FLAT or ROUND Earth?

[d taylor]

The Greek language has its roots in paganism, yet God used it to spread the Gospel throughout the world.

-
​

Yes the language was used by believers and not only believers but by God appointed believers (mostly Paul). Where as science for 1000's of years was used by unbelievers.

 

[BNR32FAN]

-
​

Yes the language was used by believers and not only believers but by God appointed believers (mostly Paul). Where as science for 1000's of years was used by unbelievers.

Flat earthers use science to try to explain their theory but they fail miserably in their efforts. That’s why they have a flat earth model to begin with. The problem is their scientific model doesn’t work. So you can’t say that people who don’t believe in a flat earth are placing science above the word of God because flat earthers have been trying to use science to explain how their beliefs are true. You’ve seen these flat earth models before where they try to explain how flat earth doesn’t contradict science.

 

[d taylor]

Flat earthers use science to try to explain their theory but they fail miserably in their efforts. That’s why they have a flat earth model to begin with. The problem is their scientific model doesn’t work. So you can’t say that people who don’t believe in a flat earth are placing science above the word of God because flat earthers have been trying to use science to explain how their beliefs are true. You’ve seen these flat earth models before where they try to explain how flat earth doesn’t contradict science.

Explain this.

 

[Edwin Wright]

The Greek language has its roots in paganism, yet God used it to spread the Gospel throughout the world.

Good point. And furthermore, as explained by exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin are actually sacred languages, primarily because they were fixed to the instrument of our salvation which is the cross (John 19:19–20).

 

[Reasonably Sane]

I hear a lot of Christians saying that we live on a flat earth and nobody can go in or out the earth. Is the Bible clear on this subject?

The bible is not a science book. It often reflects the understanding of the universe as held by the writers.

As far as modern flat earthers are today, I just follow the advise of Mark Twain.

And to be clear, I know the difference between "ignorant" and "stupid". I might argue the issue with someone who spent their life in a mud hut. They may simply be ignorant. But not someone who has spent their life within civilized society, and college students and grads even more so. Their problem is not ignorance.

 

[Edwin Wright]

From here: What is the Coriolis effect?

'As discussed earlier the effect of Coriolis effect on a hypothetical plane, the word hypothetical was used just to signify that the frame of reference for watching the plane was several kilometers away from the atmosphere of earth. If this frame of reference is taken on earth itself i.e. we are observing a plane flying over our head standing on the surface of earth then Coriolis effect won't play any role as we are also moving with the atmosphere of earth. So it is all about the frame of reference which we are talking about.

Coriolis effect would play an important role in case of Rocket Propulsion as rockets leave the atmosphere of earth.

Though the Coriolis effect does not affect the airplanes directly it has an indirect effect on the flight path by producing various phenomenon related to wind motion such as vortex winds, Jet streams etc.'

You are ignoring the frame of reference. The maths is useless unless you take that into consideration. The only adjustment any plane makes is, as it says, due to atmospheric conditions. It plainly says (and you will completely ignore this) that the Coriolis effect won't play any role.

I might have a browse later to see what other nonsense is on that website. In the meantime, do you have a copy of the map that was requested earlier? You know, one to scale that shows the correct sizes of continents?

The frame of reference is not the issue here. Simply put, when the plane departs New York, it departs (i.e., detaches from the solid earth’s surface) with the (west → east) tangential velocity of the allegedly rotating earth at the latitude of New York. Unless the laws of physics have changed, that (west → east) tangential velocity is conserved as the plane flies south. When the plane reaches the latitude of Bogotá, the plane because its (conserved) tangential velocity has not increased with the increasing tangential velocity of the allegedly rotating earth in the direction of the equator, is now at a westerly longitude, its location estimated to be somewhere NNW of the Galápagos Islands. There is simply no atmospheric or aerodynamic process that compensates for that increase in tangential velocity. Publicly available flight records indicate the flight (New York and Bogotá being on similar meridians) is due south (i.e., not compensating for the allegedly increasing tangential component). But again, not to worry. No navigation issues here because the earth DOES NOT MOVE.

Yes, concerning the map, there is such a map but not in the public domain. But I am only aware of it anecdotally.

Your commentary footer includes a quote from Theodosius Dobzhansky. Accordingly, you may be interested in reviewing our article titled, Evolution Refuted by the Ribosme.

 

[Edwin Wright]

The bible is not a science book. It often reflects the understanding of the universe as held by the writers.

As far as modern flat earthers are today, I just follow the advise of Mark Twain.

View attachment 338992

And to be clear, I know the difference between "ignorant" and "stupid". I might argue the issue with someone who spent their life in a mud hut. They may simply be ignorant. But not someone who has spent their life within civilized society, and college students and grads even more so. Their problem is not ignorance.

The Holy Bible IS clear on the subject and replete with references to the stationary, flat earth. For just a few of those references, see for example, BIBLE VERSES CONFIRMING PLANAR EARTH GEOCENTRISM.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

The Holy Bible IS clear on the subject and replete with references to the stationary, flat earth. For just a few of those references, see for example, BIBLE VERSES CONFIRMING PLANAR EARTH GEOCENTRISM.

When I read the bible as it describes things to us humans, I always like to add the phrase, "as far as we're concerned." e.g. As far as we are concerned, the earth is the center of the universe and it's flat. Unless one is an astronaut or working with the study of tides, etc. But on my acreage in rural kentucky, as far as I'm concerned, the earth is the only planet there is and it is relatively flat. I'm fine with that. It suits my purposes as it did men of old.

But being a member of modern civilization and it's discoveries, I know better.

Again, the bible is not a science book. It is a book that teaches us regarding our relationship with our creator and with our fellow inhabitants of the world. And He had no need to share 24th century science with Moses. Or us.

 

[Edwin Wright]

Commerical aircraft are not thrown. Anaylsing the movement of a powered aircraft that is flying through the air as if it is like a bullet, or ball, or even a paper aircraft is wrong. The analogy is incorrect. This has already been pointed out by myself and others several times.

It matters not whether we are considering a projectile or a self-powered object. As pointed out to Bradskii in response to his frame of reference argument, it is the conservation of (in this case) the plane's original tangential (not directional) velocity:

"The frame of reference is not the issue here. Simply put, when the plane departs New York, it departs (i.e., detaches from the solid earth’s surface) with the (west → east) tangential velocity of the allegedly rotating earth at the latitude of New York. Unless the laws of physics have changed, that (west → east) tangential velocity is conserved as the plane flies south. When the plane reaches the latitude of Bogotá, the plane because its (conserved) tangential velocity has not increased with the increasing tangential velocity of the allegedly rotating earth in the direction of the equator, is now at westerly longitude, its location estimated to be somewhere NNW of the Galápagos Islands. There is simply no atmospheric or aerodynamical process that compensates for that increase in tangential velocity. Publicly available flight records indicate the flight (New York and Bogotá being on similar meridians) is due south (i.e., not compensating for the allegedly tangential component). But again, not to worry. No navigation issues here because the earth DOES NOT MOVE."

 

[essentialsaltes]

When the plane reaches the latitude of Bogotá, the plane because its (conserved) tangential velocity has not increased with the increasing tangential velocity of the allegedly rotating earth

How fast is the wind blowing on the airplane at that point (assuming the air is relatively still near the Galapagos)? Or is this a "magic paper airplane" unaffected by wind?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Explain this.

View attachment 338991​

Sure, what exactly would you like for me to explain?

 

[Reasonably Sane]

The Holy Bible IS clear on the subject and replete with references to the stationary, flat earth. For just a few of those references, see for example, BIBLE VERSES CONFIRMING PLANAR EARTH GEOCENTRISM.

I should clarify that though I believe the bible contains the word of God, I do not believe it is the word of God. I believe it is the words of men inspired by God. And they often bring their human interpretations and beliefs into it. Hence the world and universe as described in Genesis. You take individual bible verses literally sometimes at your peril. As far as I'm concerned, the bible is written for the inhabitants of this globular "space ship" thrusting through space, attached via gravitational pull, to its star. And what the bible has to say is to those inhabitants of this particular planet that God created to be his imagers - his caretakers of the planet.

What is happening on the other planets in this universe (there could be quadrillions of quadrillions) is of no concern to us. Our focus is on this one and, more specifically, our relationship with our creator and our fellow man. And of high importance is our job as caretakers of this world. I keep my lawn mowed.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Explain this.

View attachment 338991​

I’m going to assume you’re referring to gravity? If that is your question I would have to ask, what keeps you from flying away when you jump on a flat earth? The answer is gravity. So why must gravity only pull down? Why couldn’t gravity pull towards the center on a planet? Oh and by the way you’re using science to attempt to make your point here.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

I’m going to assume you’re referring to gravity? If that is your question I would have to ask, what keeps you from flying away when you jump on a flat earth? The answer is gravity. So why must gravity only pull down? Why couldn’t gravity pull towards the center on a planet? Oh and by the way you’re using science to attempt to make your point here.

When it comes to gravity, this is always a fun one: Why is Gravity Not a Force That Pulls?

 

[essentialsaltes]

I’m going to assume you’re referring to gravity?

My guess is that he's referencing the gigantic cubical Jerusalem in Revelation.

 

[prodromos]

There is simply no atmospheric or aerodynamic process that compensates for that increase in tangential velocity.

This is where you flat out lie.

 

[Yttrium]

I’m going to assume you’re referring to gravity? If that is your question I would have to ask, what keeps you from flying away when you jump on a flat earth? The answer is gravity. So why must gravity only pull down? Why couldn’t gravity pull towards the center on a planet? Oh and by the way you’re using science to attempt to make your point here.

d taylor seems to expect everybody to figure out that his yellow cube is supposed to represent New Jerusalem, as described in the Book of Ezekiel and the Book of Revelation. The dimensions are around 1500 miles across.

I would imagine that if God were to plop such a city on the planet, the bottom would be curved to accommodate the Earth's surface. Or God could just carve out a portion of the Earth's surface. But on the other hand, a tilting box of a city could be fun.

 

[Edwin Wright]

The earth is essentially a closed system while the merry-go-round is an open system. The atmosphere on the earth rotates with the earth while the atmosphere in the merry-go-round is stationary

So in your analogy, your soccer ball will be equivalent to something like the land mass of New Zealand

For your analogy to have any basis in reality, the merry-go-round would need to be fully enclosed and rotating at a speed of 1 revolution per day. Instead of a soccer ball being thrown, you would need an incredibly lightweight craft capable of propelling itself in the direction pointed. In this case the drag of the air moving with the merry-go-round closed system, would easily counter any inertia towards the direction the craft was initially launched.

Your analogy fails because it only deals with one of the forces involved, and ignores the effect of many other much stronger forces involved in flight around the globe through the earth's atmosphere.

From a purely mechanical perspective, the rotating merry-go-round is analogous to the (allegedly) rotating earth. Based on a number of comments, the issue seems to be whether the (allegedly) rotating atmosphere of the (allegedly) rotating earth aerodynamically guides the plane laterally (i.e., west to east) increasing or decreasing its tangential velocity with latitude. In the case of the New York to Bogotá flight, we would be talking about a laterally accelerative force on the plane resulting in an increase in tangential velocity of 397 km/hr (or a decrease of 397 km/hr on the return flight). Do you not see a dynamical issue here?

 

[Edwin Wright]

This is where you flat out lie.

You think? Then demonstrate the process please — with full scientific rigour.

 

[prodromos]

You think? Then demonstrate the process please — with full scientific rigour.

You simply made a bald assertion, with no scientific basis. I will await your proper scientific breakdown of all forces involved on the body of the aircraft.