- This topic has 6,414 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
Now who is denying science? If you can’t understand something that is being easily described and demonstrated right in front of your eyes then why should we regard any of your conclusions?
This is why you believe the Earth is flat. You flat out ignore any evidence to the contrary. You didn’t even bother to note my point about the horizon going up and down in that video.
Now here’s another great video (notice the shout-out to Mike at the beginning!) [2.49 minutes long]
Let me put a pretext to this.
Okay, Mike was debunked in his latest video, but I’m going to ignore that and promote my prophet regardless. He is always right, even when others prove him wrong. And hopefully by promoting this other video of Mike’s, it will detract from the thorough debunking he received. And I hope Mike likes me because I always back him up because no guile is found on his lips.
The horizon was described very well in the video. In fact he went pretty far in establishing it was exactly spot on and he even used illustrations and that’s the issue you have with it? None so blind…
T8: Further, you do realise we are not the only world right?
In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them. (Gen 1:1; Acts 4:24, etc) What other world are you talking about?
T8: The godless can draw a conclusion from the same facts that Believers who see the wonderful eternal nature of the creator through his creation.
Agreed. But my point is that the conclusions drawn by these godless men are not based on observational empirical scientific evidence – as they’d have you believe – but from a purely philosophical desire for the earth NOT to have any special significance. They DESIRE the earth to be an insignificant pale blue dot, lost in a vast vacuum of space among trillions of other dots that have just as much significance as we do.
Here’s the “pale blue dot” image and speech by Carl Sagan… http://www.awakin.org/read/view.php?tid=682
Here’s a snippet from that speech…
Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.
This is what I’m talking about. And I’m trying to teach you that all of this nonsense isn’t based on actual evidence – but on the same PHILOSOPHICAL evolutionary principles that man is nothing but random pond scum – accidentally made, and accidentally floating aimlessly through an uncaring universe.
Here’s that quote by George Ellis – which was from 1995, not 1985 as I previously said…
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds… What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.”
Let that sink in. There is a range of models that would match the observations. The heli model is just ONE of them (after centuries of constant tweaking which continues to this day, of course). Nobody in the world would be able to disprove his mathematical construct with the earth at the center of the universe. Let that sink in. How could we NOT be able to disprove it if we really had spacecraft millions of miles away that could SEE the earth as it orbits the sun? And finally, he says point blank that they use PHILOSOPHICAL criteria to choose the heliocentric mathematical construct over any other mathematical construct – and that cosmologists try to HIDE that fact.
Do you understand now? It’s not like the heli model is empirically proven via scientific method. It’s one of many models (including the Biblical one) that would match the observations. But they accept the heli model over the Biblical one (or any other one) based solely on PHILOSOPHICAL grounds, ie: “we don’t WANT there to be a God who created a special world, and so we reject that idea – not on science, but on our own philosophy.”
Here’s one from Edwin Hubble, whom I’m sure you’re familiar with…
Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central earth. The hypothesis cannot be disproved but it is unwelcome and would be accepted only as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore, we disregard this possibility… the unwelcome position of a favoured location must be avoided at all costs…Such a favoured position, of course, is intolerable… Therefore, in order to restore homogeneity, and to escape the horror of a unique position, the departures from uniformity…must be compensated by the…spatial curvature. There seems to be no other escape.
This is how the godless men whom you hold in higher regard than your Creator sort this “science” out, T8. Not based on evidence – but on their ultimate desire for the earth not to hold a special position. He’s saying that their interpretation of the data DOES place the earth at the center of everything. But since they must “escape the HORROR of a unique position” at all costs, they simply disregard what the data says, and invent things like “spatial curvature” and “dark matter” and “gravitons” and “gluons” and anything else they need to make this HORROR go away.
And here you are, talking down to us by parroting things you’ve heard but don’t understand – completely oblivious to the fact that these things you’re parroting are all made up due to a DESIRE to not have our earth be special, or created. These are the people whose fantasies you hold in higher regard than your God’s own description of the world He Himself created.
Repent, ask forgiveness, and go forth preaching what the Bible says – not what godless men have made up out of thin air.
