Elegance in theory is not a hallmark of truth - it is but a sign that the view has been entrenched for large stretches of history.
Incoherence of a theory is a sign that most of it is ad-hoc.
The incoherence of a theory is a sign that it will be mostly ad-hoc, imo.
I completely agree with "The
incoherence of a theory is a sign that it will be mostly ad-hoc, imo."
When it starts basically saying "The earth looks flat, so it must be", then bending almost every observation we make with nonsensical "Laws of Perspective" (which basically deny any reasonably light paths, yet Tom Bishop can insist that "Photons travel in straight line" - but only if it suits his current argument).
"Universal Acceleration" (Which half say explains gravity - not gravitation, and half say something else).
"Explanations for the
cause of sunrise, sunset and moonrise and moonset".
"Directions of sunrises and sunsets" Even Rowbotham says the sun in England rises in the NORTH East, which is completely impossible on his model!
"Explanations for moon phases".
"Explanations for solar and lunar eclipses".
That's enough for now! Don't get me onto astronomical observations.
Then the Flat Earth supporters have to declare everything fake that dares look as though it might be evidence against their cherished shape!
What about of bit of research into the real explanations of eclipses, without any imaginary "shadow object"!
The Lunar Eclipse
A Lunar Eclipse occurs about twice a year when a satellite of the sun passes between the sun and moon.
This satellite is called the Shadow Object. Its orbital plane is tilted at an angle of about 5°10' to the sun's orbital plane, making eclipses possible only when the three bodies (Sun, Object, and Moon) are aligned and when the moon is crossing the sun's orbital plane (at a point called the node). Within a given year, considering the orbitals of these celestial bodies, a maximum of three lunar eclipses can occur.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
It is estimated that the Shadow Object is around five to ten miles in diameter. Since it is somewhat close to the sun the manifestation of its penumbra upon the moon appears as a magnified projection.
Hasn't anyone ever thought of the complete impossibility of a "five to ten miles in diameter" shadow object hiding essentially ALL the light from a 32 mile diameter sun onto a 32 mile diameter moon some 12,400 miles away!
And you talk about "ad hoc" explanations! Honestly a lot of Flat Earth explanations make laugh, they are just so poorly guessed (they obviously have never been thought out, let alone verified).