I am in utter disbelief that this 'Flat-Earth' nonsense has gained some attention

a reply to: wmd_2008

I responded to your post about gravity and how it supposedly pulls objects along in the direction of the Earth's rotation, in sync with it.

That's all you need to discuss right now.

Well, it is actually the Russians funding the propagation of this theory, but who cares, they are our friends!

a reply to: TheFaceOfTheEarth

We know gravity pulls on objects or are you going to deny that

We can PROVE the Earth rotates when it pulls on an object that is restrained look up the Foucault Pendulum. The path traced is due to the rotation and the swing and traces a path that can be predicted.

The pictures I posted showed CURVATURE and how the Moon looks to people on a GLOBE .

So disprove ALL of those or your flat Earth falls flat on it's face.

EXCUSE & AVOIDANCE in 10...9...8......

a reply to: M4nWithNoN4me

"utter disbelief" - drama queening much here?

So youre amazed no matter how wrong someone else may or may not be that people have a diferent view to yours?

Wow, awesome outlook.

The thing is I don't have to believe in the flat earth theory but all the proof you have the earth is not flat is garnered from OTHER peoples research (NOT YOURS) math and physics that we have been fed through school and forced to learn from governments and BS media.

So do some of your OWN research into FE theory and then pipe up!

a reply to: reboot23

There has been proof for a VERY VERY long time that the Earth is a GLOBE we have photgraphic proof we can see spheres all around the solar system so why not UTTER disbelief

ENOUGH!!!!!!

Moving to another thread doesn't change the message here:
The bickering ends here and now!!!!!
Discuss the topic in a polite manner.....You are responsible for your own posts.

Go After the Ball, Not the Player!


ETA

and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

a reply to: wmd_2008

More contradictions from the Church of Science. First it is claimed that gravity pulls objects sideways, in sync with the rotation of the Earth, then in complete contradiction, Fouckall's Pendulum is mentioned, which is based on the idea that the pendulum keeps its original orientation, unaffected by anything. Not by gravity, not by rotation.

In fact the Pendulum and Gyroscopes completely destroy spinning and flying ball Earth. I will make this painfully clear.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: TheFaceOfTheEarth

We know gravity pulls on objects or are you going to deny that

We can PROVE the Earth rotates when it pulls on an object that is restrained look up the Foucault Pendulum. The path traced is due to the rotation and the swing and traces a path that can be predicted.

The pictures I posted showed CURVATURE and how the Moon looks to people on a GLOBE .

So disprove ALL of those or your flat Earth falls flat on it's face.

EXCUSE & AVOIDANCE in 10...9...8......

thearmsguide.com...

Planes should have a very hard time landing, or even having enough fuel to make it to certain locations.

No one needs gravity on a flat infinite plane, observable density is all it is. On a flat plane with the moon with a somewhat same distance as the sun, ''diameter'' of earth calculations pointed upwards using shadows putting it at 6.3 thousand kilometres roughly, it would be the same effect as looking at a ceiling painting from different positions of the room.

Perspective and atmosphere create all the same effects as if there is curvature. When original calculations for curvature were made, oddly enough the very natural laws of eyesight and atmospheric refraction were ignored, making false assumptions and building all other calculations on false origins.

There have been simple observations disproving the notion of curvature, those are the foundations for a globe, this can't just be ignored.

a reply to: NNN87

and bingo - the sun is 6300 km away == your claim ?

it does not matter where you got this delusion from - or how you calculated it

but direct observation of the sun [ and moon ] falsifies it - as we do not see sufficient parralax to reconcile your claim when vieing eithr the sun or the moon

in short - the observable face of the sun or moon - does not alter by the required degree to validatte your claim :

either - for a fixed observer - making observations 4 hours appart

or

for 2 observers taking simultaneous observations from 6300 km apart [ your claim of distance ]

flat earth fails again

a reply to: ignorant_ape

How? You just keep saying NO, No No No,

What we see is the apparent location of the sun, not actual, the measurement is based on shadows cause by what we see as the suns location, what you are asking based on ground observations is beyond me, i would have to somehow be in view of the actual sun.

