[wRadion]

Hello there,

This post is not about proving you the earth is round, or flat, or anything. And it's not a scientific debate.
I just want to know one very simple thing :

Why do you believe that "they" lie to us about the earth shape, but not the countries shapes?

In other words,

Prove me that the countries are shaped like that:


I'm trying really hard to understand every single argument about flat earth, so that I can convince every flat-earther that they're wrong (if I meet one). I'm not trying to convince them that the earth is round, just proving them that their theory lacks consistency.

[Opeo]

We already proved that this particular map doesn't work pretty conclusively in this thread here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8995.0

I guess that means most flat Earth believers will need to rely on "we don't know what the map looks like, we just know it's flat," which is convenient. Honestly if it were me on their side that would have been my line the entire time since it's so vague it's hard to argue against.

[Westprog]

We already proved that this particular map doesn't work pretty conclusively in this thread here: https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=8995.0

I guess that means most flat Earth believers will need to rely on "we don't know what the map looks like, we just know it's flat," which is convenient. Honestly if it were me on their side that would have been my line the entire time since it's so vague it's hard to argue against.

Of course, now that people actually use Google Earth to navigate across continents, maintaining the idea that we don't know anything about the shape of countries is a bit tougher to believe.

[Dr David Thork]

The round disc makes for a nice logo, but increasing evidence shows earth is more of a splat shape.


The map above is "A Constant-Scale Natural Boundary Map of Earth edged by Antarctic Valleys" showing the ocean currents in this example.


This is called 'splat earth theory'.

[Opeo]

The round disc makes for a nice logo, but increasing evidence shows earth is more of a splat shape.


The map above is "A Constant-Scale Natural Boundary Map of Earth edged by Antarctic Valleys" showing the ocean currents in this example.


This is called 'splat earth theory'.

This still can't explain >12 hour days during the summer in the southern hemisphere. Come on, try to think a little critically.

[Dr David Thork]

You need to read Earth Not A Globe.

[Opeo]

You need to read Earth Not A Globe.

What a surprise. No real counter-argument, just a deflection. Is there a part of ENAG that somehow explains how this could ever create a 14-hour daylight like Australians experience every December?


And no changing the shape of the coast of Antarctica doesn't change the path of the sun.

[Dr David Thork]

Yes, there is a part on that, which is why I told you to read ENaG. You think I want to reiterate the book every time someone bring us an objection that the book covers? I've been at TFES for the better part of a decade. Read the ruddy book if you want the answers, and then come back if you want to critique its points.


http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm

[BrownRobin]

Hi Baby Thork,

A quick question you may be able to help answer, as my questions have gone unanswered in other threads:

If Hoaxes are unproven speculations / biases AND the Zetetic method does not speculate or imbue biases on what the answer might be before first testing out empirically through scientific inquiry -- question -- and performing experiments, than why are hoaxes (i.e. unproven speculations that NASA faked going to space) accepted and used by Flat Earth Society / Zetetic Society members as one of the means to help support the case that a Flat Earth model must exist?

(I don't believe that such speculation are what Rowbotham would subscribe to)

[Dr David Thork]

Inference is a reasonable extension of deductive logic.

The earth is flat.
Authorities tell us it is round.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related.

What else can one deduce?

[BrownRobin]

Inference is a reasonable extension of deductive logic.

The earth is flat.
Authorities tell us it is round.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related.

What else can one deduce?

OK. Looks like you don't have the answer to my question either. Moving along.

[Dr David Thork]

I answered your question. You just don't like the answer.

The hoax isn't what makes us think the earth is flat. The earth is flat and therefore we think there must be hoaxes.

[BrownRobin]

I answered your question. You just don't like the answer.

The hoax isn't what makes us think the earth is flat. The earth is flat and therefore we think there must be hoaxes.

OK. Understand. My argument is that:

The earth is Round.
Flat Earthers tell us it is flat.
They must have a reason to lie.
Those reasons are historically money/control related to Flat Earthers having a high propensity for getting caught up in ridiculous conspiracy theories and therefore many times side-stepping questions.

[Dr David Thork]

The Manhattan Project started out as a conspiracy theory.
Watergate was at first a conspiracy theory.
Asbestos causing cancer was a conspiracy theory.
The New World Order.
The Illuminati.
The Deep State.
The Federal Reserve being a private bank.


All these thing started out being dismissed as conspiracy theories and it often takes a lot of time and effort before a government is forced to come clean about its lies. Just because something is a conspiracy theory doesn't make it untrue.

[Tumeni]

Just because something is a conspiracy theory doesn't make it untrue.

Firm evidence contradictory to the conspiracy theory does, though.

For example;
1 Humankind has sent hundreds of unmanned craft around the world in orbit, around the Moon, and to the various planets of our solar system. Some of these craft have returned imagery which shows the globe from different angles and distances.

2 Humankind has sent hundreds of individuals, in manned craft, around the world, in orbit, and a lucky 21 of them have either walked on the Moon or gone around it. Again, these have brought back imagery, and photography, which shows the Earth as a globe from different aspects and distances.

If you don't accept the words and experiences of these few hundred, then what would it take? Another hundred repeating the exercise? A thousand? Ten thousand?

Seriously, there must come a point when X number of people say the world is round, that you accept it. What is your figure for X?

[Dr David Thork]

I don't have a figure for 'x'. If I had lived in the year 1400, absolutely everyone I ever met would tell me that Jesus was the son of God and that the Pope was God's conduit on earth. An organised institutional lie to perpetuate power and gain religious taxes, turned into a widespread delusion.

Were all the priests in on it? No.
All the monks and nuns? No.
Educators politicians and artists? No.
Family members, village officials? no.

So why the hell would foot soldiers like scientists be in on it? Religious personnel could pray and talk to God. And if they had doubts they'd keep that to themselves; its not like any of them ever got a reply. A monk without faith finds himself without a job until he comes up with the correct answer. Same with a scientist who stumbles across earth's shape. He dismisses his findings as wrong and starts over.

[inquisitive]

I don't have a figure for 'x'. If I had lived in the year 1400, absolutely everyone I ever met would tell me that Jesus was the son of God and that the Pope was God's conduit on earth. An organised institutional lie to perpetuate power and gain religious taxes, turned into a widespread delusion.

Were all the priests in on it? No.
All the monks and nuns? No.
Educators politicians and artists? No.
Family members, village officials? no.

So why the hell would foot soldiers like scientists be in on it? Religious personnel could pray and talk to God. And if they had doubts they'd keep that to themselves; its not like any of them ever got a reply. A monk without faith finds himself without a job until he comes up with the correct answer. Same with a scientist who stumbles across earth's shape. He dismisses his findings as wrong and starts over.

Why do you not accept that measurements prove the earth is round?

[Dr David Thork]

Should I have accepted the testimony of priests as proof of miracles?

[Tumeni]

Should I have accepted the testimony of priests as proof of miracles?

If the priests had recorded data from their miracles, and if others got the same data by different methods for the same miracle, then maybe you should have....

[Opeo]

Yes, there is a part on that, which is why I told you to read ENaG. You think I want to reiterate the book every time someone bring us an objection that the book covers? I've been at TFES for the better part of a decade. Read the ruddy book if you want the answers, and then come back if you want to critique its points.


http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/za/za49.htm

Genuinely, thanks for the more specific response, it's a lot more than I've gotten the other times I brought up this topic. Upon reading this, this topic affords us a unique possibility: here is a case where heliocentricism and FE predict two entirely different and contradictory things that are also easily testable by the common man.

- Heliocentricism predicts that locations on the same latitude North and South will experience perfectly symmetrical seasons, with the exact same amount of daylight but flipped by 6 months (e.g. if a location on the Xth parallel North experiences 18 hours and 52 minutes of sunlight on June 21st, then one on the Xth parallel South will experience 18 hours and 52 minutes of sunlight on December 21st.)

- ENAG predicts that seasons are not symmetrical between North and South, and that the Southern "hemisphere," so to speak, will be darker than equivalent opposite day in the North (e.g. if a location on the Xth parallel North experiences 18 hours and 52 minutes of sunlight on June 21st, then one on the Xth parallel South will experience significantly less than that on December 21st.)

Do you agree with this premise? If so, this is something any layperson can test and we can use it to blow the whole conspiracy open. I fully admit that if I'm wrong on this one, I'll have to reconsider my viewpoint and take a look at the other options. Do you have that same conviction? If you agree too, then we can start experimenting to find the truth.