A flat earth

[Asycthian]

I might agree those waters are relatively hard to travel across, but do you really think no one has done it? There's an Orthodox Christian Church on King George Island in Antarctica.

It's not a flat earth book, but i would suggest you read a book called ''Phantom of the Poles'' (1906) by William Reed. The man was a round earth believer, however he wrote some interesting stuff on the fact it is impossible to reach the polar areas. It is a scientific fact, these areas can not be reached. If you look at explorers who claimed to reach the North Pole, you will see a lot of dodgey accounts, and pseudo-history. You can not reach these areas, the fact round earth believers such as Reed agreed, gives a lot of support to flat earth.

 

[SithDoughnut]

Because they posessed greater knowledge, there was once a Satya Yuga or Golden Age.

It's only evolutionists who ignorantly believe man's ancestors were originally dumb but who ''evolved'' over time, becoming more intelligent.

The opposite, is in fact the truth.

''Although modern man until recently has viewed and celebrated the meaning of the history known to him as epitomizing progress and evolution, the truth as professed by traditional man is quite the opposite. In all ancient testimonies of traditional humanity it is possible to find, in various forms, the idea of a regression or fall; from originally higher states.” - Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World

Ok, definitely a Poe. You have evidence for your statement, I presume? You also realise that since Ancient Greece people have known that the Earth was round?

 

[Doveaman]

Ok, definitely a Poe. You have evidence for your statement, I presume? You also realise that since Ancient Greece people have known that the Earth was round?

One thing you learn from these forums is that it’s not about who’s right or wrong, but about who presents the most convincing argument.

From my own personal experience, there is nothing that can beat an argument that has plenty of biblical evidence to back it up.

Scientific evidence don’t stand a chance.

 

[Asycthian]

Ok, definitely a Poe. You have evidence for your statement, I presume? You also realise that since Ancient Greece people have known that the Earth was round?

<staff edit> 90% of the pre-Socratic philosophers believed in flat earth, that even included the Atheistic Atomists (i.e Democritus). The round earth belief only surfaced with Aristotle.

<staff edit>

 

[Wedjat]

Show a diagram or picture of what you are typing about?

The law of perspective, explains the declination of the Pole Star.

Alright, after drawing out some diagrams I see how the constellation could appear to flip given a flat earth and a dome shaped firmament, so I'll let that point drop for now.
As for perspective explaining how ships move into the distance however, it just doesn't hold up.
On a flat earth we would expect ships moving into the distance to look like this.

However, what we observe is this.

Also, what is your explanation for lunar eclipses?

 

[Cabal]

What do you mean, 'been into space'?

What do you mean, 'seen it'?

Yup, I've been.

Hey, it worked in the Marianas Trench thread, may as well work here.

Now watch their critical thinking suddenly kick in now that we're not talking about the Bible.

 

[Cabal]

Because they posessed greater knowledge, there was once a Satya Yuga or Golden Age.

It's only evolutionists who ignorantly believe man's ancestors were originally dumb but who ''evolved'' over time, becoming more intelligent.

The opposite, is in fact the truth.

''Although modern man until recently has viewed and celebrated the meaning of the history known to him as epitomizing progress and evolution, the truth as professed by traditional man is quite the opposite. In all ancient testimonies of traditional humanity it is possible to find, in various forms, the idea of a regression or fall; from originally higher states.” - Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World

Uh.....no.

Not even close. This is a strawman.

Remember, we're the ones saying that people in ancient cultures FIGURED OUT that the world was round?

 

[Cabal]

People actually believe that dreck?



AV -- they're stars. Orion is not bringing his club down anytime soon.

Ooh, but angels live in stars, dontcha know!

Presumably every time we fire up a tokamak or an inertial confinement fusion reactor an angel's burglar alarm goes off.

 

[Cabal]

One thing you learn from these forums is that it’s not about who’s right or wrong, but about who presents the most convincing argument.

From my own personal experience, there is nothing that can beat an argument that has plenty of biblical evidence to back it up.

Scientific evidence don’t stand a chance.

You forgot to include the fingers-in-ears factor associated with biblical arguments being shoehorned into science.

 

[Asycthian]

As for perspective explaining how ships move into the distance however, it just doesn't hold up.
On a flat earth we would expect ships moving into the distance to look like this.


