So, God inspired man to write what was not really true.
That works for Calvinists, but not the rationally minded.
--Dave
The earth is flat and we never went to the moon--Part II
- Thread starter DFT_Dave
- Start date
- Status
So, God inspired man to write what was not really true.
That works for Calvinists, but not the rationally minded.
--Dave
Quantum Mechanics does not automatically imply multiuniverses. And there is a minor problem with your approach, in that Quantum Mechanics works. Experimentally, and practically.
But hey, you can deny that too. Small change for a flat earther.
That's not what I said, Dave, and you know it.
I said that they wrote from their perspective. A car seen from one side is the exact same car seen from the other side.
Bull!
You're the one who brought it up. You're the one who repeatedly ignored multiple people begging you to stop with the idiotic YouTube videos, you're the one who refuses to be convince by the simplest of reasoning that even a third grader can understand while giving weight the most colossal stupidity to ever leave the lips of a human being and you're the one who everyone around here now associates with BOTH Open Theism and Flat Earth cosmology!
Yeah, no kidding, Capt. Obvious!
I'm telling you the truth. You've demonstrated a complete lack of discernment and wisdom or even intelligence. Don't think I expect you to apply anything I say to your life. I know that you will not.
Giving them equal weight as though you haven't any idea which (if any) of them is right shows a lack of discernment that disqualifies you to open your mouth to teach anyone anything.
You are a veritable fountain of stupidity. The fact that I am unable to read ancient Greek would, by itself, disqualify me to be the pastor of a church. I wouldn't presume to ever dream of being a pastor. I do however enjoy teaching people things but I'm wise enough to understand that if I can't discern truth from error on a particular topic that I need to keep my mouth shut.
It is when you aren't sure that you ought not presume to teach on the subject! That's the purest of common sense!
You're the one who claimed to teach every eschatology as if their all potentially true, not me! That's foolishness! I'd tell anyone who suggested such a thing that they are doing more harm than good and need to sit down and let the grown ups do the teaching.
I'll do exactly as I please and you can either like it or lump it.
Clete
Then go start a thread about about me, this ones about flat earth.
The personal attack does not prove anything and makes the one doing look like they can't deal with the subject.
I will get back to the subject, the arguments are what matter, and I will not respond to attacks on me personally.
--Dave
I agree with you that quantum mechanics does not automatically imply multiverses, but my point was that that is how it is being applied by those who believe in multiverses. And I am correct to say it's all by chance from an atheistic view.
--Dave
Not so. You do NOT know what you are talking about. Turn off the Discover Channel and TLC, neither of which is about science but rather selling an atheistic worldview and calling it science. Quantum Mechanics has pretty close to nothing at all to do with the macro universe. The idea that the quantum (sub-atomic) world operates in such a way that we have to discuss it in terms of probabilities does NOT mean that everything in the universe does likewise. It is the atheist that want people to think that but it is an intentional misrepresentation of what Quatum Mechanics is. It amounts to a hasty generalization fallacy. A fallacy that Flat Earthers have made into a fine art, by the way.
The above comment should not be taken as an endorsement of Quantum Mechanics as a theory but merely as a rejection that it is somehow predicated on atheism or that atheism necessarily follows (logically) from it.
Clete
When you say stupid or foolish things I am going to point it out on the thread where you said it. If you don't like it, stop saying stupid and foolish things.
The thread is all still here for everyone one to read, David.
The only one not dealing with the arguments is you.
Responding is not necessary.
God inspires men to write
Men wrote from their perspective not God's perspective?
Then what good is God's inspiring them if that did not give them his correct/true perspective?
One can conclude that God's inspiration produced what was not correct/true.
Why would God not tell us what was true in every way about himself and the world he created for us to live in?
If you answer because God knew we would not understand it then I would ask why would God create a man who could not understand him and the world he made for him to live in?
--Dave
As I have stated to clarify my first comment:
When chance is at the particle level it becomes the basis for the whole universe made up of particles. By chance this universe came into existence out of all the possible universes that could have resulted. By chance this planet produced all the needed elements to produce and support life out of the many other planets that exist. Infinity means there will be infinite numbers of universes that come and go into and out of existence with others earths, worlds, etc being produced.
Chance is how the universe evolved "according to atheists" and the haze of probability/chance in quantum physics is the reason, that they give. I've added these last three word to further clarify my original comment.
--Dave
View attachment 26565
This graph is a full geometric plane with perspective. It's made up of four separate flat planes. The top plane is parallel to the bottom plane and the side planes are parallel to each other.
All objects that move away from us to the center eventually disappear into the horizon, the middle.
This is how we see the world, not in theory, but in fact.
Does the sun drop over a curved earth or does it move into the horizon?
The important part of this video starts at 7:50 and ends at 10:50 only 3 minutes long.
Watch to see if the sun goes behind or into the horizon.
--Dave
This graph is a full geometric plane with perspective. It's made up of four separate flat planes. The top plane is parallel to the bottom plane and the side planes are parallel to each other.
All objects that move away from us to the center eventually disappear into the horizon, the middle.
This is how we see the world, not in theory, but in fact.
Does the sun drop over a curved earth or does it move into the horizon?
The important part of this video starts at 7:50 and ends at 10:50 only 3 minutes long.
Watch to see if the sun goes behind or into the horizon.
--Dave
Last edited:
I don't need a video. I've seen the sunset a thousand times with my own eyes. It goes over the horizon. It does not get ANY smaller as it sets because it is not getting any further away. If it were getting further away, it would never ever leave your view but simply shrink until it was a pin prick of light similar to every other star your see at night. The stars also go over the horizon, as do the planets and the Moon and every other thing in space that is moved out of view from the hemisphere on which you exist. If any of it was getting further away, you'd be able to tell that because it's apparent size would diminish with distance.
OH! Wait! The Sun, Moon and all the planets do indeed change apparent size depending on their distance! In fact, they do so in EXACTLY the right proportion as would be expected if the Earth was orbiting the Sun in a not quite circular orbit, if the Moon was orbiting the Earth in a not quite circular orbit and if the other planets were orbiting the Sun in the orbits that every science textbook that has been published in your life time describes in some detail.
And yes, it is quite definitely confirmable by anyone who decides to buy even a modest telescope and cares to make the appropriate observations, which no flat earther ever has or ever will do.
Clete
Last edited:
It's pretty simple.
It's just reading.
For instance, when the Bible talks about the four corners of the Earth, that's not literal.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Debunking flat earth arguments or videos would require viewing them first and then showing where and explaining why they are wrong.
That the sun follows the geometric plane with perspective into the horizon is a strong argument. A Nikon P900 83 x power camera is going to show us what we could never other wise see.
Here is the author of the video showing it in slow motion the sun going into the horizon in a way that is consistent with this graph.
View attachment 26565
This view is only possible over the ocean and not over land. Graphs and geometry are used to make this argument not just video.
Why would the sun not get smaller if the the viewer is getting farther away from on a spinning globe?
Perspective graphs will be combined with my distance graph as will the path of the moon and stars be looked at to see if indeed a flat earth model can make a complete and non contradictory picture to scale. I'm not sure if that makes sense to you but I think you'll get the idea.
--Dave
If it were only that simple, unfortunately it's not. What is literal and what is not has been debated for centuries.
--Dave
This is an irrational response.
That things are debated is not to conclude that they must be difficult.
Try responding rationally.
When the Bible talks about the four corners of the Earth, it is simple to see that this is not to be taken literally.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Ok, let's do this.
Isaiah 11:12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.
This means from one end to another, this implies a flat earth in that a globe has no such thing as ends.
--Dave
Dave, Dave, Dave!
"Four corners of the earth" is an idiom, a figure of speech, that means "all parts of the world".
The word used in Isaiah, KANAPH, generally means "extremity."
https://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c017.html
Judge, Judge, Judge,
Gathered from one end to other is the same thing as from the four corners of as applied to the syntax of the verse this phrase is found in.
We interpret scripture first by syntax then context then comparative texts.
--Dave
- Status