In honor of Rob Skiba’s “having your cake and eating it too” position of being a “questioning globalist” while maintaining a website The Flat Earth Theory dedicated to popularizing intellectually bankrupt flat earth theories, I would like ask him a new question. In fact, the question is directed to all who question the spherical shape of the earth.
How can an airplane like the Rutan Model 76 Voyager fly without refueling or stopping, in straight course and end up right where it started, if the earth is not a sphere? It’s been done many times now. That is the challenge, please use diagrams and mathematics to show how this is possible given your flat earth model. see
Correction: the course was not perfectly straight, rather the navigated around mountains and whatnot but the heading was still relatively straight. Here is the exact course (which still falsifies a flat earth):
Guess what? It had already been done back in 1949, traveling straight without landing once, but they refueled in the air. The flight instrumentation is very precise and the pilots navigated a straight course around the globe, how so given a flat earth?
The first non-stop flight around the world was made by, again, a team of the US Air Force flyers in 1949. Taking off from Carswell Air Force base in Fort Worth, Texas on 26 February, Captain James Gallagher and a crew of 14 headed east in a B-50 Superfortress, called Lucky Lady II. They were refuelled four times in air by KB-29 tanker planes of the 43rd Air Refuelling Squadron, over the Azores, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines and Hawaii. The circumnavigation was completed on 2 March, having traveled 94 hours and 1 minute, covering 37 743 km (23,452 miles) at an average 398 km/h (249 mph). http://www.didyouknow.cd/aroundtheworld/flight.htm
Stems From Bad Biblical Interpretation
What makes this all the worse, is that proponents of flat earth belief attempt to use the Bible to support the false belief. I agree that some passages imply a flat earth with a dome over it. But teaching earth science was not the purpose of those passages. God used ancient human authors and ancient human language to convey a moral/theological message. The original authors had a lot of backward superstitious beliefs but God still used them because he was not teaching a scientific message to modern people. To rip scripture out of its ancient context in order to answer a modern scientific concern–that would have not even occurred to the original author–is an abuse.
The Bible is a collection of 66 books by over 40 authors over a period spanning 1400 BC to 90 AD. The meaning of scripture is what the original author intended for the original reader and it is our job as moderns to learn what that was. It was not written to 21st century people, it was written to ancient people in ancient Hebrew and Greek, so it is written for us but not to us. It was written to the ancient folks, so we must endeavor to understand it in its ancient context not impose our own. Using the Bible to determine a scientific question like the shape of the earth is abusing the Bible the same way skeptics do in order to dismiss its moral authority. It’s about theology and morality, not science.
Bad Science and Math
The earth was proven to be a sphere in around 170- 180 BC by Eratosthenes, a
Eratosthenes
Greek scholar that lived in 275-194 B.C. in Alexandria, Egypt. He invented the discipline of geography, including the terminology still used today. Please follow the links to learn about the incredible power of mathematics. God created a mathematically discernible reality that we can describe in equations. The rational intelligibility of the universe is one of the strongest evidences for intelligent design — creation was designed by a logical mathematical mind. Indeed, math is the language of creation, it is God’s language. If your beliefs do not agree with the math, you’re probably in error.
You can use high school level math and geometry prove the earth is a sphere for yourself. It’s not at all controversial.
About Cris Putnam
@JAH says:
11/29/2015 at 7:49 am
I couldn’t have said it better!
None of those “flights” crossed 78 southern latitude, so none of them in fact flew “around” the world. Did you ever bother to take a look at their documented flights paths?
Ya those..
Those you conveniently forgot.
If your going to create some long-winded bogus spiel trying to prove the earth is round, you can do better than that.
And no Intel, the earth was never proved by anyone to be round, it was never actually been proven to be flat either, it’s just there is infinitely more evidence leading it to be flat than round. Radio transmissions being one of them, and the most obvious one.
The elephant in the room is if the earth was indeed round, a simple picture would been taken of it by one of the near 50,000 supposed satellites orbiting the earth, but yet, the only pictures we have are composites derived from NASA who outright admitted none of their pictures were authentic.
Again guys and gals, try again, but if your going to spout off garbage, be prepared to do something NASA hasn’t been able to do, back up your claim.
Ok, if the Earth and for that matter all other space bodies are flat, how does the water stay on without falling off and going where? What is beneath the top layer of ground? How far does it go beneath us? Why do storm swirl or turn? Why do the sun, moon, stars and Earthly satellites rise in the East no matter where you might be? As for the earthly man made satellites, yes they are there, all you have to do is get up and go outside at night and see them some times 3-5 at one time. Some in an east west direction, some in north south direction. Also get off your duff and take a plane ride at 30,000 feet and you can see the curvature of the earth no matter where you are and have flown. Most all things natural have a round shape for a purpose. There is a zillion more things that prove you are not intelligent enough to know the truth to the many wonderful things out there.
If you take an airplane ride at 5-7 miles high, you will notice the horizon is eye level. The curve you see is from the curve on the windows. There are plenty of videos proving there is no curve at elevations of 20 – 70 miles high. Flying in an east or westerly direction will work on both flat and global models. The movement of the sun, moon, and stars would be a circular path in the sky. The constant position of the starts for thousands of years is a proof against the heliocentric model.
Ask any aviator who’s flown above FL 350. It’s round.
If the world’s flat, why are there sunrises/sunsets? It the world were flat, there would never be a nighttime.
What the eyes see and the ears hear, the mind believes.
Harry Houdini
It’s all easily explained if you just do minimal research. Which I doubt you done considering you seriously just asked that.
If Nasa is lying to us how great is that deception!! The water staying on the earth makes more sense in a flat earth model. We know we have hell beneath us, who wants to know how big that is. The storms can swirl in a flat earth because of the four winds mentioned in the Bible. Look at Gleason’s Standard Map 1892 it explains how the sun and moon rotate. If Nasa is lying and they are, not one picture of the real earth all CG, so the question is what pictures are real. I look at a video that had space station footage and there was not one satellite in orbit, why? I’m not sure what we are seeing at night. You should not have to take a plane ride to see the curve of the earth. Military have targeted across the water targets 100 miles away, that would not be possible on a globe. Look at flight paths they are fishy as to why the go were they go, especially in the southern hemisphere. The sun and moon are not as big and as far away as they say , look at the rays of the sun through the clouds sometime, if the sun was 93 million miles away the rays would straight down on the earth not going in opposite directions. This experiment would as work in a flat earth if the sun and moon were closer. Something to think about. Shalom
The suns rays thing fooled me too till I thought about it. The suns rays are parallel. They come through the clouds and look spread out for a reason. The point where they come through the clouds is farther away from you than the point where the rays hit the ground. You know that railroad tracks are parallel. If you stand on the the tracks they do not look parallel. They converge at the horizon. Direct observation does not imply truth. If the earth is flat because it does not look round then you MUST admit that railroad tracks are not parallel because they don’t look parallel. The suns rays look spread out in the same exact way that railroad tracks do not look parallel.
It seems that the perspective you are talking about would act differently from the observer when looking at train tracks moving away on the same plane vs train tracks moving perpendicular from that same plane. If the suns rays are parallel to each other and perpendicular to the plane of the observer how does perspective explain the angle when no angle is seen when viewing other similar parallel and perpendicular objects like city skyscrapers from a distance? I believe we should be able to prove one way or another through simple light experiments. Jeffrey Grupp has a good video on the subject that can be tested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aQktHTP0-U
Great answer.
What I get a kick out of when they say satellites in space is how do they keep them cool? Since a vacuum is a perfect insulator where neither conduction or convection moves heat away from an object and they figure that space is a -250 degrees Fahrenheit… the radiation by their own admission in the thermosphere heats objects up to 4000+ degrees or 2500 degrees Celsius. What kind of materials do they make these things with and how do they cool them to work with less than 12 hours of shade from the “ball” and in some cases no shade on the “GPS” satellites? I guess they think that people should be educated and not intelligent. At least educated to believe what they want them to think. Phillip, when you look out of a plane at 30,000 feet what you see is the horizon at eye level…..you don’t see an edge falling away from you in all directions as you would with a sphere.
No, it seems they think people should be ‘trained’ but not ‘educated’. More and more people have a small piece that they know and fewer have any kind of bigger picture (or even care about a bigger picture). However, along with the small piece comes the ‘self esteem’ which tells them (and maybe me, too:) their opinion is valid for whatever their little hearts desire.
Let me guess?!
Not One “Flat Earther” ever became a rocket scientist!!!!
They flew within in the equator in a circle around the north pole! Compass still works
It works on a flat earth too. All directions from north are south except for the right angles of latitude we call east and west. They can be drawn out on a round plate also. I thought the most compelling argument is that above the artic circle in the summer the sun never sets below the horizon. If we are on a globe spinning in a circle the 93 million mile away sun should appear to zig – zag in the sky in a twenty four hour period when in fact the recording on camera does a circle around the horizon. Totally inconsistent for the ball earth spinning followers.
So if you agree a North Pole exists on a flat earth and that all directions away from it are south then I think I can prove this flat earth theory is rubbish by simple maths, and you can prove it yourself by paying for a few flights in the Southern Hemisphere. If you draw my explanation on a flat earth map you will find this easier to understand. If you fly south for 1000 miles from the North Pole , then 1000 miles west, then 1000 miles north again you end up back at the exact same point, the North Pole. You flew in a triangle! Anywhere in the northern hemisphere where you try this you end up with a triangle ish shape but the top point doesn’t fully meet (only the North Pole one meets fully) . If you draw this shape on a flat earth map you will see what I mean /_\ this is how your northern hemisphere flights will always look on a flat earth and also a spherical planet and to prove this shape all you need to do is fly east back to your original starting point and measure this final journey mileage. The distance is shorter than your bottom section east to west flight. Now this is exactly how it’s supposed to look because a North Pole exists as one single point. Now this is where a flat earth fails in my opinion because if you try this method in the Southern Hemisphere on a flat earth the same shape would exist where it’s a triangle ish shape with the top point pointing towards the North Pole and the distance from your east to west flight being longer than your west to east flight back to your original position , like this again /_\ but if you actual do this for real the shape you get is one where the triangle ish shape points south like this \_/ because in the Southern Hemisphere you’re flying to a southern single point known as the South Pole. Your flight from east to west will be shorter than your final flight west to east back to your original starting point. Draw this flight on a flat earth model and the triangle will always point north whether you’re in the northern hemisphere or Southern Hemisphere but in reality northern hem will look like /_\ and souther hem will be \_/ because a north and South Pole exists as a single point on a spherical planet. Saying that every direction from north is south is just utter BS and blows your theory out the water because a flat earth then can’t have a single southern pole point and by then using simple maths and taking a few flights yourself you can disprove it. Just by drawing a North Pole on your flat earth map and radiate lines from this point south in all directions you can clearly see that flights in a flat earth s.hemisphere will be the wrong shape for what exists in the ‘real world’ .
Hi there. .Mr Web owner..a spirit level needs to be flat to work..correct ??
Hos does it work on a globe ???
Please avoid the gravity nonsense
I honestly think that the whole “flat earth” thing is a social experiment conducted by one of the alphabet organizations to find out just to what length a given portion of the population can be duped.
Conclussion……..95%.
I’m not too surprised to be honest. We live in a world where a 10 year old gets to choose what sex they are, where a male MMA fighter gets to beat the hell out of woman, where Islam is promoted in public schools and Christianity is crushed by government, we’re told that lying is good, up is down and so on. It’s the blind groping around in the dark. God forgive us.
Thank you! SOMEONE understands!
OK, let’s find out for sure. Get a sponsor and set a place on at the edge to start. Then have some intrepid traveler start walking,swimming, riding a boat, whatever it takes and see where he ends up, after traveling in a straight line of course. If it is flat, I.T. will end up somewhere completely different to fall off the edge. If I.T. ends up where he started, it is a globe. I am sure the Flat Earth Society and Muslim Imams will give enough money for I.T., a film crew for the whole trip, and everything needed to prove their theorem
With those distances how does one determine a straight line? What instruments will be used? What will you do with obstacles, mountains, etc.?
Why not circumnavigate the earth from pole to pole, that would solve definitively. East – West works on either model.
SQ linked this again. I used to have a lot of respect for him but on this topic he is ignorant and using the same old washed up arguments that have no weight. People should actually understand the argument before they claim they are right. None of the rounders have answered my comments in this blog? why?
Because Steve Quayle is another fear mongering baffoon profiting off the gullable…he is always posting disinfo long with his undoctrinal Bible views
Hey Joshua Ephraim, the only good thing I can say about SQ is it wasn’t for him you and I would never get together. Good to hear from you brother!
Isn’t it amazing SQ is promoting these old, old pieces as “proof” of a globe? In all these months he has done NO research to advance his case. Hard to respect him anymore.
It’s mind boggling in this era of airplane and space travel that anyone would believe the earth is flat!
It’s mind boggling only if you haven’t taken the time to study both sides of the argument. I cannot say that I am a 100% believer in the flat earth model as it’s been presented, but I will say this : the vast majority of the more compelling arguments rest with the flat earth people. The intellectual prowess of the Rounders is somewhere down there with the kindergartners whose response to a criticism is “I know you are, but what am I . . ?. . ” When it comes to being mindless idiots devoid of objective, deep thinking or really engaging debate, I’ve noticed that the Rounders completely own the territory. Rounders are like politicians. Sound bites are their stock-in-trade. They avoid deep thinking because they are incapable of it.
Something else: Humanity’s ET managers lie to us about everything else, so why would they be honest about this? All of my life’s experiences tell me that Humanity lives in a very elaborate petri dish, a cosmic experiment, if you will . . . and I have yet to work in lab and encounter a petri dish with a rounded working surface. They are all flat. Moreover, in my entheogenic journeys, my consciousness expands to show me how fake and fabricated our world really is — like the Holodeck on Star Trek, or the Vedic concept of “Maya.” This has reinforced my perception that we really do live on a very large petri dish, of sorts.
GM – I couldn’t agree more with you. I was about to give up on this thread, I was weary of arguing with people who have not given one minute to looking into both sides of this issue and actually thinking. But, I was one of them not too long ago. I can’t believe how long I was trapped in the matrix. The powers-that-be know how to “ring our bell” and we, like Pavlov’s dog, come running, drool and all. People love the “idea” that they can “go to the stars.” “We can ascend to the heavens.” “The only thing that can stop us is our own (lack of) imagination.”
Genesis 11:6 (NKJV) “And the LORD said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them.”
Let’s see… God put a stop to those building a “tower whose top is in the heavens;” with an attitude of “let us make a name for ourselves…” But we, with the same “don’t need God” attitude get to strap men to the top of a rocket and send them to the heavens? I don’t think so.
I’m still waiting for proof the earth is a globe. But people that say they believe in the globe don’t seem to be able to justify that belief. Most have never even done the math (that they say they love so much) to understand the practical ramifications of the alleged curvature.
Flat Earthers are doing real science to establish facts, globalists appear only to give anecdotes. Thanks again for your thoughtful comment.
Since becoming a Flathead the term GLOBALIST has taken on a whole new meaning. FE has been the most exciting and thought provoking journey of any subject researched so far. As for the angry globalist, when presented with FE, it’s hilarious to see their knee jerk reaction to the subject.
I have found with many people that if you get them thinking about the plane that we live on without mentioning the word FLAT EARTH you get much further with them. The globe is so programmed into our subconscious that breaking someone of it is very difficult, even to the so called opened minded. Everyone has their own paradigm i.e. limitation in thought and since mine has changed it’s amazing to see this globe programming everywhere. You can’t get away from it.
There are a lot of questions still to be answered in FE but this treasure hunt of discovery is mentally freeing. It’s funny how FE brings the best and the worst out in people almost like there is a spiritual element good or bad at work. Whenever I hit globalist opposition it energizes my determination in search of truth. If someone wants to live on a ball in their own mind and ignore the evidence to the contrary then so be it! We can’t save them all.
