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

[rocketman]

I agree the bible does not tell us about telephones and airplanes, etc. that men have made.
But it does tell us about the earth GOD made.

Not in specific detail, and if God thought you needed great detail He would have told you of all the other great technological details that you witness today, including the computer that you converse with me on. The Bible does not tell us to ignore all knowledge either, that just seems to be Christandoms willful ignorance, and using the Bible's silence on specific things as an excuse for it.

 

[rocketman]

Rocky!
What a pleasure to see you again.

It is a pleasure to see you as well, though I am troubled seeing the spread of flat earth nonsense... and it is just nonsense.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

I'm saying that there is no rational reason why I need to do that.


That's right and if anyone attempted to get you to prove biblically that the Earth was a round spinning ball orbiting the Sun, you'd be right to tell them that there is no reason for you to do that.

Why?

Because of the portion of what I said that you didn't quote! The bible is not a science text book! That's why! There are all sorts of things that the bible is silent about and for you to hold me to the standard of "All you gotta do is show me where scripture presents the earths as a spinning globe propelling through space." is not rational!


Who cares what they attempt to do?

I'm not talking about the sort of pseudo-proofs that modern science uses to "prove" things like global warming or over population or black holes or dark matter. I'm talking about the sort of proof that is truly and genuinely irrefutable. A proof that even a middle school aged public schooled child can understand and duplicate for himself.


Is this you responding to my question in the affirmative or is this you suggesting that nothing can be proven? I can't tell for sure whether you're being sarcastic or not.


Well, the bible doesn't have a whole lot to say about cosmological issues. It's an interesting topic of discussion and study but you aren't going to find a definite answer about whether the Earth is flat or round by reading a book that doesn't discuss that topic. Just as you wouldn't read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand to learn about how to properly train puppies, the bible is of little value when trying to figure out whether the Earth is flat or not.


I don't mean to suggest that you're a liar. I fully believe that you believe what you say you believe and so you aren't lying in the sense of trying to be deceptive. My point has to do with intellectual honesty in the sense that one is willing to accept the verdict of sound reason even if that verdict falsifies their doctrine. It's simple, plain old honest rationality that I'm looking for.


Well look, some of the bible is literally true and some of it isn't. There are figures of speech on every single page of the bible. There are whole sections of the bible that are flat out allegorical. Some things are taught as absolutes and others as rules of thumb. The point isn't to turn the bible into anything other than what it is or to take it in any way other than it was intended to be taken. And that sometimes takes some effort to accomplish because we are far removed in time from when the bible was written and some words and concepts don't mean now what they meant 2000+ years ago.

What I'm here to tell you is that there is not one single verse of scripture that requires one to believe that the Earth is flat. The Christian church nor the Jewish tradition that preceded it ever believed or taught that the Earth was flat. Not ever, not even one time for even ten minutes. The idea that it did is a myth. If you believe that the Earth is flat, it isn't because of the bible nor because of any doctrine that the church has ever taught. Rather, the modern day beleif that the Earth is flat eminates from YouTube and nothing else.


I'm totally fine discussing anything with anyone so long as they are at least trying to be rational and not being willfully ignorant and ignoring the arguments presented to them.

I'm going to assume that you were not being sarcastic a moment ago. The flavor of the rest of your post would seem to suggest that is most likely and so I want to present the following proof to you that the Earth cannot be flat. I've posted it several times on this thread and I'm sure you've probably already seen it, but look at it again with fresh eyes. I know its sort of long but don't let it glaze your eyes over and really think it through because I'm not exaggerating when I say that it is an utterly irrefutable proof that the Earth is not flat that you can verify for yourself. If math works (which it does) and the sun sets (which it does) then the Earth is not flat. Here's the proof....




FET (Flat Earth Theory) claims the Sun is approximately 3000 miles above the Earth and they do not dispute well established distances between points on the surface of the Earth. I'm going to be using these two presuppositions in my calculations and you'll want to refer to the following diagram to keep track of the variables...

View attachment 26417

Side a is the distance from the ground to the Sun (3000 mi).
Side b is the distance from an observer to a point on the Earth where it is high noon (the point at which the Sun is at it's highest point in the sky).
Side c (a.k.a. the hypotenuse) is the distance from the observer to the Sun itself.
Angle A is the height of the Sun above the horizon in degrees as seen from the observer.
Angle C is always 90°
Angle B is not relevant to this discussion.

Note from the start that if the Earth is flat and the Sun is 3000 miles up (or any number of miles up for that matter) that angle A can never ever get to 0°. The Sun would never set because no matter how long you make side b of that triangle, angle A is always a positive number. The only way for the Sun to set on a flat Earth is if the Sun dipped below the plane of the flat Earth. If that were to happen, then it would be night everywhere on Earth at once, which we know does not happen. It's always high noon somewhere on the Earth.

That, by itself, ought to be enough to convince anyone that the Earth cannot be flat but there more. Let's take a look at some of these photos we took last week...

So, since we're assuming a flat Earth, I'm going to focus on just a couple of photos that both show the position of the Sun in degrees above the horizon. I should point out that you don't have to trust the numbers generated by the app on the phones used to take these photos. The numbers can be confirmed by anyone by simply fashioning a simple sextant from a cheap plastic protractor.

I'll use these two photos...

View attachment 26418 View attachment 26419

On the left is the Sun's position as seen from my house on May 8th at 01:00 UCT (8:00:01pm central time)
On the right is the Sun's position as seen from Knight's house on the same day just 38 seconds later (7:00:39pm mountain time).

The position of the Sun at my house is just .1° above the horizon while at Knight's it was 10.2° (This information is displayed just to the right of the Sun position indicator. It shows the Sun's heading and then it's elevation in degrees. On Knight's photo it's sort of hidden a little by the NW direction indicator but it reads "Sun 284.0 W 10.2°" The 10.2 is the elevation above the horizon in degrees)

So, let's look at Knight's first...

How far West would you have to go from Knight's house (where sides b and c meet) to get to a place on a flat Earth where it was high noon (where sides a and b meet)?

It turns out that when dealing with right triangles if you have the length of any one side and either angle A or B, you can know everything about the whole triangle!
The math is boring and so I'm not going to show all that. Just go HERE and plug in the numbers for side b (3000) and angle A (10.2).
You get the following results...

Someone 16,700 miles (length of side b) to his west would see the Sun at it's highest point in the sky for that day.

There is no point on Earth 16,700 miles from Denver Colorado.


Still not convinced? Well just wait till you plug in the numbers from my house!


At my house the Sun was only .1 degrees above the horizon. So plugging in the numbers from my house (side b = 3000 and angle A = .1) we get the following results...

You have to go 1,720,000 miles to my West to find high noon beneath a Sun that was 3000 miles above the surface of a flat Earth.

That's One MILLION seven hundred twenty THOUSAND miles!
(That's more that 7 times the real distance to the Moon!)

Now seriously folks! What more proof could you possibly need? How are you going to possibly refute this?

Are you going to deny that the Sun is about 10° further above the horizon in Denver than it is in Houston? Even if you did that, the distance to noon calculations aren't dependent on that!

Are you going to challenge the validity of the Pythagorean Theorem?

It seems that's your only option! It's either refute the Pythagorean Theorem or you must reject the notion that the Earth is flat based on the mere fact that the Sun gets to within .1° of the horizon at one point on the Earth while at the same time being directly over head at another.

Clete

Pissin' into the wind again I see.
Use that theorem on the stars.
Oh wait, you can't because they're light years away.(Convenient ay?)

Not only that, where do you get the idea that the sun is always 90% straight up above you at noon?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Not in specific detail, and if God thought you needed great detail He would have told you of all the other great technological details that you witness today, including the computer that you converse with me on. The Bible does not tell us to ignore all knowledge either, that just seems to be Christandoms willful ignorance, and using the Bible's silence on specific things as an excuse for it.

I think him saying he looks down on the circle of the earth is hardly being silent.
If it was a ball he would have to look up or sideways at least wouldn't he?


Like clay is molded by a signet ring, the earth's hills and valleys then stand out like the colors of a garment.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

That video describes a completely separate problem. The net effect of the problem I see is that there can only be daytime on a flat earth. You can demonstrate this for yourself by using a round table, turning out the lights, and then using a flashlight with an adjustable beam where it can be focused in a tight beam or have the light greatly diffused. Hold the flashlight above the table with a focused beam and move it around. There will be areas of light and shadow on the table. Now take a bare light bulb and power it up over the table. The entire table will be bathed in light no matter where over the table you move it. This will happen with a flat light source too for the light will flow in all directions but behind the surface of it, not in a focused beam.

The same thing would happen on a flat earth just because of the omni-directional flow of light from a light source that has not been provided with a mechanical deflector of some type to focus the light.

Nope.
Hang a lantern in your campsite.
How far up do you hang it before it does you less good.
Then also where do you post your sentries?
Outside the lights perimeter, no?
If the sun is 30 miles in diameter why would it illuminate a plane that is over 50,000 miles in diameter?

