Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Tom Bishop

Pages: [1] 2 3 4  Next >
Flat Earth General / The Anti-Newtonian: The original Flat Earth study
« on: January 20, 2018, 12:50:52 AM »
I am reading The Plane Truth: A History of the Flat Earth Movement by Robert J. Schadewald and this passage caught my eye in the chapter about Samuel Birley Rowbotham:

In 1819, an anonymous author published a 38-page pamphlet entitled The Anti-Newtonian: or, A True System of the Universe, with a Map of Explanation, Proving the Sun to Be a Moveable Body and Central Circling Equator of Equal Time, etc. The work was printed in London at the author’s expense, but it contains no hint of who the writer was, where he lived, or any other biographical information except that he had previously published a work pointing out “the dangerous consequences of speculative astronomy.”

According to The Anti-Newtonian, the earth is a vast circular plain enclosed by a wall of ice.  A map in the pamphlet shows the north pole at the center, the south pole at 12 o’clock, east and west respectively at 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock, and an “unknown pole” at 6 o’clock.  The sun’s path is a circle whose center moves back and forth along a line connecting the south pole and the unknown pole to cause the seasons.  The half of the earth beyond the east–west line toward the unknown pole is unknown and uninhabitable.

Rowbotham never mentions The Anti-Newtonian in any of his writings, but he almost certainly based his own system on it.  He discarded the circumferential poles and the unknown, uninhabitable parts of the earth as unworkable.  He left the north pole at the center, but he declared that there is no south pole; the impassable wall of ice encircling the known, inhabitable world forms the “southern limit.” East and west are merely those directions at right angles to the compass needle.  The equator is a circle centered on the north pole and lying halfway between it and the southern limit.  The sun circles above the earth in the region of the equator, moving north or south of the equator to suit the season.  Rowbotham called his system zetetic astronomy.

This was interesting. I took it upon myself to look for this book and found a copy of it online on Google Books.

The Anti-Newtonian (1819)

It is unknown who wrote this book. The author only refers to himself as "The Author". Samuel Birlery Rowbotham was born in 1816, and was only three years old at the time, so he was likely not the author.

Upon reading this book, the proofs and arguments made are very unique, in that The Author bases most of his Flat Earth model on the behaviors of the sun. There are numerous details on why the Flat Earth model in The Anti-Newtonian must exist as consequence of the sun's actions.

The Author seems to assert that there is a North Pole and a South Pole, and that the sun circles around each one depending on the time of the year. This is similar to Lady Blount's model, except that rather than one circle of rotation being on top of another, the circles of the sun overlap. I am not yet sure where Robert Schadewald is getting the "Unknown Pole" from in his description of this model.

It is unclear if the Sun "switches gears" to rotate along a different circular track, or if the center of the sun's rotations gently drifts between the North and South Poles. At first glance it appears that The Author is describing a switching of gears to mark a shifting of the two main seasons. Presumably the circle of the sun also expands and contracts like in the monopole model while on these circular tracks for the mid-seasons?

In the Preface The Author hints that he had previously written about the subject of speculative astronomy. I performed a Google Books Search on that term and came up with the following work called:

Reflections on the Inconsistency of Speculative Astronomy, Volume 4 (1819)

I couldn't find Volumes 1 through 3. The text of this work seems to follow the same style of The Anti-Newtonian, with an unknown author, and ends with "THE END." like The Anti-Newtonian does. This appears to be a Flat Earth book, as it is suggested in several places that the earth is likely a plane. The Author again speaks at length about his investigation into the sun, with perhaps greater detail and focus than is seen in other 19th, 20th, and 21st century Flat Earth writings.

There is a great amount of information here to digest. As this is the original Flat Earth study, these works are especially important, since all the rest are derivatives and interpretations. This investigative work into an alternative shape of the earth may provide insights that Rowbotham and others have not expressed.

I believe that by reading and interpreting these works, and seeking to understand this mysterious author, we will be able to answer more questions on why the globe theory was found to be insufficient, and how modern Flat Earth Theory was created.

Suggestions & Concerns / Redesign to the Library
« on: January 19, 2018, 05:31:53 PM »
I feel like redesigning the Library. I was thinking that we could just update the Flat Earth Literature section in the Wiki, which we can rename Flat Earth Library, and we can just link to that from the main page in the Library link?

Should I upload the books with the file upload feature in the Wiki?

I need to add in Zetetic Astronomy by Lady Blount and The Anti-Newtonian by author unknown.

We also need to add Plane Truth: A History of the Flat Earth Movement by Robert Schadewald, which I believe is critical.

Rather than just providing a bare link, I am also inclined to add a paragraph summary to the major Flat Earth works.

I would like to organize them by date, also indicating what era the work was created. I.e. Rowbotham's era would be the era of the Zetetic Society. Lady Blount's time would be the era of the Universal Zetetic Society. Samuel Shenton was the International Flat Earth Society, Charles K. Johnson was the International Flat Earth Research Society, and we would be simply the Flat Earth Society.

I would also like to categorize them by the monopole vs bipolar models the works promote.


Earth Not a Globe Workshop / Notes on The Importance of Empiricism
« on: December 26, 2017, 08:25:10 PM »
After much thought about our movement, I realize that we need more concrete guiding principles. After the introduction page I would like to dedicate an entire chapter to Empericism, why it is important, and why it is the best guide to our determination of truth.

Empiricism is a philosophy that stresses the importance of experience in the attainment of knowledge, especially sensory experience.

    “All our knowledge begins with the senses, proceeds then to the understanding, and ends with reason. There is nothing higher than reason.”
    ― Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason

Empericism, in fact, forms the basis of the Scientific Method (however flawed it might be, as discussed elsewhere):

Empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world rather than resting solely on a priori reasoning, intuition, or revelation.

Empiricism, often used by natural scientists, says that "knowledge is based on experience" and that "knowledge is tentative and probabilistic, subject to continued revision and falsification."[4] One of the epistemological tenets is that sensory experience creates knowledge. Empirical research, including experiments and validated measurement tools, guides the scientific method.

However, empiricism is NOT "you have to see it to believe it." It is more like "someone must have seen or experienced it at some point for that idea to have merit". If there is no evidence behind that idea, then it can be easily dismissed. Hitchen's Razor asserts:

    "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
    ― Christopher Hitchen

Flat Earth Debate / Flat Earthers debate with Tom Bishop
« on: December 04, 2017, 05:35:18 PM »
There seem to be a number of Flat Earthers who hold a different position to me or the Wiki. I am offering to debate them on the subject. As opposed to another Round Earth Vs Flat Earth debate this will be between Flat Earth proponents and require us to argue in favor of our own Flat Earth Theories.

I will ask that Round Earth proponents refrain from posting in this thread. You have everywhere else to post. Don't post here, just watch. I would only like to talk to other Flat Earth proponents about why they feel that their theories are better. Maybe if we talk about it we can refine some of these ideas and come to insightful conclusions.

I generally support the positions in the Wiki in my outlook on FET, with some slight variations. Many the positions in the Wiki are empirical conclusions which have evolved from discussing these matters over a long period of time. For the record, I hold that:

- The earth is accelerating upwards to keep us pinned to the surface (Universal Acceleration)
- The heavens exhibit Celestial Gravitation, although it is not necessarily an attraction by mass
- Light travels in straight lines and the sunset is caused by perspective
- Perspective operates on a discrete ruleset rather than a continuous ruleset (Ie. The perspective lines meet a finite distance away, as observed in the meeting of railroad tracks, rather than an infinite distance away as theorized by Euclid)
- The moon is a sphere and does not rotate significantly as it sets as consequence of discrete perspective rules
- The sun is a sphere and shines light in all directions
- The Lunar Eclipse is caused by the Shadow Object
- The Flat Earth model is a two pole system, but the exact map is unknown (this opinion differs from the majority here)
- The exact distance between distant locations on earth is unknown because distance data relies on an unproven Round Earth coordinate system (which makes it difficult to create a map)
- The nature of the edge of the earth is unknown, but may naturally end as per the Atmolayer Lip Hypothesis
- The age and origin of the earth is unknown, but "it always was" is an empirical conclusion
- There is no firmament
- Astronomers, cartographers, and other professionals are wrong, as opposed to "in on it"
- NASA's intent is to fake the concept of space travel, is not running a real space agency, and is merely mistaken about the round shape of the earth

I may have left out more. Anything in the Wiki is otherwise my position.

Feel free to ask any clarifying questions and tell me what you believe and why your Flat Earth ideas are better.

Just a friendly reminder to everyone who saw the eclipse today. Despite that the Sun is 4 million times larger than the Moon, the Sun and Moon appear to be the same size from earth and fit perfectly into each other during the Solar Eclipse. The official scientific reason for this is that it is a coincidence.

Flat Earth General / FES Think Tank - Week 1 Poll
« on: August 15, 2017, 01:09:26 AM »
I don't know about any one else on this forum, but I do not really have the bandwidth to maintain 20 different conversations. These are subjects that deserve more than a few sentence explanations. I have a proposal. We will pick a topic and talk about it in depth over one entire week in Flat Earth Debate. We will discuss and discuss and once the week is over we will compile that information and create Wiki articles out of it. I see three main topics that are brought up over and over:

Perspective - If we choose will talk about perspective we will spend the week talking about the disappearance of the sun, why the moon does not turn, the distance to the vanishing point, as well as the mechanics of perspective.

Distance discrepancies - If we choose to talk about this subject, we will talk about flight times, GPS, Latitude and Longitude, and navigation.

Conspiracy - If we choose to talk about this subject we will discuss evidence, motive, and intricacies which go beyond the Wiki.

Other - List any other subject you might feel important.

Please cast your votes or make your comment. Voting will end on Thursday the 17th. Once we have come to a consensus we will agree not to talk about any other subjects in Flat Earth Debate for a period of one week, starting on Sunday Aug 20. All discussions will contribute towards a Wiki article.

According to Round Earth Theory the sun is illuminating the earth and moon as in this top-down view:

However, it has been observed that during the day, on the "day" side of the earth, the moon can be seen with phases which show significant lit area.

It should be impossible for the moon's phase to display significant fullness during the day. But the moon is seen on many occasions to do just that. Here is an example which should be impossible under the Round Earth model:

In the video the author pans across to the sun, showing that it is significantly above the horizon. This person is clearly somewhere on the day side of the earth. How is this observation possible?

Flat Earth General / Moon and Sun Angles Don't Line Up
« on: April 04, 2017, 02:14:32 PM »
I came across a youtube video which asks some interesting questions about the angles of the sun and moon.

If every job were capable of being automated with AI and humanoid robots, people would just offer to do the job for a lower wage, to the point where it is cost effective for the company. When many people are receiving lower wages, deflation will occur and everything will be a lot cheaper.

An AI Salesperson will cost money to purchase. Human Salespeople compete by charging less than what it would cost to acquire that technology. As that technology becomes cheaper, the sales people charge less and less. Will a company really spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a machine when people are willing to work for beans?

Companies will use people, despite the possibilities of alternative technologies, because people will price themselves as a cheaper alternative. Consider automated mail or package delivery. It has been possible to create a network of automated mail and package delivery for the last 100 years. The technology existed, but that doesn't mean that a majority of cities, states or governments would actually invest in that. Using people to deliver the mail was a more primitive, but cheaper solution, and that is why delivery people still exist today.

When the automation goes down in price, so will the wages that keep people competitive. We will eventually lobby to abolish the minimum wage, and $1 will actually mean something again. Even if the new prevailing wages is 25 cents a day, the economy will adjust to make a coffee 2 cents.

We will all live in healthy competition with the AI. The better they get at creating Androids and General AI, we will just unionize and lower our wages lower and lower, into the fractions of a penny if we have to, and the economy will adjust to the current reality. Instead of annual raises, we will have annual salary reductions, and we will convince ourselves that it is a good thing.

Abortion is perhaps the most selfish act a person can do.

The baby in the womb wants life. Every cell in its body wanted to live. There is no denying that. Think about that. The baby wants to live. The baby wants to live very dearly. Aborting a baby who wants to live is incredibly selfish, and the mental gymnastics used to justify the act of abortion are shameful.

The argument that pregnancy is difficult and hard and that it would be unethical to compel women to go through a pregnancy falls flat on its face when one considers that these women want to corrupt the life and wishes of a baby in order to avoid a little inconvenience.

We have a society where we don't need to resort to abortions anymore. There are other options. There is adoption, for instance. Most infants get adopted. There is even open adoption. The government will even give you money to raise your own baby if adoption is not for you, if you choose to live that life.

How many foster children can you find who would say "I would rather have been an abortion!" Kids find a way to enjoy life, even if they are a foster child. Even if they happened to be one of those unfortunate kids who were abused, they would likely get past that at some point and enjoy life. Is some hypothetical physical or sexual abuse really worth a death sentence?

We have birth control now, and if that birth control fails then a little growing baby who only wants to live life shouldn't have to be punished for it. Why pick on someone who can't defend themselves in the most vulnerable time of their life? Abolishing abortion would be inconvenient, sure, but it is the moral thing to do.

Flat Earth General / Merely mistaken
« on: September 25, 2016, 02:46:26 AM »
The world is merely mistaken that the earth is a globe. This mistake took root in Ancient Greece when it was decided that the earth was a globe based on three casual observations -- the sinking ship effect, the observation that the shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse is round, and the observation that Polaris descends as you travel southward (Later to be addressed as fallacy in Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham). These beliefs took hold and were passed down from generation to generation, brainwashed into children from the cradle. Scientific interpretations about the world are skewed under the dogma of a round earth, and elaborate phenomena and explanations are invented whenever an observation contradicts the status quo.


Astronomers observe the heavens and interpret, just as the Astrologer does. There is no real proof for their theories. The universe is not put under controlled conditions to come the the truth of a matter. The necessity of controlled experimentation is denied entirely. A Chemist is expected to create controlled tests to determine a truth. But Stephen Hawking gets away with building theory upon theory, a house of cards model of the universe which "stands on the shoulders of giants". Hawking performs zero experimentation on the universe before coming up with a theory like the metric expansion of space.

Historic parallax observations which compute the sun to be millions of miles distant on a Round Earth also say that it is thousands of miles distant under the interpretation of a flat one. The theory of gravity doesn't seem to work at large distances in space, causing the necessity for elaborate Dark Matter and Dark Energy theories which comprise 98% of the universe. The lunar eclipse and other celestial events are predicted by the analyzing patterns of past observations -- the same way the Ancient Babylonians, a Flat Earth society, predicted them.


Geodesists are said to study the shape of the earth, but if one looks at their journals they will find that they do nothing but look at certain phenomena and interpret how it works on a Round Earth. The levels of g are slightly different at different locations, so the Geodesist declares that the earth is not perfectly round. Not really the level of inquiry we are looking for here.


Pilots fly on preplanned routes to their location and do not require the earth to be any shape. There is not enough data from airline flights to fully map the earth by analyzing aircraft logs, as no one really goes the "long way" around the earth, for obvious reasons, and a Flat Earth map can take many configurations to explain the limited results.

Satellite Communication Companies

Satellite communication companies aren't in the business of putting satellites into orbit. Do you think Direct TV has launch capabilities and access to restricted orbital rocket technologies which are 98% similar to an ICBM? They rely on the government putting up communication satellites for them and giving them a way to feed in their signal.


NASA is mistaken as to the earth's shape as well. There is a conspiracy, but it is not to hide the shape of the earth. NASA is not running a real space agency, so they wouldn't know what shape the earth truly takes. Since sustained space travel is not possible, there was a necessity to fake it. The earth is depicted as a globe in their media because that's what everyone expected to see at the time of NASA's creation.

The motivation is simple. NASA must exist for reasons of national security. Having the ability to launch rockets into orbit also means the ability to put weapons into orbit and obliterate any country at the push of a button. The purpose of NASA is to fake the concept of space travel to sustain America's military domination of space.

Following WWII the race to space lasted for 12 years, with one infamous failure and rocket disaster after another. Don't you think it's a coincidence that within three months of the USSR claiming to have launched Sputnik into orbit, the US claimed to put a satellite into orbit as well?

Flat Earth General / Satellites.... Troposcatter Technology?
« on: September 12, 2016, 07:41:33 AM »
I was watching an interesting video which provides some elements of discussion.

- In Lone Survivor, a true story, a major plot point is that the team's Satellite Phone got zero signal on the top of a mountain in Afganistan.

- There is an interesting idea posed that Satellite TV could be using Troposcatter technology, and that other satellite technologies may be land-based Troposcatter broadcasting devices.

- Brought up a point that Thork once made that many satellite dishes are often seen pointed in the general direction of the horizon, rarely "up".

- Obligatory 9/11 conspiracy tie-in at the end.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Buying a home is a terrible investment
« on: September 10, 2016, 09:01:56 PM »
It is a common myth perpetuated in our society that buying a home is a good investment. Home ownership is seen as one of the best things you could do in your life. You purchase your home and at some time in the future it will greatly increase in value.

Lets say we bought a home in 1980. The average price of a home in the United States in 1980 was $68,714.00. If we hold onto it for 30 years on a mortgage and sell in 2010, the average price of a home in the United States is now $272,900. Huge profit!

It is 2010 and you sell your house. You now theoretically have $272,900 in the bank. But wait, you still need somewhere to live. You probably want to live in at least the same quality of house as the one you were living before, right? Who would want to downgrade their living experience? But those houses are now all averaging at $272,900, too. It seems that in the end you didn't really make anything in your investment.

The only advantage you would seemingly get is to put the new home on another 30 year mortgage from the bank, to be paid off in monthly payments, and enjoy your money in the present. But now you are merely living on borrowed money, not your own. Eventually you will need to have to pay off your new home with your money, old or new, or the bank will take it back and claim what is theirs, all profits from your home investment strategy eventually equaling zero.

Flat Earth General / How would you promote the society if we were funded?
« on: September 10, 2016, 08:38:37 PM »
This is an informational query for any Flat Earthers on this forum. Lets say that I found a way to get us funded. Lets keep the amounts ambiguous for now. If you were provided with some amount of money, what would you do with it to promote the society?

What experiments would you conduct, projects would you work on, or promotional activities would you organize?

Imagine that our budget was $10,000, $50,000 or $100,000.

Thank you.

Apparently a Round Earther threw a fit when he was unable to champion his own model, becoming so enraged that he violently lost control. Seems typical.

A family argument over whether the Earth is flat or round became so heated that one of the participants threw a propane cylinder onto a campfire, prompting an intervention by firefighters.

The dispute over a question most considered resolved centuries ago boiled over around 10:30 p.m. Monday at St. Lawrence Park in Brockville, Ont.

Police said a 56-year-old Brockville man was at a campsite with his son and his son's girlfriend when the woman began insisting that the Earth is flat.

The older man insisted the Earth is round.

It's not clear if anyone at the campfire put forth the argument that the Earth's equatorial bulge makes it not perfectly round, but instead a shape known as an oblate spheroid.

Nevertheless, police said the man became so enraged he began throwing objects into the campfire, including a propane cylinder.

Brockville firefighters were called to put out the campfire. By the time police arrived at the scene, the man had left.

Brockville police are looking for the man and say they expect to charge him with mischief.

Suggestions & Concerns / Lets host Earth Not a Globe
« on: June 21, 2016, 06:59:28 AM »
The version of Earth Not a Globe is public domain and may be used for any non-commercial purposes.

scanned at, June 2005. Proofed and formatted by John Bruno Hare. This text is in the public domain in the United States because it was published prior to 1923. These files may be used for any non-commercial purpose provided this notice of attribution is left intact in all copies.

I would like to scrape the book from the site and host it directly here on this website. The person who digitized the book left various disparaging comments on the index page such as:

"To make his system work he had to throw out a great deal of science, including the scientific method itself, using instead what he calls a 'Zetetic' method. As far as I can see this is simply a license to employ circular reasoning (e.g., the earth is flat, hence we can see distant lighthouses, hence the earth is flat)."

These sorts of comments have no place in an informational resource. It could equally be argued that Rowbotham found the methods used by astronomers to come up with the theory of a round earth to be seriously lacking in evidence, and so Rowbotham adopted a much more empirical approach to determining the shape of the world.

The digitizer also comments that Rowbotham's motivations are mainly religiously motivated, when this is clearly not the case. The comments should be stripped out entirely and the book should be a source hosted on this site, where we could quote and link to freely in the Wiki and in the forums, without having to quote from a website called "sacred-texts".

Ignoring some of the religious references at the end, the following video is a good overview of Airy's Failure experiment and how it suggests that the stars are moving, not the earth.

Airy's paper on his experiment:

Specifications for the equipment he was using:

Flat Earth General / How the Sun sets on a Flat Earth
« on: May 28, 2016, 03:26:27 AM »
I came across a video by Youtube author p-brane which seems to bring up a lot of good points, showing that the diagrams which are routinely paraded as examples for why the sun cannot set do not accurately demonstrate perspective.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Teachers deserve low pay
« on: April 24, 2016, 01:08:04 AM »
For my entire life I've heard teachers complain that they get paid far too little for teaching. They are defended by many as heroes who are educating our children, who gave us our own education, and should be paid highly for this.

But what are teachers, really? At the lowest levels, preschool and kindergarten, teachers are little more than babysitters who read children stories. At the elementary, middle, high school, and college level the job role is essentially the same. Teachers remain babysitters who merely read children different books, whether it's a story about Martin Luther King, or about the periodic table. Other authors wrote those books, and did the research behind it. The teacher didn't do any of those things. The teacher is simply repeating the teachings of others. Most of the time they have their students do homework from the book and use exam handouts from the publisher (who graciously does not watermark the handouts). So why do they deserve large amounts of money for what is essentially a babysitting job?

In addition, teachers are frankly the losers of academia. Rather than contributing to an academic profession like their respected counterparts, they are reading stories to children. It's pathetic. Why should they be paid highly for that?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4  Next >