Re: What is on the other side?
« Reply #40 on: December 23, 2021, 11:30:45 PM »

I fail to see where you have shown anything to be incorrect.

The sun distance page specifically says that the 3000 mile figure does not account for EA. If you had linked to the page in question side by side to the argument you made you would have found that you were incorrect and not the Wiki.

The rest of your arguments are based on speculative inferences about nature which you think is proof. The Wiki doesn't discuss much of what you are discussing, so it can't be incorrect. Much of that are assumptions which you have created, not what the Wiki has actually stated to be the case.

Again, please link a Wiki page and show the argument, side by side, where it has been shown incorrect. You will likely find that you assumed too much and that it is you who is, actually, incorrect.

Well, the wiki says lots of things, and many of them directly contradict each other. For example, on subject of the vexed question of how far away the sun is, we have:

The distance to the celestial bodies is considered to be technically unknown due to confounding phenomena such as Electomagnetic Acceleration

…and yet we also have:

The Sun is a revolving sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the Earth.

And at the same time, you yourself, who seem to have written most of the wiki, seem to think it is 6000 miles above the earth - see

And yet you are also posting a video proposing that the sun is in fact laterally displaced from the flat earth, with its rays massively distorted by some kind of dome, in a manner which would render all of the ‘work’ done on EA and the elusive ‘bishop constant’ completely pointless.

As far as debating tactics go I suppose it’s pretty effective - you’re just switching position every time somebody points out a fundamental flaw in your argument. But the fundamental point here is that you don’t have a theory - you won’t commit to a particular layout, to a particular arrangement of the sun, moon and stars, or anything concrete. You claim that things are a matter ‘of debate’ in the FE community, but there’s never any debate visible here.

Re: What is on the other side?
« Reply #41 on: January 15, 2022, 02:57:35 PM »
There is no "other side" of course.

If I start travelling due north on the RE earth's prime meridian, say in London, and keep going,
I'll obviously end up back at my starting point in London.  This is impossible on the flat earth
model, as I'd simply eventually hit—or fly over—the perimeter ice wall.  And never get back to
London!  In fact, I'd have to do a U-turn at some stage if I wanted to return to my starting point.