazes me. It’s baffling whenever you find someone who’s smart — incredible. Soon you’ll have zoos for such things.” ― Frank Zappa
Almost everyone is stupid. Maybe less than 1% of the people have the capability of independent thought.
Everyone else, they find a leader and just regurgitate what their leader says.
Flat Earth Facts,
Maybe its that you know a great deal more about your views than I, for your reasons but neither of us really get to state our whole view. There is no way I can fully appreciate your whole view nor you mine. So I think your getting too frustrated.
Anyway, my thought was I would like to know what you think about the incentives that people who work for NASA, or the other space agencies, would receive for continuing to keep and hide a secret like a fake moon landing? I would think a lot of people would be tempted to blackmail NASA for keeping their secret. What do you think?
Hi Jerry. The problem is you are just as fixed in your belief in NASA and science as On The Level is in the ideas presented by the Flat Earth people. As I have pointed out the ideas presented by science do make a lot more sense than most of the ideas presented by the flat earth people, however there are serious flaws in both the spinning ball and the flat earth models.
You will not acknowledge the flaws in the spinning ball model and simply change the subject as you are trying to do here, rather than admitting there are serious flaws in the spinning ball model, in the same way, On the Level will just believe the flat earth ideas, including that satellites don’t exist, without considering the evidence that doesn’t suit his ieas.
This is a human failing. As humans we have imperfect senses, we are illusioned [means we believe things are true that are actually false] we cheat to try and prove our beliefs and we make mistakes. So everyone is affected by these faults.
So the point of this site is to investigate if it is possible to present another working scientific model that explains our observations based on different premises to the globe earth model.
The purpose of this site is not to engage in endless fruitless discussions with globe earthers and flat earthers who have already decided their particular beliefs are true and will ignore any evidence that goes against their beliefs.
So I do not see any point continuing discussions with you or On the level. This site is actually for people who are prepared to think outside the box, not people who have enclosed themselves in a box, whether it be a globe shaped box or a flattened box…
As an outsider to your thread with Jerry, I’d like to know what you believe are “flaws” in either the globe “model” of the Earth, or the heliocentric “model” of our Solar System. Are you saying that there are more possibilities for the Earth model than either the globe or a flattened disc, like a dodecahedron or perhaps a torus?, I think it’s fairly self-evident that we would have discovered this long ago. I mean, the site IS titled “FLAT EARTH FACTS”. So what shape “box” is your preferred Earth in, or are you simply open to other possibilities? I don’t know about you, but I’ve yet to see any evidence of Earth being a flat disc borne on the backs of a group of elephants riding the shell of a gigantic tortoise. Perhaps at some point in our distant future, the human race may evolve into some form of consciousness that could comprehend the Universe and our place within it – but as human beings we’re ill equipped to find such “truth” as you seek. Be well.
If you read the comments I have already written you will find out.
Don’t nasa get millions of dollars of taxpayer money, given to them ALL the time.
If that’s not an incentive to lie. They must have billions by now ?
If I remember correctly, they get about 54 or 58 million dollars per day. Yet with all that bread they can’t afford to keep their telemetry data from the supposed lunar missions, or have provided them with a high powered telescope with which to view Earth. This bears repeating.
https://www.thedailyplane.com/prof-r-foster-moon-landings-not-possible/
So I have been asking all the flat Earth advocate I can find to explain something I have seen so many times I cannot count. If the sun is at a set height never dipping below the horizon how can the sun cast the shadow of a mountain on the underside of clouds? This only happens at sunset or sunrise and on the edge of a storm front. The best examples I know of are of mt. Rainier you can look up the pictures in google most of the picks I have seen were taken between 1970-1999 on 35mm film I know this because I live in this area and the cities don’t look the same anymore. So can you please show me the math on how this is possible on a flat Earth. I do believe this fits your observable science ideology as I have seen it with my own two eyes without a special device to make this observation also it is clearly repeatable because the is many pictures of it and I have seen it many times. So please answer this with facts make videos showing how it is possible I don’t care show me how it happens on a flat Earth.
Very good question…
Mercury and Venus can be seen at night through a telescope. If the earth was a globe then this would be impossible as they are between the earth and the sun.
Hi Shaun
That is an interesting thought… We would have to make a scale model and check it out. The funny thing is for my whole life I have been looking for a real model of how the solar system works but have never ever seen one. Except there is that thing with the handle you turn with all the planets on it. But yes. I think on that thing no matter how you turn the handle the daylight side of the earth would be facing Mercury and Venus. Of course they can not always be seen at night. Sometimes they are seen transiting the sun. I don’t know. I have never thought about it. But sounds like an interesting thought.
Someone should make a scale model of the solar system and see, seems to be a very simple thing to do.
Scale model? What for?
Those claiming heliocentricity have to provide a valid response to the fact, that we should not be able to see Venus and Mercury at night. The sun is supposedly on the other side of the Earth at night, then so must those two planets be. But we can see them.
Just one of many many facts which disprove their theory.
Scale model would be nice to see if things work or not. Probably we would find out that the globe earth model is a very good predictive model and correctly predicts almost everything we observe.
As far as Venus and Mercury, if you could see them at midnight that would destroy the globe earth theory. But the reality is you can’t see Venus and Mercury at midnight. In fact Venus and Mercury always appear in the sky near the sun. So you can only see Mercury, with a telescope, during twilight or early morning, because it disappears from the sky very soon after the sun disappears from the sky.
Venus is further away from the sun, so you can see it for longer, but never at midnight because it is closer to the sun than earth and at midnight the sun is far away, on the other side of the globe.
So actually our observations of the planets, the different behavior of the planets between the earth and the sun to the behavior of the planets outside the orbit of the earth, it all is 100% in accord with the predictions of the globe earth model.
Great point Shaun. It can also be asked if the wandering stars truly are planets, why don’t they wax and wane or have lunar/like phases? Instead they appear all lit up no matter their relative position to the Earth.
Hi On the Level
According to the globe earth model there are inner planets and outer planets. So the inner planets, that is like Mercury and Venus, and the others are outer. So inner planets, they do exhibit phases like the moon. You may have heard of the transit of Venus in front of the Sun. So at that time Venus is dark, invisible, we can only see it because it comes in front of the Sun as a black spot. But at that time Sun is shining on the back of Venus so it is dark. So the inner planets, those between the earth and the sun, they do exhibit phases as we see on the moon.
Outer planets, however, they are always fully illuminated, as we would expect them to be in the globe earth model. You have to get a conception of the distances in the globe earth model. So if you consider the distance from the earth to the outer planets and the sun to the outer planets it is not much different. So, in the globe earth model, the view of the outer planets from the sun and the view of them from the earth is more-or-less the same. So globe earth model predicts that the inner planets, Venus and Mercury, will exhibit phases, similar to what we see on the moon, but the outer planets will be always fully illuminated.
So this is exactly what we observe. So in this case again, the observations are completely consistent with the predictions of the globe earth model.
http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~blackman/ast104/aspects6.html
“Outer planets, however, they are always fully illuminated, as we would expect them to be in the globe earth model.”
One should only expect them fully illuminated if close to directly behind the Earth. Closer supposed gas Giants like Saturn or supposed solid bodies like mars should definitely have phases depending on position relative to Earth and Sun.
Yes. Mars is an exception. It does not have phases like the inner planets, nor would we expect it to, but because it is fairly close to earth it does change shape depending on it’s relationship with the earth and the sun:
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/23552-does-mars-have-phases/
So still consistent with the globe earth model.
“Mars is an exception. It does not have phases like the inner planets, nor would we expect it to, but because it is fairly close to earth it does change shape depending on it’s relationship with the earth and the sun:”
Don’t think so. Mars is claimed on average farther from Earth than the sun, over 140 million miles. It’s only close in part of it’s supposed orbit ( 54.6 million kilometers ). Orbit supposedly being ovular, we should definitely see phases.
With all due respect On the Level, I think you don’t have a clear idea of Mars and the globe earth model of how and where it is moving. You are expecting Mars to have phases like the moon? But that is not possible.
For mars to have phases like to moon it would have to go from the side of mars we are viewing being dark to the side we are viewing being fully illuminated. For us to see mars as being fully dark it would have to be between us and the sun, the sun would have to be behind mars from our point of view for us to see it as dark.
But because mars is further out than the earth it can never get between the earth and the sun so no matter where mars is the sun is never going to be behind it from our vantage point. So from our perspective mars is going to be always illuminated except for some slight differences in the shape caused by the changing earth-sun-mars relationships. You could say mars has got some slight partial phases. But it can never have phases like we see on the moon or the inner planets.
So your idea that we should see phases on mars like we see on the moon and venus and mercury is totally incorrect. What we see, a slight change in the shape of mars due to the changing relationships, is exactly what the globe earth model predicts we should see.
So this is all total confirmation of the globe earth model. There is no way can it be construed to prove the earth is flat…
For clarity, I claimed Mars should have phases, but never claimed they should be full phases like the moon.
So how would mars look when it was a new mars? (Sarcasm)
Mercury can only be seen in the twilight shortly after sunset or shortly before sunrise, maximum elongation 27° away from the Sun. Venus has a maximum elomgation of 48° so it can be seen a few hours after sunset or a few hours before sunrise. All in corcordance with the heliocentric model.
With decent optics Venus can be seen during daylight. I used to use it to get accurate positions.
Why is it that on venus its crescent when it is not full is opposite of the sun. check it out its dark side is facing the direction of the sun and its light side is facing pure darkness. That just goes to show there light including the moon does not come from the sun. They all have there own light source.
Stand on seashore, look toward the sun (or moon). If the light you see reflected on the water makes a path to your feet, you are not on a globe. Simple everyday physics.
What would you expect to see on a globe?
The same thing you would see if you shine a light on a ball. A convex surface will not reflect a straight line for miles. You would see a hotspot with light defusing in all directions. Neither is the moon a sphere reflecting light from a distant light source. The even distribution of light you see from a full moon is an impossible image of a spherical reflector. (no matter how far away ‘science’ says that light is)
If the globe sits at a tilt on its axis and there is a slight wobble. how would Polaris sit unmoved. it would not you see while all of the stars make circles light tracers with a time laps camera . how is it Polaris is virtually un moved with all that has been said about the globe the would be beyond impossible.
There is no wobble in the globe earth model Jason
Check the ‘science’: there is motion. Not just spin, either. All the motion attributed to our globe earth model is velocity. Guess what? Velocity = speed + direction. Constantly changing direction (spinning, rotating etc.). Acceleration. Do you feel it? You do in a car. Even the slightest curve.
Flat and stationary. Earth as we know it.
You just found the biggest lie, and you found it in the seat of your pants!
Yes. You are correct. There is no indication that the earth is spinning at all…
Hey guys
On the fence on this one but leaning more towards FE. For all my 18 yrs on earth my father has consistently talked to me about a whole bunch of “conspiracy theories” but none more passionately then Flat Earth. I agree with most things on this website surrounding flat earth but i cannot wrap my head around why we can clearly see the sun disappear behind the horizon at sunset. If the earth truely was a flat plane how is this possible?
Hi Rocco.
Might it be a bit easier to grasp this phenomena IF the sun were not as large or as far away from earth as we have been led to believe?
Perception the earth is huge. When you drive and see a telephone pole in the horizon it looks smaller. So If you go to the ocean and watch a cruise ship sale off get out a high zoom camera or telescope the perception your eyes deceives you. Take your camera zoom in the ship comes back into view. The sun earth is huge the sun not bigger than the earth and that’s how this can work. So as the sun goes into the horizon it goes out of view to the human eye
Typical flat earth insanity, please don’t take any offense, but what you write here makes no sense. You explain nothing, your analogy is working completely opposite to your conclusion. Your analogy is when you see the ship disappear in the distance, it has not actually disappeared, you can get out your telescope and see the ship again. And this is your analogy for the sun setting over the horizon, but I challenge you, wait for the sun to set below the horizon and get out your telescope and try and see the sun again… You will never be able to see the sun, no matter how strong your telescope is, because sun is below the horizon. Not that sun is just in the distance and our eyes have deceived us.
So flat earthers, with all due respect, speak all this illogical nonsense between each other and convince themselves that this nonsense somehow proves the earth is flat…
“as the sun goes into the horizon it goes out of view to the human eye” Rubbish. When the sun goes below the horizon the sun is not only out of view to the human eye, it is out of view to your telescope, and the only way you can get the sun to come back up is if you go up higher. If you go up onto the top of a mountain the sun will set up there later than down at sea level. Which is what we would expect to experience on a globe of course.
So in this one paragraph there is so much flat earth nonsense that it is hard to believe anyone could take anything Aaron writes here seriously.
A point regarding IFS to consider is that it would be easy to fake with a drone. A 231′ x 240′ IFS 240 miles above our skeptical heads looks little different than 23’x24′ scale model 24 miles overhead.
Balloon IFS pod replicas filled with hydrogen and helium gas in some non-flammable combination should work fine. The pod surface covered in flat metallic matte material still reflects enormous amounts of sunlight. 15′-20′ solar panels could power small electric turbo-fans on the IFS far-side. If thought erroneously to be 240 miles away by the Law of Similar Triangles the balloon model may appear to move at 10 times the velocity it does!
Safe in the Stratoslayer our replica moves gracefully forward heedless of the Troposlayer weather!
Many private observers claim merely to see a round blob when viewing supposed IFS.
“Real amateur astronomers won’t even consider the notion, let alone speak out that these images could be fake for obvious reasons of wanting to believe… all except one however.
…directly viewing the ISS through a privately owned telescope (a Newtonian of 6 inch aperture at low magnification and using manual tracking). On every occasion I have viewed the ISS, and I am an experienced observer, a perfectly round object is revealed presenting no angular projections whatsoever.
Of course, he could only air his findings on a conspiracy forum where the defender of the realm was “astronut” aka Scott Ferguson. This man is already a dab hand at Photoshop as the signature photo on his Twitter account reveals.”
From Wild-heretic.
That’s all for now folks!
Yes. It is true, this is a point I often make, we have only got a 2 dimensional view of the sky from earth, so we can’t actually determine the distance. So we can’t tell the difference between a smaller thing close and a larger thing far away.
But there are serious problems with your proposal for imitating space station with a drone. Space station can be observed from many locations simultaneously. So it is very easy to do triangulation on it. So it is quite simple to accurately calculate the distance of the space station from earth by observing it from multiple locations simultaneously and doing the math.
So you could not replicate space station with a drone closer to the earth because then this triangulation would easily measure the actual distance to your drone.
We are talking about very close objects here, space station is within a few hundred miles distance only. Very easy to calculate its actual hight above the earth using trigonometry.
“But there are serious problems with your proposal for imitating space station with a drone. Space station can be observed from many locations simultaneously. So it is very easy to do triangulation on it. So it is quite simple to accurately calculate the distance of the space station from earth by observing it from multiple locations simultaneously and doing the math.”
Your statement is problematic.
Have you tried visual triangulation of a rapidly moving object with anyone else? Visual triangulation is extremely problematic. Do all three IFS spotters have sextants, high resolution, precision calibrated, telescopic cameras or proper tools with which to determine angular distances and information requisite to “doing the math?” Are they coordinating with electronic communicators to ensure simultaneity? How do they coordinate and maintain object observation and simultaneity? Note people using trigonometry have determined the slow moving sun to be from 700 to 3000 miles above the Earth! Such guesstimates still involve many assumptions and therefore practically worthless. Also consider since the observers can be miles away are they all observing the same object? Perhaps one observes a drone and another an aircraft they mistake for an IFS. Since you claim knowledge, please explain how you performed this task. If you can’t we should assume you really have no idea of what you speak.
You go on:
“So you could not replicate space station with a drone closer to the earth because then this triangulation would easily measure the actual distance to your drone.”
Nonsense!
Again explain how by eyeballing a drone, whether at 24 miles or 240 miles, you and your buddies can triangulate the object distance. This should be good for entertainment value if nothing else.
Boldly you continue…
“We are talking about very close objects here, space station is within a few hundred miles distance only. Very easy to calculate its actual height above the earth using trigonometry.”
Again merely asserting something proves nothing. Explain your actions. If you can’t, it’s because you don’t know how. Which definitely appears to be the case.
If by “observation” you actually mean radar tracking or some other means please let me know, because this has problems as well. Few people have instruments powerful enough to track the IFS besides NASA themselves. Airport air traffic controller’s radar range is about 50-60 miles which falls far short of the IFS supposedly 240 miles plumb-line distance above the surface and hundreds or thousands of miles from most observers.
Please explain the methodology by which you calculated the IFS distance and the assumptions you used. I’m quite sure you assume many things to derive whatever distance you wish and appear to have no clue of what you speak.
Of course if you can prove me wrong think about how amazing you’ll look to your readers. However, if you make any assumptions in your methodology you’ll only appear ridiculous to those who know.
Very much interested in your answer.
Thanks.
You fail to think or are incapable of thinking On The Level.
The orbits of all the satellites and the orbit of the space station are predictable and can be accurately plotted. So you can easily see where the space station is in the sky in multiple locations at once by checking on any space station plotting software.
And if you don’t believe it is real you can test it. You can use your program to show when space station will be overhead and you can look up and see it.
Anyhow the position of the space station in the sky is available at any time and any location. And anyone can triangulate the distance.
It is absolutely totally impossible to imitate this with a drone at a lower altitude.
If you can not understand this you are stupid. With all due respects.
Hi
I want to know more about the Flat Earth Theories.
Do you have any posters that i can display in my store
Thanks
Nick +612 9824 2211
From El Segundo close to shore I can see all of Point Dume’ ~22.5 miles away as the bird fly’s. At 8 to 8.5 inches per mile square there should be from 337.5 to 358.59 feet of curvature respectively minus the 10-15′ height of my vantage point above sea shore. Rounding my elevation up to 20′ that means from 317.5′ to 338.59′ of convex earth and ocean should have blocked my view! Of course, nothing blocked my view and convex earth ball Earth curvature proves a myth.
Scientific evidence against ball Earth abounds and can be deduced from common level sea shores and vistas around the flat earth.
Have a great day!
people who believe in flat earth are a bunch of idiots that I can’t even explain
Yes. It is true in the sense that the people who believe in the flat earth can not present any working model, they can not imagine any mechanical system that would work, presuming the earth was a flat disc. They can not even give us a map that would work, knowing how we are able to navigate around the globe, to make that navigation possible on anything but a globe, it is very difficult. And flat earth people, they can not give us a flat earth map that works.
Flat earth people, they can not explain how the sky works, if it is being viewed from a flat plane. Particularly the southern hemisphere sky, from a flat earth, it is very difficult to imagine.
On the other hand the globe earth people, they have got a very good real and working predictive model that we can hold in our heads and, with that globe earth model, any intelligent person, can easily see that it does a very good job of predicting what we see happening in the sky, and it is compatible with our actual, physical experiences as we navigate around the globe, and we can draw a map of the continents on a globe and have all the distances and relative directions correct.
So yes, you are correct, in that the flat earth people, they just have a feeling, they look at the horizon, and see it is flat, and think that proves the earth is flat, etc… But on a globe we expect the horizon should be flat…
And the globe earth believers, they have got a real working model.
However, my suspicion, is they are both wrong. Flat earthers are certainly wrong, because they all have different ideas actually, there is no actual fixed-up flat earth idea, so there is no actual flat earth theory or flat earth model. So to believe the earth is flat without having a way of explaining how the earth could be flat, certainly you could call them a bunch of idiots.
But it is faith. Blind religious faith. They have their leader, and they follow him, they believe him. Only he is an idiot and has no logical or scientific explainations.
But the globe earthers, also, they have blind faith in science, but science is a better religion, because they have got a good, well thought-out out, logical doctrine. But it is the same principle as the flat earthers, they believe their leader, and the globe earthers, they believe science.
The funny thing I find is when you ask a globe earther to prove the earth is a globe. The average globe earther has no idea at all, even they don’t know the official scientific story. Actually the official scientific globe earth story is quite fascinating and convincing. And, using that, one could make a very strong case for a globe earth, but ask today’s globe earthers, they have no idea at all why they believe the earth is a globe. They, like the flat earthers, have got blind faith, but in science. They just believe the science…
However, my suspicion is the science, like the flat earthers, is wrong.
FEF,
Just more proof the dust gathered inaccurate globe on the school room shelf that no one uses is not a working model. Apparently, some dude photographed the Toronto skyline from 30 miles away in the US down to the coast line when it’s supposed to be blocked by a few hundred feet of curvature, blah, blah!
https://www.thedailyplane.com/best-flat-earth-proof-never-been-debunked/
Of course, you still can’t explain why Auckland, NZ flights to Lima, Peru in South America fly north of the equator near Los Angeles ( 4000 miles out of the way ) when both start and end-points are south of the equator. That’s ok just repeat to yourself the globe model works there exists no other superior model ( nonsense ), drink some camomile and get some well needed rest!
Thanks and have a great day!
Hi OTL
Yes, of course, that is the flat earth’s strong point. We can see way too far [sometimes]. There are so many examples of taking pictures of things that, should, on a 8,000 mile globe, not be possible to see, that should be hidden behind the curve. Every honest person knows this. Honest scientists have known this forever. That the theoretical horizon distance does not match the actual one.
As far as flight paths, they are not chosen on the basis of the shortest distance between two points. There are so many reasons why they don’t do this. One reason is safety. You know, things can go wrong with airplanes, so they would prefer not to be in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean when something goes wrong. They prefer to be not too far away from land. So you can not base anything on airline routes.
I never said there is no superior model to the globe earth model, there may be, but no one has presented a model that is superior to the globe earth model. There is not even a working flat earth model. People can’t even present a flat earth map that works, and flat earthers have no idea how what we see in the sky could be produced if we were on a flat plane.
So the point is there is no flat earth model, and globe earth model is really very good, certainly the only working model we have, and that is why thoughtful people generally accept it.
But my point is just because globe earth model is good, works nicely, it may not be an actual true representation of how the system really works.
But such an attitude leaves you behest of the powers that be. For they created the model. If they so wished, they could create a flat earth model and then everyone would believe that.
The fact you can see stuff you shouldn’t be able to, for me disproves the theory of globe earth, and strengthens my own conviction based on my intuition and observation, that the earth is a stationery plane.
Yes. Of course. there is no indication that the earth is moving. We can not detect any movement. But there is relative movement. Everything in the sky is rotating. And the sun is moving 360 degrees around the sky in a year. So those two rotations are there, and they are nicely explained by the globe earthers by the earth rotating on its axis once every 24 hours and the earth rotating around the sun once a year. So it is a very good explanation for what we see happening in the sky.
On the other hand, flat earthers, they don’t look at the sky, and obviously have no way of explaining what is happening in the sky, presuming the earth is flat.
So yes. It may be possible to create a working scientific predictive model that explains our observations, presuming the earth is flat, but no one has done this. There is no working flat earth model.
So the globe earth model, realistically, is the only working explanation of what we see happening in the sky and around us that can satisfy thoughtful people. For thoughtful people, they want to know how it works, so the globe earth model gives a very logical and reasonable and plausible explanation as to how it works. It is a very beautiful theory, a nice idea, a blue marble floating in space. Great.
But ask a flat earther, “how does it work?” He will just say, “I don’ know how it works, but I know it’s flat…” Not a very attractive proposition for a thoughtful person…
So flat earthers should come up with a working model, otherwise they can not really expect thoughtful people to take them seriously.
You can say “Because we can see too far the earth is flat.” But it does not necessarily follow. There may be some other reason why we can see too far. It may be some optical effect that causes things that should be beyond the curve to be visible sometimes. Who knows.
Flat earthers try to find problems with the globe model, and it has some problems for sure, and the idea is that if they can find problems with the globe the earth must be flat. But this is not valid, not logical. This is a negative approach. Positive approach is to present a working flat earth model. Explain how it could be flat and work… That flat earthers have been unable to do.
You know they won’t find a working model, they’ll just claim if works versus find of something.
You have to learn to write proper English.
Yes. Flat earthers who don’t have a model and can’t explain how the things we observe could work if the earth were a flat plane are certainly not logical or scientific.
But this idea, of a flat earth, it vibrates with people. It was the original idea, this idea of a globe, it is a new imposition, and does not sit very well with most people. So the idea of a flat earth, it is very comfortable with many people and resonates with them. Maybe they are correct.
Just because they do not have a working model and the globe earth people do have a working model, it does not mean the earth is necessarily a globe. It could be flat and may be we have not yet discovered the model that logically ties together all the loose ends and contradictions of the current flat earthers.
The reality is we don’t know. As I have mentioned before, it is more amusing to see the globe earthers, when challenged to prove the earth is a globe, unable to do it…
I’m not sure what I was trying to say there, but If earth is flat you should at least be able to make a model. And any proof we give you just claim is fake.
Yes. Flat earth model that works would be very nice. But so far no one has been able to make a flat earth model that works… So this is definitely a strong advantage to the globe earth model. They have got a working predictive model which quite accurately predicts and explains most of our actual observations.
your toronto example clearly shows the usual FE cherrypicking of the exception above the rule, PLUS ignoring the sometimes obvious explanation for the one deviation. There are several pictures (1 min of googling) from the same distance that all agree on the hidden height from the curve calculator.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Skyline_of_Toronto_and_Lake_Ontario,_as_seen_from_Niagara-on-the-Lake_20170418_1.jpg
What you show is the exception and the explanation lies in the tell-tale dark blue layer between the skyline and the lake: a (probably inferior) mirage due to a temperature anomaly in the atmosphere.
I am not sure but I think the reason is when the sun is behind the city you can see it. Otherwise it is hidden. But you should not be able to see it at all, if we are on a globe of 8,000 miles across. And there are way too many examples of this to ignore them all. That is the problem with science. They have a belief, a theory, and they accept the evidence that reinforces their belief and they ignore the evidence that does not support their belief.
You can not ignore this. You can check out JTolen and his work with inferred photography. He has taken some really impossible pictures, if we are on an 8,000 circumference globe.
You can not just put your head in the sand and ignore the exceptions that do not agree with the predictions of your model. That is dishonest.
The Flat Earth Model is the only one that does work. The people who push globular cosmology take their predictions of planetary movements not from predictive mathmatical models, but from observational charts that are over 5000 years old. They are on NASA’s website, have a look for yourself.
Hi Russel
First of all THERE IS NO FLAT EARTH MODEL?
So how can a non-existent model work?
That is an insane statement.
You are talking about explaining what we see happens in the sky. Flat earth people have no suggestion at all how all this could work if the earth were a flat plane.
On the other hand, globe earth model provides a perfectly logical and reasonable model which does an extremely good job of predicting and explaining what we observe happening in the sky.
That does not mean globe earth model is necessarily correct. But it is a perfectly reasonable and logical model.
Yes. It is true that modern science is not really able to predict many astrological events. For example, you ask any of the science freaks to predict the solar and lunar eclipses. They can’t do it. Fred Epstin [or some name like that] at NASA did it years ago based on the old Sumerian system…
But that does not invalidate the globe earth model, and there is no flat earth model, so your statement, “The Flat Earth model is the only one that works,” is insane. There is no working flat earth model.
Here is a couple idiotic facts you should consider before lashing out at people with statements like idiots… #1. Since you’re so smart can you find me one actual real picture taken from a camera from NASA ever. I know it might be too idiotic for you to perform but there are no pictures from NASA ever of the Earth look at the origin of the pictures themselves where they were created and who did it. #2 if everything on Earth is basically made up of water wooden buoyancy and density explain way more than the theory of gravity. #3 I know this might take you a whole five minutes to look up but look up the patents for every flying, driving, traveling machine / apparatus, whatever patented in the US patent office what scale and what model are these items all designed to travel upon? #4 Earth has only been considered a ball for the last 100 years so what about the thousands of years of travel are all these semen from the ancient time from the past are they are they wrong were they wrong did they not know how to navigate their own Maps boy they must have rambled around like fucking idiots with bad Maps it’s amazing how they built huge structures with sticks and rocks and if you believe that that they built these things with primitive tools then I got some oceanfront property in Arizona for you but what do I know I’m just an idiot nothing about Flat Earth is explained with the statement will that’s phenomena however the globe Earth is full of fucking phenomena why because you can’t even explain it we’re so fucking stupid go ahead run with it genius
If you expected an answer, this is what you get.
Epistemology is a science.
That science tells us you don’t know if it’s a flat earth or a globe.
They have a model for “Covid”, one of the greatest hoaxes they’ve ever pulled. I don’t need a working model to know its a fake disease, I simply make a number of observations which disprove Covid. The same as I do with Globe Earth.
So arguing for Flat Earth against Globe Earth is rather irrelevant. I’m simply arguing against Globe Earth and saying I assume its flat because that’s what we sense to be true plus has proofs to back it up.
On the contrary there are no proofs for Globe Earth. None whatsoever.
Hi Zenpriest
Yes. Of course. There is no proof the earth is a globe, but there is no proof it is flat either.
But there is a logical working predictive model that demonstrates how everything could work if it was a globe. So the globe earthers are putting forward a reasonable assumption, that the earth is spinning globe, and they can explain, with their model how it could work. It is a reasonable suggestion, there is no proof for it, but they do illustrate how their model could work.
Flat earthers, on the other hand, like you say, simply “feel” the earth is flat. And it may well be. But simply “feeling” the earth is flat, without being able to explain how it could possible be flat and produce the observations we see around us, that is not scientific and not a very attractive proposal to people who want to understand things logically and practically.
So the logical, practical explanation as to how a flat earth could work is missing. So you know, you can’t really expect logical practical people to accept the earth is flat when you can’t explain how it could work.
So certainly, at the moment, the globe earth model is far superior in all ways to the flat earth non-model.
It does not mean the earth is a globe, it also does not mean the earth is flat. Really we don’t know what shape the earth is and hardly anyone is prepared to admit that.
Yes we do not know anything really. So even to talk about knowing is arrogant. So, if we are to talk about knowing anything it is with the caveat that it is only inasmuch as we can know anything.
It is up to each person to decide what they believe, what they have faith in. A so called scientist will not convince me that we were not created for i see evidence of it everywhere plus I feel it.
It is human arrogance to state that only what we can see and measure can be believed, and what is ‘merely’ felt cannot be. Remember, possibly the greatest scientist Tesla pointed to energy, frequency and vibration which is likely more to do with what we feel.
The fake scientists of today are establishment shills. They are dead souls who exist to push a world which is empty of the spirit, ie the unseen.
So, perhaps we reach the realisation that discussing and arguing the shape of the earth is a moot point for proper thinkers. What is behind it is mote important, for me that is the question of were we created or are we accidental.
Of course, they have a working model (TM) for us being accidental, but it won’t change what I feel/know/believe 😉
Hi Zenpriest
Yes. Very wise words indeed.
It really does not matter what the shape of the earth is and if we can advance to the point of understanding it is impossible to comprehend the reality with information gathered through our material senses.
No matter what the shape of the earth is it is not our actual home and we can not be happy here.
Actually they do not have a working model for life being created accidentally. That is their insane religious belief. We have never seen life created from matter. That is their idea, life is simply a manifestation of matter, but they have never been able to bring life to matter by adding some chemicals.
Life is a completely different thing to matter. And life is eternal. We live forever.
So in that sense, for eternal beings, there is not really creation. Our material bodies are created and will die, but we, the spirit souls, the life, we exist eternally.
And yes, the idea that the earth is flat certainly resonates with people. So many people “feel” that the earth is flat. And that is the understanding humanity has had practically eternally. This idea of the “Blue Marble” is only a recent invention, and does not resonate very well compared to the traditional understanding of the earth in the center. And the earth is in the center, actually.
In reality globe earth model and sun-centered model is not science, it is only a religion posing as science.
The reality is we don’t know the shape of the earth, we don’t know if the sun is in the center or if the earth is in the center, and we have no way of discovering the truth through science which depends totally on the imperfect perceptions of our imperfect senses.
The truth is we can only find out about the actual workings of the universe by hearing about it from someone who knows. That means hearing from someone who has the ability of seeing how the universe is working from far far away from the earth. So it means knowledge revealed through spiritual channels is the only way to actually know the real situation.
Scientists will never know the truth. It is beyond their minds to imagine and beyond their senses to perceive.
And by the way, the next solar eclipse over the United States will be on April 8th 2024. It will be 20 more years until we get to see another one over the US. Aug. 23 2044. So you saying science cannot tell what is going on in the sky is total fucking bullshit. How can you possibly deny these realities when I just predicted these years in advance. And yes, I know the Saros series, 223 lunar months, 1000 year cycles, all that. How stupid, in one sentence you said scientist can’t predict eclipses then you said a nasa man used an ancient method last time to predict. Come on, really. That makes no sense until you put it into the context that you must lie to yourself because your weak eye is to fragile to admit your belive system of ancient Indian bullshit is crap. You are a fucking lier and you fucking know it.
Hi Jerry
Science has no way to predict solar and lunar eclipses. Ask any scientist, they can’t do it. However ancient civilizations, using a totally different model of the universe, they can do it. Like India, they have been able to predict solar and lunar eclipses to the second since the beginning of time.
The western predictions come from one person at NASA, who is now retired or dead I think, his name was something like Fred Epps and he calculated all the solar and lunar eclipse predictions that you see posted everywhere today, using and ancient Sumerian system.
The point is you can not calculate the solar and lunar eclipse times using the globe earth model of today, but ancient civilizations were able to exactly predict them with their complete different models.
“The point is you can not calculate the solar and lunar eclipse times using the globe earth model of today, but ancient civilizations were able to exactly predict them with their complete different models.”
Yep! Their completely “different models” were Flat Earth models! How’s that for a working model? Hello!
Cheers!
Naw I’m saying there is too much going on, where you put all your faith in some guy. You probably work ALOT of hours thank you for joining the circus. We are too distracted to know the truth. Your programmed to believe everything you are told, not taught told. When you didn’t raise your hand in school you were disciplined. If you couldn’t learn the way they taught you you failed. You were indoctrinated not educated
i think that Rick beats Goku in a 1v1
70% of the earth’s surface is flat and horizontal. Therefore, a spherical Earth is simply impossible.