- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 3 weeks ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Ed J. I believe men went to the moon, but you are entitled to your belief and this likely has little or no impact toward your faith. Except to point out that one of us has to be wrong, and even those who have turned to God can be wrong.
Except to point out that one of us has to be wrong,
and even those who have turned to God can be wrong.Hi T8,
Yes, I used to think the Prophet Nathan was Nathan the son of David.
Mike Boll has shown me (using scripture) that he wasn’t that Nathan.It has always been my position that it’s good
to hear the understanding of others on things.He also found a further stat on the number 26
and it’s gematria connection to (יהוה=26) “God”=26:“God’s” (in the possessive form) is written 26 times in the AKJV Bible
Thank you for running this site 🙂
___________
God bless
Ed JEd: Hi Mike,
Thank you for addressing my points 1 and 2 of my “3” points:
Hey Ed. The third point was at least partly addressed in the 9 paragraphs I linked and asked you to read. In fact, let’s ask T8… Hey T8, how long is dusk in NZ? I’ve heard it goes pretty fast from daylight to dark.
Ed: 1. Fake moon-landings and fake space-station.
A Why might they not be able to go to moon?
Van Allen belt, lack of lethal radiation protection,
and protection from the non-pressures of a vacuum.Why would they fake moon-landings?
A. One reason is: to make the Soviets believe
that war against the west would not end well for them.Why would they fake space-station?
B. Keep the money chain going, a space-station hoax
could easily accomplish this. Preventing a NASA shut-down.You’re barking up the right tree, Ed. Your first answer includes vacuum as a reason – which would also be a reason we couldn’t go ANYWHERE in “outer space”, right? Your second answer is a popular one… for those who don’t realize that the powers that run this world all work together. There has never been any “war” between the U.S. and Russia. The leaders of both (and virtually all leaders) play for the same team, and go on stage with their scripted fights when they are told to. Putin and Trump are no different than two actors on a movie set who are friends, but play the parts of mortal enemies. Besides, Russia was the first to get to “outer space”, right? Surely they knew exactly what the U.S. knew – that the moon wasn’t an object we could go to and land on. Otherwise, why would the U.S. getting there first change the Russian’s minds? They would have just gotten there afterwards, and claimed that their mission was somehow superior to the U.S.’s mission. They surely wouldn’t stop trying, lay down and admit defeat to the “superior” Americans, right? What would the Russian people think of their government basically admitting that the Americans were better than them and could do things they couldn’t do?
Your third answer is a big component as well. NASA currently gets 56 million dollars of tax money every single DAY! And what big scientific breakthroughs have they given us? What diseases have they cured? Heck, we sent 7 missions to the moon over a 3 year period in the early 70’s, and today can’t get past low earth orbit? NASA is the one saying that. And Don Pettit even said he’d love to go to the moon, but we’ve “lost that technology, and it’s a painful process to rebuild it”. What?!? They went to the moon with less technology than we carry around in our cell phones. Actually, less technology than a 1980’s cell phone! What’s to “rebuild”?
So while you’ve given some solid answers, I ask you to consider one more: They’re faking space because outer space doesn’t exist. What are your thoughts on that notion? Dig deep and think hard about why you personally believe outer space DOES exist. And then think if any of those reasons are things you can witness or verify for yourself.
In fact, let’s ask T8… Hey T8, how long is dusk in NZ? I’ve heard it goes pretty fast from daylight to dark.
Hi Mike,
Oh sorry, I forgot you are from Arizona (I think) 🙁
_____________
God bless
Ed JEd: A 24 hour sun at the south poll could be a hoax
The YouTube comment sections are loaded with people saying they’ve either witnessed it, or know a friend of a friend of a friend who has. But all you have to do is ask them for the uncut video documentation of the event, and you never hear from them again. Interesting, don’t you think? A prominent flat earther who has a channel called “Jeranism” actually called the powers that be at Antarctica to ask why their 24 hour daylight footage is cut into different pieces instead of a live, continuous feed. They said they didn’t have the bandwidth to upload the entire 24 hours, so they do a few hours here and a few hours there. Really? 🙂 He asked them why they couldn’t just skip a couple days of uploading, so they could used the saved bandwidth to do one full day continuously. They said they had to do it the way they’ve been told to.
Just think it out. Many countries have been in Antarctica studying ICE for almost 70 years now. You and I are not allowed to go there and travel freely about the continent and just sight see or go adventuring. Why not? And in all that time, not one single person has circumnavigated the earth north to south – although millions have done it east to west. Why? And you can zoom in on any city street in the world thanks to Google’s satellites, but with 17,000 satellites supposedly up there, we can’t zoom in and see real things in Antarctica – just white oil paintings.
One flat earther who knows computers accessed the actual data Google Earth uses, and discovered that the data forms a flat earth – which Google Earth then molds around a ball. That’s why some mountain ranges are in the wrong place, and why some missing altogether.
Anyway, we’ve got plenty of beautiful plane and drone footage flying over the Sahara, Australia, America… just about anywhere on earth. Why no real footage across Antarctica – or the North Pole for that matter? Why the mystery about a huge patch of lifeless ice? It’d be like them hiding Yellowstone Park from us, allowing only military scientists to enter the region, and keeping out all adventurers, explorers, and citizen scientists.
Hey, did you know Hitler was big into the Antarctic? Before and during WW2, he sent a bunch of military forces and scientists down there. Shortly after WW2, Russia and America started sending their own people. And right after that, they both started drilling as far as they could into the earth, and started exploding weapons in the sky. It’s almost as if they discovered a hard boundary to their world, and like any caged animal, immediately began to see how they could get out to the other side. Look up Kola Superdeep and Operation Dominic/Fishbowl. The former was Russia’s attempt to get out of the cage by digging down (they made it about 8 miles), and the latter was the U.S. endeavor to blow up nuclear weapons in the sky. Btw, Dominic means “of the Lord”, so their project was basically called “Fishbowl of the Lord”. Ed, they were trying to break through the firmament with bombs, because they realized we lived in a “fishbowl”. Russia tried to dig under it, and America tried to break through it.
There is no outer space, Ed. There is just the stationary earth God created, and the firmament that still to this day separates the waters above from the waters below. In the firmament are the sun, moon, and stars that God placed there on the 4th day of creation.
Ed: Hi Mike,
In a flat Earth model you cannot have a 24 hour sun at the south poll. <– we both agree here
I can’t agree with that. It’s true that I think the “south pole” is an ice wall and extended plane that encircles the part of the world in which we all live, but I couldn’t say that sunlight couldn’t hit that entire edge at the same time. Look at the arched glare on this model….
Who’s to say that the sun couldn’t light the ground beneath it locally, while simultaneously having light travel the entire domed firmament and light the entire ice wall at the same time? I just don’t know enough about what the sun even is, let alone how it works. When we see the sun in the sky, are we even seeing God’s actual sun – or just our personal “hot spot” in the sky that is projected FROM the actual sun? Kind of like the light reflections you can see standing on the shore and watching the sun set…
You could be seeing this particular line of reflection, while I could be standing 1 foot away from you, and seeing a completely different line. Is the sun like that? Am I seeing the sun in my own personal dome of observation, while you could be 50 miles away and seeing it in YOUR own personal observation dome? I simply don’t know the answer… but many very intelligent flat earthers are doing their own experiments and looking into these things. Unfortunately, we don’t have big budget funding, and the vast majority of us work a 40 hour week, have family and household responsibilities, and very little time left to be a scientist.
Ed: How can you have longer summer daylight hours on a flat-earth model?
It would seem to me on a flat earth, in the southern hemisphere,
(please excuse the expression) the nights would be longer in both seasons.How is this explained?
Give this a little watch…
It’s 15 minutes, but you only need to watch a minute or so to get the idea. During the northern summer, the sun is running a circle that is much smaller, and it moves around that circle slower. During the southern summer, the sun is running a larger circle, and moves faster to make a complete rotation in the same amount of time.
There is a scientist from the 1800’s who lived both in England and in NZ. He made a lot of observations about day length, sunrises and sunsets, and used them to confirm that we don’t live on a ball. I’ll see if I can locate the info for you. It might be in this one, but I’m not sure…
T8: You’ve got it the wrong way round Mike.
The ISS is like a car tyre. It has higher pressure inside and is surrounded by lower pressure.
