Well, this would do it for me

I shall just quote:

The photograph below was taken by the crew on board the Columbia during its last mission, on a cloudless day.

The picture is of Europe and Africa when the sun is setting. Half of the  picture is in night. The bright dots you see are the cities lights. The top part of Africa is the Sahara Desert. Note that the lights are  already on in Holland, Paris, and Barcelona, and that's it's still daylight in  Dublin, London, Lisbon, and Madrid.

The sun is still shining on the Strait of Gibraltar. The Mediterranean  Sea is already in darkness. In the middle of the Atlantic Ocean you can see the  Azores Islands; below them to the right are the Madeira Islands; a bit below are  the Canary Islands; and further South, close to the farthest western point of  Africa, are the Cape Verde islands.

Note that the Sahara is huge and can be seen clearly both during Daytime  and night time.

To  the left, on top, is Greenland, totally frozen.

It's kind of breathtaking. I know what the flat-Earthers will say anyway: faked, Photoshopped, space programme conspiracy, etc, blah, blah, (insert inane ridiculous comment here), blah. I don't care. It's still great. Flat Earth? I don't think so.

Pssh, mundi, you disappoint me; you know it must be an optical illusion due to the refraction of light off of the heavy atmosphere don't you?

..........

Yea, .... the space shuttle image seems flawless untill you zoom-in on London.
Now I'm bloody confused till next year.

lol, wow, that has to be the worst photoshopping I've ever seen. Dr_Bill, come on man...

Pssh, mundi, you disappoint me; you know it must be an optical illusion due to the refraction of light off of the heavy atmosphere don't you?

I know, I know: standards are slipping. I was just so taken with the image I had to share it. I also said I didn't care what any flat-Earthers might have to say about it: but thanks for pointing out that the usual rigorous standards are absent!  

And your Photoshopping does suck, Dr_Bill. It wasn't even funny.  

Dr. Bills picture in my opinion is just as much full of hot air as your picture

Oh, come on, bullhorn, you'll have to do better than that: we have higher standards on this forum, you know. Specifically: what is wrong with the picture and why?

Statements that are not backed-up by anything that resembles a coherent idea surrouded by reason are discarded and the user gets placed one notch lower on my "how credible is this person" scale. Bullhorn = -1

I think the count may be a little lower than –1 . . .

obviously the nasa camera was somehow affected by extraneous circumstances (example: a person's thumb was making a shadow over that part of the earth)

see? all makes sense, so stop your "round earth" jibbah-jabbah

obviously the nasa camera was somehow affected by extraneous circumstances (example: a person's thumb was making a shadow over that part of the earth)

see? all makes sense, so stop your "round earth" jibbah-jabbah

Obviously. And on the same note, the Earth has four corners - each of which are held up by four angels -, Eden is on the south coast of Brazil, President Bush uses Voodoo magic to turn his supporters into mindless zombis and the Ark of the Covenant is buried under an oak tree in my backyard.

And your point is?... The point of this picture was to show that day and night aren't "optical illusions" as many of the flat-earthers say, and even this article concedes that it does show the day-night terminator line.

obviously the nasa camera was somehow affected by extraneous circumstances (example: a person's thumb was making a shadow over that part of the earth)

Man, that's one pretty big thumb right there, especially considering that all of the millions of people affected by the thumb have turned their lights on, while the millions of people not under the gigantic thumb haven't.

But if instead you're talking about a normal-sized thumb interfering with the camera itself, then you wouldn't be able to see anything past it. Not countries, no lights, no nothing. The thumb would be in the way. Not casting a gigantic shadow; it would be in-between the lens and the subject. That is to say, if you haven't got it so far, you would just see a blurred thumb in the way instead of all the pretty lights.

Seriously, do people think before posting around here, or does it go the other way around?

And your point is?... The point of this picture was to show that day and night aren't "optical illusions" as many of the flat-earthers say, and even this article concedes that it does show the day-night terminator line.

Yes it does. However what was not 100% clear (in my opinion) is that it is in fact a manufactured image.

Also, the facts about how it was taken is explained on that page (as opposed to it being taken by the Columbia crew).

You know, all of this has made me realise that the motion of how the sun appears to move across the sky (smoothly, from East to West) is really not in harmony with the idea of a flat Earth. The sun gradually comes over the horizon bit by bit: if it did this over the edge of a flat Earth, then it really would have to hit the entire disk within only a few minutes, an hour at the most. Instead, it takes an entire day (24 hours, not just one) for the sun to hit the entire "disk". How can this be possible?

In short, it can't.  This question is pretty valid.  $10 says it gets ignored to death.

I think you're going to win your bet.

Man, that's one pretty big thumb right there, especially considering that all of the millions of people affected by the thumb have turned their lights on, while the millions of people not under the gigantic thumb haven't.

here's an experiment you can try, get a flashlight (ie: the sun), and then shine it onto a flat disk
now, put your thumb in front of the light so that it makes the exact shape formed on this obviously photoshopped picture
same thing.

oh, and your question, the only reason you're finding a hard time believing this, is because you're basing your entire argument on YOUR laws of physics, obviously since ours are different, you cannot use them as evidence against the earth being flat (which it is)

So could you please explain your laws of physics?  I'd be happy to tear them to shreds, but as it is, you're not giving us anything to work with.  Also, while you're at it, answer Mundi's question of why it takes 24 hours for everyone on the planet to see the sun completely.

Quote from: "Mundi"

Man, that's one pretty big thumb right there, especially considering that all of the millions of people affected by the thumb have turned their lights on, while the millions of people not under the gigantic thumb haven't.

here's an experiment you can try, get a flashlight (ie: the sun), and then shine it onto a flat disk
now, put your thumb in front of the light so that it makes the exact shape formed on this obviously photoshopped picture
same thing.

oh, and your question, the only reason you're finding a hard time believing this, is because you're basing your entire argument on YOUR laws of physics, obviously since ours are different, you cannot use them as evidence against the earth being flat (which it is)

So, then, you are freely ADMITTING that someone was up there, IN SPACE, by the sun, holding their thumb out and taking a picture?  And this event was completely ignored by the media as a freak occurence?  How hot, exactly, do you think the sun is?  How bright?  Don't you think this person would've at least been blinded before he got a chance to snap the photo?  And doesn't this kinda conflict with your theory that all space voyages are driven by a vast conspiracy?

You know, all of this has made me realise that the motion of how the sun appears to move across the sky (smoothly, from East to West) is really not in harmony with the idea of a flat Earth. The sun gradually comes over the horizon bit by bit: if it did this over the edge of a flat Earth, then it really would have to hit the entire disk within only a few minutes, an hour at the most. Instead, it takes an entire day (24 hours, not just one) for the sun to hit the entire "disk". How can this be possible?

I'm not sure exactly how the flatearther sun moves but as I understand it to be 11 miles away from the earth, my first complaint is that if it has an arc the edge of the world with the big ICE walls would be hotter than the equator as the arc is at its furthest above the equator. and secondly which relates to mundis point, if the sun is indeed 11 miles above the earth, to achieve 12 hours of sunlight it would be moving incredibley slow, yet jets travelling pretty damn fast can just about keep up with the shadow of the sun setting.

oh, and your question, the only reason you're finding a hard time believing this, is because you're basing your entire argument on YOUR laws of physics, obviously since ours are different, you cannot use them as evidence against the earth being flat (which it is)

I don't think the laws of physics are subject to one's particular viewpoint. Physics is a way which some scientists use to describe the phenomena around them, and their views seem pretty much accepted. If you do have a different interpretation of the phenomena around you, that's one thing, but I don't think the phenomena change because of your viewpoint. Light still shines, objects can still revolve, and so on. Your explanation for why they do might be different, but might be a load of nonsense if it works in one instance and then doesn't when the circumstances are changed slightly.

So what are your "laws of physics"?

holy goddamn these people are retarded. round ftw.

I'm curious about these laws of physics. Do they exist or where they randomly pulled out of someones ass? Can they be proven? What I really am asking is, if I eat Alphabets cereal, will I crap out a better set of laws of physics?

Once again, all talk no proof.

other than the fact that its funny, i don't see a reason to be on this site... on that note, im gonna take like 9 benadryl and hope that i forget how to type theflatearthsociety.org

Heheheh your demand for flat earth physics is being as ignored as my demand for a coherent flat earther universe outline
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=775&start=45

See once they give us laws of physics we should be able to prove them mathmatically. They will quesiton our mathmatical assumptions when their physics dont hold up. We will prove that all mathmatical assumptions are drived from arithmetic.We will then show how physics laws come from math derived from arithmetic.
They will then be forced to either attack our chain of reasoning which will be easy to defend. Or attack arithmetic which will be easir still to defend. They will then be forced to admit thieir is a round earth.
Which is why they will never give you their physical laws that would surrener their one advantage which is that real physics is coomon knowledge so that they can do shoody research attack things and then retreat once its destroyed by logic. We cant do this to them cause their physical laws arent in writing but in their collective asses to pull out at need.
If we saw their laws we'd laught ourselves silly.Which is why we wont.
Maybe I'm wrong come on flat earths bring your laws of physics on I'll examine then for mistakes and if I find none will conced with pleasure.
An awaiting
Cinlef