A flat earth, and Noah's Ark.

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Any theory that makes any sort of pretense to be scientific must also make predictions that if shown to be false would invalidate the theory. For example when we in northern countries observe the night sky we see the stars moving in a circle around the pole star (Polaris or the North Star). For us this rotation is clockwise. However people in southern countries cannot even see the pole star but they do observe a counterclockwise rotation. If our world is flat then the stars will revolve around it all in the same direction at every point on the surface because wherever you are on the surface you are always looking at the same stars. Australians observe the stars rotating in an opposite direction to Canadians, hence the flat earth theory is invalidated.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Not able to prove on an Internet forum =/= not able to prove.

Of course you can print a reasonably accurate map of a piece of the earth's surface - the distortion because the globe is so big, maps most countries can be printed on maps with the distortion so small that it becomes immeasurable on the size of the printed map. (I suspect Russia may be an exception)

The fact that you are unwilling to conduct a simple experiment (measuring various maps for yourself) shows me that I was correct in my initial assessment of your intentions - you are not truly curious and looking for the truth, you are trolling. A truly curious person does not confine his searches to Internet forums when presented with other sources.

PS: I have already proven the most common flat-earth map wrong on this thread...
The problem is, if the world is flat, then the globe model is wrong, then the globe representation as a map is wrong and is distorted.

And, conversely, if the earth is a globe, then the representation of such, on a flat piece of paper is impossible without distortion.

The thing is, you argument assumes that the globe is the truth, thus the flat representation is wrong. Your evidence is based on your conclusion being right.

Your evidence is not determining your conclusion. Your conclusion is fabricating the evidence.

The flat earth does the same thing.

I asked another poster if they could show me an experiment that anyone can do, to prove that the earth is a globe.

Can you?
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
The problem is, if the world is flat, then the globe model is wrong, then the globe representation as a map is wrong and is distorted.

And, conversely, if the earth is a globe, then the representation of such, on a flat piece of paper is impossible without distortion.

The thing is, you argument assumes that the globe is the truth, thus the flat representation is wrong. Your evidence is based on your conclusion being right.

Your evidence is not determining your conclusion. Your conclusion is fabricating the evidence.

The flat earth does the same thing.

I asked another poster if they could show me an experiment that anyone can do, to prove that the earth is a globe.

Can you?

In the post previous to yours I disproved flat earth theory. The only way the different observed rotation of the stars in the north and south can be explained is by a spherical rotating earth.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Searril
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Flat earth. Globe earth. A simple proof to find out. At the ocean shore pick a stable subject. Either a boardwalk post, a gas station, whatever, a subject that is small, but a subject that is stationary and doesn't move. Take a helicopter and fly at sea level directly away from the subject towards the ocean, 90 degrees away from the shore. Fly until you no longer see the subject. Stop forward motion. Turn around 180 degrees. Now fly straight up until you see the whole subject, including the bottom of the subject. Stop upward motion. Now fly down to sea level. Flying at sea level, start forward motion. The top of the subject will appear first. As you progress towards the subject you will eventually see the bottom of the subject.
The proof is the ocean is curved, the earth is not flat, it is a globe.
Simple proof.
This simple proof of yours is one of the biggest misconceptions of the globe earth "evidence". This is one reason that I question, not that the earth is a globe, but that they have the size all wrong.

In your test, above, you say to turn 180 degrees and fly straight up until you see the entire object again.

What if you don't have to fly up to see it? What if it is still there even if the calculated curve of the earth should be greater than the height of the object, yet you can still see it?

We have gone over this before. The curve of the earth is, for all intents and purposes of our argument, 8 inches of curve for one mile of distance from the observer.

So, the first mile is an 8 inch drop. The second, however, due to the spherical shape of the surface of, say, the ocean, is 32 inches. The formula for the curve is the number of miles, squared, multiplied 8 inches. Charts for this are posted all over the internet and all agree.

So, at 50 miles the curve would place an object 1600 feet below the visible line of site. 30 miles would be obscured by 600 feet. 100 miles would put an object 6600 feet below the horizon.

However, there are observable structures, recorded in many places, observed without refute and over many years and accepted as truth, that are absolutely proven to be visible on any clear day, on numerous occasions by many people and accepted as being visible..........Yet they should be impossible to see due to the curve of the earth.

There are also examples where a person on shore has observed a ship or boat heading away from them on a large body of water and being observed to disappear over the horizon. However, with a telescope or camera with a telescopic lens, the object can still be viewed in perfect, un distorted detail.

Like I said, this phenomena, being impossible with the earth as it is being presented by science and believed by all sane people, proves that:

The earth is either, not a globe, sphere or does not have any curve at all..... or.... the curve of this globe earth is much less than what they are saying.

In short, the earth is either flat, or a much much bigger globe.

