The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread

[Grumpy Owl]

12 minutes ago, alexa said:

OK I've listened to all you Globalists, so tell me where does the sun go after it sets? Because it's my belief that as it sets it's rising on the other half of earth. This is what Enoch calls the Northern Gate.

 

The sun doesn't 'go' anywhere.

 

The sun appears to move across the sky in an arc due to the rotation of the Earth. The sun 'rises' towards the East and sets toward the West. As the sun 'sets' towards the West, if you started travelling westwards you'd see it in the sky for longer.

 

Because only half of the Earth is directly facing the Sun at any time, technically yes while the sun is 'setting' here where I am, somewhere on the other side of the 'globe', the sun will be rising. And that is why we have time differences. It is just after 7pm here in the UK and the sun has not long 'set' though there is still daylight. Meanwhile over in New Zealand, it is just after 6am and the sun is about to 'rise' there.

 

Yes, it is probably true that the Sun itself is 'moving' as it orbits the centre of our galaxy. But relatively speaking, the Earth itself is in a fixed orbit around the Sun, so from our point of view, the Sun itself isn't moving. And because the Earth orbits on a 'tilt', that is why we have 'seasons', because for six months of the year (orbit) more of one hemisphere is facing towards the Sun than the other is, hence why we get three months of near darkness and three months of daylight at each pole.

 

That's an example of me explaining what I know/believe using my own words, rather than resorting to just using memes/videos.

 

Is it the truth or not? I don't know. But it is a fairly valid explanation to me and one that makes most sense.

[Nobby Noboddy]

3 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

See they cant even attempt to explain a sunset. Pure bullshitters!

 

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

[alexa]

27 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Is it the truth or not? I don't know. But it is a fairly valid explanation to me and one that makes most sense.

 

Thanks for being so honest. It does make sense on a globe but not on a Flat earth & according to the Scriptures it is the sun that moves. 

[oddsnsods]

Maybe if your camera stayed & watched an actual sunset would have vanished, but it didnt. Its still there when he zooms out.

 

Go on youtube & watch any Nikon p1000 sunset & will look nothing like that.

 

You call others trolls then post shite like that as evidence?

 

 

 

 

[Grumpy Owl]

23 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

Thanks for being so honest. It does make sense on a globe but not on a Flat earth & according to the Scriptures it is the sun that moves. 

 

Well if you want to believe in 'Scriptures' then that's your belief. Scriptures that were written hundreds of years ago, from an age/era where religion was a tool used to keep the masses under control. (And still is today)

 

I do think it is possible that there may be some elements of truth contained within the writings of what we know as the 'Bible' nowadays, but a lot of the material has been corrupted and compromised over the years by bad translation and outright misinterpretation. And that doesn't apply solely to the texts of the Bible, I think the same could be said of any other 'holy scriptures' too.

 

Yes, to the observer, it would appear with your own eyes that the Sun does 'move' across the sky. But ultimately it is a question of whose 'explanation' for this you choose to believe.

 

Certainly for me, the 'established' scientific explanation is far more plausible (namely that the Earth is a globe rotating and orbiting around the Sun) than any other alternative thus far presented.

[Guest Gone Fishing...]

48 minutes ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

And that's because you're a fucking troll who just wants to put lazy people off investigating it for themselves.

 

And fucking trolls undermine the principles of decent debate by being insulting, provocative, never actually doing anything to further the debate themselves.

 

Not very funny are you?

MOD NOTE;
FUCKING TROLL - INSULTING - PROVOCATIVE - NEVER FURTHERING DEBATE ???????
YOUR POST IS FAR FROM FUNNY (and very insulting and provocative)
Someone will contact you soon
BC

[Comedy Time]

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

You are really frightened by the idea aren't you? And you seem to be taking Flat Earthers to task there a bit which is ironic don't you think?

 

Nope and nope. 

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

1. Opinion varies I think between 3 and 6 thousand miles up. It is claimed that the height can be measured using triangulation and I suppose you'd have to be on the equator.

One clue for me that the sun is closer than 93 million miles is the sunburst (fan) effect through clouds that is not possible if the sun is so far away.

 

That's a "clue" for you is it? LMAO. It's a crepuscular ray and it is exactly like the train tracks effect. The tracks aren't converging slim pyramids anymore than the rays from the Sun.

 

Your team always ignore anti-crepuscular rays because that totally fucks up this daft claim completely:

 

 

Right there silly old flat Earth down the crapper. Where's the Sun? Clue - over the curve of the horizon.

