Can this disprove the Flat Earth possibility?

Yes, the Bible is inspired by God, but each author brings his own style and historical context to it. Namely, in Biblical days, science believed that the Earth was not spherical, but flat as a disk. Is it therefore necessary to cooperate and unite the technical sciences and Theology in order to know the fullness of Truth?

Many believe that the authors of the Bible write about flat earth, and not about the Globe ball:

How to get saved then? The shape of the Earth is not included in the dogma of the Church. However, daily observation allows us to say that the Earth is a ball and is spinning. Therefore, the Bible should be read between the lines like this: "put the limits of the Earth," it is necessary to understand "put the limits of the Earth, if the Earth were flat."

If the Earth is flat and under the crystal dome on which the "Sun" shines, then it is of small proper size (measured by an observer located directly at the Sun). And if so, then when the Sun moves across the sky during the day, the Sun will very noticeably change its "visible" size from Earth: from its maximum at noon and almost to zero by early evening. As well as the moon will do and does not always coincide in apparent size with the sun. And we certainly would have known such a thing even without expensive devices.

And you can sunbathe in the evening and in the morning and even in winter. And we can burn paper with a magnifying glass equally quickly both in the early evening and at noon: just direct the glass with paper directly at the Sun. Even at winter or late autumn. Therefore, the Sun is very far away: the percentage of distance from the Sun to the magnifying glass almost does not change.

The Bible was written by man to control the population. The Bible is not “fact”.

Yes, the Bible is inspired by God

Really?
It sure seems to be the product of ignorant men that had basically no idea how the world works.
But if your argument relies upon a god, it can't prove anything except what the god claims (as a fictional character).
To get truth you should be discarding religion and focusing on reality.

Fortunately for you, you don't actually need religion for your argument so you can just ignore the religious parts.

If the Earth is flat and under the crystal dome on which the "Sun" shines, then it is of small proper size (measured by an observer located directly at the Sun). And if so, then when the Sun moves across the sky during the day, the Sun will very noticeably change its "visible" size from Earth: from its maximum at noon and almost to zero by early evening. As well as the moon will do and does not always coincide in apparent size with the sun. And we certainly would have known such a thing even without expensive devices.

Yes. The sun is hard to do due to the very large amounts of glare, but the moon is much easier.
This shows quite clearly that the moon is quite far from Earth, many times the size of Earth, which means it should always appear in the one location for everyone at once, with the only variation being due to the variation in angle at the surface (i.e. 2 sections of Earth's surface not aligned).

So yes, this solidly refutes the FE, without any need for a religion, and is one of the many problems which have been pointed out to FEers, which they have no answer for other than magic bendy light.

So yes, this solidly refutes the FE, without any need for a religion, and is one of the many problems which have been pointed out to FEers, which they have no answer for other than magic bendy light.

Even God can not bend the light at the evening in such way to increase the apparent size of Sun and Moon. God can only modify the mind, but that is Psychology, not Physics.

Even God can not bend the light at the evening in such way to increase the apparent size of Sun and Moon.

This is no longer a Flat Earth Debate.

off to Philosophy, Religion & Society . . .

Quote from: Astronomy on December 21, 2018, 10:11:44 PM

Even God can not bend the light at the evening in such way to increase the apparent size of Sun and Moon.

This is no longer a Flat Earth Debate.

off to Philosophy, Religion & Society . . .

Please do not be angry, I am just a religious and scientific person. School was completed with Gold medal, Tartu University with cum laude, was co-author in Physical Review E and the first author in European Physical Journal B. Currently the paper about fluids within Dark Matter the Journal of Fluid Dynamics considers.

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 21, 2018, 10:30:11 PM

Quote from: Astronomy on December 21, 2018, 10:11:44 PM

Even God can not bend the light at the evening in such way to increase the apparent size of Sun and Moon.

This is no longer a Flat Earth Debate.

off to Philosophy, Religion & Society . . .

Please do not be angry, I am just a religious and scientific person. School was completed with Gold medal, Tartu University with cum laude, was co-author in Physical Review E and the first author in European Physical Journal B. Currently the paper about fluids within Dark Matter the Journal of Fluid Dynamics considers.

I don't care about your imaginary CV. 

I don't care about your imaginary CV.

