Pacfanweb said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

You can actually take a high-zoom camera and zoom in and see a ship that has disappeared from view and "gone over the curve".

---

Okay....no, you can't.

I'll bet you any amount from here to Rocky Mount right now. We (you and I) will go to the coast on the clearest day we can find. We will watch a ship disappear.
You provide whatever "high power" optical device you think will do the job.

And you will not be able to see the ship eventually....and when that becomes the case, we will climb up a few stories at whatever structure is nearby and you will be able to see it again for a little while, until it disappears again.

Easily proven.

---

In responding to this comment, I did a lot of research and saw a few new things. So thanks for that.

The phenomena of a boat (or any other object) appearing to disappear "over the curve" when looking out over water is caused by several optical phenomena -- including limits of angular resolution of the human eye, atmospheric "lensing" or "magnification" (refraction) caused by the water vapor in the air, and mirages (reflections) that occur when looking out over the surface of the water.

Zooming in with a camera can only overcome one of those optical factors -- overcoming the limits of angular resolution of the human eye.

So, yes, by zooming in with a camera you will not always be able to make a boat or other object reappear. But you will be able to sometimes, when the conditions are right (ie, when atmospheric refraction is not the cause of the object being hidden).

Anyone who is interested in understanding all of this will need to take at least a little bit of time to do some research. And it is fascinating.

Here is a very short video demonstrating that zooming in with a camera will enable an object to reappear, by overcoming the limits of angular resolution of the human eye:



And there are many videos on YouTube demonstrating that boats that were not visible at the horizon can be made visible by zooming in with a camera, including this very short video:




And here is an extremely eye-opening video (only 4 minutes long) demonstrating the HUGE effect that atmospheric conditions and optical phenomena have on what we can see. This is time lapse footage from one day looking out over water to a shoreline only few miles away. During some parts of the day, the entire shoreline (down to the water level) is clearly visible. Then, during other parts of the day, a huge "bulge" of water rises up and blocks the view of the shoreline -- and things 20, 50, to around 100 feet in elevation above the water level on that shoreline. This is caused by atmospheric "lensing" or refraction, as well as mirages and other optical distortions/phenomena.



Really think about what is occurring due to atmospheric refraction, as shown in that video footage. If a boat were on that shoreline in the distance and was being blocked from view by that "bulge" of water, is it actually being blocked by "the curve of the earth"? No.

When that news channel did a report on the photo of the full Chicago skyline being seen from around 60 miles away across lake Michigan, they talked to a "scientific expert" who admitted to them that the atmosphere acts as a "lens" (ie, magnifies the image). See at 2:40 in this video for him stating this:




Now, how about doing some experiments with a lens or magnifying glass to see how atmospheric lensing affects what we see with "boats going over the horizon":




And showing how the sun "sets":

Face it, it someone you knew went to space and brought back pictures of a round earth you still wouldn't believe it because one of your tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist said the pictures were wrong

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

You can actually take a high-zoom camera and zoom in and see a ship that has disappeared from view and "gone over the curve".

---

Okay....no, you can't.

I'll bet you any amount from here to Rocky Mount right now. We (you and I) will go to the coast on the clearest day we can find. We will watch a ship disappear.
You provide whatever "high power" optical device you think will do the job.

And you will not be able to see the ship eventually....and when that becomes the case, we will climb up a few stories at whatever structure is nearby and you will be able to see it again for a little while, until it disappears again.

Easily proven.

---

In responding to this comment, I did a lot of research and saw a few new things. So thanks for that.

The phenomena of a boat (or any other object) appearing to disappear "over the curve" when looking out over water is caused by several optical phenomena -- including limits of angular resolution of the human eye, atmospheric "lensing" or "magnification" (refraction) caused by the water vapor in the air, and mirages (reflections) that occur when looking out over the surface of the water.

Zooming in with a camera can only overcome one of those optical factors -- overcoming the limits of angular resolution of the human eye.

So, yes, by zooming in with a camera you will not always be able to make a boat or other object reappear. But you will be able to sometimes, when the conditions are right (ie, when atmospheric refraction is not the cause of the object being hidden).

Anyone who is interested in understanding all of this will need to take at least a little bit of time to do some research. And it is fascinating.

Here is a very short video demonstrating that zooming in with a camera will enable an object to reappear, by overcoming the limits of angular resolution of the human eye:



And there are many videos on YouTube demonstrating that boats that were not visible at the horizon can be made visible by zooming in with a camera, including this very short video:




And here is an extremely eye-opening video (only 4 minutes long) demonstrating the HUGE effect that atmospheric conditions and optical phenomena have on what we can see. This is time lapse footage from one day looking out over water to a shoreline only few miles away. During some parts of the day, the entire shoreline (down to the water level) is clearly visible. Then, during other parts of the day, a huge "bulge" of water rises up and blocks the view of the shoreline -- and things 20, 50, to around 100 feet in elevation above the water level on that shoreline. This is caused by atmospheric "lensing" or refraction, as well as mirages and other optical distortions/phenomena.



Really think about what is occurring due to atmospheric refraction, as shown in that video footage. If a boat were on that shoreline in the distance and was being blocked from view by that "bulge" of water, is it actually being blocked by "the curve of the earth"? No.

---

So what are you really mean when you say, "you researched it" is, you discounted anything that was from actual scientists and then just went with the whack jobs.

And I notice that none of your explanations account for the fact that you can lose something at the horizon and then run up a few stories and see it again. No refraction or any other atmospheric effect at the surface would make that possible.

Not to mention the distance can be measured with radar. And then you can put the radar up higher once it goes out of sight, reacquire the target, and it will be farther away.
But I'm sure the radar is in on the conspiracy as well

Edit: Gotta LOL at the "boat and the buoy" video as well. What the hell was that supposed to prove? That the dude's camera could zoom in on a buoy with a boat sailing very near to it? LOL So the boat drove by the buoy a couple times. And?

Pacfanweb said:

---

So what are you really mean when you say, "you researched it" is, you discounted anything that was from actual scientists and then just went with the whack jobs.

And I notice that none of your explanations account for the fact that you can lose something at the horizon and then run up a few stories and see it again. No refraction or any other atmospheric effect at the surface would make that possible.

Not to mention the distance can be measured with radar. And then you can put the radar up higher once it goes out of sight, reacquire the target, and it will be farther away.
But I'm sure the radar is in on the conspiracy as well

Edit: Gotta LOL at the "boat and the buoy" video as well. What the hell was that supposed to prove? That the dude's camera could zoom in on a buoy with a boat sailing very near to it? LOL So the boat drove by the buoy a couple times. And?

---

I just linked a video (in my previous post) where one of the "scientific experts" admitted that the atmosphere "acts like a lens".

Calling people like me "whack jobs" is not an argument. That is a smear tactic. Once again, I highly doubt you carefully watched most of the videos I posted, and seriously considered the arguments and information.

It's that way with most things that so-called "conspiracy theorists" bring up. Those dismissing the arguments of "conspiracy theorists" have usually never even actually considered the arguments and information put forward by the "conspiracy theorists". They usually just call them names -- eg, "you are crazy", etc. But how can you really know if the "conspiracy theorist" is wrong, when you never even considered their argument?

Yes, I accept that if you rise higher in elevation, you will typically be able to see more of something that is being hidden at the horizon. But that fact alone does not prove that the earth is a globe/sphere. That phenomena is also explained by the optical phenomena that I'm talking about -- ie, limits of angular resolution of the human eye, atmospheric lensing/refraction, etc.

I mentioned this before in this thread, but there are hundreds of examples documented (many on YouTube) of where people have shown that they are able to see things a great distances (dozens/hundreds of miles), which should not be possible if the earth were truly a sphere. For example, being able to see an offshore oil rig platform that is around 100 ft tall at a distance of around 20-25 miles out in the ocean -- when it should be totally hidden by the "earth's curvature".

This video shows just that, and more. A man set up a camera the same exact spot on the coast of California on many different days over the course of several months, looking out at several oil rig platforms located at around 10, 20, and 25 miles out to sea. What he found was extremely interesting. Firstly, he should not have been able to see the ones at the furthest distance. But not only could he see them, but the amount of each rig he could see varied from day to day. On some days, he might only be able to see the very top of the one at 25 miles out. Then, on another day, he could see most of it. Furthermore, on some days, the one at 20 miles would appear much shorter than the one at 10 miles (proportionately), then on other days it would appear almost as tall as the one at 10 miles. The reason for all of these variations in what could be seen is optical phenomena caused by the atmospheric conditions -- and mainly atmospheric lensing/refraction.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

I just linked a video (in my previous post) where one of the "scientific experts" admitted that the atmosphere "acts like a lens".

