Can i ask some questions?

I believe that the Earth is round, like sphere, not flat, because:
1. How will you explain the picture of the Earth from the moon? If it is fake, than NASA and astronauts are all fake?
2. How will you explain day and night? Is sun just turn around the Earth?
3. How will you explain about the core of the Earth? Is core also flat?

Please respond to this questions. Thank you

You need to be enlightened. All your questions have answer, just are waiting your research; they are somewhere in this forum.

1 - FEers typically claim all photos from space are fake and that NASA and the like are lying/in on the conspiracy.
2 - There are many attempts. The 2 main ones are a magic spotlight sun with a shape-shifting spotlight, or magic bendy light.
2 - A FE doesn't have a core.

1 - FEers typically claim all photos from space are fake and that NASA and the like are lying/in on the conspiracy.
2 - There are many attempts. The 2 main ones are a magic spotlight sun with a shape-shifting spotlight, or magic bendy light.
2 - A FE doesn't have a core.

This is the Jack we want to see around. Stay like this. This Jack is lightening our burden.

Thanks for your contributions to the flat earth theory.

1 - FEers typically claim all photos from space are fake and that NASA and the like are lying/in on the conspiracy.
2 - There are many attempts. The 2 main ones are a magic spotlight sun with a shape-shifting spotlight, or magic bendy light.
2 - A FE doesn't have a core.

2-FE's also say the sun circles over the earth in an orbit and the seasons are controlled by celestial gears which shift the orbit in or out for the seasons. The moon and the sun are the same size and distance from the earth and in the same orbital path, but they never collide because the moon wobbles up and down to avoid colliding with the sun. At least that is what I have read.

Quote from: JackBlack on January 28, 2019, 03:18:25 AM

1 - FEers typically claim all photos from space are fake and that NASA and the like are lying/in on the conspiracy.
2 - There are many attempts. The 2 main ones are a magic spotlight sun with a shape-shifting spotlight, or magic bendy light.
2 - A FE doesn't have a core.

This is the Jack we want to see around. Stay like this. This Jack is lightening our burden.

Thanks for your contributions to the flat earth theory.

His use of the word 'magic' is a little condescending. It's as if he wants the reader to believe the whole thing is BS. Still, it is an improvement for him. I didn't see any personal attacks or telling people to get lost.

His use of the word 'magic' is a little condescending.

I use magic as a simple term to indicate it is completely unexplained/has no provided mechanism, and to indicate that it doesn't just solve all the problems.

Although I am a confirmed round earther, ,I am always interested in reading FE ideas on various subjects.
In this case, the horizon on a flat earth

I've seen some "theorising" about how the flat earth horizon would look but they are just that, "theorising" because there is no way to test it out.

Here are links to a couple of posts where JackBlack and I were trying to "nut it out":
        If your interested in discussing with a non flat earther, please comment « Message by rabinoz on October 30, 2018, 09:00:39 AM »
        If your interested in discussing with a non flat earther, please comment « Message by rabinoz on October 30, 2018, 02:57:15 PM »
One basic point that I was trying to bring out was that:
          on a flat earth the darker undersides of cumulus clouds would be seen above the horizon but
          on the Globe the white sides of these clouds would be seen above the horizon.
But I've seen nothing from flat earthers on that issue.

Maybe some "simulation expert" can step in and show what it should look like.

... We flat earthers are scientists not accepting the magic...

Simple question for a scientific mind:

Distance from North pole to Equator is 10 000 km. It is measured.
Circumference of Equator is 40 074.5 km. Also measured.

A scientist will know the formula for circumference of a circle.

Why circumference of Equator is not 62832 km?

Quote from: wise on June 09, 2019, 01:40:44 PM

... We flat earthers are scientists not accepting the magic...

Simple question for a scientific mind:

Distance from North pole to Equator is 10 000 km. It is measured.
Circumference of Equator is 40 074.5 km. Also measured.

A scientist will know the formula for circumference of a circle.

Why circumference of Equator is not 62832 km?

Simple. circumference in Equator isn't the longest line compared the outer circles.

circumference passing the equator is just 25 k some kilometres, not 40k.

Since globularists are not measuring it on a circle but going out of the shortest line, sometimes more south and sometimes more north so that they measure it as 40.000kms. 40k kilometres clearly means nothing.

Quote from: Macarios on June 09, 2019, 02:06:11 PM

Quote from: wise on June 09, 2019, 01:40:44 PM

... We flat earthers are scientists not accepting the magic...

Simple question for a scientific mind:

Distance from North pole to Equator is 10 000 km. It is measured.
Circumference of Equator is 40 074.5 km. Also measured.

A scientist will know the formula for circumference of a circle.

Why circumference of Equator is not 62832 km?

Simple. circumference in Equator isn't the longest line compared the outer circles.

Distance from North pole to Equator is measured. It is 10 000 km.
That is how Metre was defined in the first place. It was in France in 1789.

A new unit of length, the metre was introduced - defined as one ten-millionth of the distance from the North Pole to the equator.

(from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_metre)

Measuring circumference of Equator can be done by measuring ground speed of subsolar point for Equinox.
Sun (and subsolar point) will not look for any straight-line shortcuts, it will follow Equator all day.
That's where the result of 40 074.5 km came from.

Now please tell us what would outer circles have to do with it?

~~~~~

EDIT: There are two places in Indonesian island Kalimantan.
The places are both on Equator.
Bontang is at 117.48 degrees east.
Pontianak is at 109.34 degrees east.
The longitude difference is 8.14 degrees.
For the need of Indonesian government many distances are measured, including the distance between these two places.
The distance between Bontang and Pontianak is 906.13 km.

Knowing that Sun travels 15 degrees per hour, we know that those 8.14 degrees will pass in 0.542667 hours.
It will give us ground speed of subsolar point to be 1669.77 km/h.

That's right:
1669.77 km/h times 24 h gives circumference of Equator to be 40074.5 km.


(If 8.14 degrees is 906.13 km, how much is 360 degrees?)

Simple. circumference in Equator isn't the longest line compared the outer circles.

But the Equator is the longest parallel of latitude.

I asked Google this question "What is the longest parallel of latitude?" And the answer was:

The equator is the circle that is equidistant from the North Pole and South Pole. It divides the Earth into the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere.
Of the parallels or circles of latitude, it is the longest, and the only 'great circle' (a circle on the surface of the Earth, centered on Earth's center).

Are you suggesting the a Google search might return a false answer ?

Quote from: wise on June 09, 2019, 02:12:49 PM

Simple. circumference in Equator isn't the longest line compared the outer circles.

But the Equator is the longest parallel of latitude.

I asked Google this question "What is the longest parallel of latitude?" And the answer was:

Quote

The equator is the circle that is equidistant from the North Pole and South Pole. It divides the Earth into the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere.
Of the parallels or circles of latitude, it is the longest, and the only 'great circle' (a circle on the surface of the Earth, centered on Earth's center).

Are you suggesting the a Google search might return a false answer ?

Nope. Equator isn't the longest parallel. Google is looking at the nasa photos those are all fake. If google would look at the flat earth map then the result would be different.

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 12:51:59 AM

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 12:17:14 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 09, 2019, 03:59:35 PM

<BS deleted>

Sorry. I've already answered it. I don't want to repeat myself.

And your answer was obviously wrong.
Your answer contradicts reality, but you are hiding it from yourself.

Or you actally know it, but hide it for some other reasons?
What are you hiding?

Nope, my answer is obviously true but you are unable to get it or denying the facts, or diging your head to sand.

It is not, but ok, let me ask you something else:

If you take parallel that is 38.5 degrees north, it goes through two Turkish cities: Van and Izmir.
Van is at 43.37 degrees East, Izmir is at 27.14 degrees east. The longitudinal difference is 16.13 degrees.
Distance from Van to Izmir is 1413 km.
(Tukish government measured the whole Turkey, data is publicly available, it doesn't depend on the shape of the Earth.)

If the segment of 16.13 degrees from Van to Izmir is 1413 km long, how long is the full circumference of 360 degrees all around the Earth?

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 01:39:01 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 12:51:59 AM

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 12:17:14 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 09, 2019, 03:59:35 PM

<BS deleted>

Sorry. I've already answered it. I don't want to repeat myself.

And your answer was obviously wrong.
Your answer contradicts reality, but you are hiding it from yourself.

Or you actally know it, but hide it for some other reasons?
What are you hiding?

Nope, my answer is obviously true but you are unable to get it or denying the facts, or diging your head to sand.

It is not, but ok, let me ask you something else:

If you take parallel that is 38.5 degrees north, it goes through two Turkish cities: Van and Izmir.
Van is at 43.37 degrees East, Izmir is at 27.14 degrees east. The longitudinal difference is 16.13 degrees.
Distance from Van to Izmir is 1413 km.
(Tukish government measured the whole Turkey, data is publicly available, it doesn't depend on the shape of the Earth.)

If the segment of 16.13 degrees from Van to Izmir is 1413 km long, how long is the full circumference of 360 degrees all around the Earth?

Distance is incorrect. I have traveled most part of Turkey and clearly can say the Turkey is bigger than shown in the map. Hence your argument is null.

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 03:29:10 AM

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 01:39:01 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 12:51:59 AM

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 12:17:14 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 09, 2019, 03:59:35 PM

<BS deleted>

Sorry. I've already answered it. I don't want to repeat myself.

And your answer was obviously wrong.
Your answer contradicts reality, but you are hiding it from yourself.

Or you actally know it, but hide it for some other reasons?
What are you hiding?

Nope, my answer is obviously true but you are unable to get it or denying the facts, or diging your head to sand.

It is not, but ok, let me ask you something else:

If you take parallel that is 38.5 degrees north, it goes through two Turkish cities: Van and Izmir.
Van is at 43.37 degrees East, Izmir is at 27.14 degrees east. The longitudinal difference is 16.13 degrees.
Distance from Van to Izmir is 1413 km.
(Tukish government measured the whole Turkey, data is publicly available, it doesn't depend on the shape of the Earth.)

If the segment of 16.13 degrees from Van to Izmir is 1413 km long, how long is the full circumference of 360 degrees all around the Earth?

Distance is incorrect. I have traveled most part of Turkey and clearly can say the Turkey is bigger than shown in the map. Hence your argument is null.

Argument? I'm not arguing anything (yet).

How far is from Van to Izmir?

EDIT:
Try this: https://www.skyscanner.net/routes/van/adb/van-to-izmir.html.
Or this: https://www.distancecalculator.net/from-izmir-to-van

You are not the authority can decide what is real scientist. This is the flat earth society and our honored high zetetic counsil decides it

No, the English language decides it as it is an English word.
By the definition of a scientist, you are not one nor is anyone in this unscientific society of yours.
If you had any idea what you are talking about you would understand that zeteticism discards science and replaces it with zeteticism instead.

Again, if you were a scientist you would accept that Earth is round.
Anyone who claims to be a scientist while claiming Earth is flat is a liar.

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 04:39:01 AM

You are not the authority can decide what is real scientist. This is the flat earth society and our honored high zetetic counsil decides it

No, the English language decides it as it is an English word.
By the definition of a scientist, you are not one nor is anyone in this unscientific society of yours.
If you had any idea what you are talking about you would understand that zeteticism discards science and replaces it with zeteticism instead.

Again, if you were a scientist you would accept that Earth is round.
Anyone who claims to be a scientist while claiming Earth is flat is a liar.

By the definition of science according to whom? It is clear that those whom do not contain us in your opinion. This is your own claim your BS globularist society can define the science. But your BS globularist society can not force me to accept your BS science definition.

"Anyone who claims to be a scientist while claiming Earth is round is a liar." What is difference with your claim? Because you are crowded?  Is it a majority pressure? Are you Nazis claiming and forcing your prejecture about the earth's being so called round?

Since you can't see warnings and you are blocking my PMs, I'll tell you here. Keep it up and it's a week off. Try me.

By the definition of science according to whom?

How about the multitude of dictionaries?

But your BS globularist society can not force me to accept your BS science definition.

If you don't want to accept it there is a very simple solution, don't call yourself a scientist.
In fact some key parts of the society do that. They see see science as removed from the truth because it seeks to develop models and try to have them match reality. So instead they claim to follow the zetetic method (as opposed to the scientific method) as they see it as more direct in seeking the truth.

What is difference with your claim?

Scientists follow the scientific method. The scientific method has shown Earth to be round. Thus saying Earth is flat is rejecting the scientific method and thus not being a scientist.
It has nothing to do with the majority or popularity or anything of the like.

Since you can't see warnings and you are blocking my PMs, I'll tell you here. Keep it up and it's a week off. Try me.

Get try yourself. I am keeping to reply all the globularist bullshits here. If you like to see angry globularism so much so why don't you marry them? Get go and be a moderator in globularistearthsociety. You are a shame of the flat earth society.

How about the multitude of dictionaries?

Does it inclue flat earth dictionaries?

If you don't want to accept it there is a very simple solution, don't call yourself a scientist.

Accepting the frauds and globularist BS can not make me magically a scientist. But denying them by scientific evidences like I do even you deny them by closing your eyes make it me so.

Again, your or your angry globularist sources defining of scientist term does not mean me anything.

In fact some key parts of the society do that.

Like you do it.

They see see science as removed from the truth because it seeks to develop models and try to have them match reality.

Your imagination does not make those people magically like how you dreaming it. You are clearly saying lie or defining yourself.

So instead they claim to follow the zetetic method (as opposed to the scientific method) as they see it as more direct in seeking the truth.

We flat earthers are following the zetetic method but you angry globularists force us to accept some BS photos and cgi animations as true. It is clear that you are unturthful person can not tell the truth here.

Scientists follow the scientific method.

Like I do.

The scientific method has shown Earth to be round.

Nope. Your claiming "The scientific method has shown Earth to be round" does not magically make it round.

Thus saying Earth is flat is rejecting the scientific method and thus not being a scientist.

Again, your baseless claims against flat earth can not be evidences of anything but how you are talking baseless.

It has nothing to do with the majority or popularity or anything of the like.

I do not think we are doing it for popularity. If you want to be popular then you can visit NASA and suggest them make you a professor and they will make you a professor Brian Cox. But you have to be handsome and photogenic. I don't think you have those conditions.