Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Human beings cannot stand upside down for any discernible length of time. Blood rushes to their brain and they die. Which rules out the notion that our entire southern hemisphere is hanging upside-down.
Do you "feel like you are going 600mph when you are in a plane? You don't feel speed, you feel acceleration.And yeah, I've decided to come back here. As an aside, I got banned from Religious Forums for suggesting that maybe, just maybe atheists claiming Coronavirus being proof that God isn't real was way out of line. And that all over the country, churches are being prevented from helping those in need. Apparently this was the final straw for a forum "tolerant" of religious and political beliefs. I tend to be outspoken, so maybe I'll get banned here too. But anyway.
I'm pretty solidly a flat Earther after spending a couple days staring and the sky and determining that while the Earth is possibly a dome, there are several issues with it being round and orbiting the sun.
- It has to go quite fast to do this tilt/orbit/rotation (1000+ mph rotation, 65000+ orbit) yet despite all this none of us feel anything. Think about how fast the fastest hurricane is. Yet, a constant rotation happens without either disturbing us, or (lest you though there was some sort of biological evolution to adapt to a round rotating Earth) knocking over any chairs, cabinets, or as much as disturbing a leaf or the water. But, you say, what about centripetal/centrifugal (nobody I know keeps those two straight anyway) force? What about it? Check out an old amusement park. Remember that ride where the room spun and you started going up and out, towards the ceiling? Exactly. Remember, much slower speed, yet gravity did nothing to stop this. And you probably threw up.
I remember going to China not west or even northwest towards Alaska but straight north. While you could say this is to avoid running out of fuel and crashing into the ocean, from an overhead globe of the Earth (like this one) it makes way more sense as it is also a straight line. In fact, they had fuel for a fifteen hour flight. There is an actual calculator, and as you can see, it is a very odd curved path. Until you look at it from the lens of a flat Earth and understand what they are actually doing.
Distance from China to United States
3. Light does not curve, from my observation.
But in order to fit a round Earth, it has to bend to fit the model. Yet unlike a thrown object that clearly travels in an arc, light always travels straight.
4. Human beings cannot stand upside down for any discernible length of time. Blood rushes to their brain and they die. Which rules out the notion that our entire southern hemisphere is hanging upside-down. Nor do they appear to be able to gradually adjust to minor curves. I've gone up several mountains, and even the most gentle uphill slope can be felt eventually. Also, it would have to be a near-constant vertical curve. In contrast, the Earth could be a flat disc, as I have observed actual horizontal distortion as walking along our curved street eventually straightened out. US roads are never a straight line, yet airplanes appear to be able to glide comfortably at 30k feet.
5. I
did some math one day. In order for Earth to be even vaguely round, geometry dictates that its sides equal to 360 degrees.
Cut in half, you get Earth's diameter, cut half again, you get a 90 degree radius, not just horizontally but VERTICALLY.
Since Earth's diameter is 3,963 miles, this means that there is an implied vertical rise of 1982 (my DOB, coincidentally) miles. Not feet, making this "gradual curve" I spoke of earlier rather extreme, higher even than Everest. My dad told me this was wrong, that I needed to use the circumference (even though I am only measuring for diameter). Doing this, he got a more gradual rise, but I still managed to show that this too is absurd.
A constantly orbiting and rotating Earth would invalidate all space travel, because once you landed on a planet with a different orbit that Earth, you would never be able to catch up. Moreover even landing from the moon would present four unique difficulties beyond that angle thing they always mention in movies like Apollo 13.
Astronauts however seem to have no such fears, meaning something is funny about this whole thing. Given that it is far easier to land on a flat plane, I think this is probably the issue
- Trying to land on the Earth but having it pull towards us, flattening the spacecraft as it heads directly towards it.
- Trying to land behind, but having it pull away, constantly being slightly behind (to say nothing of the absurd speed of spacecrafts meeting no other known vehicle we have built.
- Trying to land from the side, but having it careen past
- Managing to time landing just right with the orbit, only to be pushed aside by the rotation, and either get knocked away or land upside-down
7. I took geometry, trig, and calculus. I remember at one point calculating height of like a tree using I think it was cosine or tangent and then adding height because the person involved was standing on something. We calculated based on distance for a straight line using the number of feet away. Something like that. Yet at no point is the Earth's arc added in to any calculations. You would think that how to "correct for the Earth's arc" would be drilled into student's regular education. Not in primary school. Not in high school. Not in community college, which is the last math I took before going into college proper (skipped it there). So wait, wouldn't the very people doing this math and trying to convince us the Earth is round... actually use equations that presuppose this, instead of working with flat forms?
