Give me one decent reason for believing the Earth is whirling globe

The system of Copernicus was admitted to be merely an assumption, temporary and incapable of demonstration. The following is a direct quote from Copernicus himself:

"It is not necessary that hypotheses should be true, or even probable; it is sufficient that they lead to results of calculation which agree with calculation. Neither let anyone, so far as hypotheses are concerned, expect anything certain from astronomy, since that science can afford nothing of the kind, lest, in case he should adopt for truth, things feigned for another purpose, he should leave this science more foolish than he came. The hypothesis of the terrestrial motion was nothing but an hypothesis, valuable only so far as it explained phenomena, and not considered with reference to absolute truth or falsehood."

Please, Tom Bishop, read your history books! Since you are not capable of a few simple measurements of the apparent orbits of the stellar objects in the sky, you should at least know that Copernicus needed a subterfuge like the one above just to stay alive! Any comment from him implying that his work was for real, not just a mathematical fantasy, would have resulted in the Inquisition burning him at the stake, just as they did with Giordano Bruno and others.

It was common practice back then to mask all astronomical work behind the idea of "this is fantasy but helps in the calculation of horoscopes". On the other hand, Galileo was a little too bold and devised a conversation between a heliocentrist and a geocentrist, and his boldness cost him his freedom for the rest of his life, just barely being saved from the stake.

Citing scientists out of context is the last resource of the desperate.

For the same reason scientists don't run around proclaiming the non-existence of God. As William Carpenter attests, holding such ideas keeps one back in the world.

Irrelevant.

Twine - string - nylon; it all expands and contracts due to temperature differences.

So twine, string, nylon, steel cable, etc. all behave exactly the same regarding temperature changes, and said changes always happen in a predictable pattern.

Observations are valid. We simply need to look up into the skies and observe the sun moving South in its winter annulus and then North in its summer annulus. That's all the evidence we require.

Observations are valid evidence that something is happening. They are not valid evidence promoting one theory over another when both theories can explain them.

Why should I disprove a phenomenon that does not exist?

What happened to starting fresh, Tom? Of course no one can demonstrate for you if you're already biased.

When I release a pen from my hand I see acceleration - the earth catches up to the pen. Unless you can show me what mysterious property of innert matter bends space-time, I am more inclined to believe that the "gravity" we experience is nothing more than a purely mechanical side-effect of acceleration.

Can you show me what mysterious property of the UA bends space-time? You refer everyone who asks you this to the Equivilence Principle, but can you prove this yourself? By throwing Einstein at us you're using the same theoretical science you dismiss as flawed.

You're the one who wants to create mysterious forces, Agent. We can observe the net affect of UA directly by looking into the night skies and observing the cosmos slowly accelerating away from itself. Why should I believe in a magical attraction between objects?

For the same reason you believe in a magical accelerator.

You are asking for explanations when you can provide none of your own. You have not provided a decent reason for believing in a Round Earth. No evidence whatsoever is given.

You just don't get it, do you? I don't care what you believe. I'm not here to provide evidence, I'm not here to convert you. I'm here to keep you on the straight and narrow. Believe what you want, but I'm through with the faulty logic.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 03, 2007, 02:35:15 PM

You are asking for explanations when you can provide none of your own. You have not provided a decent reason for believing in a Round Earth. No evidence whatsoever is given.

No, plenty of evidence is given- you RE'ers just constantly ignore it. Constantly.

So explain, oh all omnicious one.

Quote

Astronomy.

What about those meaningless lights in the night sky implies a Round Earth?

WHY ARE ALL YOUR POSTS EDITED?!

you fucking losers. did u never take physics at school? how the hell is the earth flat??? did they just invent the story of astronauts goin into space and takin photos of a ROUND earth. its not 2d you moron.... damn those scientific facts!

Ok, firstly can i just say do u realise what complete idiots you lot actually are for believing that the earth is flat! people didn't just randomly decide to say its round there is scientifical evidence to suggest this not to mention the photographs etc etc
how does a compass work? again you lot are idiots. IT WORKS VIA MAGNETICAL FIELDS WITHIN THE EARTH this means that a compass would work whether its round or not it doesn't matter! and i looked on your website and you say that we will fall off the earth if its round...er ever heard of gravity? its this magical thing where it pulls you donw on to earth and does not work in one direction! if the earth was flat then we'd fall off cos it has to end somewhere and personally i havent yet heard of somebody being killed by falling off the edge of earth! seriously think how stupid you lot sound beofre mouthing off! my friend also wants to add...


ok, just a thought. The thought process of a flat earth developed before 1492, as you say... therefore it must surely be neccessary to look at it within its social and historical context. At that time Europe was involved in a feaudilist system under the catholic church and a complex system of monarchs, dukes and patriachs. hence, education was extremly limited and the only texts avaliblw were only those commisioned within the tight religious and social dominion of the vatican. The flat earth theory was embarked upon by those scholors who at such an early time in the deveopment of science and human conciousness of their planet had limited understanding or educational freedom. As your website says Christopher Columbus "discovered" the earth was round, but he was under the patronage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of castile, joint monarchs of Spain who were more keen to discover new trade links and sabatage the efforts of other european trading nations in the atlantic ocean then discovering a new world....hence Columbas's silence about his discovery...he was paid to do something else!

As such, i think that to view the modern world through a strictly medieval approac can be nothing but flawed....i am sure you would not mind benefiting the medical advancements of the 20th century? 

Quote

That statement applies to both sides of the rainbow.

Let us start afresh, believing neither flat or round, and look outside our windows for a moment.

I happen to see a perfectly flat horizon. Therefore, I can say for certain, that the earth is flat by pretense.

Why should I believe in a Round Earth if my own senses tells me it is flat?

Senses are easily deceived, I was walking through the park near me, last night in a perfect twilight, the tree lined path became a beautiful monochrome vista, nowhere in the trees, the grass or anything was colour, it was incredibly bizzarre, yet the trees are not monochrome they're gorgeous shades of green and brown.

Don't trust what your own eyes tell you, Tom ^_^

When I look out a window I see anything but flat.  Does that mean I shouldn't believe in a flat earth?

When I look out a window I see anything but flat.  Does that mean I shouldn't believe in a flat earth?

What you believe about the shape of the Earth souldn't be based on what you see, whether you clearly see a flat plain or a ball.

Ok, firstly can i just say do u realise what complete idiots you lot actually are for believing that the earth is flat! people didn't just randomly decide to say its round there is scientifical evidence to suggest this not to mention the photographs etc etc
how does a compass work? again you lot are idiots.

Didn't you post this exact opinion in Angry Ranting in the Compass thread?  Why the heck did I spend time answering?

Has anyone mentioned the numerous videos and pics of space/people in space?  NASA, and other associations, were nice enough to make (or take) them for us when they ventured out, so I don't see why they shouldn't apply as evidence of a RE.

Has anyone mentioned the numerous videos and pics of space/people in space?  NASA, and other associations, were nice enough to make (or take) them for us when they ventured out, so I don't see why they shouldn't apply as evidence of a RE.

I think the FE thinks people can do whatever they want with photoshop these days.  So they can make whole videos out of nothing. 

Ok, firstly can i just say do u realise what complete idiots you lot actually are for believing that the earth is flat! people didn't just randomly decide to say its round there is scientifical evidence to suggest this not to mention the photographs etc etc
how does a compass work? again you lot are idiots. IT WORKS VIA MAGNETICAL FIELDS WITHIN THE EARTH this means that a compass would work whether its round or not it doesn't matter! and i looked on your website and you say that we will fall off the earth if its round...er ever heard of gravity? its this magical thing where it pulls you donw on to earth and does not work in one direction! if the earth was flat then we'd fall off cos it has to end somewhere and personally i havent yet heard of somebody being killed by falling off the edge of earth! seriously think how stupid you lot sound beofre mouthing off! my friend also wants to add...


ok, just a thought. The thought process of a flat earth developed before 1492, as you say... therefore it must surely be neccessary to look at it within its social and historical context. At that time Europe was involved in a feaudilist system under the catholic church and a complex system of monarchs, dukes and patriachs. hence, education was extremly limited and the only texts avaliblw were only those commisioned within the tight religious and social dominion of the vatican. The flat earth theory was embarked upon by those scholors who at such an early time in the deveopment of science and human conciousness of their planet had limited understanding or educational freedom. As your website says Christopher Columbus "discovered" the earth was round, but he was under the patronage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of castile, joint monarchs of Spain who were more keen to discover new trade links and sabatage the efforts of other european trading nations in the atlantic ocean then discovering a new world....hence Columbas's silence about his discovery...he was paid to do something else!

As such, i think that to view the modern world through a strictly medieval approac can be nothing but flawed....i am sure you would not mind benefiting the medical advancements of the 20th century? 

I think I shaved off a few IQ points by reading this post!

I think the FE thinks people can do whatever they want with photoshop these days.  So they can make whole videos out of nothing. 

It's huge reason to believe the earth is a globe isn't it?  Either that, or a huge conspiracy which would make all this stuff for and unproved reason while never letting any information slip because if it did it could be the end of it.