You cannot deny it. Unless you state that the light bends around the curve, which would mean the sun's light should be visible long after sunset as it's light would also bend around the curve and be just as visible as a far off light house that should be concealed by the curve.

They have also done laser tests to prove that, over large distances the surface of the ocean or any body of water is not curved. Unless the lasar bends with it.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
In short, the earth is either flat, or a much much bigger globe.

It is not as simple as either/or. There could be other factors operating. One I have mentioned is the lensing effect of the atmosphere particularly over water. At the moment all I can do is make that suggestion, I will have to study the physics of it.
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
It is not as simple as either/or. There could be other factors operating. One I have mentioned is the lensing effect of the atmosphere particularly over water. At the moment all I can do is make that suggestion, I will have to study the physics of it.

I did find this in Wikipedia:

Atmospheric refraction is the deviation of light or other electromagnetic wave from a straight line as it passes through the atmosphere due to the variation in air density as a function of height.[1] This refraction is due to the velocity of light through air decreasing (the index of refraction increases) with increased density. Atmospheric refraction near the ground produces mirages and can make distant objects appear to shimmer or ripple, elevated or lowered, stretched or shortened with no mirage involved. The term also applies to the refraction of sound. Atmospheric refraction is considered in measuring the position of both astronomical and terrestrial objects.

Astronomical or celestial refraction causes astronomical objects to appear higher in the sky than they are in reality. Terrestrial refraction usually causes terrestrial objects to appear higher than they really are, although in the afternoon when the air near the ground is heated, the rays can curve upward making objects appear lower than they really are.

Refraction not only affects lightrays but all electromagnetic radiation, although in varying degrees (see dispersion in optics). For example, in visible light, blue is more affected than red. This may cause astronomical objects to be spread out into a spectrum in high-resolution images.

Crescent Moon refracted by the atmosphere as it disappears below the horizon.[2]
Whenever possible, astronomers will schedule their observations around the time of culmination of an object when it is highest in the sky. Likewise sailors will never shoot a star which is not at least 20° or more above the horizon. If observations close to the horizon cannot be avoided, it is possible to equip a telescope with control systems to compensate for the shift caused by the refraction. If the dispersion is a problem too, (in case of broadband high-resolution observations) atmospheric refraction correctors can be employed as well (made from pairs of rotating glass prisms). But as the amount of atmospheric refraction is a function of the temperature gradient, the temperature, pressure, and humidity (the amount of water vapour is especially important at mid-infrared wavelengths) the amount of effort needed for a successful compensation can be prohibitive. Surveyors, on the other hand, will often schedule their observations in the afternoon when the magnitude of refraction is minimum.

Atmospheric refraction becomes more severe when there are strong temperature gradients, and refraction is not uniform when the atmosphere is inhomogeneous, as when there is turbulence in the air. This is the cause of twinkling of the stars and various deformations of the shape of the sun at sunset and sunrise.

So the atmosphere does produce 'lensing effects" particularly near the horizon.



 
Upvote 0

squirrel123

Active Member
Sep 9, 2015
276
354
44
✟43,176.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
The problem is, if the world is flat, then the globe model is wrong, then the globe representation as a map is wrong and is distorted.

And, conversely, if the earth is a globe, then the representation of such, on a flat piece of paper is impossible without distortion.

The thing is, you argument assumes that the globe is the truth, thus the flat representation is wrong. Your evidence is based on your conclusion being right.

Your evidence is not determining your conclusion. Your conclusion is fabricating the evidence.

The flat earth does the same thing.

I asked another poster if they could show me an experiment that anyone can do, to prove that the earth is a globe.

Can you?
I did. Do I have to spell it out?

Find a model globe and a few different maps. Measure the distances between various cities in various countries with a piece of string and a ruler.

Which set of measurements matched reality?

Remember that the correct distances are easily verified online - and no, those distances aren't part of the cover up - it would be way too easily proven wrong by people who actually travel.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Searril

Newbie
Jul 25, 2011
6
7
✟10,355.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
We have massive evidence for many large scale local floods. One would think that a more recent world wide flood would have wiped out the evidence of these local floods. It hasn't and there is absolutely no evidence of such a world wide flood.

I see posts like some of the posts in this thread on various forums and websites around the internet. Not trying to be harsh here, but these kinds of things are what immediately turn people off to even a consideration of the bible. When people insist on things like a global flood or one of every animal from the entire earth on the ark or a flat earth and the like all you're doing is making the bible out to be ridiculous and therefore turning off a huge amount of people to the message.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BrianAK
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I did. Do I have to spell it out?

Find a model globe and a few different maps. Measure the distances between various cities in various countries with a piece of string and a ruler.

Which set of measurements matched reality?

