If the earth is flat explain why...

Thank you. I corrected it to heliocentric system in my post. I’m still learning the terminology. Lol I appreciate you sharing your position, and I will keep in mind your points as I delve into this.

So, what I am seeing, so far, is:

1) Neither the Geocentric Theory nor Heliocentric Theory has been disproved. No more questions here yet.

2) Heliocentrism is the currently accepted theory and is the premise on which most well-known scientific observations and predictions have been based. Next, I will look into why that is.

I am so glad I started this pursuit! So much fun!




Last Edited by Fortunabeargirl on 06/02/2019 03:22 PM

Ahmm, no.

As I wrote in my last post: The size of the sun in the sky, that the sun would have in the geocentric model, doesn't agree with the observed size.

On the other hand the observed size of the sun in the sky agrees with the orbital parameters of Earth around the sun.

With a decent camera and a solar filter you can make these measurements yourself.

.

Who says that map model of the earth is correct? It’s just one of many possibilities. Since we have no true photos from sufficient altitude, how can we know AU is the furthest from Chile?

most likely the arrangement is different. As yourself why mariners operate using calculations of a flat earth and not round, and why that’s the only way to navigate from point-to-point succesfully? Also radar systems - have any idea how far a signal can be shot without bouncing, and why?????

Control, duh... To keep people in control and to orevent then from seeking the land beyond the “poles”...Also, not “all of NASA” needs to be in on some secret. They simply teach and prove using the education they have. Only a select few know the true measurements and exact calculations of this all..

Many of your fellow flat brainers said this - None of them ever delivered.

You can be the first to provide an alternative map of the flat earth - don't be shy, provide one.



Good point - How about other direct flights in the southern hemisphere? If you adjust Australia <--> South America you get problems with South America <--> Africa <--> Australia.
Show me a map that fits direct flights between all continents in the southern hemisphere.

Do it, you can be the first who delivers.



Have you ever had a look at real navigation maps?
No, you haven't - otherwise you would know that they form a globe when stitched together.
And long distance navigation uses spherical trigonometry - guess why.



Yep, hundreds of miles ...... from an aircraft.
Sorry that you fell for this shit. But thanks for your humorous contribution.

.

And hundreds of thousands of professional and amateur astronomers all around the globe, while using an equatorial telescope mount, know the true measurements and exact calculations of this all: That earth is a sphere.

Can you figure out why?

.

Thank you. Thinking perhaps I moved too quickly, I went back to dig a little deeper. All I’ve found referring to the Geocentric model being disproved are the words “obsolete, defunct, or superseded.” None of those mean “disproved.” They imply instead that the Geocentric model has simply fallen out of use and been replaced by a more modern or commonly accepted model.

If this simple experiment disproves Geocentrism, then why hasn’t it been formally declared so? iInstead just falling short or shying away from the word “disproved” or a definitive “proven false” and instead using softer less certain terms?


I’m not saying your experiment isn’t correct. I wouldn’t know. But I wouldn’t have to know if it is correct or not, if the theory had been formally disproved, instead of leaving it to a backyard very amateur scientist, such as myself or one random person I happen to be talking to on the internet. Not, that I don’t think you rock. ;-)

Therefore, I’m sticking to my first position bc I am still not convinced it has been disproved scientifically. Do you have a source or link of it being disproven? I’ll reconsider my position if you do.

Like I said, I am a words girl. A theory that has formally been “proven false” would carry a lot of weight. “Obsolete, defunct and superseded” just doesn’t do it for me.

Last Edited by Fortunabeargirl on 06/02/2019 10:24 PM

Yes, it depends on the height of the emitter and is calculable by finding the distance to the horizon. The higher the emitter, the longer the range. If the Earth was flat then range could be increased just by increasing power but that doesn't work in reality.

It's impossible to find reason when failing to agree on first principles.

A first principle is that qualities must necessarily be in something that is figured, hard or soft, coloured,that resists or moves.
It is not to these qualities, but to that which is the subject of them, we give the name BODY.

Should you find it fit to deny these things are qualities then you are free to enjoy your opinion, not fit to be reasoned with.

It is certain that no man could believe or conceive smelling to exist of itself without mind, of which, this is called a sensation.
Should you request proof that sensation can't be without mind or sentient being I can give none and must sau that to pretend to prove it would seem as absurd as to deny it.

