1

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Bedford Level Experiment Flawed

« on: April 24, 2020, 09:27:03 PM »

The blinking of that light could be a lot of things, most importantly a recording frequency. I like those videos- they are scientifically sound reasons and I certainly can't say anything bad about them. They don't convince me of a flat earth, of course, but they are definitely interesting. Thank you for those last few posts, they certainly helped me understand better the experimentation process of the Bedford Level situation.

2

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Bedford Level Experiment Flawed

« on: April 24, 2020, 03:14:14 PM »

I watched that video about refraction- doesn't really prove anything to me.
Tom Bishop, you said that there should be a hidden area when looking over 6 miles. However, I believe the observers at the Bedford experiment were never were more than 3 miles from the bridge, equal distances on either side for their experiment. Wouldn't you have accounted for that? Your video on refraction has little to do here, aside from point out that since light can curve up it could make a round surface appear flat.
I don't care who lost money or won the court battle, I'm talking about an experiment. I want to ask you directly why such a debated and flawed experiment is used for your Frequently Asked Questions page.

Perhaps the best example of Flat Earth proof is the Bedford Level Experiment. In short, this was an experiment performed many times on a six-mile stretch of water that proved the surface of the water to be flat.

If it's been repeatedly denied, why do you still say its your best proof? Is your FAQ page just out of date?

3

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Read the FAQ and still: why?

« on: April 16, 2020, 02:49:32 PM »

I'm glad we're getting down into the nitty gritty questions that Flat Earthers don't like us to ask. It really makes them start to sweat.
I have a follow up question which is comparable to yours:
How come all these supposed "conspirators" who say the Earth is ROUND agree completely on what that looks like, but there are so many different presentations of a flat Earth?
I've seen people say we live in a closed system where all the stars and other planets are simple lights in the sky, yet I've also seen the official Flat Earth Society post on Twitter that, unlike the Earth, Mars has been observed to be spherical! I think there's too much of people asking "how can we prove this" and too little of people asking "why do we need to prove this"

4

Flat Earth Theory / Re: The Math for universal Acceleration IS INCORRECT

« on: April 15, 2020, 07:42:44 PM »

I assume Iactuallycanthink believes the earth is round, which is great! I think so too. If you use the conventional model of our Earth orbiting a celestial star, the Sun, it is accelerating and maintaining a constant speed. For the sake of argument, though, has anyone ever suggested that a flat earth could simply do the same? If it were facing inward, centrifugal force could plausibly create a gravitational force similar to our planet’s own.
Please get back with me if I sound crazy. This is the first time I put that thought out and I’m NOT a flat earther I swear!

5

Flat Earth Theory / Bedford Level Experiment Flawed

« on: April 15, 2020, 06:00:34 PM »

Hello. I begin this post with the assumption that I will not convince any dedicated flat earth believer that the world really is round. It has been proven time and again that people’s opinions are nearly impossible to shake with facts or reasoning. With that in mind, I begin.
TL;DR go graph on a scientific graphing calculator the circle x^2+y^2=2490.1 to represent earths circumference, place the points (0,49.9009) and (0.6,49.89725) representing the 6 miles in the experiment, and the secant line y=-0.00608x+49.9009. See for yourself how small that really is compared to the earth as a whole! End TL;DR.
The Bedford Level Experiment, this society’s best example of flat earth proof, is flawed. The size of the experimental area is simply too small, I believe 6 miles was the official measurement. With the assumption that our Earth has a circumference (specifically at the equator) of 24,901 miles, a distance of six miles would create only one eleventh of a degree in change (1/11). A radial change of that amount would, in any size circle, create a situation similar to a tangent line. In my calculations I scaled down the size by 10:1 (one unit=10 miles) for a circle with a circumference of 2,490.1 (That’s x^2+y^2=2490.1). I generously used two points 0.6 units away from each other on the x-axis (0,49.9009) and (0.6,49.8975), which created a change in y-value of only 0.00365 (0.037 miles! That’s just under 200 feet). Then using the secant formula (y2-y1/x2-x1) I found the slope of a line connecting the two points (-0.00608) and using the equation y=-0.00608x+49.9009 successfully graphed a secant line between the two points. The difference between this perfectly straight line and the earth’s natural curvature is too small to be accurately measured.

If you have any rebuttal, feel free to comment back. I will be checking back within a week and will accept these arguments with an open mind. This is not meant to prove that the earth is round, merely argue against using such a flawed experiment in so many arguments for your cause.
Thank you.