The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.

DFT_Dave

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
"Opposing scientific view", flat earth. Uh huh

Flat earth is an opposing cosmology based on empirical, experimental, science as opposed to theoretical thought experiment that assumes and imagines what opposes our senses and logical conclusions.

--Dave
 
Last edited:

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
I stated recently that I was going to methodically start from the ground and work my way up, as per the video, "Proving the earth is not flat--Part 1 Horizons", because we were jumping all over the place with video vs video when I first started this debate.

I have and will again provide video of the sun changing size from sun up to sun down. I have explained why we see the sun do what it does on a flat earth viewed with perspective. You simply don't accept that explanation. That we all see the world in perspective is a fact not a theory. A fact that globe earth must deny.
I do not accept your explanations because they do not match what i see nor do they match your explanation of perspective. When I look at the sun through an appropriate piece of glass that protects my eyes from damage, the sun does not change size. If I place marks on that piece of glass indicating the diameter of the sun, it is always touches those marks regardless of the time of day. I watch the sun appear from the top down and disappear from the bottom up. That never changes. You explanation requires that the sun changes in size over the course of day AND it requires that the sun reaches a vanishing point or appears from the vanishing point. The sun doesn't do that. Your explanation fails and you really need to address that.

What we all see, and don't have to investigate, is that the sun, moon, and stars all move above us just as the clouds, birds, and planes do. We never sense in anyway the earth spinning. We never see a curvature that's admitted to be too far away to see anyway, but that we do see the horizon of a curved earth we look ever so slightly down at (that it's so nearly at eye level we can't tell the difference) just three miles away is mind boggling.
Why would you expect to feel motion of the Earth is rotating? We took a river cruise in Europe. We never felt that boat move yet when we looked at the window, it was obvious that the boat is moving. When you are moving with something, you don't feel the movement UNLESS something disturbs that motion, something like a pot hole or uneven rails or turbulence in the air or waves on a boat. Space has nothing in it so what would disturb the movement of the Earth as it travels through space? I noted that when we looked out the window of the boat, we could see that it is moving. When you look up in the sky at night and see the start change their position throughout the night you can see that the Earth is moving. Which brings up and interesting question for you to answer. If you are standing on the Earth watching the stars track across the sky, how do you definitively determine whether it is the Earth moving of the stars moving above the Earth?

You need to understand that whether the Earth is flat or spherical, you MUST look down to see the horizon. On a flat surface, if you look perfectly straight out, your line of sight is parallel to the surface of the Earth. This is an argument that only reveals the complete lack of understanding regarding simple geometry.


As to the size and distance of the sun from earth I have not said. But in perspective everything that moves across the sky will disappear at the horizon regardless of how high up it is or how large it is.

View attachment 26593
But this does not match what we see. In your statement above you have completely ignored that your explanation requires objects to get smaller and smaller as they approach the vanishing point. The moon never changes size. The sun never changes size. The stars never change their size. All of them go behind something, they do not get smaller and vanish. We see this every single day yet you cannot explain why your explanation does not match observations.

We don't have to be scientists in order to understand the contradictions in the globe earth model. Tesla was very clear that electromagnetism, not gravity, explains our world. He accused Einstein of departing from actual experiments and relying on thought experiments--imagined theory, instead. Flat earth research must submit to a peer review by globe scientists??? That's a good one, I'm glad someone else here has a sense of humor.
As smart as Tesla was, he was wrong regarding gravity. Einstein used mathematical models of physical phenomena to understand what was going on. That is how advanced physics is done. That is how engineering is done. Create a mathematical model to understand how things will react. Electromagnetism does not explain gravity. They are two completely different effects and each has a set of equations that explain how it works. What is interesting is your NEED to discredit gravity. Gravity totally disproves a flat Earth. Gravity explains why water and air remain on the surface of our planet. Gravity explains why people always stand vertically when standing on the Earth. Gravity (and lift) explain why birds and airplanes can fly easily from place to place. Gravity has bee understood for centuries yet you and your movement must discredit it to have any chance at making your hypothesis plausible. You attempt to use buoyancy to explain why things fall with absolutely no understanding is that a buoyant force acts to push objects up. What pulls down against a buoyant force?

If you want flat Earth to gain respectability then you must go through the same scientific process all other scientists have to follow. If you can write a paper that adequately explains why perspective explains why the sun disappears from the bottom up then you can be sure that other scientists will take notice and check your work. They will evaluate your math and experiments and will recreate them to see if they get the same results. If they do, you win. If your paper fails, well, back to the drawing board for you.



Please do elaborate on this. This is where all deception begins, "why we cannot trust our senses". I'm glad you brought it up.

--Dave
Our senses are designed to interact with the world around us to allow us to survive. We need to find food, to hunt and avoid predators. That impacted the way our eyes evolved. Our eyes have physical properties that determine what our field of view is and what we can see. Our senses evolved to deal with our immediate environment. The challenge comes when we start trying to deal with the scale of things. The Earth is far larger than can easily comprehend. The distance between us and the sun is even harder to get a handle on. You have fallen victim to the trap that what you see is all there can possible be. You have created a reality in your own mind that requires you to ignore centuries of science to believe.

You have not been able to effectively counter any argument against your position on this thread. Not one. You say you are only doing this to explorer the flat Earth position. At what point do realize that flat Earth does not work.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Flat earth is an opposing cosmology based on empirical, experimental, science as opposed to theoretical thought experiment that assumes and imagines what opposes our senses and logical conclusions.

--Dave
You are HILARIOUS Dave....

The FE is based on "empirical, experimental, science as opposed to theoretical thought" and YET cannot tell us how high the sun or the moon are above the "flat earth" in their "mode".

You are delirious and hilarious at the same time.
 

DFT_Dave

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Baloney.... and that's still not the topic of this thread.

Do you really believe that there are no other planets? Even though they are visible through a telescope.

What is the motivation for deceiving us into believing in a globe, if it does not exist, has been and is an acceptable part of this debate. A one world government under Satan is that motivation.

--Dave
 

Silent Hunter

Well-known member
Is Satan the god of this world?

It's quite naive to think he does not have his fingerprints all over government, science, medicine, finance, entertainment, and the media.
Yes, he does. That does not make the earth flat.

P.S. Who are these naive people that think that he doesn't?
What's funny (to us "non-believers") is you rant on about how crazy Dave is about FE but don't see any problem with your chosen preferred deity and its antithesis. I may be naive but you folks are certifiable.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
I know you didn't say believing that Satan will deceive the world is what discredits me.

I simply said that believing that Satan with the help of Hollywood, Marvel Comics, and the Deep State could deceive the world into believing that the return of Christ was an Alien Invasion was a possibility, not a certainty.
David, it's just stupidity. Think that through. Just think it through. How would such a deception be maintained?

Let me guess! The same way the deception of a globe Earth has been maintained, right?

This is genuine, loony bin inansity talk, Dave! You've gotta drop this.


I know you think even just questioning the spinning globe in favor of flat earth makes me and anyone else, an idiot.
Nope!

I can really tell anymore if you just aren't paying any attention or if it's just that you really are just plain old dumb. I have never said that simply questioning whether the Earth is flat vs round is what makes anyone an idiot. I've never said that and don't think that.

Idiots are people who cling to ideas in stubborn resistance to falsifying proof.

You have been shown in multiple ways that the Earth cannot possibly be flat. In response, you change the subject to some other aspect and pretend like your position hasn't be disproved.

So, I guess you're not going to have me over for Sunday dinner any time soon.

--Dave
If your behavior and positions on this topic has had this effect on me, a man that held you in quite high esteem for years, what effect do you think it'll have on people who don't know anything about you or your ministry or your other theological work?

You really need to wake up and realize that basically no one believes that the Earth is flat and those that do are literal morons who make decision based on nothing but some stupidly overblown distrust of everything related to the government or are just so naive as to believe whatever they're told. You're making decision about your life and ministry based on a desire to understand people who are not only exceedingly rare but are mentally deranged! And, instead of merely understanding them, you've turned yourself into one of them. It's just as if you went to "understand" Scientology and ended up being convinced by having read Dianetics! Only it's worse because there's probably a thousand times as many Scientologists as there are morons who believe in a flat Earth!

Clete
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
:chuckle:

I don't know if it's flat. It looks flat. Furthermore, Satan is the god of this present world and he is the father of lies. It's logical to be skeptical about the 'information' he puts out. It's illogical to assume most of it is true (like you).

So now NASA is Satan?

How can you guys not see how insane that is?!

And I (and others) have PROVEN - and I do mean PROVEN - that the world cannot possibly be flat.

Is it logical to be skeptical about whether math works?

Clete
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
To see you viciously turn on a friend for holding an opposing scientific view is sickening...a man that claims the Lord Jesus Christ as his savior.

Get over it.

I haven't questioned his salvation, I've questioned his motives, his honesty and his soundness of mind. What he is doing here is immoral. It is akin to lying. He is destroying his own reputation and, in the mind's of some, will taint the the entire Christian faith with this insanity. If he'd listen to reason, I'd treat him as though he were reasonable. He has, however, decided to ignore reason and to instead embrace abject stupidity and act as if it deserves to stand on equal ground with such things as the Pythagorean Theorem and the rest of mathematics, not to mention simple observations than anyone can make by simply walking outside with their eyes open.

Clete
 
Last edited:

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Triangulating pixels on a photo will not tell you anything about how far the moon or the stars are from earth anymore than triangulating the moon without using a photo without an assumption made somewhere along the way.
Oh yes it will!

So long as each photo has a common frame of reference like the three stars that used to line of up the photos, then pixel counting works exactly like counting inches on a ruler or miles on a map. The unit of measure is not relevant so long as it used consistently and converted properly into units that we are more used to dealing with.

There's already an assumption made that the earth is a globe. Triangulation's for sun, moon, and stars work only if the earth is flat anyway but still don't tell you how large and how far away they are.
Yes it does tell you exactly that!

Where do all these conversation go in your head, David? We just got through discussing apparent size and how that math works. If you know the angle and you know the distance, you can know the size. If you know the angle and the size then you can know the distance.

Further, triangulation isn't what's being discussed in that video. It's parallax! That's what makes the stars in the photos important because while the Moon has a different apparent location in the two photos, the stars do not. This is proof that the stars are VERY much further away than the Moon is. (That alone disproves the flat-Earth model, by the way.) And if you assume the stars are stationary (which on these scales they basically are), then you can work out the distance to the Moon based on the measurable parallax. In turn, because of what we learned last week about apparent size, we can then calculate the approximate size of the Moon.

The math is iron clad proof that your flat Earth cosmology is simple stupidity based on nothing.


Equations that are "created" to inform us about a heliocentric universe assume what it is and does not prove what is is. Math can be used as a circular argument just as words can.

--Dave
If you are still hung up on the fact that the guy did his math based on a round Earth, then do the math based on a flat Earth and see what you come up with? It'll still blow an enormous hole in the whole idea because flat or round, you aren't going to come up with a number even close to only a few thousand miles.

I, by the way, am NOT going to do the math for you. I'm perfectly content with the math that he's already done. If you want to falsify the video, here's your chance. Find a website somewhere that'll let you to the math with his numbers based on a flat Earth and report the numbers you get here.

You won't do it because you aren't interested in proving the flat earth model true, you just want to believe it.

Clete
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top