Remember that the correct distances are easily verified online - and no, those distances aren't part of the cover up - it would be way too easily proven wrong by people who actually travel.
The bolded word above "reality" is the variable. If the world is flat, then the distances cannot be bent into a globe. If the world is a sphere then the distances cannot be splayed into a flat piece of paper.

However, it all depends on what you start with. You must assume that the world is a sphere to have all the measurements align with the globe model. If you start with a Flat earth model then those measurements will be conducive to that original model.

Starting at the improper point of origin, idea or belief and correctly following the directions will still have you arrive at the wrong place or give you the wrong answers.

Check it out.....surveyors never account for the curve of the earth or make allowance for the distortion that would need to be applied if the earth was a globe, when building a canal, railway, bridge or anything.... just ask them.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
It is not as simple as either/or. There could be other factors operating. One I have mentioned is the lensing effect of the atmosphere particularly over water. At the moment all I can do is make that suggestion, I will have to study the physics of it.
Whenever I read about an observable and repeatable fact regarding this phenomena... I always get "it's an optical illusion" of some sort of "refraction" , "lensing" or some other uncomprehendable scientific event that is fooling everyone.

Someone can go to a seashore, see an object that should be thousands of feet over the curve of the horizon and it's explained away by "illusion". Yet, it happens in numerous places, under numerous conditions and has been happening for years.

However, tell someone that the ship disappearing, as it goes over the curve of the earth, is distortion of the light at the transverse line between sky and water, while the ship is still visible when viewed through a telescope... is never accepted.

I have looked into the rotation of the stars at the different poles and I get the same "spin" LOL from both camps here. It seems that everything that would clear up a distinct globe or flat earth model to the average layman, is cloaked in the concepts of angles and view points and observation placement. Nobody is giving anything that I can nail down as solid explanations.....for either model.

Do you think, just maybe, that God wanted it this way?
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Check it out.....surveyors never account for the curve of the earth or make allowance for the distortion that would need to be applied if the earth was a globe, when building a canal, railway, bridge or anything.... just ask them.

You are completely wrong. They absolutely do take this into account. Even artillerymen take a rotating spherical earth into account when firing long range high angle weapons like the M777 i55 mm gun. If they aimed directly at the target the earth would have already rotated the target away from the point of aim by the time the round arrives.
 
Upvote 0

squirrel123

Active Member
Sep 9, 2015
276
354
44
✟43,176.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
The bolded word above "reality" is the variable. If the world is flat, then the distances cannot be bent into a globe. If the world is a sphere then the distances cannot be splayed into a flat piece of paper.

However, it all depends on what you start with. You must assume that the world is a sphere to have all the measurements align with the globe model. If you start with a Flat earth model then those measurements will be conducive to that original model.

Starting at the improper point of origin, idea or belief and correctly following the directions will still have you arrive at the wrong place or give you the wrong answers.

Check it out.....surveyors never account for the curve of the earth or make allowance for the distortion that would need to be applied if the earth was a globe, when building a canal, railway, bridge or anything.... just ask them.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?

My point of origin is real distances between real cities, as verified on a daily basis by hundreds of thousands of international and domestic travellers - real people, at least some of whom aren't stupid.

I demonstrated earlier in this thread how distorted the most common flat earth map is by simply testing the possibility of flying between Perth and Johannesburg in the common time. Don't you think someone would notice if that flight took three times the advertised time?

Your kind of argument could have stood up a few decades ago. International air travel has completely invalidated it.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
You are completely wrong. They absolutely do take this into account. Even artillerymen take a rotating spherical earth into account when firing long range high angle weapons like the M777 i55 mm gun. If they aimed directly at the target the earth would have already rotated the target away from the point of aim by the time the round arrives.
Yep, saw a whole section on the rotation of the earth affecting the trajectory of a bullet from a sniper rifle. Again, it was refuted by a person of opposite view.

Like I said, the experts on each side have all the answers for the questions put to them by the other.

Why does this affect a bullet, after it leaves the muzzle but has no affect on an airplane, when it is also off the ground?

I saw a whole video, by an engineer, on why an airplane should not be able to fly and land due to this affect of the rotation of the earth. Only to have it refuted by another expert who's points and explanation of this view would negate the affect on a bullet..

It just goes in circles... Like I said, maybe God wants it to be ambiguous. Since it really has no affect on Christianity or salvation, I'm not too concerned.

It is interesting to investigate and listening to both sides banter about what is scientific fact and how it proves each of their views.
 
