Flat Earth?

This topic contains 1,881 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by  mikeboll64 1 hour, 7 minutes ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #830720
     GeneBalthrop 
    Participant
    • Topics started 42
    • Total replies 16,083

    Dig….No i am not blowing smoke. I don’t know how to draw thing on here, but yo can do the math as i have stated here before.

    1…do you know what the pathagram theram is? You know the side (area) opposite a right triangle equal the sum of the other two sides. Do you understand that if not we are dead before we can even get started.

    Do you know what a tangent line is?

    If you know those two things it’s as easy as pie.

    Take a 12 inch circle draw a straight tangent line out from the circle, that will represent on side of your right triangle, now go out along that tangent line and say every two inches draw another right triangel line, you should notice the right angel line keeps getting longer as you go further out the tangent line. Now draw a line from where the tangent line touches the circumference point to each right right triangel you made, ok so far?, now simply apply the math, it will give you the exact drop you are getting as you travel out further along the tangent line.

    It just that simple Dig. It not smoke and mirrors as the flat earther present, it really works and is proven probably a milliom time each day in figuring circumstance drops of round objects, I learned that over 60 years ago in trigonometry class in high school.

    Peace and love to you and yours. …….gene

    #830721
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 260

    Oh, I see Gene, you can’t give me an illustration or an example but I’m supposed to just know automatically what you’re talking about. I guess it’s not so simple if you can’t give a simple illustration or example. Is it?  Smoke and mirrors, nothing else. Or you could give one of your simple examples. Whichever is easier for you.

    Gene, did you honestly think you were going to tutor me on math without providing any examples or equations? Guess who is providing the math to support their theory?  It’s the FE people!  And here’s the kicker – we use your math!

     

     

    #830722
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 260

    Who’s up for the Jenga challange?

    You know any movement will topple the stack of Jenga blocks.  It has to be perfectly still (no centrifugal force) to keep from collapse.

    Just for fun, here is a video of some guy demonstrating the point.

     

     

     

     

     

    #830723
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 260

    Nick: “Could Peter walk on water? No that was impossible. He agreed and sank.”

     

    Actually he did walk on water for a while. Where did you learn that it was impossible because Yeshua did it too without sinking? He even reached down and pulled Peter up out of the water!

    You must have been listening to the scientists and not the Word of God.

     

     

    #830724
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 260

    Think about a stack of Jenga blocks stack up in a car. Now that car turns a corner –  what happens? CRASH!

    Centrifugal force!  (At maybe 15 to 20 mph and not 1,000+ mph)

     

    Take the Jenga challange!

     

     

    #830725
     GeneBalthrop 
    Participant
    • Topics started 42
    • Total replies 16,083

    Dig….you cant tell why the blocks never fell over. It because all the gravitional pull is straight dowm the center line and transfers to the main supporting leg. But let him go past center and down come all his blocks, i would put money on it. It’s like when a person balances himself on one leg same principle applies. This is all just smoke and mirrors, you people use to decieve with.

    Heres your formula, explained, not that it would do any good.

    A right triangel has three sides, side A, side B, side C. I HAVENT LOST YOU SO FAR HAVE I?

    formula… Side C = the square root of, side A squared + side B squared.

    Just type in the pathagram theram, on the Internet and there is all kinds of sites that give you the exact fornula. My computer does not make the symbols need to give you the exact formula. But what i have described is apsolutely it.

    Let say, side a = 24 ft and side b = 7 ft what would side c =

    Side A Is 24×24=576 square feet
    Side b is 7×7 = 49 square feet
    The total A+B = 625 square feet

    Whats the square root of 625 feet? Its 25

    Side C = 25 feet.

    I apsolutly do not know how much simpler it can be made for you. You are either playing games or you must be dumber then a bag of hammers. No wonder you are so easly decieved by these Flat Earthers, and Conspiracy therist.

    Peace and love to you and yours. ……gene

    #830726
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 260

    Congratulations Gene, you’ve figured out a triangle.

    Now how about a sphere? With a circumference of the earth’s? A few examples? Unless you think the earth is a triangle.

    #830727
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 260

    Gene: “”you cant tell why the blocks never fell over. It because all the gravitional pull is straight dowm the center line and transfers to the main supporting leg. But let him go past center and down come all his blocks, i would put money on it. It’s like when a person balances himself on one leg same principle applies. This is all just smoke and mirrors, you people use to decieve with.”

     

    Gene, no disrespect but that is the opposite of centrifugal force. The fact that the weight is staying over the center point proves there is no centrifugal force on it. That’s the point!

    A center line of weight does keep things upright but centrifugal force “forces” the weight to be moved from the center point – that’s the point! Ergo – Jenga!

    So the question remains, what is keeping the 1,000 + mph centrifugal force at the equator from forcing the Jenga blocks to come crashing down?

    What negates the centrifugal force on earth?

    #830728
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 77
    • Total replies 24,874

    T8:  So the lunar eclipse is not the shadow of the Earth on the moon, rather the moon which is a light turning off or kind of dimming itself. Maybe rebooting the light.

     

    Maybe.  This is what’s called a lunar wave, or pulse.  Look it up on YouTube, as there are many amateur photographers who have captured them.  What it is, I don’t know, but your use of the term rebooting brought it to mind…

    Here’s a video that has nine of them from different photographers…

     

    T8:  Wow, Mike. That is a desperate answer. First off, you have no proofand secondly, it is probably the best answer you could come up with if you reject the earth casting a shadow.

    That the moon is its own light is a desperate answer?  Rather, it is the scriptural answer.  And top-down eclipses (and selenelions) are all the proof anyone needs to know it’s not the earth causing the shadow on the moon… at least on those occasions.  And if not on those occasions, what valid reason do we have to believe the earth causes the shadow on any occasion?

    T8:  The moonlight does not cause an object to get colder. It’s the object in the shade that gets warmer. 

    Judging from your explanation, you seem to think I’m talking about measuring the temp on a clear night versus measuring it on a cloudy night.  I am not.  I am talking about having one object half in direct moonlight and the other half shaded from the moonlight, and recording the different temperatures at the same time.  There are hundreds of amateur experiments to choose from.  This one is only a minute and a half…

    Mike:  Jehovah told us that He created two lights – the greater to govern the day, and the lesser to govern the night.

    T8:  There you go being literal again and assuming that which is not written.

    Which part of my blue words above is not written?

    T8:  Remember though, David under inspiration of the Holy Spirit said the sun rises, so you have to throw out the Flat Earth model now right?

    No he didn’t.

     

     

    #830729
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 77
    • Total replies 24,874

    T8: And worse, while you say the creation is strictly 24 hours even though that word can mean ‘period of time’, you then say the sun is not rising or setting in that psalm. So you have to deny two meanings in one verse. The other word which you would assume means ‘west’ given your context doesn’t even mean ‘west’. This favours my argument as it means “to its setting” or “unto the going down”. Who is the sucker now? lol.

    The Hebrew word “yowm” can mean EXACTLY what the English word “day” can mean.  It can mean a 24 hour period.  It can mean a general period of time, as in “back in the day of Abraham Lincoln”.  It can mean just the 12 hour period of daylight within a 24 hour day.

    But please tell me your reason for NOT considering it a 24 hour period in Genesis 1.

    As for Psalm 113:3, here is the meaning of the Hebrew word translated as “setting” in many English Bibles…

    Strong’s Concordance
    mabo: entrance, a coming in, entering

    Original Word: מָבוֹא
    Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
    Transliteration: mabo
    Phonetic Spelling: (maw-bo’)
    Short Definition: entrance

     

    NAS Exhaustive Concordance

    Word Origin
    from bo
    Definition: entrance, a coming in, entering
    NASB Translation
    come (1), enter (1), entrance (13), entry (1), place of its setting (1), setting (5), sunset* (1), west* (1).

     

    Brown-Driver-Briggs

    מָבוֺא noun masculine Jeremiah 38:14entrance, a coming in, entering

     

    Zechariah 8:7  NAS: and from the land of the west;

    Ezekiel 46:19  NAS: Then he brought me through the entrance

    Ezekiel 33:31   NAS: to you as people come, and sit

    Ezekiel 26:10  NAS: your gates as men enter a city

    Does the second one mean “he brought me through the sunset”?  Does the third mean, “you people – sunset and sit”?  Does the fourth mean, “as men sunset a city”?

     

    #830730
     NickHassan 
    Participant
    • Topics started 284
    • Total replies 69,468

    Hi Dig4,

    You stand on your petty mound of intellectual superiority and hurl contempt at others.

    While ignoring the weightier matters.?

    #830731
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 77
    • Total replies 24,874

    T8:  So does this verse not mean firmament or what. I didn’t read your post where you supposedly debunked this.

    And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

    The Hebrew is, “in the face of the firmament”.

    [in the open firmament of heaven] This rendering scarcely reproduces the sense of the Hebrew words, which literally mean “in the face of,” or “over against, the firmament of heaven.” The idea is that winged things are to fly “above” the earth, and “in front of” the vault of heaven. The R.V. margin, on the face of the expanse of the heaven, is cumbrous and obscure. The meaning seems to be that the flight of winged things shall be in mid air, “in front,” as it were, of the solid “firmament of heaven,” which was not remote. The winged creatures would continually be visible against the sky.

    …and let birds fly above the earth in the face (the front, i.e., the side turned towards the earth) of the firmament.”

    In the open firmament.Literally, upon the face of the expanse of heaven—that is, in front of it, upon the lower surface of the atmosphere near to the earth.

     

    #830732
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 77
    • Total replies 24,874

    T8:  Can you not see how you have become like the Trinitarians you use to debate> Sad but true it seems.

    Start with the premise and all evidence that proves the contrary is just a misinterpretation, mistranslation, fake, false, etc.

    T8, how do Trinitarians become Trinitarians in the first place… in your opinion?

    T8:  For example, my photo of Mount Ruapehu alone debunks your quoted statement. But you will just ignore that possibility because the Earth is flat.

    Interesting that you accuse me of what I see you doing.  It’s obvious that you could see Mount Ruapehu with your own eyes that day, right?  And it’s obvious that all of us can see Mount Ruapehu in your photograph, right?  I believe that’s because you saw and photographed the actual Mount Ruapehu.  But why exactly do you believe you photographed a refracted image of it instead?  What is the reason you invoke refraction in this case?

    #830733
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 77
    • Total replies 24,874

    T8:  Those models are that, models… But knowledge increased…

    When exactly was the knowledge concerning the firmament versus a vast vacuum of space first increased?  And how exactly was that accomplished?

    #830734
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 77
    • Total replies 24,874

    T8:  Well of course it doesn’t look like that planet that NASA shows us because NASA send craft close to the subject and spend millions doing so, whereas you have to contend with atmospheric moisture, distance, and heaps of zoom on a thousand dollar video camera. If you could shoot NASA quality footage of heavenly objects in our Solar System, then why would NASA spend millions to ge the same images. lol. 

    You mean like this NASA quality footage?

    Have you ever known cloud formations to remain exactly the same for over 5 hours straight?

     

Viewing 15 posts - 1,741 through 1,755 (of 1,882 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account