The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Theory => Topic started by: grepico on September 20, 2016, 03:49:58 PM
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
Flat earthers do not regard photographs as proof or evidence of anything. They would just say that any photograph showing the earth was round was photoshopped, taken with a wide angle lens, et cetera , et cetera, and so forth.
I , too, honestly didn't believe that there were people who believed the earth was flat until I came across this website quite by accident some time ago.
I can see why maybe a person who lived in a very flat "flatland" and had never been more than a few miles from home and had never studiied geography might believe that the earth was flat. But some of us "round earthers" who have studied and observed that the earth is the globe that it is, do wonder why anyone would even think, much less believe, that the earth was flat. There are even some people who are of the opinion that these flat earth websites and The Flat Earth Society is a "spoof." One source put it (Quote) " One big hoax or one big joke."
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
I did just that. Not even with a gopro, but with a open source camera (raspberry pi). I still do that a lot (hobby of mine), but those images are refuted as proof, for a number of reasons. Lens aberration, fisheye perspective (even if it's not), the edge of the disc, whatever.
Unless you can supply a unedited recent photo of the earth as a full sphere, the earth is still flat to them.
We tried with photos from the himawari project, that snaps a full earth photo every 30 minutes. It's written off as a composite image (which all digital images are). So you see, the excuses are full circle, even though I haven't seen a single effort to actually send up a balloon (cheap) has been made by a FE believer.
However, the constantly referenced dogCam video by a FE believer is regarded as a proof of flat earth, even though the video is recorded in a semi fisheye perspective. There's no winning.
I highly recommend that you read "Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories" - You'll learn that being rational with conspiracy theorists changes nothing.
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
I did just that. Not even with a gopro, but with a open source camera (raspberry pi). I still do that a lot (hobby of mine), but those images are refuted as proof, for a number of reasons. Lens aberration, fisheye perspective (even if it's not), the edge of the disc, whatever.
Unless you can supply a unedited recent photo of the earth as a full sphere, the earth is still flat to them.
We tried with photos from the himawari project, that snaps a full earth photo every 30 minutes. It's written off as a composite image (which all digital images are). So you see, the excuses are full circle, even though I haven't seen a single effort to actually send up a balloon (cheap) has been made by a FE believer.
However, the constantly referenced dogCam video by a FE believer is regarded as a proof of flat earth, even though the video is recorded in a semi fisheye perspective. There's no winning.
I highly recommend that you read "Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories" - You'll learn that being rational with conspiracy theorists changes nothing.
I also read a book which had this (Quote). "Conspiracies Theories are invented because some people will not believe that 'things just happen ' ".
-
Shalom and welcome to the forum.
-
I would amend GTG's comment to flat earthers do not regard photographs as evidence for or proof of anything unless the photograph supports their theory. One prolific FE poster has even used animated GIFs to support his theory of bendy light.
Aside from that, I've asked a similar question regarding the ice wall. Why have they never mounted an expedition to map and measure the ice wall?
The clearest, most rational answer I can come to as to why they don't pursue actual proof of their ideas is that what they would quickly be proved wrong if they ever actually tried.
-
.... because they don't believe in science, mathematics, logic, common sense, ...
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
"at very reasonable prices".
Like saying: spend your money to prove I'm wrong/right. Not fair, don't you think?
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
"at very reasonable prices".
Like saying: spend your money to prove I'm wrong/right. Not fair, don't you think?
Well, I do feel like when you take a position that is easily a >1% minority opinion, then the burden of proof would fall on you. Additionally, video and photographic evidence of a round earth is widely available in abundance so what is lacking is the video/photo evidence of the flat position, again it seems the burden of proof would be on you.
Imagine if I made the claim that elephants only walk on two legs, you would show me many pictures and videos of elephants walking on four legs and if my response was that all of that evidence was fake or tampered with, you would rightfully, demand my proof of my claim. I think that's the same thing right?
-
Hello all,
First, full disclosure. I honestly didn't believe there were people that believed the Earth was flat when a friend told me so. I came here and sure enough, apparently there are.
After reading this forum for about 2 hours, I am genuinely curious about something. I want to be absolutely clear, I'm not being facetious or condescending, I'm genuinely asking this because I genuinely want to know the answer. So here goes:
With the technology that's available at very reasonable prices (i.e. weather balloon and a go pro), it seems that you could simply find out for yourself with definitive certainty if the Earth was round or flat. The red bull stratos video comes to mind. So, the question: Why not just do that?
I've seen a lot of posts that pose many different proofs using math and perspective, etc. But it seems like the easiest proof would be to just send up a camera and look.
Again, I can't stress this enough. I'm asking a serious question and I'm interested in a serious answer. This is not any kind of troll or attempt to belittle your beliefs.
Thanks,
"at very reasonable prices".
Like saying: spend your money to prove I'm wrong/right. Not fair, don't you think?
Well, I do feel like when you take a position that is easily a >1% minority opinion, then the burden of proof would fall on you. Additionally, video and photographic evidence of a round earth is widely available in abundance so what is lacking is the video/photo evidence of the flat position, again it seems the burden of proof would be on you.
Imagine if I made the claim that elephants only walk on two legs, you would show me many pictures and videos of elephants walking on four legs and if my response was that all of that evidence was fake or tampered with, you would rightfully, demand my proof of my claim. I think that's the same thing right?
They don't even believe those of us in the Southern Hemisphere when we tell them we cannot see Polaris !!
An observable fact which they either ignore, or refuse to believe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4DF9n3ItB0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYPJ3gGQhPU
And even though the Himawari8 photos are NOT composite... one taken every 10 minutes from 22,000km above the equator and uploaded to the internet in real time, they still claim they are apparently all CGI ... which would mean thousands of CGI artists and hundreds of thousands of people all over the Asia Pacific region to call in what the cloud cover looks like every 10 minutes, cos I can look out my window at any time of the day and confirm the cloud cover on the latest Himawari photo!
http://himawari8.nict.go.jp/ (http://himawari8.nict.go.jp/)
And of course all those old astronomers that lived before NASA was even created in 1958 and who all knew the earth was a sphere ... Aristarchus, Eratosthenes, Aristotle, Plato, Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Galileo, etc etc etc ... well obviously NASA must have invented a Time Machine to go back in time to bribe them all to say that the earth was a sphere ... although of course they've never really landed a man on the moon.
And then there's the 14,225 photos taken during the Apollo missions which were all taken on cameras with film which had to be processed, when CGI was not possible ... yep all taken in a studio or faked or painted in some way !!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/)
Then there are the flights in the Southern Hemisphere eg Sydney to Santiago or Sydney to Johannesburg ... flights which would take twice as long if the earth was flat with the north pole in the middle and the antarctic all around the edge. They deny these flights even happen.
Then there is the availability of flights, cruises and overland expeditions over Antarctica and to the South Pole, and the fact that around 40,000 tourists and researchers and support staff visit Antarctica each year ... all lies they say, Antarctica is guarded by NASA and nobody can go near the "edge". Nobody has ever seen the "ice wall" but they claim it is there !!
Then there is the fact that they can't come up with a map ... the one they have totally distorts continents and oceans the further south these countries and continents are located. This should be the easiest thing in the world to create, because IF the earth was flat then creating a map should be incredibly straightforward. The reason the Gleason Projection is so distorted is because it is a 2 dimensional representation of a 3 dimensional earth.
Then there is the sunset and sunrises at the spring and autumn equinoxes, when it is observable that every place along a particular longitude will have sunrise and sunset at the same time... but if the sun is a spotlight then it will shine a circular light on the earth, which means that the sun will NOT rise or set at the same time for any given longitude.
And then there is the outright misunderstanding that you would even expect to see curvature at sea level if you are on a massive sphere ... I have posed the question "if you were on a sphere what would you expect to see if you could see the horizon in all directions and you rotated a 360 degree circle... would you expect it to go down each side and then come back up again as you finished your 360 degree rotation? If you did you would probably be on a massive cylinder ... none of them apparently can think in 3 dimensions, or imagine the vastness of our earth.
Plus no gravity, the earth is apparently flying "up" at 9.8 m/s (not even their unit is correct as gravity is measure on the surface of the earth as 9.8 m/s2
But obviously they need some way to explain why apples fall off trees and don't fly off into the atmosphere (which they call the atmoplane!)
Then their is the total lack of predictions that can be made using the flat earth model ! As you are no doubt aware every scientific theory should be able to make predictions, but I've yet to see the flat earthers' calculations for predictions of the next total solar eclipse for any particular place on earth eg Northern America, or the transits of Venus, Mars or Mercury, or the alignment of the visible planets. They claim that we can only predict eclipses because they occur at regular intervals, but in reality they are calculated using the fact that our earth is spherical in a heliocentric solar system http://www.eclipse2017.org/2017/path_through_the_US.htm (http://www.eclipse2017.org/2017/path_through_the_US.htm)
It has been pointed out to them that they could write a paper outlining the observations, experiments, and predictions made using calculations derived from the flat earth model and their proposed theory of a flat earth and have it peer reviewed, published in a respectable scientific journal and probably win a Nobel Prize... but no... claims of "all the scientists in the world are in on the conspiracy and would not allow the paper to be published"
Then there is the big question ... why are "they" trying to "hide" the flat earth reality from us, and how many millions of people would be needed to keep the spherical earth "lie" alive ???
That's just what I can think of off the top of my head ...
Welcome to the craziness !! I largely blame the free availability of an "education" from the UToob College of Conspiracy and the Diplomas of Ignorance that it hands out to anyone who is gullible enough !!!!
But none of them will ever change their mind ... because that would mean admitting you were wrong... plus two "science" books - one written 2000 years ago and another written in 1881 just have to be more accurate than our current knowledge of astrophysics, much of which has been discovered using technologies which were not even invented in 1881 !!
-
They don't even believe those of us in the Southern Hemisphere when we tell them we cannot see Polaris !!
Who is this "they" of which you speak? Could I see some quotes? I can't say I've seen any of us deny such basic facts before.
Then there are the flights in the Southern Hemisphere eg Sydney to Santiago or Sydney to Johannesburg ... flights which would take twice as long if the earth was flat with the north pole in the middle and the antarctic all around the edge. They deny these flights even happen.
Sorry, that's completely untrue. Again, I doubt you've met anyone here who denied that these flights happen.
Then there is the sunset and sunrises at the spring and autumn equinoxes, when it is observable that every place along a particular longitude will have sunrise and sunset at the same time... but if the sun is a spotlight then it will shine a circular light on the earth, which means that the sun will NOT rise or set at the same time for any given longitude.
Please learn at least the very basics of FET before trying to discuss them. Making your own version of the Flat Earth and then debunking it is what we usually call a "straw man (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)".
Plus no gravity, the earth is apparently flying "up" at 9.8 m/s (not even their unit is correct as gravity is measure on the surface of the earth as 9.8 m/s2
So, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, allow me to reiterate: you're making shit up. No FES member has ever suggested that the Earth is moving upwards at a constant speed of 9.8m/s. It's in our FAQ. Read it.
Then there is the big question ... why are "they" trying to "hide" the flat earth reality from us, and how many millions of people would be needed to keep the spherical earth "lie" alive
Have you tried reading the Wiki? There's a whole article about this, you know. You pose some of the most frequently asked, boring, tired questions, except you pose them up as "the big question!!1!"
That's just what I can think of off the top of my head ...
Yes, now if you substitute "the top of your head" with some actual literature, you might be able to ask better questions.
two "science" books - one written 2000 years ago
Nice Bible reference, but we're not a religious organisation.
It sounds like you're either:
- making shit up, or
- confusing random YouTubers (many of which consider the Flat Earth Society to be a bunch of no-good heretics) with the Flat Earth Society
In either case, you're being very presumptuous. Not a single thing you've said here has anything to do with what this Society believes. If you have an issue with what someone else has said, why don't you raise it with them instead of wasting everyone's time here?
-
They don't even believe those of us in the Southern Hemisphere when we tell them we cannot see Polaris !!
Who is this "they" of which you speak? Could I see some quotes? I can't say I've seen any of us deny such basic facts before.
Then there are the flights in the Southern Hemisphere eg Sydney to Santiago or Sydney to Johannesburg ... flights which would take twice as long if the earth was flat with the north pole in the middle and the antarctic all around the edge. They deny these flights even happen.
Sorry, that's completely untrue. Again, I doubt you've met anyone here who denied that these flights happen.
Then there is the sunset and sunrises at the spring and autumn equinoxes, when it is observable that every place along a particular longitude will have sunrise and sunset at the same time... but if the sun is a spotlight then it will shine a circular light on the earth, which means that the sun will NOT rise or set at the same time for any given longitude.
Please learn at least the very basics of FET before trying to discuss them. Making your own version of the Flat Earth and then debunking it is what we usually call a "straw man (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)".
Plus no gravity, the earth is apparently flying "up" at 9.8 m/s (not even their unit is correct as gravity is measure on the surface of the earth as 9.8 m/s2
So, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, allow me to reiterate: you're making shit up. No FES member has ever suggested that the Earth is moving upwards at a constant speed of 9.8m/s. It's in our FAQ. Read it.
Then there is the big question ... why are "they" trying to "hide" the flat earth reality from us, and how many millions of people would be needed to keep the spherical earth "lie" alive
Have you tried reading the Wiki? There's a whole article about this, you know. You pose some of the most frequently asked, boring, tired questions, except you pose them up as "the big question!!1!"
That's just what I can think of off the top of my head ...
Yes, now if you substitute "the top of your head" with some actual literature, you might be able to ask better questions.
two "science" books - one written 2000 years ago
Nice Bible reference, but we're not a religious organisation.
