A question to ponder.

I've been casually browsing this forum every once in a while for a long time, and every time I start reading, I always think to myself, "There's got to be a simple way to prove these people wrong." But I knew if I just came on here and called you all idiots (which I'm sure happens), I wouldn't be raising any kind of legitimate argument. Finally, I found what I was looking for:

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2004-05-11-barrow-sunrise_x.htm

If the Earth is flat, explain to me why locations that are north of the Arctic Circle/south of the Antarctic Circle experience weeks of constant sunlight for part of the year, and weeks of constant darkness for another part of the year, while the rest of the Earth experiences day and night normally.

Specifically, explain this to me: Why does the Sun literally circle the horizon at the Arctic Circle occasionally? In order for this to occur on a flat Earth, the Sun would have to be on the same plane as the "edge" of the Earth and revolve perfectly around it. Your own theories about the way the Sun orbits the Earth don't match up to this.

Seems to me that if you can't come up with a logical explanation for this (or just contradict your own theories, you all seem to be pretty good at that too), the whole notion of a flat Earth is pretty much busted.

Wonderfully put!

I personally was thinking that if the Earth is flat, how is it possible to fly West from America and hit China and also posible to fly East from America and hit China... Unless of course all pilots are part of this 'conspiracy' and are secretly flying in only one direction, which would mean thousands (or however many pilots there are) of people know the 'secret' and makes the chances of it not being leaked by someone zero.

Flying east or west around the FE is entirely possible.

Flying east or west around the FE is entirely possible.

How?

Take a CD for example, place your finger above th centre and move it directly west/east/north/south, you eventually come to and pass over the edge...

Unless of course you fly under the FE in which case you would notice out of the window that you were underneath this giant disk.

Take a CD for example, place your finger above th centre and move it directly west/east/north/south, you eventually come to and pass over the edge...

South, maybe, yes.  But not East, West, or North....

Quote from: TheEngineer on July 13, 2007, 01:21:29 AM

Flying east or west around the FE is entirely possible.

How?

Take a CD for example, place your finger above th centre and move it directly west/east/north/south, you eventually come to and pass over the edge...

Unless of course you fly under the FE in which case you would notice out of the window that you were underneath this giant disk.

FE uses a trick to allow flying "around" the FE. By "re-defining" travel in a straight line to be travel with the North Pole the same distance away. It's a word game to an extent, relying on an imaginary fault in modern navigation systems.

In your CD example, the only direction of travel from the North Pole is south, and traveling south in FE will always lead to encountering the edge eventually.

If you've not read the RE Primer, you might wish to do so as it deals with the issue.

I've been casually browsing this forum every once in a while for a long time, and every time I start reading, I always think to myself, "There's got to be a simple way to prove these people wrong." But I knew if I just came on here and called you all idiots (which I'm sure happens), I wouldn't be raising any kind of legitimate argument. Finally, I found what I was looking for:

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/2004-05-11-barrow-sunrise_x.htm

If the Earth is flat, explain to me why locations that are north of the Arctic Circle/south of the Antarctic Circle experience weeks of constant sunlight for part of the year, and weeks of constant darkness for another part of the year, while the rest of the Earth experiences day and night normally.

Specifically, explain this to me: Why does the Sun literally circle the horizon at the Arctic Circle occasionally? In order for this to occur on a flat Earth, the Sun would have to be on the same plane as the "edge" of the Earth and revolve perfectly around it. Your own theories about the way the Sun orbits the Earth don't match up to this.

Seems to me that if you can't come up with a logical explanation for this (or just contradict your own theories, you all seem to be pretty good at that too), the whole notion of a flat Earth is pretty much busted.

The Sun's radius changes, causing the sun to hover over the arctic or antarctic without going away (Unexplained: Infinite daylight in Antarctic)

Wonderfully put!

I personally was thinking that if the Earth is flat, how is it possible to fly West from America and hit China and also posible to fly East from America and hit China... Unless of course all pilots are part of this 'conspiracy' and are secretly flying in only one direction, which would mean thousands (or however many pilots there are) of people know the 'secret' and makes the chances of it not being leaked by someone zero.

North: Toward North Pole
South: Toward Outer Edge
East: Counter-Clockwise
West: Clockwise



Read the FAQ.

Ok, the map made the traveling around a little clearer, from your point of view that is, i personally don't see how you can say that traveling east from a place means you actually travel in a curve....

However, the sun's radius changing?! I mean come on, not even the most twisted of scientific tests could prove that possible as the sun is just a giant nuclear fusion and fission reaction (the two forces being balanced), there is no way for that to afect the size!

Ok, the map made the traveling around a little clearer, from your point of view that is, i personally don't see how you can say that traveling east from a place means you actually travel in a curve....

However, the sun's radius changing?! I mean come on, not even the most twisted of scientific tests could prove that possible as the sun is just a giant nuclear fusion and fission reaction (the two forces being balanced), there is no way for that to afect the size!

The orbit radius:

Oh, the orbit radius changes...seems a little more believeable as some planets do change, however they are in an oval, so still not totally the same.

That however cannot be proved scientifically nor factually, so i am still going to stick with the 3D earth theory!

Try again...good luck!

Ok, the map made the traveling around a little clearer, from your point of view that is, i personally don't see how you can say that traveling east from a place means you actually travel in a curve....

That's how compasses work.

A Round Earth you travel in a curve too, just curved downward.

For God's sake, going east or west you are travelling in a concentric circle around the North Pole, and that is true in both RE and FE.

The orbit radius:

Now if only they could find the magical force that changes the radius. 

Any sufficiently advanced science is magic. 

Now if only they could find the magical force that changes the radius.

Scroll up a few posts:

Oh, the orbit radius changes...seems a little more believeable as some planets do change, however they are in an oval, so still not totally the same.

Perhaps you could start by describing how there is an orbital inclination change with the celestial bodies of you own model.

Quote

Now if only they could find the magical force that changes the radius.

Scroll up a few posts:

Quote

Oh, the orbit radius changes...seems a little more believeable as some planets do change, however they are in an oval, so still not totally the same.

Perhaps you could start by describing how there is an orbital inclination change with the celestial bodies of you own model.

What change would that be? You must not understand the RE model. Newton's and Kepler's Laws are all we need.

You cannot offer a single explanation for the change in the Sun's orbit's radius. I challenge you to do so now.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on July 13, 2007, 01:24:46 PM

Quote

Now if only they could find the magical force that changes the radius.

Scroll up a few posts:

Quote

Oh, the orbit radius changes...seems a little more believeable as some planets do change, however they are in an oval, so still not totally the same.

Perhaps you could start by describing how there is an orbital inclination change with the celestial bodies of you own model.

What change would that be? You must not understand the RE model. Newton's and Kepler's Laws are all we need.

You cannot offer a single explanation for the change in the Sun's orbit's radius. I challenge you to do so now.

Hell Tom, I even managed to come up with a decent theory on the Sun in the FE model that when put with other parts of the FE model seems to fit better...I still want to know how the Sun is the only NATURAL spotlight in the known Universe.

...I still want to know how the Sun is the only NATURAL spotlight in the known Universe.

That's not true! ...there's also the moon. 

Quote from: CommonCents on July 13, 2007, 02:11:42 PM

...I still want to know how the Sun is the only NATURAL spotlight in the known Universe.

That's not true! ...there's also the moon. 

Oh boy....yikes!!!!!   

Quote from: CommonCents on July 13, 2007, 02:11:42 PM

...I still want to know how the Sun is the only NATURAL spotlight in the known Universe.

That's not true! ...there's also the moon. 

The moon isn't a spotlight   And if it is, it's a very wierd one.

Scroll up a few posts:

Quote

Oh, the orbit radius changes...seems a little more believeable as some planets do change, however they are in an oval, so still not totally the same.

Perhaps you could start by describing how there is an orbital inclination change with the celestial bodies of you own model.

Planets orbit the sun in the RE, they don’t orbit a magical spot nothing that has enough gravitation for the sun to orbit it, yet have so little that we cant detect it.   

What changes would you like me to explain? 

Alright then, the compass thing now makes sense...maybe writing that post when tired wasnt such a good idea, but what is really confusing me now is...why keep it a secret from us?!

All this crap about NASA faking the earth photos...why would they do it? What possible explaination could they have for keeping that secret from us? We thought the earth was flat before, why not (if it is true) just tell us we were right first time, if anything people should be happy that they weren't wrong!

Also, if it was some big secret, where are the ultra-high profile leaks that would occur because, lets face it, something this big would without fail make a massive entrance into the press!

They do it for the money.

Flath earth people seem so sure that NASA formulated this "conspiracy" about the world being round  but can i just remind you that it was actually Aristole who 1st proposed the round earth theory in 310 BC!
He was then backed up by Eratosthenes, Posidonius and El Mamun!
Then Christopher Collumbus proved it by sailing west to india intead of east. . . Unless they are really the foundational members of NASA 

Then Christopher Collumbus proved it by sailing west to india intead of east. . .

Wait...what did Columbus do?

Flath earth people seem so sure that NASA formulated this "conspiracy" about the world being round  but can i just remind you that it was actually Aristole who 1st proposed the round earth theory in 310 BC!
He was then backed up by Eratosthenes, Posidonius and El Mamun!
Then Christopher Collumbus proved it by sailing west to india intead of east. . . Unless they are really the foundational members of NASA 

Eratosthenes, Posidonius and El Mamun were not part of the conspiracy. They simply had new ideas relative to general thinking of the time.

Quote from: loveisround on July 15, 2007, 01:57:21 AM

Then Christopher Collumbus proved it by sailing west to india intead of east. . .

Wait...what did Columbus do?

It may be prudent to consider that Columbus never abandoned the belief he had reached Asia and led three more expeditions to the Caribbean based on that belief.

They do it for the money.

How the hell do they make money from not admiting the earth is flat?!

Sure they get money out of it by building new space projects...but as i just said, this money is used for making new space projects which, as has alreay been mentioned, would be pointless (if FE was true) and so the money is spent on something pointless.

As anyone with even the tiniest segment of brain can see, NASA lieing is totally pointless as the money they recieve for funding is spent pointlessly...

Quote from: TheEngineer on July 15, 2007, 03:02:24 AM

Quote from: loveisround on July 15, 2007, 01:57:21 AM

Then Christopher Collumbus proved it by sailing west to india intead of east. . .

Wait...what did Columbus do?

It may be prudent to consider that Columbus never abandoned the belief he had reached Asia and led three more expeditions to the Caribbean based on that belief.

I would say it is rather imprudent to to ignore the fact that he never succeeded in reaching Asia.