Now... I have posted a few things under ask a flat earth theorist anything, and I'm pretty sure I won't get an answer. So I thought I'd just go ahead and post the last 2 under the debate board.

**I am trying to avoid anything that could be viewed as flaming. Which is quite fun.** I am simply doing a bit of maths, and looking at what it tells me.

So... The answer I got was the earth is accelerating at 9.8ms^-2, producing the same effect as gravity.

*Facepalm.

This is quite an interesting point however, as this implies certain things.

1. There is no gravitational force holding the moon in place.... So what, spooky force? Okay great explanation

2. Every single thing that does not orbit the earth is... A lie? Binary star systems? You know... The ones you can look at? The moons of every other planet?

Okay A*

3. So the earth accelerates at 9.8ms^2 and there is no gravity. The earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old (Following radioactive decay dating). I know you think the earth is something like 4000 years old though... So I'll go with that. Yeah this is.... I mean feel free to check my calculations but..... If the age of the earth is 4000 years old, that is about 1.2623 x 10^11 seconds. Now, you say the earth is accelerating at 9.8ms^-2. That means, following v = u + at, with a being 9.8ms^-2, t being 1.2623 x 10^11 and assuming u = 0 (Start at zero velocity), that the earth has a velocity of approximately 1.23705 x 10^12 ms^-1. The speed of light is about 2.998 x 10^8ms^-1.

Simplified

Following what this society "teaches" with the earth accelerating at 9.8ms^-2 and the age of the earth being 4000 years.

The earth is travelling at a velocity of at least 1,237,050,000,000 metres every second. (2,767,202,040,085.9 mph).

A little comparison, the speed of light is about 299,800,000 metres every second. (670,633,500.4 mph).

So this society is claiming all experimental evidence of the speed of light is incorrect. One of the cornerstones of modern physics is completely and utterly wrong. It's easy to claim certain things that the average person could accept, but the predictions based on that hypothesis need to be validated by experimental evidence. And quite simply.... This simple calculation based on what you're telling me is just mind boggling. The idea that the earth is travelling at that velocity is just.... How, how can nobody have realised what no gravity means? When you were thinking of a way to argue against gravity did it ever occur to you that acceleration means a change in velocity? And then this change in velocity adds up to a greater than speed of light value, utterly ridiculing the whole idea. If not... Then you are claiming that everybody else is wrong. Good luck with that

2:

Oh and another point, because I just remembered it.

On a flat earth accelerating at 9.8ms^-2, the acceleration is constant across the whole world. Which just so happens to be incorrect, the acceleration of free fall varies substantially from the equator to the poles, completely contradicting your hypothesis. The acceleration due to free fall can go from 9.76 to 9.83 ms^-2.

And because I was so amazed by my previous calculation, I decided to find the age of the earth, according to what you tell me (excluding the age you state).

So, with the earth travelling at a tenth of the speed of light, 29,980,000ms^-1, a reasonable velocity that should have little relativistic effects. Again, using v= u + at, where v = 29,980,000, a = 9.8 and u is zero, t would equal 3059183.7 seconds. In years, that is 0.09694 years. Now, I don't know how old you might be, but I'm pretty sure I've lived for longer than 35.4 days. However according to your fairly conflicting ideas, the earth is 35.4 days old. Thanks for the information, this is news worthy indeed.

P.S

In the likely eventuality that they run out of arguments and ban me, just remember that if you look into what they're actually saying, you can find some interesting statements, such as the age of the earth being little over a month

-Alex