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

2. I'm not sure I understand this but do you mean for example a bird flying (or ship sailing) away until it disappears from sight? If so then this is perspective combined with the optical limitations of the eye. Same as standing at the end of a long line of lampposts that seem to eventually meet the ground.

 

Perspective ALWAYS places the object seen above the eye line further away and still above the eye line! Watch the whole series and learn something, or skip to about 3 mins and see your claim down the crapper.

 

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

3. Again I'm not sure but are you suggesting that if the sun was so close to earth then it would change dramatically in size as it passes? The equator would be the best place to see it and I believe it is so although I've never been

 

Meaningless answer but thanks for playing. The law of perspective says that things close up are bigger than things further away. The Sun NEVER changes size no matter where it is. Your silly video "explaining sunsets" is one of the most ludicrous pieces of gobblydegook I have seen on the matter. Things get smaller as they move away but that yooootub comedian says it's "perspective innit". No dude that is maximus bollockus.

 

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

I know you won't be satisfied with these answers or willing to read or view books or videos I could suggest.

 

They are useless answers pal. You need to come back from the abyss to reality. It's a planet. You've been sucked in to some really daft shite.

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

And that's because you're a fucking troll who just wants to put lazy people off investigating it for themselves.

 

Steady on dude. I'm kicking flat earth butt, no need to get all pissy about it. I'm attempting to stop people with less ability or inclination for research from being sucked into this lunacy. People who fall for this crap don't "investigate" anything, they just complete ignore the obvious and copious evidence.

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

And fucking trolls undermine the principles of decent debate by being insulting, provocative, never actually doing anything to further the debate themselves.

 

Uhuh, well dude....I'm not the one insulting here. I'm trying to provoke a damn response that actually stands up to scrutiny and not sourced from where the sun don't shine and I not only further any debate by supplying dozens of carefully thought out and insightful posts I introduce ideas that enable those on the fence to realise that the Earth is actually a fucking planet

 

1 hour ago, Nobby Noboddy said:

Not very funny are you?

 

I'm not generally trying to be and you need to lighten up.

 

NOW about your Sun distance....... how good is your mathematics? This was deliberately buried and nobody responded....obvious why!

 

I did a quick analysis showing that the Sun (according to flat earthers is 3000 miles up) and MUST be 85,000 miles away when it is 2 degrees above the horizon.

 

But hey, let's do 1/2 degree - Sun just touching the horizon (ignoring refraction):

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

a=3000

A=0.5

From observer to the sun is............................................ 344,000 bloody miles away!

 

P.S. If we use your other figure of 6,000 miles that shit gets way, way worse for you! Again 1/2 degree above the horizon.........

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

a=6000

A=0.5

From observer to the sun is............................................688,000 bloody miles!!!!

 

Now that is QED.

 

Oh you won't watch that video will you.....things above the eye line, always above the eye line....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Comedy Time

[alexa]

34 minutes ago, Grumpy Owl said:

 

Well if you want to believe in 'Scriptures' then that's your belief. Scriptures that were written hundreds of years ago, from an age/era where religion was a tool used to keep the masses under control. (And still is today)

 

I do think it is possible that there may be some elements of truth contained within the writings of what we know as the 'Bible' nowadays, but a lot of the material has been corrupted and compromised over the years by bad translation and outright misinterpretation. And that doesn't apply solely to the texts of the Bible, I think the same could be said of any other 'holy scriptures' too.

 

Yes, to the observer, it would appear with your own eyes that the Sun does 'move' across the sky. But ultimately it is a question of whose 'explanation' for this you choose to believe.

 

Certainly for me, the 'established' scientific explanation is far more plausible (namely that the Earth is a globe rotating and orbiting around the Sun) than any other alternative thus far presented.

 

The way I see it, God gave us free will to choose in what we believe in & I choose to believe in God's word over man's any day. So my argument for Flat Earth has to stand, other wise I would be nothing more than a hypocrite. 

[Comedy Time]

31 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

The way I see it, God gave us free will to choose in what we believe in & I choose to believe in God's word over man's any day. So my argument for Flat Earth has to stand, other wise I would be nothing more than a hypocrite. 

 

Who "wrote" "God's" "word"?!!

[alexa]

6 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

Who "wrote" "God's" "word"?!!

 

 God himself through his Prophets.

Edited September 22, 2020 by alexa

[Comedy Time]

19 minutes ago, alexa said:

 God himself through his Prophets. 

 

No really "he" didn't. They lied. 

 

"God" gave us mathematics. Mathematics prove we live on a globe. "God" gave us eyes to see this but you avoid it.

