It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

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: 44
9
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


*ponders*

a solar eclipse is when the moon blocks out the sun from earth

a lunar eclipse is where the earth blocks out the sun from the moon

if the earth is between the moon and sun, how is it possible that you can view the moon and sun, unless you have see-through-the-earth goggles on?

If what you say is true, i'd love to read some literature about it.
Any reference material?




posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

*ponders*
if the earth is between the moon and sun, how is it possible that you can view the moon and sun, unless you have see-through-the-earth goggles on?


This is exactly why some FE theorists reject the RE explanation of the eclipse -- because it does occur. Seems impossible. The event is called a selenehelion, or selenelion. A 98% lunar eclipse was recorded fairly recently (historically speaking) in France; it occurred while the sun was still above the horizon and is the most complete on record.
Hevelius and Payen are among the astronomers to have recorded the events historically. The most recent was in 2004 (maybe 2002, I can't remember) viewed from Europe.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


interesting: selenehelion
you learn something new every day

It still doesnt show me how the earth can be flat though?

If you look at the moon during a lunar eclipse you see a rounded shape for the shadow of the earth....

that was my original point



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Andrew E. Wiggin
 


I hadn't heard about it until I stopped by the Flat Earth Society forum a year or two ago. They would suggest that during the selenelion it could not be the earth casting a shadow on the moon, and ergo that the round earth mechanism for eclipses is wrong and in doubt for all the others.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Using the "round Earth" theory, setting an object on the earth would be like setting grains of sand on a beach ball. Certainly a few grains would stay - right around the top, the surface is nearly horizontal - but when you stray too far from the absolute top of the ball, the grains of sand start sliding off and falling onto the ground. The Earth, if round, should behave in exactly the same fashion. Because the top is a very localized region on a sphere, if the Earth were in fact round, there would be only a very small area of land that would be at all inhabitable. Stray to the outside fringes of the "safe zone", and you start walking at a tilt. The further out you go, the more you slant, until your very survival is determined by the tread on your boots. Reach a certain point, and you slide off the face of the planet entirely. Obviously, something is wrong.
Source

Thats taken from the Flat Earth Societies website.

This is a classic example of disinformation.
They use an inanimate object, and disregard scale.
A grain of sand to an average sized beach ball is no where near close enough resemblence to a human being to the size of the earth.

But even if you put that obvious fact aside, their generalized explanation for their flat earth theory leaves out a few fundamentals that have been known for....well....a long time.

1.) If the earth were to stand still, like their beach ball, then yes - we'd all fly right out into space. However, being as how the earth spins on an axis, at a very high rate of speed, and revolves arouund a star, we get what is called Centripetal Force . This "kooky" force of physics is the biggest difference between the stationary beach ball with the sand grains, and our planet.

2.) No where in their descriptions (that i could find) does it explain what happens when you reach the end.

3.) To suggest that the earth is flat, would also be to suggest that the Sun, moon, galaxy, etc is flat as well. And i resort back to the lunar/solar eclipses. A square object would not cast a rounded shadow. Unless of course, they wish to insinuate that the earth is a flat circle. Then my theory in #3 holds no water.....however that does lead to #4

4.) Magnetic navigation. You get a simple compass that always points north. If our planet is truely flat, and thus only has two dimensions, then how could there be a constant North, South, East, West?

4a.) How can 3d objects exist in a 2d plain? if the earth is flat, and circular, then it has to have no height. Or atleast it goes in my head. To give it length and width, allows it to be 2d. But to add height would make it a round shape, AKA the earth is round.


I know that everyone reading this is thinking "duh, andy, you're just preaching to the choir man"

yeah - i am - but.....i feel so compelled.

Sorry - but the definitions at the flat earth society hold about as much water as a flat planet earth.



posted on Jun, 21 2008 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin

1.) If the earth were to stand still, like their beach ball, then yes - we'd all fly right out into space. However, being as how the earth spins on an axis, at a very high rate of speed, and revolves arouund a star, we get what is called Centripetal Force . This "kooky" force of physics is the biggest difference between the stationary beach ball with the sand grains, and our planet.


Centripetal force would not hold you to the earth nor hold sand to a beachball.



2.) No where in their descriptions (that i could find) does it explain what happens when you reach the end.


Probably because no one has reached the end.



3.) To suggest that the earth is flat, would also be to suggest that the Sun, moon, galaxy, etc is flat as well. And i resort back to the lunar/solar eclipses. A square object would not cast a rounded shadow. Unless of course, they wish to insinuate that the earth is a flat circle. Then my theory in #3 holds no water.....however that does lead to #4


Most galaxies are flat discs, including our own. Most flat earth believers think the earth is a disc. That still wouldn't explain the eclipse, however. Yet, FE denies the eclipse is the shadow of the earth.



4.) Magnetic navigation. You get a simple compass that always points north. If our planet is truely flat, and thus only has two dimensions, then how could there be a constant North, South, East, West?


