Proof the Earth is round

I only think that the scientific community is mistaken on one point.

Which is completely ridiculous.
Why accept science on so many things, but suddenly when it comes to your blind-faith belief that Earth is flat, suddenly science is wrong with absolutely no justification at all.

Also note, this one point then extends to so much more.
For example, do you agree with GPS? Which uses satellites and a RE?

Again, why believe Earth is flat when all the evidence shows otherwise?

I actually agree with the scientific community far more than most other flat-Earthers. But we all (FEers) by definition disagree with the scientific consensus on the one point that united us: FET.

So just what is your FET that is consistent with almost all the findings of the scientific community?

Images like this seem quite inconsistent with a flat earth:

Moon transit taken by the DSCOVER EPIC

Made from photos taken by the Galileo spacecraft on Feb 13, 2013 Earth's size appears to change because Galileo is moving away.

Quote from: Themightykabool on May 25, 2019, 04:40:06 PM

I meant in a sense where he is sceptical of the scientists.

I think that the scientific community is correct about most things. Global warming is real and man-made; vaccines are safe and effective and declining to get vaccinated is reckless in the extreme; the Earth is very roughly 4.5 billion years old, and the universe is very roughly 13.5 billion years old; Neil Armstrong and several others after him walked on the Moon; what we can see of the universe is about 28 billion parsecs across; all living things, including us, evolved from earlier forms, going back to the first cell, whose origin is yet to be unraveled; etc. I only think that the scientific community is mistaken on one point.

This is not to speak of individual scientists, some of whom hold outlying opinions, or of matters yet to be settled, as science is constantly learning, and consensus is not achieved overnight.

I actually agree with the scientific community far more than most other flat-Earthers. But we all (FEers) by definition disagree with the scientific consensus on the one point that united us: FET.

So you disagree on measured distances, path of the sun and satellite operation?

Mag
Seriously?
Most often all roads lead to "conspiracy".
Youre the first i hear believes everything science except theres some mysterious mssing flat piece.

Using your nonscientific basic knowledge of balls and plates, why do you think the smartest people combined with technology cant figure out this riddle?

Neil Armstrong and several others after him walked on the Moon;

Are the photos they took showing a spherical earth real?

Quote from: magellanclavichord on May 25, 2019, 05:20:18 PM

I only think that the scientific community is mistaken on one point.

Which is completely ridiculous.

You are free to hold that opinion. 

Quote from: magellanclavichord on May 25, 2019, 05:20:18 PM

I actually agree with the scientific community far more than most other flat-Earthers. But we all (FEers) by definition disagree with the scientific consensus on the one point that united us: FET.

So just what is your FET that is consistent with almost all the findings of the scientific community?

My FET is just that the Earth is flat. I don't try to explain anything. Okay, when I read what I just wrote, I am forced to admit that I don't really have a "theory," since a theory is more than just an isolated idea. But I think that where most FEers go wrong is in trying to formulate complete theories without sufficient understanding. I don't pretend to understand, or to have answers.

... do you agree with GPS?

That depends on what you mean by "agree with." I have GPS in my car and my phone. I use it all the time. It works, mostly. Once in a while there's an odd glitch and it thinks I'm somewhere else entirely, or the nav, which is using it, sends me on a peculiar detour. But mostly it works. But that doesn't mean I necessarily have to "agree with" someone else's theory of why or how it works. Heck, I certainly don't understand how my car works. I know how to drive it, but not how it works. Same with GPS: I know how to set a destination and follow the instructions from the robot voice. I don't always agree with those instructions, but most of the time I trust them. Does that mean I "agree with GPS"? Or does using GPS mean I have to agree with your theory that GPS cannot work on a flat Earth?

Again, why believe Earth is flat when all the evidence shows otherwise?

Why not?

Mag
Seriously?
Most often all roads lead to "conspiracy".
Youre the first i hear believes everything science except theres some mysterious mssing flat piece.

Thank you.

Quote from: magellanclavichord on May 25, 2019, 05:20:18 PM

Neil Armstrong and several others after him walked on the Moon;

Are the photos they took showing a spherical earth real?

The photos are real. And they're flat. I've never seen a round photograph. My computer screen is flat. The magazine pages with such pictures are flat. I have a camera, and it makes flat pictures. The brain can look at a flat picture and interpolate a third dimension, but that third dimension is all in the brain. Even our eyes generate a flat image which our brain interprets as a 3D image. And we've evolved so that this perceived image allows us to function. But the brain cannot deal with anything outside the experiences it evolved to deal with. That's why thinking about Relativity and QED bollix up our brains. So when we look at those flat images our brains construct a 3D version, but that doesn't mean that that version is "real." Perception is only as good as it needs to be for survival. And the hominids living on the savannas of Africa a million years ago, who eventually evolved into us, didn't need to be able to correctly interpret flat pictures of the Earth from space in order to survive.

Youre (mag)very interesting.

So because you dont understand how gps works does that mean someone else...possibly those who built it do?
And if those who built it telll you its based off a global round earth - what would that mean to you?

What do flat picture have to do with a round earth?
What does a blind person make of it?
They cant see photos so then in their mind it must not exist?
What does your reflection in a mirror tell you - that youre flat?

You are free to hold that opinion. 

Again, not an opinion, a fact.
You not liking that fact doesn't magically mean it is just an opinion.

But I think that where most FEers go wrong is in trying to formulate complete theories without sufficient understanding.

Again, still better than just blindly asserting Earth is flat.

That depends on what you mean by "agree with." I have GPS in my car and my phone. I use it all the time. It works, mostly. Once in a while there's an odd glitch and it thinks I'm somewhere else entirely, or the nav, which is using it, sends me on a peculiar detour. But mostly it works. But that doesn't mean I necessarily have to "agree with" someone else's theory of why or how it works. Heck, I certainly don't understand how my car works. I know how to drive it, but not how it works. Same with GPS: I know how to set a destination and follow the instructions from the robot voice. I don't always agree with those instructions, but most of the time I trust them. Does that mean I "agree with GPS"? Or does using GPS mean I have to agree with your theory that GPS cannot work on a flat Earth?

So you trust all of science, including everything that is based upon a round Earth, just not a round Earth itself. Further making your position pure nonsense.

Why not?

Because it is pure stupidity.

The photos are real. And they're flat. I've never seen a round photograph.

That isn't what they asked. They took pictures which showed a round Earth, not a flat Earth.
Do you accept those photos are real, or do you reject them as fake?

My FET is just that the Earth is flat. I don't try to explain anything. Okay, when I read what I just wrote, I am forced to admit that I don't really have a "theory," since a theory is more than just an isolated idea. But I think that where most FEers go wrong is in trying to formulate complete theories without sufficient understanding. I don't pretend to understand, or to have answers.

But if there are two competing theories and one can explain simple observation observations and one can't then it is quite obvious which theory will be accepted until further evidence comes along.

• Initially (before say 500 BC in the case of the Greeks), the earth was considered flat but with, as you agree, a distant sun, moon and stars.
• Then, as they travelled further, more evidence came in and they realised that the could not be flat.
  They probably had too little evidence to "prove" that the whole earth was "curved" but that is what they assumed and after 300 BC (some say 500 BC) it was accepted, by the Greeks at least, that the earth was a Globe.
• All evidence gathered since then (except possibly that "the horizon looks flat") was consistent with a Globe but, apart from a few dissenters, they assumed that the earth was stationary and the centre of the Universe.
• And so on with the Heliocentric Solar System being seen to fit the astronomical observations better than a Geocentric Solar System.
  So the Heliocentric Solar System was finally accepted after Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton.

The photos are real. And they're flat. I've never seen a round photograph. My computer screen is flat. The magazine pages with such pictures are flat. I have a camera, and it makes flat pictures. The brain can look at a flat picture and interpolate a third dimension, but that third dimension is all in the brain. Even our eyes generate a flat image which our brain interprets as a 3D image. And we've evolved so that this perceived image allows us to function. But the brain cannot deal with anything outside the experiences it evolved to deal with. That's why thinking about Relativity and QED bollix up our brains. So when we look at those flat images our brains construct a 3D version, but that doesn't mean that that version is "real." Perception is only as good as it needs to be for survival. And the hominids living on the savannas of Africa a million years ago, who eventually evolved into us, didn't need to be able to correctly interpret flat pictures of the Earth from space in order to survive.

Of course photos are flat but the only geometric shape that shows as a circle from all orientations is a circle and there are numerous photos of the earth taken from many different directions. As I showed in:

Images like this seem quite inconsistent with a flat earth:

Moon transit taken by the DSCOVR EPIC

Made from photos taken by the Galileo spacecraft on Feb 13, 2013 Earth's size appears to change because Galileo is moving away.

So just where does your FET differ from the findings of all these scientists?

... So you trust all of science, including everything that is based upon a round Earth, just not a round Earth itself. Further making your position pure nonsense.

I'm not sure that "trust" is the right word. When you trust someone you do not necessarily believe in them with 100% certainty. You are merely willing to grant them the benefit of the doubt when  it comes to your social interactions.

Quote from: magellanclavichord on May 27, 2019, 09:40:18 AM

The photos are real. And they're flat. I've never seen a round photograph.

That isn't what they asked. They took pictures which showed a round Earth, not a flat Earth.
Do you accept those photos are real, or do you reject them as fake?

I just answered that question. You even quoted my answer. You assert that the flat photos show a round Earth. You want me to say either that the photos are fake or that the Earth is round. That's like asking "Is two plus two equal to three or five? You have to pick one or the other." You can insist all you like, but my answer remains the same.

... if there are two competing theories and one can explain simple observation observations and one can't then it is quite obvious which theory will be accepted until further evidence comes along.

Which is why we flat-Earthers are in the minority.

So just where does your FET differ from the findings of all these scientists?

With the proviso that I have admitted, and repeat here, that properly speaking, I don't have a full-fledged theory, my "theory," such as it is, differs in that the Earth is roughly flat, and in theirs it is approximately round.

I'm not sure that "trust" is the right word.

You can discuss the semantics all you want. That doesn't effect the point.
Your position makes no sense at all.

I just answered that question. You even quoted my answer.

No you didn't.
You completely avoided the question.
Avoiding the question is not answering it.

You want me to say either that the photos are fake or that the Earth is round.

Yes, because they are the only 2 options (noting that they are not mutually exclusive). Just like I want you to either admit Earth or round or admit you reject science, because they are the only 2 options.

That's like asking "Is two plus two equal to three or five?

No, it is nothing like that as that questions is not a true dichotomy.
It is much more akin to asking if you think 2+2=4 and expecting a yes or no answer rather than you dodging the question.

So I ask again, do you accept all these photos showing a round Earth from space to be real?
It is a simple yes or no question. You can add more if you like, e.g. "Yes, these photos which show Earth to be round are real and thus Earth is round", or "no these photos are fake"

Are you capable of honestly answering a simple question, or do you hate the truth that much?

Quote from: rabinoz on May 27, 2019, 04:00:39 PM

So just where does your FET differ from the findings of all these scientists?

With the proviso that I have admitted, and repeat here, that properly speaking, I don't have a full-fledged theory,

Well, my big problem is that I fail to see how you can explain:
seasons,
day and night,
sunrise and sunset,
circumnavigation via almost any route, including both poles and the equator,
satellites and[numerous other things
if the earth is flat yet the sun, moon, planets and stars are great distances away.

Many ancient civilisations did have models similar to that but they only applied to each's small region of earth, not to the whole now known world.

my "theory," such as it is, differs in that the Earth is roughly flat, and in theirs it is approximately round.

I'd go further than saying the Globe "is approximately round".

Earth's ellipticity is approximately 0.003353 because it bulges slightly at the equator and is flattened at the poles

In other words, looked at from the "side" the Globe looks like a disk that varies less than ±0.17% from a perfect circle - that's very close to being round.

And there is a very big topological difference between a Globe and even being "roughly flat":
A Globe earth has no "edges", so can be circumnavigated in any direction,
but a "roughly flat" earth would presumably have "edges" that could not be crossed and so could not be circumnavigated in some directions.

Current flat earth models usually "invent" massive "Ice Walls" or similar to prevent the oceans from escaping and people reaching the "edge".

But you seem to be achieving nothing so far, other than being "hit" from "both sides".
Wise objects violently to NASA, space flights and Global warning while JackBlack objects to your acceptance of a flat earth while accepting (almost) all the "claims of science".

Sitting on a fence can certainly get uncomfortable in more ways than one. Maybe some inkling of your thoughts might clarify things a little.
 

Well, my big problem is that I fail to see how you can explain:

It is quite simple, it doesn't give a damn.
It is making no attempt to explain anything and ignoring the fact that the scientific explanation relies upon Earth being round.

Hey mag

Has anyone ever seen a photo that wasnt flat?
You need a hologram to be satisfied?
Come on now.

Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Rab: I don't try to "explain" anything. I've admitted I have no explanations for anything.

Kabool: You are correct: All photos are flat. That's my point. You can't prove a thing is round from a photo of it because the photo is by its nature flat.

Sorry all for the brevity of this post. I'm nearly out of time and have to run.

Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Rab: I don't try to "explain" anything. I've admitted I have no explanations for anything.

Kabool: You are correct: All photos are flat. That's my point. You can't prove a thing is round from a photo of it because the photo is by its nature flat.

Sorry all for the brevity of this post. I'm nearly out of time and have to run.