 

This religious guff is nauseating.

 

[alexa]

6 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

This religious guff is nauseating.

 

Then stop talking and asking questions about it.

 

[Guest Gone Fishing...]

21 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

 

This religious guff is nauseating.

 

 

13 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

Then stop talking and asking questions about it.

 

Everyone has a right to religious beliefs.
And should not be berated for it.

However, you're both meeting in the scientific / religious grey area......'reality'.
Answering physics and mathematics with religion and vissa versa  is always going nowhere.....fast.
Alexa - just how many verses are there in the Bible describing the Earth as you see it ?
Can you collect them all and post them ?
BC

[alexa]

1 minute ago, Basket Case said:

 

Everyone has a right to religious beliefs.
And should not be berated for it.

However, you're both meeting in the scientific / religious grey area......'reality'.
Answering physics and mathematics with religion and vissa versa  is always going nowhere.....fast.
Alexa - just how many verses are there in the Bible describing the Earth as you see it ?
Can you collect them all and post them ?
BC

 

About 200 BC & yes I will post them. 

[alexa]

The best verse about the sun has to be this;

Joshua 10:13 

And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.

 

The 200 verses in the bible that supports Flat, stationary earth where by the sun moves and not the earth.

 

 

 

 

[zArk]

youre running off track, i am calling you on these assumptions

 

Quote

 

I did a quick analysis showing that the Sun according to flat earthers is 3000 miles up and MUST be 85,000 miles away when it is 2 degrees above the horizon, 4 sun widths.

But hey, let's do 1 sun width 1/2 degree - just touching the horizon (ignoring refraction):

 

you are confusing observed angle with spherist model

the observers view is governed by the vanishing point which means you cannot translate an observed angle into spherist models without clearly noticing this visual effect

 

 

 

 

[serpentine]

9 hours ago, alexa said:

The best verse about the sun has to be this;

Joshua 10:13 

And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.

 

The 200 verses in the bible that supports Flat, stationary earth where by the sun moves and not the earth.

 

 

 

As was said previously : if the wisdom in the words is not understood the tendency is to take them literally.

 

Wisdom, if it anything, is about dealing wth what is real not what is apparent.

 

 

[alexa]

40 minutes ago, serpentine said:

Wisdom, if it anything, is about dealing wth what is real not what is apparent.

 

So the sun isn't real then ?

 

 Ecclesiastes 1:5

The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.

[Comedy Time]

2 hours ago, zArk said:

youre running off track, i am calling you on these assumptions

 

NO I AM NOT! None of this is assumption!

 

2 hours ago, zArk said:

you are confusing observed angle with spherist model

 

 

No I am not confusing anything, the angular diameter of the Sun is 0.5. FACT. It's not open to any model, any alternative interpretation. It is a FACT.

 

ANYONE can verify it by taking a picture with ANY camera (use filter or through clouds / or at Sunset). The Sun and Moon have basically the same angular diameter. 0.5 degrees. The field of view of any camera can easily be determined. The produced image will be THAT angle. The Sun will occupy 1/2 degree EVERY single time.

 

Notwithstanding that everybody who is not blind can see that the Sun and Moon are more or less the same sizes and they never change.

 

2 hours ago, zArk said:

the observers view is governed by the vanishing point which means you cannot translate an observed angle into spherist models without clearly noticing this visual effect

 

Well DUHHHHH the whole damn point. There is NO vanishing point with the Sun - right there in one sentence flat earth down the crapper.

 

It disappears full size.

 

FINALLY

I already put this diversionary post of yours in context already. The ONLY reason the angular diameter of the Sun was even noted was as a simple visual aid for COMPARISON - there is no relevance to it whatsoever. How can you have failed to see me pointing this out? And had you bothered to read the large post a few posts back I restated the problem to NOBBY without these irrelevant references!

 

I did a quick analysis showing that the Sun (according to flat earthers is 3000 miles up) and MUST be 85,000 miles away when it is 2 degrees above the horizon.

 

But hey, let's do 1/2 degree - Sun just touching the horizon (ignoring refraction):

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

a=3000

A=0.5

From observer to the sun is............................................ 344,000 bloody miles away!

 

P.S. If we use your other figure of 6,000 miles that shit gets way, way worse for you! Again 1/2 degree above the horizon.........

 

http://www.cleavebooks.co.uk/scol/calrtri.htm

a=6000

A=0.5

From observer to the sun is............................................688,000 bloody miles!!!!

 

Now that is QED.

If you continue with this angular diameter denial nonsense, you are deliberately obfuscating. If you fail to answer this maths you are just continuing with the ongoing evasion.

