- This topic has 6,416 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
LU, Mike knows that Neil is not a Flat Earther. He is using this guy to disprove Carl Sagan’s earlier assertion that the experiment proved the world was not flat. Neil is correctly saying that the experiment actually works on a Flat Earth too, but that Carl failed to mention this in his video thereby deceiving people for 40 or so years. However, my guess is that Carl was assuming a distant sun in which case he would have been correct about the shadows. But if Carl was assuming a sun 3000 km or miles away, then it seems he would have been wrong and Neil confirms this would be wrong indirectly.
So the question becomes, was Carl assuming a close sun in the Flat Earth model and what was the widely held distance of the sun back when the Flat Earth was the popular view?
t8, I get that. I have a problem with Mike calling Sagan a liar. Neil doesn’t call him a liar. Sagan was actually on to the truth and could have used a third well to satisfy the theory. Neil goes on to satisfy the theory of a spherical earth anyway through the rest of the video.
t8, I get that. I have a problem with Mike calling Sagan a liar. Neil doesn’t call him a liar. Sagan was actually on to the truth and could have used a third well to satisfy the theory. Neil goes on to satisfy the theory of a spherical earth anyway through the rest of the video.
That’s basically my view too. Regardless, if Sagan was lying, isn’t the point that the third well proves the sphere earth and thus Sagan was right about the sphere earth. My guess he was assuming a distant sun in both flat and sphere earth theories.
Hey Mike, I found a competing photo to my one, so mine is not so special after all. I feel sad now. The linked news article confirms the vantage point and subject.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/local-papers/kapiti-observer/8924589/Fine-weather-ahead
Now compare to mine.
Hi Dig4thruth,
In the beginning God created the heaven(a) and the earth(b).
And God said, Let there be light(c): and there was light.
And God divided the light from the darkness(d). And God called the light Day,
and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. (Gen 1:1-5)(Note> On day 4 NIGHT is the focus)
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day (this happened on day 1),
and the lesser light to rule the night(a): he made the stars also(b).
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven
to divide the day from the night(b); and let them be for signs,
and for seasons, and for days, and years(c): (Gen 1:16-19)Let’s presuppose for a minute the Heliocentric is true,
Then could it not be said:On Day 1, God Created:
a. Empty Space
c. The Earth
b. The Sun
d. The Earth’s Axis rotationOn day 4, for the darkness, God Created:
a. The Moon
b. The Stars
c. The Earth’s orbit of the SunI would like to hear both Your’s and Mike’s comments to this information.
And like the sun being mentioned on day 4, so also is days, which both
could be argued as occurring on day 1. (see highlighted portions)____________
God bless
Ed JJob 37:9-10 Out of the south comes the storm, And out of the north the cold. 10 “From the breath of God ice is made, And the expanse of the waters is frozen.
I’m not sure that Genesis would contain any description of the artic zones. It seems clear that at one time they were tropical too. Probably after the flood of Noah’s day the ice began to form to get the point that we see them today.
Ed, I don’t see how something said to be made on day 4 could be made on day 1. That would be a clear contradiction.
I believe we must let Scripture speak for itself. If it says the sun was made on day 4 then that must mean what it says.
Usually this type of timeline is used to accommodate long ages to fit in evolution, whether biological or astronomical. I don’t know if that is your intention or if you are just trying to accommodate a spherical earth but this is difficult to do if we take Scripture on face value.
Keep in mind that each creation day had a night and a day.
Lightenup: “I get that. I have a problem with Mike calling Sagan a liar. Neil doesn’t call him a liar. Sagan was actually on to the truth and could have used a third well to satisfy the theory. Neil goes on to satisfy the theory of a spherical earth anyway through the rest of the video.”
Actually Mike didn’t call anyone a liar, he said that the conclusion was a lie.
Mike: Â “But in 1980, Carl Sagan told millions of TV viewers that the difference Eratosthenes recorded in the shadows could ONLY happen on a ball. And those people and their kids have been repeating this lie ever since.”
t8, I believe you’ve got. The well experiment hinges on a sun that is millions of miles away. If it were close the shadows would not men a spherical earth. Also, keep in mind that adding a third well would not make any difference with a near sun.
But that begs the question if there is any evidence of a near sun!
I would have to say that there is. Two evidences come to mind; crepuscular rays and hotspots on clouds.
