Flat Earth - It's NOT Ridiculous

[Zetetica]

Correct. So why bring it up ?

Because many think that sea level observation proves the Earth to be flat. Furthermore, others often claim (in my experience) that they have "seen the curve" at a beach. I'm pointing out the fallacy for both sides.

 

[Zetetica]

When people have foolish ideas treating those ideas seriously tends to look like a mocumentary. Like it or not the experiment chosen by the flat Earthers demonstrated that they had foolish beliefs. And you are wrong. There are places in the Earth where one can see the curve. For example at Lake Pontchartrain a series of power lines allow the curvature to be seen.

Lake Pontchartrain Power Transmission Lines: Evidence of Earth’s Curvature

That's not evidence of curvature, no matter how much Soundly wants to sell the picture for.

If I can get AA batteries (placed on a marble countertop, equally spaced, and lined up) to appear to curve down and even vanish bottom up, I'm rather certain these power lines are only evidence of how human perspective works.

 

[Zetetica]

The earth has been photographed many times from space by people who landed on the moon. We can see that it's round; I'm not sure why anyone would want to suggest otherwise.

The Earth has been photographed in it's entirety once, maybe twice. Everything else? Composite. However, the most notable photo comes from the lunar mission (Apollo 11) and that's bogus to me. The other? I'm not pinning my cosmogony on the honesty of a lying government agency.

 

[Zetetica]

No, you believe. All the scientific evidence tells us it is a sphere. One has to be willing to put one's money where one's mouth is to use the accept claim.

No, I accept. There is evidence and I accept it. Can I be deceived? Yes. Can I be mislead? Yes. Does that make what I accept a belief? Not to me.

 

[Zetetica]

The earth is either flat or , er, not flat. If it is flat, we must think of it as a disc. So it must have an edge, a rim, a boundary of some kind. So, Zetetica could provide evidence to support the flat earth theory by indicating the limit of the planet. Perhaps a photograph of earth from space, taken edge-on? Now that would be convincing! Or what about a view of earth from underneath? Their could a whole new world 'down under'!

What space?

Furthermore, have you even looked into what actual Flat Earthers accept as true? I suspect not, since you brought up some ridiculous things.

1) There are many photos of the Antarctic I've shelves. Is that "the edge", I have no idea. Does the world even have "an edge", I don't know.

2) Outer space is rarely included in most FE models. Most FE models have a circular plane, surrounded by a thick and high wall of ice, and a dome over the entire thing.

3) I have no idea what is underneath the entire plane of Earth, much less what is under the water and land.

4) Earth need not be a disk, though most FE models do fashion it as one.

 

[A Realist]

What space?

Furthermore, have you even looked into what actual Flat Earthers accept as true? I suspect not, since you brought up some ridiculous things.

1) There are many photos of the Antarctic I've shelves. Is that "the edge", I have no idea. Does the world even have "an edge", I don't know.

2) Outer space is rarely included in most FE models. Most FE models have a circular plane, surrounded by a thick and high wall of ice, and a dome over the entire thing.

3) I have no idea what is underneath the entire plane of Earth, much less what is under the water and land.

4) Earth need not be a disk, though most FE models do fashion it as one.

In looking at your numerous "I don't knows" and "I have no ideas" on this thread, one could speculate that you're not really sure of yourself.

 

[Zetetica]

Why do you think it is flat?

1) Lack of measurable curvature.

2) High altitude (100 K miles) photos of the flat horizon.

3) Bible

4) NASA's (and other space agency's and company's) many lies. *On it's own, this isn't evidence for a flat world*

5) Lack of evidence for North to South or South to North circumnavigation. Also, no circumnavigation of this type recently.

6) Lack of photos and HD footage of the spherical Earth from space.

For now, that's sufficient. Honesty, I advise you to go find your own evidence. I'm trying to focus on other things than the flat world lately. I answered in this thread because it became active again.

 

[Zetetica]

And FEs call US 'sheeple.'

Not really.

I don't call you "sheeple" and don't enjoy when my FE friends do so. I've spoken up about it before but it tends to get me branded a "shill". Meh... They forget, they also once believed in the ball. Humility would help many of them.

 

[Zetetica]

A flat earth is a likely as T-rex driving down the High street in a corvet!

I'm sure there is a meme of that somewhere. You know, one of those guys in the inflatable dinosaur suits?

Sure enough... The internet provides...

You didn't specify it had to be a real Trex. Earth is likely flat now, eh?

 

[Zetetica]

In looking at your numerous "I don't knows" and "I have no ideas" on this thread, one could speculate that you're not really sure of yourself.

Do I need to be 100% certain? I accept it, given the evidence. For me, that's enough. Given new evidence, I may change my position.

 

[tas8831]

That's not evidence of curvature, no matter how much Soundly wants to sell the picture for.

If I can get AA batteries (placed on a marble countertop, equally spaced, and lined up) to appear to curve down and even vanish bottom up, I'm rather certain these power lines are only evidence of how human perspective works.