However, what we observe is this.

I already explained this, it's the law of perspective. The perspective in fact creates an optical angular illusion. The earth has no curvature. I can't yet paste pictures etc here showing this with annotation.

Do i have evidence? Yes. There are documented reports of ''half sunken ships'' restored, when people re-looked at them with telescopes.

I already believe, this is described on FES:

It has been found that the sinking ship effect effect is purely perceptual, that a good telescope with sufficient zoom will change the observer's perspective and bring the ship's hull back in full view. This is not possible if the ship were really behind a "hill of water. Hence, the effect which is usually thought to prove the earth as a globe really proves it to be a plane.

It's one of the first and primary proofs of a Flat Earth. The fact that a telescope can restore a half-sunken ship demonstrates that the ship is not traveling behind a convex earth.

Also, what is your explanation for lunar eclipses?

Another celestial body passes in front of the moon. This object is called the ''Shadow Object''. An outdated and debunked flat earth alternitive was that the lunar eclipse was a product of the earth's shadow. I'm not anti-science, if something has been debunked i will accept it has, as for flat earth, i see no evidence against it. And i see it as a theory, just the same as the round earth or globe theory.

 

[solja247]

All of them. In fact this is a main point from William Carpenter's book One Hundred Proof's the Earth is Not a Globe (1885). When in a plane and you look down, you see no curvature, all you see is a flat surface.

Thats not evidence. Thats evidence for them being too close to the ground to see everything...

What about people who sail aound the world? How do they get back to their destination if the Earth is flat? wouldnt they fall off the side of the Earth?

Isaiah xiii. 5 ''They come from a far country, from the end of heaven''

psalms xix. 4-6 ''Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them''

What's your excuse now? ''end of heavens'' is not an expression.

My 'excuse' that these two verese are either in a poetic or prophectic context. Daniel talks about a dragon with 10 horns, should I take it at face value, or something else?

 

[Asycthian]

Well, this is a flat-earther we're talking to, you can at least understand why a few people are sceptical.

Atheists who have attacked my posts in this thread haven't even bothered to read them. I simply asked for the evidence that the earth is a 'globe' and not flat. What my personal beliefs are regarding the shape of the earth, are my own, i have not declared here i am a flat earth believer. I have only stated the Bible states the earth is flat (as it does), and debunked numerous claims against the earth being flat i.e the pole star and the classic ship mast arguement.

There is simply no evidence that the earth is round and not flat. If you think otherwise, start up another scientific point (as Wedjat did). Resorting to calling me a poe (as the troll Split Rock spams around) just shows you can't debate scientifically on this topic.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Atheists who have attacked my posts in this thread haven't even bothered to read them.

of course we've read them -- we wouldn't be laughing nearly as hard if we hadn't.

I simply asked for the evidence that the earth is a 'globe' and not flat. What my personal beliefs are regarding the shape of the earth, are my own, i have not declared here i am a flat earth believer. I have only stated the Bible states the earth is flat (as it does), and debunked numerous claims against the earth being flat i.e the pole star and the classic ship mast arguement.

So, Magellan and the space shuttles don't mean much to you, do they?

There is simply no evidence that the earth is round and not flat. If you think otherwise, start up another scientific point (as Wedjat did). Resorting to calling me a poe (as the troll Split Rock spams around) just shows you can't debate scientifically on this topic.

There's a limit to how much actual time/science we're willing to waste.

 

[Wedjat]

It has been found that the sinking ship effect effect is purely perceptual, that a good telescope with sufficient zoom will change the observer's perspective and bring the ship's hull back in full view. This is not possible if the ship were really behind a "hill of water. Hence, the effect which is usually thought to prove the earth as a globe really proves it to be a plane.

It's one of the first and primary proofs of a Flat Earth. The fact that a telescope can restore a half-sunken ship demonstrates that the ship is not traveling behind a convex earth.

My younger self at a beach and our telescope can attest the the fact that this is false. The ship was big, clear, and in full view except for the fact that most of it was below the horizon. Most of the ship was clearly being physically blocked by water, perspective simply can't take this into account.

 

[Wedjat]

Another out of curiosity question. How does a flat earth explain the climate-latitude relationship?

