Hm...If the Earth is truly flat, What about Erosion?

Quote

I am looking outside my house right now. I see a small faint curve in the distance. Now about that Darwin award Tom Dipshit.

That's funny. I look out at my ocean horizon every day and I've never seen any curve.

Now, what experiments are there which prove the earth to be a globe?

Then you either have bad eyes, or aren't at a high enough altitude.
There have been millions of experiments that have proved the earth to be round. The space race for example.

Then you either have bad eyes, or aren't at a high enough altitude.

TheEngineer is a pilot. He tells us that he's never seen curvature to the earth in flight.

There have been millions of experiments that have proved the earth to be round. The space race for example.

The space race wasn't an experiment to discover the shape of the earth.

What experiments are there which demonstrate that the earth is a globe?

If there are millions as you say, then you should be able to tell us one; surely.

Not instantly, at least some water would escape through a leak...

The waters of the earth formed slowly over time.  They had plenty of time to freeze.

Quote

Then you either have bad eyes, or aren't at a high enough altitude.

TheEngineer is a pilot. He tells us that he's never seen curvature to the earth, either.

Quote

There have been millions of experiments that have proved the earth to be round. The space race for example.

The space race wasn't an experiment to discover the shape of the earth.

What experiments are there which demonstrate that the earth is a globe?

No it wasn't a way to prove anything except to get to the moon. In the beginning of the space race the astronauts orbited the earth.

No it wasn't a way to prove anything except to get to the moon. In the beginning of the space race the astronauts orbited the earth.

NASA's claims are false. You should be familiar with the premise of this website by now.

Now, what experimental evidence can you reference for us showing that the earth is truly a globe?

Quote

No it wasn't a way to prove anything except to get to the moon. In the beginning of the space race the astronauts orbited the earth.

NASA's claims are false.

Now, what experimental evidence can you reference for us showing that the earth is a globe?

First show us why these claims are false, and none of the "I don't need to prove shit" Tom Dipshit.

As for the experiments, The only I can think of is the world exploration during the Renaissance era.

What experiments exist specifically proving the earth to be spherical?

Read. (Measurement of Earth's Circumference)

Read (download the pdf - spherical Earth on a simple pendulum).

Read (Eratosthenes Experiment).
While he excelled in many areas, Eratosthenes became one of the greatest geographers of all ages by establishing the mathematical geography of the spherical earth.

Read. (Flying clocks)

Read. (Gravitation field)

Read. (Earth’s core tangent cylinder)

Read. (History of Spherical Earth)

Read. (The Christopher Colubmus voyage)

Read. (Wiki)



To save your time, just accept reality and don't read these.

First show us why these claims are false

NASA's claims are false because the Apollo Missions were filmed on a Hollywood set.



See these videos:

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Faker part 1
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Faker Part 2
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Faker Part 3
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Moon Faker Part 4

As for the experiments, The only I can think of is the world exploration during the Renaissance era.

Circumnavigation is possible on the Flat Earth model. And, that's not an experiment.

I thought you said that there were millions?

Read. (Measurement of Earth's Circumference)

That experiment is actually measuring the diameter of the Flat Earth, not the circumference of the Round Earth. This is why the diameter listed in the FAQ is identical to the circumference listed for the Round Earth. The earth is merely assumed to be round in the experiment you've posted.

Scroll to the bottom of that link:


An Alternative Model

Eratosthenes' model depends on the assumption that the earth is round and that the sun  is far away, therefore produces parallel rays of light all over the earth. If the sun is nearby, then shadows will change length even for a flat earth. A flat earth model is sketched at the right. The vertical stick casts shadows that grow longer as the stick moves to the left, away from the closest point to the sun. (The sun is at height h above the earth.)

A little trigonometry shows that



Using the values 50 degrees and 60 degrees as measured on the trip, with b=1000 miles, we find that h is approximately 2000 miles. This relatively close sun would have been quite plausible to the ancients.

Continuing the calculation, we find that a is approximately 2400 miles and the two distances R1 and R2 are approximately 3000 and 3900 miles, respectively.

Illustration


Therefore your own source proves you to be wrong. Your source even shows that Eratosthenes' experiment actually proves the sun to be around 3,000 miles above the surface of the earth under FE.

Read (download the pdf - spherical Earth on a simple pendulum).

The earth does not rotate. The stars do. The pendulum rotates due to the stars capturing the weight of the pendulum geometrically as they spin above the hub of the earth.

While he excelled in many areas, Eratosthenes became one of the greatest geographers of all ages by establishing the mathematical geography of the spherical earth.

Erathostenes' experiment with shadows was actually measuring the diameter of the Flat Earth, not the circumference of the Round Earth. Erathostenes just assumed that the earth was round in his experiment. His experiment is the same as the one in your first link.

Read. (Flying clocks)

Albert Einstein has shown in his Principle of Equivalence that Acceleration bends space time in the same fashion as "gravity" would. Therefore the results of the flying clocks experiment would be identical in both models.

Read. (Gravitation field)

Albert Einstein has shown that an accelerating body creates the same effect of gravitation. See his Equivalence Principle.

For more information see http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/physics/papers/0204/0204044.pdf

"However one of the main tenants of general relativity is the Principle of Equivalence: A uniform gravitational field is equivalent to a uniformly accelerating frame of reference. This implies that one can create a uniform gravitational field simply by changing one’s frame of reference from an inertial frame of reference to an accelerating frame, which is a rather difficult idea to accept."

Read. (Earth’s core tangent cylinder)

This is not an experiment pertaining to the shape of the earth.

Read. (History of Spherical Earth)

There are no experiments in this link pertaining to the shape of the earth.

Read. (The Christopher Colubmus voyage)

Columbus' voyage is possible on a Flat Earth. Circumnavigation is possible on a Flat Earth.

Read. (Wiki)

There are no experiments in this link pertaining to the shape of the earth.

To save your time, just accept reality and don't read these.

Apparently you didn't even read your sources and just posted random stuff from Google, because your sources do not show that the earth is spherical at all. Not a single one was studying the shape of the earth. In fact, your first post proves the sun to be around 3,000 miles above the sea level of the earth.

If the Ice Wall is eroding and is infinite, the Earth would grow.  There wouldn't be a hole in the ice wall, but it would have grown in circumference.

Quote

Read. (Measurement of Earth's Circumference)

That experiment is actually measuring the diameter of the Flat Earth, not the circumference of the Round Earth. This is why the diameter listed in the FAQ is identical to the circumference listed for the Round Earth. The earth is assumed to be round in the experiment.

Quote

Read (download the pdf - spherical Earth on a simple pendulum).

The earth does not rotate. The stars do. The pendulum rotates due to the stars capturing the weight of the pendulum geometrically as they spin around the hub of the earth.

Quote

While he excelled in many areas, Eratosthenes became one of the greatest geographers of all ages by establishing the mathematical geography of the spherical earth.

Erathostenes' experiment with shadows was actually measuring the diameter of the Flat Earth, not the circumference of the Round Earth. Erathostenes just assumed that the earth was round in his experiment. His experiment is the same as the one in your first link.

Quote

Read. (Flying clocks)

Albert Einstein has shown in his Principle of Equivalence that Acceleration bends space time in the same fashion as "gravity" would. Therefore the results of the flying clocks experiment would be identical in both models.

Quote

Read. (Gravitation field)

Albert Einstein has shown that an accelerating body creates the same effect of gravitation. See his Equivalence Principle.

For more information see http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/physics/papers/0204/0204044.pdf

"However one of the main tenants of general relativity is the Principle of Equivalence: A uniform gravitational field is equivalent to a uniformly accelerating frame of reference. This implies that one can create a uniform gravitational field simply by changing one’s frame of reference from an inertial frame of reference to an accelerating frame, which is a rather difficult idea to accept."

Quote

Read. (Earth’s core tangent cylinder)

This is not an experiment pertaining to the shape of the earth.

Quote

Read. (History of Spherical Earth)

There are no experiments in this link pertaining to he shape of the earth.

Quote

Read. (The Christopher Colubmus voyage)

Columbus' voyage is possible on a Flat Earth. Circumnavigation is possible on a Flat Earth.

Quote

Read. (Wiki)

There are no experiments in this link pertaining to he shape of the earth.

Quote

To save your time, just accept reality and don't read these.

Apparently you didn't even read your sources, because they do not show that the earth is spherical at all. Not a single one was studying the shape of the earth.

Word games again, eh? The experiment is A and you say its B.

Erathostenes' experiment with shadows was actually measuring the diameter of the Flat Earth, not the circumference of the Round Earth. Erathostenes just assumed that the earth was round in his experiment. His experiment is the same as the one in your first link.

No, Erathostenes' experiment was never intended to work on shadows to measure the diameter of the Flat earth.

Albert Einstein has shown in his Principle of Equivalence that Acceleration bends space time in the same fashion as "gravity" would.

No, acceleration never bends spacetime.

This is not an experiment pertaining to the shape of the earth.

It's not an experiment.  It's, however, an article that explains the experiments.

That experiment is actually measuring the diameter of the Flat Earth, not the circumference of the Round Earth. This is why the diameter listed in the FAQ is identical to the circumference listed for the Round Earth. The earth is assumed to be round in the experiment

No, this experiment never was intended to measuring the diameter of a Flat Earth.

The earth does not rotate. The stars do.

No, the Earth rotates.

Columbus' voyage is possible on a Flat Earth.

Read the site again. Columbus' voyage determined that the Earth was round.


It looks to me that you didn't even read the sites I've provided.

No, Erathostenes' experiment was never intended to work on shadows to measure the diameter of the Flat earth.

Did you even read your source? Go to your first link and scroll to the bottom:


An Alternative Model

Eratosthenes' model depends on the assumption that the earth is round and that the sun is far away, therefore producing parallel rays of light all over the earth. If the sun is nearby, then shadows will change length even for a flat earth. A flat earth model is sketched at the right. The vertical stick casts shadows that grow longer as the stick moves to the left, away from the closest point to the sun. (The sun is at height h above the earth.)

A little trigonometry shows that



Using the values 50 degrees and 60 degrees as measured on the trip, with b=1000 miles, we find that h is approximately 2000 miles. This relatively close sun would have been quite plausible to the ancients.

Continuing the calculation, we find that a is approximately 2400 miles and the two distances R1 and R2 are approximately 3000 and 3900 miles, respectively.

Illustration


Therefore your source shows that Eratosthenes' experiment actually proves the sun to be around 3,000 miles above the surface of the Flat Earth.

No, acceleration never bends spacetime.

That's not what Einstein says. Are you saying that you're smarter than Einstein?

No, this experiment never was intended to measuring the diameter of a Flat Earth.

Scroll to the bottom of your first link. It specifically says that Eratosthenes assumed that the earth was a sphere and that the sun was very far away for his experiment.

No, the Earth rotates.

Proof? I say that the earth is still and its the stars which rotate.

Read the site again. Columbus' voyage determined that the Earth was round.

Apparently you didn't even read the FAQ. The Flat Earth is laid out like the United Nations logo:



North is Hubward, South is Rimward, East is Turnwise, and West is Widdershins.

Now, how does Columbus' voyage prove that the earth is a globe?

Now, how does Columbus' voyage prove that the earth is a globe?

It doesn't; but he'll just ignore you like everything else.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on October 10, 2007, 07:41:53 PM

Now, how does Columbus' voyage prove that the earth is a globe?

It doesn't; but he'll just ignore you like everything else.

Read before you say anymore nonsense.

Read before you say anymore nonsense.

That's a lovely link, but your ignorance is appearing again. The sinking ship effect and the other information contained on that page have nothing to do with Columbus' voyage to the Americas. Furthermore, in light of the FAQ and the navigational proposal, his voyage proves nothing. But you'll just ignore that.

The sinking ship effect and the other information contained on that page have nothing to do with Columbus' voyage to the Americas.

The sinking ship effect and the other information on that page is not about Colombus's voyage to the Americas but about how ships disappear due to the curvature of the Earth. Read again, because you've just demostrated that you didn't.

Christopher Columbus proposed to reach India by sailing west from Spain, he too knew that the Earth was round. India was the source of precious spices and other rare goods, but reaching it by sailing east was difficult, because Africa blocked the way. On a round globe, however, it should also be possible to reach India by sailing west, and this Columbus proposed to do (he wasn't the first one to suggest this--see below).

  If you stand on the seashore and watch a ship sailing away, it will gradually disappear from view. But the reason cannot be the distance: if a hill or tower are nearby, and you climb to the top after the ship has completely disappeared, it becomes visible again. Furthermore, if on the shore you watch carefully the way the ship disappears from view, you will notice that the hull vanishes first, while the masts and sails (or the bridge and smokestack) disappear last. It is as if the ship was dropping behind a hill, which in a way is exactly the case, the "hill" being the curve of the Earth's surface.

Furthermore, in light of the FAQ and the navigational proposal, his voyage proves nothing.

Oh, so you're using the FAQ (which is bullshit) to prove someone's non-bullshit work a fiasco? Typical of you.

That's not what you said before. You specifically said in this thread that

"Columbus' voyage determined that the Earth was round."

So tell us, how did his voyage determine that the earth is round?

The sinking ship effect and the other information on that page is not about Colombus's voyage to the Americas but about how ships disappear due to the curvature of the Earth.

Perhaps the most visually stunning fact which proves the earth as a plane is the sinking ship effect. As a ship recedes into the ocean's horizon, distant from the observer, it will appear to the naked eye to sink from the bottom up into the sea when it touches the horizon line. It has been found that this effect is purely perceptual, that a good telescope with sufficient zoom will change the observer's perspective and bring the ship's hull back in full view. Hence, the effect which is usually thought to prove the earth as a globe really proves it to be a plane.

From Zetetic Cosmogony by Thomas Winship:











How does your model of the earth explain these explicitly detailed accounts?

You are taking someone else's word for it? lol

Here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

The sinking ship effect and the other information on that page is not about Colombus's voyage to the Americas but about how ships disappear due to the curvature of the Earth. Read again, because you've just demostrated that you didn't.

Ignoring the prior question and answer. To be expected.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on October 10, 2007, 07:41:53 PM

Now, how does Columbus' voyage prove that the earth is a globe?

It doesn't; but he'll just ignore you like everything else.

Oh, so you're using the FAQ (which is bullshit) to prove someone's non-bullshit work a fiasco? Typical of you.

I'm using the FAQ because it outlines the very simple nature in regards to circumnavigation of the flat Earth. And how is that proving his "work" a fiasco? I've attempted to prove nothing of the sort.

Quote from: PotEnTiaL- on October 10, 2007, 08:10:46 PM

The sinking ship effect and the other information on that page is not about Colombus's voyage to the Americas but about how ships disappear due to the curvature of the Earth. Read again, because you've just demostrated that you didn't.

Ignoring the prior question and answer. To be expected.

Wow, my link really is helpful to you too.

You are taking someone else's word for it? lol

I've observed the effect for myself, as I've mentioned many times throughout this forum.

As for hypocrisy; since your blind belief in a Round Earth is based on "someone else's word" we can conclude that the only hypocrite here is you.

Wow, my link really is helpful to you too.

I guess you didn't read it either.

Except that I too have observed it firsthand and seen different than what you claim. Magnification of the view shows me directly that the water does in fact cover the bottom portion of the boat. I will not call you a liar for the sake of not ruining these forums.

As for Divito, I was referring to ignoring the question. You only stated that he was ignoring the question without answering yourself.

It occurs to me that Early sailors used compasses in conjunction with stellar navigation. Stars have been used to navigate much longer and yet the two aren't in disagreement. Straight line traveling means no circumnavigation on FE... 

Except that I too have observed it firsthand and seen different than what you claim. Magnification of the view shows me directly that the water does in fact cover the bottom portion of the boat. I will not call you a liar for the sake of not ruining these forums.

You may have not been using enough magnification to counteract the effect.

It occurs to me that Early sailors used compasses in conjunction with stellar navigation. Stars have been used to navigate much longer and yet the two aren't in disagreement. Straight line traveling means no circumnavigation on FE... 

Well, sailors use the North Star to navigate. And guess what, the North Star is located over the North Pole.

I'm referring to constellations and lines connected between multiple stars parallel to their movements.

I can't see how a single star could provide navigational support... the other stars would be used.

I'm referring to constellations and lines connected between multiple stars parallel to their movements.

Why would constellations be used for navigation? The constellations are constantly in motion over the surface of the earth because the stars move around the pole star at one rotation per twenty four hours.

Sailors use the North Star to navigate because the North Star is in one constant location and is the brightest star in the sky.

I can't see how a single star could provide navigational support... the other stars would be used.

How do you navigate by stars that are in constant motion across the sky?

As for Divito, I was referring to ignoring the question. You only stated that he was ignoring the question without answering yourself.

I don't follow. Tom asked a question, and I answered it. Potential arrived with a link that did nothing to showcase the answer as incorrect.

In discussing Columbus' voyage, the assumption of getting from point A to B outlines a spherical Earth. Under the FE idea of navigation however, it's possible to circumnavigate the Earth; showing that his voyage proved nothing in relation to the shape of the Earth, as I stated.

Potential's ignorance of that simple information and his submittal of one of the oldest and most common arguments on this site, not to mention having nothing to do with what the question, is just annoying.

Tom, that makes the assumption that the stars are rotating in ways that aren't along the path of the ship with the turning of the Earth. A round Earth wouldn't cause problems with the relative rotation of stars. It seems you avoided answering my question of using a single dot to navigate. Sailors don't make their trip in 24 hours either which means that they would drift a good 60 degrees each day and see how far off they are when the stars are first visible again.