Absolute Proof the Earth is Round NOT Flat!

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

They attack Penguins are murder

Pesky little bastards really.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: TheSkepticGuy23

Agreed that is a good summary of the scientific method.
I agree that the scientific-method, is among our very best tools, to help us understand the physical universe.

What I mean by stories : is the things that you cannot absolutely prove for your own gnosis.

If one has not been outside of Earth, and had a clear, unobscured view, to view the Earth as a spheroid : then they are relying on somebody else's opinion, otherwise known as a story.

Another story that changes regularly, is the depth of the oceans.
They are stories, because somebody else, some supposed scientist, or influencer, tells us what they say it is, then we repeat that, just like we have learned something.

All we have learned : is a story.

If somebody says that they have a blue car : how do you know if that is true, or a untrue ?
Until you see the car : it's a story.

Then again : I used to have an oddly coloured car, that some called blue, and other swore it was green, LoL !

Then we get into the whole : " perception " thingy.

As to this one story never having crumbled, I care to disagree sir, as you have seen over the years, multiple 100 + page threads questioning it.

Other than what may be to some, obvious larks : there are some that just question everything.

Grade6 science.
Perhaps that's where the problem is (lack of basic knowledge in science)

Take a look at full moon and tell me what is its shape. Don't be afraid of the truth.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

It's still a belief-system, unless you have deep individual knowledge of it.

I don't : so therefore, all of the explanations are stories to me.

A person sitting in their home, watching videos, and believing in hamburger-patty Earth :
is in the same category, for me, as someone sitting in their home, believing in ball-Earth, because : science says so.

It's fine it one has had a good life, and never had to question reality.

But some of us had no choice, but to overturn the rocks, and look deeper.

Surely some of the FE'ers are dupes, and may be worthy of derision, but some others are just lost, and looking for something to grasp.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88


The multitude of lies and deceptions that were spoon-fed to us as young spongy-minded kids ?

So. No explanation by you how lunar eclipses work. Fights south of the equator.

There is more proof the earth is spherical. With no coherent explanation for all these as they relate to each other for flat earth.

Solar eclipses. Why the North Star gets lower on the horizon without changing brightness as one travels south into one is far enough south of the equator the North Star is physically blocked from view by the horizon.

How a flat earth would physically block the sun from view at sunset for night fall where a telescope that can bring stars too faint to see with the human eye can’t bring the sun back into view. Not even from a mountain top.

Why an equatorial mount for telescopes work.

If you want a link to an observable argument, celestial south means something on a spherical earth.

Or my own picture. In line with this thread. The sun isn’t up yet, and how it casts an upward cloud shadow pre-sunrise because the sun is relatively below the horizon. Which isn’t possible for a sun always 300 to 3000 miles above a flat earth.



Or why there is a dip to the horizon, and how it can be used to calculate the curvature of the earth.



And how earth’s curvature is verified.

Rainy Lake Experiment: Conclusion

walter.bislins.ch...

Summary

All data and observations agree with the predictions of the Globe Model, which includes Terrestrial Refraction. The predictions for the Flat Earth Model, however, contradict the observations.

The Rainy Lake Experiment shows even better than the Bedford Level Experiment that the earth is a globe, since we also have GPS measurements that are not influenced by Refraction or Perspective, but are of a pure geometric nature. GPS measurements directly provide the radius of the earth.

Only one conclusion remains:

The earth cannot be flat, but is a globe with a mean radius of 6371 km!

All demonstrable evidence and math concerning the sun points to a spherical earth in a heliocentric solar system.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin

I don't :

Now you have demonstrable evidence the earth is spherical.

originally posted by: TheSkepticGuy23
a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

and admit that they were guessing all along

That's kind of how science works. Observe evidence, postulate a "best guess." Other's evaluate that "best guess," and agree until better evidence comes along.

I was told a story, about a globe Earth, just like most.
But when some other stories started crumbling,

The earth being a globe, in a solar system, in a galaxy isn't just a story, it is proven; and never crumbled.

Crumbling is just a word.

Imagine now there are thousands of people in the US who believe in flat earth and creationism in the absence of any evidence.

I think you can see where the problem is.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: TheSkepticGuy23

Agreed that is a good summary of the scientific method.
I agree that the scientific-method, is among our very best tools, to help us understand the physical universe.

What I mean by stories : is the things that you cannot absolutely prove for your own gnosis.

If one has not been outside of Earth, and had a clear, unobscured view, to view the Earth as a spheroid : then they are relying on somebody else's opinion, otherwise known as a story.

Another story that changes regularly, is the depth of the oceans.
They are stories, because somebody else, some supposed scientist, or influencer, tells us what they say it is, then we repeat that, just like we have learned something.

All we have learned : is a story.

If somebody says that they have a blue car : how do you know if that is true, or a untrue ?
Until you see the car : it's a story.

Then again : I used to have an oddly coloured car, that some called blue, and other swore it was green, LoL !

Then we get into the whole : " perception " thingy.

As to this one story never having crumbled, I care to disagree sir, as you have seen over the years, multiple 100 + page threads questioning it.