 

[Asycthian]

What about people who sail aound the world? How do they get back to their destination if the Earth is flat? wouldnt they fall off the side of the Earth?

You can't fall off the earth. There is a boundry/wall/barrier. This Bible calls this the ''columns''. Of course, non-biblical literalists would again just say these columns are more ''poetry'' or ''symbolism''...However my point earlier was that no one can reach this far. This is something proven by classical literature. People could never travel this far, which is why they usually envisioned a 'paradise' or utopia beyond it. If you start researching this, you will come across the same recurrant theme in world-myths. The Jewish historian Josephus, in the 1st century AD wrote the flat earth barrier was made of ice. This appears in Norse myth as Jormungandr.

My 'excuse' that these two verese are either in a poetic or prophectic context. Daniel talks about a dragon with 10 horns, should I take it at face value, or something else?

Your statement is based on the evolutionist assumption dinosaurs existed before man. The dragons of the Bible, are rationally explained as dinosaurs or cryptids, and this doesn't pervert the literal interpretation. The word dinosaur itself was only coined in the early 19th century and came to replace dragon.

 

[Asycthian]

Another out of curiosity question. How does a flat earth explain the climate-latitude relationship?

Different 'latitudes' on Earth receive different amounts of sunlight, i think everyone is agreement with this. Weather etc varies across the earth. With a flat earth model, the sun would be smaller as it is in a round earth model.

The Sun is about only 30 miles in diameter, for the flat earth model. This does not contradict ancient observations, however believing the sun is huge compared to the earth contradicts the ancient testimony of man. For example Homer recorded that the sun ''dipped'' or ''sank'' into Oceanus (Iliad, viii. 485; xviii. 239). The ancient Greeks were observing the Sun as a very small object, a tiny proportion to earth.

 

[solja247]

You can't fall off the earth. There is a boundry/wall/barrier. This Bible calls this the ''columns''. Of course, non-biblical literalists would again just say these columns are more ''poetry'' or ''symbolism''...However my point earlier was that no one can reach this far. This is something proven by classical literature. People could never travel this far, which is why they usually envisioned a 'paradise' or utopia beyond it. If you start researching this, you will come across the same recurrant theme in world-myths. The Jewish historian Josephus, in the 1st century AD wrote the flat earth barrier was made of ice. This appears in Norse myth as Jormungandr.

I dont get it, lets believe you are right. Where is this evidence? Do you have any proof?

Your statement is based on the evolutionist assumption dinosaurs existed before man. The dragons of the Bible, are rationally explained as dinosaurs or cryptids, and this doesn't pervert the literal interpretation. The word dinosaur itself was only coined in the early 19th century and came to replace dragon.

There were four beasts. A leopard with wings, A lion, a bear with three ribs and a dragon (not in chronological order) they are represented as nations not real beasts...

 

[AV1611VET]

Just FYI, prior to Genesis 10, the earth was one giant supercontinent; called Eden or Pangaea.

One could walk from Portugal to New Jersey in just a few miles.

Given that curvature decreases as diameter increases, the earth would indeed appear flat where you're standing.

I personally believe that those who fell for the flat earth cosmology in the past were in the minority, as people routinely traveled up and down (north to south to north) and would realize that the earth is round.

In addition, and as I said before, Noah and his sons would certainly have vouched for a round earth from an eyewitness perspective; and those who refused to believe their reports would have fallen victim to what we today call junk science.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Just FYI, prior to Genesis 10, the earth was one giant supercontinent; called Eden or Pangaea.

One could walk from Portugal to New Jersey in just a few miles.

Given that curvature decreases as diameter increases, the earth would indeed appear flat where you're standing.

I personally believe that those who fell for the flat earth cosmology in the past were in the minority, as people routinely traveled up and down (north to south to north) and would realize that the earth is round.

In addition, and as I said before, Noah and his sons would certainly have vouched for a round earth from an eyewitness perspective; and those who refused to believe their reports would have fallen victim to what we today call junk science.

Alas, AV -- it's clear that Asythian is not interested in your baseless assertions; he's asked for evidence.

As you do not believe in evidence, there's nothing you can say to convince him.

But by all means, do try.