Using same shadow distance but on a flat surface would put the suns location at the supposed distance of the diameter, same calculations, one uses the supposed curvature the other doesn't.

a reply to: NNN87

now you are simply blathering - you claim we cannot ACTUALLY see the sun ? - just WTF ???????????

NO - what i am asking for is absolutly in your capabilities

simply observe the moon at a given time - then 4 hours later - observe it again - and note the apparent changes

here - helpfull graphic :



red lines = your view of the moon at time A

purple lines = your view of the moon at A +4 hours [ IF the flat earth delusion is true ]

bonus blue line - the observation of the moon from a point 6300km from you at A+4 HOURS

you should never have made the claim that you know the distance - you avoided it previously - but hey - one slip

observation wins - plat earth cult fails

originally posted by: NNN87
a reply to: ignorant_ape

How? You just keep saying NO, No No No,

What we see is the apparent location of the sun, not actual, the measurement is based on shadows cause by what we see as the suns location, what you are asking based on ground observations is beyond me, i would have to somehow be in view of the actual sun.

Using same shadow distance but on a flat surface would put the suns location at the supposed distance of the diameter, same calculations, one uses the supposed curvature the other doesn't.

(Facepalm)
I went to Dubai last year. Why is it that the shadows cast by the sun were shorter at Noon than back home at the same time here in London?
Odd, that.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I went to Dubai last year. Why is it that the shadows cast by the sun were shorter at Noon than back home at the same time here in London? Odd, that.

It's not odd at all but expected with a sun that moves in a circle that positions it closer to Dubai then to London.

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I went to Dubai last year. Why is it that the shadows cast by the sun were shorter at Noon than back home at the same time here in London? Odd, that.

It's not odd at all but expected with a sun that moves in a circle that positions it closer to Dubai then to London.

Ah, so now it goes around in a circle, which no-one else has ever noticed!

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

What do you mean noone has ever noticed?

originally posted by: TheFaceOfTheEarth
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

What do you mean noone has ever noticed?

Your theory about the Sun going around in circles over a flat plane. It doesn't fit with every observation made by mankind in recorded human history. The Ancient Greeks knew that the Earth is a sphere. It stopped being a controversial theory some time ago and became an accepted fact.

a reply to: TheFaceOfTheEarth

then explain the " midnight sun " observed above the arctic circle - and yes i have personally observed 24 hour daylight [ twice - iceland and norway ] and sunless days [ once norway ]

“Objects fall on the earth due to a force of attraction by the earth. Therefore, the earth, planets, constellations, moon and sun are held in orbit due to this attraction.”
- Bhaskaracharya


" Golapada (50 verses): Geometric/trigonometric aspects of the celestial sphere, features of the ecliptic, celestial equator, node, shape of the earth, cause of day and night, rising of zodiacal signs on horizon, etc. In addition, some versions cite a few colophons added at the end, extolling the virtues of the work, etc."
- Aryabhata

en.wikipedia.org...

very old stuff

originally posted by: kibric
“Objects fall on the earth due to a force of attraction by the earth. Therefore, the earth, planets, constellations, moon and sun are held in orbit due to this attraction.”
- Bhaskaracharya


" Golapada (50 verses): Geometric/trigonometric aspects of the celestial sphere, features of the ecliptic, celestial equator, node, shape of the earth, cause of day and night, rising of zodiacal signs on horizon, etc. In addition, some versions cite a few colophons added at the end, extolling the virtues of the work, etc."
- Aryabhata

en.wikipedia.org...

very old stuff

Damn, i wish they had more translated versions, still reading though, thank you for the info.

....hmmm why when we sail a ship do we not fall over the edge into the abyss when we reach the horizon?

I am ashamed I just posted in a flat earth thread.