It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# The Earth Is Flat, Proof In Model - [FARCE]

page: 20
9
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:32 PM

Originally posted by scepticsRus
Also, if the earth does not produce gravity but light is bent by gravity, exactly where is the gravity coming from which bends the light. are you sugessting that gravity just .... exists everywhere without the requirement for mass ! If so how does this affect space time in your model.
[edit on 21-4-2008 by scepticsRus]

I think you are confusing the theories. One says that gravity exists, and the other says it does not.

There is no need to try to reconcile them. It is neither useful or practical. You may also want to consider the potential discovery of Higgs Bosons that give mass to quanta of energy.

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:43 PM
reply to post by Tuning Spork

At the June solstice, the area of direct light will cover the arctic circle at all times. It still circles the north pole and illuminates other parts of the world. During June solstice the sunlit portion will not extend to the outermost parts of the sphere.

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:48 PM
By the way, at a constant acceleration of 32fps^2 for one year, the velocity "upward" will be 1,009,152,000fps. That's 5,425.55 times the speed of light.

But, since one of the advocates said that light actually travels much much slower than we've been "told", well....

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:54 PM
reply to post by Tuning Spork

The earth may have been traveling backward at great speed before starting (de)acellerate upward. Because the speed of light is relative to the observer, we can't verify we are breaking the speed of light. That could only be observed by an outside source. Because mass increases as we approach the speed of light, it may be that the solar system is unobservable from without simply because it's fastness.

[edit on 21-4-2008 by _Del_]

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:54 PM
reply to post by logician magician

Does the name Magalhães means anything to you?

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:57 PM

Originally posted by _Del_
reply to post by Tuning Spork

At the June solstice, the area of direct light will cover the arctic circle at all times. It still circles the north pole and illuminates other parts of the world. During June solstice the sunlit portion will not extend to the outermost parts of the sphere.

Interesting you use the word sphere?

Tuning Spork,

reply to post by Tuning Spork

No problem with me one way the other. Sadly though, some will believe the false arguments. Perhaps a new C2C crowd pleasing \$35 paperback will result?

Did not the OP a few pages back throw a fit over the "Farce" tag? Just a bit of my "critical thinking"

I'm going out to enjoy a little sun on the "Flat Earth". It is finally warming up here.

Have fun folks

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:58 PM
If the Earth's rotation slowed down gradually over millions of years, and this is the most likely scenario, it would be a very different story. If the Earth slowed down to one rotation every year, called synchronous rotation, every area on Earth would be in either sunlight or darkness for one year. This would be similar to what the Moon goes through where for two weeks the front side of the Moon is illuminated by the Sun followed by the front side being in darkness for two weeks.

But what if the Earth stopped rotating completely? In that case, one half the Earth would be in daylight for half the year while the other side would be in darkness. The second half of the year it would be reversed. Temperature variations would be far more extreme then they are now. The temperature gradient would affect the wind circulation also. Air would move from the equator to the poles rather then in wind systems parallel to the equator as they are now.

Even stranger would be the change in the Sun's position in the sky. In the above scenario, Sun would just have a seasonal motion up and down the sky towards the south due to the orbit of the Earth and its axial tilt. You would see the elevation of the Sun increase or decrease in the sky just as we now see the elevation of the Sun change from a single point on the Earth due to the Earth's daily rotation.

As an example, say we live at 30 degrees North latitude. In the Summer, at a longitude where the Sun was exactly overhead, it would slide gradually to the horizon as Fall approached, but since the Sun has moved 90 degrees in its orbit, it would now be due west. As Winter approached, you would now be located on the dark side of the Earth. You would have to move to a longitude 180 degrees around the Earth to see the Sun 1/2 way up the sky because in the Winter, the Sun is 50 degrees south of its summer location in the sky.

There would be other effects of the Earth's rotation slowing also. The magnetic field of the Earth is generated by a dynamo effect that involves its rotation. If the Earth stopped rotating, the magnetic field would no longer be regenerated and it would decay away to some low, residual value due to the very small component which is 'fossilized' in its iron-rich rocks. There would be no more 'northern lights' and the Van Allen radiation belts would probably vanish, as would our protection from cosmic rays and other high-energy particles. Losing this protection would cause serious health issues.

Be glad for our Earthly rotation, without it we would be much worse off!

A planet will lose it's atmosphere if the atoms within it overcome the escape speed needed to escape the planet's gravitational pull...

Let's compare Earth and Mars. Earth's mass is almost ten times that of Mars. That means if the two planets were the same size, the surface gravity would be ten times greater. But, of course, Mars is actually smaller. It is about half the size of Earth. Putting those two together, the surface gravity on Mars is a little less than half the surface gravity on Earth. Simply put, Mars has less strength holding the atmosphere in place.

So why does Mars have an atmosphere at all? Let's talk escape velocity. Escape velocity is the amount of speed any object, wheter it is a spaceship or a baseball or an air molecule, needs in order to completely leave the gravitational influence of the planet. Once again, escape velocity is dependent on the mass and the starting distance. (If you start farther away, you don't need as much starting speed to escape) When we run the numbers, we see that the escape velocity from the surface of Mars is about 5.0 kilometers per second, less than half Earth's escape velocity of 11.2 km/s. Now, air molecules don't all move at the same speed. It's like a cup of hot cocoa. The really fast stuff flies off, leaving the slower stuff behind. (That's why hot cocoa cools down so fast if you leave it uncovered. All the "hot" particles go flying away.) In the case of Mars, that means a lot more of the atmosphere had "escape velocity," but not all of it. So, some of it (the slower, heavier molecules) stayed behind. Also, if the temperature increases, we get more fast particles and lose more air than if it is colder.

Let's take a quick look at the Moon: Its escape velocity is only 2.38 km/s. With such a low escape velocity, you wouldn't expect it to hold barely any atmosphere. And voila! we see it is virtually airless.

thus earth doesn't move and voila atmosphere starts to escape because gravity is dead

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 05:58 PM

Clearly I have not renounced all my ingrained round earth theory
I will leave it unedited as a testament to intellectual honesty, although of course you know I meant disc

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:04 PM
If the sun is really that small, what are stars? haha

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:07 PM
centrifugal force people gravity regardless of the speed of spin is aquainted to this force.

you stop spinning and eventually and i mean eventually atmosphere say bye bye!

When i say bye bye i mean at a level were it could sustain life....

You nknow im getting sick of this disscussion im fueling a nieve young mind im awfully sorry but your credence is extremely diminished.... and i rather took offence to you earlier attacking a moderator with your slanderous remarks.

Im finished here and i hope that this isnt my last post on ATS

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:08 PM

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
If the sun is really that small, what are stars? haha

In flat earth theory most stars are accepted as being smaller suns not too much more distant than the sun or moon.

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:12 PM

Originally posted by ian990003100
centrifugal force people gravity regardless of the speed of spin is aquainted to this force.

you stop spinning and eventually and i mean eventually atmosphere say bye bye!

When i say bye bye i mean at a level were it could sustain life....

You nknow im getting sick of this disscussion im fueling a nieve young mind im awfully sorry but your credence is extremely diminished.... and i rather took offence to you earlier attacking a moderator with your slanderous remarks.

Im finished here and i hope that this isnt my last post on ATS

I would really like to debunk this, but I'm hoping for an objective round earth advocate to correct your position for you. Perhaps you'll take it better. I certainly never slandered someone, to my knowledge. And will offer humble apologies for insulting any one's character or hurting their feelings by not advocating a round earth. I'd be thrilled if that standard was applied both ways too. Phrases like "fueling a naive young mind" would be inappropriate for me to tell someone, don't you think?

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:15 PM

Even if we send something into space and let it go around earth taking pictures, you deny that what we find then is a sphere? Why cant we see what is under earth? or backside if you will.

And the wall in antarctica, around the world.. when did it appear? because to this point in time it hasnt been there. noone has seen it. and theres plenty of people that goes there, both explorers, scientists and hunters etc.

Can you explain? When we send satelites up to take pictures, why havent a single one seen the side of the earth? All of them sees a sphere, and none a giant ice wall.

