The Reason For Conspiracy and Magellan

I didn't say this website made a lot of money; people make livings doing other things. It would be economic suicide for any real business to advertise on this website, but that's not the point. Give me a qualified peer-reviewed (on the flat earth part) scientist who thinks the Earth is flat.

I'm sure a few scientists have seen this website (and had a few good laughs). So wait a second here, every respectable scientist disagrees with you, and you say you're right? Who came up with/discovered your evidence? It must not be a scientist...

I'd also like to go back to my first question: When did this conspiracy start? Most flat earthers that I've debated with say that NASA is making the money, so who made the money before NASA?

You asked how Magellan could have sailed around the world.  All you need to answer that is a possible map, which we have in the FAQ.

Quote from: C-Ray on September 05, 2008, 08:33:30 AM

But you do today.  You can't buy a compass in North America and take it to Brazil.  It won't work.

C-Ray is right. A special compass is needed as you get closer to the poles because the magnetic field lines become vertical.

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/aug98/899130154.Es.r.html

The author notes that a special compass with an axle is already needed for navigation in latitudes past Seattle, Washington. Compasses are only really usable on a relatively narrow part of the earth centered over the equator.

This is all due to the magnetic layout of the earth. In the Round Earth model the magnetic layout looks like this



In the Flat Earth model the magnetic field lines looks something like this:



The vertical and horizontal component of the Magnetic Field lines are identical at every latitude. As you get closer to the areas where the field lines are vertical the compass attempts to point downwards and scrapes along the bottom of the compass and stops working. In the Arctic and Antarctic circles it's actually impossible to use a magnetic compass since the magnetic field lines are almost exactly vertical. Navigators must use the Sun Compass and Gyrocompass for navigation.

Quote from: jmhudak17 on September 11, 2008, 03:11:31 PM

I'm sure a few scientists have seen this website (and had a few good laughs). So wait a second here, every respectable scientist disagrees with you, and you say you're right? Who came up with/discovered your evidence? It must not be a scientist...

The person most often credited for proving the flatness of the earth is Dr Samuel Birley Rowbotham, who wrote Earth Not a Globe.

Neat looking drawing to bad its wrong.

I'll ask again: What qualifications does a medical doctor have in proving if the Earth is round or not? That's like hiring a chemist to do open heart surgery...

Quote from: jmhudak17 on September 14, 2008, 12:49:46 PM

I'll ask again: What qualifications does a medical doctor have in proving if the Earth is round or not? That's like hiring a chemist to do open heart surgery...

I've always assumed based on his breathtaking prose that he was a very learned man.  Just because he was a doctor of medicine doesn't make him not qualified to judge the shape of the earth.  His biggest critic was a biologist!  Does that automatically disqualify him from judging Rowbotham's work?  It's a straw man.

Rowbotham's method and his math are sound.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on September 14, 2008, 10:42:52 PM

Quote from: jmhudak17 on September 14, 2008, 12:49:46 PM

I'll ask again: What qualifications does a medical doctor have in proving if the Earth is round or not? That's like hiring a chemist to do open heart surgery...

I've always assumed based on his breathtaking prose that he was a very learned man.  Just because he was a doctor of medicine doesn't make him not qualified to judge the shape of the earth.  His biggest critic was a biologist!  Does that automatically disqualify him from judging Rowbotham's work?  It's a straw man.

Rowbotham's method and his math are sound.

I thought his biggest critic (indirectly) was a surveyor. 

Quote from: markjo on September 15, 2008, 05:31:55 AM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on September 14, 2008, 10:42:52 PM

Quote from: jmhudak17 on September 14, 2008, 12:49:46 PM

I'll ask again: What qualifications does a medical doctor have in proving if the Earth is round or not? That's like hiring a chemist to do open heart surgery...

I've always assumed based on his breathtaking prose that he was a very learned man.  Just because he was a doctor of medicine doesn't make him not qualified to judge the shape of the earth.  His biggest critic was a biologist!  Does that automatically disqualify him from judging Rowbotham's work?  It's a straw man.

Rowbotham's method and his math are sound.

I thought his biggest critic (indirectly) was a surveyor. 

Alfred Russel Wallace is best known for being a naturalist and biologist who influenced Charles Darwin.  He was also an avid spiritualist.  Yet he was somehow qualified to criticize Rowbotham's work.

My whole point was that just because he was a medical doctor doesn't mean he didn't have the expertise to judge the experiments that prove the shape of the earth.  And his experiments are easily duplicatable, meaning anybody with access to a large body of water and some rudimentary equipment can prove that the earth is flat for themselves!

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on September 15, 2008, 01:02:27 PM

Alfred Russel Wallace is best known for being a naturalist and biologist who influenced Charles Darwin.

He was also a surveyor. Being "best known" for something does not mean a persons other achievements didn't happen.

The other was a quack.

The question is an appeal to authority and therefore a fallacy.

Actually it's an appeal to someone who has studied extensively the topic were talking about.