Is this hypothesis not easily disproved?

It seems to me that the hypothesis of a 'flat earth' as given is easily disproved. You just need to be able to move about the planet, something you had trouble doing back in Samuel Rowbotham's day.

Simple.

Calculate the distance between cities south of the equator based on both the FE model and the RE model.

Measure the distance by actually traveling between them.

I would suggest the cities of Sydney and Adelaide in Australia. They have very close to the same latitude, which is easy to calculate in relation to the sun (And is the same in both models) but should have greatly different distances between them model to model.

On a RE, these cities appear to be about 725 miles apart. Slightly more as the road goes... but in the FE model, the distance is much more, well over 1000 miles. Easy to verify.

It seems to me that the hypothesis of a 'flat earth' as given is easily disproved. You just need to be able to move about the planet, something you had trouble doing back in Samuel Rowbotham's day.

Simple.

Calculate the distance between cities south of the equator based on both the FE model and the RE model.

Measure the distance by actually traveling between them.

I would suggest the cities of Sydney and Adelaide in Australia. They have very close to the same latitude, which is easy to calculate in relation to the sun (And is the same in both models) but should have greatly different distances between them model to model.

On a RE, these cities appear to be about 725 miles apart. Slightly more as the road goes... but in the FE model, the distance is much more, well over 1000 miles. Easy to verify.

It is believed by a number of flatearthers, myself included that Australia does not exist.

Parsifal will possibly verify this fact as he lives there.

If Australia does not suit the (non)sensibilities of some members, then perhaps South America or the southern regions of Africa would be more acceptable.

Australia is real, consider the duck billed platypus.

According to the theory of evolution, there is no difference between an otter and a duck.. if they end up in austrilia they can mate and produce a "duck billed platypus" HAHAHAH

In any case, New Zealand is in much greater dispute for reasons I will not go into.

According to the theory of evolution, there is no difference between an otter and a duck.. if they end up in austrilia they can mate and produce a "duck billed platypus" HAHAHAH

I lol'd

It seems to me that the hypothesis of a 'flat earth' as given is easily disproved. You just need to be able to move about the planet, something you had trouble doing back in Samuel Rowbotham's day.

Simple.

Calculate the distance between cities south of the equator based on both the FE model and the RE model.

Measure the distance by actually traveling between them.

I would suggest the cities of Sydney and Adelaide in Australia. They have very close to the same latitude, which is easy to calculate in relation to the sun (And is the same in both models) but should have greatly different distances between them model to model.

On a RE, these cities appear to be about 725 miles apart. Slightly more as the road goes... but in the FE model, the distance is much more, well over 1000 miles. Easy to verify.

Well done, this would be an outstanding experiment. I wonder why no one has argued with you. I speculate that no one wishes to test these things because they are afraid of the truth.  What would happen if this experiment disproved their entire world view?  What would they live for if not this ridiculous blog?

I expect that no one is rebutting because the argument is iron clad. No 'conspiracy' can stop someone from measuring the distance from one city to the next and comparing it against the enormous difference between the two models as calculated. This isn't a tiny difference... we're talking about a nearly 2:1 error that far below the equator (Or rimward from the equator in the FE model.)

Samuel Rowbotham actually tries this argument in his arguments FOR FE in England back in his day, but he used data which, when looked at now, was obviously in error. Not only in error, but apparently manipulated to support his defective hypothesis.

No 'conspiracy' can stop someone from measuring the distance from one city to the next

You're overlooking the vast resources of the Conspiracy, both in terms of money and power. But you are welcome to try your experiment, just be careful because they certainly monitor this forum.

You're overlooking the vast resources of the Conspiracy, both in terms of money and power. But you are welcome to try your experiment, just be careful because they certainly monitor this forum.

LOL 

Quote from: Crustinator on May 29, 2011, 05:47:18 AM

You're overlooking the vast resources of the Conspiracy, both in terms of money and power. But you are welcome to try your experiment, just be careful because they certainly monitor this forum.

LOL 

Please don't make low-content posts in the upper forums.

It is believed by a number of flatearthers, myself included that Australia does not exist.

Parsifal will possibly verify this fact as he lives there.

Seems like it does to me

It's hard to disprove when every shred of evidence you throw at FE'ers is discredited because of the Globularist bias.

Quote from: spanner34.5 on May 27, 2011, 04:21:46 AM

It is believed by a number of flatearthers, myself included that Australia does not exist.

Parsifal will possibly verify this fact as he lives there.

Seems like it does to me

Looks like the Royal Botanical Gardens to me.