Evidence of a round world (Debate)

So I just stumbled upon this strange website and want too see what those who favor the flat Earth hypothesis think..

During the time of the ancient egyptians, a man named eratosthenes came across and a strange account in some diaries he was reading, what they were was too recordings by different men on the same day in locations 800km apart. What these accounts noted, was that in one location an object cast no shadow, while in the other a defined shadow was cast. Now the only logical explanation for this is that the Earth is curved, and while the sun's rays are normal at one point at another they are at an angle. This also provides evidence for different temperatures in different regions. Anyway whats your explanation for this..



Also what about orbits of sattelites? How do they manage to stay in orbit if the world is not flat?

What happens to his equations for shadow length if we assume that the earth is flat?

If the Earth were flat, then we would only need to know the angle of incidence, as the entire world would have the same shadow, or lack of it...

There is a hidden assumption in your reasoning.

There is a hidden assumption in your reasoning.

Looks like it's still hidden. Mind sharing?


But by the way, if the earth were flat, BOTH those shadows would be non-existent if the sun was as far away as it is in the RE theory. The way shadows are in the diagram, you can see that two different poles which are perpendicular to the ground have different length shadows.

But by the way, if the earth were flat, BOTH those shadows would be non-existent if the sun was as far away as it is in the RE theory.

Good thing it's not far away then, huh?

Also what about orbits of sattelites? How do they manage to stay in orbit if the world is not flat?

There are none.

The whole experiment, first done by Eratosthenes, was discussed in http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=34009.0.

In a few words, Tom Bishop will try to convince you that this experiment, done on a flat Earth can be used to measure the height of the sun, which, using the results of this experiment, is about 4000 miles. Somebody will then remember that, using a different triangle, explained by Tom Bishop in the wiki, the height of the sun is about 3000 miles, and using the data from the experiment that Tom Bishop found, also discussed in the aforementioned link, the height of the sun is about 2000 miles. Therefore this experiment soundly demolishes the idea of a sun hovering above a flat Earth and Tom Bishop will just squirrel away and find another thread, like this one, and try again as if he had not already crashed and burned.

The whole experiment, first done by Eratosthenes, was discussed in http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=34009.0.

In a few words, Tom Bishop will try to convince you that this experiment, done on a flat Earth can be used to measure the height of the sun, which, using the results of this experiment, is about 4000 miles. Somebody will then remember that, using a different triangle, explained by Tom Bishop in the wiki, the height of the sun is about 3000 miles, and using the data from the experiment that Tom Bishop found, also discussed in the aforementioned link, the height of the sun is about 2000 miles. Therefore this experiment soundly demolishes the idea of a sun hovering above a flat Earth and Tom Bishop will just squirrel away and find another thread, like this one, and try again as if he had not already crashed and burned.

Or we'll simply question the accuracy of Eratosthenes' trials. Was the experiment done at sea level? How do we know the stick was precisely vertical? How do we know that the land was precisely horizontal? To do the experiment  500 miles away at the same moment in time, how did he know what time it was with the sun at different positions?

Please recall that in RE the distance to the sun changes on a regular basis.  

On the earth's distance from the sun Copernicus computed it as 3,391,200 miles, Kepler contradicted him with an estimate of 12,376,800 miles, while Newton had asserted that it did not matter whether it was 28 million or 54 million miles 'for either will do as well'.

And pretty much either will do.

In FET, though...

Quote from: trig on November 20, 2009, 05:12:34 AM

The whole experiment, first done by Eratosthenes, was discussed in http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=34009.0.

In a few words, Tom Bishop will try to convince you that this experiment, done on a flat Earth can be used to measure the height of the sun, which, using the results of this experiment, is about 4000 miles. Somebody will then remember that, using a different triangle, explained by Tom Bishop in the wiki, the height of the sun is about 3000 miles, and using the data from the experiment that Tom Bishop found, also discussed in the aforementioned link, the height of the sun is about 2000 miles. Therefore this experiment soundly demolishes the idea of a sun hovering above a flat Earth and Tom Bishop will just squirrel away and find another thread, like this one, and try again as if he had not already crashed and burned.

Or we'll simply question the accuracy of Eratosthenes' trials. Was the experiment done at sea level? How do we know the stick was precisely vertical? To do the experiment  500 miles away at the same moment in time, how did he know what time it was with the sun at different positions?

Please recall that in RE the distance to the sun changes on a regular basis.  

On the earth's distance from the sun Copernicus computed it as 3,391,200 miles, Kepler contradicted him with an estimate of 12,376,800 miles, while Newton had asserted that it did not matter whether it was 28 million or 54 million miles 'for either will do as well'.

So, you question the data by Eratosthenes, while you never had any problems with it before. Do you question your own data? Do you question the data from the experiment you yourself brought to us, done at Millersville University? http://www.millersville.edu/physics/experiments/058/index.php Those two sets of data don't coincide either. And please tell us why you are the only one (in the world, I think) that does not believe the accuracy of Eratosthenes in his measurements was very good.

What happens to his equations for shadow length if we assume that the earth is flat?

Irresolution.

Quote from: ShnitzelKiller on November 19, 2009, 10:54:29 PM

But by the way, if the earth were flat, BOTH those shadows would be non-existent if the sun was as far away as it is in the RE theory.

Good thing it's not far away then, huh?

Keep wishing it and maybe one day it will happen?

Or we'll simply question the accuracy of Eratosthenes' trials. Was the experiment done at sea level? How do we know the stick was precisely vertical? To do the experiment  500 miles away at the same moment in time, how did he know what time it was with the sun at different positions?

Please recall that in RE the distance to the sun changes on a regular basis.  

On the earth's distance from the sun Copernicus computed it as 3,391,200 miles, Kepler contradicted him with an estimate of 12,376,800 miles, while Newton had asserted that it did not matter whether it was 28 million or 54 million miles 'for either will do as well'.

I do wonder when anyone among the flat guys will ever produce quotes or science examples from less than 140 years ago. If you wrote a paper on any scientific topic and all your references were that old, it'd be laughed out of any journal.

Nobody in the whole wide world questions an ancient Greek's accuracy in a scientific experiment?
Shit!

Eratosthenes' data has been verified several times. The point is not really whether Eratosthenes was precise in his measures, but that there are two published sets of data, these and the ones from http://www.millersville.edu/physics/experiments/058/index.php, and another from Tom Bishop and all give us a different height for the sun.

You can get as many measurements as you please, and you will reaffirm the conclusion. But since Tom Bishop believes in conspiracies, the published data is what he accepts. So, there it is.

On the earth's distance from the sun Copernicus computed it as 3,391,200 miles, Kepler contradicted him with an estimate of 12,376,800 miles, while Newton had asserted that it did not matter whether it was 28 million or 54 million miles 'for either will do as well'.

You are right, these calculations are all very far from the real distance. You did not tell us which were the assumptions made to reach these numbers, so we cannot comment on them.

Science works exactly like this. Poor models are replaced with better models as science progresses, and the explanation on how those figures was reached is fundamental, since it includes the model. On the other hand, FE has no models that permit predictions. There is no path from the ideas, some not so bad, to the actual science, that is, models, experiments and predictions.

you know, this experment  if we work together.

All we need is to find where people are in the world, and get several of them to work together.

Firstly, we need the right people. if we work out where we are on a Real Earth Map, sorry, Round Earth Map, then courtesy of the wonder of the internet, we can team up people who are in the same longitude - for example, Finland, estonia, Greece, and South africa, or Equador, Florida, NY state, and  Quebec.


the material costs are, pretty much, about $5/?5 at most - in reality, probably less..

get four 2m long canes from a garden centre, get some string, and a bolt.
use some of the string to tie three canes together into a tripod, and set it up on an open flattish area with no buildings to block the sun.
take the bolt, tie it to the other bit of string, and make a plumb-line. drop it slowly from the point of intersection down to the ground level, taking care to make sure it is steady, and not swinging like a pendulum.

the point of the tripod, and the point on the ground level are, for all intents and purposes, perpendicular to the normal of the plane, regardless of any slight irregularity in the ground. (obviously, if you're trying to put this up on a 45 degree hillside, you're a little bit "special", so try to aim for as flat a ground as you can find.)

now take the 4th cane, and firmly drive it into the ground from the the plumb-line point and going up to the top of the tripod. you've got a vertical stick which is accurate regardless of the surface. unless you happen to be standing 10 m away from a 500 cubic foot block of pure uranium. in whihc case a flat earth is the least of your worries.

now, at midday on the same day, we measure the shadow and report back with location, altitude of the location, and the exact length of the stick, and length of the shadow. direction of the shadow too.

because there are now more than two points of reference, we can start to look at using the known distances between these points, and calculating the distances, on the same day, at the same time. if we use a real-time chat programme like IRC, or MSN, it would infact be possible to co-ordinate it to "now!" and measure at that point, so we dont have to worry about differences of being within a similar time zone, but being in slightly different longitudes. if we get people in different longitudes, who are to either side of the midday line, we can work out if the curviture is 2 or 3 dimensional. (cylinder or sphere)


and therfore we can have two absolute answers.  as the multiple points give us three angles, we can triangulate with the distance and with our own data, (which should demonstrate different altitudes for the sun if it were a flat earth) we can conclude either a curvature, or that bendy light is infact 'real'.

 
 

 

Quote from: ShnitzelKiller on November 19, 2009, 10:54:29 PM

But by the way, if the earth were flat, BOTH those shadows would be non-existent if the sun was as far away as it is in the RE theory.

Good thing it's not far away then, huh?

Do excuse me, I a newbie on these forums, but how exaclty does your sun theory propose the fact that the sun moves throughout the day, and how it disapears? And how does it account for the moon?

Read the FAQs or use the search.

All forums have a search, learn to use it.

since the sun is actually a spotlight. the man with no shadow was obviously standing under the spotlight at mid day, whereas the man 800 km away had a shadow because the light was hitting him side on instead of directly above, thus casting a shadow.

get a torch, a couple of chess pieces (anything which can stand and cast a shadow), set your pieces up on the dining table (prob about 30cm would be good enough) shine the torch directly over one of the pieces and you will get the same result as in your diagram which you posted. 

Quote from: Insomniya on November 18, 2009, 06:43:30 PM

Also what about orbits of sattelites? How do they manage to stay in orbit if the world is not flat?

There are none.

Man, makes this GPS device I have here look mighty magical, eh?