The earth is flat and we never went to the moon

[DFT_Dave]

Notice he went clockwise with Antarctica on his starboard side.

Think it throught, Dave. Is that the way it would work if he went clockwise around the flat Earth?

How would you keep an ice wall to you starboard (right) side if you were sailing clockwise (i.e. turning toward your starboard side)? You couldn't!


If you sailed between Cape Horn and Antarctica from west to east (i.e. clockwise) then Antarctica is on your starboard side (right side). And, in order to go around Antarctica, you have to sail to starboard and make continuous course corrections to starboard NOT TO PORT!

If Antarctica were really an ice wall, to circumnavigate Antarctica, again sailing west to east between Cape Horn and Antarctica, would require you to make course corrections to port (i.e. counter-clockwise) or else you're going to eventually run into the ice wall!

That is PROOF that Antarctica cannot possibly be an ice wall surrounding the perimeter of the earth.

That's absolute, utter, beyond a shadow of a doubt - PROOF!


As for your 60,000 miles argument. It's bunk. If you zig-zag enough you can fit a 60,000 mile long line into a circle the size of your fist. Plus, I don't believe he actually sailed that far. His records are wrong or whoever you're getting that information from is wrong. If you get Google Maps and roughly trace out the path shown on your map, the course he took is closer to 20,000 miles. A third of the supposed 60,000. Even marginally more zig-zagging than is implied by the course on the map could potentially account for the extra mileage but it's more probably that the 60,000 mile number is overstated.

They did not count zigzags as miles, all sailing ships will encounter different winds and will not zigzag the same way. Nautical miles are straight, or all their maps would be worthless. There is no way that 10,000 miles becomes 60,000 miles. They made accurate maps, not relative ones.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

Dave,

Just a quick question.

What do flat earth folks think this is a picture of?

View attachment 25230

See full resolution image HERE.

How do we have high-resolution pictures of a place that doesn't exist?

Pictures from who? NASA?

--Dave

 

[chair]

You can see a live fake video of the flat-but-looks-round Earth here.

 

[Clete]

You want to totally disregard that almost the whole bridge is in view when according to the said curvature almost all of it should not have been visible. There are more videos that show things at a greater distance than this bridge. The atmosphere is a factor is not denied, it's that when close to vanishing point and beyond those factors do not give us the curve that is needed to prove globe earth.

--Dave

I'm not disregarding anything!

And, yes atmospheric refraction it is being denied, or at the very least ignored.

And yes atmospheric refraction most certainly does give sufficient curve to explain what is seen in that video.

What CANNOT be explained at all by the flat earth folks is why the surface of the water is not visible all the way to that bridge. If the Earth is flat we should see that entire bridge - all of it - and all of the next bridge and the land 30+ miles away along that same line of site. We should also see every bouy and boat between where that camera is set up and the furthest shoreline in that direction. But we don't! What we see is precisely what we'd expect to see if the Earth is both curved and has a thick atmosphere.

You gotta stop reacting as though I'm just blowing things off when I explain why I'm not convinced by something. Presenting counter arguments and "total disregard" isn't the same thing.

 

[Clete]

The boat is not a mirage is the point. The video shows there is a distance that can be seen with zoom lenses that reveal an extended horizon, seemingly invisible, beyond the one we can see.

--Dave

You can only see down the line of sight, Dave. It makes no difference whether you're using a telescope or not. The only way you can see past the horizon is if the light is being bent around the curve of the Earth.

What you don't seem to grasp is that the implication of what you are saying is that England is visible from New York. And, in fact, if the Earth was actually flat, it would be. It would just be a matter of having a telescope with sufficient resolution.

The fact that ships do, in fact, completely disappear out of sight, long before the resolution of even a good set of binoculars is exhausted, is proof that the Earth is not flat. It is proof, Dave. If the Earth were flat, they wouldn't just vanish from bottom to top the way they do. They would just keep getting smaller and smaller and smaller.

 

[Clete]

They did not count zigzags as miles, all sailing ships will encounter different winds and will not zigzag the same way. Nautical miles are straight, or all their maps would be worthless. There is no way that 10,000 miles becomes 60,000 miles. They made accurate maps, not relative ones.

--Dave

You can trace it out yourself, Dave. Get Google maps and trace it out. I did! My curve wasn't as smooth as the image on your map and the image on your map isn't as detailed as reality but my rough trace out came to be about 20,500 miles. The more detail the more miles and a more detailed course could potentially increase the total distance traveled by a factor of three - but I seriously doubt it.

 

[Clete]

Pictures from who? NASA?

--Dave

From the same exact satellites that create the maps that you use to get around town.

Which reminds me of something...

I was helping one of my daughters with a school project several years ago and we wanted to make a large map of the northeast part of the state of Oklahoma. I had an old map book with maps of Tulsa and the surrounding area in sufficient detail that you could find your way around whichever town you happen to be in. I had used it to find customer's homes when I was a cable installer. It was no longer being used so we decided to take out the pages and paste them together and make one large map of "Green Country" as they call it.

It didn't work!

The reason it didn't work is because the maps are generated using data from satelite imagery.

How would that have kept it from working?

Well, we didn't get three pages pasted together before the lines stopped meeting up on the edges of each page. Each page was basically an image of a piece of a globe!

Every time you pick up a Rand McNally map, you see evidence that the Earth is round.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Distance

--Dave

THis doesn't make any sense. I can see the moon from horizon to horizon and it is farther away than Europe or Hawaii. If I use a telescope I can see quite a bit of detail on the moon. So why can't that telescope see, say, Mt Everest? That mountain is 29,000 feet tall, we should be able to see that were the world really flat. Ideas?

The government prevents us from flying over Antarctica not science.

--Dave

Why does the government even care?

 

[JudgeRightly]

Why does the government even care?

Because conspiracy :deadhorse:

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[CabinetMaker]

Is Kansas flat as a pancake?
"Three geographers compared the flatness of Kansas to the flatness of a pancake. They used topographic data from a digital scale model prepared by the US Geological Survey, and they purchased a pancake from the International House of Pancakes. If perfect flatness were a value of 1.00, they reported, the calculated flatness of a pancake would be 0.957 "which is pretty flat, but far from perfectly flat". Kansas's flatness however turned out to be 0.997, which they said might be described, mathematically, as 'damn flat'." --The Guardian (link from title)

View attachment 25212 View attachment 25213

"Mathematically, a value of 1.000 would indicate perfect, platonic flatness. The state is so flat that the off-the-shelf software produced a flatness value for it of 1. This value was, as they say, too good to be true, so we did a more complex analysis, and after many hours of programming work, we were able to estimate that Kansas’s flatness is approximately 0.9997. --Improbable Research

Kansas is 400 miles of perfectly flat level earth, with no curvature.

No one can refute this one

--Dave

IT doesn't need to be refuted, it needs to be understood and it is understood by learning about gravity. Gravity is a property of all mass. Planets and people. It is always directed towards the center of the mass. So when Kansas is said to be flat, that means that it does not have much change in elevation, it does not mean that it is not curved. Because gravity is always directed at the center of mass, the gravitational attraction, weight if you prefer, will be the same at any point on the curved surface.

And, the Earth is actually smoother than a billiard ball so your flatness analysis of Kansas is proof of nothing other than relative scale. It is a misleading use of information by you.

http://www.curiouser.co.uk/facts/smooth_earth.htm

 

[chair]

...

Why does the government even care?

Because they are the Antichrist. Or Satan. Or Illuminati. Or Masons. Or all of the above.

 

[DFT_Dave]

I'm not disregarding anything!

And, yes atmospheric refraction it is being denied, or at the very least ignored.

And yes atmospheric refraction most certainly does give sufficient curve to explain what is seen in that video.

What CANNOT be explained at all by the flat earth folks is why the surface of the water is not visible all the way to that bridge. If the Earth is flat we should see that entire bridge - all of it - and all of the next bridge and the land 30+ miles away along that same line of site. We should also see every bouy and boat between where that camera is set up and the furthest shoreline in that direction. But we don't! What we see is precisely what we'd expect to see if the Earth is both curved and has a thick atmosphere.

You gotta stop reacting as though I'm just blowing things off when I explain why I'm not convinced by something. Presenting counter arguments and "total disregard" isn't the same thing.

Flat Earth or Superior Mirage - Chicago Skyline

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

You can only see down the line of sight, Dave. It makes no difference whether you're using a telescope or not. The only way you can see past the horizon is if the light is being bent around the curve of the Earth.

What you don't seem to grasp is that the implication of what you are saying is that England is visible from New York. And, in fact, if the Earth was actually flat, it would be. It would just be a matter of having a telescope with sufficient resolution.

