17761

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Where did my thread go?

« on: April 25, 2007, 01:30:36 PM »

First, why woukd these governments want to hide the shape of the Earth?

The Government isn't making the money. The Government is not aware of the Conspiracy which hides within its own space programs.

I get the feeling that the space toruists with more money than they could possibly hope to spend could decline that much money,

Those billionaire space tourists were simply tricked into believing they were on a rocket flight to space. They flushed their money down the toilet and the Conspiracy took it gladly.

It can and has been done before: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Cadets

17762

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Where did my thread go?

« on: April 25, 2007, 01:22:14 PM »

I can draw a model of the earth and the moon which explains (and predicts) full moons, no moon, the moon visible during the day, and lunar eclipses. I challenge you to do the same

Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham could mathematically and accurately predict lunar eclipses and its phases. Consult Chapter 11 of Earth Not a Globe and scroll to the bottom.

All of Astronomy is based on the assumption of the Earth as a Globe. How do you think Astronomers got the Astronomical Unit? I'll tell you:

Each astronomer throughout history make accurate measurements in relation to the distance of the Earth and Sun by using triangulation between two distant points on Earth, observing the Sun and measuring the angles in relation to the sea-level of the Earth. An astronomer could either triangulate the Sun's distance from the Earth to 93 million miles or 3,000 miles. It entirely depends on whether the earth appears as flat or round in the author's triangulation equations.

It is impossible to judge a celestial distance by looking at a distant Sun through a telescope alone. The triangulation equations require two different observers who are separated far enough away so that the angles of the Sun and Venus are slightly different. It is necessary in triangulation to require two known points in space. Look at how GPS works.

For example, this link shows us how modern Round Earth science calculated the distance between the Earth and Sun using the transit of Venus. You will immediately notice that the equations are highly dependent on the assumption of a Round Earth.

If we take those same triangulation equations and use them under the assumption of a Flat Earth and do away with the compensation extrapolation for the curvature of the Earth, assuming a flat surface, the final equation for the distance between the Earth and Sun becomes

rT = (PT / PV)2/3 (1 - eT cos ET) / (1 - eV cos Ev)

When we plug in the numbers from that link, the figure 'rT', the distance between the Earth and Sun, is equated out to an approximation close to 3,000 miles.

Finally, the angular size of the sun is 0.5°. Using this fact with a distance to the sun of 3000 miles, gives the sun's diameter: 32 miles.

Do you see now how the entire cosmos is drastically affected by an assumption?

No, I wouldn't. I value piece of mind over monetary gains. If you think money buys happiness you are a fool.

If you blindly and dogmatically follow the opinions and beliefs of others, then you are the fool. Sorry to say.

17763

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Where did my thread go?

« on: April 25, 2007, 12:54:18 PM »

(1) Departing boats gradually sink below the horizon, as do buildings on the shore from the viewpoint of the sailors. Admittedly this only proves the earth is round right where you are--the frisbee hypothesis.

The sinking ship effect people see is a natural law of perspective. Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham found that the vanishing point of the horizon is slightly below the edge of the horizon due the mean combined height of the waves. Although the waves might reach a maximum of 44 inches in height above the true edge of the horizon, it has a profound effect.

This means that as the ship shrinks into the horizon it must also sink into mean height of the combined waves. The smaller the ship gets into the distance, the more the waves at the false edge of the horizon will obscure its hull.

Consult Chapter 14 of Earth Not a Globe.

Consider a 3D model with an infinite perfectly flat plane. Any receding object on the surface gets smaller and smaller the more distant it gets, right? At the edge of the horizon, any imperfect increase in height, no matter how minuscule, will obscure the object from the bottom up as it shrinks into the distance.

Pure Geometry.

-

(2) "The sphericity of the earth is proved by the evidence of ... lunar eclipses,"

The moon glows with light from the sun, reflected off the Earth. Different parts of the Earth are more reflective than others (the seas, the polar cap, the ice wall, for example). Sometimes, the position of the sun (which has the effect of a spotlight) means that only very low-reflective or non-reflective parts of the Earth's surface are illuminated, so the moon is abnormally dark.

There is no evidence that the shadow on the moon comes from a spherical earth.

The constellations shift relative to the horizon as you move north and south around the globe.

The motes of the stars are moving in various patterns, caught in each other's gravitational vectors, rotating around imaginary points in space, common barycenters in accordance with Newton's laws. Predictable lights in the skies say nothing about the shape of the Earth.

Sorry, you're wrong. Common sense is what tells us that the world is flat.

Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham, a notable astronomer and medical doctor, performed a number of experiments which proved the world was flat. Perhaps you should look up his book Earth: Not a Globe.

Right. They covered it up because making one of the most significant scientific breakthroughs in the history of man would 'just have been another name in the history books'.

Would you hide the shape of the Earth in exchange for limitless wealth?

I would.

17764

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Science

« on: April 25, 2007, 12:31:54 PM »

http://www-atdp.berkeley.edu/1522/students/angel/kokocrater.hike/koko4.jpg

That picture was taken with the wrong lens type. Not to mention we've seen it posted on this forum at least a dozen times already.

-

If a Round Earth did exist, ambiguous curvature wouldn't even be seen until 60,000 feet in altitude.

Every single day we get people on this forum who think they can see curvature from the beach, a mountain, or any airplane. The Flat Earth Society has a number pilots on this forum who constantly give direct personal quotes attesting they have never seen curvature.

I myself have been on an international flight and I've never seen curvature when comparing the horizon to a straightedge. I've even gone so far as to ask passengers near me if they could discern curvature. None of them could.

17765

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Where did my thread go?

« on: April 25, 2007, 12:05:53 PM »

Mellenia? Are you kidding me?

Before the age of space exploration every single society since the history of time believed in a Round Earth. The people of kitty hawk believed it. Columbus believed it. Magellan believed it. The people of the Middle Ages believed it. The Greeks and the Babylonians believed it. The Romans, Chinese, and Celts believed it. Ancient Egypt believed it. No society ever believed the world was flat. No person has ever set out to prove the earth as round. Historian Christine Garwood just recently published a book on the subject. She found that no society or civilization throughout the annals of time has ever, except for the Flat Earth Society in the late 19th century, once amused the idea of a Flat Earth.

In fourteen hundred and ninety-two,
Columbus sailed the ocean blue.
He took three ships with him, too,
And called aboard his faithful crew.
Mighty, strong and brave was he
As he sailed across the open sea.
Some people still thought the world was flat!
Can you even imagine that?

Does the brainwashing sound familiar?

The Round Earth is the primitive shape of the world. Not the Flat Earth.

-

When the Royal Astronomical Society patented and sent the first large payload rocket into space they discovered the Flat Earth for themselves and concocted a plan designed to extort limitless space exploration dollars from the governments of the world. Since everyone already dogmatically believed in a Round Earth, whatever fish eye pictures they provided were immediately and dogmatically accepted as accurate. That's all.

It is a much more profitable scheme than the limited fame they would have received from publishing the existence of the Flat Earth. The RAS would have just been another name in the history books if it had done that. Through continuing to perpetuate the idea of a Round Earth, and draining nations out of trillions of dollars of space exploration dollars, this small group of Conspirators has guaranteed themselves virtually unlimited power and wealth.

17766

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Such a far-reaching conspiracy...

« on: April 25, 2007, 10:53:07 AM »

If you really want proof, you are welcome to do the following:

Step 1. Look outside your window

Step 2. Read the FAQ

Step 3. Read the book "Earth Not a Globe" by Dr. Samuel Birley Rowbotham

Step 4. Read the book "One hundred proofs the Earth is not a Globe" by William Carpenter

Step 5. Read the back-issues of Flat Earth News Quarterly

Step 6. Read the book "Flatland" by Edwin A. Abbott

Step 7. Read The book "The terrestrial plane" by Frederick H. Cook

Step 8. Read the book "Universal gravitation a universal fake" by Charles S. DeFord

Step 9. Read the book "Does the earth rotate?" by William Edgell

Step 10. Read the book "Earth not a globe: scientifically, geometrically, philosophically demonstrated" by Henry J. Goudey

Step 11. Read the book "The book of light" by Gilbert Johnson

Step 12. Read the book "Unpopular truth against popular error in reference to the shape of the earth." by Charles W. Morse

Step 13. Read the book "A challenge from the earth-flattening society" by Richard A. Proctor

Step 14. Read the book "The Earth: A Plane" by John E. Quinlan

Step 15. Read the book "He knew earth is round, but his proof fell flat" by Robert J Schadewald

Step 16. Read the book "The view from the edge; on the necessity of the flat earth" by John P. Sisk

Step 17. Read the book "Is the earth a whirling globe?" by Carl Albert Smith

Step 18. Read the book "Answers to the common 'proofs' that the earth is a globe" by Chester M. Shippey

Step 19. Read the book "In defense of the square peg." by Irving Wallace

Step 20. Read the book "The shape of the earth; some proofs for the spherical shape of the earth given in astronomical and geographical text-books examined, and shown to be unsound" by Arthur V. White

Step 21. Read the book "The Flat Earth and her moulder" by Ossipoff H. Woofson

Step 22. Come to the conclusion of a Flat Earth

17767

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: TOM BISHOP DEAD?!

« on: April 24, 2007, 10:56:37 PM »

Welcome back Tom!  And you've converted?Huh?

Glad to be back.

And, for your concern of my converting, why would I do a thing like that? It is glaringly obvious that there is no real evidence for a Round Earth. Just a lot of hearsay and foolish idealism.

I believe the earth is a stationary plane; that it rests upon water; and that there is no such thing as its rotation around the sun, no such thing as the earth's axis or the earth's roundity. It is a lot of silly rot, born in the wild fantasies of the ancient greeks ... Neither do I believe there is any such thing as the universal law of gravitation. I believe that is a lot of rot, too.

There is no such thing!

17768

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: TOM BISHOP DEAD?!

« on: April 24, 2007, 10:35:14 PM »

I simply chose to give myself moderation powers over these forums. That's all.

But, don't worry. I plan to stick around here until it is proven beyond the power of doubt that the earth is a whirling globe.

Warmly,
Tom Bishop