Pop, you familiar with these books?

[Sudden Sam]

I’m re-reading Stephen Jay Gould’s Dinosaur in a Haystack and these came up:

John Draper’s History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science. (1874)

and

Andrew White’s A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896)

I assume you likely know them well, but just curious.

[Softball Bat]

I have not read either of them.

Not that I am opposed to reading them, but just haven't.

What interests you in Gould's book?

[Sudden Sam]

I have not read either of them.

Not that I am opposed to reading them, but just haven't.

What interests you in Gould's book?

Been a good while since I read it. It’s a collection of articles.

The two books I mentioned apparently promote the flat earth theory.

[Softball Bat]

The two books I mentioned apparently promote the flat earth theory.

Oh really?

Thank you for letting me know that, Sam.

I will have to look into those two books a bit.

[The Seer]

Did we ever figure out what possible gains or benefits would come for believing the world is flat? Are all the moons & planets flat also or just ours?

[Softball Bat]

Most "flat earthers" assume the moon and stars to be lights in the firmament.
Described in Genesis 1:14-18.

Shape of them?
Not sure.

For most of human history, the prevailing understanding has been that the earth is flat.
It is only in more recent times that most people have chosen to believe that the earth is round.
Well actually, most people never look into the topic at all.
They are told from a young age that they live on a globe, and then throughout their life, day-after-day, the globe is reinforced and continually shown to them.

Long story short, if the earth is flat, stationary, and enclosed, it is very hard to deny that there is a Creator.

If the earth is just another random rock flying through space, it makes denying a creator much easier.

[Roux]

I will have to look into those two books a bit

Be sure to show us if you find a functioning map of a flat earth. Shouldn't be too difficult, really

[Roux]

For most of human history, the prevailing understanding has been that the earth is flat.

By the 5th century B.C., it was widely accepted that the Earth is a sphere. This is a critical point, as there is a widespread misconception that ancient peoples thought the Earth was flat. This was simply not the case.

[Softball Bat]

I will have to look into those two books a bit

Be sure to show us if you find a functioning map of a flat earth. Shouldn't be too difficult, really

I do not promote any map of the earth, because I do not know.
My point has always been that the globe is wrong. That we do know.

The globe is not only wrong, it is laughably ridiculous.

If you Google the Gleason's Map, you will see a flat earth map that many in my camp think might be reasonably close to reality.

[Roux]

What is laughably ridiculous is that there's not a basic map of a flat earth that actually can be used for navigation. Hint: because the earth isn't flat.

Most people who believe in a god recognize that the earth is in a general shape of a sphere, just like all of the other planets and moons.

[Roux]

Google the Gleason's Map

Thanks for the suggestion, my friend. I did that.

And here is the first thing that came up:

Alexander Gleason’s map of the world does not prove the earth is flat

Some social media users are saying that Alexander Gleason’s 19th Century “New Standard Map of the World” is proof that the earth is flat and that Antarctica is not a continent but an ice ring that circles the earth’s edges. They are wrong. The earth is not flat. The map has been misinterpreted.

One Instagram user (here) shared a TikTok video which tries to challenge the fact that that Gleason’s map is a projection of the earth as a globe. They say “where expletive is Antarctica,” pointing to the “ice ring that goes around” the world. (here).

Gleason argued that the earth is flat in his 1890 book “Is the Bible from Heaven? Is the Earth a Globe?” (here). On page 350, he mentions “a new map of the world as it is” and says, “it contains all the continents and principal islands and rivers of the world, also, all the principal cities of the earth.” (here)

In May 1893, Gleason patented the invention of the “New Standard Map of the World”, a projection of the earth centered on the north pole, which can be found (here).

But while Gleason argued the earth is flat in his book, his application to the U.S. Patent Office for the map appears to contradict this. The application states that the map is extracted from the earth as a globe. Specifically, Gleason said: “The extortion of the map from that of a globe consists, mainly in the straightening out of the meridian lines allowing each to retain their original value from Greenwich, the equator to the two poles.”

