What's wrong with a round earth?

  • 29 Replies
  • 4760 Views
What's wrong with a round earth?
« on: July 18, 2010, 03:03:18 PM »
The majority of topics here are all about RE believers coming up with new things proving there is no FE while the FE people come up with new ideas to prove they're somehow right.

But why aren't RE people right? Why can't the earth be round? The obvious answer is "go outside and look!"
But of course, that doesn't prove anything. Simply going onto google earth and going down to eye-level shows that it apperas flat when so close!

So here's the deal: can you FE people show me something that is only explainable in a flat world? Something that cannot be explained in a round one?


?

Atheist PhD

  • 101
  • God is not real and the earth is not flat
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2010, 03:38:54 PM »
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Experimental+Evidence

Could you maybe cite something you didn't post?  Or, perhaps show us something from an accepted, peer reviewed scientific journal.  IF you give me ONE scientist who has published in any national science review, that was accepted by any formal academic committee, I'll accept it.
If you show me your theories, I'll show you mine.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17934
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2010, 03:41:30 PM »
Quote
Could you maybe cite something you didn't post?

How am I supposed to reference evidence if I can't post it?  ???

Quote
Or, perhaps show us something from an accepted, peer reviewed scientific journal.

There's a peer review in the scientific journal, The English Mechanic. See my above link.

?

Atheist PhD

  • 101
  • God is not real and the earth is not flat
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2010, 04:05:06 PM »
Quote
Could you maybe cite something you didn't post?

How am I supposed to reference evidence if I can't post it?  ???

Quote
Or, perhaps show us something from an accepted, peer reviewed scientific journal.

There's a peer review in the scientific journal, The English Mechanic. See my above link.

HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?
If you show me your theories, I'll show you mine.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17934
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2010, 04:05:42 PM »
Truth has no expiration date.

?

Atheist PhD

  • 101
  • God is not real and the earth is not flat
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2010, 04:11:05 PM »
Truth has no expiration date.

GREAT come back, I am now totally convinced... NOT...
If you show me your theories, I'll show you mine.

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2010, 04:36:43 PM »
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Experimental+Evidence

I'll go over why these don't work:

Quote
It is proven that the ship does not sink behind a hill of water, but that it is actually perspective which hides it. This demonstrates that the earth is not a globe. There have been experiments where a half-sunken ship has been restored by simply looking at it through a telescope, showing that it is not actually hiding behind a "hill of water": http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Ships+appear+to+sink+as+they+recede+past+the+horizon

Do you not comprehend perspective? Things can't hide behind vanishing points, or ever reach them - you can think of it like zeno's paradox. Looking at the sail would make the ship bottom appear smaller (by a hair), however moving your view downwards would reverse the effect.

Quote
http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/cc/cc21.htm
Didn't bother to read through all of this, but I'm really not convinced. There are hundreds of stories of sailors seeing ships go under the curvature, however you of course only listen to the few articles with opposing views.

Quote
Tom Bishop conclusively demonstrates that the earth is flat here: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18114.msg319626#msg319626
First off, I want to say that your math is wrong. I ended up with around 190-200 feet that should be obscured. I really doubt you could see anything 34 curved miles away. Have any pictures to show?

Quote
Professor Mark Fonstad of Southwest Texas University mathematically demonstrates the earth's flatness here: http://www.improb.com/airchives/paperair/volume9/v9i3/kansas.html
What does this have to do with a flat earth? Topology is not measured in height from the bottom of the earth! It's measured from sea-level, and thus equaling a flat surface.
Quote
There are further experiments which demonstrate a Flat Earth in the book Zetetic Cosmogony by Thomas Winship: http://books.google.com/books?id=GzkKAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA#PPP9,M1
I'm not going to read through this monster! If you point out some key points I'll look into them however.

Quote
Daniel Shenton has demonstrated it here on the Old Bedford Canal: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=34316.msg841118#msg841118

What? He said he did not see a drop, that's not proof! Perhaps I'm missing something here, is that whole argument just that 1 paragraph?