Well... we have a lot of Christians, preachers, pastors, claiming that Corona is God's punishment for accepting gays as human beings, or God using Covid-19 to evoke a new Great Awakening, or preachers shouting into an empty room that they rebuke the virus in Jesus name or claiming that God would protect their congregation from getting sick, or that God would spare the USA because of Trump, or, or, or...And yeah, I've decided to come back here. As an aside, I got banned from Religious Forums for suggesting that maybe, just maybe atheists claiming Coronavirus being proof that God isn't real was way out of line. And that all over the country, churches are being prevented from helping those in need. Apparently this was the final straw for a forum "tolerant" of religious and political beliefs. I tend to be outspoken, so maybe I'll get banned here too. But anyway.
I'm pretty solidly a flat Earther after spending a couple days staring and the sky and determining that while the Earth is possibly a dome, there are several issues with it being round and orbiting the sun.
Hm... how much "speed" do you think you need in order to notice it? Ever ridden in a really big nice car... a big BWM or Mercedes? I felt like sitting in my living room when going at 200km/h over the Autobahn.
It has to go quite fast to do this tilt/orbit/rotation (1000+ mph rotation, 65000+ orbit) yet despite all this none of us feel anything. Think about how fast the fastest hurricane is. Yet, a constant rotation happens without either disturbing us, or (lest you though there was some sort of biological evolution to adapt to a round rotating Earth) knocking over any chairs, cabinets, or as much as disturbing a leaf or the water. But, you say, what about centripetal/centrifugal (nobody I know keeps those two straight anyway) force? What about it? Check out an old amusement park. Remember that ride where the room spun and you started going up and out, towards the ceiling? Exactly. Remember, much slower speed, yet gravity did nothing to stop this. And you probably threw up.
I remember going to China not west or even northwest towards Alaska but straight north. While you could say this is to avoid running out of fuel and crashing into the ocean, from an overhead globe of the Earth (
When using these "flight routes" you need to take into account the type of map you are using. Yes, most of these routes on the northern hemisphere look very straight when using the north-standing azimuthal projection. And they look very curved when seeing there on a common mercator projection.like this one) it makes way more sense as it is also a straight line. In fact, they had fuel for a fifteen hour flight. There is an actual calculator, and as you can see, it is a very odd curved path. Until you look at it from the lens of a flat Earth and understand what they are actually doing.
Distance from China to United States
Hm... you didn't specifiy why light would have to curve in the globe earth model... but fact is: light does "curve". Or rather, it bends. This is the optical phenomenon called "refraction", which always happens when light enters a medium of a different density.Light does not curve, from my observation. But in order to fit a round Earth, it has to bend to fit the model. Yet unlike a thrown object that clearly travels in an arc, light always travels straight.
That would only be the case if there was a distinct, independent "down" direction. But in the globe model, "down" is not a universal direction... it is pointing towards the center of the globe. So no human is standing "upside down"... except if they are practicing headstands.Human beings cannot stand upside down for any discernible length of time. Blood rushes to their brain and they die. Which rules out the notion that our entire southern hemisphere is hanging upside-down. Nor do they appear to be able to gradually adjust to minor curves. I've gone up several mountains, and even the most gentle uphill slope can be felt eventually. Also, it would have to be a near-constant vertical curve.
Airplanes work in a completely different way. Flat Earthers always seem to assume that planes would automatically fly straight lines. They don't. A topic that is a little more complex, but can be explained if you are interestedIn contrast, the Earth could be a flat disc, as I have observed actual horizontal distortion as walking along our curved street eventually straightened out. US roads are never a straight line, yet airplanes appear to be able to glide comfortably at 30k feet.