What’s exciting to think about is why now, why the massive shift now? Is there and even greater moment in human history right around the corner and how does FE play into it? These are exciting and scary times. How lucky are we to be part of this shift in consciousness at this moment!
Chad – In answer to why now, I believe it lies in this passage in Daniel
Daniel 12:3-4 (NKJV)
3 Those who are wise shall shine Like the brightness of the firmament, And those who turn many to righteousness Like the stars forever and ever.
4 “But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”
Daniel 12:9 (NKJV)
9 And he said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.
I think this is part of the unsealing at the time of the end. Maybe its a stretch, but I don’t think so.
Some look at the nature of creation as a “scientific” issue, I disagree. The nature of God’s creation is profoundly spiritual. If “We shall know the truth and the truth sets us free.” Then what do lies do? Lies always put us in bondage. God is setting all those free who have ears to hear, eyes to see, and hearts to understand from the “globalist propaganda we’ve been under our whole lives!
………..I have departed Atlanta headed to Orlando in the AM more than once and witnessed the sun rise on my left and total darkness to my right as I peered out of the windows of the aircraft. I’m not sure how the subject is even up for debate. Possibly we have too much time on our hands. Possibly compasses are round because the earth is too.
“Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance”
Would recommend at least taking the time to investigate and know what you are talking about before condemning. It is clear from many recent comments that people are willing to comment without knowing what the issues are.
If you want to know more go to testingtheglobe(dot)com. Putnam starts out by attacking Rob Skiba, why don’t you try to find out what Skiba is saying? Months of research all in one place, just for you.
How can an airplane like the Rutan Model 76 Voyager fly without refueling or stopping, in straight course and end up right where it started…? …. Wait for it…. Correction: the course was not perfectly straight, rather the navigated around mountains and whatnot but the heading was still relatively straight. Here is the exact course (which still falsifies a flat earth): How does that falsify a flat earth? It doesn’t. That exact course can be charted on a flat earth map. Compass heading would be NO different on flat or globe. Still waiting for someone to “circumnavigate” pole to pole, that would be news. East to west works on either model.
Would recommend you newcomers check out the 200+ “Older Comments” associated with this poorly researched article. There is about 4 months of lively debate that you are conveniently missing if you don’t.
So, “lively debate” aside…you are saying that on a flat earth you can travel east to west(or vice versa)and end up in the same spot you started? Wouldn’t the earth be a cylinder then? Have you ever looked into the hollow earth theory…much more sound science and a more reasonable alternative to the earth’s composition.
“Cylinder Earth Theory” is pretty much the Globe – What is a Globe? A cylinder tapered at each end.
If you have a Globe or a Flat Circular Plane (Flat Earth) with the North Pole being the pivot point (frame of reference) you can travel east to west (or visa versa) and end up in the place you started. Try it. Take a string fastened to the north pole on a globe and go east to west. Try the same thing using a pizza tray with the north pole being the center. See whether I’m right or not, don’t take my word for it.
Again I’d say hollow earth works in either model. The furthest we have ever been able to drill into the earth’s crust is like 8 miles. What is below that is only theory.
Some people have a hard time understanding that there is no east and west but rather only right or left 90 degree angles from North. in the center of the pole. All longitude from the North go south and the right angles are called latitude.
So, in the flat earth theory, the globe is spliced open and the south pole is dropped out not just outright flatened? Regardless, unless the Earth was artificially created, there is no other reason to defy physics(see properties of liquids in zero gravity)and have the shape of a pizza pan or pancake. I am all about alternative history and theories, who knows maybe the earth is literally a manufacured petri dish; but, I’d rather believe in the hollow earth theory. Firstly, because it actually follows the laws of physics and, secondly, because it could mean those who have manipulated and controlled humanity for eons are on earth and not the heavens.
So if you agree a North Pole exists on a flat earth and that all directions away from it are south then I think I can prove this flat earth theory is rubbish by simple maths, and you can prove it yourself by paying for a few flights in the Southern Hemisphere. If you draw my explanation on a flat earth map you will find this easier to understand. If you fly south for 1000 miles from the North Pole , then 1000 miles west, then 1000 miles north again you end up back at the exact same point, the North Pole. You flew in a triangle! Anywhere in the northern hemisphere where you try this you end up with a triangle ish shape but the top point doesn’t fully meet (only the North Pole one meets fully) . If you draw this shape on a flat earth map you will see what I mean /_\ this is how your northern hemisphere flights will always look on a flat earth and also a spherical planet and to prove this shape all you need to do is fly east back to your original starting point and measure this final journey mileage. The distance is shorter than your bottom section east to west flight. Now this is exactly how it’s supposed to look because a North Pole exists as one single point. Now this is where a flat earth fails in my opinion because if you try this method in the Southern Hemisphere on a flat earth the same shape would exist where it’s a triangle ish shape with the top point pointing towards the North Pole and the distance from your east to west flight being longer than your west to east flight back to your original position , like this again /_\ but if you actual do this for real the shape you get is one where the triangle ish shape points south like this \_/ because in the Southern Hemisphere you’re flying to a southern single point known as the South Pole. Your flight from east to west will be shorter than your final flight west to east back to your original starting point. Draw this flight on a flat earth model and the triangle will always point north whether you’re in the northern hemisphere or Southern Hemisphere but in reality northern hem will look like /_\ and souther hem will be \_/ because a north and South Pole exists as a single point on a spherical planet. Saying that every direction from north is south is just utter BS and blows your theory out the water because a flat earth then can’t have a single southern pole point and by then using simple maths and taking a few flights yourself you can disprove it. Just by drawing a North Pole on your flat earth map and radiate lines from this point south in all directions you can clearly see that flights in a flat earth s.hemisphere will be the wrong shape for what exists in the ‘real world’ .
Why wont anyone prove some of the hard questions. Ignorant arguments from people who have no clue on the topic. I could post much more evidence than I have but no one has even tried to refute the ones I posted. They cannot see because they have scales on their eyes.They cant understand because it is not their hearts desire to know the truth. They have been given over to blindness.
If the earth is flat, pigs will fly out of my… WAIT!… OMG THAT HURTS! OOOOUUUUCCCCCHHHHH!!!! A PIG JUST FLEW OUT OF MY ASS!!!
AVoice InTheWilderness … I know doesn’t that hurt. I hate when that happens. I just wish I could go back to the way I thought things were… but the truth is a lonely warrior.
Are Mercury,Venus,Mars, Saturn etc…spherical? and the Earth exception?
Genesis 1:14-19 (NKJV)
Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
I see lights and stars, nothing about “spheres.” Again check out the “Older Comments” and get up to speed on this discussion thread. Non of these questions are new to this thread they have all been addressed months ago.
If you use Orlando Ferguson’s map to chart the same flight, then yeah flat earth theory still holds, except then Australia, south half of Africa, and South America would all be flooded by now! Hahahah…
Flat earth or globe makes no differance to me. But the two and a half years I spent in Antarctica and watched the sun climb in the sky as it circled the horizon climbing higher in the sky as the summer days grew longer. At mid summer it would circle overhead and the start its decent back to and then below the horizon. Explain that flat earthers
If it circles you would have to be looking at the horizon in a totally circular motion….360 degrees. If the earth were spinning you should move in one direction 180 degrees then should see just the opposite in the same facing direction backwards 180 degrees because it would never set according to your statement. Right to left in the morning and afternoon then left to right in the evening and overnight hours. Unless you think we circumnavigate the sun in twenty four hours I say you lie. Think three dimensionally before you say something false.
In the northern hemisphere above the artic circle in summer the sun never dips below the horizon. If we were a ball spinning the sun should appear to zig and zag in the sky. What is actually captured on camera is that the sun completely circles the horizon line. What should happen is that you merely get closer to than farther away from the sun in a twenty four period of a spinning earth…..thus the zig and zag….the right to left motion then the left to right motion. Shadows should also do the same thing…..lean in one direction throughout the day then back the other way as we supposedly orbit the Sun. It’s the same joke when someone mentions the coriolis effect. When do pilots take that into effect when landing on a runway pointing North on a ball spinning 1000 mph?
I am 64 years old and recently read a well researched article regarding ‘flat’ versus ‘sphere’…key words…I too was envisioning ‘flat’ like a pancake…after refreshing my soul with His words on His creation throughout Job, Fenesis Psalms, Proverbs,and Isaiah…just a few…’circle’ stands out…firmament..’vault..hemisphere…half-circle’ all stand out…how can ‘those’ who came before us be considered so ‘behind/ backwards’ as to need only these very descriptive words to ‘picture’? I asked Him..”what would be the pont of introducing the ‘globe/sphere’ theory.” It has to do with ‘discrediting’ the very words God Himself gave to Moses…and thus misleading several generations into trusting that man has a keener scientific sense and therefore…has no ‘need’ for a/The Creator God. Bottom line..the Lord is exposing the false deception of the coming ‘alien’ invasion…Another word …’geocentricity’…3 probes sent into space between 2010 and 2013…that prove the earth is fixed and the heavenly bodies rotate around it…not vice a versa..as we have all been taught…His ‘word’ expressed in letters on a page and our trust in His Word…Jesus Christ..the express/explicit image of Him is what we are called to focus on in the coming days…I for one, am rejoicing when I look upwards into the firmament and see the glimpse of the waters that are above where upon His throne room sits on that blue sapphire of the sea of glass…
Amen. To God be the ALL the Glory!
Psalm 19:1 (NKJV)
1 To the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork.
1 Timothy 6:20-21 (KJV)
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of SCIENCE falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
Amen again and speaking of glory:
1 Corinthians 15:41
“There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwzjvhcKjHw
Do these look like what Nasa shows you about stars? Love the graffitti: Real Eyes realize real lies.
Agreed. I also recommend the book of Enoch. It is frequently referenced when discussing giants and fallen angels, but neglected when discussing heliocentric vs geocentric and globe vs flat. The alien deception is coming and science falsely so called is ushering it in. I pray God’s remnant will wake up and seek his face. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life.
Consider reading these books:
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/303917
The bride of Christ must get ready. Fill your lamps with oil!
Shalom
Man these trolls must be getting paid to push this flat earth theory crap in order to make people who believe in God and who are awake to the climate cooling…. i mean climate warming…. i mean climate change bullcrap as the weirdos. Please see this video if you still have doubts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikmOGqA7R7A I noticed no one responded to half the continents flooding due to flat earth. Just remember trolls, God is watching. You should be afraid and ashamed, especially for your blasphemies.
Before you call someone a liar, maybe you should join the Antarctic Research Program ( USARP) and take a look for yourself. You absolutely do not know what you are talking about. Take some time out of your life and go research it. I believe you will see for yourself that he sun circles in the sky straight overhead in the mid summer and slowly descends while circling the horizon and disappears below the horizon during the winter. Though many claim six months of darkness, that is not true. It will only remain totally dark for about 3 months until you see only an orange glow in the sky before disappearing. That orang ball will return, stays a little longer each day as winter begins to diminish. Then a yellow ball will appear as it climbs in the sky. If it were a flat earth this could not happen. I have seen it. Apparently you only have to your credit what you have read.
What I mean when I say think spatial is that you have to reference yourself on the ball and apply the rules that would follow that line of thinking. Think of a plate when you think of flat earth and think ball for sphere. Did you ever look south when the sun came up? Did you have days of twenty-four hours of light where the sun never dipped below the horizon?
Dale you’re wasting your breath talkng to these flat earth folk, they have been ensnared with this psyop distraction and refuse to hear anything, so much so that if anything goes against what they believe they just say it’s not real and then start attacking the person’s character, as you just experienced being called a liar. What’s even worse than them being distracted by this, is that they think this is some paramount truth, but as you read their comments you can see all this distraction does is puff up their pride and gives them this haughtiness where everyone who does believe this non sense is brain washed and stuck in “cognitive dissonance”. All you have to do is look at some of the responses they give that can be so easily disproven with a minute of research, but they would rather repeat all the same non sense from one mouth to another rather then testing the claims they are making. Things like “there are no satellites or international space station” yet all it takes is a minute of looking and you can find video of amateur astronomers filming the international space station from their telescopes in their backyard. Or how many claim there is no Antarctica and if anyone tries to go down there they are stopped by the military, yet all it takes is a minute of research to see they sell tourist packages there. Or that Antarctica is the ice wall and again the military stops anyone from seeing it, yet all it takes is a minute of research to see not only has Antarctica been circumnavigated, but there are yachting competitions to see who can circumnavigate it the fastest. But as I said they are wallowing in this distraction/deception and refuse to hear anything to the contrary of what they want to believe. So all you can do is Pray that those who don’t know The MESSIAH will come to know HIM, and that those who do Know HIM will turn their eyes from this distraction and fix their eyes on YAHSHUA(JESUS) and seek to walk as HE Walked Living out The WORD Of GOD by The Power Of HIS SPIRIT in HIS Grace.
YAHWEH Bless you and Keep you
YAHWEH Make HIS Face to Shine Upon you and Be Gracious to you
YAHWEH Lift you up in The LIGHT of HIS COUNTENANCE and Give you Peace
In The Holy NAME Of Our Great and Good SHEPHERD KING, JESUS The CHRIST, YAHSHUA HAMASHIACH
To WHOM Be The GLORY Forever and Ever. HalleluYAH! Amen.
What is truly sad is to see someone who doesn’t recognize what they don’t have. Truth is true in all circumstances and in every situation. Whether it’s science, finance or religion. Seeing you have your claim to Christianity, it makes me wonder if you have even obeyed the first edict the apostles gave after receiving the Holy Ghost to those who were convicted and asked, “what must we do”. You know the one given on the day of Pentecost? The one where after they obeyed there was added three thousand the first day and five thousand more the next to the church. So many think all they have to do is believe in their heart and confess with their mouths. What is sad is that who follow such theology forget that those letters from Romans to Revelations were written to those already in the church for their edification……not for those who had no reference of obedience or submission to the action which gives us a good conscience towards God.
yaakov
If you would really like to get into a discussion of Jesus who is the Everlasting Father and the Mighty God who was manifested in flesh I would be happy to share my experience. Biblical hermeneutics is a great way to expose what is false. Since God’s word is settled in heaven forever and all of creation was created in truth, exposing lies is always enlightening. I like the fact that the earth was created before the sun and the moon. Something you either believe as true or you don’t. I believe it….do you? Most people forget that fact in the bible or the Pentateuch if you will.
I am merely pointing out that if you believe in the ball earth theory spinning at 1000 miles per hour orbiting the sun at 66,000 mph you have to follow the rules of telemetry. It is on video record that the Sun above the artic circle in the summer time does not dip below the horizon and the camera pans a full 360 degree circle in twenty-four hour period. This should not happen if we are spinning. The sun is not what is moving around the sphere. It is the supposed fixed object in the heavens that we are supposed to be circling. Now throw in the fact that the “sphere” is spinning too, you end up with something that cant happen unless you think we spin (orbit) around the sun in one day. The sun because of it position “93,000,000 miles away” should appear to move from our right to left as we face North then our left to right as we finish the second half of the twenty-four period. For an educated man look at this intelligently. Either the earth is spinning or it is not and something is moving above us. For ball earthers this has to be the same for the southern hemisphere or it is a lie. The only difference is that as you face south the sun should look like it moves from your left to right in the morning and right to left in the evening. Think spatial and not up and down.
