Flat Earth Believers, I would like to hear your ideas.

a reply to: FlatBastard

it is you - and the other one who are being evasive - all i want is YOUR values for 3 distances - plus the confirmation or denial that in your delusion " the moon is a spheroid "

it should not be hard - unless you either have no science or b- dare not allow it to be questioned


can we at least have your answer to the last one - is the moon a spheroid - its a yes // no answer -

and i am not here to give you a basic edycation - if you want to know how real science calculates astronomical distances - use google

but as you two have jumped into a flat earth thread - i will delight in showing that your delusions are utter bollox - when you give the 3 distances

a reply to: pfishy

Given that the Universe is a 2d hologram it makes sense that it and everything within it are flat , the programming makes us perceive three dimensions.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I don't know if your reading what i am saying and simply ignoring it? Or just making fun?

As is said now multiple times, have not done those calculations i don't know how i can explain that beyond those words. Why you keep asking something i admitted to not knowing yet?

Also you would need 3 people for this, one in the centre of the suns path and then other two at equal and great distances apart, and as i said i haven't don't that yet so what more do you want?

What are your personal observations and experiments you have made or observed for you to absolutely know that the planet is a spheroid?

Lastly, we have no capabilities of going to the moon, i don't house wealth and resources for unknown reasons ask the space agencies if you trust them so, personally, i can afford binoculars, a laser or a camera with decent zoom, i trust my eyes, who do you trust?

a reply to: NNN87

glad you asked :

What are your personal observations and experiments you have made or observed for you to absolutely know that the planet is a spheroid?

polaris - simple - irrefutable

science wins

a reply to: ignorant_ape

and i am not here to give you a basic edycation - if you want to know how real science calculates astronomical distances - use google

I already know how this is supposedly done, which is why I said that there is no way for me to calculate this, the fact that you think that this is easy to do for FE-ers shows that you have no clue yourself.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Polaris what?

a reply to: FlatBastard

ol - lests get back to basics - a simple question for a simple person :

is the moon a spheroid - yes or no

the evasiveness is getting tiresome

a reply to: FlatBastard

sigh - you are not very good at this are you

polaris - its a star - commonly refered to as the north star

it if terain and weather permit - it is visible from any point in the northern hemisphere - and a measurement of the declination of polaris above the true horizon give the observers latitude in degrees

a very simple but vital navigation toool

now by multiple means - we can establish that 1 degree of latitude = 111km

and further - that all lines of latitude are equidistant

these facts are incompatible with the flat earth delusion

but congruent with the spheroid model

the earth is therefore a spheroid

QED - thanks for playing

if the firmament does exist
isn't there something we can bounce off it
to tell us it's there ?

originally posted by: zatara

For your information...

Isaiah 40:22 It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to live in;

a reply to: pfishy

As you can see the old israelites were also not sure if the earth was a sphere or a round flat piece of dirt we all live our lives on.

"Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the earth was founded? He sits enthroned above Tethe circle of the earthxt, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in." (Isaiah 40:21-22)

Seems Isaiah wasn't very doctrinaire about the matter.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: FlatBastard

sigh - you are not very good at this are you

polaris - its a star - commonly refered to as the north star

it if terain and weather permit - it is visible from any point in the northern hemisphere - and a measurement of the declination of polaris above the true horizon give the observers latitude in degrees

a very simple but vital navigation toool

now by multiple means - we can establish that 1 degree of latitude = 111km

and further - that all lines of latitude are equidistant

these facts are incompatible with the flat earth delusion

but congruent with the spheroid model

the earth is therefore a spheroid

QED - thanks for playing

Natural laws of perspective create such illusions also, but you are again assuming that stars are the distance and size we are told they are.

Also i did answer your question, the moon from my observations limited to me, seems to be a circle, never seen its entirety neither do i have the resources to do so, so as far as i can see, it's circle light in the sky, in simple terms, there's more to it h but you don't really care do you?

a reply to: NNN87

It really doesn't. How can perspective explain the fact that the visibility of an object above the north pole is directly tied to its latitude? On a flat earth you would be able to see the same stars from both hemispheres. In reality this is not the case.

a reply to: NNN87

what utter bollox - to quote an earlier thread of mine :

[quote2 – POLARIS

Using a sighting of polaris to determine latitudes between the north pole and the equator is simple

And can be paraphrased thus :

“ take a sighting of polaris from any point north of the equator , and the angle at which polaris appears above the TRUE horizon is the latitude “

Now the flat earth claim immediately crumbles here

Because in reality – the lines of latitude are equidistant [ and even flat earther fantasy maps draw latitude lines equidistant ]

See pic :




This can be tested with a map – the measured distances between equal increments of latitude IS identical – do try this at home kids

Now lets demonstrate the flat earth siliness

This pic shows an alledged “ flat earth from the equator to the north pole – with the scale bar delineating 10 degree incriments of latitude

As shown – the flat earth delusion fails the polaris test – one obersvational dataset in – and the flat earth delusion has crashed

Spheriod earth model handles polaris observations perfectly


there is no " illusion " = we can measure the distances between points - and measure the declination of polaris - and hey - its imcompatible with the flat earth delusion

PS - you might want to read my thread - you will learn real science thread

as for the moon - please explain lunar phases and libration

oh and continue with lunar and solar eclipses

your continuted dishonesty is now amusing

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Again, why are you completely ignoring natural laws of perspective its mind boggling. Have you ever painted? Or done any architecture drawings? Perspective, how many bloody times do we have to repeat our selfs.

a reply to: NNN87

i am not ignoring anything - and ues i have done engineering drawing

but hey - your waffling is irrelevant to polaris

a reply to: ignorant_ape

You used angles taken from a first person view, dealing with perspective and a horizon. You can't just use them in a 2d sideview. Off course it won't line up.

This is to be expected on a flat plane, objects appear lower above the horizon the further away you are from them.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: NNN87

i am not ignoring anything - and ues i have done engineering drawing

but hey - your waffling is irrelevant to polaris

Then you are a lot more capable of understanding simple perspective laws, that effecst anyone with eyesight, even when a plane is flying at a steady altitude away from the viewer, it will appear to become smaller and lower to the horizon (the limit of ones perspective) and eventually appear to be "over" the supposed curvature.

But, with lower altitudes and a stable lvl such as water, one can see beyond the supposed limits due to curvature, how is that possible.

i can only conclude that neither of you ACTUALLY know what perspective is - as you are both attempting to use it to refute polaris

there is ZERO perspective when taking a measurement of the declination of polaris

are are you both just terminally dishonest ?

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
i can only conclude that neither of you ACTUALLY know what perspective is - as you are both attempting to use it to refute polaris

there is ZERO perspective when taking a measurement of the declination of polaris

are are you both just terminally dishonest ?

We did no such thing, now you are being aggressive and ignorant, we clearly stated that perspective and all its natural laws, on a flat surface will create the same illusion, so i have no idea anymore as to how you are not comprehending what we are saying. Its actually surprising.

The further one moves, or an object moves away from the viewer, the lower and smaller (unless its a light source, size is irrelevant for quite some distance) the said observable object will get.

You are literally applying a globe model and all its numbers and assumptions to a flat one, what are you doing?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

You are aiming your sextant on the horizon. This line is more or less level to the surface but it does not represent a level line on the rest of the flat plane beyond the horizon.

Because the surface angles up in your vision, towards the horizon.