Gleason did not publicly address the contradiction between his book and his patent application. The team at Boston Rare Maps (here), which sold a rare copy of the map, said on their website they read the passage in the patent application, “as Gleason unwittingly fessing up that his map is, like any other, a projection of a globe or section thereof onto a flat surface.”

More information on Gleason’s map can be found (here) and (here).

ALL 2D MAPS DISTORT EARTH

As Gleason’s map is centered on the north pole, the edges indicate the south pole. Experts told Reuters that Antarctica is clearly visible as the white ring on the perimeter of the map, contrary to claims by social media users that the continent is not shown.

Jason Steffen, an assistant professor in physics and astronomy at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, told Reuters that the south pole “is the entire edge of the map, and the ring is Antarctica.”
“Some people call this the snow or ice wall,” Steffen said. “But, it isn’t.”

David Goldhaber-Gordon, a professor of physics at Stanford University, said that while flat maps are convenient, “a flat map of a curved surface must have distortions,” and “different mappings create different distortions.”

“Gleason’s map could conceptually be made by placing a flat horizontal paper just above a translucent globe whose north pole is at the top; then placing a bright LED at the south pole and making each feature according to where its shadow falls on the paper,” Goldhaber-Gordon said.

Goldhaber-Gordon added that this experiment would show that “locations close to the south pole appear far apart on the map,” although that is not the reality.

Charles Bennett, a Bloomberg Distinguished Professor at Johns Hopkins University, said that representing a 3D object such as the earth in 2D is impossible “on the flat pages of an atlas,” which is why projections are used, but they are not accurate depictions of the earth’s shape.

“A projection of a person on a page is also flat (see Jeff Brown’s ‘Flat Stanley’ character), but people aren’t flat,” Bennett said. “One cannot conclude that the earth is flat on the basis of a projection – any projection.”

EARTH IS NOT FLAT

There is ample publicly available evidence that the earth is not flat. NASA has published images of the earth from space, noting the “ancient Greeks believed the Earth was round and calculated its circumference with remarkable accuracy” (here).

Before photographic proof was possible, Eratosthenes measured the earth’s shadow cast by a stick during the summer solstice to calculate the circumference of the earth (here.).

“The shadow [earth] casts on the moon during an eclipse is round, regardless of where the moon is in the sky,” Steffen said.

Steffen also said that individuals can perform a similar experiment using geometry and Polaris, or the north star, as a function of latitude.

“If you measure the angle from the horizon to Polaris at the border with Mexico, and then again at the border with Canada, it will rise in the sky,” Steffen said. “It will rise in the sky higher than what is possible on a flat earth.”

Satellites have captured countless images of the Earth from space. The Global Positioning System (GPS) technology they power also demonstrates that the world is round. (here).

Goldhaber-Gordon said GPS is “based on not only an (approximately) spherical earth but also the special and general theories of relativity” that “would make no sense in any flat earth picture,” which is why anyone using GPS is relying on the roundness of the earth.

“Anyone who cares can make observations (of the moon's phases, of time zones, of constellations) that can all be understood in the context of a round earth but would be hard to explain otherwise without separate reasons for each observation,” he added,

VERDICT

False. Gleason’s map is a depiction of the earth as a globe in a north-polar azimuthal equidistant projection and is not proof that the earth is flat.

[Softball Bat]

Most people who believe in a god recognize that the earth is in a general shape of a sphere, just like all of the other planets and moons.

How do you know that "all of the other planets and moons" are spheres?
And even if they are spheres, how does that prove that your globe is true?

Google the Gleason's Map

Thanks for the suggestion, my friend. I did that.

And here is the first thing that came up:

Yes, we should all know by now that Google manipulates and censors searches.
Google directs you toward what they want to direct you toward.

Flat earth is supposedly a crackpot idea, and only the dimmest bulbs believe it, and yet Google somehow finds it necessary to post this message under videos that promote a flat earth...


Flat Earth
Wikipedia
Flat Earth is an archaic and scientifically disproven conception of the Earth's shape as a plane or disk. Many ancient cultures subscribed to a flat-Earth cosmography. The model has undergone a recent resurgence as a conspiracy theory.


If flat earth is crackpot, and it is evident to everyone that the earth is a globe, why is Google actively engaging in a campaign to squash flat earth?

