Proof the Globe Model is false

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Not sure, but I'd suspect the school curriculums are based on wanting to set up kids to be useful functioning and contributing members of society as opposed to basement dwelling internet weirdos.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 05:15:29 AM

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Not sure, but I'd suspect the school curriculums are based on wanting to set up kids to be useful functioning and contributing members of society as opposed to basement dwelling internet weirdos.

You have not even had time to watch the video just proves how " open minded " you globe believers are

How does teaching children what is correct and known rather than what is hypothesised and fabricated have any bearing on their social standing in society.

You talk nonsense like the majority of GLOBE BELIEVERS.

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

What has that to do with the Heliocentric Globe model?

But why do you repeat the video? Rubbish x rubbish = much wors rubbish I guess.

It is, however, quite irrelevant when it comes to the question of any "Proof the Globe Model is false"!

Maybe get your video maker to read

Continental crust is also less dense than oceanic crust, though it is considerably thicker; mostly 35 to 40 km versus the average oceanic thickness of around 7-10 km. About 40% of the Earth's surface is now underlain by continental crust.

 The resurrection of Legba is obviously real. 

Quote from: kennykirklan on July 01, 2017, 05:20:47 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 05:15:29 AM

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Not sure, but I'd suspect the school curriculums are based on wanting to set up kids to be useful functioning and contributing members of society as opposed to basement dwelling internet weirdos.

You have not even had time to watch the video just proves how " open minded " you globe believers are

How does teaching children what is correct and known rather than what is hypothesised and fabricated have any bearing on their social standing in society.

You talk nonsense like the majority of GLOBE BELIEVERS.

I'm glad we do teach hypothesised subject matter, such as electromagnetism, else we wouldn't have the successful electrical engineering graduates such as your good self.

You are right, I did dismiss the videos without watching them. In my experience YouTube videos posted Flat Earthers fall into two categories: irrelevant or bollocks. So I have become closed minded in that sense.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 05:15:29 AM

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

What has that to do with the Heliocentric Globe model?

But why do you repeat the video? Rubbish x rubbish = much wors rubbish I guess.

It is, however, quite irrelevant when it comes to the question of any "Proof the Globe Model is false"!

Maybe get your video maker to read

Quote

Continental crust is also less dense than oceanic crust, though it is considerably thicker; mostly 35 to 40 km versus the average oceanic thickness of around 7-10 km. About 40% of the Earth's surface is now underlain by continental crust.

Your missing the point we have only been able drill down 12 km so yet again their claims have not been verified.

And according to the above experiment above their model of the inner earth is incorrect but they still teach it in schools even though it is false.

Can you see the pattern an experiment is done that Proves their model false but some 23 years later our children are still being taught a false model that has yet to be verified.

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Wow!!  Experiments prove that we don't know as much about the earth as we though.

In other news, water is wet.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 05:23:25 AM

Quote from: kennykirklan on July 01, 2017, 05:20:47 AM

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 05:15:29 AM

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Not sure, but I'd suspect the school curriculums are based on wanting to set up kids to be useful functioning and contributing members of society as opposed to basement dwelling internet weirdos.

You have not even had time to watch the video just proves how " open minded " you globe believers are

How does teaching children what is correct and known rather than what is hypothesised and fabricated have any bearing on their social standing in society.

You talk nonsense like the majority of GLOBE BELIEVERS.

I'm glad we do teach hypothesised subject matter, such as electromagnetism, else we wouldn't have the successful electrical engineering graduates such as your good self.

You are right, I did dismiss the videos without watching them. In my experience YouTube videos posted Flat Earthers fall into two categories: irrelevant or bollocks. So I have become closed minded in that sense.

Just another example is navy lookouts. I think we should be glad that they are aware that the earth is a globe; that there is a curvature to the earth. They are then able to estimate the distance to the horizon according to their height above the level of the sea and are skilled at estimating the distance to ships, other objects and land. They often compare their sightings with those of the ship's radar. Their estimates are very close with those on the radar. If it wasn't for their training and experience we would not have those successful lookouts.

Besides, what is correct and known about a flat earth ? There is not even a correct flat earth map.

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

It’s taught because that’s how we perceive the world around us.  It fits our observations and calculations.

It’s be obvious to me that there isn’t a flat earth argument to be made merely with looking at horizons, sun rises, eclipses, etc.  Contrary to what a lot of FE believers think, there is nothing obvious about it.  It is very difficult to detect that the earth is flat by visual observation.  There currently aren't any analytical models that explain everything we observe about the world around us.  Hell, flat earthers can't even agree on the right models.  If it were really that obvious this forum wouldn't even exist...unless it was the Round Earth Society.  

There has to be more that explains the things we perceive and the things we calculate.  Find the answer to that and you have the scientific community on board and you’ll change the world.  Until then the world will go on being round and that’s what will be taught in our schools.

Full disclosure, I’m a round eather, as if you couldn’t already tell.

Mike

Your missing the point we have only been able drill down 12 km so yet again their claims have not been verified.

And according to the above experiment above their model of the inner earth is incorrect but they still teach it in schools even though it is false.

Can you see the pattern an experiment is done that Proves their model false but some 23 years later our children are still being taught a false model that has yet to be verified.

I really cannot work out what you problem is. Wikipedia say's

Conrad discontinuity
The Conrad discontinuity corresponds to the sub-horizontal boundary in continental crust at which the seismic wave velocity increases in a discontinuous way. This boundary is observed in various continental regions at a depth of 15 to 20 km, however it is not found in oceanic regions.

The Conrad discontinuity (named after the seismologist Victor Conrad) is considered to be the border between the upper continental crust and the lower one. It is not as pronounced as the Mohorovičić discontinuity, and absent in some continental regions. Up to the middle 20th Century the upper crust in continental regions was seen to consist of felsic rocks such as granite (sial, for silica-aluminium), and the lower one to consist of more magnesium-rich mafic rocks like basalt (sima, for silica-magnesium). Therefore, the seismologists of that time considered that the Conrad discontinuity should correspond to a sharply defined contact between the chemically distinct two layers, sial and sima.

However, from the 1960s onward this theory was strongly contested among geologists. The exact geological significance of the Conrad discontinuity is still not clarified. The possibility that it represents the transition from amphibolite facies to granulite facies metamorphism has been given some support from observations of the uplifted central part of the Vredefort Dome and the surrounding Kaapvaal craton.

See "This boundary is observed in various continental regions at a depth of 15 to 20 km".
That hole only reached about 12 km, so what's the big deal about not reaching the discontinuity?
Especially as we also have "however it is not found in oceanic regions."

But whatever the case this is totally irrelevant in any "Proof the Globe Model is false".
Whatever is inside the earth, it is still a huge Globe that
          rotates one in  23 hours, 56 minutes, 4.0916 seconds (on average) and
          orbits  the sun once in 365.242189 days (with respect to "fixed stars")
and any resistance to that claim is totally futile.

Have a nice  futile day  !

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 07:15:51 AM

Your missing the point we have only been able drill down 12 km so yet again their claims have not been verified.

And according to the above experiment above their model of the inner earth is incorrect but they still teach it in schools even though it is false.

Can you see the pattern an experiment is done that Proves their model false but some 23 years later our children are still being taught a false model that has yet to be verified.

I really cannot work out what you problem is. Wikipedia say's

Quote

Conrad discontinuity
The Conrad discontinuity corresponds to the sub-horizontal boundary in continental crust at which the seismic wave velocity increases in a discontinuous way. This boundary is observed in various continental regions at a depth of 15 to 20 km, however it is not found in oceanic regions.

The Conrad discontinuity (named after the seismologist Victor Conrad) is considered to be the border between the upper continental crust and the lower one. It is not as pronounced as the Mohorovičić discontinuity, and absent in some continental regions. Up to the middle 20th Century the upper crust in continental regions was seen to consist of felsic rocks such as granite (sial, for silica-aluminium), and the lower one to consist of more magnesium-rich mafic rocks like basalt (sima, for silica-magnesium). Therefore, the seismologists of that time considered that the Conrad discontinuity should correspond to a sharply defined contact between the chemically distinct two layers, sial and sima.

However, from the 1960s onward this theory was strongly contested among geologists. The exact geological significance of the Conrad discontinuity is still not clarified. The possibility that it represents the transition from amphibolite facies to granulite facies metamorphism has been given some support from observations of the uplifted central part of the Vredefort Dome and the surrounding Kaapvaal craton.

See "This boundary is observed in various continental regions at a depth of 15 to 20 km".
That hole only reached about 12 km, so what's the big deal about not reaching the discontinuity?
Especially as we also have "however it is not found in oceanic regions."

But whatever the case this is totally irrelevant in any "Proof the Globe Model is false".

So sorry for you but your Resistance to the Heliocentric Globe is Futile  

Whatever is inside the earth, it is still a huge Globe that
          rotates one in  23 hours, 56 minutes, 4.0916 seconds (on average) and
          orbits  the sun once in 365.242189 days (with respect to "fixed stars")
and any resistance to that claim is totally futile.

Have a nice  futile day  !

My problem is that as we have only drilled 12 km down into the Earth and we do not know what is past this point.

The above experiment proved what we thought we new about the Inner Earth to be false.

Over 20 years after this experiment the old incorrect/false model is still taught in schools.


Fact:

We have only drilled 12 km down;  as such any diagrams that show information deeper into the earth than 12 km are just hypothesis and fabrication which has never been verified.

My problem is that as we have only drilled 12 km down into the Earth and we do not know what is past this point.

The above experiment proved what we thought we new about the Inner Earth to be false.

Where does it prove "what we thought we knew about the Inner Earth to be false"?

Over 20 years after this experiment the old incorrect/false model is still taught in schools.

Who is saying that the "old . . . .  model is" incorrect?
And what has the material taught in schools got to do with any "Proof the Globe Model is false"?

Fact:

We have only drilled 12 km down;  as such any diagrams that show information deeper into the earth than 12 km are just hypothesis and fabrication which has never been verified.

No, it doesn't! Nothing is shown to be a fabrication.

We can learn many things without actually going there or seeing it with our own eyes.
I'm no geologist, and obviously you aren't either, but from what I have read no-one regards the theories of what is under that earth as "set in stone". They are still actively questioned.

But, none of this is even slightly relevant to the shape of the earth, whether it rotates or whether it orbits the sun!

The Flat Earth Societty claims

The Sun
The sun is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

Have you run a tape measure up to the sun to measure its height?
Have you somehow measured the diameter of the sun?

The Flat Earth Societty claims

The Planets
Rotoundity
Q. If the planets are round, why isn't the earth?
A. The earth is not a planet.

Size and Magnitude
Q. How big are the planets in the FE model?
A. Pretty small.

Solar System
Q. What does the Solar System look like in FET?
A. In FET the planets are revolving around the sun, while the sun itself revolves around the Northern Hub.

Retrograde Motion
Q. Why do the planets retrograde in the sky?

A. Retrograde motion occurs from the fact that the planets are revolving around the sun while the sun itself moves around the hub of the earth. This particular path the planets take makes it appear as if several of them make a loop along their journeys across the night sky.

Please note that the planets are moving very slowly around the sun and would not retrograde several times a day as might be implied by the above diagram. The diagram is for illustration purposes only. Several retrogrades a year would be more appropriate, depending on the planet.

The retrograde happens very slowly in the night sky, over a long period of time.

From: The Flat Earth Society Wiki, The Planets

Have you or any other flat earther been up to those planets and actually proved that they are  Pretty small ?
Have you or any other flat earther been up to those planets and actually proved that they are  orbiting as claimed ?

They are more ways of finding something out than going up to it and touching it!
It the case of what it deep under the earth it inferred from echoes, a bit like that way bats see.
Even so, it is well known that this information is still subject to imterpretataion.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 02, 2017, 04:09:02 AM

My problem is that as we have only drilled 12 km down into the Earth and we do not know what is past this point.

The above experiment proved what we thought we new about the Inner Earth to be false.

Where does it prove "what we thought we knew about the Inner Earth to be false"?

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile

Over 20 years after this experiment the old incorrect/false model is still taught in schools.

Who is saying that the "old . . . .  model is" incorrect?
And what has the material taught in schools got to do with any "Proof the Globe Model is false"?

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile

Fact:

We have only drilled 12 km down;  as such any diagrams that show information deeper into the earth than 12 km are just hypothesis and fabrication which has never been verified.

No, it doesn't! Nothing is shown to be a fabrication.

We can learn many things without actually going there or seeing it with our own eyes.
I'm no geologist, and obviously you aren't either, but from what I have read no-one regards the theories of what is under that earth as "set in stone". They are still actively questioned.

But, none of this is even slightly relevant to the shape of the earth, whether it rotates or whether it orbits the sun!

The Flat Earth Societty claims

Quote

The Sun
The sun is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

Have you run a tape measure up to the sun to measure its height?
Have you somehow measured the diameter of the sun?