Cool - show us a picture!

 

[Strong in Him]

The Earth has been photographed in it's entirety once, maybe twice.

So there are at least two photographs of what it looks like.

However, the most notable photo comes from the lunar mission (Apollo 11) and that's bogus to me.

You might think that it is; that doesn't make it so.
There have been plenty of programmes, articles about and interviews with these astronauts.

The other? I'm not pinning my cosmogony on the honesty of a lying government agency.

I don't know what reason you think they'd have to lie, but so be it.
That doesn't mean it didn't happen, only that you don't accept it.

 

[Freodin]

1) Lack of measurable curvature.

2) High altitude (100 K miles) photos of the flat horizon.

3) Bible

4) NASA's (and other space agency's and company's) many lies. *On it's own, this isn't evidence for a flat world*

5) Lack of evidence for North to South or South to North circumnavigation. Also, no circumnavigation of this type recently.

6) Lack of photos and HD footage of the spherical Earth from space.

For now, that's sufficient. Honesty, I advise you to go find your own evidence. I'm trying to focus on other things than the flat world lately. I answered in this thread because it became active again.

I cannot follow your reasoning here. I think it is fundamentally dishonest.

Just take this one: 6) Lack of photos.
There is, for example, a japanese weather satellite up there, that takes a photo of the earth (well, half of it) every ten minutes. That's a lot of photos.

So there is no lack of photos.

But then you have number 4: it's all lies.

So you demand evidence... and when you get evidence, you discard it.

How is that honest?

 

[Whyayeman]

'If the Bible says the earth is flat, it's flat.'

That is not evidence, it is a statement of faith. I can respect a person's faith, but not dressing faith up as science. Lots of scientists have faiths, and even more have none.

I want to see a photo from space showing the earth's edge. I am looking forward to it.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The threshold elevation for detecting curvature would seem to be somewhat less than 35,000 ft (10.6 km) but not as low as 14,000 ft (4.2 km). Photographically, curvature may be measurable as low as 20,000 ft (6 km).
https://www.quora.com/At-what-altitude-do-you-see-the-curvature-of-the-Earth

1) Lack of measurable curvature.

2) High altitude (100 K miles) photos of the flat horizon.

Photos from how high of flat horizon?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's not evidence of curvature, no matter how much Soundly wants to sell the picture for.

If I can get AA batteries (placed on a marble countertop, equally spaced, and lined up) to appear to curve down and even vanish bottom up, I'm rather certain these power lines are only evidence of how human perspective works.

Sure it is. When you reject obvious evidence you only make yourself look like a science denier. By the way, you can't get that effect with batteries and a lens. You can claim to be able to do that but it has not been done yet by reality deniers.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I accept. There is evidence and I accept it. Can I be deceived? Yes. Can I be mislead? Yes. Does that make what I accept a belief? Not to me.

All you have is belief. And you have deceived and misled yourself. Now when you are shown evidence that refutes your false beliefs you deny it. No evidence will convince you.

 

[Zetetica]

So there are at least two photographs of what it looks like.



You might think that it is; that doesn't make it so.
There have been plenty of programmes, articles about and interviews with these astronauts.



I don't know what reason you think they'd have to lie, but so be it.
That doesn't mean it didn't happen, only that you don't accept it.

Yeah... NASA....

1) Lost the Lunar data.

2) Lost the the Original footage.

3) Lost the technology.

4) Moon rocks were proven to have come from Earth. *Petrified wood* and *a chunk of Earth which flung at the Moon, when the astroid hit the Earth, killing the dinosaurs, and an astronaut happened to pick up that particular rock*.

5) Camera crosshairs behind objects in lunar photos

6) Bubbles in space.

7) Scuba tank in space.

8) Reflection of scuba diver in space helmet in space.

9) Harnesses used on the ISS.

10) Did they see stars or not?

11) Behavior of astronauts, post lunar mission.

12) Selective microgravity on ISS.

To name a few reasons. As for why they would lie? Using the funds to afford deep underground cities? Hiding more land? Hiding God and reinforcing the godless lie that is our entire cosmology? Pick one. However, those are still speculation and ultimately, they aren't evidence for anything.

 

[Zetetica]

I cannot follow your reasoning here. I think it is fundamentally dishonest.

Just take this one: 6) Lack of photos.
There is, for example, a japanese weather satellite up there, that takes a photo of the earth (well, half of it) every ten minutes. That's a lot of photos.

So there is no lack of photos.

But then you have number 4: it's all lies.

So you demand evidence... and when you get evidence, you discard it.

How is that honest?

I'm familiar with that satellite. I don't accept what it presents. Why on earth would I?

 

[lasthero]

The Earth has been photographed in it's entirety once, maybe twice. Everything else? Composite. However, the most notable photo comes from the lunar mission (Apollo 11) and that's bogus to me. The other? I'm not pinning my cosmogony on the honesty of a lying government agency.

This is not true. There are satellites that take full pictures of the Earth every ten minutes. They are not composites.