[mrb]

Hi

I am new to the whole idea of a flat earth and stumbled across the theory thinking people claiming flat earth were mostly just extreme conspiracy theorists (no offence) but was curious to discover that there seems to be a lot of serious people with well rounded arguments and lots of research.

I have an open mind and am not a sceptic, although am naturally sceptical. I am coming from a lifetime of believing the globe earth model though.

I would like to hear peoples single best argument for a flat earth.......

[devils advocate]

Tom Bishop said so

[juner]

Tom Bishop said so

Hi there. I know you may think this is a high-quality reply, but it is in fact low-content. Please refrain from low-content posts in the upper fora. Consider this a warning. Also, this is your 3rd warning for the same behavior, next time is a 3-day ban.

[JHelzer]

I would like to hear peoples single best argument for a flat earth.......

I am a round-earther so I can't answer your question directly.  I can tell you how I first became interested in the Flat Earth Society.
I enjoy watching a video series by Michael Stevens on YouTube called vsauce.  He is a great science educator.  One day I saw this video https://youtu.be/VNqNnUJVcVs.  In it he touches on a few flat earth ideas and is generous to the flat earth community while maintaining an obvious personal belief that the Earth is most definitely round.

In that video (at 3:40) Michael talks about an experiment performed by Eratosthenes in the 3rd century BC.  Eratosthenes measured the circumference of the Earth using the shadow cast by poles at different latitudes. Later in the video (at 4:51) he shows that the same phenomenon Eratosthenes measured can also be explained by a flat Earth if the sun is a few thousand miles away and 32 miles across.

This idea - that Eratosthenes' data can be interpreted two different ways - was what I would say is the first evidence that compelled me to research the flat-earth movement for myself.  Since that time I have been forced to reject flat-earth claims because they don't hold up to deeper scrutiny.  But I still watch the exchange of ideas with interest.

[FlatDesigner]

Argument isn't a word can be described as "Best" or "Nice" or with any adverb if the subject related with "Any" Science.. This is my opinion..
There can only be told some bunch of ideas related eachother to describe this situation which is this too much Diverse!, Weird!.

I looked for to talk about and learn about In which State of Conciusness of Mind, A Flat Earther start to search on the idea..
Since I was in a state, a month ago, I found mself saying" Oh it may be true"

I studied Chemistry for 3 years in a University, I dropped out Because of calculus..
I Had the best score in High school out of 500 students.. Now I am 48 years old.. I learned Quantum Mechanics..
I have lots of science materials in my memory. Also i knew quite lots of knowledge about Astronomy.. Yeah mostly they are popular science,
since i have been working on drawing and illustration last 20 years..But following scientific research and ideas, just i like them..

But the idea of the Earth is flat shooted me deeply, in the middle of my mind, just in a couple of hours of watching videos, alone, in a middle of a night,
without talking to any people even through internet, just like watching a horror movie and so on..

I am really maybe unnecessarily open minded person.. Maybe little bit dreamer.. Introvert, but quite friendly with my work friends and sometimes talkative..

Most important thing is for me to be honest to myself first. Then Anyone can be honest to others.

Modern sicence is just like the other professions, have their own rules. Have its own society.. And I think Flat Earthers tries to have their Rules first,
Just like Modern Scientist, They have the right to make their own Rules and society.. This is so natural..But difficult,
Since the professional work life, depend on money, and the people don't want to loose their chairs easily.. This is one side of the situation of Arguments on the Subject..

The situation of Flat Earth debate reveals last 2 years around ( again.. they say, i learned frm videos in last month ) .. Even true or not.. Maybe not enough people yet  

I think, In Arguing side, There must some point just in the middle, A flat earther should not be aggresive first, since there is nothing to loose..

My idea is that on the Theory, "Firstly i am to tell, I am neither Flat Earther or Globe Earther"

I am especially very keen on the idea "There must a real reason in the Universe exactly pointing HumanKind in these years, 
And the Flat Earth Theory is focusing so hardly.. It should be contionusly searched..

It is really strange, "Why This Much Big Issue can not be proven
easily with improved technology and clarify to everybody? Even knowing science or not? Or even rejecting Modern Science, no matter.

Secondly The Limited conditions obeying The Earth Size which is just in the limit of Human Visualization, with improving technology"
even you go up to observe it in the Orbiting area.. Iss can not take the whole Photo in one picture,
since it should go further away.. (So it can be Argued)..

Old Earth Globe Photos have diffrent styles.. Maybe due the technical changes in photography ?? (So it can be Argued on both side)

I watched almost all of the videos in Youtube, and also Searched about Zetetic Science just to understand I there is something missing in modern science..

Yes there is maybe, Since I know how to put an Hypothesis and what comes next and next.. Theoritical Science mostly rely on facts of Experimental one, the one just itself can not prooved experimentaly sometimes..
So it is easily can be seen as Fictious Sience.. The ones having deeply konowledge on them can be argued as it is not..
But one can tell how long will take to make theories without real experiments.. On the other side Michio Kaku and his firends needs also money for the big Hadron collider..
I am not sure they do garbage if one says, since the Creation tells humankind "go through inside me with your imagine and senses first, then you can prove and understand me.. I think God befly tells us this way..
God somehow created the way of thinking like this.. Or Atheism Says We think tehere s Got.. Maybe it is mutual someting..We have two sides of brain, one is to sense, other is to count.. First you sense something
then you can prove by measuring.. It is not simultanous.. Earth shape is just like this way.. You feel flat when walk, Then you fly, If it is still flat,
then you should go enough far to see the reality.. There is no way to proof if there are too many conflict on the theories.. Like refraction of light or anything.. Like in Indonessians Lence experiment of shadows.. 
 
Modern Science says, reaching reality can only be done putting some reliable constants, such as working in technology or in daily life.. For example gravity is a constant..
An mechanic engineers needs it calculating even designing a car engine.. If the constant works, then it is real, Because we produce working cars.. But it maybe in Earth conditions??..
So we comeback to same question, Is Space is real? ... It is so big question, one can say even it is not worth to ask it, since we know yes it is..

I think, I am not the one I can think of these questions more.. One reason is, my mind is really blocked thinking on Flat Earth too much..
The other reason is I have no profession and oppotunities working on it.. Thinking freely on a subject is more important, than thinking hard..
Secondly  I have no chance to go space If I have, i really would like to go..
 
I have lot of Arguments on Flat Earth theory but it is not ready in term of visualization.. But important thing is that everybody somehow should think about it without telling
it is silly or stupid..I am on the side of Flat Earthers with this point of View..
With beginnig of 21 century, Modern Science also begins to think on Matrix theory, Chaos Theory, Game Theory and so on..Someone say all these are fictious..
But Human Intension on any subject whom searching on it, should be regarded as a new parameter are told by many scientist, as i know..
If a shoemaker do physic, He does in a different way and maybe more doors open in Physic.. This thoughts are told by many scientist..
So please No Judging people doing their own researches..   

I am not a Flat Earter. But after I watched lots of videos now I am thinking the Globe Earth is maybe still "A Theory" except by the people who had the chance to observe..

Space has expanding they say, the rules and conditions in space surely must be different, Maybe really water inside, I can not refuse this idea or anything,
but "probably" not i am thinking at the moment..

Both theory needs more proof.. For example, Nasa should take real people to ISS..
Maybe with lottery in the world or something. Maybe one day, they really need to proove it to more people.. I think it is not the time yet..

I will follow Flat Eart theory almost everyday for a sometime which i don't know.. I will read but no time to search more, or write..
That's why i tried to wrote my all things now.. ( my native language is not english .. sorry for bad english

If any idea is usefull to any one i would be glad..

My main Question is this :

Dimentional relation of Atmosphere, Orbitting Lenght and the Diameter of Earth, suprisingly are just in the limit of Human Perspective View.. This calls in my mind SkyDome Theory..
Even as a realistic Material, named as Firmament doesn't exist, it does theoritically exists in terms of Human Perception.. So no matter earth is globe from far,
The Earth is Flat for Living Creatures on it..

Skydome theory in religion somehow is Ok for any period of humanity..But the limit is close nowadays maybe..

Saying "Sky is the Limit" can be true somehow in both case..
Revealing of the Real Meanings of Religions is closer or
Like Religions says End of the Humankind Perpective is closer..

In my opinion Creation is something mutual.. But somehow this mutuality can not be observed since we are human as just one eye..  As I understan String theory is closer to this idea..       

In a month, i decided both theory is at the same far for me.. Sometimes one is getting closer, and sometime the other is.. Stay in touch,

I hope the truths are not in the bad intented people, We can only for hope for that as poor people

take care of you all  




   


         

[Hmmm]

JHelzer, but what if there are many artificial suns throughout/around earth, that might optionally have the capability to turn on/off and camouflage along with the clouds like chameleons?
If in different regions there are different suns with different geometrical properties but with the same shape(circle, sphere), and some with the same size, i might be wrong, but i think, it would be a little harder to know the actual circumference of earth.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6625.0

[JHelzer]

JHelzer, but what if there are many artificial suns throughout/around earth ...
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6625.0

Hmmm, Thanks for the invite to comment on your multiple suns topic.  I'll pass since that subject doesn't interest me.  I really don't have anything constructive to say about it.

[3DGeek]

JHelzer, but what if there are many artificial suns throughout/around earth, that might optionally have the capability to turn on/off and camouflage along with the clouds like chameleons?
If in different regions there are different suns with different geometrical properties but with the same shape(circle, sphere), and some with the same size, i might be wrong, but i think, it would be a little harder to know the actual circumference of earth.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6625.0

But people had been tracking the sun for several thousands of years before artificial light was possible.  Eratosthenes did his experiment 2,200 years ago.

The biggest problem FE theory faces in regard of the sun is indeed that it needs to be in different places for different people - but having multiple suns wouldn't fix that because we can travel rapidly from one place to another - keeping the sun in view the whole time.  If there are multiple suns then there would have to be a place where either:

1) There were two suns in the sky at once...or...
2) There were no suns in the sky at all - despite it being daytime...or...
3) The sun "jumped" suddenly from one position to another as one sun was turned off and the next one turned on.

The idea that you could disguise this with a convenient cloud won't work because there are plenty of places in the world where there are almost no clouds in the sky over a period of months.

[Tom Bishop]

JHelzer, but what if there are many artificial suns throughout/around earth, that might optionally have the capability to turn on/off and camouflage along with the clouds like chameleons?
If in different regions there are different suns with different geometrical properties but with the same shape(circle, sphere), and some with the same size, i might be wrong, but i think, it would be a little harder to know the actual circumference of earth.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6625.0

But people had been tracking the sun for several thousands of years before artificial light was possible.  Eratosthenes did his experiment 2,200 years ago.

The biggest problem FE theory faces in regard of the sun is indeed that it needs to be in different places for different people - but having multiple suns wouldn't fix that because we can travel rapidly from one place to another - keeping the sun in view the whole time.  If there are multiple suns then there would have to be a place where either:

1) There were two suns in the sky at once...or...
2) There were no suns in the sky at all - despite it being daytime...or...
3) The sun "jumped" suddenly from one position to another as one sun was turned off and the next one turned on.

The idea that you could disguise this with a convenient cloud won't work because there are plenty of places in the world where there are almost no clouds in the sky over a period of months.

What observations can you quote showing that the sun needs to be in different places for two different people?

[3DGeek]

JHelzer, but what if there are many artificial suns throughout/around earth, that might optionally have the capability to turn on/off and camouflage along with the clouds like chameleons?
If in different regions there are different suns with different geometrical properties but with the same shape(circle, sphere), and some with the same size, i might be wrong, but i think, it would be a little harder to know the actual circumference of earth.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=6625.0

But people had been tracking the sun for several thousands of years before artificial light was possible.  Eratosthenes did his experiment 2,200 years ago.

The biggest problem FE theory faces in regard of the sun is indeed that it needs to be in different places for different people - but having multiple suns wouldn't fix that because we can travel rapidly from one place to another - keeping the sun in view the whole time.  If there are multiple suns then there would have to be a place where either:

1) There were two suns in the sky at once...or...
2) There were no suns in the sky at all - despite it being daytime...or...
3) The sun "jumped" suddenly from one position to another as one sun was turned off and the next one turned on.

The idea that you could disguise this with a convenient cloud won't work because there are plenty of places in the world where there are almost no clouds in the sky over a period of months.

What observations can you quote showing that the sun needs to be in different places for two different people?

Sunsets...sunrises...noontime sun.

You still have no remotely credible answer to this beyond waving hands and saying "perspective"...which doesn't hold water.

See comment in my signature...which you said you'd respond directly to - but have not.

[J-Man]

Hi

I am new to the whole idea of a flat earth and stumbled across the theory thinking people claiming flat earth were mostly just extreme conspiracy theorists (no offence) but was curious to discover that there seems to be a lot of serious people with well rounded arguments and lots of research.

I have an open mind and am not a sceptic, although am naturally sceptical. I am coming from a lifetime of believing the globe earth model though.

I would like to hear peoples single best argument for a flat earth.......

Hello one shot, I hope stinker or his alt comes by soon but in the meantime I think the best evidence for FLAT EARTH is all the lies NASA has to use to trick the sheeple. Here we can watch blatant fakery in the International Space Station live feed which was taped here for a good darn giggle.

[StinkyOne]

Hi

I am new to the whole idea of a flat earth and stumbled across the theory thinking people claiming flat earth were mostly just extreme conspiracy theorists (no offence) but was curious to discover that there seems to be a lot of serious people with well rounded arguments and lots of research.

I have an open mind and am not a sceptic, although am naturally sceptical. I am coming from a lifetime of believing the globe earth model though.

I would like to hear peoples single best argument for a flat earth.......

Hello one shot, I hope stinker or his alt comes by soon but in the meantime I think the best evidence for FLAT EARTH is all the lies NASA has to use to trick the sheeple. Here we can watch blatant fakery in the International Space Station live feed which was taped here for a good darn giggle.

What is your fascination with me? Oh wait, I am pretty fascinating. Also, why do you think I have an alt? I don't. Junker, if you are able to vouch that I have one and only one account, I would appreciate it.

Have you been to a movie in the last 10-15 years? Hollywood can make some exceptionally realistic movies. If NASA wanted to fake it, you would never know. 

[juner]

Junker, if you are able to vouch that I have one and only one account, I would appreciate it.

I can vouch that you do not have any other accounts logging in from your IP. Although you could be using a VPN or Tor for alt accounts, but as far as I can tell that is not the case.

[StinkyOne]

Junker, if you are able to vouch that I have one and only one account, I would appreciate it.

I can vouch that you do not have any other accounts logging in from your IP. Although you could be using a VPN or Tor for alt accounts, but as far as I can tell that is not the case.

Thank you much.

[J-Man]

Hi

I am new to the whole idea of a flat earth and stumbled across the theory thinking people claiming flat earth were mostly just extreme conspiracy theorists (no offence) but was curious to discover that there seems to be a lot of serious people with well rounded arguments and lots of research.

I have an open mind and am not a sceptic, although am naturally sceptical. I am coming from a lifetime of believing the globe earth model though.

I would like to hear peoples single best argument for a flat earth.......

Hello one shot, I hope stinker or his alt comes by soon but in the meantime I think the best evidence for FLAT EARTH is all the lies NASA has to use to trick the sheeple. Here we can watch blatant fakery in the International Space Station live feed which was taped here for a good darn giggle.

What is your fascination with me? Oh wait, I am pretty fascinating. Also, why do you think I have an alt? I don't. Junker, if you are able to vouch that I have one and only one account, I would appreciate it.

Have you been to a movie in the last 10-15 years? Hollywood can make some exceptionally realistic movies. If NASA wanted to fake it, you would never know.

Stink glad you're back. So you're saying this video which was live feed has no fakery in it?

[StinkyOne]

Hi

I am new to the whole idea of a flat earth and stumbled across the theory thinking people claiming flat earth were mostly just extreme conspiracy theorists (no offence) but was curious to discover that there seems to be a lot of serious people with well rounded arguments and lots of research.

I have an open mind and am not a sceptic, although am naturally sceptical. I am coming from a lifetime of believing the globe earth model though.

I would like to hear peoples single best argument for a flat earth.......

Hello one shot, I hope stinker or his alt comes by soon but in the meantime I think the best evidence for FLAT EARTH is all the lies NASA has to use to trick the sheeple. Here we can watch blatant fakery in the International Space Station live feed which was taped here for a good darn giggle.

What is your fascination with me? Oh wait, I am pretty fascinating. Also, why do you think I have an alt? I don't. Junker, if you are able to vouch that I have one and only one account, I would appreciate it.

Have you been to a movie in the last 10-15 years? Hollywood can make some exceptionally realistic movies. If NASA wanted to fake it, you would never know.

Stink glad you're back. So you're saying this video which was live feed has no fakery in it?

Correct, the live feed from NASA is legit. Do your brain a favor and stop believing random weirdos on Youtube.

[3DGeek]

The guy who is narrating that video can in no way be the graphics professional he claims to be.   For example - none of us say "Aurgumented" reality - it's "augmented".   He seems to think that "Rag Doll physics" actually has something to do with rag dolls...and he's claiming that he's doing stuff in realtime which are very clearly being rendered more slowly.

This is a fake video ABOUT fake video's.

[Revel]

Argument isn't a word can be described as "Best" or "Nice" or with any adverb if the subject related with "Any" Science.. This is my opinion..
There can only be told some bunch of ideas related eachother to describe this situation which is this too much Diverse!, Weird!.

I looked for to talk about and learn about In which State of Conciusness of Mind, A Flat Earther start to search on the idea..
Since I was in a state, a month ago, I found mself saying" Oh it may be true"

I studied Chemistry for 3 years in a University, I dropped out Because of calculus..
I Had the best score in High school out of 500 students.. Now I am 48 years old.. I learned Quantum Mechanics..
I have lots of science materials in my memory. Also i knew quite lots of knowledge about Astronomy.. Yeah mostly they are popular science,
since i have been working on drawing and illustration last 20 years..But following scientific research and ideas, just i like them..

But the idea of the Earth is flat shooted me deeply, in the middle of my mind, just in a couple of hours of watching videos, alone, in a middle of a night,
without talking to any people even through internet, just like watching a horror movie and so on..

I am really maybe unnecessarily open minded person.. Maybe little bit dreamer.. Introvert, but quite friendly with my work friends and sometimes talkative..

Most important thing is for me to be honest to myself first. Then Anyone can be honest to others.

Modern sicence is just like the other professions, have their own rules. Have its own society.. And I think Flat Earthers tries to have their Rules first,
Just like Modern Scientist, They have the right to make their own Rules and society.. This is so natural..But difficult,
Since the professional work life, depend on money, and the people don't want to loose their chairs easily.. This is one side of the situation of Arguments on the Subject..

The situation of Flat Earth debate reveals last 2 years around ( again.. they say, i learned frm videos in last month ) .. Even true or not.. Maybe not enough people yet  

I think, In Arguing side, There must some point just in the middle, A flat earther should not be aggresive first, since there is nothing to loose..

My idea is that on the Theory, "Firstly i am to tell, I am neither Flat Earther or Globe Earther"

I am especially very keen on the idea "There must a real reason in the Universe exactly pointing HumanKind in these years, 
And the Flat Earth Theory is focusing so hardly.. It should be contionusly searched..

It is really strange, "Why This Much Big Issue can not be proven
easily with improved technology and clarify to everybody? Even knowing science or not? Or even rejecting Modern Science, no matter.

Secondly The Limited conditions obeying The Earth Size which is just in the limit of Human Visualization, with improving technology"
even you go up to observe it in the Orbiting area.. Iss can not take the whole Photo in one picture,
since it should go further away.. (So it can be Argued)..

Old Earth Globe Photos have diffrent styles.. Maybe due the technical changes in photography ?? (So it can be Argued on both side)

I watched almost all of the videos in Youtube, and also Searched about Zetetic Science just to understand I there is something missing in modern science..

Yes there is maybe, Since I know how to put an Hypothesis and what comes next and next.. Theoritical Science mostly rely on facts of Experimental one, the one just itself can not prooved experimentaly sometimes..
So it is easily can be seen as Fictious Sience.. The ones having deeply konowledge on them can be argued as it is not..
But one can tell how long will take to make theories without real experiments.. On the other side Michio Kaku and his firends needs also money for the big Hadron collider..
I am not sure they do garbage if one says, since the Creation tells humankind "go through inside me with your imagine and senses first, then you can prove and understand me.. I think God befly tells us this way..
God somehow created the way of thinking like this.. Or Atheism Says We think tehere s Got.. Maybe it is mutual someting..We have two sides of brain, one is to sense, other is to count.. First you sense something
then you can prove by measuring.. It is not simultanous.. Earth shape is just like this way.. You feel flat when walk, Then you fly, If it is still flat,
then you should go enough far to see the reality.. There is no way to proof if there are too many conflict on the theories.. Like refraction of light or anything.. Like in Indonessians Lence experiment of shadows.. 
 
Modern Science says, reaching reality can only be done putting some reliable constants, such as working in technology or in daily life.. For example gravity is a constant..
An mechanic engineers needs it calculating even designing a car engine.. If the constant works, then it is real, Because we produce working cars.. But it maybe in Earth conditions??..
So we comeback to same question, Is Space is real? ... It is so big question, one can say even it is not worth to ask it, since we know yes it is..

I think, I am not the one I can think of these questions more.. One reason is, my mind is really blocked thinking on Flat Earth too much..
The other reason is I have no profession and oppotunities working on it.. Thinking freely on a subject is more important, than thinking hard..
Secondly  I have no chance to go space If I have, i really would like to go..
 
I have lot of Arguments on Flat Earth theory but it is not ready in term of visualization.. But important thing is that everybody somehow should think about it without telling
it is silly or stupid..I am on the side of Flat Earthers with this point of View..
With beginnig of 21 century, Modern Science also begins to think on Matrix theory, Chaos Theory, Game Theory and so on..Someone say all these are fictious..
But Human Intension on any subject whom searching on it, should be regarded as a new parameter are told by many scientist, as i know..
If a shoemaker do physic, He does in a different way and maybe more doors open in Physic.. This thoughts are told by many scientist..
So please No Judging people doing their own researches..   

I am not a Flat Earter. But after I watched lots of videos now I am thinking the Globe Earth is maybe still "A Theory" except by the people who had the chance to observe..

Space has expanding they say, the rules and conditions in space surely must be different, Maybe really water inside, I can not refuse this idea or anything,
but "probably" not i am thinking at the moment..

Both theory needs more proof.. For example, Nasa should take real people to ISS..
Maybe with lottery in the world or something. Maybe one day, they really need to proove it to more people.. I think it is not the time yet..

I will follow Flat Eart theory almost everyday for a sometime which i don't know.. I will read but no time to search more, or write..
That's why i tried to wrote my all things now.. ( my native language is not english .. sorry for bad english

If any idea is usefull to any one i would be glad..

My main Question is this :

Dimentional relation of Atmosphere, Orbitting Lenght and the Diameter of Earth, suprisingly are just in the limit of Human Perspective View.. This calls in my mind SkyDome Theory..
Even as a realistic Material, named as Firmament doesn't exist, it does theoritically exists in terms of Human Perception.. So no matter earth is globe from far,
The Earth is Flat for Living Creatures on it..

Skydome theory in religion somehow is Ok for any period of humanity..But the limit is close nowadays maybe..

Saying "Sky is the Limit" can be true somehow in both case..
Revealing of the Real Meanings of Religions is closer or
Like Religions says End of the Humankind Perpective is closer..

In my opinion Creation is something mutual.. But somehow this mutuality can not be observed since we are human as just one eye..  As I understan String theory is closer to this idea..       

In a month, i decided both theory is at the same far for me.. Sometimes one is getting closer, and sometime the other is.. Stay in touch,

I hope the truths are not in the bad intented people, We can only for hope for that as poor people

take care of you all  




   


       

As extensive as this prosy memoir of your generalized thought process seems to be, I see no contribution to the question, is the Earth round or flat to you. Please, you have only introduced yourself. Now move onward.

[Dither]

I really like that video, watched it a while ago.

Sent it to a Christian friend, it didn't convince him, he never even bothered to reply to it.
So don't be disheartened J-man, some people will never get it, even when shown something like this.

[3DGeek]

I've been wanting to reply to FlatDesigners post - but it's long and raises a lot of points.

So I'm just going to dip in and reply to some bits that appeal to me.

I studied Chemistry for 3 years in a University, I dropped out Because of calculus..
I Had the best score in High school out of 500 students.. Now I am 48 years old.. I learned Quantum Mechanics..

Forgive me for being skeptical - but if you flunked university because calculus was hard (trust me, I sympathise!) you must have tried VERY hard to get it straight in your head before finally giving up.

How then could you learn Quantum Mechanics - which is more or less 100% calculus!

I have lots of science materials in my memory. Also i knew quite lots of knowledge about Astronomy.. Yeah mostly they are popular science,

The problem is "popular science" is more "popular" than "science".  Most pop-sci stuff is just junk.   Idiots like Michio Kaku babbling on about how we'll be able to harness wormholes (which do not exist in actual science), tachions (also, don't exist), white holes (guess what?)...argh!

We haven't had decent science shows with good presenters since Patrick Moore (OK - bad example!)

For example gravity is a constant..

No it isn't!   The force of gravity depends on the masses of two objects and the square of the distance between them...definitely NOT a constant.   Even here, on the Earth's surface, the "acceleration DUE to gravity" (not same thing!) is tremendously variable.

The point is that this kind of misapprehension - which is entirely understandable if you don't "get" science - is what leads you astray here.   If gravity isn't constant then the Flat Earth hypothesis that it's due to "universal acceleration" cannot be true.

So unless you're prepared to look one layer deeper beneath the gloss of the superficial - you'll never understand what is a true fact and what is not.

If you read any of the threads I've started on the "Debates" section - you'll see that there are some VERY strong arguments that show up when you look past the superficial.

You have to say: "OK - they say THIS...so what would that mean if I did THAT?"...so they say that the Moon is at a fairly constant altitude of 3,000 miles above the Earth - and I say "So - how would it be if three people looked at the moon at the same time from different latitudes...the North pole, the South pole and the equator?"...and as soon as you make that mental shift, suddenly you realize that the moon would look completely different because you'd be looking at different sides of it.

You ALWAYS have to look one level deeper...don't believe the glossy 'high level' statement...just exercise your brain and dig in a bit further.

When you do that, FET falls apart like a bunch of wet tissue paper.  Nothing holds up to close inspection.

When you do that with RET, you discover the beauty of one simple law of gravity explaining everything from how an apple falls to how galaxies form.  The deeper you look, the more connections you make.  It's astounding how science "just works" in so many ways.

Eventually, you do find things that are hard to fit into the mold - so there is still work to do...but it takes DECADES of immersing yourself in the wonder of what IS known to finally reach the areas of uncertainty.

In FET - you only have to ask "What is the distance between Paris and New York" - and the flat earthers are baffled.

Both theory needs more proof.. For example, Nasa should take real people to ISS..

What makes you think these astronauts are not "real people"?   I worked for a brief time on a simulator for training people on operations involving the ISS and Space Shuttle together (stuff like docking and manipulator arm coordination) - I worked with two astronauts who'd lived for months on the ISS.  They are very real people.  Human in all the ways you'd expect.

My main Question is this :

Dimentional relation of Atmosphere, Orbitting Lenght and the Diameter of Earth, suprisingly are just in the limit of Human Perspective View.. This calls in my mind SkyDome Theory..
Even as a realistic Material, named as Firmament doesn't exist, it does theoritically exists in terms of Human Perception.. So no matter earth is globe from far,
The Earth is Flat for Living Creatures on it..

So are you asking why the limits of human perception are such a good match for the scale of the Earth?

If so, you have it backwards.

Humans evolved to live on the Earth - our senses have been tweaked by the inexorable power of evolution to be just good enough for what we need to do to survive - but no better.  Having better eyesight than you need costs energy and leaves more to go wrong.   So evolution gives us the ability to see just about as far as we need to - and no further.

In my opinion Creation is something mutual.. But somehow this mutuality can not be observed since we are human as just one eye..  As I understan String theory is closer to this idea..       

So it is US who are fitted to the Earth's parameters - and not the other way around.  We are the best animal that can be evolved to fit in the environment we found ourselves in 100,000 years ago.   Since we got our big brains, our ability to make and use tools, and (expecially) the ability to pass on learned knowledge to future generations - we've surpassed evolution and are now shaping the world directly.   Sadly, we're still learning this stuff and are making a bit of a hash of it right now...but we'll get to grips with it eventually, I'm sure.

As I understan String theory is closer to this idea..       

Not really.  String theory is just a bunch of math.  It doesn't mean very much that's profound at all.  There is no possible experiment we can do to prove it (or to disprove it).   It doesn't make testable predictions, so it's not even particularly useful.

We don't know that it's real - I think most scientists are now looking elsewhere for answers.