200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:03 pm

Posted by rare on 08/21/2015

Excellent picture find. This reminds me that it was Jesuit priests infiltrating the Chinese inner culture, under the subterfuge of being astrologers and mathematicians, that stole the secret of silk (smuggling silk eggs out in hollow canes) and the arcane knowledge of porcelain (the white gold of the 18th century) funded and aided by the India companies. Both criminal acts with no other interest than monetary gain.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:04 pm

Posted by csp on 08/21/2015

Aug 20, 2015 19:53:27 GMT schpankme said:
I firmly believe the Vacuum of Space to be a hologram, created by Jesuits, and maintained by  Freemasons.   >Smile


I wholeheartedly agree - you can even see in the picture the many astrolabes of different forms from the mariner in his hand, to the armillary on the desk, to the sine quadrant and perspective marker on the wall.. along with the celestial globe on the ground. He is then using the masonic compass to map the "earth" onto the globe - in plain sight!

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:05 pm

Posted by questionauthority on 09/01/2015
#32.

"If “gravity” is credited with being a force strong enough to hold the world’s oceans, buildings, people and atmosphere stuck to the surface of a rapidly spinning ball, then it is impossible for “gravity” to also simultaneously be weak enough to allow little birds, bugs, and planes to take-off and travel freely unabated in any direction."




_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:06 pm

Posted by gnosticwarrior on 09/02/2015

Interested to hear some opinions, thoughts, and counters to this, lol:

"Why are there are no tides in rivers, lakes and other water bodies except oceans? The gravitational pull of the moon acts even on these water bodies!":

www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-199833,00.html

..."It does, but the force is immeasurably small on something tiny like a balloon or a human, it's all a matter of scale, the oceans consist of many billions of tons of water, spread over thousands of square miles but the tide is only a few metres high out in the open ocean ( those few metres can be magnified by the topology of the coasts and ocean floor)":

www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-the-gravity-of-the-Moon-affect-anything-else-on-Earth-besides-water-tides

"It does. Let us consider the effect of gravitational pull on the 3 states of matter.
Solid (you, me, sand, buildings, cars etc) : does experience the pull but the magnitude of the gravitational force is so small that it fails to create a physical deformity in solids. Hence solids remain unchanged.
Liquids (Oceans and Seas) : The intermolecular spaces in liquids are larger than in solids and hence the physical changes due to an increased or decreased gravitational pull is more visible in liquids. 
Gases ( Air, atmosphere) : In the case of gases, there is obviously a change but you cannot see air or atmosphere so its difficult to measure or quantify. The maximum that could happen is during the increased of decreased gravitational pull (high and low tide respectively) the air gets just a fraction thinner or thicker which will again not create a physical difference on how humans perceive the atmosphere around them. 
Again, this is what I think."

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:07 pm

Posted by thinkforyourself on 09/02/2015

Sept 1, 2015 14:49:29 GMT gnosticwarrior said:
Interested to hear some opinions, thoughts, and counters to this, lol:

"Why are there are no tides in rivers, lakes and other water bodies except oceans? The gravitational pull of the moon acts even on these water bodies!":

www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-199833,00.html

..."It does, but the force is immeasurably small on something tiny like a balloon or a human, it's all a matter of scale, the oceans consist of many billions of tons of water, spread over thousands of square miles but the tide is only a few metres high out in the open ocean ( those few metres can be magnified by the topology of the coasts and ocean floor)":

www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-the-gravity-of-the-Moon-affect-anything-else-on-Earth-besides-water-tides

"It does. Let us consider the effect of gravitational pull on the 3 states of matter.
Solid (you, me, sand, buildings, cars etc) : does experience the pull but the magnitude of the gravitational force is so small that it fails to create a physical deformity in solids. Hence solids remain unchanged.
Liquids (Oceans and Seas) : The intermolecular spaces in liquids are larger than in solids and hence the physical changes due to an increased or decreased gravitational pull is more visible in liquids. 
Gases ( Air, atmosphere) : In the case of gases, there is obviously a change but you cannot see air or atmosphere so its difficult to measure or quantify. The maximum that could happen is during the increased of decreased gravitational pull (high and low tide respectively) the air gets just a fraction thinner or thicker which will again not create a physical difference on how humans perceive the atmosphere around them. 
Again, this is what I think."

This is absolutely pathetic, incorrect and contradictory. 

If a force were powerful enough to affect the giant oceans, its effect would be even greater on smaller bodies of water. If the Moon caused the ocean tides like they say it does, then there would be proportionally more powerful waves in smaller bodies of water, to the extent that puddles should not even settle due to the force moving them. 

We don't even need to debunk this argument, because it is based on the existence of gravity, which Eric has completely destroyed. 

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:08 pm

Posted by aleksandar2015 on 09/02/2015

There are lakes bigger than seas by area, but still not affected by tides. Lol.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:13 pm

Posted by Admin on 09/06/2015

Katalin Stappenbeck on FB (or "kokoro" on the forum) had mentioned doing a German translation of either FEC or 200 Proofs, can't remember which, and not sure if she has started or not. Perhaps you might want to contact her first. Thanks so much for doing that! Anyone willing to translate any of my books to other languages I really appreciate and will make it available for free on all sites.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:14 pm

Posted by susie on 09/08/2015


Try to use this tool on a spinning ball!!



_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:15 pm

Posted by changemylife456 on 09/14/2015

Thank you Eric for composing this Info in one easy concise File. I've seen bits & pieces of this Info on Videos of yours I've caught & a few other sources. Here you've got it all together! Your efforts are appreciated.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:19 pm

Posted by susie on 09/21/2015





Chicago is 60 miles from Lake Michigan and should be .45 mile below the curve. But i's not.





A pillar reflection is only possible on a flat plane. On a spherically curved sea, you'd only have a hotspot.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:20 pm

Posted by susie on 09/28/2015




If this needs moved please do so. Here is information about radio broadcasts which were impossible on a ball being done as early as 1915 that have been suppressed.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:21 pm

Posted by radicaldualist on 09/29/2015

From Wikipedia about Vatican Radio
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_Radio

"Vatican Radio began broadcasting with the callsign HVJ[3] on two shortwave frequencies using 10 kilowatts (kW) of power on February 12, 1931, with the pontificial message "Omni creaturae" of Pope Pius XI.[4] Also in attendance was Guglielmo Marconi and Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli, who would become Pope Pius XII[4] Its first director was physicist Giuseppe Gianfranceschi, who was also the president of the Accademia dei Nuovi Lincei.

In 1933, a permanent microwave link was established between the Vatican Palace and the summer residence of the papacy, Castel Gandolfo.[4]

In 1936, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) recognized Vatican Radio as a "special case" and authorized its broadcasting without any geographical limits. On December 25, 1937, a Telefunken 25 kW transmitter and two directional antennas were added. Vatican Radio broadcast over 10 frequencies.[4]"

Here the link to a webpage about that event (page it's in italian). 

www.radiomarconi.com/marconi/vaticano.html

Quote from the same page: "Le 15,30: Guglielmo Marconi con la consorte fa ingresso nella palazzina. Si reca subito nella Sala degli amplificatori per una serie di collegamenti intercontinentali: New York, Melbourne, Quebec."
Translation: " At 15.30: Guglielmo Marconi and wife entered the building. He goes first to the Amplifiers Room for a series of intercontinental broadcasts: New York, Melbourne, Quebec."

As you can see the ITU,mentioned in Wikipedia,gave to Radio Vaticana a truly worldwide range of broadcasting authorization. Only 10Kw of power was enough in 1931 to broadcast to Australia.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:22 pm

Posted by thor on 09/29/2015

Sept 1, 2015 14:49:29 GMT gnosticwarrior said:
Interested to hear some opinions, thoughts, and counters to this, lol:

"Why are there are no tides in rivers, lakes and other water bodies except oceans? The gravitational pull of the moon acts even on these water bodies!":

www.theguardian.com/notesandqueries/query/0,,-199833,00.html

..."It does, but the force is immeasurably small on something tiny like a balloon or a human, it's all a matter of scale, the oceans consist of many billions of tons of water, spread over thousands of square miles but the tide is only a few metres high out in the open ocean ( those few metres can be magnified by the topology of the coasts and ocean floor)":

www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-the-gravity-of-the-Moon-affect-anything-else-on-Earth-besides-water-tides

"It does. Let us consider the effect of gravitational pull on the 3 states of matter.
Solid (you, me, sand, buildings, cars etc) : does experience the pull but the magnitude of the gravitational force is so small that it fails to create a physical deformity in solids. Hence solids remain unchanged.
Liquids (Oceans and Seas) : The intermolecular spaces in liquids are larger than in solids and hence the physical changes due to an increased or decreased gravitational pull is more visible in liquids. 
Gases ( Air, atmosphere) : In the case of gases, there is obviously a change but you cannot see air or atmosphere so its difficult to measure or quantify. The maximum that could happen is during the increased of decreased gravitational pull (high and low tide respectively) the air gets just a fraction thinner or thicker which will again not create a physical difference on how humans perceive the atmosphere around them. 
Again, this is what I think."


Hehe, as you may have noticed they sort of contradict (for lack of a better word) each other:

the Guardian answer says the water is a singularity, one heavy body (of water), the other talks about water being molecules with the space in between larger than molecules in solids blah blah, i.e. many singular entities.
The Guardian argument seems to me to be wrong. A lot of water is heavy, yes, but it still just a big bunch of individual molecules lying in the same place with some rather weak forces acting between them - I can still pick up some water from the ocean with out breaking a sweat, can't I...Or suck it up with a vacuum cleaner or straw...
Water molecules should be pulled out and up by the moons attraction, maybe only a few molecules at a time, but over time shouldn't we see a stream of water and vapour between the moon and the earth, if the moon affects the oceans by gravity? And what about the air molecules in the atmosphere...? Too little mass you might say, but didn't the celebrated fraudster Einstein claim even light had mass, if ever so little, but still it was affected by gravity? (proven wrong of course).
Or let's say it's the other way round. Earth, after all, is bigger than the moon, SO why don't we have moon dust streaming down to Earth..or create dust tides on the surface of the moon? Or a bulge...

I think many posts have put gravity in the coffin and explained very well why tides happen.

But as a previous poster mentioned, I will postulate that all water and other loose stuff on the ball planet should end up in a belt of water and dirt around equator due to the centrifugal force fighting gravity at the rim. Moon pull or no pull...thats a big tide right there.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:23 pm

Posted by thor on 09/29/2015


One of the questions I get when presenting the true nature of our earth to sceptics, is often in the line of "why can't I see Mount Everest, if the Earth is flat?!" Or "I can see satellites flying around"...
I usually use the simple Linear Perspective 'law' to show people that they cannot see things that far away: Apparent Height = Real Height / Distance (in meters)
It a simple way to look at perspective and it fits what we see. No need for 'angular perspective' and other more complex stuff. If you see something and know how far away it is, you can calculate approximately how big it is by estimating the apparent height to your eyes. And you can calculate how big things would appear to you, if you know the distance and size of the object.

I see the sun and moon resembling discs that approximates 1cm in diameter when I look at them (I simply stretch my arm and hold out my thumb and forefinger for measuring approx appearance), but they do vary somewhat. Obviously measuring the sun is hard on the eyes, so be careful if you try! It actually fits nicely with the NASA distances and size as well, so they must have taken care there to be somewhat correct  In any case it fits if we say the Sun and the Moon are 3000 miles away and measures around 30 miles in size, they would appear to be 1cm big in the sky.

So if you were say 3000 km away from Mt. Everest it would have the apparent height of 2.5 mm (~0.1 inch) - as seen from 1 meters distance. It easy to see that looking at something that small through the atmosphere and general obstacles is, needless to say, difficult.
When it gets to satellites it even more ridiculous. A 3 meter big LEO (160km) satellite would appear 0.018 mm 'big' to the eye of the beholder. Thats 0.0007 inch!
A house dust mite is around 0.2–0.3 millimetres (0.008–0.012 in) in length or ten times that for comparison. If a dust mite took his dust mite torch and shone it at you, do you think you would be able to see it? I think not.

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:23 pm

Posted by susie on 10/07/2015


The Roman Aquaducts ..... water leading 500 miles to Rome. Some elevation angles were a mere 6 inches to the mile. How does one get water to follow the curvature over this distance .. over a 500 mile span?


_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Thinkforyourself on Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:26 pm

Posted by susie on 10/11/2015

Neil Dyer ▶ Earth is Flat 

Here is a stunning revelation which I have not seen before. There are sacred sites around the "globe' where when connected it is claimed they make a circle around the globe. I went to Google Earth to do this for my self and did not find it to be circle much like that we call the equator.

In Photoshop I opened a file depicting the flat earth. On there, I plotted only seven or eight sacred sites before it became completely obvious to me from looking at the pattern what it is I have found.

Of all of the sacred geometry and all of any sacred number there is only one which stands apart from all other. Phi, a number derived from the Fibonacci sequence, where in its ever-perfecting narrowing can be usefully considered as 1.618, or 1:618. This is also called the Golden Number or Golden Ratio. It is the pattern you see in a sunflower or the spiral you see in a nautilus shell. It has defined beauty in every form of nature including every aspect of your body proportions from your fingers to your face. It and pi is the most profound numbers found in the Great Pyramid at Giza. Phi defines the shape of hurricanes and that of a human embryo with its God like spiral. Without much more ado, I'll list the sites which this spiral intersects and post for further comments or criticism. If you ask me, I would say this is the most convincing evidence connecting ancient historical sites providing a template to which only a flat earth allows.

