[AMann]

All the argument here seems to be between one side saying that we should see the moon more often in certain photos than we do.

It appears you haven't been keeping up with the thread. Nearly the entire first page is about pictures and the rest of the thread....

And contrary to what you may believe, all that transpired BEFORE you entered the discussion.

The OP posted a video. 10 reasons earth is round... #10 We have pictures...

Someone said "We have pictures of lochness monster and big foot, so should believe those pictures are real".

So.. if you would kindly go back and read, you will CLEARLY see the bulk of this thread is about images.

Not entirely true. The comment about pictures of loch ness and other fantasy creatures was already debunked.
In spite of all the banter about pictures here, no one has yet shown a single picture to be false, so they are continuing to bang their head against the wall.

The funniest part is that as long as there is one irrefutable reason why the Earth is round, then the flat Earth fallacy is wrong. So, playing with pictures is futile.

[Bookish Neptune]

The funniest part is that as long as there is one irrefutable reason why the Earth is round, then the flat Earth fallacy is wrong.

And that one irrefutable reason is what?...

Drumrolllllll.... Let's have it!

Give us your "nail in the coffin".

[AMann]

The funniest part is that as long as there is one irrefutable reason why the Earth is round, then the flat Earth fallacy is wrong.

And that one irrefutable reason is what?...

Drumrolllllll.... Let's have it!

Give us your "nail in the coffin".

You mean that there is only one of the points left that hasn't been refuted? lol
Only 10 points have been given and none have been refuted.

[Bookish Neptune]

The funniest part is that as long as there is one irrefutable reason why the Earth is round, then the flat Earth fallacy is wrong.

And that one irrefutable reason is what?...

Drumrolllllll.... Let's have it!

Give us your "nail in the coffin".

You mean that there is only one of the points left that hasn't been refuted? lol
Only 10 points have been given and none have been refuted.

Oh you mean the video, I gotcha...

So the very first reason in the video...

1. "All other heavenly bodies are round and there is no reason to think the earth isn't the same."

Let me try it....

"I have 2 boys and that means there is no reason to think I will ever have a girl".

It's kindergarten childsplay at best.

The very first argument is not even an argument, its a gross and negligible statement...

Here's another example....

"I drive drunk all the time and have never got into a wreck, so therefore I will never get in a wreck while driving drunk".

See, but the drunk driver forgot that there may be other drunks on the road... you follow?

So, in short, the first "proof" is "this is this way, so this must be this way."

Can you explain the logic that makes #1 in the video a fact?

Then I will personally move onto #2 in the video...

[Munky]

You drive drunk all the time???  wow I hope you stop. you are endangering people.

[Bookish Neptune]

You drive drunk all the time???  wow I hope you stop. you are endangering people.

You could give me the respect to at least respond to my comments.

This is YOUR thread.

We've left the images discussion alone, and am now discussing the video...

So again, how does #1 on that list prove anything?

And no, I don't even drink alcohol. It was an example. I don't have children either. And no I'm not young. And no I'm not alone. And no I don't live in my mother's basement. And, no to any other wild claims you may come up with next. I'm just a guy.

[rabinoz]

All the argument here seems to be between one side saying that we should see the moon more often in certain photos than we do.

It appears you haven't been keeping up with the thread. Nearly the entire first page is about pictures and the rest of the thread....
And contrary to what you may believe, all that transpired BEFORE you entered the discussion.
The OP posted a video. 10 reasons earth is round... #10 We have pictures...
Someone said "We have pictures of lochness monster and big foot, so should believe those pictures are real".
So.. if you would kindly go back and read, you will CLEARLY see the bulk of this thread is about images.

I'v been keeping up with the thread and seen it getting like a kindergarten "Yes it does", "No, it doesn't" spat - useless!

Oh sure, you keep bickering about whether the moon should be in this picture or that,

when the plain fact is that with the dimensions that seem quite accepted, the earth will not fit on a plane surface.

I guess you didn't bother reading this http://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4499.msg88269#msg88269.
Argue all you like about pictures!

But, put more simply the known distances from equator to north pole and around the equator will not fit on any flat surface!

If you disagree with my figures, then we can discuss that in a rational way - no pictures, faked or otherwise!

[Munky]

Oh you mean the video, I gotcha...

So the very first reason in the video...

1. "All other heavenly bodies are round and there is no reason to think the earth isn't the same."

Let me try it....

"I have 2 boys and that means there is no reason to think I will ever have a girl".

It's kindergarten childsplay at best.

The very first argument is not even an argument, its a gross and negligible statement...

Here's another example....

"I drive drunk all the time and have never got into a wreck, so therefore I will never get in a wreck while driving drunk".

See, but the drunk driver forgot that there may be other drunks on the road... you follow?

So, in short, the first "proof" is "this is this way, so this must be this way."

Can you explain the logic that makes #1 in the video a fact?

Then I will personally move onto #2 in the video...

There is no reason to give you the respect of responding to your points, because your points dont make any sense or correlate to what we are talking about.

for example, you said " 1. All other heavenly bodies are round and there is no reason to think the earth isn't the same."

 You tried to compare it to: "I have 2 boys and that means there is no reason to think I will ever have a girl".

In reality that is not a good comparison. A more likely comparison would be "I have 2 boys and there has never been a girl in existence that we have ever observed, so I will never have a girl"

Childs play is probably not a good way to describe Astronomy and Celestial bodies.

You moved onto saying "I drive drunk all the time and have never got into a wreck, so therefore I will never get in a wreck while driving drunk,
See, but the drunk driver forgot that there may be other drunks on the road... you follow?"

No I don't follow... Those statements make absolutely no sense to what we are talking about. Which Might I remind you, is how we know the earth is round. The earth being round has nothing to do with children or driving drunk.

Your statements are just useless and nonsensical rhetoric at best!

I ask for proof of the earth being flat. You point me to the FAQ, we look through the FAQ, most of that data is erroneous and is of experiments done long ago where if you did them now you could not verify them. Yet conveniently no one here has actually performed any of the experiments that are in your OWN FAQ!!!

Yet there are countless experiments you can perform present day in which you can verify that the earth is a globe, but conveniently these experiments dont fit into your flat earth model, so it must be discounted as fake, or a hoax, or is seemingly easily explained by some made up mechanism that cannot be proven... Like the ether, or celestial gears, or mirrors... I mean are you people evening listening to yourselves?

[Bookish Neptune]

No I don't follow... Those statements make absolutely no sense to what we are talking about. Which Might I remind you, is how we know the earth is round. The earth being round has nothing to do with children or driving drunk.

I ask for proof of the earth being flat. You point me to the FAQ, we look through the FAQ,

You posted a video to begin this thread. That video was 10 proofs we know the earth is round...

The very first reason essentially says, "this is this way, so this must be this way."

I ask you how is that proof?

I then give you example statements that are similar to that statement in the videos. Which are negligent statements.

Considering the very first "proof" provided was such a simple and negligible statement, I ask you how that is submitted as proof?

To address your other statements, I have never pointed you to the wiki, others may have, but I have not.

Also, I do not and have not EVER claimed the earth is flat.

Perhaps that's the bit you are missing. Direct those questions to someone else please.

And please quit erroneously quoting me. Use the quote tags instead. Thank you.

[Munky]

1. I did not post a video that started this thread. AMAN did...
2. I have not seen the video in question. I only know that the earth is Round. So I have no way to tell you if the video is proof or not.
3. Your examples that you said in your own words, do not contrast correctly with the statements provided.
4. So if you are not claiming that the earth is flat, then what is it?
5. I am not erroneously quoting you. You did indeed make those contrasts, did you not?

[Bookish Neptune]

1. I did not post a video that started this thread. AMAN did...
2. I have not seen the video in question. I only know that the earth is Round. So I have no way to tell you if the video is proof or not.
3. Your examples that you said in your own words, do not contrast correctly with the statements provided.
4. So if you are not claiming that the earth is flat, then what is it?
5. I am not erroneously quoting you. You did indeed make those contrasts, did you not?

Oh you slipped in there while Amann and I were going back and forth. I apologize.

And I don't know the shape of the earth.

And you said for 1, said that I pointed you to the wiki link.

I know what you meant, you meant the FE community in general. I understand.

But problem is you said that I pointed you there. As I made clear in my last post I never have.

I was just clarifying for discussion purposes only.

[Munky]

what about points 3 and 5

[Copper Knickers]

Ok let's talk about the field of view provided to us by the moon passing clips...

You will see in the first pic that there is indeed PLENTY of field of view:



And so, considering what I observe as a substantial amount of Field of View seen, we should at some point see something that resembles this:



As you can see I was very generous on the field of view and I reduced the moon from the clip down to more than half.

I agree that at some point we should see something like this but very rarely. It only has a chance of happening once per month, and then it will only happen if the moon passes behind the earth from the satellite's point of view. Because of the inclination of the moon's orbit this won't be very often.

The fact that we do not see any images resembling this, nor ANY images of the moon at all from this supposed satellite has me more than just a little suspicious.

So we have determined that the field of view argument is invalid. What say ye?

The field of view is very relevant because it is tiny compared to the path the moon traverses. It follows that sightings of the moon from the satellite camera will be rare.

There's nothing suspicious here. I'm sorry you're not getting this.

[AMann]

The funniest part is that as long as there is one irrefutable reason why the Earth is round, then the flat Earth fallacy is wrong.

And that one irrefutable reason is what?...

Drumrolllllll.... Let's have it!

Give us your "nail in the coffin".

You mean that there is only one of the points left that hasn't been refuted? lol
Only 10 points have been given and none have been refuted.

Oh you mean the video, I gotcha...

So the very first reason in the video...

1. "All other heavenly bodies are round and there is no reason to think the earth isn't the same."

Let me try it....

"I have 2 boys and that means there is no reason to think I will ever have a girl".

It's kindergarten childsplay at best.

The very first argument is not even an argument, its a gross and negligible statement...

Here's another example....

"I drive drunk all the time and have never got into a wreck, so therefore I will never get in a wreck while driving drunk".

See, but the drunk driver forgot that there may be other drunks on the road... you follow?

So, in short, the first "proof" is "this is this way, so this must be this way."

Can you explain the logic that makes #1 in the video a fact?

Then I will personally move onto #2 in the video...

1 is a step in logical progression.
We look up into the sky and we see that everything is rounded in shape. Stars are round, planets are round, moons are round, comets are round, asteroids are round (the smaller the object, the more imperfections from being perfectly round, but they are still in a 3-dimensional shape, not even close to a disk)... even nebulae expand out into 3 dimensions. There are no objects that are even close to being disk-shaped.
(Solar systems and galaxies are the closest to a flat design, but they are combinations of multitudes of objects. And they have a perfectly good reason for their shape:
)
You are welcome to look at the universe yourself. Take a telescope and look at our neighbors in the solar system. Take a look at the hubble telescope pictures...
http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/heritage/

You having 2 boys and expecting to always have girls is a ridiculous counterargument. As any scientist, doctor, researcher, etc. would tell you, a sample size of 2 is not enough to draw a conclusion.
Now, try to realize that there are 30 billion trillion stars just in the visible universe. 3x10^22 (that's a 3 followed by 22 zeroes). That is just stars - and all of them spherical. Add in the planets orbiting each one, the moons orbiting the planets, comets, asteroids, ect. and you have an incredible number of object in the observable universe all displaying round features.
Here is a question:
Where are all the disk-shaped objects?

Now, our Sun is a star just like all the others. It has planets, moons, comets, asteroids, etc. that revolve around it just like the other stars that we have managed to get a close look at.
Here is another question for the middle of this:
Where are all the other disk-worlds that these other stars are revolving around?

Here is another question: Why is everything round?
The answer is a simple as something that the flat-Earth model cannot compensate for and so many deny it exists: gravity. Just in case you skipped this day at school: gravity causes objects to be pulled towards the center of mass of an object or group of objects. A sphere allows for the shortest distance between the center of mass and everything around it. For this reason, gravity slowly shapes all objects in the universe into spherical shapes.

So, the question you should be asking is:
If everything in the universe is round, this roundness is caused by gravity, Earth is made up of the same substances as the rest of the universe and Earth is also affected by gravity, why would a disk-shaped Earth even make sense?

[Munky]

To add to this argument:



Edit: This video is relevant to this thread because it explains why things in their natural state always conform to a sphere.

[juner]

To add to this argument:

If you are going to post a video, please provide some context as to what it is about and why it is relevant. Just posting a video is considered low content.

[Munky]

The content is within the video. The video conforms to what is being discussed in this Thread. "How do we know the Earth is spherical?"

[juner]

The content is within the video. The video conforms to what is being discussed in this Thread. "How do we know the Earth is spherical?"

That is not what I said at all. You are reasonably new, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. If you are posting a video, give a brief explanation of what it is and why it is relevant. Saying it is relevant and the content is in the video is not what I was suggesting. All you need to do is edit your previous post (the one with the video) and provide some context.

[Munky]

The content is within the video. The video conforms to what is being discussed in this Thread. "How do we know the Earth is spherical?"

That is not what I said at all. You are reasonably new, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. If you are posting a video, give a brief explanation of what it is and why it is relevant. Saying it is relevant and the content is in the video is not what I was suggesting. All you need to do is edit your previous post (the one with the video) and provide some context.

Is that modification to your pleasing?

[Bookish Neptune]

You having 2 boys and expecting to always have girls is a ridiculous counterargument.

Slight mistake in your quoting me there...

Always should be replaced by the word never.

I said "I have 2 boys and that means there is no reason to think I will ever have a girl".

But more importantly, I'd like to save you some time.

Myself and I am positive most of the people here understand all the principles you pointed out and then some.

You have to keep in mind "we" all know what mainstream science/school teaches us.

I myself excelled throughout school.

So, I don't aim to sound harsh, but there is little to "teach" anyone here.

RE'rs have a notion that flat earthers are uneducated. I think if you asked around you'd find that's not the case at all.

The fact that people who support flat earth do not subscribe to mainstream science, doesn't mean they don't understand it.

And in relation to your post, that was a good response to the question.

Now if that or even a bit of that was was said for #1 in the video then it would at least have an argument.

The kindergarten like statements of that video are just laughable. Truly, I was out and about today mocking it with some friends, to me it is just that funny.