Mike: They will “have no need for the sun”. Kind of silly to have a sun when there is no need for it.
T8: Not silly at all. The sun holds the earth in an orbit and gives us heat. Yes it gives us light, but the light of God supersedes any other source of light.
Did you catch that Isaiah said the sun will no longer set? So do you suppose the sun will remain at high noon, not giving light and never setting? And how does the never setting part align with your ball earth orbiting it? If the earth is orbiting the light-less sun, then it will still set, right? The deeper you look into it, the more your godless-man-fantasy-model is refuted by scripture.
Anyway, as I told Ed, all of that is BESIDE THE POINT I was making. My point was that there is a distinct scriptural difference between the sun and “light”. There is a difference between the sun and “day”. Ed seems to be saying that God made a mistake when He said He created the sun on day 4 because “how could there be ‘day’ or ‘light’ without the sun?”. And I’m pointing out that there CAN BE “day” without the sun. There CAN BE “light” without the sun. Therefore, God COULD HAVE created the sun on day 4 just like He said He did. Agreed?
T8: Show me the Adam and Eve model of creation. Did they excavate it recently? lol.
Here you go… taken directly from God’s own description of the world HE created for us.
T8: Rubbish. People know the earth is a globe…
Correct. The claim that people know the earth is a globe is indeed absolute rubbish! There is no living creature in existence that “knows the earth is a globe”… least of all any human creature. You surely don’t. You can only parrot what godless men tell you, and PRETEND that you know these things to be true. How about we stick to what we can personally verify from now on, okay?
T8: As for your last point. Pressure will eventually lead to zero pressure somewhere unless you want to state that there are no areas of zero pressure.
So an area of zero or almost zero pressure is going to be near an area of slightly more pressure and so on.
Wrong. 100% wrong. Pressure equalizes. If you place 2 vacuum chambers next to each other, one with zero pressure and one with even the tiniest amount (say .000000000000001 psi of pressure), and remove the barrier between them, the pressure will equalize within both chambers. You will not have the one chamber retain even the smallest measurable amount of pressure while the other is at zero pressure. The pressure in both chambers (which are now one chamber because we removed the barrier) will immediately equalize and become somewhere between zero and .000000000000001 psi.
Likewise with the globe earth fantasy. If our atmosphere is surrounded by a vast vacuum of space, then there is no mechanism by which the pressure wouldn’t immediately join WITH the vacuum of space – and continue as far as that vacuum spans – until the entire area has the exact same equalized pressure. The idea that a fraction of a pound of pressure (at the edge of space or whatever) can exist directly adjacent to a zero pressure vacuum is ludicrous. The idea that “gravity” can not only steal gas molecules from the vacuum of space but suck them down so hard on top of each other that they squish into 15 psi at sea LEVEL (not “sea curve”) is beyond ludicrous.
Remember… 8 foot thick concrete and steel walls in NASA’s vacuum chamber, right? Paper thin aluminum on the ISS. Get real.
T8: A silly statement because it assumes to worship YHWH, you need to join a cult, particularly the Flat Earth cult.
Rather, it presumes that to worship YHWH, you must actually believe YHWH. Do you? Or do you make fun of His description of the world He actually created?
Repent, ask forgiveness, and go forth preaching God’s written word instead of the lies of godless men.
T8, please get my last post from the spam folder (the one that talks about Saudi princes, and has #qanon).
T8: I really like this because I can post someone else’s hard work and reap the benefit here.
Now if only you knew what I and Glenn (roohif) were actually debating – you’d have the ability to say, “Yes, Glenn is right” or “Hmm… Mike has you on this one”. But since you DON’T know what we’re even talking about, or how I refuted Glenn’s points in that video via Skype (where we’ve been conversion for quite a while now), then you have no room to talk, right?
But let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and allow you to put your money where your mouth is. Put roohif’s argument from that video in your own words, letting us know that YOU even understand the point HE’S trying to make. And then I’ll dismantle it for you like I did for Glenn on Skype. Btw, I stopped him cold dead, and he could no longer make any further arguments on this point. Also, consider that in my video, I took a popular GLOBE EARTH meme about refraction lift, and swapped it from a lunar eclipse to a solar one – all other things remaining equal. So ask yourself how Glenn’s argument (that I refuted) had merit to rebut me – while simultaneously NOT rebutting the GLOBE EARTH meme that I copied.