Reasoning must be from first principles by the constitution of our very nature we are under a necessity of assenting to them.

If the world isn't flat why does a periscope work on a sub a few inches above water? Not possible on globe world.

BINGO

Wrong. While only a few inches above the water its horizon will be close (for example at 12 inches the horizon would be 1.2 miles away), the ships you are looking at are tall. a 12 inch periscope can see any ship taller than 22 feet, out to 7 miles.

Words are funny things. For example "airplane", it's not a plane in the air. The British English word is more appropriate: aircraft. And in German it's called "Flugzeug", that can be translated to "flying machine". Or "firefly", it's neither on fire nor is it a fly.

Even a little punctuation mark can change the meaning of a complete sentence and save a live: "Let's eat grandpa." vs. "Let's eat, grandpa".

In German we also have the word "obsolet". It can mean "outdated" but also "deprecated". Oh, sorry, the English word deprecated has several meanings, too. Thus let it phrase more accurate: rejected.
Is that the words you are looking for? The geocentric model is rejected?

It seems that you take your American English much too serious; it's not the measure of all things. To be honest, it's a quite degenerated language.

On the other hand there is a language, that's understood all around the globe. This language tells us that sun and planets don't orbit around Earth.
This language is called mathematics - you should give it a try.


You asked for a link: [link to portal.mytum.de (secure)] Sorry, it's in German but explains it in layman terms.
Synopsis in English: [link to physics.aps.org (secure)]
Scientific article in English: [link to journals.aps.org (secure)]

.
.

You sound like a fool. Starting from square one and building from there is, in fact, reasoning based on First Principles. Since this is my own quest for truth, I get to decide what those First Principles are. Furthermore, if I prefer inductive reasoning, that is my choice. One thing for sure, is that my thinking is always better when I stop making assumptions and allowing others to frame the problem for me.

I sift through posts, read, and engage with those I feel have something useful to offer me. You, for example, have offered me nothing so far except your incomplete understanding of First Principles and a delusion that I care whether you find me fit to be reasoned with.

I won’t allow you to distract me again.

Last Edited by Fortunabeargirl on 06/03/2019 11:23 PM

I thank you for what you have offered that has been useful to me so far, but this last post reveals your heart. You have now become unnecessary drag and an adversary against my pursuit of truth. I won’t be engaging with you anymore.

Last Edited by Fortunabeargirl on 06/03/2019 11:21 PM

So has anyone been way up in the atmosflat to see how thick it is?

Water doesn't bend. The line of site drop equation for earth doesn't work. Yeah they've got some proof.

Still haven't figured out why my satellite dish points south and up.

I didn't mean offence but was talking in relation to Hydra talking as if she knows what the sun is, she does not. Talking as if her belief is a knowing with regards to Heliononsensical religious waffle that is offered, the content....Nothing personal.

You guys should probably stop responding to the disinfo ball earth trolls. You're not going to change their mind and they have so many canned responses from trolling various forums all over the internet, that trying any discourse with them is an exercise in futility. Pissing into the wind.

That's the reason why the flat brainers always have wet pants and why you can smell them from a mile away.

.

But do you not understand how trump became president. Hate = a different form of love bby. any talk about the Matrix is good talk. Dont get me wrong i love steak and blue pills but, the truth is better.

That German humour eh!?

Wow, I’m so sorry. I feel so bad right now. I thought your post was directed towards me. I was so confused by it! Now it all makes sense. You are correct. Please forgive me.

Sphere, From Merriam Webster dictionary: the apparent surface of the heavens of which half forms the D. O. M. E. of the visible sky.

"Apparent" is interesting, the word isn't definite rather it seems like it would be but maybe not!

Just a misunderstanding. Seeing as you are challenging the official narrative it is important not to be swayed by individuals who are telling you lies to confirm their own bias. Heliocentrism and geocentrism both work on the basis we live on a ball... an unproven assumption.

Right. Since flat earth is encompassed by geocentrism, I thought I would start there. Thus, my first building block is that neither geocentrism nor Heliocentrism has been disproved. Meaning that the geocentric model is still a possibility, meaning that flat earth hasn’t been written off for me either. So, that’s where I’m at now. Been here for a minute, to be honest.

If I come to the point that I prefer the geocentric model, then I can grapple with globe vs flat. That’s my plan anyway!

NOW YOU DO

CONGRATS

This thread started out lame and went downhill from there.