 

 

 

[Comedy Time]

@zArk

 

How far away is the Sun?

Does it or does it not disappear without any size change?

[oddsnsods]

On 8/18/2020 at 11:59 PM, alexa said:

 

The sun doesn't actually set it carries on going through what is called the 6 portals or Gates throughout the night. There are 12 portals in total in which the sun travels through in 24 hrs.

The sun goes down from the heaven and returns through the north in order to reach the east.

 

PS Edit Edit

It just seems like the sun is setting but in actual fact it is still traveling around.

 

13 hours ago, alexa said:

 

The way I see it, God gave us free will to choose in what we believe in & I choose to believe in God's word over man's any day. So my argument for Flat Earth has to stand, other wise I would be nothing more than a hypocrite. 

 

19 minutes ago, alexa said:

 

So the sun isn't real then ?

 

 Ecclesiastes 1:5

The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.

 

[Comedy Time]

On 8/12/2020 at 8:46 AM, bflat said:

This video shoots a horizon at over 20 miles above earth. Yes, as the balloon swings, there are moments of both concavity and convexity, but when level and still, we see our beautiful flat horizon as far as we can go and always rising to eye/camera level which surely is impossible on a ball.

 

Concave and convex exaggerations are caused by light path being altered either side of the lens. The screenshot of the actual video is the true image. Oh look curvature.

 

On 8/12/2020 at 8:46 AM, bflat said:

and always rising to eye/camera level which surely is impossible on a ball.

 

This is just bullshit spouted by flat earthers as if they know what they are talking about. Since the distance to horizon is almost identical to a flat earth vanishing point due to the Earth being very very big, the horizon would always be below the observer eye line for both and IS. But by how much on this video?

 

Altitude 20 miles using kilometres is 32 km. Distance to horizon at that altitude is 641.2 km.

 

Angle from eye line to horizon is.........2.82 degrees! You would need to look down 3 degrees from level to see the horizon. Oooooooh - you see when you put in the ACTUAL figures, all this flat earth hyperbole suddenly becomes meaningless piffle.

 

On 8/12/2020 at 8:46 AM, bflat said:

Feel free to watch the entire vid as it's less than 12 minutes, but I have timestamped here to show you something even more important.

https://youtu.be/WwimocU0IIc

 

Quote

 

Here is a still of approximately where I timestamped the vid:

 

 

Hmmm flat as a curved pancake.....Here is a gif of YOUR screen shot. Starting with the original. Next one lowers brightness 18% and increases contrast 25%. Next one keeps brightness at -18% and now contrast at 40%. Final one brightness still -18% and contrast up to 50%. 

 

 

LMAO - shoot.yourself.in.the.foot.com

 

On 8/12/2020 at 8:46 AM, bflat said:

Please tell me you notice the hot spot on top of the clouds and ask yourself if it is even possible that that was created from a Sun that is over 100 times the size of our supposed ball, and 93 million miles away as modern astronomy claims.

Yes, I noticed the REFLECTION on the clouds. It should correspond to the visual angular diameter of the Sun. It does. 

 

Edited September 23, 2020 by Comedy Time

[Comedy Time]

31 minutes ago, oddsnsods said:

 

 

That is too funny, well spotted.

 

@alexaThe sun doesn't actually set but it does in the bible. Can you point me to the bit about "portals" in the bible? Or is this selective Enoch?

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/earth/book-enoch-and-flat-earth/

 

God won't mind if you suddenly change your mind back to reality.

[peter]

3 hours ago, zArk said:

you are confusing observed angle with spherist model

the observers view is governed by the vanishing point which means you cannot translate an observed angle into spherist models without clearly noticing this visual effect

The vanishing point is governed by the observers' point of observation not the other way round as you stated

For the last half a dozen pages you have been asked dose the sun change size as it moves across the sky ,I believe a tennis player once said to a linesman ,answer the bloody question,and just like said tennis player we are waiting to hear what you have to say 

[amy G]

2 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

a=3000

You keep saying this even after learning that this is you making up anything you want and then arguing with yourself?

 

2 hours ago, Comedy Time said:

Notwithstanding that everybody who is not blind can see that the Sun and Moon are more or less the same sizes and they never change.

You have been going on for pages with this too. Have you ever looked? I mean honestly looked. I know you have not. You work off a script and your script writers cherry pick certain points and hope that no one will look. It is a vicious circle.

 

Is it fair to say that if I could prove we see these objects at obviously different sizes, then the entire heliocentric model would need to be rethought?