I'm looking for a single scientific study which proves that the earth is a globe

We don't need a study done for the obvious. The earth was proven to be a globe before scientific studies were published. And we've been working under the assumption that were were right since things have gone into space. So... tell you what. You make an experiment showing nothing can go into space and we'll believe you. For now, the earth is round, and you are the wrongest man in wrong town.

Quote from: Kill-9 on March 30, 2008, 12:56:20 PM

We don't need a study done for the obvious. The earth was proven to be a globe before scientific studies were published. And we've been working under the assumption that were were right since things have gone into space. So... tell you what. You make an experiment showing nothing can go into space and we'll believe you. For now, the earth is round, and you are the wrongest man in wrong town.

Let me get this straight. The only way we know that the earth is a globe is because in 300 B.C. Aristotle, when he was not describing how frogs and newts spontaneously generated from mud, said some vague stuff in passing about the earth being a globe? What studies or experiments did Aristotle publish in regards to his opinions?

Are you seriously telling me that the entirety of mankind since Aristotle has blindly assumed that the earth is a globe with absolutely no scientific studies or experiments to back it up?

The only possible way to know the true shape of the planet is to put our blind faith in NASA?

However, all the proof I need is in: NASA, private industry's presence in space, non-ASA funded groups going into space for things like the xprize and google's funded competition, observations throughout the galaxy,the moon, etc.

Even if I was iffy on the subject, the conspiracy wouldn't sway my beliefs as much as proof none of that ever happened. But no real proof shows up, only an ancient book with nonsense on almost every page...

A couple things tom

1) Stop refrencing a 120 year old book thats full of BS
2) That book was part of a larger conspiracy theory
3) You FE'ers are so god damn ignorant, you say that the earth is flat, Close your ears and when anybody ever says anything saying its round you dish out your Conspiracy book of BS and say its flat
4) What would be the point in the government saying its round if its not?
5) I would like to see REAL research that theres anything like an 'Ice Wall' or that theres a conspiracy theory, and dont give me that book
6) The earth is round

Quote from: mobilegamer999 on March 30, 2008, 01:42:35 PM

A couple things tom

1) Stop refrencing a 120 year old book thats full of BS
2) That book was part of a larger conspiracy theory
3) You FE'ers are so god damn ignorant, you say that the earth is flat, Close your ears and when anybody ever says anything saying its round you dish out your Conspiracy book of BS and say its flat
4) What would be the point in the government saying its round if its not?
5) I would like to see REAL research that theres anything like an 'Ice Wall' or that theres a conspiracy theory, and dont give me that book
6) The earth is round

Why do you need a study for the obvious? Where is there a study even for a flat earth? What good would a study do anyway? Doesn't the conspiracy mean all studies are meant to somehow make money and are fake?
In other words, you don't have a study saying the earth is round?

Quote

I looked at the moon for a while. It appeared to stay the same size, which led me to believe it wasn't travelling thousands of miles away from me like what it should do if the flatties are to be believed

All explained in Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe.

I still don't see a study proving the Earth is a globe.. That's all he asked for, why are you all asking him to provide stuff when no one can do so for him? Give him one so he can shut up.

Quote from: Kill-9 on March 30, 2008, 12:56:20 PM

We don't need a study done for the obvious. The earth was proven to be a globe before scientific studies were published. And we've been working under the assumption that were were right since things have gone into space. So... tell you what. You make an experiment showing nothing can go into space and we'll believe you. For now, the earth is round, and you are the wrongest man in wrong town.

Let me get this straight. The only way we know that the earth is a globe is because in 300 B.C. Aristotle, when he was not describing how frogs and newts spontaneously generated from mud, said some vague stuff in passing about the earth being a globe? What studies or experiments did Aristotle publish in regards to his opinions?

Are you seriously telling me that the entirety of mankind since Aristotle has blindly assumed that the earth is a globe with absolutely no scientific studies or experiments to back it up?

The only possible way to know the true shape of the planet is to put our blind faith in NASA?

There have been no studies to prove the earth is a globe because every reasonable learned person in the western world has believed the earth to be round for over two thousand years. Aristotle provided physical and observational arguments supporting the idea of a spherical Earth:

• Every portion of the earth tends toward the center until by compression and convergence they form a sphere.
• Travelers going south see southern constellations rise higher above the horizon.
• The shadow of Earth on the Moon during a lunar eclipse is round.

There is also the matter of ships going over the horizon.

There is no reason whatsoever that the earth can be anything but some sort of spherical body given these arguments. These arguments are well grounded in reason, and there is no contradictory evidence, so these arguments can only be considered true.

Eratosthenes estimated Earth's circumference around 240 BCE. He had heard that in Syene the Sun was directly overhead at the summer solstice whereas in Alexandria it still cast a shadow. Using the differing angles the shadows made as the basis of his trigonometric calculations he estimated a circumference of around 250,000 stades. The length of a 'stade' is not precisely known, but Eratosthenes' figure only has an error of around five to ten percent.

Quote

I looked at the moon for a while. It appeared to stay the same size, which led me to believe it wasn't travelling thousands of miles away from me like what it should do if the flatties are to be believed

All explained in Chapter 10 of Earth Not a Globe.

There are no studies that proved the earth was flat. 

Quote from: sokarul on March 30, 2008, 09:23:43 AM

There are no studies that proved the earth was flat. 

There are many from a FE biased point of view, Earth: Not a Globe etc etc...

Stop making shit up.

How about this?

http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys240/homework/earth_radius/earth_rad.html

This page shows how you can measure the radius of the Earth with a stop watch.  Not terribly precise, but should provide a ballpark figure.

Tom, you are a serious lulcow. What Aristotle believed besides the rotundity of the earth does not matter. What matters are his proofs.

The sinking ship effect is one of the first and primary proof for a Flat Earth, since it has been found that a half sunken ship can be restored with a telescope.

As far as the Lunar Eclipse goes, there is no study demonstrating that the shadow which manifests upon the moon during a Lunar Eclipse originates from the earth. The shadow which occurs on the moon could come from any celestial body intersecting the light between the sun and moon.

Of course the constellations will appear to rise as you travel Southward - the stars are 3,100 miles  above the earth and you are changing your perspective in relation to the stars.

Aristotle didn't make any scientific research into these studies. No experiments were performed to corroborate his loose suppositions. There are no research studies published by Aristotle which demonstrate that the earth is a globe.

Proof?

Quote

Proof?

Why are you asking me to prove a negative?  That's impossible. I asked you to provide a single study which demonstrated that the earth is a globe. I'm constantly told that many exist. It's your job to provide the studies demonstrating these things. If you can't do that, then what does that say about your model?

Saying "prove that these studies don't exist" isn't a valid rebuttal. That's just stupid.