The Flat Earth Society

Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 19, 2020, 08:21:53 PM

Title: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 19, 2020, 08:21:53 PM
Hello!

I'm a Mechanical Engineer and was inspired by another engineer on the forums to post here. I'd like to state first that I respect anyone's beliefs and do not mean to offend, I only want an honest and fair discussion so that I can understand FE arguments and also FE people. Secondly, I'm a christian, and I know FE and a lot of other non-FE Christians take the bible historically literally, but I do not. I'd prefer not to argue that as your choice to take the bible literally is your choice, not mine.

I've selected a couple of the many topics I've found intriguing in regards to FET.


Gravity... Is it real? is it just Acceleration? or is it Magnitism? I'm open to discuss any other theory other than gravity, but I'll preface with what I think of other theories.

The acceleration theory: Whoever wrote the UA theory page, really butchered the Lorentz equation and doesn't understand Einstein's relativity as it relates to the energy required to reach the speeds we would be traveling by now. For reference, however old you think the earth is, multiply the years by 1.03 and that's how many times the speed of light we are traveling now. I can go into more detail regarding the authors mistakes on that wiki if a member would like me to, but I'd rather stick to the big picture here. FE'rs either believe that the universe is the way I see it where planets and stars revolve around each other or it is just an image on the fabric of the dome. In the first case, our flat world would have to be bound by different physics than worlds around us. Earth would have to be a special exception to the rules that bind the rest of the universe. If you had a high powered telescope (I had the pleasure of using one a few years back at an observatory in Texas) You'd be able to see distant planets travelling around distant stars because of gravity, obviously not acceleration. Gravity explains why planets and rocks don't fly off into space, but sometimes things do, and gravity explains that also. Saturn has rings, and meteorites hit other planets often, thank God for a thick atmosphere to protect us from that horror. In the latter theory, why would God create an environment in which we can observe things that seem one way but aren't that way in reality? I believe God could make FE a reality because God is all powerful, but God is also all good, and it's not in his character to lie en mass to people like that when, being all knowing, must've known that eventually people would be able to observe his creation the way we can now and draw conclusions (i.e. gravity exists) that aren't actually accurate. God doesn't need to do this because he's all powerful and can make the universe work in whichever manner he sees fit.

Magnetism theory: This is actually how I talk to kids about gravity. it makes a lot of sense because gravity and magnetism use the same equation with different constants. The two equations use an inverse square law, so that means as you move away linearly, the force attracting you decreases by a square. In a way, gravity is magnetism, but gravity interacts the same with all matter that has mass. There is also energy, that isn't affected by gravity as it has no mass. There are some theories out there that remain unproven that the expanse of our universe is caused by some sort of dark matter that has he opposite reaction than regular matter has to gravity: it is repelled. But this theory is not proven accurate at this time. So whenever FE'rs say gravity isn't real because look, magnetism, I get confused by what point they are trying to make. I'd like to hear some discussion on this theory in particular. :)

Another topic: This is non-scientific, but more related to statistics. The structure of the FE theory is based on this idea that the government is lying to us. I don't trust the government as much as the next guy, but I'd like to logically break this down. I work in the aerospace industry, and a lot of what I do has to do with altimeters and directional control for the F35 fighter aircraft. I can't discuss my work because security clearance stuff, but the things that I work on in the plane depend on calculations made under the assumption the earth is round. If the earth were actually not round, then the plane would not behave the way that it does. Along with 20 thousand others who work on the same aircraft, and with millions of other people that work in aerospace building rockets, satellites, high altitude spacecraft, etc., all these people including myself are either fools or are in on the conspiracy, and I know for sure it's not the latter for myself. Furthermore, this group of people would have to include the navy. I have a friend who is a naval officer who recently was on a training tour from New Zealand to Chile and it took him 12 days to get there on a rather slow boat (nuclear submarine), and on the FE model, this would have taken months to cover what looks like 25,000 to 30,000 miles. Please explain how it's possible that this many people are either fools and have failed to figure out the government is bamboozling everyone, or are nefarious and are part of the cult government that propagates the globe earth lies, and NOBODY in these critical areas aforementioned have blown their whistle on it. It doesn't seem like a sort of common unspoken knowledge among the elite, like the Clintons are corrupt, or Mrs. Obama is a man. I think it's preposterous to believe that all people in the world (FE are a small minority of the populous and are excluded from this statement) including brilliant engineers, scientists, navy officers, and thousands of other FE/RE relevant positions are either very stupid and foolish and stubborn, or they are so evil and spineless that they allow this conspiracy to continue. The reason I make this last point is becuase if I were a FE'r and heard this perspective, I'd like to believe that I myself didn't have that large of an ego that I believed that I were: much more noble than the general population in my quest for truth, despite the adversity, and also, much more intelligent than the collective society that even the brightest people couldn't figure out the truth and overcome the government lies, that the earth is flat.

Thank you for reading this if you actually did read. In my field of work, many "scientific" people find FE theory among many other groups of people, like young earth people, conspiracy theorists in general, and also religion in general to be stupid and a waste of time to try and argue with people like that, however I find this to be the wrong approach. This leads to a mass group of people being confused about reality, which I believe you, FE reader, are. This isn't my noble crusade, but rather my obligation to God to have discussions like this to spread truth and understanding. One of Gods commandments is to not take his name in vein, and I interpret this to mean, don't make God look bad. I think FE theory makes God look bad, because scientific communities will associate FE with God and my religion and damage God's image. Most of people my breed have no time to do this kind of thing, but I figured I'd maybe use my engineering mind to good work and talk with the good people of the FE society. I hope you feel compelled to discuss some things with me instead of thinking this is stupid and a waste of time, because that would make you no different than my colleges, bless their hearts.

There are so many other things I want to talk about, like balloon rockets, the centripetal force of earth spin and rotation, satellite television, the mechanics of the sun/moon, and why we can't observe the curve on the surface but this post is already faaaarr too long. If you'd like to discuss other stuff, maybe let's make another thread.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 20, 2020, 08:31:36 AM
For reference, however old you think the earth is, multiply the years by 1.03 and that's how many times the speed of light we are traveling now.
This is where you have immediately outed yourself as lacking understanding in the subject. It's a shame you didn't think to look for/read the comments on UA made by RE'ers with a background in physics. But let's dig deeper. You claim "we" would be "travelling" several times the speed of light. What is this velocity relative to?

As an aside, you've started this discussion in the worst way possible. "I'm right, and if anyone wants me to explain why they're wrong, I will happily oblige!" You're not going to have a healthy discussion with this sort of attitude. I'd suggest starting over. Get a grasp of the basics behind the debate (FET, common RE responses, actual RET [the amount of people who come here to defend RE while having no clue about their model is astonishing], what has and hasn't been done to death) and come back with an open mind.

To have a bilateral discussion, you need to be willing to convince, and to be convinced. If you're not interested in doing that, then honestly this place won't be interesting to you, and your presence here won't be interesting to us.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 21, 2020, 03:05:08 AM
Hey man, I come in good faith, pipe it down. I never said what you put in quotes, however I have implied that I am well rooted in believing in a round earth and am willing to hear what you have to say about what I think. Instead of sharing what you thought, you shared how you felt but I'd really like to see what kind of logic we can collectively produce.

Concerning the UA theory: I have read the wiki and I did say I would go into detail. Now that you've asked me in a bombastic way that I go into detail, I will. The problem with UA is that it considers that the earth is implicitly bound by relativism, rather than explicitly. You're only framing earth, when you need to frame the entire universe. Also, the speed of light is less of a speed limit and more of an energy threshold limit. light moves that fast, but not much else. the fastest alpha particle we've ever captured was moving at 99.99% of c, but nothing with or without mass can move faster. The earth would have to exist in a separate frame from the universe and abide by different laws that allow it to accelerate. Your question "relative to what?" by the way, the answer is this: the frame of the universe. Within the universe's inertial frame, nothing can move as fast as we would supposedly be moving. You can't just frame anything you want if the things in your frame are interacting with things outside your frame.


