I have now decided : The Earth is actually FLAT...!

Post Reply New Topic

Uh...I was obviously addressing the OP. Not you.

The world maybe round, but it doesn't revolve around you!
===================================================

Ban Dodger

I repeat the question- where do I go to look over the edge of the Earth?

Its just round there is proof and observable and scientific evidence that has proven. There is no flat Earth other wise we would have flat sun flat moon and avery other planet being flat, ever planet has a gravitational pull that makes it round.

Yep. Its a FAT Earth. Not a flat earth! And its slightly pear shaped. The Southern Hemisphere is slightly larger than the Northern. So it also has a fat ass!

This post was not FROM the OP. Its addressed TO the OP. Tell HIM that stuff.

Okay... so you don't get to look over the edge of the flat Earth.

What happens is that you go to the South Pole (which isn't really a point in the middle of Antarctica, but is in fact the 25 thousand mile circular edge of the Earth), and you see a 500 mile high sheer wall of ice. And that wall runs around the whole Earth.

Well that's a buzzkill! I was hoping for something like the vista from the edge of the Grand Canyon. Though a 500 mile high wall ice would also be kinda cool to see.


But be that as it may: where does the sun go when it sets? And how come the sun sets at different times in different time zones? And is lower in the sky at different latitudes? And why doesn't the sun light up the whole flat earth all at once (instead of the earth being half in night, and half in daytime)? I guess your diagrams explain all of that somehow (with this 'two sun theory'), but I don't quite follow it.

I have come across some Flat-Earthers who regard the Sun & Moon as being their own Light-Sources, but as far as their shapes are concerned, that is considered to be near-impossible to determine without getting near them ourselves. What is known for near-certain is that the Sun heats your area through radiating the atmosphere rather than blasting furnace-temperatures your way (consider, for example, that the distance to the Sun is irrelevant to the heat you will feel, for if you were up in a passenger-jet, standing at the top of a mountain, etc., you would actually feel colder rather than warmer, despite being closer to the Sun, and this has to due to the atmosphere lacking in thickness to make you feel any heat from the Sun [and here is where we question as to whether Mercury is factually hotter than other planets or if it even exists in reality at all]).


I don't know about that... I think you might want to double-check your observations... another video explains & even demonstrates how the visibility of the ships do indeed, change, but the top of the mast of tested ships are still exactly level within the line-of-sight of the horizon-marker of the telescope even when the ships are over 200 miles out, and such a result would not be expected on a globular-earth, but would certainly indicate a flat-earth.



I have to assume that you must have read this from somewhere. Have you personally conducted this experiment yourself ? Perhaps you can help us see this for ourselves by finding a good time-lapse video that records this exact same observation/experiment ?


I have to wonder about the genuine rotation of what's actually rotating when I compare, say, viewing the lands in the far-parallel distance whilst on a plane or in a train or from a car, versus how movement of the environment should look like if I were spinning or rotating on some kind of merry-go-round.


That is not how stars are supposed to be rotating around us if this were a spinning globular-ball... when was the last time a merry-go-round had you see something swirling instead of just moving across ? Should not the stars just be moving across the sky rather than spiraling around one singular star called Polaris ?


That is not a correct description of the flat-earth model as the moon and sun seem to be more like objects or some kind of light-sources rotating around kind of like a middle part of a hand that moves around some sort of clock... this video has an animation of how the rotation/movement of the sun & moon on a flat-earth model may look like although not meant to illustrate exact-movements (but none-the-less animated for demonstration-purposes).



What needs to be noted is that there is a difference between crossing the Antarctic-Continent versus simply moving around its perimeter. A lot of perimeter-movements have often been called a crossing even though it was only an expedition along the coasts of Antarctica instead.


The Antarctic-Treaty is suspect for various reasons that are mentioned in some FE-Videos.


Flight-distances & times & how it makes more sense on a flat-earth than a globular-earth have also been looked at in detail by some of the FE-videos.


I think something that gives more conclusive evidence of the sun not being 93 million miles or 150 million kilometres away would be from this hot-air-balloon capture...

...unless of course this was entirely made out of CGI. Does not seem likely though.