Other than what may be to some, obvious larks : there are some that just question everything.

Grade6 science.
Perhaps that's where the problem is (lack of basic knowledge in science)

Take a look at full moon and tell me what is its shape. Don't be afraid of the truth.

Sorry mate, but your elementary school teachers, were like internet influencers of today : information vulgarizers.

Do you really believe that your 6th grade science teacher knew all of the truths of the universe ?
Nah, but I'll bet they were a good story-teller.

The full moon looks roundish, to my perception, which I continually question.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: TheSkepticGuy23

Agreed that is a good summary of the scientific method.
I agree that the scientific-method, is among our very best tools, to help us understand the physical universe.

What I mean by stories : is the things that you cannot absolutely prove for your own gnosis.

If one has not been outside of Earth, and had a clear, unobscured view, to view the Earth as a spheroid : then they are relying on somebody else's opinion, otherwise known as a story.

Another story that changes regularly, is the depth of the oceans.
They are stories, because somebody else, some supposed scientist, or influencer, tells us what they say it is, then we repeat that, just like we have learned something.

All we have learned : is a story.

If somebody says that they have a blue car : how do you know if that is true, or a untrue ?
Until you see the car : it's a story.

Then again : I used to have an oddly coloured car, that some called blue, and other swore it was green, LoL !

Then we get into the whole : " perception " thingy.

As to this one story never having crumbled, I care to disagree sir, as you have seen over the years, multiple 100 + page threads questioning it.

Other than what may be to some, obvious larks : there are some that just question everything.

Grade6 science.
Perhaps that's where the problem is (lack of basic knowledge in science)

Take a look at full moon and tell me what is its shape. Don't be afraid of the truth.

Sorry mate, but your elementary school teachers, were like internet influencers of today : information vulgarizers.

Do you really believe that your 6th grade science teacher knew all of the truths of the universe ?
Nah, but I'll bet they were a good story-teller.

The full moon looks roundish, to my perception, which I continually question.

You answered it yourself. It's roundish and not flat. Make a projection into the 3-D space and you get a spheroid shape.

I wasn't talking about my grade6 teachers but about grade6 science. Little kids know about the shape of the planets and it's not a secret.

It's not even debatable unless you want to go down the path of creationists...

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin


Do you really believe that your 6th grade science teacher knew all of the truths of the universe ?

What does that have to do with a lunar or solar eclipse you can observe yourself. Care enough to draw out how a solar or lunar eclipse would work for a flat earth. Maybe the problem is not taking the time to observe and work things through.

a reply to: Lazy88

I noticed years ago, that most of the flathead earth info, was posted by ball-earthers.
Maybe they are building strawmen to argue with ?

In case you missed it : I do not believe in a flat-earth. It's a story.

I also do not believe in a ball earth, as I, from my viewpoint, can see that it also is a story.

I also do not believe that math can prove we live on a sphere, I see that as another story.
I also do not trust opinions of others, photos, videos, papers, nor whatever else : I see them as stories.

It's okay if you want to believe in a spherical earth, I'm just saying that it is an opinion, AKA a story.
I do not need to believe those stories, and yet : life carries-on.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88

I noticed years ago, that most of the flathead earth info, was posted by ball-earthers.
Maybe they are building strawmen to argue with ?

In case you missed it : I do not believe in a flat-earth. It's a story.

I also do not believe in a ball earth, as I, from my viewpoint, can see that it also is a story.

I also do not believe that math can prove we live on a sphere, I see that as another story.
I also do not trust opinions of others, photos, videos, papers, nor whatever else : I see them as stories.

It's okay if you want to believe in a spherical earth, I'm just saying that it is an opinion, AKA a story.
I do not need to believe those stories, and yet : life carries-on.

What do you mean you don't believe in flat or spherical earth stories.

If science and evidence was related to beliefs then we wouldn't have progressed that much.

You mean you don't accept earth is an oblate spheroid because you think you have something to add to the field in the absence of any evidence. Classical creationism tactics.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88


In case you missed it : I do not believe in a flat-earth. It's a story.

Flat earth or a spherical earth are both a story to you because you have done nothing to prove either.

Is that false.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88


I also do not believe in a ball earth, as I, from my viewpoint, can see that it also is a story.

And again. Draw out how a solar eclipse or a lunar eclipse would work on a flat earth.

A hint. The flat earth isn’t a working model. Spherical earth is. Along with why astronomical gear works the way it does for a working model of a spherical earth such as an equatorial mount for telescopes.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88

I noticed years ago, that most of the flathead earth info, was posted by ball-earthers.
Maybe they are building strawmen to argue with ?

In case you missed it : I do not believe in a flat-earth. It's a story.

I also do not believe in a ball earth, as I, from my viewpoint, can see that it also is a story.

I also do not believe that math can prove we live on a sphere, I see that as another story.
I also do not trust opinions of others, photos, videos, papers, nor whatever else : I see them as stories.

It's okay if you want to believe in a spherical earth, I'm just saying that it is an opinion, AKA a story.
I do not need to believe those stories, and yet : life carries-on.