If you were determined to still disagree with the above statement, the only explanation you would have is that earth is bound by different laws than the ether around it, and I have heard this explanation from flat earthers before and wouldn't be surprised if you said that. Then we'd have pin holes in the fabric of the dome and everything would be implicit to the dome by design. That's a different conversation and I don't think that's what you're saying.

As an aside, I will match your belligerence and you can decide how nice this conversation is or you can ban me, but I'd rather not be banned.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 21, 2020, 06:17:58 AM
Hey man, I come in good faith, pipe it down
Then act it. If you continue posting here with your current attitude, you'll get bored pretty quickly.

Your question "relative to what?" by the way, the answer is this: the frame of the universe.
There is no such thing as a uniersal reference frame, and the acceleration you used for your thought experiment is relative to an observer who just recently left the Earth.

Please try to identify your frame of reference once again, and once you've done that, please review your calculations to match reality.

Also, the speed of light is less of a speed limit and more of an energy threshold limit.
Once again, you're being very presumptuous in thinking you need to explain the obvious. You will not come across as arguing in good faith when you treat your conversation partner as inferior to you. Please focus on correcting your errors, not on reading out high school textbooks to me.

As an aside, I will match your belligerence and you can decide how nice this conversation is or you can ban me, but I'd rather not be banned.
You mistake a simple statement of facts for belligerence. You won't get banned unless you break the rules.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 21, 2020, 05:12:37 PM
Well, Pete, if I believe that I am right, then a side effect is that I believe my view is superior to your view. You mirror this behavior in your own language. Do you believe there's even a slight possibility that you could be wrong yourself? I always leave a sliver of doubt in my own beliefs. Who's to say we don't live in the matrix, or there is a true multi-god system that rules over us, or whatever else alter-reality people have chosen for themselves that are unlikely. My point is just because you believe it vehemently doesn't make it true.

I have nothing more to say, other than you are incorrect in regards to your physics and your critique of what I've said. I think the conversation can end there, as either you are wrong or I am wrong, and I don't believe I'm wrong. A flat earth simply cannot store the amount of energy we would have by now, it breaks the known laws of physics.

You haven't addressed the main point of conjecture I have of FET. How come nobody has blown the whistle from the inside? Is everybody either stupid or evil (or both)? There are so many jobs and roles people have that would rely on a globe earth. To name a few, ANY aircraft pilot, navy officer (like my friend), any aerospace engineer (including myself), satellite operator, any member of government, and the list goes on to include millions of people. Furthermore, how is there a multi-billion dollar space industry if there's nothing to do in space and the entire industry is wrapped in conspiracy? It's not just Aldrin and Armstrong lying about the moon landing, this would take an unimaginable amount of effort.

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 21, 2020, 10:22:11 PM
Well, Pete, if I believe that I am right, then a side effect is that I believe my view is superior to your view.
That's really disheartening. I couldn't do that, I'd feel anxious all the time. I sincerely hope your attitude will change with time. That said, this approach is so extremely incompatible with this forum that I'd strongly suggest you look elsewhere. I'm sure there are communities out there that more closely resemble your mindset.

You mirror this behavior in your own language.
I would prefer it if you didn't try to read my mind. I have a feeling you're no good at it.

Do you believe there's even a slight possibility that you could be wrong yourself?
Of course. As I just said, in order to have a meaningful discussion, you must be willing to convince and to be convinced. I don't waste my time with people who just want to listen to themselves proclaiming they're right, and I recommend you don't waste your (and others') time by being that person.

You haven't addressed the main point of conjecture I have of FET. How come nobody has blown the whistle from the inside?
There are several threads about this subject ongoing right now. I'm active in one of them. I will not re-write the same answers for every individual who feels entitled to it. Use the search function, read the Wiki, try to be a little bit less lazy overall.

I have nothing more to say, other than you are incorrect in regards to your physics and your critique of what I've said. I think the conversation can end there, as either you are wrong or I am wrong, and I don't believe I'm wrong.
Indeed. I can only hope that, as you progress with your education, you will one day realise the absurdity of your claims here, especially the part where you tried reasoning about relativity while assuming a universal frame of reference (the very opposite of relativity), and your claim that UA would lead to the Earth exceeding c in any observable frame of reference. I find no joy in RE'ers who don't understand their own model.

Until then, since you explicitly declared that you're not willing to review your errors, I have no choice but to stop wasting my time and wish you a fantastic day.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 22, 2020, 12:28:21 AM
You're kinda rude

edit: I did some digging today around the forums and the wiki and couldn't find information pertaining to precisely what I am talking about, in regards to how many people would have to be in on the conspiracy, and the unlikelihood of being able to keep a lid on it.

Also, Pete, I've been thinking... have you heard of the Dunning-Kruger affect?

If you don't mind, I'd like links to where I can find info about the topic above.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: pricelesspearl on January 22, 2020, 03:47:23 AM
You're kinda rude

edit: I did some digging today around the forums and the wiki and couldn't find information pertaining to precisely what I am talking about, in regards to how many people would have to be in on the conspiracy, and the unlikelihood of being able to keep a lid on it.

Also, Pete, I've been thinking... have you heard of the Dunning-Kruger affect?

If you don't mind, I'd like links to where I can find info about the topic above.

You won't find anything in the wiki or anywhere else for that matter that supports or gives any kind of evidence or detail on "the conspiracy" . The link below is about the best you can hope for.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Place+of+the+Conspiracy+in+FET

I'll let you draw your own conclusions on how valid the logic is.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 22, 2020, 06:45:52 AM
I see the argument now. Valid, yes. Sound, no. Define "unverifiable". Define "obvious truth".

Many FEr's don't understand logical reasoning at all, so at least the wiki had a valid argument. I hear often, "water always finds its level" as a proof. That would look like this:

P1: Water always finds it's level
P2: water on the earth is level
C: the earth is not round

It's not only not sound, the premises have nothing to do with the conclusion and that makes it an invalid argument. I'm not calling out Pete or this forum in general, just the people I've interacted with and witnessed previously.

I'll give Pete or whoever else a chance to respond, but I really want to discuss why millions of people are very quiet about the flat earth, including my own friends, who would know what shape the earth is. Pete said read the wikis, I read the wikis, and I honestly want to hear a rhetorically sound statement from Pete himself with the snark on the side. I guess he won't because he wished me a fantastic day and dipped.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 22, 2020, 07:59:51 AM
You're kinda rude
You were very quick to declare that you would "match my belligerence", and yet you find it "kinda rude" when the same treatment is applied to you. You came into this thread with a lordly attitude of "You're wrong. Why are you so wrong?" and you're surprised that my responses are not very compassionate.

Be the change you'd like to see in the world. Whether it's by heeding my advice (which I'll restate for your benefit: in order to have a meaningful discussion, you must be willing to convince and to be convinced. If you are unwilling to do either of these, you will fail) or by otherwise adjusting your attitude, the ball is in your court.

Also, Pete, I've been thinking... have you heard of the Dunning-Kruger affect?
Yes, I've been to school once or twice. Here's another piece of advice for you: we both have access to Google. If you want to accuse me of exhibiting the Dunning-Kruger effect*, you can just say it. If I don't know what it means, I'll Google it. I will expect the same of you.

* - except that would be against the rules in this particular board, so if you want to throw personal insults around, please do so in the Angry Ranting board. It's fair play there, and it's all in good spirit.