---

Why do you feel the need to re-litigate something that Pythagoras and Aristotle already determined conclusively 2,000 years ago?

It's not like the spherical earth is a theory recently floated by the Establishment MainStream Media Elites you distrust so much.

How do you ever make scientific progress like this when in order to believe something you have to go back and re-prove everything yourself so you'll have observed it with your own two eyes?

If AnTiFa BeLiEvEs ThE wOrLd Is RoUnD tHaN iT mUsT bE fLaT!1!1!

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

I just linked a video (in my previous post) where one of the "scientific experts" admitted that the atmosphere "acts like a lens".

---

Why do you feel the need to re-litigate something that Pythagoras and Aristotle already determined conclusively 2,000 years ago?

It's not like the spherical earth is a theory recently floated by the Establishment MainStream Media Elites you distrust so much.

How do you ever make scientific progress like this when in order to believe something you have to go back and re-prove everything yourself so you'll have observed it with your own two eyes?

---

You posed basically this exact same question to me on the previous page of this thread, and I posted a lengthy response . When Pythagoras and Aristotle put forward their theories about the earth being spherical in shape (around 500-300 BC), that did not immediately create a "consensus" in the world that the earth was a sphere. To the contrary, most people (including scientists) continued to believe that the earth was flat for around 2,000 years after Pythagoras and Aristotle. And, by the way, Aristotle believed in a geocentric model -- ie, that they earth was the center of the universe. It was not until Copernicus in the 1500s the heliocentric theory was proposed.

"Science" is constantly evolving and changing. And a fundamental principle of the scientific method is to continual skepticism -- and testing and re-testing of theories. There should never be any "sacred cows" that cannot be questioned.

I've explained at length in this thread why this issue is important -- ie, the modern theories of cosmology and the origin of life (globe earth, heliocentric model, Big Bang, evolution) are all THEORETICAL concepts that were concocted and now promoted for the specific purpose of attacking the credibility of the Bible and to advance an atheistic agenda and cause people to reject the Creator.

Are the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution "scientific progress"? No, not at all. Those theories are NONSENSE. They are utterly preposterous. They have zero proof, and are purely theoretical.

Now, take that same skepticism (for Big Bang and evolution), and apply it to other things that "modern science" tells us. Apply that to the heliocentric model/theory. Do you REALLY think that the earth is flying and whizzing through space at tens of thousands of miles an hour? How does the atmosphere even "stick" to the earth if that is what is really happening? How has the position of the stars (eg, constellations) remained exactly the same over thousands of years if the earth and sun are actually travelling through the universe at millions of miles and hour, and the earth should have "traveled trillions of miles across the universe" over that time period?

There is actually no conclusive proof of the heliocentric theory. It's all a theory. There is also no conclusive proof that the earth is spherical in shape. That is also theoretical. All the real evidence supports the fact that the earth is not moving. There have been numerous scientific experiments that have found that the earth is not moving (ie, not spinning and not orbiting the sun). The Michelson-Morley experiments in the early 1900s are the most famous of these. The fact of the matter is that the earth is stationary, and it is the sun, moon, and stars that are moving.

As far as what I observe with my own eyes and senses....what I observe is that the earth is not moving at all. All my senses indicate to me that the earth is completely still, and that it is the sun and moon and stars that are moving. And when I look out at the horizon at the ocean, I observe that the horizon is completely flat (from left to right). And all my experience and common sense tells me that water (in lakes, ponds, etc) is always completely flat and never curved.

And now with improvements in technology available to the "common man", we are able to conduct many more basic observations and experiments that conclusively prove that the earth is not spherical in shape, that large lakes and bodies of water are in fact completely flat, etc.

PackBacker07 said:

---

If AnTiFa BeLiEvEs ThE wOrLd Is RoUnD tHaN iT mUsT bE fLaT!1!1!

---

When the "Establishment" (Leftist media, Hollywood, Marxist-run universities, etc) tells me that murdering unborn children in the womb is a "good thing" and a "human right", then that sort of makes me question whether those people are worthy of trust. And then when those same people unanimously promote homosexuality and transgender madness, that also throws up a red flag that not only are they not to be trusted, but maybe they are are just behind a wicked agenda. And when they, with one voice, try to tell us that we all came from monkies and peddle such ridiculous nonsense as the theory of evolution and the Big Bang as being a "fact"...then that causes me to think that not only are these people insane, but maybe these people are actually enemies of God who want to cause people to reject God's existence.

