I guess I could go through and start getting all the posts that have not been answered yet together...
The earth is flat and we never went to the moon
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
See ya 'round Dave.:chuckle:
But seriously... this was a really fun thread. That being said I really hope you come to your senses because I used to count you as one of the sharp tacks in the drawer.
Dear Knight,
I feel exactly the same about DFT Dave as you do. He's a smart guy! I don't know what this thread is all about except to have fun. I mean, even our satellites bear witness that the Earth is round. I suppose that's been brought up already?? Will hope to hear more from you Dave!! I know you're busy and you love New York!!
God's Best Be There For You, Knight!!
Michael
The Berean
Well-known member
That is SAVAGE, JudgeRightly! :rotfl:
That must be fake... it couldn't be real.... right??? Or could it be real?
Either way.... Buwuhahahahahahaha.... :rotfl:
UPDATE: As of today 05-11-2017 the earth is still spherical.
I know some of you were curious.
I know some of you were curious.
At this juncture... I can't even bring myself to play the "devil's advocate" on this matter of disproving the "round earthers" of this modern world.
I was a little disappointed that Dave didn't want to discuss how scripture notes many scientific facts that predate their discovery in direct relation to Cosmology and the modern Bang Theory.
Its boasted by many advocates of chance based origin that the big bang dispels creation... but science has only proven that everything has ONE central origin. It makes me chuckle.
I brought up this verse to Dave...
Isaiah 40:22 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.
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain,
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
But... he wouldn't have it and wanted to stick with the scientific, instead of the philosophic and scriptural side of this discussion.
If the back and forth of the scientific discussion is what is desired by the minds here...
I could psych myself up and claim flat earth belief. All I have to do is remember the main rules of dispelling the opinions of "round earth... rebels".
1: Photography and Video is only accurate and genuine when it is produced in support of Flat Earth
2: Astro-Physicists aren't actually intelligent, but merely elected by their participation in round earth heresy.
3: No matter how valid an argument is, or how well it is constructed, I can dispel it by simply undermining its application to this topic.
4: If I'm disproven, I can simply change the subject and redirect the topic back to the "compelling" evidence for flat earth theory.
5: Just because the majority of the world embraces "round earth" doesn't mean that I'm not a ground breaking scientist awaiting my Nobel Prize for correcting years of inaccurate evidence and mathematical findings.
6: If I am disproved so obviously that my argument is destroyed... I can suggest that I am considering the validity of round earth theory and will look into the evidence. 2 hours later, I can come back and say that I am now more certain than ever that Flat earth theory is true and the "round earth" evidence simply assisted in my assurance that round earthers are simply deceived people that require you tube videos and a wake up call that they have been duped.
7: No matter how compelling an actual video is, I can say it was digitally enhanced or simulated by the use of a deceptive lens.
8: Flat earth isn't a theory. Round earthers say "The Earth is NOT Flat". If I simply remove the "NOT" from their sentence... It becomes clear that they know I am right and are actually saying "The Earth is Flat"... (Okay... I stole that one from the spiritual life youtube guy)
- EE
Here Goes... I'm going to attempt to perpetuate this discussion, while Dave is gone. I'm kind of weary from the whole Arian blindness of matters anyhow and I'm going to use this opportunity to stay on ToL, but reduce my debate to this thread and the adoption of a stance that I don't actually believe. I'll count it a debate sharpening exercise...
So... First and foremost...
I will introduce my "devil's advocacy stance". ... Ahem ...
I was reading DFT_Dave's posts and laughing the whole time. I really thought he was nuts! But... as providence always occurs at random... a Facebook link on a nerd orientated FB social media group that I haunt had a link and a picture.
Flat Earth Wiki... linked from "Flat Earth Society" page
I started to laugh, but then I realized what I was seeing. All of this time... I thought I knew everything, but then I realized how closed minded I had been.
[MENTION=16942]JudgeRightly[/MENTION] ... Your picture is genuine, but as you can see... the flat earth is rounded at the edges. How can you miss this?
I have even identified that "quantum physics" explain how we move from one edge of the earth to another. What seems like support for a round earth is actually evidence that inertial and Divine forces are at work to keep us sustained and placed within this "domed firmament".
Look at the picture JR! It's specific evidence of a flat earth with circular edges. The shot is tilted at an angle, but... you can see that the ground is "FLAT"... and the "horizon" is actually a visualization of our flat earth with the curved edges.
... if you bite... I'll try to haunt the wiki's, videos and supporting sites to get up to speed on representing the "correct" side of this argument.
- EE (Flat Earth Convert)
Actually... it's not. It supports that the earth is flat, circular and contained within a dometrical enclosure.
Could you please explain how this doesn't support "Flat Earth" Theory? I don't see a "globe", but a flat... circular earth... in this image.
- EE (Flat Earth Convert... "Devil's Advocate")
Chair...
How can you miss that the effect that you recognize as a "round earth" ... sun rising or setting is actually like the effect you see in these "train tracks".
Note how the further the train tracks get... the closer together they appear. You have only proven Dave's stance!
- EE (New... Flat Earth Convert... "Devil's Advocate")
Clete... how does this refute Dave? Relativity has much to do with point of observation. You say that "something cannot be both moving and not moving"... but even a still lake has water molecules that are being moved by subsequent aquatic life. The lake "appears" still, but it's water molecules are actually "moving".
I would say the same to you. Read what you wrote and consider how relativity further disproves your argument.
You are discounting that point of "observation" is enormously important. I've flown in a plane and I never observed "rotation" of the earth.
Can you prove that the earth is not stationary? The only relativity that I'm currently observing is your relatively different perspective on this "flat earth".
I don't see how this proves your idea that the earth is "rotating". You were typing this response from a "stationary" location. You're simply denying what your "senses" are clearly showing you with false assertions and ideas that support an idea that you "can't prove".
I can't refute what you've posed hear, but I can suggest that you are working backwards from the "assumption" that the earth is round. I can prove any idea if I logically work backwards from an assumed conclusion. You are very versed in physics in this response, but have you considered that you are trying to cram these "ideas" into your perspective that the earth is "round".?
- EE (Flat earth Convert / "Devil's Advocate")
There are about 5 million or so videos that have been linked to in this thread so I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure I made that comment about a gif that showed the relative sizes of major objects in the solar system. All of which were presented as spheres or almost spheres.
The lake analogy doesn't work because a lake is a dynamic system by definition. The only way it could work is if you were suggesting that the entire like as a whole was moving from one place to another (like from Oklahoma to Texas or something).
But to answer your question directly. It refutes Dave's objection because Dave was employing the Law of (Non)Contradiction in an attempt to refute Relativity....
The Law of Contradiction states that contradictory statements cannot both be true at the same time and in the same sense.
Relativity states that motion of one thing is relative to something else.
So, in order for Dave's objection to be valid, Relativity would have to state that an object is moving relative to the Moon and that the same object is also stationary RELATIVE TO THE MOON at the same time.
Relativity does not say any such thing nor does even the example Dave used in his objection. Relativity simply states that an object that is stationary relative to its own frame of reference can be moving relative to another frame of reference. That is, an object that is stationary in one sense can be moving in a difference sense.
There just simply is no contradiction.
I don't think you or Dave understand either Relativity or my argument.
Yes, you did. You just didn't or couldn't notice it.
The primary problem with your objection here has to do with scale. You are amazingly tiny compared to the Earth and the observation you reference would require very careful measurement. Your own motion in the plane relative to the ground would overwhelm any perception of the Earth's rotation other than the movement of the Sun across the sky which would also be affected by your movement with the plane. In other words, your plane is moving relative to the ground which is already moving in its daily revolution. Your plane's movement is being added to the spin of the Earth (or subtracted from it- depending on your direction of flite), so it would serve to obscure your perception of Earth's spin, not enhance it. The only perception that would noticeably change for you without careful measurements would be the apparent length of the day. The Sun would remain visible to you for a longer or shorter period depending on your direction and speed of travel.
I've presented several proofs on this thread already. I won't rehash them all again but just to give your a taste;
The fact that weather systems and oceanic currents (i.e. the way they spin and the general direction in which they move) are mirrored on the Earth along the equator cannot be explained by a flat earth model but would be expected only if the Earth was a spinning globe.
If the Earth is stationary then the entire universe is spinning once a day around us. Objects that we know for a fact are several billion miles away would have to travel many times the speed of light to make it even a fraction of the way around in that length of time.
You can prove the Earth is spinning by swinging the pull chain on your own ceiling fan. No matter how carefully you attempt to swing it straight, it will always swing out an ellipse (unless you live on the equator then it'll swing straight.)
There are many such proofs. Some empirical some not - all valid.
That statement wasn't made in an attempt to prove that the Earth is rotating but only to refute the notion that Relativity states something contradictory.
The speed of light and the whole of the Theory of Relativity is not predicated on, nor would it be affected in any way by the shape of the Earth.
You should learn that words of an exact meaning. You CANNOT prove any idea by simply working backward from an apriori assumption. If that were the case we couldn't know anything. Science wouldn't work. Hell, forget science, language itself wouldn't work. If logic worked like that, I could say, "The sky is blue." and you'd have to wonder whether I was talking about the expanse over our heads or the liquid coming out of that cut on your finger. And that's assuming you could define cocnepts such as "expanse", "color", "cut" and "finger". Logic works, and it works really well.
Now, I get that you probably didn't really intend to undermine the veracity of logic and meant to suggest that my arguments represent some form of rationalization or another but even that isn't the case. We're talking about 400 plus years of scientific thought, nearly all of which is published and available for anyone to read and to understand for themselves. And the further back you go in history, the more basic and easily understood the concepts become. Newton's work, in particular, is based on empirical obervations that he made himself and recorded in detail. His experiments can and have been recreated and reperformed thousands and thousands of times, always with the same result. Newton's many works are among the most tested and verified truths in all of human history. It is anything but an apriori assumption. And even his work was based, in large part, on the equally rigorous work done by his scientific predicessors, as is all science to one degree or another.
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." - Isaac Newton
That statement of his, by the way, was not, in my estimation, a statement of humility on Newton's part, as so many seem to suggest. It was merely a statement of fact, an acknowledgment of the fact that he wasn't the only great thinker that had ever come along and that we cannot be expected to start from scratch if we expect to make further progress than has already been achieved. The point being that believing the Earth is round is not an apriori assumption, it is the view gained from atop a great pillar of shoulder standing giants.
:up:
Clete
I'm not discounting that what you are saying has validity, nor the possibility that the earth is a globe. I will weigh your evidence and respond in a few days or so.
- EE (Flat earth convert... "devil's advocate")
I saw this on Facebook today. Seems pretty solid.
The following two videos present some of the best arguments I've seen. Ignore his insults and pay close attention to the actual arguments...
https://youtu.be/JgY8zNZ35uw
https://youtu.be/TeMooNFtFJk
These videos also present excellent arguments...
https://youtu.be/W9ksbh88OJs
https://youtu.be/NGZEXkSX9wI
https://youtu.be/FTBaOmJEQg0
https://youtu.be/VFU1A88N_6I
Anyone - ANYONE - who continues to believe in a flat Earth after watching these videos, even once, is an idiot or a liar.
Clete
oatmeal
Well-known member
Most certainly the earth is "flattish" from my perspective and I certainly did not go to the moon.
However, God knows that the earth is basically a sphere for He designed and created it. He did not change the design to accommodate our lack of understanding of God's word.
Psalm 103:12 indicates that north and south end, but east and west continue as far as a person want to travel east or west.
This verse clearly has nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Flat or round earth, east is the opposite direction of west.
--Dave
- Status