What is the purpose of debating this?
I am wondering why people who want to believe that the Earth is round feel the need to come to flat Earth forums in order to debate it?
because you created a forum for that purpose
What is the purpose of debating this?
In my experience people who believe the Earth is flat do so because of a "gut feeling" or religious belief or paranoia
Any evidence for a spherical Earth can simply be dismissed as "faked" or irrelevant. The fact that no digital flat Earth model has ever been constructed that accurately simulates what we actually see is completely ignored.
A good example of this is the Bedford canal wager where the flat Earth'er lost the bet and then spent twenty years harassing and threatening the surveyor who proved him wrong. So the wiki simply rewrites history.
Might as well step out into the sunshine and debate whether it is day time or night time.
because you created a forum for that purpose
What is the purpose of debating this?
In my experience people who believe the Earth is flat do so because of a "gut feeling" or religious belief or paranoia
Any evidence for a spherical Earth can simply be dismissed as "faked" or irrelevant. The fact that no digital flat Earth model has ever been constructed that accurately simulates what we actually see is completely ignored.
A good example of this is the Bedford canal wager where the flat Earth'er lost the bet and then spent twenty years harassing and threatening the surveyor who proved him wrong. So the wiki simply rewrites history.
Might as well step out into the sunshine and debate whether it is day time or night time.
All of it has been debunked countless timesWould you like to present some evidence to substantiate this claim, or are you just going to air things into the ether hoping that someone takes you word for it?
Again why should I when if you really wanted to know the truth you could find out for yourselves?Because we already found out the truth, and you're wrong. If you want to convince us otherwise, you're going to have to actually make a case for it, instead of just saying "if you wanted to you'd already agree with me".
Again why should I when if you really wanted to know the truth you could find out for yourselves?Because we already found out the truth, and you're wrong. If you want to convince us otherwise, you're going to have to actually make a case for it, instead of just saying "if you wanted to you'd already agree with me".
If you really wanted to, you'd already know that the Earth is flat and you wouldn't be wasting our time here. If only you really, really wanted.
Again why should I when if you really wanted to know the truth you could find out for yourselves?
A telescope, survey equipment, decent camera, etc. is not that expensive and if you all would pool your money you could do even more ambitious science.
No,
A cop out is when Flat Earth believers could prove themselves correct but actively choose not to.
Flat Earth believers are proven correct every single day. You need to get out more.There are no words which I could use to convince a person who is not neutral and who actively chooses not to find out for themselves.
The rewards for uncovering such a thing would vastly outweigh the cost to find evidence so since no real evidence has been presented I have to assume the Earth is not flat.
Look out your window.
Look out your window.
Look out your window.
On a clear day I can see the horizon is a sharp line, which proves curvature
I suppose that there are some instances when you are looking at a hill or something other than the actual horizon
...but if you are actually looking at the horizon and it is sharp
(and you have not just discovered the fabled flat Earth edge)
than yes it proves the Earth is round
(although I suppose it is also possible that when some people use the term "horizon" that they mean something other than the line caused by the curve of the Earth.)
I suppose that there are some instances when you are looking at a hill or something other than the actual horizon
...but if you are actually looking at the horizon and it is sharp
(and you have not just discovered the fabled flat Earth edge)
than yes it proves the Earth is round
(although I suppose it is also possible that when some people use the term "horizon" that they mean something other than the line caused by the curve of the Earth.)
I'm not sure what you're attempting to get at here. Seeing any perceived termination line is not conclusive proof of the shape of the earth regardless of the shape you believe it to be.
I'm not sure what you're attempting to get at here. Seeing any perceived termination line is not conclusive proof of the shape of the earth regardless of the shape you believe it to be.
On a clear day the horizon is a sharp line, ergo, the earth is not flat.
On a clear day the horizon is a sharp line, ergo, the earth is not flat.
This is only true if the earth is a perfectly flat. As you can tell, there are hills, trees, buildings, waves, and any number of things that block you from seeing into infinite perfect flatness. Or are you proposing that hills, trees, buildings, waves, and anything with any height doesn't exist?
Frankly I think that the ocean is a better example because it is mutually agreed that water tends to be level.Now you are just making stuff up on the fly! You guys need flow-charts or cookbooks or something.
Yes that is why I mentioned waves it is certainly possible that a wave could obstruct a view
However if one is standing on a high surface say 1000' above sea level and looking out to the ocean the wave would need to be very high. If one where in an Airplane at 10,000 ft it would need to be the Mother of all waves.
Another problem with the Horizon in the Fe model is that the ocean is essentially in a bowl with mysterious ice cliffs around it that are somewhere between 300 and 1000 ft. high
If this where in fact true and the ocean where flat than no ship would ever appear above the horizon.
I believe that there are pictures of glaciers that are often used to portray the ice cliffs and it appears in Google Earth that there are many real cliffs.
I think in FE theory it is better to just assume that it is a mysterious and inhospitable place and do not ask too many questions.
Use the Jedi mind trick:
-there are no planes that can fly above the weather
-you do not want to fly out there and find out for yourself.
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
e ?
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Whom do you think oversees the NASholes?
There is no Flat Earth map. The United Nations logo is only one possibility of several configurations.
There is no Round Earth map, either. It has been shown that the distances between continents are not completely accurate and that airlines do not use the shortest path when reaching their destinations.
Did we ever figure out why?
Did we ever figure out why?Why?
Globularist "evidence" consists of:
- heavily edited or wholly manufactured pictures
- consensus
- gut feeling
In other words: "NASA says it, I believe it, that settles it!"
There is no Round Earth map, either. It has been shown that the distances between continents are not completely accurate and that airlines do not use the shortest path when reaching their destinations.
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
e ?
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Whom do you think oversees the NASholes?
Then I suppose that we can consider the U.N. as part of "The Round Earth Conspiracy", too ?
But wait a minute. Doesn't the FES consider the U.N. logo as a flat earth map and proof of a flat earth ? But there seems to be a conflict of opinion? RE considers the U.N. logo as a stylized copy of The Azimuthal Equidistant Projection of the globe ? ???
Look out your window.
On a clear day I can see the horizon is a sharp line, which proves curvature
No, it doesn't.
Don't ask me. I was in the Navy but was never a lookout. I'm just going by what I have read in The Navy Manual For Lookouts. Ask a real sailor !
Don't ask me. I was in the Navy but was never a lookout. I'm just going by what I have read in The Navy Manual For Lookouts. Ask a real sailor !
Curious that you demand something of me which you haven't done even though you allegedly had ample opportunities.
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
e ?
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Whom do you think oversees the NASholes?
Then I suppose that we can consider the U.N. as part of "The Round Earth Conspiracy", too ?
But wait a minute. Doesn't the FES consider the U.N. logo as a flat earth map and proof of a flat earth ? But there seems to be a conflict of opinion? RE considers the U.N. logo as a stylized copy of The Azimuthal Equidistant Projection of the globe ? ???
OK-Then....Who guarded the ice ring before the UN and NASA ? The League Of Nations ? Nazi Storm Troopers during World War Two ? The Holy Roman Empire ? Or did it not need to be guarded until recently ?
Also..... Rowbotham must have seen the ice ring - Quote - " A place of howling winds,, eternal darkness, frigid temperatures.........."
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
e ?
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Whom do you think oversees the NASholes?
Then I suppose that we can consider the U.N. as part of "The Round Earth Conspiracy", too ?
But wait a minute. Doesn't the FES consider the U.N. logo as a flat earth map and proof of a flat earth ? But there seems to be a conflict of opinion? RE considers the U.N. logo as a stylized copy of The Azimuthal Equidistant Projection of the globe ? ???
OK-Then....Who guarded the ice ring before the UN and NASA ? The League Of Nations ? Nazi Storm Troopers during World War Two ? The Holy Roman Empire ? Or did it not need to be guarded until recently ?
Also..... Rowbotham must have seen the ice ring - Quote - " A place of howling winds,, eternal darkness, frigid temperatures.........."
How would Rowbotham know anything about Antarctica ... he never left the northern hemisphere !!!
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
e ?
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Whom do you think oversees the NASholes?
Then I suppose that we can consider the U.N. as part of "The Round Earth Conspiracy", too ?
But wait a minute. Doesn't the FES consider the U.N. logo as a flat earth map and proof of a flat earth ? But there seems to be a conflict of opinion? RE considers the U.N. logo as a stylized copy of The Azimuthal Equidistant Projection of the globe ? ???
OK-Then....Who guarded the ice ring before the UN and NASA ? The League Of Nations ? Nazi Storm Troopers during World War Two ? The Holy Roman Empire ? Or did it not need to be guarded until recently ?
Also..... Rowbotham must have seen the ice ring - Quote - " A place of howling winds,, eternal darkness, frigid temperatures.........."
How would Rowbotham know anything about Antarctica ... he never left the northern hemisphere !!!
Yeah I read one story that said there are U.N. guards posted all around it and no one was allowed in
So they have invented some pretty elaborate excuses why they can not go there.
But anyway if it is only 150 feet high that is still higher than most ships
e ?
U.N. Guards ??? I thought it was N.A.S.A. ???
Whom do you think oversees the NASholes?
Then I suppose that we can consider the U.N. as part of "The Round Earth Conspiracy", too ?
But wait a minute. Doesn't the FES consider the U.N. logo as a flat earth map and proof of a flat earth ? But there seems to be a conflict of opinion? RE considers the U.N. logo as a stylized copy of The Azimuthal Equidistant Projection of the globe ? ???
OK-Then....Who guarded the ice ring before the UN and NASA ? The League Of Nations ? Nazi Storm Troopers during World War Two ? The Holy Roman Empire ? Or did it not need to be guarded until recently ?
Also..... Rowbotham must have seen the ice ring - Quote - " A place of howling winds,, eternal darkness, frigid temperatures.........."
How would Rowbotham know anything about Antarctica ... he never left the northern hemisphere !!!
I am still waiting for an answer.:
Was the ice ring guarded before NASA ? And by whom ?
How long has it been guarded ?
How would Rowbotham know anything about Antarctica ... he never left the northern hemisphere !!!
Rabinoz, I support the Bi-Polar model, so I don't know what you are trying to prove to me there.Then
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The South Pole was not yet discovered when Rowbotham wrote Earth Not a Globe. It is understandable why he might depict the earth without it.
The Bi-Polar model is first advocated in the book The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918). However, the layout of the continents is left ambiguous due to lack of data. The layout and dimensions of the continents in our picture may be different as well. Someone apparently just found a map projection of a globe that looked similar for illustrative purposes.
How would Rowbotham know anything about Antarctica ... he never left the northern hemisphere !!!
Tom Bishop accepts that Antarctica was not explored in Rowbotham's time.Rabinoz, I support the Bi-Polar model, so I don't know what you are trying to prove to me there.Then. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The South Pole was not yet discovered when Rowbotham wrote Earth Not a Globe. It is understandable why he might depict the earth without it.
The Bi-Polar model is first advocated in the book The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918). However, the layout of the continents is left ambiguous due to lack of data. The layout and dimensions of the continents in our picture may be different as well. Someone apparently just found a map projection of a globe that looked similar for illustrative purposes.
Tom Bishop claims that "It is understandable why he might depict the earth without it".
I would say that if one doesn't have evidence, one shouldn't guess. Just do what the old mapmakers did and label it "Terra incognita."
Here is a link to the pdf file The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918) (http://earthnotaglobe.com/library/Sea-Earth%20Globe.pdf)
Or in the TFES library The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918) (http://library.tfes.org/library/Sea-Earth%20Globe.pdf)
This is the "modern" bipolar map that Tom Bishop refers to:(http://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c2/Altmap.png)Don't you just love the shape of Australia and the USA in that Azimuthal Equidistant (0°,0°) Centred Projection of the Globe? Yes. it's just an AE Projection centred on Lat 0°, Long 0°.
Another alternative model descripting Antarctica as a distinct continent.
"There is still an "ice wall" in this model, but it not Antarctica.
Beyond the rays of the sun the waters will naturally freeze."
From Flat Earth Wiki, Antarctica (http://wiki.tfes.org/Antarctica)
Have fun!
But.......
Back to the questions about the guards on the Ice Wall.
Has it always been guarded ?
If so, when was it first guarded ?
And by whom ? (That is : Before NASA) ?
Please don't take this as blasphemous or sacreligious. It wasn't intended to be !
Guarded by Guardian Angels ?
But.......
Back to the questions about the guards on the Ice Wall.
Has it always been guarded ?
If so, when was it first guarded ?
And by whom ? (That is : Before NASA) ?
Please don't take this as blasphemous or sacreligious. It wasn't intended to be !
Guarded by Guardian Angels ?
Did it have to be guarded before people had the means to navigate there in the first place?
How would Rowbotham know anything about Antarctica ... he never left the northern hemisphere !!!
Tom Bishop accepts that Antarctica was not explored in Rowbotham's time.Rabinoz, I support the Bi-Polar model, so I don't know what you are trying to prove to me there.Then. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The South Pole was not yet discovered when Rowbotham wrote Earth Not a Globe. It is understandable why he might depict the earth without it.
The Bi-Polar model is first advocated in the book The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918). However, the layout of the continents is left ambiguous due to lack of data. The layout and dimensions of the continents in our picture may be different as well. Someone apparently just found a map projection of a globe that looked similar for illustrative purposes.
Tom Bishop claims that "It is understandable why he might depict the earth without it".
I would say that if one doesn't have evidence, one shouldn't guess. Just do what the old mapmakers did and label it "Terra incognita."
Here is a link to the pdf file The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918) (http://earthnotaglobe.com/library/Sea-Earth%20Globe.pdf)
Or in the TFES library The Sea-Earth Globe and and its Monstrous Hypothetical Motions, (Zetetes, 1918) (http://library.tfes.org/library/Sea-Earth%20Globe.pdf)
This is the "modern" bipolar map that Tom Bishop refers to:(http://wiki.tfes.org/images/c/c2/Altmap.png)Don't you just love the shape of Australia and the USA in that Azimuthal Equidistant (0°,0°) Centred Projection of the Globe? Yes. it's just an AE Projection centred on Lat 0°, Long 0°.
Another alternative model descripting Antarctica as a distinct continent.
"There is still an "ice wall" in this model, but it not Antarctica.
Beyond the rays of the sun the waters will naturally freeze."
From Flat Earth Wiki, Antarctica (http://wiki.tfes.org/Antarctica)
Have fun!
Hmmmm.........I've just been perusing that map at great length. I have never considered my self a real sailor although I was in the U.S. Navy for four years and was on three cruises from San Francisco and San Diego, California , in the United States of America, to Yokosuka, in Japan. For the life of me I don't remember ever going by way of the North Pole and Russia. I must have slept through the whole cruise and missed it all.......That is .....If we had used the Bipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection as our means of navigation ! LOL
Hmmmm.........I've just been perusing that map at great length. I have never considered my self a real sailor although I was in the U.S. Navy for four years and was on three cruises from San Francisco and San Diego, California , in the United States of America, to Yokosuka, in Japan. For the life of me I don't remember ever going by way of the North Pole and Russia. I must have slept through the whole cruise and missed it all.......That is .....If we had used the Bipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection as our means of navigation ! LOL
Then I imagine you fell off the edge! How'd you get back - did you use JRoweSkeptic's aether (The Flat Earth Society) transport mechanism?
Maybe a lot of people traveled there and never returned? There has probably been AT LEAST 10,000 voyages like that in the history of humanity
Maybe a lot of people traveled there and never returned? There has probably been AT LEAST 10,000 voyages like that in the history of humanity
But how many to the Ice Wall ?
See the Flat Earth Wiki, searching on "Ice Wall".
Haven't there been any expeditions or discoveries of the Ice Wall since those of Sir James Clark Ross ?
Hmmmm.........I've just been perusing that map at great length. I have never considered my self a real sailor although I was in the U.S. Navy for four years and was on three cruises from San Francisco and San Diego, California , in the United States of America, to Yokosuka, in Japan. For the life of me I don't remember ever going by way of the North Pole and Russia. I must have slept through the whole cruise and missed it all.......That is .....If we had used the Bipolar Azimuthal Equidistant Projection as our means of navigation ! LOL
Then I imagine you fell off the edge! How'd you get back - did you use JRoweSkeptic's aether (The Flat Earth Society) transport mechanism?
What is the purpose of debating this?
In my experience people who believe the Earth is flat do so because of a "gut feeling" or religious belief or paranoia
Any evidence for a spherical Earth can simply be dismissed as "faked" or irrelevant. The fact that no digital flat Earth model has ever been constructed that accurately simulates what we actually see is completely ignored.
A good example of this is the Bedford canal wager where the flat Earth'er lost the bet and then spent twenty years harassing and threatening the surveyor who proved him wrong. So the wiki simply rewrites history.
Might as well step out into the sunshine and debate whether it is day time or night time.
Just for the record. You will not find any flat earth believers in the U.S.Navy.....either on active duty or veterans.
We would have thought they were candidates for the loony bin ! LOL
Just for the record. You will not find any flat earth believers in the U.S.Navy.....either on active duty or veterans.
Citation needed...
We would have thought they were candidates for the loony bin ! LOL
At least you finally admit that your mind can't even begin to process a reality different than the one you "know," because that obviously would mean you would get drug away, sedated and shock therapy'd.
What is the purpose of debating this?
Frankly I think that the ocean is a better example because it is mutually agreed that water tends to be level.Water levels in respect to gravity, even the smallest bodies of water have a small curve.
Where as the salt flats could in fact be a very large dome and would have to be surveyed and agreed upon.
"Eyes god gave us" I won't go into that, but what he means is that water levels in respect to gravity. In this situation, "Level" is reaching equidistant distances from the center of the earth, giving it a curve. This is one of the most common misconceptions that have allowed flat earth to spawn. "Level" does not equal actual horizontal perfection. Level is when all parts of an area or object are equidistant from the center of the earth, so "Level" based on earth-based observation is actually curved. NASA, for example, had to curve the edges of their Space Shuttle runway up to make it horizontally perfect, not "Level".Frankly I think that the ocean is a better example because it is mutually agreed that water tends to be level.Now you are just making stuff up on the fly! You guys need flow-charts or cookbooks or something.
The only way "it is mutually agreed that water tends to be level" is if the earth is flat --- as can be seen with the eyes God gave us. You liars can not have it both ways. Get your stories straight.