Flat Earth?

This topic contains 2,866 replies, has 16 voices, and was last updated by  Dig4truth 23 minutes ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #842585
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    Debunking a few points made earlier in this topic

    I just watched this and thought I would pot it here as it debunks points you made earlier in this topic.Ignoring the silly skits he uses as interjections, some pf the points might help dispel some of the things you believe. It covers eclipses and objects seen that sit on elevated platforms and viewed from elevated positions.

    #842603
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    T8:  So it was absurd and the solution was to not only double down on absurd, but to double down the double down x 1 million, that is throw out all the evidence we have for the globe earth because we sometimes see things that do not ordinarily happen.

    The solution for me was to investigate further, to see if there were any other similarly absurd explanations we’d been given for observations that don’t align with the theory.  I found dozens of them.

    So here you are at the jumping off point that I was at a year ago.  I could have done what you are doing, and just accept whatever story and rescue device they give – assuming that flawless men who are much smarter than me have this stuff all figured out.  But I had the advantage of just having gone through years of intensive research about the evolution/creation debate – so I already knew that these “flawless scientists who are only interested in truth” were anything but that.  I already knew how they lied and skewed the data to force the results they wanted.  So instead of blind acceptance, I said to myself, “My God, what if they’ve been lying about all this ball earth stuff along with the billions of years and the common descent evolution?”  And that’s how it all began for me.

    So right now you have to make a decision for yourself.  You clearly recognize the absurdity of thinking an entire city can be perfectly projected up over a curve and set on the horizon in such a way as to make it appear exactly as it would if the earth was flat and we were seeing the actual city.  You realize that you must accept this rescue device, not only for the Chicago skyline, but for Ruapehu, Superstition Mountain, Mount Canigou from 175 miles, the world record-holding Pic de Finestrelles from a whopping 443 km (275 miles), and a slew of other cities, mountains, boats, and lighthouses that are clearly visible at distances that they wouldn’t be if we lived on a ball.  And you’ve got to ask yourself (because nobody else can do it for you) if you’re willing to accept that ALL OF THESE are the result of light waves projecting PERFECT images of these objects thousands of feet and even miles up over a curve and placing them perfectly on the horizon.

    If you are okay with that explanation, then carry on with your blind faith in the absurd rescue devices of godless men who want nothing more than to convince you that there is no God.  If, on the other hand, you find it a little odd that ALL OF THESE objects would refract the same exact way in all different parts of the world and in all different atmospheric conditions, then you’ll be like I was and start taking a deeper look into these things.

    Anyway, speaking of objects magically refracting themselves up over a curve, here’s the next thing I’m hoping you will take a closer look at…

    You can read the explanation for selenelion eclipses in this globe earth meme for yourself.  But I have two questions for you:

    1.  In the globe earth model, the sun and moon in this meme are not supposed to be just a hair below the horizon.  They are both supposed to be perfectly aligned with the horizontal diameter of the earth, ie: half way down around the globe.  So while this meme makes it seem like the sun and moon are only being projected up over the curve a tiny amount, does it still make sense to you knowing that they should really be being projected 3000 miles up around an entire half of the ball earth?
    2. If the man at the top of the world in the meme is observing a refracted “apparent” sun and moon because the real moon had set and the real sun hasn’t yet risen, wouldn’t he have previously observed the REAL moon set – and won’t he observe the REAL sun rise fairly soon?

     

         

    #842605
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    T8:  I just watched this and thought I would pot it here as it debunks points you made earlier in this topic.

    Which points?  And how exactly were they debunked in the video?

    #842606
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    T8:  And many things like this that supposedly puts the globe earth to bed, is actually worse for the Flat Earth. Eclipses being one of them.

    Please tell us why eclipses are “worse for the Flat Earth”… especially in light of the impossibility of a selenelion eclipse in the globe model.

    #842644
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    Because the Solar System visualises eclipses and the mathematical data. The Flat Earth produces eclipses how? And the curved shadow on the moon, what is that? Refraction of the disk 90 degrees?

    #842645
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    impossibility of a selenelion eclipse in the globe model.

    Not impossible at all. We had one of these back in July. The following page has a little video about it so you can visualize what is going on. It seems you do not believe in refraction at all.

    So we have to prove the Flat Earth without photos, videos, or personal testimonies from astronaut. Now I can’t use refraction?

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/science/105801554/what-on-earth-is-a-selenelion-heres-what-you-need-to-know-about-eclipses

    #842648
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    T8:  The Flat Earth produces eclipses how? And the curved shadow on the moon, what is that?

