There are too many contradictions to this 'Flat Earth Theory' to name. I am going to discuss a few. Also don't know how much it matters but I am an academic and my field in mathematics.
1. Flat Earth cannot explain how some areas of the world are dark and some are light. If the world was really flat then no matter how close or far the sun was, every single country would be able to see the sun with their own eyes or telescope.
2. I have seen the explanation why it is apparently possible to go around the world on flat earth, however why hasn't someone actually used the map to go towards the edge?
3. There are many proven theories in my field and especially the sciences such as physics where we our work is based on knowing and working with the earth being a globe. If the Earth wasn't a globe many of these proven theories of fundamental science would break down. The word here is proven meaning we have verified this through experimentation and it cannot be denied. These are things like gravity, magnetic forces, constants such as pi, phi, e etc.
I think we all know this flat earth thing is just a bit of nonsense, it doesn't work, there is no mathematical proof and whats really funny is flat earth people seem to contradict themselves on many occasions.
Yes, I see so many everyday things that do not in themselves
prove that the earth is a globe, but they make me 100% convinced that it is.
These things range from simple observations anyone can make:
- Sun and moon rising and setting,
- The sun and moon staying essentially the same sizes from rising to setting,
- The sharp horizon at sea.
Then there are the observations that fit perfectly with the Globe, but are never adequately explained by a flat earth:
- The phases of the moon,
- Lunar and solar eclipses, and
- The accuracy of the prediction of sun and moon rising and setting times, as well as position in the sky.
Other observations are more technical, yet fit the Globe and not the flat earth. Some of these are:
- The required spacing of microwave repeater towers,
- The alignment of satellite TV and internet dishes.
And then there are the things that crop up in general reading, such as astronomical observations that would be meaningless if the earth were flat. For example, the earth to moon distance has been estimated since Aristarchus of Samos,
- with the earliest reasonable estimates by Ptolemy of 64 1/6 times the radius of the earth at the moon's farthest farthest point (or about 410,000 km - using the current radius of earth).
- The French astronomer, A.C.D Crommelin, in from 1905 through 1910 used meridian crossing to determine the distance to within ±30 km of the current value.
- Astronomers O'Keefe and Anderson calculated the lunar distance by observing 4 occultations from 9 locations in 1952 at a mean distance of 384,407.6±4.7 km
- Then radar measurements reduced the error margin giving a mean distance of 384,402±1.2 km
- And finally laser measurements place the uncertainty in the mm range.
These "estimates" are reasonably consistent even from the earliest and they all show a "distant moon".
Yet all the Flat Earthers can tell us that
The Moon
The moon is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.
With no justification as to how it was measured, estimated or guessed.
Is it any wonder we claim the Flat Earth Hypothesis is full of inconsistencies?