[Roux]

You asked me to Google Gleason’s map, and I did. The first response is quoted above.

Please read it. I even bolded Gleason’s admission for you.

When you have a functional map of a flat earth that can actually be used for navigation, let us know.

Don't be afraid of reality. Your god presumably created the earth and the universe, don’t deny his creation as it is, give him credit for what he did.

[Smackie Chan]

Google the Gleason's Map...Google manipulates and censors searches.

So you direct Roux to use a resource YOU selected, and then criticize what he finds there because it's a shitty resource. Alrighty then.

Do you expect that he'd find information more aligned to what you're peddling if he used Yahoo or some other search engine? But setting that aside for the moment, what did Roux quote from the source you directed him to that you disagree with? Do you not believe that the patent application included what was quoted?

If flat earth is crackpot, and it is evident to everyone that the earth is a globe, why is Google actively engaging in a campaign to squash flat earth?

For the same reason that reputable sources of information engage in campaigns to set the record straight regarding pretty much everything that spews forth from Donny von Shitzinpantz - if they don't (and, frankly, even when they do), enough clownfarts will buy into the bullshit and spread it so that the alternate facts will be taken as truth. Crackpots gonna slurp up crackpot ideas & theories, and if no information is presented to counter the bullshit, it can result in enough retards buying it that it becomes taken as being factual by a substantial portion of the population. That's what's happened to flat earth theory. It used to be on the fringe; just a few crackpots trying to sell long debunked claims with nobody of any intelligence paying attention because there weren't enough of them to matter. That's changed with the Internet & social media. There's now enough believers in the bullshit to compel Google and others to let folks know it's a buncha crap.

[Softball Bat]

So you direct Roux to use a resource YOU selected, and then criticize what he finds there because it's a shitty resource. Alrighty then.

I directed Roux to use Google so he could view the map that many in the flat earth camp think might be reasonably close to reality.

I did not tell him to use Google so that Google could lead him to resource #1 on their chosen list that attempts to discredit the map.
lol

This is what I told Roux...

If you Google the Gleason's Map, you will see a flat earth map that many in my camp think might be reasonably close to reality.

Do you expect that he'd find information more aligned to what you're peddling...

What am I peddling?

I did not claim that Gleason's map is the true map of the world.
In fact, I have said countless times that I do not know what the true map of the earth looks like.
I do not claim to know the shape of the earth.

Your camp, the globe-insisting camp, does claim to know for sure what the shape of the earth is.
And since you claim it is fact, we can evaluate that claim.
To cut to the chase, the claim has been repeatedly shot to hell.

But setting that aside for the moment, what did Roux quote from the source you directed him to that you disagree with? Do you not believe that the patent application included what was quoted?

I do not promote Gleason's map, and I do not care what Gleason is alleged to have said in his patent application.
I do not know, and I do not care, what he might have needed to do or say in order to get a patent for his map in the late 1800s.

I consider the map to be a "starting point."
The map is a tool that an inquisitive mind can use in order to begin to sincerely look into what a flat earth might look like.

For the same reason that reputable sources of information engage in campaigns to set the record straight regarding pretty much everything that spews forth from Donny von Shitzinpantz - if they don't (and, frankly, even when they do), enough clownfarts will buy into the bullshit and spread it so that the alternate facts will be taken as truth. Crackpots gonna slurp up crackpot ideas & theories, and if no information is presented to counter the bullshit, it can result in enough retards buying it that it becomes taken as being factual by a substantial portion of the population. That's what's happened to flat earth theory. It used to be on the fringe; just a few crackpots trying to sell long debunked claims with nobody of any intelligence paying attention because there weren't enough of them to matter. That's changed with the Internet & social media. There's now enough believers in the bullshit to compel Google and others to let folks know it's a buncha crap.

The dumb globe used to be the fringe idea, Smackie.

There is no harm to society if people think the earth is something other than a globe.
In fact, I think it is sad that so many people buy into the fantastical idea that we are riding around on a whirling, twirling space ball.
And they never really look into the matter at all.

It is much easier to control the masses when you have them duped about the very place they call home.