Easter Island .. Paracas .. Nazca .. Ollantaytambo .. Machu Pichu .. Cuzco .. Sacsayhuaman .. Paratoari .. Giza .. Petra in Jordan .. Peresepolis, Iran .. Mohenjo Daro, Pakistan .. Pyay in Burma .. Sukhothai in Thailand .. Ankor Wat in Cambodia .. Preah Vihear. by Bruce Robinson.
Photos from Neil Dyer's post in Earth is Flat - They Live! · Yesterday at 1:02am 

_________________
All about Shillaphobia

Shun the non-believers!

'Flat Earth Diva'

Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'

Apparently 'dangerous person'
avatar
Thinkforyourself
Admin

Posts : 2080
Points : 5640
Reputation : 2799
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 26
Location : United Kingdom

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Basic observation

Post by Ahough1706 on Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:14 am

Just thinking out loud but wouldn't there be a much more defined terminator line if the sun was 93 million miles away? Meaning if the sun is that far away and it covers half of the ball no matter where it is then it shouldn't get dark so gradually like this, if the sun is still above the horizon then why would it be any darker then any other time in the day? The sun is in full view yet the light gradually fades like a spotlight hovering over top..The sky should be lit from the sun until it's under the horizon and night should come almost instantly.Going along with this thought, what about the sunrise...why does it get so gradually light if the sun is above the horizon we should be hit with the full intensity of the sun because we are not any further away we are just rotating towards the sun and the intensity would always be constant and the only thing that would change would be the direction of the shadows not the brightness. Someone may have already pointed this out but i was just watching the sunset today thunking about it. Peace.

Ahough1706

Posts : 2
Points : 507
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2016-03-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Ahough1706 on Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:23 am

Also you can see the stars revealing themselves on the opposite side of the sky from where the sun is at close to sunset.

Ahough1706

Posts : 2
Points : 507
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2016-03-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Tamela Shreya on Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:26 am

The point about Shooting Stars here at 10:15

Waykiwayki Interview with Luke De Padey

  A very large building that covers a decent amount of curvature would be be an upside down trapezoid or uncapped pyramid if vertical spirit levels or plumb bobs are used in its construction. Brian Mullins explained it better with diagrams in one of his vids.

  The 3 main pyramids of Egypt were built a long time ago, I imagine that they took a long time to build, they were built to line up to Orion's Belt. They still do and that doesn't make sense if our solar system is break dancing through space.


Last edited by Tamela Shreya on Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:41 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : wrong link)

Tamela Shreya

Posts : 3
Points : 191
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2017-01-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Dismantling the Ball Earth Through Logic

Post by ConnectedtoEverything on Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:36 pm

This will be a post to compile the ways in which the ball Earth model can be challenged using logic and simple reasoning.  If you would like to get right into it, skip the next two paragraphs, as they are an introduction and explanation (and a bit long-winded).

I was introduced to the idea of a flat earth by a coworker about a year ago and have been following the growing community ever since.  Thankfully, my coworker pointed me to Eric's videos and it was not long before I fully embraced this new perspective of our home.  I even recently made the decision to become vegetarian thanks to some of Eric's interviews in which they go into topics outside the flat earth.  I came across the "Beyond the Imaginary Curve" channel and really liked the direction Del is going in his videos.  He talks to strangers and introduces them to an idea that makes them question the reality we have been taught.  I think this approach is key in waking people up to the truth, as it plants a seed that has a better chance of sprouting, as opposed to bombarding someone with flat earth facts.  Many people will be immediately turned off and not think twice about what is being presented.  So I took a few more looks through Eric's videos to put together some concepts and questions that may help plant thought-provoking seeds in those that still think Earth is the third planet from the sun and we've been to the moon.

As most of us have probably encountered, it can be daunting and even embarrassing to try to bring light as to the nature of our world, to those still in the dark.  Hopefully, using this list will allow one to strike up intelligent and respectful conversation without instantly coming across as a dreaded "flat earther".  I am deciding to exclude things that people will quickly dismiss using the widely acclaimed pseudo-sciences that have been used to brainwash the masses, as well as ideas that may lead others to assume you are trying to convince of a flat earth.  For instance, I will not include the fact that all standing water must maintain a flat and level surface by virtue of its own physics.  One would likely denounce this and say gravity allows water to conform in a spherical manner.  Or saying the horizon is perfectly flat, the ill-informed will proclaim that the Earth is far too large to see any curvature, or point out numerous NASA "photos" or obvious fish-eye lens utilizing images.  I understand that these two examples are considered the absolute best proof we have, but we should remember that the indoctrination runs deep and even these two obvious facts can be easily refuted using the lies we have been fed our entire lives.  Some of these may require images or further research (#'s 2, 9, 11, 12) or for the listener to have good conceptualization skills (#'s 1, 3, 7), so it is up to the reader to decide how to go about using these.  And FINALLY, without further ado, here is my personal list to logically deflate the ball Earth model.

1. If the earth is spinning at about 1,000 mph (at the equator), revolving around the sun at 67,000 mph, which is revolving around our galaxy at about 500,000 mph, which is pulling everything in it around the universe at a mind-boggling 670,000,000 mph, how is it that we see the same exact stars night after night, year after year?  How do we see the exact same constellations that have been recorded for thousands of years?  Shouldn't the stars we see, all of which have their own high-velocity movements, completely change every night?

2. Considering all motions in #1 (which is what mainstream science is telling us), how is it possible to get a time lapse image of the stars with perfect spirals?  Shouldn't the motion be much more erratic?

3. If it is night when we are facing away from the sun, in six months, night would mean we are facing the complete opposite direction.  How then, are we able to see many of the same stars and constellations throughout the year?  Shouldn't we see a completely different set of stars?

4. Consider the relationship between earth and sun: shouldn't the sun light up exactly half the earth while the other half is dark, and shouldn't our days and nights be exactly 12 hours each?

5. We are told that our universe is wildly chaotic and earth is a random result of pure luck.  So we are also to believe in the nearly impossible odds that the moon would have the exact rotation and revolution speeds to appear to NEVER rotate!?  I mean really, not a single degree of rotation in thousands of years!?  Also, the sun and moon, though radically different in size and distance from earth, appear to us to be nearly identical in size.

6. The moon is said to cause our tides, yet has absolutely no effect on inland bodies of water.  What a selective moon we have...And it is interesting that the moon, with such a weak gravity relative to the earth, would be able to pull on our oceans so much.

7. Gravity is said to be a constant force all over the earth.  It is gravity that is essentially "fighting" the centrifugal tendency for things to fly off the spinning ball earth.  If both of these are true, how is it that people do not experience any difference at various latitudes.  What I mean is this: someone at the equator experiences ~1,000mph of rotation of the earth, while at the poles it would be 0mph.  So at the middle latitudes it would be in the 400-600 mph range or so.  This means the centrifugal tendency is much higher at the equator and people should feel lighter, OR much lower towards the poles and feel squashed down.  Think of a fast spinning merry go round at a playground.  Standing near the edge will likely throw you off while standing in the middle allows you to stay on with ease.  This concept is completely inexplicable and debunks the theory of gravity.

8. If gravity is so strong as to keep all the water on earth utterly stuck to it, fighting a ~1,000 mph spin, how is it that this force seems to be lost on small flying creatures.

9. When seeing sunlight shine through clouds, they are always angled and form a triangle.  If the sun is 93 million miles away and ~109 times the size of earth in diameter, these rays should all be coming in straight, not angled.

10. If Venus has an average temperature of 864 degrees Fahrenheit and Mars an average of -67 (a range of 931) and their orbits around the sun are ~74 million miles apart, how is it possible for Earth to have a temperature range of 262 degrees (taking highest and lowest recorded temps).  The distance sunlight travels to the equator or the poles is only a difference of a few thousand miles, so shouldn't we see very little variation in climate and temperature. [this one is a bit complex, maybe someone else can explain it more succinctly]

11. There is a natural phenomenon known as the midnight sun that occurs in the northernmost regions of earth during the height of summer every year.  The sun will begin to set but never fully recede beyond the horizon and in fact start to rise again.  In Svalbard, Norway, the northernmost inhabited location, sees sun for several months before the sun actually sets.  How is this at all possible even considering our axial tilt?  Why does this occur only during summer months?  If the distance from the sun is the only thing changing throughout the year, shouldn't this be happening constantly?

12. At Antarctica, there exists a wall of ice that reaches heights of a few hundred feet and spans the entirety of the continent.  Isn't it interesting that something like this exists and that it's existence hasn't become common knowledge? [this one may be reaching a bit, but I found it very interesting and others may be intrigued by this.]

These are what I have gathered so far.  I am sure there are plenty others.  With a broken model that literally disproves itself, there are sure to be more of these.  Please respond with anything you think would be a good addition and I will add it to the list.

ConnectedtoEverything

Posts : 1
Points : 171
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2017-02-09
Location : Earth

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Shattered on Mon May 01, 2017 11:50 am

This was supposed to be a meme but it turned into something else. Let me know if the physics are wrong (or if you think it can be improved) so I can fix it and upload it again.

avatar
Shattered

Posts : 22
Points : 188
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2017-02-27
Age : 21
Location : United States

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: 200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum