[Isiah]

Most of us that hold a certain amount of enlightenment knows that there is such a thing called the universe,,   how the stars align , how they affect our lives ,   even something we call the power of intention comes from,  We thought,   The universe.
So, In the flat earth model,  We really should come to terms of how this "Universe" works.
For me personally, It makes much more sense that such a field of energetic intelligence would function much more efficiently within a closed dome as opposed to a would be open and eternal space...   Much the same as acoustics sound vivid within a rounded room...
It certainly points to me that we do have a creator ,,     any comments or point of view on this subject would be appreciated....   Have fun....

[neutrino]

I see you believe in dome existence, but is there a way of testing this hypothesis?

[Isiah]

I see you believe in dome existence, but is there a way of testing this hypothesis?

Testing this hypothesis???   As I compare the viability of a spherical earth and the flat earth model,,  I have to say from my grounded position,,  Apart from the occasional flight, The flat earth makes much more sense and perfectly fits to the environment we have,,   I'm sure you have done some research yourself to discover this fact or you would not be on this site unless you are paid to interfere with logic and reason.
Thank you for your intelligent input...

[Curious Squirrel]

I see you believe in dome existence, but is there a way of testing this hypothesis?

Testing this hypothesis???   As I compare the viability of a spherical earth and the flat earth model,,  I have to say from my grounded position,,  Apart from the occasional flight, The flat earth makes much more sense and perfectly fits to the environment we have,,   I'm sure you have done some research yourself to discover this fact or you would not be on this site unless you are paid to interfere with logic and reason.
Thank you for your intelligent input...

"Perfectly fits to the environment we have"? Then perhaps you wouldn't mind explaining the Foucault Pendulum. Or going more in depth with your viability comparison.

[Isiah]

I see you believe in dome existence, but is there a way of testing this hypothesis?

Testing this hypothesis???   As I compare the viability of a spherical earth and the flat earth model,,  I have to say from my grounded position,,  Apart from the occasional flight, The flat earth makes much more sense and perfectly fits to the environment we have,,   I'm sure you have done some research yourself to discover this fact or you would not be on this site unless you are paid to interfere with logic and reason.
Thank you for your intelligent input...

I see you believe in dome existence, but is there a way of testing this hypothesis?

Testing this hypothesis???   As I compare the viability of a spherical earth and the flat earth model,,  I have to say from my grounded position,,  Apart from the occasional flight, The flat earth makes much more sense and perfectly fits to the environment we have,,   I'm sure you have done some research yourself to discover this fact or you would not be on this site unless you are paid to interfere with logic and reason.
Thank you for your intelligent input...

"Perfectly fits to the environment we have"? Then perhaps you wouldn't mind explaining the Foucault Pendulum. Or going more in depth with your viability comparison.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV

I'm not here to research for you..   I have given you a link above to get you started...
As for the Foucault pendulum,,   it does not prove movement in the earth as there are magnetic forces in play that may well disturb the movement of this apparatus.

Thank you for not being abusive,,,

[Curious Squirrel]

A) Magnetic changes cannot explain the Foucault Pendulum, any degree of research would show this as the sphere's are generally brass or similar non-magnetic metals. B) If you're going to simply give the bible in response to questions, there's little point in a discussion of scientific fact/principles. But even so, I wish you a good day!

[neutrino]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

[Isiah]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

Once again,,,   I'm not here to do your research for you,,   I gave you this link to genesis as a starting point only,,
I have no time for your silly games,,   I appreciate that you need to show your worth in order that you get your salery from attempting to de bunk logic and reason.   But I simply do not have the notion to humour you...
I respect your beliefs ,,,    you do the same...    I fail to see why you are on this site if you are attached to your ball unless you are on the payroll...     Why exactly are you here?

[Isiah]

A) Magnetic changes cannot explain the Foucault Pendulum, any degree of research would show this as the sphere's are generally brass or similar non-magnetic metals. B) If you're going to simply give the bible in response to questions, there's little point in a discussion of scientific fact/principles. But even so, I wish you a good day!

To save me typing too much , this will explain why the pendulum is pseudo science..

[Curious Squirrel]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

Once again,,,   I'm not here to do your research for you,,   I gave you this link to genesis as a starting point only,,
I have no time for your silly games,,   I appreciate that you need to show your worth in order that you get your salery from attempting to de bunk logic and reason.   But I simply do not have the notion to humour you...
I respect your beliefs ,,,    you do the same...    I fail to see why you are on this site if you are attached to your ball unless you are on the payroll...     Why exactly are you here?

