The earth is flat and we never went to the moon
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
I challenge you to predict the dates of the next solar and lunar eclipses using your geocentric flat earth model, along with an explanation of the mechanics of these events and the mathematics behind it. Go ahead, we will wait.
You won't do it because you can't. But we can: https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse.html
You offer nothing but obfuscation.
From what I've read, and I'm sure there is varied opinions on this but basically their point is that the only explanation for the Earth, as it exists (i.e. flat) is God. In other words, they not only don't need to explain the mechanics of it, the lack of explanation is the point! If the world is flat and stationary, the only possible explanation is that God not only made it but is holding it together and making it work.
So why flat? One could make an equally good case for it being a cube, or shaped like a coffee mug- or a Mobius strip.
So why flat? One could make an equally good case for it being a cube, or shaped like a coffee mug- or a Mobius strip.
Excellent point!
Why not say that the Earth isn't actually here at all? I've seen some suggest that the moon doesn't exist. That it's a hologram or something. They cite the fact that there are no photographs of the moon prior to 1950 or something as proof. Never mind the countless paintings, books, songs, and ancient religions that depict, speak of and worship the moon. They clearly have no need for their worldview to be consistent, which makes it basically impossible to debate, by the way.
I was attacking Pythagoras's cosmology. I think others will see that. There is no implication from my argument that because his cosmology is wrong that his geometry is wrong. His cosmology is wrong because it's an evolved universe not a created one. The universe is no more evolved than man is, both are a creation if you believe the Bible. The stars can fall from heaven in a flat earth model, not in the globe one.
"You then imply that the whole line of science to the present day proceeded from Pythagoras and that since Pythagoras was wrong, so was all of science that connected with him."
You are wrong to use the term "all of science". We will look at specific areas of science that are wrong. But you are exactly correct about the implication. I'm not going to just imply it, I'm going to prove it.
I'm breaking down the Pythagorean cosmological world view by explaining it's irrational synthesis, I will demonstrate it's circular reasoning, and reveal the true cause of the eclipses. I will even use Pythagorean geometry to show the error of Pythagorean cosmology. Pythagorean cosmology involves three men, Pythagoras, Philolaus, and Aristarchus.
I did not have time today to answer all the questions about eclipses that you asked, I went to visit my daughter and granddaughter. I only got started on the them and I want to address the issue fully.
--Dave
Greek Pythagorean universe of Philolaus
Philolaus
"Philolaus was a Greek Pythagorean and Presocratic philosopher. He argued that at the foundation of everything is the part played by the limiting and limitless, which combine together in a harmony. He is also credited with originating the theory that the Earth was not the center of the universe. Philolaus was the successor of Pythagoras."
The center of the universe
"An astronomical system positing that the Earth, Moon, Sun, planets and unseen 'counter-earth'
revolve around an unseen 'Central Fire' was developed in the 5th century BC and attributed to the Pythagorean philosopher Philolaus. Philolaus universe moved 'the earth from the center of the cosmos', and provided the insight that 'the apparent motion of the heavenly bodies' was (in large part) due to 'the real motion of the observer'—i.e. Earth."
"In Philolaus' system, the Earth did not rotate and its inhabited surface faced away from the
Central Fire—possibly because it (the Earth) was flat. The revolution of the Earth around the
Central Fire was not yearly but daily, while the Moon's revolution was monthly, and the sun's yearly. It was the Earth's speedy travel past the slower moving Sun that resulted in the appearance on Earth of the Sun rising and setting. Further from the Central Fire, the Planets' movement was slower still, and the outermost 'sky' (i.e. stars) probably fixed."
Counter-Earth
"Along with the Central Fire, the 'mysterious' Counter-Earth (Antichthon) was the other heavenly body not visible from Earth. We know that Aristotle described it as 'another Earth', from which Greek scholar George Burch infers that it must be similar in size, shape and constitution to Earth. Some (astronomer John Louis Emil Dreyer) think Philolaus had it following an orbit so that it was always located between Earth and the Central Fire, and a tale of Greek mythology may have placed it in that location to stop man from looking at the throne of Zeus directly. However, Burch argues Philolaus must have thought it orbited on the other side of the Fire from Earth. Since 'counter' means 'opposite', and opposite could only be in respect to the Central Fire, it follows that the Counter-Earth must be orbiting 180 degrees from Earth."
"According to Aristotle—a critic of the Pythagoreans—the function of the Counter-Earth was to explain 'eclipses of the moon and their frequency', which could not be explained by Earth blocking the light of the sun if the Earth did not revolve around the sun. Aristotle suggests that it was also introduced to raise the number of heavenly bodies around the central fire from nine to ten, which the Pythagoreans regarded as the perfect number".
Aristotle said the counter earth was to "explain the eclipses of the moon".
Thoughts on this later.
View attachment 25199
--Dave
Philolaus
"Philolaus was a Greek Pythagorean and Presocratic philosopher. He argued that at the foundation of everything is the part played by the limiting and limitless, which combine together in a harmony. He is also credited with originating the theory that the Earth was not the center of the universe. Philolaus was the successor of Pythagoras."
The center of the universe
"An astronomical system positing that the Earth, Moon, Sun, planets and unseen 'counter-earth'
revolve around an unseen 'Central Fire' was developed in the 5th century BC and attributed to the Pythagorean philosopher Philolaus. Philolaus universe moved 'the earth from the center of the cosmos', and provided the insight that 'the apparent motion of the heavenly bodies' was (in large part) due to 'the real motion of the observer'—i.e. Earth."
"In Philolaus' system, the Earth did not rotate and its inhabited surface faced away from the
Central Fire—possibly because it (the Earth) was flat. The revolution of the Earth around the
Central Fire was not yearly but daily, while the Moon's revolution was monthly, and the sun's yearly. It was the Earth's speedy travel past the slower moving Sun that resulted in the appearance on Earth of the Sun rising and setting. Further from the Central Fire, the Planets' movement was slower still, and the outermost 'sky' (i.e. stars) probably fixed."
Counter-Earth
"Along with the Central Fire, the 'mysterious' Counter-Earth (Antichthon) was the other heavenly body not visible from Earth. We know that Aristotle described it as 'another Earth', from which Greek scholar George Burch infers that it must be similar in size, shape and constitution to Earth. Some (astronomer John Louis Emil Dreyer) think Philolaus had it following an orbit so that it was always located between Earth and the Central Fire, and a tale of Greek mythology may have placed it in that location to stop man from looking at the throne of Zeus directly. However, Burch argues Philolaus must have thought it orbited on the other side of the Fire from Earth. Since 'counter' means 'opposite', and opposite could only be in respect to the Central Fire, it follows that the Counter-Earth must be orbiting 180 degrees from Earth."
"According to Aristotle—a critic of the Pythagoreans—the function of the Counter-Earth was to explain 'eclipses of the moon and their frequency', which could not be explained by Earth blocking the light of the sun if the Earth did not revolve around the sun. Aristotle suggests that it was also introduced to raise the number of heavenly bodies around the central fire from nine to ten, which the Pythagoreans regarded as the perfect number".
Aristotle said the counter earth was to "explain the eclipses of the moon".
Thoughts on this later.
View attachment 25199
--Dave
Dave please don't copy and paste entire articles from other websites and or ebooks. The authors typically contact me and ask that I remove the info. It's kind of a hassle and a waste of my time.
What you can do is post a small excerpt from the source and then provide a link to the rest of the article.
Or... you can put in into your own words if you like.
What you can do is post a small excerpt from the source and then provide a link to the rest of the article.
Or... you can put in into your own words if you like.
I cannot believe that you are really this incapable of following my argument.
I didn't say that you were actually calling his geometry into question!
You are not making the argument that you appearant think your are making. You are saying his cosmology is wrong but the only reason you gave for comcluding that was because he was a pagan.
My point is very simple...
His paganism doesn't have anything to more to do with whether his cosmology is wrong than it has to do with whether his geometry is wrong. In other words, if his paganism isn't sufficient reason for you to reject his geometry, on what basis is it sufficient to reject his cosmology.
That's the last time I'm repeating that.
The globe model does not follow necessarily from any model, evolved, created or anything else. What the globe model does necessarily derive from is careful observation of the world around us and clear thinking about what is observed.
You have to prove the primary premise first.
Take your time. So far as I'm concerned it's all entirely irrelevant. Half of the technology that makes our modern life work wouldn't exist if the world wasn't a globe. Everything from weather and GPS satelites to the space shuttle to space x and all the realated technologies would never have existed. The size, complexity and world wide extent of the conspiracy you're suggesting is NOT possible. That single point alone makes this whole conversation an exercise in futility. Nevertheless, this is at the very least a non-hostile conversation, my bit of irritation with you not withstanding, and so I'm willing to take a look at whatever you've got.
Resting in Him,
Clete
These are not entire articles, these are quotes from "different" articles in Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia, so you won't be hearing from them. If I get information from a website I take only enough and say there is more information at the site if any one is interested.
This subject requires information that most people don't have and don't believe is valid. I can more easily debate other theologians, evolutionists, pantheists because it's a debate between two people both who have knowledge of the subject matter. The arguments and proofs that flat earth believers use are not well known or understood. That's why I have presented more quotes and videos than I have in former debates.
--Dave
All the posted videos have shown that flat earthers argue that, "What the globe model does necessarily derive from is careful observation of the world around us and clear thinking about what is observed," is absolutely false. They argue that there are hundreds of visible proofs of a stationary flat earth.
All cosmologies have a philosophy behind it and are incorporated in it. Pythagoras was not noted for his observations, he was noted for his philosophy behind and incorporated into his cosmology. Darwin also was not noted for his observations of nature, he saw what everyone else saw, he is noted for his philosophy of natural selection that is behind and incorporated into his theory. Both Pythagoras and Darwin provided a "mechanism" for the science of evolution--how the world creates itself.
You well know that evolutionists will say that evolution is derived from "careful observation of the world around us and clear thinking about what is observed". Just as "we" have argued together that evolution is wrong and is not what is observed, today's flat earthers have said that the cosmology of today is wrong and is not what is observed. Since I had already rejected multi-universes and space time relativity because they are based on things not observed I had to take a bite of flat earth, the worm on that hook I just could not resist.
"The size, complexity and world wide extent of the conspiracy you're suggesting is NOT possible."
And you know this is a fallacy of opinion, right? Argumentum ad populum
Thank you for your posts. I have always enjoyed you as a fellow open view theist and creationist. I have much regard for your input.
--Dave
All of which have been refuted on this thread.
Well, not "ALL"! There seems to be an infinite number is irrationalities these folks can come up with. That one video has two hundred arguments that are all 100% wrong! I don't even know how you pull that off! I mean how can you make 200 false arguments in a row about the same subject?
I haven't denied that this is so. It may very well be true. But just saying it doesn't make it so. You have to make the argument. The only way I know of to do this is to show what Pythagoras' argument was. HOW did his paganism lead to his cosmology? That's the question you need to answer in order for the argument you are making to be valid.
Whether this is true or not is irrelevant. Evolution is not false because the guy who came up with the theory wasn't that great of a scientist. There are lots of different arguments that can be made to falsify the theory of evolution but the nature of its author's worldview is not one of them. Here's one...
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications my theory would absolutely break down." - Charles Darwin
And they were either right or wrong about that but not because of their worldview. At least not directly. Otherwise, Pythagoras' geometry would have been just as wrong as his cosmology.
I agree that everyone makes the claim that they are careful observers and thinkers. The point is that not everyone who makes the claim is telling the truth.
It is no fallacy. It is not my opinion. Such a world wide, multi-generational, multi-millennial conspiracy is flatly impossible.
Nations fight about everything but somehow have come together to be in full and perfect agreement about not only that the flatness of the Earth should be kept secret but about just how that secret should be kept. You have every single nation ON THE WHOLE PLANET in agreement on nothing else but this one single meaningless secret! The Chinese and Vietnamese hate each other with an unbritalled passion but they're in perfect unified sync on the spherical Earth conspiracy. France truly, truly despises Germany but they are spooning bed-buddies on the round Earth conspiracy. Greece and Athens killed each other's armies till the beach sands were red with blood but still the secret of the flat Earth was held unassaulted! The United States will defy the entire world population, refusing to use the metric system but seemingly without effort fall in perfect lock step with protecting the flat Earth secret by spending billions and billions, if not trillions and trillions of dollars trying to maintain the illusion that there is a space program that sends things into Earth orbit, to the Moon and beyond.
NOT POSSIBLE!
I have a great deal of respect for you as well. I'm pretty sure I've read every word on your website. In fact, any irritation I've felt on this thread is rooted in my respect for your ability to think. I'm just confused about how the same guy who makes such brilliant arguments on one subject can entertain such intellectual flimsiness on another.
In any case, you are probably the only person I know of who could have made this topic worth the time I've spent on it. I've actually learned quite a lot. It hadn't ever occurred to me to bother learning the arguments about the nature of the Earth and Solar System.
Resting in Him,
Clete
I found large chunks of your recent posts taken from eBooks online. It's possible that wikipedia also copied the eBook. Either way you need to state sources and you should probably let folks know these are not your words.
I do not go to ebooks, ever. I put quotes and say at the end all quotes are wikipedia unless other wise stated. I go to wiki for obvious reasons. If I go to a website I put the title as a link so others can read it for themselves. That's why you see some of my quotes or titles in "blue". I believe I am careful enough, I have a website and I like when others link to it. In a debate site we are not writing formal papers or creating new sites with other peoples material. I understand your concern but you know we all have day jobs and we don't always have time to dot all or "i's" and cross all our "T's", but I will try to be more careful, your concern is well justified.
--Dave
The problem with this video is that it does not accurately represent the flat earth model. I had not real idea at first what the flat earth model was like but I was fair enough to look at it correctly as they presented it. It's hard to refute something you don't know any thing about. So, for better for worse, I've been studying it as part of my larger study of the various cosmologies through history. Some thing is terribly wrong with multi-universe theory and relativity space-time. So, I decided to start at the beginning (flat earth) and see for myself when and why all the changes occurred--the evolution of cosmological theories. But thanks for sharing the video.
--Dave
That's a good one.
I also like this one....
I feel sorry for the narrator. You can tell he's like.... "do I really have to explain this??"
I also like this one....
I feel sorry for the narrator. You can tell he's like.... "do I really have to explain this??"
The shape of the Earth has nothing to do with the concepts of multi-universe or relativity. Or quantum mechanic. Nor do those theories have anything to do with the shape of a basketball or pancake. You are simply muddying the waters- or your own head is muddied.
The shape of the earth was known to the ancient Greeks, long before modern science.
- Status