[WTFisThis]

I don't know if this is a joke or not. Do people actually believe that the earth is flat?

Have any of you went mountain climbing or at the very least skydiving? You can easily see the curvature the Horizon.
Hell, you can even see it from high-flying airplanes.

[Thork]

It would have to be a hell of a commitment to arrange a wiki, Q&A's, a library of materials, all learn all the theories and argue 100,000s of posts about earth's shape, all voluentarily with no payment at all for years and years and years.

Do you really think we could all be bothered to organise ourselves in such a way for a joke?

We think the earth is flat. Where else on the internet would people of such beliefs go? Would you be surprised to find stamp collectors at stampcollecting.org?

[Ghost of V]

To put it simply: This is not a joke or a weird form of satire. We are serious.

Flat Earth theory is supported by sensory evidence, as well as mathematical evidence compiled in these fora.

[Tom Bishop]

Have any of you went mountain climbing or at the very least skydiving? You can easily see the curvature the Horizon.
Hell, you can even see it from high-flying airplanes.

I've been on mountains and I've been in planes. I did not see curvature to the earth's horizon.

[WTFisThis]

I've seen it flying from Toronto to Yokohama, Japan.
It's easily visible if you're anywhere higher than 2.5 KM above sea level.

[Thork]

I've seen it flying from Toronto to Yokohama, Japan.
It's easily visible if you're anywhere higher than 2.5 KM above sea level.

Nope. It is impossible to see curvature of the earth under 40,000 ft, so we are told. You definitely can't see it in an aircraft. Your eyes aren't sensitive enough ... how convenient that you need to be 40,000ft and yet airliners rarely exceed 38,000 ft.

[WTFisThis]

Mainly because of the severe lack of oxygen up there, perhaps?

[Thork]

No, aircraft have oxygen.

[Rushy]

Mainly because of the severe lack of oxygen up there, perhaps?

Is this a strange form of satire?

[Tau]

I mean, I understand why you would be skeptical. But FET is a legitimate scientific theory. Have you ever seriously thought about why everyone thinks the Earth is round? Nobody has any real reason for believing it, they just sort of do. In reality, the idea that the Earth is round was popularized by Aristotle. Other notable theories by Aristotle are that women have fewer teeth than men (they don't), eels spontaneously appear out of mud (they don't), everything it made out of a combination of the 5 base elements (it isn't), and the sun rotates around the Earth (RET disagrees, FET agrees). He isn't known for his accuracy and he certainly wasn't a scientist. No one ever performed an experiment to prove the Earth was round. We all just kind of accepted it on blind faith. In fact, experiments consistently suggest that the Earth is flat

[inquisitive]

I mean, I understand why you would be skeptical. But FET is a legitimate scientific theory. Have you ever seriously thought about why everyone thinks the Earth is round? Nobody has any real reason for believing it, they just sort of do. In reality, the idea that the Earth is round was popularized by Aristotle. Other notable theories by Aristotle are that women have fewer teeth than men (they don't), eels spontaneously appear out of mud (they don't), everything it made out of a combination of the 5 base elements (it isn't), and the sun rotates around the Earth (RET disagrees, FET agrees). He isn't known for his accuracy and he certainly wasn't a scientist. No one ever performed an experiment to prove the Earth was round. We all just kind of accepted it on blind faith. In fact, experiments consistently suggest that the Earth is flat

How about observations and measurements of sunrise and sunset at different times and places.

[Tintagel]

I mean, I understand why you would be skeptical. But FET is a legitimate scientific theory. Have you ever seriously thought about why everyone thinks the Earth is round? Nobody has any real reason for believing it, they just sort of do. In reality, the idea that the Earth is round was popularized by Aristotle. Other notable theories by Aristotle are that women have fewer teeth than men (they don't), eels spontaneously appear out of mud (they don't), everything it made out of a combination of the 5 base elements (it isn't), and the sun rotates around the Earth (RET disagrees, FET agrees). He isn't known for his accuracy and he certainly wasn't a scientist. No one ever performed an experiment to prove the Earth was round. We all just kind of accepted it on blind faith. In fact, experiments consistently suggest that the Earth is flat

How about observations and measurements of sunrise and sunset at different times and places.

We don't claim that the sun doesn't rise and set, and we don't claim that time zones do not exist.  We believe the earth is flat, because it is.

[Tau]

I mean, I understand why you would be skeptical. But FET is a legitimate scientific theory. Have you ever seriously thought about why everyone thinks the Earth is round? Nobody has any real reason for believing it, they just sort of do. In reality, the idea that the Earth is round was popularized by Aristotle. Other notable theories by Aristotle are that women have fewer teeth than men (they don't), eels spontaneously appear out of mud (they don't), everything it made out of a combination of the 5 base elements (it isn't), and the sun rotates around the Earth (RET disagrees, FET agrees). He isn't known for his accuracy and he certainly wasn't a scientist. No one ever performed an experiment to prove the Earth was round. We all just kind of accepted it on blind faith. In fact, experiments consistently suggest that the Earth is flat

How about observations and measurements of sunrise and sunset at different times and places.

Instead of forcing a thread to be what you want it to be about, try making your own thread. Anyway, your concerns are addressed in the FAQ.

[Gulliver]

No one ever performed an experiment to prove the Earth was round. We all just kind of accepted it on blind faith. In fact, experiments consistently suggest that the Earth is flat

Citations requested. What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat? Each successful satellite launch proves that the earth is not flat. http://spaceflightnow.com/2014/12/07/chinese-brazilian-earth-observation-satellite-launched/

[Thork]

What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat?

The Bedford Level experiments. Twice proved earth was flat, once gave an inconclusive result due to fraudulent wager activities by round earthers.

[Gulliver]

What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat?

The Bedford Level experiments. Twice proved earth was flat, once gave an inconclusive result due to fraudulent wager activities by round earthers.

How is Bedford Level verifiable? Daniel tried and failed, and he's the leader of the society. How would any experiment prove something true? What citations do you have to back up your claims that those experiments were objective?

[Thork]

What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat?

The Bedford Level experiments. Twice proved earth was flat, once gave an inconclusive result due to fraudulent wager activities by round earthers.

How is Bedford Level verifiable? Daniel tried and failed, and he's the leader of the society. How would any experiment prove something true? What citations do you have to back up your claims that those experiments were objective?

Daniel is an idiot. He can't even post a T-shirt to someone, let alone conduct a scientific experiment or that nature. As for citations there is much documentation in ENaG. Feel free to read it some time.

[Gulliver]

What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat?

The Bedford Level experiments. Twice proved earth was flat, once gave an inconclusive result due to fraudulent wager activities by round earthers.

How is Bedford Level verifiable? Daniel tried and failed, and he's the leader of the society. How would any experiment prove something true? What citations do you have to back up your claims that those experiments were objective?

Daniel is an idiot. He can't even post a T-shirt to someone, let alone conduct a scientific experiment or that nature. As for citations there is much documentation in ENaG. Feel free to read it some time.

Then I invite you to reproduce it yourself, replete with zetetic accuracy. I refer you to our thread critiquing the hell out of EnaG. R didn't even understand momentum. Failure is the only thing I see in EnaG.

[Thork]

What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat?

The Bedford Level experiments. Twice proved earth was flat, once gave an inconclusive result due to fraudulent wager activities by round earthers.

How is Bedford Level verifiable? Daniel tried and failed, and he's the leader of the society. How would any experiment prove something true? What citations do you have to back up your claims that those experiments were objective?

Daniel is an idiot. He can't even post a T-shirt to someone, let alone conduct a scientific experiment or that nature. As for citations there is much documentation in ENaG. Feel free to read it some time.

Then I invite you to reproduce it yourself, replete with zetetic accuracy. I refer you to our thread critiquing the hell out of EnaG. R didn't even understand momentum. Failure is the only thing I see in EnaG.

It isn't my fault if the content extends beyond your cognitive capacity.

[Gulliver]

What verifiable objective experiment consistently suggest that the earth is flat?

The Bedford Level experiments. Twice proved earth was flat, once gave an inconclusive result due to fraudulent wager activities by round earthers.

How is Bedford Level verifiable? Daniel tried and failed, and he's the leader of the society. How would any experiment prove something true? What citations do you have to back up your claims that those experiments were objective?

Daniel is an idiot. He can't even post a T-shirt to someone, let alone conduct a scientific experiment or that nature. As for citations there is much documentation in ENaG. Feel free to read it some time.

Then I invite you to reproduce it yourself, replete with zetetic accuracy. I refer you to our thread critiquing the hell out of EnaG. R didn't even understand momentum. Failure is the only thing I see in EnaG.

It isn't my fault if the content extends beyond your cognitive capacity.

I never claimed it was your fault. It's R's. He can't even deal with Galilean concepts.