I just came here for the first time today after hearing about this group in a book by a Prof. F.A. Matsen called Science Tales.

    I'm not sure if anyone has suggested this as evidence for a round earth but my evidence is the fact that you can fly in a plane in a single direction, never wavering, and return to your exact location on the earth. I have personally done nearly this by flying from the U.S. west to Tokyo, then west to London, then west back to the U.S. Now, unless you think that our world exists many times copied over end to end with alternate versions of ourselves in each copy, this trip of mine could not have been possible.

    Now, if you've got an explanation for this that still supports flat earth ideas, i would love to hear it.

Mystery solved!  We can finally shut this site down!

i just saw in another post about how my questions about my observations of my own experiences of flight around the world could be addressed by reading the handy FAQ provided....

   the answers do seem a bit ridiculous to me, especially how a massive conspiracy with no motive (money being given as one, but what's the motive of whoever's paying) would try so hard to keep us believing the RE model when it makes a whole lot more sense than the FE model, which is based on the Bible, which anybody who's read it in detail a few times knows contradicts itself over and over and over and actually only represents the limited "scientific" observations of the people who lived at the time of its writing.

Also, if you argue that the Bible is not based on the limited knowledge of the people at the time but was rather written by God through its authors by divine inspiration, the fact that there are so many mistakes and contradictions within should convince anyone with any sense that this God is obviously an idiot and we shouldn't listen to his mad ravings and worry about his fickle whims and rages....

okay i'm tired of this now.
goodbye forever time-wasters

If I look out my window i see a flat horison, this is true, however if i take a closer look out my window i see ships gradualy disappearing over the horizon not fading from veiw. Surley this must prove that the earth is not perfectly flat.

If I get in my helecopter and fly 6000 feet in the air I can clearly see the curvature of the eath.

You'd think someone who owned a helicopter would have learned to spell it!

I dont own one im in the RAF I fly a puma.

Ps. dont make fun of the spelling I have dislexia and find it hard to spell things corectly when im tired.

Sorry.

Np. 

I dont own one im in the RAF I fly a puma.

Do you mind taking a one minute test?  You should have no trouble with it as it's about your helicopter.  Remember, you have one minute to answer.

Engines: ?
Max altitude: ?
Name your squadron and base: ?

Time's up.  Flunked!

Engines: 2 x Turbomeca Turmo
Height around 15000 feet with oxygen on board, the heighest I have been is around 13000.

I am kinda nervous about giving you this info as you are a random stranger but here goes.

RAF Benson 33sqn.


And it took me more than a minuite to type this so there is no way i could have passed.

Giving me information that's all over the internet?  You got it the same place I got it and it shouldn't have taken you 15 minutes to do it.

Look kid, you gave yourself away when you claimed you could see the curvature of the earth at 17,000 feet.  It's okay..fess up and go on but if you claim things on this forum, you'd better be able to back it up.

okay okay, i know i said i was done but i thought of something. something i think should be obvious to FEers and not explainable by any sort of "optical illusion".

this will be a little hard to explain without use of illustrations but i will try my best.

also if any FE data i cite here is incorrect, please correct me...

according to the FE model, the earth is a flat circular disc centered at the north pole, and the sun, at the time of the spring and fall equinoxes, follows a path around the equator line at a height of 3000 miles. The equator, according to the FE data, resides at a distance of exactly 6225 miles from the north pole. when one puts these two figures into a simple geometric equation the angle above the horizon at which the sun should appear on an equinox should be approx. 25.73 degrees all day long moving in a circle around the sky at exactly that angle. However, it has been observed and recorded that on the equinoxes, the "solar altitude" (the angle at which the sun is visible in the sky at noon) is 0 degrees, not only at noon but all day.

if this isn't enough of a disproof, i'll tell you more of my observations later.

sorry i left out that the 25.73 degree angle is that which would be observed from the north pole according to FE

I already know the earth is a sphere.

yes yes ms. more but i'm not talking to you... i'm giving decent reasons to mr. tom like he asked me. and here's another one.

again, please correct me if my FE data is incorrect.

according to FE, the stars, all of them, sit 3100 miles above the earth disc. right now, the constellation Draco is sitting directly above the city of Oslo, Norway, which is located at approx. 60 degrees north latitude (in FE talk about 2075 miles from the north pole). If the FE model were (and if it were nighttime on that side of the world) this very same constellation would also be visible in the city of Cape Town, South Africa (approx. 6500 miles away) at an altitude of approx. 25.5 degrees in the northern sky. However, this constellation is NOT visible from there at all (and not just because it's daylight there right now)

more to come later...