Guide to the FLAT EARTH

originally posted by: TheDon
a reply to: nerbot

I will say again, how do you know? you are just quoting what you have been told or taught? Have you been into space and looked back?

The question is what one one or who one wants to believe.

As i said I dont know, but I like to have as much information as possible.

Thanks.

Dear Lord....

Anyone who has ever been in a plane can see for themselves the Earth isn't flat - you can see the curvature of the Earth from a relatively low altitude. Not to mention the myriad of other bits of evidence, as mentioned, which totally disprove the notion.

Anyone who believes the Earth is flat (or even anyone who considers it and "keeps an open mind" on the subject) is an idiot. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

a reply to: stumason

says the ant on the superdome

if you dont get that analogy

well i cant help you

a reply to: Another_Nut

I'm not going to play silly, cryptic games with you in an effort to make you try and feel smart.

The earth isn't flat - there are dozens of different experiments one can do to prove it, whereas there is sod all you can do to prove it is.

a reply to: stumason

care to name a few of those experiments "one can do"?

and the fact you take an analogy as a "silly, cryptic game"

shows me u didnt understand it

therefore

i cant help you

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: stumason

care to name a few of those experiments "one can do"?

1) The shadow of the Earth on the Moon during a Lunar ecilpse.

2) Seeing masts of a ship over the horizon.

3) Eratosthenes experiment he did thousands of years ago

Showing that angles of shadows differ from place to place - Link

4) Triple-right triangle test
You move in a straight line for a long enough distance

Turn right 90° degrees, walk in that same direction for the same distance

Turn again to the right 90° degrees and walk again the same distance

You'll end up at the start point - on a flat Earth this would not happen.


I think that is enough, there are more.

originally posted by: Another_Nut
and the fact you take an analogy as a "silly, cryptic game"

shows me u didnt understand it

therefore

i cant help you

And that is why I am not going to play your game, because you think you're being clever. No, I didn't understand it, because it didn't make sense and was a stupid analogy. The ironic thing is, while trying to be clever, you're spelling, punctuation and grammar is shocking.

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: sputniksteve

um yes u can . like the rim of a glass . a circle. thats like saying the from a top down perspective the superdome needs multiple edges

no its a circle. one edge is all u need. with antartica wrapped around the inside

So you are suggesting that Antarctica is the entire outside circumference of the planet?

Jesus why am I arguing the silly notion you have of a flat earth.

originally posted by: sputniksteve

...why am I arguing the silly notion you have of a flat earth.

Because you chose to, along with a lot of others, turning a potentially interesting discussion into an orgy of badgering and name-calling. It just follows the most common thread pattern here on the [NEW!] [IMPROVED!] ATS.

a reply to: stumason

1. so a circle cant produce a circular shadow? only a sphere can?

2.i have not contended that the earth is a perfect flat disk . i proposed the option of it being like the roof of the superdome. why dont you actually read?

3.again this has been addressed. his calculations can be done on any arch . like the superdome. that in no way makes the supedome a sphere

4. this will also work on the superdomes top if, like you said, u walk far enough

you dont get the analogy because u didnt read anything you just came in throwing insults

not surprised there

and as for ....

you're spelling, punctuation and grammar is shocking.

hahaha the last bastion i guess

a reply to: Another_Nut

In answer to number 1...





ETA: Lemme guess, the earth is now concaved AND flat AND round, but not spherical..

But what way is it concaved??

a reply to: Chadwickus

no im saying that shadow could have been made by the superdome if the superdome was big enough and floating in free space

a 2 dimensional shadow on the moon doesnt prove a 3 dimensional shape

a reply to: Another_Nut

Because I did the first two pages and had enough - I'm not going to read 7 pages of bollocks.

You assertion the earth is a dome is absolutely ridiculous. One can circumnavigate the globe no matter which direction you take, proving the earth is spherical, ergo, your dome idea is dumb.

Also - if the earth is a dome, where does the water go? Where does it come from? You'll be telling me next there is a giant turtle.

And you can laugh at the "last bastion", but it is you proposing one of the stupidest, ill thought out idea's I've seen on ATS in a long time, with poor spelling, grammar and punctuation.

Because you chose to, along with a lot of others, turning a potentially interesting discussion into an orgy of badgering and name-calling. It just follows the most common thread pattern here on the [NEW!] [IMPROVED!] ATS.

It isn't a "potentially interesting discussion", it is a stupid idea that needs to be terminated as soon as possible. It ranks right up there with evolution deniers and Young Earth creationists.

a reply to: stumason

i didnt even start posting till page 5 so how do u know what my stance even is?

One can circumnavigate the globe no matter which direction you take, proving the earth is spherical, ergo, your dome idea is dumb.

you could do this in at least 1 direction if the earth was a dome. it proves nothing .

unless are you saying you have done this? ever fly from south america to aussiland?

if the earth is a dome, where does the water go? Where does it come from?

where does water go on a sphere? where did it come from?

what does this have to do with shapes? or turtles for that matter?

ill thought out idea's I've seen on ATS in a long time, with poor spelling, grammar and punctuation.

grammar is bs. punctuation ill give you because i usually dont use any

but spelling?

please be specific . and no trying to get around the question by quoting auto corrected things

like i think my phone split addressed into a dressed in one post . and u instead of you doesnt count either

what u are doing is a ad hominem attack and then an appeal to the popular/tradition

see carm.org...

It isn't a "potentially interesting discussion", it is a stupid idea that needs to be terminated as soon as possible.

says you

and who are you again?

It ranks right up there with evolution deniers and Young Earth creationists.

well i dont totally buy evolution either. not until abigenesis is proven

but thats a whole other subject and totally off topic

and at least you qualified creationists with "young earth" in your statement

eta

and notice how i addressed all your points with no insults only to have your reply with

basically

"this is a dumb idea and you cant spell"

as i said

last bastion

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: stumason

One can circumnavigate the globe no matter which direction you take, proving the earth is spherical, ergo, your dome idea is dumb.

you could do this in at least 1 direction if the earth was a dome. it proves nothing .

are you saying you have done this?

Yes, you can do it in a few directions on a dome, but not every direction, a point you tried to sidestep quite badly there.

I haven't personally done it, no, but my brother was in the Royal Navy and has travelled the globe, my Uncle was in the RAF and has flown around the globe. I'm not going to listen to some daft bugger on the internet tell me otherwise with poor critical thinking and even lower quality evidence.

originally posted by: Another_Nut

if the earth is a dome, where does the water go? Where does it come from?

where does water go on a sphere? where did it come from?

On a spherical earth, the water is kept in place by gravity - on your dome, gravity would actually be stronger towards the "bottom" as the earth is thicker, meaning that all the earth's water should be drawn towards the bottom, but it doesn't. That is, of course, assuming you "believe" in gravity.

originally posted by: Another_Nut
what does this have to do with shapes? or turtles for that matter?

And therein lies the problem - you're idea is so badly thought out, you didn't even consider gravity and how it would behave in a dome earth.

Atuin :

originally posted by: Another_Nut
grammar is bs. punctuation ill give you because i usually dont use any

but spelling?

please be specific . and no trying to get around the question by quoting auto corrected things

like i think my phone split addressed into a dressed in one post . and u instead of you doesnt count either

what u are doing is a ad hominem attack and then an appeal to the popular/tradition

"U" - it is bad spelling whether you think it counts or not.

originally posted by: Another_Nut

says you

and who are you again?

Someone with obviously greater intellect than you - I don't think the earth is a dome!

originally posted by: Another_Nut
well i dont totally buy evolution either. not until abigenesis is proven

but thats a whole other subject and totally off topic

and at least you qualified creationists with "young earth" in your statement

Another spelling mistake, right there... Abiogenesis is what you meant.

And, by the way, the theory of evolution does not try to answer the origins of life, so abiogenesis is totally irrelevant. It's like me saying I don't totally buy your "dome earth" theory until the Aliens are proven. Totally unrelated.

a reply to: Another_Nut

It's a stupid idea, put forward with poor critical thinking.

Expect to be told it is stupid. I'm not going to wrap it up in cotton wool for your benefit.

a reply to: stumason

i see

u cant address anything ive written and will stick to your name calling with no examples

not even of spelling errors aka ad hominem attack . point out a word BEFORE you made the attack

got it

maybe this thread isnt for you

eta and again you dodge all the questions put to you

with your "greater intellect" aka regurgitation

lo@u

eeta

On a spherical earth, the water is kept in place by gravity - on your dome, gravity would actually be stronger towards the "bottom" as the earth is thicker, meaning that all the earth's water should be drawn towards the bottom, but it doesn't.

your lack of intellect shows

this was addressed a few pages ago and even had a video for the challenged

no need for me to post it again with your superior mind it shouldnt be a problem reading a few pages


unless.....

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: TrueBrit

Well let me go out on a ledge here

Ever seen those crackerjack cards with the moving image?

You know the ones that have two images that change when you tilt them slightly?

Same concept could apply.

Now from the "northern hemisphere" your would see one picture of the sky

While from the "southern hemisphere" your would see the other

Keep in mind this is just a top of the head idea but it would work

I like your thinking, actually read alot of theories regarding the stars, but not read anything like that.
Truely thinking outside the box.

I posted a few videos a few pages back LINK, which i still believe are a very good example regarding not seeing the curvature off the earth.

And anyone that has actually watched them, one can see that if we are to follow the maths we are given that should explain the curvature off the earth things do not add up.

Also there is the Bedford Level Experiment

The Bedford Level Experiment was a series of observations carried out along a six-mile length of the Old Bedford River on the Bedford Level, Norfolk, England. The experiment was often performed during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Most results have served to prove Flat Earth Theory, and although a few have claimed otherwise they have been soundly disproved by Flat Earthers. The Bedford Level Experiment remains one of the most widely-accepted examples of Flat Earth proof.

Method
At the point chosen for all the experiments the river was a slow-flowing drainage canal running in uninterrupted straight line for a six-mile stretch to the north-east of the village of Welney. The most famous of the observations, and the one that was taught in schools until photographs of the Earth from space became available, involved a set of three poles fixed at equal height above water level along this length. As the surface of the water was assumed to be level, the discovery that the middle pole, when viewed carefully through a theodolite, was almost three feet higher than the poles at each end was finally accepted as a new proof that the surface of the earth was indeed curved.

Source

Living near the coast here in the south off Sweden, I actually went out the other day with my binoculars, and had a look over the water, and I have to say, I could see some off the ferries going to Poland which were very far away, and i don't just neen the top off the ferries I could see them breaking the water as they went.

So either someone has got there maths wrong or things are not what they are supposed to be.

On a side note as well and a question, why is it when planes are cruising at high altitude, they do not make course, corrections, dipping downwards to account for the curvature off the earth?
At the speed they are travelling they would need to be doing this every few minutes.

Thanks

a reply to: ThomasPen
Welcome
As I have mentioned many times in this thread, this is a subject that interests me, and i think there is many questions.

And I know others find this topic interesting and people should not be put of discussing it due to ohers wanting to force there beliefs on others.

BTW not a bot



Peace

a reply to: TheDon

Just take a boat!

how do yo explain boat/ship travel AROUND the world?

very funny... I think u work for Them...