It sounds like you're either:
- making shit up, or
- confusing random YouTubers (many of which consider the Flat Earth Society to be a bunch of no-good heretics) with the Flat Earth Society
In either case, you're being very presumptuous. Not a single thing you've said here has anything to do with what this Society believes. If you have an issue with what someone else has said, why don't you raise it with them instead of wasting everyone's time here?
Why don't you, as a flat earth believer and an admin, answer the OP instead of attacking those who actually replied?
-
Why don't you, as a flat earth believer and an admin
I'm not an admin. What is it with you RE'ers never getting things right?
And even if I were an admin, how on Earth would that matter? Answering people's questions is not an admin task.
answer the OP instead of attacking those who actually replied?
Two reasons:
- Priorities. Fighting back against slanderous remarks is much more important to me than answering the same question multiple times.
- The question has already been answered pretty well by somebody else. What good would it do if I said the same thing?
"at very reasonable prices".
Like saying: spend your money to prove I'm wrong/right. Not fair, don't you think?
Besides, you know very well that I personally supported and encouraged people to support a similar initiative. I'm sure you remember it well because you took a lot of your time to try and troll that specific thread (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=3449.0).
-
Why don't you, as a flat earth believer and an admin
I'm not an admin. What is it with you RE'ers never getting things right?
Fair enough, my mistake. That rethorical question does smell a bit like sweet irony though. :)
-
As you asked "genuine question", well, let me give "genuine answer", how's that? Fair enough. After watching some FEs' videos, you're now as curious as other inquisitive people on topics about FE (or GE?). Well, keep it up! It's a good way to know what's going on and find the truth out there someday. Let me give you a simple analogy. These FEs and GEs debates now going on and becoming viral are all wanting to prove their own claims about earth, but some of them are just too narrow-minded and stubborn not to see that their opponents also have a valid point. The very reason why they keep on fighting, insulting, disrespecting, cursing, etc... You know, people behave badly under fictitious names. Dare them their true identity, and they'll curse no more... :) Anyway, these FEs actually started it all long ago, decades or even centuries perhaps, and of course, GEs, including you and me in a way as we're taught or grew with GE science since we're young, could not just accept their claims, proofs, etc. as they don't conform to what GEs were made to believe eversince. So that's where the arguments and debates started.
Now, if you ask me if these FEs have a point. I would not be telling the truth if I say they don't. They have a point. But there those who are not really that serious as FEs, beware of them, they'll just confuse you more. Better be selective in getting your info about FE / GE issues. Of course, GEs are also like that, some of them. Well, we can really verify as we know also how science and GE work. If you watch FE videos and websites, you'll really ask questions because of their valid observations and supporting data for their claims, and we, or GEs, don't have all the convincing explanations plus the fact that there are fake or fraud incidents perpetrated by science or political people of the modern world. You know, this world is full of hidden agenda and political maneuvering that we just could not get to the truth in a silver platter. In fact, I see these GEs and FEs as both correct in their respective claims, only that they could not see that such that they insist that their claims are the only correct one, where in fact, both of them might have been right. You know, seeing the truth from different perspective or vantage point. The very reason why I encourage them to elevate their debates to a higher level to see the forest that they're looking at the same thing. This is the only way by which they can arrive at what's really the truth about earth. Keep asking questions about FE wrt to GE. As we know already about GE, know more about FE. We'll eventually arrive at the real truth out there someday... be one of the truth seekers then... :)
-
As you asked "genuine question", well, let me give "genuine answer", how's that? Fair enough. After watching some FEs' videos, you're now as curious as other inquisitive people on topics about FE (or GE?). Well, keep it up! It's a good way to know what's going on and find the truth out there someday. Let me give you a simple analogy. These FEs and GEs debates now going on and becoming viral are all wanting to prove their own claims about earth, but some of them are just too narrow-minded and stubborn not to see that their opponents also have a valid point. The very reason why they keep on fighting, insulting, disrespecting, cursing, etc... You know, people behave badly under fictitious names. Dare them their true identity, and they'll curse no more... :) Anyway, these FEs actually started it all long ago, decades or even centuries perhaps, and of course, GEs, including you and me in a way as we're taught or grew with GE science since we're young, could not just accept their claims, proofs, etc. as they don't conform to what GEs were made to believe eversince. So that's where the arguments and debates started.