Issues... 10 : What we see in the sky are a bunch of lights, but as far as being planets, and as to their shapes, a light does not automatically make an object a sphere. For all we know those things up there could be alien space-stations, the lights being emitted, when examined closely, have a twinkle-effect or even in some cases are disappearing & re-appearing, even changing or flickering into different colours like red & green & orange, etc (like, seriously, have you even bothered to personally look up there for yourself ?).

09 : Time-zones are also capable of existing on a flat-earth model in the form of how one of the above-videos demonstrations the cycles of moon & sun.

08 : Coriolis-Effect has also been de-bunked through actual-experimentation. The shape of your drain actually determines whether the spin of the water-draining will go clock-wise or counter-clock-wise. Additionally, the Coriolis-Effect actually adds more proof to Flat-Earth, rather than a Globular-Earth... here...


07 : This would require something more concrete than merely drawing lines around a ball-model. I already gave my example of how I would do a scientific-experiment, aligning laser-beams from the East-Coast of America across the Atlantic-Ocean towards Europe, and if it made it all the way without deviating away from the sea, then The Earth is Flat, but if the alignment of the lasers starts going away from Sea-Level by the time you reach the middle of the Atlantic-Ocean, then you will have proven the existence of a curvature.

06 : See one of the above-videos as to the Flat-Earth model of Sun/Moon-Cycles.

05 : The stars do not actually nor factually change from one hemisphere to another. Everybody sees the same set and, not only that, the example that he gave was a silly one, for it would actually be impossible that the stars would just flip rotation simply because you walked across from the North-Side to the South-Side of an Equator-Line. Really ? The view of the stars suddenly flip up-side-down for me just because I hop back & forth across a line whilst at The Equator ? Just no here, I want to use logic & common-sense, not regurgitated doctrines that haven't been subjected to skeptical-scrutiny.

04 : The electro-magnetic properties of a compass can certainly trick you into thinking that you've been moving in a straight line all along but, with something like a laser-beam, you will KNOW for CERTAIN that the LINE you are travelling is indeed, a STRAIGHT one. Yes, this is the year 2015, the TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY EXISTS to TEST these things DEFINITIVELY, and not simply rely on primitive-level experimentation that came out of the 1400s...

03 : Also disproven/debunked in a few FE-videos.

02 : Also explained in various FE-videos.

01 : Also subject to question as these so-called photographs are not actually photographs, but CGI-renderings, paintings, and there are in fact, FE-videos which have sent rockets/hot-air-balloons high up above the clouds, and recorded horizontal-horizons, indicating a flat-earth, whilst also explaining how fish-eye lense-cameras make everything appear to be round even when they are not.


Sun/Moon-Rotation within one of the above-videos demonstrates the movement of sun/moon. The disappearance is similar to the fact that, suppose a Concorde were to pass over you, the Sonic-Boom can be heard as the sound is emitted, but eventually fades & disappears as I goes off into the distance, and the same would be true of such a Light-Source at similar-altitude also passing over & eventually moving 3000 or 4000 miles away from you.

About: where the sun goes.

Well...a Concorde making a sonic boom doesn't work that way. You don't hear a sonic boom if it happened directly overhead. You hear the event miles away.

But yes: a subsonic plane (or helicopter, or blimp) flying overhead will make its droning sound overhead that you can hear while its overhead.

Likewise if the Goodyear blimp were lit up at night like a flare it would look like the sun. And its motion would mimic the suns across the sky. And the blimp would "set" as it disappeared over the horizon also mimicking sunset. That much I follow.

Okay- I thought you were gonna say that the sun goes underneath the flat earth, but that's not your theory. Though that IS what the ancients thought, and what the Bible implies ( written before all of this round earth stuff came into vogue).

So according to you the Sun always stays above the side of the flat earth that we live on (is that correct?). So...the Sun is like a glowing Goodyear Blimp that just cruises around in the earth's atmosphere a couple hundred miles above the Earth's surface in a big circle part way between the north pole and the circular edge of the earth (what the "south pole" actually is). I assume that it follows the Equator where it appears to be overhead at the Equinox. Am I right so far?



So the Sun doesn't really "set". It just gets obscured by the atmosphere because it gets so far away.

If that's the idea then there are many problems with this idea.

Among them: why does the sun appear to "set" over the horizon?