Take a photo of yourself.  Look at it.  Are you flat?  Are you so blind that you can't see that you have depth?  Can you not tell that your ears are further back than you eyes?  The wall you are standing in front of is actually a few feet away?  Or is your head so deep in the sand that you have never learned the meaning of integrity?

Quote from: magellanclavichord on May 29, 2019, 09:06:20 AM

Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Rab: I don't try to "explain" anything. I've admitted I have no explanations for anything.

Kabool: You are correct: All photos are flat. That's my point. You can't prove a thing is round from a photo of it because the photo is by its nature flat.

Sorry all for the brevity of this post. I'm nearly out of time and have to run.

Take a photo of yourself.  Look at it.  Are you flat?  Are you so blind that you can't see that you have depth?  Can you not tell that your ears are further back than you eyes?  The wall you are standing in front of is actually a few feet away?  Or is your head so deep in the sand that you have never learned the meaning of integrity?

Yes. A flat image is definitely proof of the three-dimensionality of an object.

Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Rab: I don't try to "explain" anything. I've admitted I have no explanations for anything.

Kabool: You are correct: All photos are flat. That's my point. You can't prove a thing is round from a photo of it because the photo is by its nature flat.

Sorry all for the brevity of this post. I'm nearly out of time and have to run.

How about video showing a rotation?
How do yoy manage pants with that kind of poor ass logic?

Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Saying the photos are flat is not answering the question.
The photos clearly show a round Earth. This is especially true with the multitude of photos taken from many different angles.

So while you might not be able to tell with a single photo in isolation, with the multitude of them that have been taken (or with some simple knowledge of how many continents there are and what their general shape is) they show Earth to be round.

So as you are still yet to answer, I ask again:
Do you accept these photos which clearly show Earth to be round are real, or do you claim they are fake? Again, there is no third option. Either they are real and show Earth is round, or they are not real (i.e. fake).

Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Kabool: You are correct: All photos are flat. That's my point. You can't prove a thing is round from a photo of it because the photo is by its nature flat.

Even though all photos are flat, as I've said before, the only geometric shape that can appear round from any viewing angle is a sphere.

There are photos from weather satellites owned by a number of countries. Here are samples from US, Russian and Japanese weather satellites:

The United States' has the GOES series of weather satellites, with three in operation:
       GOES-15, GOES-16 (at 75.2º W Longitude) and GOES-17 (at 137.2º W Longitude) with GOES-15 being retired in early July 2019.

A full disk image from GOES-17 captured from its new orbital position at 137.2 degrees west longitude

This full disk image of Earth was captured by the GOES-16 satellite Wednesday. Credit: NOAA

Russia's weather satellite Elektro-L No.1 is located at 76°E over the Indian Ocean and the Japanese have the Himawari 8 over the western Pacific Ocean at 140°E.

Earth as viewed by the Russian weather satellite Elektro-L, which is in a geostationary orbit at a distance of 36,000 kilometers, on September 26, 2012. A higher resolution version is available on GigaPan.

From Japan's Himawari-8 Go to Himawari-8 Real-time Web - NICT for real-time images.

Only an almost spherical object could look so near circular from such a range of viewing position.

Even though all photos are flat, as I've said before, the only geometric shape that can appear round from any viewing angle is a sphere.

No they can not. They are not photos just some images badly photosopped. These are not evidences. Prove their being real.

Quote from: rabinoz on May 29, 2019, 03:57:04 PM

Even though all photos are flat, as I've said before, the only geometric shape that can appear round from any viewing angle is a sphere.

No they can not. They are not photos just some images badly photosopped. These are not evidences. Prove their being real.

Incorrect!
Why would dozens of different organisations waste their time and money faking hundreds of thousands of satellite weather photos?
Answer that one!
The Japanese Himawari 8 satellite takes 144 full colour photos every day!

Himawari-8 Satellite Offers A New Look at Our Planet – 144 Times Per Day

<< Click photo for a very high resolution version. >>

A sense of perspective is unavoidable from 22,000 miles out. Looking down at Earth from that distance — almost three times farther than the diameter of the planet itself — allows a view of the globe as a massive organic system, pulsing with continuous movement. (NY Times)

Last month, Japan’s new Himawari-8 weather satellite began sending data back to Earth. Launched in late 02014 to help track storm systems and other weather patterns in the Pacific Rim, it looks down on Earth from a geostationary orbit, at about 36,000 kilometers (or 22,000 miles) from the surface.

You cannot get all the correct weather systems onto a fake photo by Photoshopping - especially every 10 minutes.

incorrect!

Correct! Modified jpeg animations can not be evidence.