But you keep believing these "authorities" of the Leftist Establishment. I'm sure they love you and would never lie to you.

Civilized said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

I just linked a video (in my previous post) where one of the "scientific experts" admitted that the atmosphere "acts like a lens".

---

Why do you feel the need to re-litigate something that Pythagoras and Aristotle already determined conclusively 2,000 years ago?

It's not like the spherical earth is a theory recently floated by the Establishment MainStream Media Elites you distrust so much.

How do you ever make scientific progress like this when in order to believe something you have to go back and re-prove everything yourself so you'll have observed it with your own two eyes?

---

Exactly. It's one of the old scientific observations that's been proven and confirmed over and over. Mathematically, and by simple observation....thousands and thousands have flown high enough to have seen the curvature.

What I don't get is the whole pooh-poohing of anyone remotely credible, in favor of folks who typically have zero credentials, that post "proof" of flat Earth that is easily and almost comically disproven, as if those folks are somehow more credible.

I mean, when you come at us with "proof" from such fools as "Pastor Dean Odle"? Give me a break. Dude has zero training in any science, is a complete fraud and is simply a charlatan with lots of fools that follow him. Typical mega church setup. Quick search reveals he "earned" a PHD from "Pilgrims University in Nigeria". It was an illegal university. Not a real school, in other words. And it wasn't in anything to do with science, either.

And you bring bogus people like this to the table and we're supposed to listen to what they say, that flies in the face of long-proven, undisputable-been-witnessed-by-thousands fact?

BTW, I DID watch those videos, and actually rewound them and paid attention, before I posted about them. They're all BS.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

If AnTiFa BeLiEvEs ThE wOrLd Is RoUnD tHaN iT mUsT bE fLaT!1!1!

---

When the "Establishment" (Leftist media, Hollywood, Marxist-run universities, etc) tells me that murdering unborn children in the womb is a "good thing" and a "human right", then that sort of makes me question whether those people are worthy of trust. And then when those same people unanimously promote homosexuality and transgender madness, that also throws up a red flag that not only are they not to be trusted, but maybe they are are just behind a wicked agenda. And when they, with one voice, try to tell us that we all came from monkies and peddle such ridiculous nonsense as the theory of evolution and the Big Bang as being a "fact"...then that causes me to think that not only are these people insane, but maybe these people are actually enemies of God who want to cause people to reject God's existence.

But you keep believing these "authorities" of the Leftist Establishment. I'm sure they love you and would never lie to you.

---

Dude, plenty of people who have actually SEEN the Earth's curvature don't agree with abortion. That's a very weak argument for not believing the entire rest of the world that knows the Earth is round.

So go ahead and don't trust those folks you mention. I have no issue with that. But remember, plenty of people just as conservative as you have seen the Earth's curvature and know it's real.
You think all the NASA folks are liberal? You think all our military pilots are liberal? You think all the astronauts were?
They'll all tell you they've seen it, and you're going to doubt them all?

Pacfanweb said:

---

I mean, when you come at us with "proof" from such fools as "Pastor Dean Odle"? Give me a break. Dude has zero training in any science, is a complete fraud and is simply a charlatan with lots of fools that follow him. Typical mega church setup. Quick search reveals he "earned" a PHD from "Pilgrims University in Nigeria". It was an illegal university. Not a real school, in other words. And it wasn't in anything to do with science, either.

---

I doubt you've even listened to 5 minutes of Dean Odle speak. And you repeatedly attacking him as a "fool" and "charlatan" etc is not a valid argument. That is clearly a strategy of SMEARING someone with name-calling, as opposed to being respectful of the person and actually addressing the arguments raised by the person. He is not the pastor of a "megachurch". His church is relatively small in number.

And none of us have to have a degree in "science" in order to have an valid opinion or make valid judgments on any of these matters. We all have the intellectual capacity to make judgments based on observation, evidence, and logic.

Do you have a degree in astronomy or physics? If not, why should I listen to you? (according to your own standards of who we should listen to).

I don't have to just blindly trust so-called "scientists". If I did, then does that mean I can never question such preposterous nonsense as the theory of evolution or the Big Bang?

