Saying it doesn't make it so, Dave.
Make an argument.
I'm working on it.
--Dave
Sent from my iPhone using TOL
Saying it doesn't make it so, Dave.
Make an argument.
Gravity is density turned into a "weak magnet" for a globe earth.
--Dave
Do you understand the arguments being made? How they refute your "evidence" for a flat earth?
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Why do you keep saying this?They oppose it but they don't refute it.
We have to be told/taught that the earth is not what we "see" it as. We see it as flat and stationary.
It is not a thought experiment to say that those who live in the southern hemisphere see a south celestial pole that is not possible on a flat Earth but that is REQUIRED for a spherical Earth.Theories and formulas based on those theories are mere thought experiments and not empirical evidence or proof of a globe.
That depends entirely on what you define "outer space" as but disregarding that, you do not deny the existence of man made objects in orbit around the Earth, do you?Only 24 men have ever, allegedly, been to outer space other than Captain Kirk and his crew. I know the Starship Enterprise explored outer space because we all saw that on TV. NASA productions were not as good.
--Dave
Dave probably thinks that GPS is also a NASA hoax!That depends entirely on what you define "outer space" as but disregarding that, you do not deny the existence of man made objects in orbit around the Earth, do you?
Orbits cannot work on a flat Earth! The only reason we're able to put anything in orbit is because we understand how gravity works. We know just exactly how fast an object has to go from whatever distance above the surface of the Earth in order for the curvature of the Earth to fall away from the object as the same rate as it is falling toward the Earth. Pretty neat trick! A trick that Space X is in the process of pulling off right this second, as I right this! But it is a completely and utterly impossible trick to pull off unless the Earth is a sphere.
Clete
Dave. You made this statement. I simply want to understand exactly what you mean when you say "density", as I do not understand your statement as-is. You may as well explain what you mean by "weak magnet" while you are at it.
I am not trying to "make a point". I am trying to understand yours. You should be happy to explain your point, not evasive.
Why things on earth stay on the ground
"The density, or more precisely, the volumetric mass density, of a substance is its mass per unit volume. The symbol most often used for density is ρ, Mathematically, density is defined as mass divided by volume:
p = m / v where ρ is the density, m is the mass, and V is the volume."--Wiki
Tesla believed that electromagnetism was also a key factor, not gravity.
Gravity supposedly keeps everything from flying off a spinning globe and brings order to the entire universe. It's like a "weak selective magnet" that pulls everything toward it's center but ironically allows for things to still move freely on it's surface and, with the aid of wings, move freely through it's atmosphere.
We "can see" that things have mass and volume and therefore weight on what our eyes "can see" is a flat stationary earth. We "cannot see" gravity because it's merely an explanation, not a real thing that tries to make us understand why things are held to a spinning globe that we also "cannot see", except for Captain Kirk and the 24 Saint Astronauts.
--Dave
You're really gone off the deep end Dave. There are many forces of nature that we cannot see, but we know for certain that they exist because we can measure them.Why things on earth stay on the ground
"The density, or more precisely, the volumetric mass density, of a substance is its mass per unit volume. The symbol most often used for density is ρ, Mathematically, density is defined as mass divided by volume:
p = m / v where ρ is the density, m is the mass, and V is the volume."--Wiki
Tesla believed that electromagnetism was also a key factor, not gravity.
Gravity supposedly keeps everything from flying off a spinning globe and brings order to the entire universe. It's like a "weak selective magnet" that pulls everything toward it's center but ironically allows for things to still move freely on it's surface and, with the aid of wings, move freely through it's atmosphere.
We "can see" that things have mass and volume and therefore weight on what our eyes "can see" is a flat stationary earth. We "cannot see" gravity because it's merely an explanation, not a real thing that tries to make us understand why things are held to a spinning globe that we also "cannot see", except for Captain Kirk and the 24 Saint Astronauts.
--Dave
They oppose it but they don't refute it.
We have to be told/taught that the earth is not what we "see" it as. We see it as flat and stationary.
Theories and formulas based on those theories are mere thought experiments and not empirical evidence or proof of a globe.
Only 24 men have ever, allegedly, been to outer space other than Captain Kirk and his crew. I know the Starship Enterprise explored outer space because we all saw that on TV. NASA productions were not as good.
--Dave
Why do you keep saying this?
There is nothing that we see that contradicts a spherical Earth! There's all kinds of things we see that contradict the flat Earth model.
It is not a thought experiment to say that those who live in the southern hemisphere see a south celestial pole that is not possible on a flat Earth but that is REQUIRED for a spherical Earth.
That depends entirely on what you define "outer space" as but disregarding that, you do not deny the existence of man made objects in orbit around the Earth, do you?
Orbits cannot work on a flat Earth! The only reason we're able to put anything in orbit is because we understand how gravity works. We know just exactly how fast an object has to go from whatever distance above the surface of the Earth in order for the curvature of the Earth to fall away from the object as the same rate as it is falling toward the Earth. Pretty neat trick! A trick that Space X is in the process of pulling off right this second, as I right this! But it is a completely and utterly impossible trick to pull off unless the Earth is a sphere.
Clete
I still don't see what your statement Gravity is density turned into a "weak magnet" for a globe earth is supposed to mean.
You gave the standard definition of density in terms of mass per volume. Good. But who is claiming "Gravity is Density"? Nobody that I know of- unless it is you. Density is not directly related to gravity. Gravity acts on mass, not density.
Why do things fall towards Earth in a Flat Earth model if there is no such thing as gravity?
Talk about ad hominem...The reason you don't understand what I "mean" is because either you are not to bright or you just don't want there to be any other explanation to be possible other than the one you prefer.
--Dave
Dave- there were several hundred astronauts. From many countries.
Unless all those countries and people are lying- along with their ground crews, people who watched the launches etc.
Dave probably thinks that GPS is also a NASA hoax!
You can see satellite go overhead on every single clear night. They aren't planes. They aren't stars. They're man made satelites that can be predicted to the exact second where they'll be and who can see them. Every single solitary clowdless night.Neither you nor I, or anybody else for that matter, have ever seen anything actually "orbit" a globed earth. "Seeing is believing" right?
IMPOSSIBLE conspiracy to maintain.NASA is a government, secret society, new world order, one world government, agency created when we finally discovered because of rocket technology developed during WWII that the earth was flat, surrounded by an ice wall, and covered by an impenetrable dome.
There is not one word of the bible that is falsified by a spherical Earth.Satan does not want the Bible to be taken seriously--literally, now does he?
Intellectually honest interest requires rational thought, not special pleading fallacies that run to super-secret, impossibly complex and repeatedly debunked conspiracy theories.The Biblical significance of this should be obvious to all, which is why so many Christian, like myself, are interested in this subject today.
Actually, Dave I have presented dozens - DOZENS - of actual argument, the vast majority of which I can't even tell if you've read (or in some cases watched). You presented next to nothing in the way of counter arguments. All you've done is wait till a rebutal is a week or so old and then you repeat the origninal argument as though no counter argument has been presented. You're arguing like a Calvinist "argues" against Open Theism, which is nearly not at all. Presenting and then repeating your position is not the same as defending it nor rationally establishing it.I am actually the only one here trying my best to debunk this. You can't debunk something by calling it dumb, stupid, etc. or by just stating the status quo cannot be wrong because how can so many people be wrong.
Then why don't you stop repeating your position and respond to the clearly presented concise arguments that make your position impossible to rationally cling too? If you put 1/10 of 1% as much effort into attempting to rationally establish the flat-Earth positon as you put into establishing Open Theism, you'd drop it like a hot disk-shaped rock. You'll quickly discover that no such rational effort can be maintained.This is as important a subject as the nature of God, in my opinion.
--Dave
You can see satellite go overhead on every single clear night. They aren't planes. They aren't stars. They're man made satelites that can be predicted to the exact second where they'll be and who can see them. Every single solitary clowdless night.
IMPOSSIBLE conspiracy to maintain.
Space X isn't government owned or run and they launched a rocket off Nasa's main lauch pad for the first time this morning.
There is not one word of the bible that is falsified by a spherical Earth.
Intellectually honest interest requires rational thought, not special pleading fallacies that run to super-secret, impossibly complex and repeatedly debunked conspiracy theories.
Actually, Dave I have presented dozens - DOZENS - of actual argument, the vast majority of which I can't even tell if you've read (or in some cases watched). You presented next to nothing in the way of counter arguments. All you've done is wait till a rebutal is a week or so old and then you repeat the origninal argument as though no counter argument has been presented. You're arguing like a Calvinist "argues" against Open Theism, which is nearly not at all. Presenting and then repeating your position is not the same as defending it nor rationally establishing it.
Then why don't you stop repeating your position and respond to the clearly presented concise arguments that make your position impossible to rationally cling too? If you put 1/10 of 1% as much effort into attempting to rationally establish the flat-Earth positon as you put into establishing Open Theism, you'd drop it like a hot disk-shaped rock. You'll quickly discover that no such rational effort can be maintained.
If you want to impress me, go through that 15 minute video I posted that dealt almost exclusively with issues surrounding the horizon and present a rebuttal of the arguments presented in that video. But it's gotta be an actual rebuttal that is rationally sound and intellectually rigorous, not a simple statement of the flat-Earth position. Take them on one at a time if you want.
This thread has been quite fun, interesting and educational up to this point but I think I'm running out of new things to learn about the flat-Earth arguments and how to debunk them. It's going to start getting boring unless you engage the debate in a more rigorous manner.
Clete