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 >
This thread will discuss the non-technical Flat Earth forums.

Flat Earth Information Repository
Zetetic Council Board
Earth Not a Globe Workshop

Thork's last proposal that was discussed:

1. Rename Flat Earth Information Repository to Flat Earth Media - A place for discussing Flat Earth articles, YouTube videos, books, interviews and social media
2. Rename Zetetic Council Board to Flat Earth Community - A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for Flat Earth Theory
3. Merge Earth Not a Globe Book forum with Flat Earth Community

My comments:

A slight rephrase of the community forum description to "A place for the society to collaborate on new projects, improvements and content for the Flat Earth Theory and Movement"

Rather than merging the ENAG Book Forum with the Flat Earth Community, how about making it a sub forum to Flat Earth Community that doesn't appear on the front page? Most of the threads are notes that I will need to refer back to when continuing this project, and more threads of that nature, or continuations of them, may be added. They are not old unimportant things that can be thrown away or mixed in with other threads.

If a project can't be accomplished in one or two threads, large projects we are interested in doing should become sub forums to the Flat Earth Community that doesn't show up on the front page.

There is some disagreement in the suggestions forum. Some believe that if the upper level Flat Earth discussion forums were turned into a debate club, rather than the current "ask the experts" theme, that there would be a lack of participation.

Personally, I feel that the people coming here have at least some interest in the topic, and that doing this will create more interesting, self sustaining discussions.

Imagine that this message was at the top of the present day forums:

    Welcome to the Debate Club

    The top level Flat Earth Discussion Forums are a Debate Club. As in any debate club, the goal is to exercise your ability in debate to poke holes in arguments and expose weaknesses, even if you do not believe in that position yourself. Keep in mind that this is a friendly debate. Post in the Flat Earth Debate Club and join the fun!

Would you ever consider making an argument in favor of Flat Earth if this were a Debate Club?

See the thread in Suggestions & Concerns that started this off.

Suggestions & Concerns / Debate Club: Technical Forums Execution
« on: May 18, 2018, 11:29:14 PM »
This is a continuation of Debate Club: A fundamental change to how the public perceives the forums

On Thork's recommendation I am creating a new thread to discuss execution. We will focus only on the technical forums for brevity.  There was nary a word of dissent for this idea. Please discuss any lingering concerns with the concept in the thread above. This thread is for execution.

Future threads may involve the slogans idea, what we want to do with the community project forums, or other things mentioned in that thread. Lets focus on the meat of the matter.

We will need to change three elements:

- Front Page Text: We need to describe how we present the forums in the small text area.

- Table of Contents Text: We need to describe the concept.

- New Forum Layout and Partitioning: We need to decide how we want to rename or combine the discussion/technical forums.

Current Elements:

There needs to be a fundamental change to how the discussion forums are perceived. It has reached a tipping point. Many threads consist of multiple RE'ers posting in a row attempting to challenge FET, and then questioning the lack of response.

The public perceives the forums as an invitation to come and debate against the Flat Earth Society, despite that there are few FE'rs who even post. Those few who do post are from the old guard. There have been very few new people attempting arguments in favor of FET or arguments against RET. Everyone who comes here believes that they need to debate against some kind of established organization. That is the current perception, and it needs to change.

When users visit the forum, I propose that they arrive under the impression that they are participating in a debate club of sorts, with instructions that may choose to debate in favor of FE, or in favor of RE. The discussions will contribute to the overall quality of the movement. Perhaps a header message can be implemented that clearly describes this.

If people are posting with the impression that this is a debate club, then the discussions will be more interesting. People will be more encouraged to take up discussions rather than waiting for "the Flat Earth Society" to respond.

The current path is a bad one. As we grow more popular it just gets increasingly boring by the day.

I would appreciate thoughts on the matter.

In 2016 the Flat Earther Dave Murphy, who is a notable figure in the greater Flat Earth community, had a few questions for Neil deGrasse Tyson. Tyson has still not responded, although he has most assuredly seen it. There are a few good points to think about in this video.

Flat Earth General / ODD TV Flat Earth Presentation
« on: May 08, 2018, 12:45:44 AM »
ODD TV has created a new Flat Earth Presentation that I found to be palatable for the newcomer.

There is something that seems wrong with the way the earth rotates around the Sun. Consider the following image that we are taught in school:

Assume that New York City is in its Solar Noon (look at where New York City is in the top and bottom September and March figures in the above illustration). After 6 months the motions suggests that New York City will be in darkness during its noontime.

Some Rough Calculations

Napkin Calculation 1

Day = 24 hours
Year = 365 days

365 days / 2 = 182.5 days in 6 months
24 hours x 182.5 days = 4380 hours in 6 months
4380 hours / 360 (since the sun rotates around the earth 360 degrees in one day) = 12.16666 hour offset

Earth should be offset by 12.16666 hours (similar to the above image)? NYC should be in night?

--- --- ---

Napkin Calculation 2

According to RET particulars, the earth doesn't rotate at exactly 24 hours a day, and the earth doesn't have an exactly 365 day year, which is why we have to change times and add a leap year every 4 years.

Sidreal Day = 23.933333 hours
Sidreal Year = 365.25636 days

365.25636 days per year / 2 = 182.62818 days in 6 months
23.933333 hours per day x 182.62818 days = 4370.90104712394 hours in 6 months
4370.90104712394  / 360 (since the sun rotates around the earth 360 degrees in one day) = 12.14139179 hours offset

Earth should be offset by 12.14139179 hours? NYC should be in night?

--- --- ---

Napkin Calculation 3

Some sources say that the earth "actually" rotates 360.98 degrees per day.

360.98 degrees in a day x 182.62818 days in 6 months
= 65925.1204164 degrees in 6 months
ans / 360.98 = offset is 183.62818 degrees.

Earth should be offset by 183.62818 degrees? NYC should be in night?

--- --- ---

Corrections with the 360.98 figure

Using 360.98 degrees per day in the second calculation, replacing 360 with 360.98, gives an offset of 12.1082 hours. The offset still says that NYC should be in night.

Replacing 360 with 360.98 in the third calculation gives an offset answer of 182.625 degrees. The offset still says that NYC should be in night.


I may be going about this entirely wrong. Can I have some help with this seemingly glaring problem?

According to the Round Earth model the inner planets, specifically Venus and Mercury, are orbiting the sun closer than the Earth and the outer planets are. The night side of the earth is pointing away from the sun, yet it is possible to see Venus and Mercury at night.

Here is a scale model found on Wikipedia (click to enlarge):

Assuming that the Round Earth is always half lit by the sun as so:

With the lit side of the earth always pointing towards the sun, how could we see Mercury and Venus at night?

Venus can be seen at times all throughout the night. See this article as an example Planet Venus Visible All Night Long This Weekend:

Quote from:
This weekend, Venus should appear in the western sky at sunset, weather permitting, and should be visible as a dazzling sky watching target nearly all night long.

This is curious. How is Venus viewable "all night long"?

As an explanation for the Southern Stars in the classic Monopole model, I am growing to be more in favor of P-Brane's explanation of perspective for how the Southern Stars rotate.

Flat Earth General / NASA influence in Australian Air Traffic Control
« on: April 15, 2018, 06:01:11 PM »
I came across this interesting quote:

"In August 2005, Airservices Australia (Airservices) and the United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) signed a Letter of Agreement (LoA) to undertake collaborative research on Air Traffic Management (ATM) decision-support automation, communication, navigation and surveillance. One project completed under the LoA focused on validating the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) In-Trail Procedure (ITP), a new airborne procedure that leverages the benefits of ADS-B to provide a means for pilots to make more informed requests of Air Traffic Service Providers (ATSPs) and enable altitude changes that previously would not have been approvable. Intended for use in non-RADAR (radio detection and ranging) airspace that employs procedural separation, the ITP uses airborne ADS-B data, onboard tools, and a new separation standard based on these data and tools to provide ADS-B-equipped aircraft with better access to preferred flight levels in oceanic and other remote airspace."

From "Airservices is Australia's air navigation service provider"

What business does NASA have collaborating with foreign services for Air Traffic Control? Is NASA the Air Traffic Control authority of the world or something?

Flat Earth General / Additions to the Library
« on: April 06, 2018, 04:29:57 AM »
I told Pete that I had a list of Flat Earth works that I wanted to add to the library. Here it is for discussion. There is a lot here.

The Christian Topography of Cosmas Indicopleustes

Terra Firma
by David Wardlaw Scott

Google Books Preview:

The Shape of the Earth (1909)
by Arthur V. White

The Midnight Sun
by Zetetes

The Shape of the World
by A. E. Skellam

The Coming Man
by Zetetes

Chart & Compass, Sextand & Sundial, Latittudes & Longitudes, Plumbline & Pendulum, Globe or Plane?
By The Zetetic Society

The Newtonian or Solar System: - Is it Scientific?
By The Zetetic Society

The Zetetic
Vol1, No. 1 July 1872

Does the Earth Rotate
by William Edgell

The Earth Does Not Move

Plato's Doctrine of the Rotation Earth and Aristotles Comments Grote (1860)
By George Grote, ESQ

In Defense Of The Earth's Centrality and Immobility (1984)
American Philosophical Society
By Edward Grant

Popularity of Error and Unpopularity of Truth (1869)
By John Hampden

Lady Blount Pic

Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians

World Beyond the Poles
By F Amadeo Giannini

On January 13 1956 a US Navy air unit penetrated to the extent of 2300 miles beyond the assumed South Pole of the earth. That flight was always over land, water and ice.

Since December 12, 1928 US Navy Polar expeditions have determined the existence of indeterminable land extent beyong both pole points, out of bounds of the assumed "isolated globe" Earth as postulated by the Copernican Theory of 1543.

Flat Earth Debate / The Electromagnetic Accelerator
« on: April 06, 2018, 04:05:53 AM »
Here is an old one. The theory of the Electromagnetic Accelerator states that there is a mechanism to the universe that pulls light upwards. All light curves upwards. This is an alternative to the perspective theory proposed in Earth Not a Globe. Sunset happens as consequence of these curving light rays, as well as limited visibility of objects and the sinking ship effect.

Flat Earth General / Convex Earth Documentary
« on: March 20, 2018, 11:44:02 PM »
There is a documentary about Convex Earth Theory that is coming out in 8 days.

We should all take notice. Convex Earth Theory is another sister theory that came out of Samuel Birley Robotham's Earth Not a Globe studies in the mid 1800's. Rowbotham knew that there were other conclusions from his own that could stem from his experiments. Hence why the work is called "Earth Not a Globe," and not "The Earth is Flat," and why he named his original investigative society "The Zetetic Society" rather than anything Flat Earth specific. Sister organizations will often reference Rowbotham's experiments in support of their own theories.

In Earth Not a Globe the main point and moral is that the Globe Earth model is demonstrably false, moreso than a discovery of what the truth may actually be.

Suggestions & Concerns / Logo copyright question
« on: February 27, 2018, 06:03:22 PM »
I received this private message:

Hi Tom,
Thank You for your time today, I just have a question regarding copyright. My AP Physics ll class decided to order some shirts as a class shirt and so we used custom ink to design it. Well they sent me an email saying they couldn't due to copyright rules which is understandable since we used your logo. My class has been bugging me to try and get permission for a while now so I was just wondering as well as the rest of them if we could possibly get permission. If so that would be awesome and greatly appreciated by everyone. If you do decide to please just email me at <redacted> with your name, position, and word of approval.
 Thank You again Tom
Also here is the design we came up with

Who owns copyright over the logo?

Edited to remove e-mail address. - Parsifal

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.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4  Next >