If the planet were really flat then- both the hypothetical glowing blimp, and the Sun (if the Sun really were this small close body)would NEVER actually disappear over the horizon. The sun would gradually get closer and closer to the Horizon, and would gradually get both smaller (because of distance) and dimmer (because of both distance, and the atmosphere). But it's doubtful that it would EVER totally disappear. But if it did it would look a cigarette butt gradually going out in the sky ( a tiny light getting gradually dimmer because its dimness is caused by the atmosphere obscuring it), but while lit it would never quite appear to dip below the horizon.

But what actually happens is: the sun stays the same big size in the sky, AND it stays the same brightness in the sky. But it gradually falls below the horizon. The ancient flat earthers explained this by assuming that the Sun goes underneath the flat earth. But you modern flat earthers don't have an explanation for it as far as I can see.

AND you all are just as at odds with the Bible as round earthers are! Damn you! ( I am joking here, but my point is that some modern flat Earthers are motivated by religion, and don't even realize that their modern brand of flat Earthism is at least as counter to the Bible as round Earthism is, if not more so).

From the flat-earther model it would mean going "along the coasts" for about 15,000-20,000 km; quite a distance to say the least.




You do not understand astronomy very well do you? At least it seem you're not able to visualise the "inside of a globe rotating over a sphere" thing. (Not a accurate model, but good enough to understand the movements of constellations.)


Then why are Santiago(Chile)-Sydney(Australia) flights make stop at Auckland(New-Zealand)? According to the flat-earth model it would make more sense to stop at Moscow. http://www.ausbt.com.au/lan-considering-direct-sydney-santiago-flight-on-boeing-787-9


The Coriolis-Effect affecting the spin of water draining is a misconception that scientists speak against since years; however it do explain the spin of something as big as a hurricane. If the sun and the moon are magnetics, how then come compass don't point toward them?


A experience doomed to fail. You plan to beam a laser through thousand of kilometer of air; so either it go in space if the Earth is curved or is dispersed before reaching Europe if the Earth is flat.


That's what I think too; more so from the flat-earth model the sun should appear to go many times faster during noon that during sunset and dawn, it don't seem to be the case.

Yeah, that, and another thing.

Not only should it be slower near the horizon, but it should also start to move to the side.

The sun would be directly over your head at the equator at high noon (less high at other latitudes but also at its maximum height). And it would be hauling ass. But as it passes the zenith and drops towards the horizon it would also appear to slow down. As afternoon gives way to evening the sun would get smaller, and would keep on approaching the horizon. In evening it would slow down to a crawl, never quite reach the horizon, and it would also start to veer off to the right, and start to move north above the horizon.

During "night" the sun would have more horizontal motion than vertical motion as the now tiny sun moved north around the horizon. I doubt that it would ever be dark "night" but lets go with this theory -its dark and you don't see the sun- but its there in the distance moving just above the horizon. At midnight its clockwise motion on the horizon passes north and becomes south. And then it starts to regain the upward vector of its motion. And then at "dawn" the sun would slowly start to come up again in the east. And it would gain speed as it rises to the noon zenith. And then it would move like a low altitude jet fighter overhead again at noon. Doesn't quite sound like the Sun I know which just goes up, and then goes down on the opposite side of the sky without either changing size, or veering off to the side, or changing speed.

This is a good point made against Flat-Earth theory that F-E'ers seem to say is due to perspective.

What I am going to say at this point is that some people have suspected this whole Flat-Earth Movement thing to be some sort of major gigantic Psy-Op that may be for purposes of distracting humanity from perhaps something huge to occur in the near-future. Consider the fact that each & every single Flat-Earth video has upload-dates of no earlier than the year 2014CE, and now all of a sudden, You-Tube seems to be exploding with a lot of debate over the Earth-Shape.

What I suspect may be happening or could be a possibility behind our reality is that multiple shapes could potentially be simultaneously possible. This would definitely be possible if our reality were not entire physical/material, but more like some kind of gigantic quantum-computer simulation, and if you have ever played a multi-player role-playing game, you will know that certain quests or flags that are triggered for your character/account can potentially make you see/access different zones/areas/NPCs/etc., whilst someone else's character, despite being in the exact same zone/region, may not necessarily see the same things being rendered on their screen as you would see on your own (thus as the saying goes : « With God all things are possible. »).

Suppose a Quest makes an NPC appear in Town-Square for me to dialogue with, but someone else who does not have the quest tries to initiate an item-trade with my character, only to get an error-message that a trade-window cannot be opened at the time (they may not see the NPC with whom I have opened a dialogue on their screen). Then there are other interesting phenomenon of changing properties of reality as demonstrated via the Double-Slit Experiment...

Globular-Earth still does not explain why sun-light can be seen reflecting/shining from beneath earth's clouds so for which-ever reason, the Flat-Earth model may not necessarily be accurate, but a number of researchers are studying it further & trying to map out their observations with more accuracy & detail, but there are also plenty of experiments & various amounts of evidence that show a lot of problems & inconsistencies with globular-earth theories, too. This is one of the latest analyses in regards to Sun-Shadows compared on both earth-models...

Another crazy/lunatic idea that I am going to add is the possibility that the very laws of physics may be changing constantly, and we may not even be able to recognise the change, similarly to how if you are in a dream-state, you do not recognise the transition from sleeping to dreaming, because within your dream you are not thinking to yourself things like « OMG, what happened to my physical-body, for the last thing I remember was going into my room, hopping into bed, then going to sleep but now I am suddenly here without any recollection of having gotten up out of my bed yet ! ». Basically, reality & its entire laws of physics changed on you (when you transitioned into dream-land physics), yet you do not perceive anything unusual, even if you are flying or floating or teleporting, that does not come across as a surprise, but simply seems normal...

Last edited by Ban-Dodger on 15 Sep 2015, 2:34 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Wait a minute....

Are you saying that the belief that...the belief that...the world is round...is the result of a sinister government conspiracy...is..itself....the result of a sinister government conspiracy?

Lolz for trollz.

Actually both "models" are wrong.

The cosmos is actually a vast solid, like a hunk of Swiss cheese, but it has bubbles.

Instead of living on the outside surface of a solid sphere we actually live on the INSIDE surface of one of many spherical holes in the cosmic swiss cheese.

In the normal model we think of the Chinese as walking around upside down on the other side of the planet with their feet pointing up at us through the Earth.

But there is no "planet". Only a spherical void. And China is actually directly over your head in the sky. Its people do walk around upside relative to us but with their heads pointed down at us.

You would be able to travel to China by flying in a space rocket straight up. But you would run into the sun and moon.

So we have take the long way around by hugging close to the inner surface of the Earth bubble.

This was another reason I though proved the Earth must be a globe, but now I am not so sure, the reason being, perspective, and the "Vanishing Point", just like parallel railway lines meet in the distance, then you cannot see them anymore, even though they might carry on forever, the ground in front of you rises, and the sky above you descends, until they meet at the horizon, you then don't see anything further.
I wonder if light itself disappears at the vanishing point?
So, if the sun travels away from you, parallel to the ground, it would appear to get lower from your perspective, until it meets the vanishing point at the horizon, then disappears from our vision.

But the same effect of perspective would also make the sun's disk look progressively smaller as it approaches the vanishing point. It would intercept progressively less of an angle. It would maintain its round shape, but would get progressively smaller (like the light on the back of a train). become star sized. And then cigarette butt sized. Then finally vanish.

That's exactly what the Sun does NOT do. It stays the same size (intercepts the same degrees of arc in the sky). The disk of the sun stays the same size all day, and even at sunset it maintains its apparent size while it disappears at the horizon bottom first.

So it cant be just receding laterally from the viewer like the light on a caboose. It has to be moving down in the sky. Which means either: (A) it really IS moving down (to later come really literally come up in the dawn) meaning that the Sun is a satellite of the Earth, or (B) the sun is stationary and its the Earth that's spinning on its axis.


If the former than the earth could be either round or flat . If the later then it would have to be round. But either way the sun gets blocked from the viewer by the earth which would be impossible in the Modern Flat Earth Model in which the sun stays above the earth's surface.

Even the Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead (in which the sun rides in the boat of Ra through the sky, and then goes through the underworld pulled along by the spirits of the dead before rising at dawn again) makes more scientific sense than this modern flat earth theory because it conforms better to the Sun's observed behavior.

But even though the Egyptian myth is both more poetic and more scientific than modern flat earthism, I am still going with the modern notion that the earth is round and goes around the sun.

If the Earth was flat, we wouldn't have so many time zones. The circumference of the earth would be considerably less. It wouldn't be able to rotate on its axis.

Most importantly, somebody would have discovered the "end" of the earth via ship by now.