If you believe Google is looking out for the welfare of the general public by placing their "disclaimer" on flat earth videos, I think you should step back and reconsider how you are viewing things.

Google is right there with NASA.
Liars and manipulators.

[Smackie Chan]

I directed Roux to use Google so he could view the map that many in the flat earth camp think might be reasonably close to reality.

I did not tell him to use Google so that Google could lead him to resource #1 on their chosen list that attempts to discredit the map.

So Google is good for some things, but not for others. You can believe some of what's there (like the existence of the Gleason map), but not the amplifying information regarding the map. And the info quoted by Roux was not an attempt to "discredit" the map, but merely to point out that it was never intended to be used as evidence that the earth is flat, PER ITS CREATOR. It was simply another means, PER GLEASON in the patent application, to display a sphere in two dimensions.

So if Google is a fine resource for certain things but not for others, who is the arbiter of what's right and what's not? You? And if there are more factual and less biased resources that will basically provide better info, why didn't you suggest Roux use it instead of Google, where he might just explore a little too deeply for your liking and find info that you prefer he either not find or ignore?

the claim has been repeatedly shot to hell.

Really? How, and by whom? And what is your source of info?

The dumb globe used to be the fringe idea, Smackie.

Until when? Cite your source.

There is no harm to society if people think the earth is something other than a globe.

In a vacuum, that may be true. And I'm all in favor of treating information with skepticism. But we've reached the Orwellian point where even common sense is being disputed. We're being driven toward the belief that educated people are dumber than non-educated ones because those who aren't well-schooled haven't been subjected to the indoctrination of learning institutions. Don't believe subject matter experts; they're merely bought & paid for to say what their handlers want them to say. Instead, get your info from YouTube university. Or your local veterinarian.

In fact, I think it is sad that so many people buy into the fantastical idea that we are riding around on a whirling, twirling space ball.
And they never really look into the matter at all.

Seriously? The measurements of the earth (diameter, circumference, etc.) have been looked into and computed. So has gravitational force, which explains why the water on this spinning ball doesn't go splashing into space. Math, astronomy, & physics have been employed to determine the time when the sun will rise and set each day, what phase the moon will be on any given date, and when we can expect the next eclipse. I'd say it's been pretty thoroughly looked into.

OTOH, we have folks like you who claim to not know what the earth's shape is, but you know what it's not shaped like. And if "your side" has looked into this matter as thoroughly as you believe, why don't we have any data? What's the length, width, and depth of our planet? How far do I have to go in any direction to reach the ice fringe of Antarctica? Why has no one ever reported seeing the edge of the planet? How do you explain night time? What math & physics are used to explain earthly phenomena in a non-globe scenario? Citing of sources would be appreciated.

It is much easier to control the masses when you have them duped about the very place they call home.

You make it sound like NASA, as an arm of the government, came up with the global earth as a means of controlling the masses. NASA is a relative newcomer to this party; the basics of earth science were known long before there was even a USA. There are plenty of insidious ways to control the masses. The spherical earth is not one of them.

Google is right there with NASA.
Liars and manipulators.

And yet you directed a detractor to use a resource you call a "liar & manipulator" to help support your argument. Ponderous.

[Softball Bat]

So Google is good for some things, but not for others. You can believe some of what's there (like the existence of the Gleason map), but not the amplifying information regarding the map. And the info quoted by Roux was not an attempt to "discredit" the map, but merely to point out that it was never intended to be used as evidence that the earth is flat, PER ITS CREATOR. It was simply another means, PER GLEASON in the patent application, to display a sphere in two dimensions.

So if Google is a fine resource for certain things but not for others, who is the arbiter of what's right and what's not? You? And if there are more factual and less biased resources that will basically provide better info, why didn't you suggest Roux use it instead of Google, where he might just explore a little too deeply for your liking and find info that you prefer he either not find or ignore?

Oh my goodness...

This is Gleason's map.








I should have just posted a pic of the map instead of posting this...

If you Google the Gleason's Map, you will see a flat earth map that many in my camp think might be reasonably close to reality.

You can easily see that map if you "Google" it on any search engine of your choice.





I will respond to the rest of your post when I have more time.

[Dr_Phibes]

Donny von Shitzinpantz

I've always liked his stuff.

[Smackie Chan]

I will respond to the rest of your post when I have more time.

This may be getting a little too deep into the weeds for you, but can you include in your reply, just to satisfy my curiosity, if you believe in solar systems and if you believe earth is part of one? If so, is our galaxy (if you believe in such a thing) and/or universe heliocentric, geocentric, or something else?

[Smackie Chan]

Some light reading for you to dismiss...

The idea that Earth is flat seems to have an enduring hold on human imagination. In the 1830s a commune in Britain, led by British writer Samuel Birley Rowbotham, resurrected the concept as backlash against rapid scientific progress. Members believed that Earth was a circular disk with the North Pole at the centre and a wall of ice surrounding the edges of the disk to contain the oceans. The group was regarded as a harmless symbol of British eccentricity.

What would become the modern flat Earth concept emerged modestly in the 1950s as the Flat Earth Society, a small fringe group in Britain with a membership of fewer than 4,000 people. However, largely due to the rising influence of the Internet and social media in the early 2000s, the organization launched itself worldwide in October 2009, and annual conferences followed and catered to a variety of worldviews. Some of the society’s models echo the ancient view of Earth as a disk with a dome of stars rotating above it. The models of other groups, however, claim that the Sun and the Moon are only 50 km (31 miles) in diameter and that they circle the disk at a height of 5,500 km (3,417 miles). Others envision a world hemmed in by Antarctica (which is believed to extend infinitely in all directions), or they reject conventional laws of gravity, explaining that Earth exists as a disk that accelerates upward in order to give the illusion of gravity.

Scientists and researchers who study this growing movement have found that its appeal is rooted in four trends: the public’s mistrust of official scientific sources, the perpetuation of conspiracy theories, loyalty to the groups and community they identify with, and the use of social media to spread misinformation. Flat Earth ideas have gained a large enough audience worldwide to alarm some scientists, who have launched their own social media campaigns to debunk the flat Earth models promoted online. Other researchers are working to overcome these perceptions by combining the teaching of rigorous evidence-based science with a restoration of public trust in scientific institutions attained by taking the questions of flat Earth adherents seriously and refraining from taking aloof and dismissive positions.

I understand why you believe what you do, and none of the evidence that I or anyone else posts will change your belief since it's not evidence-based, so feel free to respond however you feel is appropriate. Just don't expect to be taken seriously due to your lack of trust (and evidence).

I don't think this discussion is really about the actual evidence or the scientific process, however.

People who believe that Earth is flat aren't coming to that conclusion from the same types of observations. Instead, they believe that we are being misled and lied to, that scientists (including me) want you to believe that Earth is round, despite its flatness.

So the question isn't "Why do people believe in a flat Earth?" but rather "Why do people believe in a conspiracy?" And the answer is the same reason it always is: a lack of trust.

Many people don’t trust the society around them, most notably the representatives of that society. That trust often falls even further when it comes to elite representatives of that society, which include government officials, members of academia and scientists like me.

By claiming that Earth is flat, people are really expressing a deep distrust of scientists and science itself.

[Ken]

Will all fall on deaf ears, as ignorant as they are, smackie. Just like the rest of the flat earthers, pop will not answer any question directly but rather evade w/vague answers. Flat earthers are truly the lowest form of human intelligence on this planet.
Not sure if I feel sorry for pop or not as he seems to be an otherwise nice guy.

No, I don't feel sorry for him... he himself accepted and embraced this overwhelmingly flawed concept. It's all on him. Sad part is that he will likely never accept the truth and come clean.

[Softball Bat]

I will respond to the rest of your post when I have more time.

This may be getting a little too deep into the weeds for you, but can you include in your reply, just to satisfy my curiosity, if you believe in solar systems and if you believe earth is part of one? If so, is our galaxy (if you believe in such a thing) and/or universe heliocentric, geocentric, or something else?

I assume that earth is flat, stationary, and enclosed by a firmament.
The sun, moon, and stars are IN the firmament.
So, there is no such thing as space.
Those are my assumptions.