Car tyres are not that strong, but they can hold 18 extra PSI compared to outside.
An empty container being crushed by 14 PSI or a submarine being crushed or breached by tons of water above is not the same.
Please explain to me the difference between the high pressure being on the inside with the low pressure on the outside, and the other way around. Btw, here’s a better chart than the Wiki one I already posted for you. Beware though, this one was compiled by the flat earth idiot who put the vacuum cleaner on the thumbnail of his video… you know, the guy who has forgotten more about this subject than you and I have even learned.
Note that each added zero represents an entire ORDER OF MAGNITUDE of greater vacuum. In case you don’t understand that, 1000 is an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE greater than 100, which is an ORDER OF MAGNITUDE greater than 10, and so on.
Note that the thick steel tanker imploded at a difference in pressure of 11 psi. What’s the difference in pressure between sea level and the surface of the moon? And I’m still waiting for you to tell me why NASA and Cern need 8 foot thick solid concrete walls (with a solid steel partition in the middle so air molecules don’t get sucked right through the 8 feet of concrete) for a pressure differential many orders of magnitude LESS than the ISS is experiencing with it’s 2 inch thick aluminum walls. And remember a couple of months ago when a micrometeorite poked a hole in the ISS, and ground control decided to let the guys continue sleeping through the night because a hole leading to the vacuum of outer space was no big deal? And then the next day, one guy plugged the hole with his finger while the other one got some duct tape to put over it – thereby successfully keeping out the vacuum of space with a thin piece of tape? Yeah… good times. 🙂
Do you seriously believe this nonsense they’re feeding you, T8? If so, why on earth would you? Come on, man. Open your eyes to their lies. They’re laughing at you! Why else do you think they’d put the Disney dog Pluto on the planet Pluto?
They’re laughing at you, dude. Don’t allow them to continue making a fool of you.
T8: Mike, think for a minute.
The sun is huge compared to Earth.
Take the top and bottom points of the sun, (if there is such a thing). Draw multiple lines between these points to Earth.
Do the lines match the angles you have proposed? DO they not cover the whole face of the Earth pointing toward the sun?
Do the lines go above and below the top and bottom points of the Earth?
That is your answer.
Again, 2D diagrams and the limitation of not being able to show true distance and scale is the problem.
You’re simply not hearing me… or understanding the point of my video. At new moon, a person on the “top” of the world will watch the sun and moon rise at the same time, while a person on the “bottom” will watch the same sun and moon set at the same time. Okay listen to this part… the person at the top of the world is seeing EXACTLY the top HALF of the sun and the top HALF of the moon as they both rise. The person on the bottom is seeing EXACTLY the bottom HALF of the sun and the bottom HALF of the moon as they both set. Understand? It doesn’t matter how big I make my sun, because each person still must be seeing EXACTLY HALF OF IT at the same time.
But to humor you, I redid the drawing from my video here…
The tiny sun is the one in my video because that’s the size of the sun AS WE SEE IT. In case you didn’t know, the sun and the moon have the EXACT SAME ANGULAR SIZE – which is why we can get a solar eclipse when one completely covers the other, right? Because from our perspective, they are the same exact size. Understand? So now look at the much bigger sun I made for you, and imagine you are on the earth at high noon – looking straight up at it. Have you ever seen a sun that fills the entire sky due to it’s incredible size, T8? Of course not. You see a sun that is the EXACT SAME size as the moon, don’t you? So how is me drawing a huge sun faithful to your paradigm which acknowledges that the ANGULAR SIZE of the sun and moon are identical? It’s not, but I did it anyway just to show you that even with your huge sky-filling sun, the red and yellow lines of sight from the people at the top and bottom of the earth have to PERFECTLY DISSECT your huge sun in order for one of them to see EXACTLY HALF of it setting while the other sees EXACTLY HALF of it rising. So, do their lines of sight – which are perfectly dissecting the moon – also perfectly dissect your huge sky-filling sun? NO!
What if I made the sun even larger? It still wouldn’t matter because the same red and yellow line that are dissecting the moon must also BOTH DISSECT (split in two perfect halves) the sun. And remember, at this scale your huge sun is only 1.5 million miles away from earth. Think about how much farther my red and yellow lines of sight will diverge if we moved your huge sun to 93 million miles away. They wouldn’t touch it at all – let alone PERFECTLY DISSECT it down the middle.