Anyways, all that other stuff following seems to be from 1900 or something. I'm surprised you listen to people then, but not the ancients - who even then knew the world was round.

« Last Edit: July 18, 2010, 04:51:58 PM by pubby8 »

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2010, 04:47:18 PM »
Truth has no expiration date.

unfortunately the bedford level experiment expired a long long time ago.

please also tell us who peer reviewed that article.

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2010, 05:03:25 PM »
I still don't get why 5 shoddy articles from a hundred years ago is more conclusive than all the articles and proof written against FE on these forums.

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2010, 06:26:44 PM »
Truth has no expiration date.
Never does blind allegiance to falsehood.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2010, 09:34:42 PM »
There's a peer review in the scientific journal, The English Mechanic. See my above link.
That is not peer review. That is general description of someone doing something. He went, he watched, he saw. And that's all. You know, I guess he also just had bad eyesight as Rowbotham.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

*

AdmiralAckbar

  • 523
  • Its a trap!
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2010, 10:57:22 PM »
Truth has no expiration date.

It does when it's not the truth.

Various religions are starting to lose a lot of support, their "truth" is slowly dieing out to atheists, theists, and a lack of social structure that requires an active role in your religion.

Could we get something a little more recent?

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • Punk rawk.
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #13 on: July 19, 2010, 03:34:42 AM »
Try googling Zetetic and see what comes up. It has nothing to do with science, it means skeptic. Just because you're a "skeptic" of someone doesn't mean you're right. Look at the wonderful and awesome state of Arizona. The ENTIRE federal government is skeptical of the bill we passed. They and several politicians and police officers are suing Arizona over it. If you asked most of them, they haven't read this bill. They actually have no idea what they're talking about above beyond "they know they're right." It's like the "Zetetic scientists" on this website. They cant tell you why the Earth is flat, but they can tell you why they think it is. It isn't right, but in their head it is.

*

Raver

  • 777
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #14 on: July 19, 2010, 03:57:25 AM »
TB could you remove the note at the bottom saying the following:


Quote
None of the above have been contradicted by any Round Earther battling for his cause in all of the years of the Flat Earth Society. Given the above facts, and the basic pretense that anyone with two eyes can see that the earth appears flat, the burden of proof is on any Round Earther to prove their oddball theory correct.

The bold bit is a blatant lie, if that is what your scientific aproach is like then it is no wonder nobody here takes you seriously.
Quote from: Gen. Douchebag
Quote from: Raver
Why? You a pedo out for delicious loli?
Sure, whatever

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • Punk rawk.
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2010, 04:26:12 AM »
Truth has no expiration date.
Ancient Greeks knew it was fact that a god pulled the Sun across the sky on a chariot. We've kind of proven that wrong. That kind of proves you wrong. Why don't you stare out into Mandalay bay some more and spew some more first hand testimonial that the Earth is flat.

*

AdmiralAckbar

  • 523
  • Its a trap!
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2010, 08:56:16 AM »
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Experimental+Evidence

"
A photograph can not 'imagine' nor lie!"

"

Obvious Photoshop is obvious. So this guy can prove something with photos but we can't, and suddenly you believe him? Please be as skeptic to your own sources as your are to us Tom.

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #17 on: July 19, 2010, 10:05:46 AM »
Quote
Could you maybe cite something you didn't post?

How am I supposed to reference evidence if I can't post it?  ???

This is what FE'ers are best at. Picking apart the syntax of your post while completely understanding what you meant to ask, and ignoring the question at hand.

Get used to it.

*

AdmiralAckbar

  • 523
  • Its a trap!
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #18 on: July 19, 2010, 10:33:39 AM »
Quote
Could you maybe cite something you didn't post?

How am I supposed to reference evidence if I can't post it?  ???

This is what FE'ers are best at. Picking apart the syntax of your post while completely understanding what you meant to ask, and ignoring the question at hand.

Get used to it.

Which begs the question, are they really that dumb? or are they really that bad at trolling

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #19 on: July 19, 2010, 10:56:19 AM »
Quote
Could you maybe cite something you didn't post?

How am I supposed to reference evidence if I can't post it?  ???

This is what FE'ers are best at. Picking apart the syntax of your post while completely understanding what you meant to ask, and ignoring the question at hand.

Get used to it.

Which begs the question, are they really that dumb? or are they really that bad at trolling

I'm sure they're very intelligent people. They just employ a simple tactic.

"If I can't be right, make the other guy look wrong."
« Last Edit: July 19, 2010, 10:59:27 AM by Ranger 3 »

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #20 on: July 19, 2010, 11:45:20 AM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?

*

AdmiralAckbar

  • 523
  • Its a trap!
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #21 on: July 19, 2010, 12:50:39 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?

Einstein's work was built upon and modernized as necessary. So his work is timeless. Someone trying to prove the Earth is flat that hasn't been taken seriously since hundreds of years ago. Yes, 1926 is outdated.

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2010, 01:03:24 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?

 Yes.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.

?

Atheist PhD

  • 101
  • God is not real and the earth is not flat
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #23 on: July 19, 2010, 03:07:55 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?

The works would be outdated, IF, no one had been working to improve on them, validate them, or apply them to REAL science, sure.
If you show me your theories, I'll show you mine.

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #24 on: July 19, 2010, 03:15:20 PM »
Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?

Only if they've been proven wrong.

Bedford Level Experiment as a proof of a flat earth has been proven wrong.

Bedford Level Experiment as a proof of a flat earth is outdated.

English Mechanic article citing the bedford level experiment is outdated. (And was it ever peer reviewed?)

?

Atheist PhD

  • 101
  • God is not real and the earth is not flat
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #25 on: July 19, 2010, 03:45:10 PM »
Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?

Only if they've been proven wrong.

Bedford Level Experiment as a proof of a flat earth has been proven wrong.

Bedford Level Experiment as a proof of a flat earth is outdated.

English Mechanic article citing the bedford level experiment is outdated. (And was it ever peer reviewed?)

Of course "peer reviewed" in the English Mechanic is like being "peer reviewed" on The Onion website today.  SMILE
If you show me your theories, I'll show you mine.

*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2010, 03:49:43 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?
Yes.
Nice. BTW, what's so magical about 1926?

?

Atheist PhD

  • 101
  • God is not real and the earth is not flat
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2010, 05:55:06 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?
Yes.
Nice. BTW, what's so magical about 1926?

That was about the time when the LAST reliable science publication, the English Mechanic, if you can call it that, was published that was peer reviewed and mentioned Flat Earth. According to Tom.
If you show me your theories, I'll show you mine.

Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #28 on: July 19, 2010, 06:02:57 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?
Yes.
Nice. BTW, what's so magical about 1926?

That was about the time when the LAST reliable science publication, the English Mechanic, if you can call it that, was published that was peer reviewed and mentioned Flat Earth. According to Tom.
Oh, and just to whip the dead horse: The English Mechanic was not peer-reviewed, ever. TB posts that a peer review is someone else looking over what you wrote, not seeming to understand what Science means by a peer review.

In summary, the scientific value of the works that FE cited is negligible.
Keep it serious, Thork. You can troll, but don't be so open. We have standards

?

zork

  • 3319
Re: What's wrong with a round earth?
« Reply #29 on: July 19, 2010, 09:23:48 PM »
HOW about ONE that was Published AFTER 1926.... You do know a LOT has been learned since 1926, right?

Einstein's most famous works were published before 1926. Does that mean they are outdated?
Yes.
Nice. BTW, what's so magical about 1926?
It has 6 and 9 in it.
Rowbotham had bad eyesight
-
http://thulescientific.com/Lynch%20Curvature%202008.pdf - Visually discerning the curvature of the Earth
http://thulescientific.com/TurbulentShipWakes_Lynch_AO_2005.pdf - Turbulent ship wakes:further evidence that the Earth is round.