You've added more questions and dialogue, and Ken has come in to denigrate me and mischaracterize my views, so I will reply to all of these things when I am able to do so.

[JPGettysburg]

Will all fall on deaf ears, as ignorant as they are, smackie. Just like the rest of the flat earthers, pop will not answer any question directly but rather evade w/vague answers. Flat earthers are truly the lowest form of human intelligence on this planet.
Not sure if I feel sorry for pop or not as he seems to be an otherwise nice guy.

No, I don't feel sorry for him... he himself accepted and embraced this overwhelmingly flawed concept. It's all on him. Sad part is that he will likely never accept the truth and come clean.

Ok.
Scientists aren't lying about this.
This is definitely not a thing.
HOWEVER, most left wing cult followers actually believe that Scientists are above reproach.
So next time you make fun of a "flat earther" make surw to poke fun of left-wing crazies as well.

[Softball Bat]

The dumb globe used to be the fringe idea, Smackie.

Until when? Cite your source.

Use Google.
Use Yahoo.
Use Bing.
Or use some other search engine.
Type in ancient cosmology, and go to images.

See many globes there?
You see a whole lot of... snow globes though, don't you?

Flat, stationary, enclosed by a firmament.


In Europe, I think the tide turned toward favoring a globe about 500 years ago.
"Science" started to gain the upper hand on "religion" around that time.

The measurements of the earth (diameter, circumference, etc.) have been looked into and computed.

What is the distance to the center of the earth, and how do you know this?

So has gravitational force, which explains why the water on this spinning ball doesn't go splashing into space.

Show me the proof you have that we are spinning.

OTOH, we have folks like you who claim to not know what the earth's shape is, but you know what it's not shaped like. And if "your side" has looked into this matter as thoroughly as you believe, why don't we have any data? What's the length, width, and depth of our planet? How far do I have to go in any direction to reach the ice fringe of Antarctica? Why has no one ever reported seeing the edge of the planet? How do you explain night time? What math & physics are used to explain earthly phenomena in a non-globe scenario? Citing of sources would be appreciated.

Night time is not difficult on a flat earth, Smackie.
The sun is an overhead light.
It moves further and further away from you until it disappears under the horizon.






It isn't a problem to recognize that something is in error without knowing for sure what the full truth really is.
I don't pretend to know things that I do not know.

I am interested in evidence.
I am interested in science.

I assume that it is not possible for humans to get to the edge of the earth. Or at least not get there and come back alive.
But that is just my speculation.
I don't pass it off as a fact.

I understand why you believe what you do, and none of the evidence that I or anyone else posts will change your belief since it's not evidence-based, so feel free to respond however you feel is appropriate. Just don't expect to be taken seriously due to your lack of trust (and evidence).

I assumed the globe was my home for 55 years.
About 10 years ago I started testing the globe.
It failed... BADLY.

It was only when I looked at science, and evidence, that I came to understand how stupid the idea of a globe is.
Water is clinging to the outside of a flying, spinning ball?

Really?

You make it sound like NASA, as an arm of the government, came up with the global earth as a means of controlling the masses. NASA is a relative newcomer to this party

Until the 1950s and '60s, it wasn't possible for humankind to positively verify where it lives.
But in those decades, rockets started going up, and then some folks were able to verify a whole lot.

Tell the masses they live in a stationary snow globe? God wins!
Or...
Lie to them.
Dupe them with phoney baloney stories, and studio productions about supposed moon escapades? Heathens win!

So it goes...


One day we will all make an appearance before the Truth.

[Softball Bat]

The curvature for the globe is just not there.

Numerous videos such as this one have been posted by me in the past.

[Smackie Chan]

I wish you nothing but the best, SB. Believe whatever you want.

[JPGettysburg]

Science got the upper hand on religion?

[Softball Bat]

I wish you nothing but the best, SB. Believe whatever you want.

Ditto.

[Sudden Sam]

Wow. In one of the collected Gould articles, those old books were mentioned. I didn’t expect a war to erupt.

To each his own beliefs.

[Roux]

Numerous videos such as this one have been posted by me in the past.

And have been explained to you in the past, but you choose to ignore the explanation.

Wiki to your rescue.

