The Earth Is Not Flat

[A_Thinker]

Where are the planets in the Bible? Or the universe? ( Is Heb 11:3 a proper translation? 165. aión) Why is Sun, Moon, and stars mentioned respectively if the sun is a star? Sure science has ALL the answers, (except for COVID-19).

Why no video of earth, when they landed on the moon? Was it too hard to turn around and film during those 21 hours and 36 minutes?

The first visit to the moon (a hostile environment to humans) ... and you want them to take a video of the earth ???

BTW ... science is working on an answer to COVID, ... just like the answers it came up with for Smallpox, Polio, Cholera, Diptheria, Measles, Rubella, AIDS, Whooping Cough, etc.

 

[A_Thinker]

So then I'm not missing anything right?

Well ... there's a lot to it.

I spent a year ... looking into the phenomena of belief in Flat Earth (in my spare time, of course). There are a few foundational documents ... and there are lots of YouTube videos. There are experiments you can perform to try to prove your viewpoint. It's very interesting if you're into things like this.

There is a Netflix documentary ... Behind the Curve (I believe) ... if you want a condensed presentation of the subject.

As to my own conclusions ...

There is, of course, the issue that the Bible never says that the Earth is flat ... not one verse.

Beyond that, Flat Earthers have various explanations for why they don't believe in GRAVITY, or why the last 2,500 years of space exploration ... is a vast worldwide conspiracy.

They try to demonstrate a "flattened" model of Earth science, which tends to stall ... when you begin to get into the details.

But it is very interesting.

Here is a video which explains it a bit ...

 

[Timtofly]

The problem you have is that only a couple of continents are visible at any time, but over the course of 24 hours all of the continents will have passed through your view. From space, the atmosphere is an extremely thin layer relative to the earth, which has next to no effect on light reflected off the earth's surface. Bending of light only occurs when looking at a tangent to the earth's surface as there is much more air to pass through combined with the pressure gradient as you move away from the earth's surface.

The ISS is not stationary, nor were the moon missions. How can you say the earth was moving and they were not. They are moving and the earth is not. It is impossible to stay in one position and watch the earth spin. What is a geo-synchronous orbit? They call it a position. Is the satellite moving? Or is it trying not to move?

As for the outline of Antarctica. On Google maps, why is it across the whole bottom. If Antarctica is a round continent like Australia, why not show it as a round continent in opposition to Australia? Does Google go out of the way to stich it on a flat surface to avoid showing it as a continent next to Australia? Why would Google Satellite map go out of the way to show a view that has to wrap around a globe? I have yet to see any one do a correct map of a cube. Trying to force a cube onto a flat disk is still ancient wrong view like what Egypt taught. Earth is not a flat disk moving through a universe. God created a finite cube with a finite shape and it could easily be mapped, if one took Einstein's 3 dimensions of length, depth, and height and applied it to Google map using 3 points at the north pole and put those 3 points into a single point mathematically. Even The NT points out the length, depth, height, and breadth of God's love. Breadth is time, the fourth dimension. Creation is a finite cube, with a finite time span.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Why no video of earth, when they landed on the moon? Was it too hard to turn around and film during those 21 hours and 36 minutes?

Video cameras didn't exist at that time; they were using TV cameras and 16mm film cameras.

The Apollo 17 crew got a decent photo of Earth from the moon, featuring a carefully posed Harrison Schmitt with the US flag.

 

[Timtofly]

Less than two years ago, two men crossed the Antarctic mainland via the South pole unaided in under 2 months. Colin O'Brady from USA and Louis Rudd from Britain both set out from Union glacier to the Ross ice shelf via the South Pole, each dragging a sled weighing nearly 400 pounds. To put that into a 'flat earth' perspective, they pulled all their supplies for the journey on a sled by foot from directly south of Brazil to directly south of New Zealand in 54 days, an utterly impossible feat on the flat earth. Contrary to your claim above, the distance they walked was a little under 1000 miles.

Taking a look at the actual trip proves nothing. Their trip was on the shortest route. They headed to the South pole, and then back tracked still in a straight line, from their start to finish. How is that going across? There are 3 points of access to Antarctica: Australia (New Zealand), Africa, and South America. They took the shortest distance between Argentina and New Zealand.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If you don't trust NASA, there are the images from the Japanese Himawari-8 satellite in geostationary orbit:

There are plenty of other satellite images of a full Earth from geostationary orbit. I tried to post up more, but nothing I tried would work ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Here's the link to the Lightsail 2 images.

 

[Timtofly]

Innocent until proven guilty. You've provided no reason to doubt their validity other than your stubborn refusal to accept they are genuine.

Between post #154 and #164, how did the earth change size and distance? Did the moon get further away from the earth?

How does the atmosphere not effect what a view of the earth consist of? It is still just the atmosphere that has a round appearance not the moon or the earth. Now explain how the moon is not a light when humans land. Did God tell the angel to stop shining?

They did land somewhere, unless it was not the moon? Could there be other large objects we cannot see other than the two lights known as the sun and moon?

Or before the Flood, there were two lights and now there is only one? We could say that Satan is no longer the morning star. Was Satan the other light, and now we think the moon was the second light, and it never was? So many unknowns, and each generation jumps to conclusions based on any new discoveries.

 

[A_Thinker]

Taking a look at the actual trip proves nothing. Their trip was on the shortest route. They headed to the South pole, and then back tracked still in a straight line, from their start to finish. How is that going across? There are 3 points of access to Antarctica: Australia (New Zealand), Africa, and South America. They took the shortest distance between Argentina and New Zealand.

I don't recall the recent trekkers across the South Pole backtracking to their start positions. And again, the main point to be gleaned ... is that Antarctica is an actual contiguous continent ... not a boundary surrounding a flat earth.

The routes taken ... and those of other Antarctic trekkers ... is shown on the attached link ...

https://www.southpolestation.com/trivia/10s/crossings.html

 

[Timtofly]

I don't recall the recent trekkers across the South Pole backtracking to their start positions. And again, the main point to be gleaned ... is that Antarctica is an actual contiguous continent ... not a boundary surrounding a flat earth.

The routes taken ... and those of other Antarctic trekkers ... is shown on the attached link ...

https://www.southpolestation.com/trivia/10s/crossings.html

This was from a national geographic article.
His tale of crossing Antarctica was riveting. But how much was fiction?

 

[Paul4JC]

I find it ironic that you pretend it would change your opinion seeing as it appears you reject every other bit of evidence that was gathered either on the moon or while travelling there and back.

I did change my opinion. I've believed in a universe, etc for over 50 years. I'm asking questions now that's all.

 

[d taylor]

So your argument is if it isn't written in the Bible it isn't true? So what's gravity then? A figment of one's imagination? As well as there being other planets in outer space? There's not enough information ever to fit inside one single book.

What about Joshua 10:12-15 Joshua commands the sun and moon to stop moving and to stand still. God states He listened to Joshua's command and granted it.

Something can not stop moving, if it is not moving in the first place.

Are you saying/believing that God can not give an accurate and truthful account of an event that happened. When God gave His revelation to the author of Joshua.

That for the true and accurate understanding of this account in the Bible. Humanity had to wait until pagan science, educated humanity on what God was actually trying to say in Joshua.

 

[April_Rose]

What about Joshua 10:12-15 Joshua commands the sun and moon to stop moving and to stand still. God states He listened to Joshua's command and granted it.

Something can not stop moving, if it is not moving in the first place.

Are you saying/believing that God can not give an accurate and truthful account of an event that happened. When God gave His revelation to the author of Joshua.

That for the true and accurate understanding of this account in the Bible. Humanity had to wait until pagan science, educated humanity on what God was actually trying to say in Joshua.

Umm,.. so,.. how does this backup your claims of a flat earth exactly?

