Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Here's a cool vid of what it looks like (Time lapse starts at about :50):
On southern circle, the sun is real.
On northern circle, the sun is just a reflection.
So far no flight cross the northern rim. No wonder, north pole doesn't exist.
Shouldn't you really be more worried about the major problems with the alledged circumfrence of your Sphere Earth theory and fixing the problems instead of focusing on something you don't understand? The curvature of your Earth changes hourly. Tell us why?
. Do you know why there are so many black people in Brazil? 43% of Brazilians are black or mulatto.
Again, we receive nothing interesting except attempts to somehow show that Rowbotham was a religious fundamentalist in contrast to his instructions of putting the bible under the severest of criticism and that truth should be emperically verificatied by experiment and investigation.
Quote from: Stash"To say that the Scriptures were not intended to teach science truthfully is, in substance, to declare that God Himself has stated, and commissioned His prophets to teach things which are utterly false!”
Totally out of context Stash. Rowbotham is responding those people who say that scripture was never meant to teach science, yet it is true, and that we should look past the FE and wrong science to get our truthful philosophy. That's a stupid argument, as rightly pointed out by Rowbotham.Quote"That of its diurnal and annual motion, and of its being one of an infinite number of revolving spheres, is equally false; and, therefore, the Scriptures, which negative these notions, and teach expressly the reverse, must in their astronomical philosophy at least be literally true. In practical science, therefore, atheism and denial of Scriptural teaching and authority have no foundation.”
Are you quoting random things that you see now? Rowbotham says that if astronomy is false and the truth reflects the bible, then the bible is the conclusion and therefore the RE science atheists have no foundation.QuoteSeems pretty clear to me he is not saying "if" the earth exists as described in the Bible, he is saying the earth "does" exist as described in the Bible.
It "seems pretty clear" that Rowbotham has directly stated several times that truth must be based on physical evidence and not faith.
He may have stated that truth must be based on physical evidence and not faith, but he doesn't practice what he preaches.
He references the 'firmament' many times, yet there is no physical evidence of such. He refers to how the Great Flood could never have worked on a globe earth and would only have worked on a flat plane - Seems he's using scripture to bolster a flat earth notion, not the other way around, again, without physical evidence.
And why only referencing Christian scripture? Are all of the other religious doctrines of the world incorrect and unsupported by flat earth?
You appear to have quoted statements from Rowbotham's chapter which say the same thing said above about how evidence supports the bible, with some random words bolded. HIS WORD. LITERALLY. You forgot the "REEEEEEEEE"
If the earth is flat in a way like the bible says then it is evidence that the bible has some form of authority behind it. Merely statements of fact.
QuoteThe work of Rowbotham is full of biblical citations and "proof" that the bible is literally true and inerrant. I call that religious fundamentalism.
Actually, he doesn't say that at all, and what you have said is merely the common peddled ignorance.
Rowbotham says that if physical evidence of the world supports the world depicted in the Bible then it suggests that the Bible may have some authority behind it.
Hardly the "Rrrrreeeee fundamentalism!!!" trash that is stated on this subject.
To the religious mind this matter is most important--it is indeed no less than a sacred question; for it renders complete the evidence that the Jewish and Christian Scriptures are absolutely true, and must have been communicated to mankind by an anterior and supernal Being. If after so many ages of mental struggling, of speculation and trial, of change and counterchange, we have at length discovered that all astronomical theories are false; that the earth is a plane, and motionless, and that the various luminaries above it are lights only and not worlds; and that these very facts have been declared and recorded in a work which has been handed down to us from the earliest times--from a time, in fact, when mankind had lived so short a period upon the earth that they could not have had sufficient experience to enable them to criticise and doubt, much less to invent and speculate--it follows that whoever dictated and caused such doctrines to be recorded and preserved to all generations must have been superhuman, omniscient, and to the earth and its inhabitants pre-existent. That Being could only be the Creator of the world, and His truth is recorded in the Sacred Writings. The Scriptures--the Bible, therefore, cannot be other than the word and teaching of God. Let it once be seen that such a conclusion is a logical necessity; that the sum of the purely practical evidence which has been collected compels us to acknowledge this, and we find ourselves in possession of a solid and certain foundation for all our future investigations.
That everything which the Scriptures teach respecting the material world is literally true will readily be seen. It is a very popular notion among modern astronomers that the stellar universe is an endless congeries of systems, of suns and attendant worlds, peopled with sentient beings analogous in the purpose and destiny of their existence to the inhabitants of this earth
...
Just as in bygone times a voice was heard to say that "a universal solvent cannot be held," so now an unostentatious, but terribly dangerous and destructive, cry has been raised that water is not convex but horizontal, which will work a revolution in science greater than the world has yet seen. It will do what has never yet been done, destroy the vain and flimsy structures of human ingenuity, and turn the hearts of philosophers and all grades of men of learning to the wisdom and consistency and demonstrable truths contained in the "Word of God," the Scriptures of the all-wise, long-patient, and, by philosophers, almost forgotten Creator of the world. A reverence for, and solemn attention to, the teachings of His dictated Word will rapidly grow and spread in all directions, and our men of science and learning will become the servants of their Creator, and the true friends of their fellow-men. Vain systems of science and false honours and applause will be swallowed up in an ever-spreading, all-influencing, all-inclusive, and reverential philosophy--which will become to all progressive minds the long-hoped-for true and universal religion.
Have you read what he actually believes on that topic? A summary of Rowbotham's views of religion and FET can be found here: https://wiki.tfes.org/Samuel_Rowbotham#Religion
Your "fundamentalism" holds untrue. Rowbotham says to put the bible under severest of criticism and that any evidence for the systems of the bible should be based on evidence rather than belief or faith.
The fundamentalist accusations are completely incorrect and ill researched. A typical smear attempt befitting of those who cannot present conclusive evidence for their case.
The fact is that what Rowbotham says in the above link is correct. If FE were true and the world was found to be of similar to depiction in the Bible, then it would provide physical evidence for the Bible, and that has nothing to do with "fundamentalist belief".
The RE are the religious fundamentalists here, spamming answers like the sinking ship effect that they know have contradictory results, and who continue to do so repeatedly as some sort of evidence despite the contradictory observations, videos, timelapse, &., being pointed out to them. A purely belief based system.
Many FE are religious fundamentalist.
How many?
How did you determine the number or percentage?
Are you barking from your butt hole?
In the RE superior mirage light bends down. That allows light to go over the curvature and reach the observer. Without curvature, light bending down would hit the ground or the surface of the sea, maybe the fish would see it, but not an observer sitting at same or higher altitude.It works in the same way. Light bends down. The key thing to remember is that the light from an object goes out in basically all directions except those blocked by the object.
So how does the superior mirage work in FE? Could you please describe how is light bending and what is causing it, a diagram would help.
e.g., for a RE:
The direct light path (blue) would go through Earth, but the refracted one (purple) would curve downwards.
Note that the curved light path is going out at a higher angle than the direct light path and appears at a higher angle, making the object look higher.
For a hypothetical and purely fictional FE:
Effectively the exact same thing.
The refracted light path goes out at a higher angle, it is refracted downwards and is observed at a higher angle.
Why is it not possible? It happens all the time on the Plane Earth.
You have yet to prove a curved surface projects a horizontal mirage.
A superior mirage can happen with any surface on this Plane Earth. It can happen with water or land. The surface will rise up and mask anything in the distance. If a building or boat is off in the distance, it will be masked and didn’t go over an imaginary curve. It was either blocked by the mirage or sailed into it and blended in. Boats’ going over a curve is just an illusion and a silly argument.
A superior mirage can happen with any surface on this Plane Earth. It can happen with water or land. The surface will rise up and mask anything in the distance. If a building or boat is off in the distance, it will be masked and didn’t go over an imaginary curve. It was either blocked by the mirage or sailed into it and blended in. Boats’ going over a curve is just an illusion and a silly argument.
The East/West sunrise/sunset direction is part of the same explanation for why the sun does not change size and is discussed at https://wiki.tfes.org/Equinox#A_Flat_Earth_Equinox
Read the second link for a description of perturbations. Newtonian gravity and the inverse squared law is used as a variable in the perturbation computations as the ideal.
Perturbations = Epicycles.
When I look through a telescope, all I see is a fuzzy dot. Scientists keep conveniently coming up with these photos that supposedly show the Earth and other planets to be round, but the rest of us have no way of verifying that they're anything other than pure fiction."
Or something along those lines.
My language is Bengali. May I send the text in my language.
What Ever,
None of that matters. You are deflecting because you are wrong. The Rogers center being visible destroys you Globe theory with a 3959 mile radius. What is your new Earth's Radius and the size of the new Heliocentric theory? The foundation for your current theory has been destroyed. So what's the new one?