Is that nearer to clearer? Look, get three coins and lay them on your table. (Or, if you want a huge sky-filling sun that nobody on earth has ever seen or verified, make the third object a dinner plate.)
Put all three objects so their centers are all on the same straight line. Now take a ruler and put it’s edge at the top of the left object, and running perfectly through the middle of the middle object. Will the ruler ALSO run perfectly through the middle of the right object? No. And not even if you use the dinner plate for the right object. The ruler might run through the dinner plate, but it won’t run perfectly through the middle of it. And in the heliocentric model, your ruler would have to simultaneously run through the middle of the middle object AND the right object.
I drew it up for you again…
There are your objects 1, 2, and 3 (your huge dinner plate). Do you see that if the blue line is the line of sight of a person on the top of the earth, and he is seeing exactly half of the moon rise or set, he cannot also see EXACTLY HALF of the sun rise or set at the same time… no matter how big you make your sun? In the heliocentric model, where a person can see the full moon rise AS the sun sets, or can see the new moon rise and set WITH the sun, the blue line needs to perfectly dissect object #2 AND dinner plate #3.
Do you understand this now?
Ed: Hi Mike,
Oh sorry, I forgot you are from Arizona (I think) 🙁
Yep, I live in the Phoenix area… but there’s no need to frown about that. I like it here. 😀
And I would like to second your thanks to T8 for keeping this site up and running all these years. It’s especially great to hit “Submit” and be taken right to the post you just submitted, so thanks for fixing that issue, T8. 😎👏
Please explain to me the difference between the high pressure being on the inside with the low pressure on the outside, and the other way around. Btw, here’s a better chart than the Wiki one I already posted for you. Beware though, this one was compiled by the flat earth idiot who put the vacuum cleaner on the thumbnail of his video… you know, the guy who has forgotten more about this subject than you and I have even learned.
Okay. In a practical sense, a car tyre can contain 18 extra PSI even way more than that. So the ISS needs to be as strong as that. A 6 foot thick steel wall or whatever would be overkill given this truth.
So why the difference with inside or outside pressure? Well without googling the answer (because it will probably take more time to find than I have), I will take a stab at the answer. Take water first. The further down you go the higher the pressure right. That is because of the weight of water above pushing down on the water below. Does that make the water more dense or is it purely just the weight that creates the crushing force below, I do not know. But we know that is how it is. Now we can send craft to the bottom of the sea floor and they are way stronger than a car tyre, so given that alone, an ISS as strong as a car tyre could work, but I’m guessing it is somewhere between the tyre and sub. Whatever, it only needs to contain 15 PSI the same as a tyre does and that is a fact.
Earlier on, I did google about car tyres and it seems that the bigger the tyre, the more pressure needed. So this could explain your question. If a car tyre is really big, I assume more pressure is needed. And if the atmosphere or an ocean is really big, then maybe that has something to do with the answer.
But without having all the answers, it is obvious that car tyres not only contain the air inside, but also carry a huge weight above. The ISS needs to contain less pressure than a car tyre and doesn’t have a huge weight pushing from the outside like a car or the ocean above.
That is the answer Mike. No matter the other reasoning with six foot thick walls etc, a car tyre is not six foot thick and is made of rubber, wire, and other compounds. This is not theoretical and is easily proven to be true. It holds 32 PSI in a 15 PSI environment meaning a 18 PSI difference to more than that depending on the size of the tyrre. Whereas the ISS needs only hold 15 PSI.
I believe that while I do not understand everything about this, my answer is sufficient for the purposes of debating the existence of the ISS.
Finally, I have seen the ISS fly past my house or something fitting that description. God is my witness. It was smaller than the moon, definitely bigger than the biggest stars (exc the Sun), and was illuminating light at different angles. Wondering what the hell it was and suspecting it was the ISS, I googled it, and sure enough it was scheduled to fly over NZ’s North Island around that time. Then I remember reading an article in the news about it flying over NZ two or so days before.
