[opticon12]

I'm not currently a believer in the hypothesis that the earth is flat, but I am curious to understand the argument. In a quick review of the FAQ I was not swayed at all by the section titled 'What evidence do you have?'. I was especially not moved by the reference to the Bedford Level Experiment because it took place nearly 200 years ago, and has since been debunked. If such a simple experiment could prove the earth was flat, why has it not been replicated a dozen, or a hundred times over?

How does the flat earth hypothesis explain the tides, seasons, or even the recent eclipse that took place across the continental United States? Is the flat earth movement related at all to young earth creationist beliefs? Note, I don't believe in young earth creationism either.

Thanks and be well!
-Opticon12

[Tom Bishop]

I'm not currently a believer in the hypothesis that the earth is flat, but I am curious to understand the argument. In a quick review of the FAQ I was not swayed at all by the section titled 'What evidence do you have?'. I was especially not moved by the reference to the Bedford Level Experiment because it took place nearly 200 years ago, and has since been debunked.

It was not "debunked".

If such a simple experiment could prove the earth was flat, why has it not been replicated a dozen, or a hundred times over?

Have you checked out the water convexity experiments on Youtube?

How does the flat earth hypothesis explain the tides, seasons, or even the recent eclipse that took place across the continental United States?

That is a lot to cover there. You should narrow down your questions to a single topic.

Is the flat earth movement related at all to young earth creationist beliefs?

No.

[opticon12]

Youtube videos are not evidence of anything as the motives of those on both sides cannot be trusted. Where are the peer-reviewd academic papers that evidence a flat earth? Are there any reputable scientists in any field that will stand behind the claim that the earth is flat?

If your response to both of those questions is that there is a gigantic conspiracy by scientists, government, NASA, airlines, to keep people in the dark about our true reality then you completely lost me. To believe that conspiracy of that scale is true is as much a leap in faith, if not greater, as it is for me to trust the scientific conclusion reached hundreds of years ago regarding the shape of the earth.

[Tom Bishop]

Youtube videos are not evidence of anything as the motives of those on both sides cannot be trusted. Where are the peer-reviewd academic papers that evidence a flat earth? Are there any reputable scientists in any field that will stand behind the claim that the earth is flat?

Earth Not a Globe was peer reviewed by a journal called The Earth Not a Globe Review, later renamed The Earth, which ran for over 75 issues.

[mtnman]

Youtube videos are not evidence of anything as the motives of those on both sides cannot be trusted. Where are the peer-reviewd academic papers that evidence a flat earth? Are there any reputable scientists in any field that will stand behind the claim that the earth is flat?

Earth Not a Globe was peer reviewed by a journal called The Earth Not a Globe Review, later renamed The Earth, which ran for over 75 issues.

Do you think that sounds like an objective peer review source Tom?

[Tom Bishop]

Youtube videos are not evidence of anything as the motives of those on both sides cannot be trusted. Where are the peer-reviewd academic papers that evidence a flat earth? Are there any reputable scientists in any field that will stand behind the claim that the earth is flat?

Earth Not a Globe was peer reviewed by a journal called The Earth Not a Globe Review, later renamed The Earth, which ran for over 75 issues.

Do you think that sounds like an objective peer review source Tom?

Sure, what's wrong with it? A repeat of the Bedford Canal Experiment was also published in The English Mechanic, a scientific journal.

"The Flat Earth: another Bedford Canal experiment" (Bernard H.Watson, et al),
ENGLISH MECHANIC, 80:160, 1904

Bedford Canal, England. A repeat of the 1870 experiment

"A train of empty turf-boats had just entered the Canal from the river Ouse, and
was about proceeding to Ramsey. I arranged with the captain to place the shallowest
boat last in the train, and to take me on to Welney Bridge, a distance of six
miles. A good telescope was then fixed on the lowest part of the stern of the last
boat. The sluice gate of the Old Bedford Bridge was 5ft. 8in. high, the turf-boat
moored there was 2ft. 6in. high, and the notice board was 6ft. 6in. from the water.

The sun was shining strongly upon them in the direction of the south-southwest; the
air was exceedingly still and clear, and the surface of the water smooth as a
molten mirror, so that everything was favourable for observation. At 1.15 p.m. the
train started for Welney. As the boats gradually receded, the sluice gate, the
turf-boat and the notice board continued to be visible to the naked eye for about
four miles. When the sluice gate and the turf-boat (being of a dark colour) became
somewhat indistinct, the notice board (which was white) was still plainly visible,
and remained so to the end of six miles. But on looking through the telescope all
the objects were distinctly visible throughout the whole distance. On reaching
Welney Bridge I made very careful and repeated observations, and finding several
men upon the banks of the canal, I called them to look through the telescope. They
all saw distinctly the white notice board, the sluice gate, and the black turf-boat
moored near them.

Now, as the telescope was 18in. above the water, The line of sight would touch the
horizon at one mile and a half away (if the surface were convex). The curvature of
the remaining four miles and a half would be 13ft. 6in. Hence the turf-boat should
have been 11ft., the top of the sluice gate 7ft. 10in., and the bottom of the
notice board 7ft. below the horizon.

My recent experiment affords undeniable proof of the Earth's unglobularity, because
it rests not on transitory vision; but my proof remains printed on the negative of
the photograph which Mr.Clifton took for me, and in my presence, on behalf of
J.H.Dallmeyer, Ltd.

A photograph can not 'imagine' nor lie!" (1)

[mtnman]

Earth Not a Globe was peer reviewed by a journal called The Earth Not a Globe Review, later renamed The Earth, which ran for over 75 issues.

Do you think that sounds like an objective peer review source Tom?

Sure, what's wrong with it? A repeat of the Bedford Canal Experiment was also published in The English Mechanic, a scientific journal.

Would you accept a NASA report on the Apollo project if it was peer reviewed by NASA engineers?