So if the earth isn't round, what is it?

Is it flat like a pancake? Is it square? Do people live on the bottom? Can we go walk over to the bottom or will we fall off into nothing?

You can sail a ship or fly a plane around the world and get back to your original location. What other shape makes this possible?

What is your alternative?

You place so much faith in these so-called "scientists" and these people who have letters after their name and degrees from universities. Big whoop. Have you taken 1 minute to stop and think that 99% of those same so-called "scientists" will also tell you that the theory of evolution and Big Bang are "facts"?

The theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory are 100% complete and total nonsense. They are absolutely preposterous. They completely defy all common sense, logic, and what we see from observation and evidence. Words cannot begin to describe how completely asinine those theories are. And you want me to just blindly trust people who peddle these ridiculous lies?

People who work as professors at universities HAVE to peddle these lies, or else they will be fired by the Marxist/Leftist leadership of the universities and/or have their career destroyed in other ways. Sure, some of them may not believe in the theory of evolution or the Big Bang, and many other "orthodox" views in areas of science and other fields. But they are can't be too vocal about it and speak out against those things, or else they will be out of a job. So they just go along with the overall agenda.

The "scientific" Establishment has an agenda. They are captured and controlled by the Marxist powers-that-be that dominate and control "academia" and universities -- which are allied with the Leftist-run Establishment media and Hollywood. These people all have an over-arching agenda that is, at it's core, anti-Christian and against God. They are the enemies of God, and waging war against Him on every level.

Pacfanweb said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

---

Yet you blindly trust someone like Dean Odle? Or just random fools who post Youtube videos that don't prove anything? Over thousands and thousands of scientists, engineers, pilots, astronauts, etc, who have proven this over and over and actually witnessed it?

But yeah, some random idiot on Youtube is more credible than all of those people over thousands of years. Every single one of those folks are wrong and some fool on Youtube with a "PHD" from an illegal "university" in Nigeria is right.

---

I don't blindly trust anyone. I research things from multiple angles, and get information from many sources. I actually disagree with Dean Odle on many other points of his Christian doctrine (separate from cosmology and the nature of the earth).

NASA peddles lies. Just do 30 minutes of research on it. I've provided a bunch of evidence in this thread. But you have to actually look at the evidence and research for yourself in order to see the truth. "Scientists" in the academic Establishment, NASA....they cannot be trusted. They are proven LIARS. The evidence is overwhelmingly conclusive on that.

Speaking of fools, anyone (including all "scientists") who peddle such ridiculous lies as the theory of evolution and the Big Bang as if they were "factual"...THOSE people are fools.

Besides the evidence being on my side, I'm also following what God and the Bible teaches about the nature of the universe. The Bible says that the earth is "fixed and immovable" (Psalm 96:10), flat, and has a firmament (dome structure) over it that contains the atmosphere. But if you want to believe the enemies of God (the REAL fools), who teach the exact opposite...then so be it.

Pacfanweb said:

---

BTW, there were ZERO "Marxist powers-that-be" in existence when Pythagoras figured out the Earth was round. There wasn't any conspiracy, there was no pressure on him to come up with such an idea.

This long predates any notion of such things. The world and its peoples have been completely turned over many times since then, and anyone in any sort of position of power/influence sent packing (or killed) and new blood taken over, yet the fact that the Earth was round was constantly re-proven.

Unless you're going to say that these mythical "leftist marxists" somehow went back in time and planted these seeds, what you're saying makes no sense.

---

You think I don't know that Marxism was formulated in the 1800s? Talk about shooting down a strawman.

My point is that PRESENT-DAY "academia", the Establishment media and Hollywood (as well as all "Leftist" political movements) are dominated by Marxist ideologues. And if you know anything about Marxism, you will know that the agenda is fundamentally anti-Christian and hostile to God.

Pythagoras and Aristotle, as smart as they may have been, were wrong on their theory of the earth being spherical. They probably had no agenda against God. They probably just thought that the spherical earth theory was correct based on pure observation and mathematics. But, later, especially after Copernicus in the 1500s, noted enemies of God and the Bible (eg, the Freemasons) latched on to these theories (eg, spherical earth, heliocentric theory) and pushed them for the specific purpose of attacking belief in the Bible.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

Yet you blindly trust someone like Dean Odle? Or just random fools who post Youtube videos that don't prove anything? Over thousands and thousands of scientists, engineers, pilots, astronauts, etc, who have proven this over and over and actually witnessed it?

But yeah, some random idiot on Youtube is more credible than all of those people over thousands of years. Every single one of those folks are wrong and some fool on Youtube with a "PHD" from an illegal "university" in Nigeria is right.

---

I don't blindly trust anyone. I research things from multiple angles, and get information from many sources. I actually disagree with Dean Odle on many other points of his Christian doctrine (separate from cosmology and the nature of the earth).

NASA peddles lies. Just do 30 minutes of research on it. I've provided a bunch of evidence in this thread. But you have to actually look at the evidence and research for yourself in order to see the truth. "Scientists" in the academic Establishment, NASA....they cannot be trusted. They are proven LIARS. The evidence is overwhelmingly conclusive on that.

Speaking of fools, anyone (including all "scientists") who peddle such ridiculous lies as the theory of evolution and the Big Bang as if they were "factual"...THOSE people are fools.

Besides the evidence being on my side, I'm also following what God and the Bible teaches about the nature of the universe. The Bible says that the earth is "fixed and immovable" (Psalm 96:10), flat, and has a firmament (dome structure) over it that contains the atmosphere. But if you want to believe the enemies of God (the REAL fools), who teach the exact opposite...then so be it.

---

Nope, The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved;

he will judge the peoples with equity.

As my father in law (The Dr. David G. Moore) will translate: The world stands firm, never to be shaken

GeOrGe SoRoS tHiNkS tHe EaRtH iS rOuNd So It MuSt Be FlAt!1!1 mArXiSm1!1!

PackBacker07 said:

---

GeOrGe SoRoS tHiNkS tHe EaRtH iS rOuNd So It MuSt Be FlAt!1!1 mArXiSm1!1!

---

The anti-Christ Leftists who run academia, the Establishment media, and Hollywood who tell us that we came from nothing that exploded in a Big Bang and that we evolved from monkies....they also say that the earth is a ball that spins and flies around the sun. So that must be true too. They never lie. Everything the powers-that-be tell you to believe is true. No questions asked.

IseWolf22 said:

---

So if the earth isn't round, what is it?

Is it flat like a pancake? Is it square? Do people live on the bottom? Can we go walk over to the bottom or will we fall off into nothing?

You can sail a ship or fly a plane around the world and get back to your original location. What other shape makes this possible?

What is your alternative?

---

Flat. Antarctica is not a continent at the bottom of a sphere. It is actually a landmass that surrounds all of the world's oceans. A "firmament" (solid dome structure), as described by the Bible, is located above the earth and attached to the earth somewhere beyond the coastline of Antarctica. This solid dome is what contains our atmosphere.

GuerrillaPack is it ok to ask your age?

GuerrillaPack said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

So if the earth isn't round, what is it?

Is it flat like a pancake? Is it square? Do people live on the bottom? Can we go walk over to the bottom or will we fall off into nothing?

You can sail a ship or fly a plane around the world and get back to your original location. What other shape makes this possible?

What is your alternative?

---

Flat. Antarctica is not a continent at the bottom of a sphere. It is actually a landmass that surrounds all of the world's oceans. A "firmament" (solid dome structure), as described by the Bible, is located above the earth and attached to the earth somewhere beyond the coastline of Antarctica. This solid dome is what contains our atmosphere.

---

So the north and south pole are just two sides of Antarctica? What about those who have visited those places? They didn't report reaching the end of the world and the edge of a dome.

And that image still doesn't address how someone can fly straight, go around the entire world, and arrive back at the original location

IseWolf22 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

So if the earth isn't round, what is it?

Is it flat like a pancake? Is it square? Do people live on the bottom? Can we go walk over to the bottom or will we fall off into nothing?

You can sail a ship or fly a plane around the world and get back to your original location. What other shape makes this possible?

What is your alternative?

---

Flat. Antarctica is not a continent at the bottom of a sphere. It is actually a landmass that surrounds all of the world's oceans. A "firmament" (solid dome structure), as described by the Bible, is located above the earth and attached to the earth somewhere beyond the coastline of Antarctica. This solid dome is what contains our atmosphere.

---

So the north and south pole are just two sides of Antarctica? What about those who have visited those places? They didn't report reaching the end of the world and the edge of a dome.

