Welcome to

We explore the modern revival of the Flat Earth Movement and the questions and theories Flat Earthers present about the shape of the earth. We also review the globe earth model and consider the possibility it may be partially or completely incorrect.

The Globe Earth Model is a Brilliant Idea!

We acknowledge and respect the valid scientific predictive model based on the assumption that the earth is a globe. The globe earth model has been constructed by some of the most intelligent and thoughtful scientists and astronomers over many years.

The globe earth model predicts quite accurately our observations. The globe is something intelligent and thoughtful scientific people can believe in and use to comprehend and understand the movements of the heavenly bodies we observe in the night sky.

The Globe Earth is a New Idea

The conception of the earth as a globe spinning in space is a relatively new idea. Nicolaus Copernicus who lived in Poland from 1473 – 1543 is widely recognized as the inventor of the heliocentric [sun-centered] model. “The publication of Copernicus’ model in his book De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), just before his death in 1543, was a major event in the history of science, triggering the Copernican Revolution and making an important contribution to the Scientific Revolution.” (Wikipedia) Prior to Copernicus it was generally accepted that the earth was in the center and the sun was moving around the earth.

Traditionally people accepted the earth as it appears to us, as flat with the stars and planets rotating above us attached to some sort of giant wheel. This is the way humanity has understood the earth and its position in the universe since the beginning of time. The common understanding was a stationary earth in the center of the universe with everything rotating around it.

There are Two Possibilities

We have been ‘educated’ to believe that the only possibility is we live on a globe 8,000 miles across floating and spinning in space. However, in reality, there are two possibilities to explain what we observe happening in the sky. The one we are familiar with is a rotating earth, and the other equally valid explanation is a stationary earth with all the luminaries we see in the sky rotating in the sky above us. From our point of view the relative motion is the same. From within the system we can not determine if we are stationary and everything is moving around us or if the things we see in the sky are stationery and we are rotating.

The only way we could resolve this conclusively would be if we could get far away enough form our solar system so we could look back, from outside the system, and see what is actually happening.

NASA Proves Earth is a Globe in 1969?

There has always been some resistance to the globe earth model as it is just an idea, there is no proof. However, in the 1960’s when NASA sent the Apollo missions to the moon and provided us with one photograph of the ‘blue marble’, the beautiful earth globe spinning in space, that was considered by many as proof that the earth is actually a globe spinning in space. Most believed man had finally got high enough in the sky to send back real photographs of earth spinning in space and the issue was finally settled.

More recently, however, discrepancies have surfaced in regards to NASA and the Apollo manned moon missions causing many to question if we actually sent men to the moon. Also NASA has admitted some of their recent photographs of the earth from space are creations of Photoshop produced by graphic artists combining imagery from many sources, not actual photographs of the earth from space.

Because of these clouds of doubt around the proclamations of NASA and NASA’s inability to prove or even support their claims in any way combined with their inability to send men to the moon now, almost fifty years later, has caused thoughtful people to question if NASA ever sent men to the moon. Nowadays a huge percentage of the population believe NASA faked their manned moon missions, that they never left low earth orbit. Today NASA tell us they currently do not have the technology to allow them to send men out of low earth orbit. So if NASA can’t do it now, in 2018, they certainly could not do it in 1969.

Flat Earthers Don’t Have a Working Model

In contrast to the globe earth, which is backed by a solid and valid scientific predictive model which works quite well, the Flat Earth Movement has no working flat earth model. Flat earthers have nothing to explain what we see the luminaries in the sky doing. Until now they have been unable to, based on the premise that the earth is flat, produce a model that will predict the occurrence of day and night as we experience it in the different parts of the planet. For example flat earthers can’t explain why, on a flat earth, the polestar is not visible from the Southern Hemisphere. There are so many inconsistencies. Almost nothing works properly in the flat earth models if we seriously test them with our actual observations. They have a widely accepted flat earth map, the AE Azimuthal Projection Map, which is obviously and provably incorrect.

