and uh Why?

If I said that you were able to jump off a cliff and be able to fly, based upon one book written in 1800's that no scientific body has followed up since, would you believe me? If I were then to provide you with a lorry load of papers, all providing explanations that all support each other and the original book that leans towards the idea that you would be able to fly, would you not be more likely to believe me?

Simple experiment easily disproves this. Therefore, no. SHow me a simple experiment to prove the earth is round.

But a dull universe doesn’t sell books. A dull universe doesn’t afford the luxury of a sprawling estate. The public at large desires a vast complex universe full of mystery and magic.

I would think the opposite.  Wouldn't a model of the universe, which could suggest that the biblical story of creation was true, sell MORE books and provoke more interest than the RE universe?  Wouldn't governments/churches - especially in the past - be much more willing to fund research that could lead to proving the existence of God and the literal truth of the bible?

I would think the opposite.  Wouldn't a model of the universe, which could suggest that the biblical story of creation was true, sell MORE books and provoke more interest than the RE universe?  Wouldn't governments/churches - especially in the past - be much more willing to fund research that could lead to proving the existence of God and the literal truth of the bible?

I must note here that most Flat Earth proponents are non-theists. Samuel Birley Robotham himself was an athiest. None of his work in Earth Not a Globe was inspired by a religion. The four cornered earth described in the Bible may be flat, but it is vastly different than the current FE model. Most Flat Earth Proponents you will meet on these forums do not base their Flat Earth conclusion from religious texts.

If the Conspiracy were to have gone the religious angle, its books might have garnered some attention, but ultimately it wouldn't have been a hit. By the 1800's the world's media was already immersed in religion. Publishing a book supporting a religious topic would have hardly batted an eye.

The Conspiracy knew exactly what it was doing in fabricating its lies. Its theories were calculated to be intriguing, yet sensible enough that a common man might take a second look at the publication in the book store. As you can see, the idea of a Round Earth caught on. Today children are brainwashed with Round Earth propaganda at the age of three. The entire world is so obsessed with the idea of a Round Earth that is is much too late for the Flat Earth to make a comeback.

Round Earthers are so adamant about the shape of the earth, yet they cannot show one iota of proof to support their claims. The earth is round just because. It's an inherent belief stronger than any religion. A religion so strong that a Round Earther never questions the shape of the earth even once in their life. At least the idea of God is questioned.

I must note here that most Flat Earth proponents are non-theists. Samuel Birley Robotham himself was an athiest. None of his work in Earth Not a Globe was inspired by a religion. The four cornered earth described in the Bible may be flat, but it is vastly different than the current FE model. Most Flat Earth Proponents you will meet on these forums do not base their flat earth beliefs from religious texts.

If the Conspiracy were to have gone the religious angle, its books might have garnered some attention, but ultimately it wouldn't have been a hit. By the 1800's the world's media was already immersed in religion. Publishing a book supporting a religious topic would have hardly batted an eye.

The Conspiracy knew exactly what it was doing in fabricating its lies. Its theories were calculated to be intriguing, yet sensible enough that a common man might take a second look at the publication in the book store. As you can see, the idea of a Round Earth caught on. Today children are brainwashed with Round Earth propaganda at the age of three. The entire world is so obsessed with the idea of a Round Earth that is is much too late for the Flat Earth to make a comeback.

1) I don't think "The Conspiracy" knew anything... or is it now a sentient being?
2) It's not about making a comeback, it's about scientific advances.  Scientific experiments (such as the Cavendish experiment), as well as easily observable phenomena (ships hull, curvature of the horizon, et cetera), confirms the earth as a sphere, so long as the earth is not an anomaly of almost every pattern that can be observed in our universe.  The FE theory relies on this.
3) I have no further argument about the logic behind the conspiracy as it isn't going anywhere.

Round Earthers are so adamant about the shape of the earth, yet they cannot show one iota of proof to support their claims. The earth is round just because. It's an inherent belief stronger than any religion. A religion so strong that a Round Earther never questions the shape of the earth even once in their life. At least the idea of God is questioned.

1) Support above.  How 'bout yours? I heard you say in one thread that one of Rowbotham's experiments could not be explained by the RE model.  Im interested to hear what he did and the conclusions he drew.
2) Nobody ever went to war over the shape of the earth.
3) I would argue that the FE model is founded on blind faith rather than the RE model.  Read this article by your former president Charles Johnson:
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm

He talks about how senseless the RE theory is, just as you are, without giving a single reason why he believes that.  It must have been hard for that author to write 7 pages about nothing but speculation and denunciation.

I personally like this quote:

"Wherever you find people with a great reservoir of common sense," he says, "they don't believe idiotic things such as the earth spinning around the sun. Reasonable, intelligent people have always recognized that the earth is flat."

He pauses for a sip of coffee, his eyes sparkling with animation.

Quote from: GeoJim on March 06, 2007, 11:48:45 AM

If I said that you were able to jump off a cliff and be able to fly, based upon one book written in 1800's that no scientific body has followed up since, would you believe me? If I were then to provide you with a lorry load of papers, all providing explanations that all support each other and the original book that leans towards the idea that you would be able to fly, would you not be more likely to believe me?

Simple experiment easily disproves this. Therefore, no. SHow me a simple experiment to prove the earth is round.

Become an astronaut, then you will see a near spherical earth with your own eyes.

Quote from: deathtrekkie on March 05, 2007, 07:26:38 PM

ok, ok, ok fine! still, why does the government want to invent this conspiracy?

The Government is not aware of the Conspiracy that operates within its own space programs.

The Conspiracy is operated by an elite group of conspirators who divert NASA's multi-billion dollar budget into their personal bank accounts. In exchange, they give the nation a few lousy Photoshops of a round earth and the occasional fireworks show.

Then why do all the other governments participate in the cover up?

2) It's not about making a comeback, it's about scientific advances.  Scientific experiments (such as the Cavendish experiment), as well as easily observable phenomena (ships hull, curvature of the horizon, et cetera), confirms the earth as a sphere, so long as the earth is not an anomaly of almost every pattern that can be observed in our universe.  The FE theory relies on this.

The Cavendish Experiment and the Sinking Ship effect is perfectly in tune with FE. These observations have been brought up countless times. The mechanisms were accurately described in Samuel Birley Robotham's book over one hundred years ago.

3) I have no further argument about the logic behind the conspiracy as it isn't going anywhere.

Then, you must admit that there is considerable profit incentive to perpetuating the Round Earth Conspiracy.

2) Nobody ever went to war over the shape of the earth.

Maybe not war, but there have been lawsuits over the shape of the world.

3) I would argue that the FE model is founded on blind faith rather than the RE model.  Read this article by your former president Charles Johnson:

Charles Johnson describes his reasons for believing in a Round Earth in his quarterly newsletter entitled Flat Earth News. There is a Newsletter archive in the Information Repository. Some of his theological arguments may be a bit iffy, but his scientific arguments are certainly sound.

Become an astronaut, then you will see a near spherical earth with your own eyes.

Astronauts do not exist, sorry.

Then why do all the other governments participate in the cover up?

The other governments of the world are not aware of the Conspiracy that operates within its own space programs. When a nation reaches a certain level of advancement, and is interested in starting a space program, the Conspiracy steps in to offer them a helping hand with its infrastructure and rocket technology. If the country is an American ally, it will offer help under the name of NASA. If the country is a Russian ally it will offer its help under the name of the RKA.

After gaining the foreign nation's trust the Conspiracy plants its agents in key administrative roles of the new space agency. It really only takes two or three conspirators in each space agency to perpetuate the illusion of space travel. The rest of the space agency is kept in the dark, building what they're told to build and telling the media what they're told to tell. With each country the Conspiracy has under its belt, the more money it can extort. The more money it extorts, the more powerful it becomes.

By keeping tabs on the advancement and technology levels of the countries of the world it can predict when one is ready to venture into space. By playing its hand at key moments the Conspiracy reinforces its two hundred year old propaganda. Today the belief of Round Earth is so strong that it does not matter if Joe Scientician in a foreign nation writes a paper revealing the true shape of the world. He will be laughed at. If Joe Scientician somehow acquires high altitude pictures of the Flat Earth he will be labeled a fraud and a charlatan.

The Cavendish Experiment and the Sinking Ship effect is perfectly in tune with FE. These observations have been brought up countless times. The mechanisms were accurately described in Samuel Birley Robotham's book over one hundred years ago.

Care to respond to the last section of what I said?

It's not about making a comeback, it's about scientific advances.  Scientific experiments (such as the Cavendish experiment), as well as easily observable phenomena (ships hull, curvature of the horizon, et cetera), confirms the earth as a sphere, so long as the earth is not an anomaly of almost every pattern that can be observed in our universe.  The FE theory relies on this.

Why is Earth an anomaly to the rest of the universe?

Then, you must admit that there is considerable profit incentive to perpetuating the Round Earth Conspiracy.

I don't see how you interpreted what I said the way you did.  I simply mean I have my opinion and you have yours, and neither of us is going to change the other's mind because there's no real proof either of us can provide; this argument is based on pure speculation.  But continue twisting my words around however you please.  I'm getting used to it.

Maybe not war, but there have been lawsuits over the shape of the world.

Reference? (So long as it's from the past century)

Charles Johnson describes his reasons for believing in a Round Earth in his quarterly newsletter entitled Flat Earth News. There is a Newsletter archive in the Information Repository. Some of his theological arguments may be a bit iffy, but his scientific arguments are certainly sound.

Care to point me directly to one of his "sound" scientific arguments?

Last century?  No, won't have any luck there.  Actually, the lawsuits he's referring to were for fraud and libel that just happened to involve Rowbotham and some scientist I forget the name of; the lawsuits didn't directly involve the concept of a flat Earth.

Why is Earth an anomaly to the rest of the universe?

Your argument is an analogy in favor of roundity. It is a favorite "argument," in support of the earth's spherical form. Astronomer John Wrottesley Wallace once poised to the Flat Earth Society "that as all the heavenly bodies are worlds, and visibly round, may, not the earth be so necessarily, seeing that it is one of the same category?"

This is only seemingly plausible. In reality it is a piece of self-deception. It must first be proved that the stars are worlds. To do this, or to make it even remotely possible that they are so, it must first be proved that they are millions of miles distant from the earth, and from each other, and are hundreds or thousands of miles in diameter. By plane trigonometry, in special connection with carefully measured base lines, Samuel Birley Robotham has demonstrated and placed beyond all power of doubt that the sun, moon, and stars are all within a distance of a few thousand miles from the surface of the earth. Therefore they are very small objects. Therefore not worlds. And therefore, from analogy, offer no logical reason or pretext for concluding that the earth is a sphere.

Care to point me directly to one of his "sound" scientific arguments?

You may read the arguments of former president Charles K. Johnson for yourself in the Newletter Archive thread of the Information Repository: