The Earth is Flat, and you will prove it.

[katerinah1947]

Yours is a well researched position. My experience in 30 years of R&D was exactly the same.
What makes people angry is when they care deeply for a particular result and feel helpless
to work on things to get the desired result. Occasionally people will lie and cheat to get a
(temporary) outcome they desire.

Hi,

I have seen your observations in the sense that when I arrive in a place with few researchers, soon I have people hating me.

The fur flys, both men and women get upset with me from time to time, then All of Them apologize to me in one way or another, as time goes by.

In my last major battle at a corporation with an individual, I readied myself to years of taking this man's flak.

He was already totally upset with me.

Sitting at my desk one day, I overhear a conversation with the last guy on a science issue only, who took three days of constant table talks and drawings until he had his "Aha" moment, that I did not recover well from.

(He is a very large eastern Montana boy, and I had just shown him up in my opinion. That had long term disaster written all over it.)

As the conversation between Montana and my newest rival went on, Montana told him that no matter how outrageous anything sounds coming out of my mouth, research wise, that he is going to find out it is actually true.

In three days, I am called over to my newest rival's desk.

He says this: "When I do research, I find four or five sources that agree. When I do that I am 97-98% right. (If I recall those numbers, as they triggered a response.)(instantly my mind redid his numbers. There is no way that is true. I came up with a probable number on that technique. Then continued to listen on) You. You don't do that."

What he meant is, I keep looking and looking........

Philosophers, and stated research wise, those people who study the entire range of human thought, without proofs normally, have always asked us, how we know our life and things are not an illusion.

Still in research mode.

If God who is energy and the manipulator of energy also among the other things that He Is, changes something, then this all could be an imagined illusion from one point of view, as All energy, which can neither be created nor destroyed, but merely change forms, could very easily be taken back by God, to where that energy came from, and if and when He decides to, erase all that we were and saw. To us, what is real, would then be gone, and thus the equivalent of an illusion, would possibly be gone, possibly including all of us, our existences, on and in all realms, except in energy again, in some form.

Out of research mode.

Yet, I still had a few more years with that newbie on other issues, eventually it all ended very well, as research is research, and if done well and stated well, it is always true.

The next two issues, he caved on quicker, eventually settling on what is and was real.

Always. Always research is true if it is done properly and stated well.

Stating it well is important. Even Einstein stated Relativity well. He stated it as a theory, as far as I remember, thus if anything changes, the theory changes.

Thus, on purpose or not, it says that God exists in this sense: As things are now, this is correct.

If God decides to change any part of Creation, then things like The Speed of Light can change. Other things He might change.

Stating his work that way, allows for God to change things.

Research is Always correct, if stated well, and done well.

And of course, it is always possible, that the way Creation is Done is a result of the way God Is internally, thus nothing including the speed of light, will ever change.

LOVE,

 

[Reasoning]

So, in conjunction with my previous post about geocentricity , let's look at our arguments for the globe model. I will present you with some things about each one that make me scratch my head. Then, we can work through the situation and prove the globe with legitimate facts.

OK, fair enough. However, check this out and help me figure how this and other examples of seeing things that should not be visible due to the curve of the earth. Credit should be given to Rob Skiba for the information below.

So, my friend took this little math problem to a college level math professor. After the guy said such a thing should not be seen, Jef said, "But we've all seen it. I'm referring to the Anacapa Island arch." Doh! In a text message to me after talking with the math professor, Jef said, "Needless to say, the math guy was intrigued."

So am I.


Here are some more:


The Isle of Wight lighthouse in England is 180 feet high and can be seen up to 42 miles away, a distance at which modern astronomers say the light should fall 996 feet below line of sight.

The Cape L’Agulhas lighthouse in South Africa is 33 feet high, 238 feet above sea level, and can be seen for over 50 miles. If the world was a globe, this light would fall 1,400 feet below an observer’s line of sight!

The Statue of Liberty in New York stands 326 feet above sea level and on a clear day can be seen as far as 60 miles away. If the Earth was a globe, that would put Lady Liberty at an impossible 2,074 feet below the horizon!