[Mikey]

I haven’t read through this entire thread, but one question comes to mind, and maybe this has already been raised. If Antarctica forms a circle, or whatever shape, around the edge of the flat Earth, then how do you account for those who have crossed it, either on land or in the air? Or even circumnavigating it by sea? They would have to be stupid enough to be fooled into thinking that they were crossing a continent instead of walking in a big circle (which would be tens of thousands of miles). Or maybe it’s a conspiracy by the arrogant “spherical earthers?”

And BTW, gravity may be a “theory” but it’s been pretty well demonstrated to work as a vector force acting in the direction of the center of mass.

[Roux]

If Antarctica forms a circle, or whatever shape, around the edge of the flat Earth, then how do you account for those who have crossed it, either on land or in the air?

There are flights over Antarctica where you can see for yourself that it is a continent and not the edge of the earth.

[Meat Head]

The edge is kinda like a mirror, when you get there it's like you are on the other side, which you are. Google won't tell the truth on this obviously. Don't be too quick to discount this shit too quickly.

I have never been there except on acid which enhances my credibility.

[Softball Bat]

Numerous videos such as this one have been posted by me in the past.

And have been explained to you in the past, but you choose to ignore the explanation.

Wiki to your rescue.

I am assuming you did not watch the video.
Or if you did, you did not digest it.

From the location the cameraman was viewing ----> to the lighthouse, on your globe, there is 347 feet of earth curvature.
The lighthouse is at an elevation of 277 feet.

If we are on a globe, the lighthouse would be under the horizon by 70 feet.
Yet the lighthouse is well above the horizon.
Not even close.

Refraction doesn't cut it.

The curvature for your globe is simply never there, and you want us to believe that water behaves in ways that we know water does not behave.

Is there a lab experiment you can point us to that shows water clinging to the outside of a flying, spinning ball?



#science

[Softball Bat]

I haven’t read through this entire thread, but one question comes to mind, and maybe this has already been raised. If Antarctica forms a circle, or whatever shape, around the edge of the flat Earth, then how do you account for those who have crossed it, either on land or in the air? Or even circumnavigating it by sea?

Is there a link for what you are describing?

I had a discussion with Lefty about this in one of the threads.

[Roux]

A friend of mine just got back from his 6th trip to Antarctica, he's an LSU geology professor. He would love to find an edge instead of a continent, that would be a scientific paper, a book, then a wealthy and immediate retirement. Alas, he reports that Antarctica is, in fact, a mere continent.

Pics from near the McMurdo Station:

[Mikey]

I haven’t read through this entire thread, but one question comes to mind, and maybe this has already been raised. If Antarctica forms a circle, or whatever shape, around the edge of the flat Earth, then how do you account for those who have crossed it, either on land or in the air? Or even circumnavigating it by sea?

Is there a link for what you are describing?

I had a discussion with Lefty about this in one of the threads.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-25/ ... /101097378

Is there a link describing anyone following the coast of Antarctica around a large circle, with the continent on the outside?

[Roux]

For just $50,000, you can see the curve of the earth flat earth with your own eyes.

[Softball Bat]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-25/ ... /101097378

Is there a link describing anyone following the coast of Antarctica around a large circle, with the continent on the outside?

A few years ago Lefty posted this link -----> https://lisablairsailstheworld.com/the-record

I told him that if the goal is to prove that we are on a globe, we would need to see something such as the following...


Day 1: Morning photo of departure location, photo of sun location, photo of clock showing date and time, photo(s) of vessel instrumentation verifying current vessel location, and map of Earth -- plotting current location on map.
Do the same in the evening.

Day 2: Repeat - morning and evening

Day 3: Repeat

Day 72: Repeat

Etc.


A website talking about what someone is said to have done, maybe with a few pics, doesn't do anything to prove the globe.

Like it or not, that's how it is.

[Mikey]

Sorry it's not following your particular protocol. Obviously nothing short of a continuous video would satisfy you, and even then probably not. But Guinness tends to research these things and they apparently are satisfied.

https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/ne ... 021-629909


Do you have anybody at all even claiming to circumnavigate inside the supposed Antarctic ring?