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:19 PM

Originally posted by _Del_
I would really like to debunk this, but I'm hoping for an objective round earth advocate to correct your position for you. Perhaps you'll take it better. I certainly never slandered someone, to my knowledge. And will offer humble apologies for insulting any one's character or hurting their feelings by not advocating a round earth. I'd be thrilled if that standard was applied both ways too. Phrases like "fueling a naive young mind" would be inappropriate for me to tell someone, don't you think?

I find it rather sad, with other things that you have pointed out, that among not even being able to consider a flat Earth for lack of absolute proof of a round one, people here can not even differentiate betwwen the likes of you and I. If I remember correctly, we have converged so much in the view of certain members that we may actually be the same person.

I'll ask again to everyone else: Prove to me that the Earth is round. You keep attacking us and the theory, yet you have no evidence whatsoever that the Earth is a round mass in space orbiting a larger round mass undergoing nuclear fusion.

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:22 PM

then please resort back to reality the earth is actually round! im ok with trying to understand were you are coming from but even basic science is against you.

Im not aggressive but come on your arguments are somewhat flawed and pointless....

remember it is proven that the earth has a molten lcore and that pole shift occurs thus also leadng to the fact that the Earth is Spherical.!!!

if it was flat then we'd be not here....

you really are starting to sound silly please do not discredit yourselves any further as in the future you may stumble across something out of this world! and i really would like to have further disscussions with you guy's but on subjects that are actually debatable not based on fantasy! im not narrow minded and i'd love to believe you but guy's science proves you entirely wrong...and before the argument occurs we are talking very basic science!

I will def sign off with this

you are entirely entitled to your opinion.
wether i agree or not does not matter.
I hope you find what ever you are looking for in life.

People are like words written in the sand a gust of wind and there blown away....

how many ATS members have you blown away?
(blown away meaning they won't entertain any disscussion with you ever again?)

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:25 PM
earth being the metaphor for a "human" being witnessing life in a plane; but with greater cultivation of the being plane's of other modalities are experiential. these other planes are given names and personalities as well as correspondence on a tree of life encompassing an entire function. if the product is life and the variable consciousness; a function being parts of a constant between time and perception of such within a plane: aspects of EaUrtH may change and encompass what is known as history as well as the future and present now. as a conscious being the planar nature of ur is evident; at a more subtle nature the plank nature of what is deemed a solid is also obvious.

to look at "earth" on a more macrocosmic level and see what is supposed life from within the created confines of a vassal organic technical or biological; one could postulate that whole of creation is one likened to a point or round ball if that be what a point is. to have a greater relationship with life as well as the microcosm of what is expressed as the planets :disassociated with a human on earth, but relation by means of non physicality, one can grow even on a planar level to have an interaction with life on a more plank (planar ankh) level.

i guess what i say is not as scientific and may sound more esoteric., but, the ankh as a symbol is not used much in math: although symbols which are (like phi and pi) associated with its(ankh based planar movement) movement as well as cross based(reciprocal based movement based on phi and pi) movement across planes.

so is earth planar yes and is what is called earth a plane yes and is the earth plane a realm where other realms can interact with earth yes the plane that is earth that is planar can also be interacted with in a fashion similar to the variables you place in an equation. at advanced levels this means being able to visit other planes from the plane of modality called earth.

at more subtle levels it is occult to distinguish between the observation of the planar nature of "earth" and the experience of the nature of earth via the plane you are being a witness in experience of.

[edit on 21-4-2008 by Ausar]

[edit on 21-4-2008 by Ausar]

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:28 PM
www.sparehed.com...

how much proof do you actully need?

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:31 PM
I'd like to know how the earth cast it's shadow on the moon during a lunear eclipse if the sun is above the so called flat earth you theorize about? Only a sphere can cast a circular shadow and it looks circular to me. Is there another sun below this flat earth?

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:33 PM

if the earth is round is it safe for me to assume i can go around "it" and due to or by the way of my means see all there is to creation or of life since i will if walking properly come back to the same point in a round fashion.

does that question make any sense?

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 06:33 PM

hallelujah!

you have my upmost respect!

can you beleive these guy's are getting so much attention....

i maight start a thread saying that new york is the real jerusalem it's bound to get me at least say 20 pages....

new topics

top topics

9