 

[SeventyOne]

Umm,.. so,.. how does this backup your claims of a flat earth exactly?

It only works on a flat earth paradigm. The earth is stationary with the sun and moon moving overhead. In this model, when the moon stops, it remains stationary. In a heliocentric model, if the moon stops, there is still the appearance of movement as the earth rotates, but if the earth stops, there is still the appearance of movement as the moon orbits.

If you say both the earth and moon were stopped to eliminate apparent movement, you now contradict scripture that states it was the sun and moon which stopped. There's no way out of this for the ball earth without denying scripture.

 

[April_Rose]

It only works on a flat earth paradigm. The earth is stationary with the sun and moon moving overhead. In this model, when the moon stops, it remains stationary. In a heliocentric model, if the moon stops, there is still the appearance of movement as the earth rotates, but if the earth stops, there is still the appearance of movement as the moon orbits.

If you say both the earth and moon were stopped to eliminate apparent movement, you now contradict scripture that states it was the sun and moon which stopped. There's no way out of this for the ball earth without denying scripture.

I'm sorry, but I still don't understand. :/

 

[d taylor]

I'm sorry, but I still don't understand. :/

If you believe what science has said/stated again and again about Gods creation. Which the earth rotates and moves around the sun, the moon rotates around around a rotating earth.

The accounts in the Bible have a stationary earth, and the sun, moon and stars moving over the stationary earth.

Again the descriptions from the Bible and science do not agree with each other, about Gods creation. One is a lie

 

[April_Rose]

If you believe what science has said/stated again and again about Gods creation. Which the earth rotates and moves around the sun, the moon rotates around around a rotating earth.

The accounts in the Bible have a stationary earth, and the sun, moon and stars moving over the stationary earth.

Again the descriptions from the Bible and science do not agree with each other, about Gods creation. One is a lie

Alright quote the verses where it talks about a stationary earth.

 

[SeventyOne]

I'm sorry, but I still don't understand. :/

In the account, the sun and moon become stationary over specific parts on the land. It's easy enough under the heliocentric model to state that it really meant the earth stopped and due to the distance between the earth and sun in that model, that no movement was apparent.

However, the apparent movement between the earth and the moon doesn't provide heliocentrism with the same luxury since that movement can be watched in real-time. If only the earth or the moon had been stopped, you still would not have a stationary moon overhead. It requires both to stop in that model, but scriptures stat it was the sun and moon, not the earth and moon which stopped. You have to decide if you believe heliocentrism or the scriptures in this case. There is a clear contradiction between the two.

 

[d taylor]

Alright quote the verses where it talks about a stationary earth.

Just one of a few

You who laid the foundations of the earth,
So that it should not be moved forever,

 

[SeventyOne]

Alright quote the verses where it talks about a stationary earth.

Here's a couple:

1 Chronicles 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.

Psalm 93:1 The Lord reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the Lord is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.

Psalm 104:5 Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Psalm 33:8-9 Let all the earth fear the LORD; let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of him! For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm.

 

[prodromos]

This is what you claimed:

Antarctica is the land that keeps the oceans in place. It is land, not ice. Ice just covers the land. If a human walks the coast line of Antarctica, they would have walked the longest continuous length of land on earth. It should take about 8 times longer, than a walk from Siberia, across to Alaska, and down to the tip of South America.

Then you say:

Taking a look at the actual trip proves nothing. Their trip was on the shortest route. They headed to the South pole, and then back tracked still in a straight line, from their start to finish. How is that going across? There are 3 points of access to Antarctica: Australia (New Zealand), Africa, and South America. They took the shortest distance between Argentina and New Zealand.

Now take whatever map you have fitting your initial claim and draw a line from the Ronne ice shelf (60°W) to the Ross ice shelf (175°W) and tell me how that is in any way consistent with their actual journey. If Antarctica was as you claimed above, their journey would have been many, many thousands of miles and would have taken years to accomplish, quite aside from the fact that it would have been completely impossible to drag the supplies needed behind them.