Please write me to dmart@hot.ee and tomorrow I would check the e-mails and sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site. In the CV is the email address dmart@hot.ee

Yes, the Bible is inspired by God, but each author brings his own style and historical context to it. Namely, in Biblical days, science believed that the Earth was not spherical, but flat as a disk. Is it therefore necessary to cooperate and unite the technical sciences and Theology in order to know the fullness of Truth?

Many believe that the authors of the Bible write about flat earth, and not about the Globe ball:

Pastor Preaching Flat Earth Truth from the Bible, Celebrate Truth

Right near the start at 00:20 it starts with quite deceptive questions!
       Do you agree that the Government or Science lied to us about "evolution"?
       Do you agree that the Government or Science lied to us about the "Big Bang"?
       Do you believe and do you agree that the Government lied to us about "our earth"?

• I would assert thst "the Government" never had any policy or directive on any of those topics and could not be accused of lying in any of those cases!
  
  
• Then to claim "Science lied" is meaningless. There is no such thing as "Science" to lie about anything.
  There are simply individual scientists and scientific bodies.
  For example undoubtedly some of those promoted "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection" which many would take exception to.
  But is it correct accusing people or "Science" of lying simply because those people promoted a hypothesis that some do not agree with?
  
  I claim that someone cannot be accused of lying for saying that they honestly is correct.

So that sermon starts with a false premise.

But I'm not watching all of an as most 2 hour video. Summarise the salient points or forget it.

How to get saved then? The shape of the Earth is not included in the dogma of the Church.

I would claim that neither the "shape of the Earth"  nor the "dogma of the Church" are relevant to the question "What must I do to be saved?"
Without my preaching, which I'd fail miserably at anyway, you might try here for an answer: What must I do to be saved?

In was going to put this "inline" but I'll link to it instead, Does scripture teach a Flat Earth Cosmology?

However, daily observation allows us to say that the Earth is a ball and is spinning. Therefore, the Bible should be read between the lines like this: "put the limits of the Earth," it is necessary to understand "put the limits of the Earth, if the Earth were flat."

If the Earth is flat and under the crystal dome on which the "Sun" shines, then it is of small proper size (measured by an observer located directly at the Sun). And if so, then when the Sun moves across the sky during the day, the Sun will very noticeably change its "visible" size from Earth: from its maximum at noon and almost to zero by early evening. As well as the moon will do and does not always coincide in apparent size with the sun. And we certainly would have known such a thing even without expensive devices.

And you can sunbathe in the evening and in the morning and even in winter. And we can burn paper with a magnifying glass equally quickly both in the early evening and at noon: just direct the glass with paper directly at the Sun. Even at winter or late autumn. Therefore, the Sun is very far away: the percentage of distance from the Sun to the magnifying glass almost does not change.

Yes, I agree with that and that it gives very strong evidence that the sun and moon are neither close nor "circling above the earth" but
I do not, however, agree that the above alone "Can this disprove the Flat Earth possibility?"

Apart from anything else, one of the earliest that could be called a "scientist" was Anaximander, (born 610 bce), of Miletus.

Anaximander
Anaximander of Miletus (c.610-c.545 BC), a pre-Socratic philosopher, was a contemporary of Thales and was one of the first ‘cosmologists’ (i.e. one who attempted to explain the origin and form of the Universe). Anaximander was quite a productive philosopher as he made maps of the known world, offered explanations for the origin of the Sun, Moon and stars, and even performed simple experiments such as marking the solstices and equinoxes on sundials.

The cosmological model he proposed was a ring of fire surrounding the Earth, that was hidden from view except through vents. The stars were the light of this fire that could be seen through the openings. This model could also explain the phases of the Moon: its phase depended on how wide or narrow the vent covering was.

Anaximander’s model of the Universe. The Sun, the Moon and each of the stars is actually a transparent ring – or hoop – made of air. Each ring is filled with fire which we can only see when the hole in that particular ring passes over us.

Anaximander described the Earth as rounded and circular with two plane surfaces (not necessarily a flat disk, more like a cylinder or ‘stone pillar’), which was suspended freely in space. It stays where it is because it is equidistant from everything else in the Universe. Above the Earth were (in order) the other planets, the stars, the Moon and finally the Sun. 

So the distant sun and moon could equally fit Anaximander’s model of the Universe.

So the distant sun and moon could equally fit Anaximander’s model of the Universe.

The model must contradict the fact, that daylight on equator lasts 12 hours, but in EU England - 6.

Please write me to dmart@hot.ee and tomorrow I would check the e-mails and sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site. In the CV is the email address dmart@hot.ee

I can easily link a random CV.
You would actually need to prove you were that person.

Regardless, even if you had those qualifications, they would still mean nothing to me.

Quote from: Astronomy on December 22, 2018, 02:53:37 AM

Please write me to dmart@hot.ee and tomorrow I would check the e-mails and sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site. In the CV is the email address dmart@hot.ee

I can easily link a random CV.
You would actually need to prove you were that person.

Look how you can identify me:
1. write to dmart@hot.ee
2. if I would write back, then I would include link to CV at University web-site,
3. you will click the link and see in it my email: dmart@hot.ee
4. Therefore, you should conclude, that I am what I am.

Please write me to dmart@hot.ee and tomorrow I would check the e-mails and sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site. In the CV is the email address dmart@hot.ee

OK. I have my bank account number, credit card number,
routing number and a gallon of KY jelly ready to go.

Waiting for your instructions.

Quote from: Astronomy on December 22, 2018, 02:53:37 AM

Please write me to dmart@hot.ee and tomorrow I would check the e-mails and sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site. In the CV is the email address dmart@hot.ee

OK. I have my bank account number, credit card number,
routing number and a gallon of KY jelly ready to go.

Waiting for your instructions.

How can a PhD be a damn criminal???

Quote from: Bullwinkle on December 22, 2018, 04:33:00 AM

Quote from: Astronomy on December 22, 2018, 02:53:37 AM

Please write me to dmart@hot.ee and tomorrow I would check the e-mails and sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site. In the CV is the email address dmart@hot.ee

OK. I have my bank account number, credit card number,
routing number and a gallon of KY jelly ready to go.

Waiting for your instructions.

How can a PhD be a damn criminal???

practice?

practice?

Then please make an anonymous email account at yahoo.com.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 03:46:50 AM

So the distant sun and moon could equally fit Anaximander’s model of the Universe.

The model must contradict the fact, that daylight on equator lasts 12 hours, but in EU England - 6.

I don't follow! England certainly does not have 6 hours daylight at the equinox.

On the last autumnal equinox, 23 September 2018
    In London, sunrise 6:47 am, sunset 6:56 pm and daylight hours 12:08:51 and
    in Quito, Ecuador, sunrise 6:03 am, sunset 6:09 pm and daylight hours 12:06:27.

And everywhere on earth gets more than 12 hour daylight at the equinox, only about 06:27 in Quito, 08:51 in London but both poles get 24  hour daylight!

And even Anaximander's model could explain that but no modern FE model that I know could though maybe someone has one.

How can a PhD be a damn criminal???

Easily! And a PhD might be far better qualified to perpetrate a financial scam !

Quote from: Astronomy on December 22, 2018, 04:26:04 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 03:46:50 AM

So the distant sun and moon could equally fit Anaximander’s model of the Universe.

The model must contradict the fact, that daylight on equator lasts 12 hours, but in EU England - 6.

I don't follow! England certainly does not have 6 hours daylight at the equinox.

On the last autumnal equinox, 23 September 2018
    In London, sunrise 6:47 am, sunset 6:56 pm and daylight hours 12:08:51 and
    in Quito, Ecuador, sunrise 6:03 am, sunset 6:09 pm and daylight hours 12:06:27.

And everywhere on earth gets more than 12 hour daylight at the equinox, only about 06:27 in Quito, 08:51 in London but both poles get 24  hour daylight!

And even Anaximander's model could explain that but no modern FE model that I know could though maybe someone has one.

I am talking about today, 22.12.2018 at the moment is already dark in England, but in Africa shines the Sun.

PS-
Because the Flat Earth is not written into dogma of Church, then the God can not modify the minds of Holy Researches to make them see an illusion of round Earth. Hereby I have the Research paper, which introduces the Virtual Reality into Science, recall the virtual particles of vacuum. Thus, the history between Big Bang and the wonderful creation week of the Universe (about 7 000 years ago) is "virtual", but not the "actual". Actual time is between today and the Creation Week.

sent you the link to the glorious CV at University official site.

