Hello boys and girls, flat or round, after some reading around on this forum this is my first contribution.
I will start with my humble apologies to Pete, because I'll use my first post to contradict one of his statements:
Your model of choice is quite clearly RET. However, at least one of your observation directly contradicts RET (and FET, coincidentally). We can reach one of two conclusions here:
- You successfully disproved the two main models discussed here.
- Your observations were flawed in some way.
It's about the sun, traveling in a straight line. Contrary to what Pete suggests, this observation is not a first step in a journey of dismantling the globularist agenda. Actually this observation is fully compatible with the heliocentric model.
Remember yourself as a child sitting in a carousel spinning around its own axis, you did not see the carousel spinning, you saw the world outside the carousel including your mom and dad spinning in a straight horizontal line around you.
This is how the heliocentric model explains the trajectory of the sun and stars, not actually spinning around the earth, but apparently spinning around the earth because the earth is spinning around its own axis. So due to the heliocentric model we on earth are in the centre of the circle which we see as the path of the sun. Now the question is, how do we see a circle if we watch that circle from its centre? The answer is: As a straight line all around us. Therefore the observation that the sun moves in a straight line from the east to the west does not contradict the globular model with a sun spinning around the globe or a globe spinning around it's axis.
So Pete's conclusion that at least one of Erehps' observations directly contradicts RET and coincidentally FET, is wrong; this observation only contradicts the flat earth model, because in every flat earth model the observer is not, like in the heliocentric model, in the centre or even in the plane of the sun's circular trajectory.