The lighthouse at Port Said, Egypt, at an elevation of only 60 feet has been seen an astonishing 58 miles away, where, according to modern astronomy it should be 2,182 feet below the line of sight!

Another great example is the Notre Dame Antwerp spire standing 403 feet high from the foot of the tower with Strasburg measuring 468 feet above sea level. With the aid of a telescope, ships can be distinguished on the horizon and captains declare they can see the cathedral spire from an amazing 150 miles away. If the Earth were a globe, however, at that distance the spire should be an entire mile, 5,280 feet below the horizon!

Could you explain how the satellite that I use to find my way around NYC, orbits a flat earth without any way of propulsion?

Oh, and how do seasons work without a round earth?

 

[JacksBratt]

Let's see...
Shall I keep going? THE. EARTH. IS. NOT. FLAT.

OK, I had some time to look at these and was going to take each one at a time. However, I stumbled on to this web page and this guy covers all of them, I think.

His name is Rob Skiba and he is NOT a FE'r. Like me, he is on a quest for truth in this matter. I have watched and read a lot of his stuff. He has a good head on his shoulders and is not afraid to admit when he is wrong.
It is fitting that I would land on his site when researching an attempt to respond to your post.

Read it through. It's worth the time.

http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html

 

[katerinah1947]

OK, I had some time to look at these and was going to take each one at a time. However, I stumbled on to this web page and this guy covers all of them, I think.

His name is Rob Skiba and he is NOT a FE'r. Like me, he is on a quest for truth in this matter. I have watched and read a lot of his stuff. He has a good head on his shoulders and is not afraid to admit when he is wrong.
It is fitting that I would land on his site when researching an attempt to respond to your post.

Read it through. It's worth the time.

http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html

Hi,

Here are three items that flat earthers, have never agreed upon.

To have one of their own, that they will all believe.

To have that person go on a high altitude balloon flight, and then tell everyone what he saw.

To have one of their own take a Mig 29 high altitude fight and report back.

I imagine if it was important enough, a Space Shuttle flight would end all this, one way or another.

When I and others decided to take up a fund, the last flat earth proponent fled.

He fled mentally, and refused to let one well thought out experiment, end the discussion for all those involved.

I have read your entire reference.

LOVE,

 

[The Cadet]

So, my friend took this little math problem to a college level math professor. After the guy said such a thing should not be seen, Jef said, "But we've all seen it. I'm referring to the Anacapa Island arch." Doh! In a text message to me after talking with the math professor, Jef said, "Needless to say, the math guy was intrigued."

So am I.

This is due to refraction. The cold air over the water causes the light to bend, causing what is known as a "superior image mirage". Not exactly a new thing. These refractions can be measured and tested quite easily. It does nothing to change the fact that objects do disappear over the horizon, and that this should not happen on a flat earth.

Read it through. It's worth the time.

http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html

Globalist Argument #1: On my Facebook page, many have made mention of the fact/belief that all of the other stellar bodies we can observe appear to be spheres. They say, "If everything else we can observe is, this must mean our earth is too." Does it really? If you were an Asian, born to Asian parents, living in Asia, where all you ever saw were Asians, would that ipso facto have to mean that all humans, everywhere must be Asian-looking too? No. Of course not. This has to be the most lame of the arguments I've encountered, yet it comes up over and over again. - See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf
​

Of course, this ignores the reason that they're spheres: gravity. All other planetary bodies are spheres, and we know that the reasons why they are spheres is natural laws that apply equally on earth. Things like gravity.

This enclosure includes a 200+ ft. high cliff wall of ice and stone: - See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf
​

Well shoot, sure is a shame that that wall doesn't exist.

Globalist Argument #3: People say, "If the earth is flat, how come people have flown/sailed around the world?" Simple. You can circumnavigate a circle just as easily as a globe:

- See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf
​

Except that he's forgetting the people who have circumnavigated the globe north-south, which does not work on this model. At all.

Globalist Argument #4: "What about time zones? How can you have time zones on a flat earth?" This argument presupposes a couple of things: 1) the earth is essentially a flat piece of paper with continents on it and 2) the sun is just shining straight down on the whole thing. The Flat Earther model refutes this by showing something like the following, depicting the sun and moon in an enclosed system, much smaller and much closer than where we consider them to be in our standard globalist view:

In this model, the sun acts like a "point light" with a limited throw of light, leaving the unexposed areas in the dark.

- See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf​

I find it really hard to believe that this guy doesn't understand how nonsensical this argument is. The sun we observe is not a spotlight. It does not act like a spotlight. As long as the sun is above the horizon, we can see it. But on this flat earth model, the sun would never go below the horizon.

If it were like a spotlight and only illuminated a specific area, we should observe the shadow of its containment, and our sunsets would look like what we observe when we see a spotlight from the side, i.e. part of the light covered by its containment. We very explicitly would not see the effects we see, which is a round sun sinking beneath the horizon.

This model makes no sense. In fact, it makes no sense to a degree that I have to wonder if the person who wrote this article lives in a cave and has never actually seen a sunset or sunrise. Look, JacksBratt, at the very latest this should be the point where you start scratching your head and wondering, "Huh, you know, maybe those people arguing in favor of a flat earth aren't the brightest." Why did you send me this link? Did you find it convincing? You obviously haven't engaged with these issues in any depth, so why in the world would you try to buck the consensus view of reality and point to crap like this? And why did you tell me this was worth my time?

Please stop playing devil's advocate for the flat earthers. They are wrong. On every conceivable level. The flat earth society is literally the thing people bring up when they want to make an example like "This is as crazy/stupid as..."!

 

[JacksBratt]

Could you explain how the satellite that I use to find my way around NYC, orbits a flat earth without any way of propulsion?

Oh, and how do seasons work without a round earth?

Ya, I know, How would satellites work on a flat earth... IDK. Especially the geosynchronous ones.
However, if there are no satellites, IF that is, they could easily do it with ground base towers. There is info out there that supposedly proves that all GPS is ground based and that the Satellite idea is a hoax..... Not sure if I'm in agreement there though.

As for seasons.... they work the same as time zones. It's just that on a flat earth model the sun and moon are smaller and closer and they orbit us instead of us orbiting the sun and the moon orbiting the earth..

If the flat earth model is in any way true, seasons is not an issue. Nor is time zones or circumnavigation. Unless you have absolute proof of someone flying over the south pole and not just over a portion of Antarctica.

I would really like to know if there is midnight sun at the south pole as there is at the North. I know, I was close to the north pole, well, north of Whitehorse by six hours, and the sun came up around 10:00 AM and went down around 3:45 or so, in November.

So there is a time of very little or no sunlight in the winter and a time of "midnight sun" in the summer.

Is this true of the South?

Read these from the notes of people who were there, albeit years ago but, at least, there was less pressure to perpetuate a lie back then.

The establishment claims the Midnight Sun IS experienced in Antarctica but they conveniently do not have any uncut videos showing this, nor do they allow independent explorers to travel to Antarctica during the winter solstice to verify or refute these claims. Conversely, there are dozens of uncut videos publicly available showing the Arctic Midnight Sun and it has been verified beyond any shadow of a doubt.

The “Midnight Sun” is an Arctic phenomenon occurring annually during the summer solstice where for several days straight an observer significantly far enough north can watch the Sun traveling circles over-head, rising and falling in the sky throughout the day, but never fully setting for upwards of 72+ hours! If the Earth were actually a spinning globe revolving around the Sun, the only place such a phenomenon as the Midnight Sun could be observed would be at the poles. Any other vantage point from 89 degrees latitude downwards could never, regardless of any tilt or inclination, see the Sun for 24 hours straight. To see the Sun for an entire revolution on a spinning globe at a point other than the poles, you would have to be looking through miles and miles of land and sea for part of the revolution!


“If the earth be a globe, at midnight the eye would have to penetrate thousands of miles of land and water even at 65 degrees North latitude, in order to see the sun at midnight. That the sun can be seen for days together in the Far North during the Northern summer, proves that there is something very seriously wrong with the globular hypothesis. Besides this how is it that the midnight sun is never seen in the south during the southern summer? Cook penetrated as far South as 71 degrees, Weddell in 1893 reached as far as 74 degrees, and Sir James C. Ross in 1841 and 1842 reached the 78th parallel, but I am not aware that any of these navigators have left it on record that the sun was seen at midnight in the south.” –Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny”

“It is evident that in the great encircling oceans of the south, and the numerous islands and parts of continents, which exist beyond that part of the earth where the sun is vertical, cannot have their days and nights, seasons, etc., precisely like those in the northern region. The north is a centre, and the south is that centre radiated or thrown out to a vast oceanic circumference, terminating in circular walls of ice, which form an impenetrable frozen barrier. Hence the phenomena referred to as existing in the north must be considerably modified in the south, For instance, the north being central, the light of the sun advancing and receding, gives long periods of alternate light and darkness at the actual centre; but in the far south, the sun, even when moving in his outer path, can only throw its light to a certain distance, beyond which there must be perpetual darkness. No evidence exists of there being long periods of light and darkness regularly alternating, as in the north. In the north, in summer-time, when the sun is moving in its inner path, the light shines continually for months together over the central region, and rapidly develops numerous forms of animal and vegetable life.” – Dr. Samuel Rowbotham, “Zetetic Astronomy, Earth Not a Globe!”

 

[lasthero]

Ya, I know, How would satellites work on a flat earth... IDK. Especially the geosynchronous ones.
However, if there are no satellites, IF that is, they could easily do it with ground base towers. There is info out there that supposedly proves that all GPS is ground based and that the Satellite idea is a hoax..... Not sure if I'm in agreement there though.

If satellites don't exist, I'd have to ask how the heck Google Earth works. Because I can bring up an accurate overhead view of my house at just about any given time, and I'm not sure how that's possible if there's not something in space taking pictures of it.

 

[The Cadet]

“If the earth be a globe, at midnight the eye would have to penetrate thousands of miles of land and water even at 65 degrees North latitude, in order to see the sun at midnight. That the sun can be seen for days together in the Far North during the Northern summer, proves that there is something very seriously wrong with the globular hypothesis. Besides this how is it that the midnight sun is never seen in the south during the southern summer? Cook penetrated as far South as 71 degrees, Weddell in 1893 reached as far as 74 degrees, and Sir James C. Ross in 1841 and 1842 reached the 78th parallel, but I am not aware that any of these navigators have left it on record that the sun was seen at midnight in the south.” –Thomas Winship, “Zetetic Cosmogeny”

JacksBratt, do you have any idea what modern cosmology claims? Because if not, why are you talking about it? And if so, how did you miss the most basic fundamentals of how the earth relates to the sun?

Has creationism so poisoned your mind that no authoritative source is reliable, but any old internet blog or ancient counter-culture book is good enough? What is going through your head right now? I really am curious; I legitimately don't get it.

 

[Reasoning]

Ya, I know, How would satellites work on a flat earth... IDK. Especially the geosynchronous ones.
However, if there are no satellites, IF that is, they could easily do it with ground base towers. There is info out there that supposedly proves that all GPS is ground based and that the Satellite idea is a hoax..... Not sure if I'm in agreement there though.

As for seasons.... they work the same as time zones. It's just that on a flat earth model the sun and moon are smaller and closer and they orbit us instead of us orbiting the sun and the moon orbiting the earth..

If the flat earth model is in any way true, seasons is not an issue. Nor is time zones or circumnavigation. Unless you have absolute proof of someone flying over the south pole and not just over a portion of Antarctica.

I would really like to know if there is midnight sun at the south pole as there is at the North. I know, I was close to the north pole, well, north of Whitehorse by six hours, and the sun came up around 10:00 AM and went down around 3:45 or so, in November.

So there is a time of very little or no sunlight in the winter and a time of "midnight sun" in the summer.

Is this true of the South?

Read these from the notes of people who were there, albeit years ago but, at least, there was less pressure to perpetuate a lie back then.

You cannot be serious. Please show me that info that proves GPS is ground based. Seasons cannot work the same as time zones, because seasons are caused by the axial tilt of the earth, something that wouldn't work if it were flat.

You have to be a troll. I always used the example 'it's as stupid as thinking the earth is flat' for really stupid things

 

[JacksBratt]

This is due to refraction. The cold air over the water causes the light to bend, causing what is known as a "superior image mirage". Not exactly a new thing. These refractions can be measured and tested quite easily. It does nothing to change the fact that objects do disappear over the horizon, and that this should not happen on a flat earth.

Globalist Argument #1: On my Facebook page, many have made mention of the fact/belief that all of the other stellar bodies we can observe appear to be spheres. They say, "If everything else we can observe is, this must mean our earth is too." Does it really? If you were an Asian, born to Asian parents, living in Asia, where all you ever saw were Asians, would that ipso facto have to mean that all humans, everywhere must be Asian-looking too? No. Of course not. This has to be the most lame of the arguments I've encountered, yet it comes up over and over again. - See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf
​

Of course, this ignores the reason that they're spheres: gravity. All other planetary bodies are spheres, and we know that the reasons why they are spheres is natural laws that apply equally on earth. Things like gravity.

This enclosure includes a 200+ ft. high cliff wall of ice and stone: - See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf
​

Well shoot, sure is a shame that that wall doesn't exist.

Globalist Argument #3: People say, "If the earth is flat, how come people have flown/sailed around the world?" Simple. You can circumnavigate a circle just as easily as a globe:

- See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf
​

Except that he's forgetting the people who have circumnavigated the globe north-south, which does not work on this model. At all.

Globalist Argument #4: "What about time zones? How can you have time zones on a flat earth?" This argument presupposes a couple of things: 1) the earth is essentially a flat piece of paper with continents on it and 2) the sun is just shining straight down on the whole thing. The Flat Earther model refutes this by showing something like the following, depicting the sun and moon in an enclosed system, much smaller and much closer than where we consider them to be in our standard globalist view:

In this model, the sun acts like a "point light" with a limited throw of light, leaving the unexposed areas in the dark.

- See more at: http://testingtheglobe.com/quest2.html#sthash.Y2ar3UBr.dpuf​

I find it really hard to believe that this guy doesn't understand how nonsensical this argument is. The sun we observe is not a spotlight. It does not act like a spotlight. As long as the sun is above the horizon, we can see it. But on this flat earth model, the sun would never go below the horizon.

If it were like a spotlight and only illuminated a specific area, we should observe the shadow of its containment, and our sunsets would look like what we observe when we see a spotlight from the side, i.e. part of the light covered by its containment. We very explicitly would not see the effects we see, which is a round sun sinking beneath the horizon.

This model makes no sense. In fact, it makes no sense to a degree that I have to wonder if the person who wrote this article lives in a cave and has never actually seen a sunset or sunrise. Look, JacksBratt, at the very latest this should be the point where you start scratching your head and wondering, "Huh, you know, maybe those people arguing in favor of a flat earth aren't the brightest." Why did you send me this link? Did you find it convincing? You obviously haven't engaged with these issues in any depth, so why in the world would you try to buck the consensus view of reality and point to crap like this? And why did you tell me this was worth my time?

Please stop playing devil's advocate for the flat earthers. They are wrong. On every conceivable level. The flat earth society is literally the thing people bring up when they want to make an example like "This is as crazy/stupid as..."!

I understand your attitude toward this topic. When I first heard it, I blew milk out my nose and almost fell off my chair. So, I decided to prove them to be as wrong as I thought they were, and still do by the way. However, when you look into all their arguments put together, they are good arguments. It's not as easy as I thought to brush them off as unintelligent or ill informed. They have done their homework. A picture like the ones below make me wonder too.
If the earth is a globe, it must be much bigger than 8 inches of curve per mile squared.

 

[The Cadet]

However, when you look into all their arguments put together, they are good arguments.

No! They are not good arguments! If you think they are good arguments, you know absolutely nothing about astronomy, geology, cosmology, physics, or math. Hey, here's a simple question: provide a coherent flat earth model that takes less than an 8th-grader's education to completely demolish.

 

[Reasoning]

I understand your attitude toward this topic. When I first heard it, I blew milk out my nose and almost fell off my chair. So, I decided to prove them to be as wrong as I thought they were, and still do by the way. However, when you look into all their arguments put together, they are good arguments. It's not as easy as I thought to brush them off as unintelligent or ill informed. They have done their homework. A picture like the ones below make me wonder too.
If the earth is a globe, it must be much bigger than 8 inches of curve per mile squared.

No, their arguments are complete nonsense. So you are deeply shaken by that picture, but this one doesn't blow your mind?: Look at that perfectly flat surface! And I love that flying disc we call the moon too!

 

[JacksBratt]

You cannot be serious. Please show me that info that proves GPS is ground based. Seasons cannot work the same as time zones, because seasons are caused by the axial tilt of the earth, something that wouldn't work if it were flat.

You have to be a troll. I always used the example 'it's as stupid as thinking the earth is flat' for really stupid things

You can call me all the names you want... Something does not add up with what we have been told.

And, really, the GPS system is totally designed, maintained and controlled by the US military in conjunction with NASA.

With the technology of this century we do not need satellites for GPS.

If you believe everything they tell you about things you have no choice but take what they say as truth.....with no way of proving other wise.... I would be careful.

 

[Reasoning]

You can call me all the names you want... Something does not add up with what we have been told.
And, really, the GPS system is totally designed, maintained and controlled by the US military in conjunction with NASA.
With the technology of this century we do not need satellites for GPS.
If you believe everything they tell you about things you have no choice but take what they say as truth.....with no way of proving other wise.... I would be careful.

It adds up, you are just wrong. Yes, the GPS system is designed by them, we all know that. You said it were all land poles on a flat earth (which is not true), so I would love to see prove of that. I think you take wrong things they tell you as true... we have all proven you otherwise. So open those eyes and come back to reality.

 

[The Cadet]

You can call me all the names you want... Something does not add up with what we have been told.

That thing not adding up? It's you. You don't get it. You have a complete lack of understanding of a large number of subjects, and have bought into elaborate, nonsensical conspiracy theories. The problem is entirely on your end. None of the arguments posted have held up to even the most basic scrutiny.

 

[durangodawood]

So, you all know that FLAT EARTH promotion is just a game, right?
Its like pre-internet trolling.

 

[Reasoning]

So, you all know that FLAT EARTH promotion is just a game, right?
Its like pre-internet trolling.

Oh thanks for reminding . Pfew I almost thought this guy was serious.

 

[The Cadet]

So, you all know that FLAT EARTH promotion is just a game, right?
Its like pre-internet trolling.

See, the problem with this idea is, JacksBratt is also a creationist. So I have no idea if he's just pretending to be completely ignorant of everything we've learned about the world, or actually is. Poe's law and whatnot.

 

[Reasoning]

See, the problem with this idea is, JacksBratt is also a creationist. So I have no idea if he's just pretending to be completely ignorant of everything we've learned about the world, or actually is. Poe's law and whatnot.

Indeed. I would never imagine that people would believe in this stuff. Yesterday however, I watched a documentary from Lowis Theroux about alien hunters, and it is really amazing how crazy people can be. There was this guy with a 'mental alien gun', he ran a secret alien defense operation, including a commander, uniforms and and patches that you get if you kill 10 aliens. He proudly showed the two he had on his sleeve, because he killed 22 aliens already.... And he was dead serious.

Some people just keep amazing me.

 

[lasthero]

Jack, this is a shot of my house with Google Earth. If there are no satellites, what took this picture?