If you don't mind, I'd like links to where I can find info about the topic above.
You weren't particularly forthcoming in evaluating your failures in physics, so I see no reason to accommodate you. Once again, I expect you to be able to use the Internet.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Place+of+the+Conspiracy+in+FET
A few things which might be worth noting:
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 22, 2020, 02:43:23 PM
Implicitly insulting each other aside, it would almost be less effort to just link something useful at this point than it would to come up with something clever to say back to me that would make me look silly. I've read the wiki and all I've found is info of how we faked the moon landing (which I could make another thread about :)). Since the wiki is the only source of truth and it doesn't seem to have it, I have come to the forums to ask you, Pete, the pro.

As far as the physics go, there's not much to argue about if we can't agree on some facts and principles. Do you want math? What do you want in that regard?

Whether you or I or both of us are the rude or ill-informed one(s), I guess let the rest of the forum decide. I don't have to be open to being convinced, all I need is to respect the opinions of others, and I suppose my ability to do so is being tested, so I apologize if I've faltered.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 22, 2020, 03:50:20 PM
Implicitly insulting each other aside, it would almost be less effort to just link something useful at this point than it would to come up with something clever to say back to me that would make me look silly.
I understand why it might seem that way, but you have to consider the economy of scale. Between social media and this forum, I deal with hundreds of entry-level questions a day. Answering one of those individually isn't much effort. Handling the odd follow-up question or two would probably not be a big deal. But as the problem scales, you have to toughen up. We can't be expected to re-type the same answer over and over, and if you have a look at our Twitter, you'll see that most newcomers don't like the idea of reading a webpage - they want their answer straight from "the pro". Well, "the pros" have already written up the basic answers, and would rather discuss more nuanced things.

This is why we do things differently on this forum. We want you to know the basics before you engage. It helps whittle out people who wouldn't be interested in a real discussion anyway, and who are just trying to quickly earn some Internet points. Similarly, with a good few years of threads backed up, we prefer if people read discussions that already took place - chances are their ideas have been considered before.

Some of your conspiracy questions fall into that category (as in, they're addressed in our Wiki as part of the The Conspiracy (https://wiki.tfes.org/The_Conspiracy) page - there is no Round Earth conspiracy), and others are effectively statements of incredulity ("How is it possible that all these people got fooled?") - those I can't really help.

As far as the physics go, there's not much to argue about if we can't agree on some facts and principles. Do you want math? What do you want in that regard?
I don't think maths would help here. Your original argument (the one I was particularly aggressive about, rather than the argument on energy) can be summarised as "9.81%20%5Cfrac%7Bm%7D%7Bs%5E2%7D times a large number of seconds is more than c" - the maths behind it is not difficult. But this assumes that you can identify a frame of reference in which you could observe the Earth accelerating at 9.81%20%5Cfrac%7Bm%7D%7Bs%5E2%7D constantly for an extended length of time, and I'm not convinced you'll be able to. Your attempt at doing that was "the frame of reference is that of the Universe", but that's not a concept that can be defined - the lack of a universal frame of reference is pretty essential to special relativity.

[EDIT: I butchered that latex something fierce]
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on January 22, 2020, 11:35:29 PM
Picking a reference frame isn’t just picking a certain area in space, you are selecting an area of time as well, so when you select a frame that includes the earth, assuming initial velocity could possibly be 0, is limited by c. You can’t just reset the frame every instance of time. The idea of a “universal” just means from the beginning of time (the Big Bang presumably marks this instance, haven’t studied that in particular, not confident enough to argue over it), all matter has either gained or lost energy. The amount of energy mass has determines how close it is to experiencing no passage of time. I’m stressing this idea, because what UA proposes is that the mass of the earth breaks through that zero point, where mass would experience zero time passage, which is not possible. However in some sort of whack idea I had, why isn’t there a theory that the earth works like spinning a bucket of water, that acceleration instead of being linear is rather centripetal? I’d still disagree, but I think that would atleast keep speeds consistent.

edit: forgot to thank you for the links, I appreciate it. Perhaps more research could be done by flat earthers to find out what positions people hold that must must be corrupted, and how are these positions corrupted. Either they are in on it or they are fooled somehow by the governments to think their job is X when really its Y. Like my buddy who traveled a far distance in the southern hemisphere, where did he really travel to? How did they fool him and his ship? etc. i think that info is lacking and if it were there, there would be a more full and convincing explanation of how FET works.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 23, 2020, 03:01:16 PM
Picking a reference frame isn’t just picking a certain area in space
Indeed. But I didn't ask you to define what a frame of reference is. I asked you to identify the frame of reference under which your argument holds. For the avoidance of any doubt, I am specifically referring your argument that the Earth would exceed the speed of light.

when you select a frame that includes the earth, assuming initial velocity could possibly be 0, is limited by c
We need a frame of reference that we can actually verify, not a hypothetical one. The only Earthly frame of reference we can meaningfully investigate is a non-inertial one.

But even if we accept your philosophy for a moment, this is still fine within special relativity. In the inertial frame of reference you've identified (or, well, strongly hinted at), the Earth's acceleration would be not be constant and would quickly approach 0 - but that's a meaningless hypothetical we'll never get to observe. It does not hold much value to Zetetic inquiry.

Perhaps more research could be done by flat earthers to find out what positions people hold that must must be corrupted, and how are these positions corrupted. Either they are in on it or they are fooled somehow by the governments to think their job is X when really its Y. Like my buddy who traveled a far distance in the southern hemisphere, where did he really travel to? How did they fool him and his ship? etc. i think that info is lacking and if it were there, there would be a more full and convincing explanation of how FET works.
Perhaps, but how exactly would you investigate a hypothetical conspiracy so secretive that it hasn't been blown wide open? Especially when investigating it seems to strangely correlate with people having very unfortunate accidents or suddenly going insane. It's very easy to say "more research would be good", but it's not exactly easy to put into action.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: pricelesspearl on January 23, 2020, 09:41:45 PM
Quote
Perhaps, but how exactly would you investigate a hypothetical conspiracy so secretive that it hasn't been blown wide open? Especially when investigating it seems to strangely correlate with people having very unfortunate accidents or suddenly going insane. It's very easy to say "more research would be good", but it's not exactly easy to put into action.


The conspiracy is too secretive to be investigated. I guess that means one must wait until it is exposed, and no longer secretive, to investigate it.  But of course, one can’t expose it without investigating…therefore, we can just continue to claim it exists without providing any evidence.

The fact that you can’t prove it exists, is proof that it exists.  Typical circular reasoning of FET.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on January 25, 2020, 11:19:13 PM
therefore, we can just continue to claim it exists without providing any evidence.
"Without any evidence"? My friend, lying is such a bad look for you.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on January 28, 2020, 08:21:56 PM
Gravity... Is it real? is it just Acceleration? or is it Magnitism? I'm open to discuss any other theory other than gravity, but I'll preface with what I think of other theories.

This really depends on the FE model. There are some FE models in which the modern concept of gravity as a bending of spacetime apply, there are some FE models which don't.

For those which the modern concept of gravity as a bending of spacetime do not apply things like atmospheric pressure, UA, or magnetism, density etc could be used to explain why things fall when they are dropped.

The acceleration theory: Whoever wrote the UA theory page, really butchered the Lorentz equation and doesn't understand Einstein's relativity as it relates to the energy required to reach the speeds we would be traveling by now. For reference, however old you think the earth is, multiply the years by 1.03 and that's how many times the speed of light we are traveling now.

speed is all relative. UA is just a concept.If the entire universe was accelerating upwards at 9.8 m/s then the earth's speed, in relation to the universe, would be 0.


The universe could be attached to a large string being swung around a rope by God and that centrifugal force could be another explanation.

Saturn has rings, and meteorites hit other planets often, thank God for a thick atmosphere to protect us from that horror. In the latter theory, why would God create an environment in which we can observe things that seem one way but aren't that way in reality?

This question sounds like it's associated with the more biblical FE models. The answer to that is simple. God would create  an environment in which we can observe things that seem one way but aren't that way in reality to test your faith.

I believe God could make FE a reality because God is all powerful, but God is also all good, and it's not in his character to lie en mass to people like that when, being all knowing, must've known that eventually people would be able to observe his creation the way we can now and draw conclusions (i.e. gravity exists) that aren't actually accurate. God doesn't need to do this because he's all powerful and can make the universe work in whichever manner he sees fit.

I guess that really depends on what version of God you chose to worship and what you define "Good" as. The God of Christianity has violently murdered many babies through the great flood and the killing of the first born in Egypt. Murdering innocent children unrelated to the political strife at the time seems pretty brutal to me.

Magnetism theory: This is actually how I talk to kids about gravity. it makes a lot of sense because gravity and magnetism use the same equation with different constants. The two equations use an inverse square law, so that means as you move away linearly, the force attracting you decreases by a square. In a way, gravity is magnetism, but gravity interacts the same with all matter that has mass. There is also energy, that isn't affected by gravity as it has no mass. There are some theories out there that remain unproven that the expanse of our universe is caused by some sort of dark matter that has he opposite reaction than regular matter has to gravity: it is repelled. But this theory is not proven accurate at this time. So whenever FE'rs say gravity isn't real because look, magnetism, I get confused by what point they are trying to make. I'd like to hear some discussion on this theory in particular. :)

I don't know much about the magnetic FE version of gravity. I assume that it operates on the idea that there is a magnetic force under the earth and we are drawn to that force.

Another topic: This is non-scientific, but more related to statistics. The structure of the FE theory is based on this idea that the government is lying to us. I don't trust the government as much as the next guy, but I'd like to logically break this down. I work in the aerospace industry, and a lot of what I do has to do with altimeters and directional control for the F35 fighter aircraft. I can't discuss my work because security clearance stuff, but the things that I work on in the plane depend on calculations made under the assumption the earth is round. If the earth were actually not round, then the plane would not behave the way that it does. Along with 20 thousand others who work on the same aircraft, and with millions of other people that work in aerospace building rockets, satellites, high altitude spacecraft, etc., all these people including myself are either fools or are in on the conspiracy, and I know for sure it's not the latter for myself. Furthermore, this group of people would have to include the navy. I have a friend who is a naval officer who recently was on a training tour from New Zealand to Chile and it took him 12 days to get there on a rather slow boat (nuclear submarine), and on the FE model, this would have taken months to cover what looks like 25,000 to 30,000 miles. Please explain how it's possible that this many people are either fools and have failed to figure out the government is bamboozling everyone, or are nefarious and are part of the cult government that propagates the globe earth lies, and NOBODY in these critical areas aforementioned have blown their whistle on it. It doesn't seem like a sort of common unspoken knowledge among the elite, like the Clintons are corrupt, or Mrs. Obama is a man. I think it's preposterous to believe that all people in the world (FE are a small minority of the populous and are excluded from this statement) including brilliant engineers, scientists, navy officers, and thousands of other FE/RE relevant positions are either very stupid and foolish and stubborn, or they are so evil and spineless that they allow this conspiracy to continue. The reason I make this last point is becuase if I were a FE'r and heard this perspective, I'd like to believe that I myself didn't have that large of an ego that I believed that I were: much more noble than the general population in my quest for truth, despite the adversity, and also, much more intelligent than the collective society that even the brightest people couldn't figure out the truth and overcome the government lies, that the earth is flat.

First off I agree with your point. The more people who must be involved in a conspiracy the less likely a conspiracy is to be true.  There are two points here:

First point:
If you were indoctrinated into something from birth it becomes much easier to believe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RWOpQXTltA

If you spend your entire life from birth thinking the world is nothing more than shadows on a cave to have someone come back speaking utter nonsense you would aggressively defend your original view.


Second point:
This is keeping information secret. Which people are very good at doing.  The total number of people in the of armies in the world is in the tens or hundreds of millions. They are all able to keep their technology and information secret from 99.9% of the worlds population.


Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Naiani on January 29, 2020, 01:30:25 PM
One thing that no one has ever explained to me is why. Why would not only the United States, but the entire world participate in this "lie" that the earth is round. Why would the world spend untold billions of dollars to keep people believing it is round. What do they gain? No govt does anything for free. People don't give govts money because they believe the world is round. There is literally nothing to be gained by keeping the truth of the "flat earth" from the populous. In fact, thousands of years ago, most societies believed the world was flat, and it didn't cause anyone stress in any way. So why would they suddenly start lying and saying it is round? They can't control us any more than they already do by a lie like that. Why in the world would they suddenly, all together start telling a lie on this scale. Every country, even ones who are fighting with each other suddenly chose to lie? Why? When countries who are competing with each other would tell a different story, just to get one over on the country they are competing with. I've never received an answer to this question.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Tom Bishop on January 29, 2020, 07:47:22 PM
The government had nothing to gain from fostering the idea of RE during the cold war and space race?
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on January 29, 2020, 10:58:36 PM
The government had nothing to gain from fostering the idea of RE during the cold war and space race?



There are other possible reasons too. The space agencies make billions of dollars. If I could spend 800 million to make a government believe i was really going to space and have that government pay me a billion dollars that's a sweet profit!! CHA CHING!!

Another thing is the idea from a military perspective. Accurate maps could be considered a closely guarded military secret. I won't know what a country knows true shape of the earth just like I won't know what a country knows about how they make their atom bombs.



This isn't my noble crusade, but rather my obligation to God to have discussions like this to spread truth and understanding. One of Gods commandments is to not take his name in vein, and I interpret this to mean, don't make God look bad. I think FE theory makes God look bad, because scientific communities will associate FE with God and my religion and damage God's image.

If you're talking about the God of Judaism or Christianity (which i think you are because of your mentioning of the commandments) You should look up Tom Bishop's posts about the Flat, non-moving earth in the bible.


Tom has the full list but I just sent you some

Chronicles 16:30

Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved.


The earth cannot be moved. The earth orbiting the sun is movement and the earth rotating on it's axis is movement. Based on this verse the orbit and rotation of the earth is impossible.
Irrefutable PROOF from God.



Matthew 4:8

 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and



The only way to see every kingdom of the earth from the top of a tall mountain is if the earth is flat. If the earth was a sphere you would be unable to see the kingdoms on the opposite side of the earth.
Irrefutable PROOF from God.


Psalm 104:5

He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.


The earth cannot be moved. The earth orbiting the sun is movement and the earth rotating on it's axis is movement. Based on this verse the orbit and rotation of the earth is impossible.
Irrefutable PROOF from God.

Psalmn 93:1

The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.



The earth cannot be moved. The earth orbiting the sun is movement and the earth rotating on it's axis is movement. Based on this verse the orbit and rotation of the earth is impossible.
Irrefutable PROOF from God.


Isaiah 40:22
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:


This is more evidence that irrefutable proof. It's not sitting above the sphere of the earth, or the oblate spheroid of the earth, or the spheroid of the earth. It's a circle.


Habakkuk 3:11
Sun and moon stood still in the heavens at the glint of your flying arrows, at the lightning of your flashing spear.


The sun and moon stopped moving across the sky. Based on the round earth theory this would mean that:

The earth went from moving thousands of miles/hour orbiting the sun to a complete halt.
The earth went from spinning thousands of miles/hour to a complete halt.
The Moon went from orbiting the earth to stopping.

If all of those things happen and we didn't go flying off into space, crash into the sun, or have our entire world demolished by the spinning earth coming to a screeching halt then it is evidence which undeniably supports one of the FE models

Also notice in the verse that the sun and moon stood still not the earth. That is because the earth does not move per verses previously listed.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ChrisTP on January 30, 2020, 12:34:42 AM
@iamcpc, NASA's budget is actually accounted for publicly and even if it weren't, there's not much money going into NASA and space travel from the government compared to other things. I don't think the US government need NASA to line their pockets. God knows the government already tax the hell out of us anyway.

I could understand the reason for keeping it secret that they bluffed going to the moon to show power against Russia, only to find they couldn't and thus keep the whole thing under wraps to save face, but I don't think the moon landings were faked so I don't think this is the case. Besides I think Russia would be the first to unravel the lies to the public if they discovered the US faked it all but Russia did the opposite of that by confirming it as truth.

I also don't think the bible should be taken so literally but that's more coming from my not so religious background. To each their own on that one but I don't take the bible as evidence of anything flat earth related, though if I end up in hell when I die for not believing it all, then I guess sucks to be me.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 03, 2020, 12:08:37 AM
I guess I'm not one to take the bible THAT literally. The truth in it pertains mainly to our relationships with ourselves, other people, and God, and providing guidance in these relationships is the primary purpose of the bible, not explaining physics or the history of the world. I don't think my faith is shattered if I don't take the bible literally. That's generally what cults try to do. They say, "if you don't believe X, then you lose your salvation". God isn't a cult leader, he's God.

This started out as humorous to me, but my attitude has evolved into frustration, because I am part of the group that would be trying to fool everyone. I work on aircraft that have technology, and this tech requires a round earth and round earth physics to function properly. I have friends that do too. I know the earth is round because I see the product of my work, and the planes I work on don't crash. Probably one of the most basic concepts is that the higher the altitude of an aircraft, the farther it travels across the same distance on the surface. This is because as elevation increases, the plane has a larger radius around the globe than a car would on the surface. My team and I must account for that issue. We have to determine the best possible altitude to balance this factor along with many others in order to get to point A to point B the fastest, and our models predict real life very VERY accurately.

It's like if you witnessed a murder and you know who the murderer was but the police think it was you instead and find convincing evidence for it. That's how I feel now. Started as a joke, but now...


Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: J-Man on February 04, 2020, 03:09:11 AM
dear engineer, aluminum meets steel I-beams. aluminum wins and 3,000+ die. Thanks for the Bulshi !!!

You might want to burn that degree, it's a sham.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 04, 2020, 05:20:16 PM
I guess I'm not one to take the bible THAT literally. The truth in it pertains mainly to our relationships with ourselves, other people, and God, and providing guidance in these relationships is the primary purpose of the bible, not explaining physics or the history of the world. I don't think my faith is shattered if I don't take the bible literally. That's generally what cults try to do. They say, "if you don't believe X, then you lose your salvation". God isn't a cult leader, he's God.

If you believe that the bible is the holy word of God it says, according to the holy word of God, that the earth does not move. It's not like it only says it once. It says it multiple times.  Many of the FE models are biblical/philosophical.

In the RE model we are an insignificant specks of stardust floating around in nothing.

In the biblical/philosophical FE models we are the center of the universe. We are significant. We matter.

This started out as humorous to me, but my attitude has evolved into frustration, because I am part of the group that would be trying to fool everyone.

Not everyone feels that way. You came her for alternate explanations about things which you were given.


I work on aircraft that have technology, and this tech requires a round earth and round earth physics to function properly. I have friends that do too. I know the earth is round because I see the product of my work, and the planes I work on don't crash. Probably one of the most basic concepts is that the higher the altitude of an aircraft, the farther it travels across the same distance on the surface. This is because as elevation increases, the plane has a larger radius around the globe than a car would on the surface. My team and I must account for that issue. We have to determine the best possible altitude to balance this factor along with many others in order to get to point A to point B the fastest, and our models predict real life very VERY accurately.

I'm sure that if you started a thread about this you would have a decent chance of being introduced to other possible explanations that were shape agnostic.


It's like if you witnessed a murder and you know who the murderer was but the police think it was you instead and find convincing evidence for it. That's how I feel now. Started as a joke, but now...


Sorry you feel that way.


dear engineer, aluminum meets steel I-beams. aluminum wins and 3,000+ die. Thanks for the Bulshi !!!

You might want to burn that degree, it's a sham.

Wrong forum man. Wrong forum.

Also it's super lame for you to call someones degree a sham.

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Pete Svarrior on February 04, 2020, 05:41:33 PM
Wrong forum man. Wrong forum.

Also it's super lame for you to call someones degree a sham.
I'm inclined to agree (but iamcpc - please report posts that break the rules instead of just calling them out in-thread).

J-Man, please tone it down.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 08, 2020, 02:30:10 AM
Was that a 9/11 reference J-Man? Engineers are actually pretty useful. You're welcome for the tall buildings and the cellphones. :)

In the biblical/philosophical FE models we are the center of the universe. We are significant. We matter.

I suppose I don't have a problem with being very insignificant and neither should anyone. In reality, we are all relatively insignificant, as we are one of several billion, and most of us will breath eat and die all the same. We source our "significance" from God and God alone, not the orientation in which our land is situated in the universe or "ether". The cosmos is a primary reason I believe in God. It's so beautiful, so vast, and upon studying how all of it works, the math for it is so undeniably engineered by a higher power. Realizing my insignificance is actually useful to me because it reminds me that my endeavors are relatively meaningless while Gods' are not.

If you believe that the bible is the holy word of God it says, according to the holy word of God, that the earth does not move. It's not like it only says it once. It says it multiple times.  Many of the FE models are biblical/philosophical.

I also believe these instances are a combination of your interpretation through whatever translation you're reading and also the interpretation of God's word, having limited scientific knowledge, of the people who wrote it. Like I said, the bible is only relevant in so far as to guide people in their relationships with themselves, others, and God... not to teach high school chemistry. I just find it very unlikely that A) the world is flat and B) the bible is teaching that world is flat. I can tell we are going to disagree on this point and that is okay, I don't believe this is a salvation issue.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Groit on February 09, 2020, 08:58:19 PM
The cosmos is a primary reason I believe in God. It's so beautiful, so vast, and upon studying how all of it works, the math for it is so undeniably engineered by a higher power.

When we observe the universe by the naked eye or through telescopes etc it does indeed look very beautiful. However, from our current understanding of how the universe works, in reality, 99.999% of the universe is a very hostile place. Deadly radiation, cosmic rays, pulsars, quasars, neutron stars, black holes, gamma ray bursts and trillions of stars, with each star releasing energy equivalent to a million Hiroshima Bombs per second. The universe will evolve just the way it needs to and nothing will get in its way, we live in an unforgiving universe.

If all this is from a creator, then what does that say about the creator??   
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 10, 2020, 11:49:16 PM
If all this is from a creator, then what does that say about the creator??   

The missing premise to this if /then argument is:
“A good God wouldn’t create a deadly environment”
Or maybe it’s
“A good God wouldn’t create a vastly useless environment”
I’m not too sure which, if either, you’re trying to hint at. If it’s neither and does make for a good argument, please respond with it.

God made a sizable portion of earth rather deadly, hostile, and useless, didn’t he? For myself, I will not presuppose the kind of God I believe in initially and then view facts and evidence through that lense. If I come across new facts or evidence that I feel are proven or provable and it contradicts a presupposition I have of God, I’ll have to change what I think about God, not the other way around.

I think what this says about God is that he has an appreciation for art and beauty by design.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 11, 2020, 01:16:17 AM
Apologies to iamcpc, I sort of got tunnel vision in responding I didn't address the verses from the bible you posted that you claim lays evidence that God told us the earth is flat. This is sort of an unsophisticated take on this, but I'll give it my best shot...

With the "(the earth) cannot be moved" statements in the bible, I take this to mean that nothing catastrophic will happen to the earth after creation and before the return. However even in its literal meaning, because of what we have established in the wiki with Einsteins general relativity, the earth could be considered an absolutely still object while everything else relative to it is moving and orbiting around it.

From Matthew 4:8, the world in those peoples' scope at the time was very small, and also which mountain? 2000 years ago, it's a safe assumption the highest mountains were the Himalayas, and even if the devil took him there, he wouldn't be able to see very far. That very tall mountain had to have been destroyed without evidence or record of its existence, or the devil had to have taken him very very high in the atmosphere, AND he would've had to see through the atmosphere, which I think I read in the wiki, is the reason we can't see as far as you'd expect from a high mountain. You pick which is more likely, or choose an alternate explanation. I pick that you're taking it too literally and that the "devil" if he really was there, took him to a tall foothill and looked over various local lands.

From Habakkuk 3:11, Only two of the things would have had to happen for the story to be true: the earth had to stop spinning and the moon would have had to stop revolving. The force of the Earth's spin would be immense but stopping it within, say a 12 hour period, would be 0.68m/s^2 at the equator. Deceleration would be linearly proportional to time taken if you think it was faster than that and want to calculate. Personally, I don't see, if God is all powerful, that God wouldn't be able to do this with the heliocentric model. For an allpowerful God, it would be just as easy to do this as it would to interrupt the normal function of however the FE model works.

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: TomInAustin on February 11, 2020, 07:08:06 PM
@iamcpc, NASA's budget is actually accounted for publicly and even if it weren't, there's not much money going into NASA and space travel from the government compared to other things. I don't think the US government need NASA to line their pockets. God knows the government already tax the hell out of us anyway.

NASA was not lining pockets of their own but those of all the big defense contractors.  The big reason why Space X and other private outfits can go to space is they are not doing it on a cost-plus basis.  I understand the follow the money aspect of this, Apollo and the shuttle were hugely profitable from cost-plus contracts.  They had every incentive to run the costs up.   The new way to do it is that Space X and others are keeping the intellectual property and will be able to turn big profits the old fashioned way, providing a service.

It's going to be very hard to deny spaceflight after Space X puts up all the Starlink spacecraft as you will not be able to look at the night sky and not see them.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 12, 2020, 06:39:52 PM
Apologies to iamcpc, I sort of got tunnel vision in responding I didn't address the verses from the bible you posted that you claim lays evidence that God told us the earth is flat. This is sort of an unsophisticated take on this, but I'll give it my best shot...

With the "(the earth) cannot be moved" statements in the bible, I take this to mean that nothing catastrophic will happen to the earth after creation and before the return. However even in its literal meaning, because of what we have established in the wiki with Einsteins general relativity, the earth could be considered an absolutely still object while everything else relative to it is moving and orbiting around it.

Unfortunately the bible gives a lot of room for interpretation. Due to human conformation bias you are going to interpret a way which confirms your beliefs.

From Matthew 4:8, the world in those peoples' scope at the time was very small, and also which mountain? 2000 years ago, it's a safe assumption the highest mountains were the Himalayas, and even if the devil took him there, he wouldn't be able to see very far. That very tall mountain had to have been destroyed without evidence or record of its existence, or the devil had to have taken him very very high in the atmosphere, AND he would've had to see through the atmosphere, which I think I read in the wiki, is the reason we can't see as far as you'd expect from a high mountain. You pick which is more likely, or choose an alternate explanation. I pick that you're taking it too literally and that the "devil" if he really was there, took him to a tall foothill and looked over various local lands.

 If the Devil took him to a place in the upper stratosphere or even to a mountain which stretched all the way into outer space you would not be able to see the kingdoms on the opposite side of the world. If the earth was flat and the Devil took him to the upper stratosphere you could see every kingdom in the world.

From Habakkuk 3:11, Only two of the things would have had to happen for the story to be true: the earth had to stop spinning and the moon would have had to stop revolving. The force of the Earth's spin would be immense but stopping it within, say a 12 hour period, would be 0.68m/s^2 at the equator. Deceleration would be linearly proportional to time taken if you think it was faster than that and want to calculate. Personally, I don't see, if God is all powerful, that God wouldn't be able to do this with the heliocentric model. For an allpowerful God, it would be just as easy to do this as it would to interrupt the normal function of however the FE model works.

Ok i'll acknowledge your point. When the earth stopped spinning it did it over a period of time so we all didn't die in a 1000 MPH crash on the surface. This does not account for the fact that the earth also stopped orbiting the sun and the moon stopped orbiting the earth.

If the earth stopped orbiting the sun it would fall into the sun.
and we would go flying off of the planet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjjL9yaFrFc






If the moon stopped orbiting the earth the moon it would start accelerating twoard the earth and eventually fall into the earth.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/if-the-moon-stopped-orbiting-the-earth.405198/
https://www.quora.com/What-will-happen-when-the-Moon-stops-rotating-around-the-earth

Based on measurements we know the opposite to be true. The moon is actually moving away from the earth.




We didn't go flying off of the planet. Earth didn't go crashing into the sun. The moon didn't come crashing into the earth. This is overwhelming evidence that the whole earth/moon/sun orbit system is wrong from a biblical perspective if the moon and sun stopped moving in the sky.


Something like this makes a lot more sense based on all of these passages. Notice how the sun and moon are the ones moving? If they stop moving we are unaffected on the earth.

(https://i.imgur.com/ULkqCIg.gif)
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 12, 2020, 07:48:22 PM
Yes but it’s logically inconsistent to say that makes sense. Step 1 of Gods plan is to miraculously stop the earth and sun and moon from moving. No matter what model you believe in, that’s a miracle. Step 2 of Gods plan would be to maintain that position, which is also a miracle, if it happened. Why would you accept step 1 as a miracle but then try to explain away step 2 because “physics”? Like I said, if God were all powerful, he could just as easily override physics for that day as he could control the FE sun and moon.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 12, 2020, 09:51:35 PM
Yes but it’s logically inconsistent to say that makes sense. Step 1 of Gods plan is to miraculously stop the earth and sun and moon from moving. No matter what model you believe in, that’s a miracle. Step 2 of Gods plan would be to maintain that position, which is also a miracle, if it happened. Why would you accept step 1 as a miracle but then try to explain away step 2 because “physics”? Like I said, if God were all powerful, he could just as easily override physics for that day as he could control the FE sun and moon.

There are two miracles here.

One which the earth (which according to the bible does not move) actually does spin and move meaning the bible is wrong, as well as moon all came to a screeching halt with no affects on the earth violating all of the current laws of physics, and gravity, etc based on the sphere earth system.

A second one (where the earth is still and the sun and the moon both stopped moving like the bible says)  which does not violate all of the laws of the universe and also does not contradict many other passages and verses i the bible.

You don't get to adhere to these laws which describe our universe when they support your view and outright ignore them when they weaken your view. That's the ultimate form of conformation bias. You must be at least open minded to the possibility that it's the system which is flawed and not the miracle.


Furthermore there are people who believe this is a parable. Kind of like the tortoise and the hair. If you are to take these verses literally about the Sun and the Moon suddenly coming to a screeching halt literally then you should also take the verses about the earth not moving literally. If the earth does not move then it does not orbit or rotate.



it happens again:

Joshua 10:13

And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.


This passage does not say the sun stood still, the earth stood still too, and the moon stayed. This passage VERY clearly indicates that the movement of the sun and the moon in the sky is because the sun and moon are the ones moving not the earth. This is backed up by the many many passages specifically saying the earth does not move. Even if one of those passages is interpreted as some sort of a metaphor or parable there are still several others which are not.



https://creationconcept.info/joshua.htm

If Joshua was led to order the earth to stop its rotation by the Spirit of God, would he command the sun and the moon to stand still, or earth? (It is the earth that rotates, after all.) And what point would there be to making the moon stand still? How could that help the Israelites to punish the Amorites?
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 13, 2020, 12:10:33 AM
I understand I'm no expert in anything I talk about on this forum, I'm just good at math and engineering and find it interesting people's views differ so much from my own. I think there's a chance I'm wrong, but I also think the likelihood the earth is flat is very low. What do I know though is that I will always be an ignorant child in the eyes of the omnipotent God.

My point earlier was, God could say "Earth moon and sun, halt, but with no adverse affects." And just like we command dogs, space-time and matter will bend to Gods will. It doesn't matter that physics doesn't follow up intuitively to the actions of halting the sun, moon or earth because God owns physics. Also so that we are on the same page, I don't personally believe this event even happened, but I'm just trying to play in your field, not mine.

I'd love to discuss those verses in another thread because I think we'll get into the weeds a little bit with theology. I will respond though to your points: I think the bible is a spiritual book and is in regards to our relationships with ourselves, people, and God, and nothing else. God is saying this so the people at the time and laymen from everywhere at every time period would understand. It's not relevant to the story to say it technically correct because the bible sources its relevance from fulfilling the aforementioned purposes, not those of a high school textbook. I didn't say the miracle was flawed, just that the miracle would have to take care of a large number of complexities that are simply not mentioned in the text.

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 13, 2020, 07:43:12 PM
I understand I'm no expert in anything I talk about on this forum, I'm just good at math and engineering and find it interesting people's views differ so much from my own. I think there's a chance I'm wrong, but I also think the likelihood the earth is flat is very low. What do I know though is that I will always be an ignorant child in the eyes of the omnipotent God.

Just like the likelihood that all of the fundamental laws of our universe That God took 7 days to develop were stopped for a day then restarted with no evidence the event really happened is very low. It all likelihood that is a more likely a parable or poetic story where the moral of the story is God is super powerful, Follow the teachings of God, God is a good person to have in your corner etc.

Just like in the story of the tortoise and the hair there was not a real talking rabbit and a real talking turtle who had a real footrace. It's a parable where the moral of the story is don't quit while your ahead, don't be too cocky, slow and steady wins the race, it's not over till it's over etc.

Numbers 24:8
God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn:

Just like I don't believe there are unicorns. This is some poetic, metaphor, or imagery etc.

My point earlier was, God could say "Earth moon and sun, halt, but with no adverse affects." And just like we command dogs, space-time and matter will bend to Gods will. It doesn't matter that physics doesn't follow up intuitively to the actions of halting the sun, moon or earth because God owns physics. Also so that we are on the same page, I don't personally believe this event even happened, but I'm just trying to play in your field, not mine.

Again God took time to create the universe according to Genesis. God had to rest. Why did God have to rest. Why did it take him so long to create the universe? The God you are talking about would have created the universe outside of our pathetic human perceptions of time and would have needed no rest.


This is another verse which supports the idea that your view of God and the biblical view of God are different. Your God could drive out inhabitants even if they had chariots of reinforced steel.

Judges 1:19

And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.


I'd love to discuss those verses in another thread because I think we'll get into the weeds a little bit with theology. I will respond though to your points: I think the bible is a spiritual book and is in regards to our relationships with ourselves, people, and God, and nothing else. God is saying this so the people at the time and laymen from everywhere at every time period would understand. It's not relevant to the story to say it technically correct because the bible sources its relevance from fulfilling the aforementioned purposes, not those of a high school textbook. I didn't say the miracle was flawed, just that the miracle would have to take care of a large number of complexities that are simply not mentioned in the text.

I think the bible is the word of God if you temper it with both logic and reason. People get swallowed by whales and survive in fantasy books and movies not in reality.




Without that we would have irrefutable holy proof that the earth does not move and can only be flat to account for the movement we see in the sun and moon.

Without that we would have laws sentencing people to death for doing the dishes on Saturday because it's the holy ruling of God, from God himself, that doing chores on the sabbath day should be punished by brutally and violently murdering the offender:

Numbers 15:32-36
32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.

33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.

34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.

35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.

36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.



The God that I worship would never order someone be brutally murdered for cleaning up their lawn on Saturday. The God that I worship (and the version of God that you describe) is so far beyond our chore schedule to assume that he was that petty would be a horrible insult to God.

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 13, 2020, 09:54:32 PM
I really appreciate the effort you put into your posts iamcpc, thank you.

Let me get this straight because your post was 10% convoluted for me. You do not take everything in the Bible to be historically/factually correct? You reference the story in Numbers and you say you wouldn’t believe in a God that would order such a thing for such a reason, so therefor since you believe in the god the Bible speaks of, then the story mustn’t be true? Just trying to understand your position and that of RErs in general.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 13, 2020, 11:17:01 PM
I really appreciate the effort you put into your posts iamcpc, thank you.

Let me get this straight because your post was 10% convoluted for me. You do not take everything in the Bible to be historically/factually correct?

It's my belief that there are parables, similes, poetic verses and metaphors which were in no way, shape, or form intended to be taken literally in modern society.

You reference the story in Numbers and you say you wouldn’t believe in a God that would order such a thing for such a reason, so therefor since you believe in the god the Bible speaks of, then the story mustn’t be true?

It's my belief that there are parables, similes, poetic verses and metaphors which were in no way, shape, or form intended to be taken literally in modern society. Things like parables/similes/metaphors and poems are not really able to be true or false.



Metaphor example:

Proverbs 13:14
The teaching of the wise is a fountain of life.

Teaching is a fountain? A verb can't really be a noun. I believe this is not meant to be taken literally I believe this is meant to be taken figuratively.




Simile example:
Matthew 13:44
“The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field.”

Is the heaven really like a 20 dollar bill you find in a grassy area? No. This is not meant to be taken literally. This is a simile.


parable example

Numbers 15:32-36
And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.


I believe that this is something similar to the story of the tortoise and the hare. I'm sure you heard of it. The moral of the story is _______.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Bikini Polaris on February 14, 2020, 08:09:44 AM
Joshua 10:13

And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

This passage does not say the sun stood still, the earth stood still too, and the moon stayed. This passage VERY clearly indicates that the movement of the sun and the moon in the sky is because the sun and moon are the ones moving not the earth. This is backed up by the many many passages specifically saying the earth does not move. Even if one of those passages is interpreted as some sort of a metaphor or parable there are still several others which are not.

How can the movement be only in the sky if it's written that the sun "hasted not to go down"? I know it's difficult or nearly impossible to universally interpret the Bible, but it clearly states in many passages that the sunset is created out of a downward movement of the sun.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 14, 2020, 10:39:33 PM
What if you were standing on your head, wouldn't the movement be upwards for a sunset? God takes into account the general perspective of the reader. From our view, it's true the sun moves downward as it sets, that is our reality, but it's a relative reality and can change depending on your perspective. Besides, if you consider the earth as the center of the universe and is perfectly still and everything revolves around it, besides that being absurd, it's valid in relativity. If that floats your boat, then think of it that way.

I'm on board with you iamcpc. So in your opinion, what do you make of the verses that support the flat earth? Do you think there could be an argument that makes those verses out to be intended to be for a different reason than informing of the nature of the earths shape?
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 14, 2020, 11:07:24 PM
What if you were standing on your head, wouldn't the movement be upwards for a sunset? God takes into account the general perspective of the reader. From our view, it's true the sun moves downward as it sets, that is our reality, but it's a relative reality and can change depending on your perspective.

That's definitely one way to interpret it. I think it's just as easy to interpret it as saying it is the sun, and not the earth, which moves. Usually you can look at other verses in other chapters to help determine how you chose to interpret the passages. If you do so keep in mine there are like half a dozen other verses which, very clearly, say the earth does not move. Now after reading a half dozen times that the earth does not move in the bible and reading this verse about how the sun stopped moving then it becomes more lopsided.

Besides, if you consider the earth as the center of the universe and is perfectly still and everything revolves around it, besides that being absurd, it's valid in relativity.

I think in the more biblical models nothing revolves around the earth. I think everything is above the earth.

(https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BBU2MOV.img?h=400&w=379&m=6&q=60&o=f&l=f)
I have a post which have come up with various biblical interpretations but they all are kind of similar to this

I don't really understand what the firmament is but basically the entire universe is above the earth.


I'm on board with you iamcpc. So in your opinion, what do you make of the verses that support the flat earth?

I think that taking the 2000 year old bible literally, without tempering it with both modern logic, and modern reason is incredibly toxic and harmful to the human race and the planet we live on.

Do you think there could be an argument that makes those verses out to be intended to be for a different reason than informing of the nature of the earths shape?

I can see both sides. But when the bible says, over and over and over something to the effect of "The earth does not move" or  "the earth can't move" I can easily see why that, in conjunction with several other verses (and a failure to temper those verses with modern logic and modern reason), could lead someone to believe the earth is flat.

In my personal FE model the earth rotates on an axis which creates the day/night cycle, the moon orbits the earth, and the moon/earth combination orbits the sun which is the center of our solar system.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 14, 2020, 11:50:22 PM
But when the bible says, over and over and over something to the effect of "The earth does not move" or  "the earth can't move"
I offer an alternate interpretation to be that no major calamity will happen between the inception of man extending to the return of Jesus and possibly beyond. No asteroids, no giant solar flares, no Noah’s ark scale super floods, etc. will happen in the meantime.

Now after reading a half dozen times that the earth does not move in the bible and reading this verse about how the sun stopped moving then it becomes more lopsided.

In my perspective, you can’t console the bible for reliable information about physical reality. My assumption is that information was not put in the bible explicitly for that purpose. Rather, that information has a spiritual context or meaning. Possible interpretation above.

I am a more black and white person which may skew my view on this, but I believe it's important to be consistent with a certain view point. If there is a discrepency with your views meaning your views conflict, then your views must change or the discrepency must have another explanation in order to allow the acception. When you say that the bible is antiquated and requires modern logic  to interpret, I don't see the argument against what I've said in this post as not being modern logic, as after all, it is modern thinking that the earth is round.

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 15, 2020, 12:03:37 AM
But when the bible says, over and over and over something to the effect of "The earth does not move" or  "the earth can't move"
I offer an alternate interpretation to be that no major calamity will happen between the inception of man extending to the return of Jesus and possibly beyond. No asteroids, no giant solar flares, no Noah’s ark scale super floods, etc. will happen in the meantime.

I disagree. If you interpret the flood as literal and not poetic or a metaphor then millions of people died. If you use conservative population estimates like the one shown below then 10s of millions of people were brutally murdered by God. Including infant children. Unless you worship a God who should be charged with 10,000 + counts of murdering infants and children you should really consider these verses as a parable or poetic not as fact.

At least 75 million people died in ww2. In terms of body count that rivals the people who would have died in the very specific infant murdering interpretation of the biblical great flood event.
Now after reading a half dozen times that the earth does not move in the bible and reading this verse about how the sun stopped moving then it becomes more lopsided.

In my perspective, you can’t console the bible for reliable information about physical reality. My assumption is that information was not put in the bible explicitly for that purpose. Rather, that information has a spiritual context or meaning. Possible interpretation above.

I agree. Yet for some of the more outlandish verse or verses outright defying everything that you have learned about physical reality and the mathematical and physical LAWS of how our universe operates 100% of the time you appear to be believing that they really happened vs they are a parable. If you want to learn the history of society read a history book not the bible. If you want to learn the ancient history of the earth study geology or paleontology not the bible. If you want to learn the history of the universe study astrophysics or astronomy not the bible. If you want to learn how to try to be a good person and go to heaven then read the bible and temper it with modern logic and reason.

If there is a discrepency with your views meaning your views conflict, then your views must change or the discrepency must have another explanation in order to allow the acception.

Unfortunately, in this decorum, anyone can claim that something that does not support their specific flat earth model is incorrect, wrong, or a lie.


When you say that the bible is antiquated and requires modern logic  to interpret, I don't see the argument against what I've said in this post as not being modern logic, as after all, it is modern thinking that the earth is round.

This is why i'm not a big fan of the biblical FE models and I think they are a testament of how blind faith, without being tempered by modern logic, rational though, and reason, is harmful.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 15, 2020, 02:44:47 AM
I'm more reffering to mass extinction events, like the flood, and I'll modify what I said to, that sort of event wont happen from the flood and on, rather than from the beginning of man. I don't see the evidence for the flood though. Why are there not kangaroos everywhere else except Australia? I'm not saying one way or the other since I'm not well read in that subject, just throwing sticks at it.

What you've said is similar so the things I would say, which is why I'm confused why you're a flat earther. Is the evidence really that insurmountable to you?

Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Bikini Polaris on February 15, 2020, 11:56:54 AM
What if you were standing on your head, wouldn't the movement be upwards for a sunset? God takes into account the general perspective of the reader.

It's still a vertical movement w.r.t. the horizon. The Bible clearly states that the Sun makes a clear path:

Psalm 19:6 It rises at one end of the heavensand makes its circuit to the other; nothing is deprived of its warmth.

So the movement is a clear vertical one: rise and set and a circuit above our heads.


I think in the more biblical models nothing revolves around the earth. I think everything is above the earth.

I don't really understand what the firmament is but basically the entire universe is above the earth.

I respectfully disagree. A downward movement of the Sun, as described in great length in the Bible, implies that the Sun sets below the Earth, not above.

By the same token, a fixed Earth is totally consistent with what the Bible says, without any interpretation needed.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: iamcpc on February 16, 2020, 02:30:02 AM
I'm more reffering to mass extinction events, like the flood, and I'll modify what I said to, that sort of event wont happen from the flood and on, rather than from the beginning of man. I don't see the evidence for the flood though. Why are there not kangaroos everywhere else except Australia? I'm not saying one way or the other since I'm not well read in that subject, just throwing sticks at it.

What you've said is similar so the things I would say, which is why I'm confused why you're a flat earther. Is the evidence really that insurmountable to you?

This is assuming that the flood really happened. The flood is one of those things I had previously discussed. The idea that the entire surface of the earth was covered in water up to the peaks of the tallest mountain is definetly one of the more outlandish stories outright defying everything that you have learned about physical reality and the mathematical and physical LAWS of how our universe operates 100% of the time. In addition it paints the horrible picture that you are worshiping a God who knowingly MURDERED hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of babies. Helpless, innocent, babies.


https://ncse.ngo/impossible-voyage-noahs-ark




I think in the more biblical models nothing revolves around the earth. I think everything is above the earth.

I don't really understand what the firmament is but basically the entire universe is above the earth.

I respectfully disagree. A downward movement of the Sun, as described in great length in the Bible, implies that the Sun sets below the Earth, not above.

I would see your view point if there were not a good half dozen verses explaining that the earth can't move or the earth does not move or the earth will never move
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: Bikini Polaris on February 16, 2020, 01:56:54 PM


I think in the more biblical models nothing revolves around the earth. I think everything is above the earth.

I don't really understand what the firmament is but basically the entire universe is above the earth.

I respectfully disagree. A downward movement of the Sun, as described in great length in the Bible, implies that the Sun sets below the Earth, not above.

I would see your view point if there were not a good half dozen verses explaining that the earth can't move or the earth does not move or the earth will never move

I'm not discussing that, I agree that for the Bible the Earth doesn't move. But at the same time for the Bible the Sun moves in a vertical way, plus setting under the horizon and rising from below the horizon.
Title: Re: I'm a RE'r and have some questions!
Post by: ImAnEngineerToo on February 17, 2020, 05:29:20 PM
Unpopular opinion: just because the Bible says the earth is still doesn’t mean that it is. I’d prefer to believe in the truth that requires the least amount of faith.