Greetings,
i came across this website purely by accident, and i am interested in seeing peoples points of view on this.
Lets say that the issue of the true shape of the earth is concrete. It is either flat. Or it's not.
Let us also say that the covering up or falsifying of this fact would be a crime, with the governments of the world (whether flat or not) and space agencies as the culprit(s).
If this is indeed a crime, than they should be innocent until proven guilty.
Therefore, by extension, the earth should be considered round until PROVEN flat (or vice versa, but this is the flat earth society, and this is the issue that we are dealing with).
In every crime show ever, the culprit must have an MMO (Motive,Means,Opportunity). We can apply this to the shape of the earth.
M= Why would the governments of the earth have any reason to deny the true shape of the earth or not?
M= Is it actually possible to keep such a huge secret or truth hidden for so long?
O= When would governments ever have had the capability to fabricate such a huge lie?
Extensions: if nasa really did lie about this, why didn't any of its rivals, i.e China or the USSR expose them?
What would the governments gain?
Why a flat earth? Why not a spherical earth?
Proof: Any seventh grade debater knows that proving the opposition wrong is not the same thing as proving yourself right.
All those corrupt globulist 'proofs' can easily be explained away as a hoax, or a matter of perspective, right?
Well, yes. But the only counter claim of any note or prominence, is empirical.
As an atheist, I don't see anything wrong with this. Not on the surface.
Strictly speaking, however, empiricism, by definition,isn't just what you can see at any one time, but what can be seen, including photographic and scientific evidence.
"I look out my window (hot damn, a window), and the earth looks flat. Q.E.D"
We can apply this logic to other things.
"I look out my window, and i can't see the moon/Greenland/wildebeest/Kim Jong-Un, therefore these thing don't exist."
Q.E.D