You are correct, of course. The "argument" is the logical process. The logic can be right, while the premises and conclusion are false. I was afraid that this would confuse our friend Dave, beyond his general confusion.
The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
You are correct, of course. The "argument" is the logical process. The logic can be right, while the premises and conclusion are false. I was afraid that this would confuse our friend Dave, beyond his general confusion.
The law of averages being what they are, it was bound to happen sooner or later.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
No Dave, it wasn't. I've been paying attention to this thread almost since the beginning of the original thread, and you have NEVER addressed the size of Australia.
You just cannot be this stupid.
The Moon has a whole hell of a lot further to go, David!
The distance the Moon travels in one orbit, ignoring a lot of variables that not relevant to this particular discussion, is just about 1.5 million miles.
Take the average orbital speed of the Moon and multiply it times how low it takes for it to complete one sidereal month...
2236.94 mph x (27.322 x 24 hours) = 1,466,824.19232 miles
The Earth, on the other hand is 24901 miles and rotates at 1037 mph completing one sidereal rotation in 24.01 hours.
What's certain is your lack of intelligence.
The apparent speed of the stars, if all the data above is accurate, would be just about exactly 1/27 the apparent speed of the Moon.
Clete
You're wrong on the first part, but it doesn't matter without motive and the establishment of that necessary conspiracy. Mostly less than secret but sure, there have been less than public groups in power who've steered antiquity when the world had many fewer players on that stage with a greater concentration of power and with far fewer checks in place.
It gets more and more difficult to even imagine that happening on a scale that would be unprecedented without a compelling self-interest narrative for the players. And that's a fundamental problem for anyone in your position. You don't have that answer. Saying that there have been secret societies (that we inevitably learned about, talk about and whose goals are equally clear and rooted in that aforementioned self-interest) doesn't help you.
The problem there is that when that happens it's largely a matter of pushing a religious view unbacked by and largely contrary to legitimate science (see: literal witch hunts and the 30 years war), and cultural bigotry given the trappings of some pseudo science, as with racist founded nonsense (see: Germany) or ideological matters that aren't the wheelhouse of science (see: Marxist dogma) and not a world wide agreement by the best educated minds for generations to lie without any articulated reason about something as fundamental as the nature of the earth.
See, a vast, generational conspiracy would have to begin with that good reason, typically a self-serving one and one that would hold up for every player on the stage, from us to North Korea, to Iran, to Australia. It's hard enough to get a comparatively small group of people who all want a fairly certain thing to come together on a plan to make that happen (see: Congress) let alone get almost everyone to do it for no apparent reason, to require every serious seat of learning to falsify a process built to uncover objective truth (see: the scientific method) to align every independent economic engine to issue uniformly false reports and expend enormous energy and time to manage it (see: every space agency and airline in the world, just to begin that one) and to expect a media that hungers to expose just about any secret that could turn your hair color to miss it.
It is, in short, the stuff of fiction, fantasy, or madness.
Last edited:
It strikes me that this thread should be broken into a number of sub-topics. It will be less confusing to follow. For example:
1. FE and conspiracies
2. FE and motion of the planets and stars
3. FE and how objects appear at a distance
4. FE and sunsets (my personal favorite!)
5. FE and the size of Australia
and so on. As it is, the arguments keep jumping around, which makes it easy to miss something, or for Dave to ignore something.
On the other hand, this thread is proving to be pointless. Dave will not be convinced by any evidence. So it's been fun, but it's time to close up the shop. Everybody can go read a book or call their old parents. Two worthwhile alternate activities.
1. FE and conspiracies
2. FE and motion of the planets and stars
3. FE and how objects appear at a distance
4. FE and sunsets (my personal favorite!)
5. FE and the size of Australia
and so on. As it is, the arguments keep jumping around, which makes it easy to miss something, or for Dave to ignore something.
On the other hand, this thread is proving to be pointless. Dave will not be convinced by any evidence. So it's been fun, but it's time to close up the shop. Everybody can go read a book or call their old parents. Two worthwhile alternate activities.
I've never been confused about how logic and facts work.
1. Both flat earth and globe are founded on a presupposition.
2. Globe earth originally presupposed the shape of the earth is like all other heavenly bodies, a sphere.
3. Flat earth has always presupposed the shape of the earth is as we experience it, flat and motionless.
4. Facts: Auguste Piccard "was the first to witness views of earth from 10 miles up. It was stated in a 1931 Popular Science magazine that “It [i.e., Earth] seemed a flat disk with upturned edge”
5. Fact: All modern video from high altitude balloon, as high as 20 miles up, shows a motionless flat earth.
6. Fact: Not until our first alleged Apollo mission in 1969 did we have so called visual evidence from space that the earth was a globe.
7. My Conclusion: All calculations for the size and distances between all planets in the heliocentric model of the universe has been built on the assumption of it's original presupposition that the earth must be just as the sun, moon, planets and stars--a sphere moving through space. These calculation would be correct only if the presupposition is correct and are incorrect if the earth is not as presupposed.
There are many contradictions involved in the heliocentric model as I have pointed out.
It has been argued there are nothing but contradictions to the flat earth model.
The difference is a flat motionless earth is what we all see and experience from earth and as high as 20 miles up. The globe is only seen through fish eye lenses and NASA.
--Dave
Dave,
I will let others do the task of pulling these apart one by one. I will deal with only two of them:
2. Is plain false. That is not the history of our understanding of the globe.
3. Is also plain false. We do not view a flat motionless earth. A simple sunset is an everyday experience that doesn't fit that FE idea. As is the fact that you can see further from higher up. And no- your "perspective" and "vanishing point" have nothing to do with it- and they are nonsense to boot.
Why are you being so pig-headed about this?
The Earth as a sphere is established via physics.
The Earth as a flat thing is established by magic.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
We are patiently waiting for you to show us your math that supports your assertion. Have you determined how high the sun is above the surface yet?
genuineoriginal
New member
Fact: Ferdinand Magellan set sail from Spain in 1519 CE and in 1522 CE, one of his ships arrived safely back in Spain having completed a successful circumnavigation of the globe.
Fact: Flight paths of modern airplanes travel the shortest path (great circle) across a 3 dimensional globe instead of across a 2 dimensional flat earth.
Fact: Cartographers have had to do a lot of experimenting to find ways to display a 3 dimensional globe on a 2 dimensional map.
Could you please point me to the post where you addressed it?
Dave here is the question I had for you earlier in this thread. If you have already commented on it please direct me to your response....
Dave I hope all is well!
I have a question for you. Do you think the flat earth maps that all the flat earth people use and accept can possibly be accurate?
After all....
If the earth is a globe and looks like this...
View attachment 26526
You can drive from Brisbane Australia to Perth Australia in about 46 hours or fly on a commercial jetliner in about five and half hours. This can be verified by the literally millions of people whom have made this trip.
View attachment 26527
But if the earth looks like this....
View attachment 26528
Australia would then be about 2 times the width of the United States as we can see here...
View attachment 26529
And therefore it would take you 92 hours to drive from Brisbane Australia to Perth Australia and over 11 hours to fly from city to city.
On a flat earth here is the trip from Brisbane to Perth Australia...
View attachment 26530
Dave can you admit the the flat earth map that is used on a consistent basis by flat earth proponents cannot possibly accurate based on these facts?
Thanks in advance for your time.
Dave I hope all is well!
I have a question for you. Do you think the flat earth maps that all the flat earth people use and accept can possibly be accurate?
After all....
If the earth is a globe and looks like this...
View attachment 26526
You can drive from Brisbane Australia to Perth Australia in about 46 hours or fly on a commercial jetliner in about five and half hours. This can be verified by the literally millions of people whom have made this trip.
View attachment 26527
But if the earth looks like this....
View attachment 26528
Australia would then be about 2 times the width of the United States as we can see here...
View attachment 26529
And therefore it would take you 92 hours to drive from Brisbane Australia to Perth Australia and over 11 hours to fly from city to city.
On a flat earth here is the trip from Brisbane to Perth Australia...
View attachment 26530
Dave can you admit the the flat earth map that is used on a consistent basis by flat earth proponents cannot possibly accurate based on these facts?
Thanks in advance for your time.
Instead of the word "magic" I thought maybe you were going to use a two word phrase that starts with the letters "B" and "S". :chuckle:
"If" everything in your math is correct it's accurate but it's not consistent with the big picture.
Another Year, Another 20 Billion Kilometers Through The Universe
"We live on a spinning and orbiting world, but we don't usually think about our other, greater motions through the cosmos—maybe we should."
The earth rotates once and travels 1.6 million miles in one day. The earth and moon orbit 584 million miles around the sun in a year. The sun with the earth/moon and the rest of our solar system travels through the universe 20,000,000,000 km (12427423844 miles) a year. And yet the North star and other stars light years away and outside of our solar system are still where we have always seen them in sync with the moon moving around the North Star. This would be impossible if the universe was evolving/expanding, i.e. moving apart.
Without "imagining" an irrational tilted axis for planet earth, and without "imagining" an inconsistent gravitational pull for giving it an elliptical orbit around the sun the heliocentric system would not exist as a valid view of the universe.
Flat earth puts sun, moon, and stars all relatively close and all moving above a motionless earth, just as we see it. Flat earth does not require all heavenly bodies to be moving at the exact same rate and exact same distance from earth. If the moon is moving above the earth as we see it than why not the sun since that is also how we see it, and if the sun then why not the stars which is also how we see them?
We don't have to "imagine" a flat motionless earth with a small close sun, moon, and stars moving across the sky. It's what we all see everyday in perspective.
Everything about the heliocentric universe has to be imagined. That imagined universe has been calculated and those calculations have been made presupposing what has been imagined and therefore are not proof of what is actually true about the universe. Evolution has been imagined along with this cosmology, a well as a timeless impersonal metaphysical god behind it all.
--Dave
If you believe there is a God then you will more easily believe there is a Fallen Angel bent on revenge and planning to make himself the ruler of a one world government that he controls.
But if you don't believe there is a God then you will probably believe a higher order of species from another planet will arrive and take control of a one world government for our good.
The conspirator of a false world view of a heliocentric evolving universe would be Satan. That would be the one the Illuminati worship. A false world view would is necessary in order to falsify the Biblical world view that predicts what Satan will attempt to do. You're lucky to have this understanding, it will save you if you heed it.
--Dave
You can look for it as well as me. I can't pin point it anymore than anyone else can. Perhaps more in the Part I than in Part II of the thread if I remember correctly.
--Dave
You mean if I'm a Christian. Sure. It would be balmy to believe in a fallen angel if I was an atheist, or followed other religious precepts.
Well, no. I don't see why anyone would reasonably believe that.
How, exactly. I mean, what's the purpose of this vast, generational, extraordinarily complicated (making the science of it work out) conspiracy, across countries and cultures and religious views, that makes it desirable by any of them, let alone all of them.
But once you decide the reasonable answer to that is, "Because....the devil" it's hard to find a rational way to respond. Not because of my stand on the existence of that entity but because it's doing what Christians and theists get accused of all the time, plugging God into a rational gap, into something we can't reasonably explain.
Why would Satan care if we thought the world was flat or square? If the answer is because it promotes a Godless, mechanistic view of the universe I'd remind you that most scientists across time, including the majority of its leading minds, have been among the faithful of one religious view or another, have believed in God. It isn't inherently true that to believe in measurable mechanism is to reduce or replace the miraculous.
In any event, what's the reason again for this world wide, generational, hugely expensive hoax?
Dave, this is you failing to comprehend the scale of the universe again.
The North star is 433.8 LIGHT YEARS away. That's 2.55 × 10^15 miles. Or if you prefer longhand...
2,550,000,000,000,000 miles away.
12,427,423,844 miles is hardly a stone's throw away.
Add to that the fact that Polaris is ALSO in the Milky Way Galaxy, and is therefore traveling in the same general direction as the solar system, there is, for all intents and purposes, no movement at all.
ONCE AGAIN you're conflating cosmological evolution with globe earth. STOP IT!
:blabla:
Believing in God or saying I'm a Christian is not the same thing as taking the Bible literally.
The Bible is flat motionless earth with sun, moon, and stars moving over it. The sun stood still for Joshua, the earth did not stop spinning. The writers of this account could have known the difference between a moving sun and a spinning globe, God knows the difference, and we know the difference. If God created a spinning globe he could have and would have said so. Adam knew intuitively the earth was flat and motionless, that the sun, moon, and stars move above the earth along with the clouds just as he saw it, if this was not a reality God would have informed him and us in the Genesis account of creation.
The Bible does not say we evolved, yet many believe we did and will call themselves Christians.
The Bible says there will be a Day of Judgement, and yet many say there will not be who call themselves Christians.
Many reject what the Bible says for various reasons and it would seem that the Devil who first tempted Eve not to believe what God said if she ate the apple but to believe his counter claim instead has though out history created counter claims to what God has said for purposes already stated. Satan does not want us to believe the Bible literally.
The flat earth is measurable.
--Dave
- Status