What a bunch of fools.
Indeed, round earthers have a lot to answer for.
Ok John, exactly what do you need from round earthers that they already haven't given you with substantial proof which you deny to show the shape of the earth? It actually appears the flat earthers have a lot more to answer, as nothing they claim can actually fit into reality without making up conspiracy and new types of physics...
As Bishop suggests, they number far more than what can be answered in a forum post. They require a whole sub-forum.
However, let's start with an easy one. The distances to see many natural objects are shown to be incorrect when putting round earth theory next to actual observations. Many of these are noted in Earth Not A Globe and other literature, and many have been brought up here. How are these to be explained?
Ok, I am sure somebody that can explain this issue much better than I will respond. But how about you do the same with simple one. How come there is no accurate Flat Earth Map that reflects anything close to reality?
I solved this problem first in the 2000s with a collapsing state map. More recently, it is solved also by myself in the relativistic model - as the surface of the earth is a non-euclidean closed flat plane whose 3 dimensional projection would be more or less a globe - explaining the accuracy of the globe in spite of its inaccurate interpretation. There are a number of other solutions out there, many of which can be found here on our forums.
You solved the Flat Earth has no map problem back in the naughts? Please share the solution with us. Which state?
This is the same problem I posit, perhaps. Why are the distances to all these locations inaccurate given the supposed curve of the earth and how far we can see?
Which one(s)? Since you can't seem to name any specific examples and instead substitute references that are too vague to be addressed, I'm going to call your bluff and say there are no natural objects on earth whose distances apart cannot be explained using the geoid (when necessary... otherwise, ellipsoid, or sphere, depending on how far apart they are and the degree of accuracy needed) and atmosphere. If you think you do know of any, why don't you start with one, and state where and how much you think the discrepancy is? Otherwise, there is nothing to explain.
Well, Tom is in this thread. He has discussed the Monterey Bay Experiment at great length several times in the past.
The Bishop Experiment is nothing more than an anecdote, not an experiment. No evidence, just someone saying they could see kids playing with a frisbee on a beach 22 miles away. That's the best example you have?
I'd have to dig up the collapsing state one. I'll see if I have time later, but its the little ones birthday tomorrow so my time is a bit limited.
No rush, I'm just surprised that the most vexing issue for FET (no map) has been solved by you a decade ago and the solution is no where to be seen on this site or anywhere else.
The Bay Experiment is an experiment, one that has been repeated many times. Why do you think it is not one?
As far as the example, I wasn't providing "the best example I have". I was providing a simple one to solve, one would guess. And instead, you have hand waved, showing that the roundist is not up to the task.
I would expect the best example, but maybe my expectations are too high. There's nothing to solve with the bishop experiment because we have no evidence. "The Bishop Experiment” is not an experiment, it’s anecdotal at best. It's basically a modernized retelling of the introductory fable in SBR’s ENAG Experiment II:
"The above-named experiments were first made by the author in the summer of 1838, but in the previous winter season, when the water in the "Old Bedford" Canal was frozen, he had often, when lying on the ice, with a good telescope observed persons skating and sliding at known distances of from four to eight miles. He lived for nine successive months within a hundred yards of the canal, in a temporary wooden building, and had many opportunities of making and repeating observations and experiments, which it would only be tedious to enumerate, as they all involved the same principle, and led to the same conclusions as those already described.”
The similarities are quite striking:
"On a very clear and chilly day it is possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore on the Lovers Point beach 20 inches above the sea level it is possible to see people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 23 miles away near the lighthouse. The entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I can see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I can see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I can see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach is visible.”
SBR: when lying on the ice, with a good telescope...
TB: With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach...
SBR: observed persons skating and sliding...
TB: see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing…
If I were to retell the story from my perspective would it be worthy of calling it “The Stack Experiment” or would it just be considered some opinion piece with zero substantiation or evidence?
“Even on a very clear and chilly day it is not possible to see Lighthouse Beach from Lovers Point and vice versa. With a good telescope, laying down on the stomach at the edge of the shore on the Lovers Point beach 20 inches above the sea level it was not possible to see what I imagined were people at the waters edge on the adjacent beach 23 miles away near the lighthouse. From a much closer vantage point one could assume the entire beach is visible down to the water splashing upon the shore. Upon looking into the telescope I couldn’t see children running in and out of the water, splashing and playing. I couldn't see people sun bathing at the shore and teenagers merrily throwing Frisbees to one another. I couldn't see runners jogging along the water's edge with their dogs. From my vantage point the entire beach wasn't visible, just the blue of the bay waters as earth’s curve was in my way.”