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

[Right Divider]

I'm a very old lady.
The "valid" definition keeps changing.

No, the definition of science has not changed.
What some people claim to be science is a mess some times.

1Ti 6:20 KJV O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:​

 

[Right Divider]

Wasn't it scientist that came up with the age of the earth being millions of years old?
What "scientific observation" did they use to come up with that?

They make claims based on many assumptions. Don't confuse that with real science (knowledge).

I think it is futile.

In the book of Job chapter 38, GOD starts telling him (mankind) things that he (mankind) cannot possibly know.
One of those things was the breadth of the earth. verse 18

Job did not have the means to do so at that time. Don't confuse that with something eternally unknowable.

 

[The Barbarian]

I don't see how someone can realize that the Earth isn't flat, but still can't figure out why evolution works.

Or vice versa. They used to call them "paradoxers." Sounds like a useful word.

 

[chair]

I don't see how someone can realize that the Earth isn't flat, but still can't figure out why evolution works.

Or vice versa. They used to call them "paradoxers." Sounds like a useful word.

It's worse. Not only do they not understand why it works, they don't even understand that it happens.

 

[Yorzhik]

It's worse. Not only do they not understand why it works, they don't even understand that it happens.

You're the one that quit the conversation.

 

[Right Divider]

To an evolutionist... all forum threads must be about evolution.

 

[Tambora]

No, the definition of science has not changed.
What some people claim to be science is a mess some times.

​

So who is it that has the authority to define what the "valid" definition of science is, and why have so many school teachers and college professors and textbooks gotten it wrong all these years?

 

[Right Divider]

So who is it that has the authority to define what the "valid" definition of science is, and why have so many school teachers and college professors and textbooks gotten it wrong all these years?

That's a very debatable topic.

Just because someone claims the earth is billions of years old and supports that with some "evidence" does not ipso facto make it science.

I feel like you're distracting from simple facts that prove that the earth is not flat.... like:

• The flight time from Sydney to Santiago being roughly the same as from LA to Hong Kong (one is TWICE as far on a "flat earth").
• The curved shadow of the earth on the moon.
• The strange shape changes of the sun hitting the earth throughout the year (in the FE model). See this video for a great demonstration: https://youtu.be/fEYsgP4CuSA
• Solar and lunar eclipses.
• Many, many more....

 

[Tambora]

They make claims based on many assumptions.

Then their calculations were worthless.

Don't confuse that with real science (knowledge).

I would think scripture is real knowledge.
But a lot of scientist don't seem to want to accept it and even oppose it.
So which scientists are real scientists?

Job did not have the means to do so at that time. Don't confuse that with something eternally unknowable.

So you think that was just concerning the one man, Job, and some other man could?
The context seems to indicate that no man can because no man was there in the beginning to witness any of it, not just Job.

For the record, I do not claim to know if the earth is globe or flat.
I just claim that scripture does not present the earth as being propelled through space as it spins.
Even Hebrew language experts agree that if one takes scripture literally it does not present earth as a spinning globe.

A lot of the experiments about the curvature being seen of the earth in high altitudes have shown there is no curvature.
Some say they saw a curvature and some say they saw no curvature.
Some have used high zoom cameras and can see what shouldn't be able to be seen if the 8 inch per mile curvature were true.
So something isn't adding up.

And isn't "science" now claiming that the moon is within the earth's atmosphere?

 

[Tambora]

That's a very debatable topic.

Apparently.
Because I was told in school for years and years that it was "science".

Just because someone claims the earth is billions of years old and supports that with some "evidence" does not ipso facto make it science.

Thanks.
The same could be said for "evidence" of a globe earth.
It could be that someday it will be shown that their way of calculating "evidence" was not so correct after all.

I feel like you're distracting from simple facts that prove that the earth is not flat.... like:

• The flight time from Sydney to Santiago being roughly the same as from LA to Hong Kong (one is TWICE as far on a "flat earth").
• The curved shadow of the earth on the moon.
• The strange shape changes of the sun hitting the earth throughout the year (in the FE model). See this video for a great demonstration: https://youtu.be/fEYsgP4CuSA
• Solar and lunar eclipses.
• Many, many more....

I'm not distracting from it.
Just saying there is conflicting "evidence".

 

[Right Divider]

Then their calculations were worthless.

No argument there.

I would think scripture is real knowledge.

It is, but it does not give all details about the physical world.

But a lot of scientist don't seem to want to accept it and even oppose it.
So which scientists are real scientists?

The ones that start with God's word.

So you think that was just concerning the one man, Job, and some other man could?

You've completely missed the point. Job or any other man AT THAT TIME could not do what we can do today. For example, get in an airplane and circle the globe.

The context seems to indicate that no man can because no man was there in the beginning to witness any of it, not just Job.

Once again... AT THAT TIME.

For the record, I do not claim to know if the earth is globe or flat.
I just claim that scripture does not present the earth as being propelled through space as it spins.

Sure it does. It often talks about sun rise and sun set.... those to NOT happen in the "flat earth model".

Even Hebrew language experts agree that if one takes scripture literally it does not present earth as a spinning globe.

This type of appeal to authority is a fallacy.

A lot of the experiments about the curvature being seen of the earth in high altitudes have shown there is no curvature.

Not true.

Some say they saw a curvature and some say they saw no curvature.
Some have used high zoom cameras and can see what shouldn't be able to be seen if the 8 inch per mile curvature were true.
So something isn't adding up.

And isn't "science" now claiming that the moon is within the earth's atmosphere?

No.

 

[Right Divider]

I'm not distracting from it.
Just saying there is conflicting "evidence".

Like I've said in a previous post. It's not about piling up evidence on two sides of a scale and seeing which way it tilts. There is come incontrovertible evidence that show that the earth is not flat.

Why would the flight times for these routes be roughly the same on a "flat earth"?
View attachment 26867
The correct answer is that the earth is not flat.

 

[Tambora]

You've completely missed the point. Job or any other man AT THAT TIME could not do what we can do today. For example, get in an airplane and circle the globe.

Once again... AT THAT TIME.

It indicates that it is because no man was there in the beginning.
That hasn't changed.
There is still no man that was there in the beginning (Jesus excepted).

Sure it does. It often talks about sun rise and sun set.... those to NOT happen in the "flat earth model".

That an object can rise and fall above the earth does not prove a globe earth.
I don't why you think the sun cannot rise or fall about a flat earth.
Even in the globe earth model the sun is sometimes closer to earth than at other times.

This type of appeal to authority is a fallacy.

Appealing to "science" as authority would also be a fallacy then.

Not true.

Sure it is.
People have posted their experiments all over the internet.

No.

Igor Baliukin of Russia's Space Research Institute says yes.
"Science" keeps changing it's theories.

 

[Tambora]

Like I've said in a previous post. It's not about piling up evidence on two sides of a scale and seeing which way it tilts. There is come incontrovertible evidence that show that the earth is not flat.

Why would the flight times for these routes be roughly the same on a "flat earth"?
View attachment 26867
The correct answer is that the earth is not flat.

Because cities don't move closer or further apart, and thus the distance would be the same no matter which model is used.

If a plane flew up over Dallas and only flew in a small circle for 48 hours, would Dallas always be in view?

 

[Right Divider]

It indicates that it is because no man was there in the beginning.
That hasn't changed.
There is still no man that was there in the beginning (Jesus excepted).

So you think that God will not allow us to measure our world?

That an object can rise and fall above the earth does not prove a globe earth.

Sun set shows that the sun goes below the horizon. That is not what the "flat earth model" says.

I don't why you think the sun cannot rise or fall about a flat earth.

According to "flat earther's", it does not go below the horizon. It's not my opinion, it's what they say.

Even in the globe earth model the sun is sometimes closer to earth than at other times.

And?

Appealing to "science" as authority would also be a fallacy then.

A bunch of Hebrew language experts does not determine the shape of the earth.

Sure it is.
People have posted their experiments all over the internet.

Their "experiments" do not prove a flat earth.

Igor Baliukin of Russia's Space Research Institute says yes.
"Science" keeps changing it's theories.

That's because some things are harder to prove than others.

 

[Right Divider]

Because cities don't move closer or further apart, and thus the distance would be the same no matter which model is used.

That does not make any sense.

On the "flat earth" map (supposedly the "true" map) the distance between Sydney and Santiago is TWICE as far as the distance between LA and Hong Kong. And YET the flight times are nearly identical. How can that be?
View attachment 26868

If a plane flew up over Dallas and only flew in a small circle for 48 hours, would Dallas always be in view?

Irrelevant to the question above.

 

[Tambora]

So you think that God will not allow us to measure our world?

Just showing what scripture says.

Sun set shows that the sun goes below the horizon. That is not what the "flat earth model" says.

According to "flat earther's", it does not go below the horizon. It's not my opinion, it's what they say.

Does scripture say the sun goes below the horizon?

And?

Just pointing it out.

A bunch of Hebrew language experts does not determine the shape of the earth.

They do verify what scripture says about the earth.

Their "experiments" do not prove a flat earth.

Their experiments show no curvature.

That's because some things are harder to prove than others.

No doubt.

 

[Tambora]

That does not make any sense.

Cities don't move closer or further apart, they stay where they are.

On the "flat earth" map (supposedly the "true" map)

Someone may have hypothesized that is a "true" map.
Why would you think everyone that believes the earth may be flat HAS to use that map?

Irrelevant to the question above.

Why?
If the earth was spinning below him, wouldn't Dallas move out of his sight?

 

[Right Divider]

Just showing what scripture says.

I know what scripture says, you're claiming what it means. I disagree with what you think that it means and not what it says.

Does scripture say the sun goes below the horizon?

What does sun SET mean?

They do verify what scripture says about the earth.

That's debatable.

Their experiments show no curvature.

The "experiments" are not valid... sorry.

Please address the flight times. That alone disproves flat earth.

P.S. In the "flat earth model" the sun never even approaches "setting".
View attachment 26869

 

[Right Divider]

Cities don't move closer or further apart, they stay where they are.

Once again, you are not making any sense. Nobody is claiming that the cites move.

Someone may have hypothesized that is a "true" map.
Why would you think everyone that believes the earth may be flat HAS to use that map?

Do you have a better map? That is the "flat earth map".

Why?
If the earth was spinning below him, wouldn't Dallas move out of his sight?

We move with the planet. So does everything that sits on the surface of the earth.

You're using bad physics, like DFT_Dave.