Upvote 0

RBPerry

Christian Baby Boomer
Supporter
Oct 14, 2013
798
300
75
Northern California
✟86,295.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Firstly, they were on the ark for one whole year.
Secondly, he didn't need all 22,100 species of animals (doesn't that number seem low ).
Thirdly, if you cannot believe this bible story, or the creation story.. how do you believe the Exodus stories, Jericho, God stopping the sun, Elijah and Mound Carmel, Daniel and the den of Lions, Shaddrach Meshach and Abednigo in the fiery furnace and Samson.
Fourth, If you cannot believe any of this..... why do you believe any of the Bible. Why do you only believe the part that says you are saved from hell and have everlasting life. Why do you believe there even is a Hell, a heaven?
Fifth, If any and/or all of these are true and Christ is real.... Then, why can't the ark be real.

Yes, the flat earth is a stretch. However, there are some real good questions out there that I have to find answers for.

The issue isn't what I or anyone else believes, it is what makes sense and what doesn't. You need to look for the spiritual messages in the bible, not the literal. One doesn't need to believe the bible is infallible to believe in Christ, and the way of salvation. I can give you some real problematic issues in the bible, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. We must remember humans wrote the bible, and yes they were inspired by God, and the Holy Spirit. We also must remember what the first church did with it.
Tell me this, who wrote Genesis, and Exodus?

There are many truths in the bible, and Jesus let us know what He expected of us, and how we are to live our lives. I believe he detested the Jewish rituals, and rules, because His message to us is quite different that what we see in the old testament. That is why the Gnostics didn't believe that the god of the Old Testament, was the same as the god of the new testament, I'm not endorsing their beliefs, I'm just saying there was much controversy about what should and shouldn't be in our cannon. The Catholic bible wasn't ratified until the 16th century, and if it hadn't been for the reformation I believe they still would have been fighting over what should and shouldn't be in the bible.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
43
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Also, there is the faking of the earth shot, the question of "who photographed the Lunar landing? Who photographed Neil as he walked down the ladder? Why, upon leaving the moon, did the video camera pan upward and follow the blast off???? HOW.

Why was there no crater under the lunar lander from engines firing to slow it down? Why was there no moon dust on the feet of the lunar lander? Why is the same hill on the moon, in two different videos when the astronauts were supposed to be thousands of yards away? In the second shot, we see identical back drops, moon rocks and boulders????

Why do the Crosses etched in the lens of the camera, that were to show that the picture was not fake, go behind the astronaut in the picture, or other objects?

The list goes on.

Again, I'm not saying it wasn't true and fact, but there is a lot of splain'n to do.

Photos Neil Armstrong on the Moon
 
Upvote 0

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
43
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Anyone have any tests or experiments that show the globe earth is true? Testable, repeatable, falsifiable, tests?

Yes. Which we have been over ad nauseum.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Searril
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The issue isn't what I or anyone else believes, it is what makes sense and what doesn't.
So.. talking snake make sense?
Talking donkey make sense?
Sun and moon stopping in the sky, make sense?
Virgin, having baby, Make sense?

I understand what you are saying but we are treading on dangerous ground if we go by "what makes sense" as any atheist will argue..nothing makes sense.


You need to look for the spiritual messages in the bible, not the literal. One doesn't need to believe the bible is infallible to believe in Christ, and the way of salvation. I can give you some real problematic issues in the bible, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. We must remember humans wrote the bible, and yes they were inspired by God, and the Holy Spirit. We also must remember what the first church did with it.
Tell me this, who wrote Genesis, and Exodus?
They believe it was Moses and that much of it was dictated by God Himself.

There are many truths in the bible, and Jesus let us know what He expected of us, and how we are to live our lives. I believe he detested the Jewish rituals, and rules, because His message to us is quite different that what we see in the old testament. That is why the Gnostics didn't believe that the god of the Old Testament, was the same as the god of the new testament, I'm not endorsing their beliefs, I'm just saying there was much controversy about what should and shouldn't be in our cannon. The Catholic bible wasn't ratified until the 16th century, and if it hadn't been for the reformation I believe they still would have been fighting over what should and shouldn't be in the bible.

It's fine for me to say that the Bible is the word of God and all I have to believe is that Jesus was God and is my savior. However, when bringing this message to others, you are going to run into trouble if you start saying that you have to figure out for yourself, what is truth and what is metaphor and what is not....
Following your heart, flying by what you're feeling..... not good when it comes to dealing with the will of God and what the Bible says.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,282
6,483
62
✟570,626.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Who snapped this picture?

images


Or, who got the film from the camera to get this image back to earth?

eee876a3742ee65649357f6dec4aa5d1.jpg


As a fact, this is a freeze frame of a video in which the camera pans up as the lunar module blasts off.... how?

Another impossible picture below. The picture above is correct as to how they leave the moon in the lunar module. Below is how they land. Who, again, was taking all these pictures of the lunar lander........landing?

5.jpg


Anyway, there are whole presentations on the holes in this story. I believe it will be one of the next "conspiracy theories" to be exposed as total hoaxes.
 
Upvote 0