As I Had posted in my first Statement. I could care less if the earth is round or flat. What I tried to explain is the sun at McMurdo Base Antarctica circles the horizon. It climbs up that horizon during the summer until it reaches its peak circling in a tiny ball almost straight overhead. Back in those days 81-94 and living in a tight enclosed community I have walked out of the bar at 2 am to find the sun straight over head. As the summer draws neigh you will find it once again low on the horizon getting ready to disappear for about three months. Looking out of the power plant window I would see a faint orange glow several times until it would appear no more. That is a waking experience. So since I am not in the flat earth argument, I only ask oneself to explain to me if the earth is flat ( and maybe it is true) How does this work. I have see flat earth believers say look at the aircraft ( pictures I guess they have gotten from web sights) exclaiming they have no windows so people cant see in what direction they are flying. I say to you I have flown the C-130 Hercules Turbo prop and The C141 Starlifter into Wiley’s Field many times and they all had windows for me to see out of. I have flown to the South pole and landed there on 9000 feet of ice where the land is flat and the dry air so thin it can take your breath. A lot of the Flat Earth People have made a lot of claims that I an personally tell you that its not true from personal experience, but again I am not in that argument. I have been on one sight that claimed if the sun circled straight over head in the Antarctic then the earth is round but only showed a videos of it on the horizon at Scott Base with the shadows flipping back and forth never in a circle. But I say different. Its been a long time ago now and some things I have forgotten but it was a blast for a young man in his 30s. Be Watchful, Be Safe, Be Blessed. But I add this…..The events that are getting ready to hit America and The Global Community this year and forward you will find a Flat Earth pale in comparison
RDFaught/Ret.
Agreed that things coming will make these kind of discussions a luxury however as some say and it seems true that we are being ‘prepped’ for is an alien invasion, the knowledge of flat earth really does help one to keep ones head, doesn’t it? If that story line unfolds from TPTB. A person that knew of flat earth wouldn’t get all freaked out about aliens because they’d know that it wasn’t possible. Interdimensional demonic things seem to be possible and maybe that’s what the verse about men’s hearts failing for fear is talking about?
Praise God that ones salvation doesn’t depend on belief in the flat or round earth!! And one day we’ll all know.
Agreed. Hey Diana, How are you doing?
Hey there yourself. I’m doing well over here in my little slice of the pizza. (Sorry, couldn’t help myself) You?
Diana – Doing well, my wife and I just sold a business we’ve had for 20 years, so we are in transition right now. Looking for God’s direction (much easier when you take the “z – axis” out of the equation. X & Y axis are all you need in Plane Geometry – just the way God intended!)
Several hundred years ago sea men were afraid to travel too far out away from land because there were afraid they would fall off the face of the earth. Believe it or not, that never actually happened!
no but when you read the records of those who circled Antarctica they logged over 50000 – 60000 miles circling around the 25 parallel with over 2 1/2 years. We’re they just bad naval captains who didn’t know where they were going? Oh yeah……they also said that it was an ice wall around it…..weird huh? Maybe that’s why they couldn’t fall off.
You are correct about the wall of Ice. The Ice Flows three feet a day towards the ocean from the pole. As the Ice extends out over the water for a great distance the pressure is so great that it breaks off forming those huge Icebergs you may have seen in some Satellite photos. Some 100 stories high and as big as New Hampshire. When we built Willies Field Station Ice runway… for the C-130/141s offloads it would have to be taken down ever five years and drug back a few miles and rebuilt as it too would break off and become an Iceberg and float away. I have not circumvented the entire continent so I cant tell you if the Ice Wall circles all the way around or not. But I have seen and stayed on that God Forsaken continent more than I wish to claim. I have Been to Scotts Hut and seen what the explores built and left behind in the early 1900s. The seals he killed for his sled dogs at that time still set on the front porch as nothing rots only dehydrates in a land that actually is drier than the Sierra Desert. I have thrown a piece of raw steak in the corner of my hutch and picked it up in a week or two and ate the dehydrated meat as there is no germs that last very long down there. They come in with the FNGs and soon die off. Mid Winter Air Drop from a low altitude141 using drone shoots brings in the fresh vegies in crates with white strobe lights so you can see them in the dark always causes cold or flu outbreak for about two weeks. Well I have totally reminisced back into a distance of a long ago time so I will now digress back to the subject of…If its flat earth why does the sun ball in the sky orbit directly overhead in Mid Summer. Those cameras you see showing a shadow from a stick only going 180 degrees is because its early summer and the sun rises and sets on the horizon. If you see it, lets say December you would probably see the full circle but those who think they know well they want show you this.
The problem with the captains who logged over 50000 miles in their circumnavigation of Antarctica is the earth at the equator is only 25000 miles in the sphere circumference. You have to be a really bad navigator to get those kind of distances at the 20th parallel or you circled the outer edge of the plate.
A plane going east or west would end up back where it started on a flat earth…..what a dumb question…..obviously you haven’t looked into the flat earth theory… the north pole is the center of the “disc” so if you fly east or west you are only circling the north pole…. sheesh !!!!
So if you agree a North Pole exists on a flat earth and that all directions away from it are south then I think I can prove this flat earth theory is rubbish by simple maths, and you can prove it yourself by paying for a few flights in the Southern Hemisphere. If you draw my explanation on a flat earth map you will find this easier to understand. If you fly south for 1000 miles from the North Pole , then 1000 miles west, then 1000 miles north again you end up back at the exact same point, the North Pole. You flew in a triangle! Anywhere in the northern hemisphere where you try this you end up with a triangle ish shape but the top point doesn’t fully meet (only the North Pole one meets fully) . If you draw this shape on a flat earth map you will see what I mean /_\ this is how your northern hemisphere flights will always look on a flat earth and also a spherical planet and to prove this shape all you need to do is fly east back to your original starting point and measure this final journey mileage. The distance is shorter than your bottom section east to west flight. Now this is exactly how it’s supposed to look because a North Pole exists as one single point. Now this is where a flat earth fails in my opinion because if you try this method in the Southern Hemisphere on a flat earth the same shape would exist where it’s a triangle ish shape with the top point pointing towards the North Pole and the distance from your east to west flight being longer than your west to east flight back to your original position , like this again /_\ but if you actual do this for real the shape you get is one where the triangle ish shape points south like this \_/ because in the Southern Hemisphere you’re flying to a southern single point known as the South Pole. Your flight from east to west will be shorter than your final flight west to east back to your original starting point. Draw this flight on a flat earth model and the triangle will always point north whether you’re in the northern hemisphere or Southern Hemisphere but in reality northern hem will look like /_\ and souther hem will be \_/ because a north and South Pole exists as a single point on a spherical planet. Saying that every direction from north is south is just utter BS and blows your theory out the water because a flat earth then can’t have a single southern pole point and by then using simple maths and taking a few flights yourself you can disprove it. Just by drawing a North Pole on your flat earth map and radiate lines from this point south in all directions you can clearly see that flights in a flat earth s.hemisphere will be the wrong shape for what exists in the ‘real world’ .
Well What is amazing is What Admiral Byrd Flew into when crossing the South pole. Flying into a green vegetative wilderness in the middle of the Ice Continent. Read Steve Quayle’s Empire Beneath The Ice and it will certainly explain a lot.
Yaakov, I am thinking….that in your believe you are correct in the analysis of these Flat Earth People. But more than that I Thank You for you Blessing me with YAHWEH Blessings. Thank you sir from my heart and I pray for you too, that the He is a lamp unto your feet and you shall never stumble. Be Watchful, Be Awake, Be blessed in these trying days.
Seriously deleted my comment? Terrible website. Good luck.
I apologize, didn’t see it in the list because it’s still awaiting moderation. I take back my rash comment.
All science aside. From a biblical view, how can our sins be separated as far as the east is from the west? A sphere shape makes that impossible. How will every eye see the return of our Messiah so we don’t have to run to the desert to verify, impossible for those in America to see our Lord return with a globe, and Yeshewa could have never turned down rule over every kingdom of the earth in a globe earth, He could have only had half in His vision.
A globe earth is an attack on our very basic belief that God means what He says. How can He gather his people from the four ccorners of the earth, if our earth has no corners? How can we be separeted from our sin if, it just meets up half way around. And doesn’t God say He shaped the earth as a signet ring?
The bible cannot be 100 percent accurate with a globe earth model. It is impossible!
you have the wrong picture if you look at the spherical view of east from the west. Trivially the eastern most point of the United States is the tip of the Alaska Aleutian Islands. They are at the start of the new day and what most consider the western most point of the U.S. wrongly. The one island is on the other side of the date line. East and west are only references of right angles from what we know…..North. They are the image visually of that which is away from us when we reference the guide that does not change……North. On a plane they don’t meet while on a spree they do.
The Globe theory constantly chases East from West. The Lord is omnipresent all will see Him in the sky. The four corners have been found with orbiting ground penetrating radar. Search U Tube or Written Sights. The signate ring I will have to research so for now that is a given.
All present He may be, but Jesus warns us not to go looking for Him. If He does return to Israel, and taking the bible at its most simplistic form, for every eye to see Him, the world must be flat! On a globe.. . One persons east isanother persons west. Yoursins cannot be separated from you, you cannot be clean, and you cannot enter the Presence of he Lord! How did the devil show Jesus all the kingoms? Or did he really? Does the bible really mean what it says? Could not have been all the kingdoms, right. Choose now science or God!
Don’t go looking for Him??? The bible tells us He is a rewarder to those that diligently seek after Him. It also says two will be sleeping one will be taken. Two will be harvesting their fields one will be taken. You dont harvest your fields at night. Different time zones. I will ask you this as I have asked all flat earth people with no answer. How can the sun circle the sky stright overhead in a tight loop in McMurdo Antarctica at mid summer on a flat earth. I have been there and seen it. You need to worry about your own salvation not mine.
Matthew 24:23-25 (NKJV)
23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it.
24 For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
25 See, I have told you beforehand.
Check out Flat Earth Testimonies and see what God is doing with the Flat Earth
testingtheglobe(dot)com/testimonies(dot)html
(replace (dot) with a “.”)
If you have read my post above you will see that I hold no argument for either. I am neutral. But you should read my several post above to see my thoughts on this argument. Why no one yet can tell m e why a sun in McMurdo Antarctica circles the horizon climbing higher and higher into the sky untill mid summers day when it only circles directly overhead. As the summer draws nigh it starts back down on the horizon till it disappears for about three months. Answer that and I will move from center to more your side of the argument.
Sorry Dale, I can’t explain something I haven’t experienced. You have experienced it, what is your explanation? How does the sun circling over the Tropic of Cancer put it over McMurdo? I don’t doubt your experience. To me it just raises more doubts about what we have been told about the “globe.”
Explain to me why your experience proves the earth is a globe? Is that the only explanation for your experience? You keep asking this question, why should others do your homework? If you are satisfied that you have the answer about your experience, why are you here? Others are searching out answers to their own questions, should they stop because you are satisfied with your conclusions?
Let’s all be Bereans and search out truth.
Speaking of airplanes, they have a gyroscopicly controlled level flight indicator. These maintain the same orientation in space. If the Earth is a globe and you flew a few hundred miles straight, at the same altitude from the ground, presumably following the curve if the Earth, then made a 90 degree turn, the level flight indicator would no longer be parallel to the ground. Yet it is. How does that work?
Respectfully sir, these arguments have been satisfactorily debunked. You’d know this if you’d taken even a cursory look at the FE research.
JAH, I guess it all falls back to the fact my interest does not lay with the Flat/Round Earth Theory. I just read the article here and decided to ask a question to which I had no answer. All those flat earth folks out there seem to be so certain in their belief I thought I would just ask. My studies for the past 15 years has been with end time events, what happened in the days prior to the flood and what transpired afterwards. Its certainly not what you have been taught. And there in lies our commonality called ( Deception) my study is just in a different arena. I know there were giants on this earth prior to the flood and a few lived through it. General Eisenhower warned us against a standing Army and Kennedy was killed shortly after his Secret Society Speech. It was after his death that the NWO took charge. I have studied this and along with the subversion of our Constitution by this standing Military Army and World Corporations. What is taught by the left wing college seminary to its students is not all truths and thus what has gone on and what is now going on in the DUMBS Deep Underground Military Bunkers will open your eyes. Much of this should be taught to the sheep in the church but only a few Pastors will touch it. Remember Satan can not create a thing. He uses the dark hearts of evil men to do his bidding and dark things is what is going on a mile underground. I will say this…This is the year you will see much hidden agendas and huge financial situations come into view. Pray on your armor of God each day, put on your Garments of White and fill your Lamps full of the Oil prepare in the spiritual the physical and the mental cause its coming at us fast. When this thing hits it will be exactly as the bible has prophesied. It will be like it has never was before or ever will be again. Billions on Billions will be killed and as the Lord said if I did not come early no flesh would be left alive. We are now in those days. Food shortages are coming and water is no longer a right of the people but will be a privilege. What is ready to come up upon this earth as the Lord said will frighten the hearts of men to death. I believe much will originate from the experimentation in those DUMBS and will be released upon this earth. For what was going on with the fallen angels before the flood in the Days of Noah altering of DNA. Its on going right now where no prying eyes can see. Well I certainly have digressed here. So Flat Earth or Round Earth will be on no ones mind very soon. It will be about survival but the Lord promised to protect his Elect but they will be like the days of Noah too. VERY FEW. If you have never visited the Z3 News web sight I would only give a suggestion that you might think of doing so. Before God moves He warns His people. The Few prophets or those being given dreams and visions of these last days are posted there. Be Aware, Be Alert be Safe, Be Blessed. I will lean to a round earth until I am convinced otherwise Though I may be right or wrong.
Dale – I can respect what your saying, thank you for your candor. I really wish I could answer your question, but I’ve come to the realization there are some things we may not have an answer just because the powers-that-be control so much of the information. Frankly, there little I can take at face value anymore with out seeking the Lord for discernment. So much deception (just as Jesus said it would be.)
What I did years ago is file the questions I had away in the back of my mind until the day I got an answer. Some of those questions I had for more than 30 years before getting my answer. Flat Earth is one of the things that has addressed anomalies I had identified. And when I saw it I could have kicked myself – Genesis Chapter One is exactly right! It was there all the time, but I let myself get sucked in by those trying to reconcile the Bible to (so called) science instead of the other way around. (Let all men be liars, but God is true.)
The words on Z3 News witness with me, I agree “What is ready to come up upon this earth as the Lord said will frighten the hearts of men to death.”
I believe there IS an answer to your question, I just don’t have it. But, until then –
Luke 2:19 (NKJV) “But Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart.”
Philippians 1:6 (NKJV) “being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ; “
JAH…..Thank you for your fair replay. You are correct on the great deception that is over the entire earth. But that is how Satan works through deception. I am on slippery Ice here with my leaning to a Round Earth so any slight breeze can push me back the other way. Its probably not the right way of mind to be in, but when you don’t have all the answers its hard to be firm. I have read many articles on Flat Earth and admit they do ring with truth. I just am not for sure and still can not get into my mind about the summer orbital of the sun in Antarctica during mid summer, and how that works with a flat earth theory, but someone out there may know. Be very watchful in the days of 2016 cause I fear it is going to break lose. Begin your preps now if you have not done so yet. Japan and Sweden have brought in the war on cash and negative interest rates, the US is now following this war on cash. This is such to bring in only digital money as the banks declare cash a nuisance. This also being done to stop the run on the banks when they go to confiscate your bank accounts. This is not far off and you know where digital money will lead next… The Mark, no buying or selling without it. They now know that your DNA has a frequency of its on and that DNA can be altered. Will this chip lead to an altered DNA and thus unredeemable as the Lord says to all who take it. Once injected you belong to Satan I don’t just take this a word value alone. “Something just happened there” with that mark being taken. I will let you ponder that one for yourself for I am not exactly sure yet, but much leaning that way. Take care in your search for truth as the lord says ” It Will Set You Free”. Be Watchful. Be blessed.
Dale – Agreed, This is the day to be watchful.
