Why is the earth flat?

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

Look out your window.

It is called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is indeed flatter than a pancake.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

Look out your window.

It is called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is indeed flatter than a pancake.

It is called perception. The earth has a surface area of 510.1 million km˛ and curves at about 8 inches per mile. Just because we don't see the curve doesn't mean its not there. If the earth didn't curve, on a clear day it would be possible to see every thing in a certain direction (Unless your view was obstructed). But for some reason you can't see Europe from the east coast of America.

Quote from: totallackey on March 23, 2017, 10:50:00 AM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

Look out your window.

It is called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is indeed flatter than a pancake.

It is called perception...If the earth didn't curve, on a clear day it would be possible to see every thing in a certain direction (Unless your view was obstructed). But for some reason you can't see Europe from the east coast of America.

I will provide you the following post from another prominent and frequently WRONG RE-tard and let you take this up with him, regarding your contention it would be possible to "see everything."

In this section of posts, you can clearly read where a LEGEND IN HIS OWN MIND agrees with me! As far as I know it might the second or third time he has been right on these boards!:

Quote from: totallackey on March 21, 2017, 01:06:17 PM

Quote from: Andy on March 21, 2017, 12:52:43 PM

I have been speaking to a friend of mine on distances. And we hit a cross road on how far the moon is from the earth. In doing so he came up with the test of this question; Which has its merits.
1. Highest peak is Everest. we agreed.
2. Highest peak in US. MT Rainer example.
3. His point is why can't I see Everest from MT Rainer with naked eye. I cannot explain perspective to him so im losing the argument. He keeps saying its b/c of curvature. 

4. However this make me think...Can someone point a telescope to MT Rainer from completely another state. Ive seen all of the videos of boats and what not, lets get some real distance for a change.
Thank you.
Andy

Aside from the atmoplane being more dense near the ground, there could be all other sorts of visual impediments between a person in one location attempting to look for an object at a different location.

Aside from the fact a person can only make out a penny up to a certain distance.

Personally, I have stood in fog in Chicago and could not see my hand in front of my face, yet I was able to look straight up and see the top of the Willis Tower.

You don't need all this complication on either the Globe or the Flat Earth.
We can assume that because very high points were chosen (though Mt Rainier is not a good choice in the USA) that there are no obstacles.

Even with no obstacles and a perfectly clear atmosphere there is a limit of a few hundred kilometres to visibility.
This is from the scattering of light from the molecules of oxygen in perfectly clean air.

So, flat or Globe, no-one is going to see from USA to even Europe, let alone Mt Everest.

Of course, if the earth is a Globe the visibility is blocked by the "hump" due to curvature, but that's another kettle of fish.

When you say "the fact a person can only make out a penny up to a certain distance", you are right,
but we are not looking at "pennies", but at mountains kilometres wide.

Rowbotham claims that an object can be seen at a distance of about 3,000 x it's size, and that's not a bad estimate.
So a 5 km mountain would be visible from about 15,000 km, were it not for the limited visibility through the atmosphere.

I must be having a bad turn! Here I am almost agreeing with you and agreeing with Rowbotham, guess I'll get over it.

So, even if it was actually clear from the East Coast of the US all the way to the coast of Spain (of course, it seldom is...we are talking about the North Atlantic for crying out loud!), the molecules of the AIR would not allow for you to see more than a few hundred kms.

So, Mr. ProveMeWrong, I just did.

P.S. Change your name.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

Look out your window.

It is called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is indeed flatter than a pancake.

listen to Darf Punk: Around the World

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:56:43 AM

Quote from: totallackey on March 23, 2017, 10:50:00 AM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

Look out your window.

It is called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is indeed flatter than a pancake.

It is called perception...If the earth didn't curve, on a clear day it would be possible to see every thing in a certain direction (Unless your view was obstructed). But for some reason you can't see Europe from the east coast of America.

I will provide you the following post from another prominent and frequently WRONG RE-tard and let you take this up with him, regarding your contention it would be possible to "see everything."

In this section of posts, you can clearly read where a LEGEND IN HIS OWN MIND agrees with me! As far as I know it might the second or third time he has been right on these boards!:

Quote from: rabinoz on March 22, 2017, 03:54:47 AM

Quote from: totallackey on March 21, 2017, 01:06:17 PM

Quote from: Andy on March 21, 2017, 12:52:43 PM

I have been speaking to a friend of mine on distances. And we hit a cross road on how far the moon is from the earth. In doing so he came up with the test of this question; Which has its merits.
1. Highest peak is Everest. we agreed.
2. Highest peak in US. MT Rainer example.
3. His point is why can't I see Everest from MT Rainer with naked eye. I cannot explain perspective to him so im losing the argument. He keeps saying its b/c of curvature. 

4. However this make me think...Can someone point a telescope to MT Rainer from completely another state. Ive seen all of the videos of boats and what not, lets get some real distance for a change.
Thank you.
Andy

Aside from the atmoplane being more dense near the ground, there could be all other sorts of visual impediments between a person in one location attempting to look for an object at a different location.

Aside from the fact a person can only make out a penny up to a certain distance.

Personally, I have stood in fog in Chicago and could not see my hand in front of my face, yet I was able to look straight up and see the top of the Willis Tower.

You don't need all this complication on either the Globe or the Flat Earth.
We can assume that because very high points were chosen (though Mt Rainier is not a good choice in the USA) that there are no obstacles.

Even with no obstacles and a perfectly clear atmosphere there is a limit of a few hundred kilometres to visibility.
This is from the scattering of light from the molecules of oxygen in perfectly clean air.

So, flat or Globe, no-one is going to see from USA to even Europe, let alone Mt Everest.

Of course, if the earth is a Globe the visibility is blocked by the "hump" due to curvature, but that's another kettle of fish.

When you say "the fact a person can only make out a penny up to a certain distance", you are right,
but we are not looking at "pennies", but at mountains kilometres wide.

Rowbotham claims that an object can be seen at a distance of about 3,000 x it's size, and that's not a bad estimate.
So a 5 km mountain would be visible from about 15,000 km, were it not for the limited visibility through the atmosphere.

I must be having a bad turn! Here I am almost agreeing with you and agreeing with Rowbotham, guess I'll get over it.

So, even if it was actually clear from the East Coast of the US all the way to the coast of Spain (of course, it seldom is...we are talking about the North Atlantic for crying out loud!), the molecules of the AIR would not allow for you to see more than a few hundred kms.

So, Mr. ProveMeWrong, I just did.

P.S. Change your name.

Sorry to keep bothering, but I don't like it when people think they've proven a point. So first off, how would a flat earther explain how molecules in the air are kept down on earth. Second, seeing Europe from America was an example, and I agree it wasn't that great. Third, if the earth were flat and air molecules are the reason we can't see great distances, how amazing it is that they create such a flat horizon. Fourth, may I ask how flat earthers explain things such as: The water not falling off the face of the earth; Exactly what a flat earther thinks is at the edge of the earth, and; how things stay down on a flat earth. Fifth, I think I'll keep my name, thank you.

Sorry to keep bothering, but I don't like it when people think they've proven a point.

Except you.

Of course, you do not consider yourself a "people."

In these days of transgenderism and what not, please provide for the readership a complete description of what you are if not a "people."

So first off, how would a flat earther explain how molecules in the air are kept down on earth.

Ask Rabinoz (AKA Geoff).

He is a RE-tard however...so he will tell you some baloney about gravity...

Second, seeing Europe from America was an example, and I agree it wasn't that great.

Yeah, I don't blame you, considering I proved you wrong.

Third, if the earth were flat and air molecules are the reason we can't see great distances, how amazing it is that they create such a flat horizon.

Isn't it though!

Fourth, may I ask how flat earthers explain things such as: The water not falling off the face of the earth; Exactly what a flat earther thinks is at the edge of the earth, and; how things stay down on a flat earth.

Of course you may!

But again...

Look out your window.

They are called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is flatter than a pancake.

Fifth, I think I'll keep my name, thank you.

Your choice, but geez...After one post and one instance of being proved wrong, I think you would learn...

But that is "people."

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Sorry to keep bothering, but I don't like it when people think they've proven a point.

Except you.

Of course, you do not consider yourself a "people."

In these days of transgenderism and what not, please provide for the readership a complete description of what you are if not a "people."

only blabla

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

So first off, how would a flat earther explain how molecules in the air are kept down on earth.

Ask Rabinoz (AKA Geoff).

He is a RE-tard however...so he will tell you some baloney about gravity...

he ask you as you are a flat earther

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Second, seeing Europe from America was an example, and I agree it wasn't that great.

Yeah, I don't blame you, considering I proved you wrong.

you proved nothing

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Third, if the earth were flat and air molecules are the reason we can't see great distances, how amazing it is that they create such a flat horizon.

Isn't it though!

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Fourth, may I ask how flat earthers explain things such as: The water not falling off the face of the earth; Exactly what a flat earther thinks is at the edge of the earth, and; how things stay down on a flat earth.

Of course you may!

But again...

Look out your window.

They are called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is flatter than a pancake.

no real answer

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Fifth, I think I'll keep my name, thank you.

Your choice, but geez...After one post and one instance of being proved wrong, I think you would learn...

But that is "people."

you are so often proven wrong that you should change your name in: masterofprovenwrong 

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Sorry to keep bothering, but I don't like it when people think they've proven a point.

Except you.

Of course, you do not consider yourself a "people."

In these days of transgenderism and what not, please provide for the readership a complete description of what you are if not a "people."

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

So first off, how would a flat earther explain how molecules in the air are kept down on earth.

Ask Rabinoz (AKA Geoff).

He is a RE-tard however...so he will tell you some baloney about gravity...

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Second, seeing Europe from America was an example, and I agree it wasn't that great.

Yeah, I don't blame you, considering I proved you wrong.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Third, if the earth were flat and air molecules are the reason we can't see great distances, how amazing it is that they create such a flat horizon.

Isn't it though!

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Fourth, may I ask how flat earthers explain things such as: The water not falling off the face of the earth; Exactly what a flat earther thinks is at the edge of the earth, and; how things stay down on a flat earth.

Of course you may!

But again...

Look out your window.

They are called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is flatter than a pancake.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Fifth, I think I'll keep my name, thank you.

Your choice, but geez...After one post and one instance of being proved wrong, I think you would learn...

But that is "people."

I am truly enjoying this. I am sorry for not being clear when saying "people" but I assumed that anyone with a basic understanding of the human language would use context and be able to figure out what it meant. Sorry I was wrong.
First: I asked you as a flat earther how you would explain air molecules being pulled down. Not a REtard as I happen to be one myself.
Second: You proved absolutely nothing. You used one fact and ignored any other possibilities of physics or science and went for the insult.
Third: Outside of the argument, do you honestly not find it slightly strange that if air molecules really are the answer, that there is just a smooth horizon on an ocean?
Fourth: If you can answer the questions will you? If so, please do now.
And Fifth: I still have not been proven wrong. Probably because I'm not "people."

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

You admitted flat earthers give facts, so I guess you'll just ignore them because you do not want to be convinced?

Quote from: totallackey on March 23, 2017, 12:50:41 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 12:15:26 PM

Sorry to keep bothering, but I don't like it when people think they've proven a point.

Except you.

Of course, you do not consider yourself a "people."

In these days of transgenderism and what not, please provide for the readership a complete description of what you are if not a "people."

only blabla

What is the scientific classification/taxonomy/nomenclature of an "only blabla?"

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

Good, I'll be happy to entertain you in this thread:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69299.0

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:20:59 PM

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

You admitted flat earthers give facts, so I guess you'll just ignore them because you do not want to be convinced?

Alright. I did ask first. So I should get an answer first. However, I solemnly swear that I will take everything you say into consideration, and retaliate with my beliefs. Its called a debate. Literally the name of this section of the forum.

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:35:43 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:20:59 PM

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

You admitted flat earthers give facts, so I guess you'll just ignore them because you do not want to be convinced?

Alright. I did ask first. So I should get an answer first. However, I solemnly swear that I will take everything you say into consideration, and retaliate with my beliefs. Its called a debate. Literally the name of this section of the forum.

All my facts are laid out in this thread, I'm not repeating them over and over, meet you here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69299.0

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:20:59 PM

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

Good, I'll be happy to entertain you in this thread:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69299.0

And the debate begins. The weight, or gravitational force of earth is 5.972 × 10^24 kg meaning that it applies that force on everything in the world, including water. Where as the ball has no force on the the water, and thus its spinning throws the water off. If you were to discard gravity as a myth, then I can't convince you.

All my facts are laid out in this thread, I'm not repeating them over and over, meet you here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69299.0

and all your "facts" got debunked in that threat.

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:39:35 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:20:59 PM

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

Good, I'll be happy to entertain you in this thread:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69299.0

And the debate begins. The weight, or gravitational force of earth is 5.972 × 10^24 kg meaning that it applies that force on everything in the world, including water. Where as the ball has no force on the the water, and thus its spinning throws the water off. If you were to discard gravity as a myth, then I can't convince you.

Gravity is a theory, not a fact. I thought you were going to give facts? Biogenesis is a fact, or a principle/law of science because it was proven over and over with scientific testing. Gravity is still in a theory state because it really can't be proven to exist, much speculation, but nothing that can move it off the "assertion" list. What else do you have?

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:44:47 PM

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:39:35 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:20:59 PM

Quote from: physical observer on March 23, 2017, 01:14:21 PM

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 10:39:50 AM

I have trouble figuring out why one person would believe in a flat earth, and another would believe in a round earth. Because when one has an argument with the other, both will always have an answer. Of course, one is not just based on unproven theories and things that a five year old could make up. (I'm talking about the flat earth theory) But I guarantee you that whatever fact you throw at me that proves the earth is flat, I will be able to convince you the earth is round. Hence, my name. Bring it on.

I give you facts the earth is flat, but you'll convince me it is round, bring it on!

What facts convince you the earth is a spinning speeding ball?

To be fair, I did ask first.

Good, I'll be happy to entertain you in this thread:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69299.0

And the debate begins. The weight, or gravitational force of earth is 5.972 × 10^24 kg meaning that it applies that force on everything in the world, including water. Where as the ball has no force on the the water, and thus its spinning throws the water off. If you were to discard gravity as a myth, then I can't convince you.

Gravity is a theory, not a fact. I thought you were going to give facts? Biogenesis is a fact, or a principle/law of science because it was proven over and over with scientific testing. Gravity is still in a theory state because it really can't be proven to exist, much speculation, but nothing that can move it off the "assertion" list. What else do you have?

On a flat earth, if you were to walk forward for ten miles, make a right angle turn, walk another ten miles, and do this four times, you should arrive at the same point. However on a round earth, the curvature of the earth does not allow this. And this has been tested and proven.
Can you give me another FE fact that I can try to counter?

I am truly enjoying this. I am sorry for not being clear when saying "people" but I assumed that anyone with a basic understanding of the human language would use context and be able to figure out what it meant. Sorry I was wrong.
First: I asked you as a flat earther how you would explain air molecules being pulled down. Not a REtard as I happen to be one myself.

Heavier things fall.

Second: You proved absolutely nothing. You used one fact and ignored any other possibilities of physics or science and went for the insult.

Did you or did you not claim Europe should be visible from the East Coast of the US if the Earth was flat?

Answer = YOU DID

Did I or did I not provide you with the proof that Europe, whether the Earth is flat or or a globe, cannot be seen from the East Coast of the US?

Answer = YES I DID

Third: Outside of the argument, do you honestly not find it slightly strange that if air molecules really are the answer, that there is just a smooth horizon on an ocean?

No.

I find it amazing.

Fourth: If you can answer the questions will you? If so, please do now.

Your OP asked: "bring it on."

I brought on:

Look out your window.

They are called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is flatter than a pancake.

Deal with that.

And Fifth: I still have not been proven wrong. Probably because I'm not "people."

Yes you were.

Science doesn't work by throwing out lone arguments over and over, it works by comparing full models. A complete, or at least more complete FE model (barring the aspects it takes absurd resources to find: such as mapping the world. If you can do that in your free time let me know), should be compared to RET as a whole.
That's the only scientific way to work.
As it is, FET requires fewer assumptions. Of course, to reach that conclusion you'd need to take the time to honestly learn a model, rather than as many REers do here, come along to feel superior and outright lie in pursuit of that goal.

I'm happy if you disagree with me, so long as you give FET a fair and honest examination.

On a flat earth, if you were to walk forward for ten miles, make a right angle turn, walk another ten miles, and do this four times, you should arrive at the same point. However on a round earth, the curvature of the earth does not allow this. And this has been tested and proven.
Can you give me another FE fact that I can try to counter?

This is wrong.

There are country roads all over the the Midwest US where a person could drive 10 miles make a right turn, drive 10 miles make another right turn, drive 10 miles make another right turn, drive 10 miles and end up where he/she started.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:27:15 PM

I am truly enjoying this. I am sorry for not being clear when saying "people" but I assumed that anyone with a basic understanding of the human language would use context and be able to figure out what it meant. Sorry I was wrong.
First: I asked you as a flat earther how you would explain air molecules being pulled down. Not a REtard as I happen to be one myself.

Heavier things fall.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:27:15 PM

Second: You proved absolutely nothing. You used one fact and ignored any other possibilities of physics or science and went for the insult.

Did you or did you not claim Europe should be visible from the East Coast of the US if the Earth was flat?

Answer = YOU DID

Did I or did I not provide you with the proof that Europe, whether the Earth is flat or or a globe, cannot be seen from the East Coast of the US?

Answer = YES I DID

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:27:15 PM

Third: Outside of the argument, do you honestly not find it slightly strange that if air molecules really are the answer, that there is just a smooth horizon on an ocean?

No.

I find it amazing.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:27:15 PM

Fourth: If you can answer the questions will you? If so, please do now.

Your OP asked: "bring it on."

I brought on:

Look out your window.

They are called the Bonneville Salt Flats, not the Bonneville Salt Rounds.

Kansas is flatter than a pancake.

Deal with that.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:27:15 PM

And Fifth: I still have not been proven wrong. Probably because I'm not "people."

Yes you were.

Getting a little miffed now.
Why do heavier things fall on a flat earth.
The part of seeing Europe from America was a bad reason. However you proved it with a round earth theory, when I was looking for a flat earth theory.
I'm worried that the name of something can change how you interpret what it means. The earth has a surface area of 510.1 million km˛ and curves a 8 inches per mile. Thus the horizon is roughly 3 miles away and I doubt the human eye can see an 8 inch difference from 3 miles away.
I have not been proven wrong. Because for some reason I'm still here, my beliefs have not been changed, and others in this thread have been countering your arguments as well. I am not changing my name.

Science doesn't work by throwing out lone arguments over and over, it works by comparing full models. A complete, or at least more complete FE model (barring the aspects it takes absurd resources to find: such as mapping the world. If you can do that in your free time let me know), should be compared to RET as a whole.
That's the only scientific way to work.
As it is, FET requires fewer assumptions. Of course, to reach that conclusion you'd need to take the time to honestly learn a model, rather than as many REers do here, come along to feel superior and outright lie in pursuit of that goal.

I'm happy if you disagree with me, so long as you give FET a fair and honest examination.

Can I see one of those models?

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:54:35 PM

On a flat earth, if you were to walk forward for ten miles, make a right angle turn, walk another ten miles, and do this four times, you should arrive at the same point. However on a round earth, the curvature of the earth does not allow this. And this has been tested and proven.
Can you give me another FE fact that I can try to counter?

This is wrong.

There are country roads all over the the Midwest US where a person could drive 10 miles make a right turn, drive 10 miles make another right turn, drive 10 miles make another right turn, drive 10 miles and end up where he/she started.

Source?

Can I see one of those models?

I link to the one I hold to in my sig.
(It's on a different site to allow guests to query, and because when i made it this site was going through bouts of becoming so slow it was unusable. Just more accessible, but the outline's easy to find there).

Science doesn't work by throwing out lone arguments over and over, it works by comparing full models. A complete, or at least more complete FE model (barring the aspects it takes absurd resources to find: such as mapping the world. If you can do that in your free time let me know), should be compared to RET as a whole.
That's the only scientific way to work.
As it is, FET requires fewer assumptions. Of course, to reach that conclusion you'd need to take the time to honestly learn a model, rather than as many REers do here, come along to feel superior and outright lie in pursuit of that goal.

I'm happy if you disagree with me, so long as you give FET a fair and honest examination.

I'm sorry but its strange to be said that the RET relies on jumping to conclusions when the FET says that there is a disk floating in space, somehow keeping things pulled down on it, with a floating ball of light over it, and people on it attempting to keep the rest from figuring out the truth.
Answer me why there is a disk, who made it, is it natural? What is the point of it. Is humanity really so special that we deserve a plate to live on, that defies all laws of physics?

Quote

Can I see one of those models?

I link to the one I hold to in my sig.
(It's on a different site to allow guests to query, and because when i made it this site was going through bouts of becoming so slow it was unusable. Just more accessible, but the outline's easy to find there).

Well, I'm convinced.

Quote from: ProveMeWrong on March 23, 2017, 01:54:35 PM

On a flat earth, if you were to walk forward for ten miles, make a right angle turn, walk another ten miles, and do this four times, you should arrive at the same point. However on a round earth, the curvature of the earth does not allow this. And this has been tested and proven.
Can you give me another FE fact that I can try to counter?

This is wrong.

There are country roads all over the the Midwest US where a person could drive 10 miles make a right turn, drive 10 miles make another right turn, drive 10 miles make another right turn, drive 10 miles and end up where he/she started.

For a ten mile square the angular deficiency is only about a fifth of a second of arc.