A question I have for Flat Earthers

Maybe I have not done enough research before to find the answer to this question, but I am going to ask it anyways.

Why is it just the Earth that is flat? We know that other planets are round. But, it just happens to be Earth? All planets that we know of share one same characteristic, and it is that they are round. Earth just doesn't have this characteristic for some reason? I mean, Earth is special, in that it supports life, but it must share the same roundness that other planets share.

Maybe I have not done enough research before to find the answer to this question, but I am going to ask it anyways.

Why is it just the Earth that is flat? We know that other planets are round. But, it just happens to be Earth? All planets that we know of share one same characteristic, and it is that they are round. Earth just doesn't have this characteristic for some reason? I mean, Earth is special, in that it supports life, but it must share the same roundness that other planets share.

Actually, you have no personal clue as to the actual shape of the other "planets," as you have never personally found yourself standing on one of the other planets.

I could show you a square and given enough visual interference it could appear round.

Quote from: IsTheEarthEvenReal on June 13, 2018, 01:35:14 AM

Maybe I have not done enough research before to find the answer to this question, but I am going to ask it anyways.

Why is it just the Earth that is flat? We know that other planets are round. But, it just happens to be Earth? All planets that we know of share one same characteristic, and it is that they are round. Earth just doesn't have this characteristic for some reason? I mean, Earth is special, in that it supports life, but it must share the same roundness that other planets share.

Actually, you have no personal clue as to the actual shape of the other "planets," as you have never personally found yourself standing on one of the other planets.

I could show you a square and given enough visual interference it could appear round.

Personally standing on this planet doesn’t seem to help some people’s perception of its shape.

Why do flat earthers spend so much time trying to discredit pictures from space, if the best vantage point to determine the shape is on the ground?

Quote from: IsTheEarthEvenReal on June 13, 2018, 01:35:14 AM

Maybe I have not done enough research before to find the answer to this question, but I am going to ask it anyways.

Why is it just the Earth that is flat? We know that other planets are round. But, it just happens to be Earth? All planets that we know of share one same characteristic, and it is that they are round. Earth just doesn't have this characteristic for some reason? I mean, Earth is special, in that it supports life, but it must share the same roundness that other planets share.

Actually, you have no personal clue as to the actual shape of the other "planets," as you have never personally found yourself standing on one of the other planets.

I could show you a square and given enough visual interference it could appear round.

Oh, so, we have to actually be standing on another planet to know if it is round or not? "Scientists know that the moon is a spheroid because solar eclipses are always circular, meaning that the moon must be a shape that yields a relatively circular shadow. The boundary between the day and night sides of the moon, as seen from Earth, is an arc -- another shape that can only occur for a spheroid object. Missions to the moon, such as the Apollo, Clementine, Zond and Lunar Prospector, have provided evidence for a spheroid moon. These missions studied the topography of the moon, providing images both from orbit and from the moon's surface. " I assume your reply with be something along the lines of government secrets and some conspiracy theories.

They look round, but are they really round and what is there real true size?  The Earth is special, it is the only place that life exists.  The reason could be that a creator did this, or that the Earth is unique.  If we had proof that there was life that could talk to us from these other "planets" then maybe we could use the Earth may be like those places.  But aside from secretive organizations primarily ran by governments, we have no evidence of the actual size, shape, makeup, etc. of those "planets".
I am a skeptic in all things secretive, thos organsiations are very secretive, with or without the government funding.  Yes there are reasons, but those reasons are no more plausible than what many of the FE supporters claim.

But aside from secretive organizations primarily ran by governments, we have no evidence of the actual size, shape, makeup, etc. of those "planets".

You mean a multitude of organisations which publically release information?

You can easily get a telescope and do a lot of the work yourself.

Yes there are reasons, but those reasons are no more plausible than what many of the FE supporters claim.

No, they are infinitely more plausible.
FEers claim they are all lying to cover up the true shape of Earth, which serves absolutely no purpose at all.

Actually, you have no personal clue as to the actual shape of the other "planets," as you have never personally found yourself standing on one of the other planets.

Yet you are "standing on the earth" but don't seem to have "personal clue as to the actual shape of the" earth.
The problem is being too close and so unable to determine its overall shape, so maybe we really get a better idea of the shape of the "other" planets.

I could show you a square and given enough visual interference it could appear round.

Really? I don't see any interference in this photo of Jupiter!Or in this photo of Mars:Now you show a photo of a square appearing round and sharp like those..

Why is it just the Earth that is flat? We know that other planets are round.

How do we know that other planets are round? It'd be by the same ways we know ('know') the Earth is round, surely? So why would that evidence be acceptable for other planets but not the Earth?

In other words, many FErs believe other planets are flat too.

Quote from: IsTheEarthEvenReal on June 13, 2018, 01:35:14 AM

Why is it just the Earth that is flat? We know that other planets are round.

How do we know that other planets are round? It'd be by the same ways we know ('know') the Earth is round, surely? So why would that evidence be acceptable for other planets but not the Earth?

In other words, many FErs believe other planets are flat too.

And did Tessa or Yuri write that?

  And presumably that all photos purportedly showing the earth and planets must be "Photoshopped"?

But, to agree with you, sandokhan certainly believes that the earth and all planets are flat. See:

Flat Earth Believers / Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory « Message by sandokhan on August 09, 2017, 06:07:14 AM »
EARTH - SUN DISTANCE: 15-20 KILOMETERS
The Sun's diameter is some 600 meters:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1787025#msg1787025
The Sun, Moon, Black Sun, Shadow Moon and Jupiter have the same diameter.

All planets/stars have the shape of a disk.

Venus and Typhon-Nibiru (Mercury) orbit the Sun: together they orbit above the flat surface of the Earth.
The distance from Earth to the Sun is some 15-20 km (this figure might be even lower).

Quote

Flat Earth Believers / Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory « Message by sandokhan on August 09, 2017, 06:07:14 AM »
EARTH - SUN DISTANCE: 15-20 KILOMETERS
The Sun's diameter is some 600 meters:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1787025#msg1787025
The Sun, Moon, Black Sun, Shadow Moon and Jupiter have the same diameter.

All planets/stars have the shape of a disk.

Venus and Typhon-Nibiru (Mercury) orbit the Sun: together they orbit above the flat surface of the Earth.
The distance from Earth to the Sun is some 15-20 km (this figure might be even lower).

No need to comment that. sandokhan could first discuss this with his fellow FEers and find a common denominator.

Quote from: rabinoz on June 15, 2018, 05:17:34 AM

Quote

Flat Earth Believers / Re: Advanced Flat Earth Theory « Message by sandokhan on August 09, 2017, 06:07:14 AM »
EARTH - SUN DISTANCE: 15-20 KILOMETERS
The Sun's diameter is some 600 meters:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1787025#msg1787025
The Sun, Moon, Black Sun, Shadow Moon and Jupiter have the same diameter.

All planets/stars have the shape of a disk.

Venus and Typhon-Nibiru (Mercury) orbit the Sun: together they orbit above the flat surface of the Earth.
The distance from Earth to the Sun is some 15-20 km (this figure might be even lower).

No need to comment that. sandokhan could first discuss this with his fellow FEers and find a common denominator.

Ok, sorry. I need to comment that.

You would need a heat source, which radiates more than 5000 K. Otherwise, it would be very cold at places several thousands of kilometers away from directly below the sun. But in direction to directly below the sun the heat radiation must decrease rapidly to not melt the earth surface.

The sunlight would no longer be yellow-white. But according to FE theories the atmolayer has many properties. It could therefore easily redshift the light. Nonetheless, on a mountain or in a plane, the sunlight would be more bluish.

Apropos, does the sun sometimes move directly over a high mountain? It would not be wise to be there at noon with the distance to the sun significantly reduced. Also being on Mount Everest should be avoided at any time. It receives the heat radiation from the sun for places, which are about twice as far away. With the sun having a diameter of about 600 m - therefore being (almost) a point source - and the inverse square law and a temperature of 25°C in China multiplied with four, the received heat radiation on Mount Everest would boil water. Therefore, no ice on the Himalaya.

Apropos, Himalaya. With the sun being in only 15-20 km altitude and the Himalaya having an altitude of about 8 km over an east/west width of 3000 km, a significant area of west China would not receive any sunlight. Never. Ever.

Ok, sorry. I need to comment that.

You would need a heat source, which radiates more than 5000 K. Otherwise, it would be very cold at places several thousands of kilometers away from directly below the sun. But in direction to directly below the sun the heat radiation must decrease rapidly to not melt the earth surface.

The sunlight would no longer be yellow-white. But according to FE theories the atmolayer has many properties. It could therefore easily redshift the light. Nonetheless, on a mountain or in a plane, the sunlight would be more bluish.

Apropos, does the sun sometimes move directly over a high mountain? It would not be wise to be there at noon with the distance to the sun significantly reduced. Also being on Mount Everest should be avoided at any time. It receives the heat radiation from the sun for places, which are about twice as far away. With the sun having a diameter of about 600 m - therefore being (almost) a point source - and the inverse square law and a temperature of 25°C in China multiplied with four, the received heat radiation on Mount Everest would boil water. Therefore, no ice on the Himalaya.

Apropos, Himalaya. With the sun being in only 15-20 km altitude and the Himalaya having an altitude of about 8 km over an east/west width of 3000 km, a significant area of west China would not receive any sunlight. Never. Ever.

All I can say is: yes, yes, yes and yes. But his Advanced Flat Earth Theory makes entertaining reading.
Do you wonder that I have claimed that there are at least three flat earthers here with IQs in the genius range but sandokhan is not one of them.
Sure, he comes up with ingenious ideas but never seems able to think through the consequences, as you have pointed out.
Of course, he would invoke a varying aether density to explain these things, but . . . . .

The only way a flat earth would work is if we're living in a computer simulation, where rules of physics can change depending on boundaries and such.
Pacman can magicaly exit left and appear right.
Stars are just pixels.
South pole can be an all encompassing ring around the FE.
But then we drift into hypothetical philosophy.
Is the sim inside a sim.
Can we matrix our way out.
Haha

The only way a flat earth would work is if we're living in a computer simulation, where rules of physics can change depending on boundaries and such.
Pacman can magicaly exit left and appear right.
Stars are just pixels.
South pole can be an all encompassing ring around the FE.
But then we drift into hypothetical philosophy.
Is the sim inside a sim.
Can we matrix our way out.
Haha

The only way a flat earth would work is if we're living in a computer simulation, where rules of physics can change depending on boundaries and such.
Pacman can magicaly exit left and appear right.

Nope. That is just how it is represented. He exists in flat toroidal space.