Of course I know this is already way over your head, and that you “can’t be bothered with looking into it”, right? But that means WE also know that you are only picking any video that says “Flat earth debunked” or “Mike Boll debunked” and posting it here simply because it’s telling you what your ears are itching to hear – and not because there is anything in those videos that you could stand and defend all by yourself. That is your right, but honest people on both sides of the issue are able to see that you’re simply fulfilling this scripture…
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
And to make it worse, you started your post by saying, “Mike puts in a lot of time on this subject, so obviously we are not going to be able to debunk everything he says because we are not willing to put in the time required…”
Can you see the difference between us? I have indeed invested a LOT of time in the trinity debate, the creation/evolution debate, and the shape of the earth debate. I DIDN’T just gather around me people who were saying what I WANTED to hear. Why?
Proverbs 18:13
He who answers a matter before he hears it— this is folly and disgrace to him.
You are trying to answer a matter before you hear it, T8. We recognize this as folly and disgrace to you.
D4T: Now who is denying science? If you can’t understand something that is being easily described and demonstrated right in front of your eyes then why should we regard any of your conclusions?
I will take Mitchell’s test farther, D. I’ll do the same without touching the camera at all. But I’m going to do it on a flat table, move the coin til it disappears, and then zoom it back in. THEN I’ll do it on a slightly curved surface (I’m thinking plexiboard or a 4×8 piece of foam board slightly bent over a sawhorse or something). I’ll move the coin the same distance from the camera in both cases, and see if we can zoom the coin back up over the curve in the second test.
That should put an end to it. I’ll talk to Mr Thrive&Survive (Rich) about it today to see if he’ll help. Brooke (goes by Lumberjack) should also be willing to help (he came up from Cali and helped us on the moon temperature live stream we did a month ago). That way we’ll have a couple of different cameras shooting the whole thing from different locations, to verify that everything is on the up and up. (Wish you weren’t so far away, or we could do some of this stuff together.)
D4T: Now here’s another great video (notice the shout-out to Mike at the beginning!) [2.49 minutes long]
Wow, that one’s making the rounds. I made it, then Taboo Conspiracy expanded on it, and the one you linked is mirror of Taboo’s from someone else! 😎 My vids are now being mirrored by a few channels with a lot more subs than I have – which is great if since it allows more people to see and think about them. But that one’s funny because we’re all familiar with the weatherman saying, “What you’re seeing here is a mirage” concerning Chicago from 55 miles away. This one was of Milwaukee from 80 miles away – and the news lady gives the same exact rescue device… that the atmosphere is magically lifting things up and around an obstruction, and placing them perfectly on the horizon so they only appear to be the actual thing sitting on a FLAT horizon.
If only someone could scientifically verify that refraction CAN cause objects to lift up and around obstructions so observers on the other side of the obstruction can see them. Of course nobody can, because such a thing has never happened.
T8: Okay, Mike was debunked in his latest video…
Proverbs 18:13
He who answers a matter before he hears it— this is folly and disgrace to him.
2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires.
Mike, the bent table experiment sounds totally inspired. If the coin cannot be resolved then that would prove that the boats or lighthouses or whatever that CAN be resolved are NOT on a curved surface! What a mind you have for this!
D4T: Mike, the bent table experiment sounds totally inspired. If the coin cannot be resolved then that would prove that the boats or lighthouses or whatever that CAN be resolved are NOT on a curved surface! What a mind you have for this!
Thanks! Iron sharpens iron. T8’s claim that we could also zoom the object back in on a ball inspired me, so thanks T8. Now we’ll put his claim to the test. This is how science is supposed to work.
In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them. (Gen 1:1; Acts 4:24, etc) What other world are you talking about?
The heavens is a big place. The Bible was written for men who live on Earth. So the Earth features prominently as you would imagine. It was not primarily written for Seraphs, Cherubs, or other living creatures as far as I know.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