    Solid questions.  Let me begin my answer by asking you how you know the darkened part of the moon during a so-called eclipse is a “shadow” of something else at all, let alone that the “shadow” is caused by the earth.  Some ancient cultures believed in a dark object orbiting the flat earth and sometimes blocking the light from the sun and moon.  They called it the Black Sun, and Nibiru.  I cannot personally verify that such a dark object (that we cannot see) is out there, so I can make no substantiated statement about the authenticity of those claims.  But neither can you and I scientifically falsify those claims, right?  NASA is always putting out stories about unknown asteroids and even planets in our own solar system.  Here’s one about a football field sized asteroid that barely missed the earth…

    NASA: Previously Unknown Asteroid had a Near Miss with Earth today

    And here’s one about an unknown 9th planet of the solar system…

    https://www.space.com/38431-new-evidence-planet-nine-existence.html

    What is the Hubble doing up there?  We’re supposedly seeing galaxies billions of light years away, but can’t even see a planet that is “10 times more massive than Earth” in our own solar system?  After all, we’ve sent spacecraft all the way to tiny Pluto and beyond, right?  Pluto is 6 times smaller than earth, and this unknown planet is supposed to be 10 times larger.  How can we know about Pluto and even see it from earth, but know nothing about this planet that is 16 times larger than Pluto in the same basic area of the solar system?

    My point is that even with your heliocentric belief, there are tons of things that NASA doesn’t know about our solar system.  So how can we be sure that their idea of lunar eclipses being caused by the earth’s shadow is correct?  Well, because this is on case where we can verify their story from earth.  We all CAN personally verify whether the heliocentric story of the earth being the body that blocks light from the moon aligns with our own observations, right?  And that is easiest to do during the impossible selenelion eclipses.

    T8:  Not impossible at all. We had one of these back in July. The following page has a little video about it so you can visualize what is going on. It seems you do not believe in refraction at all.

    I read the article and watched the video.  Do you really believe you understand more about selenelions after reading and watching it?  😀    Oh, and by the way, I wonder how long you will keep calling me a refraction denier when I’ve repeatedly stated that refraction is a very real thing.  It’s been many months now that you keep making that claim, despite me repeatedly talking about the effects of refraction.  Time for you to learn a new song, T8.

    Anyway, let’s get on with this selenelion thing.  This is what we’re told happens to make a lunar eclipse…

    I just want to make sure you know that the sun, moon, and earth have to be in a straight line according to your model.  Are we agreed on that part?

     

     

    #842652
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    So eclipses are caused by objects unknown or the moon creating the effect on its own and that is a good enough explanation to debunk the idea that the Solar System model can explain it all perfectly and visually. That sounds like scientism to me Mike. I would find it hard to ignore the fact that the SS model works like clockwork and visually demonstrates the Math. One hell of a coincidence right.

    #842654
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    NASA Forensic Photo Investigation SOLVED!

    Blame the fact that they used a low res JPEG and avoided the high res version.

    See Mike. If we are patient, each FE argument will be debunked. The truth works exactly like that. It just takes time. FEers seem to think that no immediate answer means people are stumped because the Earth is actually flat. No, it just means that it takes time to find the explanation. And think about all the debunking so far. That in itself is a good case for the Solar System model because when something is true, many signs point toward it and when something is not true, it’s supposed evidence will eventually crumble under the weight of scrutiny.

    #842660
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    when I’ve repeatedly stated that refraction is a very real thing. It’s been many months now that you keep making that claim, despite me repeatedly talking about the effects of refraction. Time for you to learn a new song, T8.

    Fantastic. So you understand that Ruapehu can be explained by Taupo Plateau and refraction alone. Good to see the point being acknowledged.

    #842732
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    T8:  So eclipses are caused by objects unknown or the moon creating the effect on its own and that is a good enough explanation to debunk the idea that the Solar System model can explain it all perfectly and visually. That sounds like scientism to me Mike. I would find it hard to ignore the fact that the SS model works like clockwork and visually demonstrates the Math. One hell of a coincidence right.

    That would be a valid argument… IF the solar system model could explain it all perfectly and visually.  Let’s find out if it can, okay?  I put some artwork in my last post, and asked you a very simple question.  Please be so kind as to answer that question DIRECTLY and SUCCINCTLY so we can move on from there.

    #842733
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    T8:  See Mike. If we are patient, each FE argument will be debunked…

    Yes, the old “jpeg compression” argument again.  It might interest you to know that when Rob Skiba first increased the levels on that earth (and other NASA official images), he did it during a LIVE stream.  You can still find it online, and watch his computer AS he goes to the official NASA site, downloads the official NASA hi-def version of that photo, pastes it into his Photoshop program, and increases the levels to show the box around the earth.  I have heard (but cannot verify) that since Skiba’s live stream, NASA has gone in and “cleaned up” quite a few of those photos, and so we cannot do the same thing and get the same effect today.  Kind of like the nullschool.com weather pattern site removed the AE map as one of the choices after flat earthers were convincing thousands of people just by showing the patterns on the globe model side by side with the same patterns on the flat earth AE map.  It was a compelling argument, because any child could see the perfect patterns on the AE map while the same weather systems were jumbled and hodge podge on the other maps – especially the globe.

    Anyway, here’s a short 4 minute video that shows someone doing the exact same thing with a different NASA photo…

    But only watch it if you are interested in truth.  From what I’ve seen on this thread, you are not.  If you were, I’d see you posting some PRO flat earth videos and asking your own questions about things.  Instead, it’s clear that you only search “flat earth DEBUNKED” videos, and post them without your own comments – as if blindly posting a video fixes everything for you.  Try harder.

    #842734
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 25,281

    Mike:  …when I’ve repeatedly stated that refraction is a very real thing. It’s been many months now that you keep making that claim, despite me repeatedly talking about the effects of refraction. Time for you to learn a new song, T8.

    T8:  Fantastic. So you understand that Ruapehu can be explained by Taupo Plateau and refraction alone. Good to see the point being acknowledged.

    That is the epitome of a non sequitur.  Yes refraction exists.  No, it can’t cause mountains and cities to project perfect images of themselves up over hundreds or thousands of feet of curve and land perfectly on the horizon so it appears exactly as if we were seeing the real mountain or city on a flat earth.

    T8, what scientific reason do you have to believe that refraction could do such a thing?  It’s a serious question and deserves a serious and straightforward answer.  Because as far as I can tell, your entire reason for insisting the mountain has refracted up over a curve is that you know we couldn’t see the bottom half on a ball earth.  In other words, your reasoning goes like this:

    1.  The earth is most definitely a ball.
    2. There’s no way we could see the bottom half of Ruapehu on the ball earth from that distance.
    3. The bottom half of Ruapehu IS in my photograph.
    4. Therefore, the bottom half MUST BE projecting itself up over the curve.

    Does that sound about right?  Because if not, I’d sure love to know your empirical, observation-based reason for making such a claim.

    I was also wondering about the top half of Ruapehu that we would be able to see on a ball earth.  Shouldn’t that part of the mountain be sitting on the ground, with the refracted lower half sitting right on top of it – like a double exposure photograph?  See what I mean?  If you say the bottom part that is behind the curve is refracting up over the curve and landing on the horizon, why would the top half not still BE on the horizon where it should be?  Why would the visible part refract 3000 feet up into the air and rest perfectly on the refraction of the lower, hidden half?

    Another serious question that deserves a serious and honest answer.

    #842778
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    The solution for me was to investigate further, to see if there were any other similarly absurd explanations we’d been given for observations that don’t align with the theory.  I found dozens of them.

    But they are being debunked one at a time. And you ignore all experiments that lead to the realisation of globe earth. And that doesn’t even include sending up craft to photograph and video what the earth really looks like.

    #842779
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    Mike, I often work with JPGs in Photoshop as I’m a keen photographer who owns a photo based website where I post up JPG files with many having been passed through Photoshop first

    Sometimes part of the photo is darker than it was when seen with the naked eye, so I select that area and maybe increase brightness, contrast, and/or saturation.

    As for NASA, they are open about using Photoshop too, but that doesn’t make them a liar. Often the photo itself is lying and Photoshop can correct this or enhance features that are already there.

    In my view, this NASA conspiracy is debunked and irrelevant. Another conspiracy theory that failed under the weight of scrutiny. The Earth is in the photo and the effect you point out was either a known effect with low res images or shows that someone selected the area and perhaps upped the saturation a bit.

    I care not which one it was. This FE point is done for me.

    #842780
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    Instead, it’s clear that you only search “flat earth DEBUNKED” videos, and post them without your own comments – as if blindly posting a video fixes everything for you.  Try harder.

    I do watch Flat Earth videos as I do watch Hollow Earth videos and even Ancient Aliens. I find them interesting as they ask good questions. Rarely do I post about them because I do not believe them to be true.

    I keep an open mind and can change my mind when facts are presented. None of these theories have convinced me just as Evolution and no creator science videos have not convinced me. I have even watched Richard Dawkins videos and Hillary Clinton videos despite being against their ideas.

    I believe that truth requires a search that often takes place outside our own comfort zones. In doing this, you sometimes stumble across a jewel that you would not have found otherwise.

    #842789
     t8 
    Participant
    • Topics started 905
    • Total replies 19,005

    A lesson in Newton’s first law

    #842793
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 470

    T8: And that doesn’t even include sending up craft to photograph and video what the earth really looks like.

     

    Do you mean like the balloons that have gone to over 100,000 to 120,000 feet without seeing any curve?

     

     

    #842794
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 470

    T8: As for NASA, they are open about using Photoshop too, but that doesn’t make them a liar.

     

    Do you mean like the time they said they were close to the moon but were in a low earth orbit? If you have trouble recalling that, it is on video.

    #842795
     Dig4truth 
    Participant
    • Topics started 0
    • Total replies 470

    T8: I keep an open mind and can change my mind when facts are presented.

     

    Fact not in evidence.

Viewing 20 posts - 2,721 through 2,740 (of 2,867 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2019 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account