With respect, a link to Genesis isn't wholly viewed as a starting point for a logical and fact based discussion of why the Earth is flat, or a sky dome. But if you wish to present a logical and reasonable argument for our universe being within a dome, backed up by actual testable science, I'm all ears. But the Bible isn't that. Doubly so when the Catholic church's public stance is agreement with a round Earth. Attempting to dismiss someone's rebuttal (even if it was rude) by calling them a shill is shaky ground at best as well. The least of which being who are they a shill for?

I can't speak for neutrino, but I'm here in an attempt to learn why people believe in a flat Earth. What has brought them to this conclusion, and what tests have they performed to back it up. Sadly thus far the FE argument has been largely simply a pile of steel beams with no clear way to assemble them from what I've seen.

As for your video. Oooh, there's so much wrong there I'm not sure where to begin. Let's start with the easy stuff. Where is his own proof that these current pendulums are not following the equation set forth? How do I know he understands the rotational speed of the pendulum depends upon where on Earth it's located? Ditto for which direction the pendulum rotates. Here is some great information on the pendulum experiment, as well as information on the experiment done upon the South Pole. He cites Robowtham, and Blount, neither of which have been part of the growing precision and more of these experiments. He claims pseudo science, but all of his own claims aren't based upon fact and consistent observation. He says 'scientists have said this' but offers no sources. He says many didn't conform to the equation and other's, yet offers no sources to back up this claim either. The video is wholly useless for factually disproving the Foucault pendulum experiments.

As well he talks about how we 'can't feel the movement of the Earth/solar system' and things, as though this will explain away the pendulum. But do you feel the speed when you're doing 70+ down a freeway? No, because the car is your inertial frame of reference. Same thing for the Earth hurtling through space. I would also note, the traditional FE model requires us to be hurtling through space at even greater speeds than that.

[Isiah]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

Once again,,,   I'm not here to do your research for you,,   I gave you this link to genesis as a starting point only,,
I have no time for your silly games,,   I appreciate that you need to show your worth in order that you get your salery from attempting to de bunk logic and reason.   But I simply do not have the notion to humour you...
I respect your beliefs ,,,    you do the same...    I fail to see why you are on this site if you are attached to your ball unless you are on the payroll...     Why exactly are you here?

With respect, a link to Genesis isn't wholly viewed as a starting point for a logical and fact based discussion of why the Earth is flat, or a sky dome. But if you wish to present a logical and reasonable argument for our universe being within a dome, backed up by actual testable science, I'm all ears. But the Bible isn't that. Doubly so when the Catholic church's public stance is agreement with a round Earth. Attempting to dismiss someone's rebuttal (even if it was rude) by calling them a shill is shaky ground at best as well. The least of which being who are they a shill for?

I can't speak for neutrino, but I'm here in an attempt to learn why people believe in a flat Earth. What has brought them to this conclusion, and what tests have they performed to back it up. Sadly thus far the FE argument has been largely simply a pile of steel beams with no clear way to assemble them from what I've seen.

As for your video. Oooh, there's so much wrong there I'm not sure where to begin. Let's start with the easy stuff. Where is his own proof that these current pendulums are not following the equation set forth? How do I know he understands the rotational speed of the pendulum depends upon where on Earth it's located? Ditto for which direction the pendulum rotates. Here is some great information on the pendulum experiment, as well as information on the experiment done upon the South Pole. He cites Robowtham, and Blount, neither of which have been part of the growing precision and more of these experiments. He claims pseudo science, but all of his own claims aren't based upon fact and consistent observation. He says 'scientists have said this' but offers no sources. He says many didn't conform to the equation and other's, yet offers no sources to back up this claim either. The video is wholly useless for factually disproving the Foucault pendulum experiments.

As well he talks about how we 'can't feel the movement of the Earth/solar system' and things, as though this will explain away the pendulum. But do you feel the speed when you're doing 70+ down a freeway? No, because the car is your inertial frame of reference. Same thing for the Earth hurtling through space. I would also note, the traditional FE model requires us to be hurtling through space at even greater speeds than that.

I'm sorry...   What's your point?   You are going around in circles and quoting the findings of the most insidious institutions on our plane,,      I cannot bring dignity to your statements by becoming involved in your assumptions.   
Please explain to me why an aeroplane flies in a straight line without dipping its nose?
Clearly..   You have not researched the very strong indications that the earth is not a ball.
Agreed,,   we would not feel inertia either on a moving object like a car or a flat earth so I dont really see your argument there,,   but I do have a suspicion that we would feel the centrifugal force of a spinning globe at the equator especially..   I find it strange that we feel no difference between so called gravity and the differences in centrifugal force depending on where you are on this ball...   At the equator,The force would be much greater than further north or south,,,  yet we feel no difference,   could it be that gravity is variable???    You will have to let go of the ball sooner or later my friend.

[ErnestV1]

I believe in God and the Bible. But I feel that God's revelation of the creation to Moses does not reflect the full truth since language has come a long way since the time of Moses. The word count of the Hebrew language was much lower then than English and many modern languages have now. So I feel that Moses did the best he could to relate the revelation to his people that God gave him using the tools at hand. Of course there is still much that we can learn of the nature of the relationship of God's creation to its Creator by studying the Genesis story, but I do not see Genesis 1 as a science lesson.

No, our universe is not confined to a dome with the sun describing a circle around the equator with gradually decreasing or increasing circles depending on the seasons...

No, I am not on NASA's payroll. I repair equipment in a cookie factory... a very science oriented job to be sure, but nothing to do with space. That's just my hobby.

The Bible is my roadmap to my relationship with God with Jesus as my savior. The Bible is not a science textbook, but rather a guide for wisdom about how to treat my fellow man and how very much God loves me and the rest of humankind (refer to John 3:16&17 for starters... but I won't do your research for you.  )

The solar system holds influence over me as far as what clothes I wear based upon season and location on the globe, but that's about it.

[Curious Squirrel]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

Once again,,,   I'm not here to do your research for you,,   I gave you this link to genesis as a starting point only,,
I have no time for your silly games,,   I appreciate that you need to show your worth in order that you get your salery from attempting to de bunk logic and reason.   But I simply do not have the notion to humour you...
I respect your beliefs ,,,    you do the same...    I fail to see why you are on this site if you are attached to your ball unless you are on the payroll...     Why exactly are you here?

With respect, a link to Genesis isn't wholly viewed as a starting point for a logical and fact based discussion of why the Earth is flat, or a sky dome. But if you wish to present a logical and reasonable argument for our universe being within a dome, backed up by actual testable science, I'm all ears. But the Bible isn't that. Doubly so when the Catholic church's public stance is agreement with a round Earth. Attempting to dismiss someone's rebuttal (even if it was rude) by calling them a shill is shaky ground at best as well. The least of which being who are they a shill for?

I can't speak for neutrino, but I'm here in an attempt to learn why people believe in a flat Earth. What has brought them to this conclusion, and what tests have they performed to back it up. Sadly thus far the FE argument has been largely simply a pile of steel beams with no clear way to assemble them from what I've seen.

As for your video. Oooh, there's so much wrong there I'm not sure where to begin. Let's start with the easy stuff. Where is his own proof that these current pendulums are not following the equation set forth? How do I know he understands the rotational speed of the pendulum depends upon where on Earth it's located? Ditto for which direction the pendulum rotates. Here is some great information on the pendulum experiment, as well as information on the experiment done upon the South Pole. He cites Robowtham, and Blount, neither of which have been part of the growing precision and more of these experiments. He claims pseudo science, but all of his own claims aren't based upon fact and consistent observation. He says 'scientists have said this' but offers no sources. He says many didn't conform to the equation and other's, yet offers no sources to back up this claim either. The video is wholly useless for factually disproving the Foucault pendulum experiments.

As well he talks about how we 'can't feel the movement of the Earth/solar system' and things, as though this will explain away the pendulum. But do you feel the speed when you're doing 70+ down a freeway? No, because the car is your inertial frame of reference. Same thing for the Earth hurtling through space. I would also note, the traditional FE model requires us to be hurtling through space at even greater speeds than that.

I'm sorry...   What's your point?   You are going around in circles and quoting the findings of the most insidious institutions on our plane,,      I cannot bring dignity to your statements by becoming involved in your assumptions.   
Please explain to me why an aeroplane flies in a straight line without dipping its nose?
Clearly..   You have not researched the very strong indications that the earth is not a ball.
Agreed,,   we would not feel inertia either on a moving object like a car or a flat earth so I dont really see your argument there,,   but I do have a suspicion that we would feel the centrifugal force of a spinning globe at the equator especially..   I find it strange that we feel no difference between so called gravity and the differences in centrifugal force depending on where you are on this ball...   At the equator,The force would be much greater than further north or south,,,  yet we feel no difference,   could it be that gravity is variable???    You will have to let go of the ball sooner or later my friend.

What assumptions, and what institutions? I put forth information backed by scientific experimentation and inquiry to explain how the pendulum experiment works, and why it indicates rotation. You've given me a video that makes claims it doesn't back up, other than with the words of two people who have been dead for decades and unnamed scientists.

How do you know the airplane doesn't? Having not studied it beyond the basics, that is not a question I can answer at present, but I'm certain if you put some time into it yourself it shouldn't be too hard.
I have browsed this site quite a bit. Please, tell me what you feel are some of these 'very strong indications' that the Earth is not a globe.

The centrifugal force is minuscule compared to gravity, not to mention gravity in fact DOES vary some across the Earth. How would it do that upon a flat Earth?
For reference, the centrifugal force experienced upon the equator would be roughly equal to an acceleration outward of about .02 m/s/s. Compared to the downward acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s of Earth's gravitational pull. Minuscule.

[Pineal]

could it be that gravity is variable???

Yes, gravity is variable.

First, there is the variation of gravity with latitude that you alluded to. You weigh about 0.5% more at the poles than on the equator. The difference in weight based upon distance to the equator is very small, so that's why you never noticed a difference.

Secondly, gravity also changes with altitude. The gravitational force above the Earth's surface is proportional to 1/R^2, where R is your distance from the center of the Earth. Next time you go on an airplane, pack a small bathroom scale in your carry-on. Weigh yourself in the airport, and weigh yourself mid-flight. You will find that you weigh slightly less in the air than you do on the ground.

[Isiah]

I believe in God and the Bible. But I feel that God's revelation of the creation to Moses does not reflect the full truth since language has come a long way since the time of Moses. The word count of the Hebrew language was much lower then than English and many modern languages have now. So I feel that Moses did the best he could to relate the revelation to his people that God gave him using the tools at hand. Of course there is still much that we can learn of the nature of the relationship of God's creation to its Creator by studying the Genesis story, but I do not see Genesis 1 as a science lesson.

No, our universe is not confined to a dome with the sun describing a circle around the equator with gradually decreasing or increasing circles depending on the seasons...

No, I am not on NASA's payroll. I repair equipment in a cookie factory... a very science oriented job to be sure, but nothing to do with space. That's just my hobby.

The Bible is my roadmap to my relationship with God with Jesus as my savior. The Bible is not a science textbook, but rather a guide for wisdom about how to treat my fellow man and how very much God loves me and the rest of humankind (refer to John 3:16&17 for starters... but I won't do your research for you.  )

The solar system holds influence over me as far as what clothes I wear based upon season and location on the globe, but that's about it.

Yes,,    I agree that we have a creator that we call  "God",,,   Perhaps we are all a part of this entity and separated from the consciousness of the " one" in order that we are able to create and discover new boundaries of our virtual existence,,   virtual being the key word...
As for Christianity?   Well,  That's another story isn't it?
Yes,,,   the clouds do look lovely when they are illuminated below,,    Have you learned the concept of refraction yet?
Perhaps it may do you well to research what you say completely and not rely on others to do it for you. 😉   Even if it is just your hobby...    I have been on the trail of lies and deception for 30 years now and not in the habit of cherry picking my information..

If you use the bible as your roadmap,,   may I suggest that you stick to the early king James version as this is the closest available to the true scriptures,,,   from there,   the bible messages have been doctored quite badly and can be very misleading.

I think that you fail to understand that if we are made to believe that we just randomly popped up out of a pool of gloop on a spinning ball in a vast void of space and then evoluted from monkeys,    That would also make us believe in our souls that we are an accident....
I really do not subscribe to that suggestion in any way as this would negate the god you believe in....
We do have a creator,   That creator is you and me and everything else on this plane,t that possesses DNA strand,,,   
All the information within our "universe",  or Ether,   is contained within the DNA that communicates constantly with the world we live in.   Our everyday consciousness has no knowledge of the vastness,   we only operate on what we have learned in our lifetimes...   A cellular biologist by the name of Bruce Lipton will explain it for you quite clearly how exactly our DNA is a tranciever for this information..

You have a nice day at the biscuit factory....

[Isiah]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

Once again,,,   I'm not here to do your research for you,,   I gave you this link to genesis as a starting point only,,
I have no time for your silly games,,   I appreciate that you need to show your worth in order that you get your salery from attempting to de bunk logic and reason.   But I simply do not have the notion to humour you...
I respect your beliefs ,,,    you do the same...    I fail to see why you are on this site if you are attached to your ball unless you are on the payroll...     Why exactly are you here?

With respect, a link to Genesis isn't wholly viewed as a starting point for a logical and fact based discussion of why the Earth is flat, or a sky dome. But if you wish to present a logical and reasonable argument for our universe being within a dome, backed up by actual testable science, I'm all ears. But the Bible isn't that. Doubly so when the Catholic church's public stance is agreement with a round Earth. Attempting to dismiss someone's rebuttal (even if it was rude) by calling them a shill is shaky ground at best as well. The least of which being who are they a shill for?

I can't speak for neutrino, but I'm here in an attempt to learn why people believe in a flat Earth. What has brought them to this conclusion, and what tests have they performed to back it up. Sadly thus far the FE argument has been largely simply a pile of steel beams with no clear way to assemble them from what I've seen.

As for your video. Oooh, there's so much wrong there I'm not sure where to begin. Let's start with the easy stuff. Where is his own proof that these current pendulums are not following the equation set forth? How do I know he understands the rotational speed of the pendulum depends upon where on Earth it's located? Ditto for which direction the pendulum rotates. Here is some great information on the pendulum experiment, as well as information on the experiment done upon the South Pole. He cites Robowtham, and Blount, neither of which have been part of the growing precision and more of these experiments. He claims pseudo science, but all of his own claims aren't based upon fact and consistent observation. He says 'scientists have said this' but offers no sources. He says many didn't conform to the equation and other's, yet offers no sources to back up this claim either. The video is wholly useless for factually disproving the Foucault pendulum experiments.

As well he talks about how we 'can't feel the movement of the Earth/solar system' and things, as though this will explain away the pendulum. But do you feel the speed when you're doing 70+ down a freeway? No, because the car is your inertial frame of reference. Same thing for the Earth hurtling through space. I would also note, the traditional FE model requires us to be hurtling through space at even greater speeds than that.

I'm sorry...   What's your point?   You are going around in circles and quoting the findings of the most insidious institutions on our plane,,      I cannot bring dignity to your statements by becoming involved in your assumptions.   
Please explain to me why an aeroplane flies in a straight line without dipping its nose?
Clearly..   You have not researched the very strong indications that the earth is not a ball.
Agreed,,   we would not feel inertia either on a moving object like a car or a flat earth so I dont really see your argument there,,   but I do have a suspicion that we would feel the centrifugal force of a spinning globe at the equator especially..   I find it strange that we feel no difference between so called gravity and the differences in centrifugal force depending on where you are on this ball...   At the equator,The force would be much greater than further north or south,,,  yet we feel no difference,   could it be that gravity is variable???    You will have to let go of the ball sooner or later my friend.

What assumptions, and what institutions? I put forth information backed by scientific experimentation and inquiry to explain how the pendulum experiment works, and why it indicates rotation. You've given me a video that makes claims it doesn't back up, other than with the words of two people who have been dead for decades and unnamed scientists.

How do you know the airplane doesn't? Having not studied it beyond the basics, that is not a question I can answer at present, but I'm certain if you put some time into it yourself it shouldn't be too hard.
I have browsed this site quite a bit. Please, tell me what you feel are some of these 'very strong indications' that the Earth is not a globe.

The centrifugal force is minuscule compared to gravity, not to mention gravity in fact DOES vary some across the Earth. How would it do that upon a flat Earth?
For reference, the centrifugal force experienced upon the equator would be roughly equal to an acceleration outward of about .02 m/s/s. Compared to the downward acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s of Earth's gravitational pull. Minuscule.

Are you telling me that a surface speed of 6.660 mph will give a miniscule amount of centrifugal force,    ?     Note the number of the beast in this figure,,,,      sorry,,   that is outrageous ,,   so is the concept of gravity,, "a non entity". Being variable. 
What assumptions?    Did I suggest a sky dome?  No.  You assumed...
What institutions?  You tried to endorse the ball earth by using the catholic church!!!

I might point out that if you stood on scales in an aeroplane,  your weight would read wildly up and down depending on the aeroplane ascending or descending.   I don't see your point once again...   Perhaps you need to look at density instead of the false idea of gravity...   
You asked the question,    how does gravity be variable on a flat earth???   Once again,  There is no such thing as gravity,,,   it does not exist to be able to be variable..  ?

Your statements and questions are simply off the board ...   So sorry I can't help you...
Have a serene day....

[ErnestV1]

Yes,,,   the clouds do look lovely when they are illuminated below,,    Have you learned the concept of refraction yet?
Perhaps it may do you well to research what you say completely and not rely on others to do it for you. 😉   Even if it is just your hobby...    I have been on the trail of lies and deception for 30 years now and not in the habit of cherry picking my information..

yes to refraction. It actually bends light the opposite direction that FE says and not as much.
As for cherry picking, if you or anyone is attempting to discern truth, how is that different than cherry picking? Cherries are best at a certain stage of being ripe. I understand you are trying to discern the truth to the best of your ability as am I. But if you are doing research on your own and not relying on others to do it for you before saying anything... where is your data on how the suns rays refract enough in a FE scenario that they bend out and away from the earth plane enough to create the illusion of sunrise and sunset? What is the rate of refraction in different densities? What is the density of air at 10 miles above the earth? 20, 30, 40, 60, 80, 100?

If air refracts the sun's rays that much, how can the two sticks method of determining sun's distance even be close to being reliable to judging the sun's distance from the earth? What other method has been used to verify the sun at 3000 miles above the earth besides the two sticks method?

If you use the bible as your roadmap,,   may I suggest that you stick to the early king James version as this is the closest available to the true scriptures,,,   from there,   the bible messages have been doctored quite badly and can be very misleading.

I use multiple sources to research scripture meaning and intent, including original word definition. I have seen the 'evidence that the King James version is the truest to the original, have looked at other version's method of interpretation, have compared them to original language definitions and found that New American Standard is a bit more accurate than the King James... but I still go and do my own digging into information available, even then... so if the scriptures have been doctored badly, how do you even use them at all?

I think that you fail to understand that if we are made to believe that we just randomly popped up out of a pool of gloop on a spinning ball in a vast void of space and then evoluted from monkeys,    That would also make us believe in our souls that we are an accident....
I really do not subscribe to that suggestion in any way as this would negate the god you believe in....

Nope, I do not believe in random accident evolution theory. I believe that if evolution is a good guess at discerning the evidence in the earth, that God directed it. Natural selection may work for some things, but I see it as too weak of a 'force' to 'create' all of the amazing life that we see. My faith is not strong enough to believe in natural selection/mutation being joint creators of all DNA, RNA, ADP, ATP, ATPase and all the wonderful little machines that make up the chemical equations that make life work.

[Curious Squirrel]

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A14&version=NIV
This is where I stopped reading.

Are you serious about saying that this nonsense fits reality? A few years back there was a remarkable event of Venus transition over Sun. Give any VIABLE explanation in terms of Flat Earth.

Once again,,,   I'm not here to do your research for you,,   I gave you this link to genesis as a starting point only,,
I have no time for your silly games,,   I appreciate that you need to show your worth in order that you get your salery from attempting to de bunk logic and reason.   But I simply do not have the notion to humour you...
I respect your beliefs ,,,    you do the same...    I fail to see why you are on this site if you are attached to your ball unless you are on the payroll...     Why exactly are you here?

With respect, a link to Genesis isn't wholly viewed as a starting point for a logical and fact based discussion of why the Earth is flat, or a sky dome. But if you wish to present a logical and reasonable argument for our universe being within a dome, backed up by actual testable science, I'm all ears. But the Bible isn't that. Doubly so when the Catholic church's public stance is agreement with a round Earth. Attempting to dismiss someone's rebuttal (even if it was rude) by calling them a shill is shaky ground at best as well. The least of which being who are they a shill for?

I can't speak for neutrino, but I'm here in an attempt to learn why people believe in a flat Earth. What has brought them to this conclusion, and what tests have they performed to back it up. Sadly thus far the FE argument has been largely simply a pile of steel beams with no clear way to assemble them from what I've seen.

As for your video. Oooh, there's so much wrong there I'm not sure where to begin. Let's start with the easy stuff. Where is his own proof that these current pendulums are not following the equation set forth? How do I know he understands the rotational speed of the pendulum depends upon where on Earth it's located? Ditto for which direction the pendulum rotates. Here is some great information on the pendulum experiment, as well as information on the experiment done upon the South Pole. He cites Robowtham, and Blount, neither of which have been part of the growing precision and more of these experiments. He claims pseudo science, but all of his own claims aren't based upon fact and consistent observation. He says 'scientists have said this' but offers no sources. He says many didn't conform to the equation and other's, yet offers no sources to back up this claim either. The video is wholly useless for factually disproving the Foucault pendulum experiments.

As well he talks about how we 'can't feel the movement of the Earth/solar system' and things, as though this will explain away the pendulum. But do you feel the speed when you're doing 70+ down a freeway? No, because the car is your inertial frame of reference. Same thing for the Earth hurtling through space. I would also note, the traditional FE model requires us to be hurtling through space at even greater speeds than that.

I'm sorry...   What's your point?   You are going around in circles and quoting the findings of the most insidious institutions on our plane,,      I cannot bring dignity to your statements by becoming involved in your assumptions.   
Please explain to me why an aeroplane flies in a straight line without dipping its nose?
Clearly..   You have not researched the very strong indications that the earth is not a ball.
Agreed,,   we would not feel inertia either on a moving object like a car or a flat earth so I dont really see your argument there,,   but I do have a suspicion that we would feel the centrifugal force of a spinning globe at the equator especially..   I find it strange that we feel no difference between so called gravity and the differences in centrifugal force depending on where you are on this ball...   At the equator,The force would be much greater than further north or south,,,  yet we feel no difference,   could it be that gravity is variable???    You will have to let go of the ball sooner or later my friend.

What assumptions, and what institutions? I put forth information backed by scientific experimentation and inquiry to explain how the pendulum experiment works, and why it indicates rotation. You've given me a video that makes claims it doesn't back up, other than with the words of two people who have been dead for decades and unnamed scientists.

How do you know the airplane doesn't? Having not studied it beyond the basics, that is not a question I can answer at present, but I'm certain if you put some time into it yourself it shouldn't be too hard.
I have browsed this site quite a bit. Please, tell me what you feel are some of these 'very strong indications' that the Earth is not a globe.

The centrifugal force is minuscule compared to gravity, not to mention gravity in fact DOES vary some across the Earth. How would it do that upon a flat Earth?
For reference, the centrifugal force experienced upon the equator would be roughly equal to an acceleration outward of about .02 m/s/s. Compared to the downward acceleration of 9.8 m/s/s of Earth's gravitational pull. Minuscule.

Are you telling me that a surface speed of 6.660 mph will give a miniscule amount of centrifugal force,    ?     Note the number of the beast in this figure,,,,      sorry,,   that is outrageous ,,   so is the concept of gravity,, "a non entity". Being variable. 
What assumptions?    Did I suggest a sky dome?  No.  You assumed...
What institutions?  You tried to endorse the ball earth by using the catholic church!!!

I might point out that if you stood on scales in an aeroplane,  your weight would read wildly up and down depending on the aeroplane ascending or descending.   I don't see your point once again...   Perhaps you need to look at density instead of the false idea of gravity...   
You asked the question,    how does gravity be variable on a flat earth???   Once again,  There is no such thing as gravity,,,   it does not exist to be able to be variable..  ?

Your statements and questions are simply off the board ...   So sorry I can't help you...
Have a serene day....

The very title of your post suggest a dome.... But at least you made it plainly obvious with this post there's no point in attempting to discuss anything based upon scientific fact with you. So thank you for that. Was really hoping I had left that behind at the other board.

Although for the record, Earth's rotational speed is only 1,040 MPH at the equator. When you can't agree there is a force being generated in some manner holding us to the Earth, and you somehow can't manage to get such a basic bit of information correct in your rebuttal, there is truly no reason to pursue this discussion further. You have a pleasant journey wherever your life takes you.

[TomInAustin]

Most of us that hold a certain amount of enlightenment knows that there is such a thing called the universe,,   how the stars align , how they affect our lives ,   even something we call the power of intention comes from,  We thought,   The universe.
So, In the flat earth model,  We really should come to terms of how this "Universe" works.
For me personally, It makes much more sense that such a field of energetic intelligence would function much more efficiently within a closed dome as opposed to a would be open and eternal space...   Much the same as acoustics sound vivid within a rounded room...
It certainly points to me that we do have a creator ,,     any comments or point of view on this subject would be appreciated....   Have fun....

I think you would be better off working towards a provable FE model map.   That would be proof positive.  Until then the rest is unimportant.