Ed: Hi Mike,
In a flat Earth model you cannot have a 24 hour sun at the south poll. < – we both agree here
I can’t agree with that. It’s true that I think the “south pole” is an ice wall and extended plane that encircles the part of the world in which we all live, but I couldn’t say that sunlight couldn’t hit that entire edge at the same time. Look at the arched glare on this model….
Hi Mike, I did not say you could not have “24 hour light”… …I said “Sun”…
You could not have “a 24 hour sun” on the flat earth model – you disagree ???
____________
God bless
Ed JHere’s the thing Mike.
You try to poke holes in eclipses, the tilt of the earth and amount of sunlight received, and other such things, BUT the globe is the only model that actually explains these despite you pointing out that they do not quite work out. On a FLat Earth these points you bring up are just plain impossible.l
All you are doing is bringing up your own misunderstandings where things supposedly do not quite work out on a globe model but absolutely fail on a Flat Earth model. The easy answer is you are missing a few things regarding the Globe model, so understand these misconceptions before avanding the model for a model that explains very little to nothing.
It reminds me of Gravity. Newtown articulated it and his ideas and calculations worked nearly every time. But there was still a problem or two and Einstein came along and solved that by adding to the theory, so that the calul;ations were always right. Notice that Einstein did not debunk Newtown because he knew Newton was basically right, he just needed to add a little to it. Einstein also explained why gravity, whereas Newtown didn’t know why gravity happened.
So perhaps if you did the same and went with the Globe model, you could easily get 100% accuracy with that model if you discover what it is you are missing. But throwing away the globe model and starting with the Flat Earth one, you will always have a lack of answers. You need to not only make the Flat Earth model work with eclipses and make predictions showing your model as you can so with the Globe Earth, but you then need to redraw ocean currents, winds, work out why boats can sail faster around the Southern Ocean compared with other oceans, and a whole host of other things, even more than both of us will ever realise. II can’t even wish you good luck with that.
Mike….. You mean by now you haven’t become convienced that the earth is not flat yet. There are thousands of proof about the earth being round, but yet you do not except any of them by now? You keep drawing in T8 to this useless and endless descusion, that has nothing to do with the kingdom of God. This subject is simply just a waste of time.
T8……..1 Ti 1: 4 …..Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister “questions”, rather than godly “edifying”, which is in faith.
Peace and love to you and yours. ……gene
Gene, to be fair, I think you also waste a lot of time on similar things.
The way I see it is the purpose of this forum is to discover truth and expose lies. Scripture says that all will come under Christ.
Mike basically thinks that the Bible teaches that the Earth is flat. Whereas I do not see it. I asked him for his best proof verse and it doesn’t say anything about the Earth being flat. So the topic is being challenged not only from a biblical perspective but also a scientific one.
- to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment–to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.
- We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.
Mike, I can’t be bothered drawing a diagram. I will try to explain it.
The sun is many times larger than the Earth. So light from the sun beams toward earth giving us the view of the sun. This light bathes the whole face of the Earth facing it. The light that is being received travels in straight lines, but some light will hit object onroute and change direction and the atmosphere as a lense will also slightly change the light too.
When the moon gets in the way which is largely the same size as the sun from our perspective, we receive this light from the sun and it is even possible that the moon itself could skew some light rays. BUt the most profound effect is the moon blocks the light that the moon blocks.
My point is this. Your argument is based on a very simplistic diagram that looks right if the sun was small and close and every single light ray travelled in a perfect straight line with no interference from celestial objects, the moon, or the earth’s own atmosphere.
I have noticed that the problems with the globe and Solar System you have is largely things do not quite look right from a layman’s point of view. They are largely right, but not quite. But you never factor in these other things that could explain these smaller discrepancies. In short, you make mountains out of molehills.
So your solution is to adopt a model that cannot explain any of this. The Flat Earth has no working model to explain eclipses, sea currents, ship and air routes, ocean currents, winds, and similar phenomena with auroras and sunlight / darkness hours in the poles. Your model also needs a conspiracy so large that it would take a good percentage of the human population to be involved. Because it assumes that the Antarctic continent is BS, space exploration and satellites are BS, and air and ship routes in my part of the world are BS.
And you get on your high horse and pretend to be offended at our ignorance. Seriously Mike, when we asked what you were smoking, we were really asking.
- to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment–to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
