The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[DFT_Dave]

I think that the purpose is clear. When you know better than everybody else, and better than all those so-called experts, it gives you a warm feeling inside. This works especially well if you don't actually know much and have a hard time following facts and arguments. Why feel ignorant when one can feel superior?

This is about comparing two points of view, that's what a debate is.

--Dave

 

[chair]

...
This is a debate not a lecture.

--Dave

One one side either ignores everything the other says, or claims that the facts are all lies, refuses to go outside and watch what actually happens in the real world- there is no debate. There is one guy sticking to his preconceived notion no matter what.

 

[DFT_Dave]

One one side either ignores everything the other says, or claims that the facts are all lies, refuses to go outside and watch what actually happens in the real world- there is no debate. There is one guy sticking to his preconceived notion no matter what.

I have posted the evidence from flat earth sources that say other wise. Let every one make up there own minds about what is true.

Once you say there is no debate you have ended your participation here.

--Dave

 

[chair]

I have posted the evidence from flat earth sources that say other wise. Let every one make up there own minds about what is true.

Once you say there is no debate you have ended your participation here.

--Dave

Dave, the plain fact is that there is no proper debate. Not because I or anyone else refuses to participate. Because you refuse to consider the other sides input. People have watched your videos, considered your arguments- and responded. That is a correct form of responding to your opponent in a debate.

You, on the other hand, ignore much of what others say, label the rest as lies, and make unsupported assertions.

The reason there in no debate here is you, Dave. Not me, nor anyone else.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave, the plain fact is that there is no proper debate. Not because I or anyone else refuses to participate. Because you refuse to consider the other sides input. People have watched your videos, considered your arguments- and responded. That is a correct form of responding to your opponent in a debate.

You, on the other hand, ignore much of what others say, label the rest as lies, and make unsupported assertions.

The reason there in no debate here is you, Dave. Not me, nor anyone else.

I don't have to consider the other side, I have to present the counter point. That's what a debate is, point/argument vs counter point/argument.

Here you are on a debate website arguing against the fundamentals of debate.

--Dave

 

[chair]

I don't have to consider the other side, I have to present the counter point. That's what a debate is, point/argument vs counter point/argument.

Here you are on a debate website arguing against the fundamentals of debate.

--Dave

A says "The earth is flat"
B counters with "The Earth is a globe".

A gives some evidence
B shows why A's evidence is wrong
B gives some evidence.
A ignores it, or says "nah, lies"

Do I have it right now?

 

[DFT_Dave]

A says "The earth is flat"
B counters with "The Earth is a globe".

A gives some evidence
B shows why A's evidence is wrong
B gives some evidence.
A ignores it, or says "nah, lies"

Do I have it right now?

No! It's going more like this:

A says "The earth is flat"
B counters with "Are you nuts? Everyone knows the Earth is a globe".

A gives some evidence
B says "there is no evidence for flat earth."

But I will sum things up starting next post.

--Dave

 

[chair]

No! It's going more like this:

A says "The earth is flat"
B counters with "Are you nuts? Everyone knows the Earth is a globe".

A gives some evidence
B says "there is no evidence for flat earth."

But I will sum things up starting next post.

--Dave

Dave, this is simply false. And I think you know it quite well.
But let's see your summary.

 

[The Berean]

There's more than one kind of satellite. It's a video, you see the balloon in the trees at the end of it.

--Dave

And what is the type of satellite in that in that video, Dave? Do you know the different types of satellites? That hunk of junk is not a satellite. I don't see any bus structure, or antennae, or thrusters, of any kind. Again it looked more like some sort of student project.

Sent from my SM-G920V using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[JudgeRightly]

I don't have to consider the other side, I have to present the counter point. That's what a debate is, point/argument vs counter point/argument.

Here you are on a debate website arguing against the fundamentals of debate.

--Dave

And here you are on a debate website saying "I don't have to consider the other side, I [just] have to present the counter point."

That's not what a debate is, that's not how debates work, and the reason the fundamentals of debate are being discussed is that you don't seem to know them. At all.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Dave... would flying from Johannesburg to Sydney in 11 hours be proof enough for you that the earth cannot be flat?

And if not... why not?? How can commercial airlines fly from Johannesburg to Sydney in 11 hours?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

The mistake this video makes is that is assumes the globe model in order to establish the distance of sun from earth. It then applies those angels and distances to the flat earth model. Figures derived from an assumed globe model does not prove the earth model and does not disprove the flat earth model. There are at least three fallacies in his argument but it's simply circular reasoning.

--Dave

Dave... did you just make that up off the top of your head?

The video does no such thing. Trigonometry is trigonometry... math is math. You can do these equations yourself and get accurate distances of the sun and the moon.

Wouldn't that be valuable? Wouldn't knowing the actual distances of the sun and moon be important in your quest to "explore" this topic?

 

[Caino]

You guys aren't debating with Dave anymore, Dave was proven wrong a number of times on this thread long ago. Now you are arguing with Dave's pride. His reasonable mind left the building!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

If you dismiss "experts" then why to post videos made by flat earth theory "experts", Dave?

Fantastic question. :up:

 

[User Name]

A 100-foot-tall ship that is 15 miles away is not visible. That's because it is blocked by the curvature of the Earth. As it approaches, it "rises." First the tip of the mast is visible, then more and more of the ship comes into view as the ship gets closer:

Another fact which demonstrates the curvature of the earth is that it is possible to see farther over the horizon by climbing higher in the ship, or, when on land, on high cliffs.

Earth curvature line of sight:

 

[Nick M]

One one side either ignores everything the other says, or claims that the facts are all lies, refuses to go outside and watch what actually happens in the real world- there is no debate. There is one guy sticking to his preconceived notion no matter what.

 

[User Name]

These are the phases of the moon as seen in the Northern Hemisphere:

These are the same phases of the moon as seen in the Southern Hemisphere:

The movement of the shaded portion is reversed in each hemisphere because in the Northern Hemisphere the sunlit part of the moon moves from right to left:

In the Southern Hemisphere the sunlit part moves from the left to the right:

Also, in the Northern Hemisphere, the stars appear to rotate counterclockwise around the North Star, Polaris. However, in the Southern Hemisphere, the stars appear to rotate clockwise around Sigma Octantis.

All of these things, taken together, are only possible if the earth is a sphere.

 

[DFT_Dave]

These are the phases of the moon as seen in the Northern Hemisphere:

These are the same phases of the moon as seen in the Southern Hemisphere:

The movement of the shaded portion is reversed in each hemisphere because in the Northern Hemisphere the sunlit part of the moon moves from right to left:

In the Southern Hemisphere the sunlit part moves from the left to the right:

Also, in the Northern Hemisphere, the stars appear to rotate counterclockwise around the North Star, Polaris. However, in the Southern Hemisphere, the stars appear to rotate clockwise around Sigma Octantis.

All of these things, taken together, are only possible if the earth is a sphere.

Good post and evidence for globe earth.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

And what is the type of satellite in that in that video, Dave? Do you know the different types of satellites? That hunk of junk is not a satellite. I don't see any bus structure, or antennae, or thrusters, of any kind. Again it looked more like some sort of student project.

Sent from my SM-G920V using TheologyOnline mobile app

That's a possibility but not a proof.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave... did you just make that up off the top of your head?

The video does no such thing. Trigonometry is trigonometry... math is math. You can do these equations yourself and get accurate distances of the sun and the moon.

Wouldn't that be valuable? Wouldn't knowing the actual distances of the sun and moon be important in your quest to "explore" this topic?

You can't derive a "true" distance from an assumed globe cosmology and then impose that calculation on a flat earth model.

The argument is propositional, "if" this "then" that.

"If" the earth is a globe and revolves around the sun and the moon revolves around the earth, "then" we can calculate the sun to be at a distance of so many miles away when we use a triangulation with the moon.

This does not prove the globe model or the distance of the sun from the earth.

--Dave