Or you could just start by sending the link to the university site.

How can a PhD be a damn criminal???

Quite easily.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 05:19:42 AM

Quote from: Astronomy on December 22, 2018, 04:26:04 AM

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 03:46:50 AM

So the distant sun and moon could equally fit Anaximander’s model of the Universe.

The model must contradict the fact, that daylight on equator lasts 12 hours, but in EU England - 6.

I don't follow! England certainly does not have 6 hours daylight at the equinox.

On the last autumnal equinox, 23 September 2018
    In London, sunrise 6:47 am, sunset 6:56 pm and daylight hours 12:08:51 and
    in Quito, Ecuador, sunrise 6:03 am, sunset 6:09 pm and daylight hours 12:06:27.

And everywhere on earth gets more than 12 hour daylight at the equinox, only about 06:27 in Quito, 08:51 in London but both poles get 24  hour daylight!

And even Anaximander's model could explain that but no modern FE model that I know could though maybe someone has one.

I am talking about today, 22.12.2018 at the moment is already dark in England, but in Africa shines the Sun.

Sorry, it must have been too late at night when I answered that post.

• I mistakenly took it that you meant at the equinox.
  
  
• And while it is true that "the distant sun and moon could equally fit Anaximander’s model of the Universe" that flat earth model only applies to a relatively small area of the earth.
  
  None of the ancient flat-earth cosmologies whether Babylonian, Hebrew, Greek or Chinese work for the whole earth as we know it today. In Anaximander’s time the Greek empire covered only this area:
  
  So, I agree that Anaximander’s cosmology does not cover a large region of earth. But there simply is no flat-earth model ancient or modern that does cover the whole earth.
  
  It cannot be done in a way that fits even the simplest observations taken at a large number of locations over the earth.

PS-
Because the Flat Earth is not written into dogma of Church, then the God can not modify the minds of Holy Researches to make them see an illusion of round Earth.

As far as I am concerned the dogma of Church never controlled anything including the shape or motion of the earth.
The "Church" might have thought it did but that does not affect reality.

Hereby I have the Research paper, which introduces the Virtual Reality into Science, recall the virtual particles of vacuum. Thus, the history between Big Bang and the wonderful creation week of the Universe (about 7 000 years ago) is "virtual", but not the "actual". Actual time is between today and the Creation Week.

You can publish "Research paper" on "the Virtual Reality into Science" or anything you feel like but that does not affect reality either.

All evidence points to the earth being a rotating Globe nothing you say can change that.

The flat-earth "movement" only survives by adhering to the following philosophy in some form or other.

Place of the Conspiracy in FET
Flat Earthers start with the knowledge that the earth is flat
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Essentially the reasoning boils down to -
P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated
P2) The FET (Flat Earth Theory) is an obvious truth

(my emphasis)

Now rather obviously, no one person can ever gather enough information by their own observations to prove the shape and motion of the earth.
So most of this information is "personally unverifiable evidence" contradicting the "obvious truth" of "Flat Earth Theory".

Hence, in the mind of "true" flat-earthers" any evidence against "Flat Earth Theory" that they have not personally verified is "fabricated".

I do not, and will not, subscribe to that philosophy!
And irrespective of all I have said you just assume that anything other than a stationary flat earth is unScriptural.

I've said my bit, think what you like.

Bye,  bye.

Bye,  bye.

The information concerning the Dogmatic Knowledge (the one, which can not be falsified) is useful for ones, who unites Theology and Physics.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 04:47:07 PM

Bye,  bye.

<< Come back when you have a flat-earth cosmology that works >>

The ancient ones of the Greeks, Hebrews, Babylonians and Chinese were not too bad for small limited regions of earth.
But no-one have yet come up with a plausible flat-earth cosmology that covers the whole earth.

We'll talk when you've found one, but hurry if statistics mean anything I probably won't be around in a decade.
And flat-earthers have been scrabbling around for maybe 150 years and haven't found one that works.

As I wrote before the flat-earth survives only by pretending that all contrary evidence, not personally verified, is fabricated, ie part of the Great Global Conspiracy .
Some have "escaped the rabbit hole" by seeing little things that convinced them that the earth couldn't be flat.