Further research prospects for your question about Antarctica –
“FLAT EARTH ~ Bending Light to the Edge of Reality” on youtube by Jonathan Christopulos
(the important info starts about the 11 minute mark)
Also –
Zeteticism DotCom youtube channel with Jeffrey Grupp has made videos of his investigation in how the sun observations play out in the flat earth, for instance –
“Zeteticism (FLAT EARTH) Vol.1: Zetetic Eye Gyroscope (2nd dr), Curvature Illusion,Ocean currents,Etc”
Are these correct? I don’t know. But there are people trying find the answer and are using actual experiments to find the answers. And some are coming up with plausible explanations… more plausible than the globe, in my opinion.
The key to the whole thing, I believe, lies in the “polar regions,” unfortunately those are also the least accessible to the average person so there is an tremendous amount of control by the “powers-that- be” over any research. And they want to keep everyone in the matrix.
I believe your experience in what is called “Antarctica” has the potential to bring something to the table in this research. It seems to be an unknown region globe or flat. Don’t stop asking the questions & don’t rule anything out. That’s why I asked if what you observed is only explained by the globe or are there other explanations?
I remember on 9/11 I observed things that didn’t make sense (buildings with asymmetrical damage collapsing perfectly symmetrically into there own foot print) but the “powers-that-be were there to help me “understand” what I’d seen. It took years to break out of the paradigm I was “given.” And still, while I know the “official story” was a lie, I can’t tell you for certain what actually happened because they are still the “keepers” of the information.
The question is, “Is the strong delusion just arriving, or has it been in full operation for centuries?”
I’m resending this link just in case you missed it.
I don’t think you did, you just choose not to post it,
although I’ve gotten notice of several new posted comments
since I sent my comment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HX1HIWGtr_E
CharlesFockaert / Kerux
Simply put, it is not the circular map as indicated by the AE but more of a square as in the Miller projection.
Biblical support:
Isiah 11: 12 – And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
Revelation 7:1 – And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.
This has two witnesses, Isiah from the Old Testament and John of Patmos from the New Testament.
The verse that needs to be reconciled is
Isiah 40:22 – It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.
Here the Hebrew word is chuwg which can be translated as circle (Isiah 40:22), circuit (Job 22:14), or compass. It is used only three times in the Bible; once for circle, once for circuit, and once for compass (Proverbs 8:27). If we replace circle with circuit in Isiah 40:22 we get:
Isiah 40:22 – It is he that sitteth upon the circuit of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in.
So, using the Miller map projection as the model and placing portals on the east and west as suggested by Enoch, it is entirely possible for a plane to travel from east to west and return to its point of origin. This would suggest a “space loop” which is not beyond the realm of YHVH to create.
It is highly suggested that folks review videos produced by FreeAnergy on YouTube for a better understanding of YHVH’s great creation.
It also surprises me that some of you folks are still looking at the globe model which is the basis for evolution, the big bang, man being nothing special in the universe. and the atheistic viewpoint. Get off the ball because flat is where it is at.
Here we go again calling the ‘ancients’ backwards and superstitious! Show me ONE book that was not written by man. Just One!! You can’t because they are ALL written by mankind!! Show me ONE building that is built upon a sphere…Just ONE. Everything is built upon a flat foundation, everything. So God isn’t real, but ‘Lucifer’ is real and living in LA?? May God have mercy on all your souls!
It is the evil one (Satan) who tries to change the Truth of God into lies. 666 is just another lie from the liar. Book of Revelation 13: 16-18 [16] And he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen and bondmen, to have a character in their right hand, or on their foreheads. [17] And that no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. [18] Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man: and the number of him is six hundred sixty-six. The information in the following brackets were taken from this source. [Asimov, Isaac. Exploring the Earth and the Cosmos. New York: Wrightfall, 1982: 243. Earth’s average speed of revolution about the sun is 29.8 kilometers per second, or 18.5 miles per second.] 18.5 miles per second equals 66600 miles per hour. Here in the number we find 666 or the Greek numerals χξϛʹ which count the number chi xi digamma, six hundred sixty six. Greek is the language that Saint John wrote The Apocalypse Of Saint John (Revelation). With Greek numerals as well as Roman numerals there is no numeral for 0 (zero). The name of the beast, or the number of his name, six hundred sixty-six; would mean liar. This brings into question the astronomical model of heliocentrism, as opposed to the model of geocentrism. The geocentric model is considered a superceded scientific theory that was once commonly accepted but that is no longer considered the most complete description of reality by a mainstream scientific consenus, or a theory which has been shown to be false. In the book of Joshua: 10: 12-14 [12] Then Joshua spoke to the Lord, in the day that he delivered the Amorrhite in the sight of the children of Israel, and he said before them: Move not, O sun, toward Gabaon, nor thou, O moon, toward the valley of Ajalon. [13] And the sun and the moon stood still, till the people revenged themselves of their enemies. Is not this written in the book of the just? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down the space of one day. [14] There was not before nor after so long a day, the Lord obeying the voice of a man, and fighting for Israel. My question is. Is it not true that this text should be taken in the literal sense. For the text states that both the sun and the moon stood still. In the geocentric model this text makes sense. In the heliocentric model this text does not make sense. Also, I remember when I was 19 years old in March of 1982 the Rock Band Iron Maiden released the song ” The Number of the Beast ” It was Iron Maiden’s seventh single release, and the second single from their 1982 studio album of the same name. Upon release in 1982, the song caused controversy in the United States where its religious subject matter caused outrage amongst religious groups. In spite of this, it remains one of the band’s more popular songs. I find it interesting, this song would be released at the same time that Isaac Asimov would be able to determine the speed of the earth, traveling around the sun, as exactly (66600 miles per hour)… And as always … God Bless…
I will be commenting back on a lot of this in the next day or two, I am busy right now. But I will make the following comment –
If all of you wannabe associative intellectuals using herd-agreement with the so-called “intellectual” establishment want to live in a delusion without ever questioning the Authorities then enjoy your bliss.
It must make you all feel smarter by believing and repeating everything NASA spews out. The SAME NASA that was founded and controlled for decades by FORMER NAZI SCIENTIST BROUGHT OVER AFTER WORLD WAR 2 UNDER OPERATION PAPERCLIP – http://www.operationpaperclip.info
You all can also Google it and find more about how former or (current?) Nazi scientist were crawling all over NASA during the Apollo missions – If you need pictures of the Father of NASA, SS Wernher Von Braun, hanging out with all his Nazi buddies just search for them in Google and you will find plenty of them.
BTW the Nazis were very interested in Antarctica for some “reason”?
Also, to the commenter that said flat-earthers are religious nuts – Looks like NASA (NAZI) are the religious nuts because they name almost all their missions and vehicles after ancient pagan gods – Why all the fascination with old-fable gods at NASA (NAZI) – real scientific there – Whew!!
So David, Inky Hip, and all you we’re smart because we blindly agree and follow former Nazi “men of science” commenters, if it makes you all feel like you are intellectually superior with all the answers to gobble up everything NASA’s Nazi “Scientist” say – be my guest!
After all, just because the Nazis were Masters of Lies, Propaganda, Torture, Genocide, Pseudo-science, and Mad scientists human experimentation should be no reason not to trust a US Government Agency (NASA) they started.
After witnessing you, David, and all your NASA worshiping commenters here at this video, I can see now why it was so easy for an evil master of deception, like Hitler, could fool and drag one of the most intelligent nations at the time into Hell.
Hey All You Cult of the Closed-Mind, So-Called “Expert” Worshipers and to Other Legitimate Objective People, with open minds who visit this video with real questions and truly searching for truth – Here are a couple of things that make you go Hmmm –
1. How can fish and other creatures swim around the oceans almost effortlessly in the so-called Southern Hemisphere when, according to the so-called “established” laws of physics and gravity, the amount of gravitational pull required to hold the estimated 100s of Quintillion of gallons of water in those Southern oceans in place would be so great that how could anything actually move under that amount of pull? I mean really, All that water in the Southern Hemisphere just hanging upside down and gravity is holding it in place, but the “experts” then say that all that gravitational pull allows for all those various size creatures, from microbes to whales, to move freely around and not get pulled down to the bottom. FREAKING AMAZING ISN’T IT??
2. In the same vein of the previous question, How can a mouse, or even a man, stand under an elephant and the gravitational pull on the elephant not cause the mouse to be pulled into the ground or the man onto the ground, or at least at minimum cause a noticeable tug on the mouse or man?? Or if gravity is adjusting for the mouse or man under the elephant, why is the elephant not effected by less gravity in the area of its body directly above the other masses?
Ah, but you say that is gravity – The Magical “Force” THAT MAKES THE GLOBE EARTH POSSIBLE AND that not only holds everything down but adjusts to each individual mass even in the middle of the gravitational pull of a much, much, much larger mass. DOESN’T SOUND MUCH LIKE SCIENCE TO ME – SOUNDS LIKE A BELIEF IN MAGIC BY THE SO-CALLED “EXPERTS” of SCIENCE.
To get a better understanding of how things really are and how it all works look into atom/particle density and displacement science and not the Magic of Gravity as it is presented to the masses. BTW – the Gravity Magicians do try to borrow some of the math from atom/particle displacement and density laws to make their Gravity Magic look like real science.
Putnam and the rest of the folks he works with calls this defending the faith. Maybe we should rename him Dr. Zaius.
Dr. Zaius – That’s Good! Pretty much sums up what we’re dealing with – Monkeyman science.
That’s because there is no gravity. Its magnetism. Tesla got it right, not Einstein. If you are basing calculations on gravity, globe theory would not work. The Lord said “All things are held together through Me”. That’s just one of the things CERN searches for. Along with the seperation barrier.
It’s called hydrostatics. Have you ever been SCUBA diving? Try it and you’ll see how this works.
The full explanation requires integration over a surface, but put very simply think of a cubical box under water, weighted to have neutral buoyancy. The water pressure on all sides is the same and cancels out. The water pressure on the bottom is slightly greater than that on the top, so there is a net force upwards which balances the weight of the box.
in general at depth d the pressure P is given by
rho . d . g + pa
where rho is the density of the liquid, g is the acceleration due to gravity and pa is the atmospheric pressure at the surface.
That’s how fish, squid, submarines and SCUBA divers swim around quite happily.
Similarly with the elephant it has a mass of about 1 Tonne, the Earth about 6×10^21 tonnes, you are about 10^7 times as far from the centre of the Earth as from the centre of the elephant when you are standing under it (health & safety: this is not a recommended procedure). Using the well-known law of gravitation
f = m1 . m2 . G / r^2
we find that the gravitational pull of the Earth is about 6*10^7 of the elephant. The gravitational pull of the elephant is simply too small to detect.
This is why the Cavendish experiment is so damnably difficult to make work. I have done it once but it took a lot of fiddling and some concrete blocks to make it stable.
You could try collapsing the elephant down to a black hole. Then you might be able to detect something.
The point is that Newton’s law of gravitation correctly predicts exactly what we see. If an alternative is to be considered it needs to make more accurate predictions.
Isn’t maths fun?
lol.. Now you will tell me geometry can show the earth is spherical because the distance between the tip of south america and austrailia is 17k km ish? What would it be in the flat earth model, about 57k km miles.. Maybe physics, geometry, and math are different on the flat earth.
So the flat earth model requires that we revise all our physics, mathematics and geometry, right back to that developed by the ancient Greeks? Perhaps you’d like to point me to a location where I can find a rigorous mathematical analysis of this new enlightenment so that I can study it for myself.
Hahahaaa the fact Lesa said that ‘All that water in the Southern Hemisphere just hanging upside down and gravity is holding it in place,’ makes me realise just how uneducated these flat earthers actually are. Upside down??? Upside down?? You for real? There’s no such thing as upright or upside down on a spherical earth. Why would the s.hemisphere be upside down? Because the n.hemisphere is upright? Why can’t the s.hemisphere be upright and the n.hemisphere be upside down? Your comment is stupid!! I’m guessing you look at a picture of a round earth and because it is drawn the way it is you assume everything south of the equator is upside down haha . On a round planet which has gravity there is no upside down . There’s up, into the sky then space or there’s down towards the ground towards the centre of the earth. People in Australia aren’t holding on for dear life you know, or walking on their hands because they’re upside down!! Your comment is ridiculous and its a comment you make in school when your like 6 years old. Gravity pulls you towards the centre of the earth so if you’re in the Southern Hemisphere you aren’t just going to fall off, your comment makes out as if there’s another force trying to pull everything off the Southern Hemisphere ‘downwards’ so Gravity has to work ‘extra hard’ to hold it in place haha open your mind my friend and stop seeing the round earth as upright or upside down according to northern or Southern Hemisphere.
Well, this is interesting. I’ve been both to 37,000 feet courtesy of Boeing, and on the top deck of a hydrofoil on a perfectly calm day. In both cases it was very clear that the Earth was curved. The hydrofoil from St Malo to Guernsey was probably the more obvious of the two. As we approached Guernsey the chimney of the power station appeared first, then the buildings. The island appeared first as two separate objects as it has some low ground in the middle, then joined up.
This is a photo of the chimney from the air to give some idea of scale: http://www.electricity.gg/media/37526/Aerial-Power-Station-Photo_800x534.jpg
Now I have heard it said that this effect can be explained away by parallax, and that under sufficient magnification objects which have vanished would reappear. However this is not consistent with what I saw. Instead of seeing the whole island getting larger, I saw different high points, already widely separated, join up to make one island.
The reason I am very familiar with what parallax can and can’t do is that I developed the mathematical treatment of solid geometry that was used in the early days of digital television.
The point is that if, for example, you set up a camera on a tripod (the eye does the same thing) then each point on the camera target receives light arriving from one direction. Let’s call this a ray.
If something starts off from one side of the camera, and travels exactly parallel to the direction of the ray, its distance from the ray will remain constant. However the angle between the object and the ray when it is x units to the side and y units away from the camera will be arctan(x/y). As this becomes a small angle we can approximate the series for cos(a) to 1 and sin(a) to a, so the angular distance between the ray and the object will tend towards x/y radians. Note that this is only very basic trigonometry, we have not yet said anything about the shape of the earth. Now the offset on the camera target will of course be fx/y where f is the focal length of the lens.
The consequence of this is that as x tends to infinity fx/y converges to zero. Practically it means that any number of parallel things extended away from the camera will converge to a single point in the picture.
Because of this a distant object such as an island or a boat will appear smaller, but it will all appear smaller in proportion. The idea that the hull of a boat or the low part of an island can dip under the horizon due to parallax is a non-starter.
This of course also explains why the sun’s rays appear to converge. With the sun at 93,000,000 miles its rays are very nearly parallel. When these pass through broken cloud and are subsequently scattered they make a slab parallel of objects which, when photographed, converge on the sun as described above.
It also explains why shadows in Apollo lunar surface photos are not parallel.
As it is so easy to disprove this particular flat earth argument with nothing other than trivial maths, easily derived from first principles- let’s face it anyone can derive the series for sin(x) and cos(x) on the back of an envelope in ten minutes- it makes me call into question the stability of the whole edifice.
always hate to join in late.
I do not consider the “flat earthers” to be crazy, idiots,
or irrational. They can be simply explained away
as fun-loving people who with tongue-in-cheek like
to make jabs at us idiots who take seriously everything
we read on google.
Sorry Blain, No “tongue-in-cheek” here. We really are crazy, irrational, idiots, because that is what people who are stuck in the “Group Think” Matrix call people who actually think for themselves. Blain, we will not be explained away!
It is time you for you to come out of the Matrix. Take some time to do a little research into the subject (you really are late party Rip VanWinkle.)
testingtheglobe(dot)com
enclosedworld(dot)com
flatlikeme(dot)com
There’s one thing I’d like to ask the flat-earth apologists. Where can I find a full mathematical description of the flat earth sun and moon, one that is good enough to predict eclipses? If I’m being asked to discard the Keplerian model I’d like to know what is supposed to replace it.