I’ll have to get back to these a little later. I owe, I owe, it’s off to work I go…
Mike:  “But in 1980, Carl Sagan told millions of TV viewers that the difference Eratosthenes recorded in the shadows could ONLY happen on a ball. And those people and their kids have been repeating this lie ever since.”
And would be true if the sun were distant as is widely accepted.
Mike…..show me in the Gen 1-2 where there list any dates or times, only it says in the Beginning. Do you or anyone hare know when that was? IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH, INFACT EVERY THEN IN SPACE HAD A BEGINNING. LIKE THE BIG BAN THEORY EXPLAINS maybe.
Next go look up Jupiter’s information, and you will find that the planet is so large it acts like a giant vacuum suck up astroids and comets that aproch our solar system, so it is said to act as a protector of the earth. Look it up for yourself it all available for anyone to see.Nothing you and you FE buddies has yet been proved, as solid evidence, everything has been proven not true by many, many, many, scientific experts, not to even begin to mention the thousand of actual pictures and movies shot from space of hundreds of satlites, space station, eye witness from astronauts themselves, and the list goes on and on of thing that “completely” disprove the FLAT EARTH GARBAGE.
Peace and love to you and yours. …….gene
Ed, I don’t see how something said to be made on day 4 could be made on day 1. That would be a clear contradiction.
Hi Dig4thruth,
You appear to be addressing the sun mention
by your presupposed doubts as some kind of evidence,
while at the same time ignoring an even clearer reference:“And God divided the light from the darkness” <-day 1 "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for ...days" <-- day 4
Both of these ideas mentioned in day 4 refer BACK to the Earth’s rotation
as it correlates to the Heliocentric model of our solar-system as mentioned in day 1.Please address this point
Hi,
The creation of light and darkness in Gen 1.3 does not need a created sun.
You do not need the Sun to have light.
God is light and in Him there is no darkness at all. 1jn 1.5
And at the end there will be no need for a sun because God gives light. Is 60.19, Rev 22.5
Gene: “show me in the Gen 1-2 where there list any dates or times, only it says in the Beginning. Do you or anyone hare know when that was? IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH, INFACT EVERY THEN IN SPACE HAD A BEGINNING. LIKE THE BIG BAN THEORY EXPLAINS maybe.”
You just answered your own question, in the beginning. The beginning is when an event “begins”.
The Big Ban[g] theory is astrological evolution, that’s all it is. It’s design is to try to eliminate God from His creation.
Six days after the beginning of the universe man was created. He did not evolve and neither did the universe.
Gene: “Nothing you and you FE buddies has yet been proved, as solid evidence, everything has been proven not true by many, many, many, scientific experts, not to even begin to mention the thousand of actual pictures and movies shot from space of hundreds of satlites, space station, eye witness from astronauts themselves, and the list goes on and on of thing that “completely” disprove the FLAT EARTH GARBAGE.”
Thanks for for pitching the softballs! Yes, there IS solid evidence.
Which experiment would you like to begin with? Samuel Rowbothem’s Bedford Level experiment? Airy’s Failure, Olber’s Paradox, Michelson-Morley, Sagnac, Foucault’s Pendulum (yes, that’s one for our side), which one would you like to begin with?
Hi Jodi,
God has allowed the evil works of darkness.
God is light and He has revealed the challenge.
Light has to overcome the darkness in everyone.
But Satan and the demons are already condemned.
Earthly creation is condemned to death but hope reigns.
Jesus Christ is the only means of salvation offered by God.
Occupied man has to find the road to freedom and eternal life.
God appeals to the vessel and offers help to him in overcoming Satan.
Knowledge of his perilous situation and about entering the kingdom is vital.
The way is not easy and the only hope for man is to listen and to obey every word.
And he needs grace, grace and more grace.
Ed: “You appear to be addressing the sun mention by your presupposed doubts as some kind of evidence,
while at the same time ignoring an even clearer reference: “And God divided the light from the darkness” <-day 1 “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for …days” <– day 4″I don’t have any presupposed doubts about the Word of God. The Word says the sun was created on day 4. <- (that’s a period)
which part of “day 4” do you have a presupposed aversion to?
Are you presupposing that God needs a sun or a moon to have light? Hmm? Have you not read that God is light? I John 1:5
Assuming that the sun was created on day 1 is a little presumptuous, in my opinion. Can you defend it with Scripture is really the only test.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