Have fun finding this perfect flat-earth cosmology !

As I wrote before the flat-earth survives only by pretending that all contrary evidence, not personally verified,

The fact, that Earth has regions of different climate is doubt free. The different climate is caused by different duration of sun light during one year. The different climate is not caused by different angle of Sun above the horizon, because a tree and a grass are not flat-horizontal: the tree in England receives same amount of Sun power as the tree in Africa.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 22, 2018, 09:44:41 PM

As I wrote before the flat-earth survives only by pretending that all contrary evidence, not personally verified,

The fact, that Earth has regions of different climate is doubt free. The different climate is caused by different duration of sun light during one year.

The different climate is not caused by different angle of Sun above the horizon, because a tree and a grass are not flat-horizontal: the tree in England receives same amount of Sun power as the tree in Africa.

While that might be true of vertical objects on average there is far more horizontal area the vertical area so that is incorrect when in comes to climate.

The ground and air temperatures are the most important when it comes to determining climate so the incidence angle of sunlight is extremely important.
Why else would the Arctic and Antarctica be so cold on average even though both poles get continuous daylight for six months of the year?

A lot of nice stuff in here and much would apply whatever the shape of the earth:
Maybe read online: 1 Solar Radiation Calculation by Dr. Mohamad Kharseh or to download: Solar Radiation Calculation, Dr.  Mohamad Kharseh.

While that might be true of vertical objects on average there is far more horizontal area the vertical area so that is incorrect when in comes to climate.

I feel sorry, because under word "climate" I have intended "flora".
Look, how it must be written:

The fact, that Earth has regions of different flora is doubt free. The different flora is caused by different duration of sun light during one year. The different flora is not so strongly caused by different angle of Sun above the horizon, because a tree and a grass are not flat-horizontal: the tree in England receives same amount of Sun power as the tree in Africa and the warm air holds for a long time after the summer, because of air Globe circulation and warm ocean and its warm water currents.

Quote from: rabinoz on December 23, 2018, 02:12:27 PM

While that might be true of vertical objects on average there is far more horizontal area the vertical area so that is incorrect when in comes to climate.

I feel sorry, because under word "climate" I have intended "flora".
Look, how it must be written:

The fact, that Earth has regions of different flora is doubt free. The different flora is caused by different duration of sun light during one year. The different flora is not so strongly caused by different angle of Sun above the horizon, because a tree and a grass are not flat-horizontal: the tree in England receives same amount of Sun power as the tree in Africa and the warm air holds for a long time after the summer, because of air Globe circulation and warm ocean and its warm water currents.

I don't see how that would change what I write.

The fact, that Earth has regions of different climate is doubt free. The different climate is caused by different duration of sun light during one year. The different climate is not caused by different angle of Sun above the horizon, because a tree and a grass are not flat-horizontal: the tree in England receives same amount of Sun power as the tree in Africa.

No. It has a lot to do with the angle.

How are your trees packed? Are they magic and following the sun?

It doesn't matter if they are horizontal or not. As soon as you have a large collection of them, their horizontal area is what matters.
That is because each tree only receives a portion of the light based upon how much of the total horizontal area it covers.

As well as that the lower angle also means that the sunlight has to go through more atmosphere which can also have an effect on the climate and the flora.
The flora is fundamentally affected by the climate, and helps support the climate.

The idea that its impossible to prove any other idea wrong is one against the history and the philosophy of science.  Science has again and again benefited from contrary.  Every single notable advance has come about, by definition, from ignoring or outright throwing away current knowledge. Like the flu, the best you can hope for is to vaccinate against strains that will of course evolve.

The idea that its impossible to prove any other idea wrong is one against the history and the philosophy of science.  Science has again and again benefited from contrary.  Every single notable advance has come about, by definition, from ignoring or outright throwing away current knowledge. Like the flu, the best you can hope for is to vaccinate against strains that will of course evolve.

The things Science found irrefutable are facts. For example, spinning Globe, Darwinism. But there is self-contradiction, because they wrongly believe, that Science is refutable. So, facts are not scientific things?!

Wikipedia:
A fact is a thing that is known to be consistent with objective reality and can be proven to be true with evidence. For example, "this sentence contains words" is a linguistic fact, and "the sun is a star" is a cosmological fact.