Astropolis – What I would like to ask you, it would be helpful to me, would you explain the full mathematical description of the heliocentric model of the solar system and your personal verification of the veracity of these equations. Is heliocentrism the only explanation? Would these equations work in other models? Have you tested other models?
It would seem to me the “mathematic descriptions” are simply a language describing “observations” of these “heavenly” bodies. Therefore, the observations would be the observations regardless of “flat” or “globe,” so the math would be the same. The heavenly bodies don’t follow the math, the math follows the heavenly bodies. They follow their course (from our perspective) regardless of “flat” or “globe.”
As Cris Putnam wrote, “Our task is to save the phenomena. It doesn’t matter if our models are true, all that matters is that our models work mathematically.”
Putnam, Cris (2014-05-26). The Supernatural Worldview: Examining Paranormal, Psi, and the Apocalyptic (Kindle Locations 6570-6571). Defense Publishing. Kindle Edition.
No problem. The motions of the planets, moons and artificial satellites can be understood in terms of Newton’s laws of Motion and Gravitation. The two vital equations are
f = m . dv/dt
where m is the mass of an object, f is the vector force acting on it and v is its velocity. The second is
f = G . m1 . m2 / ( r ^ 2 )
where G is the universal gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of two bodies and r is this distance between them. The symbol f is the magnitude of the force vector which describes the gravitational attraction between them.
Kepler’s laws of planetary motion may be stated as: The orbit of every orbiting body is an ellipse with the primary at one of the two foci. The other focus is empty. A line joining an orbiting body and its primary sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. The square of the orbital period of an orbiting body is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit.
Rather beautifully the instantaneous r(x,y,z) position and v(x,y,z) velocity of an orbiting body at any time used as the epoch can be converted to the six Keplerian elements: Eccentricity, Semimajor axis, Inclination, Longitude of Ascending Node, Argument of periapsis and Mean anomaly at epoch. These six numbers which define the shape and location of the elliptical orbit can then be used to compute the position an velocity of the body at any future time.
The full mathematical argument is online in several places, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_elements is a good starting point.
However, and this is what I see at the problem, the reason orbiting bodies follow the paths defined by Kepler is the laws of motion and gravitation discovered by Newton. Differentiating the motion according to Kepler gives the law of gravitation according to Newton. The full argument can be found here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler%27s_laws_of_planetary_motion.
If you haven’t already done it try working the calculus through for yourself, it’s a sweet little problem.
Some years ago for a client I wrote a software package which could put moving maps and a planetarium on the entertainment displays of an airliner. Naturally I used a round earth model, and Kepler’s laws, to compute the geometry. I had to understand and code these things myself. the results worked out correctly, the software did what we expected.
The point is of course that if you want to make a flat earth consistent you need a different model of gravitation, one that does not depend on the attraction between localised masses.
I expect bodies to follow the paths defined by Kepler’s laws because that is what Newton’s law of gravitation predicts. A flat earth requires a different law of gravitation, and hence a different set of laws of planetary motion.
I’ve done my part. Now I’d like to see the mathematical description of the flat earth so that I can check it for myself.
I have made a full reply which is “awaiting moderation”
Astropolis – You may have to repost without hyperlinks, this site is notoriously slow about “awaiting moderation.”
No problem. The motions of the planets, moons and artificial satellites can be understood in terms of Newton’s laws of Motion and Gravitation. The two vital equations are
f = m . dv/dt
where m is the mass of an object, f is the vector force acting on it and v is its velocity. The second is
f = G . m1 . m2 / ( r ^ 2 )
where G is the universal gravitational constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of two bodies and r is this distance between them. The symbol f is the magnitude of the force vector which describes the gravitational attraction between them.
Kepler’s laws of planetary motion may be stated as: The orbit of every orbiting body is an ellipse with the primary at one of the two foci. The other focus is empty. A line joining an orbiting body and its primary sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time. The square of the orbital period of an orbiting body is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit.
Rather beautifully the instantaneous r(x,y,z) position and v(x,y,z) velocity of an orbiting body at any time used as the epoch can be converted to the six Keplerian elements: Eccentricity, Semimajor axis, Inclination, Longitude of Ascending Node, Argument of periapsis and Mean anomaly at epoch. These six numbers which define the shape and location of the elliptical orbit can then be used to compute the position an velocity of the body at any future time.
The full mathematical argument is online in several places, the wikipedia article “Orbital elements” is a good starting point.
However, and this is what I see at the problem, the reason orbiting bodies follow the paths defined by Kepler is the laws of motion and gravitation discovered by Newton. Differentiating the motion according to Kepler gives the law of gravitation according to Newton. The full argument can be found here on wikipedia “laws of planetary motion”.
If you haven’t already done it try working the calculus through for yourself, it’s a sweet little problem.
Some years ago for a client I wrote a software package which could put moving maps and a planetarium on the entertainment displays of an airliner. Naturally I used a round earth model, and Kepler’s laws, to compute the geometry. I had to understand and code these things myself. the results worked out correctly, the software did what we expected.
The point is of course that if you want to make a flat earth consistent you need a different model of gravitation, one that does not depend on the attraction between localised masses.
I expect bodies to follow the paths defined by Kepler’s laws because that is what Newton’s law of gravitation predicts. A flat earth requires a different law of gravitation, and hence a different set of laws of planetary motion.
I’ve done my part. Now I’d like to see the mathematical description of the flat earth so that I can check it for myself.
Of course, if the observations were correct, so too should be the math. As I said earlier all these equations are just a mathematical description of observations. From the beginning of history man understood the “heavens” to be a clock/calendar because of the consistency of movement. All people like Kepler did was apply the “language” of math to those observations. Let me assure you the “orbiting bodies DON’T follow the paths defined by Kepler, rather Kepler followed the “orbiting bodies.” The question is will mathematical descriptions work outside the “Keplerian Universe?”
You yourself prove that they do. You used Kepler’s laws to create a virtual environment and it worked.
Planetariums also use Kepler’s laws and create working models of the heavens. And note they are using a fixed observational platform (without adjusting gravity) to achieve that, just like the still flat earth.
So now we have two more environments where the math works. How many more are there? I suggest because these “laws” are just descriptions of observations. They will work in any proposed environment as long as the observations are accurate.
The point is of course that implicit in the math, part of how it works, is that the Earth’s gravity pulls towards its centre. Gravity in England pulls in the opposite direction to gravity in Australia, on a flat Earth gravity would have to pull in the same direction everywhere or some direction would be uphill. Now Kepler and Newton’s predictions require gravity to be towards the centre of a spherical Earth, if it isn’t spherical the maths would predict something quite different. At the moment the maths predicts exactly what we see, that the planets orbit the sun and the moons orbit the planets. In the flat earth model where is the moon, how is it moving and what forces act on it to make it move in that way?
If you can refer me to a page with an explanation of the math of flat-earth cosmology I would be very interested to see it.
For thousands of years before Kepler simple farmers could predict what we see in the heavens without the math, so what have we gained? Well of course we made the understanding more complicated, so now only certain people (the Priesthood of Scientism) are allowed to comment on the natural world. The unwashed masses need not put in their 2 cents. I contend the same math you present will work just fine on the flat earth because it is just a mathematical description of an observation of movement.
Again the objects were in motion before Kepler and Newton were a twinkle in their father’s eye. These objects could care less about these mathematical equations, they follow their courses regardless of the math. The math follows the objects, the objects do not follow the math.
To reiterate, as Cris Putnam wrote, “Our task is to save the phenomena. It doesn’t matter if our models are true, all that matters is that our models work mathematically.”
Putnam, Cris (2014-05-26). The Supernatural Worldview: Examining Paranormal, Psi, and the Apocalyptic (Kindle Locations 6570-6571). Defense Publishing. Kindle Edition.
Clint Eastwood said it well in the 2nd Dirty Harry movie, “A man’s got to know his limitations.” While the math may adequately describe the observed path of the heavenly bodies it does not have the power to describe the observation platform.
Astropolis,
Have you seen the documentary The Principle? Very interesting to hear the top astrophysicist and cosmologist talk about the current data pointing to a geocentric model instead of our current heliocentric one. It’s funny that science has to keep inventing theories to prop up Copernicus and Einstein; gravity, relativity, black holes, dark matter, the multiverse, however Ockham’s razor in my opinion would disregard all the assumptions made in the math you point to which can still be right but be logically incorrect and accept the geocentric, electric universe model. The earth is not moving and water which always finds its level prove the earth is flat. Show me any body of water that has a bulge in the center relative to the shore at opposite ends. There is no bulge because there is no curvature. Which means the horizon is just you eye’s vanishing point. Theoretical science does not hold water to experimental/empirical evidence that you yourself can go prove or disprove. Maybe the electric universe would help you understand the the movements of celestial bodies.
Chad – Chuck Missler has some good stuff dealing with the Electric/Plasma Universe. There is evidence that “gravity” is not the controlling force in the Universe that astrophysicists have made it out to be. In fact it is actually a weak force at best, exponentially decreasing in strength with increase in distance. Electro-Magnetic Fields don’t have the same vulnerability to distance. James McCanney also has also addressed the Electric/Plasma Universe. Most of the discoveries in these areas have occurred in the past hundred years. Tesla also explained gravity as a mix of transverse and longitudinal electromagnetic waves.
Gravity falls off as inverse square, not exponentially. We know this because Newton’s laws make correct predictions. Using a system in which gravity is replaced by electromagnetic forces one would expect the weight of an object to be affected by not only its inertial mass but its permeability and permittivity as well. In other words we’d expect a steel ball to fall faster than a glass one. We don’t see this. Newton’s law of gravitation predicts that weight is proportional to inertial mass, and hence that, once air resistance is removed, both will fall at the same speed. We do see this.
Since a gravitational model makes a correct prediction here, and an electromagnetic model makes an incorrect one, which model is more likely to be right?
Cool – That settles it! You’ve saved the phenomena.
Question: If a psychic makes a prediction and it comes to pass, what can we conclude?
“Our task is to save the phenomena. It doesn’t matter if our models are true, all that matters is that our models work mathematically.”
Putnam, Cris (2014-05-26). The Supernatural Worldview: Examining Paranormal, Psi, and the Apocalyptic (Kindle Locations 6570-6571). Defense Publishing. Kindle Edition.
I would conclude that we need to see if the psychic can make predictions which come true with a greater frequency than is to be expected statistically. One trivial test would be to have them predict the results of a random event which is not affected by previous trials, such as the lottery draw or a game of roulette.
Card games will not do. The quality of shuffling in many casinos these days is so poor that a good card counter can defeat the house. I’ve seen it done.
Great advice! I will keep that in mind with psychics and casinos.
Now what about the farmer who could consistently and accurately predict the movement of heavenly bodies without the math?
I still contend the equations are just a description of the observations using the language of math. Because they are just a description of what is observed they will work on any observation platform.
“Our task is to save the phenomena. It doesn’t matter if our models are true, all that matters is that our models work mathematically.”
Putnam, Cris (2014-05-26). The Supernatural Worldview: Examining Paranormal, Psi, and the Apocalyptic (Kindle Locations 6570-6571). Defense Publishing. Kindle Edition.
I would like to find anyone who could predict retrograde motion years ahead without the math. This was one of the major problems that brought down the old geocentric system. It had to be fudged by adding epicycles, lots of crystal spheres, to get even close, and even then it broke down after a decade or so and needed to be reset. It was Tycho Brahe who realised that he was tracking comets in three dimensions by using parallax and they were going through the spheres without breaking anything.
Your farmer could probably manage the sun-earth system, but I’d need evidence that he could handle a retrograde conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn. Of course I’d be only too happy to see the evidence if it turned up.
However returning to the main point. The equations predict, for example, the times of sunrise and sunset at various points on the Earth. I’ve made enough transatlantic phone calls over the years to know that timezones are real, and the sun does rise and set at different times in different places.
I once remember calling England from Los Angeles at just after midnight my time, and speaking to my parents who were on their way to breakfast in an hotel just after 8am.
So, in the flat earth model, where does the sun go at night? If it orbits above a flat disk why do we see it go below the horizon, then see the underside of clouds illuminated by it after it has ceased to be visible? If it goes below the disk, why do different places on Earth see sunset at different times? I’m not disagreeing, because I really don’t know what you believe. I’d just like to know what you think happens at sunset.
If you are serious about your questions. I think you’d enjoy “Balls Out Physics” youtube channel with Brian Mullin.
Thanks for that. I tried but by timecode 12:30 he’d made so many errors in the vector algebra that I gave up.
What do you think happens at sunset?
Here’s a good video on youtube: Flat Earth Rant: The 7 Stages Of Grief by Fade to Black
Newtons Law only proves that there is something we call up and something we call down. One could just as easily say the opposite of gravity is true: There is something above us that pulls on the lighter objects. The fact that lighter or more buoyant mater moves up doesn’t prove gravity to be the cause. One could only deduce that heavier things fall while lighter things float. No external force is needed to explain this observation and it holds just as true whether the earth is round or flat. Besides we couldn’t tell the difference between pushing and pulling because that would be relative to the observer right? Everything always from the perspective of the observer falls down with the exception of “Outer Space” which we cannot observe. Magically, the earths gravity drops off at a certain distance where it no longer pulls satellites crashing to the ground yet it manages to tug on the mass of the moon at a much greater distance. There are many problems with the geocentric Globe model that don’t fit real world observation. In order to claim that a flat earth is not possible you can only do so on the basis of what you have been told not from actual observation. The idea that the sun moon and other celestial bodies cannot be explained in a flat earth model requires a bias belief in the unseen. You must assume that you already know the nature of these bodies and therefore are unwilling to look outside the box at other possible explanations.
You deserve some kind of award for packing so many errors into a small space.
1) Newton’s law. Newton described at least four physical laws. Which one do you mean?
2) Your force pulling up has never been observed, and would be inconsistent with observation, as it would continue to pull upwards in the absence of a surrounding medium. Nothing floats upwards in vacuum.
3) Heavy things fall in less dense media and float in denser media. A block of wood falls in air, but floats in water. This is because it displaces more than its own weight of water but less than its own weight of air. This can be explained in terms of gravity. For example consider a sphere with a mass of 500g and a volume of 1 litre. Now perform the integral to determine the pressure at every point on its surface when immersed in water and you will find that it predicts the correct upthrust. When you can describe your force pulling up with the same mathematical rigour it will be possible to examine it critically. Until then it simply doesn’t exist.
4) There are people on the ISS now observing outer space.
5) Gravity does not magically drop off, it falls off as the inverse square of distance. Satellites travel at sufficient speed that their orbits do not intersect the earth, or to oversimplify the centrifugal force balances gravity. The moon stays in orbit for EXACTLY THE SAME REASON, it is moving at a speed which balances Earth’s gravity. Using this concept it is possible to compute the movements of the sun, moon and planets in the sky well in advance. I still await anyone coming up with a mathematical description of a flat Earth that comes anywhere close to this.
6) You fail to name any observations which do not fit the round earth because there are none.
7) I have made many observations myself. I have seen the sun go beneath the horizon and continue to illuminate the underside of clouds. I have measured the signal round trip time to a geosynchronous satellite. I have seen the tops of high structures appear over the horizon when approaching by ship, followed by the lower land they stand on.
8) There is no evidence for a flat earth. However the flat earth believers insist that the rest of us accept it because they say so. I prefer actual observation, mine or someone else’s, to incompetent authority.
9) I am still waiting for any hint of a flat earth explanation for the motions of the celestial bodies.
10) The nature of the celestial bodies is well-known as a result of several thousand years of observation and calculation. I am quite happy to look at another possible explanation if one is presented. So far the fat earthers haven’t presented an explanation, just a lot of assertions that “It’s flat because we say so”.
In short, if the flat-earthers want to be taken as anything other than a tribe of gibbering buffoons who have never even looked at established science, let alone understood anything, they need to come up with some rigorous maths, pronto.
LOL your insults are typical of the ignorant. Ridicule in order to discredited those who don’t agree with you in order to hid your own inadequacy. Were you unable to make out my intent? Yes. Then my communication was sufficient despite my lack of concern over proper English.
1) The first one, in reference to up and down and their reference point. The Third in relation to pushing and pulling.
2) You must be daft, if something appears to move down, it only appears as such from a certain point of reference. You cannot tell if heavy things fall or if light things rise because it is relative… So, if relativity is true then we really don’t know up from down. Likewise, no force pulling down has ever been observed any more than a force puling up. All we observe matter moving not the force that causes it. Show us then how to observe gravity oh wise one. Show us what scientists around the world have been trying to prove since its inception: The THEORY of Gravity. No object in observation has ever been shown to have an attractive force as a result of its mass. This observation is not existent in the real world. Gravity is said to be an inverse square force. If this was true than it’s effects would be greater demonstrated on lighter objects not heavier ones. Take a proven inverse square force for example i.e. magnetism. Will a magnet have a greater faster effect on paperclip or on a 10 lb steal ball? Doh! There is no need for gravity, all of our observations on earth can be explained with buoyancy.
3) Silly child, the exact same math works in the other direction. If you have a math equation showing displacement vs weight than you can also show displacement vs lack of weight. If you can calculate how heavy an object than you can calculate how light. If you cant understand this simple concept than you are clearly not as intellectual as you would lead us to believe. Besides this what you describe is not “in terms of gravity” it is a description of buoyancy. You haven’t described Gravity at all and therefore it must not exist.
4)Yea check out these monkeys:
https://youtu.be/VfVSAC1_Mug
5) Sooo, your saying that earths gravity pulls on the moon in equal but opposite proportion to the centrifugal force of the moon pulling away from the earth? Sounds magical to me. Why doesn’t such a strong force crush humans like bugs? Is it because of the centrifugal forces counter acting it? Why then don’t we observe these centrifugal forces on earth? Why at the equator spinning at 1000 mph do I not weigh significantly less than near the N pole spinning at 100 mph? How dose the moon’s gravity displace a mass of water the size of the oceans yet we feel no lighter standing under it? Such a mystical gravitational force, sure is selective on how it effects various masses with different centrifugal forces and buoyancy. Sounds magical to me. Show me an example of a mass exerting a pull on another mass without the use of the non-gravitational force. You cant show this in its smallest manifestation let alone strong enough to counter centrifugal force. Therefore it doesn’t exist.
6) You fail to name any that disprove a flat earth so what is your point?
a) We can all see things that should be well below the horizon. Where i live we regulatory see a pier that is about 30ft above the water from over 40 miles away.
b) When looking at two cites from a distance 50 or more miles apart. the building remain parallel to each other.
c) All experiments ever conducted have show the earth to be without motion. It wasn’t until Relativity was introduced that a spinning earth was scientifically plausible and theory itself means that the motion would be relative and indistinguishable anyway.
d) All this gravity, centrifugal force and we don’t feel or observe any of it no mater how fast we go in any direction we are immune. The rotation drags the atmosphere with it but leaves planes alone….
e) The arch of the sun through the sky doesn’t fit the mainstream model but I don’t want to elaborate because I’m working on a video of it.
f) Aluminum and plastic satellites don’t melt in the thermosphere….
g) They have to figure out how to get through the radiation belt before they send maned missions to mars?
h) These are just a few of the many evidences for a flat earth. They don’t prove it flat but they prove what we have been told is a lie.
7) Seeing light on the underside of clouds does not a globe prove. Many claim to have seen clouds behind the moon. Measuring a signal doesn’t prove a satellite is in “Outer Space”. it could just be attached to a dome or bounced off it. I have done the math and can see things that should be 1000s of feet below the horizon. Go read some ships logs, they can see the statue of liberty sometimes from as far as 100 miles away. youtube Flat earth ships, there are other explanations for what you think is happening over the horizon.
8) There is lots of evidence, if you don’t see it it’s because you aren’t looking or you don’t want to. I am not claiming the earth is flat, I’m just pointing out that there is evidence that supports it. I have not seen the earth from space. Having looked I can say the there is more evidence that it is flat and I have looked hard to find anything proving one way or the other. Let me ask you: how do space ships propel themselves against nothing? In the vacuum of space how do space ships propel themselves without violating newtons third law?
9) Maybe the heavenly bodies are not what you think they are. Maybe they are angles as the Bible describes them. Maybe they are holes poked into a dome with various cogs creating wheels withing wheels and through the holes the glory of God shines down from heaven.
10) The motions of the celestial bodies has been tracked and accurately predicted by cultures all over the world for thousands and thousands of years before gravity was ever theorized. Maybe they are nothing like you have been taught. Have you or anyone you know observed the size of a star or a planet? Have any more than a handful of men ever been to “outer space”? Are the organizations and associations with these men trustworthy?
There is not new math necessary, it has all been done before. Whether flat or round the math works the same given they are all based on other unknown factors e.g. the distance to the sun.
I’m getting tired and i know you are a waste of my time anyway.
Matthew 7:6, Luke 9:5
Prove me wrong.
LOL your insults are typical of the ignorant. Ridicule in order to discredited those who don’t agree with you in order to hid your own inadequacy. Were you unable to make out my intent? Yes. Then my communication was sufficient despite my lack of concern over proper English.
1) The first one, in reference to up and down and their reference point. The Third in relation to pushing and pulling.
2) You must be daft, if something appears to move down, it only appears as such from a certain point of reference. You cannot tell if heavy things fall or if light things rise because it is relative… So, if relativity is true then we really don’t know up from down. Likewise, no force pulling down has ever been observed any more than a force puling up. All we observe matter moving not the force that causes it. Show us then how to observe gravity oh wise one. Show us what scientists around the world have been trying to prove since its inception: The THEORY of Gravity. No object in observation has ever been shown to have an attractive force as a result of its mass. This observation is not existent in the real world. Gravity is said to be an inverse square force. If this was true than it’s effects would be greater demonstrated on lighter objects not heavier ones. Take a proven inverse square force for example i.e. magnetism. Will a magnet have a greater faster effect on paperclip or on a 10 lb steal ball? Doh! There is no need for gravity, all of our observations on earth can be explained with buoyancy.
3) Silly child, the exact same math works in the other direction. If you have a math equation showing displacement vs weight than you can also show displacement vs lack of weight. If you can calculate how heavy an object than you can calculate how light. If you cant understand this simple concept than you are clearly not as intellectual as you would lead us to believe. Besides this what you describe is not “in terms of gravity” it is a description of buoyancy. You haven’t described Gravity at all and therefore it must not exist.
4)Yea check out these monkeys:
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfVSAC1_Mug&w=420&h=315%5D
5) Sooo, your saying that earths gravity pulls on the moon in equal but opposite proportion to the centrifugal force of the moon pulling away from the earth? Sounds magical to me. Why doesn’t such a strong force crush humans like bugs? Is it because of the centrifugal forces counter acting it? Why then don’t we observe these centrifugal forces on earth? Why at the equator spinning at 1000 mph do I not weigh significantly less than near the N pole spinning at 100 mph? How dose the moon’s gravity displace a mass of water the size of the oceans yet we feel no lighter standing under it? Such a mystical gravitational force, sure is selective on how it effects various masses with different centrifugal forces and buoyancy. Sounds magical to me. Show me an example of a mass exerting a pull on another mass without the use of the non-gravitational force. You cant show this in its smallest manifestation let alone strong enough to counter centrifugal force. Therefore it doesn’t exist.
6) You fail to name any that disprove a flat earth so what is your point?
a) We can all see things that should be well below the horizon. Where i live we regulatory see a pier that is about 30ft above the water from over 40 miles away.
b) When looking at two cites from a distance 50 or more miles apart. the building remain parallel to each other.
c) All experiments ever conducted have show the earth to be without motion. It wasn’t until Relativity was introduced that a spinning earth was scientifically plausible and theory itself means that the motion would be relative and indistinguishable anyway.
d) All this gravity, centrifugal force and we don’t feel or observe any of it no mater how fast we go in any direction we are immune. The rotation drags the atmosphere with it but leaves planes alone….
e) The arch of the sun through the sky doesn’t fit the mainstream model but I don’t want to elaborate because I’m working on a video of it.
f) Aluminum and plastic satellites don’t melt in the thermosphere….
g) They have to figure out how to get through the radiation belt before they send maned missions to mars?
h) These are just a few of the many evidences for a flat earth. They don’t prove it flat but they prove what we have been told is a lie.
7) Seeing light on the underside of clouds does not a globe prove. Many claim to have seen clouds behind the moon. Measuring a signal doesn’t prove a satellite is in “Outer Space”. it could just be attached to a dome or bounced off it. I have done the math and can see things that should be 1000s of feet below the horizon. Go read some ships logs, they can see the statue of liberty sometimes from as far as 100 miles away. youtube Flat earth ships, there are other explanations for what you think is happening over the horizon.
8) There is lots of evidence, if you don’t see it it’s because you aren’t looking or you don’t want to. I am not claiming the earth is flat, I’m just pointing out that there is evidence that supports it. I have not seen the earth from space. Having looked I can say the there is more evidence that it is flat and I have looked hard to find anything proving one way or the other. Let me ask you: how do space ships propel themselves against nothing? In the vacuum of space how do space ships propel themselves without violating newtons third law?
9) Maybe the heavenly bodies are not what you think they are. Maybe they are angles as the Bible describes them. Maybe they are holes poked into a dome with various cogs creating wheels withing wheels and through the holes the glory of God shines down from heaven.
10) The motions of the celestial bodies has been tracked and accurately predicted by cultures all over the world for thousands and thousands of years before gravity was ever theorized. Maybe they are nothing like you have been taught. Have you or anyone you know observed the size of a star or a planet? Have any more than a handful of men ever been to “outer space”? Are the organizations and associations with these men trustworthy?
There is not new math necessary, it has all been done before. Whether flat or round the math works the same given they are all based on other unknown factors e.g. the distance to the sun.
I’m getting tired and i know you are a waste of my time anyway.
Matthew 7:6Open in Logos Bible Software (if available), Luke 9:5Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)
Prove me wrong.
LOL your insults are typical of the ignorant. Ridicule in order to discredited those who don’t agree with you in order to hid your own inadequacy. Were you unable to make out my intent? Yes. Then my communication was sufficient despite my lack of concern over proper English.
1) The first one, in reference to up and down and their reference point. The Third in relation to pushing and pulling.
2) You must be daft, if something appears to move down, it only appears as such from a certain point of reference. You cannot tell if heavy things fall or if light things rise because it is relative… So, if relativity is true then we really don’t know up from down. Likewise, no force pulling down has ever been observed any more than a force puling up. All we observe matter moving not the force that causes it. Show us then how to observe gravity oh wise one. Show us what scientists around the world have been trying to prove since its inception: The THEORY of Gravity. No object in observation has ever been shown to have an attractive force as a result of its mass. This observation is not existent in the real world. Gravity is said to be an inverse square force. If this was true than it’s effects would be greater demonstrated on lighter objects not heavier ones. Take a proven inverse square force for example i.e. magnetism. Will a magnet have a greater faster effect on paperclip or on a 10 lb steal ball? Doh! There is no need for gravity, all of our observations on earth can be explained with buoyancy.
3) Silly child, the exact same math works in the other direction. If you have a math equation showing displacement vs weight than you can also show displacement vs lack of weight. If you can calculate how heavy an object than you can calculate how light. If you cant understand this simple concept than you are clearly not as intellectual as you would lead us to believe. Besides this what you describe is not “in terms of gravity” it is a description of buoyancy. You haven’t described Gravity at all and therefore it must not exist.
4)Yea, check out these monkeys on youtube:
Astronaut slips up & says he is in the united states + Nasa hairspray fail
5) Sooo, your saying that earths gravity pulls on the moon in equal but opposite proportion to the centrifugal force of the moon pulling away from the earth? Sounds magical to me. Why doesn’t such a strong force crush humans like bugs? Is it because of the centrifugal forces counter acting it? Why then don’t we observe these centrifugal forces on earth? Why at the equator spinning at 1000 mph do I not weigh significantly less than near the N pole spinning at 100 mph? How dose the moon’s gravity displace a mass of water the size of the oceans yet we feel no lighter standing under it? Such a mystical gravitational force, sure is selective on how it effects various masses with different centrifugal forces and buoyancy. Sounds magical to me. Show me an example of a mass exerting a pull on another mass without the use of the non-gravitational force. You cant show this in its smallest manifestation let alone strong enough to counter centrifugal force. Therefore it doesn’t exist.
6) You fail to name any that disprove a flat earth so what is your point?
a) We can all see things that should be well below the horizon. Where i live we regulatory see a pier that is about 30ft above the water from over 40 miles away.
b) When looking at two cites from a distance 50 or more miles apart. the building remain parallel to each other.
c) All experiments ever conducted have show the earth to be without motion. It wasn’t until Relativity was introduced that a spinning earth was scientifically plausible and theory itself means that the motion would be relative and indistinguishable anyway.
d) All this gravity, centrifugal force and we don’t feel or observe any of it no mater how fast we go in any direction we are immune. The rotation drags the atmosphere with it but leaves planes alone….
e) The arch of the sun through the sky doesn’t fit the mainstream model but I don’t want to elaborate because I’m working on a video of it.
f) Aluminum and plastic satellites don’t melt in the thermosphere….
g) They have to figure out how to get through the radiation belt before they send maned missions to mars?
h) These are just a few of the many evidences for a flat earth. They don’t prove it flat but they prove what we have been told is a lie.
7) Seeing light on the underside of clouds does not a globe prove. Many claim to have seen clouds behind the moon. Measuring a signal doesn’t prove a satellite is in “Outer Space”. it could just be attached to a dome or bounced off it. I have done the math and can see things that should be 1000s of feet below the horizon. Go read some ships logs, they can see the statue of liberty sometimes from as far as 100 miles away. youtube Flat earth ships, there are other explanations for what you think is happening over the horizon.
8) There is lots of evidence, if you don’t see it it’s because you aren’t looking or you don’t want to. I am not claiming the earth is flat, I’m just pointing out that there is evidence that supports it. I have not seen the earth from space. Having looked I can say the there is more evidence that it is flat and I have looked hard to find anything proving one way or the other. Let me ask you: how do space ships propel themselves against nothing? In the vacuum of space how do space ships propel themselves without violating newtons third law?
9) Maybe the heavenly bodies are not what you think they are. Maybe they are angles as the Bible describes them. Maybe they are holes poked into a dome with various cogs creating wheels withing wheels and through the holes the glory of God shines down from heaven.
10) The motions of the celestial bodies has been tracked and accurately predicted by cultures all over the world for thousands and thousands of years before gravity was ever theorized. Maybe they are nothing like you have been taught. Have you or anyone you know observed the size of a star or a planet? Have any more than a handful of men ever been to “outer space”? Are the organizations and associations with these men trustworthy?
There is not new math necessary, it has all been done before. Whether flat or round the math works the same given they are all based on other unknown factors e.g. the distance to the sun.
I’m getting tired and i know you are a waste of my time anyway.
Matthew 7:6Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)Open in Logos Bible Software (if available), Luke 9:5Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)
Prove me wrong.
I won’t waste time on going through all your points, because you have made the same mistakes a lot of times. For example you say “Why at the equator spinning at 1000 mph do I not weigh significantly less than near the N pole spinning at 100 mph?” If you actually did the maths you’d discover that the difference in gravity between poles and equator is around one third of a percent. Similarly you confuse the temperature of the thermosphere with the amount of heat available from it.