And that image still doesn't address how someone can fly straight, go around the entire world, and arrive back at the original location

---

They, along with Aristotle, are also in on the conspiracy.

metcalfmafia said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

IseWolf22 said:

---

So if the earth isn't round, what is it?

Is it flat like a pancake? Is it square? Do people live on the bottom? Can we go walk over to the bottom or will we fall off into nothing?

You can sail a ship or fly a plane around the world and get back to your original location. What other shape makes this possible?

What is your alternative?

---

Flat. Antarctica is not a continent at the bottom of a sphere. It is actually a landmass that surrounds all of the world's oceans. A "firmament" (solid dome structure), as described by the Bible, is located above the earth and attached to the earth somewhere beyond the coastline of Antarctica. This solid dome is what contains our atmosphere.

---

So the north and south pole are just two sides of Antarctica? What about those who have visited those places? They didn't report reaching the end of the world and the edge of a dome.

And that image still doesn't address how someone can fly straight, go around the entire world, and arrive back at the original location

---

They, along with Aristotle, are also in on the conspiracy.

---

Yep. All the earlier researchers were wrong, and everyone in modern times is in on the conspiracy. All the pilots, astronauts and airline passengers who have seen the curvature are lying.
You can only believe idiots on Youtube that have no credibility.
Oh, and those others that misinterpret the bible to say the Earth is flat, which is does not. Of course, misinterpreting the bible isn't anything new.

Flat earth would be sweet - same time everywhere and no jet lag!

dogplasma said:

---

Flat earth would be sweet - same time everywhere and no jet lag!

---

Jet lag is a marxist conspiracy, it doesn't really exist. The same chemicals they use for chem trails, they give you while you're flying to make you feel the lag.

dogplasma said:

---

Flat earth would be sweet - same time everywhere and no jet lag!

---

LOLOL, for real!

Doesn't going all "flat earth" create way more questions than it answers? You've got to craft a whole new explanation for all the phenomena that are now easily scientifically explained when contemplating our round earth and solar system.

"Crafting explanations" without any hard data at all is what conspiracy theorists do best. To think some people believe in a flat earth is scary.

Civilized said:

---

dogplasma said:

---

Flat earth would be sweet - same time everywhere and no jet lag!

---

LOLOL, for real!

Doesn't going all "flat earth" create way more questions than it answers? You've got to craft a whole new explanation for all the phenomena that are now easily scientifically explained when contemplating our round earth and solar system.

---

I'm just imagining the "fact" that you can go to Antarctica to see the solid dome that connects to the earth and holds all of our atmosphere in. Every nation in the world that conducts research in the Arctic is hiding this from us.

Also does that picture have the moon and sun within the dome? So they are basically hovering right over the earth.

I think they claim that the sun rotates around the Earth. But even if that was the case, as soon as the sun came up on one side of a flat Earth, the whole thing would be in daylight. There would be no such thing as darkness in one country and daylight in the other.
Same way as you can see the moon. There's nothing in the way, so that light reflects right to your eyeball and that's way farther then the circumference of a globe if it was flat. In fact it could be three or four Earths wide and you'd still see the light as soon as the sun came up.

Pacfanweb said:

---

I think they claim that the sun rotates around the Earth. But even if that was the case, as soon as the sun came up on one side of a flat Earth, the whole thing would be in daylight. There would be no such thing as darkness in one country and daylight in the other.
Same way as you can see the moon. There's nothing in the way, so that light reflects right to your eyeball and that's way farther then the circumference of a globe if it was flat. In fact it could be three or four Earths wide and you'd still see the light as soon as the sun came up.

---

Assuming the earth is flat (which it is)...the sun is not high enough above the earth, nor bright enough, to illuminate the entire earth. It is relatively low in altitude (say 25-30 miles above the earth, no one knows for sure it's exact altitude).

Similar to how a single light bulb cannot illuminate an entire flat wall in a dark room.



The sun's light is also diminished by the earth's atmosphere. That's why near sunrise and sunset, the sun's intensity is much less than it is when it is near directly overhead -- due to the thousands of miles of earth's atmosphere (water vapor, air, etc) that the sunlight is having to shine through. Due to several optical phenomena that I've discussed previously in this thread (including limits of angular resolution and atmospheric lensing/refraction) the sun disappears from view after it travels far enough away from the observer -- creating sunrises and sunsets.

Here is another video explaining how sunrises and sunsets work on a flat earth: