"Flat Earth" or "Globe Earth"

lasthero said:

Okay - in what way is it compatible with the flat earth?

Click to expand...

I'm not going anywhere near that with any of you. Until you all get to a point where at least you even consider the flat earth a possibility, there is zero reason to go any further into such details. You'd all have to give me a reason to think that getting into the meat of any of this wouldn't be a colossal waste of my time. You all can't even handle the simple concepts yet.

d taylor said:

I was not addressing craters in Genesis, Genesis 1:9,10 shows that the earth was one land with a sea gathered in one place around the earth.

Click to expand...

You referred to the crater saying, "That could very well be one of the many places that water from the great deep burst forth."
Nothing in Genesis 1:9-10 referring to craters, or openings leading to subterranean depths for that matter, which craters very clearly aren't. Hence my comment about your flat earth 'science'.

SeventyOne said:

Absolutely clueless and proud of it.

Click to expand...

Yes you are.

d taylor said:

This is pure and simple light from the moon.

Click to expand...

Which is reflected light from the sun. All perfectly consistent with phases of the moon and lunar eclipses.
Light sources can't have shadows on their surface.

d taylor said:

Another interesting observation is that according to science meteors burn up at about 60 miles up. Meaning that the iss is 200 miles higher than the 60 miles up where meteors burn up. And according to this cosmos magazine every year the earth has about 6100 meteors reaching this 60 miles area.

It is really odd that this iss has not been knocked out of the sky over all these years being that they are fully exposed to every meteor before it reaches the burn up space at 60 miles up.

Click to expand...

The surface area of the sphere in which the ISS orbits is 222,600,657 sq.miles. The ISS is roughly the size of a football field which is less than 1/16th of a sq.mile. Thus, the probability of it being hit by a meteor is miniscule.

Here's some good ole globe earth propaganda.

prodromos said:

I'm just pointing out that you are in agreement with people who have some really bizarre beliefs.

Click to expand...

So what, your science attempts to make men and women think they can become women/men talk about odd.

d taylor said:

So what, your science attempts to make men and women think they can become women/men talk about odd.

Click to expand...

Back to the logical fallacies.

prodromos said:

The surface area of the sphere in which the ISS orbits is 222,600,657 sq.miles. The ISS is roughly the size of a football field which is less than 1/16th of a sq.mile. Thus, the probability of it being hit by a meteor is miniscule.

Click to expand...

To bad it is just all a lie, a lot of wasted effort to support a lie, to glorify man.

prodromos said:

Which is reflected light from the sun. All perfectly consistent with phases of the moon and lunar eclipses.
Light sources can't have shadows on their surface.

Click to expand...

Again why is the light from a full moon not always seen, even when the moon is in a new crescent phase. Light from the side/area that is in a full moon should still be seen on a crescent moon.

SeventyOne said:

I'm not going anywhere near that with any of you. Until you all get to a point where at least you even consider the flat earth a possibility, there is zero reason to go any further into such details. You'd all have to give me a reason to think that getting into the meat of any of this wouldn't be a colossal waste of my time. You all can't even handle the simple concepts yet.

Click to expand...

Given the incredible success and accuracy of the current cosmology I see no reason to consider any other proposition that does not yet even have a coherent model or even an experimentally verified physics to support it.

SeventyOne said:

I'm not going anywhere near that with any of you. Until you all get to a point where at least you even consider the flat earth a possibility, there is zero reason to go any further into such details.

Click to expand...

Then why’d you even bring it up in the first place?

I swear, I’ve never seen someone talk so much about how he doesn’t want to talk about anything.

lasthero said:

Then why’d you even bring it up in the first place?

I swear, I’ve never seen someone talk so much about how he doesn’t want to talk about anything.

Click to expand...

I didn't bring it up. It was in response to a question by one of your fellow ballers.

JackRT said:

Given the incredible success and accuracy of the current cosmology I see no reason to consider any other proposition that does not yet even have a coherent model or even an experimentally verified physics to support it.

Click to expand...

It's not all that successful. I think you just have the equivalent of beer goggles on when looking at it.

prodromos said:

Yes you are.

Click to expand...

Good one.

SeventyOne said:

It's not all that successful. I think you just have the equivalent of beer goggles on when looking at it.

Click to expand...

It works in computer programs on paper and movies, but of course anything can be made to work in those mediums.

SeventyOne said:

It's not all that successful.

Click to expand...

Where, pray tell, has it been unsuccessful?

d taylor said:

It works in computer programs on paper and movies, but of course anything can be made to work in those mediums.

Click to expand...

All navigation around the world relies on it, whether by air, land or sea.

prodromos said:

Where, pray tell, has it been unsuccessful?

Click to expand...

You've probably missed my plethora of posts over the last couple of months, where I mentioned I wasn't in the mood to any longer help out those who have shown no other reason to be on these types of threads, other than to give flat earthers a hard time and immediately reject whatever is said.

This is one of those times. If you want to learn something new, go learn it. I'm not here to win converts or coddle the lazy.

SeventyOne said:

You've probably missed my plethora of posts over the last couple of months, where I mentioned I wasn't in the mood to any longer help out those who have shown no other reason to be on these types of threads, other than to give flat earthers a hard time and immediately reject whatever is said.

This is one of those times. If you want to learn something new, go learn it. I'm not here to win converts or coddle the lazy.

Click to expand...

Apparently you're not actually here to do anything of value, and instead just want to make random, demeaning comments. You're honestly not doing a good job of representing the character of people who are FE proponents.

If you actually cared about the Truth you would engage in conversation and provide helpful, meaningful, content laden posts that point us towards the Truth.

Here's a question - What do you think created the Barringer Crater? Do you think it was a giant lightning strike? What about the other craters around the earth? And what are the comets that we see traveling through space?