There is plenty of evidence. Please see the FAQ.
I've explored the wiki a bit, which lacks citable sources or supportive, repeatable experiments. I've also looked in the FAQ only do discover either a further lack of citable sources or repeatable experiments, conflicting responses (Earth gravity doesn't exist, but the stars have gravity to produce coreolis effect?), or the most common response of go to the wiki.
Its kind of like hot potato for the new guys truly willing to learn FE; for those of us looking for some manner of supportive evidence, it feels like we're a chicken with its head cut off.
And before you say it, no, the horizon looking flat is not valid. As I examined in my own thread, the horizon curve is hardly noticable in a relatively small scale planet, and would be blurred by atmospheric scattering IRL. This makes that arguement plainly invalid for FE or RE to use.
I have presented this before - result - no response,
I have seen so many cases where a misunderstood feature of the Globe is dragged out as "evidence of a flat earth".
But, I hardly ever see any real evidence for a flat earth, except "It looks flat"!
So, what do I see with my own eyes!
- The Earth looks flat - it does, it's big!
- The sun appears to rise from behind the horizon and appears to set behind the horizon.
- The sun stays the same size as it arcs up and over the sky - it sometimes seems a bit bigger at sunrise and sunset.
- The sun always appears to be a circle, though sometimes a bit distorted at sunrise and sunset.
- The moon appears to rise from behind the horizon and appears to set behind the horizon.
- The moon stays the same size as it arcs up and over the sky - it sometimes seems a bit bigger at moonrise and moonset.
- The moon always appears to show the same face wherever it is in the sky.
- The full moon always appears to be a circle, though sometimes a bit distorted at moonrise and moonset.
I could go on about the direction of sunrise and sunset etc,
Of these, number (1) might indicate a flat earth, but then when we try to work out what the sun and moon are doing, we get into big trouble.
The Flat Earth movement just takes (1) and says "The earth is flat", then gets into terrible trouble explaining away all of the others with fanciful ideas of perspective, bending light, "celestial gears", universal acceleration (powered by "dark energy") and on and on.
But all the other points are far more simply explained on a Globe Earth, though not necessarily rotating.
There are more points you can see around every day (like the movement of the stars at night!) that are hard to explain on any flat earth model without resorting to nothing more than guesswork about strange things like aetheric whirlpools etc.
Even the problems with the stationary Globe earth were found in the past from observations made without modern instruments. Largely eyes and simple (though large) angle measuring equipment.
Honestly, I find that the Globe Earth conforms far better to the Zetetic approach than all the imagination and guesswork needed to support any Flat Earth model!
This is the same as any person of any religion telling an unbeliever to read their respective holy book for proof of what they say.
If I was to seek to properly assess the claims of a particular religion, reading their holy book would be step #1. This prevailing attitude that we're somehow beholden to relieving you of any and all background reading is what contributes to the perception of globularists here as lazy, entitled cretins. We're not here to spoon-feed you; we're not NASA.
Yes, but whether the earth is a Globe or Flat is a simply fact - it cannot be both! It is not a matter of religion!
Whatever the FES may think the contents of the Wiki and the "Sacred Texts" are certainly open to debate!
I am sorry to disappoint you, but NASA does not spoon-feed me. I was certain the earth was a Globe well before I had heard of NASA!
I was around radio HAM's who were excitedly picking up the beeps from Sputnik 1 on 20.005 MHz coming in right at the expected time - yes, I've been around! Easy to remember the date - my birthday!
My evidence for a globe - voluminous, but the elementary pieces that are just observation (I gave most of this above, but no-one cares!):
Here I much apologise for almost repeat a recent post of mine, but there was absolutely no comment on that![/b]
So, what do I see with my own eyes!
- The Earth looks flat - it does, it's big!
- On a clear day looking out to sea the sky-horizon interface is a sharp line (it is only about 5 km away!). On a flat earth it would have to fade into the distance with no distinct boundary.
- The sun appears to rise from behind the horizon and appears to set behind the horizon.
- The sun stays the same size as it arcs up and over the sky - it sometimes seems a bit bigger at sunrise and sunset.
- The sun always appears to be a disk, though sometimes a bit distorted at sunrise and sunset.
- Likewise the moon appears to rise from behind the horizon and appears to set behind the horizon.
- The moon stays the same size as it arcs up and over the sky - it sometimes seems a bit bigger at moonrise and moonset.
- The moon always appears to show the same face wherever it is in the sky. (And from wherever we observe it - have to travel for this observation).
- The full moon always appears to be a circle, though sometimes a bit distorted at moonrise and moonset.
Note that none of this is direct evidence of a rotating earth, but I believe is strong evidence of a Globe with a distant (far further than the earths size) sun and moon.
I could go on about the direction of sunrise and sunset etc.
Of these, number (1) might indicate a flat earth, but then when we try to work out what the sun and moon are doing, we get into big trouble.
The Flat Earth movement just takes (1) and says "The earth is flat", then gets into terrible trouble explaining away all of the others with fanciful ideas of perspective, bending light, "celestial gears", universal acceleration (powered by "dark energy") and on and on.
But all the other points are far more simply explained on a Globe Earth, though not necessarily rotating.
There are more points you can see around every day (like the movement of the stars at night!) that are hard to explain on any flat earth model without resorting to nothing more than guesswork about strange things like aetheric whirlpools etc.
Even the problems with the stationary Globe earth were found in the past from observations made without modern instruments. Largely eyes and simple (though large) angle measuring equipment.
Honestly, I find that the Globe Earth conforms far better to the Zetetic approach than all the imagination and guesswork needed to support any Flat Earth model!