The Flat Earth Societty claims

Quote from: the Flat Earth Society Wiki

The Planets
Rotoundity
Q. If the planets are round, why isn't the earth?
A. The earth is not a planet.

Size and Magnitude
Q. How big are the planets in the FE model?
A. Pretty small.

Solar System
Q. What does the Solar System look like in FET?
A. In FET the planets are revolving around the sun, while the sun itself revolves around the Northern Hub.

Retrograde Motion
Q. Why do the planets retrograde in the sky?

A. Retrograde motion occurs from the fact that the planets are revolving around the sun while the sun itself moves around the hub of the earth. This particular path the planets take makes it appear as if several of them make a loop along their journeys across the night sky.

Please note that the planets are moving very slowly around the sun and would not retrograde several times a day as might be implied by the above diagram. The diagram is for illustration purposes only. Several retrogrades a year would be more appropriate, depending on the planet.

The retrograde happens very slowly in the night sky, over a long period of time.

From: The Flat Earth Society Wiki, The Planets

Have you or any other flat earther been up to those planets and actually proved that they are  Pretty small ?
Have you or any other flat earther been up to those planets and actually proved that they are  orbiting as claimed ?

They are more ways of finding something out than going up to it and touching it!
It the case of what it deep under the earth it inferred from echoes, a bit like that way bats see.
Even so, it is well known that this information is still subject to imterpretataion.

So, Mr Resistance.is.Futile, you have proven nothing at all!

It quite clearly says in the video that I the OP originally posted what the experiment revealed contradicts what we thought we knew about geoology we have the layers and tempertures all wrong.

I have nothing against them teaching hypothesis/fabrication in schools.

It should be made clear that what they teach is just that (fabrication) and has not been verified.

They should not teach their hypothesis/fabrication like they are facts because  they are not.

The different layers within the Inner Earth are part of the Globe Model as such the Globe model we are all taught is false.

It quite clearly says in the video that I the OP originally posted what the experiment revealed contradicts what we thought we knew about geoology we have the layers and tempertures all wrong.

You say that like it's a bad thing.  If anything, scientists like putting models to the test and proving them wrong.  It's how they learn to make better models.

Also, the results of that one bore hole may or may not be representative of the results that might be found at different bore holes at other parts of the world.

I have nothing against them teaching hypothesis/fabrication in schools.

It should be made clear that what they teach is just that (fabrication) and has not been verified.

Sorry, but a hypothesis is not a fabrication.  It's an educated guess based on the available data.  In this case, much of the inner structure of the earth is based on many years of analysis seismic data.  This data is verified, to an extent, by the energy industry as they drill ever deeper for oil and gas resources.

They should not teach their hypothesis/fabrication like they are facts because  they are not.

The different layers within the Inner Earth are part of the Globe Model as such the Globe model we are all taught is false.

I think that you're confusing "false" with "incomplete".

It quite clearly says in the video that I the OP originally posted what the experiment revealed contradicts what we thought we knew about geoology we have the layers and tempertures all wrong.

Please quote the exact words where it says that.

I have nothing against them teaching hypothesis/fabrication in schools.

The different layers within the Inner Earth are part of the Globe Model as such the Globe model we are all taught is false.

"The different layers within the inner earth are" definitely not "part of the" Heliocentric Globe Model.

The Globe was accepted as the shape of the earth somewhere back iaround 500 to 300 BC and
the Heliocentric Globe Model for the solar system and stars became the preferred model from the middle 1500s to the 1700s.
Back then no-one had any idea of the inner structure or even the mass of the earth.
Earlier estimates of the mass of the earth based on the known density of surface rocks, these were far too low.

It was not until Henry Cavendish "weighed the earth" in his famous experiment in 1797/98 the the true mass and density were known.

No, the structure of the earth has nothing to do with the Heliocentric Globe Model.
And the quality of what it taught in schools is likewise totally irrelevant.

Quote from: Resistance.is.Futile on July 01, 2017, 05:15:29 AM

Why do they still teach the false model in our schools when the furthest we have ever drilled underground is 12 km
and this proved what we thought we knew about the inner earth to be false.

Wow!!  Experiments prove that we don't know as much about the earth as we though.

In other news, water is wet.

Not according to user321, seriously, he tried breaking it down to a molecular level when I claimed water to be wet.

Teh lulz.

Thanks for the vids OP.