Again, there is no universal "down" direction. The "drop" due to the curvature is only an optical one... and it is very much observable.I did some math one day. In order for Earth to be even vaguely round, geometry dictates that its sides equal to 360 degrees. Cut in half, you get Earth's diameter, cut half again, you get a 90 degree radius, not just horizontally but VERTICALLY. Since Earth's diameter is 3,963 miles, this means that there is an implied vertical rise of 1982 (my DOB, coincidentally) miles. Not feet, making this "gradual curve" I spoke of earlier rather extreme, higher even than Everest. My dad told me this was wrong, that I needed to use the circumference (even though I am only measuring for diameter). Doing this, he got a more gradual rise, but I still managed to show that this too is absurd.
Not sure if I can follow your reasoning here.A constantly orbiting and rotating Earth would invalidate all space travel, because once you landed on a planet with a different orbit that Earth, you would never be able to catch up. Moreover even landing from the moon would present four unique difficulties beyond that angle thing they always mention in movies like Apollo 13.
- Trying to land on the Earth but having it pull towards us, flattening the spacecraft as it heads directly towards it.
- Trying to land behind, but having it pull away, constantly being slightly behind (to say nothing of the absurd speed of spacecrafts meeting no other known vehicle we have built.
- Trying to land from the side, but having it careen past
- Managing to time landing just right with the orbit, only to be pushed aside by the rotation, and either get knocked away or land upside-down
Consider the size of planets. They are, in relation to something like a spacecraft, extremely flat. They are also extremly big in that relation.Astronauts however seem to have no such fears, meaning something is funny about this whole thing. Given that it is far easier to land on a flat plane, I think this is probably the issue
Simplicity.I took geometry, trig, and calculus. I remember at one point calculating height of like a tree using I think it was cosine or tangent and then adding height because the person involved was standing on something. We calculated based on distance for a straight line using the number of feet away. Something like that. Yet at no point is the Earth's arc added in to any calculations. You would think that how to "correct for the Earth's arc" would be drilled into student's regular education. Not in primary school. Not in high school. Not in community college, which is the last math I took before going into college proper (skipped it there). So wait, wouldn't the very people doing this math and trying to convince us the Earth is round... actually use equations that presuppose this, instead of working with flat forms?
...
Construct a Hypothesis
If the Sun is really that far away then sunlight should be parallel when it passes through the clouds due to the distance.
Test with an Experiment
Every photo of sunlight traveling though the clouds spreads out. This shouldn't be possible if the Sun were really 93 million miles away.
Is the Procedure Working?
Yes, I conducted a small scale experiment to confirm the property of light. When the light source is close, it diverges from the source. When it's very far away, the light is parallel.
Analyze Data and Draw Conclusions.
The photos match the close light source experiment which means the Sun is a local light source. There are no instances where light traveling through clouds does not diverge. This means the sun is close above the clouds. This also means that there's no way the sun is 1,287,000 times bigger than Earth.
Do Results align with Hypothesis?
No, according to the small scale model, properties of light, and laws of physics that aren't theories, there's absolutely no way the solar system model is true. ...
I get what you're trying to say but that's not what's happening here. Look I even found a satellite image of sun rays diverging. Light divergence is not possible if the sun were really 93 million miles away.
... experience has shown me that directly and plainly exposing the behaviors behind these things is the only way that has even a remote chance of actually getting through. ... dishonest tactics and poor treatment of others speaks volumes and if that behavior is what is required to "prove" a point then that calls the entire argument into question and is worth taking time reflect upon.
...
These people are young earth creationists. They use "hyper-literalistic mumbo jumbo" quite fine when it suits them. They argue against science with similarly vague and invalid arguments quite fine when it suits them. They make the same accusations of "pseudoscience" against old earth geology or evolution. The denigrate their opponents in the same way... I found a reference to the "Bible hating atheists"... and I am quite certain I could find some references to "satanic lies" if I dug deeper.
In that special case, the defense of a globe earth, their "science" might be accurate... but overall, they are an even bigger bunch of hypocrits than the Flat Earthers.
Here is the maths that shows you are not going to thrown off the Earth’s surface at the equator….. or anywhere else. ...
I have a feeling that those Christians who promote Globe earth are either not real Christians or they themselves are being deceived. Bible warned us against them. We're supposed to believe the scriptures and what the Bible says, and the Bible describes Flat Earth.
Really the Bible specifically states that the Earth is flat like a plate/coin? Or is it your interpretation based on non-literal description of Biblical passages. Many passages are not literal. It was meant to convey a message not detailed description of the physical world. Like one that Flat Earthers like to quote
Matthew 4:8
Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.
