SENSIBLE DEBATE

  • 14 Replies
  • 5333 Views
?

winston_anorak

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« on: October 08, 2005, 10:42:21 AM »
As a person with an open mind over the spherical earth versus flat earth arguement, I think it's about time we had some sensible debate.

I am extemely saddened by the lack of respect some people have for others with different views. The implications for people who see scriptural justification for a flat earth could be devastating if proof was eventually found to the contrary. This would imply that Bible was wrong!

The best common sense arguement for a flat earth is the analogy between a train and a station platform. Which one moves?
When I'm standing at the platform I can watch the train moving past me. When I'm in the train I can see the station platform moving past me.... but I'm not crazy enough to believe the illusion I see. I know what is moving and what isn't and it sure isn't the station platform!
Is it not even more unlikely that the whole earth is moving and everything else in the cosmos is standing still? If you believe your senses the opposite is true, we are standing still, like on the station platform, and the sun and moon are moving above us. why else would we use expression s like sunrise and sunset? No-one ever argues that they are illogical terms.
 :?:  :?:  :?:  :?:  :?:  :?:

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2005, 12:55:05 PM »
first off, I would like to wish you luck in having a sensible debate, it seems that all the other round earthers would rather throw insults at, and flame, anyone who has different beliefs than them.

that is a good way to look at it, how ever, I don't believe that every thing else is stationary, just moving to slowly (when compared to the size of the known universe) to tell. moons orbit their planets, planets orbit their stars, stars orbit whatever is in the center of the galaxy. galaxys are possibly orbiting somthing to large to comprehend.

next, the arctic circle. if the earth was flat, why would it be day light for months on end in certain parts of the world, but the days stay normal lengths in others?

also, how could it be day on one half of the world, and the other half be night if the earth was flat? wouldn't it be almost the same all over?

then there are the people that say if the earth was round, why don't the oceans drip off the sides. well I can't answer that myself, but, I do know that Jupiter is made of gas, the reason the gas does not just float away would be the same reason that the oceans stay on the earth.

last, have you ever heard of Eratosthenes? he heard of a well where the suns reflection could be seen in the water at noon June 21, the longest day of the year, he surmised that the sun was directly above the earth at that moment. he believed that two cities (Syene and Alexandria) where on the same meridien (longitudinal line, the imaginary north-south running lines on the map.) by measuring the shadow cast by obelisk in Alexandria at the same moment there was no shadow in Syene, he computed the length of two sides of a triangle-the length of the shadow and the hight of the obelisk. with that information and some basic geometry, he figured the angle of the triangle and with that figure determind the degree that the sun was from directly overhead. that proved two be 7 degrees 12' which is equal to about one fiftieth of a circles 360 degrees, knowing this, he further reasoned that if he knew the distance from Syene to Alexandria- wich would equal the third side of his triangle connecting the sun, Alexandria, and Syene-he could simply multiply that distance by 50 and would have the aproximate size of the earth. he then learned that it took camels 50 days to make the trip from Syene to Alexandria. using ancient EPA camel standards of 100 stadia per day (stadia is an ancient maesurement related to the size of a greek race course) he came up with a distance of 5000 stadia between the two cities, multiplying that by fifty gave him an earth circumfrence of 250,000 stadia. which roughly translates to 25,000 miles, close to it's actual measurment at the pole of 24,860 miles.

of course his measurment would not have been possible on a flat earth, and it also shows that not even the ancients thought it was flat.
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

?

Nrg

  • 24
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2005, 12:58:03 PM »
I read about you on wikipedia, so I thought I should drop in to see if I can convince you that the Earth is a sphere.

But first, I want to ask you: Do you believe in science, or do you just revoke evrything that doesn't support the Bible? In that case, men and women should not have the same number of ribs, but we do. Trust me, I have a surgeon in the family, and she's christian.

And, how come I could fly cross Atlantic AND cross the Pacific if the earth is flat? Well any way, let's go to you're arguments.

You claim that the sunsets and sundowns can only act like they do if the Earth is flat. Nope, that's not how the sunsets and sunrise work. You see, we rotate towards east, so the sun appears to "rise" in the east. The Moon rotate around us to, and that's why just one side of the Moon is shown: It doesn't have a natural satelite, so the rotation around it's own axel can't be achieved. Simple as that, if you aren't ignorant and disregard 3:rd grade physics, that is.

And have you noticed that a ball rolls around in the car. Is the car not moving?
f meat is murder, are eggs rape?

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2005, 01:18:10 PM »
Godday to you Nrg. Thank you for reccomending this site.

First, I'd like to just rip everything that Nrg said and put it into this post. But since that is stealing I'm gonna try my best to build upon what he said.

First off, I'm a convinced and almost totally beleiving lutheran christian, with some insigt and belief in "science". I for one is very intrested in the discussion if we are created by evolution or "intelligent design" (in which I represent the second of these).

But anyway (stay on topic ffs!). The Earth can't be flat. It has been proved on quite numerous occations (mainly by Magellan and the 20th century space exploration). But even by greek philosophers and mathematicians (not just the ones EnragedPenguin mentioned).

Furthermore, if the earth was flat, wouldn't there be an edge? You know that you don't just fall down, no matter how far you go. I'm quite convinced that I won't convince you. Not if these other guys didn't.
But I guess that there is one good thing in this at least, as long as you beleiven in Jesus Christ as our light and savoiur.
#31169;はエマを永久に愛する

"If you know what it means, then why question it?" -A good philosophy to follow

?

Nrg

  • 24
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2005, 01:34:24 AM »
Well, g'day to you to, mate!

And another thing wich make the flat theory dumb, is the arctic circles. You see, during a period of time in arctic Sweden, there is no sundowns for months. And then, during another period of time, there are no sunrises at all for months. How come? The rest of the world (well, except for the southern pole) isn't effected, so if a flat earth tilted there would've been a world wide effect. But it ain't. Funny, eh?

Oh, and another good advice: Stop considering terms as evidence, like sunrise and sunsets. We believed in dragons hundreds of years ago. Do you believe in dragons, just because those "terms" are still in use?

(Directed towards flat earth believers)
f meat is murder, are eggs rape?

?

winston_anorak

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #5 on: October 09, 2005, 05:37:05 AM »
Magellan's journey can be compared to a trip on a subway train on the Circle line. You can get on the train , go on along journey and get off exactly were you got on....does this imply you have been on a journey round a spherical planet? This is exactly the arguement people use when they go on circular journeys on boats and planes. Of course you end up back where you started. what does that prove?....... only that you've travelled a bigger circle than the subway train does!  

What we need is more of a simple common sense look at things, not complicated scientific theories in an attempt to bamboozle ordinary people.

?

Nrg

  • 24
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #6 on: October 09, 2005, 05:57:22 AM »
Quote from: "winston_anorak"
This is exactly the arguement people use when they go on circular journeys on boats and planes. Of course you end up back where you started. what does that prove?....... only that you've travelled a bigger circle than the subway train does!
And what if the compass always pointed in one direction during the entire journey? Then we can pretty much diregard you're "circular journey".
f meat is murder, are eggs rape?

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2005, 06:19:28 AM »
Another thing I forgot. How come you see completly different stars in the northern hemisphere, than you see in the southern hemisphere?
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

?

Nrg

  • 24
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #8 on: October 09, 2005, 06:22:58 AM »
Duh! NASA put them there, because they spend billions upon billions of dollars just to make us believe the Earth is spherical, because then they can... Um... Control us? Yes! They will have total control of us, if we believe the Earth is spherical.

Altough it doesn't add up, since there are more space research organisations then NASA, but the flatters ignore it strangely though.
f meat is murder, are eggs rape?

?

winston_anorak

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #9 on: October 09, 2005, 08:34:07 AM »
As I said earlier I have an open mind on the topic, but without trying to be cheeky or disprespectful, I have noticed that that the “round earthers” in this forum  are much more fanatical and dogmatic in their beliefs than the “flat earthers”. They seem to elevate their belief in a spherical planet earth to a tenet of faith!

I don’t think convincing proof for either side of the argument will ever be uncovered, both scenarios being equally likely. The round earth idea is counter-intuitive and against the evidence of our senses, but I do think it is a possibility. I think a lot of arguments used in the forums, such as ships disappearing before masts can be explained as optical illusions, which are phenomena that are paradoxically both real and illusionary. The concept of Optical Illusions is described in great detail at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_illusions . The article gives a definition: “An optical illusion is a type of illusion characterized by visually perceived images that are deceptive or misleading . Information gathered by the eye is interpreted by the brain to give the perception that something is present when it is not. There are physiological illusions and cognitive illusions. Optical illusions can be a natural consequence of specific optical tricks that show particular assumptions in the human perceptual system.

With regard to Magellan’s journey, both flat earth theorists and round earth theorists have a magnetic pole at the centre of their hypothetical earths, so it makes no difference to my earlier discussion point. In both versions of the earth the compass needle would behave the same way?

?

Nrg

  • 24
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2005, 08:56:25 AM »
Not really. If he would follow, let's say east, alla the time then he would eventually come to the edge of the planet.

And why don't you answer the atronomy question? And what fucking optical illusion are you talking about? If the Earth is round, then the mast will disapear. Makes sense to us "round earthers" at least.
f meat is murder, are eggs rape?

?

winston_anorak

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #11 on: October 10, 2005, 11:34:41 AM »
I’ll try to explain the concept of  “optical illusions” to you guys without being over-elaborate. Mainstream science would have you believe that the sun doesn’t rise, move across the sky and set. It also says that the sun stays the same size throughout it’s imaginary journey, even though it looks a lot bigger as it approaches the horizon. Both these phenomena are said to be “optical illusions”. I take a neutral view, even though it’s tempting to believe the evidence of your senses.
The “ship and mast” illusion is even more obscure and frankly not very interesting. I bet that none of you have ever seen it…..you don’t get that many big ships with huge maps sailing over the horizon for us all to look at!

Is it a coincidence that 2 different optical illusions take place at the horizon?

Who would expect the sky in Australia to look the same as the sky in the UK ?
If I look at the ceiling in my dining room I don’t expect it to be the same as the ceiling in my upstairs bedroom. I would be shocked and astounded if it did! Just as much as I would if the sky was the same in different continents. I don’t know why you’re so surprised to see a different sky.

I’m getting fed up with this subject now, so I think I will make my last word on the topic something my Dad used to say …..there are some things we are not meant to know – maybe the true nature of the earth and conciousness  fits into that category?
We are not meant to know the real nature of the earth? Perhaps we would not understand it?

Thanks for your contributions to this string, it was nice to get a serious debate going.

?

EnragedPenguin

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1004
SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #12 on: October 10, 2005, 06:38:13 PM »
Quote
I’ll try to explain the concept of “optical illusions” to you guys without being over-elaborate. Mainstream science would have you believe that the sun doesn’t rise, move across the sky and set. It also says that the sun stays the same size throughout it’s imaginary journey, even though it looks a lot bigger as it approaches the horizon. Both these phenomena are said to be “optical illusions”. I take a neutral view, even though it’s tempting to believe the evidence of your senses.


 The brain thinks that objects on the horizon should be farther away than objects overhead; since the Sun is the same apparent size in both places, the brain concludes that the Sun is physically bigger when it's on the horizon, and thus tricks you into thinking that the angular size is bigger than when it's overhead. This phenomenon is known as the Ponzo Illusion, and occurs for the Moon as well.
To convince yourself that this is, in fact, an optical illusion, put your head between your legs and look at the Sun upside down when it's on the horizon: it should look the same as it does when overhead, you can also look at the moon through a cardboard tube.

Quote
Who would expect the sky in Australia to look the same as the sky in the UK ?
If I look at the ceiling in my dining room I don’t expect it to be the same as the ceiling in my upstairs bedroom. I would be shocked and astounded if it did! Just as much as I would if the sky was the same in different continents. I don’t know why you’re so surprised to see a different sky.


I'm not surprised to see a different sky, but if the earth was flat I would be, because if it was flat shouldn't it look the same from all over? flat earthers say the north pole is the center of the earth and the south pole is an ice wall  
around the edge, but if that where true than people standing at random spots on the south pole would all see a different sky, but they don't.
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2005, 11:20:59 PM »
I'm happy to see that even u flat earthers can sit down and think.

Alright, if any of you can answer me this question logically your a freeking genious!

Did you know that the Romans believed the earth was round? Its true, they even calculated the sperical diameter of the earth by examining the earths distance in relation to the moons movement (and came VERY close to the actual diameter), now let me ask you, WHY would the romans lie about such matters??? They had nothing to gain from a lie, they arnt even athiest, they were polytheists! They had deduced that the earth was round BEFORE they conquered judea, meaning that the concept of Christianity (which in reality hadnt occured yet because jesus wasnt born yet), hadnt occured in Rome!!

Another point, The ancient Egyptians modelled the great pyramids and the great temples surrounding them on the stars, they wanted to make a duplicate of the heavens on earth. They made the pyramids and temples in exact order of the major stars and concellations of that time, they mirrored the heavens as they liked to say. Now the import point i'm trying to make is that the Pyramids were made some 4500 years ago, and their order in the heavens is no longer correct, they no longer are a mirror of the stars, as in 4500 years, the stars and of our own solar system has moved! (and yes i myself have gone to Egypt and looked at the stars and seen that the Pyramids no longer are in correct orbital alignment). The fact that they have moved indicates that the earth itself is moving through space along with the stars, we are no anomily, just another planet, even the romans knew that!
 r dominate forum

?

battlemonkey

SENSIBLE DEBATE
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2005, 04:27:03 AM »
i have a piece of evidence, at least i believe i do. I have done physics covering gravity and space. We place sattelites in geo-stationary orbits around the earth. a sphere has an exact center, and that center has enough mass to create a gravitational field that helps the sattelite stay in orbit around the earth. with a flat earth, assuming that it is a perfect disc, it would also have an exact center, from which most of the gravity is exerted. however, all mass exerts force on all other masses, meaning that the entire earth exerts a gravitational force on the sattelite. This means that the disc would exert unequil gravitational forces at different points in the orbit, so the orbit would not be circular, most likely an elipse. this means that at some points the sattelite is hitting the atmosphere at a much steeper angle than others, meaning that the orbit of the sattelite would decay. now, i have seen a theory on here somewhere about sattelites being bogus, a big international cover up for the flat earth, but consider this. the moon is what is known as a natural sattelite of the earth, and although it doesnt touch the atmosphere of the earth (obviously) the fairly large variations in the gravitational force would most likely cause its orbit to decay quite quickly, and i'm pretty damn sure we'd notice if the moon was getting closer.