 

[Clete]

Pissin' into the wind again I see.
Use that theorem on the stars.
Oh wait, you can't because they're light years away.(Convenient ay?)

You're an ignorant fool!

They absolutely have used that theorem on thousands of stars and proven flat out that they are indeed thousands of light years away.

Stellar Paralax

In fact, it is the Pythagorean Theorem that tells us how far away the Sun itself is. Since we know through direct observation that Venus is a sphere, we know that it is at 90° to the Sun when it is half illuminated. We bounce radio waves off of Venus when it is half illuminated by the Sun to get a very precise distance to Venus. The rest is 100% Pythagorean Theorem!

No kidding! That is exactly how we know the distance to the Sun!

View attachment 26884

Not only that, where do you get the idea that the sun is always 90% straight up above you at noon?

The sun is ALWAYS directly overhead at some point on the Earth you slobbering moron!

It's called the subsolar point. Look it up! It'll take you 30 seconds to find a whole list of websites that will show you its precise location.

Do you deny the existence of the sub-solar point, or is it the validity of the Pythagorean Theorem that you deny?

Further, lets say your idiotic point was correct, how does that save you? It doesn't! It makes the math more difficult to follow because you have to actualy triangulate rather than just use the Pythagorean Theorem but it's essentially the same math, you just have to use two right triangles instead of one. Regardless, the math grinds your pea-brained flat earth theory into powder.

 

[Clete]

Nope.
Hang a lantern in your campsite.
How far up do you hang it before it does you less good.
Then also where do you post your sentries?
Outside the lights perimeter, no?
If the sun is 30 miles in diameter why would it illuminate a plane that is over 50,000 miles in diameter?

The apparent brightness of a source is inversely proportional to the square of its distance. So, in other words, lets say you have four identical light sources, one is right next to you, one is ten feet away, one is twenty feet away and the other thirty feet away. If the light that is ten feet away is 2% dimmer than the one next to you, then the one twenty feet away will be 4% dimmer and the one thirty feet away will be 9% dimmer.

It makes no difference whether you're talking about a lantern, a 30 mile wide light source, or a 864,340 mile wide light source. The physical size of the light source isn't the demterinative factor but rather it's luminosity. The Sun and Moon have the same apparant size in the sky but the appearant brightness of the Sun is 398,110 times that of the Moon and this in spite of the fact that it is aproximately 400 times further away. (I know, you flat earth fools don't believe the Sun is further away than the Moon but that just makes your problem worse, not better.)

 

[JudgeRightly]

I think him saying he looks down on the circle of the earth is hardly being silent.

Not what it says. Try again.

It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in. - Isaiah 40:22 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah40:22&version=NKJV

As you well know by now, the word used for "circle" can also mean ball or sphere.

If it was a ball he would have to look up or sideways at least wouldn't he?

Sorry, but "down" at the north pole is not "down" at the south pole, but "up," which changes all the other directions.

Like clay is molded by a signet ring, the earth's hills and valleys then stand out like the colors of a garment.

:blabla:

 

[JudgeRightly]

Pissin' into the wind again I see.
Use that theorem on the stars.
Oh wait, you can't because they're light years away.(Convenient ay?)

Not only that, where do you get the idea that the sun is always 90% straight up above you at noon?

1M1S has been :nuke:ed.

:carryon:

 

[rocketman]

Honestly...this is your defense for willful ignorance? Clete said it earlier in this thread, and I will not plagiarize it but, I will repeat it. The Bible is not a science book! The bible is a spiritual book, a story of the redemption of mankind. Using the Bible to explain complex scientific things, or the technology that we live with long after it's completion is folly, and denial of obvious provable truths is just intellectual dishonesty & willful ignorance of the physical world that our God created.

 

[Ktoyou]

The god of this world is the father of lies, according to the Lord Jesus Christ.
It makes sense to question everything we're told while living in this present evil world.

:wave2:
Hi,
hope all is well with you? I'm doing alright and enjoying this summer here, in your state.

 

[The Barbarian]

They absolutely have used that theorem on thousands of stars and proven flat out that they are indeed thousands of light years away.

Your well-reasoned post included the above. While we can indeed get the distance to stars by parallax, I was unaware that it was possible to do this for stars much farther than a few hundred light-years away.

 

[The Berean]

Honestly...this is your defense for willful ignorance? Clete said it earlier in this thread, and I will not plagiarize it but, I will repeat it. The Bible is not a science book! The bible is a spiritual book, a story of the redemption of mankind. Using the Bible to explain complex scientific things, or the technology that we live with long after it's completion is folly, and denial of obvious provable truths is just intellectual dishonesty & willful ignorance of the physical world that our God created.