What do you mean you don't believe in flat or spherical earth stories.

If science and evidence was related to beliefs then we wouldn't have progressed that much.

You mean you don't accept earth is an oblate spheroid because you think you have something to add to the field in the absence of any evidence. Classical creationism tactics.

What do you mean : what do I mean ?
I do not believe, I don't think, I don't have an opinion :
as to the supposed shape, of this supposed planet, in this supposed realm.

It's majorly related to beliefs, if one learns to view it that way.
Any experiment using the scientific-method, is first considered by an imperfect human mind.
The method, premises, steps, and decision of what value the data will have, are all influenced by human opinions.

Sure it's our best effort, but please don't overestimate it technocratically.

Nothing to add, apparently ... LoL !!

( PS : Don't grasp for strawmen. It's not interesting. )

originally posted by: Lazy88

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88


In case you missed it : I do not believe in a flat-earth. It's a story.

Flat earth or a spherical earth are both a story to you because you have done nothing to prove either.

Is that false.

Yes.

And again. Draw out how a solar eclipse or a lunar eclipse would work on a flat earth.

A hint. The flat earth isn’t a working model. Spherical earth is. Along with why astronomical gear works the way it does for a working model of a spherical earth such as an equatorial mount for telescopes.

Your beliefs are welcomed here.

There are a lot of nice stories in there.

Perhaps it is not clear, what is meant by stories ?

a reply to: KnowItAllKnowNothin

Question everything?

I question whether you or anyone else exists. Prove me wrong.

Dark Star:


'Pinback: All right, bomb. Prepare to receive new orders.

Bomb#20: You are false data.

Pinback: Hmmm?

Bomb #20: Therefore I shall ignore you.

Pinback: Hello... bomb?

Bomb #20: False data can act only as a distraction. Therefore, I shall refuse to perceive.

Pinback: Hey, bomb?

Bomb #20: The only thing that exists is myself.

Pinback: Snap out of it, bomb.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin


There are a lot of nice stories in there.

Again. Spherical earth is a working model that can and does accurately predict tides, solar and lunar eclipses, sunsets and sun rises, the movement of stars and planets to the point their pistons are mapped in the memory of my computerised mount of my telescopes which accurately points to objects when selected. And accurately tracks the night time objects based on a rotating spherical earth to keep them in the field of view.

Flat earth is an ad hoc mess of contradictions that leads to no useful modelling, and fails to accurately predict the things already listed.

As prove in your hesitancy to draw out how lunar and solar eclipses would even be possible for a flat earth.

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: KnowItAllKnowNothin
a reply to: Lazy88

I noticed years ago, that most of the flathead earth info, was posted by ball-earthers.
Maybe they are building strawmen to argue with ?

In case you missed it : I do not believe in a flat-earth. It's a story.

I also do not believe in a ball earth, as I, from my viewpoint, can see that it also is a story.

I also do not believe that math can prove we live on a sphere, I see that as another story.
I also do not trust opinions of others, photos, videos, papers, nor whatever else : I see them as stories.

It's okay if you want to believe in a spherical earth, I'm just saying that it is an opinion, AKA a story.
I do not need to believe those stories, and yet : life carries-on.

What do you mean you don't believe in flat or spherical earth stories.

If science and evidence was related to beliefs then we wouldn't have progressed that much.

You mean you don't accept earth is an oblate spheroid because you think you have something to add to the field in the absence of any evidence. Classical creationism tactics.

What do you mean : what do I mean ?
I do not believe, I don't think, I don't have an opinion :
as to the supposed shape, of this supposed planet, in this supposed realm.

It's majorly related to beliefs, if one learns to view it that way.
Any experiment using the scientific-method, is first considered by an imperfect human mind.
The method, premises, steps, and decision of what value the data will have, are all influenced by human opinions.

Sure it's our best effort, but please don't overestimate it technocratically.

Nothing to add, apparently ... LoL !!

( PS : Don't grasp for strawmen. It's not interesting. )

Science is not based on majorities and majority beliefs. If it was then people would still believe earth is flat and it's the center of the universe.

Imperfect human mind? Yes but it has achieved a lot of things. You know, cars, airplanes, visits to the moon, satellites, medicine, science. You want to go about irrelevant matters then that's called whataboutism.

Still you have zero evidence earth is flat or is not a spheroid. The doubt you have or you pretend to have is not genuine.

originally posted by: Lazy88

Again. Spherical earth is a working model that can and does accurately predict tides, solar and lunar eclipses, sunsets and sun rises, the movement of stars and planets to the point their pistons are mapped in the memory of my computerised mount of my telescopes which accurately points to objects when selected. And accurately tracks the night time objects based on a rotating spherical earth to keep them in the field of view.

Flat earth is an ad hoc mess of contradictions that leads to no useful modelling, and fails to accurately predict the things already listed.

As prove in your hesitancy to draw out how lunar and solar eclipses would even be possible for a flat earth.

I accept your beliefs.

Why are you asking me, when I have said that I do not believe in FE, to describe FE eclipses ?
Reflect that back, and you will see that you are searching for arguments, that aren't here.
Think about it.