You can do the same and go to the highest mountain peaks in the world Everest & K2 and see for yourself if all the kingdoms in the world are visible. I can tell you without being on top Everest that I can't even see the base camp what more other cities across the world. So do you disbelieve your own eyes once you reach the mountain peak?
The passage is meant to convey a few key points.
1. Satan through his deception has gain control of all the kingdoms of the world. Thus he can offer Jesus power over the world if only Jesus gave up His own.
2. Bring Jesus to a high mountain is meant to invoke a sense of authority where you can look down on the nearby cities and villages reminding Jesus God incarnate the view He use to have sitting on His heavenly throne.
3. Satan is spiritual being meaning showing all the kingdoms of the world need not be a physical endeavor. Bring Jesus to the high mountain is just for the dramatic effect of it.
Kind of ironic when they use that verse to support a flat earth. "How could he see all the kingdoms of the world?" they ask....then say that boats going over the horizon are just disappearing from view cause they get too far away...
Sadly Flerfers appear to be unable to do mathematics even that simple. As a result they will either ignore the math or deny the math. And maybe add a jibe that since you trust math you are not a True Christian™.Here is the maths that shows you are not going to thrown off the Earth’s surface at the equator….. or anywhere else.
First of all some basic equations;
The force of gravity an object experiences on the Earth’s surface is Newton’s second law.
F = m₀g
F is the force, m₀ is the object mass and g is the acceleration at the Earth's surface.
Since the Earth is rotating the object on the surface traces out a circular path.
The centrifugal force F₁ acting radially outwards on the object is;
F₁ = m₀v²/r (1)
v is the velocity along the tangent and r is the radius of the circle.
The velocity v is also defined by the equation v = rω where ω is the angular velocity and is defined as the number of revolutions per time.
The period T is defined as the time taken to complete one revolution and is defined as;
T = 2π/ω = 2πr/v
Hence v = 2πr/T
Substituting v into (1) gives;
F₁ = m₀4π²r/T² (2)
An object at any point on the Earth’s surface of radius Rₑ will trace a circular path of radius r which depends on its latitude θ .
This is defined by the equation;
r = Rₑcos(θ)
Substituting this into (2) gives;
F₁ = m₀4π² Rₑcos(θ)/ T²
So we have two forces; the force of gravity F acting on an object of mass m₀ on the surface and a centrifugal force F₁ trying to fling it off the surface.
Plugging in the value g =9.8 m/s² gives;
F = m₀9.8 m/s²
The centrifugal force is greatest at the equator.
Earth radius Rₑ= 6,400,000 m, period T = 24 x 60 x 60 = 86400s, and at the equator where θ = 0 gives;
F₁ = m₀4(3.1416)² 6,400,000/(86400)² = m₀0.035 m/s²
F₁ << F and the object is not thrown off the surface.
Maths... it seems to be a common problem. The inablity to do the details, the measuring, the calculations.Sadly Flerfers appear to be unable to do mathematics even that simple. As a result they will either ignore the math or deny the math. And maybe add a jibe that since you trust math you are not a True Christian™.
On the plus side that was an excellent post.
Maths... it seems to be a common problem. The inablity to do the details, the measuring, the calculations.
They stay at the "oh, centrifugal force, we should all fly away" stage, the "this reflection could not happen on a curved surface" stage, the "this is cause by lensing" stage... but they are not able - or rather willing - to do the precise work and find out if these claims are correct.
But then ranting about "pseudoscience"... yes, that they are really good at.
Oh, I can at least somehow understand the Evolution deniers and young earthers. Thus stuff isn't quite that obvious, and a lot of it is necessarily conjecture. Reasonable conjecture... but still conjecture. The main problem is that their alternative is basically... "magic". Or "miracles", or "God's creative power" if you want to be nice.I remember feeling the same way as a creationist. I had trust that these Christian leaders were not the ones lying to me; that it was the godless, and therefore inherently dishonest, supporters of evolution that were the insidious ones. Until I started getting pummeled in discussions like we've seen here with the FE, and started losing trust in that creationist leadership.
The difference is, I was honest enough with myself to seek truth even if I didn't like where it would lead me, instead of tucking tail, only to return a couple months later trying to make the same arguments that have already been eviscerated.
I'd be curious to see how many flat earthers vote for Trump ... seeing as the criteria for believing is the same
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?