Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mikefaith13

Pages: [1]
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Flat Earth and The Big Bang Theory
« on: August 18, 2018, 05:35:58 AM »
This is a question to FEers who believe in the big bang theory. Now, we know that a sphere is the simplest form of matter, and so the big bang theory would have created spheres, but if you are a flat earther it must have used immense amounts of energy to create a flat earth planet, that doesn't really make sense. Are there any thoughts on this?

P.S. I am a Christian flat-earther.
why didnt they call earth a spericet or globeland its a planet every other word accociated with planet is a flat term my opinion is you cant be a flat earther and believe in the big bang tjats just the majic at work to confuse the major population

Flat Earth Projects / Re: Flat Earth Maps section in the Wiki
« on: August 18, 2018, 05:28:21 AM »
Since demand for Flat Earth maps seems to be quite high, I've decided to start a gallery within our Wiki and uploaded some of the more commonly-encountered maps. I'm keen on expanding this section, so if you believe any maps should be added, please give me a shout.

Note that while the gallery currently mostly represents the monopole model (with but an honourable mention to the bipolar model), it is not my intention for things to stay that way. Understandably I was best suited to document the model I personally support, but I'd like to see more out there. It would be particularly interesting to see an "alternative models" section in there at some point.
no map we see is going to be accurate we need to take the information given like the mountain lines the warm and cold currents and the differnet regions to layout a more accurate model

Eye level follows the horizon seems nomatter how hi u go

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Flood and Where it Came from
« on: August 18, 2018, 05:22:03 AM »
I have no Idea where I heard this theory, it has been a year or so. In the bible it speaks of the firmament, and that being above the "Dome" or what you want to call it. The theory I put forward is that the Dome is actually much higher than we think, and the milky way galaxy is the crack in the firmament in which the water came through. Now as a human if you look up at the milky way galaxy it appears as a crack. If it is a crack in the firmament then the water above would have fallen down upon the earth. Pretty crazy but amazing theory.

.   The stars are said to be as decoration above the firmament theres no crack or we would be in another flood . the moon and sun are set in the midst of the firmament like a fly trapped inbetween double paned glass. The firmament is what we now call the dome.

This is a photo of the Toronto skyline taken from Olcott, New York (elevation around 30 feet above the lake) about 39 miles away.

Question is: where is eye level?

If you can, please draw a line in paint or photoshop and repost the picture.

PS You may want to bear in mind the following:

1. When pictures are posted showing that the horizon appears to be below eye level, flat earthers tend to state that the horizon is obscured by haze, and that the horizon would actually be at eye level - ie, level with the horizontal red line in the picture below - but we just can't see it.

2. When pictures are posted of distant skylines obscured by water, such as this one:

flat earthers tend to state that it's actually waves or haze that's obscuring the bottoms of the buildings.

The interesting thing about this, though, is that #1 puts the actual flat earth horizon above the horizon in the photo, and #2 puts the actual flat earth horizon below the horizon in the photo.

(To explain #2: the photographer was 30 feet above the lake. The lower 600 feet of the CN Tower is hidden. Therefore 30 feet above the lake on the Toronto side - which must also be at the same level as the photographer - ie, "eye level" - is quite some distance below the horizon in the picture.)

"Eye level" - and therefore "the actual horizon" - can't be both below and above the horizon we see in the photo at the same time.

This is especially obvious if we imagine a photo which both includes a way to measure eye level and a view across water to a distant skyline.

Something like this:

So, given that "eye level" is not that difficult to calculate, discover, and draw, where is eye level in this pic?

the horizon always follows eye level

Pages: [1]