Why is the Flat Earth Theory right?

I simply wanted to inquire as to why members of this society consider Samuel Rowbotham's ideas and theories far more credible than the centuries of evidence supporting a round Earth. Why did the idea of a flat Earth seem more believable than a round one?

I simply wanted to inquire as to why members of this society consider Samuel Rowbotham's ideas and theories far more credible than the centuries of evidence supporting a round Earth. Why did the idea of a flat Earth seem more believable than a round one?

The answer is psychological rather than rational,  when you become paranoid to the extent that you think space is faked, then you've crossed over into the twilight zone of the conspiracy loonies...   interesting place,  but I wouldn't want to live there..    The neighbours are crazy like you wouldn't believe.

I simply wanted to inquire as to why members of this society consider Samuel Rowbotham's ideas and theories far more credible than the centuries of evidence supporting a round Earth. Why did the idea of a flat Earth seem more believable than a round one?

It is not right, the Earth is round.

Is it easy to discount us and call us "conspiracy theorists nutjobs"? Sure. Does that make us wrong? No, not anymore so than saying "It is not right, the Earth is round."

First to answer your question, I must state its not hard to show there are centuries of flat earth evidences too. However, at the base of Rowbotham's method is a return to real empiricism and a real science that puts the accountability into everyday observation and testing. These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together. Like somebody shoved three boxes of puzzles into one container. 

Is it easy to discount us and call us "conspiracy theorists nutjobs"? Sure. Does that make us wrong? No, not anymore so than saying "It is not right, the Earth is round."

First to answer your question, I must state its not hard to show there are centuries of flat earth evidences too. However, at the base of Rowbotham's method is a return to real empiricism and a real science that puts the accountability into everyday observation and testing. These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together. Like somebody shoved three boxes of puzzles into one container.

You claim "when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together." Such as?

And please only ones relevant to the earth's shape.

And I for one do not class
as being relevant to the "shape of the earth".

These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting together.

Please elaborate.  Experts in the fields of aerospace, seismology, navigation, weather, astronomy, geodesy, and countless others all agree that the earth is a spheroid planet with a radius of 6,371 km, and for all of them, things would fall apart if this were not the case.  In fact, everything fits together so well that the only ones that disagree are a small group of conspiracy theorists, none of which are knowledgeable in any of these fields. 

Is it easy to discount us and call us "conspiracy theorists nutjobs"? Sure. Does that make us wrong? No, not anymore so than saying "It is not right, the Earth is round."

First to answer your question, I must state its not hard to show there are centuries of flat earth evidences too. However, at the base of Rowbotham's method is a return to real empiricism and a real science that puts the accountability into everyday observation and testing. These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together. Like somebody shoved three boxes of puzzles into one container.

Actually it's not so easy to discount all flat earthers as conspiracy nutters,   there  seem to be as many models of  flat earth theory as there are youtube channels,   I have personal direct experience of satellite systems,  there is nothing fake about space,  NASA,  ESA,  JAXA,  all the TV and weather satellites,  GPS,  LEO systems...  you name it.   All real,  all perfectly normal.   

If you choose to deny objective reality,  that's your business,  I can imagine lots of people are happier in their own version of reality.   

Who am I to say they are wrong?   Happy hour at the sanitarium with scepti on the piano. 

Just stop pretending it's objective reality.  Most of us live in the real world.

Quote from: John Davis on July 05, 2016, 09:00:30 AM

Is it easy to discount us and call us "conspiracy theorists nutjobs"? Sure. Does that make us wrong? No, not anymore so than saying "It is not right, the Earth is round."

First to answer your question, I must state its not hard to show there are centuries of flat earth evidences too. However, at the base of Rowbotham's method is a return to real empiricism and a real science that puts the accountability into everyday observation and testing. These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together. Like somebody shoved three boxes of puzzles into one container.

You claim "when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together." Such as?

And please only ones relevant to the earth's shape.

And I for one do not class

dark matter, the underlying cause of gravitation, gravitons, the age of the universe, the shape of galaxies, etc

as being relevant to the "shape of the earth".

I am still waiting for: "these observations not fitting fitting (sic sic) together"
The Flat Earth Geography with all shapes and distances correct (as we are waiting for İntikam's "map" on TFES.org).

I simply wanted to inquire as to why members of this society consider Samuel Rowbotham's ideas and theories far more credible than the centuries of evidence supporting a round Earth. Why did the idea of a flat Earth seem more believable than a round one?

There is not "centuries" of evidence supporting a round earth.  The globe ideas and theories were taught in classrooms worldwide for hundreds of years before space flights could even provide concrete evidence of Earth's shape, but that makes centuries of tradition not actual evidence. 

I am actually a "flat earther" that is totally unfamilar with Samuel Rowbotham.  What makes the flat Earth model more believable to me is that it completely explains a lot of guidance systems and military history.

- "Flat earth" mathematics is used to guide all military weapons. No equations are used to account for the "supposed" earth curvature and Coriolis Effect
- There is no difference in travel times for East/West airplanes going with or againist the supposed rotation of the earth.
- The US Department of Defense literally uses the Flat Earth model for their WGS 84 reference system.  The WGS 84 documents define earth as a fixed ellipsoid with a "flatting effect", with a ceiling (aka the flat earth dome), and as a "geocentric system" (in other words the celestrial bodies rotate around the earth as the old flat earth philosophers observed)   
- It is public record that the US military used numerous Thor missiles with nuclear warheads for atmosphere tests despite legit fears that the nukes would cause irreparably damage to the atmosphere.  Under the Globe model their actions seem completely reckless, but under the flat earth-dome model the military action makes more sense as an act of desperation. As the very name "Operation Fishbowl" suggests the goal was to literally break free of the atmospheric dome of the flat earth with nukes.
 
 

Quote from: John Davis on July 05, 2016, 09:00:30 AM

These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting together.

Please elaborate.  Experts in the fields of aerospace, seismology, navigation, weather, astronomy, geodesy, and countless others all agree that the earth is a spheroid planet with a radius of 6,371 km, and for all of them, things would fall apart if this were not the case.  In fact, everything fits together so well that the only ones that disagree are a small group of conspiracy theorists, none of which are knowledgeable in any of these fields.

All those fields rely on GPS which was made using the WGS 84 reference model.  If you read the actual WGS 84 literature it defines itself as a re-worded flat earth model.  Ellipsoid shape with a flatting factor, ceiling (flat earth dome), no-net rotation condition like the International Terrestrial Reference System (ITRS), and geocentric system (in other words with the celestrial objects all orbiting the earth as the geo-center) You and many others don't realize it, but all the guidance models actually fitted together so well on flat earth models the whole time. lol

Quote from: John Davis on July 05, 2016, 09:00:30 AM

Is it easy to discount us and call us "conspiracy theorists nutjobs"? Sure. Does that make us wrong? No, not anymore so than saying "It is not right, the Earth is round."

First to answer your question, I must state its not hard to show there are centuries of flat earth evidences too. However, at the base of Rowbotham's method is a return to real empiricism and a real science that puts the accountability into everyday observation and testing. These observations check out, whereas when we look at round earth science we see these observations not fitting fitting together. Like somebody shoved three boxes of puzzles into one container.

Actually it's not so easy to discount all flat earthers as conspiracy nutters,   there  seem to be as many models of  flat earth theory as there are youtube channels,   I have personal direct experience of satellite systems,  there is nothing fake about space,  NASA,  ESA,  JAXA,  all the TV and weather satellites,  GPS,  LEO systems...  you name it.   All real,  all perfectly normal.   

If you choose to deny objective reality,  that's your business,  I can imagine lots of people are happier in their own version of reality.   

Who am I to say they are wrong?   Happy hour at the sanitarium with scepti on the piano. 

Just stop pretending it's objective reality.  Most of us live in the real world.

Lol. Yeah it is so perfectly normal and "non-fake" for NASA, China, and Russia to all use scuba equipment for "legit" space walk mission videos.   





GPS doesn't use any satellites.  GPS is based on the analog technologies of the LORAN and Decca naviation systems from WWII. It runs entirely on triangulating locations from all the groundbased cellphone towers.

LEO systems are simply solar-powered blimps that float in a fixed position indefinably.  Really simple dirt cheap technology. The satellites in Geosynchronous orbit worked as a great marketing fiction though. A lot of $200K blimps got to be sold at "inflated" prices as $500 million satellite packages to investors. haha 

Lol. Yeah it is so perfectly normal and "non-fake" for NASA, China, and Russia to all use scuba equipment for "legit" space walk mission videos.   

So you don't know how training for space walks is done,   that's  not unreasonable that you would misunderstand that given your lack of comprehension generally. 

Since you raised the subject of GPS,  You are probably unaware that the satellites actually transmit their co-ordinates in real time,   you can build your own receiver and write your own decoding software if you wish,  the satellites are in orbit at about  20,000 km,  but don't believe me,  you owe it to yourself to discover the truth.   

I don't understand why you think WGS84  ellipsoid is a flat earth?   It's just a simple XYZ cartesian co-ordinate system,  and the surface of the earth is mapped in that co-ordinate system as an ellipsoid,  so you can get correct altitude fixes.

I have use LEO systems extensively, and they aren't "blimps"  that's just showing your ignorance.   There are also plenty of amateur radio satellites in orbit,  built and operated by amateur radio groups around the world.   I used AMSAT OSCAR 7 many years ago.

Here is a list of current AMSAT satellites
http://www.amsat.org/status/


"LEO systems are simply solar-powered blimps that float in a fixed position indefinably"   Thats just pure BS.   If you think otherwise,  I challenge you to prove that ANY of the amateur satellites are fake.

Sanitarium happy hour here we come....  !! 

Training for space walks in dense water pools. 
Talk about a massive dose of chalk and cheese. 

I'd say you couldn't make this up but NASA and co clearly has.

paranoid ... conspiracy loonies...  crazy...

Lol he's back; it's the Wealdstone Rayzor:

Quote from: Rayzor on June 28, 2016, 08:50:54 AM

paranoid ... conspiracy loonies...  crazy...

Lol he's back; it's the Wealdstone Rayzor:

Ask scepti to save you a front row seat at the happy hour sing-a-long.     Should be a blast.    I'm not going to be able to make it however,  carry on without me.

You want some?

I'll give it ya.

Ha ha,  the Wealdstone raider,  he speaks like a true flat earther,  and psycho conspiracy nutter.   Nice one.

psycho... conspiracy... nutter...

paranoid... conspiracy loonies...  crazy...

You got no fans.

Quote from: Thanos on July 09, 2016, 12:08:10 AM

Lol. Yeah it is so perfectly normal and "non-fake" for NASA, China, and Russia to all use scuba equipment for "legit" space walk mission videos.   

So you don't know how training for space walks is done,   that's  not unreasonable that you would misunderstand that given your lack of comprehension generally. 

Since you raised the subject of GPS,  You are probably unaware that the satellites actually transmit their co-ordinates in real time,   you can build your own receiver and write your own decoding software if you wish,  the satellites are in orbit at about  20,000 km,  but don't believe me,  you owe it to yourself to discover the truth.   

I don't understand why you think WGS84  ellipsoid is a flat earth?   It's just a simple XYZ cartesian co-ordinate system,  and the surface of the earth is mapped in that co-ordinate system as an ellipsoid,  so you can get correct altitude fixes.

I have use LEO systems extensively, and they aren't "blimps"  that's just showing your ignorance.   There are also plenty of amateur radio satellites in orbit,  built and operated by amateur radio groups around the world.   I used AMSAT OSCAR 7 many years ago.

Here is a list of current AMSAT satellites
http://www.amsat.org/status/


"LEO systems are simply solar-powered blimps that float in a fixed position indefinably"   Thats just pure BS.   If you think otherwise,  I challenge you to prove that ANY of the amateur satellites are fake.

Sanitarium happy hour here we come....  !!

They use pool footage for the Live TV streams of supposed space walks. Not just the training missions.

"so you can get correct altitude fixes."  To get correct altitude fixes. Exactly. The WSG 84 reference model won't be able to provide correct altitude fixes if it a curved spherical model applied for navigating on a flat earth.  Also just like the International Terrestrial Reference Frame the WSG 84 is a no net rotation model.  IF we were on a rotating globe then the WSG 84 and ITRF would be ineffective for aerospace navigation and missile targeting.

Interesting that you mention AMSAT-OSCAR 7 its pretty fishy how it went silent with a dead battery in 1981, goes silent for 21 years with a malfunctioned battery, and then was heard from again in June 2002.  What was the radio frequency you used with AMSAT-OSCAR 7?

They use pool footage for the Live TV streams of supposed space walks. Not just the training missions.

Only on dumbass youtube conspiracy videos.

"so you can get correct altitude fixes."  To get correct altitude fixes. Exactly. The WSG 84 reference model won't be able to provide correct altitude fixes if it a curved spherical model applied for navigating on a flat earth.  Also just like the International Terrestrial Reference Frame the WSG 84 is a no net rotation model.  IF we were on a rotating globe then the WSG 84 and ITRF would be ineffective for aerospace navigation and missile targeting.

I think you misunderstand the basics of co-ordinate systems and navigation,   I shudder to think what misconceptions you have about targetting missiles.

Where do you think 0,0,0  is in the WGS84 co-ordinate system?   And why is  altitude (distance from 0,0,0)  somewhat constant ( give or take a few tens of miles) wherever you are on earth?

Interesting that you mention AMSAT-OSCAR 7 its pretty fishy how it went silent with a dead battery in 1981, goes silent for 21 years with a malfunctioned battery, and then was heard from again in June 2002.  What was the radio frequency you used with AMSAT-OSCAR 7?

I've no idea why the batteries came good,  I doubt anyone else really knows either,  the best theory I've heard is that the initial battery failure was caused by a short circuit in the battery, and over time it's burnt out to become a short open circuit.  It's still operational, but only on solar panels.

I worked AO7 back in the late 1970's on 70cm/2M split,   and  had a tracking antenna.   If you think LEO satellites don't move very fast,  (remember your stupid "floating blimp" statements)  you know nothing about them.   

Here's a challenge for you,  find a local radio club in your area and ask them about amateur satellite systems.   Report back what you learn.