Did you know that the latest model of the universe is that it's flat.
Actually:
When cosmologists say that the universe is flat they are referring to space—the nowverse and its parallel siblings of time past. Spacetime is not flat. It can’t be: Einstein’s general theory of relativity says that matter and energy curve spacetime, and there are enough matter and energy lying around to provide for curvature. Besides, if spacetime were flat I wouldn’t be sitting here because there would be no gravity to keep me on the chair. To put it succintly: space can be flat even if spacetime isn't.
Moreover, when they talk about the flatness of space cosmologists are referring to the large-scale appearance of the universe. When you “zoom in” and look at something of less-than-cosmic scale, such as the solar system, space—not just spacetime—is definitely not flat. Remarkable fresh evidence for this fact was obtained recently by the longest-running experiment in NASA history, Gravity Probe B, which took a direct measurement of the curvature of space around Earth. (And the most extreme case of non-flatness of space is thought to occur inside the event horizon of a black hole, but that’s another story.) - Scientific American, July 25, 2011 (link)
I have always thought the moon landing was iffy because I simply thought the technology was not up to the task
It really was, as it turns out, though it took a lot of effort and some of the finest minds we had trained on the problem. See:
Apollo's Rocket Scientists: Forty years ago, NASA put a man on the moon. But MIT did the steering. MIT Technology Review, Oct. 20, 2009. (
link)
Even thought I thought it quite possible that we never went to the moon I never imagined that the world was not a globe.
It doesn't take imagination to believe the world is flat, only a tendency to confuse the information of immediate senses with the larger truth they obscure.
That we could fake moon landings has always been technically possible.
But pointless.
Contradictions from NASA are all to common. For example, the Van Allen Radiation Belts are serious barriers for space flight that we have not figured out how to deal with says latest NASA video.
Well, no. The radiation problem garnered a lot of attention. Ultimately it was decided that some shielding could deal with the low levels, but there wasn't much they could do about the stronger regions except for what they did, which was pass through it quickly and take measurements to assure themselves that they weren't condemning men to radiation related illness and death.
To monitor radiation exposure during the flights, Apollo crews carried dosimeters on board their spacecraft and on their persons. And these readings confirmed NASA had made a good choice. At the end of the program, the agency determined that its astronauts had avoided the large radiation doses many feared would ground flights to the Moon. Over the course of the lunar missions, astronauts were exposed to doses lower than the yearly 5 rem average experienced by workers with the Atomic Energy Commission who regularly deal with radioactive materials. And in no case did any astronaut experience any debilitating medical or biological effects. And beside, the Apollo astronauts were former test pilots. Flying to the Moon, radiation exposure included, was still a safer day at the office than putting an experimental aircraft through its paces in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base. - Apollo Rocketed Trough the Van Allen Belts, Popular Science, Sept. 19, 2014 (link)
The empirical evidence is that the earth is not moving!
No, the sensory impression is that it isn't. The data tells us otherwise, from space flight to satellites. Eratosthenes demonstrated the truth a very long time ago mathematically. He didn't rely on the senses that often fool us in their limitations.
Or, as Carl Sagan put it:
All high altitude video confirms this.
Supra. But save yourself the headache, buy a good boat and a compass and do what all sorts of people have managed. Circle the earth.
The argument that we are contained in a atmosphere contradicts the nature of that atmosphere and the analogy that we are in this atmosphere is like being in a plane or a train is a "false equivalence" fallacy, as I have already pointed out.
You've asserted it, but you haven't actually met the easy illustration.
And again, flat earth proponents don't work off or tested and authoritative scientific theory and model. Instead, they rewrite the language and root the entire mess in a logically improbable, world wide conspiracy that is the most certain circle they've generated.