The fact that ships do, in fact, completely disappear out of sight, long before the resolution of even a good set of binoculars is exhausted, is proof that the Earth is not flat. It is proof, Dave. If the Earth were flat, they wouldn't just vanish from bottom to top the way they do. They would just keep getting smaller and smaller and smaller.

I think you're totally wrong here. Things not only get smaller and smaller the further away they get, we agree on this, but everything does disappear from view eventually. There is no doubt that things are being seen at distances that would not make that possible if the earth were curved. But I do want to know why the bottoms disappear. that does need an explanation, but at this point I don't think the curvature of the earth is why, especially over water. England is to far away to be seen from ground level. It would become visible as we elevate high enough and with a good telescope on flat earth.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

THis doesn't make any sense. I can see the moon from horizon to horizon and it is farther away than Europe or Hawaii. If I use a telescope I can see quite a bit of detail on the moon. So why can't that telescope see, say, Mt Everest? That mountain is 29,000 feet tall, we should be able to see that were the world really flat. Ideas?

Why does the government even care?

The moon is not far away on flat earth. If the moon was as far away as globe earth determines we would not see it the way we do with all the detail on it.

--Dave

 

[DFT_Dave]

IT doesn't need to be refuted, it needs to be understood and it is understood by learning about gravity. Gravity is a property of all mass. Planets and people. It is always directed towards the center of the mass. So when Kansas is said to be flat, that means that it does not have much change in elevation, it does not mean that it is not curved. Because gravity is always directed at the center of mass, the gravitational attraction, weight if you prefer, will be the same at any point on the curved surface.

And, the Earth is actually smoother than a billiard ball so your flatness analysis of Kansas is proof of nothing other than relative scale. It is a misleading use of information by you.

http://www.curiouser.co.uk/facts/smooth_earth.htm

I think the article and the study is clear, Kansas is actually "flat", not relatively flat in relation to the effect of gravity. Again we see that no test or experiment can be made to prove flatness vs curvature.

--Dave

 

[Clete]

Here's an outstanding video that shows that if the Earth is flat, Ontario Canada must be below sea level! (Similar to how that San Matteo bridge is below sea level but way worse.

Also, it shows a continuous video of a rocket launch and satellite deployment showing, not only the curvature of the Earth but that the curvature cannot have been caused by the camera lens.

As far as I'm concerned this video is vastly more convincing than anything the flat earth folks have put forward.

 

[Clete]

The same guy did this video too.

It's even better!

 

[chair]

You can see a live fake video of the flat-but-looks-round Earth here.

This really is cool. Live feed showing earth from a satellite (edit: specifically, the International Space Station). Dave- don't look at it. You'll have to make up some story about fish-eyed Illuminati government goons or something.

 

[Clete]

I think you're totally wrong here. Things not only get smaller and smaller the further away they get, we agree on this, but everything does disappear from view eventually.

I know they do! From the bottom up! That is PROOF that the Earth cannot be flat because things very simply would not do that if it were.

There is no doubt that things are being seen at distances that would not make that possible if the earth were curved. But I do want to know why the bottoms disappear. that does need an explanation, but at this point I don't think the curvature of the earth is why, especially over water.

No who's disregarding evidence?

England is to far away to be seen from ground level. It would become visible as we elevate high enough and with a good telescope on flat earth.

--Dave

It is not too far away IF the Earth is flat! It's not even close to being too far away. It's not even too small! Something the size of England would be visible for tens of thousands of miles along a direct line of sight. But, because the Earth is round, England disappears over the horizon from the bottom up after only getting very few miles away from shore. You can't even get close to as much as one hundred miles from shore before the whole of England is too far away for anyone to see from the surface.

Further, I don't care how high you go above Australia, you cannot see England from there - period. You could go all the way to Alpha Centauri and if you're directly above Australia, you will not see England or New York, either one. In fact, from directly above Australia, you can't even see any of the whole continents of Europe or Africa or any of the Americas no matter how high you get.

 

[JudgeRightly]

The moon is not far away on flat earth. If the moon was as far away as globe earth determines we would not see it the way we do with all the detail on it.

--Dave

Dave, we know for a fact EXACTLY how far away the moon is, and it's because of trigonometry. Take two points on earth, measure the distance between them. Then from each of those points, imagine lines from them to a spot on the moon. Measure the angles of each vertex, subtract it from 180 and you have the angle of the third vertex, and then use trigonometric formulas to calculate the length of the remaining 2 sides.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app