There can be a north, south, east and west on a map and it is flat, is it not? The earth would not be two-dimensional at any rate. The surface we live on would be flat, however.

I'm not sure what flat earth society you were referencing, but I was referring to these eccentrics here.



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


This website is what came up as the top result for The Flat earth society, when i googled "flat earth society" so i assumed you were refering to it.




Centripetal force would not hold you to the earth nor hold sand to a beachball.

Here is a good explanation of how we are kept on the planet despite its spin. Centripetal force keeps us on this planet, as well as sand on a beach ball. Next time you're outside, get a tennis ball, place it in your hand, and spin in circles as fast as you can. When you reach the peak of your spinning speed, slowly open your hand, and magically *hehe* the ball stays "glued" to your hand, instead of flying out.
If you stop
the ball flies away




Probably because no one has reached the end.

So.....when people fly around the world, they're not reaching the end? Your'e going to have to explain this one to me, because a 2nd grade logic would debunk this theory. (no offense intended there)


There can be a north, south, east and west on a map and it is flat, is it not? The earth would not be two-dimensional at any rate. The surface we live on would be flat, however.

I'm not sure what flat earth society you were referencing, but I was referring to these eccentrics here.



you have a hypothetical NSEW on your flap map.
Where do the magnetic forces come from on a flat object? ya know what...im horrible at explaining this so just click here


furthermore

we've all seen photographs and video footage from space of the planet earth.

so someone is suggesting that either:

A.) the pictures are fake
B.) its really an optical illusion

but to suggest the latter (option B) is to disprove the "flat disc" theory, because if it were a flat disc you would see all of the continenents at the same time, instead of a revolving image that shows them come into view and fade from view, just like watching the nike logo on a basketball when you turn it.



[edit on 22-6-2008 by Andrew E. Wiggin]



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   
in the end, you cannot argue with someone who throws scientific theory out the window.

there is not one single way a person can prove the world is flat.
but there is a mountain of evidence to prove that it is, indeed, spherical.

The space shuttle - orbits - earth.

There is no more need to argue with you - though im glad we could have this discussion. But you have yet to produce a single shred of scientific evidence to back a claim of a flat earth theory.

This thread will be removed from my watch list.

If you want MORE proof that the earth is round, go read a book about it
go to nasa's website and look at pictures of it

go outside and look from north to south or east to west, and notice how the sky has a "dome" effect


sorry - but this conversation is boring me

not even a challange.



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by logician magician

The sun and the moon is are just different sides of the same light disc, and we can see the moon during the day (the back of the sun) precisely because the world is a disc. If it was not a disc, it would not be possible.



SO how come on some days I can see both, the Sun (its day time) and the moon is also out, clear as day.

The obviously are not the one thing!

Mikey



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 01:28 AM
link   
I can't answer that one because I know nothing about his model.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I'm converted to your conspiracy theory, or, maybe not. I am not a scientist but a flat earth just seems to go against too much of what has been learned. If it was flat, a cube or whatever you are trying to say the shape would be, then from a point of view we could see a definite corner as well as 4 sides of this shape... Not possible from all legitimate sources, sorry.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Using the "round Earth" theory, setting an object on the earth would be like setting grains of sand on a beach ball. Certainly a few grains would stay - right around the top, the surface is nearly horizontal - but when you stray too far from the absolute top of the ball, the grains of sand start sliding off and falling onto the ground. The Earth, if round, should behave in exactly the same fashion. Because the top is a very localized region on a sphere, if the Earth were in fact round, there would be only a very small area of land that would be at all inhabitable. Stray to the outside fringes of the "safe zone", and you start walking at a tilt. The further out you go, the more you slant, until your very survival is determined by the tread on your boots. Reach a certain point, and you slide off the face of the planet entirely. Obviously, something is wrong.


Gravity determines "up" and "down" on a planet, not your position on the surface. The beach ball does not have a detectable gravitational field, so the grains of sand slide off it when Earth's gravity overcomes the friction between the sand and the ball !

These flat Earth guys are either having a laugh at everyone's expense, or else are incredibly stupid.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by doomdragonz
 


The Flat Earth theory proposes a disc with the north pole at its center.



reply to post by Mogget
 


I've never seen that site before, and I'd agree that that is laughable.



posted on Jun, 27 2008 @ 03:54 AM
link   
If the earth was flat, wouldnt we sail off the edge?? stupid.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 08:43 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by q_ball
 


Why would you sail off the edge on the flat earth map?



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by _Del_
 


I have a question.

Dont know if its been asked. But how is it that it can be 1030am on one side of the earth but 430 pm on the other. Both are receiving sunlight. in the flat earth model, from what i understand, the sun acts like a spotlight. wouldnt this be impossible? Thus the only conclusion has to be a round earth? Not to mention that fact that every single country with a satelight or telescope has to be in on some massive conspiracy.
?



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Found this on the website. It's claimed to be a rough representation of the sun's movement causing day and night.




new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join