Flat Earthers are not scientists. And they have no scientifically valid model or theory. They go on their feelings and instincts that the earth is flat and stationary. And they accept the traditional religious and cultural understandings and the ideas of the historical flat earth movement.

Even though the flat earthers do not have a valid working scientific model they do raise some interesting points that, at least on the surface, question the validity of globe earth model.

Proof that the Earth is Flat?

The primary ‘proof’ flat earthers present and demonstrate against the globe model is their ability to see things in the distance which should be impossible to see on a globe with a diameter of about eight thousand miles. Flat earthers present many examples of being able to see distant objects that should, on a globe, be below the horizon. In this way they challenge the globe model’s ability to predict our actual observations in these cases.

Of course scientists accept their understanding is incomplete and will acknowledge there are aspects they do not completely understand. In science everything is open to be challenged and anything that increases our understanding or that works better than our current idea is accepted and scientific models are constantly evolving with old incorrect ideas being replaced with new, hopefully, more correct ideas.

But for the flat earth people simply challenging small points in the globe earth model is not very convincing if they can’t produce a working model based their assumption of a flat earth. So unless they can present a working valid scientific predictive model they can’t expect the scientific community to take them very seriously.

If the flat earthers could produce a valid scientific model that actually worked based on their premise many scientists would consider it, even if just for entertainment, from a theoretical point of view.

At we will investigate both the Globe Earth and Flat Earth models without any prejudice in an attempt to understand the actual shape and situation of the earth.

There is every chance the current theories of science could be incorrect, either completely or in some aspects. So it is possible that the globe earth model is not correct however, at the moment, it is the only valid scientific model we have.



40 Replies to “Introduction”

  1. PP

    What kind of shill are you? “In science everything is open to be challenged and …” -BS. Almost nothing in science is up for debate and certainly not the Flat Earth. You cannot even discuss vaccines, the CO2 hox, or radiation. So this page is of course put here to mislead people. You should be ashamed of yourself!

    • madhudvisa

      I agree with you. But strictly speaking, in science everything should be open to be challenged… But as you correctly point out it is not. Science is a religion with doctrine, beliefs and high priests and if you are not inline with these then as you point out you can not discuss anything. So what is going on as science today is not actually science but religion. If it was actually science you could put forward alternative theories, you could question the current theories. But today that is not permitted. Religion, not science…

      • metaforze

        You guys are jokers! Everything in science is up to debate, if you do actual research and let other scientists review it, it can get published in scientific journals. That’s what happened with all current (globe) models etc.

        However, you have no actual research, so isn’t it logical that true scientists will not listen? You cannot post a meme to a scientific journal and expect them to listen. When you come with real evidence of a new theory, people will listen, but it isn’t there yet.

        • Flat Earth Facts

          No. Science is a religion. You can not go against the established scientific opinion. That has been proven time and time and time again. Study the history of science. Scientists have to accept the tenants of the religion otherwise they are excommunicated.

          • Navigator

            “Nicolaus Copernicus who lived in Poland from 1473 – 1543 is widely recognized as the inventor of the globe earth model. :”
            Rubbish. You don’t know anything do you. Or you are a con artist
            De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium was about movement not shape.
            As the wikipedia article you cote c;early staed “who formulated a model of the universe that placed the Sun rather than Earth at its center. In all likelihood, Copernicus developed his model independently of Aristarchus of Samos, an ancient Greek astronomer who had formulated such a model some eighteen centuries earlier”
            “Some time before 1514, Copernicus wrote an initial outline of his heliocentric theory known only from later transcripts, by the title (perhaps given to it by a copyist), Nicolai Copernici de hypothesibus motuum coelestium a se constitutis commentariolus—commonly referred to as the Commentariolus. It was a succinct theoretical description of the world’s heliocentric mechanism, without mathematical apparatus, and differed in some important details of geometric construction from De revolutionibus; but it was already based on the same assumptions regarding Earth’s triple motions. “

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Hi Navigator. I delete comments by both flat earthers and globe earthers which are simply presenting their respective religious views. You may have noticed any place where there is a discussion between flat earthers and globe earthers is not a discussion at all, but is just two opposing groups repeating their beliefs without thinking.

            This is not the purpose of the FlatEarthFacts site. Here we are investigating the possibility that another working scientific model, one that works just as well as the globe earth model, could be constructed but using quite different initial assumptions.

            The globe earthers tend to just blindly believe what they are taught, even though actual scientists will admit that we are inside the system we are trying to observe, therefore from our position within the system we can only observe relative motion.

            So all we can do is measure the sun’s relative motion to the earth, for example. But we have no way of knowing what the absolute movements are.

            So the point is you can construct a valid scientific model with the initial assumption that the sun is in the center of the solar system and that is the basis of the currently accepted model, however, you can also construct an equally valid scientific model with the initial assumption of the earth in the center. And there is absolutely no way we can determine, from our position within the system, which model is correct.

            So it does not matter who first proposed the sun-centered model and when, you can produce valid scientific models in both cases: heliocentric [sun centered] and geocentric [earth centered] and we have no way of telling which is correct.

            The only way we could conclusively say what is happening in the solar system, would be if we could get outside the system and observe it. But we can’t at the moment. So for us either heliocentric or geocentric are both equally valid possibilities.

            Actually there are numerous points that indicate the earth is stationary. I have discussed it extensively in other places. So realistically it is more likely that the system is geocentric rather than heliocentric.

            The reason actually, that today we believe in the heliocentric idea is based on religion, not science. Either option is equally valid. But many “scientists” can not tolerate the idea that the earth may be in a special position, in the center, with the other celestial bodies circumambulating it, they can not bear the idea. So because of this religious idea they choose the other alternative and switched from the geocentric to the heliocentric idea, putting the sun in the center and moving the earth out of the central position.

            While both models are equally valid as models, of course they are not both correct, there is an actual real absolute motion of the sun, moon, planets, in the solar system, but from our position in the system we can not determine what that absolute motion is. We can only measure the relative motion.

          • Navigator

            So you agree that ““Nicolaus Copernicus who lived in Poland from 1473 – 1543 is widely recognized as the inventor of the globe earth model. :”
Is rubbish, you don’t know anything and you are a con artist.
“Hi Navigator. I delete comments” Thanks for confirmng you have been deleting comments which prove you wrong,
“No. Science is a religion. You can not go against the established scientific opinion. That has been proven time and time and time again. Study the history of science. Scientists have to accept the tenants of the religion otherwise they are excommunicated.”
More rubbish.

            “So it does not matter who first proposed the sun-centered model and when, ” So why did you categorically state it does?
“you can produce valid scientific models in both cases”
No, one can’t.
“heliocentric [sun centered] and geocentric [earth centered] and we have no way of telling which is correct.” If i post proof you are incorrect will you guarantee you won’t delete it?

            “At we will investigate both the Globe Earth and Flat Earth models without any prejudice in an attempt to understand the actual shape and situation of the earth.”
But you have now confirmed that is not true.

          • Flat Earth Facts

            Hi Navigator. So everything, including the comment you said I deleted, is back. You have made one correct point in this comment. I have misattributed the invention of the globe earth model to Nicolaus Copernicus. Actually he established the heliocentric [sun centered] model as the generally accepted model. Previous to him it was widely accepted that the earth was in the center and sun was moving around the earth [geocentric model]. Both models are equally valid, we can not know, as I have discussed before which model is correct, for our position within the system.

            So the choice between the geocentric model and the heliocentric model is one of religion only. Mostly the scientists don’t want to think of the earth as being in any special position, like in the center with the sun moving around it. That idea is unbearable to many of them. So it is their religious choice, to believe that the earth is not in the center, and instead to put the sun in the center. They can not know what is actually true.

            They have given a very nice explanation for the retrograde motion of the planets in the heliocentric model, that is the only “proof” you will be able to find for the heliocentric model. If you find anything else let me know.

            And at we are investigating both the globe and flat earth models without any prejudice in an attempt to understand the actual shape and situation of the earth. That is a fact. I have nothing against the possibility of the earth being a globe. And certainly we have a very good well thought out scientific model presenting that possibility. So one of the ideas is to see if it is possible to propose an alternative model, using very different initial assumptions, that can work as well or even better than the existing globe earth model. So that is part of trying to understand the actual situation.