Good to see you, rocketman! :wave2:

 

[rocketman]

I've said my hello to you (again, good to see ya).
Now I'm gonna mess with ya! hehe!

It does too!

Isa 6:6 Then flew one of the seraphims unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar:

So this is the best you have? Cmon you can surely do better than that. Given the standard you have set is "show it to me in the Bible" Than please show me in the Bible where it addresses Automobile, Airplanes, Electricity, computers, telephones, the internet, rockets, satellites, television, and that is just a short list...Either you got me some scripture that addresses these common conveniences of today than I don't believe they exist. Do you see how silly that sounds? The Bible is silent about many things that are plain to see, if God thought it necessary to include them in a book about His plan for redemption, I have to believe He would have addressed it.

 

[Lighthouse]

I have never seen a credible argument for the Earth being flat. And the Bible doesn't say it is, either.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I have never seen a credible argument for the Earth being flat. And the Bible doesn't say it is, either.

It doesn't say either way.

 

[The Barbarian]

There are Bible verses that seem to indicate a flat Earth. But then astronomers talk about the Sun coming up, when they know that's not really what happens. Taking figurative language and making it literal is always a mistake. It's the basis of many misconceptions people have taken from scripture.

 

[Stripe]

There are Bible verses that seem to indicate a flat Earth.

No, there aren't. But we're not surprised that you'd think so, given you insist that the Bible doesn't teach "six days" and "the whole Earth."

That is the basis of many misconceptions you have taken from scripture.

Taking figurative language and making it literal is always a mistake.

Begging the question is always a logical fallacy.

 

[Clete]

Your well-reasoned post included the above. While we can indeed get the distance to stars by parallax, I was unaware that it was possible to do this for stars much farther than a few hundred light-years away.

That was true for a long time but since the advent have space telescopes, things of improved dramatically.

The following is from the Wikipedia article on the subject of stellar paralax...

Space astrometry for parallax

In 1989 the satellite Hipparcos was launched primarily for obtaining parallaxes and proper motions of nearby stars, increasing the number of stellar parallaxes measured to milliarcsecond accuracy a thousandfold. Even so, Hipparcos is only able to measure parallax angles for stars up to about 1,600 light-years away, a little more than one percent of the diameter of the Milky Way Galaxy.

The Hubble telescope WFC3 now has a precision of 20 to 40 microarcseconds, enabling reliable distance measurements up to 3,066 parsecs (10,000 ly) for a small number of stars.[11] This gives more accuracy to the Cosmic distance ladder and improves the knowledge of distances in the Universe, based on the dimensions of the Earth's orbit.

The European Space Agency's Gaia mission, launched 19 December 2013, is expected to measure parallax angles to an accuracy of 10 microarcseconds for all moderately bright stars, thus mapping nearby stars (and potentially planets) up to a distance of tens of thousands of light-years from Earth.[12] Data Release 2 in 2018 claims mean errors for the parallaxes of 15th magnitude and brighter stars of 20–40 microarcseconds.[13]

 

[The Barbarian]

That was true for a long time but since the advent of space telescopes, things of improved dramatically.

The following is from the Wikipedia article on the subject of stellar paralax...

Space astrometry for parallax

In 1989 the satellite Hipparcos was launched primarily for obtaining parallaxes and proper motions of nearby stars, increasing the number of stellar parallaxes measured to milliarcsecond accuracy a thousandfold. Even so, Hipparcos is only able to measure parallax angles for stars up to about 1,600 light-years away, a little more than one percent of the diameter of the Milky Way Galaxy.

The Hubble telescope WFC3 now has a precision of 20 to 40 microarcseconds, enabling reliable distance measurements up to 3,066 parsecs (10,000 ly) for a small number of stars.[11] This gives more accuracy to the Cosmic distance ladder and improves the knowledge of distances in the Universe, based on the dimensions of the Earth's orbit.

The European Space Agency's Gaia mission, launched 19 December 2013, is expected to measure parallax angles to an accuracy of 10 microarcseconds for all moderately bright stars, thus mapping nearby stars (and potentially planets) up to a distance of tens of thousands of light-years from Earth.[12] Data Release 2 in 2018 claims mean errors for the parallaxes of 15th magnitude and brighter stars of 20–40 microarcseconds.[13]

Well, cool. Things move on. And that's a big improvement over hundreds of light-years. This is why Galileo's theory wasn't universally accepted. If he was right, stars should show parallax. And the instruments at the time, couldn't even detect parallax on stars only a few light-years away.