Explain

Alright.
Please explain several key factors as to why the Earth is flat
1. All the other objects in the universe are spheres, as shown by the rotation of key features across their surfaces, such as sunspots on the Sun, Valles Marineris on Mars, and the Great Red Spot on Jupiter. Why is the Earth special in this case? Why is it not a sphere like everything else?
2. Gravity would pull a Flat Earth into a sphere naturally, as it does to all other objects in the universe, such as protostars, where gravity is pulling clouds of hydrogen into a sphere. Again, why does this not happen on Earth? What makes the Earth so special?
3. Why is it impossible to travel in a straight line to circumnavigate the Earth?
4. Why do I lose time if I travel east, and gain time if I travel west?

FE fans might be busy, let me help out ...

1. Earth is a special flower ... you have to realize that FE is basically a geocentric model ... (wanting to feel special is a major selling point for FE fans)

2. There is no gravity ... you can make up your favorite replacement, acceleration, air-pressure, aether, ...

3. There is, conveniently, no FE map ... and I dont mean an exact one, they cant even find a way to get the continents right ...

4. The sun is travelling above the equator (or might only be a reflection) and somehow shines like a flashlight, giving us day and night ... i know, its as dumb as it sounds ...

Welcome to the FE way ... take one small question at a time, give an answer that does sound plausibly for all of half a second, maybe add a few scientific terms that seem to vaguely fit, and BOOM, RE denied!

Because each of those answers opens up a myriad of other problems and contradictions (and FE fans are allergic to math) there can never be a real FE model, but that's why every FE fan tries to limit discussions to small, single issues ... there they can, with all the fallacy tricks and petty insults in the book, persuade themselves that they won the debate.

I guess the main point that I want to make on this is that FE'ers dont have the luxury of 500 years of science and textbooks to back up their claim and they are suspicious that deception has taken place. Everyone has there own idea on the reason of that deception and I have mine. Although I appear to have taken the FE side the reality is that I am still investigating it in my own way.

It is conceivable that the earth is the earth and the heavens are the heavens and no similarity between them exists, ancient literature indicates this very fact and it is foolish to consider the ancients as lacking in knowledge. RE'ers argue strongly their case but when you think about it they are simply the opposite of those who suspect foul play, they accept blindly and trust the world completely, who is the most insane? I believe that humans are not as smart as they like to think they are, that is why we are so easily lead and accept the teachings put before us.

Allow me to present a few counter arguments to your statements:-

1. How do you know the sun is a sphere, if it is, it still looks like a disc from here, but it might be a sphere. I have seen footage of its rays concentrated on one cloud top or patch of ground

2. Your statements on gravity again are based on what you have been shown, if FE'ers are more correct, then these claims are irrelevant, there are other possibilities other than gravity forming the earth and heavens.

3. There is no flat earth map because who would make one? If the earth is flat, they don't want you to know it is so anyone who uses the lack of a map against the movement isn't thinking very rationally. I imagine it would be much like the generic one you see everywhere due to the passage of day and night and the ability to track world time.

4. Even RE'ers will dispute your claim of losing and gaining time when you travel with or against the rotation of the earth. Their claim that the atmosphere rotates with the earth depends on it.




   

I guess the main point that I want to make on this is that FE'ers dont have the luxury of 500 years of science and textbooks to back up their claim and they are suspicious that deception has taken place. Everyone has there own idea on the reason of that deception and I have mine. Although I appear to have taken the FE side the reality is that I am still investigating it in my own way.

First problem ... science doesnt start with the assumption that a big conspiracy hides the truth, it starts with observation and hypothesis.

... it is foolish to consider the ancients as lacking in knowledge.

It is perfectly normal to assume that people knew less 500 years ago. It is perfectly foolish to assume they knew better ...

RE'ers argue strongly their case but when you think about it they are simply the opposite of those who suspect foul play, they accept blindly and trust the world completely, who is the most insane?

Here you facade of "neutral investigation" breaks down. I can distinguish between truth, lies and propaganda just fine, thank you very much. I am also able to accept when I am wrong ... I havent seen any FE fan do this so far ...

1. How do you know the sun is a sphere, if it is, it still looks like a disc from here, but it might be a sphere. I have seen footage of its rays concentrated on one cloud top or patch of ground

Thanks to sunspots we can observe the solar rotation just fine.

2. Your statements on gravity again are based on what you have been shown, if FE'ers are more correct, then these claims are irrelevant, there are other possibilities other than gravity forming the earth and heavens.

None of the FE solution comes close to gravity in covering observations and predictions ... FE makes a lot out of the fact that gravity can't explain everything 100% yet ... none of the FE solutions come close to covering a tenth of that and all contradict known observations.

3. There is no flat earth map because who would make one? If the earth is flat, they don't want you to know it is so anyone who uses the lack of a map against the movement isn't thinking very rationally. I imagine it would be much like the generic one you see everywhere due to the passage of day and night and the ability to track world time.

Again, I dont need a fancy map ... just tell me roughly where the continents are on a flat earth, a few 100 km up or down dont matter ... you still cant make it fit with known travel times everybody can check for themselves. You know, make a few cutouts roughly representing the continents and shift them around until it fits ... a 3 year old could do that.

4. Even RE'ers will dispute your claim of losing and gaining time when you travel with or against the rotation of the earth. Their claim that the atmosphere rotates with the earth depends on it.

A simple proof for the rotation of the earth is the Foucault pendulum ... I only hope i didnt call down a sandokhan wall of text for mentioning that.

1. All the other objects in the universe are spheres, as shown by the rotation of key features across their surfaces, such as sunspots on the Sun, Valles Marineris on Mars, and the Great Red Spot on Jupiter. Why is the Earth special in this case? Why is it not a sphere like everything else?

Those are not all the objects in the universe: only the ones we can see. In the DET model, the environs of the Earth develop as a result of the planar Earth. (To be rigorous, they develop by the same force). All these observations are expected.

2. Gravity would pull a Flat Earth into a sphere naturally, as it does to all other objects in the universe, such as protostars, where gravity is pulling clouds of hydrogen into a sphere. Again, why does this not happen on Earth? What makes the Earth so special?

Gravity does not exist.

3. Why is it impossible to travel in a straight line to circumnavigate the Earth?

Untrue under DET.

4. Why do I lose time if I travel east, and gain time if I travel west?

Time zones. The Sun doesn't illuminate all the Earth at once, or none at once. The RE explanation is perfectly valid here.

I have never seen proof of a spinning ball Earth none, zero, 0. Without using 'theories' and a few fake drawings you have nothing to prove the ball Earth theory. Case  Closed.

Soulblood, this is the Q&A forum, not the debate forum.  Please, refrain from posting is you do not have a legitimate question or answer about the flat Earth.  Consider this a warning. 

Quote from: TheEarthIsASphere on November 15, 2015, 01:43:20 PM

1. All the other objects in the universe are spheres, as shown by the rotation of key features across their surfaces, such as sunspots on the Sun, Valles Marineris on Mars, and the Great Red Spot on Jupiter. Why is the Earth special in this case? Why is it not a sphere like everything else?

Those are not all the objects in the universe: only the ones we can see. In the DET model, the environs of the Earth develop as a result of the planar Earth. (To be rigorous, they develop by the same force). All these observations are expected.

Quote

2. Gravity would pull a Flat Earth into a sphere naturally, as it does to all other objects in the universe, such as protostars, where gravity is pulling clouds of hydrogen into a sphere. Again, why does this not happen on Earth? What makes the Earth so special?

Gravity does not exist.

Please read the question in its entirety. I asked for an explanation as to why the Earth is special. Because on the bodies we can observe, we see spheres, rotation, and gravity, this provides the best basis of scientific proof - What you observe must be true, until you can come up with a decent explanation as to why it is untrue. I have yet to see that. Why are none of the nearby things disks? Why is the theory of gravity untrue for Earth when it has been proven often throughout the observable universe? Give me an EXPLANATION to these things, rather than just spouting facts without any backing. Explain.

Please read the question in its entirety. I asked for an explanation as to why the Earth is special. Because on the bodies we can observe, we see spheres, rotation, and gravity, this provides the best basis of scientific proof - What you observe must be true, until you can come up with a decent explanation as to why it is untrue. I have yet to see that. Why are none of the nearby things disks? Why is the theory of gravity untrue for Earth when it has been proven often throughout the observable universe? Give me an EXPLANATION to these things, rather than just spouting facts without any backing. Explain.

I did. The Earth is 'special' because it formed first, and because of it allowed alternative objects to form. Why is the Sun special, in RET? Everything else is a rock, it's a ball of gas. Because the formation of the Sun altered what was going on, to allow planets to form.
Why is this a hard concept to transfer to FET?!

As for gravity, you're just assuming RET. That's not an argument for anything.

Why is the Sun special, in RET?

The sun is not special, it's just bigger, and gravity did the rest (sun captured earth, earth captured moon, moon captures asteroids, ...) ... there are systems with several suns, there are objects that travel through the universe without sun ...

As for gravity, you're just assuming ...

We can observe gravity and have mathematical formulas to calculate its effects and predict its behavior ...

The sun is not special, it's just bigger, and gravity did the rest (sun captured earth, earth captured moon, moon captures asteroids, ...) ... there are systems with several suns, there are objects that travel through the universe without sun ...

Well done. Try applying the same logic to more than just your own model.

We can observe gravity and have mathematical formulas to calculate its effects and predict its behavior ...

That calculate the effects of something that is supposed to be gravity under RET. More than one thing can have the same end result.

Quote from: Soulblood on November 25, 2015, 02:27:43 AM

The sun is not special, it's just bigger, and gravity did the rest (sun captured earth, earth captured moon, moon captures asteroids, ...) ... there are systems with several suns, there are objects that travel through the universe without sun ...

Well done. Try applying the same logic to more than just your own model.

If I follow your suggestion and apply this logic to the FE model, everything we see in the sky must be a disc, right? No special exceptions for earth, moon, sun, ... just differences in size ...

Quote

We can observe gravity and have mathematical formulas to calculate its effects and predict its behavior ...

That calculate the effects of something that is supposed to be gravity under RET. More than one thing can have the same end result.

No model I have seen on this forum fulfills all effects, calculations and predictions we witness like gravity does ... for example, how does FE predict the time and position a comet reappears?

The stuff in the sky is not the same as what is below your feet.  It never has been and never will be.  Stop arguing and trying to start debates in the Q&A forum.  Consider this a warning. 

If I follow your suggestion and apply this logic to the FE model, everything we see in the sky must be a disc, right? No special exceptions for earth, moon, sun, ... just differences in size ...

Is the Earth made of gas?

No model I have seen on this forum fulfills all effects, calculations and predictions we witness like gravity does ...

Because 'gravity' is a theory founded on assumptions, but with formulae relevant only to observations (which would be true regardless of the model) assigned to it.