        • hana

          Hm…proofs off globe🤔…o yes , you probably think that 🌍🌎🌏 are solid and totally realistic? All they have is tone of equations and assumptions backed by CGI pics.



    • madhudvisa

      There is no real tangible flat earth model that explains what we observe happening in the sky, that explains correctly the pattern of light and darkness we experience on the planet, or that works in any way, that is in any way comparable to the globe earth model in its ability to model and predict the observations we make, at least not that I am aware of. If you have one please explain it [BUT NOT IN CAPITAL LETTERS PLEASE…]

    • Michael

      Real tangible flat earth models? Models? Can all these Models not contradict each other?

      So, please educate me. If our earth is Flat. This means the Sun, the Moon and all Stars should be Flat too. Unless you are claiming that our earth is the only place that is Flat.

      And if the Earth is Flat. Then it should be easy to calculate how wide this Earth is by observing the angles of High Point, Low Point and the Edges of the Earth from it.

      I think it is a Conspiracy from the Flat Earth Sciences Community hiding the True Working Flat Earth Model from the general public so that all of you can be smarter than the rest of us who can calculate the Earth is a Globe just as the Sun and the Moon is a Globe.

    • Alain Bos

      me 2 !

      It seems like a nice webpage to regularly browse to and stay informed of the science globers use to defend their case or read about the science used that disproves claims by flat-earthers.

      Thus far I have not seen any scientific-explanations besides an occasional reference to real-science and a couple of assumptions also supposedly based on either the lack of science used by flat-earthers or the use of science used by globers !

      I myself, do not think a photo of outer space or the mentioning of a fish-eye-lens constitutes as empirical evidence , photo’s can be altered and who can prove that a fish-eye-lens was ever used ?

      No, the real battle happens when mathematicians together with physicists will make serious effort to prove the curve going full circle and the appearance of a flat horizon on sea is properly explained and I may hope that the behavior of water (to level out) will be different on a curved earth and thus scientifically prove that oceans are curved too…..

  3. Chris Dealtry

    Yeah, capital letters are owned by the Rome-Phonecian-Cyst-Stem-Naval-Law-Thing.

    Anyway, I’ve had a look at some arguments about horizon-distance and altitude.

    Apparently, it’s possible to see Corsica and Elba from Genoa.

    So, all we need to do is a sideways diagram using the distances (150km approx) and heights (Genoa and Corsican/Elban mountains), superimposed on a small section of the claimed curvature of the planet/plane-ette? This wouldn’t include horizonal ‘mirage’ humidity-refraction distortion (or whatever it is), although that varies. There are mathematical formulae, but lets just do an example. This is to assume flat earthers can explain why we can’t see accross the atlantic (for example).

    There is also the fact that ship’s masts can be seen coming over the horizon before the rest of the ship. Not sure how flat earthers explain this either, might try it out on a good seaside day (in case the films and naval stories are all lies, which would be no surprise given naval law on land tricks and telllievision reel/real tricks.

  4. Mark

    your statement: “The primary ‘proof’ flat earthers present and demonstrate against the globe model is their ability to see things in the distance which should be impossible to see on a globe “. Is false. It is not the “Primary proof”, it is ONE of over 200 PROOFS, that the Earth is flat.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Hi Mark. “We can see too far” IS the primary proof quoted by flat earthers by far.

      Coinidently I have just published a video analyzing these 200 flat earth proofs and you can watch it here:

      So please watch this video and you will see that there are not 200 proofs at all because many of the flat earth proofs are different examples of the same proof. So when you group all the different examples of the same proof together you only have 34 flat earth proofs. And this on, seeing too far, is by far the most repeated proof. Out of the 200 proofs at least 40 of them are just different examples of “We can see too far therefore the earth is flat.” And look at the experiments flat earthers do to try and prove the earth is flat, it is almost always playing with a P900 camera and trying to take photos of things that should be hidden behind the curve of the globe. So there is no question at all, “We can see to far” is certainly the primary proof quoted by most flat earthers. Anyhow please watch the video:

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Yes. Of course, that is the problem these days, everyone has their opinion and they think just because they think it has some value. But realistically you can’t just think the earth is diamond shaped or flat or square and expect intelligent people to take you seriously. You have to have a working scientific predictive model that, given your assumptions of the shape of the earth, explains and accurately predicts the actual observations we experience. Globe earth model does this quite well. But other models, flat earth, square earth, diamond shaped earth, etc, none of the proponents of these different shaped earths can provide us with a valid, working scientific predictive model that matches our actual observations. So without this it is just baseless speculation with no credibility at all.

  5. SYates

    I am not going to try and argue any scientific points, because this site is obviously not interested in scientific facts. This is evident when it refers to science as a religion… lol.

    But let me just put this out there… to have a conspiracy of this magnitude, it would have to include thousands of people around the world. This means every country in the world would have to buy off on this conspiracy. That means private industry space exploration companies like SpaceX or Virgin Galactic are in on it. They are in the business of taking the public to space! Have you seen the images from the SpaceX rocket? Clearly the earth is round in those images.

    More importantly, it was first determined the world was round back in the 6th century by Pythagorus. So that means this conspiracy has been going on long before America and NASA ever existed. That means for 1500 years, this conspiracy has been going on…

    I mean seriously; what is the benefit of claiming the earth is round? How does that control us or make NASA money? What is the benefit for maintaining the most elaborate conspiracy ever? What is there to gain?

  6. metaforze

    You say in your introduction that the globe model is relatively “new”, stating that Copernicus was the first to say the earth was a globe. This is obviously false as the ancient Greeks already thought the earth was a globe, and even calculated its circumference.

    A quick google search finds: “Nicolaus Copernicus (19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) was a Renaissance-era mathematician and astronomer, who formulated a model of the universe that placed the Sun rather than Earth at the center of the universe, in all likelihood independently of Aristarchus of Samos, who had formulated such a model some eighteen centuries earlier.”

    That’s right, Copernicus is widely known for his heliocentric model, instead of a geocentric model! But both models had the earth as a globe all along…

  7. Ben Dover

    What is there to gain by the world hiding the fact that the earth is flat?
    Answer this and you may have a case. Imagine the conspiracy of all nations keeping this quiet.
    The more I type, the more real it becomes.

  8. Dave Smith

    You state: “Today NASA tell us they currently do not have the technology to allow them to send men out of low earth orbit.”
    Where is your source for such a claim? Who make this claim at NASA?

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Hi Dave. Ask NASA yourself. There are videos with NASA people saying this. There is one with a NASA guy talking about their new Orion capsule and he says it in that video. And there are other places. Do your own research. Ask NASA yourself, and you will find, if you can find anyone at NASA who will talk, that they are still trying to solve many problems in regard to sending men out of low-earth orbit. They have never done it, except for the Apollo missions, no person has ever left low-earth orbit. And today, NASA is still trying to figure out how to to do it. Which means, obviously, that the Apollo astronauts never left low-earth orbit.

      You know they have no propulsion system that works in space? That is a bit of a problem. All they have is the force of the rocket they blast off from the earth with. And they have to point really accurately at where the moon will be when they get there, because if they are a bit off they will miss it. They are depending on getting caught in the moon’s gravitational field and that has to pull the ship around it. Of course if they are a bit too close they will crash into the Moon, and if they are a bit too far away, they will just continue on in space forever…

      And for getting back to earth, well they are depending on conserving that energy from the initial blast off from earth while the capsule is orbiting the moon, and they do the same thing, aim at the earth.

      But they have no propulsion system in space. So all they can do is puff some little retro rockets to slightly adjust their course.

      So a very very very tricky thing. Anyhow do your own research and you will find out that the manned Apollo moon landings were most certainly faked. You will be very lucky if you can find anyone at NASA who will talk about the Apollo mission. Because they all know it was fake and it is too difficult to try and continue the lie now…

      Man’s greatest achievement, turns out to be faked by NASA…

  9. zenpriest

    If our own senses tell us that something isn’t right, and it also cannot be shown to be true by simple, repeatable experiments / demonstrations, we should remain skeptical and neutral at any claims of it being true.
    It follows that if our senses tell us something is true, and we can support this with simple, repeatable experiments / demonstrations, then we should generally believe it to be true, while we seek more evidence telling us it is or is not true.
    All else is not science, it is propaganda, religion, programming and we must reject it. It is that simple.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Rubbish. Our sense perception is not reliable. There is so much going on around us that our senses can not perceive and what we do perceive is a perception, not the actual reality. You can not get any real knowledge through sense perception and the so-called scientific method. Real knowledge descends from a person who has the real knowledge, who can explain it to you. That is the only way you can get real knowledge. You have to find someone who knows it and learn it form him. Sense perception and the scientific method is incapable of giving you real knowledge. Because the senses are imperfect and the whole scientific process is fatally flawed.

      • ON THE LEVEL

        Some other questions. What do you have that hasn’t been given to you? From whom did you get your senses? A person with real knowledge presumably? If a person with real knowledge explains something to you how do you receive it? Through your senses? Your senses are important & they provide real valuable knowledge to minds attuned and prepared to utilize them. You shouldn’t take them for granted.

        • Flat Earth Facts

          Senses are useless OTL. They are imperfect and very limited. Anyhow I already explained all these things and you didn’t get it. Perhaps if you read it again you will get it? The only way to find something is to find someone who actually knows it and hear it from him. There is no other way, hearing from someone who knows, or hearing from someone who has heard from someone who knows and can remember it and repeat it properly.

          These things are avan manasa gochara, means beyond the ability of our senses to perceive. So they can not be understood through sense perception.

  10. zenpriest

    Our creator gave us our senses as a means to perceive truth. It’s the starting point of all knowledge, not the be-all – that’s why I said to test it with repeatable tests.

  11. David Boffey

    “You know they have no propulsion system that works in space?”? Thanks for telling us you are a science illiterate. Again.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      Explain David,

      What is the propulsion system they use in space?

      Actually they have no propulsion system in space. If you study the Apollo flights the only way they were able to get back to earth is by spinning around the moon and getting out of the moon orbit using the same energy from the original blast off from earth to get back to earth. They have no way of getting any extra propulsion except from the original rocket blast on earth.

      They have some little jets they can puff a bit of gas in this direction or that direction. May or may not slightly adjust their direction. But they have no propulsion system.

    • Matt Haddock

      David, I’m probably about as far away from someone who possesses an understanding of rocket science as you’re ever going to encounter… Hence, if this sounds like an unusually dumb question that will have to serve as the most presentable explanation I am able to think of at this time.

      That being said, if it isn’t too much of an insult to your intelligence, please indulge me with a dumbed-down cursory explanation, in layman’s terms ~ geared for the typical dilettante ~ for a question I have regarding spaceship propulsion: If NASA has no propulsion system that works in the vacuum of outer space, then how did Apollo crews blast off from the moon when it was time for them to return to Earth? Thought I understood there is a hard vacuum on the moon, with no atmosphere ~ same as in outer space?

      • Flat Earth Facts

        Matt, the Apollo manned missions are only a NASA fairytale. The most any of the Apollo missions ever did was to blast off into earth orbit and orbit earth for a while and then splash land in the ocean.

        They never landed on the moon. So there is no question of ever blasting off from the moon.

        The whole thing is a fairytale.

        It is NASA who say there was no propulsion in space for the Apollo lunar missions. It is not that propulsion in space is impossible. It is a question of not being able to carry enough fuel. So, according to the NASA fairytale, the rocket takes off from earth, and that initial rocket blast provides the thrust or propulsion that will power the entire return trip to the moon.

        That initial blast only puts the rocket into earth orbit, spinning around the earth quite fast, so then at the exactly correct moment they fire their trans lunar escape rocket. They have to fire it at the exact moment so rocket ends up heading directly to the spot the moon will be in in 3 days… Because if they are even a few hundred meters out the rocket is going to either completely miss the moon and be lost in space forever, or it will hit the moon with a big explosion. They have to get it at that exact right tiny spot where the moon’s gravity will grab that rocket into its orbit. Then they have the rocket, still moving from the propulsion of that original rocket blast on earth, mostly the energy has been conserved magically and now it is orbiting the moon. So they go down magically to the moon and play golf and zoom around on their dune buggy, then magically pop back up to that orbiting craft. Then they fire the third rocket, the trams earth something rocket, at the exact moment so it will get caught in the earth’s gravity, not miss and not crash into the earth.

        And all this is powered by the initial rocket blast from eath.

        So this is the point. NASA did not use any propulsion in space on their Apollo Moon missions. They used two rockets, not for propulsion, but just to break it out of earth orbit and send it to the moon and then to break it out of moon orbit and send it back to earth. But ALL the propulsion for the whole mission was from that initial rocket on earth.

        Yes. They had some little puffers which might have been able to make some tiny course corrections. And that Luna Lander being pulled up with a crane from the moon with the camera on the moon panning up to get the shot, with no cameraman on the moon. You know you have to be a very gullible fool to believe that is real…

  12. zenpriest

    You are not getting it. Your senses are the apparatus through which you perceive truth. Regardless of whether that is from direct, or vicarious experience. Without the senses, the brain could never receive the information.
    I’m finding it strange that you’re claiming no one can perceive truth directly – only from another source. That’s completely at odds with what this site is meant to be about – questioning the narrative. You seem to be suggesting we can only be told truth by some authority.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      That is a fact. Our senses are imperfect and very limited. We can not perceive the reality with our senses. There are so many things in this reality that our senses are simily unable to perceive. The only way we can get perfect knowledge is from someone who has the perfect knowledge. There is no other way.

  13. zenpriest

    The scientific fact remains, there is no proof of the earth being a spinning ball. Only proofs resting on unproven assumptions (i.e. nothing).
    Whereas everyone can observe and verify the earth is a stationary plane.
    Globe earth is just a fantastical story dreamt up by the same people controlling us.
    Anyone claiming it’s a spinning ball needs to go and prove it. Otherwise what we observe is true.

    • Flat Earth Facts

      No. Globe earth model has got a working scientific predictive model to back it up. So the globe earth people, they not only say the earth is a globe, they can explain almost all our observations using their globe earth model. So it is a logically and intellectually sound theory.

      You say everyone can observe and verify the earth is a stationary plane, however that is not a fact. If we were on a 10,000 mile diameter ball there would be no difference in our perceptions. That is effectively a flat plane, as far as the hundred miles or so maximum we can observe. And if the whole thing is contained in a moving frame of reference the movement of the whole system will not be detected from within the system. Like when you are flying in an airplane at 600 mph. Inside the plane you do not feel any movement.

      So globe earth model is a completely reasonable and very well thought out scientific theory. It may be wrong, and I think it is, but you have to give them credit for having a very good working model.

      Flat earth, on the other hand, there is no model and flat earthers can not explain how anything could work if the earth was a flat plane. So globe earth is science and flat earth is religion.

      There is no way actually for us to tell, using our senses, if we are on a flat plane or if we are on a spinning globe. If we want to know we have to find someone who knows and hear the truth from him. There is no other way to know.

  14. Corvus

    1) What about Roald Amundsen and Robert Scott who reached the south pole 111 years ago. Were they fake or part of the conspiracy?
    2) If you take a plane from Sydney, Australia to Santiago, Chile which is approx. a 13 hour flight, can you make a stop-over in Los Angeles after about 6 hours of flying? On a flat earth map you can. Unfortunately, a flight from Sydney to Los Angeles takes about 13.5 hours..
    3) It would be very easy to prove that the earth is flat or a globe if you make a big mark on the coast of Antarctica and sail along the coast until you reach your starting point again. On the flat earth model you would have traveled about 78,000 miles. In reality it’s about 11,000 miles which is consistent with the globe model. People have done this journey many times and it shows that the earth is a globe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *