A few questions for Flat Earthers...

Hello dear flat earthers!

I am a Globalist. Now you might be questioning the reason I signed up on a flat earth forum...
It's to clear some things up, try to see things from your perspective and perhaps see the science behind the flat earth!
Ready? Here we go then:

1.If NASA and all the other space agencies + governments lied about the Earth's shape, do they have a reason to do so? Are they gaining any kind of reward/prize for lying?

2.Some of you claim that gravity does not exist. How does an object fall to the ground then? Is there any other force that makes objects fall to the ground (at different speeds depending on the object's mass) or does it just happen magically?

3. Is there any real proof for flat earth? Space pictures/actual satellite pictures (the one's that use fish eye lens/any other kind of wonky camera don't really count... Sorry)?

4. Do you think that the earth is completely flat (with the exception of mountains ⁿ or do you believe that there are different kinds of bumps/height differences depending on where you are? (again, not counting discovered mountains or anything like that)?

5. How does the dome actually work?

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

7. If the Earth truly is flat then what about the other planets?


That's all I have for now...
Feel free to answer any of the questions above! You are not obligated to answer them all or even write an answer for any of them if you do not want to.
Have a nice day!


P.S: English is not my first language so I do apologize for any spelling mistakes!

Welcome, RagingNitrogen.

Answers to all of your questions and more can be found in abundance on the site.
It is almost impossible to not find threads dedicated to these questions.
Feel free to browse and read at your convenience.

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

Round Earthers will set you straight on this one.

Quote from: RagingNitrogen on June 15, 2018, 02:28:16 PM

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

Round Earthers will set you straight on this one.

I actually have seen somebody claim that the moon is fake on one of the Flat Earth Facebook pages. I just want to know why somebody could believe that.

P.S: Answer for your first reply:
Even though it is possible to find all of those questions around the forum, I simply do not have much free time. That's why I made this post in the first place. Thank you for the suggestion though!

Even though it is possible to find all of those questions around the forum, I simply do not have much free time. That's why I made this post in the first place.

You created an account and wrote a long list of questions because you don't have any free time?

Welcome!

I'm a Flat Earther, but probably not the one you are looking for, since I do not believe in many of the ideas you question. Nevertheless, I'll try to answer them as best I can. Also, there are further answers for these if you go looking, but I figured I may as well help you out.

1. Some believe there is land and resources beyond the Ice Wall, and this is hidden so these resources can be exploited. Others believe it has just become too big of a lie, that if the truth were revealed, it would show how dishonest the government is, which is why it's kept secret.

2. There are many theories, including density (something rising or sinking based on displacement of air), and even that the Earth itself is rising (although I don't think anyone believes this here).

3. As far as I know, there are no pictures of the flat Earth. I haven't seen any yet.

4. Personally, I believe that apart from what you mention, it is completely flat, although many others here do not.

5. I don't know, sorry. I believe it is a solid ice barrier that surrounds everything, but I actually haven't seen too many people talk about the dome.

6. I believe the moon is real, as for it's phases, again I'm not too sure what others think. Sorry I can't be more helpful on these two, but if you look around there are answers to these questions to be found here.

7. Many of us think other planets are flat, too.

I hope that's answered a few of your questions, if you're still curious or my lack of knowledge shows, there are thousands of times these questions have been answered if you look a little into these forums.

Again, welcome!

Welcome!

I'm a Flat Earther, but probably not the one you are looking for, since I do not believe in many of the ideas you question. Nevertheless, I'll try to answer them as best I can. Also, there are further answers for these if you go looking, but I figured I may as well help you out.

1. Some believe there is land and resources beyond the Ice Wall, and this is hidden so these resources can be exploited. Others believe it has just become too big of a lie, that if the truth were revealed, it would show how dishonest the government is, which is why it's kept secret.

2. There are many theories, including density (something rising or sinking based on displacement of air), and even that the Earth itself is rising (although I don't think anyone believes this here).

3. As far as I know, there are no pictures of the flat Earth. I haven't seen any yet.

4. Personally, I believe that apart from what you mention, it is completely flat, although many others here do not.

5. I don't know, sorry. I believe it is a solid ice barrier that surrounds everything, but I actually haven't seen too many people talk about the dome.

6. I believe the moon is real, as for it's phases, again I'm not too sure what others think. Sorry I can't be more helpful on these two, but if you look around there are answers to these questions to be found here.

7. Many of us think other planets are flat, too.

I hope that's answered a few of your questions, if you're still curious or my lack of knowledge shows, there are thousands of times these questions have been answered if you look a little into these forums.

Again, welcome!

Thank you for answering! I don't mind if you don't know the answers to some questions!
Also, thank you for the warm welcome

Quote from: Bullwinkle on June 15, 2018, 03:09:33 PM

Quote from: RagingNitrogen on June 15, 2018, 02:28:16 PM

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

Round Earthers will set you straight on this one.

I actually have seen somebody claim that the moon is fake on one of the Flat Earth Facebook pages. I just want to know why somebody could believe that.

What Bullwinkle meant with REers setting you straight on this question, is the fact that earth's shape is not involved in the appearance of the moon phases. This is only the case during a lunar eclipse.

Quote from: RagingNitrogen on June 15, 2018, 03:46:15 PM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on June 15, 2018, 03:09:33 PM

Quote from: RagingNitrogen on June 15, 2018, 02:28:16 PM

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

Round Earthers will set you straight on this one.

I actually have seen somebody claim that the moon is fake on one of the Flat Earth Facebook pages. I just want to know why somebody could believe that.

What Bullwinkle meant with REers setting you straight on this question, is the fact that earth's shape is not involved in the appearance of the moon phases. This is only the case during a lunar eclipse.

Thank you for clarifying then!

Hello dear flat earthers!

I am a Globalist. Now you might be questioning the reason I signed up on a flat earth forum...
It's to clear some things up, try to see things from your perspective and perhaps see the science behind the flat earth!
Ready? Here we go then:

1.If NASA and all the other space agencies + governments lied about the Earth's shape, do they have a reason to do so? Are they gaining any kind of reward/prize for lying?

2.Some of you claim that gravity does not exist. How does an object fall to the ground then? Is there any other force that makes objects fall to the ground (at different speeds depending on the object's mass) or does it just happen magically?

3. Is there any real proof for flat earth? Space pictures/actual satellite pictures (the one's that use fish eye lens/any other kind of wonky camera don't really count... Sorry)?

4. Do you think that the earth is completely flat (with the exception of mountains ⁿ or do you believe that there are different kinds of bumps/height differences depending on where you are? (again, not counting discovered mountains or anything like that)?

5. How does the dome actually work?

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

7. If the Earth truly is flat then what about the other planets?


That's all I have for now...
Feel free to answer any of the questions above! You are not obligated to answer them all or even write an answer for any of them if you do not want to.
Have a nice day!


P.S: English is not my first language so I do apologize for any spelling mistakes!

1. The main reason is money.

2. Universal Acceleration is one explanation. Here's a pretty good write up https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71053.msg1921458#msg1921458

3. We do not believe space travel is possible... but every picture of the earth is a picture of the flat earth!

4. I'm not sure what it is you are asking.

5. I don't know about this one, I don't think there is a dome.

6. The moon is not fake. Please don't spend too much time looking at it, it's dangerous.

7. It is unknown if there are other flat worlds.

P.S. Your spelling wasn't bad at all. 

Quote from: RagingNitrogen on June 15, 2018, 02:28:16 PM

Hello dear flat earthers!

I am a Globalist. Now you might be questioning the reason I signed up on a flat earth forum...
It's to clear some things up, try to see things from your perspective and perhaps see the science behind the flat earth!
Ready? Here we go then:

1.If NASA and all the other space agencies + governments lied about the Earth's shape, do they have a reason to do so? Are they gaining any kind of reward/prize for lying?

2.Some of you claim that gravity does not exist. How does an object fall to the ground then? Is there any other force that makes objects fall to the ground (at different speeds depending on the object's mass) or does it just happen magically?

3. Is there any real proof for flat earth? Space pictures/actual satellite pictures (the one's that use fish eye lens/any other kind of wonky camera don't really count... Sorry)?

4. Do you think that the earth is completely flat (with the exception of mountains ⁿ or do you believe that there are different kinds of bumps/height differences depending on where you are? (again, not counting discovered mountains or anything like that)?

5. How does the dome actually work?

6. I have seen that some Flat earthers believe that the moon is fake (due to it's different phases). Even though I'm sure it's the shadow cast by our lovely planet, I still want to hear what you have to say.

7. If the Earth truly is flat then what about the other planets?


That's all I have for now...
Feel free to answer any of the questions above! You are not obligated to answer them all or even write an answer for any of them if you do not want to.
Have a nice day!


P.S: English is not my first language so I do apologize for any spelling mistakes!

1. The main reason is money.

2. Universal Acceleration is one explanation. Here's a pretty good write up https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71053.msg1921458#msg1921458

3. We do not believe space travel is possible... but every picture of the earth is a picture of the flat earth!

4. I'm not sure what it is you are asking.

5. I don't know about this one, I don't think there is a dome.

6. The moon is not fake. Please don't spend too much time looking at it, it's dangerous.

7. It is unknown if there are other flat worlds.

P.S. Your spelling wasn't bad at all.

Thank you for answering! Sorry if number 5 is a bit weird... I was referring to the Earth not being a perfect sphere but instead being more “distorted“ around the educator. Just a round earth theory (I believe there are a few images for that on the internet.. just saying in case anybody's interested).
Again, thank you for taking the time to answer my questions!

Welcome!

I'm a Flat Earther, but probably not the one you are looking for, since I do not believe in many of the ideas you question. Nevertheless, I'll try to answer them as best I can. Also, there are further answers for these if you go looking, but I figured I may as well help you out.

1. Some believe there is land and resources beyond the Ice Wall, and this is hidden so these resources can be exploited. Others believe it has just become too big of a lie, that if the truth were revealed, it would show how dishonest the government is, which is why it's kept secret.

2. There are many theories, including density (something rising or sinking based on displacement of air), and even that the Earth itself is rising (although I don't think anyone believes this here).

3. As far as I know, there are no pictures of the flat Earth. I haven't seen any yet.

4. Personally, I believe that apart from what you mention, it is completely flat, although many others here do not.

5. I don't know, sorry. I believe it is a solid ice barrier that surrounds everything, but I actually haven't seen too many people talk about the dome.

6. I believe the moon is real, as for it's phases, again I'm not too sure what others think. Sorry I can't be more helpful on these two, but if you look around there are answers to these questions to be found here.

7. Many of us think other planets are flat, too.

I hope that's answered a few of your questions, if you're still curious or my lack of knowledge shows, there are thousands of times these questions have been answered if you look a little into these forums.

Again, welcome!

1. If there are hidden resources somewhere, there would be no reason to create such a huge lie. They could just go there and take them, just like they do anywhere else. Also a lie of that scale is not possible to keep up. Just look at the VW emission scandal, or Edward Snowden, or any secret project. If too many people know about it, someone is going to tell the truth. Secrets on a large scale can only be kept for a few years, maybe a few decades, if it's a smaller and highly confidential project.

2. If density (mass/volume) is an explanation, you would just come back to mass, which leads to gravity.

1. The main reason is money.

2. Universal Acceleration is one explanation. Here's a pretty good write up https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71053.msg1921458#msg1921458

3. We do not believe space travel is possible... but every picture of the earth is a picture of the flat earth!

4. I'm not sure what it is you are asking.

5. I don't know about this one, I don't think there is a dome.

6. The moon is not fake. Please don't spend too much time looking at it, it's dangerous.

7. It is unknown if there are other flat worlds.

P.S. Your spelling wasn't bad at all.

1. If it's about money, why would they waste billions to fake the entire spaceprogram? They would need to build actually working rockets (you can watch the launches), they need to pay hundred of thousands employees to fake it (the Apollo program had about 400,000 people working on it). There are over 140,000 pictures taken from space, which all would have to be faked as well. Everyone who knows the truth would need to be kept quiet. Look at the VW emissions scandal and see for yourself how "well" that works. What benefit would they have, that couldn't be achieved by simple denial and using their resources for whatever project instead of using it for faking evidence?

2. First of all, Universal Acceleration is contradicted by your own FAQ. Secondly, it would have reached the speed of light in less than a year and wouldn't be able to continue accelerating. Also it would need an infinite amount of energy. Even if you claim it continues to accelerate, the acceleration would need to slow down. I admit I'm not sure about that and have to look it up. Also it would contradict one common flat Earth claim, that Earth is not moving. You can't have acceleration without movement.

I suggest you look up Special Relativity.

I suggest you look up Special Relativity.

I suggest you look up General Relativity or are you fussy about which bits of Einstein's Theories you believe.

Then look up your own FAQ!

What Is Gravity?
Gravity as a theory is false. Objects simply fall.

In the flat earth community there are several theories as to why this happens. Some attempt to explain this with use of mechanics like electromagnetism, density, or pressure. Others make use of traditional mathematics, such as the infinite plane model, and others a new look at the problem - such as the non-euclidean model.

What is certain is sphere earth gravity is not tenable in any way shape or form.

Is The Earth Accelerating Upwards?
No. This is popular theory among some small groups to explain gravity, but it is problematic at best. The Earth Is Stationary. We are not whizzing about in space at 67,000 miles/hour or at speeds accelerating towards the speed of light.

From: FAQ, What Is Gravity?

So, is your FAQ quite wrong or . . . . ?

2. First of all, Universal Acceleration is contradicted by your own FAQ. Secondly, it would have reached the speed of light in less than a year and wouldn't be able to continue accelerating. Also it would need an infinite amount of energy. Even if you claim it continues to accelerate, the acceleration would need to slow down. I admit I'm not sure about that and have to look it up. Also it would contradict one common flat Earth claim, that Earth is not moving. You can't have acceleration without movement.

You are considering it from an outside observer.
To an outside observer, Earth can't continue to accelerate at a constant, it would reach the speed of light.
However, to someone on Earth, accelerating with Earth, it can.
To an outside observer, the acceleration would appear to slow down. But time is also dilated. That means a watch in this accelerating frame would also slow down.
This means that the observer accelerating with Earth can continue to feel the same acceleration.

Dear rabinoz, pls take your meds.

I offered an answer for gravity. I did not refer to the FAQs.

Dear rabinoz, pls take your meds.

So sorry, I don't have any meds to take except one for high blood pressure, undoubtedly brought on by . . . . . . .

I offered an answer for gravity. I did not refer to the FAQs.

So did I offer an answer for gravity, in the form of Einstein's General Relativity which reduces to Newtonian gravitation.

The Infinite Flat Earth, as presented by John Davis in the following quote from the Wiki, requires Newtonian Gravitation.

Infinite Flat Earth
The infinite flat earth theory has been talked about by writers such as Samuel Rowbotham, Voliva and Shenton. It is a stationary geocentric earth model.

Gravitational Theory
Gravity is caused by mass and creates a finite pull.

Infinite Finite Gravitational Pull and Gauss' Law
American Flat Earth President John Davis and forum administrator jroa came up with the formulation of the gravitational pull of an infinite plane. It follows Gauss's Law for gravitation which states that an infinite slab or plane will have a finite gravitational pull equal to 2π G ρ h where G is the gravitational constant, p is density, and h is the depth of the slab.

From Infinite Flat Earth

The text states "a finite gravitational pull equal to 2π G ρ h" but that is simply expressing "Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation" without mentioning Newton's name.

You flat earthers are happy enough to accept  Einstein's Special Relativity and even his Equivalence Principle in support of your UA yet baulk at his General Relativity where he brings gravitation into the Theory of Relativity.

To me that seems that you're trying to put yourself above Einstein in pretending that you can pick and choose which bits to ignore.

Maybe you "did not refer to the FAQs" but I did to point out that your own FAQ claims that UA is ridiculous.

How are these newcomers supposed to know which bits of FE Theory believe and which to ignore?

They can make up their own minds.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl

I offered an answer for gravity. I did not refer to the FAQs.

So did I offer an answer for gravity, in the form of Einstein's General Relativity which reduces to Newtonian gravitation.

It doesn't, but I do understand what you mean.

The text states "a finite gravitational pull equal to 2π G ρ h" but that is simply expressing "Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation" without mentioning Newton's name.

Again, no. These are all different formulas describing different things and they have distinct uses in physics. But in most cases, yes they are functionally the same.

You flat earthers are happy enough to accept  Einstein's Special Relativity and even his Equivalence Principle in support of your UA yet baulk at his General Relativity where he brings gravitation into the Theory of Relativity.

By bringing the infinite Earth up before saying this, it kinda seems like you're implying that the infinite Earth model wouldn't work without ignoring general relativity. But the infinite Earth model incorporates general relativity.

But that's a little besides the point. Yes, the FAQ is self-contradictory and not representative of beliefs here. What FAQ could be?

Quote from: SomeRandomPerson on June 16, 2018, 01:22:42 PM

2. First of all, Universal Acceleration is contradicted by your own FAQ. Secondly, it would have reached the speed of light in less than a year and wouldn't be able to continue accelerating. Also it would need an infinite amount of energy. Even if you claim it continues to accelerate, the acceleration would need to slow down. I admit I'm not sure about that and have to look it up. Also it would contradict one common flat Earth claim, that Earth is not moving. You can't have acceleration without movement.

You are considering it from an outside observer.
To an outside observer, Earth can't continue to accelerate at a constant, it would reach the speed of light.
However, to someone on Earth, accelerating with Earth, it can.
To an outside observer, the acceleration would appear to slow down. But time is also dilated. That means a watch in this accelerating frame would also slow down.
This means that the observer accelerating with Earth can continue to feel the same acceleration.

As I said I'm not sure about the physics near the speed of light, so let's just assume you are right and it would feel the same. Where does the energy come from? You need energy to accelerate. A constant movement on the other hand doesn't need energy as long there is nothing slowing it down. What about the common claim that Earth is not moving? If you contradict that claim, you would lose quite a lot of arguments against the rotation of the Earth, and against the movements of planes on Earth etc...

What about the common claim that Earth is not moving? If you contradict that claim, you would lose quite a lot of arguments against the rotation of the Earth, and against the movements of planes on Earth etc...

Those arguments focus on sideways movement. If you try to apply the same arguments to vertical movement (at least for a small region of Earth), then it indicates we are moving. This is because gravity is equivalent to accelerating upwards.

This so late it's "grown whiskers", what with " the tablet ate the first try ", things to be done and finally the site going down, but here goes:
The main reason for posting it is not to show you are wrong, but that I consider that GR reducing to Newton's Equations of Motion and Gravitation is quite important because so many, especially FEers claim that "Einstein proved Newton wrong" and he, himself, never claimed that.

Quote from: rabinoz on June 16, 2018, 06:01:24 PM

Quote from: Space Cowgirl

I offered an answer for gravity. I did not refer to the FAQs.

So did I offer an answer for gravity, in the form of Einstein's General Relativity which reduces to Newtonian gravitation.

It doesn't, but I do understand what you mean.

May I respectfully disagree?
Though I should have added "for low enough velocities and the weak, static gravitational fields of our solar system" but it was aimed at FEers not physicists.

GENERAL RELATIVITY AND THE NEWTONIAN LIMIT, 6. The Newtonian Limit
In a classical system, the equations of relativity–the geodesic and Einstein equations–reduce to the equations of Newtonian gravity–Newton’s second laws of motion and gravity. General relativity thus passes its most important test: in agreeing with Newtonian gravity, it agrees with centuries’ worth of experimental data.

See GENERAL RELATIVITY AND THE NEWTONIAN LIMIT, ALEXANDER TOLISH

And

Assembling the Pieces: The "Entwurf" Paper of 1913
This quantity is almost the Einstein tensor. Grossmann is so close to the modern Einstein field equations that one could now scarcely imagine how the final steps could not be taken.

But they are not taken. One condition the new equations must satisfy is that they must return Newtonian results for ordinary conditions. For Newton's theory works extraordinarily well for the weak, static gravitational fields of our solar system.

From: Einstein's Pathway to General Relativity, Assembling the Pieces: The "Entwurf" Paper of 1913, John D. Norton

Quote from: rabinoz on June 16, 2018, 06:01:24 PM

The text states "a finite gravitational pull equal to 2π G ρ h" but that is simply expressing "Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation" without mentioning Newton's name.

Again, no. These are all different formulas describing different things and they have distinct uses in physics. But in most cases, yes they are functionally the same.

OK, I guess I should have said, "derived from 'Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation' without mentioning Newton's name."

Quote from: rabinoz on June 16, 2018, 06:01:24 PM

You flat earthers are happy enough to accept  Einstein's Special Relativity and even his Equivalence Principle in support of your UA yet baulk at his General Relativity where he brings gravitation into the Theory of Relativity.

By bringing the infinite Earth up before saying this, it kinda seems like you're implying that the infinite Earth model wouldn't work without ignoring general relativity. But the infinite Earth model incorporates general relativity.

Not really, even UA claims support from SR and Einstein's Equivance Principle which was one of the "stepping stones" to GR.

But that's a little besides the point. Yes, the FAQ is self-contradictory and not representative of beliefs here. What FAQ could be?

The main reason for posting it is not to show you are wrong, but that I consider that GR reducing to Newton's Equations of Motion and Gravitation is quite important because so many, especially FEers claim that "Einstein proved Newton wrong" and he, himself, never claimed that.

Okay, we absolutely agree here.

May I respectfully disagree?
Though I should have added "for low enough velocities and the weak, static gravitational fields of our solar system" but it was aimed at FEers not physicists.

And here. The addition is appreciated

Quote from: Tessa Yuri

Quote from: rabinoz on June 16, 2018, 06:01:24 PM

You flat earthers are happy enough to accept  Einstein's Special Relativity and even his Equivalence Principle in support of your UA yet baulk at his General Relativity where he brings gravitation into the Theory of Relativity.

By bringing the infinite Earth up before saying this, it kinda seems like you're implying that the infinite Earth model wouldn't work without ignoring general relativity. But the infinite Earth model incorporates general relativity.

Not really, even UA claims support from SR and Einstein's Equivance Principle which was one of the "stepping stones" to GR.

I'd disagree here that the infinite Earth violates GR, but that's a more nuanced discussion which probably deserves it's own thread.

I'd disagree here that the infinite Earth violates GR, but that's a more nuanced discussion which probably deserves it's own thread.

Sorry, I never meant to imply that the infinite Earth violates GR, only that in justifying their UA they claim support from SR and Einstein's Equivance Principle which was one of the "stepping stones" to GR.