The fact that the Earth rotates, and its size were known centuries before relativity.
You have arguments of this form, “How dose the moon’s gravity displace a mass of water the size of the oceans yet we feel no lighter standing under it?” Once again you have failed to grasp the scale. The minute changes in gravity caused by the sun and moon have visible effects when they act on thousands of miles of water, they are too small to be felt by a person.
It’s interesting that you introduce the bible. I hope your grasp of Koine greek and ancient Hebrew is fairly solid.
If you want to give up and leave please do so.
I wasn’t talking about the minuscule difference in gravity between the equator and poles, I was talking about how the centrifugal force would be drastically different, thus offsetting gravity as you say it does.
I am not confused regarding the theromosphere. I know they say it is cold as hell but also hot as hell…
The theory that the earth is a ball and rotates was promoted by some for a few centuries prior to relativity but it was never experimentally possible until relativity. All the experiments prior showed the earth to be without motion it is only with relativity that those same experiments could allow for a moving earth. AIRY’S FAILURE being one of the most popular of the thousands that showed the earth as motionless. This is not something I just dreamed up and there are plenty of mainstream scientists today who are geocentric.
Yes a molecule of water is effected more significantly from gravity than a human… Explain to us the scale of fluid molecules so I can finally grasp it.
My Hebrew is better than my Greek but I manage to get by enough to know the difference between: “…since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.) and “καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀσύνετοί ἐστε; οὐ νοεῖτε ὅτι πᾶν τὸ ἔξωθεν εἰσπορευόμενον εἰς τὸν ἄνθρωπον οὐ δύναται αὐτὸν κοινῶσαι,” As for the rest I can just study what I care to know.
You have not answered for even one of my points, I have nothing to give up on. Besides I was have been in this conversation longer. A fact which you are clearly unaware because you are a patriot that just spouts off at the mouth. Never taking the time to consider your wrong and actually reading the body of arguments and evidence before you answer a mater. But that is the difference between you and I i.e. I know I don’t know it all.
Proverbs 18:13
We understand you don’t waste your precious time educating us poor folk who are just two steps above white trash. Your not answering because your points are absurd not because of my errors. Before you do answer in an effort to salvage your credibility go back and read all the posts so you can better understand some of the points on the debate..
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2001). (Pr 18:13). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.
Westcott, B. F., & Hort, F. J. A. (2009). The New Testament in the Original Greek (Mk 7:18). Logos Bible Software.
The idea that the spherical earth was “promoted by some for a few centuries prior to relativity but it was never experimentally possible until relativity” is simply a lie. The shape of the Earth was well known to tha ancient Greeks, who had measured its size. I don’t quite see the relevance of Mk7:18 here.
I’d be only too interested to read this alleged body of arguments for the flat earth, if I could actually find it. So far all I have is assertions with no maths to back them up and statements that turn out to be untrue when I check.
Some Greek writings theorize that it was round but this was not the accepted belief until around 1500 AD after the first recorded circumnavigation (which of course doesn’t prove its round). Many of the Greek philosophers also claimed it was flat as was the prevailing opinion among the Greeks and throughout the world. Your claim that they had measured it size is the actual lie. Theorized sure, some of them theorized on its size but non of them measured it and it was fringe not accepted.
My point in bringing up Mark7:18 is just as relevant as you questioning or rather promoting your superior knowledge in Hebrew and Koine. If you didn’t want to include a discussion of our understanding of these languages than for what relevant point did you bring it up?
You have not answered for any of the evidences already presented to you. The math will only explain what is already observed,
While your at it you should also demonstrate to us your infallible superiority in “ancient Hebrew and Konie”. I could use some enlightenment.
BTW your statement that “Your claim that they had measured it size is the actual lie” is, shall we say, being economical with the truth.
It is a matter of historical record that Eratosthenes (276-194 BC) made a measurement of the Earth’s circumference, which was reasonably accurate.
He theorized on it size based on information he had. He did not measure the size of the earth…
1) The fact that Eratosthenes attempted to measure the circumference of the earth proves that he knew it was a sphere.
2) My earlier reply was trapped in moderation.
Had a quick look at the red boat video. This shows the hull going below the horizon while the superstructure remains above it. In other words the highest point of the water between observer and boat is at least half the height of the hull above the water (much higher than the waves), conclusive proof of the curvature.
The person walking away from you will only have his legs cropped if higher ground intervenes. Higher ground always intervenes in the end because the earth is curved. Perspective alone does not crop things. If you look at someone standing on a hill miles away through a telescope you can still see their feet.
Note my words “to a first approximation”. At altitude the horizon always falls off but at the sort of altitude that we can reach in aeroplanes or by climbing mountains the effect is too small to see.
I don’t see where you got the 14 degrees from.
>>> r = 6371000.0
>>> h = 11000.0
>>> print math.acos ( r / ( r + h ) ) * 180 / math.pi
3.36448016027
This seems to give a depression of just over three degrees, still too small to see easily with the naked eye.
100 miles is about 1/250 of the circumference of the earth. So Two skyscrapers 100 miles apart lean outwards by slightly less than one and a half degrees. This is of course the principle used by Eratosthenes in about the third century BC to estimate the circumference of the Earth. Observing this with two nearby buildings is quite difficult without sensitive instruments. For example the towers of the Humber bridge lean detectably outwards.
Look up ‘Humber bridge statistics’
The point is that in every case I have been able to check the round earth maths gets it right, the flat earth gets it wrong. Curvature explains mathematically why the bottoms of things disappear at distance, perspective does not. In fact the maths of perspective predict that on a flat earth the red boat would remain the same shape but get smaller, the hull would not disappear first. The hull does disappear first, exactly as predicted by the round earth.
Or to put it simply: Where there is a detectable difference flat earth matches NO observations, round earth matches ALL of them.
@ Astropolis
“So, in the flat earth model, where does the sun go at night? If it orbits above a flat disk why do we see it go below the horizon, then see the underside of clouds illuminated by it after it has ceased to be visible? If it goes below the disk, why do different places on Earth see sunset at different times? I’m not disagreeing, because I really don’t know what you believe. I’d just like to know what you think happens at sunset.”
The most common flat earth view: When things high in the sky move far enough away from you they vanish at the horizon. This happens with Planes, clouds, etc. The sun need not actually move below your position, it is simply a perspective.
Just youtube (Flat earth sunset) A channel called “My Perspective” does a good job demonstrating this.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_9cFTQg7NE&w=560&h=315%5D
@ Astropolis
“So, in the flat earth model, where does the sun go at night? If it orbits above a flat disk why do we see it go below the horizon, then see the underside of clouds illuminated by it after it has ceased to be visible? If it goes below the disk, why do different places on Earth see sunset at different times? I’m not disagreeing, because I really don’t know what you believe. I’d just like to know what you think happens at sunset.”
The most common flat earth view: When things high in the sky move far enough away from you they vanish at the horizon. This happens with Planes, clouds, etc. The sun need not actually move below your position, it is simply a perspective.
Just youtube (Flat earth sunset) A channel called “My Perspective” also does a good job demonstrating this.
Youtube jhenningkelloggia also does a good job on the sun.
If the lowest point of the sun is h metres above a flat plane, and at a distance d metres from the observer, and the radius of the sun is r, then the limb of the sun will appear
arctan ( h/d )
radian above the horizon and its centre will be
arctan ( ( h + r ) / d )
above the horizon. Since all of the parameters are positive both angles are positive. Put simply perspective geometry will not place any part of the sun below the horizon, ever, under any circumstances. The reason things vanish at the horizon is that they go beneath the curvature of the Earth.
I had a look at jhenningkelloggia. Do any of his videos contain a coherent mathematical argument? I didn’t find any.
As I say I’d like to see this “body of evidence” in support of a flat Earth. So far I have found none.
Astropolis says: The reason things vanish at the horizon is that they go beneath the curvature of the Earth.
LOL! Hold onto that math. It’s crazy what happens when you leave the classroom of scientism. Take that FLAT piece of paper with your math formula, wad into a BALL and throw it into the trash. I forgot you need a coherent mathematical argument to understand the world around you and not empirical evidence. Nice try.
http://aplanetruth.info/17-if-a-flat-earth-why-does-the-sun-go-down/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHvDD8V0QcQ
You are correct that that math would never place the sun below the horizon. At the same time you just outlined my point. The sun need not drop bellow that horizon physically, its apparent setting can be explained with perspective. So then your saying that a Jet at 30,000 feet does not appear to go below the horizon when it is actuality still much higher than you relative to your position? No one on earth has ever observed the sun at a lower position than eye level. Your math still fails to explain how something that is lower than you physically, at distance appears much higher than you. If you look at any flat large body of water it will appear like a wall of water in front of you until it meets the sky at your eye level. If you increase altitude the wall of water will rise further to meet your eye level. Since this is a product of perspective and not an actual wall of water one can easily understand that a small object that is closer to you will conceal a larger object that is farther away even if it is high in the sky. At a point where the sun is far enough away it would appear to set behind a 5 ft tall wave that is much closer. The actual position of the sun would still be much higher relative to the observer.
I hope you understand that math doesn’t prove an observation it can only explain the observation. You can look at a picture of 2 basketballs and say one plus one equals two but without the knowing if they are full balls in 3D means you are missing a factor. Math can only be used to explain what we already observe because we don’t know for sure that we aren’t missing part of the equation. Since we never observe the sun below our feet can you provide the math outlying proof that it sets below our position?
How exactly can the setting of the sun be explained with perspective? Would you please post the equations giving the apparent elevation of the sun’s limb and centre given its height above the flat earth and distance from the observer.
As far as I can see on a flat earth the maths predicts that the sun will not go below the horizon, on a round earth that it will. It clearly does and continues to light the underside of clouds afterwards.
With increasing altitude the horizon falls lower in the observer’s eye by an angle
arccosine ( R / ( R + h ) )
where R is the radius of the Earth and h is the height of the observer’s eye. With R being 6,371,000 metres and the highest point on land being the top of Everest at 8,848 metres we get a depression of the horizon of around three degrees.
To a first approximation the horizon is at eye level anywhere on Earth, but that is what the maths predicts for a sphere as large as the earth.
Using the same equations I posted earlier it should be apparent that an obstruction such as a wave would only obscure the horizon if it were higher that the observer’s eye. So we are once again faced with a geometrical impossibility. The sun clearly does set. On a flat earth it cannot.
As I said before if you can post the mathematics I’d be only too happy to have a look.
An object above eye level as it moves away from the observer will eventually reach the horizon line at which point it shrinks and is cropped out with the things that are below eye level. This is what is observed in reality, things above eye level and things below eye level meat at the horizon wish is always at eye level. It can be demonstrated simply by have someone walk far enough away from you. First his feet will be cropped off then his legs and so on. There is also a distortion that occurs. This happens at distances that even the round earth math says is not a result of earth curvature. So the sun need not actually set it could just be moving farther away. As it shrinks as a result of its distance the bottom looks cropped and distorted until it shrinks small enough that you thing your seeing the top limb.
Watch this video example on youtube “Flat Earth Conspiracy.com Red Boat Video”
You contradict yourself. Does the math predict that the horizon would be at eye level or does the math predict that it depends on elevation? Because as most of us have observed even at 40,000 ft elevation the horizon is still at eye level and no globe math explains it. Your own math puts it at 14 degrees lower. You should have to look down from your relative position to see the horizon at this height. Yet in practice as I said the things above and the things below always converge at eye level.
Things below our eye level do indeed cause distortion of objects farther away that are above our eye level. This should be apparent in the video but there are many more examples of this if you cared to look.
Furthermore observe no divergence from our perspective on any axis. Maybe you can help me with some math:
1) How many degrees would a sky scraper be leaning away from you at a distance of 100 miles?
2) Two skyscrapers 100 miles apart from each other. What would be the difference in their degrees from parallel?
Why don’t we observe these differences in reality despite our ability to do the math?
FYI: No one cares what the math says if it doesn’t match the actual observation.
Had a quick look at the red boat video. This shows the hull going below the horizon while the superstructure remains above it. In other words the highest point of the water between observer and boat is at least half the height of the hull above the water (much higher than the waves), conclusive proof of the curvature.
The person walking away from you will only have his legs cropped if higher ground intervenes. Higher ground always intervenes in the end because the earth is curved. Perspective alone does not crop things. If you look at someone standing on a hill miles away through a telescope you can still see their feet.
Note my words “to a first approximation”. At altitude the horizon always falls off but at the sort of altitude that we can reach in aeroplanes or by climbing mountains the effect is too small to see.
I don’t see where you got the 14 degrees from.
>>> r = 6371000.0
>>> h = 11000.0
>>> print math.acos ( r / ( r + h ) ) * 180 / math.pi
3.36448016027
This seems to give a depression of just over three degrees, still too small to see easily with the naked eye.
100 miles is about 1/250 of the circumference of the earth. So Two skyscrapers 100 miles apart lean outwards by slightly less than one and a half degrees. This is of course the principle used by Eratosthenes in about the third century BC to estimate the circumference of the Earth. Observing this with two nearby buildings is quite difficult without sensitive instruments. For example the towers of the Humber bridge lean detectably outwards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humber_Bridge#Bridge_statistics
The point is that in every case I have been able to check the round earth maths gets it right, the flat earth gets it wrong. Curvature explains mathematically why the bottoms of things disappear at distance, perspective does not. In fact the maths of perspective predict that on a flat earth the red boat would remain the same shape but get smaller, the hull would not disappear first. The hull does disappear first, exactly as predicted by the round earth.
Or to put it simply: Where there is a detectable difference flat earth matches NO observations, round earth matches ALL of them.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5WZ05O1ZwI?list=PLzL1qDngeVYU-9pNm1iRL8pTshEoAv363&w=560&h=315%5D
Watch this video on youtube: It’s a small ball after all? Or is it just an optical illusion?
So you’re standing on the Earth. Let’s assume the Earth is a perfect sphere, because that makes things a lot easier.
The circle is the surface of the Earth, which has a radius of R. The Earth’s radius varies with latitude, but I’ll just use 6365 kilometers as a decent average. The dude standing on the Earth is a human of height h. The line-of-sight to the horizon is d. Finding the value of d is the goal here. Note that the radius of the Earth is a constant, but that d will vary as h goes up or down.
The key thing here is that at the visible horizon, the angle between your line-of-sight and the radius line of the Earth is a right angle. That means we have a right triangle, and — reach back into the dim, dusty memory of high school — that means we can use the Pythagorean Theorem to get d. The square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides. One side is d, the other is R, and the hypotenuse is the Earth’s radius plus your height above the surface, R+h. This gives us the following algebraic formula:
d2 + R2 = (R+h)2
OK. Now what? Well, let’s expand that last term using FOIL:
(R+h)2 = R2 + h2 + 2Rh
Substitute that back into the first equation to get
d2 + R2 = R2 + 2Rh + h2
Hey, we have a factor of R2 on both sides, so they cancel! That leaves us with:
d2 = h2 + 2Rh
Now, take the square root of both sides, and voila! You get d.
So now we have an equation that tells us how far away the horizon is depending on where we are above the surface. We can use this to put in different values for h, our height, and see how far away the edge of the Earth is. I put this into an Excel spreadsheet, and the numbers are below.
Height (meters) Distance (km) Height(feet) Distance (miles)
10,000 356.9 32,800.0 214.2
Now you have your triangle. So at 32,800 ft in elevation what is the angle between level and the horizon? That’s right, you would be looking down. This is simply not what we observe in reality.
Using a different set of assumptions you have got a depression of the horizon which is slightly smaller than mine, closer to 2 degrees than 3. In either case it’s still too small for the naked eye.
We see the horizon almost at eye level, exactly as the round earth predicts.
Its interesting to note the triangle provided in the math if rotated 90 degrees would describe the same observer looking over a flat plane. Coincidence? Where is the 8′ per mile squared in this calculation? Besides, non of this math maters if it doesn’t match reality. In reality we can all see much farther than the math dictates. I commonly go to a pier about 30′ above the water near where I live and point out to people a 200′ tall tower that is 40 miles away across the water. People see it every day but don’t realize the math says they can’t see it. You can even make out the sandy beach at the base of the tower with some magnification. The math may add up on paper but it is fuzzy in observation. This is not just in my area people commonly see things that the ball earth math dictates as impossible.
Since one of the terms used in calculating the geometry of the triangle is the radius of the earth, I’d be interested to see how you get it to work on a flat plane.
The 8′ per mile squared is a very crude approximation.
The effect you describe is probably due to atmospheric reaction.
Remove the earth from the equation and turn the triangle so that you 90 is facing up and across the plane. Wouldn’t the same angle be present for the observer looking at a target the same distance?
People all over the world regularly see things above the horizon that should be hidden below the curve in all different weather conditions. If this was the result of atmospheric conditions, couldn’t the opposite also be true? Couldn’t atmospheric conditions cause things above the horizon to appear to sink below the horizon? This is common, summer winter day and night this can be seen anytime there is not low cloud cover obscuring the view. If one were to see the same tower sunk below the horizon that would be an anomaly that has never happen the 100’s of times I have looked at it. How can we tell the difference and how can we call the norm the anomaly? If these atmospheric conditions conditions were present daily you would think our vision would be effected in other areas also?
Once again the dimensions of the triangle are derived from the radius of the earth, so no.
The only way to make the atmosphere bend light the other way would be to turn it upside down so that the high pressure was at the top.
No, our vision is not AFFECTED by that sort of thing. Light is affected, where it meets a change in air pressure it bends slightly.
Well as I suspected you have it all figured out. Before I bow my head in shame would you watch one more video?
Youtube: Fake World Reality Part 11 (How the Sun Works on the Flat Earth)
Oh dear. The first completely fatal error is around timecode 1:00, after which it goes downhill rapidly. These are my comments:
You seem to have got down into a hole with your phone and used the edge of the hole to hide the other person’s feet. This is a very nice demonstration of how things go below the horizon on a round earth.
The angular velocity of the Earth is about 70 microradians/sec, far too small to feel. Yes, the large size of the Earth means that the surface is moving at about 1000mph. You don’t feel this any more than you feel the wind when travelling in a car at 100mph. The air in the car remains still relative to the car, the Earth’s atmosphere is carried along with the Earth.
Your convergent sun rays are in fact almost parallel. In this image of Chester cathedral
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Chester_Cathedral_(7251396712).jpg
you can see that the galleries diverge at the same sort of angle, even though they are obviously solid stone and don’t meet. However a very clever architect has used the illusion of convergence to draw the worshippers eyes to the high altar.
You claim the rising and setting of the sun is due to perspective. However if the sun is at a height h above a flat earth, and at a particular time the base of a perpendicular from the sun to the flat earth is at a distance d from the observer then the observed elevation has to be arctan ( h/d ). Since the numbers h and d are both positive the elevation has to be positive. The sun would not
ever go below the horizon. Would you oblige me by posting the equations you use to compute the azimuth and elevation of sun and moon?
At timecode 17:22 you contend that after parallel lines converge they diverge again. The whole point about parallel lines is that, being parallel, they don’t meet. The vanishing point is at infinity. This is important. Let’s say you have two parallel lines that are physically one metre apart. Follow them with your eye. Every time you double the distance to the point you are looking at you also halve the separation that you see. The point where the lines appear to meet is at infinity. There is nowhere in the universe beyond this point. Interestingly in your animation the perceived and real suns do not stay in line. After the real sun goes off top right the perceived one does a sneaky speedup to get the horizon.
Oh dear. The first completely fatal error is around timecode 1:00, after which it goes downhill rapidly. These are my comments:
You seem to have got down into a hole with your phone and used the edge of the hole to hide the other person’s feet. This is a very nice demonstration of how things go below the horizon on a round earth.
The angular velocity of the Earth is about 70 microradians/sec, far too small to feel. Yes, the large size of the Earth means that the surface is moving at about 1000mph. You don’t feel this any more than you feel the wind when travelling in a car at 100mph. The air in the car remains still relative to the car, the Earth’s atmosphere is carried along with the Earth.
Your convergent sun rays are in fact almost parallel. In this image of Chester cathedral
(Link to wikimedia Chester Cathedral)
you can see that the galleries diverge at the same sort of angle, even though they are obviously solid stone and don’t meet. However a very clever architect has used the illusion of convergence to draw the worshippers eyes to the high altar.
You claim the rising and setting of the sun is due to perspective. However if the sun is at a height h above a flat earth, and at a particular time the base of a perpendicular from the sun to the flat earth is at a distance d from the observer then the observed elevation has to be arctan ( h/d ). Since the numbers h and d are both positive the elevation has to be positive. The sun would not
ever go below the horizon. Would you oblige me by posting the equations you use to compute the azimuth and elevation of sun and moon?
At timecode 17:22 you contend that after parallel lines converge they diverge again. The whole point about parallel lines is that, being parallel, they don’t meet. The vanishing point is at infinity. This is important. Let’s say you have two parallel lines that are physically one metre apart. Follow them with your eye. Every time you double the distance to the point you are looking at you also halve the separation that you see. The point where the lines appear to meet is at infinity. There is nowhere in the universe beyond this point. Interestingly in your animation the perceived and real suns do not stay in line. After the real sun goes off top right the perceived one does a sneaky speedup to get the horizon.
Reply
Astropolis, “You don’t feel this any more than you feel the wind when traveling in a car at 100mph. The air in the car remains still relative to the car, the Earth’s atmosphere is carried along with the Earth.” If you take the top off a car like a convertible you would get a completely different reaction to say lighting a match verses having the top on. So what is acting as earth’s top? The vacuum of space! Gravity! Maybe a dome. I live next to an international airport and observe contrails of planes that are being tracked flying straight and level and they always converge downward to the vanishing point of the horizon due to perspective. The Coriolis Factor is not experienced anywhere by anyone. Once you remove the curvatrometer from your brain you will see the world in it’s true glory.
The car is punching through air which is moving at a different velocity. This air pushes on the air in the car if you take the top down, and you feel a wind. The Earth is moving through vacuum so there is nothing to push the air backwards.
The Coriolis force is regularly observed by artillery. soldiers and weather forecasters. It has been known since 1853.
As an exercise would you care to explain how something is a NASA conspiracy when it was well documented a century before the formation of NASA?
Try to keep off the personal comments, there’s a good chap. We’re doing maths here now.
LOL you start with insults and then you want to lay off the personal comments that should not even be offensive if your correct…
NASA or Never A Straight Answer, has been engaged in fakery since inception. The Coriolis Factor is not actually used. In fact when the so called spinning of the earth is factored, projectiles miss their target. How is it that the spinning of earth affects artillery trajectory but if you hovered in a balloon or helicopter for any length of time the earth doesn’t move under you. I know, gravity is pulling the atmosphere along. However, artillery shells? Planes are nothing more than big projectiles and they do not take the spinning of the earth into account when landing east to west or north to south facing runways. Mark Sargent has interviewed many military professionals who all say the Coriolis Factor is only used in text books:
1. Aviation & ground combat training expert with 45 years’ experience
2. US Army Master Gunner
3. Air traffic controller
4. Australian Intelligence Officer SAT Data
5. Retired US Air Force Navigator
6. Marine Sniper Instructor,
7. US Army Field Artillery Radar Operator
8. Flight Instructor
9. US Navy Submarine Chief
10. US Navy Missile Instructor
Are they all lying? The US Navy Instructor says that they could paint targets by laser, which is not going to bend with curvature, at 60+ nautical miles. Atmospheric refraction is not the answer to that. By all means hold onto your math and not what is observed and practiced. NASA is a crumbling house of cards. They have been stealing tax dollars for years and I want my money back! I recommend watching The Principle to hear it from the horse’s mouth. The simplest answer is usually the correct one. The earth is not a spinning globe when in fact it is flat, stationary, and the center of the universe. Can I get an AMEN!
Wow, You have truly dazzled and enlightened us. Let me try ans summarize your findings for the mere mortal men who may be following along:
The ship moving away from the observer on the z axis disappears haul first because it is sinking below the curve of the earth, but the curve is so small that it can’t be perceived on the x or the y axis even from atop Mt. Everest. Even though to a certain extent the use of magnification can restore the haul of the ship this is a result of light curving. This same phenomenon can be repeatably reproduced on an flat surface at both short and long distance but this is a result of putting a camera in a hole. Observations and math show that the things below eye level appear to rise to meet line of sight at this horizon but things above line of sight don’t do the reverse. Your feet that are below your line of sight appear to be lower than your horizon but in reality the horizon is much lower than your feet. The same is not true with things above your line of sight because then the then the sun moving away from you would make it appear to set below the curve of the earth. On a flat surface at a height of zero your horizon line is at a distance of zero. On this same plane the entirety of an object 2 feet tall at a distance of 2 feet from the observer will be higher than the observers eye level but will be cropped off at the bottom from the observers line of sight but this is a result of the curve of the earth even though it is on a flat surface. You can still see the top of the 2 foot tall item as long as nothing else that is closer blocks your line of sight. In revers we have the sky rather than the ground so you can imagine the sun doing the same thing from the top down only this time once it hits the horizon line the ground hides it from your line of sight. So the sun moves below eye level at the horizon which is at eye level but is actually much much lower than your feet because the earth is a ball. It only looks like it is at eye level because of gravity and things above below eye level don’t appear higher than the horizon and things above eye level never appear lower than the horizon…. But we know the the ground at the horizon is actually lower than our feet so the the sky side is also lower than our eye level thus the setting sun is lower than our feet even though it is high in the sky. The curve is to small to be measured or observed but if it supports the earth curve it can be noticed. Mathematicians and Physicist Say: “There’d definitely still be a horizon if the Earth were flat. It would be in almost exactly the same place, and look essentially identical.” And although we have no instruments that can measure such minute differences over such great distances we know it exists. The math proves the curve but it also works on a plane but it only proves a curve. The horizon is a result of the curve of the earth although the same phenomenon is observed on a flat surface unaffected by the curve of the earth but that is not a product of angular perspective it is a product of the earth curve and gravity. Although we are spinning at 1000 mph and moving at 67,000 mph we cant feel this motion like we cant feel the wind in a car. Although we can feel and hear the motion in a car, jet or on a merry go round we cant on the earth because it is to big and to fast for our scenes to detect and the atmosphere is moving with us. Even the change in centrifugal force vs gravity is unnoticeable because its a ball. This is the reason that spaceships and satellites get torn to shreds when they leave the atmosphere and suddenly change velocity when they meet the still vacuum of space. And so our atmosphere is malleable enough to be dragged around with the earth but rigid enough to not get sucked into the vacuum of space because it is held in place by the weak force of gravity that is strong enough to also hold the moon from much further way but since it is an inverse square force it ignores the rules of all other inverse square forces and holds the atmosphere because it is light but holds the moon cuz its heavy but ignores the water molecules in my body cuz umm… cuz they are in the shape of a Ball! But it also effects the water molecules in the oceans causing the tides. The few spaceships that manage to survive the impact with the still solid force of space are not melted in the Thermosphere because it is hot as hell but colder than ice. They propel themselves through nothingness by expelling compressed gas against nothingness to propel themselves through the nothingness all done without breaking Newtons 3rd Law. The compressed gas canisters don’t implode because they are made with secret NASA technology that is the strongest materiel known to man but it is to heavy to escape earths gravity. It’s same material they use to keep the atmosphere from getting sucked into the vacuum and to keep the spaceships from melting in the Icy hot portions of space. Shh that part is secret.
You have the wisdom of gods, but cant see the forest through the trees. Things above eye level do indeed appear to drop below eye level at a distance just as things below eye level appear to rise up to eye level at a distance. The only difference is the things above move behind the ground at the horizon wile the things below are not obscured by the sky. This is a simple and actually proven fact of perspective on a ball or a plane. Show me the math that predicts why the ground and things at distance rise to eye level and higher but the sky and things at distance don’t do the same. Actually, never mind I’m tired of talking to a fool who has no understanding of how our perspective works.
1) Go back and read what I actually said.
2 ) Learn to spell simple words like “Hull”
You are obviously an intelligent person, so please be intellectually honest and admit there is a problem with the ball earth math when a ship disappears over the horizon, but can brought back into view with high powered optics. Testable, observable, provable, repeatable………isn’t that science. That alone crushes the curve math. If your go to is atmospheric light refraction, please. I believe you are smarter than that. Below is an image of the Chicago skyline taken from across Lake Michigan at over 50 miles. We are told this is a superior mirage. BS, if that was true it would be inverted.
http://wfgr.com/chicagos-floating-skyscrapers-may-be-a-mirage-but-they-are-cool-to-see-video/
Refraction increases approximately 1% for every 0.9 kPa increase in pressure, and decreases approximately 1% for every 0.9 kPa decrease in pressure. Similarly, refraction increases approximately 1% for every 3 °C decrease in temperature, and decreases approximately 1% for every 3 °C increase in temperature.
1) Once was more than enough.
2) Funny, I misspelled Hull but of the two of us your the ignorant one.
NASA or Never A Straight Answer, has been engaged in fakery since inception. The Coriolis Factor is not actually used. In fact when the so called spinning of the earth is factored, projectiles miss their target. How is it that the spinning of earth affects artillery trajectory but if you hovered in a balloon or helicopter for any length of time the earth doesn’t move under you. I know, gravity is pulling the atmosphere along. However, artillery shells? Planes are nothing more than big projectiles and they do not take the spinning of the earth into account when landing east to west or north to south facing runways. Mark Sargent has interviewed many military professionals who all say the Coriolis Factor is only used in text books:
1. Aviation & ground combat training expert with 45 years’ experience
2. US Army Master Gunner
3. Air traffic controller
4. Australian Intelligence Officer SAT Data
5. Retired US Air Force Navigator
6. Marine Sniper Instructor,
7. US Army Field Artillery Radar Operator
8. Flight Instructor
9. US Navy Submarine Chief
10. US Navy Missile Instructor
Are they all lying? The US Navy Instructor says that they could paint targets by laser, which is not going to bend with curvature, at 60+ nautical miles. Atmospheric refraction is not the answer to that. By all means hold onto your math and not what is observed and practiced. NASA is a crumbling house of cards. They have been stealing tax dollars for years and I want my money back! I recommend watching The Principle to hear it from the horses mouth. The simplest answer is usually the correct one. The earth is not a spinning globe when in fact it is flat, stationary, and the center of the universe. Can I get an AMEN!
It is funny when talking about the spin the say “Coriolis Factor” but when you talk about the atmosphere they say it moves with the earth. They cant keep their own lies and misinformation in line. It is funny that I have taken up that argument because I’m not certain the earth is flat. I guess I’m just tired of lies and the inability in people to even consider evidence against their bias.
I say I’m not certain because I haven’t seen it from “space”. As far as all the evidence including the math is concerned it is flat. From my own scenes and the scriptures it is definitely flat. So, AMEN!
Another Youtube video: FLAT EARTH – Perspective and Horizons EXPLAINED
maybe that glider would have been better going around the world from North pole to South Pole..though not starting at the north pole.. but he could have started further south,, and done it that way..
Only an idea.
P>S bored to death of hearing Chris Putnam and tom Horn going on and on about the so called prophecy of the so called popes.
there is nothing prophetic about roman Catholicism at all.