Now, if you ask me if these FEs have a point. I would not be telling the truth if I say they don't. They have a point. But there those who are not really that serious as FEs, beware of them, they'll just confuse you more. Better be selective in getting your info about FE / GE issues. Of course, GEs are also like that, some of them. Well, we can really verify as we know also how science and GE work. If you watch FE videos and websites, you'll really ask questions because of their valid observations and supporting data for their claims, and we, or GEs, don't have all the convincing explanations plus the fact that there are fake or fraud incidents perpetrated by science or political people of the modern world. You know, this world is full of hidden agenda and political maneuvering that we just could not get to the truth in a silver platter. In fact, I see these GEs and FEs as both correct in their respective claims, only that they could not see that such that they insist that their claims are the only correct one, where in fact, both of them might have been right. You know, seeing the truth from different perspective or vantage point. The very reason why I encourage them to elevate their debates to a higher level to see the forest that they're looking at the same thing. This is the only way by which they can arrive at what's really the truth about earth. Keep asking questions about FE wrt to GE. As we know already about GE, know more about FE. We'll eventually arrive at the real truth out there someday... be one of the truth seekers then... :)
You long paragraphs are very hard to read, especially on the screen of a tablet.
Especially as you seem to ramble on ( ;) I thought that was my prerogative ;)) without ever seeming to get anywhere.
-
Well, I do feel like when you take a position that is easily a >1% minority opinion, then the burden of proof would fall on you. Additionally, video and photographic evidence of a round earth is widely available in abundance so what is lacking is the video/photo evidence of the flat position, again it seems the burden of proof would be on you.
Imagine if I made the claim that elephants only walk on two legs, you would show me many pictures and videos of elephants walking on four legs and if my response was that all of that evidence was fake or tampered with, you would rightfully, demand my proof of my claim. I think that's the same thing right?
Most people in the world also believe that there is a magical fairy in the sky that grants wishes... should the existence of this fairy be taken for granted as fact until proven otherwise simply because most people believe it?
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it. Our evidence is very real and direct, while the RE evidence requires a leap of trust and a leap of faith. Just because most people share this faith does not put the burden of proof on us. The claim of a Round Earth is a positive claim in the face of contradicting evidence, and therefore the burden is on the Round Earther to prove that position.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
-
So, the question: Why not just do that?
--- because it is unnecessary.
-
Well, I do feel like when you take a position that is easily a >1% minority opinion, then the burden of proof would fall on you. Additionally, video and photographic evidence of a round earth is widely available in abundance so what is lacking is the video/photo evidence of the flat position, again it seems the burden of proof would be on you.
Imagine if I made the claim that elephants only walk on two legs, you would show me many pictures and videos of elephants walking on four legs and if my response was that all of that evidence was fake or tampered with, you would rightfully, demand my proof of my claim. I think that's the same thing right?
Most people in the world also believe that there is a magical fairy in the sky that grants wishes... should the existence of this fairy be taken for granted as fact until proven otherwise simply because most people believe it?
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it. Our evidence is very real and direct, while the RE evidence requires a leap of trust and a leap of faith. Just because most people share this faith does not put the burden of proof on us. The claim of a Round Earth is a positive claim in the face of contradicting evidence, and therefore the burden is on the Round Earther to prove that position.
I look out the window each day and see the sun setting and know someone further to the east sees it occuring later. Measuring the angle of the sun from different locations at different times proves a round earth, as you know.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
The RE evidence presented on this forum is often explained by lack of research. There has not been an argument which was not badly flawed.
See the following argument:
I look out the window each day and see the sun setting and know someone further to the east sees it occuring later. Measuring the angle of the sun from different locations at different times proves a round earth, as you know.
And who measured these angles?
The flaw in your argument is that you are assuming favorable results for an experiment which may not have occurred. I submit that it probably did not occur. If there were such an experiment, unless it was very recent, believe me, we would be among the first to know about it.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
The RE evidence presented on this forum is often explained by lack of research. There has not been an argument which was not badly flawed.
See the following argument:
I look out the window each day and see the sun setting and know someone further to the east sees it occuring later. Measuring the angle of the sun from different locations at different times proves a round earth, as you know.
And who measured these angles?
The flaw in your argument is that you are assuming favorable results for an experiment which may not have occurred. I submit that it probably did not occur. If there were such an experiment, unless it was very recent, believe me, we would be among the first to know about it.
Yet you can't even come up with a believable explanation for:
Sunrise and sunset.
Moonrise and moonset.
The fact the everyone who can see the moon sees almost exactly the same phase.
The fact that the sun's angular size stays exactly the same (well we'll allow 0.004%) all the time from sunrise to sunset, except for some distortion near the horizon.
Lunar eclipses.
Etc, etc.
So many simple observations, yet they elicit the most convoluted Flat Earth explanations.
Sure, I haven't made all these observations myself, so what?
Yes, I've looked up the Wiki!
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
I'm the same way with avatars. For example I picture you as a velociraptor. Imamate faceless objects I have no problem with though.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
The RE evidence presented on this forum is often explained by lack of research. There has not been an argument which was not badly flawed.
It's easy to just make a blanket declaration that they are all flawed, but I can pull up a list of arguments for which no flaw has been pointed out. Would you like me to? You are just talking out of your butt, as usual.
I'm the same way with avatars. For example I picture you as a velociraptor. Imamate faceless objects I have no problem with though.
A thoughtful velociraptor. Don't forget the thoughtful part! You can tell by the way my finger (talon?) is quizzically positioned near my chin.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
The RE evidence presented on this forum is often explained by lack of research. There has not been an argument which was not badly flawed.
It's easy to just make a blanket declaration that they are all flawed, but I can pull up a list of arguments for which no flaw has been pointed out. Would you like me to? You are just talking out of your butt, as usual.
I'm the same way with avatars. For example I picture you as a velociraptor. Imamate faceless objects I have no problem with though.
A thoughtful velociraptor. Don't forget the thoughtful part! You can tell by the way my finger (talon?) is quizzically positioned near my chin.
Oh yeah. My bad.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
The burden of proof is on the Round Earther, as his position is one beyond empirical experience. It's not impossible to post valid evidence, and you may have posted some, I have yet to look at all of your posts, but the burden of proof starts with the Round Earther, which holds regardless of what is true.
-
In actuality if you want evidence of a Flat Earth you simply need to look out your window. If you want evidence of a Round Earth you need to take the military's word for it.
How do you even say this with a straight face? (In my mind I picture you exactly like your profile picture, so I just assume you have a perpetually straight face with a slightly raised eyebrow.) I have personally posted quite a bit of very straightforward evidence that requires absolutely no trust in the military. Others have posted tons of evidence as well that requires no trust in the military. Have you not browsed the forums recently?
On the other hand, the evidence for a flat earth begins and ends with "look out your window". The fact that you even consider this evidence is just evidence of your own personal bias. Any rational person would realize that the earth is way too big to notice any horizontal curvature at ground level, regardless of whether it is round or flat.
The burden of proof is on the Round Earther, as his position is one beyond empirical experience. It's not impossible to post valid evidence, and you may have posted some, I have yet to look at all of your posts, but the burden of proof starts with the Round Earther, which holds regardless of what is true.
So... does this mean you are retracting your statement about needing to relying on the military's word? Or are you just going to pretend you didn't say it?
And honestly, I don't really mind shouldering the burden of proof. It would be way too easy without some kind of massive handicap. That being said, does it really not bother you that you hold your own arguments to a lower standard than those of others?
-
Don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but this generation isn't the first to look into Flat Earth. Historically, in most relatively peaceful times, Flat Earth becomes a big thing; but it is always interrupted by war before it can get too far. Not saying WW3 is about to start, but *cough cough cough*
Here is a good example:
http://imgur.com/gallery/miXLb
Auguste Piccard set record heights in the 1930s. From an altitude of 23,000 m (75,459 ft), he reported that the Earth seemed "a flat disk".
And it is true, most videos are recorded with fish eye lens cameras; when the camera looks down, you see a 'frowning curve', when it looks level with the horizon, it is 'flat', and when it looks up, you see a 'smiling curve'.
Ultimately there is currently no real way to make money proving the Flat Earth. And it's no one's job to spoon feed you, whether or not you are genuinely interested. Education simply isn't free, someone has to pay for it somewhere along the line. There are a few high altitude cam videos out there shot without fish eye lens cameras; they all, without exception, show a flat plane.
-
Don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but this generation isn't the first to look into Flat Earth. Historically, in most relatively peaceful times, Flat Earth becomes a big thing; but it is always interrupted by war before it can get too far. Not saying WW3 is about to start, but *cough cough cough*
I suspect that is because during times of war, there is less time for pondering scientific theories of... ahem... dubious quality. The only research going on is highly practical stuff. One would think that if the earth were ACTUALLY flat, flat earth theories would receive a boon during wartime, considering how important maps are for successful military campaigns.
There are a few high altitude cam videos out there shot without fish eye lens cameras; they all, without exception, show a flat plane.
Care to link one or two? I've seen flat earthers make this claim before. Every time I actually measure, the claim turns out to be false. For example, the dogcam video. Speaking of measuring, did you bother calculating how much curvature you would expect to see if the earth was round, based on the given altitude and camera?
-
I suspect that is because during times of war, there is less time for pondering scientific theories of... ahem... dubious quality. The only research going on is highly practical stuff. One would think that if the earth were ACTUALLY flat, flat earth theories would receive a boon during wartime, considering how important maps are for successful military campaigns.
Who gets to say which scientific inquiries are dubious? Depends on who is financing what kind of research, for what reason and to what ends; the funding has to come from somewhere. If Oreo poured money into 'scientifically' proving Oreos were healthy, would that be dubious? I'm not going to argue that. It is impossible to tell if something is dubious without thoroughly investigating it in any case. Most wars in the [previous resurgences of FE movement] have been very localized, in small geographic pockets. Nowadays, with technology such as Aircraft Carriers, Fighter Jets, ICBM, etc, yes that makes sense to know the shape of the world a little better. Though without testing them on 'global' distances, you can't be sure. I'm not bringing VFR/IFR rules (https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLRTva6m.png&t=568&c=zL_gmXWzy35vqw) into this simple topic though, we already have some of those here discussing flight paths (https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?action=search2) and nautical lines/ocean transport. I like to keep my options open for now until I understand this thing better.
As for practicality. You might have heard of a little Official NASA 1988 publication 1207, Derivation and Definition of a Linear Aircraft (https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88104main_H-1391.pdf) manual, which contains the phrases:
"The lack of documentation and, occasionally, understanding of the derivation of linear models is a hindrance to communication, training, and application. This report details the development of the linear model of a rigid aircraft of constant mass, flying over a flat, nonrotating earth. [...] By defining the initial conditions (of the nominal trajectory) for straight and level flight and setting the asymmetric aerodynamic and inertia terms to zero, one can easily obtain the more traditional linear models from the linear model derived in this report." - Introduction, p6.
"This report derives and defines a set of linearized system matrices for a rigid aircraft of constant mass, flying in a stationary atmosphere over a flat, nonrotating earth. Both generalized and standard linear system equations are derived from nonlinear six-degree-of-freedom equations of motion and a large collection of nonlinear observation (measurement) equations. This derivation of a linear model is general and makes no assumptions on either the reference (nominal) trajectory about which the model is linearized or the symmetry of the vehicle mass and aerodynamic properties." - Concluding remarks, p35.
Well, I guess investigating flat earth geometry isn't practical!
Care to link one or two? I've seen flat earthers make this claim before. Every time I actually measure, the claim turns out to be false. For example, the dogcam video. Speaking of measuring, did you bother calculating how much curvature you would expect to see if the earth was round, based on the given altitude and camera?
I was just offering an answer to the question. Youtube is so inundated with GoPro fish eye lense cameras now it's hard. I did look to try to find a few as an example, but the first 25 results I got were all fish eye lens. Literally. The first 25. I gave up. Feel free to search "High altitude balloon" and see for yourself. In any case, Field of View has to be taken into consideration, even if it appears 'flat'. Just because it looks flat doesn't mean it is. Though the overwhelming amount of fish eye lenses is somewhat odd.
Like I said, I'm not spoon feeding. I just offered what I offered, no more, no less. Though Kerbal space program is a nice tool to demonstrate how much curvature there should be. 8 inches to the mile squared is what wikipedia says (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/Earth's_Curvature.png) for a spherical Earth. Most (decent human beings) show the altitude in their videos, or even mention it in the title. Not too hard to figure out the expected curve if you have (an accurate bearing on) the altitude. Though, to be fair, as I said, I don't know to what extent and Field of View mechanics should be included to interpret such an equation. I'm still learning about perspective.
I'm not one to say "this is how it is". I will kindly point the right way to find for yourself (though I may be snide), but I ain't gonna say "here's what you should think about it". Unless I happen to think it's funny at the moment. ;D
Also, Watch the earth smile here @ 2:57! (https://youtu.be/p4V-SRWG4SM?t=2m57s) This is what I mean by 'fish eye lens cameras' for those who don't know. Understand if I sound frustrated this is why. Of course I could use a non-fish eye lens myself, though I'm beginning to think maybe you can't get a permit for that anymore!
EDIT: I think I found a non-fish eye lens clip here. It's a 2+ hour sunrise video, low quality camera, but I'm seeing what could be measurable curvature. This is a first for me! I learned something today, maybe. Check here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVkiixUDuzA). He claims it may have reaches at least ~117,000 (feet I assume). He also mentions that this launch had a 'top view' camera, which he is currently uploading (a 30 gb file). I'm not sure if it's non-fish eye, it doesn't seem to ever go low or high enough angle to tell. 2:28:57 there appears to be curvature. Shortly after, you see the 'mound' of darkness on the horizon, where the 'night time' is retreating. Also, note that your field of view is a circle. So, it is all too easy to write off the field of view as the 'curvature'.
-
Good point. It was merely my assertion that it is dubious, which certainly doesn't make it true. Here is slightly fairer wording of the point I was trying to make that I think we can agree on:
Amateur science tends to stop during wartime, because the amateurs tend to get drafted. Flat earth "science" is quite exclusively an amateur pursuit. As you said, there isn't much money in it.
Well, I guess investigating flat earth geometry isn't practical!
I actually said that it WOULD be practical, if the earth is indeed flat. So... we agree?
Anyway, the linear aircraft manual isn't hinting that the earth is flat. It is merely stating that there is no point in taking account the curvature of the earth while deriving the equations of motion of an aircraft. Because the earth is really big, and most aircraft don't go fast enough for it to matter. You could of course take into account the curvature and rotation of the earth, but all it will do is complicate the derivation. The final numbers that it would spit out are virtually identical. Which is why they they don't bother.
Though the overwhelming amount of fish eye lenses is somewhat odd.
Not at all. There are several reasons why they all use wide angle lens.
1. Stability. The camera on a balloon won't be as stable as a camera on a tripod. Wide angle lens make the shaking much less noticeable.
2. Depth of field. No one is up there to focus the camera. A narrow lens requires precise focus.
3. Aim. No one is up there to aim the camera. A narrow lens requires precise aim. A wide angle lens.... eh... general direction of the horizon is good enough.
The trade off of course is the optical distortion. Since most people aren't trying to prove the shape of the earth with these videos, they don't really care about the distortion.
EDIT: I think I found a non-fish eye lens clip here. It's a 2+ hour sunrise video, low quality camera, but I'm seeing what could be measurable curvature. This is a first for me! I learned something today, maybe. Check here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVkiixUDuzA). He claims it may have reaches at least ~117,000 (feet I assume). He also mentions that this launch had a 'top view' camera, which he is currently uploading (a 30 gb file). I'm not sure if it's non-fish eye, it doesn't seem to ever go low or high enough angle to tell. 2:28:57 there appears to be curvature. Shortly after, you see the 'mound' of darkness on the horizon, where the 'night time' is retreating. Also, note that your field of view is a circle. So, it is all too easy to write off the field of view as the 'curvature'.
Sorry to rain on your parade, but at the beginning he lists the cameras as GoPro Hero 3/4 Silver/Black. 5.4mm lens. I think that equates to a 140 degree horizontal FOV for the Silver, which is pretty wide. :(
FOV = 2*arctan((sensor width / 2) / focal length)
Practically the exact same math as from the other thread about perspective! Coincidence...?
One way to eliminate optical distortion as a culprit is to measure the curvature twice. Once when the horizon is on the bottom half of the picture, once when it is on the top half of the picture. If they are curved in opposite directions, you can definitely attribute it to distortion. If they are curved in the same direction, it probably isn't optical distortion. Probably.
Edit: Posted early. Weird. Added the second half of my reply.
-
Oops! Correction to my last post: Apparently the 5.4mm GoPro lens is a rectilinear lens, with an approximately 60 degree FOV. I must have misread the sensor size. This means there is probably minimal (if any) barrel distortion, and any curvature you see in that video is probably legit.
-
Good point. It was merely my assertion that it is dubious, which certainly doesn't make it true. Here is slightly fairer wording of the point I was trying to make that I think we can agree on:
Amateur science tends to stop during wartime, because the amateurs tend to get drafted. Flat earth "science" is quite exclusively an amateur pursuit. As you said, there isn't much money in it.
Understood. I just thought it was funny military industrial complex (or at least NASA) got that frustrated. That wording was exquisite (http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/019/698/d96.jpg). ;D They literally said "F it" as intellectually as possible in the Synopsis :)
Anyway, the linear aircraft manual isn't hinting that the earth is flat.
I know, didn't mean to apply it was. I was just illustrating even in war times FE geometry has practical applications, though I don't really know how to make any money on it otherwise.
Depth of field.
The trade off of course is the optical distortion. Since most people aren't trying to prove the shape of the earth with these videos, they don't really care about the distortion.
Dang it I've been trying to work DoF into an argument for a while. I don't know much about it (other than from a 'video game design standpoint'). I had a basic understanding of these principles, but never thought of it such explicit terms.
So you basically answered the initial question here. Hard to get stability up there, with all the rotating. Most use go-pros, which have fish eye lenses for focus at cost of accurate curvature. Then there's *boring* the math lel.
Anyway I've never seen that dark patch receding at that altitude before. That was still an interesting video for that. I didn't know the darkness peels back like a scab or something and hangs on the horizon at sunrise... Nor do I think I saw and sundogs or anticrepuscular rays at that altitude. Hmmm... that might have some bearing on that other theory of p-brane? I think you know to which I'm referring...
Thanks for clarifying the camera, I didn't even think to look it up. I assumed it was a sort of budget go-pro. 2:31:00 (https://youtu.be/MVkiixUDuzA?t=2h30m57s) just for reference (look if you want). The 'ring of light' with the 'darker eye' above, might be an interesting and useful observation for later studies. I'm assuming this is the form 'crepuscular rays' or 'sundogs' take at that altitude for now, but I assume there is a simpler more obvious explanation.